Something I can't find: Do Commlinks have Firewall equal to their Device Rating?

Yes, they're devices, and all devices but cyberdecks and RCCs do.

I suppose my issue with the shared combat pool is the word combat pool, which brings back horrid memories of SR3. So I may be a bit biased, but that seems workable. It'd give a reason to have implanted commlinks again, but I'm curious about why you only chose 2 or 3 dice. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I'm just interested in the reasoning.

For the second point, that seems workable, but how many actions should it take for the hacker to get through? If it takes more than a turn or two, then it doesn't matter as the sammie should've ghosted the opposition by then. Do you picture it working like this?

Samurai Joe and Billy the Decker are pinned down at an Evo warehouse, hiding behind a few steel-sided crates. Four corpsec is facing them at other end of the warehouse, one of which is behind good cover and pressing suppressive fire down at the path between them and the exit. The other three are only under partial cover, so samurai Joe pops up and caps one of the partially covered corpsec after aiming (2 single actions) while Billy the Decker uses (complex action) brute force to place a mark on the corpsec's tacnet. Corpsec fire, miss, or whatever, and Samurai Joe responds by capping another one of the corpsec. Then Billy the Decker uses his next complex action (assuming 2 passes) to make the suppressive fire guy have a lower limit, therefore capping his next suppressive fire hits to something manageable. The remaining corpsec try to flee, Samurai Joe caps another one of them, and the turn ends.

(Presuming, of course, that Samurai Joe is good enough to ghost a corpsec with every pass, of course - still, there's no reason to think he shouldn't be, but I feel if the sam can waste the opposition at a good rate, the decker needs to have actions comparable to that, at combat speeds.)

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Combat Pool was awesome!

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

It broke immersion and prevented me from doing awesome shit. As I play the game for immersion and doing awesome shit, I'll have to disagree

I estimated the max bonus at 2/3 dice because:
-It has to be big enough to make a change and make limits relevant.
-It has to be bigger than the contribution of a single device to the dicepool (so that it doesn't feel like you're just getting a self-contained "+1" when attaching a device)
-It is big enough that it will deplete fast, encouraging the subscription of many devices.


As for the vulnerability, getting 2 marks on the TacNet server will be 1 to 2 complex actions, getting 3 marks 1 to 3 actions, and the action to send bogus data/commands (like, making the cybereyes picture distorted) is going to be complex or simple, depending.
So between 1 and 3 actions to access the central node, and 1 actions thereafter for each device you want to mess up.

I still like the DP as the thing that the Tacnet is represented by in the mechanics of how the system works.

but what about Hackers stealing and coopting the opposing tacnet to literally steal dice from the pool of the opposition?

i.e. fluff wise you perform a Man-in-the-middle attack on the link of your opposition sam's cybereyes and divert his data stream into your tacnet letting you suddenly see where 3 of his team are (you take 4 dice from their pool), you pass along his signal to his team so he doesn't know you've tapped him, but the stolen dice that are now in your team's pool are also a representation of the fact that the data coming from his cybereyes is slowed down or something.

That's... a very interesting idea. I like it.

But getting a mark on a device is a single complex Brute Force or Hacking on the Fly action. Are you going to houserule you need a new matrix action, or specify that you need 2 marks minimum on the tacnet server in order to do other shit? What are you going to make the tacnet server as well? Per SR5 RAW, there are only six types of icons - device, persona, file, pan, grid, and host. Is the tacnet going to be a pan or a wan?

So say you get 2 marks on a tacnet server (let's say it's a WAN or some shit, I need to reread the pan/wan descriptions to see if that's even viable), that's probably 2 complex actions, ie, two passes. That's probably what you'll have a decker, maybe a 3rd pass. So in a turn, all you've managed is just getting those 2 marks, and maybe a single spoof command. Still feels too long to me, where the sam has already ghosted most of the opposition.

I feel that the decker should have, for lack of a better term, AoE effects to compensate for the slow speed of his work. So he takes a while to get marks on whatever, but he can affect a large group once he does.

A mark (or 2 or three if you're willing to take risks) is a single complex action, but "Control Device" is also a simple or complex action, requiring 2 (simple action) or 3 (complex action) marks.

And the TacNet server is someone's commlink, set in master. The TacNet clients are other commlinks, set to slave.

I haven't taken too hard of a close look at the slaving rules for 5, but wouldn't it make it better to hack the commlink directly rather than futzing around with the tacnet, if that setup is used?

That's what I meant by "hacking the TacNet". It's just that since I don't like the rules for bricking, I was suggesting other possibilities for consequences when someone had access to your slaved devices.

Ah, I see. I thought you meant the tacnet as a separate thing, rather than shorthand for benefits you get by being slaved to a decker (or whatever).

I actually see it as software or commlink add-on that requires a connection between at least two characters (each having the software installed)

That still raises the issue of why go after the tacnet software or add-on when you can hack the master and slaves directly, though.

You don't, but it gives a good excuse for the commlinks to be on wireless-mode in the first place. Also gives a good excuse for slaving gear instead of putting it "offline".

I always liked how it prevented someone from dodging an infinite number of shots fired against them by bad marksmen.

Must be all the realism I prefer out of a game... with... elves and... drag--erm, nevermind.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

^_^

Your eyes don't connect. You commlink does. Your eyes are shared through that. You basically hack to isolate people from the tacnet.

I wouldn't call it a combat pool. i would call it a tacnet pool. It should be able to be used for combat rolls. But also perception rolls, leadership rolls and tactics rolls of various types.

Hacking a tacnet could lower limits. But you could also steal dice for your own tacnet pool. (simulating stealing the intel your tacnet has to give you an advantage) Also perhaps a tacnet will allow a decker to do teamwork on certain skills rolls like perception. Don't the teamwork rules allow limits and dice to be added to your roll?

I see as I was catching up some of my ideas were already thought of

You put your eyes online and slave them to the team hacker's cyberdeck running the team's tacnet. That's a link to the Cyberdeck as a slaved device.

The hackers are taking those devices and slaving them to their cyberdeck and creating some alternate feed to the other team's tacnet.

No. I do not want eyes having wireless connections of their own. They don't need one and should not have one. They need to go through a data jack or some other connection.

in SR5, it doesn't really matter even a tiny bit how things are connected. all that matters is that they are. if it's connected, no matter how many things it is going through first, it is vulnerable.

and actually, having eyes *capable* of wireless makes a heck of a lot of sense, given that they are cameras as well. you can use them to film your family vacation and then take that from your eyes, and put it wherever else you feel like. if we're talking about some special super-amazing military-only laz0r eyes that can also serve as hand grenades in a dire emergency, then yeah... those shouldn't be wireless. but given you're just buying the commercial model (and then installing vision mods in it), wireless legitimately makes a lot of sense.

First, whether or not they use a wireless connection is up to the user. If someone wants to register cybereyes but has no datajack or implanted commlink, then wireless is pretty much the only solution.
Second, since they have a connection to the TacNet (even indirectly), they're hackable through the TacNet anyway, even if the connection is wired. The TacNet needs to be wireless because it needs 2 characters.

Presumably you could wire your eyes out your datajack directly to a datachip without ever turning on any wireless, but you wouldn't be able to transmit that information to other people very quickly. Also you'd have a datachip hanging off the side of your head.

out the datajack to your commlink.

So, you plug a cable into your eyeball? This seems impractical. Remember, we're talking about a character who doesn't have a datajack in the first place. And many things are simply impractical to wire.

sure. if you had a datajack. not everyone with cybereyes will.

like i said, for some organization that has a reasonable expectation of running into nanites that will force a device into wireless state if available, wireless cybereyes that can have the wireless turned off or on is undesirable.

for pretty much anyone else, wireless cybereyes makes far more sense. it's more convenient, and convenience trumps security as a general rule. you either make your security convenient (and for most people, simply disabling the wireless when they're not using it actively is as much security as they'll ever need on their cybereyes), or don't bother, because people will bypass the security for convenience, and generally that will leave far larger security holes than just providing a less secure method that is still convenient. worse yet, you will know about the security holes in the convenient-but-less-secure design that you make, and can cover it in exceptional situations. if it's people altering your ultra-secure-but-inconvenient design, you won't know what they're going to do to get around it.

[quote name='RHat' date='Jul 18 2013, 10:18 PM' post='1245396']
So, you plug a cable into your eyeball? This seems impractical. Remember, we're talking about a character who doesn't have a datajack in the first place. And many things are simply impractical to wire.
[/quot

Most cyberware has to be wired to you brain. not a stretch to pipe a datajack into that. What changed in 3 years?

Matrix security, for one.

And the big question, can you still, by RAW, claim a wireless bonus if everything's physically wired instead?

What does matrix security have to do with peoples cyber eyes being connected to their brain? This is my problem with the whole wireless bonus thing. It makes no sense at all.

officially, no. not even if the wireless bonus makes absolutely no sense to be tied to an actual matrix connection. it has to be an actual matrix connection if it is to gain the bonus.

unofficially, many of us think that's stupid (the part where it has to be connected to the matrix specifically, and the part where some of the bonuses should logically work with wired DNI connections just fine, or even better than a matrix connection). others seem to think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Shadow Knight: Just think of the hard on a spider or security rigger might get if they can 'sniff' the feed from your cybereyes and see what you see.

Jaid: I know a guy who's going to be running an SR5 game (jumping from SR3), who pretty much thinks the later. He loves to screw with sloppy players, and these various wireless bonuses are a kilo of frosting on the cake. And yes, when I asked about using some datajacks to wire Reaction Enhancers, Wired Reflexes, cybereyes with a smartlink, and a smartgun, all to a cyberdeck, he laughed before saying "No."

ok. here's your solution:

cyberdecks make for lousy matrix defense anyways. get a used implanted rating 7 commlink. it will work better

if you think you're getting hacked, turn on a high rating jammer and watch the opposing decker weep as he eats a 6 point penalty to all his dicepools. use the commlink to avoid being jammed yourself.

Wouldn't've thought a commlink could have the processing power necessary for that with the new matrix rules.

in almost every case, firewall is used for defense. your commlink has firewall = device rating.

but hey, let's not stop there:

page 237:

"If
a device is completely unattended, the Device Rating
stands in for any Mental attributes an icon needs but
doesn’t have. For example, a device that an owner sets
and forgets, like a door lock, uses its Device Rating in
place of Intuition as part of the defense pool against a
Control Device action."

so ummm... make sure you don't pay any attention whatsoever to your commlink, i guess. just get it installed, and then never ever ever use it. in fact, get yourself a cat, and designate that cat as the owner. since the cat has no way of "attending" the commlink, you'll get rating times two, apparently.

unless of course you have amazing intuition.

Well then you sure as fuck aren't connected to a tacnet.

In other news, the way a design goal is implemented doesn't reflect on the goal itself. We're talking here about a completely different implementation, after all, but first we gots to agree on goals.

Sorry, I was away from thread quite a while, I know this is an old comment I'm responding to.



Yeah, a really good defense for an Intuition 2 character that finds their Rating 6 commlink being hacked is to throw it on the ground. :eyeroll:

*shrug* i don't make up these silly rules. i just poke holes in them.

Here's a draft of a potential TacNet Houserule:

TacNet rules, v0.5

Design goal:
Providing hacker-type characters with actions to directly undermine opposition in combat/fast-paced situations, via mechanical incentive for characters (PCs and NPCs) to make their devices accessible from the matrix, while preserving suspension of disbelief.

Gear:
TacNet (Electronic Accessories) : Availability 4, 1000¥
While listed in Electronic Accessories, the TacNet is technically a software add-on to a commlink, cyberterminal or RCC. TacNet software integrates sensor output, status report from cyberware or other equipment and other combat-relevant data to provide advanced tactical advice on the battlefield. To be effective, TacNet requires at least two characters to own commlinks (cyberdecks/RCC included) with the TacNet accessory, connected to the matrix. These characters have to decide to create a TacNet network, essentially telling their devices to exchange information and talk to each other via wireless. Note that this doesn't require a Master/Slave relationship between the two commlinks.
TacNets have a special dice pool called the TacNet pool. Each compatible device that a character will slave to a commlink that participates to the TacNet (not necessarily his own, if you want the decker's protection!) will provide 1 die to the maximum TacNet pool. This pool refreshes at the beginning of each turn (and only then). Adding more devices mid-turn doesn't provide extra dice until the next refresh. Edit: in order to contribute dice to the pool or withdraw dice from the pool, all characters need to be "in the same general area". This is deliberately left vague because the relevant area can vary from situation to situation. If the action is happening on the streets, for instance, a character in a helicopter 200 feet above but with a good view of the scene will provide dice to the TacNet and will be able to withdraw dice from it.
This pool is used as follow: a character with a commlink participating in the TacNet (and the means to obtain the advice provided by the commlink, at least via audio or visual interface - glasses, earphones, etc.) may withdraw dice from the TacNet pool and add them as a bonus to any test that doesn't involve a resonance or awakened skill. Dice withrawn from the pool are not available for anyone else until the next TacNet pool refresh. The maximum number of dice that can be withdrawn for any single action is 2 if the character doesn't have DNI to the commlink, or 3 if he does.
In order for gear to actually provide a bonus, in needs to be involved in the general situation the characters are facing. Deploying a series of Smart Firing Platforms facing a wall in an isolated corridor during a run won't provide any bonuses, but a single one covering the back of a team while they're facing a squad of Red Sams will. An Ares Predator in its holster won't contribute any die to the TacNet pool, but one in the runner's hands will. Unless otherwise noted, only one instance of each item can be registered per character.

List of gear that can provide dice to a TacNet ("compatible"):
Smart Firing Platform (when deployed in a relevant location)
Smartgun System
Chameleon Suit
Hazmat Suit
Biomonitor
Sensor Array
Control Rig
Olfactory Booster
Ultrasound Sensor (when active)
Skilljack
Wired Reflexes / Reaction Enhancers
Cyberlimbs (multiple cyberlimbs can be added to the TacNet)
Imaging Scope / Cybereyes /Glasses / Periscope / Endoscope / Mage Sight Goggles (only one per character)
Cyberears / Microphone (laser/omnidirectional/directional) (only one per character)

Hacking the TacNet:
If an enemy hacker obtains 2 marks on a commlink running a TacNet, he may use a "Control Device" simple action on that commlink to feed it with misleading data. Any time the character that owns this commlink withdraws dice from the TacNet, instead of gaining a bonus equal to the number of withdrawn dice, that character gains a penalty equal to that same number.
If an enemy hacker obtains 3 marks on a commlink running a TacNet, he can use a "Control Device" complex action to "steal" the TacNet pool for the turn, preventing any character participating to that TacNet from withdrawing any further die for the remainder of the turn and, if he so chooses, and adding extra dice to another TacNet to which he is himself participating equal to the number of non-withdrawn dice on the hacked TacNet (essentially turning the TacNet against the team).




I'll personally also use an optional rule about matrix condition monitors and such:
When a matrix condition monitor is filled, the corresponding device isn't bricked. Instead, its embedded computer crashes and shuts down, essentially disconnecting the device and shutting down some or all of its functions until it's switched on again. Some devices have a failsafe mode or redundancies that allow ongoing critical or vital functions (a plane's basic avionics, a cyberheart's basic pump) in such situations.

Okay silly question probably but I can see most of the items working with this, but why the chameleon suit? what does it add to the input of the tac-net? I can see the hazmat as it might sample the air and provide data on same, but not sure what the chameleon would be sending off to the tac net to report.

May be missing something obvious...

The Chameleon suit has advanced awareness of its surrounding -it runs a "4 pi" scan of the area so it can imitate it. This sort of data seems relevant to the TacNet as well.

Counterpoint:

A TacNet Control Unit (TNCU) runs as an upgrade to a cyberdeck or commlink (cyberdecks are somewhat more secure).

Individual TacNet Member Units (TNMUs) run as upgrades to commlinks. A TNCU can host a number of TNMUs equal to its rating. Individual devices (cybereyes, cyberears, goggles, etc) can be linked to the TNCU by that sub-unit's owner -- basically anything in your PAN if you have a TNCU links into the greater TacNet.

Any member of a TacNet can utilize the audio/visual information available to any other member -- the TacNet sorts out through a variety of configurable filters what information is relevant. In its basic configuration a TacNet will allow any individual member of a TacNet to use the best modifier available regarding a target that any other member of the TacNet would have.

That is, if Member A has thermographic vision enabled and Member B doesn't, so long as Member A has a visual of the target (presuming pitch blackness), Member B can use that better modifier (-3 instead of -6, or however). That includes blind-fire penalties, so as long as someone in the TacNet has any sort of visual on a target, no one suffers the blind-fire penalty (though cover is still addressed from the source of an attack).

Further, if a member of the TacNet has a Smartlink, any other member of the TacNet with a Smartlink can use that member's Take Aim modifier so long as they take at least one Take Aim action before firing. That is, if Member A uses 4 consecutive Take Aim actions (for +4 Accuracy and +4 dice), Member B, C, and D can all opt to spend one action on Take Aim and receive the full +4/+4 bonus rather than their individual +1/+1 bonuses. In that way, one person in a TacNet can server as a spotter' for the other members.

Lastly, the owner of the TNCU can spend a Simple Action to issue a command and perform a Leadership + Logic test as a Teamwork Test to the next specified action of a member of the TacNet, so long as that member follows the explicit directions of the TNCU.

That is, if the TNCU owner orders Member A to "take cover behind the stack of boxes 2m to your left and shoot the target being spotted by Member B" and opts to use his Teamwork Test on Member A's defense, then Member A can take those precise instructions and receive the teamwork bonus to his defense dice the next time he rolls defense that turn.

A hacker can affect a TacNet by forcing individuals to drop out of the network (thus reducing the TacNet's overall effectiveness), changing the available data (deleting target data or adding false data with Edit File actions), or by more insidiously spoofing commands from the TNCU -- ordering members to take tactically detrimental actions, with the hacker making his own Leadership + Logic Teamwork Tests to provide negative modifiers to specified actions. A TacNet hacker might spend two Simple Actions to tell Members A and B to move into bad cover and attack separate targets, and apply his negative Teamwork Test to their shots, or order them out of cover and reduce their defense dice. The Members of the TacNet might realize their tactical instructions are bad or their audio/visual data is faulty and choose to ignore instructions or drop the link, thus negating the primary benefits of the TacNet entirely until control can be reestablished by the owner of the TNCU.

I like what you guys have so far. I think both those rock. Asside from my minor notes.

How would wired reflexes benefit a tacnet?

How do drones fit in? are they handled by sensor arrays?

I think both have seemed to miss the point.

To me the point isn't that tacnets *NOT* become a piece of uber add-on gear. But that the stupid 'matrix bonuses' be completely replaced by a pervasive tacnet system that is simply part of the core rules. Provide a reason for people to want to network all those items on their list of toys.

Example: you can't get more than 1 die from the pool per device subscribed to the tacnet per combat turn. Now you have a reason to subscribe a lot of items. Street sams with all their toys go to the top of the list... as do riggers.

Earlier a lot of the dice pool mechanics mentioned made a lot of sense. I remember dice pools in the SR3 and earlier sense. They weren't that hard to work with... and contrary to ones assertion they tended to allow people to pull the awesome without resorting to karma pool. (they'd put as much of their pool into one roll instead of dribbling it out or saving it for defense).

I think the key problem is this. Not making up new gear for a tacnet... this is simply something anyone with a commlink/deck can do or join (maybe make it software... though I'd prefer to integrate it at a lower level like the system of the device... it just is). Simply redefining the matrix bonuses in a way which makes sense (no cyberlimb bonuses to a tacnet as I saw someone just did!). Then defining a new set of actions so that someone can maintain the pool... refreshing it, maybe enhancing the number of dice a member can pull. Or that someone can attack it. (instead of a bonus they'd get a penalty instead if attacked, disconnect them from the network, remove dice from the pool, insert misinformation into the pool... etc.).

Just a few quick thoughts.

Is there any merit to the ideas of letting a friendly decker/technomancer serve as the tacnet administrator and provide a dicepool similar to how counterspelling works? Then the bonus pool isn't so beholden to having a cybered up group and it accomplishes the goal of having the decker contribute more directly. What if these dice could be assigned to any action and they could be assigned and rolled after the initial pool has been rolled? Maybe your street sam misses a critical shot, so you give him 3 more dice to try to squeak out a hit. That could be a powerful bonus even if the pool is relatively small.

For other tacnet bonuses, what about initiative redistribution? Maybe a character could get up to +5 initiative provided the other members in the tacnet are willing to reduce their initiative by a similar amount (one character drops his by 5 or two drop theirs by 3 and 2, etc.). Other ideas: bonus free or simple actions, reduced penalties from environmental sources (cover, weather), additional movement, improved teamwork test bonuses or additional teamwork combat options.

@Falconer: the new gear is here for verisimilitude purposes. I don't see the matrix doing this sort of tactical calculations so you can perform illegal violent acts, and I don't see this being basic commlink functionality. Discrete software seems like the most realistic option, and 1000 nuyen seems low enough that almost any mundane character can afford it, but high enough to not be a "no-brainer" for others.

That said, I don't understand what you're trying to say - it's a bit confusing. In particular, I *did* provide a reason to turn matrix access on for all these items: each one adds to the dice pool. There's already incentive for the Street Samurai to put *more* gear online: adding more dice to the pool, hence providing *more* bonuses for the team on critical skill checks. Your saying I didn't provide such an incentive leaves me puzzled.





Wired reflexes benefit a TacNet through position/action awareness (which is useful for coordination: "Joe is getting ready to sprint through the corridor") and motion interpretation (that is, if the character punches an enemy, the wired reflexes can transmit enough motion information for the TacNet to know which sort of armor/muscle mass the fist encountered, via recoil analysis).

I'm not sure how to handle drones. Maybe "only drones registered to a RCC/jumped in can contribute dice", so that characters can't just fill the air with cheap microdrones to get 200 extra dice.

No worries...

You say that like it actually means something. And it doesn't. I do not build my characters to rely upon a Tacnet, nor do I care if I have the bonus or not. SO, going dark will 100% protect me from the opposition Hacker, and will not impact my abilities one whit (and is the only real choice, as "bricking ware" is just stupid. So, therefore, the design goal of having people connected to the matrix because of [IDIOCY] has absolutely failed to achieve its mark (And That WAS the Design Goal, as has already been stated many times... they wanted to incentivize Hackers and give them something to do in Combat). I see no BENEFIT from the Wireless Bonuses as presented in this book (you really did fail there, Neurosis, no offense), and I see a huge pile of detriments to incentivize me to stay the hell off the matrix when actively shadowrunning.

I think the real problem is that JH made assumptions about the game that do not stand up to scrutiny (I know some Freelancers had opposing opinions, but were overridden). It has been stated many times that hackers had PLENTY to do in game, even in combat (I know mine did). It was also shown that "Hacking Ware" was a horrible idea, and that is something that CGL actually recognized and stepped away from as SR4 developed. Unfortunately, apparently JH LIKES the idea of Ware Hacking and so therefore forced it down everyone's throat. And then CGL (Devs and Freelancers) wonder why there is a hue and cry about the decision. And then you get upset that people are slamming your baby (Wireless Bonuses) while wondering WHY it was not received as well as you thought it should have been.



Again, some of the rules appear to have been approached with absolutely no clue on what the game is actually about. This is just another example of poor implementation. *shrug*

Cannot get on-board with a Hazmat suit either... Want to sample the air, use an actual Sensor. And yes, the Chameleon Suit breaks the design goal for me, as I can not suspend my disbelief that a piece of Armor (Even one that can help you remain undetected) actually matters in a Tacnet. *shrug*

Also do not like Wired Reflexes or Reaction Enhancers adding to the Tacnet. Sensors, Yes... Non-Sensors, No.

It's not "a piece of armor", it's a complete network of sensors. That's *how* it works.


They're a bit like "improvised sensors" in this case. Also, TacNet isn't just about knowing where the enemy is, it's about coordinating a team and knowing what they're going to do. Sensors don't tell you that, but wired reflexes do (because they're first on the line when it comes to "acting").
Anyway, it's a community-driven design thing, I'm not the leader of the TacNet project. This was a suggestion (and how I'm going to run it at my table), but if the community thinks wired reflexes shouldn't be on this table, or that the chameleon suit's sensor net isn't appropriate for a TacNet for some reason, then the dumpshock-official version won't have them (provided the TacNet pool version is the one that gets the most votes, which isn't a given by any stretch).


Finally, my main reason to include these was that I wanted to avoid only giving bonuses for cybereyes/cyberears/obvious sensors, which makes for a very limited set of devices. It's not inconveivable that Wired Reflexes could give a lot of feedback that a TacNet could use (as opposed to a telescopic baton), so I included it.