Shadowrun 5 & a lot more in 2013! Options

[phlapjack77]

Now the question that comes to mind: Is it, 'the higher the node, the more IPs it takes' (greater level of security) or 'the lower the node, the more IPs it takes' (less bandwidth)? Either could apply, in theory. Mind, this could be combined with other factors: The old blue, green, yellow, red, black nodes, with the ratings 1-6. So one could represent IPs needed, and the other represent Hits needed, perhaps.

So a Red 6 node might require 6 hits, and require 4 IPs per roll, for example.

I don't like this idea, only because every time I would hear "Red 6" or similar, I'd hear in my head "Red 5 standing by" and probably would say it out loud as well. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

But really, this seems pretty cool. Simplifying hacking while kind of throwing back to previous editions, which a lot of people have fondness for. Count me in.

[Tashiro]

No, if that's their play style, it shouldn't "go south" that much, or else it's the GM being an arse and trying to force a so-called "right" way down their throats. And before you start pulling anything, note the "that much". Meaning that some times is okay, but there is a limit to what is acceptable before it becomes being an arse.

Hmm. I guess I'm just looking at it as 'if you don't do the homework, you can expect to be surprised'. If you don't know security's routine - when they change guards and such, it becomes harder to slip past them. If you don't know the type of IC in a node, you aren't going to know which programs to bring and which to leave behind because they slow your commlink down. If you don't know which room your target's in inside the building, it becomes harder to get to it. All these just increase the chance of security showing up and ruining your day.

The 'kick the door down shooting' just usually means to me that the security's going to be triggered near-immediately. My GM (and me, when I GM), both tend to have security networked -- so the moment someone seems something, the head of security is alerted, and everyone gets the alert. If a security member is 'blacked out', then this is an indication something is up, and a check is immediately made. That kind of thing.

Heck, I had the idea of having all security and workers in a factory getting downloaded skills to their skillwires when security is tripped before it was mentioned in one of the Shadowrun adventures. I was quite happy to see that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It made perfect sense - turn your entire workforce into killers if someone breaks in.

[All4BigGuns]

Hmm. I guess I'm just looking at it as 'if you don't do the homework, you can expect to be surprised'. If you don't know security's routine - when they change guards and such, it becomes harder to slip past them. If you don't know the type of IC in a node, you aren't going to know which programs to bring and which to leave behind because they slow your commlink down. If you don't know which room your target's in inside the building, it becomes harder to get to it. All these just increase the chance of security showing up and ruining your day.

The 'kick the door down shooting' just usually means to me that the security's going to be triggered near-immediately. My GM (and me, when I GM), both tend to have security networked -- so the moment someone seems something, the head of security is alerted, and everyone gets the alert. If a security member is 'blacked out', then this is an indication something is up, and a check is immediately made. That kind of thing.

Heck, I had the idea of having all security and workers in a factory getting downloaded skills to their skillwires when security is tripped before it was mentioned in one of the Shadowrun adventures. I was quite happy to see that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It made perfect sense - turn your entire workforce into killers if someone breaks in.

Which is all right if everyone in the group is happy with that play style, or as an occasional complication. It's when not everyone likes things that way and it's done too much (fine line there) that it gets into "being an arse" territory.

[Grinder]

ShadowDragon8685, phlapjack77: play nice. Your "conversation" does have a very aggressive and unfriendly nore, which you should change to avoid receiving Warnings.

[_Pax._]

Do you disagree that SR has a long history of this already?

Yes, yes I do.

People already make combat-hackers, face-hackers, etc.

People make Melee-adepts, Gun-adepts, Face-adepts ... should we eliminate the Adept trope/role?

Not to mention ... people were making combat-deckers, face-deckers, etc in First Edition.

[phlapjack77]

People make Melee-adepts, Gun-adepts, Face-adepts ... should we eliminate the Adept trope/role?

Not to mention ... people were making combat-deckers, face-deckers, etc in First Edition.

This is a fair point. I will say that my hacker-hybrid defense wasn't given as the prime reason to get rid of the pure mundane hacker archetype, more in support of showing that the times, they are a'changing.

And it does look like the pure adept trope/role is slowly being subsumed, too. Right now, in 4th, it's considered the "best" build to be a cyber/bio phys ad (in terms of mechanical benefits) over an adept with only magic. So slowly, the pure phys ad trope is also being removed, as shown by the mechanical benefits of not going pure adept.

Again, this is what the wireless matrix was supposedly going to do, right? Make it so the Decker who sits at home doing the hack separate from the rest of the team is no longer having to sit out during the run. Moving forward, it seems reasonable to make it so that everyone on the run can hack, in some way, shape or form.

[ShadowDragon8685]

I don't get this, this is generally the role most often missing--second only to pure Face, or at least Face with the kind of focus seen on this forum and the other forum--when we play (we have a small group), and we do just fine usually.

Then either
A: You're not playing 4th Ed (which, okay, that's fine,)
B: The GM conviently gave you an NPC or other MacGuffin who does it for a modest cut of the profits and doesn't complain and doesn't participate other than handwaving away the hacking.
C: You're playing MagicRun or otherwise playing far outside the presumed scope of "players are people who break into places corporate overlords would really rather they not be in for money."

I guess having a reasonable discussion isn't an option with you after all.

If by "Reasonable" you mean "I will refrain from cursing when I feeling cursing is required to emphasize a point," then the answer is that it is only an option under threat of Moderation, especially when I feel the person I am attempting to converse with is being deliberately obtuse or outright ignoring the points I am trying to make by stating his own proposed end-goal as self-obviously desirable and ignoring all complaints that it may not be.

As such a threat of Moderation has been issued, consider this your lucky day.

Good thing this thread is about 5th edition, and I'm not talking about changing hackers or hacking in 4th edition. Did you miss that part? Your whole post is talking about 4th edition and utterly worthless to this discussion.

Yeah, and? We have only what we have to go on, and I think it's very unlikely they're going to dramatically change the dice paradigm or, with it, the standard numbers of scale. Even so, even if they did change the scale, the fact remains that the point I was trying to make is that hacking is, and will remain, something you need to specialize in or stay the heck out of, or you'll blow things for those who do specialize in it, and by extension, the whole darn team once security goes on alert because the designated "hurt people and break things with guns" guy decided to take his middle-of-the-road computer and middle-of-the-road computing skills and run a laughably middle-of-the-road hacking program which the security systems detected, triggering a general alert on the computer system and attracting the notice of the decidedly bleeding-edge sysadmin who logs on.

To make an analogy that doesn't involve hacking, suppose the Face is using his Facing skills to talk a van full of Runners dressed as security guards yet using outdated codes through a gate, by trying to complain that they had a system malfunction that wiped their updates. The Face is going to get through, but then the socially-awkward hacker in the passenger seat stupidly tries to throw some jargon at the security guard to flummox him, but he mightily summons a craptastic dice pool that glitches and winds up attracting suspicion, prompting the guard to call them in for a deep check. Only worse, because while a good Face should be able to social-fu the idiot's mistake away, when it comes to hacking, the mistake is being detected at all, and it usually means that the group suddenly has to enact Plan B immediately, whether Plan B means "kick in the door and start shooting" or "take the money and run."

Yeah, I think that would definitely be more interesting to reintroduce bandwidth in some way, as you sweat waiting for your download to complete before the guard comes back (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Along with bandwidth limits, what about re-introducing something like storage capacity on datachips and commlinks and whatever? Give more thought to how you store the paydata, rather than just abstracting that part away.

I think 4th abstracted too much in some areas of the matrix(see above), and didn't abstract enough in other areas (hacking a door lock or camera feed, etc).

Ugh. No, no, NO. Did you play 3rd? Try to play a Decker in 3rd? If I wanted to keep track of my megapulses and bandwidth and storage capacity, I'd be playing 3rd. Reintroducing bandwidth and data storage capacity - especially after they've been conclusively stated to be extinguished concerns in the setting - would be a wrongful backward step.

Actually, the idea that hacking is a solo job? I could see that not being true. If one hacker gets to the middle of the network and gets sysop level of authority, he can sit there and ensure that security isn't triggered by anyone else as they head through the network and do different jobs at once. Having more hackers means getting more done, faster.

If one hacker gets to the sysop level of authority, that's it. Game, set, match. Unless the real Sysop happens to be awake, onsite or otherwise ready to jack in at a moment's notice, getting system operator levels of control means that it's in the bag. You can do everything you want to do and just walk away. You can also grant Sysop levels of authority to your friends, of course, so that once the super-hacker has hacked the good hack, the good and mediocre hackers can come and play in the sandbox, but it's going to be very few situations where hacking puts you in a time crunch such that the number of total Matrix actions your team can take per initiative round will matter.

Yeah, a hacking change would mean more players get to participate in the so-called hacking minigame, which seems like a win for everyone...

The problem is that this change is going to be impossible. Hacking cannot, and should not, and will not, be something that any schmoe who can toss a few Karma to get Hacking to the middle of the skill scale and then buys a half-arsed commlink, will meaningfully contribute to. It's not like physical combat, where half-assing it is enough to provide valuable (and necessary) support for the super-stars. Computers don't run out of IC to throw at you, and if they know they're being compromised and can't stop it, they can shut down.

Again, this is what the wireless matrix was supposedly going to do, right? Make it so the Decker who sits at home doing the hack separate from the rest of the team is no longer having to sit out during the run. Moving forward, it seems reasonable to make it so that everyone on the run can hack, in some way, shape or form.

Alright. Let me try to explain it to you another way.


Suppose there's a big nasty lurking in Astral space the the group needs to get past. Bignasties in Astral space are traditionally the domain of the Magician(s), any Spirits he or she (or some combination thereof, or neither,) or they, can summon up, and, very rarely, assuming the Astral Bignasty feels like playing nice, a PhysAd who can perceive.

Your suggestion that everyone on the run can contribute in some way to hacking in some way, shape, or form, is about as offensive and ridiculous as an assertion that the Essence 0.01 cybered-out gunslinging killing machine and the technomancer can meaningfully contribute to Astral Combat.

[_Pax._]

And it does look like the pure adept trope/role is slowly being subsumed, too. Right now, in 4th, it's considered the "best" build to be a cyber/bio phys ad (in terms of mechanical benefits) over an adept with only magic. So slowly, the pure phys ad trope is also being removed, as shown by the mechanical benefits of not going pure adept.

That's a balance issue, between Augments and Magic. And it is an issue that has always existed, from First to Fourth. It's just that Fourth is the most forgiving of Awakened characters having at least some Augmentation ... coupled with the new way Magic Rating is handled (meaning, it no longer automatically starts at 6 like it used to).

Again, this is what the wireless matrix was supposedly going to do, right? Make it so the Decker who sits at home doing the hack separate from the rest of the team is no longer having to sit out during the run. Moving forward, it seems reasonable to make it so that everyone on the run can hack, in some way, shape or form.

No, it does not (to me) sound at all reasonable.

Should everyone on the run be able to cast spells in some way, shape, or form?

Should everyone on the run be able to summon spirits in some way, shape, or form?

...

The thing with an RPG is, it's an ensemble cast affair. Each member of the group has to bring something to the table that makes their presence essential - each member of the team needs to have a Niche, in which they become the number-one star of the show.

"Dealing with computers & electronic security" is in fact one of those niches.

[phlapjack77]

Then either
A: You're not playing 4th Ed (which, okay, that's fine,)
B: The GM conviently gave you an NPC or other MacGuffin who does it for a modest cut of the profits and doesn't complain and doesn't participate other than handwaving away the hacking.
C: You're playing MagicRun or otherwise playing far outside the presumed scope of "players are people who break into places corporate overlords would really rather they not be in for money."

A. No true scotsman fallacy
B. This could be true, which means that they don't find hacking that fun, which suggests new rules for hacking should be thought of in 5th, perhaps...
C. No true scotsman, again

If by "Reasonable" you mean "I will refrain from cursing when I feeling cursing is required to emphasize a point," then the answer is that it is only an option under threat of Moderation, especially when I feel the person I am attempting to converse with is being deliberately obtuse or outright ignoring the points I am trying to make by stating his own proposed end-goal as self-obviously desirable and ignoring all complaints that it may not be.

As such a threat of Moderation has been issued, consider this your lucky day.

It's not that I'm ignoring your points, it's that, with all respect, I think your points are bad. I've responded to most of them, I think. You've made it clear you don't like my ideas on this too. We can leave it at that, I guess. And with the cursing thing, you're actually hurting your point, not emphasizing it.

Yeah, and? We have only what we have to go on, and I think it's very unlikely they're going to dramatically change the dice paradigm or, with it, the standard numbers of scale. Even so, even if they did change the scale, the fact remains that the point I was trying to make is that hacking is, and will remain, something you need to specialize in or stay the heck out of, or you'll blow things for those who do specialize in it, and by extension, the whole darn team once security goes on alert because the designated "hurt people and break things with guns" guy decided to take his middle-of-the-road computer and middle-of-the-road computing skills and run a laughably middle-of-the-road hacking program which the security systems detected, triggering a general alert on the computer system and attracting the notice of the decidedly bleeding-edge sysadmin who logs on.

See, you don't know what 5th will contain. Neither do I. But you're taking what you think will happen, then using that as a platform to say my ideas are worse than bad. You don't know that hacking will remain something you need to specialize in. And I'm saying this is a change that should happen, that mostly hacking needs to go away as something you have to specialize in, at least in the realm of specializing to the exclusion of all other things.

To make an analogy that doesn't involve hacking, suppose the Face is using his Facing skills to talk a van full of Runners dressed as security guards yet using outdated codes through a gate, by trying to complain that they had a system malfunction that wiped their updates. The Face is going to get through, but then the socially-awkward hacker in the passenger seat stupidly tries to throw some jargon at the security guard to flummox him, but he mightily summons a craptastic dice pool that glitches and winds up attracting suspicion, prompting the guard to call them in for a deep check. Only worse, because while a good Face should be able to social-fu the idiot's mistake away, when it comes to hacking, the mistake is being detected at all, and it usually means that the group suddenly has to enact Plan B immediately, whether Plan B means "kick in the door and start shooting" or "take the money and run."

Your example is not really useful, as you're still going from the assumption that hacking is something you will have to specialize in, in 5th edition. I'm advocating for this to not be the case.

Ugh. No, no, NO. Did you play 3rd? Try to play a Decker in 3rd? If I wanted to keep track of my megapulses and bandwidth and storage capacity, I'd be playing 3rd. Reintroducing bandwidth and data storage capacity - especially after they've been conclusively stated to be extinguished concerns in the setting - would be a wrongful backward step.

You got me here, I never played 3rd. 1st and 2nd, skipped 3rd. Sounds like some people liked this aspect of hacking though, at least if the SR2050 project says anything about this.

If one hacker gets to the sysop level of authority, that's it. Game, set, match. Unless the real Sysop happens to be awake, onsite or otherwise ready to jack in at a moment's notice, getting system operator levels of control means that it's in the bag. You can do everything you want to do and just walk away. You can also grant Sysop levels of authority to your friends, of course, so that once the super-hacker has hacked the good hack, the good and mediocre hackers can come and play in the sandbox, but it's going to be very few situations where hacking puts you in a time crunch such that the number of total Matrix actions your team can take per initiative round will matter.

Changing the fundamental hacking minigame is what I'd like to see happen in 5th. So your 4th-edition specific example wouldn't actually be relevant.

The problem is that this change is going to be impossible. Hacking cannot, and should not, and will not, be something that any schmoe who can toss a few Karma to get Hacking to the middle of the skill scale and then buys a half-arsed commlink, will meaningfully contribute to. It's not like physical combat, where half-assing it is enough to provide valuable (and necessary) support for the super-stars. Computers don't run out of IC to throw at you, and if they know they're being compromised and can't stop it, they can shut down.

I'm asking honestly - do you have some kind of special knowledge of what 5th will contain? Because most of your arguments sound like "No, you can't change that, because that's not what 5th will have".

Alright. Let me try to explain it to you another way.


Suppose there's a big nasty lurking in Astral space the the group needs to get past. Bignasties in Astral space are traditionally the domain of the Magician(s), any Spirits he or she (or some combination thereof, or neither,) or they, can summon up, and, very rarely, assuming the Astral Bignasty feels like playing nice, a PhysAd who can perceive.

Your suggestion that everyone on the run can contribute in some way to hacking in some way, shape, or form, is about as offensive and ridiculous as an assertion that the Essence 0.01 cybered-out gunslinging killing machine and the technomancer can meaningfully contribute to Astral Combat.

I've seen your point for several pages now. I just disagree that all hacking needs to be solely the realm of the "hacker". TMs can still be around for those uber-hacking needs of the team, but you don't have to tell me you don't like that idea either (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[phlapjack77]

That's a balance issue, between Augments and Magic. And it is an issue that has always existed, from First to Fourth. It's just that Fourth is the most forgiving of Awakened characters having at least some Augmentation ... coupled with the new way Magic Rating is handled (meaning, it no longer automatically starts at 6 like it used to).

Right. That's what I mean, 4th has made the pure adept less "viable", meaning the pure adept is slowly going away as a trope. I'm not saying it has to happen, or that 5th has to continue this trend, just that it seems to have started already.

No, it does not (to me) sound at all reasonable.

Should everyone on the run be able to cast spells in some way, shape, or form?

Should everyone on the run be able to summon spirits in some way, shape, or form?

...

The thing with an RPG is, it's an ensemble cast affair. Each member of the group has to bring something to the table that makes their presence essential - each member of the team needs to have a Niche, in which they become the number-one star of the show.

"Dealing with computers & electronic security" is in fact one of those niches.

This magic / machine divide still exists, but it's getting grayer all the time. The increase in the mana levels means it might be possible for all PCs to do some rudimentary magic, as the years go by. I guess the split from Earthdawn continuity will keep it from really happening, but you never know...

My point all along has been, every PC in 5th could have more skills and ability in the way of "dealing with computers and electronic security". Right now, the niche of the uber hacker is mundane or TM (or adept, craziness). I'd like to see that reduced to where the niche of uber hacking is TM, with general hacking available to all PCs.

[Cain]

My point all along has been, every PC in 5th could have more skills and ability in the way of "dealing with computers and electronic security". Right now, the niche of the uber hacker is mundane or TM (or adept, craziness). I'd like to see that reduced to where the niche of uber hacking is TM, with general hacking available to all PCs.

That does exist in Sr4.5 in a limited fashion, with Rating 0 skills. Granted, because SR4.5 uses program + Skill instead of Stat + Skill, you can't really rely on defaulting to give you any dice to roll.

[Halinn]

That does exist in Sr4.5 in a limited fashion, with Rating 0 skills. Granted, because SR4.5 uses program + Skill instead of Stat + Skill, you can't really rely on defaulting to give you any dice to roll.

Technically, you can default the various hacking skills with logic. They're logic-linked skills that aren't explicitly incapable of defaulting. I do not believe any sane person would allow it, logic being as easy to boost as it is.

[Lionhearted]

Technically, you can default the various hacking skills with logic. They're logic-linked skills that aren't explicitly incapable of defaulting. I do not believe any sane person would allow it, logic being as easy to boost as it is.

I think that the errata FAQ states that you cannot use certain matrix actions without a program and defaulting without the skill runs at program-1

[Grinder]

ShadowDragon8685, phlapjack77: play nice. Your "conversation" does have a very aggressive and unfriendly nore, which you should change to avoid receiving Warnings.

Ok, that's it: stop your ongoing "discussion" or move it to PM, but don't continue it in this thread.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/mad.gif)

[Draco18s]

Your example is not really useful, as you're still going from the assumption that hacking is something you will have to specialize in, in 5th edition. I'm advocating for this to not be the case.

So, in other words, you both want the same thing.

Now then.

How do you propose changing the system such that the underlined phrase is true?

Because unless you come come up with a half-brained, rough, barely-workable system that validates your position, then it's unlikely that CGL will come up with a system that validates your position.

Trust me, I've tried to make a system that allows team hacking to be more successful than solo-hacking, and no one liked the result.

[Sengir]

Ah, I thought quantum computers allowed more data compression.

It probably does, but you are at a different layer of the transmission (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Shannon's Law (or for Falconer, the Shannon-Hartley Theorem) describes a theoretical limit on how many bits per second can be sent over a given (in terms of bandwidth and signal/noise-ratio) communications channel. This is purely a limit on the physical transmission of bits, it does not take into account whether those bits represent an uncompressed raw image, or a JPG file that looks indistinguishable to the human eye at a fraction of the size.

[Redjack]

Back to Shadowrun 5

1) One thing I would like to see is Matrix fast resolution rules, in addition to standard matrix rules. I love a gritty technical, matrix as does one of the guys in our tabletop group and when we play the hacker it works great. The other members of our tabletop group dislike the complexity and the fact that people with a solid grounding in modern computer technology have a much easier time playing a hacker/technomancer.
2) Modular vehicle/drone design. Rules for creating vehicles more from scratch.
3) Vehicle cargo ratings (something like was in SR3)
4) Divergent magical traditions. The whole unified magic theory sucked out a lot of flavor.
5) Spell checking and grammar checking prior to publication.
6) Errata.

[Fatum]

Falconer, the point of bandwidth discussion was that a rack of servers under high load is not going to go wireless. Just because spectrum is by definition limited, as is transmitting power, and you face a bunch of problems like interference in wireless that you don't with wires.

[ Spoiler ]

phlapjack77, dedicated archetypes are about committing resources. Right now anyone can fight, just like anyone can hack already - get the software, get the skill, and there you go, nothing's stopping you. The thing is, just like a sammie is going to have a specialized implant and skill set that's making him most effective in combat (which is what, you know, makes him a sammie), a hacker has his own specialized implants and advanced skills. You're not seeing people who're not the team's dedicated hacker buying hacking programs at rating 6, advancing their Cracking group to rating 6, or buying simsense boosters and encephalons. Just because they have their own areas of competence to pour money into. Claiming that "everyone is a hacker" or that "everyone should be the hacker" is just failing to understand the very basics of Shadowrun group dynamics. Runners work in troupes because each one is a narrow specialist; and they need a representative set to succeed (how is that not obvious).

UPD: ooops, missed the moderator warning, disregard this.

[All4BigGuns]

Then either
A: You're not playing 4th Ed (which, okay, that's fine,)
B: The GM conviently gave you an NPC or other MacGuffin who does it for a modest cut of the profits and doesn't complain and doesn't participate other than handwaving away the hacking.
C: You're playing MagicRun or otherwise playing far outside the presumed scope of "players are people who break into places corporate overlords would really rather they not be in for money."

Assume much?

[Grinder]

Back to Shadowrun 5.

What's so hard to understand about it?

[Stahlseele]

What's so hard to understand about it?

Everything it seems.

[Remnar]

This is mostly 'meh' for me too. Card games, mini's, board games, etc... eh, I won't buy em but I hope they are good for those who are interested in those kinds of things.

5th Edition could maybe get me interested if it brings back the old flavor I like. I've long struggled with the concepts of 4th edition (universal magic theory, wireless matrix, technomancers) and the only 4th Ed. product that I really liked was Ghost Cartels (which i really liked); but after War! I really lost interest in the whole line for quite awhile.

If 5th ed could maybe bring back the 2050's or 2060's by being "universal" rules and maybe supporting those time periods I'd think about it. If it is going to advance the timeline and continue with the everything is wireless, everyone is watching, mirrorshades over mohawks, style then I'll just stick with Eclipse Phase for my super sci fi (which puts out better products at the moment, in my opinion).

[nezumi]

I do actually agree with All4, in that the game ideally should support both styles of play. Both are valid, and most players fall somewhere in the middle.

(I do disagree about the comments of things going south. Whether you're ghosting or kicking down doors, things should go south. If everything goes according to plan nine times out of ten, it's not going to be a very exciting game. However, the GM needs the results of that 'going south' to match what is fun for the players. Having a massive shoot-out in the lobby is very fun for pink mohawk. Having Lone Star CSI track your astral signature and remotely kill you is not. I'd leave the latter for a possible threat during your black trenchcoat games.)

[DnDer]

Could have sworn that was you, but no worries. I happen to agree with you on that one. Ah Well... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Catching up on the thread... But sounds like you're referring to a guy named Emperor Tippy, if I remember correctly. (If someone hasn't already found this out already.)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Catching up on the thread... But sounds like you're referring to a guy named Emperor Tippy, if I remember correctly. (If someone hasn't already found this out already.)

I do believe that you are correct... Thanks DnDer. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)