[Warmachinez]

For those of you who are interested in the Matrix for SR5, here is an update:

http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2013/05/sr5-development-wireless-bonuses/

My thoughts on the topic are pretty neutral, none of my players really played a Hacker in SR4, so I just hope these new rules/mechanics might bring a Decker to my group. Although the comment have been mostly negative, I wonder if it is because we are only provided with a piece of the rules and not the whole picture.

What are your thoughts?

[Michael Chandra]

I think it has potential but the example of Vision Enhancement made me winch. Honestly I think that it'd be more reasonable if some things required a PAN with a good commlink and they simply list clearly what requires wireless to work well (TacSoft, advanced Safety protocols, etc). Yes it means the hacker might not be as useful in life combat, but they can still hack vehicles, security systems and more.

If they actually find good ideas, please do. But if things are like the Vision Enhancement example, it feels too much as a forced choice not for reason but for forcing a choice.

[Carz]

Their example almost feels like a straw man argument, pitting 'wireless' against 'non-wireless', but by 'non-wireless' they are implying 'not connected at all' instead of cabled or skinlinked.

Sure, I get that wireless is going to be superior to *not being connected*, and if they want to provide bonuses, that's fine. But players now are not making the choice between wireless or nothing, they are making the choice between wireless, or wired/skinlinked, and choosing wired/skinlinked because its safer.

Given the limited info, I can't say much, but unless they do away with wired/skinlink (which I would certainly dislike), or rule that wired/skinlink is inferior to wireless (also IMO a bad call) I can't see any 'carrot' at all in this.

[Sichr]

Same here. I really hope it is caused just by lack of other info, since the examples really sound like players nightmare...you buy Herolabs to keep track of dicepools for you, or you are lost amongst modifiers adding and  extracting dices here and there...

[RHat]

Sure, I get that wireless is going to be superior to *not being connected*, and if they want to provide bonuses, that's fine. But players now are not making the choice between wireless or nothing, they are making the choice between wireless, or wired/skinlinked, and choosing wired/skinlinked because its safer.

And that safety comes at no cost, which is contrary to principles they seem to be building 5e upon.  Of course, we're rather lacking in detail to know whether there's any sort of accounting for various methods of connection.

[Warmachinez]

Or maybe we could see it as... additional options per item/gear. It gives us flexibility. If I am a Streetsam with out perception as a skill, I might not want the eyes to be wireless, the bonus is not worth the risk... but if on the conrary perception is worth it for your character... Or even for the situation at hand, as depending on the type of job.

And let us not forget the added game mechanics for Deckers.

The problem is that this seems complicated, but really you just have  to trust the player that he is counting his shit straight. The optimization possibilities are huge as well.

 

[Shinobi Killfist]

Could be a pain in the ass.  How often do you hack in order to balance the benefit vs the risk?  I suspect it will fall primarily into 2 camps the I never hack the players outside plot points, or the players are constantly hacked to make sure its never used.

 Honestly it just seems odd to me its like running around in a secure facility with your focuses on when you dont have improved masking and you are trying to sneak in.  If played remotely realistically can players ever run with wireless on while on a run.  Sure on the streets, or in the barens hey go for it.  But if you are going into a place that employs security deckers how are they not hacking the hell out of you at all times and how is this not alerting people to your presence. 

And I think there goal to make deckers have direct combat attacks a poor one, and I think the method they are going about it sounds even worse.  Its like shooting for a STD but not from having sex. 

[DamienHollow]

I've always been of the opinion that being wired was a natural solution to the potentially over powered hacker. Why the hell would I want my gun to have wireless anything anyways? Though I've noticed there are occasional mentions to guns as if there was a lot more tech in them than there should be (even vanilla revolvers with no smart link). We don't need incentives to go wireless, what we need is a matrix that doesn't feel like knee deep mud to trudge through. Simplify the hacking rules please. Also, just because you're picking signals doesn't mean it needs to be a two way street. You can pick up passively and never even let the world know you're there to hack. The matrix works like a modern WiFi, right? So it's a computer game of marko-polo. As long as you don't call back, they can't find you.

P.S. The hacker can learn to use a gun or a drone.

I'm hoping these little glimpses we're getting aren't as bad in the final release. I'm afraid the game is backpedaling into a over complicated mess. If shooting you gun is as complicated as hacking a node, I'll stick to 4th.

[RHat]

"Direct combat attack" implies damage, Shinobi, which isn't what this appears to be.

And while a hacker can learn to use a gun, he's gonna need his Attribute budget for hacking in SR5 - meaning that being decent in combat and at the things expected of a hacker isn't that simple, especially with the introduction of Inherent Limits.

[I_V_Saur]

My take on it, is that they're adding in arbitrary numbers for making things wireless. They're also bumping a Hacker's usefulness from 'take one or go Mohawk', to 'take three or die'. Unless they seriously bump the power of IC, this is just inviting a lot of hacker min/maxing.

The Matrix needs clarification. If each device is in its own way a 'node' capable of holding a fair amount of data, then why can a MilSpec node run only nine programs before it starts to experience lag? Set a hardware standard, utilizing RAM and CPU power. Make the systems relate to modern tech, but about a thousand times greater than our current standards - after all, people are creating A.Is, so the tech needs to be pretty insanely good. Having numbers we recognize means that your average teen knows enough numerically to reason out how to be a pretty awesome Hacker inside a half hour.

What would make it so hard to say 'A rating three Commlink has a CPU of 35 GHz, eight core. It has 40 Gigabytes of DDR7 RAM. Its hard drive stands at five Petabytes. The onboard Video Card produces Rating 3 images. The onboard Sound Card produces Rating 3 sound quality.'

[RHat]

It's not hard - it isn't done because it would look stupid in a few years.

[I_V_Saur]

Maybe I'm being stupid here, but I don't quite get how it'd look stupid in a few years. Set a standard, assuming that all hardware doubles every nine months.

Also, Shadowrun had a lizard for President, for a day.

[All4BigGuns]

I agree with many of the comments below the blog. It just seems like more of the same stuff along the lines of "everybody should be just as good in a fight as the Street Sam", and it's complete bull. If your Decker/Hacker wants to be good at combat, then he can buy the skills for it. If he doesn't want to do that, then tough cookies, he'll just have to suck in a fight.

[RHat]

I love how "able to contribute to combat" transforms into "just as good as the specialist".  Being able to make a meaningful, indirect contribution helps make it worthwhile for that character to actually be there in the first place - like being able interfere with an enemy in such a way that the Sam's attack is less effectively dodged, perhaps to the point that it becomes an outright kill.

I get not liking an idea, but maybe people should check their assumptions a bit - nothing in the blog post suggests killing people via hacking, after all.

Also:  Using real hardware measurements would create some new problems and fix NONE.  Not a one.  In fact, all the inconsistencies between the Matrix and real world computing would become more apparent - the Matrix is not meant to resemble real world computing.

[All4BigGuns]

This idea that everyone should be doing something in every single type of scene imaginable without buying the requisite skills to contribute in that scene is what makes it complete bull. If one wants to contribute to combat, buy combat skills. If they want to contribute in social situations, buy social skills. Don't expect to be able to "one size fits all" other skill sets into every situation. If they don't want to buy those skills, then they have no room to gripe about not contributing in those scenes. It's their own fault.