Full Version: Matrix Rules Debate
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0 @ Jun 22 2007, 03:30 PM) |
| Essentially, it could be done that way, but to say, hack it for example, every time you went to a new area, you'd have to do Exploit again. |
yeah, you'd be going back to SR1-style system maps. which were interesting in their own way, but are basically inimical to the goal of making hacking quick and simple.
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0) | ||
This may be the root of the arguement, but , why can't you? Isn't that what a distributed network is? Or is my ignorance showing?  |
It's not ignorance, it's illustrating a point.
A node has a subscription limit. But multiple nodes can be combined into a network. But that network can be treated as a single node. And somehow this new node has the same stupid subscription limit.
That's obviously absurd. I consider that axiomatic, so I'm not going to "prove" it. A very simple, and very obvious solution, is to say that nodes don't have subscription limits. The only time a subscription limit applies is when a persona running on a commlink is connecting to hosts, agents, and drones. And I'm pretty sure that's exactly what page 212 says.
But damn, this argument keeps cropping up, doesn't it?
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| problem is that to go into that level of detail would be impossible if one wanted to keep the price of the book at any reasonable level... |
Now, come one. Earlier editions managed to put rules into the basic book that explained quite well how you do access large networks and servers. And suddenly, that is impossible?
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) | ||||
It's not ignorance, it's illustrating a point. A node has a subscription limit. But multiple nodes can be combined into a network. But that network can be treated as a single node. And somehow this new node has the same stupid subscription limit. That's obviously absurd. I consider that axiomatic, so I'm not going to "prove" it. A very simple, and very obvious solution, is to say that nodes don't have subscription limits. The only time a subscription limit applies is when a persona running on a commlink is connecting to hosts, agents, and drones. And I'm pretty sure that's exactly what page 212 says. But damn, this argument keeps cropping up, doesn't it? |
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
| And somehow this new node has the same stupid subscription limit. |
Ah, that was the detail I'd missed. Thanks.
Yes, a lot of these same arguements have been had before. Makes me cringe for when Unwired actually comes out.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| yeah, you'd be going back to SR1-style system maps. which were interesting in their own way, but are basically inimical to the goal of making hacking quick and simple. |
You're probably right. I tend to think of SR2 system maps whenever I think of hacking a host. Some habits are hard to break I suppose.
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0) | ||
Ah, that was the detail I'd missed. Thanks. |
No problem.
And like I said, that may be the key part that is, in fact, not true. But a lot of people keep thinking it is, and if a lot of people are confused by the same thing, then it's probably not clear enough.
Currently, I'm thinking that the rules say it's not an issue. I think I said the opposite earlier, honestly I'm not sure anymore, but if I did then I've changed my mind. Fortunately, I'm not a politician so I can do that.
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
| Fortunately, I'm |
Fixed.
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) | ||
| But you're missing something, I think. You're assuming there are only two types of data (roughly). Percieved and hidden. Consider:
There is hidden stuff, non-hidden stuff, and then a very small subset of the non-hidden stuff is the stuff that a human hacker percieves. An Agent is in no danger of having their senses overwhelmed, so I would think they would be aware of much more. They would certainly be aware of the metaphor that the hacker uses, but I would think all that background stuff would make them really operate one level lower than the hacker. |
Hidden and non-hidden, actually. The non-hidden stuff may not be displayed by default to the hacker, but it still isn't hidden. I imagine such information includes things like routing information and checksums; data that agents don't really need, either. But basic things like function and the like are still hidden. Heck, you don't even get a Matrix ID without a check.
Metaphors:
First my view. Metaphors are purely visual representations of what is happening on the matrix code level. To take the previous example of a street with agents all over the street. If you wanted to tell one of the agents to move to a different spot, you may tell the agent to move across the street but that then gets translated and told to the agent in matrix code commands. Then you see the agent walk across the street which is the visual representation of the agent moving into position. The agent never sees the street or knows that it was the bum or the helicopter or the kid.
Second. You guys are fighting over a hidden argument. If in a metaphor there is an obstacle like a wall or a door will agents/ic see it and or be restricted by it. I dont see how thats even possable. A wall or door would BE the agent/ic. There is nothing in a node to be a barrier to an agent/ic or hacker. Its all files, paths and data streams.
So can either of you give examples of your hidden argument about how a metaphor would affect an agent/ic or hacker?
First my view. Metaphors are purely visual representations of what is happening on the matrix code level. To take the previous example of a street with agents all over the street. If you wanted to tell one of the agents to move to a different spot, you may tell the agent to move across the street but that then gets translated and told to the agent in matrix code commands. Then you see the agent walk across the street which is the visual representation of the agent moving into position. The agent never sees the street or knows that it was the bum or the helicopter or the kid.
Second. You guys are fighting over a hidden argument. If in a metaphor there is an obstacle like a wall or a door will agents/ic see it and or be restricted by it. I dont see how thats even possable. A wall or door would BE the agent/ic. There is nothing in a node to be a barrier to an agent/ic or hacker. Its all files, paths and data streams.
So can either of you give examples of your hidden argument about how a metaphor would affect an agent/ic or hacker?
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
Now, come one. Earlier editions managed to put rules into the basic book that explained quite well how you do access large networks and servers. And suddenly, that is impossible? |
like those rules where any less "faulty"?
i recall matrix and SR3 having conflicting ruling on how to handle multiple deckers and the security tally. with both having their own problem areas.
as for accessing large networks and servers. didnt they provide the exact rules that you dont want to deploy in SR4? tiers and similar?
the only thing missing is the limited subscripting. and i keep pointing out that the book hooks that to the persona, not the node. yes they come from the same basic stats, but they are not the same matrix constructs.
hell, if you compare what VR2.0 and SR3 contained, the level of detail that was removed in SR3 was impressive.
and people moaned and deployed NPC deckers then to as the rules where unworkable in their opinion.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| as for accessing large networks and servers. didnt they provide the exact rules that you dont want to deploy in SR4? tiers and similar? |
I got absolutley no problems with tiered networks.
But being forced to create tree-shaped networks just to cope with inane limitations of the rules rubs me the wrong way.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| hell, if you compare what VR2.0 and SR3 contained, the level of detail that was removed in SR3 was impressive. |
They could have simplified some more things in SR4 - that's not my issue. It's that they made rules for how networks mesh, and those rules don't really work out.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| But being forced to create tree-shaped networks just to cope with inane limitations of the rules rubs me the wrong way. |
limitations that im not sure are present.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| limitations that im not sure are present. |
They sure are there... what could be debated is when they apply. But from an 'official' PoV, they do seem to.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
They sure are there... what could be debated is when they apply. But from an 'official' PoV, they do seem to. |
if your referring to the subscription rules, i have stated and will restated that they talk about persona, not node. and those two, while share a common source, are not one and the same iirc.
therefor, it appears that a persona can only maintain system x 2 active subscriptions, a node can have any number of them.
or in other words, while the pure devices can maintain connections to any number of devices, your user interface limits you to interact with x number of those (via their node interfaces. a interface that can merge multiple devices) at one time.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| if your referring to the subscription rules, |
No, I'm referring to the rules for 'Accessing Multiple Nodes', p. 218.
As long as this is not a hard limit, the first thing any hacker would do is to remove it.
| QUOTE |
| Linking and Subcribing p 212: In game terms your persona maintains a subscription list of nodes that you are accessing and that are allowed to establish communication with you. The subscription list may be unlimited in size, but the number of nodes, agents, or drones that a persona may actively subscribe to (access) at any one time is limited to the persona's system x2. |
Emphasis was added. The confusion comes from the italicized accessing. In the FAQ it says:
| QUOTE |
| The act of subscribing is merely the act of creating and maintaining a connection between two nodes. Subscribing does not automatically grant access to a node (unless it happens to be a public all-access node)--that is the purview of accounts. Subscribing is essentially the "handshake" that occurs between two nodes, a protocol check and very basic form of authentication so that each node knows it's connecting with the right other node. |
So this clarifies it to mean that you can have an unlimited subsciption list but you can only actually do stuff on system x2 nodes to which you have an account.
Accessing multiple nodes p 218:
| QUOTE |
| ...you can only act in one node at a time...There is also a limit to how many nodes you can access at once: you can only connect to a maximum of system x2 nodes at any one time." |
Here we run into the problem of imprecise wording that was cleared up in the FAQ quote I posted above. Connection is unlimited but you can't do anything on a node unless you access it. In order to access a system you must have an account. You may only have a number of accounts active = system x2.
None of this is conjecture or guess work on my part. Everything I've quoted is from the book with a clarification from the FAQ. These are all official rules for playing SR4. Since there is no clear distinction between persona, node, drone, or agent then this should apply to any persona or entity with pilot.
| QUOTE |
Then tell me what is a good judge of proof? |
A good judge of proof for a flawed mechanic is simply pointing out the problems with it in a well-written and well-backed manner. I've seen a few people do that here.
I suppose a good judge of proof if the rules were a horrible pile of steaming crap would be a lack of sales.
| QUOTE |
Um... One of your design goals was streamlining the game while keeping it playable to a newcomer, right? I'm pretty sure that things that contradict themselves isnt in line with those designs. |
Mechanics that contradict themselves would be a problem, yes. But you replied to me with something separate from what I said, which was that "making everyone happy is not a design goal." And it's still not.
In fact, I did say that valid concerns that impede the actual design goals are worth keeping track of to see if they can be corrected.
| QUOTE |
| The whole book doesnt need reworked and it doesnt have to even BE a full rework! |
I would hope not, since I was replying to someone who said that was necessary and I said it wasn't going to happen.
| QUOTE |
| You blatant admittance that you guys wont do anything, which is basicly a repeat of other Freelancers, makes you guys look like Wizards of the Coast and other companies I've seen before. |
I'm sorry, what? I don't think I said we weren't going to do anything. In fact, I'm pretty sure I asked for a concise list of the problems so that the writers and devs could look at in when we address these things in the future.
Please, if you are going to reply to my posts, take the time to actually read and comprehend them first.
| QUOTE (Cheops) |
| Here we run into the problem of imprecise wording that was cleared up in the FAQ quote I posted above. Connection is unlimited but you can't do anything on a node unless you access it. In order to access a system you must have an account. You may only have a number of accounts active = system x2. |
What is this nonsense? It's a rule about 'Accessing multiple nodes' and the connection limit is thus referring to accessed nodes by itself.
You are taking the word 'connection' from the context of the FAQ and try to claime something by putting it in a different context. That's not possible, as it's not a game term, i.e. capitalized.
| QUOTE (Cheops) |
| None of this is conjecture or guess work on my part. |
It is guesswork, as that FAQ adresses the subscription rules, not the Acessing Multiple Nodes rules.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||||
What is this nonsense? It's a rule about 'Accessing multiple nodes' and the connection limit is thus referring to accessed nodes by itself. You are taking the word 'connection' from the context of the FAQ and try to claime something by putting it in a different context. That's not possible, as it's not a game term, i.e. capitalized.
It is guesswork, as that FAQ adresses the subscription rules, not the Acessing Multiple Nodes rules. |
So since we seem to be having difficulty understanding the difficulty here please reiterate your problems with Accessing Multiple Nodes, preferably with quotes and I'll do my best to answer them.
In short, that this rule exists at all. Not even considering the confirmed implications on servers, it keeps you from watching more than 12 different channels at the same time. Which is a bad thing. 
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| In short, that this rule exists at all. Not even considering the confirmed implications on servers, it keeps you from watching more than 12 different channels at the same time. Which is a bad thing. |
Lol...okay. I see a little more clearly now. You could actively subscribe to system x2 different Trid providers. It is up to your GM how many channels each one is providing. Honestly I could see 1 node providing several hundred different channels. But that question is up to your GM.
What it does say is this: you can only actually "be" on one node at a time. You are "present" on the other systemx2-1 nodes but your icon sits there doing nothing (except passively defending itself). You can only have access to system x2 nodes at once. If you decide that you want to actively subscribe to a 13th node (not already on your active list but on your passive list which = infinite) you'd have to drop one of the 12 to add the 13th.
Think of your subscription list as your Favorites list, and active subscription as IE windows. I can have as many URLs on my favorites list as I want. I can only have as many IE windows open as my processor can handle (system x2). However, I can only actually type or read one of those IE windows at a time.
Does that help?
Quick, probably dumb question:
Can you engage in cybercombat in AR? If so, do you just use the rules for cold sim? I was a little unclear on this based on what I was reading in the book.
Can you engage in cybercombat in AR? If so, do you just use the rules for cold sim? I was a little unclear on this based on what I was reading in the book.
| QUOTE (Cheops) |
| You could actively subscribe to system x2 different Trid providers. It is up to your GM how many channels each one is providing. Honestly I could see 1 node providing several hundred different channels. |
Yeah, but I'm only interested in one channel from those providers, so I really need all those.
| QUOTE (Cheops) |
| What it does say is this: you can only actually "be" on one node at a time. You are "present" on the other systemx2-1 nodes but your icon sits there doing nothing (except passively defending itself). You can only have access to system x2 nodes at once. |
And I don't really see a reason for that being that. The more nodes you access, the more nodes you are a sitting duck in, so it's balancing itself. The limit just raises issues, it doesn't really solve any.
| QUOTE (Cheops) |
| If you decide that you want to actively subscribe to a 13th node (not already on your active list but on your passive list which = infinite) you'd have to drop one of the 12 to add the 13th. |
What? Miss a channel?
| QUOTE (Cheops) |
| Think of your subscription list as your Favorites list, and active subscription as IE windows. |
I'd rather think about it as pairing like done in Bluetooth.
But the real point is: We now got two different rules limiting connections that sound similiar, yet are different in obscure points. Doesn't this strike anyone as odd in a supposedly streamlined system?
| QUOTE (JonathanC) |
| Quick, probably dumb question: Can you engage in cybercombat in AR? If so, do you just use the rules for cold sim? I was a little unclear on this based on what I was reading in the book. |
If you engage in cybercombat in AR you go at your "meat" speeds. ie. your actual physical initiative. So if I have Wired 1 and I am fighting you in cybercombat in AR I have 2 IP, same as cold VR. This allows Sams and Adepts to match Hot VR speeds in AR. Many people don't like that rule.
Well Daining not sure I can really help you much if your favorite channels are spread over so many nodes. You're kinda stuck...lol.
I think I understand what you are saying about the active subscription limit. Since it is a free action to switch between accessed nodes I think maybe they did that just to restrict hackers a little bit. I don't really have a reason for that other than my lame windows example. Sorry I don't know jack about bluetooth.
I have always read them (subscription, access multiple nodes) as being the same rule. Why its not crossreferenced i have no idea.
| QUOTE (Cheops) | ||
If you engage in cybercombat in AR you go at your "meat" speeds. ie. your actual physical initiative. So if I have Wired 1 and I am fighting you in cybercombat in AR I have 2 IP, same as cold VR. This allows Sams and Adepts to match Hot VR speeds in AR. Many people don't like that rule. Well Daining not sure I can really help you much if your favorite channels are spread over so many nodes. You're kinda stuck...lol. I think I understand what you are saying about the active subscription limit. Since it is a free action to switch between accessed nodes I think maybe they did that just to restrict hackers a little bit. I don't really have a reason for that other than my lame windows example. Sorry I don't know jack about bluetooth. |
Well sure, but a person using actual hot sim would receive bonus dice to their tasks, wouldn't they?
yes. +2 dice. But at the risk of actual physical harm from matrix attacks and dumpshock.
True, but those 2 dice are a pretty decent advantage against our theoretical hacking adept/street sam. Plus, most hackers I've made had Wired 2 anyway.
Anyway, my real question was how damage was handled. I assume it works just like cold sim, where your icon gets damaged, and potentially your system can be crashed, but otherwise you're safe.
Anyway, my real question was how damage was handled. I assume it works just like cold sim, where your icon gets damaged, and potentially your system can be crashed, but otherwise you're safe.
Guys, as someone who doesen't know anything about programming and shit, I must I don't understand half of what your talking about because you're applying RL logic and computers to the otherwise OK game rules. We have no problems so far, because we accept it.
Ok I agree there may be flaws that doesen't make sense, but please concentrate on those and how they may be solved to keep this simple for us laymen, ok?
Ok I agree there may be flaws that doesen't make sense, but please concentrate on those and how they may be solved to keep this simple for us laymen, ok?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.