Hi there everyone, I am a bit new so please take everything I say with a grain of salt here until I acclimate to the "culture".

After having read the rules I have some opinions good and bad about the new system.

The Bad

1) The shift to Attribute + Skill kind of rubs me the wrong way. It really moves away from what FASA was doing with its games at the time of 3rd ed. Something I really agree with. At no time should an attribute really overshadow skill. I think that a game mechanic that gives equal representation to an attrubute for a skill roll gives an unfair advantage to people who create characters with heavy emphasis on attributes at the cost of skills which are generally easier to increase with Karma. It just doesn't seem to mesh with the way things work for me. Shadowrun and Mechwarrior 3rd simply made it easier for you to increase skills if you had high likend attributes. This makes more sense to me since natural aptitude really just makes things easier to pick up instead of making you a savant. I can see two reasons for making this move. Firstly, when you are designing a system that requires the modification of dice pools, you have to have a fairly significant die pool to manipulate while still being able to provide realistic modifiers. You are left with either going with adding a lot of positive modifiers, having relatively high skill levels or going with a linked attribute score. I didn't like it in White Wolf and I don't like it here. In general I feel that Shadowrun has really taken a lot from the White Wolf book here and I am not sure I like it.

2) I really really really hate the loss of the "pool" system. Whether it be combat, casting, haking or control. I think that it was one of the things that really set Shadowrun apart from other systems. I felt that the combat pool had a significant factor in putting you in the drivers seat of the combat. Thinking ahead about dividing your pool amoungst mutliple actions, modifying your level of aggressiveness and generally making on the spot calls that made or broke a combat. I think that the combat system is a lot less dynamic without it.

3) Close combat does not allow for defenders to score hits. Once again, making the game a little less dynamic. Counterstriking and exploiting overextensions in attack are a good part of close combat. With the loss of this more "swirling melee" type simulation we are left with a very bland and ordinary combat system that is generally the same as any other in any system. Making things sort of videogamey.

The Good

1) They really got creative with the setting upgrade. Some real nice work here in keeping up with the pace of technology. Although I think the AR system adds a bit of a challenge to the GM its pretty darn facinating. Although its a bit of a rip off from Cybergeneration's "trode" system. Being a Decker/Hacker isnt as much of a party encuberance as it used to be, which is basically the bane of a Cyberpunk game. I like the smooth integration of Rigging and computer use. Real nice.

2) The Technomancer is super sweet. Shadowrun is not totally a dual world where every aspect of life is touched and manipulated by magic. Mage deckers. They even alluded to it in 3rd ed. This really brings things full circle.

3) 4th edition gives us a more generalized and comprehensive look at magic. It gives the GM a broader set of generic rules for creating traditions. Spells seem more varied and spirit use is nicely unified between traditions, leaving things mostly separated by flavor and feel.

Any Thoughts?

I basically agree. I may post in much more detail later. There are other things I really dislike (loss of variable TNs, loss of damage levels--both result in a less tense game, and tend more towards foregone conclusions) and a few that I like (improvements to ritual sorcery come to mind).

The one place where I disagree with you is with technomancers. They are clearly magical, given that there is no physical mechanism by which someone can send and receive radio waves with unaugmented brains. But the book doesn't say they are magical ("you decide!") and the first ones were created in the Crash in 2064 (how do you create magical activity with a virus--doesn't that go against the "magical ability is inborn/innate" canon?) and they are harmed by implanted technology despite being spawned by people who were dependent upon implanted technology. It's all very weird. It's especially odd to be maintaining the magic-tech tension with essence loss affecting magic and resonance, but losing the magic-tech tension by supposing that people who interact really well with technology do so magically.

If you ignore all those difficulties--if you ignore the SR backstory and previous editions--then I suppose technomancers are kind of cool. However, they do strike me as rather too lame a copy of post-Architect Neo.

The AR stuff is a nice addition. It was implemented impossibly fast, but I guess it wasn't feasible to advance the timeline much more than 5 years or else people's characters would be too old to make the transition, and that wouldn't be good for sales. An easily overlooked flaw, given the advantages of an AR system. (It's a pity there wasn't more AR in earlier SR products!)

The magical traditions I think are an open issue. The unification has the great danger of eroding all significant differences between magical traditions, removing richness from the game. (Melting pot vs. tossed salad.) If future fiction and games really stresses individual traditions, makes them feel distinct and important and all, then I think the unified construction rules will be a plus. Otherwise, it will end up just removing material from the game that was not complex, not hard to keep track of, and made for interesting variety. I understand that developers didn't like the old traditions' strength because it trod on their creative freedom or something. But losing content is kind of dull.

Hell, even SotA64 had those LinkClubs...

You did see the word "more", right?

Considering that 90%+ of the entire world is owned and operated by less than a dozen corporations, if they all got together and decided that the entire worlds matrix system should be replaced by spaghetti, I think it would take maybe 2 years tops for pasta to be running through the walls of almost every household in the world.

They make damn near every product. The control the service centers. And most electronics and components today are deisgned around a 3-5 year lifespan. There's a reason Sears and other places don't generally offer anything longer than a 3 year warranty on products. They don;t expect it to last much longer than that.

So if they decide to upgrade, they simply replace everything. Within 5 years, the majority of electronics and mechanicals in the worlds needs replaced, or repaired. And since they're out of production items, they're more expensive to repair. After all, if only one or two palces in the world make the parts for your wired smartlink system now, they can and will charge whatever they want. Eventually, it becomes cheaper to upgrade than to keep up with repairs.

And with the events of System Failure making it necessary to repair and replace major companents of the Matrix in the first place...

<shrug>

Bull

Having translated internal technical manuals and fix guides for the local support crews for companies such as Intel, Sony, Samsung, Grundig and Nokia for everything from TVs to computers to cellphones I beg to difer... 5 years is optimistic.

As for network hardware the introduction of 3G phones over the past couple of years have forced many Eurotelecoms to upgrade most of their (5-6 year old tops) networks for the added traffic, greater demand for stable connections and wireless compatiblity (in Europe, Vodaphone alone has spent 650 million USD on upgrading their network hardware in under 2 years according to a Financial Times report) - ie. the widespread popularity of a new consumer technology forced an upgrade of the backend hardware to meet the new market standard.

Well, I am coming at you from a retail and consumer standpoint. I worked retail at a number of outlets over the years, and 3 years is what I will empatically tell anyone will be the expected average lifespan for any piece of technology they will use. There are plenty of exceptions to this, on both sides of the argument. For every story of "Well my vaccum cleaner has run great for 15 years", I've heard "I just bought this a year ago and it blew up!".

Why should Shadowrun be any different? We're still talking consumer goods on most scales.

Hell, I work at one of the largest hospital systems in the US. They're one of the top 5 research hopsitals in at least the country (I dunno the exact specifics, I was half asleep during orientation and bored outta my skull). lemme tell you... 9/10 of the crap here is "consumer" level, and often mid-low end consumer at that. The rest is specialized equipment that they can only purchase from one or two places in the world, and they have to likewise buy their parts from those places. If at some point those companies said "Well, we no longer support this machine", we would be fucked, and would have to buy a completely new machine.

Bull

If you take into account, how quickly technology changes now already, I dont see a problem with a new world wide matrix in 5 years.

Examples (for and against, unsorted):
My TV set is about 15 years old and still works fine. No worries for HDTV though, but as we dont have (much if at all) that in germany, no worries.

We have UMTS cells since about 2 years now, no one wants em due to costs, not of the cell but the use of the new tech.
Same goes for SMS / MMS. SMS work perfectly for a nice price, MMS dont offer that much more overall that I would only use them. SMS tech is how old? I have had cells for about 10 years now, no one used SMS back then though.

Try using a 10 year old PC nowdays, or get hardware for it. Software? *HAHA*

There are studies showing how long it took for TVs to become common, then CD Players, then VHS Players and now DVD Players. The turnover rate to new tech is getting shorter and shorter already.
1) The tech wont hold as long as it used to be
2) The tech is way cheaper nowdays as it used to be (compared)
Well both points are pretty much linked though...

But given the consumper PoV its simple: give my broken VHS to repair, buy a new one (same price as repair) or upgrade to new tech (same price +/- some %).

Theres always the nostalgic person and the tech savy one, but once the broad mass is used to ever changing tech and the interfaces of the stuff is easier, I expect even old ppl (no offense) to change to new tech where they can, even though there are many that dont think highly of new tech nowdays.

Either there was a lot of unannounced wireless capability in 2063/4, or there was massive retrofitting to almost every consumer electronics device in short order. It's not as simple as everyone having a new cell phone.

The megas certainly could force it through if they wanted, but where would the profit be in that? They could force through lots of other more profitable things if they wanted, but they seem not to.

One could go back and create backstory about how all electronics devices were modularizable and really cheap AR interface transmitters became commonplace and everyone went and stuck them in everything. I didn't see much of that, but maybe I didn't look in the right places.

Do we need to get David Spade in here?

Buh-bye.

Sorry, I mean in all the things that people are hacking these days. If the security system on your door didn't have a wireless interface before, and it wasn't easily upgraded, it wouldn't now, either.

I agree that all the technological precursors were there at low penetrance waiting to be used. It's the scope more than the speed of the penetrance that is surprising. (The speed is surprising given the apparent change in scope.)

IIRC, in 2009 a Congress mandate will go into effect here in the states. All radio signals for televisions will shutdown and every broadcast company will either be satalite or digital. So if anyone here in the states still has a 15 year old television.....

They've extended that deadline so many times....

Ah, first Ive heard about it. Doesn't suprise me though.

It's hard to force the voting public to give up established technology. You have to pull them with cool new stuff (and low price), not push them with mandates. Not if you want to get reelected, anyway.

Yeah, only reason I heard about it is because I have a friend that hooked me up at Best Buy. Finally got myself a new tv and he told me about it while I was there. Makes me laugh though because they should force this upon everyone as it should clear up some much needed airwaves.

A lot of the wired infrastructure that wasn't nuked is probably still in use (or dark fiber waiting for a shadownet). Take apartments with built-in trid. Rebuild the whole building or just install a wireless gateway on the roof and plug the building's net into that? As stuff dies, replace it with wireless.

IMO the main advantage of wireless is that it forces all devices to have a firewall. If you look at 99% of current LANs they are defenseless PCs hiding behind firewalls/VPNs/etc.. The largest/smartest companies have router-level systems that look for attacks but how many of their WinXP boxes are running even the craptastic XP-firewall? Pretty much none.

As far as bandwidth....screw it, I'm saying every single device takes advantage of quantum entanglement to transmit the data. It's the only thing I can think of that might give you multiple OC3's worth of data path in the same airspace. IMC some numbnut came up with the quantum-entanglement equivalent of making LCDs (crushed velvet?!?) in that it works but nobody knows how or why. Otherwise I'll record random snippets of ST:TNG and and play it backwards loudly at anyone who asks how dozens of simsense feeds get sent over the air.

Okay, I am going to get involved in this conversation (having been avoiding so many dozens of others save where entertainment value is retained).

I agree that the Scope and Depth and Timing of the change is dramatic, and it seems wholly unbelievable by modern day operating standards.

I also agree that the Consumer market drives foundational economies.

I also agree that a politician cannot force his/her/its pundits to make changes in their supporting habitual natures (what type of tv, what type of phone, where to eat, etc) without risking political suicide.

However

The other examples everyone is giving are not really on cue either. Synner's example for instance involves working as a manual writer and related support for other companies. However, he also gives a clue as to the real nature of the corporate beast. The Corporations don't make plans for materials to last beyond a certain point not because of durability but because of Marketable ROI (Return on Investment). If it costs "x" to make 50,000 cd players which can then be sold at "y" to each customer. The customer then gets to spend "y" amount which is then servicing all those things you put into the product (we'll call that CD after all . If producing company says it's market outreach cap is 100,000 total units, then they determine how much it costs to make that money back plus their deemed appropriate profit margin. Producing company then says "well, if it takes us 2 years to reach our outreach cap, then in 2 years time I want to have the next better product."

THIS is what determines lifespan of product in the technological and service industries today globally.

Now let's get back to SR4 for a moment. We're looking at the WMI (the Wireless Matrix Initiative) being talked about in the "Shadows of " books (Asia, Europe and I presume the Latin America once it's on PDF). Research for this whole thing has already been in the works. Honestly, it is in the works in the REAL WORLD NOW. The big areas of economic gain with the WMI has to do with network maintenance. All the sheer electrical force/generation needs of a (re)growing/expanding population simply outdistances what we have to offer now. Lord knows in the theorectical age of SR4. Then let's talk wires/cabling. Even with the best technologies to lay down and install cabling imaginable (bubble-magnetic field implacement is the best thing I've heard of), it will still take time (man hours/drone hours) to take care of all those problems which include breakages and burnouts.

No, the whole reason the WMI is happening is because of sheer economics, and it is pretty clear that with the next technology being played with today (did anyone know that the cellphone tech being played within Nippon allows for streaming HD quality DVD-level feeds???) that bandwidth is simply not going to become an issue with regards to broadcasting.

Now then, with the discussion about Firewalls vs. Defenseless Networks, I do find things interesting. Has anyone else caught the part where the various grades of cyberware have Device Ratings??? And those Device Ratings serve as the Firewall, System, etc... attributes for that object with regards to hacking and such? Here's my dream scenario I thought of last night.

I'm going to have someone buy a Betaware Commlink implant that will then act as the HUB of the PAN for the guy. It has a built in Firewall of 5. As part of the PAN, the whole network is thus shielded behind that Firewall 5. This is something that I found extremely unusual given the whole new SR4 system. I found nothing that says I can't do it and everything that says I can. And thus I don't have to pay for anything more with regards to security (because a rating 5 Firewall in a basic/unmodified/no-house-rules SR4 game is damn near God).

And btw, to kigmatzomat ... nice to see you over here ... don't forget that networked Firewalls is how part of the "Self Repair/Self Watching" Cisco and IBM systems function. Gotta love the idea of "Teamworked Devices".

I've said it before, I'll say it again: firewalls only have a point if you are running services with vulnerabilities. I've got my firewall off right now and feel great about it.

Edit:

Kagetenshi wrote:
I've said it before, I'll say it again: firewalls only have a point if you are running services with vulnerabilities. I've got my firewall off right now and feel great about it.

---
First of all, lets be clear here that the Matrix is a waaaaay oversimplification of actual computers. It has to be, because after all.. most of this stuff is theoritical at best, and fantasy at worst.

Look at encryption... Even at a basic level it is easy to understand that a system running encryption would require an EXPONENTIALLY more powerful system to "brute-force" hack the encryption. And I don't care if you have a system/commlink with all 6s, even if you are trying to break a simple encryption on a system 1 commlink it would take weeks, even months.

With these systems able to do brain functions in real-time (which technically means the computers have to be FASTER then the brain.. to keep up). I think it is more along the lines of multi gigabit level encryption.. which would take centuries..

But that is not "fun", and "fun" is mandatory. So we have "decrypt" programs that can do it in a few combat turns.. yeah.. ok..

It also stands to reason that firewalls in their definition is just an easily associated word to describe a systems security. So a low firewall 1-2 means that the system has not gotten all the updates and patchs, it has vulnerable holes in the OS, and is easily hackable.

However, just because someone has hacked a person's commlink.. does not mean they now own their soul. Remember that most any device can create nodes instantly.. and nodes can be both public and private... Most of a user's private SIN data will be on its own private node hidden in their commlink. Any sucesses in that node in detecting an intrusion would cause the node to shutdown in 1 turn, effectively dumping any would-be hacker. (Security sheef for a PAN node would be 1 = shutdown).

Since most users do not need their SIN data available 24/7, they can be paranoid and not even have that node "active" until they need it to make a purchase or pass an ID scan. An inactive node on a person's comlink could be activated by a hacker.. but would risk alerting the user just the same way.. and all they need is 1 success.


-----------------------------------
NeoJudas wrote:

It has a built in Firewall of 5. As part of the PAN, the whole network is thus shielded behind that Firewall 5. This is something that I found extremely unusual given the whole new SR4 system. I found nothing that says I can't do it and everything that says I can. And thus I don't have to pay for anything more with regards to security (because a rating 5 Firewall in a basic/unmodified/no-house-rules SR4 game is damn near God).
---
How is a firewall - 5 "god" ? System and Firewall don't even have an availability.. and a Rating 6 of either costs 3,000 nuyen. (Costs even less if you upgrade Novatech Nova OS to rating 6s).

But remember that hacking is now an extended test.. it is not a question of "IF" you can hack a system, but "when" and if it detects the intrusion or not.

Eventually the hacker will get the required 5 hits to your Firewall=5 threshold.. and he is in your commlink.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I am currently working on a document of my ideas on the new wireless web.. I will post it when it is done. (Of course, most of it will be obsolete when the new SR4 matrix sourcebook comes out in the new few months.)

Replying to Eldritch:

Meh, your POV is fine, but I don't think there is any malice.

You guys bring up a good point. The one thing I can't stand about SR4 is the fact that people can throw fireballs. I don't know anyone that can do it or at least to that capacity.

Sometimes the suspension of disbelief is useful and allows you to enjoy the game versus attempting to pigeon futuristic technologies and methodologies based on current day knowledge and perception.

I will stab you in the face.

~J

So you want to be rich & famous ?

True, but I'm willing to suspend disblief long enough to accept that in 65 years we might come up with a way to solve some of our current bandwidth, etc. problems and thus make a wireless world truely a reality, in a networking sense. And I'm a network engineering (well, that's what part of my job description says anyway).

Shanon's Law allows for potentially infnite data transfer if noise levels are sufficiently low. Which is to say that if you could distinguish your signal from all others to an arbitrarily fine voltage, then you could send infinite information over miniscule bandwidth through the air as long as everyone was using different voltages.

Kagetenshin, I suspect, doesn't actually know what he's talking about and is just making a fuss because he wants Deckers to stay in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant and make food for him.

-Frank

Stupid Double Post.

-Frank

All of this is nice, but pointless. The real reason that SR4's wireless system won't work as intended has nothing to do with the technology involved. It has to do with magnetics.

Earth's magnetic field is, for some reason, variable. Variable enough that some areas are literally wireless deadzones, to where no matter what you do you cannot get a cell phone or similar technology to function properly. Hell, my house is one. You always have to step outside to use a cell phone or get messages to your beeper. Everything in the house is wired and connected to something because of that.

Now, keep in mind that's one house in the middle of the city. Also, keep in mind that these wireless deadzones can stretch for miles. And, even worse, is that there is nothing that can be done about it.

So, yeah, wired systems will still be available and there will still be new versions of them. There have to be, simply to cover those areas where wireless don't work.

Accidental double post.

I thought there were SR4 rules for wireless dead zones?

There indeed are. I think the thing that's been forgotten in this is that the entire planet isn't wireless in SR. Large portions are, and most major cities are, but you'll be hard pressed to find a decent signal in the Barrens, for example.

Bull

In SR4, at last... in SR3, there was always CSS.

As I've suggested earlier, you can always cheat and say there's a freakish, incomprehensible trick that to utilize quantum entangling. Maybe it's just for data correction so that normal RF is treated as noiseless, maybe it is the media (although that would destroy the need of Signal rating). Regardless, there are semi-theoretical things that could cause near infinite bandwidth.

I don't hear any complaints from the masses that the processing power for a cyberdeck, which was greater than the processing power of a server cluster, has been eclipsed by a 200Y Comm. After all, we're rapidly approaching the point that circuitry is only a couple atoms wide. To increase performance will either require a massive shift in technological paradigm or a change in the way people understand the laws of physics.

Who says that the one doesn't enable the other?