Shadowrun 6, What needs to be changed? Options

[Koekepan]

Public-key cryptography provides (you're right about this) within some bounds (assumptions about the sanctity of the chain of operation) certain assurances related to authentication and integrity. However, these guarantees are not ironclad, and are not unique to it either.

The one thing that absolutely all encryption systems do, from ROT13 through OTP, is obfuscate the message. Every single one of them. Otherwise it's not encryption. It is the single, necessary, defining criterion of encryption.

I didn't say "public key encryption". I didn't mention a particular encryption field at all. I said just encryption, period. There are many, many ciphers that don't do a damn thing for integrity checking, or authentication.

All the things that you are describing as "lateral thinking" are great, but do not constitute the process of identifying a key by analysis. When you go to actually do battle in the Matrix, what is your target supposed to be? And your opposition? And your method? And your environment? At that level of supposed abstraction, there's no reason whatsoever to believe that the encryption algorithm is any one of the above, unless it's possibly the target in the sense that you're trying to divine what algorithm is supposedly in use in some location or other - an edge case, at best.

No, your probable target is some nebulous data, or access to some system. Your opposition is intrusion detection and response systems, trying to do to you what you're trying to do to the systems hosting your target. Your method is - that's a point of debate, but it sure as hell isn't DECRYPT HARDER!!! My best guess at a plausible approach amounts to abstracted QA, looking for exploitable implementation flaws. And the environment is (and this is the ludicrous part, to me) a metaphor for your target, opposition and methods that is both incredibly lavish and somehow more efficient when driving signals to your brain that are so intense that it could cook the neurons. Nobody has yet been able to explain why the extra few milliseconds or so won by directly sending signals to and from the neocortex should aid in a process that largely depends upon consideration and judgement.

[Koekepan]

The Matrix VR metaphor wouldn't care at all about your hardware. Once again Echo Mirage was hacking networks on the Internet like it was nothing. This means that the metaphor makes it trivial to hack any system regardless of hardware limitations.

That's great, but you're not saying WHY the magic pixie dust brainterface will be effective over 14.4KHz, more than a mouse and keyboard. You see, it doesn't matter how fast your neurons operate if they're sending signals over a link that only sends a dozen or so bits per millisecond.

So, the floor is yours: why does that brainterface work better at sending bits than a reasonably fast typist? This is the mystery that has not been explained adequately by anybody.

Without exposing your brain cells to biofeedback it means you don't get all the benefits of the VR metaphor. Which to be fair, the mechanics do slightly reinforce that in all editions.

Yes, we got it. The magic pixie dust brainterface is magically effective.

Why?

The idea isn't that the Matrix is literally magic, but that it's a high level abstraction on top of a higher level abstraction. It's like all those insane Java frameworks that are abstractions on top of other abstractions but taken to the nth degree. The idea is that low level code is a thing of the past. It's easier to visualize code in a 3d interface and sculpt (literally in 3d VR space) code then it is to write lines of code into VIM. In 50 years all our coding paradigms are going to be completely obsolete.

I'm familiar with the concept of abstraction. Why this abstraction? What does it change? How does it make the pondering that goes into coding unnecessary to the point that the limiting factor is how quickly you can get electrical signals to and from the brain?

Flaser proposed a mechanism where the neural tissues aid in decryption (a dubious position, to say the least). But at least that was a proposal of an underlying reason, however flawed.

Remember, even with ten monitors, a twitch-gaming mouse and a machine that's a tiny tin god, the hard work of a programmer is thinking about causes and effects in long, interwoven chains.

And this raises the question of whether programming is even what is going on when you deck the gibson. Chances are, it's not. Chances are, the programming happened first and now you're implementing your solutions.

So why does a complex neural interface work better than hitting the return key?

Whoever can answer that question in a cogent, coherent fashion gets a cybercookie. It's been a few years since it was first asked, so the cookie might be stale by now...

[binarywraith]

So why does a complex neural interface work better than hitting the return key?

Because of three things :

1. DNI removes the cumbersome brain-to-keyboard lag in both input and observation. See SR2-3 Matrix initiative for the mechanical demonstration that deckers are flatly acting on speeds that only the most highly specialized augmented sams can hope to match.
2. The Matrix interface created by a cyberdeck is actually performing a huge number of operations, while simplifying them into a perceptual intuitive GUI for the decker.
3. Worldbuilding fiat.

[Kyrel]

Why wouldn't you just buy the best decryption program and be able to hack any encryption then? Honestly, it sounds pointless and makes decryption mandatory now (which it already is...).

A valid question. In most games, this change would make absolutely no change to the game what so ever, because every hacker character starts the game with Rating 6 programs. The change, however, would be that a Decrypt 6 program wouldn't crack an Encrypt 6 program. The players would need to use some other method to acquire the ability to crack that encryption, be it a Decrypt 7+ program, social engineering or something else would have to be up to them. The goal, however, would be to make the hacking process of some nodes a question of more than simple extended or opposed tests.
I'll admit that I'm also looking at this problem from the perspective of my own game(s), and in my games, I don't throw around high rating programs and device ratings on nodes all the time. Rating 6 is actually top-of-the-line hard-/software, and it's not something you encounter in very many places, and hence it's both more difficult to get your hands on Rating 5+ programs, and in most cases you don't actually need to have them, in order to get by.

This isn't meant for you, Kyrel, but in general. Its stupid to make the Matrix realistic. It should be 100% based off the metaphor because the coding and security is so insanely high level that it's literally beyond human comprehension how this stuff actually works. It makes some sense when you think about it. Echo Mirage weren't necessarily better hackers then everyone, but they did have the first ASIST interfaces and they weren't going through lines of code or seeing 0s and 1s. No, they were seeing a high level abstraction that made security vulnerabilities in the code more obvious and easier to exploit.

So the point is no longer to make unhackable encryption, because the metaphor of the VR Matrix makes it easier to crack. The whole point of Matrix security is to make the metaphor fight back. Security is more about frying someone's brain cells, since it's more reliably secure.

I actually agree with you that you can't, and shouldn't, make hacking "realistic", but I would personally prefer a system that retains some level of present time logic and recognition, rather than a completely stylized system where you simply roll a handful of dice against a target number or another handful of dice, and if you succeed, then because "magic inside the black box" you break into the computer system and defeat the system's defences. For the same reason, it's always bothered me that something that's supposed to help keep your information relatively safe from being read by foreign parties, actually only serve to delay said parties access to your data by a few seconds, as compared to you not having protected your system at all. From my perspective, the problem with quickly and easily broken computer systems and their encryption is that the only logical response to this situation is to go back to physical hardcopy typed on typewriters and stored in folders in a relatively safe location, because most of the time it will be more difficult and time consuming for aforementioned foreign parties to access the data that way. It's essentially the same problem as we have with why various forms of cyberware must be accessible via the matrix, when you live in a world where that means that the equipment that's essentially replaced your nervous system and other key parts of your anatomy, can be hacked in seconds, and shut down, killing or crippling you in the process (or rather not killing or crippling you for "magic" reasons...).
So we're back to how we make a system that at one time both makes sense to our current minds as players, without having to resort to "because it does" argumentation, and at the same time function as a fun game mechanic, and still actually work and make sense on within the context of the game setting itself.

This also gets to the point, AR vs VR hacking. We can't go back to only VR hacking, because then we run in to the problem of the hacker having their own 30 minute dungeon crawl while the rest of the team goes and gets pizza. So we NEED hacking to move at the same speed as the rest of the game.

The biggest problem with the Matrix is that its too slow. It basically means you need to go VR hacking, because you need all the initiative passes you can get to hack or fight IC, or whatever. But the problem is, being immobile is kind of a death sentence. A way to fix this, and that is to give everyone mesh reality if you're in VR. So that you can spend your meat initiative doing meat things like running around, taking cover, or shooting people, and the rest of your initiative goes towards Matrix actions. Also reducing Matrix actions from complex to simple, would also help a lot. After all, twitchy fast paced combat should most definitely be apart of the Matrix metaphor, maybe taking a dice pool penalty to reduce the action type.

And the metaphor should also be reflected not needing to rely on "hacking" or "software" skills, but by using pistols or climbing, or whatever. Other active skills should replace hacking, because everything is just a metaphor in the VR landscape.

To be honest, I would personally prefer to strongly reduce the need for VR hacking, so that it is typically confined to the pre-run legwork section of the game, instead of being something you enter during shooting combat. I know this flies flat in the face of 20 years of Shadowrun, but like you in D&D have the saying "don't split the party", meatspace and VR is essentially that exact thing, and can be compared to a the Wizard in a D&D group teleporting to another plane when combat starts, forcing the DM to run not just one encounter, but two at the same time. Add in Astral space too, and you are now talking about splitting the party into three, and running three separate but connected encounters simultaneously. I know that VR will remain a core part of SR, but personally I would really like to reduce it's importance compared to AR hacking.
Which brings me to another theoretical way to approach the concept of AR hacking in SR. Since we effectively have a situation where it's mainly the hardware and software that's doing the actual hacking, rather than the hacker sitting around and puzzling out how to circumvent the security features of said node, why not take that idea to the next step, and instead accept that the hacking is mainly being done by the hardware and software, and what's really needed, is a hacker that can let the program loose on on the target node, with the right set of tools, and targeting the right part of the defensive code. Basically have the hacker take an action in VR in order to get things underway, and then have the hardware run automatically for the next X number of action phases, whilst the hacker is free to concentrate on not getting shot and/or shooting back at the enemy? Essentially getting an "Agent" to hack the system while he shoots and moves around the battlefield. And yes, that detracts from the concept of the hacker a bit, but it also opens up the option of a hacker letting loose a handful of hacking protocols from AR, and then letting them do their work while he dodges enemy fire and moves along with the rest of the team, which is essentially what we really want to achieve.


(P.S. my appologies if parts of the above doesn't make sense, but I'm somewhat tired at the moment, and English is not my first language, so bear with me pls.)

[DeathStrobe]

That's great, but you're not saying WHY the magic pixie dust brainterface will be effective over 14.4KHz, more than a mouse and keyboard. You see, it doesn't matter how fast your neurons operate if they're sending signals over a link that only sends a dozen or so bits per millisecond.

So, the floor is yours: why does that brainterface work better at sending bits than a reasonably fast typist? This is the mystery that has not been explained adequately by anybody.



Yes, we got it. The magic pixie dust brainterface is magically effective.

Why?



I'm familiar with the concept of abstraction. Why this abstraction? What does it change? How does it make the pondering that goes into coding unnecessary to the point that the limiting factor is how quickly you can get electrical signals to and from the brain?

Flaser proposed a mechanism where the neural tissues aid in decryption (a dubious position, to say the least). But at least that was a proposal of an underlying reason, however flawed.

Remember, even with ten monitors, a twitch-gaming mouse and a machine that's a tiny tin god, the hard work of a programmer is thinking about causes and effects in long, interwoven chains.

And this raises the question of whether programming is even what is going on when you deck the gibson. Chances are, it's not. Chances are, the programming happened first and now you're implementing your solutions.

So why does a complex neural interface work better than hitting the return key?

Whoever can answer that question in a cogent, coherent fashion gets a cybercookie. It's been a few years since it was first asked, so the cookie might be stale by now...

The point isn't to prove why hacking with your DNI is faster then keyboard and mouse; the point is that the core concede the the cyberpunk genre is that computer networking is de facto standard using a 3d metaphor. The reason why it's faster, better, etc is because it is, because it has to be for the genre to work. Realism doesn't matter here. This is about theming. Stop trying to figure out why something can't be and play along with the idea that it in fact has to work that way and you need to explain why.

So, why is DNI better then a terminal command line window? You tell me.

[DeathStrobe]

To be honest, I would personally prefer to strongly reduce the need for VR hacking, so that it is typically confined to the pre-run legwork section of the game, instead of being something you enter during shooting combat. I know this flies flat in the face of 20 years of Shadowrun, but like you in D&D have the saying "don't split the party", meatspace and VR is essentially that exact thing, and can be compared to a the Wizard in a D&D group teleporting to another plane when combat starts, forcing the DM to run not just one encounter, but two at the same time. Add in Astral space too, and you are now talking about splitting the party into three, and running three separate but connected encounters simultaneously. I know that VR will remain a core part of SR, but personally I would really like to reduce it's importance compared to AR hacking.
Which brings me to another theoretical way to approach the concept of AR hacking in SR. Since we effectively have a situation where it's mainly the hardware and software that's doing the actual hacking, rather than the hacker sitting around and puzzling out how to circumvent the security features of said node, why not take that idea to the next step, and instead accept that the hacking is mainly being done by the hardware and software, and what's really needed, is a hacker that can let the program loose on on the target node, with the right set of tools, and targeting the right part of the defensive code. Basically have the hacker take an action in VR in order to get things underway, and then have the hardware run automatically for the next X number of action phases, whilst the hacker is free to concentrate on not getting shot and/or shooting back at the enemy? Essentially getting an "Agent" to hack the system while he shoots and moves around the battlefield. And yes, that detracts from the concept of the hacker a bit, but it also opens up the option of a hacker letting loose a handful of hacking protocols from AR, and then letting them do their work while he dodges enemy fire and moves along with the rest of the team, which is essentially what we really want to achieve.


(P.S. my appologies if parts of the above doesn't make sense, but I'm somewhat tired at the moment, and English is not my first language, so bear with me pls.)

You're totally right. Splitting the party is a fools errant and that's what the Matrix does. I think what could be better is that the Matrix is just a different way to deal damage, like magic.

You have an army of goons; you can fireball them, shoot with them with an SMG, or hack their brainmeat.

And different goons should be more resistant to different types of damage.

A drone can easily eat small arms fire and spells, but hacking is it's weakness.

A spirit is weak to magic, but strong to fire arms, and probably immune to Matrix.

A corporate mage is strong against magic and hacking but weak to small arms.

Something like that. Turn the game in to a bit of a paper rock scissors match mixing up the different types of damage.

[binarywraith]

The fools errand here is thinking that everything needs to be scaled around combat, rather than scaled around defeating obstacles.

Drone riggers are just physical damage, same as sams, or pistol adepts.

The Decker's niche is the same as the D&D rogue, scouting, dealing with locked doors, hidden treasure, and all the other subtle assholery that corpsec can come up with.

If you want your decker to have a part to play in combat, teach them to use a pistol.

[Koekepan]

Because of three things :

1. DNI removes the cumbersome brain-to-keyboard lag in both input and observation. See SR2-3 Matrix initiative for the mechanical demonstration that deckers are flatly acting on speeds that only the most highly specialized augmented sams can hope to match.

Nice, but not persuasive for how a conceptual SR6 should look.

2. The Matrix interface created by a cyberdeck is actually performing a huge number of operations, while simplifying them into a perceptual intuitive GUI for the decker.

Actually, this motivates the opposite answer: once you hit the button/flip the switch/urinate on the pansies it doesn't matter how fast your brainmeats are cycling because the deck's doing the work (and had damn well better be doing it over a blazing fast network, otherwise the deck's speed will be largely of academic interest).

3. Worldbuilding fiat.

Again, not persuasive with respect to how a supposed SR6 would look.

[Koekepan]

So, why is DNI better then a terminal command line window? You tell me.

It isn't. Next question?

More seriously, the question is asked the wrong way round: what does a DNI possibly allow that could in any plausible fashion improve outcomes?

Not raw speed, because by the time you've lovingly rendered everything down to the embroidery on your kimono, a straightforward script will have run through whatever processes you want.

Not programming complexity, because with modern systems the limiting factor is already the programmer's cognitive functions, most notably abstract reasoning and short term memory.

At best, the strongest argument is that it allows for really complex data presentation, which is all dandy but there's no real explanation why it wouldn't be just as good on a fast-refreshing monitor, given that the real magic is what you actually DO with the damn information. And that takes consideration, decision-making and action. Basically, you're marginally speeding up the parts of the OODA loop that are already the fastest. Unless you're arguing that the whole brain, i.e. the decision-making apparatus, is being accelerated, you're talking a couple of percentage points worth of difference, tops.

Take all that combined with the observation that for the last percentage point of advantage, you're putting yourself in a position where one lucky piece of code can kill you, and it makes less sense than playing russian roulette with a taser.

If I were to come up with a justification, the argument would revolve around that presentation of information, but then it would hinge on incredible speeds for data communication (without which you couldn't hope to gather enough data to present to make it worthwhile), thus leaving tortoises just as well off in many cases. However, the good news is that this motivates the case of getting deckers into key sites, rather than having them rape machinery from half a planet away. This at least gives a reason for them to go on runs.

[Blade]

A little video showing how the presentation of binary data can make hacking much easier.

On top of that, you could imagine that the DNI does more than just provide I/O, it could actually have the brain take part in the processing. Like it could complement the decision-making mechanism of the brain by integrating the data directly into it.

[sk8bcn]

There isn't much randomness in this stuff. And if you go a more realistic road, you wouldn't even have to roll dices. That's why I firmly believe that realism isn't a way to go.

I like the game to be a game. So I have nothing against any idea, that doesn't break the suspension of disbelief, that makes the game fun. Even if you roll Attribute +skill when realisticly, you just run a program, and so on...

[Sascha Morlok]

While the prolonging discussion about crypto is nice, I would like to point out, that before entering new terrain and making new rule, SR6 should more focus on better "craftsmanship" when writing rules.

E.g. right now the German freelancers are in the last steps of finishing the texts for our upcoming book "SOTA ADL" (ADL = AGS). The book will include some new weapons and because of that I again took a look on the weapon accessories and modification rules. While the Core Rules are quite clear in that there are 3 spots and the different weapons can only have certain types of accessories, Run & Gun throws this system aside and introduce 3 additional spots (the two sides and the stock). The problem is, it doesn't specify which weapon class can get which type of accessories/mods. Can now every weapon get every type of accessories/mod, because all weapons have all spots available? Apparently not, as the Core Rules specify certain restrictions. Ok, but what about modification? Well, it seems like not all weapons can get every type of mod, as the infobox gives you certain restrictions... but only for Holdouts and Light Pistols.

Sure, the individual description of the accessories/mods give you some hints, which weapon class can have it, and which not, but not every description does so. A folding stock for example is required to be put in the stock slot - where else - but it doesn't specify which weapon classes have this spot, and which does not. So can it be attached to every weapon, that already has a stock? Or, which would make more sense, which doesn't? And then I have to think about, that a folding stock gives you +1 RC but a fixed stock doesn't, and that they put several vital accessories/mods in a different book, that I they doesn't provide the information which range the under barrel weapons in Hard Targets use, that there is no list of weapons from the Core Rule book and their standard accessories/mods,... and that's basically the point where I want to set everything on fire.

Maybe I was missing a page in one of these books, or in a different one, that answer all these questions and fill this gaps, but then I ask, why isn't it in the place where it really belongs? Sure, this is just a tiny piece of all the rules, and there are certainly hundred other examples of bad "craftsmanship" in rule writeing (don't get me started with the fluff), but that needs to be fixed. You need everything at the right spot, at the right time and not fifty bits and pieces that you have to put together yourself.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The fools errand here is thinking that everything needs to be scaled around combat, rather than scaled around defeating obstacles.

The Decker's niche is the same as the D&D rogue, scouting, dealing with locked doors, hidden treasure, and all the other subtle assholery that corpsec can come up with.

If you want your decker to have a part to play in combat, teach them to use a pistol.

This cannot be said enough...

[Koekepan]

This cannot be said enough...

Agreed, I think that most magic should fall into the same category. Let the combat specialists be the combat specialists. The DnD-ish idea of a fireball carbonising your opponents is ill-placed in this context.

I would make a serious plea for preparation being a requirement for your magicians as well as your deckers. Prepare a known crack on the probable surveillance cameras so that you can use them for tactical map overlays? Great. Prepare an alchemically stored fireball-grenade? Excellent. Kick it all off on the spur of the moment? I don't buy it.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Agreed, I think that most magic should fall into the same category. Let the combat specialists be the combat specialists. The DnD-ish idea of a fireball carbonising your opponents is ill-placed in this context.

I would make a serious plea for preparation being a requirement for your magicians as well as your deckers. Prepare a known crack on the probable surveillance cameras so that you can use them for tactical map overlays? Great. Prepare an alchemically stored fireball-grenade? Excellent. Kick it all off on the spur of the moment? I don't buy it.

Hacking should not be about bricking someone else's gear so that the Hacker can feel relevant in combat.
The Magic does not bother me all that much.

It is the attitude about Characters (of any stripe) that does. How many times have you heard "Unless you have maxed out your skills at start, you are just gimping yourself..."

I cannot tell you how many times I have seen the uber-optimized Magician with 20+ Dice in Casting and a Magic of 6/7 right out of the gate; and it irritates me no end.
Or The Super Military Sniper that can shoot the wings off of a gnat at a mile, but cannot actually function in any of the other military skills that would have been required as part of the training.

And you see it in the advice given on character builds, both here and on the official forums. When anyone puts together a charactetr that looks realistic and could actually, you know, function in the world of Shadowrun, the players are told that the character is crap and to scrap it for a more optimal build that, while may be uber whammadyne in its core one or two skills is totally ineffective at actually living in the world in which they live.

Sorry... I get irritated about all the complaints about how the system is broiken, but it is truly only broken for the extreme edge builds that are out there. Sadly, those extreme edge builds are often the ones that hit the table because the players are convinced that to do otherwise is character suicide.

[binarywraith]

Again, not persuasive with respect to how a supposed SR6 would look.

It absolutely is, unless you're going to do SR6 from a completely blank slate. The world still exists, and still has a cruft of previous decisions piled on top of each other as far as how it works. Unless you're planning to do your theoretical SR6 as a blank slate with the brand name attached, you're stuck with them having existed.

If you want to keep the same playerbase, you're stuck with there being some basic tropes of both the setting and the game world, such as mind/machine interfaces, working magic that can affect the physical plane, and the Awakened races.

Hacking should not be about bricking someone else's gear so that the Hacker can feel relevant in combat.
The Magic does not bother me all that much.

It is the attitude about Characters (of any stripe) that does. How many times have you heard "Unless you have maxed out your skills at start, you are just gimping yourself..."

I cannot tell you how many times I have seen the uber-optimized Magician with 20+ Dice in Casting and a Magic of 6/7 right out of the gate; and it irritates me no end.
Or The Super Military Sniper that can shoot the wings off of a gnat at a mile, but cannot actually function in any of the other military skills that would have been required as part of the training.

And you see it in the advice given on character builds, both here and on the official forums. When anyone puts together a charactetr that looks realistic and could actually, you know, function int he world of Shadowrun, the players are told that the character is crap and to scrap it for a more optimal build that, while may be uber whammadyne in its core one or two skills is totally ineffective at actually living in the world in which they live.

Sorry... I get irritated about all the complaints about how the system is broiken, but it is truly only broken for the extreme edge builds that are out there. Sadly, those extreme edge builds are often the ones that hit the table because the players are convinced that to do otherwise is character suicide.

This is the stuff that absolutely drives me crazy, and is why I don't play or GM at cons anymore and am picky about what players I invite to my games. One super-minmaxed pornomancer can render most of the rest of the team obsolete in short order.

[DeathStrobe]

The fools errand here is thinking that everything needs to be scaled around combat, rather than scaled around defeating obstacles.

Drone riggers are just physical damage, same as sams, or pistol adepts.

The Decker's niche is the same as the D&D rogue, scouting, dealing with locked doors, hidden treasure, and all the other subtle assholery that corpsec can come up with.

If you want your decker to have a part to play in combat, teach them to use a pistol.

BS because even a rogue in D&D can use their core abilities in combat and can even use them to help reinforce their role in combat. A Decker doesn't get the same benefit. And considering the the majority of rules in all editions of SR has always been dedicated to combat, odds are the core resolution mechanics in SR just so happens to be combat.

Not to mention by saying the only way to contribute to combat is with a gun just forces people to get their right arm cut off to get a maxed out cyberarm to do all their shooting.

People should be allowed to have options, not be pigeonholed to be the most optimized character.

[Glyph]

Deckers should have different options in combat, but I think the wireless/bricking thing was an atrocious idea.

Now first off, I think the Matrix needs to be more integrated into normal combat. Tacnets should be much cheaper and more common. Meat world combat should involve sensors, drones, team members feeding data to each other, jamming, and trying to hack the other side's tacnet while protecting your own.

Deckers should be doing things like getting an aerial view of the battle from a flyspy drone, while using that view to send indirect fire from another drone's grenade launcher. They should be sending fake orders to the corporate guard unit's goggle displays, trying to get that main door to open, and on and on. Obviously, this hinges on a lot of things being hackable and operating wirelessly. But wireless makes sense for interconnected tacnets and remote-controlled things like drones. Deckers should still invest in a small arms skill (most characters should), but they should have plenty to do in combat - although like mages or covert ops specialists, they are better as tactical multi-taskers than as front-line fighters.

Sorry... I get irritated about all the complaints about how the system is broken, but it is truly only broken for the extreme edge builds that are out there. Sadly, those extreme edge builds are often the ones that hit the table because the players are convinced that to do otherwise is character suicide.

If making a character with the "starting maximum" breaks the system, then the system is broken. That's precisely the point where the system needs to be balanced. I mean, I would agree more if you were talking about exploiting ambiguous rules, but the example you gave (mage with Magic: 6 and spellcasting dice pool of 20) is some pretty meat-and-potatoes optimization that won't keep the character from being decent in a whole lot of other areas. So if that is too overpowering, then the rules need to change so that you can't make that build. You don't make a game where you can make Superman, with the expectation that players will go "Nah, that's too powerful, I'll make Spiderman instead".

[binarywraith]

BS because even a rogue in D&D can use their core abilities in combat and can even use them to help reinforce their role in combat. A Decker doesn't get the same benefit. And considering the the majority of rules in all editions of SR has always been dedicated to combat, odds are the core resolution mechanics in SR just so happens to be combat.

Not to mention by saying the only way to contribute to combat is with a gun just forces people to get their right arm cut off to get a maxed out cyberarm to do all their shooting.

People should be allowed to have options, not be pigeonholed to be the most optimized character.

It doesn't force anything. The 'necessity' of the cyberarm is entirely based around the idea that everyone at the table should be single-skillset maximum dicepool autists, and thus the need to stack bonuses to be able to effect the things that are more than an exercise in counting pips for the combat monster. As it stands, the vast majority of the opposition presented in the SR5 base book is laughably simple for what the internet would consider a 'good build' to deal with.

This is, at the end of the day, a design issue because the game mechanics do not sufficiently punish monofocused specialization and instead leave it to the GM to present the players with challenges that require more than 'I roll a metric shit-ton of dice to shoot my rifle.'

A sufficiently toxic player can always turn every problem in SR into a shooting problem.

[Kyrel]

...I think what could be better is that the Matrix is just a different way to deal damage, like magic.

This I'd probably have to disagree with. On my end I'd really have very little problem with hackers actually not being able to deal any kind of direct damage via the Matrix. I agree that there should be some way for them to contribute in combat, using their speciality, but I'm much more onboard with Glyph's vision in this regard:

"Now first off, I think the Matrix needs to be more integrated into normal combat. Tacnets should be much cheaper and more common. Meat world combat should involve sensors, drones, team members feeding data to each other, jamming, and trying to hack the other side's tacnet while protecting your own.

Deckers should be doing things like getting an aerial view of the battle from a flyspy drone, while using that view to send indirect fire from another drone's grenade launcher. They should be sending fake orders to the corporate guard unit's goggle displays, trying to get that main door to open, and on and on. Obviously, this hinges on a lot of things being hackable and operating wirelessly. But wireless makes sense for interconnected tacnets and remote-controlled things like drones. Deckers should still invest in a small arms skill (most characters should), but they should have plenty to do in combat - although like mages or covert ops specialists, they are better as tactical multi-taskers than as front-line fighters."

[Flaser]

It isn't. Next question?

More seriously, the question is asked the wrong way round: what does a DNI possibly allow that could in any plausible fashion improve outcomes?

Not raw speed, because by the time you've lovingly rendered everything down to the embroidery on your kimono, a straightforward script will have run through whatever processes you want.

Not programming complexity, because with modern systems the limiting factor is already the programmer's cognitive functions, most notably abstract reasoning and short term memory.

At best, the strongest argument is that it allows for really complex data presentation, which is all dandy but there's no real explanation why it wouldn't be just as good on a fast-refreshing monitor, given that the real magic is what you actually DO with the damn information. And that takes consideration, decision-making and action. Basically, you're marginally speeding up the parts of the OODA loop that are already the fastest. Unless you're arguing that the whole brain, i.e. the decision-making apparatus, is being accelerated, you're talking a couple of percentage points worth of difference, tops.

Take all that combined with the observation that for the last percentage point of advantage, you're putting yourself in a position where one lucky piece of code can kill you, and it makes less sense than playing russian roulette with a taser.

If I were to come up with a justification, the argument would revolve around that presentation of information, but then it would hinge on incredible speeds for data communication (without which you couldn't hope to gather enough data to present to make it worthwhile), thus leaving tortoises just as well off in many cases. However, the good news is that this motivates the case of getting deckers into key sites, rather than having them rape machinery from half a planet away. This at least gives a reason for them to go on runs.

What if DNI works because it sidesteps the limits of reasoning? Why use the darn complicated sensorium in the first place, what does it bring to the table? Animal instinct and subconscious analysis. Your brain didn't evolve to contemplate math problems and algorithms... Simsense bridges that gap, translating abstract concepts like code into perceptions your brain more readily digests. Sight, smell, touch, even your sense of space (hence why everything is 3D or 2.5D) is brought to bear to better represents what would otherwise be incomprehensible.

Is it faster than silicone? No it isn't... but let's not forget that unlike a program you can actually think, which is why programmers write programs instead "clever programs" (AI 1.0) writing even more clever programs (AI 2.0, etc). This also explains why the use of ASIST is so widespread: it makes metahumans much more effective at intellectual tasks as it leverages the "animal brain" to better grasp complex issues.

This also explains why Matrix sculpting is such an issue: it's not graphics design, it's translating complexity into impressions that a metahuman's mind can interpret. Everyone's matrix impression will be slightly different. By embedding certain patters - say iconography, sounds, etc. - you can influence the result but it's not a certain thing. Good iconography is not just a "skin", it's an effective metaphor that turns complex data into something palatable for your average Joe in the office.

Why sight, smell, sound and touch? Because that's what your brain is used to... what if you tweaked your input, employed synesthesia to better convey something that has no easy perception analogue? Now you're starting to venture into dangerous territory, stuff that gives you a very nasty headache (biofeedback). Now what if, you not only consumed the raw impressions, but setup a control system so you directly tweak the sensorium mapping on the fly? Suddenly you get a personally tweaked version of the data that maps onto your brain... however since all control system are susceptible to feedback, this is a much more dangerous setup. This is what hot-sim really is.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

This I'd probably have to disagree with. On my end I'd really have very little problem with hackers actually not being able to deal any kind of direct damage via the Matrix. I agree that there should be some way for them to contribute in combat, using their speciality, but I'm much more onboard with Glyph's vision in this regard:

"Now first off, I think the Matrix needs to be more integrated into normal combat. Tacnets should be much cheaper and more common. Meat world combat should involve sensors, drones, team members feeding data to each other, jamming, and trying to hack the other side's tacnet while protecting your own.

Deckers should be doing things like getting an aerial view of the battle from a flyspy drone, while using that view to send indirect fire from another drone's grenade launcher. They should be sending fake orders to the corporate guard unit's goggle displays, trying to get that main door to open, and on and on. Obviously, this hinges on a lot of things being hackable and operating wirelessly. But wireless makes sense for interconnected tacnets and remote-controlled things like drones. Deckers should still invest in a small arms skill (most characters should), but they should have plenty to do in combat - although like mages or covert ops specialists, they are better as tactical multi-taskers than as front-line fighters."

Yes... so very much this... Kudos to Glyph. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Koekepan]

What if DNI works because it sidesteps the limits of reasoning? Why use the darn complicated sensorium in the first place, what does it bring to the table? Animal instinct and subconscious analysis. Your brain didn't evolve to contemplate math problems and algorithms... Simsense bridges that gap, translating abstract concepts like code into perceptions your brain more readily digests. Sight, smell, touch, even your sense of space (hence why everything is 3D or 2.5D) is brought to bear to better represents what would otherwise be incomprehensible.

Is it faster than silicone? No it isn't... but let's not forget that unlike a program you can actually think, which is why programmers write programs instead "clever programs" (AI 1.0) writing even more clever programs (AI 2.0, etc). This also explains why the use of ASIST is so widespread: it makes metahumans much more effective at intellectual tasks as it leverages the "animal brain" to better grasp complex issues.

This also explains why Matrix sculpting is such an issue: it's not graphics design, it's translating complexity into impressions that a metahuman's mind can interpret. Everyone's matrix impression will be slightly different. By embedding certain patters - say iconography, sounds, etc. - you can influence the result but it's not a certain thing. Good iconography is not just a "skin", it's an effective metaphor that turns complex data into something palatable for your average Joe in the office.

Why sight, smell, sound and touch? Because that's what your brain is used to... what if you tweaked your input, employed synesthesia to better convey something that has no easy perception analogue? Now you're starting to venture into dangerous territory, stuff that gives you a very nasty headache (biofeedback). Now what if, you not only consumed the raw impressions, but setup a control system so you directly tweak the sensorium mapping on the fly? Suddenly you get a personally tweaked version of the data that maps onto your brain... however since all control system are susceptible to feedback, this is a much more dangerous setup. This is what hot-sim really is.

Great. Fantastic. Running on instinct is the reason it's so fast. It's too fast for reasoned consideration to be the reason for success, it's hindbrain, twitch reflex stuff.

I have a new deck. I tell it what to do, and the cultured nodule of rat neurons inside it actually takes the risk. Oh no, the rat neurons got fried? I remove the rat neuron module, replace it with the next. Hell, maybe I have a custom deck with five parallel rat neuron nodules so that if one fries, it's still business as usual.

RAIN. Redundant Array of Inexpensive Nodules. I'm a pioneer!

And I still just need a screen and pointer device to tell the nodules what their goals are.

Moving on ...

(Oh, and what could be more cyberpunk than nodules of neurons acting as your agents? Very thematic goodness. Can you, individually and personally, get an ASIST view of the Matrix? Sure, but why the hell would you? Let the rats do it. Or roaches, if you're really low rent. If you're all fancy, clone your own to have human neuron nodules, for all the difference it makes.)

[Flaser]

Great. Fantastic. Running on instinct is the reason it's so fast. It's too fast for reasoned consideration to be the reason for success, it's hindbrain, twitch reflex stuff.

I have a new deck. I tell it what to do, and the cultured nodule of rat neurons inside it actually takes the risk. Oh no, the rat neurons got fried? I remove the rat neuron module, replace it with the next. Hell, maybe I have a custom deck with five parallel rat neuron nodules so that if one fries, it's still business as usual.

RAIN. Redundant Array of Inexpensive Nodules. I'm a pioneer!

And I still just need a screen and pointer device to tell the nodules what their goals are.

Moving on ...

(Oh, and what could be more cyberpunk than nodules of neurons acting as your agents? Very thematic goodness. Can you, individually and personally, get an ASIST view of the Matrix? Sure, but why the hell would you? Let the rats do it. Or roaches, if you're really low rent. If you're all fancy, clone your own to have human neuron nodules, for all the difference it makes.)

Uhm... no. That's not what I wrote... or if it came across like that then I wasn't succinct enough. If anything et all, then what I propose is just a riff on your idea that ASIST makes QA easier.

It's not fast. It doesn't make you faster either. What it does is leverage your hind-brain to tackle complexities your conscious mind can't grasp because they fall outside the 7±2 limit. Does it make you smarter? No, it only makes you perceive things easier. Putting a rat brain in there won't solve anything as the rat was already too dumb to grasp any of this.

People use similar tricks anyway, like how a memory palace allows you to map concepts onto a spatial space and memorize huge quantities of information. Heck, there are myriads of engineering tools like Veitch-Karnaugh tables or Feynman diagrams that are all about presenting information in a certain way so you have a better grasp of it. Imagine if you could map protein folding onto a person's proprioception (the ability to tell where your body parts are, relative to other body parts)! It's not VR because your intentionally making unreal impressions... but you can leverage senses and modes of "though" that are normally inaccessible. When I talk about instinct, I refer to all the things your brain normally does that's unrelated to conscious reasoning. It won't make the solution to a problem "magically" pop into your head, but it will give you all these extra impressions that allow your consciousness to find and reason about patterns, symmetries and connections that'd normally get lost in noise of raw data.

If you ask why one can't enjoy the same benefit with VR goggles and feedback gloves, the answer is that a lot of these "non-traditional" senses don't have handy input ports like your eyes or ears to feed data into. I'm talking about stuff like balance, temperature sense, pressure sense, proprioception and we haven't even started to explore synesthesia or hijacking internal senses for our purposes.

Also keep in mind that ASIST should have a use outside hacking, else it'd never have gained the widespread adoption it enjoys, hence why I'm trying to come up with something that's not strictly an anti-security feature.

[binarywraith]

Also keep in mind that ASIST should have a use outside hacking, else it'd never have gained the widespread adoption it enjoys, hence why I'm trying to come up with something that's not strictly an anti-security feature.

What you describe above is, idly, exactly how an ASIST-based RCA works. It converts vehicle sensor data into sensory perception that the rigger can then act on.

As far as other uses for the tech, people always forget SimSense is a thing. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)