Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Banshee on <07-17-19/1537:13>
-
the post is up ... https://www.shadowrunsixthworld.com/2019/07/the-matrix-in-sr6/
-
I’m curious to see how this is substantively different from marks. If I have to gains access to a network then gain access to the pan or whatever it’s just marks under a different name.
-
I’m curious to see how this is substantively different from marks. If I have to gains access to a network then gain access to the pan or whatever it’s just marks under a different name.
I don't think you'll have to gain access to the network first. The way it sounds to me is that there's the hosts (corp's network) and PANs (for hacking the individual). I don't think you need to move from one to the other to gain access.
-
I’m curious to see how this is substantively different from marks. If I have to gains access to a network then gain access to the pan or whatever it’s just marks under a different name.
Access levels are indeed kind of "marks by another name" but the difference is more things can be done with the equivalent of 0 marks.
-
Yep, access levels are very much an analog similar to marks... but they are a bit more easier to use and hopefully people find them more intuitive but also when compared to the matrix actions also not as restricted as marks were
-
I'm hoping techno's are done right by this time, with a robust ruleset so I can build one my way, and not be forced into a 'pet' archetype to be effective. They got treated so poorly in 5th and not corrected till almost the end. Here's hoping.
-
I’m curious to see how this is substantively different from marks. If I have to gains access to a network then gain access to the pan or whatever it’s just marks under a different name.
That was my first reaction as well.
Then it was the claim that 6e unified the game clock. I had to reread the article to notice it doesn't make that claim, but is written in a fashion that allows the reader to make that conclusion.
Other than that what stood out to me was the cyberjack.
We were introduced to the concept earlier, and it seemed acceptable. With further details, I'm questioning it.
- "Significant Essence cost." By itself, this is innocuous enough. Unless you are considering making a Rigger / Decker hybrid. Is it significant like a Control Rig? I hope not. With luck, the Control Rig will function like a cyberjack.
- Contains the Data Processing and Firewall attributes. When I first read that I took it to mean it was the only piece of gear that had DP and FW. I had to reread it to see that isn't what the article claims. Then I remembered the comm in the Rigger dossier didn't have a DP listed (might be device rating) and had a specific Firewall of 0.
- It is still looking like a car thief is going to have to carry a Deck. Hopefully that will be addressed better in the vehicle rules. Unless the Core Rules carry over the Attack/Sleaze workarounds of Data Trails, it may be some time before a Rigger can hijack a ride. :(
I am not sure the article sold the Sixth World version of the Matrix very well. Then again, I'm likely over-critical of this section of the rules. I'd be curious to see what a more typical Shadowrun player - as well as a non SR player - takes from the article.
-
So of I’m reading this correctly you don’t need access levels to each device, only the network it’s on.
That cuts a lot of rolls as before marks only moved up in the structure, not down.
-
So of I’m reading this correctly you don’t need access levels to each device, only the network it’s on.
That cuts a lot of rolls as before marks only moved up in the structure, not down.
Yep .. you are correct sir .. proper access to the network itself is all you need with no need to track individual devices as long as they share a network
-
I’m curious to see how this is substantively different from marks. If I have to gains access to a network then gain access to the pan or whatever it’s just marks under a different name.
That was my first reaction as well.
Then it was the claim that 6e unified the game clock. I had to reread the article to notice it doesn't make that claim, but is written in a fashion that allows the reader to make that conclusion.
Other than that what stood out to me was the cyberjack.
We were introduced to the concept earlier, and it seemed acceptable. With further details, I'm questioning it.
- "Significant Essence cost." By itself, this is innocuous enough. Unless you are considering making a Rigger / Decker hybrid. Is it significant like a Control Rig? I hope not. With luck, the Control Rig will function like a cyberjack.
- Contains the Data Processing and Firewall attributes. When I first read that I took it to mean it was the only piece of gear that had DP and FW. I had to reread it to see that isn't what the article claims. Then I remembered the comm in the Rigger dossier didn't have a DP listed (might be device rating) and had a specific Firewall of 0.
- It is still looking like a car thief is going to have to carry a Deck. Hopefully that will be addressed better in the vehicle rules. Unless the Core Rules carry over the Attack/Sleaze workarounds of Data Trails, it may be some time before a Rigger can hijack a ride. :(
I am not sure the article sold the Sixth World version of the Matrix very well. Then again, I'm likely over-critical of this section of the rules. I'd be curious to see what a more typical Shadowrun player - as well as a non SR player - takes from the article.
Well to he honest we didn't address car theft in the CRB at all but we laid the base line for there to be no need of a deck to do any such thing
-
Okay, this stuff looks generally good to me.
Yeah, I like planning things out ahead and picking my battles, but this stuff means, if a van pulls up and people jump out of it with guns in their hands, I'll be able to do stuff right away that isn't just a return fire. I'm also happy to hear that the necessary equipment is no longer nearly unattainable, as well as the improved user-friendliness.
-
I need to reread the Matrix section to make sure it was a legal move, but my brother tapped a commcall to Snoop on the other end so he could tap the next call. And another Snoop he did he then immediately rerouted the outgoing call to 911. I'm not even sure of all the actions you'd need in SR5 for that. Felt much more fluent this time 'round.
-
Well, the Matrix sounds functional again. Yay.
At the moment, though, I really, really dislike the cyberjack notion, and maybe even hate it. Playtesters have revealed that this cyberjack is in the ballpark of 2-3 points of essence, which really bothers me. The idea that suddenly after 5 editions and 30 years of enhancing the same technology, you have to get a partial skull and spinal replacement just to hack properly just doesn't feel right or make any sense. It also has now been stated to have been done solely to solve for a hypothetical mechanical or balance issue, when I see no problem with just dropping the cost in general in what we had. That feels like design overtly disrupting a well established game world continuity to satisfy a "you" problem, not allow a "me" benefit. I'm hoping this device can be houseruled out without breaking the whole system or making the book effectively useless to players. I get that you can forego it and then apparently be a sucky decker, but that's a choice I also don't like. It doesn't make any sense that it not being in your body makes you less good (especially when the software and hardware isn't doing the actions, its only your own skill dice, as was just confirmed in the post) or that VR protocols are suddenly need you to sacrifice half your soul to work right. It feels like an insane and illogical tradeoff. MAYBE if you added in five other meat world bennies to it, like a perception and or init boost, or built-in AR vision or something, and it might make some sense to me to go for. But you've only described it as basically implanting half a cyberdeck because you felt a need to balance things as that way instead of some other way. I can't get behind that logic, and the history of the tech doesn't seem to support it either. If I can upgrade either aspect, I can upgrade it whether it's in my skull or in a box, and that's always been true. All the deckers in the shadowverse just decided let's rip half our spines and skulls just to be able to start at the new baseline? The whole point of being able to jack in was to be able to jack OUT when you needed to, yank the plug, and don't die when your deck fries. It's why headware cyberdecks never caught on. Now, I guess you'll just have to fry if you hit that black IC? There better be a lot more to this crazy soul-sucking device we now have to have. Otherwise, boo. Just boo.
Maybe new players won't care, but it lands in the major minus column for me with only this teaser review to go on. Sorry to those who struggled to create it, but that component is a thumbs way down. FWIW, to stave off the inevitable rejoinders of 'you just hate what's different', no. I don't care that it's different, i care that it's a major change that appears to make no sense on paper as described so far, and seems to upend the gameworld continuity, only implemented solely for meta reasons. Unifying the game clock, simplifying processes, those are major changes too, but I find them completely all to the good. This part, not so much.
And no, it's not a deal-breaker for me buying into 6E (its one piece of gear after all, hopefully I can just tell players it goes in the box instead of in the skull), but it's an eye-roller for me. I'd love to be able to axe it. I already have to work out a mechanic for putting meaningful armor back in the game and work out how to incorporate strength into melee, maybe even address how to do abstracted vehicle movement rules for chases, and now I will probably want to extricate cyberjacks too. >:(
Last bit of ranting here: This piecemeal teaser review process is driving me up the wall too. I'll hear three things I like and then wham, a big one I can't stand and makes no sense to me gets revealed, all without the ability to see it for myself and take it all in with context and get a *proper* first impression. The Bad Thing may not be that bad, but I have no way to see that, and now I'll be irritated over it for how many more weeks? The way half this stuff is being teased out is driving me nuts. Just stop or release the dang book already. I hope CGL never does a release reveal this way again. It's crazy-making.
-
Playtesters have revealed that this cyberjack is in the ballpark of 2-3 points of essence, which really bothers me.
It really depends on the rating/quality you're going for. There's a large variety.
More importantly, Cyberjacks taking 2 of the Attributes allows more customization options for Deckers, since you can get a cheap deck and expensive jack, or the other way around. And they're by far superior to Commlinks stat-wise now.
-
I need to reread the Matrix section to make sure it was a legal move, but my brother tapped a commcall to Snoop on the other end so he could tap the next call. And another Snoop he did he then immediately rerouted the outgoing call to 911. I'm not even sure of all the actions you'd need in SR5 for that. Felt much more fluent this time 'round.
For 5e? That's easy. Snoop, Core page 242.
Unless the receiver was in 100 meters, you would likely need a Matrix Perception to actually "see" the receiver (see sidebar on page 242), then repeat. There wasn't anything really legal about rerouting commcalls though. Maybe Garbage In, Garbage Out (Data Trails, page 178).
Now, depending on whether or not Reckless Hacking was involved, you might need to gain MARKs at each new target. With a persons digital safety deposit box getting it's door ripped off (commlinks having their Firewall removed, or at least significantly reduced) I'm not sure it would be a fair apples to apples comparison to compare the editions anymore. Apply the same security shred to 5e, and Hackers lives get a whole lot easier.
-
It is troubling to hear that jacks may be a 1 ess a rating investment, because that is extremely high in SR for a minimum investment into a role. Samurai, who are essence intensive, can get their entire essence package done with by 2 essence if they aren't going hard on soak tanking. 1/rating means that your role's 'ware at a mid grade level is going to be more than the deluxe of most roles, and its a huge part of why 5e riggers didn't work: Attribute 'ware is traditionally the gate of an archetype, and attaching a second gate more intense than attribute 'ware hurts an archetype. I get they are trying to prevent samurai from just taking this to go full decker, but in reality the main advantage of being a mundane is you can hybridize really well, and super strict walls between roles isn't ideal if mundanes are going to take advantage of the versatility 'ware and their reduced gen costs are meant to impart.
Secondly, while its nice to hear about streamlining and the fact you can always do something, it is troubling there isn't much talk about what deckers do outside of pure matrix scenes. I hope they have an identity outside of 'matrix things' sort of like what they grew into late in 5e with KillCode (no, I am NOT biased ;-;) where they became amazing tricksters and defensive buffers.
Third, and finally, 'Technomancers mostly unchanged' is very ominious and hopefully they just didn't impress enough that technos are also getting a massive reduction in the investment to be one.
Overall however, a lot of this is very common sense stuff. It may seem like I really hate this announcement, but in reality it said most of the things that NEEDED to be said ("We are making the matrix not take 5000 years and it will cost less so deckers can buy 'ware that isn't decking related so that you aren't FORCED to be a remote decker or to go into situations you have no tools to handle in a misguided attempt to be 'fair'") and some interesting concepts were teased. The fact deckers instead of buying all their stats in one clump combine two different mid grade investments means deckers will feel way less samey than they used to, especially if 'civilian' matrix stats are useful in the hands of a matrix specialist, because now the ratio of 'Dicepool boosts vs your deck vs your cyberjack' will specialize your decker (Hopefully) in the same way street samurai who both play street samurai 100% straight might be different due to their weapon choices and some 'ware choices.
It is a bit of a shame we didn't get anything jaw dropping like the magic writeup though, which while it had problems was probably perfect in what a teaser should do to the point it spoiled me. We didn't hear anything equivalent to "Oh and now heal has elements, wrap your brain around that you nerds and anticipate what that hotness will be!" It still is a good post that builds confidence in decking overall, yes, even with all those concerns I have. It is pretty much impossible for a teaser NOT to leave consumer anxiety inducing uncertainty, but a good one also projects confidence and competence, which this seems to do.
-
I think it sounds not too bad so far.
Yes, access Levels are pretty much Marks in disguise (which where SR4 access Levels in disguise, so... yeah :P), but as I understand it, there are now two ways to get stuff done (which are not mentioned in the article, though): Fast and loud or slow and sneaky. When you don´t have the Mark access level, you can now either get the access level first and do your stuff, or you can try to do the stuff directly, but you have to perform an illegal hacking action each time. In SR5, you could get your Marks by Brute Force or by Hack on the fly, but both actions were just as fast. You could only do stuff loud or not loud, but not really quicker. Reckless Hacking was intruduced too late and too badly thought through to really make a difference.
Some things that I´m very curious about is the role of direct connections: In SR5, there was a clear benefit of getting direct access to devices, as you could use this as an easy entry point to hack the WAN/PAN/Host it was slaved to. Without Masters and Slaves (please don´t tell me that these were removed because of PC issues... God, better not ask ::)), I hope they have thought about adding an incentive to go up close and personal with the devices you want to hack (besides throwbacks). I also found it a missed opportunity in SR5 that Data Taps only offered the advantage to make throwbacks go wireless, but nothing against gear that already is running wireless. Planting Data Taps is one very obvious way to facilitate actual teamplay between the hacker and the rest of the team.
About Carjackers: I suspect that all kinds (malicious) Hardware Manipulation like Carjacking, Maglock-Picking etc. will be enrolled in either Computer, Engineering or even the Cracking skill. Maybe we will see some non-hackers with Cracking as a part of their B&E skillset in this Edition? I´d surely allow the Cracking skill to be used without a Deck or Resonance in the right circumstances. Things like glitching a Terminal or grabbing someones unlocked commlink and sneakily installing a tracking programm...
About Technomancers: I´m on the fence here. At first, "We didn’t make many changes" doesn´t sound too good considering their horrible state over almost the whole lifespan of SR5. But maybe you really don´t have to change that much about TMs when the rules around them change. In SR5, Technos (and especially Trog TMS) were absolutely crippled by the limit mechanic, forcing them to make huge investments in all 4 Mental Attributes. But limits are thankfully gone now. I do hope that they don´t turn into a pet class again and that the Complex Forms are more direct and flashy and not just little twists on existing Matrix Actions and Programs, though.
-
Yes, access Levels are pretty much Marks in disguise
This does not seem to be the case. They behave a lot more like access levels from 4e (funny that) than marks. In fact, one can argue marks were nerfed 4e access levels, in that you needed to get access AND do other stuff, rather than access granting you a lot of 'free' benefits. This seems not so much a new thing but splitting the difference between 4e's godlike access levels that let you basically pull a crash 3.0 whenever you wanted due to how program copying and permanent hackable access worked in 4e, and 5e's marks which were temporary and not actually able to emulate a full user.
Not to be too off brandly charitable, but it seems like they are actually a recognition of the problem with 4e's matrix (the fact that permanent access created massive incentives to segregate all matrix content to the front end of the run and hack literally for as long as your GM would stand you copy-pasting your agents to every device within a 5 mile radius) while not designing the matrix to be really limited in what you could accomplish like 5e, where marks (and the general matrix design philosophy) didn't exist to say "You can do all these cool things" so much as say 'Look at all these things you CANT do, get inside that box and flick lightswitches, loop cameras, and open doors like a good little code monkey!"
I think the only lasting 'trauma' from 4e's matrix is the desire to really preciously protect the hacker's role from any intrusion, which is still bumming me out, but I suspect that 6e's matrix will be highly functional, purely going off this preview. Matrix PCs may struggle with a new essence crunch, but it is good they recognized for example that you can't force deckers to be there in the meat while at the same time making matrix tools so nuyen and skill expensive you can't get good at the meat, because... that was awful, like truly terrible.
Of course, to go back to my usual pessimistic self, this is only based on a preview designed to make it look good, so it could always be secretly terrible. :P But at the very least there were enough good ideas that a full length article could be written that didn't raise any major red flags and actually made me somewhat intrigued, which may seem like damning by faint praise but is actually like literally the most you can strive for in this sorta thing.
-
I think it sounds not too bad so far.
Yes, access Levels are pretty much Marks in disguise, but as I understand it, there are now two ways to get stuff done (which are not mentioned in the article, though): Fast and loud or slow and sneaky. When you don´t have the Mark access level, you can now either get the access level first and do your stuff, or you can try to do the stuff directly, but you have to perform an illegal hacking action each time. In SR5, you could get your Marks by Brute Force or by Hack on the fly, but both actions were just as fast. You could only do stuff loud or not loud, but not really quicker. Reckless Hacking was intruduced too late and too badly thought through to really make a difference.
yeah, I didn't go into much detail here because I was directed to not give out many actual game mechanic details ... but yes you have the choice of fast and loud or slow and sneaky and reckless hacking isn't reallt required under the new system
Some things that I´m very curious about is the role of direct connections: In SR5, there was a clear benefit of getting direct access to devices, as you could use this as an easy entry point to hack the WAN/PAN/Host it was slaved to. Without Masters and Slaves (please don´t tell me that these were removed because of PC issues... God, better not ask ::)), I hope they have thought about adding an incentive to go up close and personal with the devices you want to hack (besides throwbacks). I also found it a missed opportunity in SR5 that Data Taps only offered the advantage to make throwbacks go wireless, but nothing against gear that already is running wireless. Planting Data Taps is one very obvious way to facilitate actual teamplay between the hacker and the rest of the team.
I ditched Master/Slave relationships just because they were overly complicating the system and didn't need it ... technically from an IT infrastructure pint of view they still exist but it just doesn't matter to the game mechanics. All you need to worry about now is "do they share a network?". Want to hack the camera directly, then do it, or do you want to access the the camera via the security guard station where you can have total overwatch too, then do it ... it is the same process either way because they are on the same network
About Carjackers: I suspect that all kinds (malicious) Hardware Manipulation like Carjacking, Maglock-Picking etc. will be enrolled in either Computer, Engineering or even the Cracking skill. Maybe we will see some non-hackers with Cracking as a part of their B&E skillset in this Edition? I´d surely allow the Cracking skill to be used without a Deck or Resonance in the right circumstances. Things like glitching a Terminal or grabbing someones unlocked commlink and sneakily installing a tracking programm...
exactly, as I stated above we didn't get into specifically writing up car jacking (so to space restrictions that is limited to future books) we did lay the ground work with the intent of it just being a series of skill checks with the proper tool kit without the need to need to be a decker to do it
About Technomancers: I´m on the fence here. At first, "We didn’t make many changes" doesn´t sound too good considering their horrible state over almost the whole lifespan of SR5. But maybe you really don´t have to change that much about TMs when the rules around them change. In SR5, Technos (and especially Trog TMS) were absolutely crippled by the limit mechanic, forcing them to make huge investments in all 4 Mental Attributes. But limits are thankfully gone now. I do hope that they don´t turn into a pet class again and that the Complex Forms are more direct and flashy and not just little twists on existing Matrix Actions and Programs, though.
yes, the biggest change to technomancers is the change to the system around them, I did rework the complex forms to work a little more direct and be useful across the board and sprites are still super useful if you want to go that route (not needed to function though) ... but now that everything is attribute+skill based things aren't nearly as bad for them as they used to be plus they get to use their resonance score as boost to their matrix attributes, so they get some choice and flexibility in how you can build them out and approach things in the matrix.
-
More importantly, Cyberjacks taking 2 of the Attributes allows more customization options for Deckers, since you can get a cheap deck and expensive jack, or the other way around. And they're by far superior to Commlinks stat-wise now.
I don't think this really addresses my concern here. Why must it be in my skull? If it works in there, it can work outside of that too. Not allowing that doesn't make any sense, and seems to fly in the face of what's been established previously.
I'm not buying "modularity" either, since in past editions you could upgrade each rating on its own. Except 5e where ratings were irrelevant since you could just switch them whenever.
-
More importantly, Cyberjacks taking 2 of the Attributes allows more customization options for Deckers, since you can get a cheap deck and expensive jack, or the other way around. And they're by far superior to Commlinks stat-wise now.
I don't think this really addresses my concern here. Why must it be in my skull? If it works in there, it can work outside of that too. Not allowing that doesn't make any sense, and seems to fly in the face of what's been established previously.
I'm not buying "modularity" either, since in past editions you could upgrade each rating on its own. Except 5e where ratings were irrelevant since you could just switch them whenever.
ok ... fluff wise the reason is that the corps have been making changes to the basic matrix structure in an attempt to combat the technomancer threat, but the resonance being what it is has just kept adapting to the new protocols however deckers got the short end of the stick so to keep their edge in the new matrix environment the cyberjack was developed which allows for full neural interface.
for game mechanic reasons it was to simply allow us to offset the nuyen cost with essence for a portion of the "required" investment thus reducing the gatekeeping effect of having a super high required resource allotment to just be a decker ... which then leads into the "modularity" ... it is now very feasible have a starting decker that is very good at what he does right of the gate by going with resources c at most and cheaping out on either the cyberjack or the deck and then upgrade the other one later
-
Is some this related to Character creation moving back to using ADCDE priority levels instead of free form point build?
-
Is some this related to Character creation moving back to using ADCDE priority levels instead of free form point build?
the basic Priority build system has always been the default system right out of the gate, I assume point build will come later as part of the players option book when it is released
-
About Carjackers: I suspect that all kinds (malicious) Hardware Manipulation like Carjacking, Maglock-Picking etc. will be enrolled in either Computer, Engineering or even the Cracking skill. Maybe we will see some non-hackers with Cracking as a part of their B&E skillset in this Edition? I´d surely allow the Cracking skill to be used without a Deck or Resonance in the right circumstances. Things like glitching a Terminal or grabbing someones unlocked commlink and sneakily installing a tracking programm...
exactly, as I stated above we didn't get into specifically writing up car jacking (so to space restrictions that is limited to future books) we did lay the ground work with the intent of it just being a series of skill checks with the proper tool kit without the need to need to be a decker to do it.
I'm all for the concept. I always wanted the [subcategory] Mechanic skills to act a the Cracking Skill Group (and maybe even Electronics) for appropriate devices.
The problem is how it ties into the world. I am reminded that I think you (Banshee) are the person who said [paraphrasing here] that you don't give a toot about tying the rules to the game world? I hope I didn't screw that up...
Anyway, the only way to get the cars computer to play nice, without hacking it as a Decker, is to at best shut off wireless - and at worst shutdown the computer.
That sounds well and good, until you think about how the world reacts to that:
Shut off the computer? If it is anything like modern cars, car don't run.
Turn off wireless? Then I hope the Core book settles the whole idea on how Gridguide (and similar technologies) handle wireless-off cars, and whether or not that requires a special license, and if the local L.E.O.s are alerted automatically when an anomalous non-broadcasting vehicle is detected... (https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=28928.0)
-
About Carjackers: I suspect that all kinds (malicious) Hardware Manipulation like Carjacking, Maglock-Picking etc. will be enrolled in either Computer, Engineering or even the Cracking skill. Maybe we will see some non-hackers with Cracking as a part of their B&E skillset in this Edition? I´d surely allow the Cracking skill to be used without a Deck or Resonance in the right circumstances. Things like glitching a Terminal or grabbing someones unlocked commlink and sneakily installing a tracking programm...
exactly, as I stated above we didn't get into specifically writing up car jacking (so to space restrictions that is limited to future books) we did lay the ground work with the intent of it just being a series of skill checks with the proper tool kit without the need to need to be a decker to do it.
I'm all for the concept. I always wanted the [subcategory] Mechanic skills to act a the Cracking Skill Group (and maybe even Electronics) for appropriate devices.
The problem is how it ties into the world. I am reminded that I think you (Banshee) are the person who said [paraphrasing here] that you don't give a toot about tying the rules to the game world? I hope I didn't screw that up...
Anyway, the only way to get the cars computer to play nice, without hacking it as a Decker, is to at best shut off wireless - and at worst shutdown the computer.
That sounds well and good, until you think about how the world reacts to that:
Shut off the computer? If it is anything like modern cars, car don't run.
Turn off wireless? Then I hope the Core book settles the whole idea on how Gridguide (and similar technologies) handle wireless-off cars, and whether or not that requires a special license, and if the local L.E.O.s are alerted automatically when an anomalous non-broadcasting vehicle is detected... (https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=28928.0)
first off ... that quote was definitely not me. the new matrix is specifically rewritten to function as much like real world IT security as we could make it without throwing the whole SR history out the window and starting over from scratch.
then taking the "real world" one step further (and this plays in to where I said we laid the ground work but did not address it directly) all you need to do is bypass or reprogram the computer of a car and it still run just fine, though you might lose some efficiency and bells and whistles it will still run ... and since matrix actions are attribute +skill (matrix attributes only figure in on the defensive side) then all it takes is proper skill use and not any hyper specialized gear such as a deck ... you do need to be able to access the computer but the proper toolkit can do that ... just like the mechanic down at the jiffy lube can do with using current real world technology and the right know how
-
... you do need to be able to access the computer but the proper toolkit can do that ... just like the mechanic down at the jiffy lube can do with using current real world technology and the right know how
As long as it is in the rules, and I don't have to give another GM a crash course in modern (and by extension, future) auto mechanics, I'm all for it. :P
-
At the moment, though, I really, really dislike the cyberjack notion, and maybe even hate it. Playtesters have revealed that this cyberjack is in the ballpark of 2-3 points of essence, which really bothers me. The idea that suddenly after 5 editions and 30 years of enhancing the same technology, you have to get a partial skull and spinal replacement just to hack properly just doesn't feel right or make any sense. It also has now been stated to have been done solely to solve for a hypothetical mechanical or balance issue, when I see no problem with just dropping the cost in general in what we had. That feels like design overtly disrupting a well established game world continuity to satisfy a "you" problem, not allow a "me" benefit. I'm hoping this device can be houseruled out without breaking the whole system or making the book effectively useless to players. I get that you can forego it and then apparently be a sucky decker, but that's a choice I also don't like. It doesn't make any sense that it not being in your body makes you less good (especially when the software and hardware isn't doing the actions, its only your own skill dice, as was just confirmed in the post) or that VR protocols are suddenly need you to sacrifice half your soul to work right. It feels like an insane and illogical tradeoff. MAYBE if you added in five other meat world bennies to it, like a perception and or init boost, or built-in AR vision or something, and it might make some sense to me to go for. But you've only described it as basically implanting half a cyberdeck because you felt a need to balance things as that way instead of some other way. I can't get behind that logic, and the history of the tech doesn't seem to support it either. If I can upgrade either aspect, I can upgrade it whether it's in my skull or in a box, and that's always been true. All the deckers in the shadowverse just decided let's rip half our spines and skulls just to be able to start at the new baseline? The whole point of being able to jack in was to be able to jack OUT when you needed to, yank the plug, and don't die when your deck fries. It's why headware cyberdecks never caught on. Now, I guess you'll just have to fry if you hit that black IC? There better be a lot more to this crazy soul-sucking device we now have to have. Otherwise, boo. Just boo.
Maybe new players won't care, but it lands in the major minus column for me with only this teaser review to go on. Sorry to those who struggled to create it, but that component is a thumbs way down. FWIW, to stave off the inevitable rejoinders of 'you just hate what's different', no. I don't care that it's different, i care that it's a major change that appears to make no sense on paper as described so far, and seems to upend the gameworld continuity, only implemented solely for meta reasons. Unifying the game clock, simplifying processes, those are major changes too, but I find them completely all to the good. This part, not so much.
And no, it's not a deal-breaker for me buying into 6E (its one piece of gear after all, hopefully I can just tell players it goes in the box instead of in the skull), but it's an eye-roller for me. I'd love to be able to axe it. I already have to work out a mechanic for putting meaningful armor back in the game and work out how to incorporate strength into melee, maybe even address how to do abstracted vehicle movement rules for chases, and now I will probably want to extricate cyberjacks too. >:(
Personally, for my games, I'm going to keep Datajacks and have lower end and older Cyberdecks that carry all four attributes, with the option of Cyberjacks and cutting edge decks that split the difference as described, that way a specialist Decker can have the latter, while jack-of-all-trades types or sometimes Decker characters can go with the former option and still be somewhat competitive, and more so the more Nuyen they pour into that aspect. One of my favorite characters to play right now is a sneaky Cat Shaman with a little bit of cyberware that includes a datajack, depending on how "hefty" the Essence cost for the new Cyberjack is, it could ruin that character's concept.
-
... you do need to be able to access the computer but the proper toolkit can do that ... just like the mechanic down at the jiffy lube can do with using current real world technology and the right know how
As long as it is in the rules, and I don't have to give another GM a crash course in modern (and by extension, future) auto mechanics, I'm all for it. :P
well as I said it is not specifically in the rules yet (due to space restrictions we had to pick and choose) but that was the direction we intended for it to go
-
@Midnight: Don't worry.
-
Personally, for my games, I'm going to keep Datajacks and have lower end and older Cyberdecks that carry all four attributes, with the option of Cyberjacks and cutting edge decks that split the difference as described, that way a specialist Decker can have the latter, while jack-of-all-trades types or sometimes Decker characters can go with the former option and still be somewhat competitive, and more so the more Nuyen they pour into that aspect. One of my favorite characters to play right now is a sneaky Cat Shaman with a little bit of cyberware that includes a datajack, depending on how "hefty" the Essence cost for the new Cyberjack is, it could ruin that character's concept.
datajacks are still a thing and function as they always have ... cyberjacks are just the superturbo version with nitros ... and I said in the article they are not explicitly required to have one ... as for essence they are comparable to wired reflexes but have 6 levels total
-
well as I said it is not specifically in the rules yet (due to space restrictions we had to pick and choose) but that was the direction we intended for it to go
My bad.
I didn't mean to suggest that it be in the Core Book, just that when the topic is released about mechanics "popping" cars without a deck it is spelled out (somehow) that it is actually possible to do without a deck.
datajacks are still a thing and function as they always have ... cyberjacks are just the superturbo version with nitros ... and I said in the article they are not explicitly required to have one ... as for essence they are comparable to wired reflexes but have 6 levels total
That... That is disappointing. Well, I am assuming that Wired Reflexes haven't gotten a kick ass Essence discount between editions...
-
I think it's been said but I'll repeat: if you want to be a hybrid concept that can't afford to sink a lot of essence in a Cyberjack, you don't have to buy a Cyberjack. It gives benefits sure but you can still hack without one (and its benefits).
-
As much as myself and majority of my group are not interested in 6th, we might steal the new Matrix rules, because 5th Matrix was crap and we just used NPC Deckers.
-
@Midnight: Don't worry.
I don't worry, chummer, I homebrew. ;) Good to see that it's not a replacement, but an addition though. Can't wait to sink my teeth into the Core Rules when they come out (my SO is getting me the book for my 40th birthday ;D).
-
As much as myself and majority of my group are not interested in 6th, we might steal the new Matrix rules, because 5th Matrix was crap and we just used NPC Deckers.
I have mixed feelings about this post ... on one hand I did work on the entire project to some extent but to hear someone say my specific portion is what they want to port over ... yeah that's an ego boost 8)
anyhow ... you will need to tweak a few things but overall it should integrate pretty well
-
datajacks are still a thing and function as they always have ... cyberjacks are just the superturbo version with nitros ... and I said in the article they are not explicitly required to have one ... as for essence they are comparable to wired reflexes but have 6 levels total
Does this mean there also a Matrix init boost with the implant?
I'm still not understanding why this must live in my skull when it never needed to before. Hardware is hardware. Because Technomancers - that are, what, 0.01% of the population, are that big a threat we will now need to upgrade all our VR workforce to this tech - and whoops it still didn't work? Sorry about your soul, Joe Deckslave, but now you just paid less for an implant than for a deck...which would now also cost less also if we didn't implant it in you minus the surgery costs--what the heck is the extensive biological interface possibly providing that somehow is better than a cyberdeck could?
Sorry, this will be the last question on this. Only seeing a small window here, and it's got a crack in it. I guess for me, if I can build the same capability without it, that's fine. I'll quit fussing.
-
yes, cyberjacks also provide an initiative boost
-
...
I'm still not understanding why this must live in my skull when it never needed to before.
...
For me, it helps to remember that 6w is not another expansion book for 5e... it's an entirely new edition of Shadowrun. Put simply... things change between editions.
This isn't as big a change as from 3rd to 4e matrix rules... but yes there's a change on a smaller degree.
Cyberjacks are a "new thing" that was invented for this edition. A new generation of mind-matrix melding based on research in Technomancers isn't as fundamental a shift as say Crash 2.0. But nonetheless the cutting edge is here. What was SOTA in 2079 (5e) is now hopelessly out of date in 2080 (6w). If you don't have a fancy newfangled cyberjack, you're not on the leading edge anymore. End of story. The tech is THAT important. And since it's brand new, it's only available as an invasive brain implant. Maybe, given a few game years (or another edition), it'll be available as an externally worn device like a set of 'trodes. Or maybe there's a technobabble factor that simply prevents the tech from working if it's not physically implanted. Either way. as of 2080 (the 6w CRB) the tech is still too new to exist as anything other than implanted cyberware.
I find that's well within the bounds of suspension of disbelief.
-
Cause hacker need headware. Otherwise we can’t call them head cases. So given the clock merge this means cyberjack initiative is also useful in non hacking situations?
-
...
I'm still not understanding why this must live in my skull when it never needed to before.
...
For me, it helps to remember that 6w is not another expansion book for 5e... it's an entirely new edition of Shadowrun. Put simply... things change between editions.
This isn't as big a change as from 3rd to 4e matrix rules... but yes there's a change on a smaller degree.
Cyberjacks are a "new thing" that was invented for this edition. A new generation of mind-matrix melding based on research in Technomancers isn't as fundamental a shift as say Crash 2.0. But nonetheless the cutting edge is here. What was SOTA in 2079 (5e) is now hopelessly out of date in 2080 (6w). If you don't have a fancy newfangled cyberjack, you're not on the leading edge anymore. End of story. The tech is THAT important. And since it's brand new, it's only available as an invasive brain implant. Maybe, given a few game years (or another edition), it'll be available as an externally worn device like a set of 'trodes. Or maybe there's a technobabble factor that simply prevents the tech from working if it's not physically implanted. Either way. as of 2080 (the 6w CRB) the tech is still too new to exist as anything other than implanted cyberware.
I find that's well within the bounds of suspension of disbelief.
Very much this. While it can be nice for lore reasons to back up edition changes when possible, edition changes are a totally acceptable point to retcon the status quo, like when D&D added Dragonborn and Warlocks to all its settings from 3.5 to 4e, or added sorcerers as a concept from 2e to 3e. These things never existed and their 'sudden' existence was not addressed.
SR has a bit more of a burden because it has strong continuity between editions, posing them as time skips, but still has changed major ways the universe has worked between editions without saying why, and the change from shaman vs hermetic to generic mages with minor differences (Which was a good change because maybe there are really unfortunate implications to making shamans 'good guy' mages with unique powers and hermetics 'bad guy' mages with unique powers and drawing super clear lines between contemporary western and Native American philosophies and drawing moral values and personal worth and capabilities relating to logic and rationality vs passion and exotic mysticism) was only really 'backfilled' well after the fact. But even things like autofire going from a DV boost to an accuracy boost majorly changes how every person in the world relates to weapons and chooses their weapon, but no one batted an eye.
It isn't like there is any difficulty in giving a lore reason for the cyberjack. "Computers got bigger, better, and badder, and we put computers in people's heads, and now the head computers you have are bigger and badder." Like 'tech gets better and more tech options exist' is probably is the most natural thing to happen in an SR edition change, it would be WEIRD if computers didn't get stronger and hackers got new tools for hacking.
As for modularity, it is true it was possible to customize stats in previous editions specifically... and that did cause deckers to behave differently! A problem in older editions, especially 4e, was you just pushed all the stats to 'yes' but it seems like that won't work anymore. Attack Defense Firewall and DP are less interesting and say less about you than say... Signal vs Processing did, but that is assuming it all works like 4e where these things work almost exclusively as limits outside of matrix combat. And limits are gone so... they literally can't.
-
datajacks are still a thing and function as they always have ... cyberjacks are just the superturbo version with nitros ... and I said in the article they are not explicitly required to have one ... as for essence they are comparable to wired reflexes but have 6 levels total
Does this mean there also a Matrix init boost with the implant?
I'm still not understanding why this must live in my skull when it never needed to before. Hardware is hardware. Because Technomancers - that are, what, 0.01% of the population, are that big a threat we will now need to upgrade all our VR workforce to this tech - and whoops it still didn't work? Sorry about your soul, Joe Deckslave, but now you just paid less for an implant than for a deck...which would now also cost less also if we didn't implant it in you minus the surgery costs--what the heck is the extensive biological interface possibly providing that somehow is better than a cyberdeck could?
Sorry, this will be the last question on this. Only seeing a small window here, and it's got a crack in it. I guess for me, if I can build the same capability without it, that's fine. I'll quit fussing.
Think about it like this. When the matrix first went online, you entered via cyber-terminal. It was clunky and slow but it worked. Then cyberdecks came out that used the datajack to let you directly activate your programs. Security rose to meet the new challenge, leaving the terminal users in the dust as they simply were not fast enough to deal with new intrusion countermeasures.
When matrix 2.0 came online, security was a joke and even a script-kiddie with a second rate commlink could hack things. Then the new De La Mar matrix went live and security tightened like a noose, forcing deckers to once more ply their trade fully. Turns out that the De La Mar matrix and security was based on the gestalt power of 100 technmancer brains in jars, which is why the matrix (and especially the Foundation) behave in odd ways sometimes.
Security is now moving in a new direction. Using the inherent power of the matrix to make smarter, more adaptable IC. Computers are great at crunching numbers far better then any metahuman ever could, but they can't easily adapt without an operator to direct that. Make a program that can adapt to new information on the fly and you'll have something truly scary. Even with a DNI connection running HotSim, datajacks just simply can't adapt their otherwise deck bound programs quickly enough for the new security, so a deeper connection was needed.
A decker with a datajack simply enters the matrix and interacts with it. Anyone with a datajack can also interact with a car the same way, jack in and interact with it via thought. But a rigger with a VCR doesn't just interact with the vehicle, they become the vehicle, putting them above any plebeian who simply "plugs in". That's what a cyberjack does. A decker with one no longer just interacts with the matrix, they become one with it, activating and adapting programs with a speed and fluidity that can't be matched by someone simply "plugging in" with an old deck. The deeper, faster connection lets them meet the new security on an even battleground, but the cost is deeper, more extensive augmentation then someone who simply dabbles in the matrix.
PS: This is all just speculation and world building that constantly runs though my head as I look over new stuff and shouldn't be taken as anything more then that. Unless the devs like it and want to use it then go right ahead cause that would be cool and humbling.
-
...
I'm still not understanding why this must live in my skull when it never needed to before.
...
For me, it helps to remember that 6w is not another expansion book for 5e... it's an entirely new edition of Shadowrun. Put simply... things change between editions.
This isn't as big a change as from 3rd to 4e matrix rules... but yes there's a change on a smaller degree.
Cyberjacks are a "new thing" that was invented for this edition. A new generation of mind-matrix melding based on research in Technomancers isn't as fundamental a shift as say Crash 2.0. But nonetheless the cutting edge is here. What was SOTA in 2079 (5e) is now hopelessly out of date in 2080 (6w). If you don't have a fancy newfangled cyberjack, you're not on the leading edge anymore. End of story. The tech is THAT important. And since it's brand new, it's only available as an invasive brain implant. Maybe, given a few game years (or another edition), it'll be available as an externally worn device like a set of 'trodes. Or maybe there's a technobabble factor that simply prevents the tech from working if it's not physically implanted. Either way. as of 2080 (the 6w CRB) the tech is still too new to exist as anything other than implanted cyberware.
I find that's well within the bounds of suspension of disbelief.
Very much this. While it can be nice for lore reasons to back up edition changes when possible, edition changes are a totally acceptable point to retcon the status quo, like when D&D added Dragonborn
I'm still convinced they added those to appease annoying players like me who kept begging to play dragons without the higher level crippling that half-dragon level adjustment gave. ;D
-
As much as myself and majority of my group are not interested in 6th, we might steal the new Matrix rules, because 5th Matrix was crap and we just used NPC Deckers.
I have mixed feelings about this post ... on one hand I did work on the entire project to some extent but to hear someone say my specific portion is what they want to port over ... yeah that's an ego boost 8)
anyhow ... you will need to tweak a few things but overall it should integrate pretty well
Glad to give you an ego boost, Chummer! 8)
Myself and my group have various complaints in regards to 5th, but we figured out how to deal with them. 6th is just not what we want in most things combat and spellcasting for the most part, but Matrix, more than likely.
-
A decker with a datajack simply enters the matrix and interacts with it. Anyone with a datajack can also interact with a car the same way, jack in and interact with it via thought. But a rigger with a VCR doesn't just interact with the vehicle, they become the vehicle, putting them above any plebeian who simply "plugs in". That's what a cyberjack does. A decker with one no longer just interacts with the matrix, they become one with it, activating and adapting programs with a speed and fluidity that can't be matched by someone simply "plugging in" with an old deck. The deeper, faster connection lets them meet the new security on an even battleground, but the cost is deeper, more extensive augmentation then someone who simply dabbles in the matrix.
So, the difference between visualizing reaching out for an icon and manipulating it (old school Gibsonian style) vs just intuiting "Data Spike that guy!" Speed of instinct vs speed of thought maybe? I think I've seen TMs written as basically intuiting what they want to have happen, so in that context, I guess I could see that as enough of an explanation.
Again, just to clarify, I don't care that its different. There's tons of shifts between editions I don't care about elsewhere. I care that this one specific gear item felt like it needed some logic to it that I could grab on to. I wasn't getting that from anything else posted so far. I hope the book is actually in line with this notion, as it works for me.
Thanks.
-
I think it's been said but I'll repeat: if you want to be a hybrid concept that can't afford to sink a lot of essence in a Cyberjack, you don't have to buy a Cyberjack. It gives benefits sure but you can still hack without one (and its benefits).
What hybrid concept?
I'm trying to wrap my head around a nova hot decker is now sporting as much, if not more, chrome as a street sam all of a sudden.
Sure, you can deck with out the best cyberjack you can afford, just like you can be street sam without any wired reflexes. Both are still capable of being really good without them. Doesn't mean it is wise to avoid them.
And all I can come up with as to "why" is that the gawd awful cyberdeck prices in 5e were to keep "everyone from hacking." Dovetailing off of this, Sixth World decided to cost a decker a literal arm and a leg in order to keep from just arbitrarily reducing the price of cyberdecks while at the same time reducing the skill number, and level, requirements to be good at decking.
If that wasn't noodle warping enough, hot-sim VR maxed out 5e's unified game clock initiative dice with just a datajack. In Sixth World, the cyberjack increases initiative (at least to some level). Does that mean that Sixth World's unified game clock broke past the theoretical max in 5e? Or is it worse than that, and Matrix initiative was cut off at the knees to make room for the cyberjack?
This is reading like a solution in desperate need of a problem. This solution is so jonezing for a problem, that one was created specifically for it.
I can say this for Sixth Worlds consistency... Every time there is something that gives me some hope for the future of the franchise, two or three other things come along and make me wish Sixth World was aborted long before viability.
-
On the other hand, if the costs in hardware, skill investments, and essence were all small in order to hack at max capability, there'd be no place for a decker archetype. Or put another way: it'd allow a dilettante to be in par with a specialist. That's no good.
Ok, so being a first rate decker costs significant essence. To me, that means Sammies, riggers, adepts, and mages can't hack as well as a decker. Again: that's a good thing in my book.
-
I’d think the whole skill+attribute thing would keep most people out pretty well, but I don’t mind a bit more niche protection.
-
Ok, so being a first rate decker costs significant essence. To me, that means Sammies, riggers, adepts, and mages can't hack as well as a decker. Again: that's a good thing in my book.
That is your position this minute?
Because previously it was;
The Classless system again.
With the very notable exceptions of magic and resonance, there are no capabilities that are reserved solely to certain archetypes. Aside from Magic and Technomancer stuff, anyone can do anything if you invest in the skills and/or hardware.
Riggers are the mundanes that actually come closest to getting hallowed turf... you literally cannot perform their signature ability if you're not a rigger. Or a post-chargen technomancer.
What will your position be in half an hour?
-
Ok, so being a first rate decker costs significant essence. To me, that means Sammies, riggers, adepts, and mages can't hack as well as a decker. Again: that's a good thing in my book.
That is your position this minute?
Because previously it was;
The Classless system again.
With the very notable exceptions of magic and resonance, there are no capabilities that are reserved solely to certain archetypes. Aside from Magic and Technomancer stuff, anyone can do anything if you invest in the skills and/or hardware.
Riggers are the mundanes that actually come closest to getting hallowed turf... you literally cannot perform their signature ability if you're not a rigger. Or a post-chargen technomancer.
What will your position be in half an hour?
Post today: if you invest heavily, you ought to be better than someone who doesn't.
Post then: (generally) everyone can invest to gain some degree of proficiency in a given capability.
To synthesize those two "apparently" divergent opinions for you: everyone can hack. But someone who goes "all in" is rightly better than someone who goes in half way. For the purposes of this synthesis: "all in" means spending the essence as well as skills and nuyen, whereas "hacking half way" is not spending the essence.
-
I see also that Technomancers get to add their resonance to their matrix roles. Does this mean that they have lower/non-existant abilities to make up for the lack of a Cyberjack and/or a Cyberdeck?
-
That says Matrix Attributes, not matrix rolls. Jacks and Decks can go pretty high statwise, higher than people's unaugmented attributes tend to be. This helps TMs get nicely high themselves.
-
yes, cyberjacks also provide an initiative boost
So given the clock merge this means cyberjack initiative is also useful in non hacking situations?
I would also like to know this as well, as what route I go will depend on whether this cyberjack affects initiative when not in the matrix. Does the mentioned (in the first quote) initiative boost apply to non-matrix activities? If not, are cyberjacks compatible with other pieces of cyberware such as wired reflexes or the rigger control thingy?
-
yes, cyberjacks also provide an initiative boost
It is a static boost and not initiative dice (so no extra actions .. that's regulated by AR/hot sim etc) and it only applies to matrix
So given the clock merge this means cyberjack initiative is also useful in non hacking situations?
I would also like to know this as well, as what route I go will depend on whether this cyberjack affects initiative when not in the matrix. Does the mentioned (in the first quote) initiative boost apply to non-matrix activities? If not, are cyberjacks compatible with other pieces of cyberware such as wired reflexes or the rigger control thingy?
-
Your quotes went a bit wrong there.
So: "It is a static boost and not initiative dice (so no extra actions .. that's regulated by AR/hot sim etc) and it only applies to matrix"
-
Yes ... posted from my phone so not sure what happened.
Thanks for breaking it out.
-
Alright, thanks for the head's up! I have a friend picking up a copy of the main rule book for me at the big convention next month (Gencon?), so I'll play around with seeing if I can make cyberware work for my decker/rigger character concept.
-
Alright, thanks for the head's up! I have a friend picking up a copy of the main rule book for me at the big convention next month (Gencon?), so I'll play around with seeing if I can make cyberware work for my decker/rigger character concept.
If they have a high essence cost for a Cyberjack, that may be a hard sell with a Control Rig. But, it sounds like it may be possible to get a Control Rig, then pick up both an RCC (for Data Processing and Firewall) and a Cyberdeck (for Attack and Sleaze).
-
Hey Banshee, you mentioned this:
I ditched Master/Slave relationships just because they were overly complicating the system and didn't need it ... technically from an IT infrastructure pint of view they still exist but it just doesn't matter to the game mechanics. All you need to worry about now is "do they share a network?". Want to hack the camera directly, then do it, or do you want to access the the camera via the security guard station where you can have total overwatch too, then do it ... it is the same process either way because they are on the same network
I had a few questions on what you meant:
1. If master/slave relationships are gone, how do pans work?
2. When you say 'share a network' Does this mean 'on the same pan' or 'on the same host'?
3. If #2 is correct, can we still hack devices that are not on a pan/host?
4. Is direct connection still a mechanic?
I'm curious if hacking is just hacking the 'network' and don't have to hack individual devices anymore. If that's the case, deckers will be a lot more fun, and it would remove a lot of rolls so I don't have to send players for pizza to do the decker areas.
-
Also, for what it's worth, I can by cyberjacks as "like a Control Rig, but for software instead of hardware" or however it's being sold. Though I do hope, as it's been suggested here, a cyberdeck & Control Rig can work together without using up all your money/Essence.
If not, it sounds like it'd be pretty simple to just be a decker with a microdrone. Surveillance, maybe a datatap with legs?
-
Also, for what it's worth, I can by cyberjacks as "like a Control Rig, but for software instead of hardware" or however it's being sold. Though I do hope, as it's been suggested here, a cyberdeck & Control Rig can work together without using up all your money/Essence.
If not, it sounds like it'd be pretty simple to just be a decker with a microdrone. Surveillance, maybe a datatap with legs?
I see Drone-Deckers and Rigger-Hackers being a thing in 6th. If you can connect to an RCC and a Cyberdeck, then (in theory) you would have access to the full attribute array while still being able to control drones.
-
Alright, thanks for the head's up! I have a friend picking up a copy of the main rule book for me at the big convention next month (Gencon?), so I'll play around with seeing if I can make cyberware work for my decker/rigger character concept.
If they have a high essence cost for a Cyberjack, that may be a hard sell with a Control Rig. But, it sounds like it may be possible to get a Control Rig, then pick up both an RCC (for Data Processing and Firewall) and a Cyberdeck (for Attack and Sleaze).
Oops, missed this reply somehow! Isn't the cyberjack somewhat necessary now, if you want to be decent as a hacker, and thus I would need both a RCC and Cyberjack? My take on what has been said so far is that while you can still hack with a datajack (and cyberdeck, of course), you would be mediocre at best doing so.
-
You face restrictions, but they can consider risking it.
-
Oops, missed this reply somehow! Isn't the cyberjack somewhat necessary now, if you want to be decent as a hacker, and thus I would need both a RCC and Cyberjack? My take on what has been said so far is that while you can still hack with a datajack (and cyberdeck, of course), you would be mediocre at best doing so.
I can't speak to 6th yet, so I'm only going off of 5e restrictions and limitations.
If all you are looking to do is be a drone bunny, any character willing to spend the nuyen can do it. As long as 6th doesn't add in any restriction to the RCC, anyone can use it and anyone can use drones. In fact, I have long argued that drones were written with Deckers in mind for 5e. The only thing that Deckers miss out on - over a Rigger - is the option to Jump In to one drone at a time. Potentially useful in some situations, but as a blanket option it isn't that big of a loss.
If your character idea is drone bunny who hacks, you just might be able to do that through Decker alone. You only run into complications if you want the ability to Jump In.
-
Hey Banshee, you mentioned this:
I ditched Master/Slave relationships just because they were overly complicating the system and didn't need it ... technically from an IT infrastructure pint of view they still exist but it just doesn't matter to the game mechanics. All you need to worry about now is "do they share a network?". Want to hack the camera directly, then do it, or do you want to access the the camera via the security guard station where you can have total overwatch too, then do it ... it is the same process either way because they are on the same network
I had a few questions on what you meant:
1. If master/slave relationships are gone, how do pans work?
2. When you say 'share a network' Does this mean 'on the same pan' or 'on the same host'?
3. If #2 is correct, can we still hack devices that are not on a pan/host?
4. Is direct connection still a mechanic?
I'm curious if hacking is just hacking the 'network' and don't have to hack individual devices anymore. If that's the case, deckers will be a lot more fun, and it would remove a lot of rolls so I don't have to send players for pizza to do the decker areas.
answers to #1 and #2 ... PAN's and Host's are mechanically the same thing, it's just that a PAN is personal and mobile (i.e. runs off of a commlink or deck, etc) where as a Host is not (runs off of a corp server for example)
anserws to #3 and #4 ... if a device is not connected to a network (a PAN or Host) then yes you can still hack it using just the device's own ratings. Yes direct connection is still a thing and is useful for negating some issues caused by distance but what is opposing your rolls depends on if it is on a network or not
in general as to your overall question ... yes all you need to do now is hack the network and not individual devices unless that device is not on a network
-
ok, just some clarification for you all concerning the decker-rigger relationship
you can NOT combine a cyberdeck and a RCC ... they are not compatible ... a cyberdeck can not control multiple drones like a RCC and a RCC can not be used for hacking.
but you can combine a cyberjack (a cyberjack is basically a turbocharged modified datajack) and a control rig and then choose to use a cyberdeck OR a RCC depending on what role you want to focus on if you want to be able to do both decking and rigging
yes, anyone can still use a RCC to be a drone bunny, but you just have to rely on the drones pilot if you don't have a control rig and yes anyone can control a single drone via issuing commands via commlink or similar device
yes a rigger can provide matrix support and act as the team PAN protector by using an RCC since it possesses Firewall
and yes a rigger can attempt to control drones that are not jumped into but don't belong to them via matrix actions
-
ok, just some clarification for you all concerning the decker-rigger relationship
you can NOT combine a cyberdeck and a RCC ... they are not compatible ... a cyberdeck can not control multiple drones like a RCC and a RCC can not be used for hacking.
but you can combine a cyberjack (a cyberjack is basically a turbocharged modified datajack) and a control rig and then choose to use a cyberdeck OR a RCC depending on what role you want to focus on if you want to be able to do both decking and rigging
yes, anyone can still use a RCC to be a drone bunny, but you just have to rely on the drones pilot if you don't have a control rig and yes anyone can control a single drone via issuing commands via commlink or similar device
yes a rigger can provide matrix support and act as the team PAN protector by using an RCC since it possesses Firewall
and yes a rigger can attempt to control drones that are not jumped into but don't belong to them via matrix actions
Thank you for the clarification!
-
you can NOT combine a cyberdeck and a RCC ... they are not compatible ... a cyberdeck can not control multiple drones like a RCC and a RCC can not be used for hacking.
Cyberdeck provides A/S, RCC gives you D/F. Seems like that should work fine if you want to Hack stuff and Pilot Drones. You give up Matrix Edge Actions of course unless you have a Cyberjack or Resonance stat. And no Jumping in unless you've got a Vehicle Control Rig.
But should be a functional Decker with A/S/D/F, and be able to AR Pilot Drones, or just issue orders and let the Drones roll their dice.
-
you can NOT combine a cyberdeck and a RCC ... they are not compatible ... a cyberdeck can not control multiple drones like a RCC and a RCC can not be used for hacking.
Cyberdeck provides A/S, RCC gives you D/F. Seems like that should work fine if you want to Hack stuff and Pilot Drones. You give up Matrix Edge Actions of course unless you have a Cyberjack or Resonance stat. And no Jumping in unless you've got a Vehicle Control Rig.
But should be a functional Decker with A/S/D/F, and be able to AR Pilot Drones, or just issue orders and let the Drones roll their dice.
Oh I know what it appears to be, and it is on the errata list of fixes ... we do have a bit in the rigging section that says a RCC can not run hacking programs ... the error we made (and it made it past proofing/editing) is that we did not specifically expand on it and say that you can not combine a cyberdeck and a RCC to get a full array
you can as decker own and operate an RCC just fine and pilot drones as you said ... but you can not combine the attributes together from a cyberdeck and RCC to create a persona
-
There you go, thanks again for the clarification!
-
...but you can not combine the attributes together from a cyberdeck and RCC to create a persona
Should not really come as a surprise (as you can't do that in SR5, either). Shrug.
-
...but you can not combine the attributes together from a cyberdeck and RCC to create a persona
Should not really come as a surprise (as you can't do that in SR5, either). Shrug.
Except SR5 didn't split the cyberdeck attributes across two different devices / pieces of gear like 6th has. Double shrug.
-
you can as decker own and operate an RCC just fine and pilot drones as you said ... but you can not combine the attributes together from a cyberdeck and RCC to create a persona
*tch* :P
-
The general rule for 6th is that you can pull Matrix stats from any of your devices. RCC/Cyberdeck would be the only exception so far. Unfortunate that got missed is all.
-
The general rule for 6th is that you can pull Matrix stats from any of your devices. RCC/Cyberdeck would be the only exception so far. Unfortunate that got missed is all.
I will let you all in on a not so secret "secret" ... I didn't write it so "any" device could be used and I didn't change it. It was supposed to just be a commlink/cyberjack/cyberdeck and you could not swap attributes across devices
-
So you can combine commlinks/cyberjacks/cyberdecks to make a full persona, but not an RCC. So what is to stop a savvy tech player from using a cheap commlink and a cyberdeck to make a persona for hacking, and a a control rig and an RCC for controlling/piloting/jumping into drones/vehicles?
The way things sound they would all be on the same network, and one person would just have two distinct personas. And I can think of some fun bait-and-switch tactics for nuking hostile deckers with that setup...
-
The way things sound they would all be on the same network, and one person would just have two distinct personas. And I can think of some fun bait-and-switch tactics for nuking hostile deckers with that setup...
I have to wait and see how the language is written.
In 5e, a person only ever had one Persona. On top of that, they could only form one at a time.
That didn't prevent a person having more than one PAN at a time, since a Persona was not a requirement for a Master. So, a mythical person could have one PAN mastered by their commlink, another under their cyberdeck, and a third under their RCC to link their drones to.
There also wasn't any preventative language to stop that person from issuing commands through their RCC even if their Persona was formed on their cyberdeck.
I'm not expecting that to be the case in 6th... However I don't expect the whole development crew to be better at noticing these gaps in their rules language this time around.
-
So you can combine commlinks/cyberjacks/cyberdecks to make a full persona, but not an RCC. So what is to stop a savvy tech player from using a cheap commlink and a cyberdeck to make a persona for hacking, and a a control rig and an RCC for controlling/piloting/jumping into drones/vehicles?
The way things sound they would all be on the same network, and one person would just have two distinct personas. And I can think of some fun bait-and-switch tactics for nuking hostile deckers with that setup...
the only real limit here is that you would only be able to have a single persona active, but otherwise yes you can run a double setup and swap between the two as needed ... and as ISP said in his post ... you can also the RCC technically at the same time for drone control but your persona (and therefore your matrix attributes) are limited ... or use a commlink or cyberjack plus a RCC and then your only limit is what programs the RCC can run
the basic concept was to provide a way for riggers specifically to be able to at least defend themselves from hackers and engage in matrix combat at least some what if need be, but not allow a full hybrid crossover super decker/rigger without significant investment
-
How would a Cyberjack + RCC work, regarding swapping Data processing and firewall? Since both have them, do you just pick the two best ones?
When you are making a pan, is there a limit to devices you can slave? and what is it based off of? Data processing?
-
How would a Cyberjack + RCC work, regarding swapping Data processing and firewall? Since both have them, do you just pick the two best ones?
When you are making a pan, is there a limit to devices you can slave? and what is it based off of? Data processing?
can't go in depth on details on a public forum yet ... but as written you have 4 matrix attributes between the two devices not just 2
and yes it is based on data processing
-
Thanks Banshee, I'll have some more organized questions once the NDA lifts.
Knowing that we're hacking 'systems' rather than individual devices is an improvement in my opinion. It means that deckers feel more tuned, and have way more options with the single hack. In addition to having more than one Major action, I feel like they will be able to be more impactful.
-
Thanks Banshee, I'll have some more organized questions once the NDA lifts.
Knowing that we're hacking 'systems' rather than individual devices is an improvement in my opinion. It means that deckers feel more tuned, and have way more options with the single hack. In addition to having more than one Major action, I feel like they will be able to be more impactful.
that was the goal!
also if you (or anyone for that matter) will be at gencon and want to discuss further I will in the SR room Friday, Saturday, and Sunday
-
and yes a rigger can attempt to control drones that are not jumped into but don't belong to them via matrix actions
Hi, I am struggling to understand how the above is possible. Both "Jump into Rigged Device" and "Control Device" have user/admin access necessity, which if I am assuming correctly, demand hacking.
-
In the paragraphs above he is talking about using a cyberjack and a control rig. And then switch between a cyberdeck and a RCC (depending on what role you want to focus on if you want to be able to do both decking and rigging).
A rigger that want to be able to do both decking and rigging will have the cracking skill and also own a cyberdeck. This hacker/rigger can attempt to control drones that are not jumped into but don't belong to them via the Spoof Command matrix action (to instruct the auto pilot to take actions) and via the Control Device matrix action (to directly remote control it themselves). They can also jump into them via the Jumped Into Rigged Device matrix action (to directly remote control it themselves while being jumped in). All of the above can be done while using a cyberdeck, none of them require that you must use a RCC.
-
Is there anything that prevent me from using a commlink or RCC to take the Spoof Command Matrix Action??
There are a few matrix actions (Backdoor Entry, Brute Force and Probe) as well as programs (Biofeedback, Blackout, Stealth and Trace) that are linked to either attack or sleaze (book doesn't actually say, but I guess it is plausible that you need to have a cyberdeck to take the above actions or use the above programs since cyberdeck is the only device that grant you attack and sleaze attributes).
Almost all matrix actions also require that you have some sort of access other than Outsider before you may take them (and gaining access require that you use brute force or probe+backdoor entry which are linked to either attack or sleaze).
But then there are actions that neither are linked to a attack or sleaze attribute nor require other than Outside access. The list of actions that match this filter are: Full Matrix Defense, Hide, Jack Out, Matrix Perception, Matrix Search, Send Message.... but also the Illegal actions Data Spike and Spoof Command.
The damage of Data Spike is Attack/2 (and also here book doesn't actually say, but I guess it is plausible that you need to have a cyberdeck to take Data Spike since cyberdeck is the only device that grant you the attack attribute).
But is there anything stopping me from taking the Spoof Command matrix action while I am not using a cyberdeck (for example while I am just using a cyberjack without a cyberdeck/commlink/RCC or when I am using a commlink or RCC or a combination of cyberjack + commlink or cyberjack + RCC)??
Can illegal (Cracking) matrix actions only be taken when you are using a cyberdeck (or living persona)??
- Can't find such a rule.
-
Living Persona or Cyberdeck is the only way to get a Sleaze or Attack Attribute, so it's certainly implied you'd need one of those to do an Illegal action. But the wording on p. 174 is a little fuzzy, but from Banshee's statements it's safe to assume the RAI is that you'd need a Cyberdeck or a Living Persona to have a Sleaze or Attack Attribute.
And (like Magic and Resonance) it seems to have gone unstated that if you have an Attribute of 0 you can't do it. It's pretty obviously RAI though.
-
Actually, every device effectively has the Attack and/or Sleaze, if you want it to.
Per pg 174:
If the device doesn’t possess one or
more of the Matrix attributes, then the applicable
attribute is treated as if it were 0. You can
rotate all attributes through your persona, even
if they originated from different devices.
It sure looks to me like you can absolutely flip a device that only has D/F stats to A/S stats and transfer the implicit 0s over to D/F.
-
...it's certainly implied you'd need one of those to do an Illegal action...
Where?
As far as I can tell, the book doesn't say that you need to use a cyberdeck or having a resonance rating to take an illegal action (but maybe it should).
I could agree that it might or might not be implied that they are needed for matrix actions that are linked to either sleaze or attack (but spoof command and data spike are not linked, but maybe they should).
And it is also certainly implied you need to take one of the linked matrix actions (probe or brute force) in order to illegally gain more than outside access (but spoof command and data spike don't need more than outside access).
In SR5 Spoof Command was resolved with Hacking + Logic [Sleaze]
In SR6 there is no longer any "limit" concept and Sleaze is not part of resolving the action (Cracking + Logic)
The only place where Sleaze and Attack comes into picture when using Spoof Command is when you Distribute Edge.
Attack rating for ranged weapons either have a value or it doesn't. If it doesn't have a value at all then the shot cannot be attempted at that range category because of an explicit rule that only applies to combat (SR6 p. 108 If a weapon does not have an Attack Rating in a certain range category, it cannot be used at that range.). But there does not seem to be anything preventing me from taking a shot if an existing AR is reduced to the value 0.... For example AK-97 at Extreme range have an attack rating of 1 and if used it with a SA attack that attack rating is reduced to the value 0 which mean opponents with a DR of 4 (instead of a DR of 5) or more will gain an edge.
Unlike ranged weapons that either have a value for a category or it doesn't, attack rating for illegal actions always seem to have a have a value (but in some cases this value might be treated as if it is 0, SR6 p. 174 If the device doesn’t possess one or more of the Matrix attributes, then the applicable attribute is treated as if it were 0.). Just like for ranged attacks there does not seem to be anything preventing me from taking an illegal matrix action if an exiting AR have the value 0 (or is reduced to the value 0). And even if it may be argued that rating 0 is the same as not having an Attack Rating when it specifically comes to combat attacks, no such explicit rule seem to exist for matrix actions.
-
Actually, every device effectively has the Attack and/or Sleaze, if you want it to.
Per pg 174:
If the device doesn’t possess one or
more of the Matrix attributes, then the applicable
attribute is treated as if it were 0. You can
rotate all attributes through your persona, even
if they originated from different devices.
It sure looks to me like you can absolutely flip a device that only has D/F stats to A/S stats and transfer the implicit 0s over to D/F.
This is indeed what the bad phrasing allows which directly contradicts the 'you need a cyberdeck to hack' fluff and the apparent RAI of some rule sections, so if it's not fixed in errata or faq I will 100% houserule it out.
-
This is indeed what the bad phrasing allows which directly contradicts the 'you need a cyberdecck to hack' fluff and the apparent RAI of some rule sections, so if it's not fixed in errata or faq I will 100% houserule it out.
Whilst I agree this feels weird, I wouldn't characterise it as "bad phrasing." That suggests it's ambiguous or something. It's extremely clear that the ability to move stats from.cyberjacks to cyberdecks and vice verda is both current RAW and current RAI. I think it's even mentioned again somewhere else in the book, for emphasis.
-
The idea of being able to use 4 Commlinks for 3/3/3/3 stats and being able to hack, or even a single commlink just by swapping its 3 with an 0, completely contradicts this quote:
In game terms, the difference between a commlink
and a cyberdeck is that the cyberdeck possesses
the Matrix Attributes needed for hacking
We also don't have an example that explicitly allows the A/S <--> D/F, all we have for that is the implication of the other section. So, we need proper clarification here either way, there's not enough to be clear on RAI. And the implication is horrible: Why would I even get the expensive gear if I can just hack with a commlink or two and swapping Attributes?
(We also know that Banshee originally intended for it to NOT be allowed, but death of the author and all.)
@Xenon: Data Spike is now Attack-linked, by errata.
-
So you can combine commlinks/cyberjacks/cyberdecks to make a full persona, but not an RCC. So what is to stop a savvy tech player from using a cheap commlink and a cyberdeck to make a persona for hacking, and a a control rig and an RCC for controlling/piloting/jumping into drones/vehicles?
The way things sound they would all be on the same network, and one person would just have two distinct personas. And I can think of some fun bait-and-switch tactics for nuking hostile deckers with that setup...
the only real limit here is that you would only be able to have a single persona active, but otherwise yes you can run a double setup and swap between the two as needed ... and as ISP said in his post ... you can also the RCC technically at the same time for drone control but your persona (and therefore your matrix attributes) are limited ... or use a commlink or cyberjack plus a RCC and then your only limit is what programs the RCC can run
the basic concept was to provide a way for riggers specifically to be able to at least defend themselves from hackers and engage in matrix combat at least some what if need be, but not allow a full hybrid crossover super decker/rigger without significant investment
My two cents on this matter:
While I generally like the new Matrix rules, I really think that the space between Rigging and Hacking could use a bit more illumination, so I‘d be happy about any news and clarification on this matter, especially these kind of double-Setups of RCCs and Decks. I feel that Decker-Rigger Hybrids are quite common these days, since they both rely on the the same Attributes.
You mention the option to swap between RCCs and Decks. I assume that this means that you transfer your Persona (with a certain action?) from your deck to the RCC and vice-versa? Or do you have to log out (and reset OS, lose Access rights etc.) and relog on the other device each time? This can obviously make a huge difference.
On the other hand: Do you need to run your persona on the RCC anyways if you want to control the Drones its PAN? Or can you just run your Persona on the Deck for Hacking purposes and add an RCC to the Networks that is set up to „relay“ orders from
your deck-based persona to the drones? In this case, there would rarely be a need for swapping anyways (not that this is a bad thing. In fact, that‘s how I handled Decker/Rigger Hybrids so far in 5th Edition...)
-
The idea of being able to use 4 Commlinks for 3/3/3/3 stats and being able to hack, or even a single commlink just by swapping its 3 with an 0, completely contradicts this quote:In game terms, the difference between a commlink
and a cyberdeck is that the cyberdeck possesses
the Matrix Attributes needed for hacking
No it doesn't, the same way as the statement "all rectangles are not squares" doesn't completely contradict the statement "all squares are rectangles."
Just because Cyberdecks are the only devices that possess Attack and Sleaze does not mean that a Persona can never have an Attack or a Sleaze attribute without a Cyberdeck.
I concede that Banshee did not intend it that way, however that doesn't translate to being able to move your Persona's Data Processing from a commlink to Attack, for example, as being non-RAI.
We have to wait to find out what RAI is after at least one round of Errata publishing.
-
Data Spike is now Attack-linked, by errata.
Thank you.
SR6 Core Rule Book Errata Aug 2019 p. 7 "p. 181, Data Spike"
Add the following second paragraph:
This action is linked to the Attack attribute.
Damage was also Attack/2 (which also seem to suggest that you need an Attack rating).
Maybe Spoof Command should be linked to Sleaze.
Maybe actions linked to attack or sleaze should only be allowed if you are currently using a cyberdeck or resonance.
-
Maybe Spoof Command should be linked to Sleaze.
Maybe actions linked to attack or sleaze should only be allowed if you are currently using a cyberdeck or resonance.
Spoof command has three different levels of access, outsider/user/admin, which practically means you can perform it without no prior action (like brute force, probe and backdoor I assume, or jacking-in a cable for the matter of access)
I stumbled upon a different thread where Banshee clarified this.
Link: https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=30141.msg525630#msg525630
This confirms previous statement, PC can take control of a device which does not belong to them even if they are not deckers. Overall I think it makes sense and allows for great breadth of characters.