Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: jtkirk22 on <04-10-20/0508:09>
-
Hi,
new player here with no experience from older rule editions. I read the IC and Host section, but it doesn't seem quite clear to me, which counter measurements are expected in which kind of Hosts and when Spiders and IC are "activated" or triggered .
So, which Hosts have Spiders and which ones are intended to have "only" IC (rule of thumb)?
- Do only "big Hosts" have spiders?
- Would you make it dependent from Host rating?
- Do all Hosts have IC?
- Under which circumstances are Spiders or IC triggered (by rules + rule of thumb as how they are intended to work by story/game design)
Would be glad about help! Thanks in advance!
-
Spiders are expensive so usually only the big Hosts have them. Smaller ones may have one on call, who may pop in for a patrol, or only when an alarm is triggered. You can influence the difficulty of the hack by deciding on the spider protocol, and could make it something knowledge skills or legwork reveals, awarding players for their preparation efforts with info on how dangerous things will be.
All Hosts have IC, the kind depends on the Host: The less public and more high value, the nastier the IC will be. Usually only Patrol IC is active (in part because IC is a burden on the Host, said past fluff, so it's not all running 24/7), once any kind of alarm triggers more will be deployed.
-
to build on what MC said ...
An alarm is raised whenever a hacker fails a hack attempt, Patrol detects the hacker, or if overwatch score gets to a certain point. The OS point you can control a non secure host may not have one before convergence but a secure bug host may have a much lower threshold.
Also as he said spider protocol is strictly something controlled by the GM to adjust the difficulty of a hack. It is easy to think about just like physical security and a spider is just another guard ... so how much does the target value it's property? Enough to have a full time guard (or multiple guards), just one that checks in once in a while, or one that just shows when an alarm is tripped.
Host should always have IC, but may often be just Patrol IC and follow the same principles.
-
You can think of "well, what kind of matrix security SHOULD this place have" in the same way as you think of the physical and astral security.
There's no guidelines for how many doors should have what kinds of maglocks. No guidelines for how many astral barriers a site should have, nor how strong should they be.
Ultimately, it comes down to the story. There "should" be enough security in each of Shadowrun's three worlds that the team is challenged, but not SO challenged that they can't succeed.
-
First of all, thanks for your answers and sorry for my late response. Your posts are really helpful as a general guideline. Just one question concerning alarms:
An alarm is raised whenever a hacker fails a hack attempt, [...]
Do you mean any failed matrix action like a failed control device?
-
...any failed matrix action like a failed control device?
Yes.
There are a few exceptions to this.
Probe, for example, seem to only raise an alarm on a glitch ("unless major mistakes are made")
You probably also don't raise an alarm on a failed matrix perception test.
Results of actions linked to attack, however, seem to be always set off alarms whenever successful.
The result of other actions might also be noticed (for example it is probably fairly obvious that a device is suddenly rebooting), but doesn't automatically mean that it will always set off an alarm.
-
Sounds very reasonable to me. Thanks, Xenon! :)
-
Is it still possible, in 6we, to have a spider with a control rig, deck, and RCC or some sort of hybrid, so as to co-ordinate all the drones in the building as well as the cybersecurity?
-
The designer intent was that you can't form a persona with both an RCC and a Deck. I do imagine that coordinating the drones would be possible through the Host, though without some of the RCC advantages.
... And now I want to write up a Rigger Host, which also features Autosoft-sharing with the security drones and where a Spider can visualize all the feeds and mass-command the security.
-
Book isn't very clear on this, hopefully Banshee will fill in the blanks.
But as I see it in this edition the Host will provide spiders, drones and the network as a whole with all necessary matrix attributes
... which make me believe that the spiders in this edition perhaps doesn't really "need" any devices at all?
Having said that, they probably still need to 'access the matrix' in some way (commlink, RCC, cyberdeck or perhaps a terminal of some sort) and they probably also need a source of DNI (wearing trodes or having an implanted datajack, control rig, cyberjack) and if he wish to enter VR he also need access to a sim module (by using a cyberdeck, a modded commlink or by having an implanted control rig).
If my initial assumption is correct (which maybe it isn't) then I think that in this edition we will see everything from low budget corporations using low budget spiders (mostly just depending on the Host network - connecting with a budget commlink modded with a sim module while wearing trodes and not having a control rig at all) to high budget corporations that spare not expense on their spiders (connecting with a high rated RCC and having both a high rated control rig implant and a high rated cyberjack implant at the same time).
The only time it seems as if the spider need to 'access the matrix' via a cyberdeck is if he plan on actually perusing the characters out on the matrix, beyond the boundaries of the host (but now I think we are typically talking more about G-men or DemiGods - rather than Spiders).
-
Is it still possible, in 6we, to have a spider with a control rig, deck, and RCC or some sort of hybrid, so as to co-ordinate all the drones in the building as well as the cybersecurity?
This an even more relevant Question for player characters: First, playing a Rigger/Decker hybrid is quite desireble for some players. Second, clandestine Riggers may really want to add a Sleaze Attribute to their WAN, to help protect their Drones from being spotted.
The problem is: The benefits of RCC obviously werenīt designed with that option in mind. It wasnīt supposed to be a thing. So if you allow "Hybrid Networks" with Decks and RCCs without any limitations, these will be a lot better and even cheaper than the supposed new standard of Deck+Cyberjack. The noise reduction alone is a huge kicker. Cyberjacks get a little more traction once you interpret their Initiative Bonus as Initiative Dice bonus, as it was originally intended. But itīs still not enough.
If you want to allow it, but donīt want to screw up the Deck+Cyberjack setup to badly, here are some suggestions:
- Definitely Read the Initiative Bonus of Cyberjacks as "Initiative Dice " Bonus, along with the additional Minor Actions. Note: This also means that you will have to use the Stats in the Matrix Section and not the effed-up stats in the Augmentation section. And you will probably also increase the Minor Action limit to 6 to fit the 5 Initiative Dice Maximum... The ripple effects if bad editing ::)
- Another idea: A Cyberjack (or a Resonance Attribute) is not only needed for the specific Matrix Edge Actions, but for every Edge use on illegal Matrix Actions in general.
- Restrict the RCC noise reduction to remote control in the WAN, so that it canīt be used as a hacking aide.
- You have to choose if you want to use the RCC program slots or the Deckīs Program slots. Or you even have to use the lower number of the two.
Or you just wait a few years ītill either the Matrix or Rigger supplement comes out and shines further light on this issue ;D
-
Cyberjacks get a little more traction once you interpret their Initiative Bonus as Initiative Dice bonus, as it was originally intended.
I had the same thoughts as you, but getting bonus minor actions and access to matrix specific edge actions totally reshape the landscape and suddenly make it into an almost 'must have' implant for any serious decker.
While on the rigging side the control rig implant is a 'must have' for them (the RCC doesn't even come with a sim module of its own and the control rig is required if you ever wish to make the 'jump' anyway).
While you are allowed to combine both of them, this will be quite an investment both resource wise and essence wise.
Also, since it seems as if you don't really need a cyberdeck for a majority of all matrix actions anyway (that riggers may spoof a command to a vehicle slaved to someone's PAN without having an attack or sleaze attribute and while only having outsider access on the PAN).
And with a direct connection it seems as if you are allowed to take outsider actions (such as spoof command, which doesn't require a cyberdeck) on a device that is part of a nestled host as well (and that you perhaps may even get a wireless direct connection just by having enough physical proximity).
Restrict the RCC noise reduction to remote control in the WAN, so that it canīt be used as a hacking aide.
You have to choose if you want to use the RCC program slots or the Deckīs Program slots...
I like this.
As long as we are discussing house rules....
The book seem to assume that you are using one distinct device to 'access the matrix' with.
If this device is a cyberdeck then I think your cyberdeck should soak matrix damage and your network should get attack and sleaze attributes required for hacking and cybercombat - and that it is your cyberdeck that provide you with your program slots (but you don't get noise reduction or sending same command to several drones or any other advantage that RCCs provide). If you also have commlinks or a cyberjack etc in your network then you get to use them to complement the DF part of your ASDF array, but not for the AS part of your ASDF array.
If this device is a RCC then i think your RCC should soak matrix damage and that you get noise reduction. sending same command to several drones, higher slave limit and sharing autosofts with slaved drones etc - and that it is your RCC that provide you with your program slots (but you don't get attack or sleaze attributes required for hacking and cybercombat). If you also have commlinks or a cyberjack etc in your network then you get to use them to swap around whatever you use for your DF part of your ASDF array, but since you are not using a cyberdeck to 'access the matrix' with I don't think you should get the AS part of your ASDF array. Not even if you have one in your network. That to get the AS part of the ASDF array I think you should actually use a cyberdeck to 'access the matrix' with.
-
Xenon is pretty spot on ... spiders do not need to operate under the same parameters as a decker or rigger since the host can function as their primary device and do anything a deck or RCC needs to do. Just slave the drones to the host and let the spider control them.
As for PC decker-rigger hybrids and how they interact... using g the CRB they don't very well and that is intentional... but I've already submitted and awaiting on approval to work on that for a supplement book
-
Another note: there's no restriction to having only 1 spider. A host might have 6 spiders in it, if the GM wants it to be VERY well patrolled. So it's not a case of either/or when it comes to spiders and security riggers.
-
Another note: there's no restriction to having only 1 spider....
True that! the previous edition even talked about a "...special kind of rigger, the security spider..." that "...slave their RCC to the buildings host and connect to the entire security system, including all of its slaved drones..." but also that the the "...spider-rigger is often teamed up with a spider-decker to help against hacking intrusions on the security system".
The 'Spider' (as in corporate hacker), using a cyberdeck, protecting the integrity of the host.
The 'Security Spider' (as in corporate rigger), using a RCC slaved to the host, protecting the physical facility.
Both working from inside the same host (= direct connection to all the slaved drones).
-
Another note: there's no restriction to having only 1 spider....
True that! the previous edition even talked about a "...special kind of rigger, the security spider..." that "...slave their RCC to the buildings host and connect to the entire security system, including all of its slaved drones..." but also that the the "...spider-rigger is often teamed up with a spider-decker to help against hacking intrusions on the security system".
The 'Spider' (as in corporate hacker), using a cyberdeck, protecting the integrity of the host.
The 'Security Spider' (as in corporate rigger), using a RCC slaved to the host, protecting the physical facility.
Both working from inside the same host (= direct connection to all the slaved drones).
Note: Not too big a fan of that last point here, at least in part. I recreates that weird situation from 5th Edition where all host are magical clouds in the Matrix with perfect Noise canceling capabilities. If the host has a kind of physical backbone and isnīt just "everywhere" in the Matrix (and Iīd say that this is the default for most "security" hosts, not the other way around), then it should matter to some degree how far the Patroling Drones steer of the perimeter.
But to my main point: Technically, Spiders donīt need either a Deck or an RCC to protect the host to some degree. As long as they stay inside, they can always use the host attributes for themselfes and lend their Mental Attributes to the hostīs defense Tests. In that regard (and thatīs a key function of Spiders in the new Matrix rules!), thereīs a huge overlap between a "Decker-style" Spider, a "Rigger-style" Spider or even just a "Dude with a Commlink that knows a bit about Matrix security"-Style Spider. Having a RCC, Control Rig, Deck, Cyberjack and/or Resonance just adds more options, physically or in the Matrix. RCCs and Control Riggs helps you to better coordinate Drones to hunt for intruders, while Decks/Jacks/Resonance allow you to leave the host and hunt them down in the Matrix (Which might be necissary quite often, since some hostile Actions donīt require insider Acces).
Which brings me to the question: Where does a Spider (of any kind) have to "sit" in relation to a host to protect it?
Figure a nested host like this:
Outside Matrix ===== A ("lobby") ===== B ("security") ===== C ("root") ===== McGuffin
There may be other hosts nested in this structure, I just fokus on these 3. The "lobby" is easily accessible for outsiders - maybe even without any actual hacking through some entry level social engineering. Then thereīs the "security" host: Thatīs the nest of the Spider, and itīs also where most of the physical security devices are slaved to so that the spider can monitor them. "root" is some ultra-secure insiders-only data host. Thatīs where the runīs McGuffin can be found. Which hosts (and other things, like the McGuffin) can now now actually be considered "protected" by the Spider?
The current Matrix rules are still "malleable" in that regard, so right now, itīs basically "Whatever the GM feels like is working best." As a GM, I have a strong preference here: As long as the Spider sits in host B, he can only buff the protection of Host B and the direct "children" of it. Or, basically, all the Firewalls that he can immediately "see" in the Matrix from his current position - and explicitly not the whole System.
Why so? Because it makes things more interesting.
Letīs say that our Hacker (marked with an H) has already penetrated the outer layer and infiltrated A. The Hecker also has figured out that thereīs a high-level Spider (marked with an X) sitting in Host B. (Tipp: Picture the nested hosts as 3 nested circles instead, with the Spider sitting in middle layer. The lines of the circles are the Firewalls of the different hosts. The Spider protects just the adjacent firewalls.)
Outside Matrix ==== A ("lobby") ==H== B ("security") ==X== C ("root") ==== McGuffin
That would make hacking B more difficult, but also hacking into C to retrieve the McGuffin. With that double protection, the Hacker figures that this would be to risky. So, time for a little diversion : The decker calls in a favour from a local Matrix Gang (or compiles a Sprite etc.) to cause some ruckus from the outside: Vandalism, Dataspiking low-priority devices, harassing customers - just enough for the Spider to emerge from B to kick some ass.
Outside Matrix ==X== A ("lobby") ==H== B ("security") ==== C ("root") ==== McGuffin
That would leave B and C more vulnerable, which might be just the Edge advantage the Hacker needs. Besides that, this handling also creates an ingame explanation on why hosts are not just layers after layers after layers of firewalls to stall hackers. The more layers, the more spiders are needed to protect them all.
-
Yeah, I see no reason to presume anything other than "the spider is only lending his stats to the host he's currently inside, and those devices networked to that host". However, when a site has nested architecture with multiple hosts, it'd make sense they have multiple spiders as well. Maybe enough spiders to put one in every host 24/7. Maybe more. Maybe less. Probably less, if you have a complex host architecture.... but the point is spiders (just like any other matrix user) can move around from host to host. if trouble erupts in one host, spiders certainly can come-a-runnin' from other hosts to respond. I wouldnt' figure IC can do this though, as the lore always said they ran natively on the hosts themselves.
But this simple idea of host architecture brings us kind of full circle back to the fun (bad?) old days of 1e decking where you had a dungeon-like map of nodes that only connected to certain other nodes. They're just called hosts, now! Corp sec can (and arguably should) build choke points and DMZs in their architectures. Presumably if they do so, they can trust other hosts to operate without needing a spider INSIDE 24/7, and that in turn incentivizes deckers to leave the van and physically join the penetration for direct connections beyond those architecture choke points...
-
Note: Not too big a fan of that last point here, at least in part.
If it wasn't clear enough - that was just a reference to how it used to work in SR5. I fully acknowledge that it work differently in this edition.
Where does a Spider (of any kind) have to "sit" in relation to a host to protect it?
When it comes to a physical on premises host that is running inside a facility, designed to protect the facility, the spider (and all drones slaved to the host) is most likely also physically located inside the facility somewhere (if the host have a spider that is).
When it comes to a global virtual matrix host the spider can probably be physically located anywhere in the world.
Which hosts (and other things, like the McGuffin) can now now actually be considered "protected" by the Spider?
Unmonitored hosts roll zero dice instead of mental attributes. Monitored hosts benefit from mental attributes of whoever is monitoring it. Different spiders can monitor different hosts.
Question is if the spider need to actually be inside the host in order for the Host to be considered monitored
...or can several hosts be considered monitored by a single spider at the same time even if the spider is not actually inside the host.
...and that in turn incentivizes deckers to leave the van and physically join the penetration for direct connections beyond those architecture choke points...
+1
-
Which hosts (and other things, like the McGuffin) can now now actually be considered "protected" by the Spider?
Unmonitored hosts roll zero dice instead of mental attributes. Monitored hosts benefit from mental attributes of whoever is monitoring it. Different spiders can monitor different hosts.
Thatīs my point here, Iīm talking about the "virtual location" of the Spider in the Matrix and the ramifications of it. If the spider can sit just anywhere in the matrix to defend a host with his mental Attributes
- having multiple spiders isnīt going to make a big difference for the corps (besides redundancy)
- Smart tactics like luring the Spider out of a host wouldnīt work either.
Thatīs why I think that it would make more sense if the Spider is, f.i. restricted to the host heīs currently in and its direct "children" (f.i. Files, slaved devices, other hosts). Or, if heīs in the outside Matrix to hunt for troublemakers, just the outermost host. This works better if you donīt picture nested hosts as a network of connected nodes and more like a different layers of (fire)walls nested inside each other. The Spider can monitor these walls to look for intruders and backdoors, but only those that he can see because of his current virtual location in the matrix topology.
But this simple idea of host architecture brings us kind of full circle back to the fun (bad?) old days of 1e decking where you had a dungeon-like map of nodes that only connected to certain other nodes. They're just called hosts, now! Corp sec can (and arguably should) build choke points and DMZs in their architectures. Presumably if they do so, they can trust other hosts to operate without needing a spider INSIDE 24/7, and that in turn incentivizes deckers to leave the van and physically join the penetration for direct connections beyond those architecture choke points...
It has the potencial to become sour if host nesting is used to just "stall" hacker PC and force more and more dice rolls. Thatīs not good GMing, though. Hosts should be designed to challenge hackers and, most importantly, offer rewards for clever thinking: Finding physical (or metahuman? :P) weakpoints to access deeper layers, distracting the security spiders...
-
But this simple idea of host architecture brings us kind of full circle back to the fun (bad?) old days of 1e decking where you had a dungeon-like map of nodes that only connected to certain other nodes. They're just called hosts, now! Corp sec can (and arguably should) build choke points and DMZs in their architectures. Presumably if they do so, they can trust other hosts to operate without needing a spider INSIDE 24/7, and that in turn incentivizes deckers to leave the van and physically join the penetration for direct connections beyond those architecture choke points...
It has the potencial to become sour if host nesting is used to just "stall" hacker PC and force more and more dice rolls. Thatīs not good GMing, though. Hosts should be designed to challenge hackers and, most importantly, offer rewards for clever thinking: Finding physical (or metahuman? :P) weakpoints to access deeper layers, distracting the security spiders...
Sure, there's always the possibility of something being overdone. Or maliciously done. Like the GM saying the "only" way to get to the research lab is to get through half a dozen checkpoints. I mean, it's absolutely possible a site might be constructed in such a way. While there's a pact between GM and players that the GM shouldn't be malicious, there's simultaneously no part of that social pact that says the GM has to make things EASY for you just because you're the protagonists. You might have to penetrate layer after layer of physical security. Now that nested architecture is a thing, that possibility also exists in the matrix, as well.
Would you make a team fight/pick their way through 6 doors to get to the macguffin? You might, if they were really good at fighting/picking locks. You probably wouldn't though, if they'll be challenged by one. Same thing for matrix. If your hacker(s) make quick work of hosts, then you can challenge them by making them do it more than once to get to the digital macguffin.
-
I haven't seen any discussion on what happens when the decker is detected by a Patrol IC. The description of Patrol IC says..
"When it is activated, make a Matrix Perception roll for the Patrol IC; that serves as hits on Matrix Perception actions it takes every in-game minute it is active."
Great, Ok, then what? It's detected the persona which it presumably thinks is a legit admin / user? Or does it automatically see through that and raise an alarm?
Then there is the example on page 188 which says: "While doing so, the Patrol IC rolls the host Device Rating of 4
x 2 and gets a surprising 8 hits. (so far makes sense) This more than beats Mungos Sleaze rating of 4 and adds 8 to his Overwatch Score."
WTF? The rule and the example seem to bear no resemblance to one another at all. IF I read the rule correctly, OS score is meant to go up when the decker takes illegal actions. Matrix perception is legal, so my understanding is that it would have no impact on OS. Am I missing something here?
-
I haven't seen any discussion on what happens when the decker is detected by a Patrol IC. The description of Patrol IC says..
"When it is activated, make a Matrix Perception roll for the Patrol IC; that serves as hits on Matrix Perception actions it takes every in-game minute it is active."
Great, Ok, then what? It's detected the persona which it presumably thinks is a legit admin / user? Or does it automatically see through that and raise an alarm?
GM discretion. Although, for simplicity's sake, it's probably best to assume the IC realizes the runner is in fact NOT a legit user on a successful perception test. But YMMV, especially in unique circumstances.
Then there is the example on page 188 which says: "While doing so, the Patrol IC rolls the host Device Rating of 4
x 2 and gets a surprising 8 hits. (so far makes sense) This more than beats Mungos Sleaze rating of 4 and adds 8 to his Overwatch Score."
WTF? The rule and the example seem to bear no resemblance to one another at all. IF I read the rule correctly, OS score is meant to go up when the decker takes illegal actions. Matrix perception is legal, so my understanding is that it would have no impact on OS. Am I missing something here?
Yes, adding to the OS is referring to some rules that were cut prior to publication and this (and a few other) supporting examples regarding OS still haven't been corrected.
-
Thanks for the quick response.
That make sense.