[All4BigGuns]

It's currently nebulous, open to abuse and badly thought out. Clarifying it so you have clear limits on what can be done and how is not more hassle than it's worth, because it provides (in theory) good rules for an integral part of the setting.

Something that is part of the feel of the game not working is not reason to throw it away. It's reason to fix it.

I did, in another post offer a possible suggestion, but the proponents for doing the cyber-hacking thought it was "too limited" because it didn't let Hackers 'puppeteer' every Street Sam they met into attacking their own allies.

[Wildcard]

Right. I guess it depends on how you define combat monster. If you define it as someone who purposely doesn't do anything other than combat, you can't then bemoan that they can't do anything else. But if you're just defining it as someone who is first and foremost geared towards melee and ranged combat, then there is still easily room to slap on an additional skill or two or four (Intimidate, Infiltration, Shadowing, Hardware, heck, even the various Piloting, etc.) that gives them purpose in non-combat situations.

I agree. My current fighter guy is a troll with 6 edge, 9 reaction, can fix anything that's not a computer, and can survive in hostile environments.

It's just he doesn't do any of those things exceptionally well. He's kind of a generalist, except he'll never sling spells or go astral, nor can he hack anything. Meanwhile, since he's got some `ware, certain folk on here would say that he's going to have his body hacked from time to time.

Let's break down the elements of a run.

Meet
Recon
Legwork
Execution
Payment
Aftermath

For the purposes of this argument, we'll assume the close quaters specialist and the fire support specialist are condensed into the ubiquitous "Combat Monster".

As it stands, the CM can, depending on build, touch a few of those run elements. If he's got some good contacts, he can do a bit of legwork. If he's got some good infiltration and perception, he can touch some recon. If he's got some charisma, he can be of some use during the meet and payment portions beyond being a bulletcatcher. However, a combat monster *can't* do all of those things with a single build. He just doesn't have the BP.

Meanwhile, a hacker can cover all of those aspects. He can hack the Johnson's commlink during the meet. He can browse the matrix around the scene and find some interesting nodes, and open up cameras and mic feeds for recon. He can hit up shadowgroups and hacker databases for legwork.  He can at the very least, provide matrix defense during execution, and more then likely will be a key component in bypassing maglocks and building security. He can set up anonymous accounts and split up nuyen after verifying payment, and will likely be one of the few characters unaffected should the team have to lay low after the run.

So the hacker can cover every single aspect without having to spread his skills and BP thin, covers the Matrix better then any other archetype, and now, as a subset of execution, should combat break out, he should be on par with a combat monster?  Bullshit. Let every archetype have their own spotlight. If every 4 or 5 sessions a good combat breaks out, let the monster have his day.

[emsquared]

This is exactly the problem. People want hackers to be able to do combat without spending points into other skills. The Street Sam and Face can't be effective in other areas without investing in those skills, so why should any other character type be able to?

But they're not "doing combat", they're doing battlefield control, sure. Mages do that with one skill too, and are waaaaaayyyyy better at it. And with sammies and faces, it's very easy to be fantastic at their specialty and tack on these other roles. Possibly requires less investment than Hackers when you look at the systems and programs required to do their thing.

By having cyber-ware being a liability like that, that is exactly what it makes the Hacker.

You are freaking out about something that hasn't even been stated as a goal by the devs. Think about that.

He can already use his Matrix skills to get more information--and do it better--than the Face can with his contacts (unless you're talking the cheesy Pornomancer crap).

Depends on your Face (how ballsy and creative he is) and your GM (how much he nut-hugs the Matrix). I've found Faces to be better at getting information and infiltrating then Hackers and B&E.

He's already better at being undetected than the Infiltrator (not being on-site and not tripping alarms). The only thing the Hacker can't do already with his Matrix skills is deal with magical threats considering that he can already fight almost as good if not better than the Street Sam by using drones (while being in the safety of his comfy chair).

Did you not read about the concept of Noise? Your arm-chair Hacker/Rigger is probably not going to be the norm anymore - they're going to be assuming the same risk as anyone else.

[Falconer]

Mara;
I think you understand better what I mean by diagnostic interface and the like.

But a lot of your things like AR spam aren't directed directly at the eyes... they're directed at the commlink!   The imagelink is merely the monitor passing data from the commlink.  (nothing stops people with cybereyes from wearing imagelink glasses/goggles/helmets)

I just solidly disagree with this notion that SR should be GitS.   The premise are completely different... GitS is E-ghost AI's in fully robotic bodies.  Even the least of them Togusa had his brain replaced which means even he with his meat body is still an AI E-ghost in SR terms.   To me busting into their other systems in GitS is no different than busting into nexus/links and rigger's drones...

Meat/metal cyber should be different.   Not simply this is a drone or we're going to replace your brain with a computer... but we're going to call it a cyborg like GitS does.


Some others:
Yes I have put internal commlink to run purely internal software and black ICE completely seperate from my external wireless-on link & glasses.   GM's just ignore it!   Have the wireless ripped out of all your implants...   Once again the  miracle of nanites... not only do the suckers turn on all the wireless... if things don't have wireless they use the mites wireless and tap in anyhow.   This is just a small smattering of the BS I've seen in play.   Since the char is a face/sam... he doesn't have hacking skills of his own... he has a good hacker contact he relies on for setting up his security though.

You seem to think it's mere incompetence, unfamiliarity with the rules for getting this stuff hacked.   No it always ends up trivially easy... even when the only way in you setup is a datajack.


The problem isn't that cyber is a choice.   Cyber is  choice with very heavy costs to the user in terms of essence and $$$ already.     Really with all the silliness presented here... why should anyone ever get Wired Ref instead of Synaptic?    All this cyber-hacking stuff is provide one less reason to ever take it instead of just getting bioware right away!   Why should I rip off my arms for 'cool' replacement arms when I don't have to put up with all this BS if I just get muscle toner/augment 4 in my normal ones.  All this hate is essentially directed at a single archetype and one archetype only... the street sam who makes heavy use of this.



I'm all for getting into their guns.. getting into their links... spoofing commands to all manner of external devices and systems.  If not that, editing the data coming from those devices....  (really why not edit the smartgun guncam/aiming feed so the sight starts wandering around like a drunken sailor giving a penalty instead of a bonus).    I simply believe that cyber should be off-limits, it has too many drawbacks compared to other alternatives already.  It doesn't make sense that meat/machine hybrids should be subject to the same level of problems no-meat robotic drones have.

More importantly, it doesn't pass the "Why the hell is this wireless anyhow smell test?'

After 4ths abortive attempt at the everything is wireless... Everything needs to be resubjected to that "Why the hell is this wireless again?" question for 5th.

[emsquared]

I think it still depends on how big of a Matrix nut-hugger your GM is.

Meet
Recon
Legwork
Execution
Payment
Aftermath

Magicians and Faces (especially Adepts) are capable of excelling at every single one of these stages too. Even a true combat monster (no skills but combat) should have something to do at each stage, and can easily excel at that whether as it's just as muscle or the driver, etc.

Each "class" having it's time to shine depends 100% on your GM presenting that opportunity (and taking away others), not on the rules.

[Wildcard]

Did you not read about the concept of Noise? Your arm-chair Hacker/Rigger is probably not going to be the norm anymore - they're going to be assuming the same risk as anyone else.

If Noise is as ill-frequently used and applied as background counts are for magic, I don't think It'll be an issue at all.

[All4BigGuns]

Each "class" having it's time to shine depends 100% on your GM presenting that opportunity (and taking away others), not on the rules.

It seems that people think that Hackers should be an exception to this and that the rules should make them the "super class" able to, by the rules, do everything (except Astral and magical stuff)) without investing in skills outside their specialty.


Oh, and by the way, if FALCONER and I are in agreement on something (an occurrence that never really happens), don't you think it's a pretty good idea to take note?

[Mirikon]

Falconer, just as things should not be allowed/disallowed on a game-wide basis because bad players do stupid things, the same applies to when bad GMs do stupid things. The phone book is not just for problem players, but problem GMs as well.

Honestly, when I was in a game with a GM who tried to say that a Shark mage going into frenzy meant they no longer got to roll defense, I walked. No hard feelings on my part, but that wasn't a game I was going to be a part of, especially since such things weren't brought up when I was making my character. Your objections are less about why cyberware shouldn't be hacked, and more about why certain GMs should be beat with a Metro Atlanta phone book.

[emsquared]

If Noise is as ill-frequently used and applied as background counts are for magic, I don't think It'll be an issue at all.

It will be interesting to see how it factors in, if it's like a background count for hacking (that is reduced by proximity) I think that would be fantastic, because it should be everywhere then. A GM not using BGs as appropriate is simply a poor GM, not bad rules or a bad goal.

Oh, and by the way, if FALCONER and I are in agreement on something (an occurrence that never really happens), don't you think it's a pretty good idea to take note?

Really, I am not in disagreement with either of you on the principle (that Hackers shouldn't be able to dominate combat), I just think you're blowing it out of proportion. If the simplification/stream-lining of the Matrix ends up having the effect of making Hackers more potent in combat, it's really pretty simple to nullify that I think is all.

[All4BigGuns]

Falconer, just as things should not be allowed/disallowed on a game-wide basis because bad players do stupid things, the same applies to when bad GMs do stupid things. The phone book is not just for problem players, but problem GMs as well.

Honestly, when I was in a game with a GM who tried to say that a Shark mage going into frenzy meant they no longer got to roll defense, I walked. No hard feelings on my part, but that wasn't a game I was going to be a part of, especially since such things weren't brought up when I was making my character. Your objections are less about why cyberware shouldn't be hacked, and more about why certain GMs should be beat with a Metro Atlanta phone book.

If the Hacker wants to be good in combat, he can take Gunnery and a drone or two. Giving him the ability to control any Street Sam he sees is just stupid overkill.

[All4BigGuns]

It will be interesting to see how it factors in, if it's like a background count for hacking (that is reduced by proximity) I think that would be fantastic, because it should be everywhere then. A GM not using BGs as appropriate is simply a poor GM, not bad rules or a bad goal.

Not using Background Count doesn't make one a poor GM. It just means that GM doesn't like how BGC functions with how it's written and with how common it is by the "fluffy" elements of it (I actually made a suggestion for improving it earlier in the thread just to get it out before it was forgotten).

[Wildcard]

It will be interesting to see how it factors in, if it's like a background count for hacking (that is reduced by proximity) I think that would be fantastic, because it should be everywhere then. A GM not using BGs as appropriate is simply a poor GM, not bad rules or a bad goal.

I've been to around 10 agent run missions now, and I've yet to see background count applied once. If you're suggesting that 4 different GMs were poor GMs... Maybe? I think it's more a matter of being poorly written and oft ignored, as opposed to wards and other such magical phenomenon.

[KarmaInferno]

The whole crux of their argument is that they want Hackers to be able to be just as good in the area of the Street Samurai's focus without investing the same amount of resources into the same skill set that the Street Sam did.

Instead of letting the Hacker use what skills they bought that let them rule pretty much every other situation in the game to take away what the Street Sam is good at, make the Hacker actually have to invest in combat skills--oh my God, what a horrid, horrid thought (apparently)--in order to contribute to combat. If the Hacker's player doesn't want to invest in those skills, well then he's chosen to make himself useless in combat.

Nobody said "just as good".

Seriously, go re-read the thread.

Peoples have said "effective" and "not useless". This in comparison to the street sam, who is and should remain the pinnacle of combat.

The idea is to have some way for hackers to contribute to a firefight that dosen't involve multiple rolls to take over a network. Or pulling a gun. Or just hiding until the fight is over.

Not to dominate combat. Just to be able to chip in, using their skill set.


-k

[emsquared]

Giving him the ability to control any Street Sam he sees is just stupid overkill.

See, where is this concern coming from?

I haven't GMed since 2nd Ed and have never played a Hacker, but can someone explain to me how something that doesn't have the hardware for wireless communication, nor a CPU, be hacked? The brain is the CPU for (most) 'ware, a hacker can't even interface with that, this is why I don't understand how people think they can build a 'ware drone-body or hack a sammy. There isn't rules for this stuff is there? This is just people saying "I want this!" Why get worked up over that?

[All4BigGuns]

Nobody said "just as good".

Seriously, go re-read the thread.

Peoples have said "effective" and "not useless". This in comparison to the street sam, who is and shpuld remain the pinnacle of combat.

The idea is to have some way for hackers to contribute to a firefight that dosen't involve multiple rolls to take over a network. Or pulling a gun. Or just hiding until the fight is over.

Not to dominate combat. Just to be able to chip in, using their skill set.


-k

And they've been told already how they can be "effective" and "not useless" in combat. They can either invest in combat skills, or buy Gunnery and a drone or two. It's available to them, and doesn't hose another character type.