Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Typhus on <11-12-19/0959:56>
-
Under the Spoof Command action, it says that the device attempts to execute the spoofed command on its next major action. However, I don't see a reference anywhere on how many actions devices get or when during a round they would occur.
Hoping Banshee can shed some lunch ght ok the RAI here, or that anyone who has spotted it can point it out. I've checked the obvious places I can think to look. Any help is appreciated.
Thanks!
-
Drones and vehicles have an initiative score of Pilot x2 + 4d6 (pg 201).
Other devices aren't given initiative scores in the CRB, so it'll be up to the GM. Maybe something like a camera slaved to a host has Hostx2+4d6. Maybe a smartlink in possession of an active NPC simply doesn't have a separate initiative score and is assumed to have potential actions whenever that NPC does.
-
Yeah, pretty much what SSDR says .. it's not meant to be a major factor if it's a device that could or should have it's own initiative then use that but if if it's a simple device that does not you can base it on the initiative of the npc possessing it or if your just looking for simple timing have it act on the hackers initiative ... the key point is that it is not an immediate action but that there is a slight delay
-
So, for devices other than those with their own initiative, which don't have their own actions, "on the device owner's next turn" would be the basic idea in a combat situation?
-
If you are already inside the network then you could legally remote control the drone yourself as if you were its legit owner. The drone will be controlled to take the action by you directly, during your action using your own dice pools.
You can also take the illegal spoof command action, if successful the on-board autopilot of the drone will accept the instruction as if it came from a legit user and it will try to execute as its next action, using its own dice pools to its best ability.
Since actions are taken in turn in this edition it doesn't really seem matter what the actual initiative score of the drone is. All that really matters here is that when using spoof command the drone will not take the action directly during your turn - but it also means that the drone will get to take its action before it is your turn to act again.
(unless you already know the initiative score of the drone I would personally just resolve its actions right after the hacker is finished with his or her turn).
-
If you are already inside the network then you could legally remote control the drone yourself as if you were its legit owner. The drone will be controlled to take the action by you directly, during your action using your own dice pools.
You can also take the illegal spoof command action, if successful the on-board autopilot of the drone will accept the instruction as if it came from a legit user and it will try to execute as its next action, using its own dice pools to its best ability.
Since actions are taken in turn in this edition it doesn't really seem matter what the actual initiative score of the drone is. All that really matters here is that when using spoof command the drone will not take the action directly during your turn - but it also means that the drone will get to take its action before it is your turn to act again.
(unless you already know the initiative score of the drone I would personally just resolve its actions right after the hacker is finished with his or her turn).
And for Devices without an initiative score, just have them act on the command immediately after the hacker gives the order. You wouldn't roll for a Commlinks initiative to see when it sends a text, it would just send the text. (Or the door open, or the camera to pan left, or whatever).
-
Thanks all!
-
Yeah, pretty much what SSDR says .. it's not meant to be a major factor if it's a device that could or should have it's own initiative then use that but if if it's a simple device that does not you can base it on the initiative of the npc possessing it or if your just looking for simple timing have it act on the hackers initiative ... the key point is that it is not an immediate action but that there is a slight delay
Interesting. the example I was looking at is a smartlinked weapon where you can fire the weapon remotely or eject clip. what would be the initiative order? would the npc get a shot before the clip is ejected? can the weapon fire remotely first screwing up the npcs major action?
-
If you, during your turn, have admin access then you take the control device action and eject the clip. The clip will be ejected during your action (before the NPC get to take their major action in their turn) and if you have actions left during your turn you can take them before ending your turn.
If you, during your turn, use spoof command then the clip will be ejected after your turn is done (I would just resolve it directly after your turn is done, before the NPC get to take their major action in their turn).
-
OK, I thought I had my questions answered on this, but now I have more.
If you, during your turn, use spoof command then the clip will be ejected after your turn is done (I would just resolve it directly after your turn is done, before the NPC get to take their major action in their turn).
The statement from the author was that there was an intent to have a delay. New question is "why?"
(a) if the goal is to allow a user to potentially prevent the problem, how is that supposed to be accomplished? So far it seems like Spoof the one and done version. If you get one net hit, it happens.
(b) is the goal to encourage a player to admin hack rather than spoof if they want faster results (ie, on their turn)?
If it's (b) -- which I assume -- wouldn't "immediately after your turn" create the same effect as "on your turn"? It seems like for the delay to have any meaning it would need to be "at the start of the device owner/system/drone's next turn" in line with the text of "next Major action". I think the 'better' interpretation is the last one, otherwise Spoof = Admin Access effectively. If the two are supposed to be separate ideas with separate mechanics, anyway.
-
If a clip will eject at the beginning of the owners turn, at the end of the hackers turn or somewhere in between the two have no mechanical importance.
Reason why you want to use Control Device is because it is a legal action that does not increase overwatch score (and it let you use your own ratings which might be useful if your have a few points in engineering and/or piloting)
Reason why you want to use Spoof Command is because its an outsider access action and can be taken directly without first gaining admin access (and it let you depend on autopilot ratings which might be useful in case your own ratings suck).
-
Since actions are taken in turn in this edition it doesn't really seem matter what the actual initiative score of the drone is. All that really matters here is that when using spoof command the drone will not take the action directly during your turn - but it also means that the drone will get to take its action before it is your turn to act again.
Just making sure I understand this bit.
This seems generally true in practice, and would be completely true if initiative scores could not be changed after play starts. But doesn't the Edge Boost that changes your Init. score by +3 make it not completely true?
I have no idea how much this would actually come up in play; I suspect it would only rarely matter for this specific topic. But, one can conceive how it might. For example, an Enemy hacker has used the Spoof Command to force a security door to close, but it hasn't actually closed yet, and my runner REALLY needs to get through that door or he is a dead man. In this case, the exact value of the door's initiative might matter. As long as I have X Edge, and the door's initiative is less than +3X away from mine, I can spend that Edge to take my turn before the door does in the initiative order, jumping through at the very last second.
Or am I misunderstanding how this boost works?
-
The reason for the delay is a "everything has a price" offset. Spoof is relatively easy to pull off when compared to Control Device but you pay the price of not having an immediate effect.
As basically a FAQ of sorts I would rule that the order of operations for when the device action takes place is as follows: 1. On the devices next action if it has it's own initiative, 2. At the beginning of the device owners next turn if it does not have an initiative (before the owner gets to go), 3. At the beginning of the hackers next turn
-
As basically a FAQ of sorts I would rule that the order of operations for when the device action takes place is as follows: 1. On the devices next action if it has it's own initiative, 2. At the beginning of the device owners next turn if it does not have an initiative (before the owner gets to go), 3. At the beginning of the hackers next turn
Banshee to follow up and understand this clearly and using my example...
* if the door has its own initiative for some reason (which seems unlikely), then I could spend Edge to boost my initiative over the doors in the next round and jump through before it closes.
* if I own the door (for some strange reason) then I'm probably screwed, because it will close at the beginning of my turn.
* if no one in the fight owns the door, then it will close on the Hacker's next turn, so as long as I can beat the hacker's initiative I can jump through.
Does that make sense?
Also this seems obvious but in the interest of complete clarity, if I for some reason owned the door and the hacker hacks it BEFORE me in the turn order, it will close on my turn even though it is the same round. In that instance, the hacker is the one that has the incentive to spend Edge to boost their initiative to before mine to get the door closed before I can respond.
-
As basically a FAQ of sorts I would rule that the order of operations for when the device action takes place is as follows: 1. On the devices next action if it has it's own initiative, 2. At the beginning of the device owners next turn if it does not have an initiative (before the owner gets to go), 3. At the beginning of the hackers next turn
Banshee to follow up and understand this clearly and using my example...
* if the door has its own initiative for some reason (which seems unlikely), then I could spend Edge to boost my initiative over the doors in the next round and jump through before it closes.
* if I own the door (for some strange reason) then I'm probably screwed, because it will close at the beginning of my turn.
* if no one in the fight owns the door, then it will close on the Hacker's next turn, so as long as I can beat the hacker's initiative I can jump through.
Does that make sense?
Also this seems obvious but in the interest of complete clarity, if I for some reason owned the door and the hacker hacks it BEFORE me in the turn order, it will close on my turn even though it is the same round. In that instance, the hacker is the one that has the incentive to spend Edge to boost their initiative to before mine to get the door closed before I can respond.
Yes ... not perfect but as close to the original design intent that the current rules allow
-
Now I have another question. ::) Sounds like Hosts don't normally have initiative scores? Is that right?
I see that IC uses (DP x 2) + 3d6, but nothing for Hosts. If a Host is controlling something like a door, camera, sending commands to drones, etc, doesn't it need that? Should we assume the same as the IC for a calculation? Or would whatever the old 5e calc is still work?
-
Now I have another question. ::) Sounds like Hosts don't normally have initiative scores? Is that right?
I see that IC uses (DP x 2) + 3d6, but nothing for Hosts. If a Host is controlling something like a door, camera, sending commands to drones, etc, doesn't it need that? Should we assume the same as the IC for a calculation? Or would whatever the old 5e calc is still work?
Yes. Technically that should be IC uses the Host initiative of DPx2 + 3d6 ... same end result
-
Makes sense. Thanks!
-
DANGIT! I keep running into questions. ;D
I assume that all IC attacks are Major actions? It doesn't say anywhere I can find, but since using an attack action for cybercombat would be a Major action (Crash Program, Data Spike, etc), I'm assuming IC attacks are also Major actions? If that is true, I assume that means IC should be assumed to get two attacks every turn? It has nothing to use it's Minor actions for, so that would effectively be the situation, right?
-
DANGIT! I keep running into questions. ;D
I assume that all IC attacks are Major actions? It doesn't say anywhere I can find, but since using an attack action for cybercombat would be a Major action (Crash Program, Data Spike, etc), I'm assuming IC attacks are also Major actions? If that is true, I assume that means IC should be assumed to get two attacks every turn? It has nothing to use it's Minor actions for, so that would effectively be the situation, right?
They would need to have 4d6 initiative to have 2 majors ... but otherwise yes
-
:o That's different than what characters get.
"The basic action allotment for each character is 1 Minor Action and 1 Major Action per combat round. Players get 1 additional Minor Action for every Initiative Die they have."
"+ 3d6" would be a total of 1 major and 4 minors, no?
-
:o That's different than what characters get.
"The basic action allotment for each character is 1 Minor Action and 1 Major Action per combat round. Players get 1 additional Minor Action for every Initiative Die they have."
"+ 3d6" would be a total of 1 major and 4 minors, no?
Duh ... nevermind... you're right
There are minor actions IC could take, but I agree they rarely woukd
-
OK, whew!
Wait, what Minors could they take? Send message to alert the system owner? Can it swap it's attributes?
-
OK, whew!
Wait, what Minors could they take? Send message to alert the system owner? Can it swap it's attributes?
Technically they can take any of the matrix actions ... it's just a matter of whether they would benefit from it. So yes send messages to put the Host on full alert and or alert the Owner is a very good one. Swapping attributes not so much because they use the Host attributes for most things.
-
Thanks!