The difference between a hobby hacker and a purist is the difference between skill rating 2 and skill rating 5 on one side, and the number of optional programs on the other. We play with rather high income, and almost any hobby hacker has only those programs the real hacker was willing to hand out. THATS RAW RULES HERE!
In case of Franks Ruleset, skill does matter, as does selection of attribute. Logic does not seem to be high priority for non-mages in our group, and those 80+ points in skills a good hacker will need are nothing to laugh at. Two groups, plus some mechanic skills, some pilot skills, at least basic skills for communication... and if you buy yourself a few drones, the time spend upgrading equipment yourself AKA at half price makes you a full-time hacker on its own. You are what you play.
The same someone who buys high hacking skills without being a hacker could have an agility at racial max, a strength of one, and carry a HMG. Its GM time.
HappyDaze
Nov 9 2007, 11:34 AM
QUOTE |
because he wasted all those points he put into being a badass hacker, since most of the time, the computer hobbyist street sam can do just as good a jobecause he wasted all those points he put into being a badass hacker, since most of the time, the computer hobbyist street sam can do just as good a job. because he wasted all those points he put into being a badass hacker, since most of the time, the computer hobbyist street sam can do just as good a job. because he wasted all those points he put into being a badass hacker, since most of the time, the computer hobbyist street sam can do just as good a job.b. |
That's not the only time that SR4 (and other editions of the same) will show you that it's more efficient to do something in a particualr way. With hacking, it is often most efficient to not over-specialize and to have many other capabilities. You'll be 80% of the full-on hyper-specialized hacker, but you'll also have a half-dozen other uses. As a shadowrunner, this should be more appealing...
QUOTE |
your point only makes sense if you're willing to ignore four editions' worth of fluff that says that dedicated hackers--guys who put lots and lots of resources into being good hackers--are viable shadowrunners. |
The fluff also says that adepts can be as strong and quick as cyber. Look at how inefficient Improved Physical Attribute is (especially for going aove the natural maximum) compared to the bio or cyber options. Does this mean that a 'pure' adept that takes this approach is wasting points? Yeah, it does. So what? Everyone gets what they pay their points for, and you can't cure stupid. If someone wants to go all uber-hacker and complains that they suck after reading over the rules and having some play experience (first time ignorance may be excused - once), that's their fault, not the game's.
FrankTrollman
Nov 9 2007, 11:56 AM
QUOTE (Moon Hawk) |
The only part of this that I have trouble with is the trodes working without being near the head. Datajack, nanopaste trodes, conventional trodes: all fine. But being able to manipulate someone's mind electromagnetically from a distance gives me problems. |
This almost got lost in the sea of Doctor Funkenstein's spam attack on this thread. For that I apologize, since this was in many ways the last on-topic post, I should have gotten to it a long time ago. Which is to say yesterday.
In Shadowrun 4th edition you can connect to the wireless matrix with "synthskin" (Augmentation) which you can put on your hands, or your feet. Anywhere you want really. And that stuff sets up a connection with your brain and you can imbed transmitters into it in order to increase the original signal range of the stuff (3 meters) to whatever you need to get your PAN and hacking groove on. In the case of Trolls, that Synthskin can indeed be about 3 meters away from the head, which indicates to me that the brain is treated as having a Signal of 0 (high density signal transmission range of 3 meters).
But while that indicates that you could set up a Sim Module 3 meters in front rather than just 3 meters down in order to send and receive high density signal, who says you want to actually do that? What if instead you just want to technologically image the contents? In such a model you are using the disturbances in your field, not disturbances in the target, and thus the important question is one of your own signal range, and not one of the "Handshake" range (which is to say the range at which both units are within signal range of each other).
A Drone does not need to be able to send information back to its controller to receive instructions. And there's no real reason to believe that a human brain needs to be able to send information back in order to be destructively interfered with.
As is, an Action Potential is invoked with the shift of 15 milivolts at any point in the Axon. And if the right (wrong) seven neurons go off at the same time and epileptic event occurs. The First Law of Thermodynamics tells us that we couldn't possibly trigger an event like that with the expenditure of less than about 100 atto-joules. The second law of thermodynamics tells us that we couldn't possibly hope to do it that cheaply - that no matter how well we calculated things there would be many points of energy loss.
But you know what? I spend about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atto-joules every single day just staying alive. I am totally willing to spend many trillions of atto-joules triggering a seizure in my enemies. I'm willing to go even more inefficient than that. Heck, modern Action Potential Stimulation therapy uses as many as forty volts, and I'm willing to be even that inefficient if I'm bringing an opponent to his knees.
The thing is that directional signal strength does not fall off with the square of the distance. It falls off only with shielding. The only thing which counts in a directional model is the shielding provided by the atmosphere. A non-trivial concern certainly, but not a technically infeasible one.
-Frank
Blade
Nov 9 2007, 02:00 PM
QUOTE (FrankTrollman @ Nov 9 2007, 12:56 PM) |
In Shadowrun 4th edition you can connect to the wireless matrix with "synthskin" (Augmentation) which you can put on your hands, or your feet. Anywhere you want really. And that stuff sets up a connection with your brain and you can imbed transmitters into it in order to increase the original signal range of the stuff (3 meters) to whatever you need to get your PAN and hacking groove on. |
I'm not sure it's meant to communicate with the brain with EM waves. I guess it's closer to skinlink, or maybe it uses the neural network... I think it's a stretch to say it supports the view that the naked metahuman brain has a 3m range signal.
EDIT : But I'm not sure why I answer because it looks like the only way to be "on topic" is to either support your view or have minor disagreement you can easily solve.
darthmord
Nov 9 2007, 02:58 PM
QUOTE (mfb) |
Doc, for god's sake, read what i'm saying. i'm going to put it in all caps because we've been going at this for almost a full page and you're still arguing the wrong point: I DON'T CARE IF HACKERS NEED TO HAVE COMBAT SKILLS. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE I AM TRYING TO POINT OUT. i'm not trying to piss you off, but jesus christ, read.
the issue i am trying to point out is that hacking is so easy, and so affordable, that anyone can do it well enough to get by. that's the issue that Gelare is pointing out, and it's part of the issue that's causing FrankTrollman to come up with wildass ideas like brainhacking. |
Wouldn't that be the GM's fault for making hacking / decking that cheap and easy? I could have sworn that it was up to the GM to provide a proper level of challenge to his/her players... including having high security hosts that a moderately skilled hacker/decker can't penetrate because you needed a high skilled one instead.
Whipstitch
Nov 9 2007, 03:15 PM
Actually, that doesn't really work at all. One of the things people take issue with about hackers is that since attributes don't come into things much if at all the only real dicepool advantages a "pure" hacker -might- have over a "dabbler" is in skill ratings, the codeslinger quality and perhaps the hideously expensive 'ware from Augmentation. That actually doesn't amount to that much bigger of a dicepool, and it's certainly not a big enough pool to average much more than a single extra hit compared to a "dabbler" on most Matrix actions. Since the single biggest danger to an intruding Hacker is the sheer number of rolls required rather than the difficulty of said rolls, it becomes rather hard rather quickly to create a Matrix system that will defeat a dabbler and challenge a specialist; a sufficiently tough system will usually take either character down with little problem simply by forcing rolls until their luck inevitably fails them.
Compare that to street samurai, who typically only need a roll or two to grease an opponent and have more options to take advantage of when it comes to distancing themselves from "dabblers".
eidolon
Nov 9 2007, 03:28 PM
NOT A MOD POST. That out of the way,
@Frank: I'm neither trolling nor attempting to bait you. What I am doing is trying to get you to acknowledge that the problems that you have with the game are just that:
Your problems with the game.
Not "problems with the game", not "reasons the game sucks", but "Frank's problems with the game".
This is not your private forum. This is not where people come to read your ideas and bask in them. This is a place that people come to discuss issues. If you don't want anyone to take issue with your posts, don't post them.
And I'm not speaking as a mod. I'm speaking as someone that posts to online forums. It's. An. Open. Board. We. Are. Free. To. Discuss. Things. Here.
I'm sorry if you see "responding to your posts with anything but fawning praise" as baiting or trolling, but that's your issue, not mine or anyone else's.
I have posted several things that run directly counter to how you are interpreting the rules and fluff, and counter to what I see as your misconceptions (and those of others). Your posts run counter to my interpretation and ideas, does that mean you're trolling and baiting me by starting this thread?
Disagreeing with you and having a different opinion != trolling.
Back to the issue:
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
I've seen some people suggest that a method to handle Defender Opt Out is to punish people outside the Matrix for opting out or rewarding them outside the Matrix for opting in. These would potentially work, but despite the length and breadth of this thread noone seems to have actally gone ahead and implemented such a strategy. |
What are you talking about? There's not need to go on and on about a specific strategy for using such rules. And since you keep ignoring that fact, that is in the core rulebook. It's optional and it's in a sidebar, sure, but it's in the book. Right there. In print. It's no more an esoteric strategy that we need to expound upon at length than "shooting someone in the face for standing still, and not shooting them in the face if they hide behind cover."
Gelare and mfb:
Maybe I'd see what you're meaning a little more clearly if you gave a game example of when a sammy is just as effective as a hacker? Are you saying what I think you're saying, which is:
Okay, a Sam has a decent commlink, and is running a few programs. He has dumped a few points into hacking. So he needs to hack into node X, and he needs 4 hits. Since he is rolling skill+program, he has just as much chance of success as a "dedicated" hacker.
That's it, right?
I can see how the situation could come up with the skill+program that the rules use, but apparently it just hasn't been a problem for me. (Again, I expect this is because my sam players never want to be hackers or they would play one; I just don't have the experience with the issue.)
If that's the case, isn't there already a house rule that addresses the problem? The attribute+skill and can only do it with a program, and only get hits up to...is it skill or attribute?
So why would such a major system overhaul be needed when a simply one line house rule exists?
K, sorry, I'm responding as I read through, so
QUOTE (Gelare) |
More importantly, it does not mean "someone with no training as a hacker whatsoever, but who bought a commlink with some shiny new SOTA programs on it". |
It looks like that's exactly your issue. I can see that, but again, easy house rule, no?
The basic topic here is how rational behaviour will make Joe Average abstain from participating in the wireless matrix. Brainhacking has its place here because it is Franks way of enforcing matrix use. Still, it´s only a tangent to "should one use the matrix".
Less tangentially, the threat of hacking depends on the requirements of hacking. Duh!
We will not reach agreement on this threat level, as the number of people who are into hacking depends on the campaign. Much.
My opinion:
- matrix use is a requirement of modern society
- Joe Average is not under risk of lethal attack because
- actual hackers are rare since not being caught while learning the ropes is tricky with several matrix security divisions out to justify their budgets.
- if they are common, Joe Average will still believe what he is told and run his comfy setup
I for one have still to see a hacker not busy in combat. He might not be able to use technical tricks if found without drones in a otherwise dead matrix zone engaging low-tech enemies. Some enemies will fit this category nicely, some will turn their comlink of and need to be affected indirectly. Fine. The classical associal fat guy/kernel hacker has no business being in a brawl, too.
Internal logic does not require the potential for brain hacking, too. A chip can offer a dual wireless interface. DNI-close contact tech can. If that DNI tech requires quantum tech to influence the brain (NOT just creating a simple and omnipresent EM field), required computing power can increase with range n-exponentially. So any advancement over the entire SR-history might have jielded a few centimeters of range.
eidolon
Nov 9 2007, 03:36 PM
QUOTE (Ryu) |
My opinion: - matrix use is a requirement of modern society - Joe Average is not under risk of lethal attack because - actual hackers are rare since not being caught while learning the ropes is tricky with several matrix security divisions out to justify their budgets. - if they are common, Joe Average will still believe what he is told and run his comfy setup |
Well said. Analogy might be weak overall, but I see this as being much akin to eating fast food.
We know it's unhealthy. We know we'll get fat. We know we shouldn't eat it. But we eat it because it's convenient, tasty, and they tell us to.
In fact, I think I'll get Arby's for lunch today.
Penta
Nov 9 2007, 03:38 PM
I feel sad that I was ignored.
Really. Isn't everybody on this thread thinking of the Hacker's role in SR4 a bit too narrowly?
Cthulhudreams
Nov 9 2007, 03:43 PM
See the thing is though in the rules and fluff as present it's really not. Players like, say, Kyoto kid wander around with 'commlinks as mobile phones' all the time. You can seriously go buy a mobile phone now that has GPS, mapping, calls people, sports encryption (you can even get ones with semi serious encryption) blahblahblah and there are people living out in the barrens that really don't have this stuff because they are very poor.
Now maybe joe average wage slave uses wireless, but, like, whatever, because shadowrunners don't really have anything to do with joe average. They deal with barney the security guard, biff the go ganger and SuperBadAss the Ares SAS super commando.
One of them cannot really afford fast food and the otherone certainly watches what he eats
Gelare
Nov 9 2007, 03:59 PM
QUOTE (eidolon) |
Gelare and mfb:
Maybe I'd see what you're meaning a little more clearly if you gave a game example of when a sammy is just as effective as a hacker? Are you saying what I think you're saying, which is:
Okay, a Sam has a decent commlink, and is running a few programs. He has dumped a few points into hacking. So he needs to hack into node X, and he needs 4 hits. Since he is rolling skill+program, he has just as much chance of success as a "dedicated" hacker.
That's it, right?
I can see how the situation could come up with the skill+program that the rules use, but apparently it just hasn't been a problem for me. (Again, I expect this is because my sam players never want to be hackers or they would play one; I just don't have the experience with the issue.)
If that's the case, isn't there already a house rule that addresses the problem? The attribute+skill and can only do it with a program, and only get hits up to...is it skill or attribute?
So why would such a major system overhaul be needed when a simply one line house rule exists?
K, sorry, I'm responding as I read through, so
QUOTE (Gelare) | More importantly, it does not mean "someone with no training as a hacker whatsoever, but who bought a commlink with some shiny new SOTA programs on it". |
It looks like that's exactly your issue. I can see that, but again, easy house rule, no?
|
What you're describing is the script kiddie phenomenon (if I read your post correctly), and that is one of my problems with the Matrix, but not my only problem. I am of the firm opinion that someone who wants to play a hacker should have a lot of options
to play a hacker. Not to play a hacker and a sammie. Not to play a hacker and a mage. What do I mean by this? Let me clarify:
A sammie can go on playing forever, accumulating money to make his less-than-half-human body even more tricked out with betaware and new SOTA gear and whatever. Furthermore, it is possible to mix and match the cyber and bioware in the BBB and Augmentation to make lots of exciting and different (that word is important) characters. I think that's awesome. Similarly, mages just have staggering options as characters that they can go on enhancing with karma forever. I don't think I need to spell that out for anyone.
A hacker takes four ranks in each of two electronics-related skill groups, and spends maybe 20 BP on a truly SOTA, fully-loaded commlink. That is 100 BP. By spending this 100 BP, you have now reached pretty well near the absolute pinnacle of doing what you do. I don't mean that you're just an awesome hacker (though you are), but you are actually near
the best hacker the rules allow. Sure, you can go get yourself cybered up, improve your marksmanship, but you can never get better at hacking. Seeing as the hacker is and ought to be a fundamental character type, I find that to be awful. For this reason, I like the set of house rules that Frank has put forth, which allow a hacker much more variety than two skill groups and a commlink.
On a side note, I'm pretty sure myself and mfb have different (though not contradictory) beefs with the system, and some people decided to lump us together for reasons I won't speculate on. Sorry man, didn't mean to get you dragged into this.
eidolon
Nov 9 2007, 04:26 PM
Yup, script kiddie. Thanks for the clarification too.
Sorry for the lumping.
I can definitely see your point, but I guess to me there's so much more to each character than the numbers and gear that it just doesn't bother me. I'm not saying that it's not to you, I'm just saying that's where I'm coming from (well part of it).
And take the sammy, with his "options". Tell me that once the players (well, the ones that take "the best build) figure out the "best" stuff to get, they aren't playing the same stat sheet with a different name every time you slide up to the table. Same gear at the start, same gear 10 runs in.
I just see it more as a problem of the people playing the game and not of the game, is all. And I don't mean that you're wrong for wanting to solve your problems for your games, or that that's a bad thing. Hell, "problem" is the wrong word.
hyzmarca
Nov 9 2007, 04:49 PM
QUOTE (mfb @ Nov 9 2007, 03:38 AM) |
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) | Then I have no idea what your concern is as, since you can't distinguish between a dedicated hacker and a hobbyist hacker beyond labeling them as such, there really isn't a difference between them beyond how crummy you build them. |
part of it is attitude. the bigger part of it, though, is the amount of resources (skill points, attributes, gear) that the character has dedicated to hacking.
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) | That said, all the fluff in the world is moot since the Second Crash. |
incorrect. the fluff in SR4 is relevant, and the fluff in SR4 indicates that dedicated hackers remain viable shadowrunners. the rules disagree. that's a problem, to me.
your lousy astral mage is a bad example. he can't do the magic-related things that a shadowrunner mage should be able to do. a dedicated hacker can do all of the Matrix-related things that his team needs--but the fact that he's really, really good at them doesn't help his team as much as if he were only okay at them, and spent more time learning to fight. it's like being a mage and finding out that you really only need 3 points in one magical skill and 3 points of magic rating to complete almost all of your team's magic-related tasks. the dedicated mage with 5 points in one magical skill, 4 points in three other magical skills, and 6 magic--he's gonna feel kinda useless.
|
There are two ways to handle this, really. If you want dedicated deckers to be powerful then you can either make it cost prohibitive for other character types to dabble, as is the case with magic and technomancy and as was formerly the case with rigging and decking, or you can make decking useful during combat. This does not necessarily mean that it should be useful in combat, but that it should be useful enough that there is a real dilemma about choosing to crack a node or choosing to shoot back at the person who is trying to kill you. This can be accomplished by actually using terrain and making security movements more time-sensitive. The decker opens and closes, he locks and unlocks, he controls the maze, people. And a decker who can do that during combat doesn't have to shoot a foe, he can simply lock a door so that the foe can never reach him.
Moon-Hawk
Nov 9 2007, 05:12 PM
QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ Nov 8 2007, 04:35 PM) | It's listening to waves that come from the brain |
"Brain waves" are not waves in any meaningful sense. The brain does not produce electromagnetic radiation except insofar as the movement of ions may induce currents. Note that muscles and nerves, among other things, also involve moving ions. In short, there is no signal in any meaningful sense emitted from the brain.
|
First let me clarify something from my very long post. We're talking about two different waves here. Usually when people talk about "brain waves" they're talking about the alpha waves and the beta waves, etc. which sweep through the brain at large on the order of a few Hz. Those don't really carry much useful information in that state. You can tell if someone is calm, sleeping, alert, etc, but certainly not what they're thinking, any more than you can tell what one person in a baseball stadium is saying by watching the crowd do "the wave".
But as you say, when nerves fire, ions do move, and a charged particle in motion generates electromagnetic radiation. (these being the waves I was talking about) And of course, when you have billions of these happening together, they tend to make patterns and listening to them all together give you the first type of brain waves. In order for a trode net to figure out what each individual neuron is doing, it has to be sensitive enough to pick up not only the waves from that neuron, but also be a sufficiently complex array that it can distinguish the waves generated by that neuron from the similar waves being generated by every other neuron at the same time. That's where the problem gets tricky.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
This almost got lost in the sea of Doctor Funkenstein's spam attack on this thread. For that I apologize, since this was in many ways the last on-topic post, I should have gotten to it a long time ago. Which is to say yesterday. |
No problem. I just want to say again that while I seem to be writing an awful lot on this one tiny point, overall I really like your rules, and I appreciate all the people who are civilly trying to exchange information and not trying to "win" anything. So don't take any of this as flaming. I'm just having fun exchanging information. Bear with me, I have suggestions at the end of all this.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
In Shadowrun 4th edition you can connect to the wireless matrix with "synthskin" (Augmentation) which you can put on your hands, or your feet. Anywhere you want really. And that stuff sets up a connection with your brain and you can imbed transmitters into it in order to increase the original signal range of the stuff (3 meters) to whatever you need to get your PAN and hacking groove on. In the case of Trolls, that Synthskin can indeed be about 3 meters away from the head, which indicates to me that the brain is treated as having a Signal of 0 (high density signal transmission range of 3 meters). |
I assumed that the synthskin on your hands acting as an antenna is connected to your brain via conventional wired DNI. Otherwise why bother connecting it to your body at all? If it's actually communicating wirelessly with your brain there's no reason for it to be synthskin, it should be synth-piece-of-stuff-in-my-pocket, or synth-thing-on-the-desk-over-there. Synthskin is required to be in your body.
In short, I don't agree with you about exactly how synthskin works, although in the interest of full disclosure I'm not looking at my copy of Augmentation right now, so there's an upper bound on how insistent I can be at the moment. Although even if the book does explicitly and unambiguously say it works the way you say it does, I plan to house rule it to working the way I say it does.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
A Drone does not need to be able to send information back to its controller to receive instructions. And there's no real reason to believe that a human brain needs to be able to send information back in order to be destructively interfered with. |
You have a good point here. I agree that you can trigger events in a person's brain without listening to it, i.e. one-way communication. I agree that you can do so by selectively tweaking neurons, rather than the whole brain (which as I've insisted many times, is no longer brain hacking but more of a ray gun). However, let me point out that in terms of the complexity of managing the antenna array, an array capable of doing one can do the other. It's one of those fundamental electromagnetics thing. Now for clarity, let me point out that even with the given antenna array, outgoing communications would still be easier, but that's because of difficulties in constructing a receiver (which is not the antenna) with a good enough signal-to-noise ratio to actually be able to dig out the signal. But like you said, we don't really have to worry about the receiver, we're transmitting here, and that really is an easier problem, just not due to the antenna array. In short, you're absolutely right about this.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
As is, an Action Potential is invoked with the shift of 15 milivolts at any point in the Axon. And if the right (wrong) seven neurons go off at the same time and epileptic event occurs. |
I agree. But the trick is to trigger the action potential in those seven neurons and no others. Or in whatever specific neurons you choose and no others. (or at least, very few others) Just hitting a brain with a strong enough blast of emag radiation will fire action potentials, no doubt. It absolutely will. It's really not difficult at all, if you're not concerned about the health of your target, which, fortunately, we're not in this example. But that's a trivial problem, and also falls in my definition of a ray-gun. It's not exciting the action potential that's the problem, not at all. That part is relatively easy. It's exciting the action potential exactly where you want it and no where else (much) in the brain that's the really, really, phenomenally difficult part.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
I'm willing to go even more inefficient than that. Heck, modern Action Potential Stimulation therapy uses as many as forty volts, and I'm willing to be even that inefficient if I'm bringing an opponent to his knees. |
I agree 100%. Getting enough power is not the problem at all. Accomplishing the desired goal without hitting the brain with too much power is more of a problem, because too much power just makes it a ray-gun, which I've said many times is a trivial invention.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
The thing is that directional signal strength does not fall off with the square of the distance. It falls off only with shielding. The only thing which counts in a directional model is the shielding provided by the atmosphere. A non-trivial concern certainly, but not a technically infeasible one. |
You are correct about this. Mostly. If it's directional like a laser is directional, you're totally right. Arrays, even those with extreme directionality, still fall off due to more than shielding because they're made up of multiple antennas which are not as directional as the array, that's part of the point of making them into an array in the first place. Since we're obviously talking about something which is electronically steerable (since it can be aimed by changing the individual signal strength and phase of each element, rather than by being physically aimed with an exotic weapon skill) it's not a laser, so it is still going to fall off with more than just shielding, because it's the interfernce pattern which is directional, not the individual antennas. Otherwise it can't adapt to movement, reconfiguration, or different brains. It's a complicated problem, and it sounds like we both understand it well enough and we're just getting hung up on each other's approximations, so I'm not going to go crazy here. But yeah, extremely directional arrays don't fall off terribly quickly. This is true.
But, the problem here is that whether it's an array or a laser of whatever, if it's highly directional like that you're going to be activating neurons in a beam; a line of them through their brain. Ray-gun. You eliminate this in one of two ways. 1) You play with the waveform such that it only peaks where you want it to and very few other places. This gets harder and harder with shorter wavelengths. Can we use longer wavelengths? Not really, if we're going to have single-neuron resolution we need waves about that small. Larger waves
could interfere cleverly to make sub-wavelength peaks along the direction of travel, but you'd still be exciting other neurons next-to and above/below the beam (orthogonal to the direction of beam travel), so especially in the directional-beam case, we're absolutely commited to using a wavelength on the order of magnitude of neuron size, or smaller. And this wave which we're sending and affects only specific neurons along a path can't be sent by a single transmitter, because we can't do this trick with a single transmitter; that wave (even if it's the right shape) will still be propagating forward and do it's thing to everything in it's path. We need a standing wave, and that means interference, and that means we're right back to needing an array. Which sort of morphs me into point 2), you use an array.
And this brings me back to an old, old point, that if you have a device (array) of size X which can accomplish this feat at distance Y, then at distance 2*Y the device needs to be size (at least) 2*X. I'm assuming that trode nets are approximately the size they need to be, or else they'd be smaller. If they could easily make them the size of a dime they would, and it would be the trode-patch. But they're bigger. At a distance of a few inches, they need to be the size they are, so at longer distances they need to be bigger.
To sum up: here are some things that would make me fine with distant trodes:
1) Incorporate magic. As soon as there's a mind-probe focus involved in the process, all my arguments vanish in a puff of smoke.
2) Technomancers: see magic.
3) Large, specialized equipment. Much much larger than a trode net, and with limited range.
4) Small, extremely expensive equipment. I could see the special brain-hacking antenna existing if it cost many orders of magnitude more than a trode net. Make it cost a million
and I can live with it. But then you should also be able to get a 'trode net which is very very tiny and sticks to your head in a teensy little place, for approximately the same price. Which I would also be okay with. And for the record, I still think allowing it is a huge concession, but it's at least a reasonable attempt to appease physics, and that's enough for me.
***this is the part where I really start making helpful suggestions instead of just bitching***5) Limit the effects. If you want a program which simply tunes one or more nearby antennas to excite action potentials in a chosen brain, causing some generic bad things to happen, I'm totally okay with that. I can even live with that amount of power coming from a commlink antenna, but I wouldn't call it brain hacking, and you couldn't do anything complex like inserting ideas or brainwashing. But making someone pass out, or have a seizure? I have no problem with that. I just have a problem with calling it brain hacking, 'cause it really is more of a ray-gun. Screwing with brains at a distance-okay. 'Trodes at a distance-bad. I have no problem with "black-hammer"ing a naked brain at a distance (although I would lobby for it being a different program entirely). It's the other (more precise) functions of trodes that I have a problem with working over such long distances. I think this is probably the best solution right here. This still forces you to need a commlink to defend yourself. Your friendly firewall could monitor your brain and the airwaves and notice these incoming bad waves and try to cancel them out or reconfigure your brain or blah blah technobabble I don't care. Having even a rating 1 firewall would be a better defense than having none at all, which as I understand it is your desired goal, but I feel that taking out the other abilities is more consistent with the gameworld as well as with physics. I would suggest that the range of the attack be based on the signal strength. I'd say use signal (strength - 4) (or some other number, whatever looks good) and consult the signal range table with the new modified rating (if still positive) and that's the range of the brain-fry. Your commlink might not have the range, but the hijacked transmitter nearby might. That just gives you your threshold to make action potentials happen, but I'd leave the actual damage based on program rating, since a better program can make more destructive waveforms or something like that.
Other than that, I have no issues.
Geez, sorry about another super-long post.
Eurotroll
Nov 9 2007, 05:25 PM
I think I need a new smiley here: the "I agree with Moon-Hawk" smiley.
Cheops
Nov 9 2007, 06:37 PM
QUOTE (Gelare) |
What you're describing is the script kiddie phenomenon (if I read your post correctly), and that is one of my problems with the Matrix, but not my only problem. I am of the firm opinion that someone who wants to play a hacker should have a lot of options to play a hacker. Not to play a hacker and a sammie. Not to play a hacker and a mage. What do I mean by this? Let me clarify:
A sammie can go on playing forever, accumulating money to make his less-than-half-human body even more tricked out with betaware and new SOTA gear and whatever. Furthermore, it is possible to mix and match the cyber and bioware in the BBB and Augmentation to make lots of exciting and different (that word is important) characters. I think that's awesome. Similarly, mages just have staggering options as characters that they can go on enhancing with karma forever. I don't think I need to spell that out for anyone.
A hacker takes four ranks in each of two electronics-related skill groups, and spends maybe 20 BP on a truly SOTA, fully-loaded commlink. That is 100 BP. By spending this 100 BP, you have now reached pretty well near the absolute pinnacle of doing what you do. I don't mean that you're just an awesome hacker (though you are), but you are actually near the best hacker the rules allow. Sure, you can go get yourself cybered up, improve your marksmanship, but you can never get better at hacking. Seeing as the hacker is and ought to be a fundamental character type, I find that to be awful. For this reason, I like the set of house rules that Frank has put forth, which allow a hacker much more variety than two skill groups and a commlink.
On a side note, I'm pretty sure myself and mfb have different (though not contradictory) beefs with the system, and some people decided to lump us together for reasons I won't speculate on. Sorry man, didn't mean to get you dragged into this. |
DISCLAIMER: This is not directed at you personally Gelare, you're just the person on this page who is saying this stuff so that's why you got quoted. This is also representative of how I run my game and might not be the way other people run their games because my group has no problems with the RAW compared to what other people seem to have.
1) First off, a Script Kiddie |= 400 BP. A Shadowrunner does but not a Script Kiddie.
2) A Script Kiddie has <= 2 points in any skill because at 3 you are considered Professional.
3) A dedicated hacker is so much more than his Active Skills/Programs. It is also the way he interacts with the Matrix and his Knowledge Skills.
eg. A Script Kiddie relies entirely on his Matrix Perception to ID an IC whereas a Dedicated Hacker uses MP + his complimentary knowledge skill Security IC.
4) Dedicated hackers have as many different ways to differentiate themselves from each other as do Street Sams. You took the example of maxing skill groups at 4. Well that's not the only option that you can take at character creation and still be dedicated. What you described is a GENERALIST.
Look at the difference between someone who has EW 5, Computer 5 and Codeslinger (Intercept Wireless Traffic) versus another dedicated hacker that has Hacking 6 and Codeslinger (Matrix Infiltration). The first is very good at finding and intercepting signals and then learning everything there is to know about them. He's a good phone tapper. The second is the bomb at getting into systems undetected. Both of them will also be moderately good at everything else as Dedicated Hackers but they are specialized in 2 different areas.
Another thing that differentiates a Good Hacker from just another cannon fodder hacker is Aptitudes.
But, as I said at the top of the page that is just how I see the RAW, and I obviously fall into the category of those who feel it doesn't need change, just for people to change their interpretation of it.
Lagomorph
Nov 9 2007, 07:26 PM
Perhaps setting up some more concrete definitions would be helpful in this discussion. Since there seems to be a lot of issue between dedicated hacker vs hobbyist hacker, perhaps we can define them by the amount of build points used to create a starting character.
We'll start with the assumption that you've spent 200bp on the 8 basic attributes, how tehy're spent is irrelevant, it'll be assumed that they're spent in the way which benefits the character most.
That leaves 200bp for everything else.
If you spend 50% of those 200bp for items or skills regarding a particular archetype, you can consider that your specialty. Spending 100+ points in guns cyberware and shooting/dodging skills will make you a streetsam more than anything else that you spend points on. Same goes for magic or hacking.
Now if you spend 85% of your points for one archetype, you can consider yourself a "dedicated" specialist. This leaves 15% of your points for other basic survival skills and hobbies, but the vast majority of points have been put to one archetypal purpose.
Now, under this set of definitions, I haven't made an assumption about riggers vs hackers, so if you feel that riggers are a different archetype rather than a subset of hacking. You'll need to define that for yourself in further arguments.
In my mind though, I think that riggers have been set as a subset of hackers in 4th ed. I think that if you don't allow rigging as a subset of hacking that you may actually have difficulty macking a dedicated hacker, I'm not sure that there are enough items specifically for hacking to allow a person to spend 160bp on it. I'm sure I can be proven wrong as I don't have and haven't looked at augmentation yet.
Anyway, with that done, hopefully people can continue to discuss from a common standpoint. Thanks.
Gelare
Nov 9 2007, 08:26 PM
For people who don't like long posts, I request you skip down to @Moon-Hawk.
@eidolon: You're quite right, players do tend to gravitate to the "optimal" character choices. The problem as I see it is that no matter how you slice it, there are just a lot more options and progressions for mages and sammies - whether or not characters choose to follow them is another matter, of course. I'll admit, the fact that Unwired isn't out yet, while Street Magic and Augmentation are, almost proves my point by default and also makes it less interesting by default until Unwired does come out. Maybe Unwired will be all kinds of awesome and I won't have a problem anymore. But I think you see what I'm saying, that having a cap of 100 BP on absolute hacker-itude is lame.
QUOTE (Cheops) |
DISCLAIMER: This is not directed at you personally Gelare, you're just the person on this page who is saying this stuff so that's why you got quoted. |
Well heck, sounds like a pretty good reason to me.
@Cheops: You're right that it is possible to make specialist hackers, who are really awesome at a given thing. And yes, I admit that 100 BP isn't
quite the limit on hacking. The trouble I'm having is that Codeslinger, Aptitudes, specializations, whatever, they're ways you can improve in certain things, but there just isn't enough to improve on. Once you have Rating 6 programs, 6 ranks in those two skill groups, and the Codeslinger quality, that
really is the absolute limit on hacking. And to make matters worse, that
absolute best hacker the rules allow is only better from the generalist hacker available at chargen by 3-5 dice, depending on the task. And he's really not anymore
interesting than that generalist, chargen hacker. Three more dice , or even five, does not give me a sufficient feeling of awesome that I feel the master of his craft should have.
Don't get me wrong though, if RAW works for you, by all means, enjoy.
QUOTE (Lagomorph) |
I think that if you don't allow rigging as a subset of hacking that you may actually have difficulty macking a dedicated hacker, I'm not sure that there are enough items specifically for hacking to allow a person to spend 160bp on it. |
Yep, my point exactly. There's nothing wrong with playing a rigger of course, but I don't want to, and that being the case I'd like some more options on what else I can do with my mad computering skillz.
Last but, to be honest, most important, and if anyone's rushing to debate me on the above points, I'd rather you read this first...
@Moon-Hawk
Again, good stuff. I mostly agree with your point #5, and I'm actually right now looking over Frank's rules to see how we could actually fix this. Please hold.
Here are the "brain-hacking" programs in all their glory:
Brain Scan: View someone's memories. Requires signal range, line of sight, and some time. Fix: The person has to be hooked up to something that can transmit data back to you. Change the range to handshake if you think you can justify the hacker controlling the target's commlink as part of this program, or to be on the safe side, make it connection. Done.
Find Mind: Tells you if there are people around. Requires signal range. Therefore, it presumably tells you if there is anyone in range of the signal. Fix: This supposedly works by detecting perturbations in the wireless world around you. That's fine. No fix required.
Black Hammer: I will Black Hammer your mom. For no reason. Requires signal range and line of sight. Fix: We do not need feedback from the brain in order to instruct it to digest the pancreas. No fix required.
Jingle: Implant a suggestion in the target's mind. Requires a connection to the target. Fix: We have a connection, so we have back and forth communication of the type that is and ought to be required to use nuanced mental programs. No fix required.
Seize: Causes the target to have a seizure. Requires signal range and line of sight. Fix: See Black Hammer, except this program is even more limited. Definitely no fix required.
Peristalsis: Causes the target to poop his pants. Requires signal range. Fix: This seems a lot like Seize and Black Hammer. Therefore, change it to require line of sight as well as signal range. Done.
Taxman: I honestly am unsure as to what this does and how it works on a human brain. Fix: Judgment postponed.
For sake of completeness, here are the brain-hacking Technomancer complex forms. It's worth noting that whereas hackers are supposed to be all technology-oriented, Technomancers actually do use magic which precludes any discussion of technological feasibility. You can actually explain any weird stuff technomancers can do by going, "But look, it's magic!" And that's fine. Remember, in Shadowrun the Matrix is populated by sentient AIs, self-aware sprites, and a who-knows-what Deep Resonance that shouldn't exist if technology had a thing to do with reality. That said:
Death Note: Man goto end. Sucks to be that guy. Requires signal range and line of sight. Fix: See Black Hammer. No fix required.
Test Pattern: Creates an illusion in the mind of everyone around. Requires signal range and line of sight to all targets. Fix: For the hacker this would be iffy, but as mentioned above, the technomancer has no need to pay attention to the laws of reality. No fix required.
Transfigure: I've underlined this because this really is the ultimate brain-hack. This is a technomancer-only complex form. It requires signal range and line of sight to the target. It takes one hour to use. If the target has any biofeedback filter or firewall active at all, this will fail. In that hour, you completely overwrite the target's brain. The whole thing. Memories, values, knowledge, whatever. Yowza. Fix: This is hardcore. Like, really freaking hardcore. This right here is why technomancers are feared. Since this is so hardcore, the fix is left up to the GM. Requiring connection range would be fine, requiring a range within Signal 0 would be fine, requiring an unconscious target would be fine, banning it outright would be fine. Pick your favorite or make your own.
I feel like this thread at times has been the blind leading the blind, so I wanted to put in some relevant parts of the rules so we all know exactly what we're talking about. Moon-Hawk, does that stuff sit well with you?
QUOTE (HappyDaze) |
You'll be 80% of the full-on hyper-specialized hacker, but you'll also have a half-dozen other uses. As a shadowrunner, this should be more appealing... |
no, it should not necessarily be more appealing, any more than it's necessarily more appealing to play a mage/street sam hybrid versus playing a dedicated street sam or mage. if someone wants to play a dedicated hacker (not overspecialized into utter uselessness, just focused much more heavily on hacking than anything else, since people can't seem to keep these arguments straight), that should be a viable option. every other archtype is a viable option; hackers should be too.
QUOTE (HappyDaze) |
The fluff also says that adepts can be as strong and quick as cyber. Look at how inefficient Improved Physical Attribute is (especially for going aove the natural maximum) compared to the bio or cyber options. Does this mean that a 'pure' adept that takes this approach is wasting points? Yeah, it does. |
a) no it doesn't, depending on what you're trying to build, and b) the fact that tiny discrepancies exist in the system does not make huge discrepancies okay.
Moon-Hawk
Nov 9 2007, 08:34 PM
QUOTE (Gelare) |
I feel like this thread at times has been the blind leading the blind, so I wanted to put in some relevant parts of the rules so we all know exactly what we're talking about. Moon-Hawk, does that stuff sit well with you? |
Yeah. Yeah, actually, it does. I mean, I'm not going over it in super-detail and referencing back to all the other rules about connection range, etc, but in general this sits a lot better with me. I find these effects to be more reasonably pseudo-realistic, while still upholding one of Frank's core ideas; that Firewall 1 is, at least in many ways, safer than no Firewall at all.
I like it.
Gelare
Nov 9 2007, 08:44 PM
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ Nov 9 2007, 03:34 PM) |
QUOTE (Gelare @ Nov 9 2007, 03:26 PM) | I feel like this thread at times has been the blind leading the blind, so I wanted to put in some relevant parts of the rules so we all know exactly what we're talking about. Moon-Hawk, does that stuff sit well with you? |
Yeah. Yeah, actually, it does. I mean, I'm not going over it in super-detail and referencing back to all the other rules about connection range, etc, but in general this sits a lot better with me. I find these effects to be more reasonably pseudo-realistic, while still upholding one of Frank's core ideas; that Firewall 1 is, at least in many ways, safer than no Firewall at all. I like it.
|
I need a thumbs up smiley.
What about other people? There are the brain-hacking rules in most of their glory, reasonably clearly defined. What do you think of them now? For your convenience, I'll explain the signal ranges.
Signal: The target has to be within range of your signal. Their signal, or whether or not they have one, is irrelevant.
Handshake: They must be in range of your signal and you must be in range of their signal. I'm pretty sure none of the brain-hacking programs or complex forms have this as their range.
Connection: You have an open connection to them. Probably one they don't want there. That's why you're a hacker.
Line of Sight: Duh.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
A Drone does not need to be able to send information back to its controller to receive instructions. And there's no real reason to believe that a human brain needs to be able to send information back in order to be destructively interfered with. |
which brings us back to the 'death rays from space' issue. sending commands to multiple drones is possible (or at least it should be, if it isn't in SR4), therefore sending heart attack signals to multiple brains is possible... and therefore wiping out all unprotected vertebrate life on earth is possible for one guy in a few hours.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
In Shadowrun 4th edition you can connect to the wireless matrix with "synthskin" (Augmentation) which you can put on your hands, or your feet. |
where? a text search for synthskin in Augmentation gives only one result, where it's talking about cosmetic cyber; a search for synthetic skin gives four results--one in an in-character discussion about the dehumanizing effects of cyber, one in the disguise cyberware entry, and two in the penile implant entry.
Moon-Hawk
Nov 9 2007, 08:52 PM
Like I said before, the only problem I had before was trode functionality at a distance. Setting your commlink's antenna to deep fry and zapping someone's neurons into submission is cool. Although I still say the range that you can do that should be much shorter than your normal communication range, simply because I think brain zapping is a high-power application than communication, but considering their data rates their communication power could be much higher than I'm assuming, so I won't argue it.
I mean, I still haven't decided if I want to actually adopt these rules, but I no longer object to any part of them, in principle.
Moon-Hawk
Nov 9 2007, 08:54 PM
QUOTE (mfb) |
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) | A Drone does not need to be able to send information back to its controller to receive instructions. And there's no real reason to believe that a human brain needs to be able to send information back in order to be destructively interfered with. |
which brings us back to the 'death rays from space' issue. sending commands to multiple drones is possible (or at least it should be, if it isn't in SR4), therefore sending heart attack signals to multiple brains is possible... and therefore wiping out all unprotected vertebrate life on earth is possible for one guy in a few hours.
|
This is one of the reasons I advocate shortening ranges for brain frying. If the brain-frying range is shorter than the normal signal range, you can't kill everyone from space with existing satellites. You would AT LEAST need a special MacGuffin sattellite, and it's easy enough to rule that the required signal strength is unattainably high.
see my edited post, above. i can't find what Frank's talking about, in Augmentation.
unless maybe he's talking about smartskin and altskin? smartkin is nanocyberware, and uses DNI just like any other piece of 'ware. DNI != psychic brainwaves controlling your 'ware. altskin specifically connects to the user's PAN, not his brain.
tyweise
Nov 9 2007, 09:14 PM
Why is LOS required? (Other than game balance.)
It seems like if you have to focus your BrainRay mojo at a target you can see, and you're not also going to BrainRay anyone else in the vicinity, then you are point-click-shoot firing a 'gun' of sorts at someone. Do targets get to dodge these focused CancerWave Oven beams of e-hate?
that's another problem. since you can't read the brain you're 'hacking', there's no skill involved in the hack. you just pump out a certain signal and people fall over dead. assuming that you're pumping it out on some sort of limited-range beam, there's really no reason not to slap it into a gun-shaped commlink and put a trigger on it. hackers are still useless.
Moon-Hawk
Nov 9 2007, 09:24 PM
QUOTE (mfb) |
that's another problem. since you can't read the brain you're 'hacking', there's no skill involved in the hack. you just pump out a certain signal and people fall over dead. assuming that you're pumping it out on some sort of limited-range beam, there's really no reason not to slap it into a gun-shaped commlink and put a trigger on it. hackers are still useless. |
Which is why I've been referring to it as a ray-gun all along. Whether you have to aim it or not, it's not really "hacking" anymore. But it IS more feasible to invent. You have a point.
Also:
QUOTE (tyweise) |
focused CancerWave Oven beams of e-hate |
Awesome.
Gelare
Nov 9 2007, 09:34 PM
QUOTE (tyweise) |
Why is LOS required? (Other than game balance.)
It seems like if you have to focus your BrainRay mojo at a target you can see, and you're not also going to BrainRay anyone else in the vicinity, then you are point-click-shoot firing a 'gun' of sorts at someone. Do targets get to dodge these focused CancerWave Oven beams of e-hate? |
Line of sight is required because it just makes sense. If you want to hit someone with a Black Hammer, you have to know where they are. If you want to hit someone with a manabolt you also have to know where they are. You can't just pipe out "Black Hammer Remix" on all frequencies to everyone within signal range, you actually have to have a target. (Why you can't do that is mfb's question, and a very valid one, and one I would much rather leave to Frank.)
As for whether you can dodge a black hammer, allow me to post some source material, because knowledge is power! Note: When it says "affected as normal by Signal Defense", it means your hacker buddy is doing the equivalent of what your mage buddy does when he gives you Counterspelling protection. In the black hammer case, that would make your initial defense pool Firewall+Signal Defense (if any), and your soak pool is Willpower+Biofeedback Filter.
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
Using an Attack Program involves rolling Logic + Cybercombat, using the target's Firewall as a defense pool. A character may add their own Cybercombat skill to their defense pool against programming with a range of C. Programming with a range of S or H is affected as normal by Signal Defense. If an Attack Program is soaked, a B program is soaked by Willpower and a D program is soaked by System.
Black Hammer Type: B Range: S (LOS) Time: CA An improper neural impulse can digest a pancreas, terminate breathing, or stop a heart, which is exactly what Black Hammer does. If a character is affected by Black Hammer, she uses Willpower (Biofeedback Filter bonuses apply) to resist physical damage equal to the Rating of the attack plus the net hits. Black Hammer is incapable of doing damage beyond that which is necessary to completely fill in the condition monitor. Any excess damage is lost (stoppage of internal organ function is bad, but it's not "heads exploding" bad). |
Logic + Cybercombat 15 dice. Proper spec. 17dice
Against Firewall 6 thats about 3 net hits. Using black hammer 6, soak about 9 boxes of damage with willpower alone. All have to be hackers, they do at least have do have Cybercombat down pat!
I do think we have larger problems than brainhacking.
eidolon
Nov 9 2007, 10:21 PM
I'd just like to say that regardless of my opinion of using it in a game, the text:
I will Black Hammer your mom. For no reason.still cracks me the hell up.
Synner
Nov 9 2007, 10:31 PM
QUOTE (mfb @ Nov 9 2007, 08:55 PM) |
see my edited post, above. i can't find what Frank's talking about, in Augmentation.
unless maybe he's talking about smartskin and altskin? smartkin is nanocyberware, and uses DNI just like any other piece of 'ware. DNI != psychic brainwaves controlling your 'ware. altskin specifically connects to the user's PAN, not his brain. |
For the record mfb is correct.
Synthskin links to a cyberlimb's nanosensors and through DNI to the brain.
Dermal sheaths are controlled via a PAN.
Though the writeup doesn't specify, as nanotech, smartskin recieves on/off commands via DNI or PAN.
Altskin is a full-body nanopaste suit/skin that connects to your PAN via integral nano-circuitry (though it would be easy enough to include trodes in the package).
FrankTrollman
Nov 9 2007, 11:00 PM
Note: as a good resident of Czech Republic I have consmed more than a liter of Beer tonight. Some parts of tirade may make less sense than others.
First off: Moon Hawk, I genuinely don't see what's so special about a brain as opposed to a computer chip. It just sits there and processes information. Neither one is
designed to be read at a distance or interface with a wireless transmitter. So either you accept that late 21st century technology has figured ot a way to force an interface, or it has not.
Figured Out: People can do things to your computer or your brain. Firewalls and IC become a necessary part of life, and air gaps become meaningless. Hackers run into enemy componds to wirelessly interface with information storage units.
Still have not figured it out: Then every stage of the Matrix carries with it the implicit fact that the defender, and not the attacker, has to choose to play the game. That's a very difficult sell because being the defender in any situation totally sucks. You don't actually get anything for winning as the defender, you jst don't lose. So whatever entices characters (S-K included) to participate at each level of the Matrix (and thus play as the defender) has to exceed the bilt in penalty of having any chance at all of losing. The current SR4 rules don't do that - even a casual reading of character sheets in this very forum shows us that in actual play real characters simply operate with the wireless turned off.
QUOTE (Moon Hawk) |
Limit the effects. If you want a program which simply tunes one or more nearby antennas to excite action potentials in a chosen brain, causing some generic bad things to happen, I'm totally okay with that. I can even live with that amount of power coming from a commlink antenna, but I wouldn't call it brain hacking, and you couldn't do anything complex like inserting ideas or brainwashing. But making someone pass out, or have a seizure? I have no problem with that. I just have a problem with calling it brain hacking |
What? I didn't even coin the phrase "brain hacking". I don't actually care what you call it. It's bypassing Handshake range by using Signal ranged effects which take longer to use and often have LOS requirements. Whether the target is a microchip that doesn't have an antenna of its own or a human brain is completely irrelevent. Both are just information processing units in 2071.
QUOTE (Moon Hawk) |
I'd say use signal (strength - 4) (or some other number, whatever looks good) and consult the signal range table with the new modified rating (if still positive) and that's the range of the brain-fry. |
Why? Signal ranges are already incredibly short. Commlinks in the book go from 100m at the low end to 4,000m for the top models. A gsm cell phone in 2007 goes out to 20,000m.
That's what the rule about High Density Signal and Low Density Signal is all about. If what you're doing is just sending emails and phone calls like an early 21st century cell phone - the signal is increased by 2. So your wicked hot Transys can make a phone call out to 40km - which is actually still not that impressive even by modern standards.
The signal ranges of the basic book are so horrendously tiny that I'm assuming that they are already being reduced down to whatever range they can do weird signal management bullshit to induce action potentials in brains and image the activities on a hard drive.
-Frank
Spike
Nov 9 2007, 11:01 PM
All the stuff out there in the land of creative people (read:Literature) and this is the only viable way to read how near total connectivity and massive levels of processing power MUST work: Making magic hackers who throw 'brainhack' spells at people, just because of some weird metagame requirement to make hackers 'viable just like mages'?
This shit trips me out, I don't need no stinkin' drugs man, just a heap dose of Franktrollman and legion.
I say that knowing he'll take exception to it, but then refuse to explain to me what exactly I am not getting about his ideas... using small words 'cause I'm dumb that way. We've done that dance before.
There was a book I read quite a few years back, and I wish to bog that I had the name of it, or the author, but cest le vie or whatever.
Anyway, plot summation: Everyone is fully wired, alla time. PANS if you will, with interface headset/goggly thingies. Main Girl wakes up one day and her shit is broke. She can't ride the bus to work, can't get in any building, people don't even talk to her no more. She can't even get a replacement 'Commlink'... though later it turns out there is a resistance of 'invisibles' who aren't PANed to hell and back, and some other wierds shit. Sure, its missing wide spread hacking (something to do with AI's, as I recall....) and the like, but its a reasonable look at the choice you make to be 'unhackable' by going unwired. Its not shadowrun, but if my duck ain't on fire, it's relevant.
Giving hackers magic spell brainhacking is a step around the looney bin.
That said, Caveat Time: GitS has brain hacking, but Shirow postulates a certain ubiquity of brainwiring, and people that aren't wired are simply immune... in fact one guy is 'on the team' mostly for that reason. That doesn't mean its 'magic zappy powers for hackers', that seems to be the main idea here. Of course, also missing seems to be a reliance on dedicated hacker archetypes, just about anyone that does 'shadowrunny stuff' seems to be part hacker and part something else, and they do just fine. Not that GitS is my go-to source for Shadowrun...
Fortune
Nov 9 2007, 11:18 PM
QUOTE (Gelare @ Nov 10 2007, 01:59 AM) |
A hacker takes four ranks in each of two electronics-related skill groups, and spends maybe 20 BP on a truly SOTA, fully-loaded commlink. That is 100 BP. By spending this 100 BP, you have now reached pretty well near the absolute pinnacle of doing what you do. I don't mean that you're just an awesome hacker (though you are), but you are actually near the best hacker the rules allow. Sure, you can go get yourself cybered up, improve your marksmanship, but you can never get better at hacking. Seeing as the hacker is and ought to be a fundamental character type, I find that to be awful. |
A dedicated Face has a total of only 5 Skills (one Group plus Intimidation) to max out before he has reached the pinnacle of his chosen field. Seems he's even worse off then the Hacker. Every single thing that you said about the Hacker could also be said about the Face. Why aren't you as concerned about that 'class'?
Let's take a Sammy. A Sammy kills things, according to you, in the same way that a Hacker hacks things. Well, he only has 2 Skills Groups to max out before he's pretty much covered his specialty as far as he can take it in the same way as your Hacker character has in his. Sure there are other skills that might be needed, but they would be needed by pretty much any other shadowrunner as well (unless they had another means around the skill). Sure there are other non-role-critical skills to take, but they are available to everyone else as well (the non-magical ones at least). I think you are seeing a problem where there isn't one.
Mercer
Nov 10 2007, 01:36 AM
I had a similar thought today when I was leaving my bank (no point there, just where I was when I thought it). It seems like a hacker can buy a few skills and a few choice bits of uberware, and encroach on the sammie's niche. Why aren't we protecting the sammie?
It seems to me that if a hacker ever wants to leave his basement, or if a rigger ever wants to leave his van, they're going to have to "encroach on the samurai's niche". That is, they're going to have to be at least decent at physical world stuff in order not to be splattered by the first hard look from a ganger. This isn't a weakness of the hacker so much as the way the system is (currently) designed.
That isn't to say a hacker who isn't competent at physical combat is a bad character; I see it as an interesting tactical and rp'ing challenge. As long as the other players aren't pulling their hair out too much because they keep having to bail you out of fistfights with angry 9-year olds. I mean, sometimes its fun to play hard-nosed, ice-water for blood, steely-eyed killers, and sometimes its fun to play screwballs who probably shouldn't be shadowrunning but are giving it their best shot (ala Mystery Men, The Specials, Bad News Bears, and so on). Sometimes its fun to do both (I think Sneakers and Serenity would qualify here).
But playstyles aside, it seems odd to me to write in brainhacking as a way to say, "I'm choosing to make a character who isn't particularly good at physical combat, but who is a god at hacking. Also, he should be able to use hacking to be a god at physical combat." --Edit: I know that's not exactly what you guys are arguing for, but balance-wise that's where it seems to point.--
Also, it would seem to me that if hackers could hack brains, and the "only" way to protect yourself was to get wired up with the stuff that the system is already designed around hackers hacking, wouldn't it make more sense for computer mundies to develop helmets, wifi nanopaste and tinfoil hats that blocked brainhacking?
Also (and this is my last "also" for today), it seems like "hacker" just means someone who hacks. If a "hacker" can brainhack to be competive in the system with a sammie, isn't a "sammie who hacks" going to be even nastier at it? (I mean, brainhacking or no, once a hacker caps out his skills, ware and tech, isn't that what he's going to be doing anyway, becoming a better sammie?)
mfb
Nov 10 2007, 02:03 AM
QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
First off: Moon Hawk, I genuinely don't see what's so special about a brain as opposed to a computer chip. It just sits there and processes information. Neither one is designed to be read at a distance or interface with a wireless transmitter. So either you accept that late 21st century technology has figured ot a way to force an interface, or it has not. |
for god's sake, that's not a yes/no question! knowing how the brain can be interfered with at a distance is not separate from knowing that it can be done at all! brains and computer chips are based on technologies that could be described as mildly divergent. the fact that one can be affected at a distance has no bearing on whether or not the other can.
i'm certain you're aware of this. but since you've said like three words regarding the how in this thread (and i've put up strong counterarguments to each of them), i was kinda hoping to get your attention.
tyweise
Nov 10 2007, 04:10 AM
QUOTE (Gelare) |
Line of sight is required because it just makes sense. If you want to hit someone with a Black Hammer, you have to know where they are. If you want to hit someone with a manabolt you also have to know where they are. You can't just pipe out "Black Hammer Remix" on all frequencies to everyone within signal range, you actually have to have a target. |
Ok, I can get how you would have to have line of sight to do things at Signal ranges, as opposed to Handshake range. You can't locate something if it can't send a signal out that can reach your detector. But if you are using line of sight to target something, then you're targeting based on physical trajectories. "I'm here, target brain is there, I have to send my NastyGram in that direction to get it there."
Manabolts work that way because they're magic. Not technology. They can go through Astral Space to get from point A to B. Anything mundane cannot do that. I don't know how a mage can say "I want to melt his face, right there. Just him. I hate that guy." and just make it happen. It's magic. He gets a free pass. I don't know how a hacker can say "I want to Blackhammer his mom, right there. Just his. I hate that guy." and just make it happen. But it's not magic; so he needs some way to single out that one guy's mom's brain. Otherwise, he's just pumping out Black Hammer Remix (club edition) which he's not. Unless he knows something about the target brain, like just what whatever it is will set it off and not the others, then he's got to be aiming it physically so only one brain is inside the BrainZooka blast.
siel
Nov 10 2007, 04:36 AM
This is my opinions at the topic. Maybe it doesn't go with the fluff or mechanic, but it is what I feel most comfortable with.
Brains can be hacked:
If a hacker can interact with a device, he can hack it. If a hacker can interact with a brain, he can hack it too.
HOWEVER
Brains do not send signals over large distance:
Brains do not transmit signals across the room. Devices like commlinks with wireless capabilities do.
Brains have their own and unique "OS":
Everyone grew up in their own special way. Just like there are Windows, Mac OS, Linux, there are as many different OS as there are people out there. Since a program that works on Mac will not always work on Windows, a 'hack' that worked on one brain will not always work on another.
Brains have built-in protection:
if it takes magic an opposed check to control someone, the same should happen with brains, with or without commlinks. Your mind should have natural defenses based on your mental stats.
Hacking requires interaction
You cannot simply send a signal and hack a system. This might happen if the system has been compromised before and you are just triggering a command. However, even the most talented hacker cannot hack without any sort of feedback. It's like trying to use your computer without the monitor on or with your eyes closed, or not even knowing whether your fingers have actually typed the proper keystrokes.
This leads to the conculsion that
*Every brain has a different OS, you must first have interaction with it before you can hack it.
*Once you have interaction, you can hack it as any device. However, the brain has its own System, Firewall, and whatever stat based on your mental attributes.
*You cannot have interaction across the room because brains cannot send signals back.
*If there's a device providing feedback like a commlink with hot sim mod, then you could be hacked. This means a commlink with hot sim mod make you more vulnerable to brain hacking from across the room.
*If your brain has been hacked before, it is possible to send signals to trigger certain pre-established commands.
*The same message to trigger a result in one brain will not work on another due to the difference in the nature of the OS.
I can see how hackers can put someone in restraints and put trode net over their head to probe and hack their brain. Hackers would still have to deal with the brain's natural defense mechanism like the subjects willpower to not give in and tell the truth and such.
It is also possible for hackers to hack people in the manner described above to create meat-drones. The runners could capture one of a security guard at a compound and compromise his mind to insert a certain code, then erasing his memory so he returns to work knowing nothing. Then the next day when the runners arrive, they could trigger that code and have that guard start shooting randomly or take out the safety for them.
But yeah, that's my take on it. I think it might actually create some interesting situation and allow hackers to do a bit more than what they are currently allowed to do.
If technology really advanced far enough in 2070 for people to hack brains from afar for whatever reason, one would think that Deus would have taken over the world already..
Cthulhudreams
Nov 10 2007, 04:40 AM
QUOTE (tyweise @ Nov 9 2007, 11:10 PM) |
Not technology. They can go through Astral Space to get from point A to B. Anything mundane cannot do that. |
Actually there is lots of speculation on how to make that work. No-one has managed to get it to work though!
Maybe they will though.
For example, people have come up with teleportation for photons, that allows you to 'teleport' a photon beam by destorying it in one location and instantly recreating it in another.
Allowing people to do that with electrons would be quite a breakthrough as the photon thing depends on quantum entaglement, but lots of people are trying to do things that allow you to act at point C from point A without passing through point B between them.
Maybe the hot new technology that frank posits is the ability to generate electrons that are entangled with other electrons allow action at a distance! Or something.
Red
Nov 10 2007, 05:15 AM
One of the key problems here is that as a cynical audience with a finite attention span, it is difficult for people to accept the idea that a massively parallel, analog organ like the brain with billions of cells, and trillions of connections that on the cell to cell level possess a randomized configuration that only conform at the macro level... is just handwaved into a wireless enabled computer.
All the headware technology in Shadowrun is based on I/O interaction with the brain. Input is supplied to existing regions of the brain like visual, audio, tactile, taste, smell, etc... cyberlimbs using parts of the lower brain that are already made to control limbs. And things like DNIs just allow the brain to learn new outputs. Even skillwires is simple copying an existing neurological pathway.
At no point in the core rule books has cyberware ever been implied to take the brain, and rework the whole organ as the axon level. First, it isn't necessary. Second, that is Singularity level technology. Was that level of technology is achieved, civilization as we understand it will disappear in short order. The most successful set of memes transmitted by a virus that exploits this technology will simply wipe out all of mankind's memetic history as it dominates the fusion of human brains and the net. Firewalls will not stop this because they only need to fail once before something like this gains enough critical mass to overwhelm all of cyberhumanity. The only reason a single meme set doesn't dominate all mankind right now is the "airgap" called the human skull and the fact that we have to actually talk to each other.
Reworking the collective axons, trillions of them, requires massive coordinated physical interference in an irregular fashion. Regions of the brain have consistant order. But axon to axon, each brain is unique like the formation of blood vessels in the face, fingerprints, or crystals in a snowflake. Intervention at that level requires, demands, physical interference. The only way to do that in a precise fashion is with nanites.
It may be possible that Deus infected all the world with a nanite cloud that built a DNI into every metahuman brain on Earth. That could make brain hacking possible. But it hasn't been mentioned. Nothing of that level has been mentioned at all.
I really don't care what has been written in the novels. They are fluff. Story. Cool stuff. I can buy magic for magic because that is what it is. But technology requires logical rigor, and precedence. And I don't see the foundation necessary for handwaving the "brain" as just another computer. In fact I think that doing so is a gross insult to the complexity of the organ in question. I find there is less cognitive dissonance in saying that the writers just fucked up. Wouldn't be the first time. After all, where are all the ork spawn overlords that should be populous in the billions range? I don't see why we should rewrite biology for that piece of lore.
As my final note: Yes, if people disconnect from the Matrix they become immune to direct attack. So what? Big deal. If your hacker has a problem with that, then invest a few meager build points into a weapon skill. There is no need to re-write the system just so that people aren't punished for overspecializing. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Or you try to make it into a nail. But sometimes you just have to recognize this, get over it, and expand your toolbox.
FrankTrollman
Nov 10 2007, 07:26 AM
QUOTE (mfb) |
i'm certain you're aware of this. but since you've said like three words regarding the how in this thread (and i've put up strong counterarguments to each of them), i was kinda hoping to get your attention. |
mfb, in the official Shadowrun storyline everyone in he world thought this was impossible twenty two years from now when an as-yet unexplained breakthrough proved the world disastrously wrong. I do not now, or ever, feel compelled to explain the math or methodologies behind the high-end physics that make the machines in a science fiction setting work.
If your story has FTL in it, why don't you make a real FTL drive in order to demonstrate the "feasability" of a fucking story?
-Frank
mfb
Nov 10 2007, 08:14 AM
so, wait. your problem with the Matrix as written is that it doesn't make sense. so you come up with this brainhacking scheme. and when someone points out that it doesn't make sense, you throw up your hands and say "well, it's science fiction! it doesn't have to make sense!"
this isn't "math or methodology", this is basic shit. signal propagation is not some kind of advanced super-science. ignoring it is exactly the kind of thing you'd shit down Synner's throat over.
FrankTrollman
Nov 10 2007, 08:45 AM
We are obviously not communicating. I don't care where Magic comes from, I don't care what nanites are made out of. And I don't care how computers "work" in 2071. Those are all abstract, because they reresent things which in 2007 we don't have.
But I do care what magic can do. Shadowrun doesn't have timestop. I care what nanites can do. Shadowrun nanites require an external power source last I checked. And I care what computers can do.
I do not care how they do it. A computer can wirelessly submit "stuff" to another computer that will hack into it. A computer can wirelessly send "stuff" that puts simsense data into another human being that will hurt or kill them. What is it sending wirelessly? How is it generating targeted impulses? I don't even pretend to care!
There are parts of the game, such as how many "megabytes" your phone has, which do not improve the game to "know". For one thing, any numbers you plug in there will almost certainly be obsolete in a few years.
---
The only thing which is important to know is how the devices interact with the world and the actions of the players. That's important to know, because we are telling a cooperative storytelling game and everyone has to be on the same page as to what the black boxes actually do. But we don't need to actually do the advanced particle physics that makes these computers work - we don't even know the advanced particle physics, that's how advanced it is.
Yes, it's comforting to look at conservation of energy restrictions and see that what we are askig of commlinks is actually well within theoretical limits. I like that, it makes me feel happy because it means that I don't also have to handwave away an energy source that would be better spent shooting X-Ray lasers at people.
But that's as far as I want or need to go. Everything else I should be able to extrapolate from the end results that are being generated by the game mechanics. If the game mechanics tell us that leaving the Matrix on gives you an extra front to defend yourself on and provides no discernable mechanical advantages in most instances - I can tell you exactly what will happen. If the game mechanics tell us that the Matrix is an extra front that you aren't protected on unles you do something about it - well I can tell you what will happen there too.
So seriously mfb, what do you want? I have a sneaking suspicion that you're one of those people who won't let D&D Fighters have nice things on the grounds that Magic can do whatever it wants, but "not magic" has to be constrained by Physics regardless of character level. In short, that you are perhaps demanding a different level of abstraction for computers than you are for Sorcery. Different levels of abstraction leads to different levels of game simulation which in almost all cases involves one or more players going off into another room to play something out while everyone else goes and plays Soul Caliber.
-Frank
mfb
Nov 10 2007, 09:05 AM
no, i'm actually demanding the same level of abstraction for hacking as for magic. we know pretty much all we need to know about how magic works. it has its own internal logic. the Matrix, somewhat less so. attempting to fix that is fine. attempting to fix that by introducing more illogical craziness? that doesn't fix anything!
this is the same deal as the running rules. you decide you want things to work in manner X, and you throw up all these reasons why they should work like that. and then someone comes along and knocks all your reasons down, and you get all huffy and say "well, this is FrankRun, and that's how i want it" with no regard for anything anybody else has written or said on the subject. which, okay, that's fine and all--but what's the point of throwing it up here for dissection in the first place, if you don't care what anybody else says?
if you want brainhacking, just say "hey guys, brainhacking!" and have done with it. throwing up justifications for it, and then falling back on "it's science fiction, who cares" when someone tries to argue the point is just flamebait.
FrankTrollman
Nov 10 2007, 09:23 AM
In that cse, I'm pretty sure I answered your questions about a dozen times already. You may not
like it, which is fine. I don't think my ideas for everyone, I don't think that any conceptualization of the Matrix is for everyone.
Hacking requires a massive, but arbitrary, amount of computer processing. People in the Shadowrun world get that massive but arbitrary amount by hooking a number of computer devices together and orchestrating the whole network into a big problem solving machine with a human brain.
Human brains are integral to the working of computers in the Shadowrun future, and computers are all built with the idea of being integrated with human brains.
The Signal Ranges in the basic book are so incredibly short because they represent the range of "high density signal" - the limit of a device's ability to remotely image, alter, and reconcile with Simsense, other devices. The actual range that devices can make a phone call or do other early 21st century crap are, of course, much farther just as they are in 2007.
Reactive signal modulation is much easier than pro-active signal modulation. A firewall program can adjust a toaster or a human in order to limit the effects of a hacking attack even if it is not able to draw upon a vast network of computers and neural tissue to do it. A databomb can sit there and "explode" when someone connects to it without needing a human-powered network to project it into the target.
I don't care how "high density signal" is produced. But I can take those axioms and create interactions in the world with them which match the majority of the flavor text in Shadowrun. In fact, virtually all of it excepting the idea of "jacking out" (though even then it works if you're specifically being harassed by Black IC as removing your own jack chord would terminate the connection that the IC was reactively attacking you through).
So seriously, other than the fact that you
don't like it, what is the problem?
-Frank
mfb
Nov 10 2007, 09:30 AM
ugh. never mind.
FrankTrollman
Nov 10 2007, 09:44 AM
QUOTE (mfb) |
i still see no reason why you couldn't blanket black IC on unprotected populations. |
Because high density signal range is the range that your device can remotely image, alter, and render in Simsense other devices. Because high density signal range is not the range at which you can broadcast the orchestra which simultaneously hacks all who can hear it.
This idea of yours that somehow the ability to hack into machines or brains at a distance one at a time is topologically similar to hacking into machines or brains all at once is something which I have never advocated. I've never implied it was possible, and I've repeatedly told you that it is an inappropriate leap of faith. I don't know why you have clamped down pitbull-like onto this particular concept, but I get the distinct impression that I could grab this idea and swing you around, your body trailing behind the death grip of your mouth.
It takes an action to attempt to hack into a network. A netowrk. One.
-Frank
mfb
Nov 10 2007, 09:48 AM
you don't hack a naked brain! there's no hacking involved! you simply send data to it! you can't "hack" it because it can't send data to you! why, for the love of god, can you not grasp that!?
all you need to generate "high density signal" is more processing power! congrats, you've staved off doomsday--instead of taking a day, it will take a month!
argh, screw it. Frank wants brainhacking, Frank gets brainhacking. no actual brains need be involved! wooo!