Full Version: Idiot's Guide to the Matrix 2.0
| QUOTE (Aku @ Mar 26 2006, 06:53 AM) | ||
i dont think it's in the spirit of the rules, that thats how it works, and i also think that it's strongly implied in the rules that the only effect of the loss of response, is the loss of the initative.
Now, i realize this isnt "conculsive", however, i think if they wanted it to work in a cycle, they would state what everyone around here does, about how it then reduces the response again, making the new cap 8, and oops, you're still over than so you go down again. It's just not intelligent gameplay to have it work like that, and i think some very important words were cut during editing. Lets try an example like this, with realworld stuff. Think back to when you had a program crash in XP (if you use it), but kept trying to do other stuff. You were capable of even starting other programs, even though your cpu cycles were at 100%, but everything was HELLA slow, your response was decreased, until you got the crashed program to clos out. Programs didnt become "less", just slower, which is what response represents, imo. |
Edit: Of course, you meant ten programs, and not 20.
All right, I think that makes it conclusive that the chain effect doesn't happen (which is good), and that the penalty is only based on initial System. So you can't crash your comm by running just a handful over its base System.
However, the rules do flat-out say that System is limited by Response, and that program ratings are limited by system. You may only be looking at a -1 penalty, but it still reduces System and program ratings.
As far as the XP analogy, when you've exceeded your capabilities, you programs become not only slower, but also worse. You're more likely to see them crash, to find visual artifacts show up, and to be just unable to use them at full effectiveness. I don't know how helpful real-world analogies are to this sort of thing, but in this case they could go either way.
| QUOTE (Azathfeld) |
| I do wonder if "Are technomancers nodes?" is the wrong question. It seems perhaps likely to lead to a "yeah, sort of" answer that won't be really helpful. What we're really looking to answer is "Can technomancers be hacked?" |
Late response on my part.
I had thought about that, and phrased it like this:
| QUOTE (me) |
| Technomancer brains are effectively organic commlinks; does that mean they also maintain their own user account list or are technomancers supposed to be immune to hacking? More simply put: Are TMs technically "nodes?" If not, where do their living personas appear after a reboot? |
I figure if at least a portion of those interrelated questions are answered, we'll have something potentially useful to work with.
| QUOTE (Azathfeld) |
| However, the rules do flat-out say that System is limited by Response, and that program ratings are limited by system. You may only be looking at a -1 penalty, but it still reduces System and program ratings. |
That's the way I've always run it. I've been sifting through all of the other threads I missed over the weekend so far, so let me get back to this one over lunch.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| the programs of a agent is contained within the agent. therefor its only one program (pr agent). |
That's the way I've been playing it so far.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| also, those agents will not be running all the time right? i also wonder why encrypt and data bomb is loaded. from what i understand you only need to run them to set up the data bomb or the encryption... |
Actually, since this host is specifically designed to do nothing but detect and detain hackers until security can arrive, those agents are running. As stated above, I've been running it that agents are 1 program with a payload of other programs. The payload programs don't count towards the much maligned system/response limitations as they are run within the agent program.
As for data bomb and encryption, I've been playing it that the programs must be loaded and running for you to receive the benefits of those programs. This, of course, provides the savvy player the opportunity of crashing the programs rather than dealing with decryption of defusing actions. However, I think that any host worth its salt will pretty quickly fire an alert if it's programs start crashing.
| QUOTE (aaron) |
| If an agent is running programs separately from the hardware it's running on, where does the agent get the resources to run the programs it's loaded with? Page 228 says that an independently acting agent must have its programs active in order to use them. If they don't count toward the hardware's program count, then there must be some way to run a program without filling the hardware, and everybody would be using those kinds of programs on their own commlinks. (hm ... maybe I can convince my GM that this is the case ...) |
Of course there's a way to load a program without filling th hardware --- use them in agents. Again, to me SR does not have to recreate the realities of computer science. I'm a programmer by trade so I understand what you're saying, but I don't think the game benefits from that level of realism. If the agent's payload counted against the system's ratings, then hosts would be crippled by the system/response limitations, even with the more friendly non-cascading interpretation of that limitation. Thus, to avoid the SR equivalent of a "DOS" attack where hackers simply go to a host, upload 40 agents to it and make them run on the host's system dropping it's system and response probably to 1 leaving you free to do what you like while your agents paint graffiti on the host's virtual walls.
@Aku
The colors are pretty eye-bleeding on my monitors as well. The green and red in particular. Honestly, I'd prefer that you keep it to orange = out of character, yellow = in character so that our posts have the same color scheme. Simplicity and all that.....
As for the @everyone posts, I'd say that the Aku character is not aware of most of the mechanical (orange) posts but the "in-character" (yellow) posts are fair game. Does that answer your question?
I'm seeing 9 porgrams (analyze, armor, biofeedback filter, exploit, battlecat, boomer, spyman (and counterpart), and fido). With a system of 6, this means you at a -1 to response for the purposes of matrix initiative (balanced by your choice of hot sim) but this also limits your system to 5 and your programs will, thus, also run at 5.
While not really a major problem, I'll need you to re-roll your hacking on the fly attempt.
As promised, now that Aku has told me that he's looking for a basic user access to the system and intends on relying on his hacking abilities to get him by as quickly as possible, I'll let you know what security and administrative access would have done on the chokepoint host.
In general, I assume that security access provides easier access to the security logs which could be edited following the hacker's activities to remove a record of them. On this host, security access wouldn't have gotten Aku much more than that, as this system isn't set up to do anything other than stop hackers.
However, Admin access to this system also provides information about the host at the other end of the chokepoint's gauntlet. This information is the physical location and address of that node. Thus, admin access could have saved one operation after logging in at the expense of potentially not getting in at all.
Actually, you forgot about stealth and spoof, which are always loaded, for me, however, in lieu of lossing the response, i'm going to drop..... SpyBuddy, because right now it's kinda of redundent, in favor of a reality filter, which, if successful weill bring me back up to a response 6, and if unsuccessful, will drop me to a response 4 (EEK!)
EEK! things are not looking very good heh...
[ Spoiler ]
EEK! things are not looking very good heh...
What roll was that? Reality filter or hacking on the fly? Either way, did you add you skill (or for reality filter, response) into that pool?
why put the rolls in spoilers? put them as orange text and be done with it...
That was for reality filter, and yes, it was response 5, reality filter 6
| QUOTE (Dashifen) |
| As for data bomb and encryption, I've been playing it that the programs must be loaded and running for you to receive the benefits of those programs. This, of course, provides the savvy player the opportunity of crashing the programs rather than dealing with decryption of defusing actions. However, I think that any host worth its salt will pretty quickly fire an alert if it's programs start crashing. |
I run it that you need to have Encrypt active to encrypt communications, but that for data files you only need to activate it, encrypt, and then deactivate it.
I require Data Bombs to be active, though, if only so that my runners don't have bombs all over their PANs, on every device and file.
Quick sidetrack about the program thing: I noticed that he's got so many on there that he's dropping ratings on stuff.
Does the drop only come about from having active programs on your comm, or from having them on there at all? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to only leave so many programs active and turn them on and off as need be, in order to keep your ratings up?
Does the drop only come about from having active programs on your comm, or from having them on there at all? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to only leave so many programs active and turn them on and off as need be, in order to keep your ratings up?
it takes a complex action to load a new program...
however, i cant find a action to shut a program down
and the drop in response comes from active programs (and agents/ice) only...
however, i cant find a action to shut a program down
and the drop in response comes from active programs (and agents/ice) only...
That doesn't seem too bad, considering you're getting more IPs than normal when doing this kind of stuff. I figure that shutting down a program should be a free or a simple.
| QUOTE (Dissonance) |
| Quick sidetrack about the program thing: I noticed that he's got so many on there that he's dropping ratings on stuff. Does the drop only come about from having active programs on your comm, or from having them on there at all? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to only leave so many programs active and turn them on and off as need be, in order to keep your ratings up? |
You can store as many programs as you like without affecting performance but, as hobgoblin pointed out, it takes precious time to load the new ones later.
Just to drop my 2 
in on the TM debate....
What exactly is the point of hacking a TM? I understand that someone might try, thinking the TM was a standard comm, but if you find out that you CAN, what are you going to do with that? TM's have no data storage, no running programs to crash, nada.
I thought I had read in the old Hacking & Rigging sticky that TM's can only be crashed, not hacked...cause there's nothing TO hack, only a brain that works in undefined ways. Every TM carries something to store data (& broadcast SIN, etc info as needed), so you can hack THAT. I'd bet you can hack any cyber, or smartgun the TM has, but I'm fairly confident that you cannot hack the TM.
I don't think TM's can receive calls. Mine is played that if somebody needs her, they drop an IM into a service she monitors. She can call out of her head, folks can't call in. Also, when she calls out, we play it like the screen shows whatever she wants it to show....
As for TMs jacking out, why would they? The book indicates that TMs get testy when they are unable to connect. Since AR can be up while interacting with other characters, I have been playing like being in the Matrix is a drug, or that being out & away from the Matrix is like an allergy or phobia.
Finally, as for signature, iirc, the book indicates that other TMs can recognize TM signatures in the Matrix, implying that regular hackers, seeing that signature, will only see garbage. TMs can get systems to let them in, but when the security hacker tries to see who got in, the log will only show a mess.
(I don't have my book handy right now. Some of this info may have come from the previously mentioned sticky.)
Until more complete canon info is released, I agree that the interpretations are many. However, I believe that treating TMs like organic commlinks is a little too simplistic. What they do SEEMS to work like an organic comm, but the specifics are in no way the same.
(Sorry for the uber-long post. I've been away for a bit & had to catch up.)
in on the TM debate....What exactly is the point of hacking a TM? I understand that someone might try, thinking the TM was a standard comm, but if you find out that you CAN, what are you going to do with that? TM's have no data storage, no running programs to crash, nada.
I thought I had read in the old Hacking & Rigging sticky that TM's can only be crashed, not hacked...cause there's nothing TO hack, only a brain that works in undefined ways. Every TM carries something to store data (& broadcast SIN, etc info as needed), so you can hack THAT. I'd bet you can hack any cyber, or smartgun the TM has, but I'm fairly confident that you cannot hack the TM.
I don't think TM's can receive calls. Mine is played that if somebody needs her, they drop an IM into a service she monitors. She can call out of her head, folks can't call in. Also, when she calls out, we play it like the screen shows whatever she wants it to show....
As for TMs jacking out, why would they? The book indicates that TMs get testy when they are unable to connect. Since AR can be up while interacting with other characters, I have been playing like being in the Matrix is a drug, or that being out & away from the Matrix is like an allergy or phobia.
Finally, as for signature, iirc, the book indicates that other TMs can recognize TM signatures in the Matrix, implying that regular hackers, seeing that signature, will only see garbage. TMs can get systems to let them in, but when the security hacker tries to see who got in, the log will only show a mess.
(I don't have my book handy right now. Some of this info may have come from the previously mentioned sticky.)
Until more complete canon info is released, I agree that the interpretations are many. However, I believe that treating TMs like organic commlinks is a little too simplistic. What they do SEEMS to work like an organic comm, but the specifics are in no way the same.
(Sorry for the uber-long post. I've been away for a bit & had to catch up.)
| QUOTE |
| That doesn't seem too bad, considering you're getting more IPs than normal when doing this kind of stuff. I figure that shutting down a program should be a free or a simple. |
it was free in SR3 and earlyer so free should be fitting...
another question is: can one start or stop more then one program/agent pr action?
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) | ||
it was free in SR3 and earlyer so free should be fitting... another question is: can one start or stop more then one program/agent pr action? |
According to the RAW, "Deactivate a Program or Agent" is a simple action relevant to Matrix actions, so I inflict that upon my poor hacker while he's hacking. Then again, he wasn't designed as a hacker (he kinda fell into it), so I have yet to see him operating when he HASN'T had his response reduced by program load; he's upgrading it now to take care of that problem.
As for loading/killing multiple programs, my interpretation is "no". I'd let him "kill all" as a simple, but other than that, I force him to take simple and complex actions per program.
Killing all programs? Wouldn't that just be a straight-up reboot?
| QUOTE (neko128 @ Mar 27 2006, 06:31 PM) |
| According to the RAW, "Deactivate a Program or Agent" is a simple action relevant to Matrix actions, so I inflict that upon my poor hacker while he's hacking. Then again, he wasn't designed as a hacker (he kinda fell into it), so I have yet to see him operating when he HASN'T had his response reduced by program load; he's upgrading it now to take care of that problem. |
crap! i could have sworn i read that list several times but i didnt spot that simple action
| QUOTE (Aku) |
| That was for reality filter, and yes, it was response 5, reality filter 6 |
@Aku
Ah! I understand, there were line breaks in there. I saw three different rolls, two of five dice and one of one and couldn't figure out what you were trying to tell me. I feel you'd have to roll your Reality Filter test after you break into the host, but since you'd only end up losing 1 die from each roll made above, you would still end up with 7 hits after two intervals, beating the System's Firewall of 6. Thus, re-rolling the old rolls to break-in doesn't really matter. Also, since your modified System rating is, for the moment, 5 and System caps program ratings, the roll should have been - unless I'm missing something, response 5 + reality filter 5. If you could edit the old rolls to remove one die from all of them (just get rid of a miss so that we can move on past the hacking attempt) for thread consistency I'd appreciate it.
As Aku attempts to hack into the system, the system -- as per the rules on p. 221 -- gets an extended test with a threshold of Aku's stealth program to try and detect him. The system rolls Analyze + Firewall, a total of 11 dice. We know from Aku's rolls above that he was about to hack into the system in two intervals. The host rolls the following against a threshold of 5, the current modified rating of Aku's Stealth program.
1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6
1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6, 6
Luckily, the host doesn't quite get to the threshold of 5 before Aku successfully hacks himself access to the system.
Next, his Reality Filter test pits the hacker's Response + Reality Filter vs. the host's System + Response. Aku's roll above resulted in only two hits. I roll 12 dice (System and Response of 6):
1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 6, 6, 6
and gets 3 hits. This is bad for Aku, as a failed Reality Filter test means that not only is he at -1 Response for the number of programs he's currently running, he's also down -1 for the failed test. This puts his response at 4, and a modified System and Program cap of 4 as well. Plus, by the rules on p. 59 under Trying Again mean that if he wants to try and re-apply his reality filter he can do so, but he's at a -2 dice pool modification for his previous failure.
Want to try again Aku?
hmmm, would that be a cummaltive -3, for the reality filter failing the first time?
Yes, your total modification would be -1 for too many programs, -1 for failed reality filter, -2 for trying again. Alternatively, you can suck the -2 for the programs and the failed reality filter to avoid a potential -3 for programs and 2 failed reality filters.
'Course, you could argue that the reality filter failure modification doesn't stack, but then the only way a reality filter fails to work is if you continue to fail the test until you're out of dice pool (and edge if you roll long-shots) which I don't think I like.
'Course, you could argue that the reality filter failure modification doesn't stack, but then the only way a reality filter fails to work is if you continue to fail the test until you're out of dice pool (and edge if you roll long-shots) which I don't think I like.
i havnt forgotten i'm just still debating how i wanna go hehe, almost as important as a real game, eh?
I think running this thread like a PBeM is really handicapping its usefulness. Dashifen, I'd just like to suggest that it might be more streamlined if you just ran an NPC hacker through his paces. Things would definitely progress a little qjuicker that way. Just a suggestion...but thanks to both you and Aku for the work you're putting into this...
check the old thread that synner started. it to had the problem of time between posts...
@JustSix
Well, I could just write an Idiot's Guide to the Matrix 2.0 in word and host it, but that wouldn't allow for the conversations and questions in between the posts of the tutorial. Since I personally feel that these questions and conversations (i.e. the technomancer node discussion) are at least as important as the tutorial, I'd rather keep it in this format. At the end of each scenario, I will mark up the tutorial information for the web and host it at my SR site for posterity.
Further, if I simply write a document it gives the impression that I'm some form of authority in this area. Sure, I drove to Gen Con Indy last year to get my copy of the first printing, but that didn't give me much extra time in front of the e-book release. Thus, I'm in the same boat as you all, I just think I've got a good understanding of the rules and the willingness to interpret and be flexible about my decisions. Thus, because of the inherint flexibility of the Matrix 2.0, I think allowing others to comment or contradict my decisions is valuable to the community at large, even if things move a little slowly.
@Aku
I wouldn't worry about things too much. Besides, if you die horribly, it'll only show the dangers of assaulting highly defended nodes. Plus, I think we've illustrated how the response vs. number of programs question can quickly spiral out of control, too.
Well, I could just write an Idiot's Guide to the Matrix 2.0 in word and host it, but that wouldn't allow for the conversations and questions in between the posts of the tutorial. Since I personally feel that these questions and conversations (i.e. the technomancer node discussion) are at least as important as the tutorial, I'd rather keep it in this format. At the end of each scenario, I will mark up the tutorial information for the web and host it at my SR site for posterity.
Further, if I simply write a document it gives the impression that I'm some form of authority in this area. Sure, I drove to Gen Con Indy last year to get my copy of the first printing, but that didn't give me much extra time in front of the e-book release. Thus, I'm in the same boat as you all, I just think I've got a good understanding of the rules and the willingness to interpret and be flexible about my decisions. Thus, because of the inherint flexibility of the Matrix 2.0, I think allowing others to comment or contradict my decisions is valuable to the community at large, even if things move a little slowly.
@Aku
I wouldn't worry about things too much. Besides, if you die horribly, it'll only show the dangers of assaulting highly defended nodes. Plus, I think we've illustrated how the response vs. number of programs question can quickly spiral out of control, too.
i think i'm going to stick with the penelty, as is, because i dont think i'll score much better the second time, but now i've forgotten what step we're at. With the chances to my dice pool, i need to re-adjust my hacking attempt, correct?
No. I'm scooting past the hacking attempt because (a) I think it's pretty clear and (b) you wouldn't have been doing the reality filter test until after hacking. Reality filter only works on the node that you're hacking:
| QUOTE ("SR4 p. 226 under Reality Filter) |
| A Reality Filter program translates a node's VR simsense sculpting (see Virtual Reality, p. 228) into the metaphor of your choice. |
(emphasis mine)
Thus, if you were going to use Reality Filter and then hack you'd need Reality Filter again when you got into the new node. Anyway, looking at your hacking attempt, you rolled one extra die for each interval. The worst that would have happened is that you would have had 7 hits rather than 9 and that still beats the Firewall of 6 for this node, thus you're in and you lost your Reality Filter attempt. I have to do work now, but I'll be back for a more involved post including the system's metaphore in an hour or two.
Thus, if you were going to use Reality Filter and then hack you'd need Reality Filter again when you got into the new node. Anyway, looking at your hacking attempt, you rolled one extra die for each interval. The worst that would have happened is that you would have had 7 hits rather than 9 and that still beats the Firewall of 6 for this node, thus you're in and you lost your Reality Filter attempt. I have to do work now, but I'll be back for a more involved post including the system's metaphore in an hour or two.
Now, on with the action.
@Everyone:
So now that Aku has broken into the system, he is presented with it's metaphor (in yellow below). More importantly, perhaps, is the fact that the three agents running in the host also get a chance to detect his presence. The Agents roll Pilot + Analyze vs. Aku's Hacking + Stealth try and detect him (p. 217). I'll throw the agents' rolls here, and Aku can reply with his rolls below:
Attacker: 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6 « 3 hits
Tracker: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4 « Critical Glitch
Hybrid: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6 « 2 hits
Since the Tracker critically glitched, I'm going to rule that it will be automatically "surprised" by Aku if, at a later time, it becomes aware of him. For now, however, there's absolutely no way that the Tracker will acquire Aku, unless Aku critically glitches as well.
As the advertising corporation's node overrides your Reality Filter's attempts to subvert it to your will there is a moment of disorienting static before its metaphor settles into your field of view. You appear to be in a long, underground tunnel. Looking behind you, it extends into the murky darkness for a hundred meters or so before you cannot make anything out. A similar sight confronts you in the opposite direction. A dull, musty odor confronts your vitual senses and the rhythmic sound of water dripping in the distance seems specifically timed to unnever you with each hidden plunk. The walls and floor are bare stone. From the ceiling you can see root systems plunging into the tunnel, illusory tentacles reaching down sometimes to only a meter or so above your iconic shoulders.
@Aku:
I'll need a Hacking + Stealth roll to combat the rolls the Agents are making against your icon appearing in their node. Also, if your Agents are coming online with you, roll their Hacking + Stealth once as well. I'll have to roll against them too as necessary.
@Everyone:
So now that Aku has broken into the system, he is presented with it's metaphor (in yellow below). More importantly, perhaps, is the fact that the three agents running in the host also get a chance to detect his presence. The Agents roll Pilot + Analyze vs. Aku's Hacking + Stealth try and detect him (p. 217). I'll throw the agents' rolls here, and Aku can reply with his rolls below:
Attacker: 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6 « 3 hits
Tracker: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4 « Critical Glitch
Hybrid: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6 « 2 hits
Since the Tracker critically glitched, I'm going to rule that it will be automatically "surprised" by Aku if, at a later time, it becomes aware of him. For now, however, there's absolutely no way that the Tracker will acquire Aku, unless Aku critically glitches as well.
As the advertising corporation's node overrides your Reality Filter's attempts to subvert it to your will there is a moment of disorienting static before its metaphor settles into your field of view. You appear to be in a long, underground tunnel. Looking behind you, it extends into the murky darkness for a hundred meters or so before you cannot make anything out. A similar sight confronts you in the opposite direction. A dull, musty odor confronts your vitual senses and the rhythmic sound of water dripping in the distance seems specifically timed to unnever you with each hidden plunk. The walls and floor are bare stone. From the ceiling you can see root systems plunging into the tunnel, illusory tentacles reaching down sometimes to only a meter or so above your iconic shoulders.
@Aku:
I'll need a Hacking + Stealth roll to combat the rolls the Agents are making against your icon appearing in their node. Also, if your Agents are coming online with you, roll their Hacking + Stealth once as well. I'll have to roll against them too as necessary.
OK, I'm a little confused by the latest developments. Hopefully someone can set me straight. Aku has successfully hacked into the node without triggering an alert. Now that he's in, though, all the IC in the node get a chance to detect him and his agents? I thought that he was basically "in the clear" once inside, unless a security hacker or "patrolling" IC happens to wander by.
Do these IC count as "patrolling" since they possess Analyze?
If they do detect Aku or one of his agents, is an alert sounded -- or is that just one possible response?
I guess it just strikes me as odd that once you've successfully hacked in, all the IC in the node then get a chance at you too. Conceptually, it makes sense, I guess I just never thought about it like that...
Do these IC count as "patrolling" since they possess Analyze?
If they do detect Aku or one of his agents, is an alert sounded -- or is that just one possible response?
I guess it just strikes me as odd that once you've successfully hacked in, all the IC in the node then get a chance at you too. Conceptually, it makes sense, I guess I just never thought about it like that...
im guessing that the logic is that you icon/persona is allways visible, its just that the stealth program is working its butt of to void having it flagged as a intruder.
problem is this, there is no real info about how a agent/ice reacts to a persona ones you have hacked in without triggering an alarm. in theory you can go around doing just about anything unless you glitch or critical glitch, but there are no set rules for it...
problem is this, there is no real info about how a agent/ice reacts to a persona ones you have hacked in without triggering an alarm. in theory you can go around doing just about anything unless you glitch or critical glitch, but there are no set rules for it...
| QUOTE (JustSix) |
| OK, I'm a little confused by the latest developments. Hopefully someone can set me straight. Aku has successfully hacked into the node without triggering an alert. Now that he's in, though, all the IC in the node get a chance to detect him and his agents? I thought that he was basically "in the clear" once inside, unless a security hacker or "patrolling" IC happens to wander by. |
Dash mentioned earlier that, since this is a chokepoint, these agents are always active, and thus presumably "on patrol". It's reasonable that they'd get a chance to notice an intruder, and they'll probably get another one if he happens to do anything to draw attention to himself.
I'm confused on the IC issue as well. According to pg 208, "Once a hacker has penetrated a node, he can go about his business without having to compete with security anymore - unless he has triggered an alarm. If the system is alerted to the intrusion, he will have to deal with whatever IC and other countermeasures the gamemaster throws at him."
As I've played it, once I've successfully gotten in, with either personal, security or admin account privileges, I don't have to roll any more unless I want to do something that exceeds the user account privilege I have. With a personal account - the basic account that Aku tried for - a user should be able to be in the system without having to have IC questioning him all the time.
Unless a corporation wants to have all of its staff - from the janitor ordering more TP to the secretary making travel reservations for his boss to the executive writing up a report - constantly getting attacked by IC and crashing the system... But I don't think you'd keep employees very long (or, more important, get 10 hours of work out of them in an 8 hour day ) if they have to stop all the time to answer to IC or get their brains scrambled.
Is my group just making it easier, or do other people play it this way? And yes, it is a chokepoint... but secretaries and sales people and clients need to get through a chokepoint just like the rest of us hackers. Otherwise how can they do their jobs?
As I've played it, once I've successfully gotten in, with either personal, security or admin account privileges, I don't have to roll any more unless I want to do something that exceeds the user account privilege I have. With a personal account - the basic account that Aku tried for - a user should be able to be in the system without having to have IC questioning him all the time.
Unless a corporation wants to have all of its staff - from the janitor ordering more TP to the secretary making travel reservations for his boss to the executive writing up a report - constantly getting attacked by IC and crashing the system... But I don't think you'd keep employees very long (or, more important, get 10 hours of work out of them in an 8 hour day
) if they have to stop all the time to answer to IC or get their brains scrambled.Is my group just making it easier, or do other people play it this way? And yes, it is a chokepoint... but secretaries and sales people and clients need to get through a chokepoint just like the rest of us hackers. Otherwise how can they do their jobs?
they're agents, not IC, strictly speaking.
you just load them onto the node, and tell them to perform analyse every round.
so, technically speaking, anything you find that says "IC can do this" is irrelevant. this isn't IC. it's normal agents.
note that it actually makes no sense whatsoever for anyone to be using IC under the current rules, since i see no reason why a node couldn't activate agents with equal ease, though it isn't specifically called out.
you just load them onto the node, and tell them to perform analyse every round.
so, technically speaking, anything you find that says "IC can do this" is irrelevant. this isn't IC. it's normal agents.
note that it actually makes no sense whatsoever for anyone to be using IC under the current rules, since i see no reason why a node couldn't activate agents with equal ease, though it isn't specifically called out.
Well, agents or IC, if they are running analyze constantly, all they should see from a successful hacker is - "oh, there's another user logged in. Hm. Looks like Paul Shmitz, HR analyst. Okay dokay."
If they are doing a full-on query, then every user is going to be getting stopped every 2 minutes to type in (scan in, biometric in, whatever) their passcode or verify their identity somehow. Do you know how annoying that would be to a wage slave? And what that would do to productivity? And how many times Suzie in accounting would have to take the IT department donuts to appologize for locking up the system... again? Just 'cause she entered a '*' instead of a '&' in her passcode?
If they are doing a full-on query, then every user is going to be getting stopped every 2 minutes to type in (scan in, biometric in, whatever) their passcode or verify their identity somehow. Do you know how annoying that would be to a wage slave? And what that would do to productivity? And how many times Suzie in accounting would have to take the IT department donuts to appologize for locking up the system... again? Just 'cause she entered a '*' instead of a '&' in her passcode?
there is no action involved on the part of the employee for the agent to use analyze.
and you don't type in your passcode. chances are, it's a string of numbers, letters, and maybe random symbols even, which you are not expected to memorise. you have it stored on your working computer/commlink.
it takes 1 action for the IC to check it. considering this is a chokepoint, it is an area that people should not need to go through often, if ever; they are sitting behind the chokepoint, and they start from INSIDE the chokepoint. the chokepoint is the spot between the matrix and the corporation's working area. only people that would need to regularly leave the chokepoint need worry.
it's really not that big of a hassle at all. between the three agents, assuming you don't want to allow anyone through without being scanned, you can make 3 checks per second.
i don't consider that to be what i would call a massive drain on resources. it literally takes no time at all for the person who is passing through, unless there is a massive lineup for some freakishly weird reason.
and you don't type in your passcode. chances are, it's a string of numbers, letters, and maybe random symbols even, which you are not expected to memorise. you have it stored on your working computer/commlink.
it takes 1 action for the IC to check it. considering this is a chokepoint, it is an area that people should not need to go through often, if ever; they are sitting behind the chokepoint, and they start from INSIDE the chokepoint. the chokepoint is the spot between the matrix and the corporation's working area. only people that would need to regularly leave the chokepoint need worry.
it's really not that big of a hassle at all. between the three agents, assuming you don't want to allow anyone through without being scanned, you can make 3 checks per second.
i don't consider that to be what i would call a massive drain on resources. it literally takes no time at all for the person who is passing through, unless there is a massive lineup for some freakishly weird reason.
| QUOTE (Tiger Eyes) |
| I'm confused on the IC issue as well. According to pg 208, "Once a hacker has penetrated a node, he can go about his business without having to compete with security anymore - unless he has triggered an alarm. If the system is alerted to the intrusion, he will have to deal with whatever IC and other countermeasures the gamemaster throws at him." As I've played it, once I've successfully gotten in, with either personal, security or admin account privileges, I don't have to roll any more unless I want to do something that exceeds the user account privilege I have. With a personal account - the basic account that Aku tried for - a user should be able to be in the system without having to have IC questioning him all the time. Unless a corporation wants to have all of its staff - from the janitor ordering more TP to the secretary making travel reservations for his boss to the executive writing up a report - constantly getting attacked by IC and crashing the system... But I don't think you'd keep employees very long (or, more important, get 10 hours of work out of them in an 8 hour day ) if they have to stop all the time to answer to IC or get their brains scrambled.Is my group just making it easier, or do other people play it this way? And yes, it is a chokepoint... but secretaries and sales people and clients need to get through a chokepoint just like the rest of us hackers. Otherwise how can they do their jobs? |
This particular node is not the corp network itself, but rather an outer node intended purely as a firewall. Employees would never have a reason to log on to this node itself from inside, and from outside they'd never have to worry about their Stealth being pierced, because they're actual, legitimate users. In many, if not most corp nets, hacking in may be enough (although I don't run it that way), but this one is specifically designed to be locked down harder than usual.
ok, then, now that i'm "in", my next action would be finding this other node, but i'm not honestly sure how. I think it's a matrix perception test, but the text almost makes me think that i have to be aware of something in order to do so.
| QUOTE (Azathfeld) |
| This particular node is not the corp network itself, but rather an outer node intended purely as a firewall. Employees would never have a reason to log on to this node itself from inside, and from outside they'd never have to worry about their Stealth being pierced, because they're actual, legitimate users. In many, if not most corp nets, hacking in may be enough (although I don't run it that way), but this one is specifically designed to be locked down harder than usual. |
Exactly. In this case, consider that the agents are doing the same thing as the last paragraph in the text about Matrix Perception (p. 217). There it says that the Analyze program can be set to run automatically and try and detect new users running on the node. Thus, these agents were instructed to run their analyze program to do so. If they don't see Aku, then he'll be in the clear because his hack and stealth program make it seem to these agents like he's a legitimate user.
Having considered that, perhaps I should have run only the analyze program in the rolls above. Then, if a user is detected roll a Pilot + Response test to determine if the agents understand the information that the Analyze program returns. Thoughts on this?
| QUOTE |
| ok, then, now that i'm "in", my next action would be finding this other node, but i'm not honestly sure how. I think it's a matrix perception test, but the text almost makes me think that i have to be aware of something in order to do so. |
You are correct. You can attempt to detect other nodes within a network with a matrix perception test. If the other node is running stealth, it may be an opposed test. In which case, if you don't find the node, you'll have to go about other means of detection (i.e. find the traffic between the nodes with an Intercept Traffic test) once you find more details about the virtual location of the other node, you can try a perception test again, perhaps with a lower threshold. Or, upon failing, you can always try again, with the -2 penalty for trying again (p. 59)
However, don't forget that the agents are attempting to determine what just happened. Roll Hacking + Stealth for a "Matrix Infiltration" test as an exercise in how not to be seen. If your agents are coming online at this point, too, you might as well roll steal for them either individually or as a group if you prefer.
| QUOTE (Dashifen) |
| Having considered that, perhaps I should have run only the analyze program in the rolls above. Then, if a user is detected roll a Pilot + Response test to determine if the agents understand the information that the Analyze program returns. Thoughts on this? |
I don't think so. First of all, it says specifically on p. 222 that patrolling IC may be set to randomly scan users. Second, this IC is specifically on guard against anyone entering the node, because legitimate users have very few reasons to do so. Finally, telling a program to set its program on automatic seems kind of silly to me; instead, you'd just tell the agent to constantly scan everything around it with Analyze.
The security on the node currently being run in this thread is perhaps tighter than usual, but not unreasonably so. In my own games, hackers have to contend with challenges to their Stealth every few turns while hacked into a node, and more often if they start doing obvious things like booting legitimate users.
Aku?
sorry, i started to type my actions out and my computer started to have bad lag playing eq and i forgot about it and restarted, but anyways...
As my reality filter fights with the host and losses, i try to blend in with the rest of the symbology, making a Hacking+stealth test.
1, 2, 2, 4, 4,4, 5, 5, 6
Scoring 3 hits
Hoping that that will be enough to avoid detection, i forego loading most of my agents, Except for battlecat, which i'll load on to the host and subscribe too. This frees up 1 payload, bringing me to 10 (since it's now running off of the servers resources, correct?) and it gets to roll pilot(4)+ stealth(6, but limited to 4 because of pilot, i think) got 8 dice.
2, 2, 4, 4, 4,6, 6, 6 again, i get 3 hits for it
Next up i'd just sorta like to lay low and see where traffic is going. I know scan is used for detecting wireless traffic, but what about traffic on/to a wired host?
As my reality filter fights with the host and losses, i try to blend in with the rest of the symbology, making a Hacking+stealth test.
1, 2, 2, 4, 4,4, 5, 5, 6
Scoring 3 hits
Hoping that that will be enough to avoid detection, i forego loading most of my agents, Except for battlecat, which i'll load on to the host and subscribe too. This frees up 1 payload, bringing me to 10 (since it's now running off of the servers resources, correct?) and it gets to roll pilot(4)+ stealth(6, but limited to 4 because of pilot, i think) got 8 dice.
2, 2, 4, 4, 4,6, 6, 6 again, i get 3 hits for it
Next up i'd just sorta like to lay low and see where traffic is going. I know scan is used for detecting wireless traffic, but what about traffic on/to a wired host?
Good news for Aku, with three hits to hide both himself and his agent, the system doesn't detect him. On p. 217 of SR4 it clearly status at the top of the third paragraph under Matrix Perception Tests "Your net hits determine how successful the examination is." Thus, his three hits subtracted from my three hits means I have no net hits at all and, thus, do not detect him.
| QUOTE ("Aku") |
| Hoping that that will be enough to avoid detection, i forego loading most of my agents, Except for battlecat, which i'll load on to the host and subscribe too. This frees up 1 payload, bringing me to 10 (since it's now running off of the servers resources, correct?) and it gets to roll pilot(4)+ stealth(6, but limited to 4 because of pilot, i think) got 8 dice. |
The book doesn't provide specific instructions about how a person would go about loading a persona onto a node such as this. A public node where people could log in and log off as necessary, I don't know that I see a problem with just offloading your agent with little to know ceremony or extra rules. However, since this is a secured host, it seems to me like it's unlikely to simply allow Aku to run his software on its hardware.
Thus, I think that in this case, a Hacking + Edit test is in order. This test represent's Aku's attempt to offload his agent program from his commlink and onto the server so that it can run in the chokepoint independently from Aku himself. Which, of course, begs the question whether or not Battlecat would have to exploit its way from the chokepoint into the other system, but we'll get to that problem when we get to it.
What does the peanut gallery think of this test? Agree, disagree?
I'm honestly now sure, since it now sees me as an "authorized" user on the node i'm not sure if the node would object to a user running something on this system or not.
question is, can the node tell if its a agent passing by from a outside node for some reason vs a agent that got uploaded localy by a persona?
i would guess that as the agent was not spotted upon upload it can roam freely (basicly its just the same if it got in there on its own or was uploaded, the node does not "know" its there), but would have to independently hack into the next node if told to follow the owner (if not it will just stay put).
i would guess that as the agent was not spotted upon upload it can roam freely (basicly its just the same if it got in there on its own or was uploaded, the node does not "know" its there), but would have to independently hack into the next node if told to follow the owner (if not it will just stay put).
@hobgoblin
So, if the node does not "know" it's there, do you feel that the agent should count against the node's system/response ratings for running too many programs?
So, if the node does not "know" it's there, do you feel that the agent should count against the node's system/response ratings for running too many programs?
well i never liked the idea of a DOS attack based on a agent storm...
but lett me redo that statement. its more like the node and its watchdog programs (think about it, a agent fielding analyze strikes me as the next step in anti-viral development) didnt see anything wrong with the new prosess that got started up (prosesses are probably starting and stopping all the time, even on a node thats supposedly high security. alltho perhaps with a lower frequency then a normal node).
they know its running but for the moment the stealth program was able to fool it into thinking its nothing wrong (kinda like how some viruses are made harder to detect because they change how they look internaly).
now for each action the agent takes, i would roll a new perception test for the roaming ice. basicly, any activity from the agent (or for that matter the persona) is like a person a guard is not entirely sure about doing something in the same room.
basicly he will continue to look the person over the shoulder as long as they are in the same room or the guard is for some reason told to leave the person alone.
one net hit and the question would be the legitimacy of the agent or persona (or maybe a treshold similar to when trying to gain access).
basicly the less time a persona and his agents stay in the chokepoint, the better...
but lett me redo that statement. its more like the node and its watchdog programs (think about it, a agent fielding analyze strikes me as the next step in anti-viral development) didnt see anything wrong with the new prosess that got started up (prosesses are probably starting and stopping all the time, even on a node thats supposedly high security. alltho perhaps with a lower frequency then a normal node).
they know its running but for the moment the stealth program was able to fool it into thinking its nothing wrong (kinda like how some viruses are made harder to detect because they change how they look internaly).
now for each action the agent takes, i would roll a new perception test for the roaming ice. basicly, any activity from the agent (or for that matter the persona) is like a person a guard is not entirely sure about doing something in the same room.
basicly he will continue to look the person over the shoulder as long as they are in the same room or the guard is for some reason told to leave the person alone.
one net hit and the question would be the legitimacy of the agent or persona (or maybe a treshold similar to when trying to gain access).
basicly the less time a persona and his agents stay in the chokepoint, the better...
let my expand on my view when it comes to agents and their effect on response of a node.
first of all, i dont support the idea of a spiral of death. the number of programs only affect the effective response a hacker have available for things like calculating matrix initiative.
therefor any number of agents can be running on a node thats not being used by a hacker directly. most likely a server/office node will have personas running around, all being people that are using personal comlinks to access a shared storage and cooperation node.
in theory you could have a rating 1 node act as the host for any number of personas, each bringing and uploading any number of agents. its only if a person would try to jack directly into that node that he would experience the system "overload" as the responsiveness of the AR or VR enviroment generated for him would be cut back to deal with all the extra tasks the node have to handle.
basicly a node thats only being used as a server do not have to spend time and response generating the simsense feeds and the arrows needed for a VR or AR enviroment. therefor it can manage many more prosesses.
rember that today, the heaviest task a computer can be given thats purely a user experience, is the generation of images on the screen. hell, look at the requirements to run the fullblown windows vista eyecandy.
first of all, i dont support the idea of a spiral of death. the number of programs only affect the effective response a hacker have available for things like calculating matrix initiative.
therefor any number of agents can be running on a node thats not being used by a hacker directly. most likely a server/office node will have personas running around, all being people that are using personal comlinks to access a shared storage and cooperation node.
in theory you could have a rating 1 node act as the host for any number of personas, each bringing and uploading any number of agents. its only if a person would try to jack directly into that node that he would experience the system "overload" as the responsiveness of the AR or VR enviroment generated for him would be cut back to deal with all the extra tasks the node have to handle.
basicly a node thats only being used as a server do not have to spend time and response generating the simsense feeds and the arrows needed for a VR or AR enviroment. therefor it can manage many more prosesses.
rember that today, the heaviest task a computer can be given thats purely a user experience, is the generation of images on the screen. hell, look at the requirements to run the fullblown windows vista eyecandy.
I agree with everything you said, including the bit about the Agent storm approach to bringing a host to its knees. However, to circumvent that either (a) agents offloaded from a persona onto a node has to, without justification that I can see, not effect the response/system of that node or (b) the node must have the opportunity to stop the offloading process before it's successful in order to protect its response/system. I lean toward (b) which allows a hacker to try to offload agents onto the node's hardware, but requires a test, IMO Hacking + Edit vs. System + Firewall, to do so. Fail the test, it doesn't work. Glitch, the node goes to alert status. Succeed and you have the opportunity to offload your agent and subsequently reduce the system's attributes.
Of course, I think any system worth the plastic it's chassis is made from is going to go on alert status when or if it's attributes are decreased. To me, this represents a significant drop in performance for the system, as a result of which it will at least inform human security types of the problem and they'll log on to figure out what's going on (resulting in more perception tests and a better chance that the hacker will be found).
This interpretation seems to be the best, IMO, because it offers the largest number of actions to the player with consequences as a result of failure and success when making those actions without resorting to a GM fiat in anyway, since the rules for Hacking and Editing are pretty much up to the GM anyway.
Of course, I think any system worth the plastic it's chassis is made from is going to go on alert status when or if it's attributes are decreased. To me, this represents a significant drop in performance for the system, as a result of which it will at least inform human security types of the problem and they'll log on to figure out what's going on (resulting in more perception tests and a better chance that the hacker will be found).
This interpretation seems to be the best, IMO, because it offers the largest number of actions to the player with consequences as a result of failure and success when making those actions without resorting to a GM fiat in anyway, since the rules for Hacking and Editing are pretty much up to the GM anyway.
kinda like that "classical" scene in hackers?:
"there is only one user on the server, but the workload is that of 20! i think we have a hacker!"
"there is only one user on the server, but the workload is that of 20! i think we have a hacker!"
Yeah, basically. Anyway, I'll get back to the action of the tutorial tomorrow which'll give others a chance to chime in on the discussion between myself and hobgoblin (why do I always see hobogoblin when I glance at that screen name!!) are having.
Not to kibitz, but I think that since Aku has user access, I imagine he'd be allowed to run programs on the node (including agents) if that is something that users of the node are allowed to do. It's possible that the node is important enough to deny the average user the ability to initiate a program, and so he'd need security or even admin access, but I think most nodes would allow agents to run at user level if a user decided to run one.
In any case, patrolling agents/IC would, no doubt, get a chance to Analyze the agent (i.e. a new icon in the node) when it starts running, to see if it's allowed, as well. This would mean that Aku still runs the risk of the agent triggering an alert if its Pilot + Stealth doesn't beat (or match, really) the patrolling agent/IC (y'know, when you think about it, IC is just an agent with a program that hurts).
Just my 2¥.
In any case, patrolling agents/IC would, no doubt, get a chance to Analyze the agent (i.e. a new icon in the node) when it starts running, to see if it's allowed, as well. This would mean that Aku still runs the risk of the agent triggering an alert if its Pilot + Stealth doesn't beat (or match, really) the patrolling agent/IC (y'know, when you think about it, IC is just an agent with a program that hurts).
Just my 2¥.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.