Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: SR3 Matrix questions
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
SimpleRunner
I have a player that wants to run a decker in the game. Granted I have been playing Shadowrun and running games since 1st edition. I knew how to run characters for the previous 2 editions.

When I read over the 3rd edition layour for creation of a system for the Decker to wander through I read and read but nothing tells me what I need to see. I understand that a Host is set up with an Intrusion difficulty in which 2 values are generated; Security Value and Subsystems Rating.

Security Value: I am gathering is the number that gets tied to the Blue, Green, Orange and Red Security Rating. Nothing in the books states this as true or false. Given the table for this I came up with an 11 for this value based on (2d3)+6. Would this be a "Hard" Blue-11?

Subsystem Rating: Given the table on page 205 SR3 if I choose an Intrusion Difficulty of "Hard" I would get a value of (1d6)+12. For this example I come up with an a roll of 6 and add 12 = 18. What does this number have to do with ACIFS?

Perhaps I am missing something here but on pages 205 and 206 of SR3 there is no mention on exactly how these values pertain to creating a challenge for the decker.

Any care to help me on this? I wait your help...
Kanada Ten
Security Code is the color and Value is the rating. The Value is the number of dice the system rolls on opposed checks. The color determains the number of successes a decker needs, combat target numbers, and the base damage of IC.

Each of the ACIFS has its own rating. The random 18 is one of the subsystem ratings. Typically, Control and Access are the highest, followed by File and Slave depending on the nature of the host.

The rating of the ACIFS is the base target number of system operations performed by the decker. These numbers are modified by the particular programs that aid the specific system test.
Moonwolf
The host rating ie Blue11, is actually two different parts. The colour determines what the target numbers are in cybercombat, and is also used on the table for random IC stating. The number is the number of dice the system uses to oppose the decker, in this case 11. This is rolled every time the decker performs a system test, against the deckers Detection Factor.

The subsystem ratings ie 13/12/11/14/10, are the ACIFS ratings (Access, Control, Index, Files, Slave). This is the target number for any system test the decker needs to make in relation to that area of the system. For example, if the decker wants to locate a file, he makes a test against the Index subsystem target number. This test is opposed by the host rating. This target number is reduced by the rating of the relevant program, in this example Browse.

A Hard system for a starting decker with a good program set would be about Green/Orange 10-14/13/14/14/12

Does this help?

Edit: As a point, if the subsystem is 18, a starting decker who can't have programs with a rating above 6, will be rolling at TN 12!
SimpleRunner
Okay so the Security Value becomes the value for the Blue, Green Orange, Red etc... and the Subsystem Rating would be rolled for each of the ACIFS values leaning heavy on the Control and Access values?
Kanada Ten
I my opinion for the Control and Access, yes. Even though the ratings are being rolled randomly, you don't want it to be easier to create a superuser account than to do a file search.
SimpleRunner
QUOTE (Moonwolf)
Edit: As a point, if the subsystem is 18, a starting decker who can't have programs with a rating above 6, will be rolling at TN 12!

How would you go from a TN 18 to a TN 12?
Herald of Verjigorm
In decking, the TN is reduced a by a utility's rating before you roll.
Eyeless Blond
QUOTE (Kanada Ten)
I my opinion for the Control and Access, yes. Even though the ratings are being rolled randomly, you don't want it to be easier to create a superuser account than to do a file search.

Personally I think Access shouldn't be artificially heightened, although admitedly it's for metagame reasons. It kinda makes for a stupid game if the decker can't even get into the host. If you're a real stickler for realism, though, then you want to boost Access and Control as high as you can feasably get them, and probably not bother so much with Index or even Files, depending on what your host has on it.
Kanada Ten
The problem is then people hacking from onsite and bypassing Access all together have little to worry about.

I don't think you can talk about "artifically heightened" when talking about system design. I am not a fan of random hosts, but if you're going to do it, why not assign the results after the rolls?
Eyeless Blond
QUOTE (Kanada Ten)
The problem is then people hacking from onsite and bypassing Access all together have little to worry about.


Not so. Unless you have a user password, even jacking in directly to the mainframe dumps you off at the LTG. Yeah, I think it's a stupid rule myself too, and sometimes paradoxical, but it's a good idea thematically to always have to login before doing anything, and that means Access.

QUOTE
I don't think you can talk about "artifically heightened" when talking about system design.  I am not a fan of random hosts, but if you're going to do it, why not assign the results after the rolls?

True, true. I guess "artificially" was the wrong word.
Kanada Ten
QUOTE
Not so. Unless you have a user password, even jacking in directly to the mainframe dumps you off at the LTG.

Is this in Matrix? I would think if one were to wire into the physical device of a Slave, you've already Accessed the host. If you takeover a connected cyberterminal, it has already Accessed the host... Argh.

What about stolen passcodes, of which I'd think finding Access passcodes is easier than Superuser? The former requiring only an employee with terminal access and the latter a supervisor.

10/12/8/8/8 is the normal ACIFS distribution in my mind.

16/18/14/14/14 for something really tough.

Remote systems, those not hooked up to the Matrix, can have lower Access though:

8/14/12/10/8 for data hosts.

10/14/10/10/14 for security hosts.

My main problem is I can't get a player decker (much less find time to play) to keep sharp on the rules and get practical numbers.
mfb
i run, and like to run in, matrix-only games at shadowland. i've got four hosts of varying difficulty in the in-character Matrix section, and don't have a problem whipping up new ones on the fly.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (Eyeless Blond)
Not so. Unless you have a user password, even jacking in directly to the mainframe dumps you off at the LTG.

slightly wrong. if you try to jack into a system directly (like say from a terminal port on a secretarys desk) you will be handed straight to the access subsystem of the host with no option for going out onto the LTG unless you can login to the host and thereby pass tru it onto the LTG. same deal with slaves (alltho that may well toss you into contact with the slave sub rather then the access sub)...
TinkerGnome
It's always the access subsystem. Depending on where you're doing it from, it might be easier or harder to hack in, per Matrix.
hobgoblin
ah yes, the jackpoints. my bad frown.gif
Nikoli
My question is, why would someone spend that sort of money on a computer to control security cameras?
Cameras shuold be on the general host for the building, where HVAC, building access, power distribution, etc are controlled, of course this system is by no means on the matrix directly.

I see it like this:
Host A on the Matrix= public data stores of harmless or by subscription data
Host B connects to Host A, small system, not a lot of processing power, but good security high Index and Slave ratings, controls the more mundane tasks of the building
Host C connects to Host A, acts as another chokepoint for all research facilities, so, high all around ratings especially index, possibly orange or red depending on the company.
Additional hosts conenct to Host C with lower ratings but still lethal level IC and support research, manufacturing, sensitive data, etc.
mfb
that's a great plan, if your facility can obtain the funding to pay for all those hosts--and, more importantly, if you can convince the researchers in charge of the facility that they should spend some of their precious funding on security, instead of their research. considering the difficulty in securing funding for new projects (there's so many, like that crazy "wireless interface" idea, or "ballistic aircraft that fly faster than a twentieth-century 747"), it's probably like pulling teeth to get the head MFIC to part with the cash for a second, offline host.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012