I really dislike the thrid ed's decking rules and I'm wondering if anyone still has a copy of hte rules from the second edition. I foolishly sold my 2nd ed book back when fasa closed, and am now desperatly trying to reconstruct those matrix rules for the game I'm running.

Out of interest, what don't you like about the new rules?

~J

Too abstract. You roll to get into the system. then roll to do everything in the system. I liked it when you had to move for one the datastore to the spu to the cpu to the I/O point. I miss having the system mapped out to to get the info you wanted you had to find file which could be in one of several differnt data stores, and you had to go though different areas to get to them.

heh...someone who actually was a target audiance member of the LOOOOOOOONG decking resolutions.

Man, back in 2ed, we would never have deckers in our group and we'd always just roll simple dice rolls kinda like how they do it now in 3rd (but simpler) to run the matrix when we did (most times was an npc)

I can't believe someone would prefer those 2ed rules...unless you're running a solo matrix run with a single player playiong his decker character, the old rules were a pain. The abstract aspect has to be balanced with descriptions giving life to the Matrix run. For example , when your decker is trying to take control of cameras (Locate and Monitor Slave), why not describe him/her sneaking past mean-looking chromed warriors clad in fullplate armor etched with circuitry design through stone corridors with a lot of arches allowing to get glimpses of different places in real world ( cameras Slave Modules inthe sculpted Host handling security you would have called a SPU in old rules) to break into a crypt filled with thick cobwebs (Scramble IC) where a glowing crystall ball (camera slave module)lies on a pedestal.
Takes a few seconds to make the description, a few seconds to handle dice rolling for Matrix tests instead of having to roll several times to go from node to node, several tests to deceive IC (not even mentioning potential cybercombat)...
Much better...
it only gets abstract if you don't provide the atmosphere by describing...but then again it's just MHO...

Hey, at least he isn't a fan of first edition matrix rules!

I think he is. 3ed rules came out in Virtual Realities 2.0 which predates 3ed. Those 2ed rules our firend is referring to are the good old 1st ed rules...

Ombre: Wrong.

VR2 is for 2nd Ed. Says so right in the book.

T:Matrix and... Some other book are for 3rd Ed.

I wasn't aware that there had been a change in the matrix rules between first and second. No one's ever referenced the change.

VR changed to VR2. I'm not sure what the changes are, as I picked up books starting with 2nd, but I'm sure there are some (as it says it simplifies the whole thing a lot in VR2).

VR2 was the book that changed the matrix from UMS (with CPU, SPU, Access node, etc) with the sculpted look still in use today. There were only hosts in VR2, and the security tally, etc etc.

He's talking about 1st edition matrix rules, either from the BBB or VR1.

Strangly enough I've never had a problem having a decker run the matrix at the same time as the rest of the team run though a corp facility (or what have you). It did take a couple of minor house rules but it worked well for my group.

As for being a fan of long complex rule systems, what can I say we also play HackMaster and some RoleMaster .

Whatever works for your group man

I do think that the newer matrix rules more accurately reflect modern network systems architecture though.

Considering the first Matrix rules were written in the late 80's, that makes sense. Back then they didn't have half the security advances we do now, some of which are only recent additions to SR's Matrix.

Wardialing forever!

~J

Is this where I stab you with a rusty spoon?

Probably.

~J

I've always played with the first VR, because it was all we had for a long time, and to understand any of it, we had to read the whole fragging thing cover to cover (well, no, the second half of it is fiction, but it's COOL). When we finally got VR2, we realized that there would be a similar situation, and we didn't want to read a whole book cover to cover again, only to make the first book that we had read cover to cover obsolete. Also, we had 2 copies of VR1, and only 1 copy of VR2, which isn't owned by the decker or the GM. Luckily, we've never had any real problems with VR1, other than the fact that only the decker and the GM understand decking, but from what I gather, that's a problem with ALL the matrix books.

Heh. That's very true. Unfortunately, our group tends to hit that problem more with magic. The prospect of a decker knowing the rules and the GM not knowing them doesn't bother me very much, because I always see the mage knowing them when the GM only SLIGHTLY knows them. Poor GM, keeping up with EVERYONE is a pain in the ass.

About the only thing I don't know fully is decking (with magic coming a very far second), and most of my group doesn't know decking either. We usually NPC deckers, simply because it's a lot easier to go that route than to sit and do it yourself. (Not to mention the upkeep for SOTA, ugh!)

Other than that, we know pretty much all the rules and can dig one of the harder to find ones out in a pretty decent flash. If the GM is having one of "those moments" where the rule just isn't coming to them, we usually have the book at hand and can point it out in just a moment's notice.

Then again, we're all of the "read a book cover to cover" type, and sometimes read it twice just for all the cross referencing that goes on in a lot of books.

I really liked the VR2 idea of moving from node to node, really made you feel like you where whizzing through the computer (a la every VR movie that came out in 1990), but it absolutly kills gameplay time for non-deckers.

VR3 (SR3 version) is nice because it's friendly to non-deckers and you can still make some complicated systems (Matrix Sourcebook helps this alot) if you so desire. This also keeps things consistant as far as being somewhat abstract, and keep you as GM from having to define every nuiance of a computer system.

That's a great way to spell nuance in this context.

As far as NPCing deckers, my groups pretty much against it. We like to turn SR into more of a cyberpunk game, which you don't get when the mages are necessary, and everyone else's role can be worked around, which unfortunately seems to be the case in most of the game. Taking deckers out of the equation would just make it even more of a "mages only" show. Personally, I look forward to the day when nobody in the group has a mage they really want to play, so the GM doesn't need to counter any magic and can thus leave it out entirely unless something special comes up, at which time we can just NPC the mage on the fly. I just don't think this is the type of casual treatment that should be afforded to deckers in a cyberpunk setting. Of course, most people here will tell you that it's not supposed to be a cyberpunk setting, but that's a matter of opinion on which we'll never unanimously agree.

Well, it is supposed to be based on Cyberpunk, loosely. Whether or not it's a Cyberpunk setting is left up to the GM.

And, if anything, mages are a more integral part of a run than a decker is.

Depends entirely on the run. I'm pretty sure a Matrix run will benefit a great deal more from deckers than it would magicians.

Meh, then my games are just odd. (By "my" I tend to mean my GM's.)

We also have that "always geek the mage first" outlook as well as "if we don't have a mage, we're dead."

Oh, I'm not arguing the way things ARE, I'm arguing that I'm not sure that's the way things SHOULD be, and then whining about how the rules have made this hard to reflect in my games because we always have the joker who plays a mage in our group, thereby forcing the GM to counter him somehow, which necessitates that we don't just ignore magic. But whatever, this is going to turn into a rant about how much I hate the preponderance of magic in the game, which will turn into me shooting my mouth off about how much I hate the way immortal elves are presented, and about how great I think it is that in the past my group has refused to let someone in because they mentioned that they liked the bit about Dunkelzahn getting elected. I'd better just start up a different thread so nobody has to further derail this one when they make known their disgust with my vision of what SR should be.

By the way, though, I should again emphasize that I don't really see a problem with VR1, except that it mentions that your street cred gets totally blown if you buy your tech, but building and coding it yourself basically means that you're waiting YEARS before your stuff is very effective. But whatever, the solution I've found is to buy something and then just heavily modify it to make it "yours," and as far as programs go, try to just find a few that you use a lot, and focus on just making them powerful instead of trying to get everything at a decent rating. I don't know if the rules on how long making/coding your stuff have changed over the editions, but hopefully they've made it a little easier on deckers (You gotta hate when by the time you've got that MPCP 10 deck, plus enough programs to work it properly, plus a response of 2, the mage has initiated 5 times, the rigger's built a FLEET of combat drones from scratch, and the troll street sam has grown old).

Playing a decker currently, the 3rd edition matrix rules are all about speed. If Gm and player know the rules, it goes very very fast. Two sessions ago I hit about 5 or six hosts because we are currently burried in a really twisted investigation (Grendel is a bastard). It took maybe 30 mintues. Under 1rst edition rules, that could have taken all damn night. It is also MUCH easier to run matrix overwatch in 3rd. My advice, upgrade to 3rd. Its not nearly as complicated as it looks.

Ignore this post. Added only to make the date of the last post be in 2004.

Jumping a few posts back:

1st ed decking rules were confusing as hell. Needed to have a degree in patience to use.

VR1 streamlined these enough to be useful.

2nd ed took VR1 rules almost wholesale, minor tarting up.

VR2 made it so that basically all you needed to know to run the matrix was that there are tests between your skill and a host/LTG/RTG rating, programs reducing the target number.

3rd ed I think took VR2 rules word for word (from memory - haven't used a decker since Super Tuesday - hey, it was free).

The new rules are all about speed and though that works for alot of people I've found them to be too fast. And it's just about pointless to have more then one guy decking, all you end up doing it seems is crashing the host. Which is why I'm looking for the old 2nd rules.

Well, there's a few options.

1) eBay.
2) Stiggybaby
3) (If you feel like going against that copyright law and possibly getting in trouble with the law) PDF

Outside of that... Can't particularly help you.

As discusssed by Azrael and Ombre, there are 2 major versions of the decking rules. VR2 referred to the earlier rules as Matrix 1.0 which started in SR1 and continued with VR1 and into SR2. VR2 introduced Matrix 2.0 rules which continue to this day...

Sounds like the old sega genesis shadowrun decking.

You resurrected a two-year-old thread just to say that?

Yes, there's a reason for that.

Was it really necessary to resurrect this thread for that observation, though?

~J

Well, actually I was just searching around and that thread caught my eye. I didn't bother to look at the date.

Timeline Resurrection
(now updated to SR4)

I always liked the old VR1 rules not because of their elegance or complexity but because they paralleled the make-believe network world of Gibson's Neuromancer. The new rules are a little more realistic but lose out in flavour and description. Yes, VR1 was a virtual dungeonhack, but it had a visual style that that hasn't been replicated in the new books.

And VR1 still has the best matrix story in the entire history of Shadowrun.