NEWS

[SR6] Hacking devices within PANs / Hosts -> one or two hacks?

  • 65 Replies
  • 7161 Views

Redwulfe

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 770
« Reply #60 on: <04-08-20/1152:14> »
Wait RCC's have a different Device limit than commlinks and Cyberdecks?

Wouldn't it be easier to just errata them to all be the same?

you would need only errata the following locations to fix this, Bold is my addition.

1. Pg. 267-268 "Unless otherwise noted, these accessories are compatible with commlinks, cyberdecks, and (with GM permission) other electronic devices. All peripheral accessories are wireless, and unless slaved properly, offer a sneaky ingress into a user’s PAN. Commlinks can have a maximum number of “slaves” equal to their Data Processing x 3. All other accessories are “open” connections and can be exploited."

2. Pg. 197 "An RCC can have a number of slaved drones equal to its RatingData Processing x 3.

That seems to be it fro the searches I did on the core book. Data Processing still has uses as it sets device limits and program limits as well as plays into VR initiative. Riggers can still have a good amount of drones attached to there RCC even lower level RCCs can have 9 drones, which I don't feel is a problem since there ASDF is not that great. Commlinks get a boost for those that want to have some devices plugged in 3-9 is better than the original 1-3 and the amount of changes is low. Adding a new classification though elegant can add more confusion especially since that classification will only exists ever on an external document where errata will at least sooner or latter go into the book and even further down the road into a corrected printing.

Wouldn't this be better?
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't

Red

*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1055
« Reply #61 on: <04-08-20/1238:43> »
Wait RCC's have a different Device limit than commlinks and Cyberdecks?

Wouldn't it be easier to just errata them to all be the same?

you would need only errata the following locations to fix this, Bold is my addition.

1. Pg. 267-268 "Unless otherwise noted, these accessories are compatible with commlinks, cyberdecks, and (with GM permission) other electronic devices. All peripheral accessories are wireless, and unless slaved properly, offer a sneaky ingress into a user’s PAN. Commlinks can have a maximum number of “slaves” equal to their Data Processing x 3. All other accessories are “open” connections and can be exploited."

2. Pg. 197 "An RCC can have a number of slaved drones equal to its RatingData Processing x 3.

That seems to be it fro the searches I did on the core book. Data Processing still has uses as it sets device limits and program limits as well as plays into VR initiative. Riggers can still have a good amount of drones attached to there RCC even lower level RCCs can have 9 drones, which I don't feel is a problem since there ASDF is not that great. Commlinks get a boost for those that want to have some devices plugged in 3-9 is better than the original 1-3 and the amount of changes is low. Adding a new classification though elegant can add more confusion especially since that classification will only exists ever on an external document where errata will at least sooner or latter go into the book and even further down the road into a corrected printing.

Wouldn't this be better?

Yes RCCs are different.. that is one of the things that make them special. Your change takes that away from them ... doesn't really weaken them any but does take away part of their advantage.

You would also still have to run some form of daisy chain to allow a hacker to run defense for a whole team.

Oh, if I get it approved it WILL show up in an a book somewhere
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9855
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #62 on: <04-08-20/1241:37> »
RCCs:
- Only mention Drones as slaveable
- Give their slaves more benefits than a commlink does
- Have static DP and FW, instead of an interchangeable DP/FW pair
- Have DP that may not equal their DR, which is why some RCCs cost more than others: DP/FW values differ

So they don't need to be made equal to Commlinks. They're very explicitly different beasts.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

jtkirk22

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 33
« Reply #63 on: <04-11-20/0113:30> »
Quote from: Banshee link=topic=31179.msg536569#msg536569
Control Devuce is essentially a sustained ability, first gain access to the network, then use control device to gain control of the device, then use it with appropriate skill. Should be language in the first part of the action description that says as much.
Just to make sure, I get it right (I might have overread something, because English is not my motherlanguage):
To control a device,
A) I have to gain access first.
B) After that I have to take one major action to take the Control Device action and get sustained control.
C) I can now use the device for anything I have sufficiant access.

1.) But what's the cost for using the device (e. g. opening a Maglock, firing a drone)? Is it another major action?

2.) Is it intended that Control device gives two opposed checks (one for sustained control + one for using the device)?

3.) In the German rules, if there is no test associated with the device you wish to use, it's made with Cracking + Logic (instead of Electronics + Logic). Which one is right?
« Last Edit: <04-11-20/0116:42> by jtkirk22 »

Xenon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6365
« Reply #64 on: <04-11-20/0243:00> »
A) I have to gain access first.
If you check the book you will notice that Control Device have an access level of: "User/Admin (can vary with action chosen)"

So yes, you first need to gain access on the device / the network the device is linked to.

B) After that I have to take one major action to take the Control Device action and get sustained control.
C) I can now use the device for anything I have sufficiant access.
It depend on the device.

For devices that have a test associated with them (such as drones and vehicles that have Piloting and Engineering tests associated with them) then, yes, you now have sustained control:

"While you have control, you can use the device as if you were the owner using a standard skill test..."


For other devices that have no test associated with it (such as opening a maglock or sending the elevator down to the lobby) you instead use the Control Device action (which is resolved as an opposed Electronics + Logic vs Willpower + Firewall test) every time you wish to do something with it:

"If there is no test associated with the device you wish to use, use Electronics + Logic vs. Firewall + Willpower. "


what's the cost for using the device (e. g. opening a Maglock, firing a drone)? Is it another major action?
It is resolved in two different ways.

For the maglock you take the Control Device major action (Electronics + Logic vs. Firewall + Willpower) to open it and then the Control Device major action again  (Electronics + Logic vs. Firewall + Willpower) to lock it.

For the drone you take a Control Device major action to gain sustained control over the drone, an Attack Major action (Engineering + Logic vs Reaction + Intuition test) to fire it and a Use Skill major action (Piloting + Logic vs Perception + Intuition) to sneak pass a guard with it.


In the German rules, if there is no test associated with the device you wish to use, it's made with Cracking + Logic (instead of Electronics + Logic). Which one is right?
It was listed as an Illegal Electronics + Logic test in core but it got explicitly changed in the first English august errata to a Legal Electronics + Logic test.

This mean that if you are already made it inside the network then you can open up a maglock (without getting the attention of GOD) while if you are on the outside you have to illegally use Spoof Command to instruct the maglock to open itself (which might attract the attention of GOD).
« Last Edit: <04-11-20/0246:50> by Xenon »

jtkirk22

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 33
« Reply #65 on: <04-12-20/1007:14> »
Your reply is awesome! Everything put together on point and understandable! Thanks for that! :)