Why pick technos over uber hacker? Options

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Two submersion grades to get Biowires, and IIRC the name Overclock (no, that's not right, but the one that boosts the 'mancer's offline speed) and you have a Technomancer who can process skillsofts and gets multiple IPs. Threading brings him the ability to get software to augment his already good charisma, and boom, Face time. Rigging is not at all hard to parallel into, either, and sprites can, as mentions, make excellent drivers. Especially on Saturdays. Not every technomancer would do these things, true, but not every hacker is going to diversify into Face either. The possibility for diversity still exists in the technomancer, though.

No arguments, but the Technomancer needs to spend a godd deal of Karma (AND a not so insignificant bit of cash, depending) for all that, while the Hacker spends Money almost exclusively... That does make a huge difference in the end. My point is that the hacker will "top out" his capabilities earlier and will be able to broaden his abilities that much earlier, while a Technomancer will always be improving his hacking abilities to stay on par with the Hacker. Yes, they CAN (Theoretically) get to crazy levels of Threading and Compiling/Registering, but in play, it is less of an issue than the theorty craft behind it is.

It is the classic connundrum... Money vs. Karma... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Digital Heroin]

It is the classic connundrum... Money vs. Karma... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

I'm in agreement that the Technomancer is going to need a lot more karma than any hacker will ever need, but I don't see it as a problem. Even while he is hungry for karma, a technomancer can be spending money to equalize as well, buying programs to cover what he is not inherantly good at, setting up botnets, all those devious little hacker tricks my own brain remembers not so well. I enjoy both Hackers and Technomancers, but it's not about who hacks better to me, it's about the little tricks, the e-sensing, the sprites, the widgets. Those are what make a technomancer stand above and beyond.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I'm in agreement that the Technomancer is going to need a lot more karma than any hacker will ever need, but I don't see it as a problem. Even while he is hungry for karma, a technomancer can be spending money to equalize as well, buying programs to cover what he is not inherantly good at, setting up botnets, all those devious little hacker tricks my own brain remembers not so well. I enjoy both Hackers and Technomancers, but it's not about who hacks better to me, it's about the little tricks, the e-sensing, the sprites, the widgets. Those are what make a technomancer stand above and beyond.

Indeed... they have completely different flavors, and I enjoy both equally... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

[Mäx]

Dryad? That's a wee bit intensive on the BP, neh?

Can't say, i only use karmagen for making characters (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
But ofcource your right, dryad technoshaman(or normal shaman) isn't the most optimal shoice if the team has a dedicated face, but IMO pure face isn't really necessary part of a team(as you say, pornomancer isn't really needed)
And high charisma face has a great synergy with shamans(of both types)

[Cain]

I'm going to argue that sprites are the only thing otaku have going for them over normal deckers. Sure, otaku have Threading, but you can only Thread one CF at a time, effectively. You can get a huge stealth rating, but only at the expense of all your other programs. Summoning sprites, OTOH, gives you the edge in spades. And I mean that literally: Sprites have Edge, which Agents and Botnets do not. You can also pull the same summoning cheese for spirits that you can on sprites.

[Cheops]

That's where you are getting into a gaming situation Cain. Does the GM allow you to roll your own Hacking + Stealth? If yes then you know when it is happening and only thread when called upon to roll. Else, everything only needs to be threaded as you use it since threading is a non-action per RAW. So you don't actually have it "at the expense" of everything else.

Also 2 submersions let you ignore your first sustained threading if you are overly concerned about it.

I notice that you also ignored the Resonance Realms in your list of TM super tricks. Note that a Resonance Quest can allow you to force a bond (or fodder to negotiate one) with a Free Sprite which can grant huge power. Widgets are also something I'd place in the realm of "Awesome trick a TM can pull if they desire."

[Cain]

And all of that requires massive amounts of karma, during which time the decker will have also improved his skills. The decker's core abilities will go up, while the otaku will have a neat bag of tricks. Don't forget that the otaku has to raise his Resonance, as well as his CF's, to keep up. That also requires karma.

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, I try not to worry too much about the progression aspect since the costs are weighted such that it's typically only a major concern if you have a team that's really trying to go the distance or if you're hitting play with non-standard starting conditions, something I generally don't do in my games.

[CanRay]

Because I want to play someone that actually has skill, and not some Skript Kiddie. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Because I want to play someone that actually has skill, and not some Skript Kiddie. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Hackers do not have to be Script Kiddies, though... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
Especially if you use the Optional RUle for Dice Pools (Skill + Logic, Hits Capped by Programs)...

[Saint Sithney]

Right, so I see you agree that only silliness lies in the idea of 'independent Program Options'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Then, if the Option is specific to the program, what is to stop it from being developed alongside as originally suggested.

Potentially run is all it needs to fit the language.

[Yerameyahu]

The rules stop it. I didn't write them.

[Udoshi]

Then, if the Option is specific to the program, what is to stop it from being developed alongside as originally suggested.

Program options can be cracked and degrade in the same manner as normal programs, and copied to new programs just fine.

See Unwired 118, Coding Program Options, second paragraph: "if a character wishes to upgrade software he already has with new program options..."

[Yerameyahu]

That evidence doesn't match your claim.

[Udoshi]

That evidence doesn't match your claim.

How, exactly, does it not?

It quite clearly says that you can acquire source code from cracking. Since copy protection is now an option, then you can pirate program options.

[PoliteMan]

See Unwired 118, Coding Program Options, second paragraph: "if a character wishes to upgrade software he already has with new program options..."

I think this is where it breaks down. If you're doing Options there's two ways to get a Program optimized. First, you can buy the program with the option, which we don't want to do because of cost, or we can install the option later. The problem with using the program option to program is that the program you're designing cannot run on the comm/nexi until the option is installed, which means at some point there will be a program you can't run on the node it was programmed on, which would violate the "potentially" part of programming it. Otherwise, you could program anything because potentially you could always buy the option later, even if you don't have it now. Without the option you have no way to run it and there's no way to get the option onto the program being coded before it is finished, because you have to do it as a mod.

For example, say you had a System 4 Commlink and an Optimization 6 option for the Stealth program. If you coded a R10 Stealth program it could potentially run on the link However, once you finish coding it, it will not be able to run until you install the option, which means you've essentially coded a program that cannot run on the comm/nexi that you coded it on. If there was some way to get the option as part of the code you're creating then it works perfectly. Unfortunately I don't see any way to do that.

I'd actually really like it if this worked but it's a GM call because I don't think the RAW case is strong enough.

[Yerameyahu]

All the rules say is that you can start with the source code of a program and add options. You can get the source code of the program by cracking an existing program-with-options. If anything, Copy Protection is destroyed by this, although it hardly matters.

The question of Options degrading is an interesting one, but not one covered in the RAW AFAIK. Right now, I think everyone gets a free pass on their Options when it comes to program degradation; if not, it would only make programming yourself even less feasible for non-munchkins.

You can't crack Options, in the sense that you can then reuse them on anything. I think there's a RAW case that cracking a program-with-options gives source code that retains any options. A consequence of this could be that you have to manually remove the options you don't want (similar to removing bugs? *shrug*).

Again, I'm not arguing that it's good RAW, but there's nothing that supports Options as little standalone quasi-programs to be copied, mixed, and matched.

[Udoshi]

All the rules say is that you can start with the source code of a program and add options. You can get the source code of the program by cracking an existing program-with-options. If anything, Copy Protection is destroyed by this, although it hardly matters.

Again, I'm not arguing that it's good RAW, but there's nothing that supports Options as little standalone quasi-programs to be copied, mixed, and matched.

And then you have the source code, and can patch it onto existing programs.(because you have the source code) Besides, all signs point to options as their own sort of mini-programs - they degrade on their own, for example.

[Yerameyahu]

That doesn't make sense. Source code doesn't do that.

Why do you think Options degrade? I must have missed that. :/

[CanRay]

Oh, man... I'm totally flashing back to Programming Class now!

CHARLIE IN THE CODE TREES, MAN! CHARLIE IN THE TREES!!! THE LINE PRINTER! TAKE OUT THE LINE PRINTER BEFORE IT GETS US ALL!

[Saint Sithney]

That doesn't make sense. Source code doesn't do that.

Why do you think Options degrade? I must have missed that. :/

When you crack their copy protection, sure.

[Seth]

All the signs to me point to the fact that an option is the equivalent of a rating point. Is there anything I have missed that says this isn't the case?

So by the normal interpretation a program of rating 3 with 2 options would become a program of rating 2 with 2 options after a suitable amount of time. Is this the case?

[Yerameyahu]

Options don't have Copy Protection, Saint Sithney. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Or was that a joke. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Yes, Seth, AFAIK the program degrades while the options just sit there, part of the program. If they both degraded, that'd be harsh *and* complex.

[Saint Sithney]

And people wonder why everyone ignores or misuses the Matrix..

[Yerameyahu]

It's not too bad if everyone isn't constantly trying for loopholes and abuses. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)