Ask the Infiltration specialist? I suppose it comes down to what you expect of your hacker more: the ability to not die instantly in a firefight, or the ability to bypass hardwired security. Both are technically outside of his archetype description, I suppose.

If the building is wired, he can just hack into it and not have to bother with a Hardware roll. If it isn't, well....drop a little cash on a sequencer and hope for the best, I suppose.

This is false, and people can make that choice for themselves anyway. *You* value combat more.

I was pointing out your own contradiction, dude. You're the one who repeatedly said 'only hacking matters' and then said 'except also combat, just nothing linked to Logic'.

Prove it.

Prove that combat is more useful in general play than 'the ability to waste downtime'? It's opinion, that's the point.

If you have a sequencer, but no hardware, you have a 100% chance of setting off the alarm on the Maglock I just described. The sequencer will help you get the door open, but nothing other than your own Hardware skill helps with anti-tamper. If you want to get past it without setting it off, you need someone who's good at Hardware - you need to be able to get 4 hits on a Hardware test, so that's 12 dice to even do it on average and more if you want to do it reliably (and failure=alarm). It's hard to get Hardware that high without having Log-linked skill boosters...which makes the Hacker a natural person to cover that role because the Hacker wants those anyways. It's also part of the Electronics skill group, and while you can skip Software, you really shouldn't be skipping either Data Search or Computer as a mundane hacker, so it's cheaper for you to pick up Hardware than it is for anyone else.

Now, granted, there are other ways to cover Hardware. You can, of course, have someone be Logic Skills Monkey...but if you're going to get Log-linked skill boosters to do that, why not also be a hacker? You can have a Logic mage cover it and there's no real flaw there, and any type of Technomancer who can summon Machine sprites can cover it.

First Aid, while less hacking-related, is another invaluable Logic-linked skill.

And at least at my table, that's a very 'useful to the group' skillset.

So, you can't prove it. So you're claiming that something is false, without any evidence? And you have the nerve to call me a liar?

Just curious, which Log-linked skill boosters are you referring to? Also, as you already pointed out, the Mage (if Hermetic) and the Technomancer both have better options; the Hacker could conceivably use Logic as a dump stat (it adds nothing to his hacking) and arguably should (unless he needs to unlock doors).

That's true: he *could*, and—if he doesn't *want* to work on Logic skills—should. And that's a nice option to have. If he does want to work on Logic skills, then he also has that option.

The mage and the technomancer really need their karma, while the hacker is free to expand his skills into various areas, including (quite easily and with some synergy) Logic skills.

All I (and others) am saying is that this isn't 'broken'.

--
On the contrary, JonathanC: I'm claiming *you* can't claim it's true. It's 100% opinion, so it can't be true; your claim is false by definition. And while my nerve has no limit (hyuk), I said you were lying, not "a liar".

Then why aren't there options for mages who don't want to invest in the magic attribute? Or Street Samurai who want to have low Agility? Why can't a face get by without investing in Charisma?

--
If you say that someone is lying, you are calling them a liar, you asshole.

Because there aren't. So? Hacking is different.

! Saints preserve me, you called me a bad name.

So suddenly, Hacking is the only skillset for which natural talent means absolutely nothing, and that doesn't strike you as unusual?

Also, seriously, on what planet do you think that you can call me a liar and then deny calling me a liar, and NOT be an asshole?

It's unusual. It doesn't strike me as *broken*, bad, or wrong.

Earth.

If you don't know what the word "liar" means, you've got no business discussing anything more complex than simple shapes and colors.

PuSHeD, Encephalon, and NeoCortical Nanites.

You mean Cyberlimbs? Because you can totally be a street samurai with a 1 agility. And just like being a low-logic hacker, it's not the only way to go but it is a way to go.

Cyberlimbs are a little similar, but they have the downside of limiting your potential in your chosen field (they take up a lot of essence, which prevents you from taking other combat-oriented cyberware). While there are disadvantages to having a Logic of 1 (inability to unlock doors, etc.) none of them directly affect hacking.

TJ:
I really like that concept of yours a few pages back of using the difference between program ratings... since generally most computer/hacking tests are opposed. Though a few are simply threshold like browse+data search.

Did you ever figure out how to work those in?


Here's the one problem I sort of come up with though. I've experimented in the past with using ((Program + Logic)/2)+skill. It worked really well (high attribute could make up for poor tools, or great tools with so so attributes).

The problem was logic became sort of an uber-alles stat. To make it work better it really should have used intuition, logic, and willpower. You ended up with the same old problem of raising agility to the rafters then running 1 or no skill in most things and still being god-like compared to a normal human.



The idea of capping dice pool at 2x program rating also has some allure, avoids some of the massive dice pools... barring really good kit.

Similarly capping successes at 1x program rating...

Yeah, Falconer, that makes sense: if suddenly all you need to hack is Logic+Exploit, you definitely have to use a limiter (either one of the suggested ones, or something new).

(Edit: JonathanC helpfully and politely pointed out that I meant 'Hacking', not 'Exploit'.)

Wait, so logic became too powerful? Impossible! It's not good for anything. It's not used for killing things after all.

Sounds more like the problem was "Logic became actually *useful* for hacking, so we had to make some adjustments...."


Traditionally, Logic has been the stat for hacking/decking related stuff.

No, the problem was definitely that the DP for everything was suddenly Logic+Exploit. You have to have it limited somehow, and programs are the natural choice.

(Edit: JonathanC helpfully and politely pointed out that I meant 'Hacking', not 'Exploit'.)

I thought we determined that your reading comprehension made it impossible for you to contribute to this conversation, Mr. "I don't know what the word Liar means". He was using the average of program/logic + skill, so everything was basically Logic +hacking, not Logic + Exploit (how would you hack using only Exploit, anyway?)

I did accidentally say exploit instead of hacking (twice, because I did it in the last post). Whoops. Man, you really nailed me there! I'm so embarrassed that the public knows I mixed up two words.

Back to the point, where I was paraphrasing. He also said this: "The problem was logic became sort of an uber-alles stat". So… the problem was that logic was used for everything. I feel like I said something exactly like that, but it's hard to remember after all the vengeful nitpicking.

...with regards to one specific class of activities; this is a bit like saying "the problem with combat is that Agility has become sort of an uber-alles stat".

It is, in some ways. However, it's even worse in the matrix, because you'd roll it for literally everything. Physical combat has lots of other factors, including Reaction, Body, and (sometimes) Strength. So, you can see how this is totally different. Even so, sometimes you get people complaining that Agility is too good, or that Automatics is too good, etc.

Oh yes, absolutely. Because 90% of one's time in Shadowrun is spent on the Matrix. Why, I remember my last game, where....oh wait, the players never actually went on the Matrix.


So not only do you not understand the concept of the word "liar", not only do you not know the difference between the skill "Hacking" and the program "Exploit", but you also don't understand the concept of a simile. Awesome. Let me guess: public school?

Funny how in so many threads by page 8 I figure it's about time to stop following the thread.

More than 90% of all hacking takes place on the matrix, though, and it would all potentially use Logic. Every optional rule I've seen suggested acknowledges this problem, and addresses it (usually, again, via programs). I can't believe you're even arguing this.

I *can* believe that you're wallowing around in personal attacks, though. Have fun.

Kind of rich, considering that you were the one who decided to take this to personal insults in the first place. Again, if all combat uses agility, then why is this a problem? You don't using Logic/Hacking to avoid attacks in the matrix, and your icon's health boxes is not based on your logic or hacking, so your claim that Agility is less crucial to combat than Logic would be to hacking under these circumstances is false.

I didn't, because all I ever said was that you were lying (and you were, or you were mistaken despite the points being covered immediately beforehand). Either way, that's not an insult (personal or otherwise). Even if it were, you seem to be enjoying yourself as you go well beyond that first perceived slight. I only mention it because it's amusing, not because I want you to stop.

And, as I said, some people *do* think combat relies too much on Agility (and/or Automatics). However, the fact that it also relies heavily on Reaction, Body, and other things serves to mitigate the problem. The result is that that problem is more pronounced in the field of hacking. If all the hacking DPs are Logic, then Agility is less crucial than Logic. As Falconer said (not me), the problem was that Logic was too good. This basic idea is implicit in the various Logic-based hacking rules, which specifically include limiting mechanics.

Finally, my initial point was that you were wrong to say (even, presumably, in jest?) that the problem was, "Logic became actually *useful* for hacking". Nobody has a vendetta against Logic in hacking. It's simply a thematic decision that the writers made, and then explained in SR4A and again in Unwired. Assuming Logic-based hacking is the table's choice, then the limits are in place only for balance; no one is trying to repress the power of Logic per se.

Yeah, I just started skipping anything written by those two after page 5 or so. Spiraled into uselessness and drama.

I disagree. I think we should keep the system+2 Max rating. It fits with the other mods.

@Johnathan C

Not sure why you aren't getting any of the points other people are making. Log 1 script kiddie has 40BP more to throw around than the Log 5 hacker; that much is true. However, these two characters are completely different animals.

Your Log 1 script kiddie cannot code or patch his own programmes, he has to buy them. He might want to invest some of those BP in Charisma so he can get some of the higher availability stuff, though. Hackers on Shadowsea dismiss him as a rich moron. A maglock defeats him. If he branches out into rigging, he will have to shell out his hard-earned new yen on a mechanic to repair/upgrade his drones, on top of the cash bleed keeping his programmes updated costs him.

Your Log 5 hacker basically sucks at combat (where most of said script kiddie's "extra" BP probably went). He is respected by his Shadowsea peers as articulate and skilled. In his downtime he codes and patches a lot of his programmes. He is the team's go-to guy for bypassing maglocks, and is pretty handy as a combat medic. When he branches into rigging, he can repair/upgrade his drones better than Auto Bob, who the script kiddie gives a lot of his new yen to. Oh yes, and that shiny drone the sammie just shot out of the sky, a few weeks at his workshop and the team may well be using it on their next run.

Finally, I can see talking about only Log 1 or 5 as the extremes of the hacker vs script kiddie, but in terms of character flavour I think most players trying to design a script kiddie will put at least 10-20BP into *some* Logic in order to make their script kiddie less of a cardboard cut-out excuse of a character.

I agree in theory with the dislike of the current direction of SR4 and not using Logic. I liked the flavor of the cyberdecks needing to plug in to a human brain to be as powerful as they were. So I'm all in favor of optional rules that use Logic.

But in other ways, I don't agree with comparisons to Street Sams and Mages and the like. I don't need all "archetypes" to work the same. It is kind of nice, that if you go for a "hacker", you might have a different set of goals than if you're the "hitter", "grifter", or "thief".

Ultimately this seems like a matter of opinion. Don't like the rules / background information? Change them at your table! Have a blast. Just don't get your panties in a wad when other people don't agree with your opinion.

I was only commenting as regards matrix stuff... when running like so, only 2 attributes seem to matter if you do a lot of this logic (easily pumped up with cerebral boosters) and willpower for soak. Charisma has it's uses, just I meant that some of the less planned and more reactive stuff or black magic should likely tie to intuition instead.

Even this got problematic because to take a combat example... it's easy to pump logic, hard to pump intuition. So you end up with more dice available to attack and less to defend in that example if you split the uses like so.

And here to me one of the best things about shadowrun:Archetypes are just merely guidelines. No one actually has to be one.

Agreed. In my experience, people always play hacker-and-X. Having multiple roles lets you make a fun hybrid that's useful and interesting. And as phlapjack said, wanting Logic to matter is no reason to condemn everyone else's (RAW, fluff, and default) fun.

I've actually played one of these. Naturally kinda clumsy, Artificially a gunslinger with quicksilver reflexes and a good right arm.
Not everyone plays a cookie-cutter. Cyberlimbs aren't the first choice for optimization, true. But they work just fine.

I find that numerical optimizers tend to hyperspecialize because they overlook the benefits of versatility (because it's harder to numbercrunch). A 1-trick scriptkiddie can be replaced by a good DINAB. If it can't be directly hacked, he's useless. A real hacker has options. And they could be based on his gear, his Logic, or maybe his Charisma. Or possibly (Gasp) all of them. I have been in games where hardware and social solutions were sometimes easier than direct hacking. More often the easiest approach used all three.

What's the role of a hacker? He's your go-to guy for dealing with computer stuff. Any computer stuff. Considering how much of SR4 is computerized, that's a big role. You can narrow it down if you want, but that really narrows your options. An over-specialized character is sometimes forced to use a non-optimum line of attack on a problem. Why do it the hard way unless it's your only choice?

Naaah... Just Optimize (Program Option) your Encrypt Program (It is Common Software after all, so not all that expensive to start with) to run on the lower rated System of your Comlink.

The problem is, JonathanC, that you are making an erroneous assumption that the character who has a higher logic is "Useless" in combat. That is not the case. You can have all three as a hacker. You can have a good Logic, Good Matrix Skills, good support skills and good combat skills as a Hacker. I know, I have done it on more than 1 occasion. Specifically BECAUSE I agree that Logic SHOULD be more useful. As I said before, it is a design philosophy. You can do it well as a Hacker with a high Logic (And as I indicated, even bettter than Herp A Derp does in your example).

Just because you have a higher Logic DOES NOT limit you from having a large bankroll, excellent hardware and programs, and combat skills that can contribute to the overall success of your team. In fact, having a high logic will also ensure that you have some good support skills as well, when things go pear-shaped; you know, like Hardware and First Aid.

Presumably, your investment in Logic will pay off in cash savings in the long run. Has this been your experience, TJ?

There are options for such characters... it is called not raising the attribute to the highest possible level.

I routinely play mages with Magic in the 2-4 Range. And you know something? They have been pretty damned effective. It is a different style of mage, to be sure, but still very valuable to have around.

Same with Street Sams. Have one currently with a Agility of 4 (5), a Reaction of 5 (6), and Body of 4. He has an Initiative Rating 9, and 2 passes. He is not bad as a Street Sam, and gets the job done. Is he as good as the Sam with the Agility 9, Reaction 9 Initiative 14 and 3 Passes Sam? Probably not in an extended fight. but in the normal range of fights, he can compete.

Played Many a Face with a Charisma of 3 and only 10-12 Dice. Again, worked just fine.

All the above characters "get by" and succeed at their jobs just fine. COULD they be more "powerful" with higher stats? Yes, Likely. IS IT A REQUIREMENT TO DO THE JOB? Absolutely Not. After a point, success is just success. whether I get 2 Net or 20 net is irrelevant most of the time.

Having a high logic means that you have 40 points less than someone with 1 logic. By definition, you have less to work with. They will be better in combat because they don't have much of anything else to spend those points on once they've fully optimized their hacking skills.

Indeed it has.
Between
Programming of my own programs (with options)
Crafting my own Comlink Hardware
Building Drones from Obtained Plans
Repairing Damaged Drones
Repairing my own Weapons and Armor when they are damaged
Repairing my Vehicles when they are damaged, or obtaining damaged vehicles and bringing them to functionality (Good plan with Aircraft)
etc.

I have saved Hundreds of Thousands of Nuyen over the course of the campaign My CyberLogician played. That ain't chicken scratch.
Now some of that was quickly realized, while some of it took some time to realize (like the plane we bought and then refurbished, which took 7 months of on again, off again repairs).

By the explanation given, it is NOT unusual.
For those who disagree (Like Me, and apparently you), there are Optional Rules.

Not sure how many times that need be said.

The Essence Limit for Cyberware is Laughable in a long term campaign.
You can cram almost 30 points of Essence Loss into a Playable Character with an Essence above 0, over time.

Again, I know because I have seen it.

He didn't say 'better', he said 'good' and 'not useless'. We're talking about a few dice in one place, versus a few dice somewhere else. Combat and Logic-skills are equally useful and equally valid, so none of the BP in Logic are 'wasted'. They're simply somewhere else. No-Logic hacking lets the player make that choice.

You must have had a very lenient GM to allow you the time to do all of this software development. Yes, I'm aware of your methods of paring the time down, but "rushing the job" doubles your chances of a glitch, and glitching is *supposed* to undo the work you've done so far. Ditto for your commlink hardware.

If you have a GM who is willing to handwave inconvenient rules for you, then yes, you can have fun playing almost anything.

I dislike optional rules. They're basically house rules in print, and if I wanted to make up my own rules for a game, I wouldn't be buying rulebooks.

We have addressed that issue. Though threshold test do not really change all that much.
I do not have access to the rules right now... But I thought it was pretty elegant.
We played with Dice Pool Caps, and though it worked out not too bad (I liked them, it was Hits equal to program Rating), our GM said he felt a bit off about it. Thus the new houserules we are currently testing.