[j2klbs]

You only need to roll to find out specific details, for example you would know there are multiple devices connected to it but not know what they are.

So, HackerX wants to brick the security guard's gun.  He sees the PAN and only sees that the security guard has 5 devices associated with his PAN.  HackerX could blindly target one of the 5 devices hoping he bricks the right one, but if he wants to know which device for sure is the gun, he must succeed with at least 1 net hit to know the basics of what each device is.  Only then can he be sure to Data Spike the correct device.

Is this a correct interpretation?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

You only need to roll to find out specific details, for example you would know there are multiple devices connected to it but not know what they are.

So, HackerX wants to brick the security guard's gun.  He sees the PAN and only sees that the security guard has 5 devices associated with his PAN.  HackerX could blindly target one of the 5 devices hoping he bricks the right one, but if he wants to know which device for sure is the gun, he must succeed with at least 1 net hit to know the basics of what each device is.  Only then can he be sure to Data Spike the correct device.

Is this a correct interpretation?

From the rules for Matrix Perception (which governs the concept of "spotting"):

With a tie, you can perceive the item’s icon. A
single net hit will give you basic information, such as
device rating, or whatever name the device or icon
calls itself.

The thing is, if you can physically see the sec guard, it's often moot as to whether you get the spot, or spot + "this icon calls itself the Fichetti Security Light Pistol".  If you can see the guard, you can see his gun/holster. And therefore the accompanying ARO hovering in space where the gun physically is.  Doesn't much matter if you can't tell what the ARO on the gun says it is.  You know that's the gun's matrix icon based on physical contextual clues.

It only matters when you don't have those physical contextual clues.  Like when you're in VR, or you're hacking someone from beyond physical line of sight.  In those cases... yeah I'd say a "no test success", if you get one, only gives you the most basic result.  1+ net hit requires an actual roll, in my view.

[Banshee]

You only need to roll to find out specific details, for example you would know there are multiple devices connected to it but not know what they are.

So, HackerX wants to brick the security guard's gun.  He sees the PAN and only sees that the security guard has 5 devices associated with his PAN.  HackerX could blindly target one of the 5 devices hoping he bricks the right one, but if he wants to know which device for sure is the gun, he must succeed with at least 1 net hit to know the basics of what each device is.  Only then can he be sure to Data Spike the correct device.

Is this a correct interpretation?

From the rules for Matrix Perception (which governs the concept of "spotting"):

With a tie, you can perceive the item’s icon. A
single net hit will give you basic information, such as
device rating, or whatever name the device or icon
calls itself.

The thing is, if you can physically see the sec guard, it's often moot as to whether you get the spot, or spot + "this icon calls itself the Fichetti Security Light Pistol".  If you can see the guard, you can see his gun/holster. And therefore the accompanying ARO hovering in space where the gun physically is.  Doesn't much matter if you can't tell what the ARO on the gun says it is.  You know that's the gun's matrix icon based on physical contextual clues.

It only matters when you don't have those physical contextual clues.  Like when you're in VR, or you're hacking someone from beyond physical line of sight.  In those cases... yeah I'd say a "no test success", if you get one, only gives you the most basic result.  1+ net hit requires an actual roll, in my view.

yes, this

[MercilessMing]

Just seeing the icon should be good enough to know what thing it is in most cases, unless the owner is deliberately trying to disguise its nature.

[Hobbes]

GMing tip, not straight RAW....

Treat Matrix Perception as much like "normal" Perception as possible.  The Matix is intended to be universally accessible and intuitive for everyday folks.  Burying obvious things behind "easy" Matrix Perception checks just slows down the action and makes everyday Matrix activity seem clunky. 

Unless the Icon is running silent, or has some level of Noise due to walls/distance/whatever, there just isn't a reason to have a Hacker character rolling 14 Dice looking for a single hit.  Especially if they're not in combat and don't need to track the 5 plus minor actions they could take every 3 seconds looking for that single hit.

If the Hacker wants to hack a thing in Narrative Time, skip straight to the Hacking a thing check unless the Icon is running silent, far away, or otherwise deliberately concealed.

And honestly if it's an experienced Hacker player vs some Commlink PAN, I'd be inclined to skip the Hacking checks as the dice pools involved are so lopsided in the Hacker's favor anyway.  Just have the Hacker Narrate what they want and keep the scene moving.  YMMV.

[MercilessMing]

Treat Matrix Perception as much like "normal" Perception as possible.  The Matix is intended to be universally accessible and intuitive for everyday folks.  Burying obvious things behind "easy" Matrix Perception checks just slows down the action and makes everyday Matrix activity seem clunky.

I have trouble treating matrix as normal perception when you can perceive through walls and across large distances.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Treat Matrix Perception as much like "normal" Perception as possible.  The Matix is intended to be universally accessible and intuitive for everyday folks.  Burying obvious things behind "easy" Matrix Perception checks just slows down the action and makes everyday Matrix activity seem clunky.

I have trouble treating matrix as normal perception when you can perceive through walls and across large distances.

Anyone can hear through walls.

You can even "see"the through walls if you have thermo...

Edit: the analogy works for distance, too.  If the NPC is close enough for you to make out all his gear w/o a physical perception test, it doesn't need a matrix perceptionn test either!

[Xenon]

In the FAQ we added an example that specifically dealt with a guards PAN, his gun and the similarities between regular perception and matrix perception.

You think the example should perhaps be clarified in some way? (if so, what are you missing / what is unclear)?



Using Matrix Perception as a form of recon to pick out someone’s gear

Mungo, sitting at a café in a busy downtown area in Seattle, automatically, without taking a regular perception test, notices the security guard that is openly patrolling the street outside. Just like regular perception Mungo does not need to take a test to notice things that are immediately obvious in the Matrix either, and since the guard is not running his Personal Area Network in silent mode (or otherwise trying to hide from him) Mungo also automatically, without taking a matrix perception test, spots it via his Augmented Reality ‘overlay’. The PAN of the guard consists of all the wireless enabled personal electronic devices he carry on his body, including what appears to be a firearm, all networked to the device the security guard is currently using to access the matrix with.

Mungo is interested in what type of device this is and spends a Matrix Perception Major action to observe the device that the security guard’s persona icon originates from more in detail. He gets 3 hits which let him know that it has a device rating of 3, that it currently runs a DF array of 2 3 and that it’s only program slot is currently running Signal Scrub. “Standard issue Renraku Sensei, this should not be any problem”, Mungo mumbles to himself.

He is also interested in what type of firearm we are dealing with. He chooses to spend another action to analyze the device icon of the firearm and finds out that it is a Colt America L36 light pistol with a Device Rating of 2. His street samurai partner, which is somewhat of a gun-nut, would instead probably have observed it in detail more directly while taking a regular perception test before coming to the same conclusion.

[j2klbs]

You think the example should perhaps be clarified in some way? (if so, what are you missing / what is unclear)?

I like the reference in the first paragraph to "Augmented Reality 'overlay'" and maybe a clarification on that.  For example, maybe in the next sentence stating what he sees in this overlay, like, "he sees the icons associated with a commlink, heavy pistol, assault rifle, and goggles".  That way, it's very clear that the AR overlay reveals what icons map to.

Also, in the 2nd paragraph the line that says he's "...interested in what type of device this is" creates confusion to the first paragraph.  According to what we've been saying, he already knows what the devices are.  So, this should perhaps be reworded to say he wants to know additional information about these devices, so ... etc.

Thoughts?

[j2klbs]

You can even "see" the through walls if you have thermo...

I don't think this is true.  I searched the rules and did not find this capability. I also did a "matrix search" (i.e. I Googled it), and discovered movies are wrong and unless the walls were paper thin (Japanese rice walls?), thermographic vision can not see through solid objects like walls.

[Xenon]

Thermograhpic can also not even "see" through most objects that are transparent to regular light, such as regular windows.

But as you say, there are some objects that thermographic can "see" through.

A thin black garden plastic garbage bag, for example, will appear transparent for thermographic while at the same time prevent regular light.
Lack of light is also no issue. Thermograhpic vision work perfectly fine no matter daylight or in total darkness.
You can also for example also see the heat from the engine of a car that have been running recently.

[MercilessMing]

I get the instances where things obvious to normal perception are also obvious to matrix perception.  It's remembering the stuff that's obvious to matrix perc but not to regular perception that I have trouble with.  It's not akin to hearing through a wall, more like 100m x-ray vision.

[j2klbs]

It only matters when you don't have those physical contextual clues.  Like when you're in VR, or you're hacking someone from beyond physical line of sight.  In those cases... yeah I'd say a "no test success", if you get one, only gives you the most basic result.  1+ net hit requires an actual roll, in my view.

yes, this

Soooo, if HackerX is in the flesh looking at someone's PAN (via AR), he can readily identify what the various devices are.  However, if HackerX is in VR, he would instead see the person's persona and not necessarily know what devices are present?  So, in the case of VR, HackerX would need to perform a Matrix Perception test?  Is this correct?

[j2klbs]

It only matters when you don't have those physical contextual clues.  Like when you're in VR, or you're hacking someone from beyond physical line of sight.  In those cases... yeah I'd say a "no test success", if you get one, only gives you the most basic result.  1+ net hit requires an actual roll, in my view.

yes, this

Soooo, if HackerX is in the flesh looking at someone's PAN (via AR), he can readily identify what the various devices are.  However, if HackerX is in VR, he would instead see the person's persona and not necessarily know what devices are present?  So, in the case of VR, HackerX would need to perform a Matrix Perception test?  Is this correct?

Now that I think about it, the security guard would not have a persona since he's not also in VR.  So, what exactly does the target look like to a person who is in VR but their target is not?

[MercilessMing]

Quick question on daisy-chaining commlinks to have the team decker protect them:  What does this look like in the matrix?  Let's say we've got four PANs of four people, each with various devices.  When networking these together, do we have just one PAN now?  Can the slaved comms be said to have their own personas anymore?