Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Decking
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Community Projects
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
mfb
i like the ACIFS uber-progs, btw. if i were a proponent of keeping ACIFS at all, that's how i'd do cyberdecks (though i'd have them be combinations of hardware, software, and firmware).
Kagetenshi
Out of interest, what would you prefer instead of ACIFS?

I suppose I could go for uber-progs, mildly overpriced as compared to their individual components. Either way that's an issue for when we get to program sizes; does anyone see a problem with the list of Operations? If no, we can decide the program… thing… stuff later.

~Zzzzzzzzz
mfb
honestly? i'd scrap the whole system and start over. my current thinking is to make it mechanically similar to spellcasting.

(insert pause while the crowd screams curses and burns me in effigy here)

i think the TN for the decking test should be determined by the target and the conditions, and that the target should resist against a TN determined by the rating of the program used. attempting operations without a program would use something similar to the defaulting rules, and the resistance TN would be 2.
Kagetenshi
*Roasts a marshmallow*

Actually, while I personally don't like it, it isn't a half-bad idea. It is, however, out of the scope of SR3R unless the current rules completely defy attempts to streamline (which I don't believe they're going to do).

~J
SirBedevere
Kagetenshi, I like your ideas about the Control operations and utilities. Just a question; I presume that under your Inject utility the Crash Application action is included with Crash Host?

I would put Alter Icon under the Cloak utility. I can't really think of a better place I'm afraid.

I have some suggestions for what Cloak could be called: Deceive, Confuse or a Russian word Maskirovka. That's a term for military deception. The Russian 'advisors' had taught it to the Iraquis and they used it during Desert Storm. They would build fake tanks etc with oil drums and bits of old pipe to fool radar and light a small fire inside to fool infra-red sensors.

IMO the otaku should be 'different' not necesserily 'better'.

I do like the idea of making response increase a function of MPCP.

I'll comment on your other ideas when I've had a chance to read them properly.
blakkie
QUOTE (mfb @ Apr 15 2005, 02:22 AM)
honestly? i'd scrap the whole system and start over. my current thinking is to make it mechanically similar to spellcasting.

(insert pause while the crowd screams curses and burns me in effigy here)

i think the TN for the decking test should be determined by the target and the conditions, and that the target should resist against a TN determined by the rating of the program used. attempting operations without a program would use something similar to the defaulting rules, and the resistance TN would be 2.

Punt! wink.gif My problem always was that decking of any conciquence involved a lot of intricate dice stacking and rearranging by the rest of the [bored] players. Fixing that definately seems outside of SR3R scope.

EDIT: Unless you get it down to the equivalent of someone going alone to meet a fixer. But then it becomes brutally simplistic.
Link
QUOTE
(Dissonance)
I get the impression that this WAS possible at one point, in the form of, like, program carriers.


QUOTE
IIRC, Program Carriers would carry three of your persona chips ... Masking, Sensors, and Evasion. You used your own Body as Bod. When you jacked in, you used your (at the time massive SR1) Hacking Pool to create any other programs on the fly.


I mucked around with updating rules for program carriers based on the update in the Running Gear netbook. The lost item "Program Enablers (Essence Cost .1)" from SR1 were going to allow for hardwired utilities as someone here mentioned.
Link
Quick point: The term Matrix 2.0 was used in VR2 to describe the second generation of decking rules (which we are currently discussing).

1. The idea of the super utilities could be used for an ultra simplified rule system similar to the present rule that ACIFS can be condensed from 5 values to 2. This would allow some to deck with minimalist rules while allowing for an expansion later on if desired. The basic system/host rating could be 2 values; Security Rating & ACIFS.

Utilities would expand from Access (for example) into Deception et al. The multiplier of the super utility might be that of its component utilities but a beginner wouldn't need to deal with that.

Sort of a basic, expert and advanced layer of rules.

2. The current list of system operations is big but it also guides gm's and deckers by informing them of options in a host. Condense the list by all means, but still mention all aspects of what the operations can do.

As for utilities, condensing them would lessen the demands on decker characters in terms of programming, not a bad idea.
Eyeless Blond
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Commlink
Make Comcall
Triangulate
Tap Comcall

Sniffer
Intercept Data

I think you can combine these two into one utility, and call it Intercept.

My big beef with the current ruleset is the lack of extensability of the utilities; every time some new function comes out it ends up under the purview of some new utility, and that IMO is one major thing that makes deckers a bitch to play. The other problem is that there is no "basic loadout" included, that tells a decker which utilities he *needs* to have (like Sleaze, Deception, Analyze, R/W, Spoof, Cloak, etc), and that really has to be addressed because 90% of the deckers I've created have been inadveredly "missing" something that I didn't realize I needed until the GM razzed me with a test I couldn't dreg up a utility for. The simple knowledge that there are X utilities, and Y of them are basically prerequisites for being a decker, would make things much easier and less of a pain in the ass to play.

So long as you address that, I don't have much a problem with the difference between 5 and 13-14 operational utilities.
Kagetenshi
Have the extensibility guidelines done anything to meet your needs?

~J
Eyeless Blond
That was pretty much all I was looking for really, so yeah. smile.gif

(Edit): Also, I guess I can see the Encephalon thing being too radical a change, so I concede that one.

How's this one, though: I would like to have it so that buying, say, an MPCP chip and installing it yourself is actually cheaper than having someone else install it for you, rather than being ~10-20 times more expensive. smile.gif
hahnsoo
QUOTE (Eyeless Blond)
How's this one, though: I would like to have it so that buying, say, an MPCP chip and installing it yourself is actually cheaper than having someone else install it for you, rather than being ~10-20 times more expensive. smile.gif

That would mean actually redoing the deck construction rules and... *shudders at the thought* Never mind, my mind is starting to implode just thinking about it. *grin*

I'm sure there's a reasonable way to rewrite deck construction. I don't know if I would want to fry my brain on it, though. I think a start would be reconciling the cost of an MPCP from SR3 to the installation of an MPCP in a custom deck from Matrix.
Kagetenshi
I've already volunteered for quite a bit of brain-incinerating, so I'll give it a look-see a bit later.

On the monolithic-programs issue: I still don't like it, I still don't think it's that big an issue, but I also don't think it needs to be resolved right now. We'll let the onlookers pipe in with their opinions and come back to it once we get some other issues worked out.

5) Null Operations

What the hell do we do with this?

~J
hahnsoo
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Apr 15 2005, 11:58 AM)
5) Null Operations

What the hell do we do with this?

~J

You don't do anything. smile.gif Treat it as an optional rule. Most people don't ever use it, and if they do, it implies a mastery of the Matrix rules that they would require such a thing.
Eldritch
QUOTE
The Big Picture

Access
Deception
Logon
Freeze Vanishing SAN
Graceful Logoff

Encrypt/decrypt

Extensibility: quite simple, really. If it's an Access operation that doesn't involve encrypting or decrypting, it uses Deception.

Commentary: You'll still be using Access as the TN to do things like crash the Access subsystem, but I don't consider that an Access operation per se (you aren't Accessing anything).

Control
Analyze
Analyze Host
Analyze Icon
Analyze Process
Inject
Abort Host Shutdown
Block System Operation
Crash Host
Alter Icon*
Redirect
Decoy
Redirect Datatrail
Relocate Trace
Validate
Dump Log
Invalidate Account
Restrict Icon
Validate Account

Extensibility guidelines: if it involves analysis, stick it under Analyze. If it involves interfering with a running process, use Inject. If it involves falsifying data or otherwise confusing system monitors, Decoy. If it involves logs, user accounts, or using the system's own security systems to allow you to do something or disallow someone else from doing something, it's a Validate issue.

Commentary: Altering an icon at will seems similar enough to the idea of injecting arbitrary code that I stuck it in there with it. Opinion?

Index
Browse
Locate System Resource
Trace MXP Address
Scanner
Locate Icon

Extensibility guidelines: If it's finding something that's a basic part of the system or can be considered a file, folder, subsystem, whatever rather than an active user (keeping in mind that processes can be users too), it goes under Browse. If it's finding something that has an icon, it goes under Scanner.

Or, to simplify it further: if it moves, it's Scanner. If it doesn't, it's Browse.

Commentary: Self-explanatory, I think. We'll need to define what a system resource is or come up with a better term, though.

Files
Read/Write
Manipulate Data

Encrypt/Decrypt

Extensibility guideline: this one's really pretty basic. If it has to do with reading data from or writing data to something that isn't a slave or protected by special permissions (logs, user databases), it goes under Read/Write.

Commentary: something about Make Comcall being here doesn't sit right with me. Any thoughts for a better place to put it? Possibly combine Commlink and Triangulate and put them both under Slave? Update: Done.

Slave
Spoof
Control Slave
Edit Slave
Monitor Slave
Commlink
Make Comcall
Triangulate

Encrypt/Decrypt

Extensibility Guideline: if it's a slave node, it falls under Spoof. This one's really easy as long as you don't try to make Slave do something that Slave shouldn't do.

Commentary: The exception is for cases like Triangulate. Is there another case someone can point out where additional information might be gleaned from a Slave that would need a program to calculate? Also, see Files commentary. Update: Triangulate no longer uses a separate utility.

Other
Analyze
Analyze Subsystem
Inject
Crash Application
Purge
Disarm Data Bomb
Disinfect
Relevant worm
Infect
Sniffer
Intercept Data
Commlink
Tap Comcall
None
Swap Memory

Encrypt and Decrypt
Separate utilities, but it makes little sense to discuss them separately.

Discuss.


Is this still where we are?

QUOTE
If it involves falsifying data.....


Wouldn't you want to use Read/Write or Manipulate Data on that? I'd assume you already accessed the node, now you are making changes.


Yeah, My first thought was to lump Triangulate in with Commlink.


Kagetenshi
I don't know how to express it, but I feel that the data falsification that goes on when creating decoy images of your icon or messing with an attempted Trace is meaningfully different from what is done with Read/Write. Any other opinions?

Hahnsoo: I guess you've got a point. I really don't like optional rules, but it'll do until we can find something better (if we do).

Are there any other issues that people see with the Operational Utilities, or shall we move on to the remaining Special Utilities?

~J
Fortune
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
5) Null Operations

What the hell do we do with this?

Is it really necessary?
Kagetenshi
Well, that's exactly the question I'm asking. I don't really like the idea of rolling Null Ops tests every time I wait for something, but on the other hand I also don't like the idea that unless another Decker comes into the system a Decker can sit in a host for years just because they aren't doing anything.

~J
Eyeless Blond
Well remember it's only one test for however long you want to wait/continue monitoring slaves/etc. The test just gets harder if you want to stick around for hours. smile.gif Null Op should stay as it is, IMO; it's fine so long as you don't go too overboard in calling for them all the damn time. They're also used for activating Command Sets and such as well, which are good additions to the rules, and is a fairly transparent mechanic for doing so. Keep it.
Kagetenshi
Null op stays as is.

Anything else before the Special Utilities?

~J
Kagetenshi
6) Sleaze

I personally like Sleaze adding in a software component to DF, but others have advocated getting rid of it. What's your take? Why?

~J
hahnsoo
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
6) Sleaze

I personally like Sleaze adding in a software component to DF, but others have advocated getting rid of it. What's your take? Why?

~J

Either get rid of it, or make it the only thing that needs to be used to sneak around. I'd much prefer a "programs are for operations, hardware are for stats" paradigm than having a mix of the two in the crazy special utilities category. This is not to say "eliminate all special utilities", but I think Sleaze should be a function of the persona. Most of the stuff I associate with the old Sleaze program (prior to SR3/VR2.0) actually has been taken over by Deception.
Eyeless Blond
Either ditch it, or ditch Evasion and Masking as Persona programs. Sure it "makes sense" for both hardware and software to be used for DF, but in practical terms all it means is that the people that know it just have Sleaze and Masking at the same or very close ratings (one equal to MPCP, one equal to MPCP-1), and people that don't know it get screwed. It's unneeded complexity, and doesn't add anything to the game.
Kagetenshi
Any suggestions as to which side should be scrapped? I'm inclined to scrap the hardware side, personally.

~J
Eldritch
I wouldn't touch any of the persona programs - they are your attributes.

Sleaze and deception do sort of the same thing, just different ways - Sleaze is stealth. Sneaking around and not leaving an easily folllowable trail. Deception is fooling the sytem into thinking you are someone else by generating pass codes and user info.

At least that's the way I remember it. Honestly I just began runningg a decker in an online game, and I'm counting on the GM for rules. It's been awhile since I ran on before that. I need to sit down and read the section/book.

Shockwave_IIc
Ok i know i'm late with a lot of this, for that i'm sorry.

QUOTE (Kage)
2) Validate makes the world obsolete.

Yup, Like every one else it would seem, i agree. Might i suggest getting rid of Evaluate as well.

QUOTE (kage)
4) Link Utilities
Rating based hardware.

QUOTE (kage)
The only one that I think could make sense would be Doorstop, but what would we replace it with?

Spoof??

QUOTE
For reference, that would leave us with something like:

Analyze
Analyze Host
Analyze Icon

Isn't a Host just a REALLY BIG icon on a grid?

QUOTE
Something preexisting to absorb Redecorate
Alter Icon

Read/Write? Since you are altering the Icon programs code.

QUOTE
Cloak (yes, I know the name's already used, if someone has a better one please contribute)

Breadcrumbs?

QUOTE
So: combine Locate Access Node, Locate File, and Locate Slave into Locate System Resource, take Locate IC out of Analyze's purview and make Locate IC, Locate Decker, Locate Frame, and Locate Tortoise User all Locate Icon with the special case that tortoises only take a Simple Action to locate.

Evaluate: I have no idea what to do with this. There's no way it's balanced for the paydata-finding program to do anything but find paydata; my personal inclination is to just scrap it entirely.

Agree with both. I just don't understand how a program can determine how valuable something is without it being a least an SK.(but i'd still rather see the program gone)

QUOTE
Does anyone have a suggestion for a utility to replace Triangulation? That's the only thing I could really see shaving off here.

Spoof again? As anyhost that can triangulate will have the nessacery hardware to do so i'd imagine

QUOTE (Eyeless)

Get rid of the damn Task Pool and virtual Int increase for the Encephalon, and instead have each level add +2+d6 to mental (ASIST-based) Initiative. You'll need a third level that costs 2.25 Essence and 200,000Y, but that's okay as well.

I like this alot but as Moon-hawk said, have it also limited on the hardware.

QUOTE
I still think that there need be only five basic Operational Utilities, possibly with specializations like hahnsoo mentioned (great idea, btw!)

I am liking this as well.

On to the Sleaze thing, i'd one or other like most people are saying however i would go with ditching Sleaze as it would involve less work as your wouldn't need to fess around so much with the MPCP rules
Eyeless Blond
Indeed, ditching Sleaze is less work, and gives you the same end result. Keep in mind that the Persona programs, like all "hardware" in SR are about 5% parts and about 1495% software, going by construction costs. The only possible complication arises from the fact that you can't use Tar to crash the sleaze program, but I don't like that rule anyway as it's horrifically unfair when it does work; you're basically forced to dumpshock yourself right after unless you want to activate all the IC on the host in ten seconds.

As for Evaluate, I tend to agree, though keep in mind the rules for such a program make it so you basically need to reprogram it every month or so. You really have to be on the ball to keep that thing from becoming useless; since it's you actually finding the paydata with your computer skill it's more like a database of what's valuable on the market today. Remember that utilities don't actually do anything themselves; they have to be guided by an intelligent hand to be useful.
Shockwave_IIc
QUOTE (Eyeless Blond @ Apr 18 2005, 10:26 AM)
The only possible complication arises from the fact that you can't use Tar to crash the sleaze program, but I don't like that rule anyway as it's horrifically unfair when it does work; you're basically forced to dumpshock yourself right after unless you want to activate all the IC on the host in ten seconds.
Im up for seconding you for dumping it.

QUOTE
As for Evaluate, I tend to agree, though keep in mind the rules for such a program make it so you basically need to reprogram it every month or so. You really have to be on the ball to keep that thing from becoming useless; since it's you actually finding the paydata with your computer skill it's more like a database of what's valuable on the market today. Remember that utilities don't actually do anything themselves; they have to be guided by an intelligent hand to be useful.

Yeah but all it is really is a browse program, it doesn't know what is valuable and what isn't.

How can it tell the difference between "Secret plans for world domination" and "Goals for next year" how can it tell which one is the real deal?? Thats where you knowledge skills come in. You Browse for data containing Key words, then sift through the crap it turns up yourself. Much like Goggle.
Eyeless Blond
Yes, but it's a Google 60 years in the future, in a land where Agents and such have Computer skills of their very own. I'm sure in a world with various classes of programmable intelligence--remember Agents and Smart Frames are within the reach of starting deckers--content-recognition is going to be possible, at least to a small degree, and something that can summarize contant for you and check it against a database of "hot topics" would be very handy for evalutaing data. Remember, again, that the utility isn't doing all or even most of the work, either; it's your own wetware that really finds things. The utility just helps.
Shockwave_IIc
QUOTE (Eyeless Blond)
content-recognition is going to be possible, at least to a small degree, and something that can summarize contant for you and check it against a database of "hot topics" would be very handy for evalutaing data.
But isn't this the domain of Browse??

QUOTE
Remember, again, that the utility isn't doing all or even most of the work, either; it's your own wetware that really finds things. The utility just helps.

Yes but it's your computer skill that does the work, HOw can that help when looking for paydata in a Biotech research host??

Thats why I think it should Browse and Knowledge skills. As it states in the Main Rules, a good set of search parmenters can give you a Tn reduction when performing browse tests.

But we are pulling this Off topic a little.

Sorry Kage.
Kagetenshi
No worries, it's keeping the thread active while I'm being slow. Either way, Evaluate is gone and paydata is handled by the GM now.

~J
Eyeless Blond
Guess that answers *that* question doesn't it? nyahnyah.gif
Kagetenshi
Right, where was I. We'll do two to four more sections and then take a look at where we are.

7) Combat Utilities

Both offensive and defensive. Do we use Decking to roll the attack, or the rating of the program? Arguments could be made for both sides. We also need to more clearly explain why Black Hammer and Killjoy determine their damage based on the host they're being used on, but I believe that that's the proper way to do it. Does anything else need to be altered/dropped/etc?

8) Guardian

Do we need this? I'm inclined to drop it in favour of hardware, but that creates iffy things like people getting around it by just taking out the Guardian chip. Thoughts?

~J
hahnsoo
I've always thought Attack Program = Weapons. So they have a power level = rating and damage level based on the multiplier.

Drop Guardian in favor of hardware. It shouldn't be "just a chip", but an overall measure of how much security the deck casing and the hardware has, like a maglock.
Link
In regard to combat utilities, having the attack based on computer skill brings it into line with other types of combat resolution, which may come up later in SR3R.

Having attacks as simple actions seems a bit unnecessary and overwhelming but I don't know if changing this would upset balance??
Kagetenshi
Why would attacks as simple actions be either unnecessary or overwhelming?

~J
Fortune
QUOTE (Link)
In regard to combat utilities, having the attack based on computer skill brings it into line with other types of combat resolution, which may come up later in SR3R.

That's how it works according to info@shadowrunrpg. I'm not sure if it was Rob or the new ShadiwFAQ who actually answered that question for me, but it makes sense.
Kagetenshi
It may make sense, but it isn't what the book says (indeed, it's quite explicit on page 226 that you can use hacking pool dice to augment the program, not the user's Computers skill). Personally, I think it makes sense both ways.

~J
Fortune
We've had this discussion before, and the book reference can be read either way. This is the reason I asked for clarification in the first place. The response from (I think it was Rob) said that attacking in the matrix works the same as anything else in the matrix, using the Computer skill against a TN modified by the program.
Kagetenshi
I disagree that it can be read either way.

Woah, he said there was a TN mod? Whatever he was on, I want some.

In any case, in this particular case what SR3 canon is is mostly irrelevant. Your vote is for skill?

~J
Fortune
Let me dig up the response ...

Nope, he didn't. I must have made that up. biggrin.gif

Here is the actual Q & A ...

QUOTE
Question: When using an attack program in the Matrix, there is some confusion because of the specific wording in the books. Does the Decker use his Computer Skill for the attack [just like he would with any other test], or is it the Rating of the Attack Program itself that is used?

Answer: Decker uses his Computer Skill just like for running other programs.


Regardless, my vote is indeed for using the skill as opposed to the program rating.
Link
Unnecessary in that one attack test is faster than 2.
Overwhelming because the 1-2 punch soaks up resistance pool dice. I always consider actions (for people of the same speed) should alternate. A attacks then B attacks rather than A attacks twice then B attacks twice. This may have an adverse effect on decking manouevres however.
Kagetenshi
More to the point it's a philosophy that would have to be applied to ranged combat to be consistent. I'm not sure I like the idea, but if anyone else has an opinion feel free to chime in.

~J
Shockwave_IIc
Guardian chip. thats the one where you need a passcode to use the deck right? I like the idea, and if it's actually apart of the memory (what ever we deside for that) then it can't be simply "pulled". Though i don't think it would hurt the game that much if we were to get rid of it.

I Abstane nyahnyah.gif

On the Attack roll. Dice for attack= Computer skill (Decking), With power and damage being the program get my vote. As for the Damaging effects of killjoy/ Blackhammer. I agree that the current way is right, but as for explaining it maybe you need the processing power of the Host, which would help to explain why they are so difficult to wright.
Kagetenshi
That's actually exactly what I've already used in my games. Let me get the relevant SotSW shadowtalk…

QUOTE (SotSW.net)

>You guys are going to think I'm crazy, but what I'm about to say is completely true. A friend and I were decking through one of Lone Star's security databases, trying to clear a criminal record, when out of the blue we get hit by loads of IC. Nothing unusual, we amscray and regroup at a public host. All of a sudden this icon comes up and BAM, hits my friend hard. I check the icon, and it's a decker persona, all kitted out in Lone Star uniform. I start to bounce my connection, but then I realize my buddy isn't following me. I go back, and he's just standing there while the pig hits him again and again. I'd only ever seen that once before, when one of my chummers got hit with some black IC. My friend's icon fragments and vanishes, and the pig turns and looks directly at me. I jack out and head over to my friend, but he's slumped over his deck. I rushed him to the hospital, but he was DOA. I swear, that pig did it to him. Watch out for the Star!

>Gridzombie

>You're right, we do think you're crazy.

>Qewpie

>I wouldn't be so sure. There were definitely projects like this when I was there. One of them might have gotten it right.

>X-Star

>Well. It took you long enough to realize they have the stuff, didn't it? From what I've been seeing, it isn't just the Star, either.

>PolarPenguin

>Impossible. Even an Excalibur doesn't have the processing power to kill a healthy adult with biofeedback. That takes the kind of power only a host has.

>The Technician

>There are ways around that.

>FastJack

>This thread is a legitimate concern, and thus deserves a place outside the Rumors forum. Consider it moved.

>Captain Chaos
"I am everywhere!"

>Wait a tick... are you suggesting that the program uses the host's processing power... but that opens up everything!
>NuJack SETI


(With thanks to Alex and Kanada Ten, who chimed in with parts of that)

~J
Link
QUOTE
More to the point it's a philosophy that would have to be applied to ranged combat to be consistent.


Funny that you mention it.. Our rule on ranged combat is that if an attacker states they are firing 2 shots in a phase, the attack is resolved as a 2 shot burst complex action, the same applies to 2 [3 round] bursts. It's quick to resolve and removes the 'shoot once and see what happens' mentality which detracts from the mood.

Also, for consistency and simplicity, should decker (and melee) combat use the ranged combat resolution rule where the final net success are used to stage rather than staging before damage resistance tests.
Link
As above
Kagetenshi
Guardian is now misc. hardware, Attack now uses Decking with Power determined by the utility. The more I think about it the more I think it makes more sense the other way, but this way is probably simpler.

Link: your concerns are noted, but unless we do end up changing ranged combat or initiative cybercombat will continue to have two simple actions with a simple action for attack.

Compressor would logically be next, but for that we need to answer…

3) Active Memory and Program Sizes

Do we keep canon active memory totals and rework current utilities to balance? Do we alter canon active memory totals? Do we scrap them altogether and put in a different balancing mechanic?

~J
Shockwave_IIc
Personally im up for keeping the program size's the same and sorting out the memory issue. But then i've got no issue's with the maths and now that we've dropped a few of the utilities is not that much of a pain then it was.

What sort of thing did you have in mind to fix it?
Kagetenshi
I didn't have anything in mind. I think it's a very good balancer, but am open to the possibility that some might consider it more complex than warranted.

~J
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