Okay, I have been using the Attribute+Skill, hits capped by program rating, optional rule for hacking. This has worked just fine so far. Now I have a player that wants to play a Technomancer and its become apparent that they are really affected by that optional rule (See this discussion).

Something new came to me and I wanted to know if anyone had ever tried it before, and if so how it worked out. At it's core, I hate the fact that core rules don't take attribute into account for hacking, but it does for EVERY other aspect of the game. The idea that came to me is a hybrid of the core rules, and the optional rule.

Roll Skill + Program, as described in the core hacking rules, but Hits (not net hits) are limited by Attribute.

I've not had a chance to really think it thru, but it was an idea that just came to me that I thought I'd get some feedback on. On the surface it looks to be something that uses the core rules, for good and for bad, but makes mental attributes important for hackers at the same time.

I almost played in a game where the GM wanted to use that rule, and one problem that immediately jumped out at me is this: it's tough to raise an Attribute cap. Hit caps are hardly used anywhere in the game; the only other one I can think of is Force, for spells, and that's easy to raise by just casting at a higher Force. Capping at Program rating is easy to raise by buying a better Program (assuming your GM isn't cash-throttling your group). Can't a TM use Threading to increase the effective rating of his CFs? Seems like they'd be less affected, not more, than regular hackers.

But Force is limited by Magic, which costs the same as other Attributes.

I'm not saying that you are wrong. I'm just trying to think this thru and get devil's advocates, as well as play devil's advocate, to see where it works and where it fails.

No, force is limited by Magery x 2 and you don't really often go above 10 or 12...

So limit hits to Attribute x 2, just like spells.

Actually, thinking about it... it'd be interesting to see how well applying an Attribute x 2 hit cap to ALL skill tests works. I have a suspicion it would serve to limit power far better than the existing optional dice pool cap rules.



-k

No, for most rolls the attribute is a key component of the pool, often contributing the single largest source of dice (because it's agility, and agility is easy to make huge). I mean your typical optimized mundane combatant is going to be that elf with the right qualities and 12 agility, so now he's limited to "only" 24 hits on firearms, melee, infiltration, gymnastics, etc.?

Er, there's probably like one guy with 12 Agility on the planet. I know the rules make it possible, but 12 Agi simply isn't common, even among min-maxers.

And in any case, pretty much any rule can be broken when you focus on corner or extreme cases. That doesn't mean the rule won't work for most other purposes.

And guess what? He's spent so many resources to get 12 Agi that he won't have many other decent abilities. Really, if a player wants to spend so much BP to effectively have no hit cap, that's fine too, it serves to limit power elsewhere since it eats up build resources.



-k

Ok so "just" 7 agility then, standard soft cap for an elf, he's capped at "only" 14 hits. To actually hit the cap on average he'd need to be rolling over 40 dice. The Force cap on spells works because there's a reason to cast low Force spells (less drain).

What dice pools do you see this limiting really? The only one I can think of is Charisma/Social Rolls but that's a corner or extreme case because you'd need to be playing the 50 dice pornomancer to be affected.

I'm 99% sure we've discussed this variant of the '3 factor' hacking, including the subdiscussion about all kinds of hit caps in general… so yes. You should be able to search for it.

My brief take is that hit caps are almost always bad; even if they work correctly on their target, they hurt other people. If they manage both okay, then they're crazy complex.

The core problem you're going to run into is this: if you make hacking more logic-dependant, you make Logic stream technomancers better than other types of technomancers. Other than Willpower stream technomancers sucking terribly (which none of this fixes), the balance between technomancer types and hackers is one of the few well-balanced parts of SR and I'd be hesitant to poke around with it.

problems with a Logic cap are threefold. first, its rather common to need 12 hits to get admin access when hacking on the fly against firewall 6, and if your not fast enough then you get a +4 TN from the restricted alert. if you create a cap, then your saying that its NOT possible for 12 dice to get lucky with 12 hits, which then creates a minimum time to hack of several IP (2 or 3 IP).

second, you put the orks and trolls at a mechanical disadvantage when hacking, due to their lower logic caps. even with a cerebral booster, thats still only a +2 to the cap at chargen for a probable 4(6) logic.

third, you reduce the importance of adding more dice after (cap*3 or 4). if my cap is 5, then i can use 15 dice most times, 20 other times to just buy hits. you can build a character who throws a LOT of dice with the right 'ware and positive qualities. even if were just talking about starting characters, enchephalon 2, pushed geneware, program 6, and skill from 4 to 6 with a specialization, using hot sim gives 15 to 19 dice. it goes up with positive qualities, and certain nanoware.

also, if we have caps then the contested rolls would be more about who has a higher cap, instead of who has more luck and skill.

really, you don't need a cap at all- if high-dicepool hackers are a problem in your game, then simply apply the optional rule to cap dicepools. maybe change the availability of some ware if its a problem for you.

And your three "Problems" are actually problems why?

I have absolutely no issues with Hacking taking several passes to Hack-on-the-Fly into a System 6+ network for Admin Access. This exists with Program Capping hits as well, and I love that.

Orks and Trolls ARE at a Disadvantage, an should be, when it comes to Logic based things (Otherwise their Attribute Caps are not a limit). This Also exists in the Program Caps Hits paradigm. Did I mention that I loved this? You can still make a viable Ork or Troll Hacker with these rules in place. Hell, Our Uber Technomancer is an Ork, and he is just fine. (We use Program Caps Hits, However. But Logic still has an Impact because it is now a part of the DP)

You are only as good as your Tools (Program Caps) or your Innate Intelligence (Logic Caps). What is wrong with that? Makes sense to me. Especially for Hacking.

All that being said. Hit Caps are a limit, regardless of how you implement them. The question is really: WHY are you interested in implementing Hit Caps? Is it to fix a perceived problem? Is it to limit capabilities. Are you implementing Hit Cpas across the board? Only for a few things (Magic and Hacking)? Reasons matter.

For the record. We have hit caps only for Hacking and Magic. And for one of our games, we have implemented a test of DP Caps.

Agreed. A system 6 isn't something that every starting hacker should be able to get into in under 1 second (with 4 IP and hot VR). But, as demonstrated, getting that 15-19 dice pool to start means it usually is with the core rules.


Humans are at a disadvantage physically compared to other races. We shouldn't change physical rules to accommodate them. If you choose to play a character with limited intellect, but wish to play a concept that is intelligence based, you should face handicaps and challenges.


Couldn't have said it better.


The idea isn't to impose hit caps just to impose hit caps. The idea is to get mental attributes involved in Hacking. This was put forth as an idea of a slightly different way to do that is all.

Definitely. The question was not directed at you specifically Caadium. It was a general postulation.

I've always believed it should be handled similar to spells. Attribute + Skill, but you can only perform operations if you have the required programs (which doesn't have or need a rating of its own). "Hacking on the fly" can also be done, but with what amounts to a defaulting penalty. Or, in other words, if you don't have the program, you suffer -2 to your dice pool per program you lack for the objective. It requires a restructuring of costs and whatnot, but that shouldn't be all that hard. Especially since you can then set prices based on the individual programs rather than their general category. And you'd have to redefine various aspects of the commlink, too, but that wouldn't be difficult.

Basically, I'm of the opinion that there's no good reason for their to be an artificial cap on hits when it comes to hacking (or most other actions). Having them means that its not about personal skill, after all, and actually trivializes said skill. "Oh, you're the world's best hacker? Too bad you only have a rating 1 program and can only ever achieve one hit. <points and laughs>"

EDIT: Actually, it's a pretty big job to alter it since you really have to redefine how a lot of those god-awful rules work. But it's still something I'd rather do than make some minor tweak that doesn't really fix anything at all. 'Course, that assumes that I ever bothered with the Matrix rules in my games to begin with. That's always delegated to "the NPC Hacker did it" handwaving dependent upon a single roll of the dice.

I actually like this idea a lot. We are currently looking at something similar, and are in the design/re-design stage. Not sure how it will work out, but it should be interesting.



Likely, the worlds best hacker is going to have better than a Rating 1 Program. It has never been an issue with us.



This works too, but I really enjoy the hacking in Shadowrun, more so now that we went to the Optional Rule of Attribute + Skill (Program Caps). Do I ever hit my cap with hits to spare. Yeah, about 35% of the time (Usually 1-2 hits left over for mostly rating 4-5 Hacking Programs, and Rating 6 Common Programs), with 25% about right on, and the other 35 % of the time I am short a hit or so. The remaining 5% outlier is either a LOT of extra Hits (I had 11 on a roll once) or only 0-1 Hits. It all works out in the end. (For reference: The character I am currently playing as a Hacker has a DP of 17 in Hot VR, 15 Otherwise)

A rule my group has toyed around with is using Mental attributes to provide bonus dice.

IE: If you're using a Logic linked skill, you get bonus dice based on how high your Logic is.

1-2 you get nothing.
3-4 you get +1
5-6 you get +2
7-8 you get +3
9+ you get +4

That or some permutation of that seems like it would involve Mental stats and reward players with higher Mental stats without having to cripple the hacking system.


I'm not in favor of putting a cap on hits for a couple of reasons.

1. If you're really lucky and get a crapton of hits, you're really lucky and shouldn't be penalized for it.

2. Attribute + Skill seems like it would start hurting the higher in progression you get because with a skill and attribute at 6, your cap is 12 hits. I had a basic Technomancer that was rolling 15 dice and granted it's very unlikely to get even 10 hits, but once you start progressing you cant really expand your cap but your ability to hit that cap will increase quickly. Especially if you start buying hits. It's not the same as Magic because you can improve your cap by raising your Magic and you get other benefits for doing it.

We've been using the Attribute+Skill, capped by program/CF rating for our hacking and TMs, combined with a tweaked version of The Resonance Difference optional rules (below) and it's been working out fine, although, I should include the caveat that the group Technomancer is a newbie player and still learning his way around the rules, as well as being generally non-optimized, and everyone else doesn't have anything more than Electronics group rtg 2.

Yet you use the Magic system as it stands?

To Me capping hits based on program rating makes sense,sure FastJack is one of the best Deckers/hackers in the sixth world but with out the right tools even he would be limited to what he could do. A real world example would be giving a professional mechanic a wench and screw driver and telling him to rebuild a engine there will be only so much he could do with the tools he has but his skills would allow him to make maximum use of those tools. The same thing with the hacking rules in Shadowrun,a hacker with high skill will only be able to get hits equal to the program he is using but the number of dice being rolled increases the chances of hitting that number.

Agreed. Reason I went with the Attribute+Skill capped by program rating was the logic that even the most skilled, smartest hacker in the world can't do much if his tools are crap. It's the difference between, to give an example, MSPaint (Rating 1, if that), Paint.NET, GIMP (rating 2-4), full Photoshop Professional with all of the add-ons (4-5) and the software used for Avatar-level photorealism.

So you think someone like Fastjack, should he find himself with only a rating 1 program, couldn't -- shouldn't -- be able to outhack a guy with Logic 1 and Hacking 1 with a rating 2 program?

Not that it applies at all to what I mentioned in my first post. I advocate getting rid of program ratings completely, and simply using them as tools with which a hacker uses his actual skills to get the job done. If they don't have all the tools they need, they suffer for it. But put them up against someone with less skill and natural affinity, but with all the same tools, and they'll run circles around them. Just as they should. Limiting hits does nothing to reflect that whatsoever, and instead is a massive, artificial hamper to a character's skill and ability with no positive game.

Well, aside from justifying why programs have ratings.

Hmm I'll have to admit that is a good point, a less skilled individual with better tools shouldn't really be able to out perform someone more skilled with lesser tools,should they?

Point. However, I allow that the use of Edge allows for bypassing the hit-caps and will allow the more talented character to work miracles with his limited tools; since he already has the larger dice pool, even if he only has Edge 2, that, well, edge he has of skill, experience and natural talent will allow him to outshine the other guy.

So. In other words. Leave it uncapped.

Because honestly, who gets 8 hits (attribute 4) on 12 dice (6 skill + 6 program)?

I've played around with this before, and the limiting hits mechanic is just bad, and also screws technos.

What I ended up coming up with was something along these lines. Its not complete, but I figure its decent enough guidelines for other people to flesh out.

Hollywood Hacking houserule:
You roll: Logic+Skill. Programs are no longer necessary - all a hacker needs is a keyboard(or other terminal) to do their job. Yes, the 'if you don't have the program you can't make the roll' rule is rescinded.
Having the right tools for the job help you out a bunch, depending on the grade of the tool. This is balanced against the various Toolkit(+2)/Shop(+4)/Facility(+6) bonuses, FYI. Programs give a dice pool bonus equal to half their rating, round up.

It doesn't stop there - the houserule needs to account for agents, sprites, and technos as well to truly be a good alteration.
No really, the reason the usual log+attribute rule sucks is because it doesn't take into account technos very well.
Technomancers, because they literally use their brains as computers, are handled a little differently. Both of the following options are available to techno's, so that a mandatory change to the rules doesn't hurt their capabilities.
Technomancer may use either Logic+Skill, Stream Drain Attribute+Skill, or substitute their Complex Form in place of the Attribute(yes, this means that the CF does double duty, but basically only matters in the case of threading.)

Agents and Sprites use Pilot in place of Attribute, for everything. Potential pitfalls I never got around to fleshing out: Should agents get a small powerboost by getting EW by default now.(they already use Pilot for Hacking)

Additionally, Sprites are no longer dumb, and actually have Hacking/EW/Computer/Analyze skills by default(this is to compensate for 4A devs being dumb, and giving some sprites Decryption without Electronic Warfare, and also giving entities that live on the matrix built in Full Defense capabilities, much like spirits come with Dodge and Perception.). I was thinking about giving them Software as well(used in making accounts, for example, which sprites should be able to do) but specifically prohibiting Threading unless the sprite goes free.(this is normally how it works)

But in general, yeah: Logic+attribute+1/2program round up. Possibly a defaulting penalty if you don't have it. This means odd #'s are good, and even #'s just let you use more Options on that program.

As I said before, the cap for spells is determined by Magic which is, theoretically, limitless. Attribute + Skill is a hard limit that is incredibly difficult to raise past ~12

Magic is different. Hacking is for everyone.

What? What?
No, really, what?
12?
Seriously now.

In terms of hacking alone we have:
Cerebral Boosters (+3)
PuSHeD (+1)
Neocortical Nanites (+1 to +3)
Genetic Optimization (raises augmented max too, and natural max, which matters in some cases)
Specialties (+2, and not hard to cover all critical bases)
Encephalon (+1/+2)
Drugs: Overdrive, Trance, Psyche.
If you're an adept, Improved Skill is cheap, and can get you up to a skill of nine
And these all stack.

So yeah. Magic has a much higher upper limit.
But hacking lets you pile on a huge number of bonuses at start. Enough that it doesn't matter at all which one is better after a few hundred karma is earned. Because lets face it, magic 7 is 45 karma, plus initiation, and it only gets more expensive from there.

35.

7 * 5 is 35.

And *that* is another strong point against attribute-Hacking: even worse DP-creep, and even worse differences between haves and have-nots.

Also with hacking, you're usually fighting the target number of a machine or program who can be scaled to match your competence. With magic, you're attacking living beings with little to no defense.

Though to be honest, all of this just screams "SR4's system sucks." But I'm pretty biased since I do, in fact, think it sucks. Not that previous versions of the game were flawless, but at least it didn't pretend to use a universal set of mechanics to resolve everything. Magic, decking, and combat all had their own unique subset of rules. SR4 was made with a lame core mechanic that they tried to make universal, but they failed miserably at it, leading to all these bizarre situations like this where you end up with exactly the same thing, but artificially and in a way that just demonstrates how weak the overall game system is. Previous editions embraced the differences. This one is (or at least should be) embarrassed by them.

Sorry, starting to rant.

Dice Pool Creep matters not when you are capped at Program Rating.

Which in the end, is all opinion. I actually like that they got rid of all the stupid sub-systems of previous editions. I like the elegance of a single system. I MUCH prefer dice pool adjustments to Target Number Adjustments. Etcetera, Etcetera, Ad Infinitum.

No worries, though. Everyone is allowed to Rant from time to time.

Yes, TJ, it does. DP creep always matters. If you have a large DP and a lower cap, then you can ignore penalties; if the cap is high, then it doesn't mitigate the DP creep in the first place.

The point is that they didn't get rid of them.

If I were bound and determined to shoehorn Logic into hacking, I think Udoshi's got the best suggestion I've seen. The only thing I would add is to give nodes +Firewall/2 on any opposed tests (but not other types of tests) they make, so that they're on the same relative level as everything else. Then I'd just give generally harder hacking challenges to account for the bonus dice everyone's getting.

Maybe not entirely, though I do not really agree with you on that.
No worries.

Well, they did streamline things a lot, but it remains that Hacking is NOT in fact using the same rules mechanics as everything else.

Really, the "streamlined rules" trend is something that has been occurring industry-wide. People in general don't seem to actually LIKE having multiple different rule systems in a single game. I mean, seriously, look at most of the current generation game systems, they generally have a central mechanic that all their rules revolve around.




-k