[X] My Assistant

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The drawback is that if you get hacked or crashed, you lose everything. Your Firewall and System are limited by the lowest rating of everything clustered, so you realistically wouldn't have ratings above 4.

Why?
Alpha Grade Cyberware clustering is only Rating 4, to be sure. But Beta is Rating 5, and Delta is Rating 6. Of course, it will take a long time to get to that point, but by the time you are there, it is all good.

And of course, it is still all slaved to the Super Comlink that you likely have, as Yerameyahu pointed out.

[Yerameyahu]

Well… you should never get there anyway, so it's not really the point. Chargen or nothing. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) This is Missions we're talking about.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Well… you should never get there anyway, so it's not really the point. Chargen or nothing. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) This is Missions we're talking about.

Missions... That's right. Delta Grade is only a Wet Dream in Missions. Heh... Sorry for the distraction. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Fortinbras]

Nah, it's all slaved behind the super-comm. Hmf.

But slaved isn't the same as clustered. Salved devices are using up that subscription limit and clustered devices are drawing down your Response.
I think what he's talking about here is making all your cyberware one big node, which, frankly, is a hacker's wet dream. Get through your Firewall and make your Wired Reflexes my personal concubine. Don't mind if I do.

[Yerameyahu]

No, no. The cyberware is all clustered, and *that* is slaved to the one commlink (with the good Firewall and IC). It's not an offensive tactic; you're using your own gear (to get a lot of something for nothing). Even if it were possible to do it to someone else, I don't think it'd *do* anything. "Take this! … You now have an extra node, mwa ha!" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) You're just talking about vanilla 'ware-hacking—which is its own whole mess.

Anyway. Regardless of the tactics, I still don't agree with cyberware (and other similar) clustering; it's just horribly abusive. Those device ratings, which are only based on a GM-friendly shorthand in the first place, are for easily determining hacking defenses. A betaware datajack is not a free 5/5/5/5 commlink (Fairlight Caliban upgraded is 12000 for a 5/5, plus 5000 for the OS parts). It's even worse for the deltaware version, which costs 5000 and has Avail -- (compare to something like 9500+11000+6000 = 26500, Avail 16, plus 2000 to implant it).

[longbowrocks]

I feel like I'm misunderstanding something here. If something can be hacked, can't it also support you attempts to hack back?

[Fortinbras]

Okay, I see what you're talking about.
Depending on the cyberware, that leaves a whole boatload of exploits for both the GM and hacker. Your cyberarm is ostensibly the exact same device as your cybereyes and Analyze software? The glitch possibilities are endless! All my players do is DNI. Sad GM.
On the other hand, get within mutual signal range, or get your linked up Adept or spy drone to do it for you, and that hacker has his "Exploit"able run of ALL your cyberware in one roll against a Rating 4 device once he gets that commlink's Access ID.
God help you if you decide to slave it to your team's hacker and bump your clustered cyberware's Signal up. God help you, chummer.

[Yerameyahu]

I guess. You're assuming they get through the 'gate' commlink; if that happens, the whole team is *already* screwed, regardless of shenanigans. It's probably not a valid assumption, because that's exactly what the gate is there to stop anyway. If the rest is slaved, you *must* go through the gate, or have direct physical access (… to his implants). You can also make multiple clusters, as many as you have implants for. Some maniacs even claim there's no need to cluster, that their implants each count as solid comms individually.

longbowrocks, I don't understand the question.

[longbowrocks]

Ah, nevermind. I read your earlier comment and thought you said cyberware clustering was impossible.

[Yerameyahu]

I think it shouldn't be allowed, but the clustering rules in general are a complete vague mess. We should have clustering rules, and … we don't. There are no real requirements, tradeoffs, or penalties. And that's for things with actual stats! Doing it in conjunction with Device Rating stats is just nuts.

None of this is really related to Empathy software, sorry about that. :/ I got distracted, it's an old argument.

[Fortinbras]

Gate link, schmate link. Spoof that sucker's Access ID and now you have the totality of his cyberware at your disposal.
Unless it's all DNI connected to a wired commlink, in which case I'm not entirely sure how it is superior to regular DNI cyberware.

[Yerameyahu]

I'm really not sure what you're suggesting (Spoofing is a really slow method, one command at a time), but you'd have access to his cyberware *anyway*. It's not really a big difference if it's a couple fewer nodes, especially given how vague and requiring-massive-GM-fiat the cyberware hacking rules are. You're right that it's a weakness, but it's the same weakness that everyone, everywhere already has. And if you've got someone running a bunch of free betaware 5/5/5/5's with IC (as I've seen suggested), it's actually worse.

Obviously, that's once again outside of the typical Missions scope, though. :/ Doubly off-topic, whoops.

[Fortinbras]

Sorry, I'll try and be clearer.
If you have the "gate" link's Access ID, which shouldn't be too difficult, and can get within mutual signal range of his cyberware, again with the Adpet or spy drone of Infiltration or whatever you like, then you don't have to hack the commlink or anything else to get control of the whole of his cyberware. All you have to do is Spoof the ID of the "gate" link against a Device Rating of 4(like 8 or 10 dice) to tell that cyberware to do whatever you want.

While this is generally useful to spoof things like Wired Reflexes or Smarlinks, to have all cyberware obey your Command with one Complex action is a pretty powerful tool.
This is made doubly fun if this clustered cyberware decides to slave itself to the team hacker's commlink, boosting the Signal of the clustered cyberware in the process and negating any trouble getting within mutual signal range might cause.

The only way I can think to negate this is if the clustered cyberware is DNI to a wire from head to datajack or commlink(or Skinlinked), in which case I'm not sure what the benefit of clustering the cyberware would be.

EDIT: One Command at a time is all you can manage in the Matrix anyway, but if your guber has all his cyberware clustered you can give one Command( e.g. "Shut Down" or "Overload") to devistating effect vs. Commanding one piece of cyberware at a time.
And who is giving away this free betaware and IC??? Where can I sign up.

[Yerameyahu]

Right, but I wouldn't call that "control of the whole of his cyberware". I'd call that 'one little command at a time access to one piece at a time of his cyberware, if you don't fail the test'. I guess I could see a GM letting you send the same 'stop' command to everything, but that'd be a significantly powerful little oversight on his part. Because the clustering rules are vague and crappy, we can't even really say for sure if 'shut down' makes all the cyberware turn off. Maybe it just turns off the cluster-node, leaving the rest to function as normal. (As a cyberware-clustering hater, I do love the thought of your suggestion, though!)

I'm not sure that being slaved to something with a high Signal magically raises its Signal, either. Slaved nodes forward connections from themselves to the master; the master doesn't forward connection attempts from itself to the slaves. I assume the tweaker has his non-commlink Signal ratings dialed down to 'off', and is using skinlink.

The main reason to cluster the cyberware in the first place (at least, the one suggested earlier in this thread) was to create a massive pool of 'running program limit'. A secondary (and much more compelling) is one or more cheap, high-quality nodes; I've even see people suggest throwing Response upgrades into the 'ware, though it's cheaper to get deltaware datajacks. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) (No essence cost if they're in another limb.)

If you check my numbers above, the betaware (and even delta) is massively cheaper than the honest equivalent, and the original suggestion was to use 'ware that you already had. That means any additional functionality is free, something for nothing.

[Fortinbras]

Right, but I wouldn't call that "control of the whole of his cyberware". I'd call that 'one little command at a time access to one piece at a time of his cyberware, if you don't fail the test'. I guess I could see a GM letting you send the same 'stop' command to everything, but that'd be a significantly powerful little oversight on his part.

No more overpowered than clustering all your cyberware. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. All that cyberware, once clustered, is one node. One device. The command "Shut down" to one device shuts it down. I don't see how that is either overpowered or an oversight.
EDIT: They are the ones who decided to turn all their cyberware into one big thing, so they cannot the decide, once spoofed, that it is still several smaller things. Either your cyberware is one big clustered node, capable of being given one command, or it's several piece of individual cyberware with the usual processor limit. the choice is yours.

I'm not sure that being slaved to something with a high Signal magically raises its Signal, either. Slaved nodes forward connections from themselves to the master; the master doesn't forward connection attempts from itself to the slaves.

Your right, it doesn't. But if you want your clustered cyberware to be withing mutual signal range of the "gate" link and your hacker is however many meters away, you would need to boost your cyberware culter's Signal to communicate with it. The master node needs to be able to give the device the Command "Do the Thing", but the slaved device needs to be able to communicate with the master if "Do the Thing" runs into errors or anything else that requires mutual signal range. The same idea comes up in TacNets a lot.

The main reason to cluster the cyberware in the first place (at least, the one suggested earlier in this thread) was to create a massive pool of 'running program limit'

If you check my numbers above, the betaware (and even delta) is massively cheaper than the honest equivalent, and the original suggestion was to use 'ware that you already had. That means any additional functionality is free, something for nothing.

The guy who suggested this idea originally(in this thread) suggested alphaware, so I was going off of that. If this gets into things like deltaware, by that time everyone has a +infinity sword of insta death, so that's a bridge to burn when you come to it.
I'm just saying that doing such a munchkiny thing as clustering your cyberware to up your running program limit leaves you far more vulnerable to Electronic Warfare as opposed to Hacking.

[Yerameyahu]

Oh, I get you. I couldn't imagine why the hacker would be several meters away from… his *own* cyberware. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) You meant other people.

While I certainly agree that they should be punished for trying it, the clustering rules are (I can't say it enough) such a mess that it's probably wrong to assume that 'shut down everything' works. We had this long thread once considering the consequences of things like clustering drones and stuff, but the basic idea is that clustering can't really do what it says it does. :/ I let that bleed into my reading of your argument, whoops.

I still don't think it'd work, though. Everything should be skinlinked, and you'd have no way of knowing it was there anyway, except possibly by a wide-area Detect Hidden Nodes action. Even if we're not just talking about the hacker and his own 'ware, *they* should be skinlinked to their own main commlinks as well, which would then be slaved. Either way, no wireless to receive the spoof, and no easy way of knowing where to spoof anyway. Right?

The only reason I brought in deltaware is that a deltaware (6/6/6/6, though you'd prolly disable the Signal) datajack has Avail -- and costs 5000. That's not +Infinity. You might keep them from that kind of abuse by not allowing a delta clinic, but the beta version is still pretty bad (and even cheaper). A (free) 4/4/4/4 is still nothing to sneeze at (total retail value like 8500?), and you could arguably upgrade the Firewall pretty well.

[Dez384]

Just crash the cluster than spoofing a command to tell them to shut down.

[Yerameyahu]

Yeah, that's Fortinbras's suggestion. It's a good one, and I'd probably use it if I let the situation happen in the first place. I'm not sure what Missions would do. Between the half-baked clustering rules and the half-baked cyberware-hacking rules, I don't think it's safe to guess.

[Fortinbras]

While I agree that clustering is wonky at best and wobbly at worst, if someone is going to come at me that a cluster is one node, I maintain that cluster gets treated like one device. As I understand it, that's what clustering does.

"Should" is the operative word in "should be Skinlinked." But if all of that is so, what's the benefit of clustering your cyberware?
It's still working off Device Ratings, yes? If not, why not just copy and paste all your Firewalls all over the place anyway?

+Infinity sword of Insta Death is a reference to a VERY old gaming comic which claimed that wizards in AD&D sucked because by the time they got any good spells everyone else had a +Infinity Sword of Insta Death. Really old comic. I was saying that by the time your crew has access to a boat load of deltaware they are staring down the barrel of Lofwyr's snout without blinking, so the clustering of cyberware and it's implications are a little beyond consideration.

[Yerameyahu]

Yeah, and I *do* appreciate the 'screw you' iron justice of it.

I think it's fair to assume skinlinking under all circumstances. But you have to use clustering, because otherwise they're peripheral nodes, and can't help you run software. And yes, you *should* do that with your Firewalls, as I implied above.

I realize that, but I'm saying that the datajacks cost next to nothing and have 0 Avail—they don't qualify for that.

[KarmaInferno]

You could only spoof the 'ware itself if it has a signal range to begin with.

If everything's hardwired, you'd have to attack the commlink directly.





-k

[Fortinbras]

Is a datajack a device for the purposes of running programs? What commands could you give it? "Be a brain plug!" or "Keep being a brain plug!"

I'm just saying that if all your cyberware is DNI or hardwired, I don't see the point of clustering it. The point of clustering is to help prevent the cyberware from being hacked by increasing it's processor limit, yet that yields it more vulnerable to Electronic Warfare. All of this if made moot if you just DNI your cyberware, but then it has less ability to communicate with others, the reason for clustering it.

If you are talking about hackers using their cyberware as devices to cluster to increase their processor limit, they'd need Deltaware in order not to drop the Response and System below the relatively cheap cap of 6, and if they have the money for Deltaware, they probably have the cash for a couple extra Responses, so I've yet to see how that's a thing.

[PoliteMan]

*shrug* Clustering a bunch of Alphaware to get some extra processing power seems like a cute trick to get some extra processing power. I think Fortinbras counter is reasonable, although it seems like something that would happen more on accident by intent. After all, it's unlikely anybody is going to realize you've clustered all your cyberware unless they've already hacked in and taken a look around. Kinda seems like a stretch to say you could find out something like that on an Analyze roll. I would imagine the majority of the time it'd happen if someone tries to spoof, say, your cyberarm and then watch in surprise as all your stuff shuts down. Yeah, it would make hacking cyberware a semi-reasonable tactic but I can't remember the last time someone tried to hack cyberware and there's no way for them to know hacking your cyberware is a semi-reasonable strategy.

Now the deltaware is different. Ignoring multiple deltaware datajacks, even one at chargen gives you a free quality commlink at far below cost. While the image is kinda cool, if anything should be hacking it's the cord into your brain, that's probably time for a GM discussion.

[Fortinbras]

If you are giving your players deltaware at chargen, you've got more problems than clustering, omae.

[Daishi]

I lean against letting the Optimization bonus count towards Empathy software for social situations since it's not actually part of the test per se, it's a dice pool bonus. When I read "applying a +1 dice pool modifier for all tests using that software," I'm thinking that means the software has to be part of the test description. E.g Hacking + Exploit uses the Exploit program, but Negotiation + Charisma doesn't use the Empathy software as the test. It's just a dice pool on top of the base skill and attribute. It's a bit hair splitting, but I feel more comfortable this way.

On the other hand, Optimization (Agent) is always hilarious for the non-hackers.