[PiXeL01]

Reckless Hacking was written to help hackers overcome the action economy they were facing, but since the penalty is -5 by Mark is it really viable?

Would lowering the penalty a bit not be better, to say -3 per mark or a step -3/-6/-10?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Even at -5 it's pretty damn good.

If Control Hierarchies weren't a thing, Control Device would be utterly broken even at -5 dice/mark.  It's easy to build an optimized dice pool that can afford to forfeit 15 dice.

[JudgeMonroe]

Reckless Hacking was written to help hackers overcome the action economy they were facing, but since the penalty is -5 by Mark is it really viable?

Would lowering the penalty a bit not be better, to say -3 per mark or a step -3/-6/-10?

Marks are the essential currency of the hacker in the action economy, and they can and should get their marks *before* Initiative is rolled and Combat Turns begin. If hackers find themselves cornered by the action economy such that they are faced with Combat Turns without having their marks, then they should adjust their approach instead of looking for freebies.

Reckless Hacking gives the Hacker the chance for some clutch hacking, should they be caught off guard. The penalty should sufficient to keep it a tool for the edge cases. If it was easy, nobody would bother with marks. I think the -5 penalty steps are fine, but I do think the Reckless action should result in the appropriate number of marks on the target at the conclusion of the action, which the rule does not say is the case. If you interpret Reckless Hacking as "placing marks at the same time as attempting an action that requires them," then the recklessly placed marks should persist in the usual way.

[Beta]

Given that reckless hacking not just saves an action but saves a roll, with the risks that come with any opposed roll, I'm good with the -5.  As is I see two likely circumstances for it:

 - Quickly dealing with lower rating targets.  Like say someone not protected by a host, running a rating 4 or less  link as the key to their PAN.  The hacker at -5 probably beats the 8 dice of the defense without edge most of the time.  Which is great for 'oh bugger, we need to stop him from sending a warning with his link' or the like.

- When the hacker has a high edge pool, only needs a single matrix action to complete their goal, and is dealing with a tough target (i.e. one where they have only a one or two die advantage on)  It might actually be better to take the -5 and plan on using a point of edge, rather than to possibly have to edge both the roll to get a mark and the roll to complete an action.

[JudgeMonroe]

Given that reckless hacking not just saves an action but saves a roll, with the risks that come with any opposed roll, I'm good with the -5.  As is I see two likely circumstances for it:

Saving that roll can also let a hacker attempt a "legal" action while evading both detection (from Brute Force) and an OS increment (from Hack on the Fly/Watchdog), especially useful if they are near the Convergence threshold but just need to get this one last thing done...

[kyoto kid]

..there's also the "Instinctive Hack" Quality which is only 2 Karma at chargen and allows a decker to get a mark prior to initiative.

[Beta]

..there's also the "Instinctive Hack" Quality which is only 2 Karma at chargen and allows a decker to get a mark prior to initiative.

Hunh, putting the two posts above together, I see a question I hadn't thought of before: Does instinctive hack mean that you are 'instinctively' starting your overwatch timer all of the time?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

..there's also the "Instinctive Hack" Quality which is only 2 Karma at chargen and allows a decker to get a mark prior to initiative.

Hunh, putting the two posts above together, I see a question I hadn't thought of before: Does instinctive hack mean that you are 'instinctively' starting your overwatch timer all of the time?

If you're going into a fight that the decker hasn't pre-marked the targets, 9 times out of 10 that instinctive hack action will be a matrix spotting test.  And that's huge because that's one necessary step to combat hacking removed from being spent in a precious initiative pass.

It also moves the necessary "Ok, tell me all their silent running drek" action from mid combat to prior to combat.

[kyoto kid]

...exactly, extremely useful.

Also just perceiving for silent running links/decks/gear doesn't invoke an overwatch count.

...and any Decker who doesn't have Baby Monitor constantly running on a programme carrier or their Datajck Plus is a careless one.