Wireless bonus rules suck., Lets write the tacnet rules they should have used. Options

[Fiddler]

Its easy to see how, regardless of GM, for some groups hacking an opponent's gear or cyber is a worthwhile option, should it be their default option? If the team can't think of any other options, then why not. However, I personally am considering eliminating the concept of bricking gear. Making it a temporary inconvenience is one thing, but making players waste 400k on cyber is not my idea of fun.

Bricking gear does not destroy it it just puts it out of comission until repaired p. 228. Permanent bricking only occours if you criticallly glitch on the repair check. I kind of like it but really think the wireless bonuses mostly were rushed to get a bonus for enabling wireless and some may need to be rethought.

[Dolanar]

I'll need to see how bricking works in game before I make a solid ruling on whether I will keep it as is or modify it. As far as wireless boni, I kinda wish they were more clearly thought out as well.

[SpellBinder]

Its easy to see how, regardless of GM, for some groups hacking an opponent's gear or cyber is a worthwhile option, should it be their default option? If the team can't think of any other options, then why not. However, I personally am considering eliminating the concept of bricking gear. Making it a temporary inconvenience is one thing, but making players waste 400k on cyber is not my idea of fun.

Bricking gear does not destroy it it just puts it out of comission until repaired p. 228. Permanent bricking only occours if you criticallly glitch on the repair check. I kind of like it but really think the wireless bonuses mostly were rushed to get a bonus for enabling wireless and some may need to be rethought.

In the previous edition filling the Matrix damage track of a wireless device pretty much made it reboot and it'd be out of commission for a few turns, IIRC. Now it can catch fire in your hands (or body, if it's an implant) along with becoming a short lived sparkler ball. And even if a bricked gun is only temporarily out of commission now (at least until repaired), one combat turn or two is all that it may take for you to get geeked by the other guy who's gun isn't bricked.

And yeah, decking shouldn't have to be the decker's only option in a fight. The rules also do seem a bit rushed and/or not well thought out. I mean, why does a smartlink have to be connected to the matrix for a weather report if you're indoors in a firefight?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

That's a complete misdirect, and at this point either you know that or you're just not listening. A mage CAN pick up a gun and shoot, and that can certainly be good enough. So can a rigger. So can the face. But guess what? They've all got combat options inside their specialty. You still haven't provided any reason why the hacker should be the only one who doesn't get options within his specialty for combat. My contention is that there are no design reasons for this, and thus far you have not even attempted to respond to that.

The HACKER HAS OPTIONS with his Hacking abilities in Combat. They should NOT include hacking cyberware. And if YOU don't understand THAT, then you are not listening either. Not all mages cast combat spells, and so in combat, are reduced to either using support spells (Wow, like a Decker offering Support) or picking up a gun to add firepower (again, WOW, like a Decker picking up a gun). There are many things a Hacker can do while others are shooting/spelling/facing/or whatever. There was never any reason to add the bricking of Cyberware into the mix.

People hated that concept in 4th Edition, and Catalyst backed off on the premise, recognizing the ludicrousness of it. Now, in SR5, J. Hardy determined that he was done listening to the People who supported his games, and decided he would FORCE the issue in a way that was ham-handed and ignorant. And you are surprised that people STILL HATE the idea? Really?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Bricking gear does not destroy it it just puts it out of comission until repaired p. 228. Permanent bricking only occours if you criticallly glitch on the repair check. I kind of like it but really think the wireless bonuses mostly were rushed to get a bonus for enabling wireless and some may need to be rethought.

Good luck repairing that stuff in your body, attached to all that sensitive and vulnerable meat, when it has the following effect from being bricked:

Devices that are bricked never fail non-spectacularly. Smoke, sparks, pops, bangs, sizzles, nasty smells, and occasionally even small fires are common features of a device in the process of becoming a brick.

So, tell me how you plan to approach fixing those issues outside of a decent Medical facility, with needed equipment and medical supplies, cause I am just not seeing it. Have your spine start smoking, sparking, sizzling, roasting you from the inside out because of the fires, and you are NOT just going to shrug your shoulders and say "hmmm, might need to sit down for a few minutes to make some repairs and adjustments."

Sheer Lunacy... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif) *shakes Head*

[Medicineman]

....oO( I wonder what happens if You Brick a WiFi Throwing Knife....)

HokaHey
Medicineman

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

....oO( I wonder what happens if You Brick a WiFi Throwing Knife....)

HokaHey
Medicineman

Now you have a Throwing knife that deals, in addition to its normal damage, both Electrical Damage and Fire Damage equal to its DR.. DUH!!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Dolanar]

what bothers me most is that they added that sort of fluff & ignored adding or detailing the mechanics behind it, so either

A. we were meant to ignore the fluff & the devices just stop working.

B. its all meant to be roleplay, but even so, if my cyber eyes start sparking, I expect that I should have blinded penalties at least. or

C. they just wanted to leave it to GM Fiat, which, can be good if your GM understands the responsibilities of GM fiat.

I actually would like to know how Missions would handle bricked Cyber Eyes, whether they would impose a fiat penalty based on the text or just ignore the fluff for it all together.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

It is a direct result of poor direction and oversight, as far as I am concerned. Sadly, that seems to be business as usual at Catalyst. I was really hoping it would get better, but it has yet to return to where it could be. Really, Mr. Hardy is just not a good Line Developer. Not even adequate, really, as most issues can be laid directly at his feet due to lack of leadership and direction (or just a lack of understanding on the world and the ramifications of his design decisions). *shrug*

[Epicedion]

They should NOT include hacking cyberware. And if YOU don't understand THAT, then you are not listening either.

You keep yelling this over and over, but why?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

You keep yelling this over and over, but why?

Because Wireless Bonuses Suck, and forcing Cyberware online to return to basic functionality of previous editions is not only ludicrous, but ignorant.
Says so right on the Thread Topic. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Hackers had more than enough to do in combat without adding the idiocy of Online Cyberware and Wireless bonuses. *shrug*
About the only thing you can dispute on this idea is that Hacking took time, due to extended tests, in SR4A (which often resulted in the Hack ending 2 rounds after combat did). With the elimination of Extended Tests for Hacking, that no longer applies, and the last barrier to understanding Hacking in Tandem with Combat is eliminated.

[Epicedion]

Because Wireless Bonuses Suck, and forcing Cyberware online to return to basic functionality of previous editions is not only ludicrous, but ignorant.

That's not a 'why' argument, unless you expect people to buy "because I hate them" as a valid reason.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

That's not a 'why' argument, unless you expect people to buy "because I hate them" as a valid reason.

Because there is obviously an disconnect between what is available, and what people see as available. Extended tests kept people from seeing the utility of a Hacker in the midst of combat, and thus resulted in the "oh, woe is me" syndrome of Hackers. There were plenty of things to accomplish while combat raged around you, and yet, because they chose to not see the options (Extended Actions consumed time otherwise useful to combat), Hackers complained that they just could not do anything in combat. Having played a Hacker for years in SR4A (and a fairly average Hacker at that, as he was definitely not Overly specialized), I can guarantee you that that perception was dead wrong. It may have taken a few more rounds prior to primary engagements to set some things up (handled with a couple of rolls and less than 2 minutes of exposition), and it may have taken a few more actions to complete certain tasks (one of the reasons I opted to have as many passes in the Matrix as possible); but that did not mean that a Hacker was ever useless. Short form is that the Street Sam kills very efficiently. Most Faces also have nothing to do in Combat, nor do Investigators, nor any other number of character concepts, and yet, only the HACKER complains. Pick up a Gun and shoot something if you cannot see other options. They are there, of course, but the Hacker is not looking.

[Dolanar]

I think it comes down to...why waste money on chrome anymore? Bioware doesn't require an internet connection for what it does, cybereyes can be completely subsumed by contacts/goggles, same with cyber ears & they are far cheaper to replace if they get made useless.

so the reason why is it is, for some people, removing an entire aspect of the game because of an adhoc that was added to make a small population of players feel useful in a situation that, some believe, didn't need anything added to.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

That works as an explanation, Dolanar. There is a lot more to it, I think, but at its core, it is pretty accurate. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Implementation also sucked a lot, and many of the design decisions in the Transition were just horrible, considering what came before. *shrug*

[Dolanar]

agreed, but it answers the question of why well enough

[Fiddler]

Well it's a new edition with new mechanics, we'll probably see more info at some point, and hey theres only a few pieces that have those problems most don't have wireless bonuses at all you can leave those offline.

i do wonder what would happen with a bricked move by wire system?

[Epicedion]

Because there is obviously an disconnect between what is available, and what people see as available. Extended tests kept people from seeing the utility of a Hacker in the midst of combat, and thus resulted in the "oh, woe is me" syndrome of Hackers. There were plenty of things to accomplish while combat raged around you, and yet, because they chose to not see the options (Extended Actions consumed time otherwise useful to combat), Hackers complained that they just could not do anything in combat.

The lack of usefulness of the hacking mechanics was the players' fault? Lovely.

Having played a Hacker for years in SR4A (and a fairly average Hacker at that, as he was definitely not Overly specialized), I can guarantee you that that perception was dead wrong. It may have taken a few more rounds prior to primary engagements to set some things up (handled with a couple of rolls and less than 2 minutes of exposition), and it may have taken a few more actions to complete certain tasks (one of the reasons I opted to have as many passes in the Matrix as possible); but that did not mean that a Hacker was ever useless. Short form is that the Street Sam kills very efficiently. Most Faces also have nothing to do in Combat, nor do Investigators, nor any other number of character concepts, and yet, only the HACKER complains. Pick up a Gun and shoot something if you cannot see other options. They are there, of course, but the Hacker is not looking.

I don't care what you did at your table. We're talking about a ruleset, not your utterly unique experience.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The lack of usefulness of the hacking mechanics was the players' fault? Lovely.

In a word, yes. The mechanics worked exactly as they should have. The only real complaint is that Extended tests could have been made faster, by eliminating those tests. Which is what SR5 did. That was really the ONLY change needed to "Speed Up" Hacking to truly mimic "In Combat" usefulness. Problem that most people had was that they were not willing to take an extra few passes to complete their hacks. Fact is that you COULD be useful in the run, onsite, with major impact on the scenario, with minimal time invested. I know, because I did it all the time. It does require that you know the rules well, and that you know what you want to accomplish. Lacking either of those, the Hacker character was left in a sea of decisions, that he was ill-prepared to navigate. They still have that issue in SR5, but, due to the removal of Extended tests, their decision making MUST happen even faster. And unfortunately, they added even more (mostly ill conceived) options for the hacker to contemplate. Options that make absolutely no sense, but were "Cool" to the writer. *shakes head* And the Game world suffers for it.

I don't care what you did at your table. We're talking about a ruleset, not your utterly unique experience.

Except that my experience is hardly unique. Know of plenty of tables that had absolutely no issues with Hacking (Have many Friends across the country that play the game), and there are people here on this forum that also have reported the same things.

Sad thing is: WE ARE discussing the ruleset. And there is absolutely no way that you will EVER convince me that putting Cyberware "ONLINE" is a good idea. It is such a horrible idea (in game world, look at the consequences again) that it boggles the mind. ANY Security conscious person can see that, and while the common man is usually oblivious to security concerns, the professional men (and Shadowrunners by extension) are not, and so, as Shadowrunners, the idiocy of Wireless Bonuses will have absolutely no benefit to hackers, as no sane security minded person would ever enable wireless bonuses, and that goes double for their Cyberware.

Now, that said... if there had actually been some thought put into coming up with appropriate and interesting Wireless bonuses, that actually gave an incentive to having a device online, well, maybe there would be some room for argument that they are a good idea. Sadly, at the writer's own admission, he chose "Rule of Cool" rather than logical, well thought out choices. And sadly, Rule of Cool loses out in this instance. *shrug*

[KCKitsune]

I think it comes down to...why waste money on chrome anymore? Bioware doesn't require an internet connection for what it does, cybereyes can be completely subsumed by contacts/goggles, same with cyber ears & they are far cheaper to replace if they get made useless.

Cybereyes are good for a mage so that he can cast spells in the dark or for distance casting.

Get cybereyes level 2 and put in it Flare comp, lowlight, thermographic, and vision magnification. None of these need wireless and therefore don't need to be on the matrix.

I guess now the corp sec forces will know who the mage is because he's the only one with cybereyes. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Dolanar]

well, also the immediate magic aura mages will have , but thats another issue.

[Epicedion]

In a word, yes. The mechanics worked exactly as they should have. The only real complaint is that Extended tests could have been made faster, by eliminating those tests. Which is what SR5 did. That was really the ONLY change needed to "Speed Up" Hacking to truly mimic "In Combat" usefulness. Problem that most people had was that they were not willing to take an extra few passes to complete their hacks.

It's not "exactly how it should have worked" if the rest of the game made it undesirable or otherwise useless to try and incorporate hacking into combat, and you start from the premise that hacking should somehow be useful in combat. You seem to be arguing on one hand that hacking was useful but not useful, and on the other hand that hacking should be allowable but not allowable.

If magic rules were such that it took two or three combat turns to cast a combat spell, would you see many fireballs or stunbolts flying around the field? Would you be making an argument that even though combat spells were made useless by the speed at which other actions could be accomplished, they were somehow still available and useful?

And there is absolutely no way that you will EVER convince me that putting Cyberware "ONLINE" is a good idea. It is such a horrible idea (in game world, look at the consequences again) that it boggles the mind. ANY Security conscious person can see that, and while the common man is usually oblivious to security concerns, the professional men (and Shadowrunners by extension) are not, and so, as Shadowrunners, the idiocy of Wireless Bonuses will have absolutely no benefit to hackers, as no sane security minded person would ever enable wireless bonuses, and that goes double for their Cyberware.

You're on both sides of the in-game/out-of-game argument again. The effects something has on the in-game world are different from a discussion of the ruleset.

Are you implying that players should have some sort of intrinsic right to unhackable gear for their characters? This seems contrary to the nothing-is-invulnerable theme of cyberpunk in general.

Now, that said... if there had actually been some thought put into coming up with appropriate and interesting Wireless bonuses, that actually gave an incentive to having a device online, well, maybe there would be some room for argument that they are a good idea. Sadly, at the writer's own admission, he chose "Rule of Cool" rather than logical, well thought out choices. And sadly, Rule of Cool loses out in this instance. *shrug*

You can't on one hand argue that wireless bonuses are idiocy and on the other hand argue that better wireless bonuses would be appropriate and interesting. Is your issue conceptually broad or numerically specific?

[Dolanar]

he's mentioned that specifically the way wireless was implemented currently & the current boni are not worth it, however had wireless boni been implemented in a way that made them undeniably a good option & worth the risk & all the boni match the pieces they are on well, it could have made their implementation better.

Just for reference, I will mention a few items that have questionable Wireless Boni:

Survival Knife
Stun Baton
Shock Gloves
Defiance EX Shocker & Yamaha Pulsar
Fichetti Tiffani Needler

these are just a few of the ones that seem superfluous or redundant to other gear you often carry anyway.

[BigGreenSquid]

For most of here, we are well aware the wireless rules suck. As for the yesmen, nothing that is said will change them from towing the company line. As I have read through this post, it seems like the yesmen have made a concerted effort to draw the discussion away from the development of a good TacNet system or anything else that would replace the retartedness of the RAW.

So, wireless sux, how do we fix it?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

It's not "exactly how it should have worked" if the rest of the game made it undesirable or otherwise useless to try and incorporate hacking into combat, and you start from the premise that hacking should somehow be useful in combat. You seem to be arguing on one hand that hacking was useful but not useful, and on the other hand that hacking should be allowable but not allowable.

But it DOES work as it should have worked in SR4A. Resolution was fast (Orders of magnitude faster than previous editions) and yet not Ludicrous (Hacks taking 0.75 Seconds). Hacks should take 10-30 seconds, rather than being instantaneous. SO in that regard, SR4A was perfect. Additionally, I consider "In Combat" to be inclusive of the combat, as well as some stuff being outside of the combat. Example: I am taking care of the door, and it takes me 10 seconds to bypass it... Guard comes around the corner and my Street Sam engages him in Melee combat (Range was pretty close). Yes, the Street Sam of Uberness could indeed waste him in 1 to 2 passes (3 seconds or less), but if that is the only encounter in that 10 second timeframe, the hacker still participated "in combat" even though he did not fire a shot. Now, if you track your game in 0.75 Second increments, and never move away from that time frame (obviously your Sam has 4 passes), then no, your hacker may fee left out (I doubt it, though, since his slowest action cost is 1.0 Seconds). On the other hand, if your Hacker (like mine) moves in 0.6 increment time slices, then your Street Sam may feel left out if he has less than 4 passes. I would doubt it, though. Both contribute to the success of the mission, and neither take up any appreciable in-game time to do so.

If magic rules were such that it took two or three combat turns to cast a combat spell, would you see many fireballs or stunbolts flying around the field? Would you be making an argument that even though combat spells were made useless by the speed at which other actions could be accomplished, they were somehow still available and useful?

Apples and Oranges. A HAcker is not a Mage, and should never consider himself to be. And THAT is the issue. HAckers want their cake and the ability to eat it too. Everyone has their niche, and a Hacker's niche is not spells, or guns. He can pick up a gun when needed (if not, why is he even there) or when the Hacking is not yet required, but his niche is dealing with MATRIX threats, not with bricking someone else's cyberware because he is bored.

You're on both sides of the in-game/out-of-game argument again. The effects something has on the in-game world are different from a discussion of the ruleset.

And yet, they are intrinsically linked. A Poorly thought out implementation in-game results in that implementation never being adopted, and you see it die on the vine. Wireless bonuses and Cyberware Hacking is just such a poorly implemented in-world phenomenon.

Are you implying that players should have some sort of intrinsic right to unhackable gear for their characters? This seems contrary to the nothing-is-invulnerable theme of cyberpunk in general.

Cyberpunk does not care about the BS of Hacking/Bricking of the common man's equipment (Because the common man is irrelevant in Cyberpunk). Really, you want to Hack Cyber in a Cyberpunk manner, Direct Connect it. THAT is cyberpunk. HACKING the MATRIX... THAT is Cyberpunk and always has been. Hacking the Man's communications and communications devices... Cyberpunk... Hacking Security Systems and altering feeds directly and in real time... Cyberpunk. Bricking someone's Wired Reflexes wirelessly... Absolutely not. That is BS.

You can't on one hand argue that wireless bonuses are idiocy and on the other hand argue that better wireless bonuses would be appropriate and interesting. Is your issue conceptually broad or numerically specific?

Wireless bonuses are an interesting idea. However their current implementation is complete and total lunacy, with a hefty helping of idiocy. I really wish they had found someone who actually cared about the design principles, who had a good idea about the logical consequences of their choices, and who had better direction from on high. Rule of Cool fails here, and fails miserably, as you can see from the absolute craziness of this thread topic. There is absolutely no bonus listed that is in any way incentivized. The logic fails when you look at it. There is no choice, at this point, because the drawbacks are so screwed up in comparison to the benefit that no one would ever activate the wireless. So, the design goal failed, and Hackers still suck, if you follow the design's paradigm, because there is no true incentive (Really, look at those Wireless bonuses again) that offsets the potential drawback. No Professional would ever risk it. And therefore, Hackers will continue to moan that they have nothing to do in Combat. *sigh*