Meh. You could rule that the hacker could have made a spot test anyway, since he would likely know his friend's link's commcode ID, and that could count towards "knowing" something about the icon you're looking for, but the mark would have removed the necessity for a test.

Since the whole argument lately has been over what counts as "knowing" something...

Note that "place" isn't a thing on the Matrix, and that an icon outside of 100m doesn't correspond to a physical location until you run a successful Trace User on it (which means having found and heavily marked the device already).

You could presumably use "Owned By ID" as a feature of an icon, but you run into two significant problems:

1) A corp that owns gear would have a lot of equipment potentially worldwide stored under one ID, so "Ares Predator owned by Ares" would probably turn up a gabillion hits, and the only way to find a specific one would be to Matrix Perception each one, which would probably take longer than anyone has.

2) Plenty of gear (Shadowrunner and Corp) would likely be unlicensed. Corps need some shell of plausible deniability in their own operations, and so you could imagine that the Corporate Court would passively allow unlicensed equipment so long as that unlicensed equipment doesn't do (read: isn't caught doing) anything nominally illegal.

Not to mention that features like "owner" and "slave of" (and, again, "location") aren't really features of an icon (though I agree that "features" needs to be expounded upon).

Even restricting yourself to the confines of a host, if there's gear connected to the host there's likely a ton of it. Imagine what the Knight Errant Seattle Security Host (hidden, of course) with all its drones and commlinks and such on it looks like. How long would it take you to sift through the mess for one very specific target? When faced with 900 mostly identical Fichetti icons, what's your tactic to find the one you're looking for on the guy you're looking for?

You therefore can't just say "I want a search of the smartguns in that building" from the comfort of your couch, unless your couch is in the building.

The only people who are in serious danger of being found on the Matrix are the general SINner public, who aren't hidden and have everything they own registered and otherwise tied down to a real ID.

Whatever works, or doesn't, for you Smash.
It's an obvious fact that some people are far more adaptable within the open boundaries of the game than others. Some people want every detail listed out in advance in detail as the be all and end all, others like myself can look at a basic chart if examples and work a case by case out happily in our heads. To this there are pros and cons but obviously what you see as unplayable I see a flexible system I can easily use.
Horses for courses as they say.

*sigh*

it cannot be your hardware doing a search for radio signals when you do a matrix perception test. there is no way for that to tell you information about an icon, at best you could get information about their antenna. furthermore, hosts do not have any physical distance, and yet you can only detect stuff inside a host when you're inside a host. even if the host itself is physically located everywhere (which is complete and utter nonsense), you cannot detect stuff inside it until you're inside it, at which point you cannot detect the stuff that is 100 meters from your physical location.

a matrix perception test is essentially you filtering through all the matrix traffic to try and find something relevant to what you're 'looking' at. either that or hosts are magic and can selectively block all wireless signals everywhere, but only when they're trying to get information about stuff on the other side of the host wall, which is both everywhere and nowhere.

I think part of the problem is trying to equate the way that Shadowrun (or at least the devs) say that Matrix equipment works with how equipment works in the real world. Sure, there's no way an antenna pinging all other antennas within 100m would tell you anything about the software/icons/personas running on that equipment, but that's how the system says it works. It's another artificial limit (like Physical Limits or Mental Limits) that tries to make sure the decker is on-site with the group rather than sitting home on his couch, but does it in a confusing and poorly written way.

There's no logical reason beyond "the rules say no" that a "ping" request from your deck couldn't be repeated/forwarded from any device within range to any devices within range of that, and so on until you run out of devices within signal range of each other, but that's the way the book says it is.

I think what the writers intended was that if you are looking at a physical object ("within 100 meters") you can poke its icon in VR (if it has one and its not hidden). If it's hidden you have to make a perception test first.

If you're outside that meat-visual-perception-bubble then you can't look for hidden icons because the information necessary to target it isn't available. Sure you have some general knowledge ("Joe Hacker, man, its got a ACME logo on it") but that isn't the relevant information: there's millions of those that could be anywhere.

It's more "ok, so it's there in the real world, so it ought to be about here in the matrix...filter out some junk...oh here we go ACME Safe Co. Safe Lock"

Everything you just said can be condensed as 'These rules are poorly written and have no logical underpinnings.'


Which is accurate.

Well, yeah, but at least this way we know exactly WHICH rules that are poorly written with no logical underpinnings we're talking about, so people don't think we're talking about any of the other poorly written illogical rules out there.

I suppose that is a distinction we need to make!

Again, I have to keep going, but only because I think you've finally stumbled upon how this is supposed to work. Yes, in your scenario the guy who drops his comlink 100+ meters away while it is in stealth mode could not get his decker friend to find it. Assuming;

1) He can't give the decker some information about it's icon. A MAC address, a virtual serial number, some other wierd IT stuff that you don't need to actually know about to play the game. As the owner of the device they may know this. a photo of his comlink while he was on holiday does not count in this regard.

2) The Decker has never seen the device on the matrix, EVER. Not on a run, not just by casual observation. Nothing. If the decker had seen the icon before he intrinsically knows plenty of matrix relevant information regarding that icon, or at least his deck does, and hence can find it outside of 100m.

3) The guy was running his comlink in hidden mode in the first place. For the most part you're comlink is the one part of your kit that is required to be broadcasting so big brother knows who you are. Even if it is just a fake SIN.

4) The scenario highlighted earlier that perhaps the decker has a mark on the comlink. although this would have to be done every time one of the devices was turned off.

5) I've always assumed (and yes this is an assumption but it is one that helps the world work for me) that you can register hidden devices with allies or a host. this is how a corp decker would know whether a hidden icon is something to worry about because he knows the protocols to spot all the corporate devices running in the same fashion. If this is the case then to the buddy decker the device is not actually hidden.

All of this has a design point behind it. It is to get the hacker on site with everyone else AND to protect their anonymity once they are off-site again. Otherwise the corp decker could get some surveilance footage of you and just scan the world for your icons day and night until your are dead and there would be 3/8 of f-all you could do about it except to dump all your gear every run...... including cyberware, or to just never turn it on. now I know this is the scenario that you guys seem to want but the clear intention of the system is that having wireless on should be the norm or at least a risk assessment you make with each run. If you implement the 100m limit then the system works.



The whole game has inconsistencies. It has for every edition, but the fact that so much focus is put on the matrix seems to suggest that it's not actually about the mechanics but feels like resentment for having to make choices.



That's not an interpretation we share. If you want to interpret it that way and have it break your game then more power to you.

it's not just that your antenna can somehow magically tell you things about their devices.

it's that your device magically is or isn't able to detect things within 100 meters based on the matrix location of your persona that is the telling point. the fact that being in or out of a host completely changes your ability to detect stuff within 100 meters of your location clearly demonstrates that you're not using your antenna for that. rather, you are using your device's ability to process data, and filtering through all the matrix traffic that your device normally just glosses over, to find icons. meanwhile, the other icon isn't magically broadcasting a signal that is impossible to detect, rather it is disguising it's matrix traffic to look like something that other devices should gloss over.

i do find it interesting that suddenly, the supposed need to know that a device is running in hidden mode beyond a shadow of a doubt seems to have been discounted at least.

at present, we're basically arguing about what exactly "one feature" means, and since that's not clearly defined anywhere, neither side is going to be able to definitively prove the other wrong... but with that said, if i know that your device is running on a specific OS and specific hardware, i'd have to suspect that i know enough to try and look for your device, because i should likewise know how your software handles trying to make it look like you're something to be glossed over.

As for the 'host' thing, the way I look at that is sort of like running a private IRC server. Once you're in, you can see everyone/everything in that same server, but you'd have to leave the server and go back out to the general Internet to see people there. This is also (in my mind) the fault of trying to ascribe current computing practices to the Matrix, which can't really be done. Connecting to a host is sort of like a VPN tunnel, I suppose. Once you tunnel into the host, traffic can only go where that tunnel's endpoint will let it go, and in a host's case, that's in-host only. You'd have to log off the host(VPN) to get traffic back out to the general Internet/Matrix. It's a rather poor way of describing it, but I'm a bit tired at the moment and while I can picture it clearly in my head, the imagery isn't really translating itself to words very well.

And yes, I'll agree with you, it's likely that we'll never truly agree (as a group, or even as a pair of individuals) on what constitutes "one feature" of a device. Some may say that you need something concrete, like a commcode or an ID number. Others may get more vague, like knowing what a default icon for that device should be, or what you can dig up on it might give you. Vague rules are vague. Hopefully it'll get explained further in the Matrix splatbook whenever that comes out, but that doesn't exactly excuse it from being absent in the core rules.

it doesn't matter how you get to the host (or rather, it probably does, but not for this particular point). the point is that the physical location of the device which generates your persona is obviously not being used to determine what you can see when you're in the host, otherwise you would only be able to see hidden icons that are both in the host and within 100 meters of your physical location. instead, you can search for hidden icons anywhere in the host, regardless of the physical distance between your hardware and their hardware.

Why can't both be true?

When in a host the distance doesn't matter because there is no distance in the host and outside the host the distance from your deck does matter. Can't a game mechanic have exceptions?

i'm not arguing that distance doesn't matter. i'm arguing that distance *from the device* doesn't matter, but rather distance from the persona.

otherwise, you seem to be arguing that for no benefit whatsoever, every single device in the shadowrun setting uses two completely different methods of performing the most basic function (of perceiving the matrix). also, you seem to be arguing that in spite of the fact that you can move your persona about the matrix, when you're not in a host and not perceiving from the vicinity of your device, you randomly use neither of those two methods, but a third method which is less functional, even though one of your existing methods allows you to operate at any distance with full functionality.

sure, you *could* do that. but at that point, you're arguing that when designing the matrix they decided to develop two completely different systems, use both of them, and thus have to maintain both systems instead of one, and furthermore they decided to ignore a perfectly functional system and developed a third system that has to mesh with one of the previous two systems but does not allow full use.

it's a game mechanic that exists to provide us a way to simulate reality, albeit a different reality than our own. if it lacks verisimilitude, then it should bloody well be torn to shreds and replaced with something more simple. if i'm going to be playing a game that doesn't feel realistic, then there is no reason for the rules to be complicated at all: make a single die roll, if it's good, i succeed at whatever i was trying to do, and if not then i failed. if it's going to feel fake, it may as well resolve quickly and easily. i don't need to make 10 different skill checks to shoot a person, after all.

Sorry, and this may very well be me being thick but I really can't tell what point you're making here. However the book is quite clear on the fact that matrix perception is talking wholly in real world distances. It's right there under the matrix perception part of the book on p235:



I've been talking about this for half of this thread. But you've been arguing that this is not the case because you've just decided that you don't like the way it works. That's fine if you want to house-rule the matrix. Go for it, by why argue that it's about the rules?



Yeah, exactly. That's exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying that the way you perceive the matrix works differently within a host to outside the host. So, yes that's what I'm arguing. That's what the book says as well so are we discussing why the rules suck or how the rules work?

I can even justify it some some extent and this goes back to me asking you how you measure 100m in the matrix. It's the same as asking you how long is a piece of string? What you see in the matrix is not the real world, it might be pretending to be the real world so you can make sense of it but there's no reason why what you might perceive to be 1m in the matrix corresponds to anything in reality. So in reality whenever you are perceiving the matrix you are just being fed information about somewhere else through your deck. That might seem like flying to the other side of Seattle, but it's not. That's an archaic view of the matrix that was abandoned in 3rd edition.

When you enter a host you might be getting a visual representation of a building or a facility, but what you're actually getting is information fed to your deck about everything else that's in the host. The only thing that is hard to reconcile is that there is no noise and you know what, I don't need to know the physics behind it, I just need to know that's how hosts work in Shadowrun, and of that there's no question.

We also have 2 totally different sets of rules for how vehicles work in combat as well. The reason being that the game works better this way.



Verisimilitude is totally subjective and I really think it's not the issue here. I mean I don't know what part of 'future technology' doesn't reconcile the matrix for you when if you were playing dungeons and dragons the word 'Magic' explains everything without any problems. Ironically Shadowrun has both.

I can't imagine what game you would play that would satiate you need for everything to exactly mirror reality (and those REAL Shadowrunners out there that are doing runs right now against FOX News!). Would you play any White Wolf games where the rules are basically optional? How do you reconcile vampires in 'Vampire'? Hell vampires in Shadowrun!? I mean how does a virus turn you into a Vampire? Oh right, it's a 'Magic' virus.......

You know what. I was one of those players that actually hated wireless conceptually and wanted it removed in 4th Ed to preserve that tactile feel of deckers in 1st - 3rd editions. In 5th they've tried to satiate everyone to the smartphone kiddies that think wireless is just tops, to the old codgers like me that thought the game was better off without it. And they turned ME around with this edition. It can't be that hard just to get on board and let someone else have fun playing a decker again.

It's really very simple.
Devices not tied to a Host (or a PAN that's currently in a Host) are on the Grid, the Grid is the VR and AR overlay of the Physical world existing within the Data Streams that firm the Matrix. The Grids pretty much exist for the transfere of Information, they are essentially the "wires" the wireless runs on. Almost everything else on the Matrix exists within a Host, the chat zones, virtual bars, web pages, shopping catalogues, databases, lab computer systems, data drops and so forth.

Any form of AR or VR can only translate 100m of the surrounding Grids in complete detail, the rest requires the User to actively look for certain things which the Deck or Commlink will then translate the data code into VR or AR if present. This can be achieved at almost any distance but the further away or the more barriers makes it harder (Noise).
Hosts are automatically linked to any point on the Grids but have their own limits on access (some may be public others require changing Grid to the appropriate one). Because of the nature of Hosts (and the fact the Matrix exists to allow access to them) they don't have a Physical distance.

The things you see on the Grids is substantial because of a need for cross communication for day to day items, SINs,Credsticks, Commlinks, Fashion and so forth. You'll also find some of the more mundane security cameras and stuff just linked to the grid because hosts are typically existing by function or purpose and I dare say are not cheap and against most threats (given the rarity of runners) is probably more than sufficient.

wow. can't believe i missed that nonsense about all matrix perception being based on your physical location. that is incredibly dumb. like, mind-blowingly stupid. if i send my persona to check out the local library, i have to make a perception test for the library, then i have to make a perception test for every book i want to read, etc.

now i'm left wondering why anyone even cares about the matrix. it's a huge pain in the ass to use the matrix to do anything unless what you want to interact with is on a host or within 100 meters of your physical location, meaning you could just go there anyways. with this idiocy, the entire matrix is limited in convenience dramatically. now if i send my persona out to explore, once i get past 100 meters, i see absolutely nothing. unless of course i make repeated matrix perception tests for specific things. there could be the matrix equivalent of a 100 foot tall robot break dancing 101 meters away, and i would be completely unable to spot it unless i specifically decide to try and spot that specific robot.

and it also doesn't make sense. you are blatantly obviously not using your antenna to detect stuff within a host. why wouldn't that be equally possible when you are not on a host?

as for why "future tech" isn't good enough, well sufficiently advanced tech *is* indistinguishable from magic. but this isn't sufficiently advanced tech. they're using antennas, batteries, optical fibre, software, etc that all works on principles we understand today.

as to magic being, so long as it follows the rules for magic as defined in the setting, it still allows me to immerse myself in the setting. but if suddenly a new spell was released for shadowrun that lets you teleport, for example, and it wasn't explicitly indicated to be a setting change, i would have to stand up and say "hey, something screwy is going on here" just the same way, because it breaks the rules of the setting. apart from that, magic explicitly breaks from the rules of the real world, that's what makes it magic.

but tech doesn't have that advantage. the whole thing about tech is that it *isn't* magic. it doesn't break the physical laws of the real world, and it doesn't get to have nonsensical requirements because tech is based on science. it has to make sense.

as to how to resolve a matrix distance of 100 meters, pretty much every part of the matrix that is not a host does have a physical location. in fact, the only way that idiotic 100 meter rule can even work at all is if everything on the matrix actually has a physical location assigned to it. otherwise when you look around, you won't see anything at all (barring specific matrix perception checks to try and find specific icons) unless you're in a host.

so yeah, that being one of the dumbest rules i have ever seen, it's going to be house ruled. and in fact, probably is repeatedly house ruled in most groups without even knowing it. or do you find that as soon as you move 100 meters away from the device your persona is operating from, you can't see anything at all in the matrix?

Yes, you have to make Perception tests. Most of these are stupidly easy. You also have to make Perception tests to find your car keys in your pocket or to pick out which thing on your desk is your water bottle rather than your stapler.

Really, it's starting to look like some of you guys are being deliberately obtuse.

The fact that you are required to make a Perception Test to pick out your water bottle (regardless of how easy that test might be) and that you can then fail that test for something that should be obvious without a test is the Ludicrous part of this conversation. And the fact that you don't see that is truly funny to me. One could say that you are being just as deliberately obtuse.

That was a real-life example. Occasionally you do fail to pick the water bottle. Just like occasionally you leave the remote in the fridge and the milk on the counter. I've seen people fail to spot a car on fire less than 100 feet away. There's a video you can watch and totally fail to spot a man in a gorilla suit walk directly through the middle of the frame.

(It doesn't help that he was just plain wrong. You don't need to make Perception tests to spot the library books in the host, assuming the book files aren't hidden.)

Point taken.
I HAVE SEEN THE GORILLA VIDEO, AND IT IS FUNNY TO WATCH PEOPLE'S EXPRESSIONS WHEN THEY REALIZE THEY COMPLETLEY MISSED IT.
Damned Caps Lock. Sorry, not gonna retype.

I love that video.

unless everything is a host, you do have to make that perception test to find an icon for a book. essentially, as it is set up, the matrix is stupid unless you are perpetually on a host.

and no, it isn't like the water bottle. there are no rules that say you are incapable of detecting things beyond a certain range of your eyeballs. we were just quoted a rule that says you cannot see things more than a certain range from your antenna unless you make a matrix perception test. remember that quote that was posted just before mine? apparently not, so here it is again:

"You can automatically spot the icons of devices that
are not running silent within 100 meters of your physical
location. No matter where you are in the Matrix, your
commlink or deck (or your living persona) only has its
own antenna for wireless signals, so this distance is measured
from your physical location no matter where you
are in the Matrix. Beyond this distance, you need to make
a Matrix Perception Test (p. 241) to find a specific icon."

- you can automatically spot icons within 100 meters if they are not running silent.
- beyond this distance, you need to make a matrix perception test to find a specific icon.

in other words, the entire matrix just became stupid. at this point, unless you are in a host 24/7, someone can do a matrix perception test to find your icon (probably using a spotter to pick you out, or just noticing you and waiting for you to get far away). then, they can do whatever they want to you, and your only recourse is to shut off your device. you can't perceive them, because you don't know what icon to look for. you can't search for hidden icons within 100 meters to find them, because they aren't within 100 meters. basically, whoever is the aggressor instantly wins the fight as long as the aggressor doesn't use and fail at sleaze actions, because the only way you're going to figure out who's doing it to you is if you get a mark on them from that.

the only protection against this is to never be online (even in hidden mode, someone can get a successful matrix perception test to find you. at best, you can delay your doom until someone manages to get enough information to tell their buddy who is farther away for them to make a perception test, however much information that may be. and their buddy could be a simple agent sitting in an inexpensive piece of hardware), or to have high defensive ratings on everything you own (as in, high enough that their dice pool reliably beats theirs, meaning everyone needs to have crazy high mental stats if they want to be online, or perpetually lose actions to full matrix defence), or being in a host. otherwise, at any point, you can basically be completely screwed with no recourse. somehow, i have my doubts this is the system the megas set up.

Hmnn. This has been an interesting conversation. Jaid, I don't think things are quite as bad as you're making them out to be.

Now, I'm the first to admit that things in the Running Silent section are unclear, and poorly written. However, there's an interpretation that avoids the rather intimidating scenario postulated above:

There is nothing that suggests that knowing a piece of Matrix Info about a device allows you to automatically defeat Running Silent.

So, let's look at the scenario above: You defeat Running Silent on a device within the 100m limit. You wait for the device to move out of the 100m radius. At this point, you make a Matrix Perception check, easily, & start your attack, the Noise Reduction on your Deck eating the distance penalty.

So your target pulls a Hide action, and succeeds. You have to spot the Icon again to resume your attack.

At this point, we have two possibilities. One is that as you defeated Running Silent earlier, and have a piece (or more) of Matrix Info on the device, you can spot him with a simple "beyond 100m" Matrix Perception check.

I think it's far more likely that he's just gone. There's no system in place for noticing Running Silent devices outside of 100m. I think it's because you're close enough to pick up the RF transmissions. Outside of that, you can't get the starting point to defeat Running Silent.

I suppose another way to interpret it would be that it's impossible to even track a Running Silent device outside of 100m.

I'm probably not expressing this the best way I could. I think it's a combination of physical proximity and identifying knowledge (from the Sleaze-defeating Matrix Perception check) that allows someone to interact with a device that is Running Silent. Take away proximity and the whole thing falls apart.

Your example breaks down because if you've made your Matrix Perception Check at the start as a prerequisite before starting your attack, you know Something about the icon. Therefore you can Spot it.

There's another one out there that's even better. One second...

Ah here it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNF9QNEQLA

What's unclear to me is if that applies when something does a successful Hide. I would say it does not, as it leads to Jaid's scenario where once you're spotted once you are toast forevermore. In addition, if that's the case, there is practically no point to the Hide action as it becomes a 1 IP stop-gap.

The more I think about it, the more I believe that it's the combination of physical proximity & matrix knowledge that let's you "see" something Running Silent.

I think it's option a) I think the only way you are going to avoid that hacker from that point on is to turn your wireless off. I think you could then (given some time) change something about your icons by giving then new codes or something like this. 4th Ed actually had pretty decent rules for this and I'm sure we'll see them in 5th Ed sooner or later. Right now a few assumptions need to be made.

I do think this debate has turned a corner. I think we are now discussing how the rules are supposed to work rather than how we want them to work. This feels like progress. How we want them to work is another completely valid conversation. Personally I like them pretty much how they are although I only think they would benefit more from some ironclad can/can't rules and other clarifications.

I agree that it Should be Option A.

Not really, because the persona/IC/agent attacking you would need to spend another action attempting to spot you again, and if you've got your stats and programs right, you stand a good chance of beating them on the opposed test to stay hidden...as long as you've also made sure to wipe out any marks they put on you.

The main thing I find that a) doesn't work for me is the Hide action.

The key point for me here is "against you." Matrix Perception isn't against anything if the device isn't running silent. It's a Simple test where you get a piece of Matrix Info for each hit. This strongly suggests to me that you need to succeed again on the whole Intuition + Computer[Data Processing] v. Logic + Sleaze test. At the very least, it makes Hide more then a pointless 1IP stop-gap.

I also still think that this could mean a device that Hides from you beyond the 100m limit loses you completely. If Hide re-establishes Running Silent, then you should have to go through the two-step process to re-start things. And as we've already established, there are no rules to notice a Running Silent device beyond the 100m radius.


What people have been arguing is that once you have that critical 1 piece of Matrix Info, you no longer have to beat an opposed test to see the target Device. It's just a simple Matrix Perception check. As I mention above, I agree that Hide suggests that a new opposed test is necessary. What I'm not sure of is whether re-establishing contact is even possible if somebody successfully Hides outside the 100m radius. I don't think it can be done. It would certainly fit with the idea that Deckers need to get close to the action in 5th Edition.

Agreed. Well at least that it works this way, not so much that it's stupid. I think the only way this changed under your scenario is if knowing that the 'icon attacked you' constitutes knowing something about the icon. I think this is why we have consequences for failing tests in the matrix to cover this exact scenario.

The other question is that why are they doing this? Are they just punk kids hackers (with $200k toys that I guess their parents bought for them on the black market or something) or are they corporate spiders defending their assets. Both scenarios aren't very likely as has been pointed out before, spiders are probably guarding hosts and kids undertaking this kid of activity have to worry about GOD. If a spider did somehow get onto you while wandering around corporate property, I'm not sure they have the luxury of waiting for you to do whatever it is you're there to do. I'd imagine they're paid to prevent that.

So yes, in the event that you are spotted by someone and you don't spot them and they are happy to wait for you to leave then you might be in some trouble. Shadowrunning is risky business after all. I don't think you are forever screwed, I think given some time offline you could change your icons (with fancy future tech magic) so that the information that spider has is no longer valid.

Actually, re-reading Hide, I don't think it breaks things at all. It is for situations where you expect the person targeting you will fail the matrix perception test to re-aquire you, not as a default response to being spotted. It doesn't imply that it resets their need to know something about your icon to spot it at all.

One of those moments where you Hide to break contact, drop wireless, and then come back online in a few when they've stopped looking for you.

I certainly haven't been arguing that. My proposition is that to make the opposed perception test outside 100m you're required to know something about the icon. I obviously missed that with the first example. The matrix perception side bar on p235 says this:



The book also says that just knowing it is there within 100m is enough to perceive it. Ergo, if you have seen it within 100m at some point, you now have information pertaining to that icon and can subsequently continue to spot it out side of this range with noise penalties, if applicable. This has always been the scenario I envisage where the outside 100m perception test even becomes possible.

Ok, I think I see where you're coming from there. However, I'm unclear as to why you think knowing something about the Icon allows for the Opposed Test to occur outside of 100m.

I'm going to ignore the 100m for a moment, just to establish my baseline. To interact with an Icon that is Running Silent you need to do the following:

1) Make a simple Matrix Perception check to determine the number of Running Silent Icons in the vicinity.
2) Make opposed Matrix Perception checks randomly against the Icons detected in Step 1 to gain Matrix Info on them, thereby Spotting them as on pg. 236.
3) Interact with the Icon until the Spot ends.

So, I think that's agreed upon by all.

Now, let's add distance in: The Icon wanders out of the 100m range. It's established on pg. 236 that a Spot does not end unless a successful Hide action is taken or the target reboots or jacks out. So I agree that if you make the Simple Matrix Perception check to Spot a non-Running Silent Icon further than 100m, you can continue to interact with your target.

Now, what I'm debating is what happens when the target Hides (successfully) or reboots/jacks out. At that point, you no longer have him Spotted. You have to re-establish the Spot.

Now Hide specifically says that you have to "perform a new Matrix Perception action against you", which I interpret as a new Opposed Test against the Icon that has Hidden. That's fine. The question becomes, do you have to do both Steps 1 & 2 above in order to re-establish your Spot? I think you do.

I picture it somewhat like this: you're picking up signals from devices within 100m. Unless you're continually keeping track of the number of Running Silent Icons by using Matrix Perception, I don't accept that you just automatically go to Step 2. You need to start the process over again.

So, what's the process when the Icon is past the 100m mark? There isn't one.

The bolded bit is where we disagree. Per the rulebook :





So you are correct on the need for another opposed test, but there is in fact a procedure for spotting a running silent icon past the 100m mark, as it is directly stated above. If you know one feature of it (meaning you have successfully gotten at least one success on it with a previous Matrix Perception Test), then you can spot it. The 100m range only matters for blind potshots at any possible silent icon nearby, and is only ever stated in the singular line about finding unknown hidden icons within that range. It does not matter in the slightest to an icon you already have some identifying feature of.

Which again is why we recommend changing the action of Running Silent to Walking Casual

Agreed.



No, you don't. This is why the 100m limit is differentiated. Using the spot hidden icons action basically gives you the 'If you know at least one feature of an icon running silent you can spot the icon' It's further explained that you would need to perceive each one separately to know what the icon actually is. The example on p271 shows that once you konw there are icons out there you actually know where they are:



I then assume that you can use AR to overlay these location over things you can see within 100m to determine which one you wish to perceive, but that's beside the point. Eventually you roll that opposed perception test on the right icon and then learn information about it. Once you do you don't stop knowing what that information is, even if the owner of that icon hides again and resumes running silent. Your deck is a computer after all so it must now have some information that allows you to perceive it. Some protocol information or other IT mumbo jumbo. It doesn't really matter what it is because getting a net hit let's you KNOW 'Something'.

It is pretty clear that you should have the ability to search for hidden icons outside of 100m. From p241



Emphasis mine. The table at the top of the page also supports that you should be able to perceive outside of 100m. It just has caveats in the text. I think at best here you're making a semantic point about a rules loophole but at this stage I'm just not seeing it. There is clear intent that it should be possible under some circumstances.



1) Spot the icon running hidden within 100m
2) Perceive the icon running within 100m and get 1 net hit.
3) That icon moves outside of 100m and hides.
4) Perceive that icon again with the info gained from 1 net hit. With noise penalties, if applicable.

I'd also like to just add that I don't think step one is necessary. If you somehow KNOW something about an icon and you assume it is out there you can go straight to step 2. It's just not that likely a scenario. All step one does is let you perceive things you don't know anything about, which only works within 100m.

The library will probably be a host, which is visible everywhere. The new matrix is a weird hodge-podge of a locally restricted internet of things, with globally reachable hosts floating above them...

as to why the above is a problem, it's probably not a problem after a run unless either the corp or the runner are particularly vindictive. once the information or person or prototype or whatever has been handed off, they have nothing to gain from going after you, and you have nothing to gain from going after them.

the problem is that, for example, this means your hacker can sit 500 meters outside of the corporate facility, wait for his buddies to get him "one feature" about stuff that needs hacking, and hack from beyond their ability to detect him... and that once the team of people who were physically at the corp facility, if they got spotted, leave the facility, they suddenly are in the same situation, where an enemy can perceive them and hack them but they are incapable of responding. in other words, they are safer from the hackers the corporation employs if those hackers are nearby.

and until they've offloaded whatever it is that they got (and the corporation knows that fact, which they likely aren't going to send a courier to the runners to inform them of that fact), all of the people who were physically present at the facility and had even *one* piece of gear fail against a matrix perception check are screwed unless they shut down their wireless on everything just to be safe. the only way to be safe from the corporate hackers is to go completely offline with anything that might have been the target of a successful matrix perception check. including the RFID tags in their stomachs and clothes, for example, a lack of which may make them stick out like a sore thumb in public.

in short, it leads to stupid results. you *need* the hacker to stay away from the corp facility, because if he gets spotted any time during the run it is a huge risk to go back online until the corporation they ran against decides to stop looking. in other words, if you want your hacker to be able to hack after leaving the facility but before the run is done, you'd bloody well better make sure you *don't* bring your hacker along.

even more fun is that the megas, who apparently designed this mess, are screwed even worse. if they ever want to be secure, they need to make sure that every single device they own which could become a potential target is offline, or replaced regularly, because all it takes is for someone to post enough information on a shadow board to do a matrix perception check against anything online, and suddenly the entire shadow community can target their stuff. from beyond the corporation's ability to detect the hacker.

or, in other words, the only thing really protecting anything on the matrix is to have your icons protected by unbeatable dice pools, or not be important enough for anyone to care in the slightest about you. or never stay outside of a host for more than a few minutes at a time. everything that isn't worth those ridiculous dice pools but is important enough to potentially be a target and isn't inside a host (and physically secured to prevent it from becoming a point of vulnerability for the entire host) would have to stay offline, and the corporations are generally the ones who have stuff important enough to be worried about; it would mean that the megas built a new matrix that is supposed to favour them, but ultimately can only be used by them if they have the matrix equivalent of a large security detail following them around everywhere they go.

Jaid, I'm super glad to hear someone else complaining about how vulnerable hosts are since any device they protect is also a potential attack surface. I've been thinking about fixes for it, but coming up black so far.

My best thoughts thus far have to do with some sense of partitioning inside of hosts -- where a mark on one device doesn't propagate to everything. The classic example is this: if your host protects both your security cameras and your sensitive research data then someone standing outside can read next year's design specs by attacking the camera. However, if your host has some statistic (house ruled in) that lets it split marks against it onto a few different clusters of items then there is still some protection.

However I mostly just want to add a big +1 for the thought in hopes of more discussion.

getting a mark on a host doesn't give you a mark on anything else attached to the host (IC, however, is in fact running on the host itself, so you do get marks on them, just as you would get a mark on an agent that was being run by a cyberdeck if you got a mark on the persona controlling the cyberdeck).

the security threat is that the other stuff is counted as you having a direct connection; you can hack it without noise regardless of range, and it doesn't get to use the (probably greatly superior) attributes of the host for protection.

on the other hand, getting a mark on something slaved to the host does give you a mark on the host... but the same is true of any other slaved device to the master device.

the security risk only exists for devices which are slaved to the host and not physically secured. in other words, hosts are only vulnerable if you slave things to them which you cannot reasonably protect from someone gaining direct physical access to. hosts are only vulnerable if you don't take precautions. they are not the solution for everything at all times, which is fine.

Way way back before the dismal result that is SR5 was even announced I attempted a stab at different hacking rules. The idea was to resolve things with as few rolls as possible although the timeframes involved could vary from "seconds" to "days" depending on the disparity between attacker's and target's hardware.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=31131

Take a look, something there might spark your interest.

Thanks for the perspective. I believe the situation I'm concerned about is covered by your discussion above. Wearing my security designer hat, I want to put a camera on the outside of a building in order to spot potential intruders. I don't want to pay a tremendously expensive professional like a decker to protect it all the time, so I'd like to slave it to a host. (This gains the additional benefit that an on call decker can show up to defend the host from anywhere in the matrix.) However, if I do so, then anyone within 100 meters of the building can get marks on my host, and one mark is all it takes for my precious paydata to leak out the walls without anyone stepping into line of sight of the camera.

OK, so the fix is that I have a separate security host and paydata host. However, this still isn't perfect; my entire security can be compromised by anyone standing within 100 meters of my building. I can put up a fence 200 meters away, and pay lots of people and dogs to wander around at night. However, this makes building any facility with even a modicum of security and technial sophistication really, really expensive. Hosts just don't make sense in many situations; even in the heavily secured facility I described above I'd be really hesitant to use a setup which could lose entire zones of security at the same time. Given the choice I'd go with a network of on-site security spiders every time. That's a shame because I think having an asymmetry in hacking stationary, mildly hardened targets is cool and it really improves the verisimilitude of the world if there exists any way to secure data.

In summary, I agree with your assertion that "the security risk only exists for devices that are slaved to the host, but not physically secured," but I think the standard for physically secured is ridiculously high. Physically secured in this context means there is no way for an unauthorized human to stand within 100m of a slaved device at any time. Because of that, and the inability to localize failures, I have difficulty seeing why anyone would ever install a host.

Also, the rest of your statements raise a few questions for me.

* What's the difference between being attached to a host and slaved to a host? The only network relationships described in the book (to my knowledge) are master/slave relationships.
* I think the errata changed the wording of hosts and IC such that IC share marks on you, but you have to mark each piece of IC individually.

QUOTE
IC AND MARKS CLARIFICATION (P. 247,
INTRUSION COUNTERMEASURES, PARAGRAPH 2)
The fourth sentence of the paragraph should be changed
as follows. Change: “The IC in a host and the host itself share
marks, so if one IC program is slapped with a mark, they all
get one, as does the host itself.” To: “The IC in a host and the
host itself share marks, so if one IC program marks, they all
do, and so does the host itself.”

Draco, really cool set of rules. I like a lot of what I see there and it dovetails with some vague ideas I'd had about making hacking into a worker placement mini game.

My concern about reading them is that the decker might get indignant about not rolling dice particularly often. This would be exacerbated if combining hacking and combat. The rules also don't speak to commlink vs. commlink combat, but I assume you just left the normal rules in place for that.

I really appreciate the tip; I've been accumulating house rules in anticipation of updating the house rule thread I started months ago. Someday I'll get around to it.

I imagine that hosts actually have a real world location (a server or mainframe) as well and thus if it is located anywhere near the camera it doesn't really matter as the hacker will detect the host anyway (assuming that you're running it silently). Of course this will vary from building to building. In a warehouse this may not matter, but at an airport it probably does. While you can enter a host from anywhere it makes sense for the hardware to be local for maintenance, etc. and centralizing them doesn't make much sense either because If your centralized site gets compromised so do ALL your facilities.



Sure, I guess you can do this, but it's really just going down the same road as nesting nodes in 4th Ed. These solutions all seem reasonable, but you have to consider that what you're doing is trying to secure a system, in universe, from a roleplaying game's mechanics. Don't forget that 90% of hackers were taken out of the game with the new matrix protocols. The fact that you have a host HAS already made your system more secure by its very existence.

Also, Shadowrun pits Shadowrunners against these systems. The have to be hackable. It doesn't really matter if you can design a system that's impregnable because they're not supposed to be. To simulate this we have host ratings. The higher the host rating the more time and money has gone into designing its security. Abstraction for the win! This is why realism is not a good tool for thinking about p&p game systems. It doesn't allow for disconnection between the mechanics and the situation in universe.

You're welcome!

The "not very oftenness" is more of a "you can't reasonably attack this, you need better gear" mechanic than anything.
I don't recall exact details any more, but commlink vs. commlink should use the same rules.
Hacking during combat was almost specifically "this should not happen." If the hacker is hacking and combat happens, defend him. If you're thinking along the lines of getting the hacker to hack some guy's gear: no, he don't have time for that shit.

Other people are entitled to their opinions of course, but that one is mine.