Unbreakable Encryption, Use it today! Options

[Draco18s]

The matrix rules in SRI, SRII, and Virtual Realities 2.0 were slaves to too many masters. We were trying to replicate the Gibsonian experience, while still acknowledging "how things are supposed to work", and the two schema are not compatible.

They are not, not in the slightest. The Gibsonian experience is "there's a locked door between you and the target" which has many solutions (break the door, pick the lock, and climb in through the window) all of which are represented in the Matrix as a single program: Exploit.

In so doing this you leave it up to the player to decide what "Exploit" does, except that they don't give a damn (as well as leaving it to the GM to describe the "door," which only matters to one player, so often gets left out). What you want them to be able to say is, "I climb in through the window." *

Unfortunately, what the matrix is doing is being the locked door in the meat world, which is where those creative solutions come in, and the Hacking part is the "I pick the lock" (combat is breaking the door, and stealth is climbing in through the window).

What gives rise to the Gibsonian experience is allowing the player a range of options to solve a problem, not telling them that the problem is an abstract construct of your imagination, and the solution is just as fuzzy. They'll give you a blank stare, look at their sheet, and go "I use the Exploit program. There's nothing else I have that would do that," which is boring.

*I actually built a technomancer like this once, where I would--on the fly; it was a pbp game, so both I and the GM had the time to come up with these details--decide what form my CFs took when I used them (being a crazed lunatic with sever identity issues), only to find that in practice I'd built an unplayable character: I had no Stealth (the concept was originally designed for a campaign where it wouldn't have mattered).

[Demonseed Elite]

Thanks Tom, I do understand what you were trying to say now. And I agree with it. That division between Gibsonian presentation and mechanical structure is very difficult to reconcile. I think Fourth Edition tried to address it in its own way, by trying to take some of the Gibsonian presentation out of the equation, but it was still challenging.

[Draco18s]

Thanks Tom, I do understand what you were trying to say now. And I agree with it. That division between Gibsonian presentation and mechanical structure is very difficult to reconcile.

I think the problem lies in the fact that a Gibsonian presentation turns hacking into a subgame that rivals D&D 3.5's grapple rules. You can't get that level of detail without forgoing the abstraction.

You have to realize that the two ideals (Gibsonian presentation and an integrated mechanics) aren't just polar opposites but do not even exist on a continuum. There is no middle ground and any attempt to create one will merely destroy the two ideals (the sum is less than the parts).

[TomDowd]

TomDowd, thank you for that excellent post. I must admit that I don't envy your position of having to justify design decisions made 20 years ago...

Fortunately in this case I'm not having to justify anything, but rather elaborate why I agree with everyone that they didn't work. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

TomD

[Draco18s]

Anyone got comments on my suggested fix? People screaming left and right that if I can't offer a fix I can't bitch.

[Heath Robinson]

I think that increasing CFs is too expensive in your system. You're charging as much as RAW between 1 and 3 (twice as much for hacking CFs) and then more for every point afterwards. The prices in RAW have been called too expensive when you rolled skill, and attributes are more expensive than skills.

Which is to say that most rolls are Computing or Hacking, and each point of Logic is equivalent to 2.5 skill points. Assuming that you don't link some programs to other attributes entirely, that is a general loss of half a skill point per dice. I think that CFs have to be cheaper than RAW under your system, else TMs will see their DPs shrink relative to Hackers. They certainly shouldn't be getting more expensive.

[Draco18s]

I think that increasing CFs is too expensive in your system. You're charging as much as RAW between 1 and 3 (twice as much for hacking CFs) and then more for every point afterwards. The prices in RAW have been called too expensive when you rolled skill, and attributes are more expensive than skills.

Given that I was face down on a table getting a massage at the time, I couldn't have looked up what the costs were by RAW, so I guessed. I pulled a number out of my ass.

Which is to say that most rolls are Computing or Hacking, and each point of Logic is equivalent to 2.5 skill points. Assuming that you don't link some programs to other attributes entirely, that is a general loss of half a skill point per dice. I think that CFs have to be cheaper than RAW under your system, else TMs will see their DPs shrink relative to Hackers. They certainly shouldn't be getting more expensive.

I had intended for them to be cheaper, but I picked a number that "felt right" and happened to pick one that was higher than RAW.

And I would link some programs to other stats, but I'd have to sit down and take the time to map out each one. The post was a 1 hour contemplation followed by a brain dump onto the forums before I forgot it.

[Heath Robinson]

It's not like I'm concerned. I figured you'd not remembered the RAW costs. My signature says "</pedant>" for a reason., though. I had to explain why the costs needed to go down, and couldn't even stay at the RAW levels. There are 26 or so CFs, but the actually useful subset is generally something like 9-12. TMs need to be able to acquire at least 9 CFs up to the 4-5 level.


The idea of using Attribute + Program (+ Skill) is interesting, since Agents don't have Mental Attributes, and neither do Sprites. That intentional?

[Crusher Bob]

Anyone got comments on my suggested fix? People screaming left and right that if I can't offer a fix I can't bitch.

My first impression is that your fix doesn't start from where a matrix re-write needs to start. You'll note that Frank's systems starts with answering questions like:

Why do people participate in the Matrix?
Because not participating in the Matrix is more dangerous. (See: naked brain hacking)

Why does the hacker need to be a guy, rather than a box of computers that my mage pushes the 'Go! Go!' button on?
Because actually having a brain hooked up to the computer makes it a whole lot more effective.

Why does the hacker need to be a guy that actually comes along with the team, rather than a guy in a wheelchair in Malaysia that we just call on the phone when we need any hacking done?
Because most of the really cool hacking stuff needs to be within high-density signal range, which is quite close, compared to Malaysia.

What does the hacker actually have to do during the parts of the game that aren't directly related to getting the paydata out of the target computers?
Why, everything. They can Jedi Mind Trick, they can Taxman, they can bake you an orgasm in a cake...

And once he has all those questions answered, the actual rules mechanics of Frank's system follow. You've stated with the rules mechanics first.

------------------

Now, here's an outline of a 'carrot' based Matrix approach, rather than Franks stick based approach:

Why do people participate in the Matrix?
Because it makes you over 9000 times more awesome when you are hooked up. How does that work? It works a bit like google-fu and Wikipedia. But it's not like reading Wikipedia, it's like knowing everything on Wikipedia.

Say you get into a gun-fight, how the matrix going to help you? Because when you are hooked up to the Matrix you 'know' just about everything every human who has been alive knows about gun-fights. You 'know' what to do, what not to do, and so on.

And the Matrix is so 'big' and 'complete' that anything your runner could possibly want to do already has thousands of helpful 'guides' already up on the Matrix.

System Stuff
When connected to the Matrix, you get +3 bonus dice to everything. Yes everything. Shooting, running, jumping, intimidating people, singing, making love to your wife, everything.

But we don't want to roll a bunch of extra dice all the time, so we really only track who has a 'Matrix Advantage' over the other side. If you are connected, and the other side isn't, then you get 3 bonus dice against them.

For those who like to live dangerously, you can got 'hot' this gives you an additional +2 Matrix bonus dice. Of course, it opens you up to black IC and all sorts of nasty things, but sometimes you need that extra bit of edge.

The Smartlink is a precursor to this tech, in that is gives you a bunch of 'knowledge' about how to shoot guns. But the nigh infinite knowledge about how to shoot guns to be found on the Matrix can give you bigger bonuses. Your smartlink is now a backup in case you get dis-connected.

Why does the hacker need to be a guy, rather than a box of computers that my mage pushes the 'Go! Go!' button on?
Because the pattern analysis required by 2070 google-fu is not yet possible to program.

Why does the hacker need to be a guy that actually comes along with the team, rather than a guy in a wheelchair in Malaysia that we just call on the phone when we need any hacking done?
This system of rules is fine with the hacker contact in Malaysia.

What does the hacker actually have to do during the parts of the game that aren't directly related to getting the paydata out of the target computers?
What happens when a lot of how you are acting comes from 'Google' and a hacker Google-bombs you?

System Stuff
So you are having a conversation with a guy, both of you are using all the various facial recognition, lying detection, etc, etc stuff provided by the Matrix. So there is no net Matrix advantage. But then your hacker manages to Google-bomb the other guy with 'everything my guy says is 100% true'. So now you have a Matrix advantage on him, and get +3 dice.



-------------------

So now, everyone wants to be connected, even if it makes them vulnerable to Matrix shenanigans. And, sometimes, people will even go to hot-sim and make themselves vulnerable to Black IC, because they want a extra 2 dice to dodge those bullets you are shooting at them.

[Sengir]

Attribute + Skill + (Equipment) is the basic building block of all ShadowRun tests (the meaning equipment varies from skill to skill and does not mean your gun, it does however cover your smartlink)

In the matrix you cannot perform a matrix action unless you have the program for it, this is similar to not being able to default on (some) skills.

Attribute + Program + (Skill)

I know this has been beaten to death, but the way hacking (in the meaning of "gaining illegal access to a system") works IRL is that you need a good program and know how to use it. And what is so unintuitive or complicated about using skill+program, anyway? You have a program and a skill, you roll an extended test based on those two values against the system's firewall, the system uses its own programs against your stealth. The only thing which is a bit out of the line is the fact that the system uses two programs to detect you and not skill + program

[Ascalaphus]

I'll go post my own ideas later today, but I'll comment on the stats first; Programs are to Attribute+Skill in the Matrix as Guns are to Attribute+Skill in a gunfight. I think in my writeup programs won't have ratings AT ALL. They'll have some attributes and traits that describe what they do, however.

I'll try to make the system resemble guns&spells as much as possible. I'll try to downplay brainhacking, because that's just not the flavor I want (possible technical feasibility ignored.)

Importantly, I want to somehow insert something clearly missing: programs/attacks that damage hardware.

Finally, I want to downplay Agents, separate them from IC and Pilots. Frank did nicely with that.

[D2F]

Anyone got comments on my suggested fix? People screaming left and right that if I can't offer a fix I can't bitch.

The idea is pretty much the same concept as is. You just throw the attribute into all of that on top of the already used dice pools. It does not address any of the concerns raised in this thread, like conflicting logic of the matrix architecture, implausibe encryption rules and data security.

I may have missed something important and if I did, please point it out to me, but from what I read (which may include a lack of reading comprehension on my part), I couldn't see anything that would fix any of the true problems of the matrix rules in SR.

[Draco18s]

The idea of using Attribute + Program (+ Skill) is interesting, since Agents don't have Mental Attributes, and neither do Sprites. That intentional?

Yes. People should be better at hacking than computers.

My first impression is that your fix doesn't start from where a matrix re-write needs to start. You'll note that Frank's systems starts with answering questions like:

I'll get to your list later, only have a few minutes right now. I wasn't thinking about all of that all at once, and some parts of it I disagree are required. For example: why do people participate on the internet now? Is it dangers to not be online?

I know this has been beaten to death, but the way hacking (in the meaning of "gaining illegal access to a system") works IRL is that you need a good program and know how to use it. And what is so unintuitive or complicated about using skill+program, anyway? You have a program and a skill, you roll an extended test based on those two values against the system's firewall, the system uses its own programs against your stealth. The only thing which is a bit out of the line is the fact that the system uses two programs to detect you and not skill + program

Because Program + Skill means two things:
1) In order to be a "decent" hacker, you need to pay out karma for a minimum of 2 skills up to a minimum rating of 3, in addition to buying the 6 or so required programs.
2) Logic has no benefit. Einstein given the best software in the world is going to be just as good at it as a 12 year old "special education" student.
I addressed those two things in my post.

The idea is pretty much the same concept as is. You just throw the attribute into all of that on top of the already used dice pools. It does not address any of the concerns raised in this thread, like conflicting logic of the matrix architecture, implausibe encryption rules and data security.

Having only pondered the problem for an hour I did not get around to solving those issues. Encryption is something very tricky to deal with in a game mechanics sense. If it can be broken in less than a day with little to no skill, then its worthless. But if it takes more than a few minutes, even with the best mind on the problem, the players can't do anything about it. ShadowRun has both forms of encryption (regular can be cracked in seconds, supersecure can never be cracked, ever). Finding a middle ground is not a trivial problem to solve (and I don't think FT's take on the matter did either).

[nezumi]

The matrix rules in SRI, SRII, and Virtual Realities 2.0 were slaves to too many masters....

I know you play Shadowrun now (please don't shatter my fragile dreams if you don't). Having seen the SR4 rules, and perhaps some other house rules tossed about, what do YOU use?

BTW:
Paul Hume, who wrote the magic rules, is a practicing hermetic magician and wrote the SR rules to match to a great extent his world view.

I can definitely say that:
1) Shadowrun got me interested in studying real magic more (not that I'm a magician, but I'm hugely into magic, mythology and Jungian psychology)
2) I always appreciated that, whenever I read regarding magic, it never seriously conflicted with what Shadowrun had already established in my head (except for the whole, you know, casting fireballs in three seconds bit - but that's just because we're waiting for 2012).

(Oh yeah, I would have to say 2012 is the one exception - when I was in Tikal and asked our guide if in 2012 dragons would reappear and people would transform into orks and trolls, he said no, the calendar would just restart. But I wouldn't call him a reliable source. He also said that the Mayans sacrificed primarily fruits and gourds, and only very rarely people. It's PR spin, I tell you.)

[D2F]

Because Program + Skill means two things:
1) In order to be a "decent" hacker, you need to pay out karma for a minimum of 2 skills up to a minimum rating of 3, in addition to buying the 6 or so required programs.
2) Logic has no benefit. Einstein given the best software in the world is going to be just as good at it as a 12 year old "special education" student.
I addressed those two things in my post.

Logic should not factor into hacking rolls. Logic is an attribute that mainly correlates to learning capacity and memory retrieval. As Sengir pointed out correctly, actual hacking is about knowing how to use your software, how to exploit existing software and how to manage hardware resources.
Knowing how to use a softweare is not covered by the Logic attribute, but by the Software skill (or the hacking skill in the case of hacking). The skill represents the available, already leanred and ready to apply knowledge the character possesses. Logic would be relevant in aquiring that knowledge in the forst place, but once it's there, it shouldn't factor in as a main contributor anymore.
If you want to use Logic in its "raw brain power" function, emulating mental flexibility and solving complex problems, then you can use Logic as a limiting factor for your software skill. Just rule that your software (or hacking) skill can not provide more dice to the roll than your Logic attribute. I think that would be a much more elegant and much more plausible route than overblown dice pools.
And to answer a question not yet asked: why are program ratings still plausible? Because not all software can do the same task with the same efficiency. Compare MS Paint to Photoshop, for excemple, or Notepad to Word, or Windows Calc to SPSS... More sophisticated software allows for better functionality and should therefore be reflected in dice rolls.
You can be a math genius, but with Windows calc it would still take you several weeks to run a factor analysis on a questionaire with 180 items, when SPSS can do the same thing in seconds. Software matters.

Oh and as a minor sidenote: a skill a rating 3 means professional level knowledge in that field. What makes you think you should need more than rating 3 to be a decent hacker (given proper software)?

I don't have abetter solution myself, but I don't comlain about the matrix rules, either. Yes, they are unrealistic, yes they are defying basic logic, yes they are poorly documented and riddled with holes. But they work for the most part and if anyone wants to change them, they can always house rule them. For someone with no computerknowledge, whatsoever, they'd even be fine.

[Sengir]

2) Logic has no benefit. Einstein given the best software in the world is going to be just as good at it as a 12 year old "special education" student.
I addressed those two things in my post.

And what's wrong with that? Einstein would have no clue how to use a modern computer (=> low computer skill) and breaking an encryption does not get any faster just because you place a genius at the keyboard. It gets faster if you have an efficient (high rating) algorithm/program and are skilled at using it (high skill)...the former usually being more important.

[Draco18s]

Logic should not factor into hacking rolls. Logic is an attribute that mainly correlates to learning capacity and memory retrieval.

Yet Software (or more accurately, Hacking and Computers) have the linked attribute of Logic. That's got to mean something, right?

Oh and as a minor sidenote: a skill a rating 3 means professional level knowledge in that field. What makes you think you should need more than rating 3 to be a decent hacker (given proper software)?

Because at the best available software you have 9 dice. No one wants a mere 9 dice at hacking. In the entire game there is only one thing you can do that doesn't take into account your meat statistics: hacking.

Why? Because computers are doing all the work.

But that's the problem. If the computer is doing all the work, then what do you need a hacker for?

[Crusher Bob]

The 'problem' with assuming that your skill level fully represents your actual ability to do that task is that that's not how all the other skills in the game work. With every other skill in the game, your ability with a task is some stat + skill. So the greatest doctor in the world is not just some guy with medicine 6, he also needs the appropriate stat (logic?) to back it up. So the greatest hacker in the world should also need to have a high stat. Personally, I find the Stat + skill + program die pool to be clunky, but I find the skill +program rule clashes with how every other subset of the rules is written.

[Draco18s]

Why do people participate in the Matrix?

Why does the hacker need to be a guy, rather than a box of computers that my mage pushes the 'Go! Go!' button on?

Why does the hacker need to be a guy that actually comes along with the team, rather than a guy in a wheelchair in Malaysia that we just call on the phone when we need any hacking done?

What does the hacker actually have to do during the parts of the game that aren't directly related to getting the paydata out of the target computers?

1) Why wouldn't they? The matrix enables faster communication to anywhere on the planet at a minimum of effort and skill. Ease of data storage, retrieval, and sorting.

2) This is one of the biggest problems that ShadowRun has: that the human is unnecessary. I am going to use the same answer as Frank, that having a human being involved makes the computer better.

3) This is another oddball. In the real world you'd want to be closer than father, due to latency, but apparently the 6th world doesn't have that issue (routing through two toasters, a vending machine, and three pairs of underwear doesn't have any noticeable effect on how fast you are). I don't think Frank properly explains why the human needs to be on-site (your summary made sense, but I didn't get that out of Frank's post). Personally I'd advocate latency reasons as well: the farther away you are, the harder it is to be good. But if you're sufficiently good, you can be farther away. Of course, even in a wireless world, there'd still be the equivalents of Closed Circuit systems. Systems that cannot be accessed from the outside, period.

4) Frank's answer goes too far. If the mage can't mind-trick because its too powerful (nearly everyone disallows Control Thoughts), why did we let the hacker have that power? The other things the hacker can do:

• Open locked doors
• Call the elevator, even though its been disabled for security reasons
• Cancel alarms
• Reduce automated security measures effectiveness ("haha, your turrets just blew each other up! Ooh, look out for that one though, seems its got its friendlies backwards!")

And that's off the top of my head. The hacker shouldn't be all powerful (Franks rules let them be), but sufficiently powerful to cause havok with machines. It should be trivial for a hacker to go "that turret is mine." On the other hand, they shouldn't be able to go "All Your Base Are Belong To Us" on the entire building's network from a safe location.

[Demonseed Elite]

2) This is one of the biggest problems that ShadowRun has: that the human is unnecessary. I am going to use the same answer as Frank, that having a human being involved makes the computer better.

Frank goes a bit further in addressing that, doesn't he? I mean, by changing the test mechanics to include Attributes, most computers will no longer be as good as a human + software at hacking, because most computers don't have Attributes.

But that's a controversial rule change, as we can see from the posts above.

[Draco18s]

Frank goes a bit further in addressing that, doesn't he?

He wants everyone to willingly be a zombie, because then your brain won't get eaten by zombies.

He wrote up a ton of fluff on why its a Bad Idea to not be on the matrix to justify his rules, and people vehemently object to that fluff but are OK with the rules (except the brain hacking part) which adds attributes into the equation.

I can use the very same fluff (taking out the brain hacking) to justify doing it my way too.

[Demonseed Elite]

He wants everyone to willingly be a zombie, because then your brain won't get eaten by zombies.

He wrote up a ton of fluff on why its a Bad Idea to not be on the matrix to justify his rules, and people vehemently object to that fluff but are OK with the rules (except the brain hacking part) which adds attributes into the equation.

I can use the very same fluff (taking out the brain hacking) to justify doing it my way too.

The brain hacking is separate from the issue of justifying why hackers should be people and not computers, though. Both are issues that Frank addresses, but they aren't directly dependent on each other.

[Yerameyahu]

Crusher Bob, just use one of the alternate computer skill rules right there in the book.

[Ascalaphus]

I think "brains make computers more powerful" is a very elegant way to justifying hackers as well as spiders, AND eliminating Agent Smith scenarios. Add in the promise that "biochips that will make hackers obsolete are almost possible" for the proper desperate tone.

The best reason for on-site hackers is that any paydata will only be on offline systems; also, that many facilities have defenses that require combined hardware/software solutions (and hackers tend to excel at hardware too.) I don't see why this is such a big problem. The R&D server is simply not connected to the Matrix.

[Blade]

Be careful with "Brains make computers more powerful".
It can also mean that agents/CI are worthless and that a hacker will be able to hack everything that isn't connected to a brain, which would mean that you NEED a spider for a system to be secure.