So, a hacker compromises the commlink of an opponent, and loads the AR Environment program Negator (p.108, Unwired) to modify the commlink's AR Output. The program's been set up to "negate" any visual input of the hacker or his runner teammates.

What in-game effect should this have? Target Hidden (blind fire) modifier? Surprise Tests? Both? Something Else?

As a GM, my quick and dirty answer would be -3 to tests to perceive the runners, as per the AR modifiers sidebar. It would also force perception checks in situations that wouldn't normally require them.

If it was me, I might impose a negative dice pool modifier equal to the number of net hits the hacker gets when he makes an Edit + Hacking Test opposed by the target's Firewall + System.

Turn the CommLink into a Spam Zombie and have it attack all the CommLinks it's connected to as a "Approved Sender", as well as itself.

-3 to everyone!

Why require Edit, when the explicit purpose of the "Negator" Environmental AR program is to automate editing things out that are not desired to be seen?

I'd use Edit because you've still got to futz with what the target actually gets on his display, and that's the purview of the Edit program.

If you're just negating the AR stuff that would help the target, why wouldn't one simply remove the bonus dice he'd be getting from AR?

If, on the other hand, you're "negating" real visual input, I'd call shenanigans: I'm pretty sure there's a difference between an AR overlay and raw visual input.

Negator is a program from arsenal that does, in fact, edit out real world objects from the users view.

That's the exact purpose of the Negator program though:

Negator software seeks to "edit out" anything the user programs in as "undesirable." Perfect for eccentrics, people suffering from certain phobias, or snobs who don’t like to be bothered by the little people, Negator software will hide, mask, or blot out with other AR sensory input whatever they wanted negated. -- p.108, Unwired

While the book is not specific on how the program uses AR to hide things from meatspace, hiding things is exactly what it was designed to do.

It works exactly like you would edit an object out of a picture in photoshop, only with crazy amounts of processing power behind it, so it can be done on the fly in real time.

It doesn't say it does so unoticably, for all you know it merely blackboxes out stuff. Or just overlays something else in front. Don't like to see spiders? Have it put bunny pictures over them instead. Hate your wifes face? Put a superstar on instead. I don't see it as being perfect, or even close to hard to notice that its doing its job. Its not a program designed to be maliciously used on someone else without them noticing.

laughing man

*sigh* Lemme look ...

The description says "hide, mask, or blot out." It doesn't say "edit out" or "remove." So it seems we're back to either applying the standard modifiers for AR distractions, or determining how well the hacker Edits the Negator's parameters.

My netrunner character's favorite trick is to hot-sim (if available) or just graphically overlay bad Syrian camel porn into their brain/smartlink visual. Done this to a rigger a few times and it's amazing how much worse you pilot stuff when your whole visual universe is a huge, floppy-breasted arab woman servicing a rather dingy flea-bitten camel...

Regardless of the description of what the program does, whether it throws big black censorship bars, edits out photoshop style, or anything else, the rules are the same. Even if you are editing on the fly by hand, the rules are the same (incidentally, I find it far more beleivable that a program could continually edit something out in real time, than thinking that human could do it.) The rules state that anytime your AR would be disadvantageous, assess a -1 to -3 penalty to the appropriate checks. The better your solution, the higher the penalty will be, but it's GMs call and it's capped at -3.

For the black bar scenario, I'd probably only asses a -1 or -2 penalty, and only on rolls to notice something about the character, not to notice their existence (the obvious balck bar does that OK). I'd apply the -2 penalty to tests to shoot as well, as you don't know exactly where they are behind that black bar. Not precisely blind fire, but troublesome like having pop up windows fill your field of view.

For the full on edit scenario, I'd asses a -3 penalty to perception rolls, and require one to even see the character. You might catch errors in the editing that leaves an arm sticking out or obviously repeats a background item, you might notice something with another sense that isn't being edited. Failure to see the target with a perception check induces full blind-fire penalties, otherwise a -3 penalty assessed for AR interfering with normal sight.

If I found that too powerful in play, I'd lower the penalties to -1 and -2, respectively.

And, of course, the question is why not just tell it to edit everything out then, and just make the entire AR display black?

Arguably, the amount of effort required to set that up is greater than the amount of effort required to turn off or remove the AR display.

Actually, it does say edit out, in the very first sentence. Even uses the same quotation marks you did. (Wait, that last part tends to help your case more, doesn't it?)

The general consensus of using the tandard "AR Distraction" modifiers though seems to be a sound one.

I was wondering about one special case though. Since Negator hides/masks/blots out what it has been told is undesirable, could you tell the program that everything is undesirable?
[Edit: Damn. Tarantula beat me to that one.]


True enough, but turning off AR doesn't blind someone to meatspace. You yourself said in a post above "there's a difference between an AR overlay and raw visual input."

indeed, the big idea here is to have the target unaware that his AR have been compromised. im hazarding a guess that the basic idea is more of a hackers version of a empty hallway illusion then something used in combat.

Ah, looping the feed. An old classic.

Blacking out the whole view is very distracting but not insurmountable-AR is semi-transparent for this exact reason. A character who is so blacked out will shortly be able to see through the full black much like adjusting their eyes to the dark or to wearing sunglasses, only darker. -2 to all actions.

Actually it's more effective to fill their view with a mosaic if constantly shifting colors: it's much harder to filter out and see through. For maximum effect put their music player on visualize and full screen it with goblin rock on maximum volume. -3 to everything.

i would hazard a guess that the AR is as transparent as the user wants it to be, unless its been overridden by someone...

Except the program doesn't say it does so unnoticeably. Example users are for snobs who don't want to see bums. Instead, they might see a bag of trash, or a mailbox. It doesn't say that they don't notice that its editing it in.

would not then the editing be kinda useless as your still mentally reminded that under that noticably fake trashcan is a bum?

Sure, but you still don't have to see him shivering in the cold, or feel bad because you didn't see his sign saying how pathetic he is and needs your money.

Let $Bum = AR_Display:Fuzzy_Bunnies-V2.3

in the origional Star Wars: Empire strikes back, before the re-editing, theres a shot in the snow battle where the shot looking out the cockpit window as you are doing a flyby. The cockpit is a matte painting, layered over the shot. Now some detail about how they did the special effects back then, specifically regarding edge conditions where the shots meshed, required that they layerd the matte in with transparency. It's like at 90% opacitiy, and if you look closely you can make out the terrain through the cockpit. But it's like a half-second shot, and you don't notice it unless someone pauses the movie and points it out. It takes focusing on it to look through.

I kinda figure even full-opacity AR objects are kinda like that. They are layered over your real view, either as an external graphic projected on the transparent screen, or as a simfeed layered over your visual data. In the first case, every screen I've ever seen could be seen through if you tried hard enough. Even at their best they are still a little transparent. I don't know if theoretically a full opacity display could be made, but for AR goggles and Contacts, there's absolutely no reason to do so. in fact, you WANT them so that if the AR blacks out, you can still kinda see through them, as a safety feature. As for the simfeed version, your eyes are still receiving the raw data. If you focus through, you can ignore the altered feed and pick out your real vision. This was true in previous editions of the game, if you were in VR you could try to ignore it and perceive the real world instead, with a hefty penalty.

In both cases a totally blank screen is the easiest to see through, because it provides no distracting visual data of it's own. An image is harder to see through, especially a visually cluttered or "noisy" one, and one with a lot of different colors. Motion makes it even harder to adjust. Really, a black-out attack is no more effective than putting a pair of sunglasses on your opponent.

safety is not a big thing in SR

Even in SR, when one thing is harder, less safe, and has no appreciable benifit over the other, it tends not to be done.

unless it also makes for more profits for the corps

I would say that greater profits are an appreciable benefit.

heh, very true. sorry about that one...

I just figured you overlooked it, directly pointing it out was the only way you'd ever realise that you'd done so (believe me, I've misread certain words for decades before someone pointed out that I was spelling them wrong).

i most likely have