[RHat]

Why are they taking away things that make the game fun for other players in order to try and improve the decker? Why not just streamline the overcomplicated matrix and try to give the decker more fun things to do that doesn't take 10 extended tests?

I don't like this. I can already see this happening.

GM: "Roll perception checks everyone!"

Player 1: "Ok! I roll 12 dice for that. "

GM: "Nuh uh. You only get 9."

Player 1: "But I have vision enhancement."

GM: "You didn't say you flicked the switch on your goggles so now you don't. "

Stupid. I can only imagine what limits like this will do to cyberware/bioware. Do I need to mention I turned those on too? How many combat rounds will it take me to turn my cyber eyes back on if a decker decides to blind me because I rolled a perception check?

I fundamentally disagree with the design concept of limiting the game for all other character archetypes because another one needed more things to do besides Google. Instead of taking the time and effort to streamline the clunkyness or making it so the decker can possibly be valuable to the group in a more combat orientated way, we've put limitations on everyone elses toys. My personal opinion and design philosophy of course.

This is exactly it. Not every character type needs to be applicable in combat. Period.

Sam?  Combat relevant.

Mage?  Combat relevant.

Rigger?  Combat relevant.

Even the Face has some combat relevancy (particularly in adept form) through the Leadership skill.  Why should the hacker be the exception?

[Michael Chandra]

So scout for hidden nodes. Toss communication to the others giving the location of hidden enemies nearby. Run IC in their commlinks and keep an eye out against enemy hackers. You need to protect those communication channels after all. But if a runner has wired part of his network, he should have the consequences for that through other ways. Those goggles can be wired but even then to access TacNet he needs to have a Wireless PAN. All making the goggles wired does is preventing spoofed commands. It doesn't block the chance to hack the PAN, then give false commands or intel to the goggles. And if the goggles control the smartgun, then when you get into the commlink boom.

At this point you have something posing a clear advantage and disadvantage. If you run TacNet, you get the bonus dice but need to have your commlink wireless. An enemy can make use of that. If you decide not to run TacNet, not only do you cost yourself the bonus, you give the others less bonus. Meanwhile, if you run TacNet the hacker on your team tries to defend it while the enemy hacker tries to get into a commlink, spoof commands and cause your clip to eject. This is something that clearly has a benefit and a risk from wireless.

Vision Enhancement? Not so much. Any explanation given for it translates to it not working against well-prepared enemies or a dead zone. If that corp uses wifi-negating paint and all their gear and clothing is stripped of all RFID tags, and their comms are in hidden mode, how will Vision Enhancement have any benefits from scanning?

[Aryeonos]

The problematic point of what they are suggesting is that items will need to be wireless to somehow be used in a sane and normal fashion. Like, the glasses need to be wireless in order to benefit from their own vision enhancement, or you have to have a wireless connection to your own chemical seal in order to activate it without taking a stupid amount of time.

I think, the idea is, that they'd be making an unnecessary differentiation between wired and wireless, lumping wired in with, not connected.

[Michael Chandra]

By the way, I would consider it fair if things like Vision Enhancement 3 need a program running to analyze the data, requiring a link with your commlink and a decent-level commlink to run the program fast enough. Required Response equalling (Ratingx2-1) or something. But even then you could wire the commlink. It does make you hit consequences: Spend more on the commlink so you can run protection and all the enhancing programs you need.

[Mystalya]

The problematic point of what they are suggesting is that items will need to be wireless to somehow be used in a sane and normal fashion. Like, the glasses need to be wireless in order to benefit from their own vision enhancement, or you have to have a wireless connection to your own chemical seal in order to activate it without taking a stupid amount of time.

I think, the idea is, that they'd be making an unnecessary differentiation between wired and wireless, lumping wired in with, not connected.

I just don't understand why my futuristic binoculars/glasses need a wireless computer link to help me see things. I can set up a telescope in my backyard right now and see Venus with no wireless computer hookup and but now my glasses in the future need one to help me see better across the room?

Just...no. 

[RHat]

More your glasses in the future can provide a greater benefit if connected to an outside data source - perhaps as a cloud computing version of sensor software.

The wireless improves the function - you still get the base function without it.  And I suspect they'll have something to account for different connection methods.

[Mystalya]

More your glasses in the future can provide a greater benefit if connected to an outside data source - perhaps as a cloud computing version of sensor software.

The wireless improves the function - you still get the base function without it.  And I suspect they'll have something to account for different connection methods.

This makes sense. But if I'm already connected to the outside data source then why does the hacker need to run the face recognition when I have my badass wireless glasses 3.0?

I think we need more information. We're making jumps now. >_<

[Aryeonos]

True, but they could be moving towards the idea of non local computing, like we are now. It's more than just cloud computing, massive bandwidth fiber optics can deliver pre computed data, all the processing is done server side, so your link is just a terminal. While this is the direction we're heading IRL, that is a MASSIVE privacy concern for runners. In that case you'd be running up against massive corp server security every time you try and hack Tim from accounting's glasses to sneak a peak at his TPS reports.

They just need to make it so that the hacker has a completely unstealthy ability to bruteforce commlink security using just AR. We've seen real time hacking done in GitS and its awesome effect, in the artwork we see the hacker doing all kinds of swag tricks through AR, they just need to work out some method of reasonably paced combat hacking that would be too loud and crude to use outside of combat.

[RHat]

Yes, but I was trying to use a term everyone would recognize - I find it helps make the point.

And they have already talked about combat speed hacking - which I suspect will be different from properly gaining access.

[Sengir]

The sitting duck part is the issue with hackers/technomancers. Sooooo much BP is alotted towards the hacking that if they try to pick up a gun they'll probably shoot themselves in the face with it.

Like you said, SR has quite a bit of combat. So if somebody builds his char as a one-trick pony with no useful combat skills whatsoever, he should face the consequences

[Mystalya]

The sitting duck part is the issue with hackers/technomancers. Sooooo much BP is alotted towards the hacking that if they try to pick up a gun they'll probably shoot themselves in the face with it.

Like you said, SR has quite a bit of combat. So if somebody builds his char as a one-trick pony with no useful combat skills whatsoever, he should face the consequences

I addressed this further down in the same post.

Screw it, I'm awake I'll have at it again.

Why is making a support character considered a "consequence"? The BP ratios are set up so that if you choose to roll a hacker/technomancer then that is pretty much what you do. Aside from the folks that know how to grease the system and have dropped countless hours into Chummer and HeroLab, your average player will end up creating a Google on legs because that's how the system was designed.

Someone has to be able to do the majority of the legwork and make sure the team isn't spotted. It's an important job, if not very rewarding. This is where the issue lies. Nobody wants to be the guy sitting in the van eating bon-bon's and staring at AR while the group goes in and blows things to hell. Unless the GM tosses them a bone they essentially get skipped in combat since all the action is far away from them. It is NOT FUN.

If something is NOT FUN then I, personally, consider it bad design. The question should then become: "How do we make this fun?"  Which was pretty much the rest of my post.

[Novocrane]

I'm thinking Vision Enhancement integrates a level of AR feed to give you more detailed information about your RFID-coated environment.

[Michael Chandra]

So then its bonus won't work in deadzones, and inside cleaned Corp buildings?

[Novocrane]

That would feel like a less impish question if I had said, "solely consists of".

[Michael Chandra]

Not really, since their example lists 2 effects. First of the non-wireless part that raises your limit, second the wireless part that gives a dicebonus. I assumed that by integrating you meant as explanation for the second bonus. If I'd argue that the limit-raising wouldn't work either, it'd be impish.

But what this basically boils down to is that any possible explanation I can think of would clash with some environments, meaning a GM would have to start evaluating when items work fully.