I wonder a bit how the matrix side of things can take people so much time? The sequence of rolls is almost fixed, and success can usually be assumed. The player can initiate character actions mechanically "I browse for...", and either player or GM can add a description like "the librarian puts a book on the counter." Data Searches require no test if time is no issue. Five or ten minutes, who cares?

Even if the hacker does all the data searches, the whole group should chime in on what to search for. Who gets to roll the dice is ultimately of no concern. Locate Node / Exploit / (Decrypt) / Browse... two minutes real time, comfortably? Thats a hacked database. (Unless you have a little surprise for the hacker of course). And that time ignores that you can well only roll Exploit and go from that, as the other rolls in case of success only determine needed time.

Matrix activities on the run are not that much more complicated, there is just a higher chance of IC/spiders, and more hidden nodes. If you coordinate matrix attack and physical attack (what security would try to do), everybody gets involved at the same time. Aarons Cheat Sheets can help with speeding things up if rules knowledge is the issue. Getting a legitmate users matrix ID for the targeted site is legwork, spoofing a "door open" order from that user a singe test. What is taking people so long?

Wes--I wasn't targetting you, as much as the general thread of gripe before we read.

Ryu--I wish I knew what was taking people so long. If I did, I'd be able to help provide a solution.

Gotcha. Just covering my ass.

"So can we put together our common complaints about 4th edition and start from there? See if we can create solutions that are generally appealing to both new and old communities."

That is what Nightmare and I were discussing, I'll ask him to edit to make explicitly clear what compromise we're trying to find here. The point of the compromise thread isn't simply to say "well your GM sucks!" louder than the other person. The two of us are actually trying to find middle ground in a way that isn't "venomous, argumentative, confrontational" Everyone feel free to help unless that is exactly what you're trying to create around here?



No, the solution to all of those is to abandon SR4 and never buy a Catalyst games book.
Which is the absolute best solution I've found so far as an original fan of Shadowrun.

Do you want them to sell less books?
It keeps the setting "pristine" for some people if there isn't stuff for other people, but it isn't good for the long term health of the company.

As in past editions, the GM defines the game - especially fluff-wise. Just about everyone of those complaints can be handled by the GM.

Too much hackable stuff? Reduce it, and use more non-wireless stuff.

Some metaplot not to your taste? GM ignores it.

It's really as simple as that.

It should be, however I think the fiction set up the fluff, if you down play the red smog and acid raid in the fiction then GMs ignore it. The appeal of Shadowrun and Whitewolf has always been the fiction inside the gaming books.

Also some people play Missions, my understanding is the rules are set in stone (I have only played missions never tried to GM) if thats true I would love to see Catalyst open this up, allowing optional rules found in the books to be ok. You can house rule any home game to develop what you want, providing your not playing with a bunch of rules lawyers. Ironically the Matrix rules they have now look similar to the ones I came up with back in 2e to make deckers more playable. Saying if you don't like it change it, sucks because then theres no reason for me to buy another book beyond 2e because I've already house ruled it. I want to support the new stuff, I am a shadowrun fanboy, however I don't want to have to house rule everything all over again because I have the old and it works great with house rules I've already created. I think if they address many of the issues the old timers have 4e should be workable with book X and Y. Then 5e should be loved by all out of the box.



That is a little harsh, I think they have not had the time yet to fix the pile they were handed (Traslations, Buisness, or Developers you decided what happend, PS Fanpro did produce some good parts but over all I found the quality lacking). Runners Companion Karma Build shows me that they can build something better than what they were handed. Also 4e is out, unless they release 4.5e your not going to see big changes to the core mechanics anytime soon.

I agree.
For most of the posts, it seems as though interpretation of the fluff is the biggest sticking point. There have been several wonderful posts outlining how the same fluff, interpreted by two different GM's has had opposite effects.

I don't want to rehash the same points over and over. Wesley Street's post was very good at outlining point where a interpretations of both the fluff and rules made a game where Cain wasn't enjoying it. Jhaiisiin's follow up post also hit the nail on the head that a GM does need to balance out time to the players. Your reply about GM's following the books "too closely" was incorrect. The GM's weren't following the books too closely, they were taking an extreme interpretation. We have been trying for six pages now to offer a compromise on those extreme interpretations.

If you refuse to meet us halfway by giving up your preconceptions about what sr4 is, then where is the compromise?

There's too many posts to reply to individually, so I'm going to try to address this generally.

The issue I have is that, in every SR4 game I've played in or GM'ed, the decker has dominated the legwork section of the game. This involves many games under many GM's, including one Commando (whose name I've forgotten), and includes published adventures as well as home games. GM style is not an issue, unless somehow I've magically only gotten GMs who overplay the matrix beyond the setting bounds. (And before you go there, my playstyle is not an issue either: I have yet to play a decker-type in SR4.)

There are several reasons why this comes about. The first is that fact that every time people start looking for answers, they start with a matrix search. Based on what they find, they may or may not then go to contacts or do other types of legwork; they might decide to follow up with more matrix searching. This holds true today, for many of us: if someone asks for quick information on a topic, we tell them to google for it, or use the forum search function.

The second reason is that, mechanically speaking, the matrix is better for general info. Contacts have specific knowledge skills and social networks; the matrix is everywhere and has information on everything. Granted, if you want specific info, it's better to go to a contact; but first, you have to know what you're looking for.

The third is the fact that Data Search rolls provide predictable results, while contact information is frequently up to the whim of the GM. Even when you have an appropriate contact, the GM has to decide what he knows, if anything. For example, your Mafia contact may not know that a particular bar pays protection money to a different branch of the mob, even though it falls under his realm of expertise. He may even have in-game reasons for not wanting to tell you. The Data Search results give you predictable thresholds for specific information.

The fourth is that a Data Search roll is free, while going through channels can not only cost you money, but can make you indebted to your contact for a later favor. Even high-loyalty contacts will ask for favors in return, especially if you've been using them frequently as a resource. At worst, you could roll a critical botch on an ettiquette or other social roll with the contact, and annoy them.

The fifth is that Data Search rolls are low-exposure, while asking questions in person is much riskier. If you're working with a low-loyalty contact, or a "friend of a friend", there's a good chance that they'll tell someone else that someone is digging for a particular piece of info. Especially if there's multiple factions and/or shadowrunning teams involved.

The reason I'll close this list with is this: According to all the fluff, the matrix is everywhere, and the decker should always be the one doing the first info run. In fact, I just got a copy of Unwired, and did a quick skim through it. Here's one direct quote:

So, whenever you have a question, or want background information, the game is *designed* around a decker doing the grunt work. This isn't just fluff, this is in the rules section.

Now, how does this become a problem? Count up the number of questions that come up in a game. A good runner team will ask all sorts of questions, gathering information on all aspects of a target: their security, their personnel, their friends and enemies, and so on and so forth. Sometimes these questions lead to dead ends, sometimes it wanders off into tangents. Tangents aren't a bad thing, though; they can lead to an off-the-wall approach that will make for a fun run. Sometimes the answers only lead to more questions. But when you total up the number of questions that are asked, including the dead ends, you end up with a lot of data search rolls made. Ultimately, it's the decker who gathers most of the information; everyone else then goes to contacts or other sources to fill in the blanks, and to get more specific intel on certain things.

The GM can help make the other parts of the game more interesting for players, by setting up fun interactions with contacts, and the like. But first, you need to know what contact to go to. In short, the rest of the team sits on their thumbs while the decker amasses a pile of information; the team then sorts it, and decides what to do with it, like deciding which leads they want to chase down; this is, of course, assuming that they do want to do further searching. Until the background information is complete, though, they can't really do much of anything.

Many GMs try to give every player spotlight time. And they do; when I GM, I make sure there's something for everyone. Once you've figured out who has the information, for example, the Face will get to shine when you start talking. But none of that does you any good unless you know where you're going, and that requires a lot of digging on the matrix.

Yes, you can try to balance the focus on the decker by giving the bulk of the rest of the time to the other players. Make exciting combat scenes for the combat characters, introduce interesting NPCs to interact with, and so on and so forth. Players can leave satisfied, even with this problem. However, it's better to engage as many characters at once as possible. A combat scene engages everyone there, so does a meet. A decker Data Search run is pretty much a solo act.

And gods forbid if the decker decides to chase down some secure info on his own, leading to a hacking run. OK, you have the same problem if the mage on astral recon decides to try an astral penetration: in both cases, you're running a "dungeon within a dungeon" for one player. Sure, the sammie might decide to run off on his own, but the rest of the players have the ability to go after him.

This is the problem. What's the compromise? I have no idea. I do know what it cannot be, though:

• It cannot be "up to the GM" to fix. The GM should not be required to create major adjustments to the setting and rules to please his players.
• It cannot be a "change your playstyle" issue. If someone's playstyle doesn't fit the game, they should play a different game.
• It cannot be a "you're misreading the fluff" problem. Or that they've over-emphasizing it. It's clear that deckers as primary researchers is intended in the rules as well as fluff.

So, what we're left with is a need to fix the setting and supporting rules, to make it so that legwork is a more cooperative activity.

Then perhaps maybe the fluff could be written better? It is not up to either side to determine what the author's original point is, but the original author. On top of that if there is a point of agreement on what it is supposed to mean about providing it rather than just comments that basically say "your GM sucks".



I've not seen any compromise put forth. Please show me what the compromise recommendation was for future development of SR.



First of all they aren't "pre" anything. I've tried SR4 with a couple GMs and found it lacking. I'm not an expert on it because what I've tried doesn't really leave me wanting to spend my time playing 4th edition when I have the option of 3rd. The issues have been listed and other SR3 fans agree on the points, but all I'm seeing is SR4 fans saying "it isn't an issue" and that is your compromise.

So here is an example of a compromise:

Future SR4 missions have limits to how much legwork can be completed by internet searches. Some information is only word of mouth people the bad guys with privacy concerns won't allow anything to be recorded. (i.e. Corrupt CEOs know better than to leave a paper trail giving their employees illegal orders... even when it is provable they're in a situation to know what is going on).

When SR4 launched I gave up on Fanpro because of numerous and obvious shortcomings. I know many of you disagree, but the mass exodus of old familiar Dumpshock names around that time proves that a lot of people did give up. Likewise I also gave up on dumpshock because of the endless intractable flamewars and personal attacks towards people because of silly things like a rules mechanic preference or a preference for different fluff (And yes I'm commonly guilty of responding to those attacks in kind). I'm really wondering if Dumpshock deserves a second chance as a place for insightful discussion of Shadowrun or if Catalyst deserves a chance (do they even want one?) of producing a product that will make us disgruntled old SR fans happy.

So he did in every SR3 game I had, where Data Search was a specialization of Computer and the table was in the Matrix book.

What's the point? It's always been that way in Shadowrun. That's what the computer guys do - handling information.

You forgot other similar SR4 shortcomings:
The issue I have is that, in every SR4 game I've played in or GM'ed, the streetsamurai has dominated the combat section of the game.
The issue I have is that, in every SR4 game I've played in or GM'ed, the mage has dominated the astral section of the game.
The issue I have is that, in every SR4 game I've played in or GM'ed, the face has dominated the social section of the game.

The hacker is the master of data, the same way the mage is the master of magic and the streetsam the master of combat. No wonder he's able to find data easily! That's actually one of the role of a hacker. That was already the case with deckers, except that nobody played them so it always was a decker contact doing it.

That post goes a long way in making me understand your problem Cain. Let´s see if I can offer another perspective on that.

-> Given that contacts and social skills and mooks require investments outside the other specialities, many chars are not able to participate in legwork much. You should consider the needs of the legwork phase when you approve characters. This is tangential to the reason why I advocate skill-heavy builds in the chargen threads. Also, Loyality 1 / Connection 3 won´t save anyones ass.
OTOH, there is no problem in everyone getting matrix info via the hacker. Just a different person picking up the dice, if those are even rolled. My previous suggestion of simply buying a method of Data Search is just for the DIY people.

-> The game should at first be about figuring out what info to search for, and that just screams "brainstorm involving everybody". Specialist contacts are pretty useful for telling you what to look out for, too.

-> Getting really deep in classic GM territory. I can tell you what I do, and tell you that it works for us. I give out the info that I think can be found on the matrix, without dicerolling. Data Search has an auto-success-mechanic anyway. If the players start to search the matrix for a list of info monitored by certain bad guys, bad things happen. On the other hand, contacts are willing to dig their sources for info the players want. And I´m personally seeing to contacts being more helpful than the matrix. "Hey, I have my hands on an old DW ambulance, wanna have for that mission?"

-> Smallish data runs / intrusions require a short list of tests. Learn that sequence, and a hacker data run is resolved in a few minutes. Don´t overdo playing those out, hacking low-rated nodes is like driving a car from A to B for the hacker. Put the hacker spotlight into the action-heavy phase of everyone else.

There's nothing stopping the rest of the team doing their part of the matrix searhing, i would see a team dividing the subject between them self and then everyone does a seperate datasearch rolls.
so at least everyone is taking part to the action.

Or you could just not roll at all, as extendet tests only take time, and just give them the ansewers theyr looking for, there is nothing att all actually forcing a GM to make the players roll for all extended test if the characters have time.

And of course, given the teamwork test rules in SR4, other characters can actually help the computer guy searching.

The matrix wasn't quite as omnipresent in SR3. Also, the primary source of shadow information was Shadowland, which anyone could access. You could buy permanent access to Shadowland by buying a Level 2 contact.



I'll concede on the mage; but in social or combat situations, there's a lot for the non-supporting characters to do while the main guy does his business. The rules are designed for multiple characters to take action during combat and social events. The same rules are designed for solo hacking runs; unless you're also a decker, you can't go along for the ride.


Ok, first things first. Remember that I was not the GM in most of these games, so while I thank you for the advice on how a GM can modify his game, it isn't very helpful to me. I need something I can bring to another GM that won't sound like I'm criticizing his style, or the way he sees the Shadowrun setting.

Now: most of the characters I've seen have at least some social skills, and they all have contacts. That means they have the ability to do some traditional legwork. What they don't have is the ability to conduct massive information searches easily, and then correlate the data. Deckers rule at this. Some matrix actions can even be considered the equivalent of a clue-by-four upside the head; Info Sortilage seems like the perfect excuse to hand the players whatever clues you feel like. Other than Divination, I can't think of any other guaranteed way of getting desired information, and even Divination has limits.

As far as brainstorming goes, the way it's happened in every SR4 game I've player or read, it starts with the decker going out chasing down background information, and any tangents he feels are worthwhile. GM nudging may or may not be involved in getting him to focus on the information you want. Once he's come back with the data, the group brainstorms, and the decker goes out to follow up on any good ideas. Once he's come back from that, then people start calling their contacts that are likely to be of help. This is admittedly a group issue, but one I've seen every single time, in every single group.

I can't control what other GM's do, so I can't really respond to your next point. But as to your final point, even low-rated decking runs can become time-consuming. Given the high Matrix dice pools of your average decker, when facing a low-rated system, there's no reason to try for anything other than admin access and careful probing. Individually, each might not take too long; but after a while, they do add up.

Now, speaking for when I do GM, I personally don't like handing out information for free. I used to have a few players who viewed easy information as a trap, they felt better when they worked for it. Also, it tends to smack of railroading; even when you aren't trying to get the players to go down a particular path, they need to feel like they have options. Finally, it makes certain skills and abilities less useful; what's the point of having Perception, if nothing is hidden? Again, this is just me personally, YMMV of course. But just handing out information without rolling pretty much nerfs the Data Search skill, which IMO takes things too far in the opposite direction.

How do we fix things? I honestly don't know, but I think the matrix needs to be dialed back a bit. I probably didn't make it clear that when I GM, I try to use the matrix as the general information source, and contacts and knowledge skills for specific tidbits. But honestly, the way the rules and setting is set up, there's no reason to not Data Search everything you come across-- in fact, it's generally a smart idea.

What's needed here is a fix to the setting and rules, in a way that is acceptable to a lot of players and GM's, and reduces the decker dominance on legwork without totally nerfing them.

Edit1:

That would mean everyone needs the Data Search skill, a Browse program, and a sufficiently powerful commlink. That has never happened in my experience.

Edit2:
To do that, they need a dice pool. Which again, means having a Data Search skill, a Browse program, and a sufficiently powerful commlink. How often do you encounter that combination in non-deckers?

Before reading these comments, everyone please read the edited original post. That should clarify a few things.



If you want to undertake it, go ahead and start a thread. I have no mind for mathematics, and the vehicle rules have never been my forte so this is something I must leave to others.



I know - I have all these sources. I however am not the one that needs convincing (if that's the right word)



From a practical standpoint it is.



My apologies Wes, I must have missed that in the clutter. You're right.



I agree, but think that is a place where the rules could stand to be clarified a bit.



This comes down largely to a matter of taste. We had 23 pages of house rules with SR3. Now we're down to 8.



IMO every character should have some skill in Data Search, and a commlink with System/Response 3 or less is essentially begging to be hacked. Will these non-hackers be handling the majority of browsing? No. But they can share some of the load, and thus the play time.



Again, not helpful.



That seems to be the majority opinion, yes.



Which is not what any of us want I believe. Now that I've taken the time to actually listen to and understand your (and others') objections I can understand the venom often seen. Hence this thread.

In several cases (such as the Tir thing), this I think is the case. There are others where it is not, or where the material is unclear as noted below.



True. However, this as NotofthisWorld said is a matter of the text lending itself to such interpretation. The entire matter (in many cases) could be solved with some clarification in the errata (or somewhere).



This is true - both sides must be willing to compromise and give the other what they need. NotofthisWorld has shown himself willing to do that a number of times in the past few days, and for that I am grateful.



NotofthisWorld suggested an excellent one IMO.

"Future SR4 missions have limits to how much legwork can be completed by internet searches. Some information is only word of mouth people the bad guys with privacy concerns won't allow anything to be recorded. (i.e. Corrupt CEOs know better than to leave a paper trail giving their employees illegal orders... even when it is provable they're in a situation to know what is going on)."



Which isn't helpful really, though I don't need to tell you that.

The Matrix book says otherwise, as did the Sprawl Survival Guide.

No, the primary source of any information started with a Data Search test.

In fact, accessing Shadowland on the fly required you to be a pretty good Hacker as you needed to track it down.

With Runner's Companion, that is possible for any Data Haven and the like in SR4, too.

No, that just means that everyone gets the cracked Browse program from the Hacker, and even if they don't have the Data Search Skill and no high System, they'll throw some dice, which can generate hits that will provide the Hacker with bonus dice.

Here's where I have to disagree. There's lots of skills "every character should have", if you actually bought all of them, you wouldn't have enough points to buy up the things that most matter to the character. Every character "should" have Perception, Dodge, the entire Social group, the entire Stealth group, at least one vehicle skill, multiple combat skills, Athletics, and probably a few others I'm missing. In reality, however, most characters can get by with Rating 0 in many of these skills, and instead, focus on the things that make the character effective.

The "effective generalist" concept is a myth.

With Karma-based chargen, not so much.

You know, I can't seem to find the defaulting rules for a matrix test. But at any event, if we're talking a System of 3, and standard defaulting rules, they can throw at maximum two dice. That not only is only slightly likely to generate even a single success, it has a very good chance of botching, and a respectable chance of critically botching.

Edit:

I don't have RC, but from what I've seen of the builds posted, specialists still hold the advantage. Mechanically speaking, having one or two huge dice pools and a select group of of low level skills/good defaults is superior to having a lot of midrange skills.

My "must have" list is much shorter than what you stated. It includes Computer, Data Search, Etiquette, Perception, Pilot Ground Craft, Pistols, and Unarmed Combat. These IMO are the bare bones minimum that every runner needs to function, but the skill rating necessary is like 1 or 2 (due to the fact that your attribute adds to the dice pool). That's 14bp total for all at 2. That leaves plenty of room for specialization.

That said, I've made some rather effective generalists (if one avoids combining magic and hacking).

IIRC there are none - we had to house rule them. This is a glaring error.

@NightmareX: Regarding the vehicle integration issue, I have offered to help with rules application, not rules creation. I maintain that the rules work in that regard, but shall not try to prove it in this thread. Opening said thread(s) is up to those who have problems, not me. (Edit: And I have posted my answer to your post because you seem to make a genuine effort, and had a nice condensing list going on, not because I´m talking to you specifically.)

@Cain: Your only options regarding GM problems is talking about it or dealing with the consequences. The problems you describe are, as I have shown, not part of the ruleset. Or fluff for that matter. What I described is only modifying the game for those GMs who have a strong pro-matrix bias going in, or who prefer to roll the dice for anything that has a test option. I don´t have dice rolled for things that can be handled by buying hits.

But what can the player do?
- Help your teams hacker figuring out what to search for. Ask your contacts for advice and help. Lead by example.
- Take a peek at other char sheets and suggest to call certain someones, or ask other players to come along meeting a contact.
- Take a look at how much time it takes to run a Data Search. Tell the GM. The hacker should search data DURING the brainstorm. Bring a fetch module or browsing agent in case the hacker doesn´t want to. Circumvent group issues your experience tells you you will have.

The GM angle answer:
The rating of Data Search is not important. This skill is the freebie that comes with the Electronics group. If you want to give a spotlight here, do it in a hostile node on active alert, so that every die counts. But don´t bother where the rules don´t. You should not make obstacles up and try to speed things up at the same time.

Well, my "must have" list is a myth. Ideally, all shadowrunners need a bunch of skills. For example, I think all shadowrunners need the stealth skills, because they'll be sneaking around a lot. You can function without them, however. There's also workarounds for other skills, like using Pilot programs instead of a vehicle skill.

However, I am curious as to how you reached 14 BP for all those skills. Since each skill costs 4BP per point, I calculate it as 56 BP for rating 2. That's a pretty substantial investment.

Data search being a logic based skill, whit a logic 3 and rating four browse program you get 6 dice for datasearch, not great put usable considering it's an extended test.

You just roll Program - that's what you do when you don't really do anything, like making tests on nodes you are not active.

Except they just tend to cost more in the special field and less likely to survive outside it.

I have to disagree that the problem *is* part of both the ruleset and the fluff. If you look at the emphasis Data Search gets in the core rulebook (about a full page, IIRC) and how many times Unwired mentions the decker as the data master (as well as many other people in this thread), I have to say that there's a very basic assumption made in the game rules and setting that the decker will be the one doing all the primary research. While it's OK for certain archetypes to take the lead in certain situations, they shouldn't dominate it to the exclusion of everyone else.

I will try and introduce some of the things you suggest for players, the next time I'm in a game. I'm just not 100% convinced it'll help much. But I will try. However, I think a better compromise would be dialing back the matrix. That means going more along the lines of what Not Of This World posted earlier:

Edit:

Except you don't default to attributes when making Matrix tests. It's Skill + Program. Also, with a System 3 commlink, your Browse program is also capped at Rating 3.

Do you have a page reference on that? I've looked and looked, and I cannot find that rule anywhere.

p. 218 - it's can't get any worse than 'not doing anything'.

I really hope it works out for you Cain. Please report your findings!

I don't see that. I see this:

That doesn't tell us anything about defaulting, it tells us what happens when you're focused in another node.

Even if you make your case that this should be the defaulting rule, that means the script kiddie approach is better than actually learning the skill, for non-deckers.

No, I'm not - I'm making the case that 'defaulting' in this case won't be worse then just rolling 'the appropriate program rating or computer attribute'.

Which is exactly why distributing a cracked Browse program around your team will enable anyone to participate in a Teamwork Data Search Test.

No problem. I'll leave it to NotofthisWorld and Cain (they were IIRC the ones that mentioned the vehicle rules) to pursue this if they wish then. Thank you for the offer.



Yes, there are work arounds for most things. However, in situations where one skill is vital and the player chose not to have it, I do not see that as being the rule's (or GM's) fault that said player ends up inactive. This is not D&D.



My bad - I referenced the specialization cost, not the actual skill point cost on the BP table in back. Haven't built a character in a couple years. Yes, that is a substantial investment, but note I did say that a skill of 1 is acceptable IMO (a mix of 1s and 2s is what I generally do).



Thanks much Rotbart! I retract my earlier statement about Matrix defaulting *wanders off to delete unnecessary house rule*

Can you point out where it says that becouse BBB playnly says that Datasearch is linked to logic and can be defaulted, and the rules for defaulting says you use the linked atribute-1 so 2 in this case.
My character of course has a response 4 comling to use that program.

According to Unwired a character with a middle lifestyle has free access to an agent with a Browse program (I don't remember the exact rating).
Other characters can buy it, a rating 3 agent with a rating 3 browse program isn't expensive, and is enough for basic searches.

Besides, they can also help by thinking and giving directions for the search, or use their knowledge skills to help filter the data or make sense out of it or in many other ways.

I'm playing in an SR4 game, in our last outing we had no decker per say but my rigger has some basic skills and programs if needed. When the legwork came around I told the rest of the team to go hit up the contacts while I searched the matrix. Then I told the GM I would just take my 2 auto hits per hour and it takes as long as it takes, giving the rest of the team more face time and their characters plenty of time to hit those contacts. If anyone had to go out for pizza it was me while I waited for the legwork to finish.

The default for data search tests in the current printing of SR4 is not specifically stated as such but is implied as a Logic+Computer roll, when it stats that if you don't have a program you can use Logic+Computer. Its never mentioned again and I will add the page number to this post tonight. Using Logic+Computer as the default opens up a new can of trouble though as to why would a decker/hacker ever bother with programs? I would say you have a greater number of hits needed but this is never stated that I can find.

The BBB does say skills are linked to attributes, however it says that for programs use the effective program rating (instead of attribute) + skill to derive your dice pool.

Cain-Did you even open the book and look at the Skills Chapter?

-Data Search is linked to Logic. (p. 110, 111, 123)

-Data Search may be defaulted to. (p. 123)



Thus the Data Search test is normally Data Search + Browse. In cases of defaulting it is (Skill of 0 - 1) + Browse.

And for those of you who think that legwork via the matrix is purely for the tech-heads:


Also to answer the earlier question about investment and how many characters do I see that aren't hackers investing in Data Search, the answer is most. If they don't buy the skill itself, they buy a low rating Agent. A rating 3 agent with Browse 3, will net a decent amount of hits just by rolling. If you increase those to 4, then you can just use the dice turn-in and get an automatic 16 hits. All for 8 minutes of work.

RJ--I think Max knows, and forgot to put a ? between his question to Cain, and his following support statement

That was uncalled for. I don't appreciate personal attacks.

The fact is, when using a program, you use Skill + Program. Attributes don't factor into it.

There is no clear defaulting rule for Matrix actions, because of this exception.


An agent is basically a NPC. What you suggest is relegating the matrix tasks to a NPC, which is exactly the problem SR4 is trying to avoid. We're discussing compromises, here; we can't go too far in the opposite direction, and render deckers unplayable. I assume you we all want deckers as a viable character type?

Cain could you please explain to me were it says that you don't use logic-1 when defaulting the data search skill? becouse i can't find anythink in the BBB.

No, attributes always factor into it. Data Search is a Logic skill. Whenever you make a skill roll you always add the attribute to the skill's dice pool. McQ may have come off sounding harsh but this is a basic core mechanic of SR4. When conducting a Data Search without a Browse program, roll Logic + Data Search. When conducting a Data Search with a Browse program, roll Logic + Data Search + Browse Program Rating. When a PC doesn't have the Data Search skill, do a default roll of Logic minus one die.

Does it say this specifically on pages 219-220? No. But it's assumed that you understand how skill rolls work from reading the Games Concepts and Skills chapters.

I agree with both these statements, its not clear but I think its implied.



And thats wrong, the program REPLACES the attribute...

if only I had the BBB in front of me

I'm looking at pages 225-226 of the BBB and it says nothing about the Program replacing the attribute. If it replaced the attribute you could have a Logic 1 character with a Rating 6 program be an effective hacker.

Completely wrong. You do *NOT* use Logic when using a program. Here's what it says on p 218 of the BBB:

In every case listed in the book, you do not get to add your logic to your Skill + Program dice pool. You only get Skill + Program. If you don't believe me, look at the various "Logic 1 decker" threads here; you might find them listed as "script kiddies". Your Logic only applies in certain places, and using a program is decidedly *NOT* one of them.

stealing your quote from the book cain



The device bit is what I feel they mean as the default if you don't have the program. I'm not sure if it was left out or translated wrong from the Fanpro days or what but based on the rules for defaulting skills and that when you dont have a program it looks like you could use (though they don't come out and say it) Computer+Logic, I would say a default to Logic-1 makes sense even if unclear. Errata would be greatly appreciated on the matter.

I see what it says and no I'm not wrong. Attributes are the base level for every skill roll a PC makes in SR. Roll yourself back to page 106.



Moving on to page 123 under Technical Active Skills.



Data Search is a Logic skill. Anytime you use a Logic skill, you always add the Logic attribute. Yeah, I could see if you cherry-picked that one paragraph it could be interpreted that Logic would be replaced by the Program Rating. But only if you ignore every other preceding chapter. Nowhere in SR4 does a player remove an attribute from a skill roll (unless the rule specifically says "Remove such-and-such attribute") when making a skill roll.

EDIT: For clarification.

Bare with me because I just don't see how you can say that when the book clearly says computer+program rating, nothing about logic in there. If thats the case it breaks the rest of the rules where its attribute+skill+edge. They dont add the "gear" dice in like nwod. With the exception of the matrix they are fixed scores and not part of the dice pool. I hope you can explain to my why you believe the matrix breaks every other standard in the book of rating+rating = dicepool. I might not get it, but I certainly can't find an example in the book.

Wrong on both counts. The paragraph I cited makes it very clear that you only use Logic when using certain devices, when using a program it's skill + program. The script kiddie thing is not a house ruling; you can build an effective Logic 1 decker.

Let's take a look at a few other places, and see what the dice pool is supposed to be:
P218-19:

Skill + Program. Not Logic + Skill + Program.
Further down page 219:

Once again, it's clearly listed as Skill + Program. Not Logic + Skill + Program.
P220, under the Data Search skill:

So, the BBB very clearly spells out what dice pool you are to use. And in every case, it's only Skill + Program.

Throughout the entire section, the exact dice pool you need is explicitly spelled out. And in no case do you get to add Logic to a Skill + Program dice pool.

Let's see where Logic next turns up, on p 225:

So, we see the general rule is this: When dealing hands-on with a device, it's skill + Logic. When utilizing a program, it's skill + program.

I made that same mistake at first, and I was embarrassed when I was caught. I thought it was Logic + Skill + Program. But, to my chagrin, it isn't. If you are adding in Logic to every matrix roll, you need to adjust the threshold on everything to compensate for the larger dice pool.

It's a badly written paragraph. Like I said, you can cherry-pick it but you end up confusing yourself.



Give me an example of outside a Matrix test where a PC would rating + rating = dicepool. "Computer" is a skill. Skills are attached to attributes. They do not operate independently unless specifically cited (and I can't think of one off the top of my head).

I hate to add fuel to the fire, but I'd like to point out that the Browse skill searches through files in one particular node. That's what it does. Data Search is a skill representing your ability to search across the entire matrix, and connected systems.

Using the Data Search skill is not the same as "using the browse program" any more than driving a car is the same thing as cruise control.

Just puttin' it out there.