Full Version: Emergence Preview
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jun 21 2007, 02:20 PM) |
| That doesn't solve the Subscription Limit issue though, which as it is now, limits every connection on both sides to Systemx2, limiting servers to 12 users logged in. This, on the other hand, results in the need of snowballing large systems into complex star shapes... causing anyone browsing through to hop nodes one by one. Additionally, an Agent searching the matrix uses the rating of the node he is running on, and as he constantly hops nodes, his attributes are constantly changing. |
You do not need to be subscribed to a commlink to use it. e.g. subscription limits do not apply to what are essentially "guest" accounts. This subscription limit isn't a limit on the total number of devices a commlink can communicate with. It's a limit on how many devices it will accept system commands from.
And I'm not sure why an Agent hopping seems to be a requirement for a Matrix Data Search? I don't envisions an Agent going from device to device examining each one for data, rather it sits in the host commlink and sends out a general query and analyzes the responses. (Though it would be uiseful to have your Agent load itself onto a powerful node and run itself from there, it doesn't have to "go" anywhere to perform it's functions.)
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Perhaps I didn't manage to make my point clear: As it is now, the matrix rules have serious bugs that make them pretty much near unusable in normal play without heavy handwaving. Thus, playing a matrix centered campaing without debugging the first in one way or another seems a bad thing to do. |
\signed
| QUOTE (DireRadiant @ Jun 21 2007, 09:11 PM) |
| And I'm not sure why an Agent hopping seems to be a requirement for a Matrix Data Search? I don't envisions an Agent going from device to device examining each one for data, rather it sits in the host commlink and sends out a general query and analyzes the responses. (Though it would be uiseful to have your Agent load itself onto a powerful node and run itself from there, it doesn't have to "go" anywhere to perform it's functions.) |
Simple answer: The agent is hopping nodes because the rules say so. The agent is not sitting there. In SR4 it isnt even defined what "sitting there and sending querries" means. The best guess is: Querrying something means sending your icon there, and as agents are not allowed to run on comlinks when being on their own (why?) they hop nodes (which is totaly stupid, imagine a bot uploading to your harddrive everytime somebody wants to search your homepage . . .).
| QUOTE (DireRadiant) |
| You do not need to be subscribed to a commlink to use it. e.g. subscription limits do not apply to what are essentially "guest" accounts. This subscription limit isn't a limit on the total number of devices a commlink can communicate with. It's a limit on how many devices it will accept system commands from. |
Actually, it is a hard limit on open connections and, for the record, if I'm talking about users, I'm talking about real accounts, not just guests.
| QUOTE (DireRadiant) |
| And I'm not sure why an Agent hopping seems to be a requirement for a Matrix Data Search? I don't envisions an Agent going from device to device examining each one for data, rather it sits in the host commlink and sends out a general query and analyzes the responses. |
Agents don't have Personas - they are Icons and thus only can interact with the Node they run on.
My issue isn't that the rules aren't fun or balanced - it's that they try to explain some low-level stuff and can't get a coherent picture together that fits fluff.
Some of those rules try to invoke game balance (e.g. How many drones can you have around at the same time) but they cut into fluff parts (e.g. ..yes that means that even though you have the state-of-the-art computer with a rupo-display covering your wall, you can't view more than 12 News Channels at the same time.)
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jun 21 2007, 07:20 PM) |
| Again, this is just the way the matrix works by RAW. |
This is the way the Matrix works under the basic rules and the basic rules are just that. You are making the erroneous assumption that they reflect global picture.
For simplicity, space, and ease of play, the core book simply assumes the nodes people will be hacking (using the basic rules) work on the same principles and rules as personal commlinks - just like it assumes basic level players don't want to jump right in with multilayer and dual-key encryption when they're just getting the hang of the rules. This need not be the case with the advanced rules and these need not contradict any of the existing rules, just expand upon them.
The restrictions and limitations of commlinks and small networks will undoubtedly be different from those of servers, networks, and distributed grids. The advanced rules covering these will be introducing in Unwired.
And now back to your regular broadcast.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| For simplicity the core book assumes the nodes people will be hacking using the basic rules work on the same principles and rules as personal commlinks - this need not be the case with the advanced rules. The restrictions and limitations of commlinks and small networks will undoubtedly be different from those of servers, networks, and distributed grids. The advanced rules covering these will be introducing in Unwired. |
This incites me to post.
But we're playing now, and would like a working system now. You're defending the basic rules with imaginary advanced rules. They may exist for you, but they don't exist for us, and will not until Unwired is released.
It's not that servers don't make sense in only the basic rules, it's that they don't make sense in the only rules that exist.
If one person can't figure out the matrix it's probably because they're an idiot. If many people can't figure out the matrix it's probably not because the rules are perfect and they're all idiots.
I don't mean to come off as overly negative, overall I like SR4 and I can't wait until Unwired comes out and answers all these questions. I certainly understand why there aren't rules for unusual systems. But a server: any host capable of connecting to more than 12 things at a time, is so integral and fundamental to the game that I can not fathom how the "advanced" rules for making a simple host function haven't at least appeared in a FAQ as an "Oops, I can't believe we left this out of the core book, here's the rule for hosts until Unwired comes out." Or perhaps a "No, no, that's not what a subscription list means at all, it actually means..." Or a line in errata that says "The System x 2 limit does not apply to large servers. Nevermind how they work, we'll address that in Unwired, but rest assured that megacorporate hosts aren't run off someone's commlink, so the limit doesn't apply"
*pant pant pant*
Whoa. What was that? I think I blacked out for a minute. Was I typing?
What was I saying? Oh yeah, I love SR4, and I can't wait for Unwired because there are some burning questions I would like answered.
| QUOTE (Synner) | ||
This is the way the Matrix works under the basic rules and the basic rules are just that. You are making the erroneous assumption that they reflect global picture. |
It's hardly my error to go along with the published rules - which lack the disclaimer 'Only good for small networks'.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| The restrictions and limitations of commlinks and small networks will undoubtedly be different from those of servers, networks, and distributed grids. The advanced rules covering these will be introducing in Unwired. |
So basically, you state that hacking into any real corporate network/browsing the matrix requires the extended rules as the basic rules never intedned to cover it - so let's wait until the last book of the current publishing cycle appears.
Uhm. Actually, that's worse than 'the basic rules have some bugs than should be worked out - like ammunitions and skill levels'.
Oy. Peace, children. I do not want this argument to continue here and now. It is readily apparent that there are some issues regarding the Matrix rules that need to be addressed, and they will be addressed at the appropriate point in time. Bitching, whining, complaining, kvetching, moaning, mooning, and generally being emo are not going to speed the process-and there are other and better threads and e-mails to bring your legitimate concerns to the eyes and ears of those who can and will make everything better.
Disengaging, Aunty H mode, keep in mind that this preview is just that-a sneak peak at what lies ahead. Chapter titles and a bit o' fiction fluff to give you a taste of what is to come-ye need not try to pick it apart on the rules level just at this second. Emergence does not require Unwired to use. I'm not saying more because y'all have had more than enough glimpses, and I'm not aimin' to ruin it for you when you finally buy the book.
Disengaging, Aunty H mode, keep in mind that this preview is just that-a sneak peak at what lies ahead. Chapter titles and a bit o' fiction fluff to give you a taste of what is to come-ye need not try to pick it apart on the rules level just at this second. Emergence does not require Unwired to use. I'm not saying more because y'all have had more than enough glimpses, and I'm not aimin' to ruin it for you when you finally buy the book.
| QUOTE (Ancient History) |
| and they will be addressed at the appropriate point in time. |
Highly improbable. And the appropiate point was the Errata.
Serbitar, please lay off.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
It's hardly my error to go along with the published rules - which lack the disclaimer 'Only good for small networks'. |
No, IMHO your error was in assuming advanced rules would not nuance the existing basic rules or that the existing rules were the full extent of the rules.
The basic book has magic working the same all over the world, but when you pick up Street Magic you discover (and knew going in) that in certain places magic works better and in some places magic works worse. The basic book did not introduce background count though it fundamentally affects the way magic works.
Good advanced rules are perfect plug-ins. They are fully compatible and they do not contradict existing rules but rather expand and extrapolate from them.
| QUOTE | ||
So basically, you state that hacking into any real corporate network/browsing the matrix requires the extended rules as the basic rules never intedned to cover it - so let's wait until the last book of the current publishing cycle appears. |
Actually I did not state that. I never stated that the "basic rules were never intended to cover it". The basic rules are intended to cover it. What I said is that they're basic rules, they're intended to be accessible, easy to use, and keep things simple. The basic rules don't cover "small networks" they cover pretty much any decentralized secure networking grid.
Want to hack a wifi security network of cameras and alarms, the basic rules work. Want to hack a night club system, basic rules work (just daisy chain two or three networks). Want to hack an office system during an intrusion, the basic rules work. Want to hack a security rigger's network with a half dozen perimeter drones, the basic rules work. Want to reproduce a local corporate server but are having problems with the limit on subscriptions, make the node a server hub connected to the server rather than the server itself, the basic rules work.
Does this mean the basic rules are perfect and complete? No. Do they hold up well on the high-end? No. Does everything make sense if you assume they are the be all and end all of rules? No.
They are intended to reflect hacking as used by shadowrunners while shadowrunning. They are meant to be quick and simple.
Want to hack the UCAS Government system, slipping in through the Seattle Metroplex Administration network by accessing the ACHE's local environmental control system, things start to get complicated but you can still use the basic rules.
Want to duplicate 10 thousand copies of your favorite combat agent and wage e-war on Renraku, the basic rules are not so good but still doable (if you don't mind making that number of rolls for both sides).
What the basic rules are not meant to do is cover all the nuances and all the angles (heck, not even advanced rules do that). To use the analogy above technically the basic Magic rules don't even cover a magician casting a spell in parts of the Barrens and yet they function and do their job (with a little "hand-waving" as you put it) or playing a houngan.
And yes, if you can't make do with the basic rules, if you're the type of gamer who prefers to play all the nuances and wants all the details of the Matrix then Unwired is for you. Just like Street Magic was essential for anyone wanting to play any possession tradition or use background count as an element of the game.
While your personal preference might be a higher priority for Unwired (and everyone is entitled to an opinion), making it the last of the core books to be released is simply good business sense and good development. No matter what importance we want to give the Matrix2.0, realistically there's only so many books that can be produced at a time, there are books that have wider target audiences, and there is the need to make sure that when something like Unwired is done it is done right.
Furthermore we knew from the get go that we intended to expand on technomancers and the other things before we got to Unwired. We knew Unwired, unlike the other core books, would involve very little updating of old material. We knew Unwired was going to take more work than most of the other core books put together. And we knew that Unwired needed to be as complete as possible So the simple answer is that Unwired will be the last book in the current production cycle exactly because because all the elements and concepts we want to cover need to be in place.
Unwired is under development and this is the last comment I'll make on that book until primary writing is wrapped. Back to Emergence.
Serbitar has more priviledged information on this than some, but I agree that his tactics are unhelpful.
---
The deal with the Matrix stuff currently published is that it is contradictory. It is an opinion-laden value judgement to say that any of the ideas presented are good or bad, but it is merely factual to state that they are incompatible. You seriously must ignore portions of the basic book simply to follow other portions of the basic book. To that extent, those who maintain that the system cannot be played without using handwaving technologies are completely correct.
However, asking it to come out quickly is honestly what got us into this mess in the first place. Even the basic mechanics of whether hacking into a node is performed by rolling Logic + Hacking (as stated on pages 124 and 223) or Exploit + Hacking (as stated on pages 221 and another part of 223) is completely up in the air. That's a really fundamental question and it's answered positively in incompatible ways in two different parts of the main book.
What Serbitar is referring to is the mandate that Shadowrun Developement has set for themselves to not contradict the Basic Book in Supplementary Rules Material. That's a laudable goal in general of course, but in this specific instance the basic book includes both A and ~A as definitive statements. This means that really anything you say is going to contradict something in the Basic Book, leaving the devs the option only to fail in the mission they have set for themselves or to be deliberately deceitful.
Game Companies have a strong tendency to err towards the latter choice unfortunately. Many times Andy Collins and those lovable scamps at WotC will issue a hedged statement that is so wishy-washy and unclear that it is supposed to jive with two incompatible statements in the rules so that they can claim that they somehow aren't contradicting anything that the rules say. This is certainly a danger with Unwired as well. It is certainly possible that the authors will pull a D20 or a White Wolf and make a book that is incomprehensible and contradictory so that they can claim that they aren't contradicting any currently existing rules (even though those rtules contradict themselves). It's possible of course that they'll show some nuts and come clean with the viewers and write something that cuts the bullshit and moves on - I'm betting on something in between that fixes some problems and leaves some others untouched.
--
Serbitar can be forgiven his skepticism, since Unwired is an awful long time in coming out and Peter won't admit publically that there are problems that need to be fixed (of course he won't, that's his job - he's supposed to spin things as positively as he can). Honestly, I can't say that he's wrong to hold that view.
Here are some things that need to be fixed in Unwired (off the top of my head):
But take a step back for a moment: of course Peter knows about these issues. He fucking well editted Street Magic. And while there are some fubars that fell through the cracks (Aspected Magicians and Blood Spirits), the book on the whole is very high quality and addressed a lot of the issues people had with the magic system of 4th edition. There is no way in hell that he's going to come out publically and say "Yeah, the rules don't actually say that there's any meaningful limit on how many piratted agents you can have in alternate nodes running continuous Medic commands on duplicates of your icon accessing different nodes, thus allowing you to regenerate your entire matrix condition bar every combat turn. There's no listed flavor reason why that wouldn't work either. Oops." - one can be certain that he actually has had his attention drawn to this fact.
-Frank
---
The deal with the Matrix stuff currently published is that it is contradictory. It is an opinion-laden value judgement to say that any of the ideas presented are good or bad, but it is merely factual to state that they are incompatible. You seriously must ignore portions of the basic book simply to follow other portions of the basic book. To that extent, those who maintain that the system cannot be played without using handwaving technologies are completely correct.
However, asking it to come out quickly is honestly what got us into this mess in the first place. Even the basic mechanics of whether hacking into a node is performed by rolling Logic + Hacking (as stated on pages 124 and 223) or Exploit + Hacking (as stated on pages 221 and another part of 223) is completely up in the air. That's a really fundamental question and it's answered positively in incompatible ways in two different parts of the main book.
What Serbitar is referring to is the mandate that Shadowrun Developement has set for themselves to not contradict the Basic Book in Supplementary Rules Material. That's a laudable goal in general of course, but in this specific instance the basic book includes both A and ~A as definitive statements. This means that really anything you say is going to contradict something in the Basic Book, leaving the devs the option only to fail in the mission they have set for themselves or to be deliberately deceitful.
Game Companies have a strong tendency to err towards the latter choice unfortunately. Many times Andy Collins and those lovable scamps at WotC will issue a hedged statement that is so wishy-washy and unclear that it is supposed to jive with two incompatible statements in the rules so that they can claim that they somehow aren't contradicting anything that the rules say. This is certainly a danger with Unwired as well. It is certainly possible that the authors will pull a D20 or a White Wolf and make a book that is incomprehensible and contradictory so that they can claim that they aren't contradicting any currently existing rules (even though those rtules contradict themselves). It's possible of course that they'll show some nuts and come clean with the viewers and write something that cuts the bullshit and moves on - I'm betting on something in between that fixes some problems and leaves some others untouched.
--
Serbitar can be forgiven his skepticism, since Unwired is an awful long time in coming out and Peter won't admit publically that there are problems that need to be fixed (of course he won't, that's his job - he's supposed to spin things as positively as he can). Honestly, I can't say that he's wrong to hold that view.
Here are some things that need to be fixed in Unwired (off the top of my head):
- Agent Smith (There is no meaningful upper limit on how much assistance you can levy out of duplicates of agent programs running on various nodes).
- Hacker Dicepools (Logic and Programs should both be important, as is one or the other is useless depending upon which part of the book you believe).
- Servers, Matrix Cafes, and Hubs (Subscription limits are way too low to have any meaningful matrix society, the limits written for drone rigs simply don't allow for libraries or shopping catalogues to exist).
But take a step back for a moment: of course Peter knows about these issues. He fucking well editted Street Magic. And while there are some fubars that fell through the cracks (Aspected Magicians and Blood Spirits), the book on the whole is very high quality and addressed a lot of the issues people had with the magic system of 4th edition. There is no way in hell that he's going to come out publically and say "Yeah, the rules don't actually say that there's any meaningful limit on how many piratted agents you can have in alternate nodes running continuous Medic commands on duplicates of your icon accessing different nodes, thus allowing you to regenerate your entire matrix condition bar every combat turn. There's no listed flavor reason why that wouldn't work either. Oops." - one can be certain that he actually has had his attention drawn to this fact.
-Frank
I think I will wait to purchase this until the Matrix issues get dealt with in Unwired. 
This thread is for discussion of the new book Emergence. Unwired certainly has a lot to do with that, but the pros and cons of releasing one or the other first, and the hacking rules potential gaps, have been gone over again and again. Drop it and move on before it devolves further please.
[ Spoiler ]
[ Spoiler ]
[ Spoiler ]
[ Spoiler ]
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| No, IMHO your error was in assuming advanced rules would not nuance the existing basic rules or that the existing rules were the full extent of the rules. |
As I'm perfectly aware of the basic SR4 design premise, obviously, that isn't my error.
My error may have been believing that the design premise will hold true, but that will be revealed to me in the Game Information chapters of Emergence.
PS: And no, building a node tree is only a solution if you want your players to hang you on it.
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman @ Jun 21 2007, 11:49 PM) |
| Serbitar has more priviledged information on this than some, but I agree that his tactics are unhelpful. |
It is a known fact that the rules expansions are just that. Rules expansions. The BBB rules will not be "corrected" by rules expansions, only expanded.
This fact was stated by Synner and Rob several times. I do not have special informaiton in this case.
And it is my opinion that this is not the right way to do it. Especially when rules are broken. I am just stating this opinion. There is nothing wrong with this.
There are no "tactics".
| QUOTE |
This is certainly a danger with Unwired as well. It is certainly possible that the authors will pull a D20 or a White Wolf and make a book that is incomprehensible and contradictory so that they can claim that they aren't contradicting any currently existing rules (even though those rtules contradict themselves). It's possible of course that they'll show some nuts and come clean with the viewers and write something that cuts the bullshit and moves on - I'm betting on something in between that fixes some problems and leaves some others untouched. |
Thats exactly what Ive been thinking. And my fears are backed by experience (in this case the hacking FAQ/Errata, which did not solve the hacking problems, though virtually all of them were mentioned and discussed. Lots of the stuff was simply ignored).
The BBB is not the holy grail. One should change things when necessary and not create complex rules that circumvent the problems made by bad rules in the first place.
All in all I am voting for a more flexible Errata/Update system. We have the Internet to distribute Errata and rules changes of clearly broken rules. Why is it not used? Why wait for SR5 to fix broken things if you could just make updates. People already have to print out Errata. Why not go all the way?
Because not everyone thinks the rules are broken, contradictory, problematic, unplayable or otherwise bad.
Nothing is unplayable, you always have the GM to fix things. But this dos not make a good rule set. But more important: The matrix rules are contradictory, thats an undenyable fact (see Franks Post).
And furthermore. Alot of people think that the matrix rules do not keep up with the rest of the ruleset in quality, consistency, intuity, and ease of gameplay. That should be enough.
And furthermore. Alot of people think that the matrix rules do not keep up with the rest of the ruleset in quality, consistency, intuity, and ease of gameplay. That should be enough.
| QUOTE (Dashifen) |
| Because not everyone thinks the rules are broken, contradictory, problematic, unplayable or otherwise bad. |
Not everyone thought that special ammunitions were broken, and some people argued that the skill caps rules were perfectly clear.
Ok, Fisty asked kindly for the rules/errata arbitration to be dropped. It is now my strong suggestion that if you wish to discuss this issue you start up another thread to do it. This is the Emergence thread, not a rule errata thread. This is the last warning.
I was one of the people bitching, and I just want to add that while I am irrationally desperate to see Unwired, I would rather have it be good than soon. I want it months ago, but if it needs to be done last to be done right, then so be it.
Now, I must talk about Emergence, lest I be smacked. I am very excited about Emergence. I've always really liked the plotlines involving Otaku and what's under the black marks. And with technomancers being connected to Otaku, I'm glad to be getting more information about them. I've mentioned before that I haven't really used them in my game yet, and that's probably largely because I didn't have Emergence. I'm not one to adhere 100% to the metaplot, but I don't want to take off running with Technomancers, developing characters around them, and then find out that I was running in the wrong direction. So far I've had guarded feelings about technos, but I have high hopes for this book.
So, I know there is only a page of rules or something in this book, but what are they going to be rules for? The blacked-out stuff? That would be great.
Now, I must talk about Emergence, lest I be smacked.
I am very excited about Emergence. I've always really liked the plotlines involving Otaku and what's under the black marks. And with technomancers being connected to Otaku, I'm glad to be getting more information about them. I've mentioned before that I haven't really used them in my game yet, and that's probably largely because I didn't have Emergence. I'm not one to adhere 100% to the metaplot, but I don't want to take off running with Technomancers, developing characters around them, and then find out that I was running in the wrong direction. So far I've had guarded feelings about technos, but I have high hopes for this book.So, I know there is only a page of rules or something in this book, but what are they going to be rules for? The blacked-out stuff? That would be great.
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
| So, I know there is only a page of rules or something in this book, but what are they going to be rules for? The blacked-out stuff? That would be great. |
If there are rules at all in the book, thats a bad thing, as that breaks the SR4 design premise part of separating rule books and fluff books.
Oh. I thought somebody said there was less than a page of rules. I sort of inferred that meant less than a page, but more than zero. Or maybe I'm just totally wrong.
well from what i understand, on the run had rules for pop up hardpoints. rules that will most likely be made obsolete by arsenal.
im guessing the same deal here. whatever rules that show up in emergence will be specific, and found in unwired when it comes out.
im guessing the same deal here. whatever rules that show up in emergence will be specific, and found in unwired when it comes out.
| QUOTE (Synner) | ||
They were and they're intended to work as spoilers and leave you some surprises. As I've said before there's a lot going on in Emergence and we'd like to save some of the twists for when the actual book hits the shelves.
I take it you've never read Shadows of Europe. Switzerland isn't what it used to be. |
Ah. Well, I do have Shadows of Europe but the last time I read it was a year or so ago. Guess I missed the part about them.
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ Jun 22 2007, 05:17 PM) |
| Oh. I thought somebody said there was less than a page of rules. I sort of inferred that meant less than a page, but more than zero. Or maybe I'm just totally wrong. |
Emergence contains no rules, but offers simple guidelines on how to handle the "blacked out stuff" using the existing rules (in the BBB). Closer to two lines of guidelines than a page if I remember correctly.
| QUOTE (Synner) | ||
Emergence contains no rules, but offers simple guidelines on how to handle the "blacked out stuff" using the existing rules (in the BBB). Closer to two lines of guidelines than a page if I remember correctly. |
Ah, I see. Wonderful. Thank you. I love straight answers.
Really, handling the blacked out stuff using the existing rules is probably more in the spirit of SR4 than coming up with a whole set of new rules, anyway.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.