Otaku On Acid
Oct 11 2004, 03:19 AM
My players have decided to start using fake SINs which i think is a good idea. However, I figure when Lone Star arrests them and they're running their info there is the possiblity that the fake will be recorded. Are there any rules for this in any of the books, or does anyone have any house rules? I figured a contested roll of the Fake Sin Rating vs. the rating of whatever is doing the check. So like 4 for a traffic stuff, 8 for an arrest, 12 for a deep background check. Any thoughts?
Kagetenshi
Oct 11 2004, 03:22 AM
I think it's just a flat-up verification reader test against a TN equal to the rating of the fake SIN. That seems overly harsh, though… *looks it up again*
Nope, it's an opposed test. You were right. Tie results in further questioning.
~J
Crusher Bob
Oct 11 2004, 04:17 AM
They gave the sample ating of ID checkers in one of the sourcebooks, though nbow I forget which one. I think your ratings for background checks are a bit high, remember that they take both time and money. If you don't have the sourcebooks, take a look at the credstick verification table for the types of ratings to expect.
Maybe 2-4 (depends on resources) for a simple traffic stop, 4-6 for an arrest, with the bigger stuff only being drug out for the really serious stuff (mass murder, etc). Spending 24+ officer hours to check the background of the guy you've got in the drunk tank is not worth the time. Since almost all aresttes are Runners, they are mainly looking for previous criminal records, and stuff which a rating 4 or so check would turn up easily. A rating 6 SIN should be good against anything 'regular'. (High profile/large crimes/cases will probably get a bit more work put into them)
Kagetenshi
Oct 11 2004, 04:20 AM
I believe all credstick verifiers over Rating 3 are nonportable.
~J
toturi
Oct 11 2004, 05:23 AM
Nobody, not even the rules, ever addressed this situation before: What does a real SIN roll when making a test? Like your real real SIN, not the Rating 99 one.
Sabosect
Oct 11 2004, 05:25 AM
A real SIN requires no verification roll for obvious reasons. It is impossible for it to be fake.
Crusher Bob
Oct 11 2004, 05:27 AM
And there is never incorrect data in the computer, and the people keeping real records never screw up, and your name is never confused with some other guys, and the address they have for you is never your old address, and ...
Kagetenshi
Oct 11 2004, 05:32 AM
Roll the verifier and if it doesn't rule-of-1, you pass.
Keep in mind that even if it gets everything about you wrong, it doesn't matter unless it flags you for inspection.
~J
Jason Farlander
Oct 11 2004, 05:59 AM
QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
Roll the verifier and if it doesn't rule-of-1, you pass.
Keep in mind that even if it gets everything about you wrong, it doesn't matter unless it flags you for inspection.
~J |
The problem here is that your *real* credstick will end up coming up as fake more often with verifiers that do only cursory checking than with those that go through a more thorough search.
toturi
Oct 11 2004, 06:02 AM
I think that should exactly be it. A cheap verifier is lousy, so it would be possible to read a real ID as a fake more often. A good verifier wouldn't.
Jason Farlander
Oct 11 2004, 06:13 AM
Let me put it this way: a cheap credstick verifier would then designate one out of every six valid transactions as involving a fake sin. I dont think that would be a reasonable think to expect society at large to simply accept. Furthermore, it means that a rating 1 credstick verifier is *more* likely to accept a rating 3 fake SIN as being real than an actual SIN, and that is retarded.
toturi
Oct 11 2004, 06:19 AM
You get what you pay for. You go to a flea-market/bazaar and get yourself a cheap pirated CD and you are surprised it doesn't work?
Jason Farlander
Oct 11 2004, 06:26 AM
Actually, pretty much any gas station or grocery store would be using a rating 1 verifier; only particularly "swank" businesses would use a rating 2 version. Banks splurge and go with rating 2 or 3 versions - the most secure banks in the world would use a rating 4 verifier. You dont see anything higher than that except in corp/government intelligence agencies.
Kagetenshi
Oct 11 2004, 12:15 PM
If you think that's unreasonable, roll twice the rating for tests against a valid SIN. Still too many false negatives? Increase the multiplier.
Problem solved.
~J
Otaku On Acid
Oct 11 2004, 01:50 PM
A rating 6 fake sin should not be able to fool a bank's verifer. Is there a list anywhere for what level verifier different establishments use? If it really is only a rating 2 or 3 I may need to double or even triple these ratings.
Sandoval Smith
Oct 11 2004, 02:03 PM
QUOTE (Crusher Bob) |
And there is never incorrect data in the computer, and the people keeping real records never screw up, and your name is never confused with some other guys, and the address they have for you is never your old address, and ... |
Those are things that GMs refer to as 'plot hooks.' I can't imagine any reason for them to come up as the result of a dice roll.
Fortune
Oct 11 2004, 02:06 PM
QUOTE (Otaku On Acid) |
A rating 6 fake sin should not be able to fool a bank's verifer. |
Why not?
RangerJoe
Oct 11 2004, 03:34 PM
There seems to be some confusion over what exactly a "fake" credstick does. Unlike a "fake ID" that the kids who roam the street outside my office use to get into complicit local bars, a "fake credstick" links to a "real" account/ID/etc. which just happens to belong to someone else (usually a ficticious someone else). For simple transactions, all that a reader should have to do is verify if the name/ID number/account name match (i.e., the noodle kiosk just wants to exchange your nuyen for their noodles). For more exotic transfers at banks and other institutions, more detailed information may be needed (before issuing a loan, or letting you invest in stocks, it might pay to know that a person really is who he claims to be, by making sure the DMV records match the realestate records and the LS permit records). The enhancement in the level of detail gives a "fake ID" a better rating. A higher rated "fake SIN" has its owner show up in more databases, and look more "real."
ES_Riddle
Oct 11 2004, 03:36 PM
QUOTE (Jason Farlander) |
Actually, pretty much any gas station or grocery store would be using a rating 1 verifier; only particularly "swank" businesses would use a rating 2 version. Banks splurge and go with rating 2 or 3 versions - the most secure banks in the world would use a rating 4 verifier. You dont see anything higher than that except in corp/government intelligence agencies.
|
I'm certain that any gas station or grocery store would be using at least a rating 2 or 3, depending on how much business they do. A rating 1 is just too easy to fool with a counterfeit credstick, so they might as well invest the extra 30,000:nuyen: because it will save them more than that much in the long run (not to mention enabling them to pay whoever it is that delivers their goods…shipments could easily exceed 5k which is the limit for a rating 1). I see rating 1's as something that wealthy people will have so that they can settle up bets with their friends without going to a bank or having exactly the right denomination of certified cred.
I think that rating 4-5 is what most "swank" businesses would have. It allows them to cater to people who will spend more than 20k in a single transaction (a mere 20 sets of tres chic clothes), as well as letting them have more security. Rating 6 is "restricted" which I take to mean that it would only be available to banks and police/security forces.
Overall, I guess I would break down ratings like so:
1-personal use
2-3-Mom and Pop shop, police cruisers (anything bigger isn't portable)
4-5-ritzier stores (jewelers, fine clothiers, electronics stores, etc.)
6-7-bank, standard precinct computer
8-FBI equivalents
10-CIA equivalents
12+-NSA equivalents
ES_Riddle
Oct 11 2004, 03:38 PM
QUOTE (Sandoval Smith) |
Those are things that GMs refer to as 'plot hooks.' I can't imagine any reason for them to come up as the result of a dice roll. |
I agree completely. However, if you did want a botched roll on a credstick reader when reading a real SIN to return a false fake, it doesn't seem too far out if most businesses have a rating 3 or better. Rating 3 means only 1 in 216 checks will result in a false check. Having worked as a convenience store clerk myself, you can bet that that guy will fast karm it to avoid the hassle of dealing with a pissed off customer. So unless a single clerk does 430+ checks per shift, you won't generally have lots of people having their stick rejected.
Ouchies
Oct 11 2004, 03:47 PM
getting real ones called fake is like todays currency, sometimes real currency is considered fake by untrained people, its kinda the same.
Fortune
Oct 11 2004, 03:54 PM
QUOTE (Ouchies) |
getting real ones called fake is like todays currency, sometimes real currency is considered fake by untrained people, its kinda the same. |
So how often has that happened to you? When was the last time some store clerk refused your $20 and called the cops on you for counterfitting?
Jason Farlander
Oct 11 2004, 04:17 PM
Nono... regardless of how you try to justify it, if the basis for potential rejection of a valid SIN is that there is some minute detail somewhere in your credit history that was misentered by an inept clerk, a more thorough check is going to be more likely to find it. Period. In the 2060s, a cursory (rating 1) check will not ever register a real SIN as being invalid unless there is some decker somewhere deliberately screwing with your data, in which case its a plot device.
As for alternate views on verifier ratings, thats fine. You are free to houserule that if you want, but the numbers I listed are as canon (check out the credstick verifier ratings listed in the tables on
this page) as I can manage. And, really, why the hell would most businesses waste their money on superdeluxe verifiers? Fake SINs are neither terribly common, nor are they really that bad for these businesses - they still get their money. I imagine that really ritzy businesses use rating 2 verifiers just as a sort of advertisement for their upperclassity rather than any real benefit they derive from better background checking. The only organizations who should care about fake SINs are banks, credit agencies, and governments - and, surprise! those agencies tend to use higher rating verifiers.
Actually counterfeiting money in the 2060s is nearly impossible - only certified credsticks can be modified in such a way, and they possess rating 12 data encryption. Thats pretty hefty. Furthermore, the TN to notice counterfeit funds is the number of successes generated on a Computer (12) test used to generate them, so even a rating 1 verifier is likely to notice them unless we're talking about a truly god-like decker... and even if the counterfeit money passes that check, its only a matter of time before the banks notice. This is all straight from the SSG.
Fact: the *vast* majority of people using fake SINs are still conducting transactions with real cred, and thats all most businesses would really care about.
Scarecrow237
Oct 11 2004, 06:58 PM
QUOTE (Fortune @ Oct 11 2004, 11:54 AM) |
QUOTE (Ouchies @ Oct 12 2004, 01:47 AM) | getting real ones called fake is like todays currency, sometimes real currency is considered fake by untrained people, its kinda the same. |
So how often has that happened to you? When was the last time some store clerk refused your $20 and called the cops on you for counterfitting?
|
At least twice a month. It's worse now that the US Treasury has come out with two new style twenty dollar bills in less than 10 years apart. At least the cops are knowledgeable and understanding enough to not call the peach and green bills a fake when they see them.
Edit: Changed "lest' to "less"
Voran
Oct 11 2004, 08:26 PM
In real life I tend to use my debit card to buy groceries and stuff. So its the card-swipe at the checkout counter. On occassion, the reader gets f-ed up. So I usually have to swipe it again.
Anyhoo, I found the rules referred to in Sprawl Survival G and the BBB to be a little off in regards to readers. In that only on a tie does the reader request more info (Your thumbprint, or whatever). Maybe a houserule that for lower rated readers, on a fail, as well as a tie, it requests more info. Or like a real world example, another swipe.
Granted, a debit card is more like a certified credstick than a registered one.
Edward
Oct 11 2004, 11:24 PM
For a real sin roll the reader. On rule of 1 one of several things will happen.
Comms error.
Bad reed.
Damaged credstick.
Data suspect (as with equal successes on a fake id)
Data suspect (and the reader has some of the data wrong)
Forged credstic.
The lower rating ones will more likely do the first 3. such problems happen so often users will develop a tendency to press cancel and run the card again (trust me we had a dodgy EFT machine at my work and the official instructions from management where try 3 times, unplug the machine for 2 seconds if it jams. And signature verification is a joke with half a days practise anybody with reasonable dexterity can forge a signature such that the untrained person behind the counter will never be able tell) I security at these places will change any.
Also remember. If you go to a store with a fake cred stick (as the rules for creating a fake cred stick show) your still paying. Many clubs that want to present a venere of legality will deliberately use rating 1 readers and may tamper with them to reduce there reliability (how many clubs let 15 year olds in with the crudest of fake Ids today)
Edward
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.