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

[deek]

In response to Critias's point of caps robbing the player of getting lucky, I'm of the idea that that is what Edge is for. You can choose before the roll to add edge and ignore any caps, thus giving you that "luck" back.

[Yerameyahu]

That's making your own luck. And it means you have to invest in Edge just to do what you used to.

[Mr Clock]

*ding!*

How about capping hits at program rating x2 or program rating + System?

I don't see complaints about a rating 5 program being capped at "only" 10 hits, but I do like the idea of keeping rating 1 and 2 progs as bare-bones utilities that may work, but not work very well - inherently limited by their nature.

[Yerameyahu]

That works better than the more general 2xSkill cap that Inncubi uses, because there's no defaulting for programs (no program, no dice). A minimum cap of 2 hits seems twice as reasonable, and it quickly becomes high enough not to matter. The Logic fetishists are happy because Logic is still half the DP. Does it make high-rating programs (and the cash they cost) unnecessary, though?

Program + System works about as well, but it's more open to 'abuse' at the low end, and it's slightly more complex; I'd say the first suggestion wins.

It still doesn't address the (my?) more general concerns about Logic-basing, but there's nothing wrong with partial solutions. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Mr Clock]

Thanks for the feedback. I was primarily thinking about hackers rather than TMs for the use of System as part of the cap as you need good gear as well as good programs. Regarding high-end programs, I would submit that while the cap isn't going to be the driving factor, when you consider program rating as base DV or threshold, it's always worth going for one higher. Should the use of Edge override the cap?

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and suggest that given the state of computing in the 70s, Logic is one of the factors that helps separate the great from the good. Computers and computing has become so pervasive, it's hard for most city-dwellers to conceive how things could be any different. It's the world they've grown up in. Based on my logic, I would argue that Logic is as essential to a good hacker as Agility is for an athlete.

[Yerameyahu]

Good point about program Rating actually having Rating-based effects. I'd forgotten about that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) There are several things for which that's not true, of course, but it certainly matters for Stealth, etc.

AFAIK, the actual fluff is that the state of computing in 2070s is precisely that brains (Logic) are too slow to matter, which is why programs are the DP. Doesn't mean you can't invent fluff; by definition, fluff doesn't matter. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Saint Hallow]

Wasn't there a line from the books that said the best hackers write their own programs? Makes it look like really good hackers know the limitations of their tools and write their own to overcome. From that perspective, it seems it's more talent over warez, but the talent makes it's own warez to get that additional edge.

[CanRay]

Wasn't there a line from the books that said the best hackers write their own programs? Makes it look like really good hackers know the limitations of their tools and write their own to overcome. From that perspective, it seems it's more talent over warez, but the talent makes it's own warez to get that additional edge.

Yeah, it was a story with Slamm-0 complaining about having to give up one of his custom programs to a sharing site to get what he needed for a specific 'Run, IIRC.

[Mr Clock]

If brains are too slow to react directly, wouldn't that make hacking and other opposed Matrix tests into more of a chess game where both players are trying to out-smart their opponents by planning six steps ahead? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

I dig what you say though. Lets see what programs have direct effects based on rating.

...

Reality Filter is a system versus system test, program and hardware ratings are the only things counted.

Armour protects equal to its rating, as do BFF.

Attack, Black Hammer, Blackout, Data Bomb base their DV on their rating.

ECCM is a straight add to Signal against ECM, or rather, a reduction of ECM effects.

Stealth uses the rating as a threshold and as a DP modifier against Tracking.

Common use programs are barely affected. It fits the notion that a regular user will just play with Windows Movie Maker rather than invest in Sony Vegas Pro, to use video editing as an example. Cybercombat demands the best ratings, as does Stealth. Seems like hackers will go for the good stuff.

So, from
#1) Use [Stat + Skill] Cap Hits @ Program RTG (like spell force).

#2) Use [Program RTG + Skill] Cap Hits @ Stat

I was thinking [Stat + Skill], cap @ 2x program rating. Then I saw the bit about comparing program ratings and applying the difference as Reach. Now I have something else to ponder.

Essentially, my quandary comes down to this: I like the idea of moving Hacking away from skill plus software, but without removing the role of software entirely. I dig the idea of success caps, because there's really only so much you can do with inferior gear. Just to give a out of Matrix example, the best driver in the world on a Dodge Scoot won't outrun a Suzuki Mirage in a flat race.

Grr.

RAW is fine, but I like the idea of tweaking it. I want it to be cool, thematically appropriate, i.e. in line with other similar success test mechanics, simple, and yielding predictable results.

Has Kerenshara gotten back to see what she's done yet?

EDIT: Yes, Slamm-O swaps a home-coded Black "Slugger" for a cracked S-K Stealth program to sneak into an AZT system. Under either tweak we choose to use, the trade makes sense for a quiet op.

[Yerameyahu]

Another option is the Stat+Skill+Gear model, which just means DP inflation. As long as it's for everyone, that's not a huge problem. Something to consider, I'm sure it was mentioned above.

[deek]

Yeah, it is making your own luck (going back to the Edge suggestion I made). I was just wanting to show it was still possible to beat the caps if you wanted to use the option to limit hits by rating.

And along those lines, I did also add positive qualities for players to boost their own cap. But like I said, at my table, no one had any issue with the cap limits I put in place and rarely lost dice due to them, therefore not needing to increase the cap. But, I did give them an option, if needed.

I think the main point here, is that there are a lot of different options and they are all valid for the type of feel you want to bring to your table, in regards to matrix play. From what I am seeing you have:

1) Use core rules, if you want everyone to hack well
2) Cap hits by either Attribute or Program Rating, if you want players to invest more in their attributes and/or make lower rated programs viable
3) Add Stat + Skill + Gear to give each equal meaning

[Warlordtheft]

Computers and computing has become so pervasive, it's hard for most city-dwellers to conceive how things could be any different. It's the world they've grown up in. Based on my logic, I would argue that Logic is as essential to a good hacker as Agility is for an athlete.

IIRC in the SR4A book, it mentions similarly that the reason RAW doesn't use Logic is because the technology is so much faster and easier to use that one's owm logic doesn't have time to impact the outcome. THis gets back to the Logic being used for creating custom programs--rather than the actual use of said program.

[deek]

Yup, I think the reasons why the core is the way it is, is pretty well documented and those that like that flavor in their games can roll with it. For others that don't subscribe to that same flavor, there are several other options that a viable.

I think the first thing a table should do before making any changes to their matrix tests, is discuss how they want the matrix flavor to be. And once that is decided, then they can bring in the model that best works.

[Mr Clock]

I think the first thing a table should do before making any changes to their matrix tests, is discuss how they want the matrix flavor to be. And once that is decided, then they can bring in the model that best works.

QFT. There is wisdom here.

[sabs]

The problem with Custom Programs, is that. There's no bonus for a custom program. Why does Slamm-O need to go out an trade for a S-K Stealth program, doesn't he already have a rating 6 stealth program?
What's so special about his Black IC bat?

[Yerameyahu]

It's just fluff, most likely, but it could also be that they really are different. Presumably, they have different Options installed.

[sabs]

Yeah, need to create more options.

[Yerameyahu]

Actually… that's a great point. What if the distinguishing role of programs *was* just the Options (for one flavor of Matrix rules)? They're limited (in quantity) by Rating, which is a start. Under RAW, I think the most common Options are probably Optimized and Ergonomic, but that would change under the ORAW (Logic, Program Cap) version. I don't think many of the Options are compelling enough to be a balance source as-is, but it's a thought.

[sabs]

Mute starts to look nice
Optimized looks worthless for the most part. (You're never running in less than a 6 Response unless you suck). Although, if you start having response degrading lower your system rating, then all of a sudden, Optimized looks better.
Crashguard is only good if you get into a lot of cybercombat
Viral Resistance requires your DM to actually use that stuff.
Area/Armor Piercing/Rust/Shredder/Targeting are all of dubious use as they are for cybercombat only.

We need more options that give concret bonuses in certain situations, or remove negatives in certain situations.

exploit program that's Ergonomic, mute, sleazy.
Where sleazy is an option that reduces the interval for slow hacking by 1/2, or gives a +2 bonus to slow hacking tests, or any number of options.

Yeah, I think that if you want to make Programs improtant in a stat+skill max hits = program rating or ratingx2 you want more options.

[Kerenshara]

Wow.

Thanks to everybody who contributed to the discussion. Sorry I took so long to come back to the mess I started, but I was out on disability again and ... well, steroids and narcotics make things like being able to focus on an interesting discussion and consider the arguments fairly pretty rough.

1st: I wasn't so much asking IF I should cap hits as much as seeking thoughts on which limit was better/fit the flavor I was going for. It seems the overwhelming majority of people like my first impulse, so I am quite relieved.

2nd: My table(s) always - ALWAYS! - play with the skill based hit caps, Skill+Stat DP mod caps, AND the 20 dice max on skill tests except when using Edge. How often do we hit those caps? Not that often, because people design their characters around the ideas. It also means we can hand-wave a lot of incidental die rolls because some people couldn't really compete against a pro. Of course, I also like comparing naked skill to thresholds and if the target's lower than the skill and the check is routine (read: not exciting to the scene) I just assume the player gets what they want/need. A decker with both groups (Electronics and Cracking) at 4 should be able to best most non-military/banking/secrity systems with ease.

3rd: The idea of a "reach" style mechanic is in fact brilliant IMHO, but I don't want to use program rating there. How about, instead, using the Response of the equipment? That way, a drek-hot deck (sorry, 'link makes me think of Jimmy Dean) gives an edge, but doesn't LIMIT the decker in any fashion... it's only really relevant when going head-to-head. Ideas on that possibility?

4th: I Grok the discussion about programs and ware being faster than meat. But my favorite author (David Weber in the book "Honor of the Queen") talks about where the human comes into a near-AI digital battlefield when comparing the relative quality levels of the crews of HMS Fearless and MSN Thunder of God. He suggests that the computers process everything but report back a list of options for the operator to select from based on experience, goals and intuition. So that's why skill comes into it at all, really. And the ability to implement a skill is tied to your native talent (read: Attribute).

Now, with THAT in mind, her's another Kerenshara pattented monkey wrench for you folks:

Mix it up even more by making the linked stat in CYBERCOMBAT Intuition instead of Logic. After all, you're having to make snap decisions and take stock of the situation almost by gestalt because you ARE moving at the speed of thought. Use Logic for slow hacks and all the other things deckers do outside combat where the ability to analyze in detail is much more important. It helps make cybercombat feel like a virtual gunfight/swordfight than a chess match.

Thoughts on that part or my alternate "Reach" idea?

-Kerenshara

[Epicedion]

Now, with THAT in mind, her's another Kerenshara pattented monkey wrench for you folks:

Mix it up even more by making the linked stat in CYBERCOMBAT Intuition instead of Logic. After all, you're having to make snap decisions and take stock of the situation almost by gestalt because you ARE moving at the speed of thought. Use Logic for slow hacks and all the other things deckers do outside combat where the ability to analyze in detail is much more important. It helps make cybercombat feel like a virtual gunfight/swordfight than a chess match.

-Kerenshara

In another thread just earlier today, the idea came up to use Logic as Cybercombat's to-hit attribute and Intuition as the second Defense attribute (instead of Firewall, since Firewall gets its turn in damage resistance tests), making the attack roll Logic + Cybercombat, and the Defense roll Response + Intuition.

At least I think that it suits the system using the Mental attributes as analogues to the Physical attributes, where Logic ~ Agility / Intuition ~ Reaction. Other opinions may vary.

[Cain]

In response to Critias's point of caps robbing the player of getting lucky, I'm of the idea that that is what Edge is for. You can choose before the roll to add edge and ignore any caps, thus giving you that "luck" back.

Except then you need Edge on top of everything else to be a good decker, instead of just being a good idea.

As far as the OT goes, there was a point where I was learning to hack wireless networks. This is perfectly legal to do, especially since it's the best way to test your own security. With the right program, I could set up the attack in about ten minutes. Using the advanced program, I could do it with a few clicks. I could crack certain networks in less than 30 minutes, with minimal training and skill.

Now, I'd be considered computer illiterate nowadays. The only programming language I can use is C64 BASIC, I can't even figure out Acrobat or Photoshop, and I don't even know what a spreadsheet is. But I can hack a wireless network with the right programs, and pull off the occasional nifty trick here and there with the right support. So, yeah, high Program values are the secret, mush more than high skill.

[Kerenshara]

As far as the OT goes, there was a point where I was learning to hack wireless networks. This is perfectly legal to do, especially since it's the best way to test your own security. With the right program, I could set up the attack in about ten minutes. Using the advanced program, I could do it with a few clicks. I could crack certain networks in less than 30 minutes, with minimal training and skill.

Now, I'd be considered computer illiterate nowadays. The only programming language I can use is C64 BASIC, I can't even figure out Acrobat or Photoshop, and I don't even know what a spreadsheet is. But I can hack a wireless network with the right programs, and pull off the occasional nifty trick here and there with the right support. So, yeah, high Program values are the secret, mush more than high skill.

Ah, but any competent Blackhat or Whitehat will tell you that WiFi networks are the next best thing to unsecure. The locks are equivalent to the locks on your car or house: they only keep the honest people honest. Anybody who knows what they're doing who puts the effort into it will get in. In SR4X terms, the Firewall rating of the ubiquitous OTS (Off The Shelf) router is a 1 - pathetic even in it's own time.

[CanRay]

Please, no, not again. *Goes back to my corner, crying and rocking back and forth*

[Cain]

Ah, but any competent Blackhat or Whitehat will tell you that WiFi networks are the next best thing to unsecure. The locks are equivalent to the locks on your car or house: they only keep the honest people honest. Anybody who knows what they're doing who puts the effort into it will get in. In SR4X terms, the Firewall rating of the ubiquitous OTS (Off The Shelf) router is a 1 - pathetic even in it's own time.

That's not necessarily true. Some security protocols are much more secure than others. And even then, you're missing the point. Someone with no skill and the right programs can legally hack a wifi network, while someone with high skills and no programs cannot.