Absolutely necessary optional/house rules, Give me your list Options

[Larme]

Using Essence + Charisma to refresh Edge is just a giveaway to Mr. Lucky. Mr. Lucky is already pretty uber, insofar as he can add 8 dice to anything. His one disadvantage is that he can only do that 8 times per session at the most. If you give him a way to refresh Edge, he'll just take minimal cyber, a good Charisma, and he'll be even more sick and wrong than he already is. No thanks.

[Veggiesama]

Ever tried to get someone to use Office 2007 but hated the interface because it didn't look like the old Office?

While I am fine with Logic capping Program rating (or at least I wouldn't go so far as call it "retarded"... you people need to chill out), I really don't see a problem in giving the dumb Logic 1 troll a rating 6 program and actually letting him get some use out of it. The team hacker could show him a few tricks, teach him what buttons to press and a few simple commands, and suddenly the troll can hold his own in a cyber-brawl. He won't be as good as the hacker, but if he's got a decent commlink and a good enough program, he should be able to act at least like an Agent.

Hackers can act as backup gunslingers in the real world, so why can't gunslingers be backup hackers in the Matrix?

From a fluff perspective, I imagine high-level programs still have wizards and basic modes for new users. Some people just "don't get" computers, no matter how hard you try to teach them (low Logic), but the program should be smart enough to predict what the user wants with some degree of accuracy.

So that's what the -2 represents. If your panties are still in a ruffle, then make it -1.

[Draco18s]

I understand where you're coming from, but mechanics wise it doesn't work. A logic 5 person would never be able to get full use out of a Rating 6 program, despite being in the top 20th percentile for intelligence.

[It trolls!]

12. Armor penetration. If an attack has a positive AP, the bonus dice given to the defender cannot exceed the defender's current armor. For example, if you shoot flechette (+5 AP) at an opponent wearing a leather jacket (2 ballistic armor), he rolls Body + 4 to resist, not Body + 7.

13. Reverse the Concealability charts (i.e., SMGs are now -4 and light pistols are now +2). Higher is better. It makes more sense to get a bonus/penalty to your Palming test, because there's no reason that the searcher should "know" he's getting a penalty (in the case of players patting down NPCs).

I've already been using rule #12 and I am stealing #13 from you for my new game.

As for hacking and logic: I just cap successes at Logic*2.

And last but not least: Indirect combat spells get a flat -2 to their drain DV.

[Heath Robinson]

I will apologise in advance for throwing out a colour-explosion response, but it's easier to colour-code bits of text and append my response so that you can see the context of the statement. I've tried to minimise the eyebleedingness, but I've no guarantee that it will be sufficient. To those of you who are colourblind, I further apologise for any confusion.

While I am fine with Logic capping Program rating (or at least I wouldn't go so far as call it "retarded"... you people need to chill out), I really don't see a problem in giving the dumb Logic 1 troll a rating 6 program and actually letting him get some use out of it. The team hacker could show him a few tricks, teach him what buttons to press and a few simple commands, and suddenly the troll can hold his own in a cyber-brawl. He won't be as good as the hacker, but if he's got a decent commlink and a good enough program, he should be able to act at least like an Agent.

Hackers can act as backup gunslingers in the real world, so why can't gunslingers be backup hackers in the Matrix?

From a fluff perspective, I imagine high-level programs still have wizards and basic modes for new users. Some people just "don't get" computers, no matter how hard you try to teach them (low Logic), but the program should be smart enough to predict what the user wants with some degree of accuracy.

So that's what the -2 represents. If your panties are still in a ruffle, then make it -1.

Actually, I was insulting the people who made the Programs in your version of the setting. They keep putting the default settings at stupid values that requires someone smart do some trivial (to a smart enough person) mathematics to get the right values (hence requiring logic at certain levels). This is a perfectly valid assumption to make, since people in real life make programs that have stupid defaults, and force the user to do things that could be automated.

Glad to see we're in agreement. So can you please throw away penalties for low Logic users and move to a Carrot system where you give people bonuses for having high Logic? Low DPs are one of the problems with the Matrix as it stands (i.e. a "top scientist" equivalent Hacker with equipment that is nearly top end of the normally available set expects to bounce off any security system more than half the time, which is ridiculous) and more penalties just makes the whole thing worse.

They always could. Until you came along and dropped a -2 penalty on them, rendering your Logic 1 Troll nearly useless with any Program. The only impediment beforehand was their skill selection, which you've still got as a problem. You're going to see that Troll buying an agent more often under your rules because he's less useful now than before.

I've always considered UI a function of Rating anyway. If anything a low Logic character should be better with a high Rating program than a low Rating program. Which they are under the normal rules.

That's better, more like the defaulting penalty.


By the way, you're the one whose houserule involves making your "dumb"er characters worse using programs. I just suggested an alternative that doesn't mean you lose dice when making your program better - which is counter-intuitive and bad because it's difficult to see beforehand and totally binary. I go in for Stat + Skill + Program, and let Hackers throw down DPs in the same ranges as Sams in their chosen role.

[Stahlseele]

man, that post looks like i'm tripping on something good o.o
munchies too . .

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

WOW...... Look at all the pretty colors...

[Veggiesama]

All valid points, Heath. I don't like the default system, because Logic has no use.

But saying that Logic caps Program rating (or vice-versa) means Logic 1 Troll can't tell the difference between MS Paint and Photoshop (both would act like Rating 1). Maybe he can't, but just pressing random buttons is sure to get him some effective difference (hence the -2). So if Logic 1 Troll uses an R6 program, it's treated more like an R4 program to him.

So I tried to aim for a middle-ground rather than all Logic or no Logic.

The other popular choice is using Logic or Program rating to cap the number of *hits*, and I don't like that because it makes your randomly awesome successes (8 hits! Woo!) lose steam. Plus I like dicepools I can write down without having to remember additional rules about them later, because more often than not players forget all the details after char-gen.

In the end I will probably stick to one of the Unwired optional rules, because it's more familiar and a little simpler. Thanks for the comments. Helps me think things through.

[Veggiesama]

And last but not least: Indirect combat spells get a flat -2 to their drain DV.

Do you still find this necessary after the SR4A changes to Direct Combat spells?

Many people don't seem to like them, but they seem fine if you let the player ignore unwanted net hits.

[Veggiesama]

Sorry to post three times in a row, but this just popped in my head.

Okay, I like Logic + Skill (limit hits to program/CF rating). It seems elegant on the surface, because you only have to remember one dice pool. If you roll a lot of hits, that's when the GM asks "So what's your program rating again?"

But, how does that affect riggers? Do they then roll Reaction/Agility + Skill for jumped-in tests and Logic + Skill for remote-control tests (along with Intuition + Perception for Sensor tests). What exactly are their hits limited to?

Technomancer threading gets a little gimped too, right? Boosting your possible hits doesn't help at all.

Program + Skill (limit hits to Logic) might be better, but it just ends up complicating the system with a new limitation to worry about, rather than simplifying things (which is my intention).

[The Mack]

Do you still find this necessary after the SR4A changes to Direct Combat spells?

Many people don't seem to like them, but they seem fine if you let the player ignore unwanted net hits.

The only change that is standard now is the new OR table (the Direct Combat Spell changes are in the Errata as optional), and while that gives magicians a bit more reason to use them - I still think they could use a more direct boost.

[Heath Robinson]

Direct Spell Drain
Direct spells involve creating some kind of mana channel through which you push the effect. Things bounce back up the channel, though. This sets up a fluctuating feedback effect that means that the more you push in, the more painful the feedback.

All Direct Spells add the number of Hits used (selected after they've seen the results of their Sorcery roll) to their Force when calculating the Drain Value.

So when you throw a Direct Spell at a Counter-Spelled, Magic-Resistant Dwarf Sam you're gonna be hurting hard. Except when they fail to punch through, which I'm fine with.

Okay, I like Logic + Skill (limit hits to program/CF rating). It seems elegant on the surface, because you only have to remember one dice pool. If you roll a lot of hits, that's when the GM asks "So what's your program rating again?"

But, how does that affect riggers? Do they then roll Reaction/Agility + Skill for jumped-in tests and Logic + Skill for remote-control tests (along with Intuition + Perception for Sensor tests). What exactly are their hits limited to?

Technomancer threading gets a little gimped too, right? Boosting your possible hits doesn't help at all.

Jumped-in Riggers are uncapped and roll their normal pools. Remote-control Riggers use Attribute+Skill, capped by Command.

There are still a number of things that are based off the Rating of the relevant Program, like Encryption strength, ECCM, Data Bombs, Tracing/Perception Thresholds. Threading is weakened but by no means dead.

(My current GM is using this rule, so I've had a look through what it ends up affecting)

[The Mack]

Direct Spell Drain
Direct spells involve creating some kind of mana channel through which you push the effect. Things bounce back up the channel, though. This sets up a fluctuating feedback effect that means that the more you push in, the more painful the feedback.

From the SR4A changes document, found here.

Direct combat spells have a new optional mechanic: for each Net Hit applied to damage, the Drain Value increases by +1.

Emphasis mine. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Heath Robinson]

If you read closely you'll notice a major difference from the SR4A rule and the one I just proposed. Like, one that will dramatic reduce complaints about overcasting being distinctly better, and another that will remove the problems with multiple targets. It also applies to more than Combat spells.

[The Mack]

If you read closely you'll notice a major difference from the SR4A rule and the one I just proposed. Like, one that will dramatic reduce complaints about overcasting being distinctly better, and another that will remove the problems with multiple targets. It also applies to more than Combat spells.

Sorry, I didn't realize that was a rules proposal.

That'll teach me for not reading. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blush.gif)

[Draco18s]

So I tried to aim for a middle-ground rather than all Logic or no Logic.

Yes, we understand your point, however in so using a -2 you're using an extreme example (1 logic, rating 6 program) and forgetting the average/above average values (Say Logic 5, rating 6 program).

Hence I would suggest:

Rating > Logic:
Rating -2 OR Logic, whichever is higher.

Or possibly Rating > Logic * 2:
Rating -2 OR Logic*2, whichever is higher.

By using the first you're capping to Logic anytime that the program exceeds Logic by only 1 (granting a +1 over the Rating -2 method) while still having the benefit of the edge case Logic 1, Rating 6.

By using the second method we've eliminated the Exceedingly Smart People Unable to Utilize Very Sophisticated Programs issue (i.e. Logic 7 can't use Rating 9 programs), while still "penalizing" low Logic characters. Min Logic*2 again, or a Logic 1 character would still have an effective Rating 1 program while using Rating 3, but Rating 2 and Rating 4 both work as Rating 2.

[Caadium]

6. If the modified DV of an attack is less than or equal to the modified Armor, the defender chooses whether to suffer Physical or Stun damage, instead of suffering only Stun damage. This makes trolls fall unconscious from being stunned to death less often, and instead they can wrack up insane Wound penalties (like -6).

I really don't like this. If it's a known fact that trolls don't die as easy as squishier races, but have jaws that are made from the same glass, then they should take steps to utilize this instead of making choices that are designed to knock someone out rather than kill him.

Simply put, someone wears a modern kevlar vest knowing that instead of getting killed they will get knocked out (yes, this is a simplified example, but the point remains so please don't get into the science of kevlar and ignore the point). This is basically converting physical damage to stun damage. This is a choice that is made because getting dead is bad, you make a choice to keep yourself from getting dead.

Back to the troll. If the troll is more worried about getting knocked out instead of getting dead, then he shouldn't be doing things that make it more likely for him to get knocked out. AKA, he should a little bit of armor off. Yes, he is bigger and tougher and therefore capable of wearing more armor. This is fine, as it keeps him from getting dead, again this is bad. However, making the choice to keep from getting dead at the risk of getting knocked out is something that they do on their own. If they'd rather risk physical damage, since they are tougher that way, then that is a risk they can take without having to try to rework how armor works.

In my opinion, this rule is in place to help keep trolls (or really anyone with a higher body) from just wearing absurd armor and stacking body modifiers so that they can become walking tanks. They are not tanks, they are metahumans. Bullets hurt metahumans. You can choose to wear armor to reduce this, but it runs the risk of knocking you out. If you are more worried about getting knocked out than getting dead, well then take some of that armor off. As with all things, there is a point of balance to be struck. Excess is never healthy, and an excess of armor has it's own unhealthy risks associated with it (getting knocked out easier).

Maybe I sound like an old codger, but I miss lethal combat in Shadowrun. I miss a troll getting dropped from a single shotgun blast (admittedly, that was based on bad luck more than anything) since it gave a real risk to things.

[codger voice]
Back in my day, combat was something to be scared of. People died when they got shot. Thats the risks we faced, and we liked it!
[/codger voice]

[Draco18s]

[codger voice]
Back in my day, combat was something to be scared of. People died when they got shot. Thats the risks we faced, and we liked it!
[/codger voice]

My GM likes the fact that a troll in body armor is going to fall unconscious FAST.

[Larme]

In my opinion, this rule is in place to help keep trolls (or really anyone with a higher body) from just wearing absurd armor and stacking body modifiers so that they can become walking tanks. They are not tanks, they are metahumans. Bullets hurt metahumans. You can choose to wear armor to reduce this, but it runs the risk of knocking you out. If you are more worried about getting knocked out than getting dead, well then take some of that armor off. As with all things, there is a point of balance to be struck. Excess is never healthy, and an excess of armor has it's own unhealthy risks associated with it (getting knocked out easier).

Actually, the rule doesn't really keep anyone from being a walking tank. It just prevents them from getting full use out of their Condition Monitor. No matter how you slice it, it's better to have lots of damage resistance dice but fewer boxes than it is to have lots of boxes and fewer dice. Now, the stun damage rule seems a little unfair to trolls because they pay points to have such high Body and thus such an amazing number of boxes, but they can't even use them. But honestly, they can cry me a frickin' river, they're pretty powerful as it is.

What I object to with that house rule is that it breaks realism so much more than this system already does. It would mean that you could fire two identical bullets at two copies of a heavily armored guy, and based on their own personal choice, one suffers bruising and the other one gets severe lacerations? That's going too far, for me.

[Caadium]

My GM likes the fact that a troll in body armor is going to fall unconscious FAST.

That was sort of the point I was getting at.

But honestly, they can cry me a frickin' river, they're pretty powerful as it is.

Agreed. Making a special rule for armor just to make trolls, or wannabe trolls, even tougher isn't something I'd use in my game.

What I object to with that house rule is that it breaks realism so much more than this system already does. It would mean that you could fire two identical bullets at two copies of a heavily armored guy, and based on their own personal choice, one suffers bruising and the other one gets severe lacerations? That's going too far, for me.

I actually meant to touch on that, but got carried away with being goofy. Thank you for also mentioning this.

[Draco18s]

That was sort of the point I was getting at.

I should mention that he likes it as a player, as a GM, and as a story teller.

[Falconer]

Quite frankly... I don't like any of your house rules Heath. If I hand a toddler an ultra fancy cable tester, I don't expect him to be able to do anything more than plug it in and see if it shines green or red. I don't expect him to be able to use the more advanced diagnostics functions such as a TDR or the like. Same goes for software... yeah drawing w/ the mouse is easy, now making full use out of all the bells and whistles is hard. I also disagree SEVERELY w/ your suggested drain mechanic.

I also really dislike your thoughts that all systems should be trivial for a hacker out of chargen to bust into. Really they should bounce back a lot more than that. And I say that as someone who has worked in computer security and has had to harden systems and have them tested by professional hackers trying to crack them.


Of the decking house rules listed... I like these suggestions:
Logic + hacking... capped by program rating. (it just makes a lot of sense). Especially if people can edge for more hits than allowed when needed.

Though for the related question as regards rigging tests... especially in relation to the command program. I'd probably take a page from astral space... and use mental attributes for VR activities. (Logic -> agility, intuition -> reaction, bod -> wil, cha -> str). Though that gets complicated because for a lot of things response is used instead of reaction (EG: defense against attacks). The only two skills I can think of w/o checking my books would be affected would be gunnery (agility), and vehicle (reaction/intution).

[Veggiesama]

words

Defeats the purpose if it's going to be so complicated.

For now, I'm dumping the Logic thing. It sounds simpler for hackers, but it just makes figuring out what riggers do even more difficult, and technomancers take an even bigger hit. I'm already against riggers needing a bunch of real-world skills to rig their drones, so I don't want them also needing a bunch of real-world attributes. One is fair, but agility, reaction, and logic together seems like overkill. If they're rolling Agility + Gunnery for a drone attack test, they might as well just be a street sam.

If the troll is more worried about getting knocked out instead of getting dead, then he shouldn't be doing things that make it more likely for him to get knocked out. AKA, he should a little bit of armor off.

(EDIT) Having to find a sweet spot is too metagamey for me. (/EDIT) If someone's wearing good armor and has a high Body, I expect them to have more "hit points." Before they go down, I want to see them limping, bloodied, and unable to see straight. Getting knocked out from Stun damage reminds me of a mixture between fainting and being bludgeoned by a whiffle bat. I have difficulties imagining that happening to a troll.

[In my opinion, this rule is in place to help keep trolls (or really anyone with a higher body) from just wearing absurd armor and stacking body modifiers so that they can become walking tanks.

I made armor encumbrance kick in at Strength + Body (x1.5 if Milspec) rather than Body x 2. Plus I took the rule from Arsenal where you can wear one piece of armor without penalties. Plus I'm doing karmagen and still charging trolls a 40 karma racial cost, and on top of that you get a +1 bonus to shoot large dudes, like trolls.

So I feel bad for the big fellas at this point.

What I object to with that house rule is that it breaks realism so much more than this system already does.

I'm not concerned with realism. I'm more concerned with making the game work as one would expect it to. For me, that means a troll in good armor should be able to wrack up more wound modifiers before going down, compared to someone else.

In hindsight, I should remove the "choice" part from the house rule. There's really only one choice someone would make, and that's the one that leads to not dying. I don't think it's worth getting hung up on the wording, though.

[Larme]

Of the decking house rules listed... I like these suggestions:
Logic + hacking... capped by program rating. (it just makes a lot of sense). Especially if people can edge for more hits than allowed when needed.

Well, it would make a lot of sense if hackers were sitting at a PC with a keyboard and mouse. But when they're flying around in hot sim VR, it might not. I think that the rule you mention is a good idea if you feel it's important to make logic worthwhile, because as is, it's the worst stat in the game (maybe neck and neck with strength). But it's not a reality objection.

If you think that hackers in 2070's Net do the same thing that today's hackers do, I think that's a failure of imagination. Look at it this way: when you use your armor prog, do you pull up a config screen in your firewall and set the values to defeat the enemy's attack? Hell no! You pull out your virtual shield, and the enemy's attack goes 'ping' right off it, based on how good the code is. When you exploit, you pull out your virtual hound dog and he starts sniffing for a rabbit hole. Your skill is a factor because you need to know how to handle the hound dog, and make sure he doesn't get stuck in a corner or something. The inner workings of programs in VR are totally opaque. The user uses them like he does a gun, he pulls it out, aims it, and pulls the trigger.

At least, that's how I explain the disconnect between attributes and hacking. The only people who need Logic are the ones that design the hardware and software. It's not like modern hacking, where everything you do is based on understanding the inner workings of code. Maybe it's an unrealistic vision of the future. Hell, I'll be surprised if it turns out the way that Shadowrun predicts. The whole concept was pioneered by Gibson in the 80's, when many computers didn't even support graphics. His idea was that a program did the work, and the netrunner just drove it like a virtual car, or something. The point is, logic and hacking aren't necessarily connected. They can be if you want to house rule the game, but don't feel like there's no rational explanation for the system as is. I think people who know about computers want to change the rules because they have a personal bias against script kiddies, not because the system as it stands is bad. They just hate the idea of hackers being script kiddies who don't write their own software or even know how to write it. My suggestion is, play a hacker, see if it's fun, and only house rule it if you just can't deal with it.

[Draco18s]

I think people who know about computers want to change the rules because they have a personal bias against script kiddies, not because the system as it stands is bad. They just hate the idea of hackers being script kiddies who don't write their own software or even know how to write it. My suggestion is, play a hacker, see if it's fun, and only house rule it if you just can't deal with it.

It's not a bias against script kiddies that I have, but rather that Logic isn't needed damn near anywhere in the game. Plus, it does take some intelligence to use computer programs, anyone can Search Google (Rating 5 Data Search program?) but it takes some skill and some logic to know how to use it in such a way to get good results.

For example, this Google Search:

intitle:index.of +�last modified� +�parent directory� +(mp3|wma|ogg) +"The Beatles" -htm -html -php -asp

Will find mp3s, wmas, and oggs of songs by the Beatles in open HTTP directories. Getting that string doesn't require skill, it requires Logic and some knowledge.