Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Banshee on <09-23-20/1158:24>
-
As was mentioned here quite some time ago, I decided to put together a Matrix Guide. I had submitted it for approval but never got any feedback, but I wanted to make it available to the public. So just note that is NOT official but it does fall in line with what I wrote in the 6WE CRB Matrix chapter when combined with my intentions and how I run things for my personal home campaign.
There are some rule changes proposed within, I feel they fix some of the issues that have came up since release but do not have official stamp of approval yet from CGL (yet?).
Also a very special thank you goes out to SSDR and Xenon for helping me out with this (especially in writing the examples) by interpreting what was in head and getting it down in written word.
Since the forum formatting will not let me post the document content directly, here is a link to he viewable Google doc.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DYgYXlKQ5XUG_3R4aDbaTTcm5XeYfdjf6Kqlop1J72k/edit?usp=sharing
-
I had submitted it for approval but never got any feedback
:'(
-
Thank you! Checking it out now.
Running Silent is network based and not device based, so you set your PAN to silent mode and then it and all of its connected devices are concealed behind the Sleaze attribute of the master device. Please note that running silent does require you actually have a Sleaze attribute but it sure does help to have one if you want to remain hidden.
Should be "running silent does NOT require you actually have a Sleaze attribute"
Also, any disclaimers you want to attach to this FAQ should probably appear in the doc not just the forum post, cause that link is gonna get shared and you don't want it to be misconstrued as official.
-
Amazing resource, thank you!!!!
Question related to the following:
"Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection."
This seems in contradiction to itself. The first part suggests I can brick a device from the outside so long as I succeed at a Matrix Perception test, but the last sentence says I need to be inside the Host to target said device. Can you please clarify?
-
Running Silently: Why would anyone *not* run silently. Even if you were a legal citizen, just for fear of being hacked (picking up viruses, etc.), wouldn't people regularly *always* be in silent mode? Is there any downside to running silently?
-
Amazing resource, thank you!!!!
Question related to the following:
"Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection."
This seems in contradiction to itself. The first part suggests I can brick a device from the outside so long as I succeed at a Matrix Perception test, but the last sentence says I need to be inside the Host to target said device. Can you please clarify?
please reference the bolded portion, the ONLY action you can take is perception ... other words you can detect what is there but not manipulate them without being on the "inside"
-
Amazing resource, thank you!!!!
Question related to the following:
"Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection."
This seems in contradiction to itself. The first part suggests I can brick a device from the outside so long as I succeed at a Matrix Perception test, but the last sentence says I need to be inside the Host to target said device. Can you please clarify?
please reference the bolded portion, the ONLY action you can take is perception ... other words you can detect what is there but not manipulate them without being on the "inside"
Thank you!! My bad. I didn't notice the language restricting it to Matrix Perception only. That makes perfect sense! :D
-
Running Silently: Why would anyone *not* run silently. Even if you were a legal citizen, just for fear of being hacked (picking up viruses, etc.), wouldn't people regularly *always* be in silent mode? Is there any downside to running silently?
not mechanical downside, but there should definitely be RP or environment drawbacks. running silent in public would be viewed the same as openly wearing armor and carrying weapons ... sometimes it will attract attention just by being out of the norm.
-
Amazing resource, thank you!!!!
Question related to the following:
"Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection."
This seems in contradiction to itself. The first part suggests I can brick a device from the outside so long as I succeed at a Matrix Perception test, but the last sentence says I need to be inside the Host to target said device. Can you please clarify?
please reference the bolded portion, the ONLY action you can take is perception ... other words you can detect what is there but not manipulate them without being on the "inside"
Thank you!! My bad. I didn't notice the language restricting it to Matrix Perception only. That makes perfect sense! :D
Wait, in the bricking example of Mungo vs. the security guard's gun, he is able to perform a Data Spike attack against the gun with the reason being it's an "outsider" action. So, just to clarify, one only needs to be inside the host/PAN if the matrix action involved cannot be performed as an outsider. Is that correct?
If so, you may want to consider altering the wording to say one can only perform a Matrix Perception or Outsider actions against devices inside a host.
-
Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection.
Maybe this could be reworded to reference outsiders doing matrix perception on icons inside a host? Because as it was said elsewhere in the FAQ, if you've got user or admin access, you don't have to test to see icons. I know you kind of said it when you said "while being on the outside". Maybe something clearer like "All inside icons are considered to be running silent to an Outsider, using the Host Rating + Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll."
-
the Interaction statement is in the Host section and is referring to how things operate across the Host Event Horizon and should not be applied to other scenarios.
EDIT: specifically it is a response to the Pg 185 statement about interaction with a Host.
-
Banshee,
Thank you for the resource. I have a new player wanting to run a Hacker/Techno and this document will make both our lives much easier.
Edit: 1.) Now that I have had a chance to red it. I completely agree with the changes on Commlinks.
2.) It did save me time explaining things to the new hacker, thanks!
Best,
SL
-
Banshee,
Thanks for the Information.
I have a question regarding Brute forcing Access to a PAN.
You wrote that the guard is full aware of A Hacker being present in bis PAN.
Why would he Not Reboot his Commlink in his Next Action, to deny the Access for the Hacker?
Best regards,
Slingshot
-
In previous edition access were on individual devices and you could reboot an individual device to clear marks from that specific device. In this edition access is on entire network, rebooting a single device in a network will not change the fact the hacker is still in your network.
But yes, one solution could have been to reboot the entire PAN (and perhaps this is what actually what happens if you reboot the device you used to access the matrix with, that I think Banshee have to answer).
But in my example Bob actually had three specific reasons why he didn't reboot his entire PAN (I considered it):
- Action economy. In the first action phase, when Bob noticed that his gun was under attack, he used his actions to both turn off the gun and to also do a full matrix defense. On his next action phase he opened up a communication channel with Tattoo via the Send Message minor action while refreshing his full matrix defense.
- Bob was currently communicating with Tattoo over the matrix when Mungo invaded his network, this call would have been terminated if Bob had decided to reboot his PAN
- It would only been a single Major action for Mungo to brute force his way into Bob's network after the reboot anyway
And also, we wanted to showcase how to resolve an eavesdropping on an outgoing call by using the Snoop action ;-)
-
Banshee,
Thank you for the resource. I have a new player wanting to run a Hacker/Techno and this document will make both our lives much easier.
Edit: 1.) Now that I have had a chance to red it. I completely agree with the changes on Commlinks.
2.) It did save me time explaining things to the new hacker, thanks!
Best,
SL
thanks, that was the goal after all.
-
Banshee,
Thanks for the Information.
I have a question regarding Brute forcing Access to a PAN.
You wrote that the guard is full aware of A Hacker being present in bis PAN.
Why would he Not Reboot his Commlink in his Next Action, to deny the Access for the Hacker?
Best regards,
Slingshot
In previous edition access were on individual devices and you could reboot an individual device to clear marks from that specific device. In this edition access is on entire network, rebooting a single device in a network will not change the fact the hacker is still in your network.
But yes, one solution could have been to reboot the entire PAN (and perhaps this is what actually what happens if you reboot the device you used to access the matrix with, that I think Banshee have to answer).
But in my example Bob actually had three specific reasons why he didn't reboot his entire PAN (I considered it):
- Action economy. In the first action phase, when Bob noticed that his gun was under attack, he used his actions to both turn off the gun and to also do a full matrix defense. On his next action phase he opened up a communication channel with Tattoo via the Send Message minor action while refreshing his full matrix defense.
- Bob was currently communicating with Tattoo over the matrix when Mungo invaded his network, this call would have been terminated if Bob had decided to reboot his PAN
- It would only been a single Major action for Mungo to brute force his way into Bob's network after the reboot anyway
And also, we wanted to showcase how to resolve an eavesdropping on an outgoing call by using the Snoop action ;-)
ok, so ... yes rebooting your network (the PAN itself not a singular device, though this will usually mean rebooting the device used to actually connect to the matrix ... in this case Bob's commlink) does remove access for anyone on the network (legal or not), but as Xenon pointed out sometimes the secondary effects and/or action economy makes that a not always a go to choice.
-
I think the Guide is great. I don't like only one thing - I don't think it's necessary to renumber commlinks, because it's another errata. It's easier to say that the ones offered in CRB are trash for wageslaves and in some next book put a new table with safety commlinks (with the same device ratings, but with better numbers F/D and at a higher price).
-
Thanks very much for all your work, this is a great help.
Other than initiative and taking physical damage instead of stun, I'm not seeing a difference between using Hot or Cold VR. Since the Cyberjack adds dice to Matrix initiative, it allows the Decker to avoid Hot VR from the safety of Cold VR (or even AR). Is this intentional? Are there other benefits I'm missing?
I was very confused by the CRB definition of Slaved Devices, and had built a PAN with enough Slave Slots to cover all my Deckers gear, and his team. Apparently that's not really needed. Thanks.
The Networked range is DP x 100 meters, but what's the range of Slaved Devices? How does that combine with the Sattellite Link?
Your suggested skill spec list:
You have Control Device, Hash Check, and Jump Into Rigged Device under Cracking when the CRB has them labeled as Electronic actions.
Similarly, Disarm Data Bomb is a Cracking action.
I suggest siting the appropriate specs in your examples.
One thing I was curious about that was not covered: Drones.
Drones can have an EWarfare Autosoft that allows it to use the Cracking skill "for jamming and overcoming ECM." I'm not sure what actions the second part covers.
Could a Decker/Rigger perform Matrix Actions through a drone (when Jumped In or when Controlling Device)? How does Noise apply, especially in combination with an RCC's ability to reduce Noise?
-
Each die means a Minor Action. If a Cyberjack grants bonus dice, it means you can reach 6 Minors, aka 2 Majors + 2 Minors.
ECM is a Rigger-book thing (at least it was in SR5), it's basically a form of jammer.
What SR5 mentioned explicitly, SR6 simply notes you do it all through the Matrix, is that every action you take when rigging through the matrix, is a Matrix Action. So ALL those actions face Noise. You want to drive a car with static on the line, you take a penalty.
-
Thanks very much for all your work, this is a great help.
Other than initiative and taking physical damage instead of stun, I'm not seeing a difference between using Hot or Cold VR. Since the Cyberjack adds dice to Matrix initiative, it allows the Decker to avoid Hot VR from the safety of Cold VR (or even AR). Is this intentional? Are there other benefits I'm missing?
yes it is intentional, but remember extra initiative also means extra actions!
I was very confused by the CRB definition of Slaved Devices, and had built a PAN with enough Slave Slots to cover all my Deckers gear, and his team. Apparently that's not really needed. Thanks.
The Networked range is DP x 100 meters, but what's the range of Slaved Devices? How does that combine with the Sattellite Link?
slaved devices have no range limit except for noise
Your suggested skill spec list:
You have Control Device, Hash Check, and Jump Into Rigged Device under Cracking when the CRB has them labeled as Electronic actions.
Similarly, Disarm Data Bomb is a Cracking action.
I suggest siting the appropriate specs in your examples.
will need to double check I guess ... that was copied from another discussion and I didn't look at that to be honest but it was something people were asking about
One thing I was curious about that was not covered: Drones.
Drones can have an EWarfare Autosoft that allows it to use the Cracking skill "for jamming and overcoming ECM." I'm not sure what actions the second part covers.
Could a Decker/Rigger perform Matrix Actions through a drone (when Jumped In or when Controlling Device)? How does Noise apply, especially in combination with an RCC's ability to reduce Noise?
I didn't do the drone stuff .... so ... 1st as MC said all drone rigging is done through the matrix so technically all they do is matrix actions. the difference is what you are limited to with the device at hand, a RCC is not a Deck. A RCC cannot be combined with a Deck, and does not have Attack or Sleaze attributes so cannot be used for any actions linked to those attributes. While a Deck can be used to communicate with a drone, it does not have the sharing or noise reduction so it best used for single drone.
EWarfare ... jamming should be an opposed test or at least have a threshold to overcome, so that's what the autosoft helps with
-
Other than initiative...
Initiative dice give you minor actions. Which is pretty huge. But not always needed.
Since the Cyberjack adds dice to Matrix initiative, it allows the Decker to avoid Hot VR from the safety of Cold VR
More initiative dice still give you more minor actions.
If you have +1 initiative dice from your cyberjack and enter hot sim you will have 1 major action and 5 minor actions to spend on your turn. If you switch to cold sim VR you will only have 1 major action and 4 minor actions...
...but what's the range of Slaved Devices?
Regular noise and device rating limitations apply here.
How does that combine with the Sattellite Link?
As long as your device rating can handle the noise you can connect to your drones no matter where in the world they are located.
Could a Decker/Rigger perform Matrix Actions through a drone (when Jumped In or when Controlling Device)?
Not sure I follow, but you typically perform matrix actions through the device you used to connect to the matrix with.
If you connect to the matrix via your RCC and remote control a drone you will measure noise due to distance based upon the distance between your RCC and the drone.
If you want to spoof a command a guard's smartgun you will measure noise due to distance based upon the distance between your RCC (not the distance from the drone) and the guard's PAN.
Slipped by Banshee while typing this response....
(His answers supersede mine in case they happen to be different).
-
Thanks all.
I am aware that initiative dice provides Minor actions. My point was that having a good Cyberjack providing Init dice is no different than Hot Sim providing Init dice.
So the question remains: is there another reason to go Hot? It feels like going Hot should always be something a Decker would want to do, but when they get a good enough Cyberjack, it becomes less of a priority.
If you connect to the matrix via your RCC and remote control a drone you will measure noise due to distance based upon the distance between your RCC and the drone.
If you want to spoof a command a guard's smartgun you will measure noise due to distance based upon the distance between your RCC (not the distance from the drone) and the guard's PAN.
That is what I was looking for, thank you.
That does lead to the follow up question: Why? Shouldn't it be the range to the device you're using to see with?
What about jumping into the Drone? Then you are the drone, and the range is nullified. Right?
-
It feels like going Hot should always be something a Decker would want to do, but when they get a good enough Cyberjack, it becomes less of a priority.
I am assuming you are talking about reaching 1 major action and 4 minor actions that you can trade into a second major action?
There are still advantages of having an extra minor action beyond that. Matrix perception, for example. Or Send Message. Or brute force user access to a host, entering the host and then still have a major action that you may use inside the host before your turn is over...
But yes, if you invest into a cyberjack then you can get 2 major actions without going hot sim.
Or from another perspective... if you wish to get 2 major actions and you don't invested into a cyberjack then you need to risk it by going hot sim.
That does lead to the follow up question: Why? Shouldn't it be the range to the device you're using to see with?
Think of it as noise due to distance representing extra latency / signal loss / lower bandwidth you get when connecting via wifi over the matrix compared to if you would connect directly via a cable.
What about jumping into the Drone? Then you are the drone, and the range is nullified. Right?
You are not actually physically inside the drone, even if it feels that way when controlling the drone in this manner. You are still connected to the matrix via your RCC and you are then, from your RCC, connecting over the matrix to the drone.
Remote connecting to devices wireless over the matrix might cause extra latency / signal loss (noise).
This is one of the reasons why wheelman riggers sometimes connect directly to their vehicles, using the retractable cable that their control rig implant comes with...
-
More actions means you can both double-Major AND use some Minors for defensive stuff.
Jumped-in still means you face distance penalties. Streaming your consciousness elsewhere is costly bandwidth-wise.
-
I am assuming you are talking about reaching 1 major action and 4 minor actions that you can trade into a second major action?
I'm talking about the +5d6 to Init cap (which also affects how many Minor Actions you gain).
+1D6 Base, +1D6 for Cold VR, +3D6 for an R5 or R6 Cyberjack.
Going Hot VR would add 1D6 more, which would exceed the cap.
Sounds like the answer is "No there are no other benefits."
Think of it as noise due to distance representing extra latency / signal loss / lower bandwidth you get when connecting via wifi over the matrix compared to if you would connect directly via a cable.
Remote connecting to devices wireless over the matrix might cause extra latency / signal loss (noise).
Noise from distance can be negated through a comination of Satellite Link and RCC of DR 5+ (3+ if you use Signal Scrubber). So the connection between the pilot and the drone would be 0 Noise (at least due to Range).
Let's take noise and range out of the equation for a minute.
One of the key things elements to hacking something is that if you can see the icon, you can hack it. If the drone can see icons (and there's no reason I can see why it wouldn't) then the pilot should be able to hack those icons. So slave your RCC to your Cyberdeck and start hacking your way around the block from the comfort of your couch.
Now let's bring noise and range back in.
If the pilot doesn't have any noise cancelling, then the normal noise for range between the RCC and the Drone applies to all checks made to or through the Drone. If they apply the proper mods to reduce the range noise to 0, then they're hacking their way around the planet.
That is, until they hit a zone of noise that isn't based on Range.
-
The Matrix Init Bonus for cyberjacks is the extra dice you get when in VR.
So deck-and-jack hackers will have between +3D6 and +5D6 init dice in VR depending on VR mode and jack model, while technomancers will get +2D6 or +3D6. This power delta is intentional?
-
Noise from distance can be negated through a comination of Satellite Link and RCC of DR 5+ (3+ if you use Signal Scrubber). So the connection between the pilot and the drone would be 0 Noise (at least due to Range).
Let's take noise and range out of the equation for a minute.
One of the key things elements to hacking something is that if you can see the icon, you can hack it. If the drone can see icons (and there's no reason I can see why it wouldn't) then the pilot should be able to hack those icons. So slave your RCC to your Cyberdeck and start hacking your way around the block from the comfort of your couch.
Now let's bring noise and range back in.
If the pilot doesn't have any noise cancelling, then the normal noise for range between the RCC and the Drone applies to all checks made to or through the Drone. If they apply the proper mods to reduce the range noise to 0, then they're hacking their way around the planet.
That is, until they hit a zone of noise that isn't based on Range.
Just added a note about this in the FAQ, I do not allow a RCC and deck to be combined. That was never the intent and I was overridden.
-
On the topic of using a cyberdeck and RCC simultaneously... we've had this conversation already so I know I'm not convincing you of anything here :D Just want to opine for the readers at large that personally, I do like that the combination is allowed in the CRB. Without a Sleaze attribute of your own, the Rigger can't realistically pull off running their drones silently. It doesn't feel right to me to be dependent on the Hacker for cover on this. In fact, I like the notion of a Rigger being the matrix overwatch specialist. Adds more to the archetype, and even allows more flexibility in team makeup without HAVING to have a hacker for matrix defense.
-
If the argument against combining RCC + cyberdeck is about noise reduction... well that doesn't seem like a problem unique to RCC's does it?
-
Giving Cyberjacks extra initiative dice also seems to greatly devalue Hot Sim for deckers. If you can get +3D6 and four minors in cold sim, then hot sim doesn't look so good in risk vs reward. It actually makes me want to use Hot Sim as a tactical advantage Edge generator. Matrix is hurting for non-AR/DR generation sources anyway. I'd move the VCR edge generator to hot sim too.
-
+3D6 for an R5 or R6 Cyberjack.
There are two tables in the book. They have different numbers.
Page 177 is the correct one.
Noise from distance can be negated ...
Yes.
In which case you can remote control over larger areas.
One of the key things elements to hacking something is that if you can see the icon, you can hack it...
Eh?
The signal originates from the device you used to access the matrix with (for a hacker that would typically be his cyberdeck).
If you are trying to gain access on a network that is 4km away then you have 3 points of noise due to distance. No matter how many drones that are part of your PAN.
-
Giving Cyberjacks extra initiative dice also seems to greatly devalue Hot Sim for deckers. If you can get +3D6 and four minors in cold sim, then hot sim doesn't look so good in risk vs reward. It actually makes me want to use Hot Sim as a tactical advantage Edge generator. Matrix is hurting for non-AR/DR generation sources anyway. I'd move the VCR edge generator to hot sim too.
"You're in Hot Sim" can win the Circumstantial Edge whenever the GM wants it to.
-
+3D6 for an R5 or R6 Cyberjack.
There are two tables in the book. They have different numbers.
Page 177 is the correct one.
*forehead slap*
Right! Thank you.
-
"You're in Hot Sim" can win the Circumstantial Edge whenever the GM wants it to.
I totally agree with this idea. Similar to "Has night vision, and opponent doesn't."
-
Giving Cyberjacks extra initiative dice also seems to greatly devalue Hot Sim for deckers. If you can get +3D6 and four minors in cold sim, then hot sim doesn't look so good in risk vs reward. It actually makes me want to use Hot Sim as a tactical advantage Edge generator. Matrix is hurting for non-AR/DR generation sources anyway. I'd move the VCR edge generator to hot sim too.
"You're in Hot Sim" can win the Circumstantial Edge whenever the GM wants it to.
Anything can give edge whenever the GM wants to, but the CRB never mentions it as something worth edge. When I started playing SR6 I thought deckers got an edge for being in VR, and of course it was pointed out to me that this wasn't the case. Thinking more on it, maybe this should be limited to tests vs personas, like a spider defender, so we're not getting 1 edge on every round of Probe for example or Matrix Searching in hot sim. A hierarchy of Hot VR > Cold VR > No VR is probably a good rule of thumb and could apply evenly to riggers.
-
....or, you know, just be satisfied that higher initiative dice give you access to more minor actions.
Which, after all, is kinda the main reason why the street samurai might opt for wired reflexes or why the physical adept is using the improved reflexes power....
Personally I like when hackers (but also and snipers and riggers and astral magicians and faces etc and all other 'remote' characters) join the rest of the team inside. In case of the hacker, doing most their hacking directly via AR.
If the GM start to hand out edge just for being in hot sim then you are diminishing the incentive to hack from AR.
-
personally I would only award edge for being in hot sim VR only when you are going against a target or opponent that isn't, but I would also award being in VR in general if going against a target in AR ... it is all about representing who has the upper hand just because of circumstances.
-
...
If the GM start to hand out edge just for being in hot sim then you are diminishing the incentive to hack from AR.
It's a funny place to be, but I find myself thinking there's more than reason enough to be hacking from AR as is. So... the attempt to get the "decker out of the van" that's been in the works ever since 4e (if not earlier) has FINALLY been achieved as of 6e! That's actually a bit of a feather in a cap, really.
However, I think that "yeah we're finally there"... but it might have overshot just a SMIDGE and leaves too-little reason to use VR. Who needs the +init dice for VR when you can just have drugs or wired reflexes in AR to get an even better init score.
personally I would only award edge for being in hot sim VR only when you are going against a target or opponent that isn't, but I would also award being in VR in general if going against a target in AR ... it is all about representing who has the upper hand just because of circumstances.
Yes, this is exactly what I was alluding to... "you're in hot sim and the other guy isn't" is what I was implying in my last post. Hot Sim awards edge when your target is not. Cold Sim awards edge when your target is in AR.
-
....or, you know, just be satisfied that higher initiative dice give you access to more minor actions.
Hot Sim's got a risk associated with it though - Physical biofeedback and BTL addiction (in fluff only for now). When that was the only way to get a 2nd Major in VR, the risk/reward was good. If a cyberjack user gets a 2nd major in Cold sim, there's very little reason to embrace those dangers of Hot sim. Besides like I said, there's only one established way to accumulate Edge round-to-round in the Matrix. It could use more.
-
...Besides like I said, there's only one established way to gain Edge in the Matrix. It could use more.
Well. There's Matrix Attack Rating vs Matrix Defense Rating... and there's Analytical Mind.
There's also programs, but on reviewing those they appear to all be use-or-lose Edge gains.
-
....or, you know, just be satisfied that higher initiative dice give you access to more minor actions.
Hot Sim's got a risk associated with it though - Physical biofeedback and BTL addiction (in fluff only for now). When that was the only way to get a 2nd Major in VR, the risk/reward was good. If a cyberjack user gets a 2nd major in Cold sim, there's very little reason to embrace those dangers of Hot sim. Besides like I said, there's only one established way to accumulate Edge round-to-round in the Matrix. It could use more.
I have yet to run a scenario where a decker is not maximizing his edge on every action, unless he was in actual cybercombat with an "equal" opponent.
-
I have yet to run a scenario where a decker is not maximizing his edge on every action, unless he was in actual cybercombat with an "equal" opponent.
I ban Analytical Mind, so yeah I forgot about that "established" way to gain edge on most every action a decker does ever, but yes once you're up against someone that is moderately challenging, there's no way to gain edge. In physical combat, if your target has a high DR, there's still a million situational things you could do - get high ground, shoot out the lights, give them a status effect, flush them out of cover, flank them. In matrix you don't have those interesting options. When you come up on something challenging, you have no edge options.
-
All those things you mentioned could work just as well as Matrix analogues.
High ground = bringing the cybercombat to a familiar host/grid/etc.
Shoot out the lights = hack the security file so that the spider's credentials are called into question by the Host/IC
Flank = Superior numbers on your side (Spider + IC, Hacker + Sprites/Agents and/or more Hackers)
When it comes to hacking access rather than cybercombat:
Doing homework, doing homework, doing homework!
Learning the login procedures/patterns used by employees
Doing research on the physical matrix infrastructure of the building
Doing research on the specific software the host(s) use
and of course, having appropriate knowledge skills should be a common way to be awarded edge!
edge as an advantage is ultimately about creativity, not being codified in the rules.
-
All those things you mentioned could work just as well as Matrix analogues.
High ground = bringing the cybercombat to a familiar host/grid/etc.
Shoot out the lights = hack the security file so that the spider's credentials are called into question by the Host/IC
Flank = Superior numbers on your side (Spider + IC, Hacker + Sprites/Agents and/or more Hackers)
edge as an advantage is ultimately about creativity, not being codified in the rules.
Matrix chapter needs suggestions like these to lay some ground rules, because we're dealing with an environment that is completely foreign to us IRL and honestly, a completely arbitrary space that will be different from gm to gm.
I could see your suggestions making sense with some people and not with others:
Flank =/= superior numbers, its about positioning and there is no such thing in matrix, and besides matrix activity is usually a 1 PC affair.
Hacking security file of spider: sounds good but if the hacker can do this, they probably don't need to cause that's a matrix run in itself
bringing combat to familiar host/grid - not usually an option, since matrix work is often about breaking into a digital castle not cyberbattles across the matrix.
Learning the login procedures/patterns used by employees
Doing research on the physical matrix infrastructure of the building
Doing research on the specific software the host(s) use
and of course, having appropriate knowledge skills should be a common way to be awarded edge!
Now these are good suggestions, again the matrix chapter needs suggestions like these to lay some ground rules that gm's and pc's can have expectations around.
-
If a cyberjack user gets a 2nd major in Cold sim, there's very little reason to embrace those dangers of Hot sim...
Some people will invest essence and resources to get a cyberjack. In some cases they will be in cold sim. In some cases
they might still want that extra minor action beyond their two major actions and opt for hot sim. Similar to technomancers that go for the Overclocking echo.
Others will will not. Placing their priorities elsewhere. Perhaps they will compensate by using hot sim instead (which comes at its own price).
And then, on the other side of the spectrum, you might have a third group of people that have such a high focus on AR initiative (from adept powers, spells, chrome and/or drugs) that will be as fast (or perhaps even faster) in AR than they are in VR. But that typically mean they make other sacrifices...
Everything has a price.
(I am not totally against rewarding edge during an encounter if one side is having some sort of advantage over their opponent, for example by using hot sim while the other side is not, - I just don't think it is needed to reward a point of edge every turn just because someone happen to be in hot sim...)
-
(I am not totally against rewarding edge during an encounter if one side is having some sort of advantage over their opponent, for example by using hot sim while the other side is not, - I just don't think it is needed to reward a point of edge every turn just because someone happen to be in hot sim...)
Same, hence why I laid out Hot > Cold > AR but I could've been more clear. Same goes for Rigging. Just need to decide where to land on VR mode vs non-personas. But I've already thrown this thread too far off a tangent.
-
Re: maglocks, the errata suggests: "Hacking your way past one is probably the number one use of direct connection and using Spoof Command."
But, since Spoof command can be performed with Outsider access, why would one need the direct connection? Couldn't one just spot the "running silently" device via a Matrix Perception test and then Spoof it without the direct connection?
-
Re: maglocks, the errata suggests: "Hacking your way past one is probably the number one use of direct connection and using Spoof Command."
But, since Spoof command can be performed with Outsider access, why would one need the direct connection? Couldn't one just spot the "running silently" device via a Matrix Perception test and then Spoof it without the direct connection?
It depends on whether the maglock is meant to interact with people who are not logged in to the host.
Consider a maglock on the main entrance of the office building vs a maglock protecting an office inside a tenant corp facility on the 4th floor of that same office building.
The maglock on the main entrance is usually unlocked during business hours, but after-hours it still has to be accessible by janitorial staff, emergency response personnel, and etc. Either you give all these people access to the building host, or you simply have the maglock be visible from outside the building host. In this case, the maglock is outside the "event horizon" and you don't need to be inside the host to hack it.
On the other hand, up on the 4th floor NastiCorp has leased out all the space and deep inside their little warren, there's tight access controls into some office or such. Not only do they not want John Q Public in there, they don't even want each and every employee in there. So for starters, that maglock is only visible when you're already inside the NastiCorp host. It's inside an event horizon, and necessitates the direct connection if you're not going to hack into the NastiCorp host first.
-
since Spoof command can be performed with Outsider access...
Devices in this edition can be stand-alone, connected to a PAN, be on the matrix facing side of a host or they can be on the 'inside' of a host.
If they are stand alone, connected to a PAN or on the matrix facing side of a host then you can spoof commands to them without any consideration at all, but you can not take actions against icons on the 'inside' of a host unless you first enter the host (which typically require user or admin access, but not always) or use a direct connection.
Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside.
Optional rule: wireless direct connection
If you are within 10 meters of the device, can detect the device (see matrix perception), and the device is wireless enabled you can form a “wireless direct connection”
-
Re: maglocks, the errata suggests: "Hacking your way past one is probably the number one use of direct connection and using Spoof Command."
But, since Spoof command can be performed with Outsider access, why would one need the direct connection? Couldn't one just spot the "running silently" device via a Matrix Perception test and then Spoof it without the direct connection?
It depends on whether the maglock is meant to interact with people who are not logged in to the host.
Consider a maglock on the main entrance of the office building vs a maglock protecting an office inside a tenant corp facility on the 4th floor of that same office building.
<snip>
I understand your logic but respectfully suggest that interpretation is not consistent with the ground rules established earlier in the section describing what actions may be performed as an outsider.
From Banshee's guide we have ...
"Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection."
Earlier (page 1) of this thread I questioned the above "interaction" section and came away with the understanding that one *can* attempt to brick a device (aka Data Spike) because the Data Spike action is an Outsider action. I was told that those limitations were for actions taken "inside" the host. So, with respect to bricking someone's gun (a device "beyond the event horizon"), it is treated as an silent device which I can perceive and target even as an Outsider with a Matrix Perception test.
I suggest that the maglock is no different mechanically from the gun. It is simply a "device" on a "network" which I can perceive and take "outsider" actions against (and Spoof is an outsider action). My conclusion is that performing a Spoof against a maglock is mechanically no different from performing a Data Spike against a gun.
-
Re: maglocks, the errata suggests: "Hacking your way past one is probably the number one use of direct connection and using Spoof Command."
But, since Spoof command can be performed with Outsider access, why would one need the direct connection? Couldn't one just spot the "running silently" device via a Matrix Perception test and then Spoof it without the direct connection?
It depends on whether the maglock is meant to interact with people who are not logged in to the host.
Consider a maglock on the main entrance of the office building vs a maglock protecting an office inside a tenant corp facility on the 4th floor of that same office building.
<snip>
I understand your logic but respectfully suggest that interpretation is not consistent with the ground rules established earlier in the section describing what actions may be performed as an outsider.
From Banshee's guide we have ...
"Interaction - what does this include? In this case that means the only matrix action that you can directly take against any “inside” devices/icons is limited to Matrix Perception while being on the outside. All inside devices are considered to be running silent using the Host Rating+Sleaze of the Host as the opposed dice roll. To target any icon (persona, device, IC, nested sub-host, etc) on the inside you must first gain access via Brute Force, Backdoor Entry, or Direct Connection."
Earlier (page 1) of this thread I questioned the above "interaction" section and came away with the understanding that one *can* attempt to brick a device (aka Data Spike) because the Data Spike action is an Outsider action. I was told that those limitations were for actions taken "inside" the host. So, with respect to bricking someone's gun (a device "beyond the event horizon"), it is treated as an silent device which I can perceive and target even as an Outsider with a Matrix Perception test.
I suggest that the maglock is no different mechanically from the gun. It is simply a "device" on a "network" which I can perceive and take "outsider" actions against (and Spoof is an outsider action). My conclusion is that performing a Spoof against a maglock is mechanically no different from performing a Data Spike against a gun.
You would be correct IF the maglock is not protected by being insidecs host, but if it is inside the host event horizon your only choice is to gain access to the host OR use a direct connection to the lock to bypass that event horizon
-
You would be correct IF the maglock is not protected by being insidecs host, but if it is inside the host event horizon your only choice is to gain access to the host OR use a direct connection to the lock to bypass that event horizon
I'm obviously not understanding the difference between the Data Spike and Spoof interactions with respect to devices. I'm honestly trying to understand and not in any way trying to be argumentative.
Are you saying that the gun example is different because it it tied to a PAN and not a host (aka two different types of "networks")? So, I can perform an "outsider" action across the "event horizon" if it is targeting a device in someone's PAN but not a device in a host?
Again, to me, the gun is a device also "beyond the event horizon" yet we are treating it differently. I'm not seeing the reason that the gun and the maglock, both of which are beyond the event horizon, are rules-wise different. I'm super grateful for your efforts to help me understand.
-
The question of whether an icon is an eligible target is a seperate question than what access is required for an action.
If a device (gun, maglock, can of dragon piss, etc) is part of a PAN, then it can seen so long as the PAN can be seen.
This is not also true when it comes to hosts. If a device is slaved to a host, you usually have to first enter the host before you can even perceive that device's matrix icon. Ergo, if you can't even perceive it, it's not an eligible target and the issue of access is a non sequitur.
That phenomenon is what I called the "event horizon".
Now, as Banshee said, it's possible for a host-slaved device to NOT be behind the event horizon. Because rather often corps are going to want John Q Public to interact with a device yet you don't want to let everyone get inside your host in order to see the device in AR/VR so that they CAN interact with it. Traffic Lights. Vending Machines. Light switches. And yes, sometimes, maglocks.
-
The question of whether an icon is an eligible target is a seperate question than what access is required for an action.
If a device (gun, maglock, can of dragon piss, etc) is part of a PAN, then it can seen so long as the PAN can be seen.
This is not also true when it comes to hosts. If a device is slaved to a host, you usually have to first enter the host before you can even perceive that device's matrix icon. Ergo, if you can't even perceive it, it's not an eligible target and the issue of access is a non sequitur.
That phenomenon is what I called the "event horizon".
Now, as Banshee said, it's possible for a host-slaved device to NOT be behind the event horizon. Because rather often corps are going to want John Q Public to interact with a device yet you don't want to let everyone get inside your host in order to see the device in AR/VR so that they CAN interact with it. Traffic Lights. Vending Machines. Light switches. And yes, sometimes, maglocks.
Okay, so, to make it abundantly clear, there are three posibilities and here's how they related to outsider actions like Data Spike and Spoof.
1. PAN - If you can see the PAN, "outsider" actions are allowed.
2. Host/Outside - "outsider" actions are allowed.
3. Host/Inside - "outsider" actions are *not* allowed - must gain access to the host first.
Follow-up re: #1. I'm not perfectly clear on the Mungo example of what information is known about a PAN with and without a Matrix Perception test. Since Mungo's PAN is not running silently, the PAN is obviously visible. Would one see all the icon's/devices tied to his PAN automatically but just not know much about the details? Or are all the devices inside a PAN also considered to be running silently as if it were a host?
-
Re: maglocks, the errata suggests: "Hacking your way past one is probably the number one use of direct connection and using Spoof Command."
But, since Spoof command can be performed with Outsider access, why would one need the direct connection? Couldn't one just spot the "running silently" device via a Matrix Perception test and then Spoof it without the direct connection?
Basically, if I understand it correctly (and I may not), Banshee is just trying to come up with a maximum hacking distance for devices protected by hosts, while also letting you peek inside a host and have a look around at the IC and files and other virtual items without actually being in it, and protecting those icons from data spikes (outsider) that they wouldn't be able to retaliate against.
-
1. Yep.
2. Yep.
3. Yep.
Follow-up re: #1. I'm not perfectly clear on the Mungo example of what information is known about a PAN with and without a Matrix Perception test. Since Mungo's PAN is not running silently, the PAN is obviously visible. Would one see all the icon's/devices tied to his PAN automatically but just not know much about the details? Or are all the devices inside a PAN also considered to be running silently as if it were a host?
Of note: PANs do not have an event horizon in the way Hosts can/do. PANs cannot be entered, therefore you can't hide anything "inside" one.
Spotting Mungo's PAN means spotting all the devices in that PAN. If no spotting test is necessary (i.e. Mungo is physically nearby AND is not running silent) then neither is it necessary to roll to spot devices in his PAN.
Spotting an icon means it's eligible to be targeted with matrix actions. Information over and above "unlocking the icon so that it can be targeted by matrix actions" is covered by the Matrix Perception rules.
A successful test gives you information about the target. 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. Two net hits will give you more specific
information, including individual attribute ratings,
and what programs it is currently running. Additional
hits will give you more information based on what
the gamemaster wishes to reveal.
-
1. Yep.
2. Yep.
3. Yep.
Perfect! Thank you so much!!! :D
-
1. PAN - If you can see the PAN, "outsider" actions are allowed.
2. Host/Outside - "outsider" actions are allowed.
3. Host/Inside - "outsider" actions are *not* allowed - must gain access to the host first.
0. You also have a case where the device is stand alone and not connected to any network at all
1. Yep
2. Yep
3. Yep. You need to first either enter host (which typically require that you first gain access) or use a direct connection (which typically require physical proximity).
Which I think is what I already wrote above;
Devices in this edition can be stand-alone, connected to a PAN, be on the matrix facing side of a host or they can be on the 'inside' of a host.
If they are stand alone, connected to a PAN or on the matrix facing side of a host then you can spoof commands to them without any consideration at all, but you can not take actions against icons on the 'inside' of a host unless you first enter the host (which typically require user or admin access, but not always) or use a direct connection.
-
The question of whether an icon is an eligible target is a seperate question than what access is required for an action.
If a device (gun, maglock, can of dragon piss, etc) is part of a PAN, then it can seen so long as the PAN can be seen.
This is not also true when it comes to hosts. If a device is slaved to a host, you usually have to first enter the host before you can even perceive that device's matrix icon. Ergo, if you can't even perceive it, it's not an eligible target and the issue of access is a non sequitur.
That phenomenon is what I called the "event horizon".
Now, as Banshee said, it's possible for a host-slaved device to NOT be behind the event horizon. Because rather often corps are going to want John Q Public to interact with a device yet you don't want to let everyone get inside your host in order to see the device in AR/VR so that they CAN interact with it. Traffic Lights. Vending Machines. Light switches. And yes, sometimes, maglocks.
Okay, so, to make it abundantly clear, there are three posibilities and here's how they related to outsider actions like Data Spike and Spoof.
1. PAN - If you can see the PAN, "outsider" actions are allowed.
2. Host/Outside - "outsider" actions are allowed.
3. Host/Inside - "outsider" actions are *not* allowed - must gain access to the host first.
Follow-up re: #1. I'm not perfectly clear on the Mungo example of what information is known about a PAN with and without a Matrix Perception test. Since Mungo's PAN is not running silently, the PAN is obviously visible. Would one see all the icon's/devices tied to his PAN automatically but just not know much about the details? Or are all the devices inside a PAN also considered to be running silently as if it were a host?
correct, the whole "event horizon" limitation is only related to Hosts, and as Ming stated the game mechanic purpose is to promote Host security without also making a total pain in the butt for PC's just to figure out what they are up against.
as to your follow up ... just seeing a PAN (or even a host) that is not concealed or running silent is easy and does not require any roll. 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.
running silent is for the network and not based on devices
-
1. Yep.
2. Yep.
3. Yep.
Perfect! Thank you so much!!! :D
Actually, I just realized. Pedantically, #3 is technically "Not True". Explanation:
3. Host/Inside - "outsider" actions are *not* allowed - must gain access to the host first.
Pedantically... ACCESS is irrelevant to the scenario. You must ENTER the host in order to see icons that are not perceptible from outside the host. Yes, usually, you have to gain User or Admin access to perform the Enter Host matrix action. But remember: some hosts do allow Outsider Acccess for the "Enter Host" matrix action! (namely, any host that expects John Q Public to log into it. Online storefronts, Public Libraries, etc.)
So... it's possible to enter the host and therefore get behind the event horizon and see the icon inside, all without ever having gained increased access to that host.
Pedantically, for the answer to have accurately been "Yep!" the question would have had to have been worded as:
3. Host/Inside - "Outsider" actions are *not* allowed - must enter the host first.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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?
-
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?
-
The default in SR is that everyone is in AR so the Security Guard would have a Persona.
Edit: in fact, you don't even need DNI to have a Persona. If your Commlink is on, you've got a Persona Icon and you can interact with the Matrix by looking at the Commlink Screen and tapping commands in.
-
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?
You may have a single PAN from a Network security Point of View, just the "top level" would need to be hacked. But there would still be four Persona Icons, and the assorted Device Icons.
-
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.
well the wall acts in a similar way, though. While you can pick up the matrix signal through the wall (subject to noise and wireless negation, of course) you can't correlate those icons to physical objects just as easily as with physical perception unless you CAN physically perceive through that wall.
Mungo's looking at the wireless signals of a sec guard 5 meters away on the other side of a glass window? At 0 net hits, he can pick up those icons and because he can see effortlessly through the glass, he can correlate those icons (AROs) to physical objects.
Make no change to the scenario other than the wall has no transparent window, and suddenly Mungo needs that 1+ net hit to be able to identify what those icons all are.
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?
He'd still see all the devices' matrix signals. Still for free without any test necessary, if the physical distance between HackerX and the devices is still short (and again assuming a host event horizon isn't in play). However without any physical cues to correlate AROs with real-world objects, the signals all require 1+ net hit to identify in particular.
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?
All matrix users have personas, whether they're in AR or VR. So, yes, the security guard still has a persona even if he's not in VR. Frankly, the difference wouldn't even be obvious to HackerX if he were in VR, unable to see whether the Security guard is up and standing or slumped and comatose. Although a persona's current matrix user mode is absolutely a valid thing to learn via Matrix Perception on the icon... at whatever threshold of hits the GM deems appropriate. (personally, I'd say 2+ net hits ought to be about right, if you didn't ask the question, or 1+ net hits if you specifically asked that question)
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?
I hate to imagine it, I'd rather play where there just are no number of device limits.
But if put on the spot: one of those commlinks is subsumed into the Persona (as normal), and all the extras are just extra devices that happen to be commlinks.
-
But if put on the spot: one of those commlinks is subsumed into the Persona (as normal), and all the extras are just extra devices that happen to be commlinks.
Still need Persona Icons to do Matrix things (generally). The Persona Icons aren't subsumed when protected by a Host, they wouldn't nessisarily be subsumed when protected by a Cyberjack or better Commlink or Technomancer with the appropriate ability.
-
Edit: in fact, you don't even need DNI to have a Persona. If your Commlink is on, you've got a Persona Icon and you can interact with the Matrix by looking at the Commlink Screen and tapping commands in.
Per the clarifications on how AR Vertigo works... I do believe that if you're using a commlink the way we use smartphones in the real world (physically holding it up to your ear, physically tapping it to manipulate apps) you're not even "in" AR matrix user mode. At that level of luddite interaction, I don't believe you would have a persona.
-
But if put on the spot: one of those commlinks is subsumed into the Persona (as normal), and all the extras are just extra devices that happen to be commlinks.
Still need Persona Icons to do Matrix things (generally). The Persona Icons aren't subsumed when protected by a Host, they wouldn't nessisarily be subsumed when protected by a Cyberjack or better Commlink or Technomancer with the appropriate ability.
Yeah I think it's still technically unclear whether there is any difference between commlink icon and Persona. Is it POSSIBLE to dataspike the commlink specifically, without affecting the Persona matrix CM? I don't think it should be possible, but also I don't think it's ever specified.
-
Edit: in fact, you don't even need DNI to have a Persona. If your Commlink is on, you've got a Persona Icon and you can interact with the Matrix by looking at the Commlink Screen and tapping commands in.
Per the clarifications on how AR Vertigo works... I do believe that if you're using a commlink the way we use smartphones in the real world (physically holding it up to your ear, physically tapping it to manipulate apps) you're not even "in" AR matrix user mode. At that level of luddite interaction, I don't believe you would have a persona.
Have to have a Persona Icon to do Matrix things otherwise AR Deckers get super dumb and just use an old fashioned keyboard and lol at IC and Spiders. "Can't get me, I'm in a Turtle!"
RAW Matrix Actions are based around Matrix Attributes. You have to have some kind of Icon with Matrix Attributes doing Matrix things. If you want to call it a Device Icon for a Commlink, sure, whatever. There isn't a meaningful mechanical difference between a Persona Icon in AR and a Commlink Device Icon stand in that I can think of off the top of my head.
It does all the things a Persona Icon does, has the same mechanical stats as your Persona Icon does. Call it whatever you'd like, I'm calling it a Persona Icon. : )
-
But if put on the spot: one of those commlinks is subsumed into the Persona (as normal), and all the extras are just extra devices that happen to be commlinks.
Still need Persona Icons to do Matrix things (generally). The Persona Icons aren't subsumed when protected by a Host, they wouldn't nessisarily be subsumed when protected by a Cyberjack or better Commlink or Technomancer with the appropriate ability.
Yeah I think it's still technically unclear whether there is any difference between commlink icon and Persona. Is it POSSIBLE to dataspike the commlink specifically, without affecting the Persona matrix CM? I don't think it should be possible, but also I don't think it's ever specified.
If the Persona was formed with the Commlink (Cyberdeck, RCC) it's the same Icon I would think.
-
Yeah I think it's still technically unclear whether there is any difference between commlink icon and Persona. Is it POSSIBLE to dataspike the commlink specifically, without affecting the Persona matrix CM? I don't think it should be possible, but also I don't think it's ever specified.
If the Persona was formed with the Commlink (Cyberdeck, RCC) it's the same Icon I would think.
In my imagination, if a user is carrying a commlink but not using it's AR/VR capabilities, then on the matrix it would just appear as a device icon (not a persona). As it moved around, the icon for the commlink would just bob around. :D
-
...maybe in the next sentence stating what he sees in this overlay
There are potentially hundred of different electronic devices and files networked to any regular PAN.
If you wish you can choose to see all of them at once... but this tend to be a bit overwhelming.
Most people instead choose to filter out icons that they are not particularly interested in at the moment.
According to what we've been saying, he already knows what the devices are...
He knows that it is "some sort of firearm". Iconography is very intuitive and helpful when it comes to things like this.
This is no different from if the street samurai would have just glanced over the guard using his regular perception.
SR6 p. 173 Icons
Icons generally follow guidelines to resemble the class of object they represent.
Looking at the icons more in detail reveal more detail, such as the weapon being "a Colt America L36 light pistol".
But this would the street samurai also find out if he spend an observe in detail action with his regular perception.
You understand the difference between what is immediately obvious that you pick up when just glancing over the scenery and what you can find out if you spend the time and effort to observe something in detail?
In most cases you can just treat matrix perception as you would treat regular perception...
...the security guard would not have a persona since he's not also in VR.
You will normally show up with a matrix persona icon as soon as you connected to the matrix (no matter if you are in AR or VR). Most people you run into on the street (like Bob the security guard) will pretty much always be connected to the matrix (= having a PAN / a persona icon).
Quick question on daisy-chaining commlinks to have the team decker protect them: What does this look like in the matrix?
Each commlink, cyberdeck or RCC used to access the matrix with typically represent a person. No matter if they are part of a larger network or not. The Iconography state that they will be represented by some sort of sapient being;
SR6 p. 173 Icons
Icons that represent personas (see Personas, Devices, and Attributes, below) are supposed to be some sort of sapient being, though that can still get pretty wild; cat-headed people, humanoid trees, and shapeshifting robots are all forms you might encounter, along with the (relatively rare) people who just like to look like themselves.
Yeah I think it's still technically unclear whether there is any difference between commlink icon and Persona. Is it POSSIBLE to dataspike the commlink specifically, without affecting the Persona matrix CM?
It seem as if the persona's CM will be the same CM as the device (commlik, RCC, cyberdeck) used to access the matrix with. If this specific device (=your persona) is bricked then you will be booted out of the matrix (possible suffering dump shock).
There isn't a meaningful mechanical difference between a Persona Icon in AR and a Commlink Device Icon
As I see it....
A wireless enabled but unattended and unused commlink will be represented by a small device icon (that visually probably look similar to that of a small smartphone). It is immediately obvious that this is a device.
A wireless enabled commlink that someone is actually using to access the matrix with will be represented by the users's matrix persona - which look like a human sized sapient being of sorts. It is immediately obvious that this represent a persona (but I guess it might be tricky to tell if it is actually a real user, an agent program, a sprite or an IC etc)
In my imagination, if a user is carrying a commlink but not using it's AR/VR capabilities, then on the matrix it would just appear as a device icon (not a persona). As it moved around, the icon for the commlink would just bob around. :D
Even back in 2020 most people were connected to the internet via their smartphones 24/7.
Not often someone would not be "logged on" to their smartphone and just carry it with them as dead weight.
It is pretty safe to assume that most people in 2080 will be connected to the matrix....
You kinda need to be if you want to see augmented reality and if you wish to broadcast your SIN etc.
This is from SR5, but I don't think this part changed:
SR5 p. 222 Life with a commlink
Stores have their logos blazoned in 3D above their door, restaurants offer animated menus complete with tantalizing images of their food, street names hover over every intersection, decorators use AR objects to spruce up interiors, all viewable in AR for anyone who has the capability, which is pretty much everybody. The unintended side effect is that things can look a bit dingy when you turn off your AR display, but that’s the price of progress.
-
SR5 p. 222 Life with a commlink
Stores have their logos blazoned in 3D above their door, restaurants offer animated menus complete with tantalizing images of their food, street names hover over every intersection, decorators use AR objects to spruce up interiors, all viewable in AR for anyone who has the capability, which is pretty much everybody. The unintended side effect is that things can look a bit dingy when you turn off your AR display, but that’s the price of progress.
Great reference! Thanks! And while almost all are walking around with AR on, a few might not. Perhaps they are technophobes, get dizzy from all the ARO's, etc. In that case, I think there is just a bobbing device icon. :D
-
He knows that it is "some sort of firearm". Iconography is very intuitive and helpful when it comes to things like this.
This is no different from if the street samurai would have just glanced over the guard using his regular perception.
SR6 p. 173 Icons
Icons generally follow guidelines to resemble the class of object they represent.
Looking at the icons more in detail reveal more detail, such as the weapon being "a Colt America L36 light pistol".
But this would the street samurai also find out if he spend an observe in detail action with his regular perception.
This makes sense. I don't think "class of object" is ever defined somewhere, so I guess we would need to use our best judgement? For example, if I casually glanced at someone, I could easily detect the difference between a light pistol and a rocket launcher, but maybe not between a light pistol and heavy pistol. Although, at a glance I could see the difference between a hold-out pistol and a heavy pistol. So, I get what you are saying but it seems to me that "some sort of firearm" is too broad.
Alternately, a GM I suppose could group devices into categories of objects like ...
Weapon: melee, projectile, firearms, grenades, rockets, missiles, etc.
Weapon Accessory: smartlink, imaging scope, silencer, etc.
Armor: armor mods, chameleon suit, riot shield, etc.
Augmentation: cyberware, bioware, etc.
Vehicle/Drone: Ares Roadmaster, Cessna c750, MCT Hornet, etc.
Sensory Device: optical/auditory devices, sensors, etc.
Tool: survival gear, B&E gear, biotech, etc.
Other Electronic: anything not belonging to any other category
-
I don't think "class of object" is ...
Basic Matrix protocols require device icons to provide some hint of their real-life function. A firearm’s icon looks like a weapon (even if that weapon is a tomahawk, like the icon of the Super Warhawk pistol), a vehicle’s icon looks like a vehicle (often in the form of a miniature version of the real deal, but the Ares Mobmaster riot control vehicle, for example, is famous for its unorthodox Roman chariot icon complete with reins to drive the vehicle), a lock’s icon looks like a lock (but even if it is a hightech maglock the device icon might for example have the form of an old school padlock), a refrigerator looks like a cold box for food, etc. The restrictions on devices are typically not as stringent as on personas, as long as form suggests function at a glance.
-
Quick question on daisy-chaining commlinks to have the team decker protect them: What does this look like in the matrix?
Each commlink, cyberdeck or RCC used to access the matrix with typically represent a person. No matter if they are part of a larger network or not. The Iconography state that they will be represented by some sort of sapient being;
Follow-up question on daisy-chaining. Wouldn't this strategy have the added benefit that if one wanted to gain User/Admin access to the PAN, they would need to access each nested PAN in sequence? So, if Commlink-D networked to Commlink-C to Commlink-B to Commlink-A, then HackerX would have to Brute Force into A, then B, then C, then D before getting Admin access to D?
-
While not shadowrun, this video might still give you an idea of what augmented reality might look like:
https://vimeo.com/166807261
-
While not shadowrun, this video might still give you an idea of what augmented reality might look like:
https://vimeo.com/166807261
That was a really fun video to watch! Thanks for sharing! :D
-
Iconography: I get the feeling SSDR sees AR iconography and VR iconography differently and Xenon does not. When I look at a guard with a Ruger Super Warhawk in AR, does it look like he's carrying a pistol, with a hovering ARO for ammo counter and maybe safety indicator or something, or does it look like he's holding a tomahawk?
-
Iconography: I get the feeling SSDR sees AR iconography and VR iconography differently and Xenon does not. When I look at a guard with a Ruger Super Warhawk in AR, does it look like he's carrying a pistol, with a hovering ARO for ammo counter and maybe safety indicator or something, or does it look like he's holding a tomahawk?
Based on official artwork it could look either way.
For me personally AR never 100% masks a real object so a pistol will still look like a pistol in AR but it might have a different skin or overlay that enhances or alters it.
-
When I look at a guard with a Ruger Super Warhawk in AR, does it look like he's carrying a pistol, with a hovering ARO for ammo counter and maybe safety indicator or something, or does it look like he's holding a tomahawk?
As I see it;
When you "just glance" at the guard (without spending any action) you will probably notice that the guard carry some sort of holstered weapon (but without taking a closer look you will probably not recognize details, such as the specific type and model).
If you are interested to find out more specific details, for example what type of type and model, you would typically "spend an action" to actually study the weapon more in detail. By doing this (and taking a perception test, either physical perception or matrix perception) you might find out that it is specifically a Ruger Super Warhawk.
My point is that it doesn't really matter if we are talking about a physically looking at the guard and his holstered weapon (observe in detail with physical perception), if we are talking about virtually looking at the guard's PAN and the weapon's icon via AR (observe in detail with matrix perception) or if we are talking about virtually looking at the guard's PAN and the weapon's icon via VR (observe in detail with matrix perception). In 6th edition we would typically treat all three scenarios in a similar manner.
Also, most device icons are probably just sculpted as the real deal - and if this make it easier for you to grasp then just rule that all device icons are always represented by an icon that looks like the real deal (in fact - that would make more sense to me as well...)
I am sorry if I confused anyone with the "Roman chariot" and the "Tomahawk" examples. Only reason why I brought them up in the first place was because 5th edition (unlike 6th edition) actually explained iconography and basic matrix protocols (on a few different locations). And it also gave use some very specific examples:
SR5 p. 219 Devices
Device icons in the Matrix represent electronic devices in the real world, from your music player to your commlink to your car and beyond. By default, a device’s icon looks like the object it represents, in miniature if the real thing is larger than a person. It has controls of some kind, often the same controls it has in meat space, but not necessarily. The Ares Mobmaster riot control vehicle, for example, is famous for its unorthodox Roman chariot icon complete with reins to drive the vehicle.
Basic Matrix protocols require device icons to provide some hint of their real-life function. A firearm’s icon looks like a weapon (even if that weapon is a tomahawk, like the icon of the Super Warhawk pistol), a vehicle’s icon looks like a vehicle, a lock’s icon looks like a lock, a refrigerator looks like a cold box for food, etc. The restrictions on devices aren’t as stringent as on personas, as long as form suggests function at a glance.
So by default, in 5th edition, most icons simply looked like the real deal, but there were also some distinct exceptions (such as the Mobmaster and the Warhawk) that while still suggested function were not really miniature versions of the original object. Perhaps this is no longer valid for SR6. I honestly don't know (...but it seem to be the case as: "Icons generally follow guidelines to resemble the class of object they represent" SR6 p. 173 Icons).
...but frankly it doesn't really matter how the specific icon is sculpted. Your character still instinctively know that a weapon is a weapon (just by glancing over the physical guard or the guard's virtual PAN) and your character know that a Ruger Super Warhawk is a Ruger Super Warhawk, not a Tomahawk (at least long as your character spend an action to actually, either physically or virtually, observe it in detail).
Hell..... since the Ruger Super Redhawk seem to have such an unique sculpturing then maybe (but perhaps only if you have the correct knowledge skill or owned one yourself) you would even realize that it is specifically a Ruger Super Warhawk just by glancing over the guard's PAN (while for other devices of the same "class" you would typically have to study them more in detail to find out... perhaps just because their icons would be more generic and harder to distinguish without first observing them in detail).
-
Just found this thread and would like to say thank you for some clarification on things. Have shared it with my GMs.
I do have a question and a comment on things brought up by others though.
1) The document mentions that Data Spike for Mungo had a DV of 5/2, rounded to 3. However the description of Data Spike says that DV is based off Attack Rating and not Attack attribute. I know that this is only an example but which is correct?
2) In regards to the dice for Initiative from a Cyberjack/going Hot-sim. I would probably rule that Matrix damage to the Cyberjack removes the bonus, on a sliding scale. Going hot-sim would be a way to counter that loss.
3) Stainless Steel Devil Rat, mentioned that PANs cannot be entered. However through the Mungo/Tattoo example that is done by both Mungo and Tattoo.
Anyway as I said again, thank you.
-
Data Spike was errataed to be Attack Attribute / 2.
Data Spike
(illegal) Cracking + Logic
vs. Data Processing + Firewall (Major)
Outsider/User/Admin
You send harmful instructions to a persona or
device, causing Matrix damage to the target. Your
attack has a Damage Value equal to your [Attack
Attribute/2, rounded up], with one additional box
of damage per net hit.
-
Stainless Steel Devil Rat, mentioned that PANs cannot be entered.
Which is correct.
There is no actual Enter PAN or Exit PAN action...
Let me expand a bit on this.
When it comes to PANs you might say that you are considered connected to all devices that are part of the PAN and are allowed to take any actions on them as long as you have the correct access level on the network they are all connected to. When it comes to PANs you don't actually also need to 'Enter' the network.
When it comes to Hosts you might say that you are also considered to be connected to all devices and are allowed to take any actions on them by having the correct access level on the network, but for Hosts this is actually only true for specifically matrix facing devices (you could say that matrix facing devices are treated similar to devices that are part of a personal area network).
Having said that, to interact with devices on the inside of the Host (or to interact with inner layered Hosts in a layered onion network of hosts) you not only need the correct access level for that action, you typically also need to first actually take the 'Enter Host' action (the exception to this would be if you, typically via physical proximity, establish a 'Direct Connection'... as this let you interact with them in a similar manner as if you had first actually Entered the Host - but without actually Entering the Host).
For reference please compare my Mungo example ('just' brute forcing access on the Guard's PAN without actually entering it) with my Spike example (brute forcing access on the host but then also actually Enters the Host before he is allowed to interact with the drone located beyond the event horizon of the host / on the 'inside' of the host).
-
Stainless Steel Devil Rat, mentioned that PANs cannot be entered.
Which is correct.
There is no actual Enter PAN or Exit PAN action...
Let me expand a bit on this
...snip...
To segue on this post: I'd like to stress/reiterate that access is not the same thing as entering.
You can gain access to PANs. You can gain access to Hosts. But only Hosts may be entered.
Also: remember that some hosts are configured to allow Outsiders to execute the Enter Host action, so there isn't any direct correlation at all between having access and entering!
-
Data Spike was errataed to be Attack Attribute / 2.
Data Spike
(illegal) Cracking + Logic
vs. Data Processing + Firewall (Major)
Outsider/User/Admin
You send harmful instructions to a persona or
device, causing Matrix damage to the target. Your
attack has a Damage Value equal to your [Attack
Attribute/2, rounded up], with one additional box
of damage per net hit.
Can you please advise which errata this was in both the ones on Catalysts resources pages, Feb 2020 and Aug 2019, do not contain this. If I am missing an errata document that includes this, I am probably missing other changes.
-
Can you please advise which errata this was in both the ones on Catalysts resources pages, Feb 2020 and Aug 2019, do not contain this. If I am missing an errata document that includes this, I am probably missing other changes.
YUP. Some changes that went into the errata'd Feb 2020 PDF edition of the CRB were NOT included in the errata file. Why they did that I can't say. This correction was introduced in the Feb 2020 PDF but NOT the Feb 2020 errata.
-
Even more confused now, I purchased my pdf copy direct from the Catalyst store in April, and it has a lot of the Errata from the Feb 2020 already. It still says that Data Spike is based on Attack Rating. How do I tell which version of the PDF I have or are even ordering if I try to get it from another website?
-
Even more confused now, I purchased my pdf copy direct from the Catalyst store in April, and it has a lot of the Errata from the Feb 2020 already. It still says that Data Spike is based on Attack Rating. How do I tell which version of the PDF I have or are even ordering if I try to get it from another website?
Oh wow. Uhh.. I dunno! I also got my copy from the catalyst store, back when it came out, and downloaded updated versions with each errata. My copy has the corrected text for Data Spike on pg.181. The only help I can think of is that they have bungled those updates... when I received a download link, they had a zipped and non-zipped version, and the zipped version contained the wrong version of the PDF.
-
Even more confused now, I purchased my pdf copy direct from the Catalyst store in April, and it has a lot of the Errata from the Feb 2020 already. It still says that Data Spike is based on Attack Rating. How do I tell which version of the PDF I have or are even ordering if I try to get it from another website?
Check the Contents and Credits section, lower left corner of page 5. The most recent version will say "Corrected Second Printing". This version says Data Spike is derived from the Attack Attribute and is an Attack-linked Action. Whereas the pre-Jan 2020 version will say "First Printing", and that version says Data Spike is derived from Attack Rating and omits the Attack-linked mechanic. I can't guarantee that there's not a third version running around, but I'm not aware of any.
I got my copy thru Drivethrurpg, so I can't say I know 100% for sure that the Catalyst store will give you updated pdfs if you bought the original one, but I know they SAY they do!
-
I got my copy thru Drivethrurpg, so I can't say I know 100% for sure that the Catalyst store will give you updated pdfs if you bought the original one, but I know they SAY they do!
The Catalyst Store provides the correct version as well.
As I recall, there was a significant delay between one of the errata updates and the release on DriveThru.
-
I can't guarantee that there's not a third version running around, but I'm not aware of any.
I got my copy thru Drivethrurpg, so I can't say I know 100% for sure that the Catalyst store will give you updated pdfs if you bought the original one, but I know they SAY they do!
Looks like I have a third version that states, First Printing, had the Attack-linked mechanic but says Data Spike is derived from Attack Rating. Every time I posting about this, I am checking it over and over, just to make sure I am not going crazy.
-
The Catalyst store is down right now apparently but I'd recommend downloading it again from there when you get the chance... and if they give you the option of zip vs not zipped, download both and look for second printing.
-
Have done so, and now have the Corrected Second Printing. Thank you for helping, and sorry for hijacking the thread.
-
Thanks for letting me know. I just downloaded the 2nd printing.
Question:
I need some help, where is the information on Agent (software), index says 271. Also done the find/search and can't find it. I know I have read it before, but can't find it. Getting ready for a game tomorrow.
Regards,
SL
-
I need some help, where is the information on Agent (software), index says 271. Also done the find/search and can't find it. I know I have read it before, but can't find it. Getting ready for a game tomorrow.
Page 184
-
Agents got errata'd out, as they were mentioned (and iirc, priced) but no rules were ever given for them.
They got punted to the upcoming Matrix book, rather than finding room to give them rules in the CRB.
-
So to summarize:
1: Physical book.
2: Initial PDF, with August errata implement.
3a: January PDF.
3b: February Errata file.
And unfortunately the (01-20) PDF and the Feb errata are slightly mismatching.
It seems I missed the Attack Rating vs Attack Attribute on my compare, apologies, let me add it: https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=31170.msg536323#msg536323
-
SSDR,
Thanks, I though I had lost my mind or something.
Regards,
SL
-
SSDR,
Thanks, I though I had lost my mind or something.
Regards,
SL
Well, to be fair... ;D
-
MC,
If I had feelings, that might have hurt one of them. :)
Best,
SL
-
Quick question: How am I supposed to to bring registered Sprites into Hosts if they are already active with me? Since they're personas, do they need get their own access using Probe or Brute Force?
-
Quick question: How am I supposed to to bring registered Sprites into Hosts if they are already active with me? Since they're personas, do they need get their own access using Probe or Brute Force?
By my understanding, access is not transferrable to other personas (just as marks were not transferrable in 5e). That would mean that Sprites outside the host would have to perform their own Enter Host matrix action. And that in turn means yes they need their own access... assuming of course the Host doesn't let Outsiders perform the Enter Host action. Bear in mind that many public hosts do! (doesn't make very good business sense to require customers to hack into your host in order to order anything from you online...)
Of course, once you're in you're in. If, for example, you compiled a Sprite after you already entered a secure Host, that Sprite doesn't have to execute the Enter Host action now does it.
-
As far as I understand it work like this (I might be wrong though):
- If the Host allow outsider access then it will follow you inside the host.
- If host require User or Admin access to enter then you can put a registered sprite on standby and once inside you call them.
- Or you compile an unregistered sprite while you are inside the host.
- Or you the sprite brute force + enter host or probe + backdoor entry the host on its own, using its own access.
-
Right, it does make sense. And i only just realised that it if course also means that even if you compile a sprite inside the host, it doesn't have your access levels, so if say you want it to crack a file it needs to elevate its access. Right?
-
Right, it does make sense. And i only just realised that it if course also means that even if you compile a sprite inside the host, it doesn't have your access levels, so if say you want it to crack a file it needs to elevate its access. Right?
yep.
-
Another quick one:
on page 176 for OS and Convergence the rules say that OS increases for illegal actions for each hit on the opposing roll.
However, in the example beneath it says that mungo gets 6 OS from opposing hits AND 3 OS from illegal actions, one of which is "Check overwatch score" which doesn't even allow for an opposing roll.
So am I to conclude from this that any illegal action performed always results in at least 1 point of OS plus the OS score from any potential opposing hits, if the action allows for an opposing roll?
I also just looked at Banshee's guide which has me still confused:
"Mungo’s player rolls his 10 dice and gains 3 successes. GM opposes the test with 5 dice and gets 2 hits. Mungo’s Data Spike lands with a total of 1 net hit. GM notes that Mungo’s overwatch score increased by 2 from the defense and by another point because of the hacking program that was used."
This implies that it's just opposing hits and hacking program.
"Mungo’s player lucks out with 4 hits while the opposing side gets 3 hits. GM notes that Mungo’s overwatch score increased to 7, three from the opposing defense and again another point due to the hacking program being used. "
Same here.
"Snoop is resolved as an opposed Cracking + Logic vs Logic + Firewall test. Mungo’s player gets 3 hits while the opposing side gets 1 hit. GM notes that Mungo’s overwatch score increased to 9. "
Here it increases by 2 even though there's only 1 opposing hit and no mention of the hacking program although we might assume that he still uses it.
So I'm really not sure how it's supposed to work. If it's just opposing hits, though, then what's the consequence of labelling some actions without opposing rolls as illegal? Is it just for flavour, then?
-
Some of the examples on tallying Overwatch score are not compliant with the rules as given on pg. 176. I'm pretty sure this is due to the rules evolving thru playtest/development and the example text fell through the editing cracks.
Take the rules here as gospel, and where the examples don't match, go with the rules.
So I'm really not sure how it's supposed to work. If it's just opposing hits, though, then what's the consequence of labelling some actions without opposing rolls as illegal? Is it just for flavour, then?
So you gain OS from:
Any matrix action where you benefitted from a hacking cyberprogram (+1 OS per action)
Maintaining hacked access (+1 OS/round for User Access; +3 OS/round for Admin access)
Performing illegal matrix actions (+1 OS per hit on the opposing roll)
So, for example:
If Mungo throws a Data Spike at a goon's gun, he gains however much OS as there were hits in the resistance test because it's an illegal action. 0 hits = 0 OS. 10 hits = 10 OS.
If he used the Exploit hacking cyberprogram to lower the Matrix Defense Rating for the target of the Data Spike, then that's +1 OS.
If he used multiple hacking cyberprograms, it's still only +1 OS, as the language says it's per "action modified" and not "per hacking program employed"
If he had previously hacked the goon's PAN and had gained access, he gains +1/+3 OS as well for the round, even though that didn't come directly from the Data Spike.
-
I am inclined to say that the example in core where the hacker gain OS from checking overwatch score (which is a simple threshold test, not an opposed test) is wrong and that checking this will not cause overwatch in itself (as there are no opposed hits).
That perhaps check OS should be re-labeled into "(Legal) Cracking" rather than "Illegal (Cracking)"
Similar to Disarm Data Bomb action. Which I personally think make sense.
(but then you should perhaps also revisit Jam Signals.... Should this also be a (Legal) Cracking action perhaps? Not equally sure about this one to be honest.... Perhaps Jam Signals should, unlike the other two, always generate 3 points of Overwatch, or something like that.... I don't know)
-
I am inclined to say that the example in core where the hacker gain OS from checking overwatch score (which is a simple threshold test, not an opposed test) is wrong and that checking this will not cause overwatch in itself (as there are no opposed hits).
That perhaps check OS should be re-labeled into "(Legal) Cracking" rather than "Illegal (Cracking)"
Similar to Disarm Data Bomb action. Which I personally think make sense.
(but then you should perhaps also revisit Jam Signals.... Should this also be a (Legal) Cracking action perhaps? Not equally sure about this one to be honest.... Perhaps Jam Signals should, unlike the other two, always generate 3 points of Overwatch, or something like that.... I don't know)
Not only that, but also the Hash search is understandably an illegal action without an opposed test. Should that also be labeled legal then? Strictly going by the rules would mean this doesn't cause OS. Is that how it's supposed to be?
-
I am inclined to say that the example in core where the hacker gain OS from checking overwatch score (which is a simple threshold test, not an opposed test) is wrong and that checking this will not cause overwatch in itself (as there are no opposed hits).
That perhaps check OS should be re-labeled into "(Legal) Cracking" rather than "Illegal (Cracking)"
Similar to Disarm Data Bomb action. Which I personally think make sense.
(but then you should perhaps also revisit Jam Signals.... Should this also be a (Legal) Cracking action perhaps? Not equally sure about this one to be honest.... Perhaps Jam Signals should, unlike the other two, always generate 3 points of Overwatch, or something like that.... I don't know)
Not only that, but also the Hash search is understandably an illegal action without an opposed test. Should that also be labeled legal then? Strictly going by the rules would mean this doesn't cause OS. Is that how it's supposed to be?
Going by the rules: it's correct to say Hash Check doesn't generate Overwatch Score directly. However since you must maintain User access level, you must still necessarily gain at least 1 OS for maintaining User access in that Host for the round. And given its special rules, it may take multiple rounds.
So... yes it's an oddity that Hash Check is labelled Illegal. I believe that at one time prior to publication, the OS rules were such that any illegal task generated an automatic 1 OS. Obviously since then it evolved to the rule as-is. Just like certain examples regarding illegal actions and OS now being erroneous/obsolete, soo to might be Hash Check's status as illegal... esp. since it conflicts with the rule of thumb that Illegal actions use the Cracking skill whereas Hash Check uses Electronics (normally used for Legal actions). Does it need fixing? Meh. The purist's view might be to consider it a Legal action instead, but what does that really gain you other than an added bit of arcana for your own house rules document? Also... changing it to Legal might have unforseen 2nd order effects once the Matrix expansion book comes down the line. My personal view is this is something that is odd but doesn't really need fixing.
-
I am inclined to say that the example in core where the hacker gain OS from checking overwatch score (which is a simple threshold test, not an opposed test) is wrong and that checking this will not cause overwatch in itself (as there are no opposed hits).
That perhaps check OS should be re-labeled into "(Legal) Cracking" rather than "Illegal (Cracking)"
Similar to Disarm Data Bomb action. Which I personally think make sense.
(but then you should perhaps also revisit Jam Signals.... Should this also be a (Legal) Cracking action perhaps? Not equally sure about this one to be honest.... Perhaps Jam Signals should, unlike the other two, always generate 3 points of Overwatch, or something like that.... I don't know)
Not only that, but also the Hash search is understandably an illegal action without an opposed test. Should that also be labeled legal then? Strictly going by the rules would mean this doesn't cause OS. Is that how it's supposed to be?
Yes that is intentional ... afterall not everything you will doing should attract a lot of GOD attention, that's why we have the "maintaining access" accumulation which is the basic background slow build, then you have the illegal use of hacking programs which tic up a little faster .. then you have the opposed illegal action which really attraxt the attention since you are actively engaging the system.
As for the examples... the CRB were not written by me and most likely done before final version was complete so the examples that are in the Guide are correct as I intended them to be (btw Xenon did the actual writing of the examples for those thatcwant or need to know)
-
oh Thanks Banshee for chiming in!
that's why we have the "maintaining access" accumulation which is the basic background slow build
except when you get access via backdoor entry in which case you can hash check to your heart's content right?
-
except when you get access via backdoor entry in which case you can hash check to your heart's content right?
From a Grid Overwatch Division Point of View, perhaps, yes.
But if Patrol IC or Spider in the local host you just invaded notice you then it will be immediately obvious for them that you don't belong, so.....
-
except when you get access via backdoor entry in which case you can hash check to your heart's content right?
From a Grid Overwatch Division Point of View, perhaps, yes.
But if Patrol IC or Spider in the local host you just invaded notice you then it will be immediately obvious for them that you don't belong, so.....
Yep
-
Brute Force
...Using Brute Force will always alert the device you are attempting to gain access to, so GOD score accumulates with each test...
I got a question about Brute Force.
So, let's say I am the owner of the device, right? And I notice someone is trying to Brute Force my device, why don't I just turn off the wireless function of my device? Anything stop me to do that? Does that make Brute Force essentially useless?
-
Brute force is resolved in a single action. By the time you notice the attack the hacker already have access.
And since the device is probably part of (and defended by) your personal area network the hacker will now have access on the entire network. Not just a single device. And also not just wireless enabled devices (the hacker also have access on wireless disabled devices that are using a wired connection to your network).
Disconnecting a single device (from both the matrix and your network) might prevent the hacker from controlling that specific device, but if you want the hacker out of your PAN then you basically need to reboot your entire network (which is typically done by rebooting the device you used to access the matrix with).
-
Brute Force
...Using Brute Force will always alert the device you are attempting to gain access to, so GOD score accumulates with each test...
I got a question about Brute Force.
So, let's say I am the owner of the device, right? And I notice someone is trying to Brute Force my device, why don't I just turn off the wireless function of my device? Anything stop me to do that? Does that make Brute Force essentially useless?
That was a problem in 5e, yes.
However some key things changed in this edition: A) it's not a free action anymore to turn wireless off B) You can't turn multiple things off at once C) it's an electronics test to succeed, not an automatic success anymore.
So if you brute force a PAN, the victim has to spend minor actions to turn off each device they're worried you'll hack. You already scored access to all of them by succeeding on the PAN in the first place.
Even if they do this, you scored an action economy nerf on your target at the very minimum. Costing someone actions mid-combat is always a win.
-
Speaking of Matrix Damage: It applies penalties to all tests using the device. So say I Data Spike a gun and do 6 damage, then the owner turns the gun offline: The way I read it, the Matrix Damage means they still take the -2 penalty on shooting?
-
Yes, that's also a change from last edition. Matrix damage isn't all or nothing anymore... matrix condition monitor damage applies to physical world actions too now.
-
Hey guys, I'm confused as to what Matrix actions give Edge for a higher attack value.
From Banshee's guide, it seems like almost all actions give the Edge. For example, even non-combat actions like 'Trace Icons' give edge. It leads me to assume that all Matrix actions with an opposed test can give Edge. But it's not that, because it doesn't seem to work for Matrix perception.
So how do we determine if a Matrix action gives Edge?
-
Hey guys, I'm confused as to what Matrix actions give Edge for a higher attack value.
From Banshee's guide, it seems like almost all actions give the Edge. For example, even non-combat actions like 'Trace Icons' give edge. It leads me to assume that all Matrix actions with an opposed test can give Edge. But it's not that, because it doesn't seem to work for Matrix perception.
So how do we determine if a Matrix action gives Edge?
You're right, any opposed check has the potential for granting edge
-
Hey guys, I'm confused as to what Matrix actions give Edge for a higher attack value.
From Banshee's guide, it seems like almost all actions give the Edge. For example, even non-combat actions like 'Trace Icons' give edge. It leads me to assume that all Matrix actions with an opposed test can give Edge. But it's not that, because it doesn't seem to work for Matrix perception.
So how do we determine if a Matrix action gives Edge?
You're right, any opposed check has the potential for granting edge
Except for Matrix perception? In your guide, you give an example of using Matrix perception to discover a silently running PAN, which is an opposed test, but there's no mention of edge considerations. Is this simply omitted because it's not relevant in that case or is Matrix perceptions generally excluded?
Using Matrix Perception to find a silent running hacker, Trying Again.
Tattoo tries to “spot the hacker that is currently attacking Bob’s network”. Normally it is a Major action to spot a silent running network, but since Tattoo is a Technomancer using a Living Persona it is only a Minor action (it is also a Minor action for characters that use a cyberdeck and/or a cyberjack). Matrix Perception is resolved as an opposed Electronics + Intuition vs Willpower + Sleaze test. The test suffers a negative dice pool modifier of 3 dice because of noise due to distance.
Tattoo gets only 2 hits, while the eluding hacker gets 5 hits; and the attempt fails.
“Perhaps he already jacked out?”, she thinks to herself as she decides to double check by spending another Minor action to Try Again, just to be sure. Retrying a test when circumstances have not changed imposes a negative dice pool modifier of 2 dice - yet she manages to get 6 hits, while Mungo gets 4 hits. Just by being successful Tattoo now locates the hostile network and with the net hits Tattoo also discovers that it has a Device Rating of 1 and that it is running Signal Scrub and Exploit. “Heh, so… you little punk… you are just running an Erika MCD-6 are you“, Tattoo thinks as her body is lifeless on the couch at home. “Now… where are you hiding you little bastard”.
-
Same as with regular perception, you typically don't compare AR and DR when taking a Matrix Perception test. This is what normally grant you Edge while hacking.
But if it is an opposed encounter then Edge might still be granted because of situational reasons or if you have a specific piece of gear or a quality etc.
-
Don't forget that (m)AR vs (m)DR is only 1 potential avenue of edge gain on an action. Even when there's no comparison, you can still gain edge via gear/qualities and you can still gain edge via circumstantial advantages.
Matrix perception to spot an icon that has hidden but you've spotted previously? Or know well? GM might rule circumstantial Edge award.