Alternate Hacking Systems, Post your own! Options

[Ascalaphus]

I've been thinking about that Authority system, and I do like it a lot. It gets rid of the clunky "low-level" business of trying to define the meaning of having various account privileges. It also helps move beyond specifics of RL-hacking.

I'm not entirely happy yet though. It still runs the risk of being a sub-game. Chopping it up into "macro-hacking" which is like legwork, and "micro-hacking" which is done at combat speeds would be a good step.

"Warez" is also an issue. While I want to make equipment and SOTA matter somehow, rating commlinks 1-6 is dull and results in everyone having rating 6 commlinks. Like medkits. Also, software has the free download issue. And even IF you have to pay for it, you'd still have access to a much bigger and faster market (the Matrix) than possible for physical items.

For hardware, I'm thinking about making them rather like guns; a couple of traits like Signal, Response, and maybe some other gimmicks. Instead of just choosing brute power, you get several different choices with each their own advantages and disadvantages. And I want cyberdecks to be one of those choices; more power, but bigger.

For software, I'm inclined towards abstraction; programs shouldn't necessarily be a kind of "gear". Anyone with Data Search will have programs. Only MacGuffin programs need mention, because they enable unusual hacking "maneuvers". All such programs will also invariably have unusual hardware requirements and/or copy protections that can't be easily circumvented.

[Draco18s]

For hardware, I'm thinking about making them rather like guns; a couple of traits like Signal, Response, and maybe some other gimmicks. Instead of just choosing brute power, you get several different choices with each their own advantages and disadvantages. And I want cyberdecks to be one of those choices; more power, but bigger.

Good plan.

System would be your "Computing Power" (eg, Requirements: Computer Power Rating 3+)
Response would be a modifier to effective lead. Aka, even if the system has +4 more Authority than you, but your Response is 2 higher, the effective Lead is +2. At least that's what I'd do for determining how long each hack action takes, higher lead more time. Better response, lower lead, less time per hack action.
Signal would really only be applicable in a wireless matrix.

For software, I'm inclined towards abstraction; programs shouldn't necessarily be a kind of "gear".

Personally I'd run with a "you have software X or you don't." Eg. "do you have a medkit?" not "what rating is the medkit?"

I suppose another comlink tidbit might be how many programs it can run at once (unrelated to response), so if there are 6 "this hack action requires [program]" actions, no comlink could ever run all 6 of those programs at once. You'd get maybe 3, which would limit your options between hacking moves depending on your strategy.

[Teulisch]

i was reading unwired again, and the section on pirate networks is interesting.

lets say you have data search 4, browse 4. you can buy 2 hits, which means you can find a new pirate network in 4 days. once you find that network, you could find and purchase (at 10% cost) your programs in a few minutes, as the interval is then by the combat turn. spending (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) 600 for a rating 6 hacking program after about 9 combat turns of searching is a good deal. an even better deal is how easy it is to find optimized, virus resistant ergonomic versions of those programs. sure the GM fiat thing comes into play here, but a lot of stuff makes too much sense not to be there.

honestly, i cant see any reason under the rules in unwired to not just charge hackers 10% of cost for programs and raise availability for programs to something like 20. its fairly simple and cheap to load a deck up so that the only question becomes how loaded programs impact your matrix initiative. this makes dicepools a lot easier to deal with in general. skill 4 rating 6 with +2 hot sim and +2 enchephalon 2 makes for some fun hacking rolls of 14 dice. and starts to make the fetch module seem a little bit redundant.

[Ascalaphus]

I'm wondering if we wouldn't be off not bothering with specific programs altogether. And dispense with tracking how many programs you can run and all that.

Just your Attribute+Skill; modifiers as dependent on what you're trying to do.

You have software; we don't care what software. If you have hacking skills, you are 99% likely to have hacking software.

[Wandering One]

I'm wondering if we wouldn't be off not bothering with specific programs altogether. And dispense with tracking how many programs you can run and all that.

Just your Attribute+Skill; modifiers as dependent on what you're trying to do.

You have software; we don't care what software. If you have hacking skills, you are 99% likely to have hacking software.

I can't agree with this more. While the system of using programs and combined ratings and deck stats... etc. are fun for number crunching, in the new system where you can pirate everything *cheaply* if you're a regular hacker... why bother? Up the prices on 'hacking comms' vs. standard comms and you've got the same price impact on starting hackers as you do otherwise, which is the only real restriction.

I like the idea of the authority point system, and it works well with the IP system, I think, with some tweaking. Not that SR can officially ever steal directly from Spycraft, but with enough rewording... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Draco18s]

I like the idea of the authority point system, and it works well with the IP system, I think, with some tweaking. Not that SR can officially ever steal directly from Spycraft, but with enough rewording... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I'm working on a writeup right now (on and off around work), but one of the things I did was give AR hackers 2 IPs, always, and VR hackers 4, always. This averts the issue of a drugged up AR hacker being better than the VR hacker.

I'm also using a hacking time table based on Lead like in Spycraft, though I've severely lowered the interval. At a lead of 9 it's only 10 minutes between each hack action. Down where players should be, Lead of 4, its down on a minute or less (VR hackers use "half the listed interval" because they get 4 actions in a pass vs. the AR hacker's 2 so it averts having to list everything as a number of complex actions, while not penalizing when the interval moves to "minutes").

[Dixie Flatline]

I can't agree with this more. While the system of using programs and combined ratings and deck stats... etc. are fun for number crunching, in the new system where you can pirate everything *cheaply* if you're a regular hacker... why bother? Up the prices on 'hacking comms' vs. standard comms and you've got the same price impact on starting hackers as you do otherwise, which is the only real restriction.

I like the idea of the authority point system, and it works well with the IP system, I think, with some tweaking. Not that SR can officially ever steal directly from Spycraft, but with enough rewording... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

That's why I kind of wanted to reduce everything down to a hacker commlink. As far as what was said above about everyone running a commlink 6, they wouldn't if it cost a half million nuyen or whatever. We're spoiled right now on a 10k maxed out commlink.

I'm just tired of the super granular matrix rules which are just enough real-world and detail oriented to encourage common sense, yet abstract enough that none of that common sense applies.

I also wasn't inferring that the above rules were all there was to hackers. I have no problem creating an extended system for legwork and adding other goodies into the bag of tricks. But that's not the main problem. The main problem is that the current matrix rules are crap and need a complete overhaul. I see where they were going, and I liked it, but under the surface the mechanics just don't strike me as fun or balanced.

Oh, and spycraft 1.0 *was* published under the OGL. That might open up some bits and pieces of it for licensing/cribbing. I'd have to read the OGL agreement at the front of the book to know for sure.

[Ascalaphus]

I just borrowed Spycraft, I'm gonna check it out too.

[Wandering One]

I also wasn't inferring that the above rules were all there was to hackers. I have no problem creating an extended system for legwork and adding other goodies into the bag of tricks. But that's not the main problem. The main problem is that the current matrix rules are crap and need a complete overhaul. I see where they were going, and I liked it, but under the surface the mechanics just don't strike me as fun or balanced.

There's also the concept of core vs. secondary rule books, which has fed SR for years. Thinking about this from a publishing perspective (instead of the home-rules perspective which we're currently discussing), imagine the core rules being this simplified set and the redonkulus matrix rules self contained in a secondary rulebook with a giant "Optional" stamped on the cover.

Why? Because, well, I still love the old SR2 matrix rules, the full out node dungeon, the number crunching and deck building and software programming and... well, you get it. It's just a different game. It's like randomly shoe-horning in a Star-Fox sim into the middle of a shadowrun. "Okay, your pilot hops into the simulator in the middle of the building and has to get a score of 1000 to turn off security..." "Wait, what? Who wants what on the pizza, I'll go pickup."

I could see legwork being a subset of the skills needed for public venues, and for more 'shadow oriented' ones, it would rely more on their matrix presence... kinda like a 'street cred' in the matrix. I can't see that being difficult to formulate a rule set for and would make sense... word of mouth gets you into Shadowland and private VPN's where you can contribute... and get information.

I think with enough use and abuse on the idea we could come up with a system that would satisfy the geeky gods who want to do a Johnny Mnemonic as well as a system with enough speed and intelligence the Sammy doesn't start doing target practice with gnats while waiting, and can also follow it. I mean, what's the point of being in the spotlight if noone's got a clue of what your 20 minutes of acting does until they finally hear the key words: "Okay, the cameras are off!"

[Draco18s]

One of the things I have in my new hacking rules is an entire section on how to bypass a maglock:

Maglock passkeys, forged passkeys, legitimate passkeys, duplicated passkeys (mechanically identical to stolen legit ones), and "Break it open already!" Aka "Cut the blue wire."

I even included a bonus to maglock passkeys and forged passkeys if you can get a hold of a legitimate one.

[Redcrow]

I just borrowed Spycraft, I'm gonna check it out too.

I just picked up a copy as well and while most D20 systems have never really appealed to me, I have to admit that from what I've read so far SpyCraft 2.0 looks like it could be a lot of fun. I may have to get my group to try it after our current SR campaing ends.

[Draco18s]

I just picked up a copy as well and while most D20 systems have never really appealed to me, I have to admit that from what I've read so far SpyCraft 2.0 looks like it could be a lot of fun. I may have to get my group to try it after our current SR campaing ends.

Its hard to get my group to switch and try new games, especially if the person who finds it (in this case, me) isn't willing to run the system.

So its unlikely that I'll ever get to try it out.

[Rand]

Spycraft 2.0 is neat, but very, very crunchy. The myriad of little rules are all over the place. Though, as far as d20 games go, it is one of the ony ones I would really consider playing (Fantasy Craft more likely).

As for hacking, it can be problematic, but just like being able to shoot a gun, hacking skills shouldn't only be the pervue of the hacker. Every runner should have computer, data search, and electronic warfare skills - if only as a defensive measure. They should all have the best Stealth program they can find, even if it is to just slow down a tracker. Also, it doesn't hurt if one or more can assist the hacker in taking on the corp facility as the facility is surely of a higher rating than the hacker.

That said, I agree with the attribute+skill+misc concept; it is done for the other aspects of the game, why do this differently? Also, if the highest end cyber/bioware costs an arm and a leg (literally, in some cases) why not hacking equipment?

As for the Medikit example bouncing around, I have already concidered it and have thought of this: Ratings 1-3 (civilian/home kits) = Rating Squared x 100 (1 = 100, 2 = 400, 3 = 900); Ratings 4-6 (Professional) = Rating Squared x 500 (4 = 8,000 12R, 5 = 12,500 15R, 6 = 18,000 18R); resupplies cost 10% total cost of the medikit being resupplied, and have the same availiblity (controlled substances are, well, controlled.)

The same can be done for the programs which could be the limiting factor of the number of successes you can get from a skill check - sort of like the power level of a spell. Increase the costs and availibility which means that the hacker has room to grow and things to shoot for.

The idea of "spoofing as you go" through the corp dungeon, doesn't make too much sense as the sensors aren't what you would be hacking, what they are connected to is. For the most part, runs are "after-hours" jobs, done when the wage-slaves go home (or where ever) so the idea of wirelessly attacking the place is not usually an option - most of that would be shut down at night as there is no one but security there to use it (and you don't want your security guys to be watching p()rn when they should be watching the multi-million nuyen facility). In this case, the previous editions were a bit more accurate: the hacker had to plug into the system on site to do anything. Daytime would be for the very slow poking around to get a feel for the place, maybe learn the types of defenses they will need to deal with and such,a nd maybe slipping in a worm or something to help them on the run later.

I don't really like all the extended tests for hacking skills, sorry, but eventually you give up. I have tied it to the characters willpower; they will only do as many rolls as they have points of willpower before they give up (getting frustated and the like - it happens now, so it would happen then). If they want to force themselves, I will allow them a composure (2) roll, every net success means another roll. Otherwise, I prefer to set a static TN and they roll for that, with me determining how long it took for them to dig up the information, or whatever.

The Authority Point System (APS) seems like it mike be workable, will look into it withmy Spycraft books as well.

[Ascalaphus]

The Spycraft system is pretty interesting. It would take several changes to incorporate into SR though.

SR combat is sequential, while the Spycraft system is parallel. That can be changed though. Better initiative would enable you to put up the perfect defenses by delaying your action to see what the lower-initiative person is doing; this is okay if the benefits from matching attacks to defenses aren't too excessive. The last strategy used by predator and prey would remain on the table to affect the contest.

IC should be able to take the place of a spider to protect a system; but it should be better at defense than attacking. If IC loses control of a system, it can't recapture it, at that point you need to call the spider.

I'm thinking maybe the chase analogy shouldn't be taken too far. Having a core war between three different sides should be possible too. What about the following:

- Every "Person" in a system has a number of APs. You need > 0 APs to stay in the system. 10 APs denotes unlimited Root authority.
- Persons can carry a list of other Persons and how many APs those Persons should have. For example, the IC's list says the SysAdmin should have 10 APs, the SysOp 8 and the accountants should have 3 APs.
- All actions require a minimum amount of APs to enact. Otherwise the hardware will not process your instructions.
- There is an action to detect the AP level of another Person. IC uses this to check if people haven't hacked their way up beyond their intended privileges. If they do, they're classed as intruders.
- There is an action (at a lot of AP) to put yourself on another Person's trusted list. With enough APs, you can cause the IC to believe you belong in the system.
- There are actions to increase or decrease Person's APs.

Furthermore, IC can have Logic and "Willpower", but not Intuition. Some actions use Intuition, particularly attacks. This means IC has a hard time attacking foreign systems.

Also, certain actions require special software, hardware, or access to the target system's hardware.


---

As for hacking being doable by other characters...

On the one hand, I might cut the number of computer skills; Cybercombat might disappear, and Electronic Warfare might become Signals Warfare. I'm probably going to merge Computers, Software and Hacking into 1-2 skills, with as the end result a single hacking skill group: Signals Warfare, Hardware, Hacking and Data Search*. That means it gets within closer reach of other "classes".

On the other hand, I'm inclined to increase the basic security rating of most devices, so that you don't quite need to be as skilled for your commlink to be safe. Elementary security precautions (wifi-disabled cyberware) will reduce the amount of risk hacking poses to most characters. A smartlink should be safe if it's set up to be that way.

On the gripping hand, TacNets and drones, which are nearly useless without wireless communication, remain vulnerable.


* Seriously, it took me forever to figure out what exactly Computers did.

[Draco18s]

Just as an update on how much work rewriting the hacking system is, the write up I have is 25,000 character (including spaces) which, I believe, is just over half of the size limit on a single post (40k characters?). That's 11 pages in Times New Roman 12 point font, single spaced.

And I haven't even dealt with Technomancers.

[kzt]

Nancy Regan had the right idea about Technomancers.

[Draco18s]

Nancy Regan had the right idea about Technomancers.

Who?

[kzt]

"Just Say No" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Draco18s]

"Just Say No" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Hehe.

In any case, I think I can work them in. Their living node is just like a comlink, so they lose complex forms and Threading (oh no, whatever shall they do with their Karma?) but otherwise they'd fit in pretty well.

[Synner667]

Just as an update on how much work rewriting the hacking system is, the write up I have is 25,000 character (including spaces) which, I believe, is just over half of the size limit on a single post (40k characters?). That's 11 pages in Times New Roman 12 point font, single spaced.

And I haven't even dealt with Technomancers.

Much, much, much too long and intricate.

I thought the idea was to come up with something that's different to what currently exists, and different in it's use ??
I've not seen discussion and testing - just individuals putting their view forward.

[Bira]

Individuals putting their view forward was about what I expected here, actually. My view is in the opening post, and can be summed as thus: programs shouldn't matter at all, and hacking a node should be handled in a single test, so that the overall action can move along as quickly as possible. My system is a modified version of the rules from GURPS Action 2 (which is what I'm actually using), pitting the hacker's skill against the system administrator's, both of which are modified by the potency of their respective hardware. Personally, I think writing 40.000 word alternate systems, or even writing rules for programs at all, are fool's errands (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) . Don't let me stop you, though.

[Draco18s]

Much, much, much too long and intricate.

Keep in mind that I'm not writing a four line fluff here, I'm writing out and putting pen to paper for the actual crunch, including an example, equipment cost modifications (its necessary if software is free and abstracted out), and short (one line) fluff rationalizing design choices.*

The four line fluff is that a hack is an extended opposed test between the Predator and the Prey. Multiple participants can engage on either side (see: teamwork) and vie for control, each round consisting of an opposed check (winner gets a (potentially long term) bonus) and then an option to forgo long term advantage for short term gain (for example: sacrifice total control of a system in order to download this file right now). The bigger an advantage the Prey has, the longer it takes the Predator to make the same amount of gain. The better the hardware on both sides, the more they can push things towards being to their advantage.

*For example, as I've made remote hacking impossible as I've broken up the Matrix topology (you don't put your security server on the internet at large, that would be stupid) Signal has almost no meaning, so I made Signal the limit on the number of Agents that can be running in a node. Signal is network speed, each agent takes up a certain amount of network bandwidth or processing, thus Signal is an indication on that maximum limit.

[Redcrow]

Signal is network speed, each agent takes up a certain amount of network bandwidth or processing, thus Signal is an indication on that maximum limit.

Perhaps Signal could be a double-edged sword in that a high signal allows you to have more active agents, but also makes it quicker/easier for someone on the other end to trace your Signal? Just a random thought.

[hobgoblin]

reminds me of the sr3 exapnded rule where increased bandwidth resulted in quicker trace. But back then a download could extend over several turns.

[Draco18s]

Perhaps Signal could be a double-edged sword in that a high signal allows you to have more active agents, but also makes it quicker/easier for someone on the other end to trace your Signal? Just a random thought.

Not a bad one, but I think I won't go with it, because I'd like it if there was a good reason to take high signal Ratings. I still have to balance traces, I think (they might be taking too long; I haven't sat down and played these rules out yet, just looked at the basic "how long until system take over" or "how long until hacker banned from system"). As well as work out how a completed trace even figures into the scenario at all.

(Random thought was that a hacker couldn't get booted from a system--eg. hacker loses--until a trace was completed, but that means that the hacker would always win: breaking a trace is much easier than completing it! Not to mention that a good hacker (rating 6) gets full system control of a mediocre system (rating 4) in 4 hacking rounds* or about 12 seconds).

But I'll consider it. Might make it "number of agents in use" rather than full signal. Agents don't grant that much of a benefit to attacking a system, so having traces get a +1 bonus isn't that big of a deal, where as +6 (for having the possibility of 6 Agents) is kind of suck.

*For comparison, a rating 6 system beats a rating 4 hacker in 3 hacking rounds, or about 72 seconds.