Using your brains, Putting attributes back into hacking the Matrix... Options

[Kerenshara]

I'm running a PbP game (hopefully to actually kick off to IC in the next day or so) as well as preparing to take up a PnP game in that weird place some people like to call "reality". Here's my issue:

There is only a single place where a primary attribute does not come into use and somebody's equipment is the most important factor in their success: the Matrix.

Now, I know that in the actual World Wide Web, plenty of "script kitties" make a genuine hash out of general purpose users, but they don't stand much of a chance of real success against the like of major hard targets; That take actual knowledge, talent and skill.

But just about everything in the SR4 Unwired World is [ Skill + ProgramRTG ], and that means there's not brain power needed to make it go. For all intents and purposes, you could slot R4 'softs into some near-brain-dead mentally-retarded trog along with a bleeding-edge cyberdeck (you're using the comlink to hack, therefore you're a Decker and your tool is a 'Deck. I'm old school. Sue me.) and you have somebody to rival the best deckers on the 'Trix. That makes absolutely ZERO sense to me, and it's almost WORSE with a virtuakinteic (Technomancer).

Here's my current plan:

I'm playing with all three basic dice/hit caps in place

• No more DP modifiers in your favor than [Attribute + Skill]
• No more than twenty (20) dice rolled in any single skill test
• No more Hits (not Net Hits) than twice your Skill rating (or 1 in the case of a default)

I'm going to run the Matrix with [ Attribute + Skill ] and cap the Hits (not Net Hits) at Program / Form Rating. The attribute will USUALLY be LOGic, but for things like On-the-Fly hacking of a firewall, because you're trying to "intuitively" probe the target, INTuition will be key there. Essentially, any time you have time to work things out, it's probably going to be LOGic, and in quick maneuvers, INTuition.

With the caps in place, things take on a slightly different appearance, and it keeps things a bit more balanced and level on first blush. If you see a hole, let me know.

I'm happy to hear a discussion, but please try to keep it to the idea at hand; That includes offering your OWN ideas how to get where I want to go if you have something that's worked better at your table before. That doesn't include rants about the Rules As Written. I can read, and if that's all I wanted, I wouldn't have started this thread.

Thanks in advance, and have at it!

[Jhaiisiin]

Hate to say it, but everything you've mentioned except the intuition bit is listed in tweaking the rules, Pg 39 Unwired.

[Cthulhudreams]

You need to ask yourself why you want brainpower back in (i.e. what's the gameplay objective) and also how do you think the matrix works?

What the rules (probably) say:

You decide that you need to create a false and temporary Access ID. This is completely required, since otherwise when you sign out, Renraku can just plain call you. The dicepool is Hacking + Spoof, but you only need one hit (it's unopposed unless you are currently being traced) and you can do this in downtime, so whatever. You can also do this step by routing your hacking through any electronic item for the duration of your current hacking job and then ditch the item. If you need a specific Access ID, you need to have analyzed that access ID's Icon with Matrix Perception by being in the same node as the Icon and winning an opposed Analyze + Computer vs. Stealth + Firewall test.

Then you have to find the node. This is ridiculously hard. It's an Electronic Warfare + Scan test, and as written it's an extended test (with a threshold of 15 or higher) to find a Hidden Node and mysteriously a non-extended test (threshold 4) to find a node that is not hidden. So as written, with 6 dice it's an average of 10 rolls to find a node that is not hiding and only 8 to find one that is. May be a typo, who can tell?

Armed with your fake and temporary Access ID, you attempt to hack yourself an account into the node you found. This is done by making opposed extended tests against the node. You roll Hacking + Exploit and need to get a number of hits equal to the Firewall of the node (or 3 or 6 higher if the node requires a "security" or "admin" account, which is just a preference toggle for whether you want hacking your systems to be easier or harder). Every time you roll dice, the node gets to roll Analyze + Firewall, trying to add up to a number of hits equal to your Stealth. When you get your total of hits, you get your account. If the computer gets ts number of hits, it sets off an Alert. It is entirely possible for both of these to happen simultaneously. You can also choose to take hours instead of Complex Actions to make these tests, and then the node only gets one chance to spot you instead of one per test you make.

Now that you are in the node, you need to render all the icons. This takes a Simple Action to find out how many icons there are (making an opposed Computer + Analyze test vs. Firewall + Stealth test to count any of the icons that are Stealthed), and then an additional Simple Action to actually identify each of the icons that you have counted (which are also an opposed Analyze + Computer test against Stealth + Firewall to identify any of the stealthed icons you have counted).

Whether an Alert has been triggered or not, the node may well have an active IC protecting it. While you are rendering the node, it is rendering you. If it notices you (Analyze + Agent Rating vs. Hacking + Stealth), it will compare you to its list of who is supposed to be on the node (separate from the Node's list, so you haven't had a chance to hack it yet - so you're not on this list). It can then take any actions it want against you until you successfully render it. Since you're the new kid on the block, it can start attacking you as soon as it renders the programs you came in with. Also, it can call for backup before it even renders you. Or, since it presumably already has a Security Account on its own node, it can attempt to kick you out.

If the IC doesn't spot you and you didn't set off an alarm, skip this step altogether. You can get rid of the IC in several ways. They seem to think you want to engage it in Cyber Combat, which involves rolling initiative and then following the rules for casting low force manabolts at people with spell defense who also get to soak damage and have armor. What you'd actually want to do is to spoof a command to the IC to make it go away. This is just Hacking + Spoof vs. Firewall + Pilot. One net hit and the IC stops all harassing of you forever. If for some reason you are being bothered by one Agent, it's pretty much over in one action.

When you have rendered the target file, you can try to access it. It has a Data Bomb on it, which means that you need to Disarm it before you open the file or you'll get hit by very weird pile of damage. For no reason, Data Bombs have a unique damage mechanic where they inflict matrix boxes equal to Rating multiplied by the score shown on a single d6. Since Data Bombs normally run in ratings of 3-6, this means that you usually have a 2/3 chance of just crashing: no save. Also, Data Bombs can be set to nuke the file you were after. So having one go off is absolutely not an option. You roll Hacking + Defuse (incorrectly written "Disarm" in the book, but we know what they mean) and the Data Bomb rolls twice its rating. If you get more hits than the bomb, you get the data. Otherwise the data is lost and you probably crash. Note that if you're a Technomancer, that taking 30 boxes of matrix damage actually means that you die. So always have a Sprite or Agent open a Data Bomb if you are a Technomancer.

Now you can transfer the file to your commlink. This requires a Computer + Edit test, but you only need 1 hit, there is no consequence for failure, and retries are allowed. So um... whatever.

What you're actually going to want to do is different, but whatever you are doing is going to impact what changes you should make. For example, switching to skill + stat makes the already insanely dangerous Data Bombs RIDICULOUSLY dangerous as it reduces the size of your dice pool and gives an average optimised starting character a 30% chance of just dying every time he encounters one.

So you probably need to change that to. And because sysadmins now do have a dice pool of 6 instead of 9, you probably need to drop the threshold required to find a node that is not hidden (I suggest: 1)

Finally you also want to change the rules that let the IC instantly and permanently disconnect you from their node instantly as soon as they spot you by changing the access ID white list (given as an example in unwired)

[Udoshi]

I was going to suggest capping the amount of rolls on one extended test by your logic. This means that, by and large, any noob can load up a script and some agents and pretend to be a hacker - but only the -really- smart people with the brains can actually -hack- well. Think about it - all the important actions on the matrix are Extended tests. Hacking on the fly is. Probing is. Crashing Nodes is.(under 4a, crashing programs isnt). Decrypting, defusing data bombs, disarming programs, tracing users - even fixing programs on the fly with medic. All extended tests. Sure, anyone can throw a mookbot at a firewall - but only someone with a logic of 5 or so actually stands a reliable chance of probing down an opening in that rating 6 firewall.

The problem with capping hits at Program Rating is it kind of screws technomancers up.


The game I'm currently in places a bit more emphasis on plain jane hackers being able to make their own code and personal programs, and iron out the bugs. We use a pretty simple houserule for that - any hits on the Software test over the threshold reduce the time you need to complete the program, by a proportionate amount, depending on how big the threshold was in the first place. Here's an example: A decently smart person(4) with above average software skills(3) and a basic compiler(software creation suite 1) can hammer out a simple Common Use program like Command 1(Threshold 1, 1 month) in two weeks. (8 dice, buying 2 hits, which is twice what he needs so it gets done in half the time. 1 hit needed/2 hits = 0.5 time).
While they don't match the ability of TM's to improvise code entirely on the fly, with a few days warning a hacker can brush up some of their utilities for the job at hand. If you're going to cap players at their program ratings, at least give them a reasonable means of advancing it.

A more practical example from my game is making an rating 1 agent, having social engineered my way into limited access at a Programming Environment, and busting my ass to get it done with a Rush Job. sixteen dice vs a threshold of 3/3 months. I got 4 hits and a glitch, and finished it in a little over 3 weeks - with some lasting trouble from the glitch. If anything, the rule just enforces the 'If its rating 4 or higher, its hard to find and twice as expensive' for programs.

[Kerenshara]

Hate to say it, but everything you've mentioned except the intuition bit is listed in tweaking the rules, Pg 39 Unwired.

Yes, I know there are several options. But I was looking for feedback of the combination of:

1. the three caps and how that might interract with the "book" option(s)
2. the "book" options and
3. the use of INTuition instead of pure LOGic.

Thanks, both for the observation AND the cite, which most people don't bother with and is helpful for people who might not have scanned the thing in the first place themselves.

[Kerenshara]

You need to ask yourself why you want brainpower back in (i.e. what's the gameplay objective) and also how do you think the matrix works?

What the rules (probably) say:



What you're actually going to want to do is different, but whatever you are doing is going to impact what changes you should make. For example, switching to skill + stat makes the already insanely dangerous Data Bombs RIDICULOUSLY dangerous as it reduces the size of your dice pool and gives an average optimised starting character a 30% chance of just dying every time he encounters one.

So you probably need to change that to. And because sysadmins now do have a dice pool of 6 instead of 9, you probably need to drop the threshold required to find a node that is not hidden (I suggest: 1)

Finally you also want to change the rules that let the IC instantly and permanently disconnect you from their node instantly as soon as they spot you by changing the access ID white list (given as an example in unwired)

Thanks, this is the kind of feedback and discussion I wanted, especially the possible "potholes".

As to my objectives, I just dislike that the current system is mostly about 'ware. People who aren't very talented (read: 1 or 2 LOGic and INTuition) are just as capable as somebody with tremendous talent (read stats at 5+). That doesn't seem to make sense, it's out-of-character with the rest of the game-mechanics/universe, and it flys in the face of what we know about people who violate network security in the real world; Good hackers can do a lot of things just with a command line and their own brains and experience.

I wanted things to be consistent, more person-focused, and to be more like conventional skill use.

[BlueMax]

This post is purely on theory. It has nothing to do with what I may or may not play in Keren's game.

Using mental stats accentuates the importance of Mental Stats for Technomancers. In addition, it clouds some issues. TMs are not the same programmers as their mothers and fathers. TMs reach out and command the bits. If emphasis is placed on Logic, the defining characteristic between TM and hacker is "language". Intuition is interesting. If one argues that virtuakinetic abilities are intuitive, and places many of the rolls on intuition, it forces all TMs to be rather insightful folk.

The amplification gets worse if the Stream uses one of these mental stats for Fading. Thus the stat used may be assigned by Tradition and boy howdy does that get bogged down and complicated fast.

Its a tough question.

BlueMax

[Cthulhudreams]

Saying you want it 'more person focused' is nice, but I need concrete examples of what you want to change to contribute meaningfully: Frank's helpfully written down all the steps in a 'hack' with the rules abuses removed, so what were you thinking about doing to make it more people focused?

Incidently if you do that: I'd seriously suggest starting with banning agents and limiting IC to one per node and confined only to that node. That makes a big change in the right direction straight up.

I'd also remove Access ID's for every purpose except for trailing people.

@Udoshi: This doesn't do what you think it does. Capping hits by logics either makes Agents/IC super awesome (as they are straight up and down better than the sys admin) or back door bans them (because they don't have a logic score). Now, banning them is obviously a good idea and should be encouraged but banning IC might be a bad idea. The other option moves away from the stated design goals.

[Ascalaphus]

I rather like the system RAW; I disagree with your interpretation.

I would call someone with low Skills, high Programs (that he likely can't write himself) a script-kiddie. Someone with high Skills would by definition not be a script-kiddie in my view.

One explanation for not using your Attributes is that the program really does more of the analysis and thinking than you do, computer vs. brain speed and all. Skills obviously feature, because it's skill in doing things at that speed.

I don't think the current system is all that unfair; high Logic is useful when you want to write your own software, which is still worth it, especially with software degradation and all manner of registration thingies in Unwired.

There are a few areas where I'd consider adding an attribute to the test; basically all those checks that take longer than combat-speeds. Data searches at a leisurely pace, sniffing for possible exploits in a firewall etc.

[Kerenshara]

I was going to suggest capping the amount of rolls on one extended test by your logic. This means that, by and large, any noob can load up a script and some agents and pretend to be a hacker - but only the -really- smart people with the brains can actually -hack- well. Think about it - all the important actions on the matrix are Extended tests. Hacking on the fly is. Probing is. Crashing Nodes is.(under 4a, crashing programs isnt). Decrypting, defusing data bombs, disarming programs, tracing users - even fixing programs on the fly with medic. All extended tests. Sure, anyone can throw a mookbot at a firewall - but only someone with a logic of 5 or so actually stands a reliable chance of probing down an opening in that rating 6 firewall.

You're essentially suggesting the opposite MECHANIC from what I chose tennatively, but you sound like you have the same idea.

Essentially, where I went [Attribute + Skill] <Cap ProgRTG> you went [ProgRTG + Skill] <Cap Attribute>

OK, I'm not averse to that as an idea, and IIRC it's the other idea presented in that sidebar.

The problem with capping hits at Program Rating is it kind of screws technomancers up.

Why? Their Forms take the place of ProgRtg, and they can go higher than a Decker. Or did I miss something?

The game I'm currently in places a bit more emphasis on plain jane hackers being able to make their own code and personal programs, and iron out the bugs. We use a pretty simple houserule for that - any hits on the Software test over the threshold reduce the time you need to complete the program, by a proportionate amount, depending on how big the threshold was in the first place. Here's an example: A decently smart person(4) with above average software skills(3) and a basic compiler(software creation suite 1) can hammer out a simple Common Use program like Command 1(Threshold 1, 1 month) in two weeks. (8 dice, buying 2 hits, which is twice what he needs so it gets done in half the time. 1 hit needed/2 hits = 0.5 time).
While they don't match the ability of TM's to improvise code entirely on the fly, with a few days warning a hacker can brush up some of their utilities for the job at hand. If you're going to cap players at their program ratings, at least give them a reasonable means of advancing it.

Nifty idea, and I don't object to that in principle, especially when time is plentiful and the objective isn't too unusual. I'd probably say that as long as the RTG of the 'ware you're trying to program is < your Software skill, it should be "buy successes". That's just me though. When you're writing at (or beyond) the practical limits of your knowledge and experience, though, you're going to be doing a lot more debugging and working with the AR Manual "in your lap" as it were. But thanks for that idea! And I always thought the really Sierra Hotel programmers (and other B&R types) should be able to beat those minimum thresholds if they really blow the roll away.

A more practical example from my game is making an rating 1 agent, having social engineered my way into limited access at a Programming Environment, and busting my ass to get it done with a Rush Job. sixteen dice vs a threshold of 3/3 months. I got 4 hits and a glitch, and finished it in a little over 3 weeks - with some lasting trouble from the glitch. If anything, the rule just enforces the 'If its rating 4 or higher, its hard to find and twice as expensive' for programs.

OK, makes sense. See my above comment as well.

[Kerenshara]

Saying you want it 'more person focused' is nice, but I need concrete examples of what you want to change to contribute meaningfully: Frank's helpfully written down all the steps in a 'hack' with the rules abuses removed, so what were you thinking about doing to make it more people focused?

Sorry. Apparently I'm not making my feelings clear (and it IS feelings, not CrunchyBitsTM): I want the (meta)human to be the critical element in the story, not the gear they're wielding. That gear is a set of TOOLS, but I want the characters to be CRAFTSPEOPLE, not cogs or assemblypersons (hand-craft versus mass-production).

Does that make more sense? It's why I put the hit-cap as it relates to skill, because it rewards the artisan, not the talented kid.

Incidently if you do that: I'd seriously suggest starting with banning agents and limiting IC to one per node and confined only to that node. That makes a big change in the right direction straight up.

I'd also remove Access ID's for every purpose except for trailing people.

OK, my reading - explicit here - is that if it doesn't have a listed stat, it's a 3 when it comes to electronics. That puts it on-par with the "average" SysAdmin and behind a good one.

And I think the "revised" wording on access IDs is bulldrek. An IP address should be unique and separate from a Login separate from a hardware serial number (MAC ID). But that's a whold different thread, entirely.

@Udoshi: This doesn't do what you think it does. Capping hits by logics either makes Agents/IC super awesome (as they are straight up and down better than the sys admin) or back door bans them (because they don't have a logic score). Now, banning them is obviously a good idea and should be encouraged but banning IC might be a bad idea. The other option moves away from the stated design goals.

See my above comment about the LOG/INT of an Agent.

[Cthulhudreams]

It's actually the device rating, which is the rating of the agent - which will be 4 to 6. And they still don't actually have a logic score, there is just some words about using it in place of logic blahblahblah

Anyway it doesn't matter, if you give them device rating 4, skills 4 and an R6 program, they are still better than a human system administrator (who's 3/3/6). Which is against your stated policy objective so there is no particular reason not to cut agents unless they add something helpful.

Anyway, if I was you and didn't want to just use Frank's matrix rules I'd

1) Cap hits by program rating

2) Change skill pools to skill + stats

3) Remove all reference to Access ID except for track and faking your trail.

4) Ban agents, remove the mobility from ICs and Pilot functions

5) Make it so that Databombs do damage equal to Rating + net hits on the defuse test.

6) Make it so one matrix perception test renders the entire node, but give the defender a 'reactive' roll to instantly render nodes that enter.

7 Then all you need to do is fix this

Armed with your fake and temporary Access ID, you attempt to hack yourself an account into the node you found. This is done by making opposed extended tests against the node. You roll Hacking + Exploit and need to get a number of hits equal to the Firewall of the node (or 3 or 6 higher if the node requires a "security" or "admin" account, which is just a preference toggle for whether you want hacking your systems to be easier or harder). Every time you roll dice, the node gets to roll Analyze + Firewall, trying to add up to a number of hits equal to your Stealth. When you get your total of hits, you get your account. If the computer gets ts number of hits, it sets off an Alert. It is entirely possible for both of these to happen simultaneously. You can also choose to take hours instead of Complex Actions to make these tests, and then the node only gets one chance to spot you instead of one per test you make.

So a starting hacker cannot hack Zurich Orbital, the Pentagon and the Red Pagoda out of the box.

6)

[Kerenshara]

I rather like the system RAW; I disagree with your interpretation.

I would call someone with low Skills, high Programs (that he likely can't write himself) a script-kiddie. Someone with high Skills would by definition not be a script-kiddie in my view.

One explanation for not using your Attributes is that the program really does more of the analysis and thinking than you do, computer vs. brain speed and all. Skills obviously feature, because it's skill in doing things at that speed.

I don't think the current system is all that unfair; high Logic is useful when you want to write your own software, which is still worth it, especially with software degradation and all manner of registration thingies in Unwired.

There are a few areas where I'd consider adding an attribute to the test; basically all those checks that take longer than combat-speeds. Data searches at a leisurely pace, sniffing for possible exploits in a firewall etc.

You're welcome to disagree with my definitions and/or semantic linguistic diferentiations. But that doesn't change the fundamental substance of my arguments.

I have friends in the industry, and the drek I have seen them pull with a command line (read: Control R1) is just phenomenal, but that kind of thing takes experience (Skill) and talent (INTuition or LOGic). It represents an understanding of the system itself and the underlying principles that make it work as well as the ability to manipulate information, concepts and commands to get the results you're looking for. The idea of limiting hits to LOGic/INTuition as apropriate (just how well considered/appropriate and rapid was that command selection?) would seem to be less intrusive on the actual RAW in terms of how the CrunchyBits^TM roll, but it still leaves it totally divergent from the rest of the system both conceptually and functionally.

[The Monk]

@Udoshi: This doesn't do what you think it does. Capping hits by logics either makes Agents/IC super awesome (as they are straight up and down better than the sys admin) or back door bans them (because they don't have a logic score). Now, banning them is obviously a good idea and should be encouraged but banning IC might be a bad idea. The other option moves away from the stated design goals.

Udoshi isn't suggesting capping hits but limiting rolls on extended tests, which is interesting. Not sure what it would do, it's nifty.

Also, because its bugging me: Detecting a hidden node is four successes unless you are trying to detect all the hidden nodes in an area in which case it's an extended test with a threshold of 15 and an interval of 1 combat turn. Don't know how Frank read it any other way.

[Lok1 :)]

I have a possible solution, primarly because this is a problem i've always seen with the Matrix mechanics and seeing this thread gave me the inspiration. I now plan to impose this new rule (or a variaton of) in my new game.
Please read it all the way through before comenting

Basic concept: Program rateing cap= both attribute and system.
Reasoning: This makes very little or no sence with normal computers, but because a decker (or TM) controlls the increadibly complex programs to influnce the matrix, even with training you have to be a real geniuse to run the more complex programs out their, the average joe just dosn't have the brain power to be able to even begin to use a high level spoof/whatever program.
--------
Now this is a rough concept just plugging this into a game will likely lead to disaster so hear are a few ways to taper it to fit and make it make more sense, along with some similer solitions:
Drop the system cap. (and give system another use)
Make either system or attributes a cap for hits instead.
Impose a pently for useing programs/complex forms above your logic.
Make it TMs only. (not adviced)
Make it Deckers only. (depends on how you view TMs)
Increas glitch chances by the ammount the rateing exedes your Logic. (a tade weak, perhaps increasing it by X2)
-----
All in all this is a fairly balaned way to make Deckers (or technomancers) have to be smart fellers to do their job.

[Udoshi]

@Udoshi: This doesn't do what you think it does. Capping hits by logics either makes Agents/IC super awesome (as they are straight up and down better than the sys admin) or back door bans them (because they don't have a logic score). Now, banning them is obviously a good idea and should be encouraged but banning IC might be a bad idea. The other option moves away from the stated design goals.

Sorry, should have elaborated there. Substitute the Pilot rating for stats(this matrix is attribute+skill, remember?) - including logic., and its golden. Additionally, it nerfs agents slightly and puts greater emphasis on proper Payload configuration. Without the right program, it can't -get- any hits on tasks its not setup for. The most an IC or Agent will ever roll on any given task is 12 dice. No edge, no hotsim bonus, no Optimized hardware, no Specialties - and rating six ic/agents is rare anyway. Metahumans almost always do it better. Example: A rating 3 Dataworm rolls 6 dice to breach firewalls, across 3 attempts before giving up - and only six dice on opposed Stealth tests(capped by the stealth of 3 anyway). A clueless average user(log2/computer2) and standard firewall(3) are going to fall to that, but a character who knows what they are doing is going to realize what's up very quickly - as it should be, if you're placing emphasis on the people.

[Kerenshara]

It's actually the device rating, which is the rating of the agent - which will be 4 to 6. And they still don't actually have a logic score, there is just some words about using it in place of logic blahblahblah

Wait, where did I see only data on Agents up to R4? Did I miss something? Or am I mis-remembering something? Pricing only listed up to R4 when I was genning up a Decker (N)PC.

And they aren't "devices", they're programs. I guess technically the "device" rating would be their home node... maybe?

Anyway it doesn't matter, if you give them device rating 4, skills 4 and an R6 program, they are still better than a human system administrator (who's 3/3/6). Which is against your stated policy objective so there is no particular reason not to cut agents unless they add something helpful.

So you're putting a program of a higher RTG into a lower RTG Agent. I need to re-read that when I get home.

Anyway, if I was you and didn't want to just use Frank's matrix rules I'd

1) Cap hits by program rating

2) Change skill pools to skill + stats

3) Remove all reference to Access ID except for track and faking your trail.

4) Ban agents, remove the mobility from ICs and Pilot functions

5) Make it so that Databombs do damage equal to Rating + net hits on the defuse test.

6) Make it so one matrix perception test renders the entire node, but give the defender a 'reactive' roll to instantly render nodes that enter.

7 Then all you need to do is fix this



So a starting hacker cannot hack Zurich Orbital, the Pentagon and the Red Pagoda out of the box.

6)

OK, I got 1 and 2.

I've been unhappy with the hybrid (simplified?) AccesID taking the place of a login/MAC ID/IP Address, but I'd like something more concrete to make sure we're not talking apples and kiwis here.

What's the complaint about IC/Pilot mobility? And why ban Agents entirely?

I will go back and look at DataBombs; They already looked pretty ugly even as-is.

Can you explain #6? Maybe I'm totally misunderstanding the Matrix Perception rules, or I haven't caught something important that can be manipulated into a loophole you could drive a Rover through?

[Kerenshara]

Udoshi isn't suggesting capping hits but limiting rolls on extended tests, which is interesting. Not sure what it would do, it's nifty.

Also, because its bugging me: Detecting a hidden node is four successes unless you are trying to detect all the hidden nodes in an area in which case it's an extended test with a threshold of 15 and an interval of 1 combat turn. Don't know how Frank read it any other way.

The caps are to any single DICE ROLL. An extended test is a combined sequence of SEPARATE but RELATED dice rolls. Does that change the argument at all? Or did I miss something again?

[Udoshi]

Why? Their Forms take the place of ProgRtg, and they can go higher than a Decker. Or did I miss something?

Okay. I'm going to try to tackle the problem with how this messes things up for technomancers. I don't play one, so I'm likely going to miss something.

Using mental stats accentuates the importance of Mental Stats for Technomancers. In addition, it clouds some issues. TMs are not the same programmers as their mothers and fathers. TMs reach out and command the bits. If emphasis is placed on Logic, the defining characteristic between TM and hacker is "language". Intuition is interesting. If one argues that virtuakinetic abilities are intuitive, and places many of the rolls on intuition, it forces all TMs to be rather insightful folk.
The amplification gets worse if the Stream uses one of these mental stats for Fading. Thus the stat used may be assigned by Tradition and boy howdy does that get bogged down and complicated fast.
BlueMax

First, I'm assuming everyone knows TM's are kind of BP starved - and now they're karma starved, too. Because thats what complex forms need to learn, to advance, and you only get a handful at start. And with Hits capped at Program Rating, they're kind of underpowered for stuff they don't know how to do. Example: "I want to edit something. Okay, what's your edit Complex Form? Uh, i don't have one. ...then you can't. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif) ". You can get eight CF's to start, out of twenty, and bringing each one to 1 costs 2 karma. I don't like that math. Oh yeah. And you have to save for submersion too. Lame.

Second, build points. Now you need Logic AND intuition AND all the normal resonance junk, leading to more BP problems. What if someone wants an Alternate Stream from unwired? Now you need Charisma too. Ouch.

Third. Threading. You now basically -have- to use it to get Complex Forms for stuff you don't know - or to raise a CF at one to a useful level. I'm assuming if you don't have a program, your hits are capped at zero. Yes, it fixes the problem of threading stealth up to an absurd level and being completely invisible on the matrix(under this system, stealth 12 would limit you to 12 hits- you're never going to get that many anyway) - but that -2 distraction penalty to everything is going to kill you if you want to Trace someone AND use a Sniffer.

Fourth. Sprites. Assist Operation and Sustain Complex Form are now either slightly broken for how they're supposed to help a TM, or absolutely critical depending on how you look at it. So TM's are even more of a sprite wrangler than they are now.


Thats all that comes to mind right now. I'm sure someone else can chip in with stuff that system would mess up for them.

However, there's an easy fix for technomancers. A way to make them special, and have that Karma they spend on CF's and skills actually give a dice pool benefit. A decent way to reflect that TM's talk to computers in bizarre, sideways and often effective ways than other users is simple - let them use the old dice system on the matrix. ... that's it. The benefit from being a TechnoMancer is you get to skip the Attribute thing that burdens down all the other users who can't see the glory of the resonance like you do and just work with the code directly. A minor benefit is that it makes them more efficient at the Matrix than other people, under this system - Regular people need to pay out the nose to increase their Attribute to be more effective, as well as a Skill. A TM just needs to increase the skill, and CF's are cheap. Under the new system, i can see a TM player bitching about being 'forced' to spend karma on a ton of complex forms just so they can get 'one hit'. This solution bypasses the whole thing quite nicely.

[Udoshi]

The caps are to any single DICE ROLL. An extended test is a combined sequence of SEPARATE but RELATED dice rolls. Does that change the argument at all? Or did I miss something again?

Yeah, you did. Here, lemme help...

Udoshi isn't suggesting capping hits but limiting (The Total Number of) rolls on (a single series of) extended(and only extended) tests, which is interesting. Not sure what it would do, it's nifty.

Additions mine. Does that make more sense?
Example: Probing. You have a logic of 6. Thus, you may roll to Probe a firewall up to six times. This is a a completely seperate from the idea of capping hits by program rating.

[Kerenshara]

*snip stuff that's pretty on-target generally*

However, there's an easy fix for technomancers. A way to make them special, and have that Karma they spend on CF's and skills actually give a dice pool benefit. A decent way to reflect that TM's talk to computers in bizarre, sideways and often effective ways than other users is simple - let them use the old dice system on the matrix. ... that's it. The benefit from being a TechnoMancer is you get to skip the Attribute thing that burdens down all the other users who can't see the glory of the resonance like you do and just work with the code directly. A minor benefit is that it makes them more efficient at the Matrix than other people, under this system - Regular people need to pay out the nose to increase their Attribute to be more effective, as well as a Skill. A TM just needs to increase the skill, and CF's are cheap. Under the new system, i can see a TM player bitching about being 'forced' to spend karma on a ton of complex forms just so they can get 'one hit'. This solution bypasses the whole thing quite nicely.

Well, our PnP group's "rigger" is also our "decker" - and they're a TM. They're CONSTANTLY threading to get things to decent levels anyway, so I guess I don't see the change there. Maybe somebody else who has a lot of experience with multiple TMs can weigh in on THAT particular point. *grin*

As to the last bit, on one level, I like it.... a lot. I even considered it as essentially letting the Complex Forms be BOTH The Program AND the Attribute. It's abberant (as in: not like the others) but DOES take into account the 'mancer's unique abilities as well as how they do things. The fact that they're "learned" helps asuage me a bit, and in theory a lot of what the 'mancers are doing is supposed to be subconcious anyhow.

So, let's say I went with the original idea but left 'mancers mostly as-is but capped them at their Complex Form's RTG (since it's both Program AND Attribute)?

Essentially, we make brains important in (conventional) Decking, limiting the abilities of the Decker to the power of the tools they have to work with; We cap 'Mancers to their Complex Forms, which take the place of both Attribute AND Program in the grander scheme of things, representing their innate connection to the Matrix and all things wireless.

Fair enough? I kind of like the "motif" there, but how do the CrunchyBitsTM work out?

[Kerenshara]

Yeah, you did. Here, lemme help...

Additions mine. Does that make more sense?
Example: Probing. You have a logic of 6. Thus, you may roll to Probe a firewall up to six times. This is a a completely seperate from the idea of capping hits by program rating.

Aha! Ok, so it's a related side-discussion...

In that case, I happen to like the general reducing dice pool idea myself, but hey...

But since we're now essentially debating two separate (but related) ideas, would you (and everybody else weighing in on it) do ME the courtesy of somehow highlighting the "Alternate Extended Test" aspect or something? I'm REALLY trying to stay on top of this one, becuase I'm looking for real "stuff" to take to both my PbP game AND the PnP game I may wind up inheriting. I'd seriously appreciate it if you would.

[Udoshi]

So, let's say I went with the original idea but left 'mancers mostly as-is but capped them at their Complex Form's RTG (since it's both Program AND Attribute)?
Fair enough? I kind of like the "motif" there, but how do the CrunchyBitsTM work out?

Hm. If you're using the CF as a cap...... replace that with Resonance instead. That way you're not keeping track of a ton of different CF levels. Resonance caps most things for TM's anyway - and a resonance of 4-5 is still going to be about as good or better than a regular commlink decker.
So it'd be Skill+CF capped by resonance. In the case of Sprites, replace Resonance with Force.

Your CF's can't go higher than your resonance anyway - this just saves a step in limiting things. Also I like that the Resonance stat is a pretty solid guage of what a given TM is capable of, in this system. - it ALSO handily nerfs the 'rating 18 CF' problem rather simply. Under your way, with the CF as the cap, it would add 18 dice AND limit you to 18 hits. Thats just broken. Under my way, you can Thread and Assist Operation ALL you like, but you aren't going to benefit wholly from it unless you increase your Resonance too.

[Udoshi]

[font="Lucida Console"]
In that case, I happen to like the general reducing dice pool idea myself, but hey...

I dont, because it messes things up on the matrix. Yes, i agree there should be a limit of some sort to prevent some guy with totally insufficient experience from making a military firewall with a few years of effort, but that isn't it. Consider..... The Tracewar.

Trace User is a Computer+Trace Extended test that needs 10 hits to finish, and is a complex action. Stealth acts as a negative dice pool modifier.
Redirect Trace is complex action(not extended!). Hacking+Spoof opposed by Computer+Track. Any net hits increase the threshold for the trace.
Basically, the tracer is trying to push the hits up to ten, while the hacker is trying to shove it back down in order to not get caught, Black IC connection jamming makes the window smaller.

With the '-1 Reducing Dice Pool' rule, its a wonder anyone ever gets Tracked and mobbed by security because a spider tracing someone gets penalized every time he rolls. When you reach zero dice - blam, sorry, you failed, game over, try again when you've had a break. The hacker? Trace redirecting isn't an extended action - he can sit there and bounce his connection all over the place with impunity, and get no penalty to doing it forever. To be fair, a Spider -can- do things like Crash the offending hackers stealthware, beat up his icon and brain with attack and blackout to give him dice pool penalties before tracing, but still.

IF you limit the amount of times either party my roll by their Logic(i would make an exception in the case of redirecting traces) - the smarter hacker gets caught less, which makes much more sense. Or limiting it some -other- way. But the -1 per extended test makes me wince a little.

[Falconer]

I'm glancing at some of this. And while I disagree somewhat w/ using all the dice caps together on general principle, I understand where you're coming from. (I tend to be more of the school of he's an ultraspecialist... too bad the specialty doesn't come into play).

I don't really like your use of intuition. Intuition doesn't really need more uses. Also, speaking as someone who's been on both the white hat and black hat side of things. It's not really 'feel' it's your knowledge of systems and exploits. Not feeling your way through them.

To relate one idea I've been pounding out while trying to come up w/ other items to make skills more important than attributes. Turn the attribute into an old school style 'pool'. EG: 6 logic, you have 6 extra dice you can add to any test during this combat turn... refresh it every turn (not every pass).

Another idea would be to average the logic w/ the program rating.
Rating 2 program, logic 6... rating 4 average.

What's kind of a nice side effect of averaging is that it gives the high attribute player an edge when he has a lot more software loaded, and program degradation is an issue.

Though having just visited old friends at a LAN party this weekend... hardware matters... a lot. There's not a lot you can do when the wannabe sniper w/ the hitscan laser beam and super-gaming rig has you in his sights. Outside of the twitch, that's pure hardware advantage.