IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> CHNs as Commlinks/RCCs for homes?, Ideas while we wait for the matrix book.
BlackJaw
post Mar 10 2014, 05:31 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 27-May 09
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Member No.: 17,213



The idea I got from the matrix section of the SR5 book is that most people do not own or use a host. In particular, the chart on page 247 makes me think its a technology mostly used by buisness, organizations, and other groups. Typical people and families probably don't have a host to protect their matrix enabled house hold appliances and belongings.

4th edition had Central Home Nodes, devices that all the smart appliances in a house or apartment were connected to, and which more or less ran the house systems. I think that's a good model for 5th edition, at least until we get more detailed rules in some future book.

So what about Central Home Nodes, or maybe Central Home Networks (CHN like WAN or PAN) which act like a commlink for a house or apartment? All the devices inside the apartment or house can be slaved to the Home Node device (A Houselink?), and gain the benefits of it's attributes for defensive tests. It might also act like an RCC, providing cyberware program slots which can be shared with any drones in the house. Your CHN might run a special Home-cleaning or french cooking autosoft which improves the capabilities of your various home appliances and drones. Or maybe you run signal scrubber on it so you can get a better connection to the matrix (say for watching your favorite sports trids). The security minded folks might install Encryption software to better secure their system. I could also see some users running an Agent on their CHN to make for a smarter smart-house.
The "Houselink" device acts as the master device of the network, but is a larger device than portable commlinks and RCCs. It's main advantage is the ability to accept many more connections, say 30 times the device rating instead of the 3 times of portable devices, but it's limited to only devices within 100meters and is too bulky to be transportable. It might protect our car while it's in the garage, but not while driving the streets. These devices are probably about the size our desktop computers, and depending on how fancy they are, people could have them installed into their home entertainment systems (as it acts an entertainment server), a closet, the kitchen, an office, or bedroom, etc.

From a hacker's perspective, the system is still more or less like hacking a Commlink slaved personal device. The house appears as a CHN icon (much like a person's icon is of their PAN) which allows them to try and hack individual devices. That makes it a step bellow a Host, where you have to break into the host's VR environment in order to target individual devices remotely. CHNs don't provide a virtual environment, can't run IC, and don't have Attack or Sleaze, making them mostly used for improving the Firewall of everything in the house, and coordinating the automated home chores.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Drace
post Mar 10 2014, 10:08 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 504
Joined: 8-November 05
From: North Vancouver, BC
Member No.: 7,936



Personally I like the rules a lot. Though perhaps X 10 devices is a bit high. Unless you have each rooms lights synced seperately, each rooms temp, windows and th like all done trough the CHN that could be dang overkill. And if you had th too end you're looking at 70 devices.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Drace
post Mar 10 2014, 10:08 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 504
Joined: 8-November 05
From: North Vancouver, BC
Member No.: 7,936



Personally I like the rules a lot. Though perhaps X 10 devices is a bit high. Unless you have each rooms lights synced seperately, each rooms temp, windows and th like all done trough the CHN that could be dang overkill. And if you had th too end you're looking at 70 devices.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BlackJaw
post Mar 11 2014, 03:28 AM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 27-May 09
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Member No.: 17,213



QUOTE (Drace @ Mar 10 2014, 05:08 PM) *
Personally I like the rules a lot. Though perhaps X 10 devices is a bit high. Unless you have each rooms lights synced seperately, each rooms temp, windows and th like all done trough the CHN that could be dang overkill. And if you had th too end you're looking at 70 devices.

Every light, lock, appliance, home drone, security sensor, and entertainment system in the home is probably a seperate wireless device. Then you have a variety of personal devices which you leave at home, or slave to the home network when they aren't with you. Add in all the wireless options on tools and even clothes (according to the previews of Run & Gun) and it starts to look like the number of wireless devices in a house might be very large in deed.

The limit on slaved devices might be a waste actually. Maybe a CHN can handle any number of slaved devices within 100 meters. The main difference between devices is their firewall and number of program slots in that case. That's probably easier to play with at any rate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kyrinthic
post Mar 11 2014, 05:03 PM
Post #5


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 20-September 11
Member No.: 38,390




Why not HAN for Home Area Network, to match with Pan, and Wan?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BlackJaw
post Mar 11 2014, 08:05 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 27-May 09
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Member No.: 17,213



QUOTE (Kyrinthic @ Mar 11 2014, 12:03 PM) *
Why not HAN for Home Area Network, to match with Pan, and Wan?

Sounds good.

So a HAN is the network, and the CHN is the device. "NeoNet's Homelink CHN" for example.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DMiller
post Mar 12 2014, 03:04 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 681
Joined: 23-March 10
From: Japan
Member No.: 18,343



Here’s my take on the CHN…

I’d consider each CHN to be a Host. The home occupant doesn’t own the Host, but it is more like rented space (as part of the Lifestyle cost). For low and middle lifestyles I’d set the CHN as a Rating 1 Host with GM assigned fixed attributes. For high and luxury lifestyles I’d have them be Rating 2 hosts, high lifestyle would still be fixed attributes, but luxury could reassign them (assuming someone in the home knew how to do so). It keeps it all within the rules as we see them now, which may change once more splat books come out. This would also keep it simple, and I like the rule of KISS.

The reason I picked Host rating 1 and 2 is due to the table on page 247. The table there lists Host ratings 1-2 as “Personal sites”. Someone’s CHN could also be their personal site if they set it up that way. If you don’t want the CHN to be usable for hacking you can say that the actual owner of the Host space has set the Attack and Sleaze attributes to 0, or simply disallowed access to them (setting them to 0 makes more sense to me).

Even if someone “purchases” a lifestyle (paying 100 months rent), it doesn’t mean that they own every aspect of that lifestyle, it means that they have paid to keep the lifestyle self-sustaining so having the CHN be a rented Host space is a fair option.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BlackJaw
post Mar 13 2014, 06:25 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 27-May 09
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Member No.: 17,213



QUOTE (DMiller @ Mar 11 2014, 10:04 PM) *
Here’s my take on the CHN…
I’d consider each CHN to be a Host. <Snip>
It keeps it all within the rules as we see them now, which may change once more splat books come out. This would also keep it simple, and I like the rule of KISS.

I'll have to disagree here. I personally think Host systems and related rules are a lot more complicated than the basic slaved device rules used for PANs.

I could see some people running a personal host and using it for security on their property, but I don't get the feeling that it's the standard or common thing. It's just my take, and as you note, it will all change with future books.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sendaz
post Mar 13 2014, 06:53 PM
Post #9


Runner
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,039
Joined: 23-March 05
From: The heart of Rywfol Emwolb Industries
Member No.: 7,216



I am inclined to go with BlackJaw on this one.

A proper host is by definition on page 216, a self-contained place in the Matrix. Hosts have no physical location, as they exist purely in the Matrix cloud. I see the Host as being far more powerful as they are harnessing a lot more computational power as well as data storage and other features.

What I gather BlackJaw is after is sort of a souped up PAN, in this case designated as the HAN* which is the House equivalent of a Commlink/RCC on Steroids, designed specifically to juggle a greater number of devices and tying them all together into the HAN in a sort of a System Overwatch (of) Linked Objects.

What?

You didn't think you were getting out of using a term like HAN* without the other half did you?
Just be sure to regularly delete woo-- er, cookies.

ahem... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


While it might support an Agent or some level of encryption, it will not run IC or do most of the heavy lifting digitally speaking a proper host would handle with ease.


(yes I know its supposed to be HCN, but that's not as fun (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) )
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DMiller
post Mar 14 2014, 12:20 AM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 681
Joined: 23-March 10
From: Japan
Member No.: 18,343



The main reason I suggested using the Host rules is for simplicity. Rather than creating new rules for a new device and then changing them once actual rules covering it come out my suggestion was use the existing rules until new rules come out. The less House Rules at a table the better in my opinion. Creating an entire section of rules is a lot of house rules, where applying rating 1/2 host rules to the CHN is easy. When (if) rules actually come out covering the CHN you just drop the host stuff and follow the new rules. A rating 1 or 2 host that is not controlled by the home owner isn't out of the question.

The way I imagined it was that the building or even complex of apartments and houses all basically share the host. The individual CHN is a simple device used more as an interface rather than an actual host in and of itself. The actual host is owned and maintained by the actual owners of the apartment complex. This would explain why the home owner cannot adjust the host settings. One Host could service hundreds of apartments. The CHN (host interface) would then control the various personal devices within each apartment.

But your ideas would work too, in the absence of rules each table just needs to find what would work best for them. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shortstraw
post Mar 15 2014, 05:16 AM
Post #11


Running Target
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,003
Joined: 3-May 11
From: Brisbane Australia
Member No.: 29,391



QUOTE (Kyrinthic @ Mar 12 2014, 03:03 AM) *
Why not HAN for Home Area Network, to match with Pan, and Wan?

As long as the HAN is programmed to shoot first when it detects intruders.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BlackJaw
post Mar 15 2014, 02:01 PM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 27-May 09
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Member No.: 17,213



QUOTE (DMiller @ Mar 13 2014, 07:20 PM) *
The main reason I suggested using the Host rules is for simplicity. Rather than creating new rules for a new device and then changing them once actual rules covering it come out my suggestion was use the existing rules until new rules come out. The less House Rules at a table the better in my opinion. Creating an entire section of rules is a lot of house rules, where applying rating 1/2 host rules to the CHN is easy. When (if) rules actually come out covering the CHN you just drop the host stuff and follow the new rules. A rating 1 or 2 host that is not controlled by the home owner isn't out of the question.

The way I imagined it was that the building or even complex of apartments and houses all basically share the host. The individual CHN is a simple device used more as an interface rather than an actual host in and of itself. The actual host is owned and maintained by the actual owners of the apartment complex. This would explain why the home owner cannot adjust the host settings. One Host could service hundreds of apartments. The CHN (host interface) would then control the various personal devices within each apartment.

But your ideas would work too, in the absence of rules each table just needs to find what would work best for them. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I see what you mean. My CHN concept introduces a new unofficial thing to the rules, while yours does not.

I actually like the (weak) Host idea for large apartment buildings, condos, and possible for gated communities and developer owned neighborhoods, but in those cases I suspect the built in appliances and similar would be in the host, while the privately owned devices and possessions of the occupants would simply be free floating on the grid. If you don't own/control the host, you can't slave anything you own to it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DMiller
post Mar 17 2014, 02:23 AM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 681
Joined: 23-March 10
From: Japan
Member No.: 18,343



QUOTE (BlackJaw @ Mar 15 2014, 11:01 PM) *
I see what you mean. My CHN concept introduces a new unofficial thing to the rules, while yours does not.

I actually like the (weak) Host idea for large apartment buildings, condos, and possible for gated communities and developer owned neighborhoods, but in those cases I suspect the built in appliances and similar would be in the host, while the privately owned devices and possessions of the occupants would simply be free floating on the grid. If you don't own/control the host, you can't slave anything you own to it.

I agree that the personally owned devices would likely not be slaved to the CHN in this case. Though there is likely a process to add a purchased home appliance to the CHN (effectively turning ownership over to the Host owner). I'm sure this would have very little game effect, just something of note.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th June 2024 - 08:52 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.