[gilga]

Can Anna connect her link directly to the door or something? (like a datatap?)

[Jack_Spade]

@Volker

I'm sorry, that's what the rules tell me. Faking a message can be done two ways (as I explained before):

Spoof Command (Meaning you have a Mark on Slobs Link but need to roll against Krestovs Link)
Edit File (Meaning you have a Mark on Krestovs Link and roll against Krestovs Link)

But  I have a trick/solution for you up my sleeve: p.178 DT

GARBAGE IN/GARBAGE OUT (COMPLEX ACTION)
Marks Required: 3 Test: Software + Logic [Sleaze] vs. Logic + Firewall
This allows a decker to “cross the wires” of a single device, confusing its input and output commands. Only a single input can be changed to correspond to a single output—devices can’t be reprogrammed wholesale or made to act in a manner outside of their original design through Garbage In/Garbage Out. For example, a smartgun-enabled firearm could be reprogrammed so that every time the fire command is given (through either pulling the trigger or DNI), the clip—or even the magazine—ejects. An elevator could be reprogrammed to go to the 23rd floor instead of the lobby, but a decker can’t override its basic safety protocols since that would require multiple commands. Gamemasters have final say in what can and cannot be reprogrammed, but the rule of thumb should be “a single keystroke” of activity or the inversion of a binary relationship—the “friend or foe” recognition program in a smart safety system, for example. Rebooting the device restores the code to its proper state.

Now all you have to do is rewire the "take a call" action with the "open the balcony door" action

@gilga
If you heeded bnc's advice you should already have data taps in your inventory
That said, no, since this would only benefit you if the device was offline and you wanted to bring it online.
One thing you could do would be to steal Whitman's commlink, although that is a highly risky move.

[gilga]

Another idea:
Slobbertooth gets to Whitman's car and calls him telling him that if he does not let his 'girlfriend' out of the penthouse the car is ruined.

I think Anna can try to steal the link as well - but the problem is her physical limit of 4 so she cannot be 'that' good at it even with dice luck. She can kick it up to 6 with improve reflexes though.

[Volker]

@Jack

I still interpret it differently, as "command" and "message" are two different things entirely. But I absolutely and fully accept your interpretation. So, if you are interested we can continue the thought exchange PM-wise. If not, well, not.

I never new there were new Matrix Actions in Data Trails! woohoo This changes about everything. Meow, gets my juices flowing

All right, I'll just roll all the dice in advance, then do the IC stuff later.

2nd pass: First, I need to eradicate the marks he must have on me for failing Sleaze actions. I can't hope to escape his awareness forever, even outraged and all.

Free Action: Swap Attack for Sleaze
Complex Action: Erase Mark: 15d6t5 7
Opposed Roll: 10d6t5 3

Complex Action: Erase Mark: 15d6t5 5
Opposed Roll: 10d6t5 4
Free Action: Swap Sleaze for Attack
With Fade into Black, this also counts as Hide.

With this, combat round 3 ends. I'll post combat round 4 in my next post to give you the chance to respond. Please note that if you just missed the fact that he should have already had a possibility to notice me and would inform Zody about me, I might not bother with hiding any more. Might not. Dunno now. So in case this happens, please allow me to withdraw from actions already posted that happened subsequently.

Initiative: 4d6+10 26

@gilga

If you would have a datatap with you, there would also be another possibility. You plug in your commlink into the door you want to open, then attach the data tap to the wire and thus allow me to directly access the door.
But with this new Matrix Action, I'm gonna get you out in no time. I think ^^

[gilga]

Volker - Anna will take bnc's lead on that one as she will probably not think of a technological solution to the problem.

[gilga]

Can you explain what the garbage in garbage out do ?

The elevator is open and bnc wants Anna to step in it? or did bnc open the balcony.

[Jack_Spade]

I just remembered why I didn't let Whitman react to the failed hack: The MARK for the failure would have been from the Host not Whitman. So neither he nor the Hacker would have known about the attempt immediately.

Never mind now. Just assume that the host informed him about a fake command to his devices.

About the elevator: bnc never opened the elevator as she never beat the hosts defenses.
The opening of the elevator is entirely Charles' doing, trying to lure Anna out.

@Volker
SInce there has been a bit of confusion, I'd suggest to start a new matrix ini after Charles has made his offer to Anna.
Also you need to define which action of his will transfer command level to the public since he still can revoke that right with a normal command (as that isn't cross wired)
You could - for example - use the command "Accept Phone Call" to change the output to "Give the Public Access to Elevator Control"
If you want to prevent him from revoking that right, you'll have to GIGO the command "Revoke Public Access to Controls" with something else again, for example: "Grant Public Access Even Harder"

[Volker]

Uhm. This is one hell of a collection of misunderstandings, it seems ^^

I had 5 hits in the Spoof Command roll, he had 3. You then rolled the 2 additional hits for the extra dice from the host protection, and said it would be a good investment to spend 1 point of edge to break the tie, to which I replied, that I now, depending on what you count, have spent 1 or 2 points of edge. Which was a complicated and apparently confusing way to say "yep".
Well, at least that means that I haven't wasted this point of edge, I guess...

Some things definitely went completely wrong -.-
Now I didn't attack the important thing in the first place (cause I thought that I have spare dice en masse), nor did I complete the distraction I planned from the beginning. Hell, who cares ;-D it's boring when everything runs smooth!

I swap the command "Send voice message" to "Give public access to Balcony door control". I don't think there is a necessity to prevent him from revoking. If he, after the system informed him that I tried to access the elevator, enters his host in the middle of everything to double-check the access rights of a still closed balcony door in, what?, the 12th floor or something, I will not only appreciate he bested me, but also give up my life as a shadowrunner in order to become his willing padawan. ^^ It's not only about throwing dice around, but also about outwitting each other.

@gilga

Basically it means that you'll be able to open the door yourself by simply sending a message to it. It'll recognize you as authorized.

[Jack_Spade]

Oh, now I see. Yeah sorry, that went straight past me 

And yes, this combination works.

Just one thing: Being slaved to a host doesn't mean an Icon is automatically in the host. Hacking a WAN's host just means you have direct connection to all slaved devices.

p. 233 core
"There are also wide area networks, or WANs, with multiple devices slaved to a host. A host can have a practically unlimited number of devices slaved to it, but because of the direct connection hack you rarely see more devices than can be protected physically. If you are in a host that has a WAN, you are considered directly connected to all devices in the WAN. Only devices can be slaves, masters, or part of a PAN. In a WAN, the slaves must be devices, and the master must be a host. "


Also about the difference between slaving and ownership, which makes me retract my previous statement on noticing the MARK from the failed Spoof Command:
"There are risks to slaving devices. Because of the tight connections between the devices, if you get a mark on a slave you also get a mark on the master. This happens even if the slave was marked through a direct connection, so be careful about who you give your slaved devices to. This doesn’t work both ways; if you fail a Sleaze action against a slaved device, only the device’s owner gets the mark on you, not the master too."

As the owner of the device Whitman would have gotten the MARK on you, not the Host. So all in all the IC info is correct 

[Volker]

Ah, thanks for enlightening me. So we both learned a bit ;-)

Besides, I just wanted to say that game is real fun at the moment. Thanks for being an awesome GM! With you, I can live bnc.

[Volker]

Hoi!

Altough it's not strictly speaking relevant, I'd like to explain how my last IC post developed. Over a span of about 45 minutes (as my girlfriend didn't fail to remind me) I wrote the post, deleted it, edited it, posted it again, deleted it again, changed it once more, posted. And maybe once more, I'm not really sure.

In my first post I summarized and rolled the Hack on the Fly. As I saw that you beat me, I wrote that I use edge to avoid him getting a mark on me (which was vital for my plan).
Then I went through my subsequent options and thought it wise to Fully Defend as well. That's why I double-checked the rules and found that the CRB states it works only against Attack actions (I only use the English version, as I thought it would be the more accurate one). Thus, I found that she wouldn't get a mark on me and deleted my already rolled edge roll. Retrospectively, I should have left a paragraph like "I saw that we used Full Defense different before, so if we do it again, I'd edge with following roll." I thought about it, and I can't tell for sure why I discarded the idea. I guess lazyness.

Then I was wondering why he would have a mark on me, as I had done everything to avoid it (i.e. spend edge, which I then thought unnecessary). The only thing that occured to me was that he tried to Hack me the same way I did to him. This was a clear error in my thinking. I had discarded the possibility of a failed Sleaze action for me, but I forgot, that for you it was still the only valid option.

So, it wasn't intenionally "double standard"ing. I just tried to do this according to the rules in the English CRB. If I had had the correct rules, I would never have gotten marked in the first place.
I also pointed out that Whitman should have a mark on me, didn't I?

I guess I should not have edited the already written post in the first place. bnc would never have allowed Zody to mark her and thus also find her position, when she had the change to unleash all her powers on him. She's frustrated to no end that she blew the chance. I'm only glad that she doesn't know that I'm responsible for it ^^

Well, at least I didn't waste another point of edge. Still, it's not exactly where I wanted this to head, which is slightly annoying since this happened twice within one encounter (first the elevator, then the fight with Zody).
One lesson I learned from that is that I should not only describe my actions, but also my objectives and considerations.

[gilga]

Well I hope it did not frustrate you too much, I enjoyed the scene very much on my scene and bnc kind of saved the day. I think that we got the solution we wanted without  physically hurting Charles.  The information Anna hid - that she was invisible and things like that - was to avoid that information leaking.  (she kind of try to keep the fact that she used magic to herself.)

I think bnc did great even if there were some difficulties, eventually it was a really tense and enjoyable scene.

[Volker]

I absolutely enjoyed the scene a lot. If the first misunderstanding had not happened (i.e. if I had known that I roll against 16, not 10, dice from the beginning), I would have spent all my energy into just opening the balcony from the beginning. It would have been way more elegant and Whitman would never have known that there's been a decker around. But it would also have never become this exciting.

I regret the second misunderstanding a bit. For the run, it's better: I have one more point of edge, there was no objective to accomplish, and we might have made an enemy to reckon with. But bnc would have loved to kick some ass.

Still, it was/is awesome.

[Jack_Spade]

No harm done - it's one of the hazards of pbp that you can only avoid by repeating information and explaining everything detailed and clear (which doesn't prevent misunderstandings entirely, especially if the reader happens to be tired at the time.
At the same time it's always useful to get questioned now and again and revise your knowledge with the books.

Speeking of which, here is the German rules text for Full Matrix Defense:

p.241
Volle Matrixabwehr
(Unterbrechungshandlung)
Benötigte Marken: Besitzer
Diese Handlung erlaubt es dem Charakter, in der Matrix auf Volle Abwehr zu gehen. Sie kann jederzeit durchgeführt werden. Wenn der Charakter eine Verteidigungsprobe gegen eine Matrixhandlung ablegt, darf er seine Willenskraft als Bonus zum Würfelpool addieren.

Translation: The difference is between the English version (Attack actions) and the German (matrix actions), so full defense works against all enemy matrix actions. Which is good, otherwise the Attack actions would be even worse than they already are.

[Volker]

I agree it makes sense. Take only the situation with Anna as an example. On other hand, it's incredibly powerful.

At any rate, yeah, pbp works differently, I saw that again. In RL, it would have done just to describe my actions. In pbp, it's better also to describe the intentions in order to avoid misunderstandings.