Shadowrun 5 Matrix, Ugh Options

[Redjack]

I know a lot of Dumpshockers don't like, or simply haven't been enticed to, 5th edition. Here is my take in a nutshell: I like a lot of changes from 4th to 5th, like skills to r12, contact ratings to r12, interrupt actions, leveling out of direct combat spells, removing edge from spirits, etc. Currently, I really only have 5 house rules:
- +1dp initiative for everyone (ergo: base 2dp for initiative). Gives more people opportunity for interrupts and provides a slight leveling of reflex/initiative enhancements.
- Combat Defender rolls reaction +/- modifiers: This is opposed to Reaction + Intuition +/– modifiers (SR5 pg 173).
- Restore individual karma awards: Dump the 'one size fits all' Karma awards (SR5 pg376). 1-2 Survival, 1 Per Objective Completed, 1-2 Good Role-playing, 1-2 Guts/Bravery, 1-2 Player pushing the storyline, 1 Right Place/Right Time, 1-2 Smarts, 1-2 Humor/Drama

Several things I really hate that have not yet been addressed:
- Characters starting with edge > 5. This really unbalanced the game.
- Everything about the SR5 matrix. The more games I play, the more I hate it.

For this thread, I would like to focus on the SR5 matrix.

Thread Scope: SR5 matrix. Please take any other discussions to a different thread.

[Redjack]

Ok, so in itemizing this I have discovered things that I do actually like: Orange is for problems needing a fix, Green is for areas that have improved, and Blue is cool concept needing some help with the implementation.

Subcategories of SR5 Matrix:
1) Ownership mechanic:
2) Decks: Cost of decks, lack of rules to build a deck.
3) Comlinks: Simplified and separate from decks.
4) Nerfing of Technomancers: I like technomancers in 4th though perhaps they were a little too good. 5th over compensates by completely nerfing them.
5) Everything Wireless enabled: The bonuses are silly in some cases.
6) Removal of direct connecting via mutual signal range: Similar to everything is wireless, there are some subtle differences.
7) Separate icons for weapons
7) G.O.D.: Mixed emotions here.
8) Global Grids: I actually like global grids. I think the complete lack of definition on how a global grid works functionally is a weakness.
9) Noise: Finally, a technically sound drawback to wireless (above and beyond the logistical, strategic, & security reasons.

Anything I missed?

Edit 12/19/14
10) Bricking devices: Data spiking a device to where it burns out. What about some sort of buffers? Or even a "fuse" if you will that simply burns out and takes the device offline?

[pragma]

The SR5 matrix breaks my heart because I really want to like it. It is the first matrix my players have ever consistently had fun playing around with, and it feels like it runs lightning fast compared to other editions. I even once had a team frantically discussing whether to take their network down during a hacking attack, which is a deeply desirable outcome.

However, it has very serious bugs which require a gentleman's agreement and GM rulings to work. My big issues are below. I have denoted my numbers with a p (for pragma) in front of them to keep them separate from Redjack's issues.

p1) Wireless and stealth -- because you can run an analyze program on a drone, any corporate facility worth its salt will _always_ detect PANs that emit any wireless. The drone can use analyze ~3 times every turn and the hacker will eventually roll poorly on stealth. Note that in addition to breaking the game, this issue requires an infinite number of dice rolls to adjudicate.
My solution: This is a big issue and probably requires a total rework.

p2) Hidden mode and proxy icons -- the rules for hidden mode are still woefully bad, just knowing the number of hidden nodes near you is a useless piece of information and it opens up the "electric toothbrush defense" where the street sam just wears a sufficiently large number of hidden nodes such that the hacker never finds him.
My solution: scanning for hidden mode tells you what the hidden things are, in a general sense. This doesn't play well with issue 1.

p3) Incentives to drop out of matrix are pretty high -- since wireless stealth is bad you can't sneak anywhere if you have something wirelessly active. Even if you house rule that out, players are totally willing to give up +2 dice to negate an entire class of threat. Also, you can still get smartlink dice without being threatened on the matrix by using the following actions: on your pass you turn smartlink wireless on (free action), shoot (simple action), turn wireless off (second simple turns into a free).
My solution: You always get wireless bonuses and can't turn wireless off. Enforced by gentleman's agreement to disregard logic. This really needs a rework too.

p4) Wireless disengagement -- say you're playing the game with a gentleman's agreement so that it's workable. Your hacker brushes up against a bad guy hacker and they start exchanging data spikes or brute force attempts. The decker will hog a whole bunch of table time because there's no way to stop the enemy decker from finding you again if you try to run away. Even if one side wins or loses, the fight only pauses for the amount of time necessary for a reboot: the appropriate strategy for losing a matrix fight is to reboot and try your luck at dice again. This goes back to there being no useful model of stealth in the matrix: you can't hide, run away, or end the scene in any reasonable way.
My solution: Gentleman's agreement that I can tell the hacker "a stalemate ensues" and put screen time on other people. Can go back to rolls once in combat or some other decision has been made and matrix needs to be resolved.

p5) Hackers are actually super ineffective -- I don't mind this so much because players seem to have a good time messing with opponent's networks, but it takes 3-4 rounds (~12 IP) to overcome a network guarded by a bad guy hacker. At the end of that, the hacker reboots and everyone loses wireless bonuses for a bit. They've wasted 12 attack rolls for a round of -2 penalties to the bad guys. Admittedly, they can do this from outside line of sight, but doing nothing from outside line of sight isn't a useful contribution to a fight.
In the case the enemy has a rigger the hacker is marginally more useful, but it's easy to build a rigger that laughs at hacking attempts (16 dice for full matrix defense out of the box) and you can selectively reboot drones as a simple action when they get close to being hacked. The hacker is, at best, costing the rigger a few simple actions every round or two.
Outside of combat hackers are actually pretty fun, it's easy for them to mess with stuff with a small amount of down time and a high amount of risk. That's an OK trade for me.
My solution: I've got nothing. Like I said, I'm kind of OK with this.

p6) No rules for the actions you want to do -- intercept a phone call and be the guy on the other side, prevent someone from making a call for backup, figure out what files someone has on their PAN (do you get it from the matrix, with one mark, after you crack protection, do you do a matrix perception for each of them), all of these are things which lack rules or have them so poorly formatted that a 12 year veteran of Shadowrun can't figure them out with a few attempts.
My solution: On the spot rulings, I dislike this.

p7) GOD should never catch up with you -- Since you can't hold onto marks for long periods of time, you just reboot between hacking attempts. 40 overwatch score is pretty high. Again, even if you get close to 40, you're just a reboot away from being back in action.
My solution: Gentleman's agreement with hacker that OS follows him all run and that reboots can only happen in combat or with sufficient (a day) down time.

Summary:
Notice that a lot of this comes down to gentleman's agreements and ignoring the rules. I'm not a big fan and would welcome comprehensive house rules, but I don't want to draft them and haven't found any real winners that keep what I like about 5e and jettison the bad. Probably because a sufficient matrix rewrite is a Herculean, 100,000 word task.

A few notes on Redjack's stuff:
* Deck costs -- My solution: I house rule that decks cost 1/10th of their list price and programs cost 10x. This is the best house rule I've written and it really helps get decking into the game.
* Technomancer nerf -- My solution: I never liked technomancers anyway. Steer players away from them. This isn't a super constructive fix, but just wanted to put it out there.
* Noise is pretty easy to mitigate, signal scrubber program + math SPU knocks of 3 points right out of the box. You have to be in a pretty noisy world to apply more than a -2 penalty. That said, I really like what directional jammers do, though there should be a way to knock something off the matrix with sufficient noise.
* Global grids don't do anything other that provide another -2 penalty and some bookkeeping. You could use them as the basis of a cool mini-game (hiding on another grid, etc.), but I think of them as little more than an annoyance as implemented.
* I think the RCC is a cool piece of equipment that is a very big improvement from SR4. In particular, sharing programs is a nice rules clarification. I also think the simplified commlinks are a step in the right direction.

[Bertramn]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) Global Grids

What do you mean by how it works functionally?

The matrix in fifth edition tries, at some points, desperately to be similar to the 1-3 matrix.
Grids are an example of this. Decks are another.

In third edition the Grids were basically the area codes for the matrix,
with Regional, Local and Private Telecommunication Grids.
You generally started in a specific Local, within a specific Regional Grid, when you jacked in.
To enter a Private Grid, you had to sometimes change Local, or Regional Grids.

In fifth edition all Grids are global, except those that are not, like the Seattle Grid, and other Local Grids.
To enter a specific Host, you sometimes have to switch to a different Grid, as in third edition rules.

I imagine the fifth edition global grids to work something like if you laid out seperate cables for another internet,
only it is Wireless.
Or it is something like Tor in real life.

Am I making sense on this?

[Redjack]

p1) Wireless and stealth {..} My solution: This is a big issue and probably requires a total rework.

While I would say 3/turn is not reasonable given that they are surely doing other things, there is a certain frequency that any security rigger worth his salt would have them checking. I would add that low rating devices would generate critical glitches on a frequent enough occurrence to remove them from the pool of candidates performing this function, though (continued thoughts under hidden mode)

p2) Hidden mode and proxy icons {..} My solution: scanning for hidden mode tells you what the hidden things are, in a general sense. This doesn't play well with issue 1.

Exactly my thoughts: Combine this with p1 and the situation is untenable. Add to that the nonsense about 100M, but no ability to use mutual signal range in SR5 and my willing suspension of disbelief begins to falter.

p3) Incentives to drop out of matrix are pretty high {..} My solution: You always get wireless bonuses and can't turn wireless off. Enforced by gentleman's agreement to disregard logic. This really needs a rework too.

Agreed, the incentives are high. Magic then becomes the needed weight to offset this imbalance (vs cameras, etc). I have ran a lot of SR5 games in the last two years with a lot of players. Hackers are rare and people quickly lose interest in playing them, I've only ran into one technomancer character ans she is struggling for relevance at the tables.

p4) Wireless disengagement {..}My solution: Gentleman's agreement that I can tell the hacker "a stalemate ensues" and put screen time on other people. Can go back to rolls once in combat or some other decision has been made and matrix needs to be resolved.

SR4 was much more elegant in this with things like: Drop off the matrix and move to mutual signal range, spoofing of Access ID/comcode/logon, hidden mode, etc

p5) Hackers are actually super ineffective {..} My solution: I've got nothing. Like I said, I'm kind of OK with this.

See my previous comment about player abandoning this archtype. Sad, because even with the complexity of SR4, they were still used quite a bit.

p6) No rules for the actions you want to do {..} My solution: On the spot rulings, I dislike this.

And in Missions play, this because highly inconsistent.

p7) GOD should never catch up with you {..}My solution: Gentleman's agreement with hacker that OS follows him all run and that reboots can only happen in combat or with sufficient (a day) down time.

With the few hackers I've ran for, coming even close to 40 really hasn't been an issue.

A few notes on Redjack's stuff:

Like I said, I really like noise. It was needed in SR4. I hate house rules for SR5 because we do a lot of Missions play. Every house rule then creates an issue in Missions play because we then become accustomed to the smoother house rule and have to revert back to clunk for Missions.

* Global grids don't do anything other that provide another -2 penalty and some bookkeeping.

The -2 is public grids, isn't it?

* I think the RCC is a cool piece of equipment that is a very big improvement from SR4. In particular, sharing programs is a nice rules clarification. I also think the simplified commlinks are a step in the right direction.

I hate the RCC. Given full VR and the power of simrigs, the thought that a rigger needs an additional piece of hardware to jump into a vehicle exceeds my ability to willing suspend disbelief without it continually nagging at me. To be honest, I hated this in every previous edition. I understand it exists for a balancing game mechanic, but that doesn't stop it from being like fingernails on a blackboard to me.

[Redjack]

The matrix in fifth edition tries, at some points, desperately to be similar to the 1-3 matrix.
Grids are an example of this. Decks are another.

Yes, but SR3 global grids are a completely different animal.

In third edition the Grids were basically the area codes for the matrix, with Regional, Local and Private Telecommunication Grids. You generally started in a specific Local, within a specific Regional Grid, when you jacked in. To enter a Private Grid, you had to sometimes change Local, or Regional Grids.

Exactly. Even with wireless, you still either have to start with a local or public grid or you need to access a satellite to connect to a global grid. Using a local/public you are effectively creating a VPN to the global grid.

In fifth edition all Grids are global, except those that are not, like the Seattle Grid, and other Local Grids.
To enter a specific Host, you sometimes have to switch to a different Grid, as in third edition rules.

In SR5 there are 10 global grids. Most areas have local and public grids, lacking those, the global satellite network can be used to access a global grid.

I imagine the fifth edition global grids to work something like if you laid out separate cables for another internet,
only it is Wireless. Or it is something like Tor in real life.

Am I making sense on this?

Yes, I just don't believe that there would be 12 different wireless infrastructures in every city. I find the VPN solution far more elegant and believable. Even in advanced technologies in the near future, I like solutions that are believable. The thing I find the most unbelievable is that every megacorp would lay out all that infrastructure when they have satellites available and the ability to contract with local grids.

Thanks for the replies though!

[KarmaInferno]

One thing I was dissapointed about is that while there are ostensibly more wireless targets for a prospective hacker to attack, the actual mechanics for executing a hacking attack on someone's gun or cyberarm still requires multiple rolls and notable amounts of game time.

I would have loved to see hackers be able to execute quick debuff-style attacks to temporarily interfere with an opponent's gear or the environment around him. Ideally with a mechanic as simple as shooting a gun - attacker roll combat hacking roll, defender resists, if the attack gets through some short term equipment dysfunction occurs like the gun ejects it's clip, or a cyberarm glitches giving a penalty to actions done with that arm, or a nearby electrical panel explodes causing minor damage. Combat hacking results would be limited to immediate effects or at most short term effects before the target equipment recovers and clears the glitch.

As it is, at home and Missions games, the handful of times I've seen someone try hacking opponent's gear, after multiple rolls to achieve the desired result and seeing generally the opponent simply switching off his wireless, most concluded it was a massive waste of time and just pulled out a gun next time.


-k

[Redjack]

I would have loved to see hackers be able to execute quick debuff-style attacks to temporarily interfere with an opponent's gear

Agreed.

As it is, at home and Missions games, the handful of times I've seen someone try hacking opponent's gear, after multiple rolls to achieve the desired result and seeing generally the opponent simply switching off his wireless, most concluded it was a massive waste of time and just pulled out a gun next time.

A good friend of mine who has also played SR about as long as I have (SR1) wanted to play a decker for SR5, played several times, got the hang of it and dumped the character as simply ineffective and underpowered compared to the rest of the team (the Matrix rules and the cost of a deck being the two things that soured him on the decker). I feel he gave it a good, honest try.

[Beta]

The part that frustrates me is that, as a game master, I find I have to contort stories quite a bit to not have a very large number of all adventures just get flattened by locked doors, security cameras, or the like. Logically important stuff and people should have security tech around it, and given the technology that security should be pretty good and pretty quick to summon help. There are only so many times that the employer can give you pass codes, or whatever, before it begins to strain the willing suspension of disbelief.

I would have loved to see hackers be able to execute quick debuff-style attacks to temporarily interfere with an opponent's gear or the environment around him. Ideally with a mechanic as simple as shooting a gun - attacker roll combat hacking roll, defender resists, if the attack gets through some short term equipment dysfunction occurs like the gun ejects it's clip, or a cyberarm glitches giving a penalty to actions done with that arm, or a nearby electrical panel explodes causing minor damage. Combat hacking results would be limited to immediate effects or at most short term effects before the target equipment recovers and clears the glitch.

I like this. I immediately thought "denial of service attack on your gun" Allowing that sort of thing would make hackers a really key piece of battlefield control--if you can stop someone shooting (moving, seeing, whatever) briefly it can really allow a well coordinated team to do cool things. And at the same time it is not as all-or-nothing as the current rules for taking control are, which I feel would make it more entertaining.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I like this. I immediately thought "denial of service attack on your gun" Allowing that sort of thing would make hackers a really key piece of battlefield control--if you can stop someone shooting (moving, seeing, whatever) briefly it can really allow a well coordinated team to do cool things. And at the same time it is not as all-or-nothing as the current rules for taking control are, which I feel would make it more entertaining.

Which becomes completely useless, in my opinion, when the user just never puts that stuff online to start with. Professionals will not compromise their security by putting that nonsense on the grid.

[Redjack]

Professionals will not compromise their security by putting that nonsense on the grid.

Agreed. I hate it that an assumption in playing the game is that steps would not be taken to mitigate obvious security holes by professionals. There is a difference in acceptable risk and bone headed moves (like walking around with a gun icon prominently attached to your persona in AR)

[Smash]

I really like the 5th Ed matrix. I think if you take the fluff at face value and assume that most non-runner/non-elite corp operatives don't give a shit about wireless security because it is almost never an issue. The last crash and the new protocols took 99% of all hackers out of the game and they are now so rare (due in part to the cost of the gear) that the benefits far outweigh the risk.

It's not really a problem if the players don't take the risk. Principally because they are the players and that they are playing shadowrunners. They live outside what is typically the normal world.

That being said, even then it has it's problems. Wireless bonusses are next to pointless, so no-one has their gear online and secondly, they went overboard on some of the bonusses, like stun batons, etc. This was ridiculous over-reach.

I can also see that dispite the fact that I don't mind it, it seems like the broader community does not. Ghost dragons are great but triangulating from a deck?! that's the bridge to far.........

Honestly, the solution (and it's what I desperately wanted in the development of 5th Ed, is for wireless to go away. People seem to like the extreme paranoia angles for shooting down wireless, so why not just make it the in-game reality. No-one is stupid enough to use wireless because of hackers, so nothing is. It ticks a lot of boxes, particularly getting deckers on-site and making decks cool again (I personally loved the whole electric guitar style phase of decks, the new iPad ones are a bit of a snore-fest).

I guess we'll have to wait until 6th edition. Perhaps the rights might be cheap and I'll just buy them myself (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Umidori]

I've always said, give Hackers a MacGuffin powered "Hacking Gun".

If you have line of sight to a device, you can shoot MacGuffin beams at it and hack it by directly interfering with the electronics. It can use whatever nonsense explanation you like - "Quantum Impulses" or "Ionization Cascade Resonance" or whatever - but the end goal is that you're shooting an invisible beam of energy that physically mucks with the electronics of various devices, flipping bits of data in a controlled (or sometimes uncontrolled) way.

That's just the barebones of the concept, but you could quickly run from there with many options.

They could have limited range, giving you an incentive to buy bigger and better "Hack-Guns" to extend your range, as well as to make tactical decisions about value and tradeoffs - take the long range but hard to conceal "Rifle", the easily hidden but short range "Pistol", or the rather bulky medium range "shotgun" that can affect multiple devices several meters apart, and doesn't need quite as good aim but is less good at penetrating "armor"?

Make device "shielding" a defensive option against these "Hack Guns", but don't make it all or nothing - armor should reduce effectiveness, rather than provide invincibility. Also make such shielding expensive and hard to obtain (and maybe even maintain), so it's not ubiquitous. Tie it into the MacGuffin somehow for consistancy (it blocks the Quantum Impulses via... Reverse Polarity Phase Shifting... or whatever).

Maybe tie cover and "armor penetration" into things. We're using focused Whatever Rays, so line of sight is required, but they might have some small degree of penetration allowing them to interact with devices behind poor enough cover. That concrete wall is probably gonna stop your shots, but that up-ended flimsy plastic table might only dampen the beam - particularly if you're using a high end professional "Hack Gun" rather than a cobbled together homebrew variant.

Hackers face the obvious problem of time management - why would you spend ages trying to fiddle with enemy devices when you could much more easily just shoot drekheads in the face? "Hack Guns" give you the best of both options, giving you the tactical choices of hacking, but on the time frame and in the same limited area as physical combat.

If you want, you can still hack from afar, outside of line of sight - and in many situations, this is the preferable option for being more discrete and covering your tracks. But when speed is of the essence, there should be an option for hackers to throw down some quantum bullshit beams alongside their team's flaming lead.

And as a bonus, "Bricking" a device finally makes sense now! You shot that drekhead's fancy Ares Predator V with high intensity quantum bullshit waves, so it makes perfect sense that the electronics exploded in a shower of sparks, neh?

~Umi

[Glyph]

I keep hearing this refrain of "It would be neat if deckers could hack a gun with a simple mechanic", and I am a bit confused, because I am looking at the example of Tesseract the decker hacking some street thug's gun (on page 228), and it looks like that is exactly what he is doing. So as someone not that familiar with the SR5 decking rules, please explain what this example is forgetting about, or getting wrong.

[Redjack]

looking at the example of Tesseract the decker hacking some street thug's gun (on page 228), and it looks like that is exactly

I'd say that's a pretty compelling counter argument for being a simple way to attack a gun/device.

[Smash]

I keep hearing this refrain of "It would be neat if deckers could hack a gun with a simple mechanic", and I am a bit confused, because I am looking at the example of Tesseract the decker hacking some street thug's gun (on page 228), and it looks like that is exactly what he is doing. So as someone not that familiar with the SR5 decking rules, please explain what this example is forgetting about, or getting wrong.

There's a lot of that on dumpshock because a lot of people didn't want the rules to work so much that they refused to learn them in the first place. About a year ago i was involved in a thread that went for quite a while where people just refused to accept the intent of the distance restrictions with matrix perception checks. It took a while but in the end when it seemsed that they finally accepted how the rules actually worked they just reframed their arguments away from mechanics to realism.

In short, you can brick guns quite quickly. It works quite well, my hacker does it quite often, although my GM is sub-consciously changing his world to a nothing is wireless one for no apparent reason but to make hacking more boring. I digress.......

The problem is that the guy in the example doesn't have to have wireless on his gun. He could just draw another gun, or a knife. Alternatively, the hacker could have just drawn his own gun and shoot the ganger rather than hacking the gun.

There's something to a lot of that. What Umi is suggesting (which is something I've suggested before myself) is something that allows you to hack devices even if thet don't have wireless functionality. That way you defeat the logic arguments that go more or less like "Der! Why wouldn't I just have a wire running from my smartlink to my glasses/brain. It would be faster and immune to hacking!"

But the tachyon whatsits don't care that it's not wireless, they get in anyway.

[Bertramn]

The fact that anything is hackable when it is wireless, does not mean that people are going to refrain from using wireless,
just like people do not refrain from putting up naked pictures of themselves, on servers, where they can be hacked,
or how some people leave their Routers unprotected, or the protection badly encrypted.

Smash nails it down quite aptly:
I am more interested in the in-world explanation for a Shadowrunner, a professional, using his Smart-Link wirelessly, instead of with a cable.
I remember my Range-Sammy in fourth Edition, who basically had everything smart-linked, and wirelessly controllable,
but as soon as he touched the stuff with his skin, or special gloves, wireless would turn off, and it would work like a cable connection.
Skin-Link I think it was called.

What they basically intended with the rules, i think, was to make it like in GitS, where everything is hackable, and you have to go into Autistic Mode to evade hackers.

Does anyone know what the in-world explanation in GitS is for everything being hackable?

[Kyrel]

This is kind of a sidetrack, but I've never been able to shake the simple question: "Why must hackers be able to mess with things that have no point being wirelessly connected, and why must they be able to do it during combat?" I just don't see a reason for it, beyond "the hacker build that can't do anything but hack, must be able to contribute in combat", and that argument is just weak IMO.

On a more related note, I really didn't see the need to bring back the Deck. Especially not in the way it's apparently been done in 5th (I haven't read the 5th ed. rules, so I'm running on 2nd hand information here). You've gone from something that to me felt pretty cool and futuristic with the comlink, and gone back to having to carry around a computer (even if it's something closer to a tablet?). You could have solved the issue easily enough by simply making "Decks" either follow the rules for Nexi, or alternatively just use the higher rating comlinks from War. Or you could have just made Decks a necessity to enter full VR, and let the Comlink be AR only, but just as effective, save the VR bonus. I realise that the Deck idea has a lot of oldschool proponents, who liked the feel and idea, but to me, who only started playing SR with the arrival of SR4A, the return of the Deck really just feels like a technological step backwards, based on how I'm interpreting the descriptions of the thing.

[Redjack]

In short, you can brick guns

And this brings me to another point I dislike about SR5 matrix: The ability to brick hardware that has no reason for being vulnerable. To elaborate, a hacker can choose hot sim... or cold sim. With cold sim, there are effectively buffers that stop lethal overload...

As I think through this paradigm and I think about every device being hackable and every device being on the matrix, why wouldn't you just spike every DNI link and kill you opponents rather than mess with the gear?

[apple]

I am more interested in the in-world explanation for a Shadowrunner, a professional, using his Smart-Link wirelessly, instead of with a cable.

The official ingame explanation is, that only with wifi the smartlink can access the supercomputer ressources neccessary to compile the targeting data provided of billions of weather sensors inside buildings who can pinpoint the wind/weather situations, which, apparently, change every nanosecond.

The short story should be on the official homepage for the SR universe.

Does anyone know what the in-world explanation in GitS is for everything being hackable?

GITS play in Japan, a heavily industrialized and centralized country in the GITS universe. A lot of things are hackable because the use of cyberbrains (basically brains enhanced with headware) which are connected to the net there for better intelligence distribution and communication (image your iphone in your head, constantly chatting with your SO) are the norm in Japan (socially and sometimes legally enforced). GITS never had incidents like the 2029 or the 2064 crash, so being online is socially "normal" and the entire society depends on it. Its like having electricity, internet, email and a phone today. You can survive without it but you would be regarded as very akward. This leads to lots of people being online and with that hackable from the net.

The other reason is that some kind of tacnets (usually show in funky green computer generated maps: https://scifiinterfaces.files.wordpress.com...canner-035.png) are in common for any kind of operative (army, intelligence, police etc. Wifi indeed is quite like in SR4 there - low level thugs don´t care for wifi dangers, so their eyes can be hacked and their vision manipulated with that - and high level operatives are often compromised using backdoors and flaws in their communication system.

But yes, if you go completely passiv, not even the Major can hack you. But then again, being online with cyberbrains and tacnets gives so much goodies ... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Since the main characters in the GITS universe are not runners, but acutally GOD-operatives and are among the highest ranking agents for the Japanese government they can use a lot of security overrides, access codes.

This was a step proposed during the beginning of SR5 (make tacnNets standard, because then you have a reason to stay online or do go offline for more security, but less bonuses - in a believable wa)y. However the SR5 authors went for online silencers.

SYL

[apple]

This is kind of a sidetrack, but I've never been able to shake the simple question: "Why must hackers be able to mess with things that have no point being wirelessly connected, and why must they be able to do it during combat?" I just don't see a reason for it, beyond "the hacker build that can't do anything but hack, must be able to contribute in combat", and that argument is just weak IMO.

Well, thats exactly the reason what JH posted about it. Hackers were not played during 4E according to him, so they needed a combat role.

I really didn't see the need to bring back the Deck.

To be honest I like the slang. I believe for a cyberpunk game to work you need to have some kind of "subculture" language. So having a reason to distinguish between a civilian commlink and an illegal/military hacking device is quite nice - but not in the way it happened in SR5. I would have preferred if the word "deck" would have simply been ingame termn to describe a tricked out commlink (perhaps some hardware changes like hot SIM or scramble chips) loaded up with illegal hacking programs.

SYL

[Bertramn]

This was a step proposed during the beginning of SR5 (make tacnNets standard, because then you have a reason to stay online or do go offline for more security, but less bonuses - in a believable wa)y. However the SR5 authors went for online silencers.

SYL

Damn, I remember a scene from GitS - Standalone Complex, where the Sniper tries shooting down an intelligent tank with his Hawkeye-system, but It is able to see the exact direction and timing of the shot coming, and thus protects its weak spots, forcing him to shoot witough the Hawkeye-system.
That system analyzed weak spots in the targets armor, and took into account wind and other such factors.

What exactly would tacNets do?
Some aspects of GitS are very vague, such as the defense against hacking attempts the major uses.

Would it be possible to houserule them in?
Also, the second crash was a while back, so it would be reasonable to assume that the population has lost its aversion to the Matrix once more.

Thanks for the answer though, makes a lot of sense.

[Bertramn]

Well, thats exactly the reason what JH posted about it. Hackers were not played during 4E according to him, so they needed a combat role.

That is not a good argument for giving them that role though.
What is going to be next? Faces using their skills like Bards in D&D, to inspire their team in combat?
It should not be encouraged to spend all your resources on something other than combat, and then having to shine in combat too.
I had Hackers in my games in fourth edition, they did something in combat too, that wasn't when they used their decking though.

To be honest I like the slang. I believe for a cyberpunk game to work you need to have some kind of "subculture" language. So having a reason to distinguish between a civilian commlink and an illegal/military hacking device is quite nice - but not in the way it happened in SR5. I would have preferred if the word "deck" would have simply been ingame termn to describe a tricked out commlink (perhaps some hardware changes like hot SIM or scramble chips) loaded up with illegal hacking programs.

It was previously mentioned that Commlinks maybe should not provide VR access. I second that notion. In third edition there were Commlinks, but there were also decks.
Decks are described however as these massively powerful computer machines, that need that massive power to translate your nerve impulses into interactions with the computer code.
A commlink is something different.
Dividing those two up like that is a valid option in my opinion.

[Shortstraw]

I always saw hackers as the ranger/rogue equivalent, looking for traps (finding hidden cameras/laser tripwires), scouting (with stealthy drones or hacking aforementioned cameras), not being attacked by the bad guys by hiding in a corner. Not necessary for them to take a major role in combat as long as there is enough in their area to make them useful. The main problem is in the other games stealth is one roll, perception is another, and maybe a third to disable a trap or open a lock - much much faster.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Well, thats exactly the reason what JH posted about it. Hackers were not played during 4E according to him, so they needed a combat role.

SYL

Anecdotal, maybe, But I have never played at a table that lacked a Hacker of some sort in SR4/4A. We were ecstatic that the hacking rules were actually playable (without the pizza problems commonly associated with previous editions) coming from previous editions. In many cases we had two hackers (Hacker and a Technomancer). And no, they were generally not front line combatants. They really shouldn't be. As to complaints that they were ineffective in combat? Again, no such complaints. They were focused in other areas, and the Technomancer generally complained when he was getting INTO combat (he avoided it like the plague if he could), because he hated it so much (it could get him killed). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

When the Hacker needed to assume a combat role, he pulled a weapon and used that.