Hacking: Talent over Warez?, or: Which trumps, brains or toys? (Tweak not House Rule) Options

[Warlordtheft]

I used option one for a while but eventually went back to raw. My reasons were: 1. The caps led to the program ratings effectively determining the outcome. If the program ratings were the same though the end result was masssive back and forth dice rolling until someone glitched. 2. Technomancers were uber powered in this scenario due to threading. 3. Not all programs (like stealth) easily convert to this rule. On the plus side though, deciding to handwavium low security systems was very easy.

Option 2 I see similar pitfalls. It would favor hackers over technos since they can boost their logic well past racial norms with cyber. There also may be some inconsistencies with some programs, as well as the fact that once logic is up above a certain point it probably is not the limiting factor.

Agents/IC-also under this system either ignore the caps to make them more challenging, or if capped at rating become useless.

Pretty much I'd suggest option 3:Stick with raw, but keep in mind the Logic 1 hacker can't upgrade his own programs in a reasonable time frame. Also, if the sytem is not likely to pose a serious challenge, handwavium should be used.

[Yerameyahu]

That's a font, not a script. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) And it's horrifying.

Those are good points, Warlordtheft. I know Seth is also right: we discussed this in some length in a past thread. I wonder if I can find it.

[Seth]

If a player rolls 10 and you say, 'screw you, you get 5', that is a Sad Player™

Yes. Very sad. Players like rolling well. It makes us happy. This says "you cannot roll well, everything is average and dull"

I don't like it in the magic system, however the magic system in SR4 is IMO better than any previous, so I put up with it. I am delighted that the "extra dullness" factor added by capping successes has not been added to the rest of the game. YMMV

[noonesshowmonkey]

I'm pretty sure it makes it rather unintelligible.
Advocating font changes is like advocating public defecation: "I can do whatever I want, and it's none of your business! Turn away if you don't like it!"

Syllogism fail.

Sweet tantrum, though. You'd give a little cry baby a nice run for their overstuffed diapers.

[Inncubi]

Yes. Very sad. Players like rolling well. It makes us happy. This says "you cannot roll well, everything is average and dull"

I don't like it in the magic system, however the magic system in SR4 is IMO better than any previous, so I put up with it. I am delighted that the "extra dullness" factor added by capping successes has not been added to the rest of the game. YMMV

That is true. Players love rolling high.

As a Gm I like challenges that don't take all my week to scale with my players, so I go with caps. It makes it easier for me to prepare runs. I also like a certain... predictability in the character's abilities. As I've said a lot of times, I make a very extensive use of 4 dice =1 hit rule, and -1 dice per roll in extended rolls.

And if a player really wants to break the caps... Include edge in your roll. /Then/ you may break the cap. Makes those rolls more memorable, in my games.

The extra advantage that I've seen with this is that stuff takes time to be accomplished. Gives the game a somewhat more "cerebral" taste, when extended tests are involved and more "pressure" when they can't be used. Not because of any "my game is smarter than yours" crap or "my game is better than yours" trolldrek.

Now, Seth, I am not trying to make you change your game. Simply trying to explain why I prefer caps. They work AMAZING for me.

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

What happened to warlordtheft happened to my group to. We changed to one, but as he said, Stealth is a problem. In this case, you should better think of a better way to use it (perhaps asking the player to roll it, instead of just using as a passive number).

[Fatum]

Syllogism fail.

Sweet tantrum, though. You'd give a little cry baby a nice run for their overstuffed diapers.

Nice ad hominem there.
Now, here, have a chance to explain what does using insane fonts and formats add to the dialog, except for showing that the author knows the tag, and making the text harder to read?

[Mardrax]

Style.
We're roleplayers.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I used option one for a while but eventually went back to raw. My reasons were: 1. The caps led to the program ratings effectively determining the outcome. If the program ratings were the same though the end result was masssive back and forth dice rolling until someone glitched. 2. Technomancers were uber powered in this scenario due to threading. 3. Not all programs (like stealth) easily convert to this rule. On the plus side though, deciding to handwavium low security systems was very easy.

Except that you only change the way things work for constructing the Dice Pools. The thresholds for things based upon Programs (Like Stealth) stay the same...

Option 2 I see similar pitfalls. It would favor hackers over technos since they can boost their logic well past racial norms with cyber. There also may be some inconsistencies with some programs, as well as the fact that once logic is up above a certain point it probably is not the limiting factor.

Technomancers are not limited in how they boost attributes, it just costs them to do so. And as for Increasing ther Hits Threshold, that is what Threading is for in our games. Technomancers do not have to spend their precious Edge to exceed the Caps based upon Program Rating.

Agents/IC-also under this system either ignore the caps to make them more challenging, or if capped at rating become useless.

Agents roll 2x Rating with Caps by Program Rating... which will likely be their rating unless there are Optimized Programs in use.

Pretty much I'd suggest option 3:Stick with raw, but keep in mind the Logic 1 hacker can't upgrade his own programs in a reasonable time frame. Also, if the sytem is not likely to pose a serious challenge, handwavium should be used.

RAW method works, but leads to those annoying characters with 1 Logic and 20 Dice to Hack, which I despise... Which is why we went to Option 1.

I do not agree with Yerameyahu, that this brings Hackers and Script Kiddies more in line with each other, because the Script Kiddies are typically the ones with the Logic of 1-2, and a Hacking Skill of 1-3... It is a Flavor that I like; but I DO understand his reservations about it.

@Inncubi... I have to agree with the reasoning that you are using for the Caps.

[Fatum]

Style.
We're roleplayers.

Ugly unreadable fonts have nothing to do with style.

[Mardrax]

Ugly unreadable fonts have nothing to do with style.

For you they don't, perhaps. Many of my old typographer colleagues would differ on that opinion.

[Fatum]

For you they don't, perhaps. Many of my old typographer colleagues would differ on that opinion.

I'm sure they'd love white monotype on light gray background.

[Tanegar]

I am not responding to its contents, because the OP has made everything for me not to be able to read it. That is, it is unintelligible.
And of course asking to follow the basic rules of netiquette is trolling. Tell me more tales like that.

Sorry, sorry, I know I said I was done, but I have to point this out. You responded to the content of my posts, which were in... wait for it... a different font! Congratulations, you have successfully refuted your own thesis. *wild applause*

[deek]

I've been (had been, at least) using a variation of #1. I liked the symmetry of Program Rating mirroring Force. And, there's always the possibility for me to drop some military grade programs around here and there for the hacker that is constantly losing dice to the 5 or 6 cap. I think it works great.

Now, I say a variation, because I have also house ruled skill caps, so my players are used to low skills capping their successes (my current cap is skill x 2, with defaulting having a max success of 1). This allows me to also introduce a positive quality to boost the cap to x 3 (which to date, no player at my table has needed). Also, using edge always removes caps, which gives the player an opportunity to throw a brick of dice and keep all results, which is welcomed at my table.

Now, going with #1, to raise that cap, you can give out >6 rating programs, you can use edge or, you can always create a new positive quality to let the player extend the cap. I would think something like a multi-tiered quality, something like +1 cap / 5bp with a maximum of maybe +3 could work well...

[Fatum]

Sorry, sorry, I know I said I was done, but I have to point this out. You responded to the content of my posts, which were in... wait for it... a different font! Congratulations, you have successfully refuted your own thesis. *wild applause*

Sorry, what?!

Your whole argument so far burns down to "Look, I'm shitting in the middle of the street, and you're not dying from the smell! See, see, you're not dropping dead! That means it's totally ok to be doing that!"
A reasoning level hardly expected from an adult.

[Yerameyahu]

Take it outside, ugh. Other fonts are really annoying, and so are these little personal tiffs.

[Fatum]

Other fonts are really annoying

...and that is precisely my point. Annoying, hard to read, and having nothing of worth to compensate for that.

and so are these little personal tiffs.

Well, if you know a better way to teach people the basics of netiquette, please show it to me.

[TheOOB]

I like the rules as written. There is an important thing to remember when comparing hackers to mages. Mages spend all their resources to be good at their magical and astral skills, but for them increasing their magical power also increases their power in the physical plane, where 80% or so of the game takes place. Hackers spend a lot of resources to be good in the matrix, and there are always new things to spend nuyen on to get better, but their hacking ability really doesn't increase their effectiveness in the meat, which means that hackers need to be able to increase their physical abilities without sacrificing their ability to hack.

The RAW does this, by making hacking primary about the gear, a hacker is free to use most of their karma to make themselves skilled in other fields. By forcing hacking to use an attribute for hacking, you are hamstringing hackers in the meat by forcing them to spend more karma on their abilities. This is especially bad because while program rating can go to 7+, some metatypes can't even get a 6 logic.

Besides that, your logic and intuition wouldn't be necessary to hack. You're ability to interface with the matrix and hack things isn't based on how fast you think or how well you can solve equations, the human mind is way too slow for that to be effective, that's what programs are for. The logic come into the software and hardware skills necessary to make good programs/equipment, so hackers allready have a reason to have a good logic. Those are powerful skills, and by RAW logic is already one of the things that separates a good hacker from a great one.

[Mardrax]

Writing code = coding != hacking.
A good hacker never has to touch on making actual program code in his life.

By the commonly mainstream, mass-media-boosted definition of someone who circumvents computer security systems.

[CanRay]

I've coded and never touched a hack in my life, Old Skool or not.

Me and electricity don't mix, as I found out the hard way.

[Mr Clock]

I think I'll stick with standard for now, but option 1 looks interesting. I don't tend to have 20+ dice pools in my games, so program rating as a limit isn't going to be too much of a handicap, and the notion of busting the cap with Edge sounds good for dramatic fun. It always seemed a little odd that everything else was attribute plus skill except for Matrix stuff.

[TheOOB]

Writing code = coding != hacking.
A good hacker never has to touch on making actual program code in his life.

By the commonly mainstream, mass-media-boosted definition of someone who circumvents computer security systems.

But a great hacker will.

Also, hacking in 2072 is way different from hacking now adays.

[CanRay]

A great hacker will know more about a system than the people that built it and maintain it!

[KarmaInferno]

Sorry, sorry, I know I said I was done, but I have to point this out. You responded to the content of my posts, which were in... wait for it... a different font! Congratulations, you have successfully refuted your own thesis. *wild applause*

I for one don't mind font changes. Century Gothic is a nice readable font. I love good fonts. I have a massive collection on my computer.

However, the OP's posts are in a font that IS somewhat hard on the eyes, and as such some folks will elect to not bother reading it. As a graphic designer, it's not a font I would ever pick for extended amounts of text. Then again, my designer job is to get people to actually READ the messages - you will be surprised at how little it takes to make people turn away from an advertisement without reading it.

At the end of the day, though, it's not the reader that suffers, it's the person who is using the ill-advised font. Because the issue of the painful font does in fact take away from the impact of the message. It's like making a verbal presentation in a thick fake accent, just because you wanted to be "unique". Yes, you might be unique and people will certainly remember the accent, but it's also likely the listeners will not get much out of the actual presentation.

As the writer of a message, if you want your message to be heard, it's your responsibility to format the message such that it is accessible and easy to comprehend. It is NOT the reader's responsibility to jump through hoops to figure out your message.

And that's pretty much all I will say on the subject. As you were!



-k

[Tanegar]

Sorry, what?!

Your whole argument so far burns down to "Look, I'm shitting in the middle of the street, and you're not dying from the smell! See, see, you're not dropping dead! That means it's totally ok to be doing that!"
A reasoning level hardly expected from an adult.

Nice strawman, but unfortunately as inaccurate as strawmen generally are. My argument burns down to the fact that your argument is nonsense, which it is; and which fact you, yourself, have repeatedly demonstrated.

...and that is precisely my point. Annoying, hard to read, and having nothing of worth to compensate for that.

Well, if you know a better way to teach people the basics of netiquette, please show it to me.

Except that's not actually the point you've been making. The point you've been making, as expressed by you in one of your own posts, is this:

I'm pretty sure it makes it rather unintelligible.

Which is nonsense. The fact that you have been responding to the content of my posts, which are in nonstandard fonts, proves it. You have responded to the meaning in my posts, therefore my posts have perceptible meaning, therefore they are not unintelligible. Q.E.D. I'm prepared to entertain the possibility that you simply don't know what "unintelligible" means; indeed, now that I think of it, I consider that highly probable. If you'd like to change your thesis to "Nonstandard fonts are annoying," then I will say no more. Annoyance is subjective. Intelligibility is not.

Oh, yes, one last thing. Kindly link me to the Great Big Book of "Netiquette," because in the fifteen or so years I've been communicating over the Internet you're the first person I've seen piss and moan about somebody else's choice of font.