Deciphering the mechanics...? Options

[Ka_ge2020]

I'm not sure that is as relevant to this particular avenue of questioning, but I can certainly see how in other avenues of questioning it would become increasingly relevant.

For sure, I'm getting waaaaay more information in this thread than I need and, well, that's not a bad thing.

I've still got to figure out how to make Ritual Magic a little bit more interesting than it is presented in the SR books (I've looked in SR5 and SR6, along with supplements in SR5).

And before that? Traditions. (And boy do they require a bunch of work! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )

[Bodak]

You're probably familiar with Project ShadowWatch's work towards reconciling SR2 with SR3 Sorcery.

Have you seriously considered joining forces with the SR3R project? With your enthusiasm and scope, you might find that some of the bugs in SR3 (not insect spirits!) have already been addressed in SR3R and your ideas and solutions for stuff on the SR3R todo list could serve double duty advancing both projects.

[Ka_ge2020]

You're probably familiar with Project ShadowWatch's work towards reconciling SR2 with SR3 Sorcery.

Have you seriously considered joining forces with the SR3R project? With your enthusiasm and scope, you might find that some of the bugs in SR3 (not insect spirits!) have already been addressed in SR3R and your ideas and solutions for stuff on the SR3R todo list could serve double duty advancing both projects.

I'm not at all familiar with it other than what I could Google in a few short minutes.

TBH, I never really considered SR as the "go to system" for this project because of the damage soak vis-a-vis Body. That and how it selected to incorporate Earthdawn magic into the game through Initiation made it a bit challenging.

With that said, tell me more about SR3R if you would be so kind. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Ka_ge2020]

One thing that I remember from the days of SR2 was that hacking was an absolute "fuster cluck". The common solution was just to remove Decker characters to contacts and be done with it.

Did any of the editions past SR2 solve this situation? As I looked through SR4 that answer seemed to be "No" and, indeed, they doubled down on it with the wireless Matrix.

To make things simple, I'm either tempted to use the SR2 solution or just chalk it up to another form of magic. Err, but different from the Technomancer magic... O.o

[Kagetenshi]

One thing that I remember from the days of SR2 was that hacking was an absolute "fuster cluck". The common solution was just to remove Decker characters to contacts and be done with it.

Did any of the editions past SR2 solve this situation?

The answer in SR3 was “yes, but”. Decking is fully functional and not that bad in SR3, with the caveat that the GM and especially the player need to know exactly what they’re doing. It breaks down in places (is security tally a property of the icon or the host? What happens when two non-system deckers are active in a system simultaneously? Who knows?) but those places are mostly rarely-explored corners—how many group really have two deckers on one system at one time?

The problems are the massive proliferation of Utilities (probably the single biggest thing we achieved at SR3R was boiling down and combining a huge number of niche utilities into a set from which a player could reasonably be asked to pick and choose) and the fact that high-powered decking devolves into deckers and hosts throwing giant piles of dice against each others’ giant TNs. A lot of people still wanted nothing to do with it, but it really wasn’t bad provided you actually knew the rules going in.

SR4… well, Frank Trollman can tell you about SR4 decking better than I can (am I the only one who still thinks of him as an SR4 partisan?). Search for his posts here.

~J

[Ka_ge2020]

It sounds like the solutions are still a problem?

[Kagetenshi]

It sounds like the solutions are still a problem?

I’m not sure what you mean here?

In SR3, the rules are functional. They are rough around the edges and by canon are fiddlier than they need to be, but for a PC decker in a standard-ish campaign they work. They aren’t really good enough to support a full-scale decker campaign where all the characters are deckers and most of the action goes through the matrix (the way you could run a rigger campaign, or a mage/astral campaign if you wanted), but the typical campaign doesn’t need that or anything close.

~J

[Ka_ge2020]

Let me come at this from another way, then:

What problems did SR3 fix from SR2?

And why were the utilities an issue? On the face of it, they seem to be giving some spread to the character's options?

* * *

Does the decker actually bring something to the game that couldn't be done by an "off camera" hacker?

[Kagetenshi]

Let me come at this from another way, then:

What problems did SR3 fix from SR2?

I’m not sufficiently familiar with SR2 decking to be sure. I can only tell you that SR3 decking was functional.

And why were the utilities an issue? On the face of it, they seem to be giving some spread to the character's options?

They (and their corresponding operations) were too numerous and too specialized, which in practice reduced options because people tended to stick to a few operations and their corresponding utilities and avoid swapping them in and out of memory.

Edit: ok, it was mostly Operations rather than Utilities that we changed: see the spoiler tag in the SR3R Decking thread.

Does the decker actually bring something to the game that couldn't be done by an "off camera" hacker?

Does the Face?

I thought so, at any rate.

~J

[Ka_ge2020]

Ramble warning...

I’m not sufficiently familiar with SR2 decking to be sure. I can only tell you that SR3 decking was functional.

...

They (and their corresponding operations) were too numerous and too specialized, which in practice reduced options because people tended to stick to a few operations and their corresponding utilities and avoid swapping them in and out of memory.

...

Edit: ok, it was mostly Operations rather than Utilities that we changed: see the spoiler tag in the SR3R Decking thread.

My sense from this is that, no, the issues were not addressed as they were not a function of the mechanics but rather a table synergy thing. It's one of the reasons that you'll see not insignificant numbers of discussions about, as mentioned above, tossing the Decker as a PC, having troupe-play for "Decker Circles" (or whatever), and so on. Not withstanding the fact that the background of the game didn't age well out of Gibson and the times to be replaced by Google. ( (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) <-- Note the smiley for the last!)

Does the Face?

The Face does work around the edges of "The Run", sure, but they could also be involved in "The Run" on a direct basis. The main shtick of the Decker involved hacking things for the other 'runners, which in my experience (and others based on the discussion) ending up being a huge bag of no-fun for the other players as they sat around and twiddling their fingers. On the face of it, this isn't inherently badwrongfun. They are, after all, being given their time to shine. It was just such a huge time-suck and essentially re-created the issues of the "split adventure party" problem--just more problematic because their was a chronological connection between what happened in one of the groups impacting the events in the other.

Same deal with mages and Astral Projection, to be honest. They, too, deserve to have their moment of screentime.

(FWIW, the game that I'm thinking about was also the origin of the, for me, notorious statement, "Shut up and tell me how many dice to roll!" as even the player wanted an end of the hacking to get back to the 'run. Or, at least, that's the positive interpretation on why they pulled out that phrase.)

I had just hoped that someone more creative/imaginative/clever had solved the issue for me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

(That is, find a mechanical solution to the party-split that didn't ditch on the premise of being a Decker as much as saying, "Nah, I don't allow Deckers in my game as PCs".

* * *

Again, though, this is a table synergy thing--not inherently a fault of the mechanics even if it was partially a product of it.

I imagine that SR4's wireless Matrix/hacking was a direct reaction to this, perhaps, common problem around peoples' tables. It just seems to have opened up a huge bag of worms, at least from deciphering some of the conversations on the subject.

It's also one of the reasons that I'm personally thinking of "Ritual Magic" being used before a 'Run--just one that takes into account deck, software, and number of hackers than mystical space, material components, and numbers of mages. You attempt the main hack, then can also produce "talismans" that can represent zero day exploits, backdoor hacks etc. where the players plug in doodads to "do the thin" that they might want, e.g. spoof security systems, open doors etc.

Other alternatives have been in the past that aforementioned Troupe play where you Highlander-esque transition into the Matrix run where you Google/Dark Web Search Deck for the information, find the system, get the plans, etc.

[Kagetenshi]

My sense from this is that, no, the issues were not addressed as they were not a function of the mechanics but rather a table synergy thing. It's one of the reasons that you'll see not insignificant numbers of discussions about, as mentioned above, tossing the Decker as a PC, having troupe-play for "Decker Circles" (or whatever), and so on.

I mean, it’s true that Decking without a fundamental and complete bulldozing is going to require the same GM skillset as running split parties. It’s not as bad as arbitrary split parties, because the Matrix is fairly well-defined in rules and scope, but split parties are one of the classic separate-the-strong-from-the-weak GM trials-by-fire. I think it’s a basic skill that anyone doing any amount of GMing needs to have or very rapidly acquire, but I’m already in the fortunate position of being able to do it myself and mostly having had GMs who could as well. I suppose it also depends in no small part on the players knowing the rulesets they interact with—if you need to handhold the decker, the difficulty of handling the rest of the party at the same time skyrockets, but at the same time why would someone make a decker without learning the decking rules?

In short, I think the issues you see are issues with the speculated table, not the rules.

Not withstanding the fact that the background of the game didn't age well out of Gibson and the times to be replaced by Google. ( (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) <-- Note the smiley for the last!)

“Yesterday’s Tomorrow Today!” is a feature, not a bug! Besides, have you tried using Google lately? Maybe ten years ago it was more advanced than the Gibson version, but these days I’d risk Black IC just to get relevant search results.

The Face does work around the edges of "The Run", sure, but they could also be involved in "The Run" on a direct basis. The main shtick of the Decker involved hacking things for the other 'runners, which in my experience (and others based on the discussion) ending up being a huge bag of no-fun for the other players as they sat around and twiddling their fingers. On the face of it, this isn't inherently badwrongfun. They are, after all, being given their time to shine. It was just such a huge time-suck and essentially re-created the issues of the "split adventure party" problem--just more problematic because their was a chronological connection between what happened in one of the groups impacting the events in the other.

It depends on how you structure your runs. Decking the system can be interleaved with meatspace action—especially if you need to jump an air gap or a high-security external connection by either going in to a local jackpoint or having a teammate plug in a retransmitter. It takes practice, but not that much.

Again, though, this is a table synergy thing--not inherently a fault of the mechanics even if it was partially a product of it.

Sure. I just don’t think there actually is a set of rules streamlined enough to appease tables unwilling to use the current rules that isn’t of similar depth to rolling Negotiations to hire an NPC decker—you could replace it with a “do Matrix magic” roll, but what does that get you?

I imagine that SR4's wireless Matrix/hacking was a direct reaction to this, perhaps, common problem around peoples' tables. It just seems to have opened up a huge bag of worms, at least from deciphering some of the conversations on the subject.

It was, it did. Part of it is also the desire to make some sense—if you’re willing to make your matrix a virtual space that for no good reason matches the physical space you could have your cyberblaster zap IC that are basically guards other characters can’t see and then shoot controls that other characters can’t see, I guess that could work until you think about it.

I don’t suppose I can sell you on the virtues of one-game-many-systems, can I? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

~J

[Ka_ge2020]

In short, I think the issues you see are issues with the speculated table, not the rules.

I was clearly being too delicate with my touch, so I'll rephrase.

It's not specifically the fault of the rules, but rather their RAW application. As soon as you've got an event that has different levels of interaction with the rules in their application, e.g. the sheer amount of dice rolling and adjudication, then you're going to get a situation whereby you've got a bunch of players standing around twiddling their thumbs while the action resolves itself elsewhere.

And that was the problem with Decking perhaps more so than other "elsewhere" types, e.g. mages. The Decker jumping into doing their thing was often coupled with the other players dropping out of "combat time" into "narrative time" as they twiddled those thumbs waiting for the Decker to achieve the thing that they had wanted to achieve. Given the nature of the "dungeon crawl" nature of hacking brought in part by the aesthetic, the action of "spoof that keypad" could take a whole bunch of screen time and potentially lead to the "It was a boring conversation anyway" moments.

When both groups are involved in the same time (combat time)? More to juggle, but since everything is going super-slow anyway it was "just" a case of changing gears for the GM. (This also to address, I believe, your mention of "interleaving".)

I guess if I had my druthers in the SR mechanics, I would be tempted to formulate a "significance" vs. a "comparison" rule, i.e. when you just compare statistics and say "You do it" and when you go, "No, let's roll for that." And those items are abundant in what I remember of the rules but it cyberdecks and software, host systems and bandwidth throttling, passcodes, or whatever. And to be honest, if all that dice rolling doesn't end up being significant then I wouldn't want to be doing it anyway.

Put another way, reduce the amount of dice rolling. Perhaps that's what you did with SR3R?

...but at the same time why would someone make a decker without learning the decking rules?

Back in the day of "friends gaming around a table" in the 90s, I would have agreed with you for the most part. I know at least from my own experience that for a pick-up game, to include online gaming outside of an established group, that's a big ask for me if I'm not super-interested in the setting.

Times are a-changing... Well, technically changed. Plenty of past tense involved depending on where you look on the Interwebz.

“Yesterday’s Tomorrow Today!” is a feature, not a bug! Besides, have you tried using Google lately? Maybe ten years ago it was more advanced than the Gibson version, but these days I’d risk Black IC just to get relevant search results.

You definitely made your point about Google of the now.

I am, however, noting that it broke my groups' sense of verisimilitude back in the '90s when we were playing SR2 in the early '90s and more particularly the mid-to-late '90s.

Heh. Verisimilitude. In a game with magic and elves. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Sure. I just don’t think there actually is a set of rules streamlined enough to appease tables unwilling to use the current rules that isn’t of similar depth to rolling Negotiations to hire an NPC decker—you could replace it with a “do Matrix magic” roll, but what does that get you?

Where there was less frustration at the table at the expense of mechanical screen time for the Decker?

Not a good solution, of course, hence them often being shamed into NPC-hood. All the other types broadly operate within the same simultaneous "times".

It was, it did. Part of it is also the desire to make some sense—if you’re willing to make your matrix a virtual space that for no good reason matches the physical space you could have your cyberblaster zap IC that are basically guards other characters can’t see and then shoot controls that other characters can’t see, I guess that could work until you think about it.

Clearly you have not encountered Cybergeneration. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I'm being facetious. You quite probably have, as you may be making a judgement about Virtuality (CGen's upgraded version of Cyberpunk 2020's version of the virtual dungeon crawl that is the Lawnmower Man aesthetic).

I don’t suppose I can sell you on the virtues of one-game-many-systems, can I? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Heh. That's what is already done in the SR meta-setting. I'm trying to merge them into a single system with some "improvements" and changes to suit preferences. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)