IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Defeating Scramble IC, 3rd Edition Decking Question
Swing Kid
post Dec 28 2010, 05:37 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 189
Joined: 21-April 04
From: Usually in the Nexus
Member No.: 6,266



I have a question for you old-schoolers.

If you defeat Scramble IC that is on a file by attacking it, does that remove the encrypted aspect of the file? Meaning, once it has been suppressed/crashed, can the file be downloaded normallly?

I see in the SR3 rulebook (p228) that it can be attacked and destroyed/suppressed, but I can't tell by the verbage if doing so will make the file accessible.

Also, during such cybercombat, should I just assume that on the IC's initiative, it just tries the Scramble Test that it describes for failed decrypt attempts, or simply have the Scramble Tests happen once/every time it is attacked?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Link
post Dec 28 2010, 01:18 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 519
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Queensland
Member No.: 3,180



QUOTE (Swing Kid @ Dec 28 2010, 06:37 AM) *
If you defeat Scramble IC that is on a file by attacking it, does that remove the encrypted aspect of the file? Meaning, once it has been suppressed/crashed, can the file be downloaded normallly?
I see in the SR3 rulebook (p228) that it can be attacked and destroyed/suppressed, but I can't tell by the verbage if doing so will make the file accessible.

Just like Access & Slave nodes, it appears that crashing the IC through combat leaves the file unprotected.
QUOTE (Swing Kid @ Dec 28 2010, 06:37 AM) *
Also, during such cybercombat, should I just assume that on the IC's initiative, it just tries the Scramble Test that it describes for failed decrypt attempts, or simply have the Scramble Tests happen once/every time it is attacked?

Using SR3/Matrix it's unclear how the IC reacts to being attacked.
VR2 has the IC attempt to destroy the data on every attack action against it.
SR2 Scramble IC
[ Spoiler ]

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Swing Kid
post Dec 28 2010, 03:47 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 189
Joined: 21-April 04
From: Usually in the Nexus
Member No.: 6,266



Thanks Link, that's great info!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Dec 28 2010, 07:03 PM
Post #4


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (Swing Kid @ Dec 28 2010, 12:37 AM) *
Also, during such cybercombat, should I just assume that on the IC's initiative, it just tries the Scramble Test that it describes for failed decrypt attempts, or simply have the Scramble Tests happen once/every time it is attacked?

Scramble IC is Reactive, so it doesn't get actions. I don't think it even gets Initiative (the general rule is that Reactive IC doesn't get Init unless specifically noted, and I don't see such a note).

As you note, the question of "what happens when it gets attacked" isn't addressed in either SR3 or Matrix; I think we have to assume that it tries to destroy the data every time it is attacked but not destroyed, as the alternative means that the only cost for going the cybercombat route is that you need to Suppress the IC or eat extra tally afterwards.

Although…

Ugh. Actually, by my reading Scramble IC must be Decrypted (rather than crashed) to "Access any host or slave devices they protect"; it's not clear then what attacking would get you. I don't think the designers had a clear mental model of what was going on, or at the least I don't think there's enough left to reconstruct their intentions.

Edit: though the SR2 passage suggests to me more that crashing it was supposed to remove the encryption.

(My guess is that trying to reify encryption as IC was a bad idea; a conceptually separate data-destroying access-blocker would've been more simple to reason about.)

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Swing Kid
post Dec 28 2010, 07:50 PM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 189
Joined: 21-April 04
From: Usually in the Nexus
Member No.: 6,266



Yeah, that was about the nature of the debate we had around our table (except referencing SR2 rules - good idea). I appreciate the feedback (especially since it requred referencing old rules).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st July 2024 - 06:09 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.