Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Gamemasters' Lounge => Topic started by: virgil on <02-19-13/1418:16>
-
I've been a DM for years and years, but never with Shadowrun. I'm about to start with a group, using only Core, Aresenal, Augmentation, & Street Magic; as well as some relatively simple house rules...
* Skills, Knowledge Skills, Specializations, and Skill Groups at half BP cost
* Skill groups possess the transitive property, so if you buy one skill up in a group, then buy another, you can buy the rest of the group to match at the remaining cost; and the same goes for purchasing a group and then breaking it up (buy a group up to 4, then pay for the remainder to raise one of the group to 6)
* Frank Trollman's Ends of the Matrix fully implemented
* Karma replaced with BP (cannot spend on contacts or nuyen after character creation), session rewards are BP = 2/3 * Karma. Items that only have karma costs are halved to determine BP cost, except for initiation/submersion (so 10+(Grade x 3)BP per initiation, before discounts from ordeals)
* Magic/Resonance at flat 10BP per rating, even if buying the current maximum (so 50BP to go from 1 to 6)
* Contacts cost [Loyalty x Connections]cp; each BP gives you 3cp, encouraging more lower end contacts instead of high-end executive life-debts
* Adept's Improved Ability is .25/level for all skills
* Improved Physical Attribute is .5/level for all attributes
* No sustaining fociOtherwise, I've got three players heavily experienced with 3rd edition and are touching 4th for the first time, and one other player who's got about a year of experience with just D&D. One is planning on making a dedicated human hacker with ~4 Essense worth of 'ware & a smidgen of rigging, another's playing a human phys-adept with poisoned (Immunity quality for Cyanide) crossbow bolts and a monowhip, another's an elven face adept that's using the core chassis of this forum's revamped archetypes (advocated for Lost Love & Trust Fund quality for backstory, which I might permit). The newbie is playing a beefy (highest Body of the group, so very likely highest armor) satyr mage parkour-ist with 11 dice spellcasting and 14 dice summoning (12 binding); and as I nominally don't allow the Runner's Companion, there's no mechanical change with being a satyr over an ork (pure aesthetic).
As an aside, when I thought about whether being a satyr should count as a distinctive quality, I was fascinated at look at the demographics of satyrs. Presuming they crop up only in those with Greek ethnicity, because of their high rate of magical talent, the math says there's likely near as many satyr mages as ork mages in FDC. This assumes only a 1% rate of magic talent for 'plain' orks, as I've yet to find hard numbers regarding magic demographics. I heard rumours of one book setting it for 1:10,000 or something like that, which is a number I will flat-out ignore.
The group will be set in DeeCee, year 2071. I'll try to stick roughly to what's been established as far as in-game historical events, but will largely ignore anything new coming out unless I like it, and will be upfront with the group about it. The first session is intended to be a milk run, some T99 manager wants to get Lucifer bulbs for his department's research at less than market price and heard that some is being delivered to the Illuminates; they'll find out after some legwork it's being held temporarily in the 'executive' suite at a Stuffer Storage facility; which has grand total of two corpsec, two guard dogs, basic alarms, keypad maglocks on every locker, and a Force 3 ward on the executive suite locker room.
Any general advice for things to watch out for, condemnations to me or my players' choices, missions that would fit this group, etc?
-
Those are some ... interesting ... house rules.
Seems like you're setting yourself up for massive abuse with the whole, halving of skills cost thing. Maybe it wouldn't play out this way, but it seems like there's next to no reason to raise most attributes at all until you have hit all of your desired skill hard-caps. Know what I'm saying? You're going to end up (quite quickly) with PCs who are the worlds best Everything. Also don't understand the throwing away with of Karma. Seems like using Karma-gen and just allotting your players X free Karma for skills at start would make way more sense and be way easier to deal with post-chargen (no wonky calculating needed). And with your new Magic/Powers rules, as is evidenced by your group's composition, you've turned Shadowrun fully into Magic-run. Not condemning, just don't understand why.
-
Abuse? Skills were/are way overpriced in comparison to attributes, and in a nominally skill-based system, I'd prefer skills to take precedence over attributes rather than vice versa.
BP-then-Karma where initial BP expenditures are min/max create very large disparities that I disapprove of. Runner Companion's KarmaGen, like nearly everything else in that book, is borked (admitted by at least two SR authors I know). The numbers are smaller, just as easy to grok as Karma (easier, if anything), and I don't mind a largely linear advancement; as that keeps progression from going into a crawl, as a common problem that I've seen in such systems.
For the magic/resonance thing, it's still expensive to get from 6 to 7, as Initiation will only raise the maximum rather than the attribute itself. I've considered the idea of removing Exceptional Attribute quality and just having the final point & the one point past the racial max in any attribute be 20BP each (barring Magic/Resonance), but most of the rough drafts I've seen so far aren't running into that problem yet, so it's something I'll discuss.
I know for a fact that the character choices were made independent of the house-rules (especially the ork mage). The player poison-adept only knew SR3 and is still getting used to SR4, and I actually made the changes to powers after he made his rough draft to help the specific player. I personally feel Combat skills to be overpriced to begin with, so it wasn't a hard decision to make. The face adept made his decision *purely* because he wanted a chassis for a face, and was going to use the one in the book; since I've yet to see anyone say that the sample characters in the book were any good, I pulled what seemed the most pure face on the archetype replacement (http://forums.shadowrun4.com/index.php?topic=4495.0) thread as a suggestion for a better chassis to use (he'll have to take out the RC and Way of the Adept stuff, of course).
-
1: Skills are not way overpriced. This is an attribute+skill system, not a skills system - one of the differences between 3 and 4. Might not hurt to put attributes up to about 6xNew Rating or 7xNew Rating, but halving skill costs is not good - there's a number of other karma costs that screws with, and it just overcorrects the small of attribute/skill cost comparisons.
2: If you want to unify creation and advancement, use Karmagen from Runner's Companion. Advancement is curved for damn good reason, and you should not mess with that. And I would love to see who "admitted" Karmagen is "borked", because I'm fairly certain they'll turn out not to be in a position to "admit" anything.
3: Raising Magic in SR4 does a lot for you - for example, if directly raises your spell force, because force is chosen at time of casting and the max force is based on Magic. It also lets you get more powerful spirits without taking Physical Drain. Resonance does the same with sprites and complex form threaded ratings. The attribute does way too much for you to be that cheap.
The effect of these houserules is not to fix anything, rather to make things a little more like a previous edition while
-
SR4A isn't perfect, but I am a bit puzzled why, your first time running a system that has been round for a quarter century or so and has been through four editions, your first instinct is to muck about with what is arguably the most complex CharGen system ever devised.
I mean, houserule away, but I'd run it for awhile, first.
Oh! But fix Scatter... :D
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
SR4A isn't perfect, but I am a bit puzzled why, your first time running a system that has been round for a quarter century or so and has been through four editions, your first instinct is to muck about with what is arguably the most complex CharGen system ever devised.
I mean, houserule away, but I'd run it for awhile, first.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
Yeah, it's really best to learn how a system works before you go messing around with it.
-
What RHat said.
-
SR4A isn't perfect, but I am a bit puzzled why, your first time running a system that has been round for a quarter century or so and has been through four editions, your first instinct is to muck about with what is arguably the most complex CharGen system ever devised.
I mean, houserule away, but I'd run it for awhile, first.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
Yeah, it's really best to learn how a system works before you go messing around with it.
Well, from looking at the house rule list, he's basically taking to heart the BS spouted by the trolls who just talk smack about everything that CGL does.
-
SR4A isn't perfect, but I am a bit puzzled why, your first time running a system that has been round for a quarter century or so and has been through four editions, your first instinct is to muck about with what is arguably the most complex CharGen system ever devised.
I mean, houserule away, but I'd run it for awhile, first.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
Yeah, it's really best to learn how a system works before you go messing around with it.
Well, from looking at the house rule list, he's basically taking to heart the BS spouted by the trolls who just talk smack about everything that CGL does.
This might explain why the game designer in me looks at that list and wants to punch something.
-
I would say that 400 BP with those house rules is the equivalent of 500 or so BP under "normal" rules, meaning you should expect prime runners (close to maxed in their specialty, covered in other areas). The players being new to the system might offset that. I hope you relaxed the Availability limits for 'ware a bit, to allow augmented characters to keep up with the boost you have given to adepts.
-
I have said this a lot, but as a GM, the system AS A WHOLE is great and relatively balanced. Run with it. Then house rule as the game goes on.
-
I have said this a lot, but as a GM, the system AS A WHOLE is great and relatively balanced. Run with it. Then house rule as the game goes on.
Truth!
I am sorry, Virgil, that you are so fixated on one group of people's beliefs that there is something wrong with the system. Have
you played it under the standard rules? If not then you should definately not be making what essentially amounts to a whole
new ruleset for your House Rules. You do not yet understand how everything interacts, and thus cannot make an informed
decision on how the changes will effect things.
-
Fixated seems a bit harsh, as does the declaration that I only listen to CGL-smacking trolls. The accusation that such house-rules are to make it more like a previous edition seem...unfounded. I don't need to sour me or my players' experience with the system with what is a plainly & provenly broken Matrix system, for example (hence using Ends). My opinion of RC and its quality was there before I heard anyone else talk about it, and was only confirmed by the writer of KarmaGen (Ancient History) calling the book terrible.
That revelation leaves BP just as valid as KarmaGen, IMO. There is a clear need to adjust for the abuse inherent in differing creation from advancement. I am familiar with triangular advancement (Karma) from other systems, & the curve is absolutely not steep enough to actually make all-in specialization a bad idea; psychologically maybe, but anyone who looks at the math should see it, and my experience is that it psychologically just makes advancement feel stagnant. There are real things that would actually discourage hyper-specialization, truly exponential costs and an enforced pyramid (eg. four 3s for every 6) being two ideas off the top of my head, but those house-rules are truly drastic & untested. BP is established, simple, doesn't seem to break the game at the outset, and allows for steady advancement. The concern for overly rapid advancement would require that the game last for 2+ years of weekly games to be a real concern; and it's statistically much more likely to last for half that at best. I'll admit that the initiation cost rule was misleading, as it was supposed to mean 13BP for the first initiation rather than every one.
Yes, it's a Skill+Attribute system, so when raising four skills costs as much as raising an attribute linked to 10 or 18 (Intuition & Agility, respectively) skills, something is rotten in Denmark. Strength, Body, & Willpower were outstripped to begin with; but merging Strength w/Body and making Willpower more than a mage tax is an actual significant set of house rules.
-
Your group has admittedly never gamed in 4E before, therefore your house-rules are based entirely on something other than actual experience and a holistic use of the system. And given that 10s of 1,000s of people game with the vanilla rules easily and happily, well, doesn't leave a whole lot of options as to where your pre-concieved notions come from. Math? Sure. But the greater assumptions you are making overlying that is the players choices regarding the math, and even worse you are assuming what they will be and what they should be - this is a poor approach. I don't think anyone was criticizing your use of Ends, everyone has their preferences regarding the Matrix, so that's irrelevant. And your anecdotal, context-less "quote" from Ancient History holds about as much water as a sieve.
So, we're left with the statement that you dislike "all-in specialization". Never mind that this should be left to the players to decide if they like, what is/are the alternative(s)? Generalization (which is completely pointless when you have an adequate number of PCs)? Or some lesser degree(s) of specialization? Either way, whether they specialize or not is a choice that is and should be left to the players, the vanilla rules don't prevent this choice, nor even penalize it really, beyond that you're just not as good at any one thing as someone else (*whisper*because you don't specialize in it*whisper*). You haven't made all-in specialization harder, you've made it easier. Thing is, your whole group will be all-in specialized in many things. As many things are pretty easy to tack on to just about any build (Stealth, Hacking, Facing), therefore you're decreasing the viability of any character oriented towards one of those roles. And if you and your group prefer anybody to be able to fill just about any particular role, that's great, but that doesn't mean Karma is broken. It means you and/or your group don't like having to make choices and having weaknesses. That's all your doing, eliminating your groups reliance upon one another and individual weaknesses.
-
Any general advice for things to watch out for, condemnations to me or my players' choices, missions that would fit this group, etc?
Perhaps spice up the opening milk run by having some sort of minor hiccup/complication. Perhaps there is an unexpected employee or two in the Stuffer shack executive suite.
-
Most people I know would rage for being accused of lying like that. Fortunately, I am both wise & merciful. Let's make it non-anecdotal, straight from the horse's mouth (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=259064#259064)...
Hell, I wrote a good chunk of it and I admit it's crap.
Another sample quote, which I could probably relink if you find it necessaryBack in '08, I was working on Runner's Companion, which was a piece of shit and I will never live it down
Let me clarify. When I say I dislike all-in specialization, I mean I dislike it when there's heavy disparity if you don't ignore everything but your chosen specialization at chargen, which BP-then-Karma does. Leaving it alone is not leaving players free to choose what they think is appropriate, it's a tacit acceptance that you're punishing people who want to start with Rating 3 in a skill. Yes, a player who wishes to be the best at their chosen role is going to specialize all-out in it, and that's perfectly acceptable, even inevitable with karma or BP.
Hmm...I'll have to think about that, GiraffeShaman. It's an idea, but it'll take a bit to figure out why there are employees inside the executive suite; as it is just a storage locker.
-
Hmm...I'll have to think about that, GiraffeShaman. It's an idea, but it'll take a bit to figure out why there are employees inside the executive suite; as it is just a storage locker.
Hint. One is a male giraffe, one is a female giraffe...
-
First, I for one accused you of nothing - I simply made an observation. Second, the guy who wrote that post is, well, wrong about a number of things. For one thing, charging for metatypes in Karmagen would make it well and truly borked because, due to curved costs, you'd be paying for your metatype twice - not a fair thing to do. It does, in effect, balance out except when playing directly against type - in which case the reduced potential is enough of an inhibition. Amount of Karma required would be a valid point but for the fact that changing the Karma budget is trivial.
His description would have you believing that RC is some universally reviled piece of trash that is almost always banned - does not meet with my observations. And, frankly, the tone in his post is a bit revealing - people who are angry are not dealing in the pure and honest truth, but rather one run through the filter of that emotion whether they want it to be or not (human memory kind of sucks that way). There are some issues with Metavariants (see: Oni), sure, but dismissing AI's and Free Spirits as unplayable is erroneous. AI's are as playable as Full Immersion characters - it takes some work, but in making that character choice you've signed on for that. The failure of Karmagen to account for playing some of these choices may be part of his issue, however. Haven't seen much of Free Spirits in play to fully comment on their playability, but nothing I can see would make them truly unplayable (save, perhaps, for the cost to play them).
In strict logical terms, authority does not equal accuracy. Form your own opinions. Karmagen, for its part, is seen by a lot of people as being far superior to BP - though I will note that as written, it fails to account for some of the options in RC, like shapeshifters.
Thirdly, I never said that you shouldn't adjust the relative cost of skills and attributes. I said that skills were the wrong lever to pull here - it is attribute costs that should be changed to a multiplier of about 6 or 7. Halving skill costs is a bad idea on its face, and you cannot simply use the number of skills the attribute can potentially influence as a barometer - to any real character, only a small number of those will actually be relevant.
The curved costs of karma have a clear and direct purpose - to nudge players into generalizing a bit more, so they're not screwed as soon as they need to do something outside of everyone's specialty. Converting things to a flat cost can cause some serious issues.
In the end, play the game before trying to "fix" it, because you need direct experience first so that you have an awareness of what might need to change - and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
-
Most people I know would rage for being accused of lying like that. Fortunately, I am both wise & merciful. Let's make it non-anecdotal, straight from the horse's mouth (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=259064#259064)...
Then most people you know are immature internet-knobs, if being asked to substantiate a claim sends them into a rage. You not doing so doesn't mean you're wise or merciful, it means you're not an immature internet-knob.
So, Karmagen is borked because 750 is too much Karma and they didn't charge for Metatypes? The former is nothing more than opinion, and furthermore can be "fixed" by 1st grade level subtraction. That's irrelevant though because this obviously isn't a problem you had with Karmagen, because you have raised the power level - beyond what Karmagen does - with your house-rules. The latter part of his statement is a commonly known short coming, that not everyone has a problem with but if you do, it can be satisfactorily "fixed" by charging Metatype BP cost in Karma.
Mainly what they're complaining about in that thread is Metavariants, Drakes, Infected, yada, yada - and while those are a large part of the book, the most common and widely used parts (Posi/Neg Qualities, Karmagen, Contacts and Lifestyles) are, well, some of the most commonly used rules in all of supplementary SR books. So, yeah, if you want to turn Shadowrun into Freakshow-run, it's gonna leave you pissed - but not everything in it is shite, indeed, the "core" parts of the book are fantastic editions.
Not to mention it sounds like some of those people do seem to have personal beefs with CGL. Can someone be unbiased when their contributions ended up on the cutting room floor and they therefore perhaps didn't get paid as much, or found out the artists make more? Rhetorical question.
When I say I dislike all-in specialization, I mean I dislike it when there's heavy disparity if you don't ignore everything but your chosen specialization at chargen, which BP-then-Karma does. Leaving it alone is not leaving players free to choose what they think is appropriate, it's a tacit acceptance that you're punishing people who want to start with Rating 3 in a skill.
Presumably the BP > Karma method is the vanilla method for a specific choice made to align with the vision of the devs. If you don't like that vision (which maybe does favor specialization?) then use Karmagen. Unified chargen and advancement means no exploitation, no de-facto missing out - no favoring of anything, accept possibly meta-humans - but only if those meta-humans don't go all-in, as you so dislike. And as Karmagen is demonstrably not borked (or rather that it can be easily unborked with some addition/subtraction one time math), there's no reason to do what you're doing.
-
and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
Wait, deciding the Matrix rules are broken is a misconception on their/my part?
-
and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
Wait, deciding the Matrix rules are broken is a misconception on their/my part?
Assuming the standard definition of broken? Quite.
-
Okay, so...not having played the game, you try to houserule the most complex aspects of the system, ask on the forums for input, then get cranky and argumentative with veteran players who unanimously disagree with your proposals?
Hmmm.
Good luck with your game.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
To put it a more polite way:
You have never played/run this game before, and have no experience with anything within the rules. I can understand getting upset with those who posted hostile remarks, but most of the first few posts were warnings about not changing anything unless and until you have some experience with the base system. When you have done that, then you will be able to see what the changes mentioned will do to the game, and can better decide whether the house rules mentioned by others will be worth adding to the system.
Until you have played, you really won't have any common ground with the veteran players/GM's here. Many of which are cautioning against making such strong, broad, and sweeping changes.
If you really want to put these changes in, the veterans can tell you what you are in for. So long as no one is getting snarky, please don't get hostile or argumentative with the ones just trying to give you the advice you asked for. (Remember, you DID ask us for advice.)
-
and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
Wait, deciding the Matrix rules are broken is a misconception on their/my part?
Assuming the standard definition of broken? Quite.
I don't need to play/run a bunch of Shadowrun to see the flaws in the Matrix rules, and how they can readily and thoroughly break; reading comprehension on my own part showed me that.
Also, I have played this game before. I stated I had never DM'd for it, which is different. I do appreciate the more constructive input, and am actually thinking about things on my end.
-
Matrix rules have always been hard to follow. This edition is the friendliest so far. If that tells you something about previous editions, think on this: Each edition previous was more difficult than the one that followed (I.E. 3rd: harder, 2nd: even harder, 1st: ZOMG what? this is it's own dungeon crawl separate from the other players?)
And one thing I have always said about technology: It uplifts those who embrace it, and condemns those who condemn it. There is no such thing as "balance" with technology. Each iteration grants more of an advantage than the previous one, and those who do not adapt will be left behind in the cold. This is true today, and will be much more so 60+ years from now.
-
and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
Wait, deciding the Matrix rules are broken is a misconception on their/my part?
Assuming the standard definition of broken? Quite.
I don't need to play/run a bunch of Shadowrun to see the flaws in the Matrix rules, and how they can readily and thoroughly break; reading comprehension on my own part showed me that.
Oh, do go on. In what way do you perceive them as being broken?
-
and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
Wait, deciding the Matrix rules are broken is a misconception on their/my part?
Assuming the standard definition of broken? Quite.
I don't need to play/run a bunch of Shadowrun to see the flaws in the Matrix rules, and how they can readily and thoroughly break; reading comprehension on my own part showed me that.
Oh, do go on. In what way do you perceive them as being broken?
There is quite the list, let's go easy and use the first one that comes to mind, icon detection. It's a simple action and a Matrix Perception Test for each and every icon on a node to even know what it is (SR4A, p228); using a browse or datasearch will not work, because it's only going to tell you the node, not the specific icon. All you have to do to protect a node is fill it with a thousand open folders, and it will take someone weeks to even know who to target.
This is only an inkling. There are at least four other major problems I can readily think of that either break concepts or bring the whole Matrix dance to a screeching halt.
-
"This action can be used on any large amount of data, such as a list of icons in a node" - SR4A, page 230, Data Search action. You might use your Analyze program instead of Browse, but that's the action. Know how's about you actually list your issues?
-
"You can't make a system foolproof. Fools are much too creative."
The rules cannot, and shouldn't have to, account for every contingency.
It is the role of both the GM and the Players to use common sense, discretion, and good judgement to ensure fair play and avoid abusing the system.
If someone subverts the Matrix rules by dumping thousands of useless, open folders, the GM should rule that the node either crashes and/or is too cluttered up to be used effectively.
Dump a thousand shortcuts on your desktop and try to make good use of it...
-Jn-
City of Brass Expatriate
-
"You can't make a system foolproof. Fools are much too creative."
The rules cannot, and shouldn't have to, account for every contingency.
It is the role of both the GM and the Players to use common sense, discretion, and good judgement to ensure fair play and avoid abusing the system.
If someone subverts the Matrix rules by dumping thousands of useless, open folders, the GM should rule that the node either crashes and/or is too cluttered up to be used effectively.
Dump a thousand shortcuts on your desktop and try to make good use of it...
-Jn-
City of Brass Expatriate
Dude, check the Data Search table. All that would do, unless it's a Nuke program, is delay someone by a few seconds.
-
"This action can be used on any large amount of data, such as a list of icons in a node" - SR4A, page 230, Data Search action. You might use your Analyze program instead of Browse, but that's the action. Know how's about you actually list your issues?
That gives you a list of icons in a node, that doesn't tell you which icon is which. It is explicit that you need to take a simple action to determine whether one icon is a Program, a Persona, a Sprite, an Arrow, or even Colonel Sanders's Secret Recipe.
And let's not forget the Denial of Service rules. You don't even need to succeed, as even failing to hack will make alerts, and a node will just plain shut down with too many alerts. If your goal is for a node to not even be on, which would be very handy in many cases, there's not really much they can do.
EDIT: At best, assuming you used that incorrect reading, it's still an entire Initiative Pass to find/identify ONE icon; presuming all icons are in near plain-view (Threshold 2). If you somehow care about more than one icon, which you very well should, things are going to get hairy very quick; "did I remember to search for a third Black Hamm...ow"
-
I get what you are saying, RHat.
Just trying to make a point.
There's a big difference between a broken system, and a system that can be broken. All systems can be intentionally subverted.
If you're the GM, and you set out to break the game, or allow your players to break the game, I don't have sympathy if you then hold up the jagged pieces and cry to the uncaring skies that it is broken.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
"This action can be used on any large amount of data, such as a list of icons in a node" - SR4A, page 230, Data Search action. You might use your Analyze program instead of Browse, but that's the action. Know how's about you actually list your issues?
That gives you a list of icons in a node, that doesn't tell you which icon is which. It is explicit that you need to take a simple action to determine whether one icon is a Program, a Persona, a Sprite, an Arrow, or even Colonel Sanders's Secret Recipe.
And let's not forget the Denial of Service rules. You don't even need to succeed, as even failing to hack will make alerts, and a node will just plain shut down with too many alerts. If your goal is for a node to not even be on, which would be very handy in many cases, there's not really much they can do.
EDIT: At best, assuming you used that incorrect reading, it's still an entire Initiative Pass to identify ONE icon; presuming all icons are in near plain-view (Threshold 2). If you somehow care about more than one icon, which you very well should, things are going to get hairy very quick.
It doesn't "give" you the list, it looks through the list based on whatever criteria - Data Search is a very flexible action; if you know enough about the icons you're looking for, you can find them with one Data Search. Denial of Service will very rarely achieve what you want to do; most times the node being off is the opposite of helpful.
-
Distributed Denial of Service Attacks (ddoS)
Unwired 101
A node under DDOS attack has three options. First, it can spoof its access ID, so that the DDOS can no longer find its target. The node must be offline (not meshed with other nodes) to switch access ID. Second, it can try to block access from botnet access IDs or attempt to filter out all flooding traffic. The success of these latter options is largely up to the gamemaster’s discretion.
Emphasis mine.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
"This action can be used on any large amount of data, such as a list of icons in a node" - SR4A, page 230, Data Search action. You might use your Analyze program instead of Browse, but that's the action. Know how's about you actually list your issues?
That gives you a list of icons in a node, that doesn't tell you which icon is which. It is explicit that you need to take a simple action to determine whether one icon is a Program, a Persona, a Sprite, an Arrow, or even Colonel Sanders's Secret Recipe.
And let's not forget the Denial of Service rules. You don't even need to succeed, as even failing to hack will make alerts, and a node will just plain shut down with too many alerts. If your goal is for a node to not even be on, which would be very handy in many cases, there's not really much they can do.
EDIT: At best, assuming you used that incorrect reading, it's still an entire Initiative Pass to identify ONE icon; presuming all icons are in near plain-view (Threshold 2). If you somehow care about more than one icon, which you very well should, things are going to get hairy very quick.
It doesn't "give" you the list, it looks through the list based on whatever criteria - Data Search is a very flexible action; if you know enough about the icons you're looking for, you can find them with one Data Search. Denial of Service will very rarely achieve what you want to do; most times the node being off is the opposite of helpful.
That security system or rigger-controlled drone being disconnected from everything is totally the opposite of helpful. And that's still ONE icon's worth of identification; if there's more than one piece of information, you're in trouble. Knowing which Icon is the attacking IC is an initiative pass or longer, unless there's more than one, then the time frame is multiplied; which shouldn't even work for Data Search, because you cannot Google "every icon I care about."
-
"This action can be used on any large amount of data, such as a list of icons in a node" - SR4A, page 230, Data Search action. You might use your Analyze program instead of Browse, but that's the action. Know how's about you actually list your issues?
That gives you a list of icons in a node, that doesn't tell you which icon is which. It is explicit that you need to take a simple action to determine whether one icon is a Program, a Persona, a Sprite, an Arrow, or even Colonel Sanders's Secret Recipe.
And let's not forget the Denial of Service rules. You don't even need to succeed, as even failing to hack will make alerts, and a node will just plain shut down with too many alerts. If your goal is for a node to not even be on, which would be very handy in many cases, there's not really much they can do.
EDIT: At best, assuming you used that incorrect reading, it's still an entire Initiative Pass to identify ONE icon; presuming all icons are in near plain-view (Threshold 2). If you somehow care about more than one icon, which you very well should, things are going to get hairy very quick.
It doesn't "give" you the list, it looks through the list based on whatever criteria - Data Search is a very flexible action; if you know enough about the icons you're looking for, you can find them with one Data Search. Denial of Service will very rarely achieve what you want to do; most times the node being off is the opposite of helpful.
That security system or rigger-controlled drone being disconnected from everything is totally the opposite of helpful. And that's still ONE icon's worth of identification; if there's more than one piece of information, you're in trouble. Knowing which Icon is the attacking IC is an initiative pass or longer, unless there's more than one, then the time frame is multiplied; which shouldn't even work for Data Search, because you cannot Google "every icon I care about."
You search for IC using offensive programs against the relevant target(s).
-
A node under DDOS attack has three options. First, it can spoof its access ID, so that the DDOS can no longer find its target. The node must be offline (not meshed with other nodes) to switch access ID. Second, it can try to block access from botnet access IDs or attempt to filter out all flooding traffic. The success of these latter options is largely up to the gamemaster’s discretion.
And that brings up the fact you can automagically stop ALL hackers by messing with Access IDs. You only make Matrix Perception tests on icons on the same node. If you need the Access ID of something, for example, on the node to get in the node, there's nothing you can do. Don't forget, nodes can totally refuse you without rolling dice for not having an Access ID (Unwired p. 99) or for having an Access ID they don't like (Unwired, p. 101), which can totally be "every Access ID that isn't the one I accept." Before you try to be clever and go on about spoofing one of those Access IDs, you need to share a node with one of the icons that already has one of the accepted Access IDs. If a system doesn't put any of its icons that are allowed into the restricted areas into non-restricted areas, you can't hack it.
-
Sniffer first, than spoof. Simple enough - that kind of logon script is a delaying action, sure, but easy enough to get around.
-
And if the two nodes communicate (awfully convenient they're being) behind a node with its own Access ID stored inside, sniffer won't work. And this rabbit hole can just keep getting deeper. By the time you finally get deep enough, the Access IDs are reset to something new and you're kicked back to the starting line.
-
No, because Access ID's are hardware bound and very difficult to permanently change. Which means that you wind up having everyone spoofing in, which is a massive vulnerability.
And you can get into the intermediary node and then your life easier.
I'm sorry, but you simply do not understand the Matrix rules.
-
So, anyone up for actually being constructive, rather than putting down and insulting the new guy? I wasn't looking for affirmation of my house rules, and was honestly more interested in advice with the setting/plot.
-
So, anyone up for actually being constructive, rather than putting down and insulting the new guy? I wasn't looking for affirmation of my house rules, and was honestly more interested in advice with the setting/plot.
No one is insulting you, but rather advising you to run with the actual rules first instead of some weird collection of house rules that do seem to be inspired by the "CGL Bashing Trolls".
-
Spoof chips are small firmware add-ons that automatically generate a new access ID for a vehicle node (or any device) on a regular basis,
My favourite node mod.
Personally, I wouldn't consider a Hardware + Logic (2) or Hacking + Software (2) test to be very difficult, though.
-
No, because Access ID's are hardware bound and very difficult to permanently change. Which means that you wind up having everyone spoofing in, which is a massive vulnerability.
And you can get into the intermediary node and then your life easier.
I'm sorry, but you simply do not understand the Matrix rules.
Did you not read what I said? There's no traffic to sniff if the nodes communicate behind a wired node you don't have the Access ID to.
-
So, anyone up for actually being constructive, rather than putting down and insulting the new guy? I wasn't looking for affirmation of my house rules, and was honestly more interested in advice with the setting/plot.
No one is insulting you, but rather advising you to run with the actual rules first instead of some weird collection of house rules that do seem to be inspired by the "CGL Bashing Trolls".
Then he needs to work on his delivery, because his tone has been dripping; especially with the obvious assumptions that I have no first-hand experience with the system (which is subjective, at best).
-
So, anyone up for actually being constructive, rather than putting down and insulting the new guy? I wasn't looking for affirmation of my house rules, and was honestly more interested in advice with the setting/plot.
No one is insulting you, but rather advising you to run with the actual rules first instead of some weird collection of house rules that do seem to be inspired by the "CGL Bashing Trolls".
Then he needs to work on his delivery, because his tone has been dripping; especially with the obvious assumptions that I have no first-hand experience with the system (which is subjective, at best).
You never said wired - that is a different case, though splicing into the cable (hello microdrone) certainly becomes an option. Or just stealing/hacking/gaining the Access ID of a device with access.
And if you think my tone is dripping, well... There's no nice way to say it: Grow a thicker skin. This is a pretty polite approach to this conversation, and if you're taking that personally, it is the furthest thing from being anyone's fault but yours.
And this little "hack and forth" doesn't really get at why you think the Matrix rules are broken.
-
Then he needs to work on his delivery, because his tone has been dripping; especially with the obvious assumptions that I have no first-hand experience with the system (which is subjective, at best).
Are you familiar with the Tacoma Narrows Bridge? It was designed by people with all the relevant knowledge. However, they lacked
practical experience with that type of location. The bridge looked good on paper.
Have you played SR4A? Have you hacked against a GM using the full hacking rules in Unwired and the BBB? Have you GMed using them?
Have you run the system? One thing about RPGs I have learned over the years: there are things that seem to make no sense when
you just read them, but when you run them, you see why the developers and writers did what they did. You asked the veteran GMs
on this forum for advice. I have been gaming since 1992. I have played and GMed dozens of systems. The one constant I have seen
through all those years and systems is: Play system "as is" first, house rule as little as possible, and based only on your practical,
hands-on experience.
-
so much for reading comprehension.
virgil stated that he already played SR4.
he just never GMed it.
-
so much for reading comprehension.
virgil stated that he already played SR4.
he just never GMed it.
I just looked through all his posts in this thread. No where do I see him explicitly state this. The closest was when he stated that
he doesn't need to play to know the matrix is broken. Frankly, no system is anymore or less broken then the GM lets it be. That
he gets defensive when people suggest running with the rules as is, or asks him about his SR4A experience, in fact, is somewhat
suspicious.
-
so much for reading comprehension.
virgil stated that he already played SR4.
he just never GMed it.
I just looked through all his posts in this thread. No where do I see him explicitly state this. The closest was when he stated that
he doesn't need to play to know the matrix is broken. Frankly, no system is anymore or less broken then the GM lets it be. That
he gets defensive when people suggest running with the rules as is, or asks him about his SR4A experience, in fact, is somewhat
suspicious.
And i stand by my point of insufficient reading comprehension because of postings like this.
and I'd be saying that to anyone listing off a bunch of starting houserules for their first time playing the system, not just when they're coming from a number of misconceptions (like when you call the Matrix rules utterly broken).
Wait, deciding the Matrix rules are broken is a misconception on their/my part?
Assuming the standard definition of broken? Quite.
I don't need to play/run a bunch of Shadowrun to see the flaws in the Matrix rules, and how they can readily and thoroughly break; reading comprehension on my own part showed me that.
Also, I have played this game before. I stated I had never DM'd for it, which is different. I do appreciate the more constructive input, and am actually thinking about things on my end.
-
And this little "hack and forth" doesn't really get at why you think the Matrix rules are broken.
Says the person that thinks Data Search replaces the need for a Matrix Perception Test of every icon on a node.
-
A node under DDOS attack has three options. First, it can spoof its access ID, so that the DDOS can no longer find its target. The node must be offline (not meshed with other nodes) to switch access ID. Second, it can try to block access from botnet access IDs or attempt to filter out all flooding traffic. The success of these latter options is largely up to the gamemaster’s discretion.
And that brings up the fact you can automagically stop ALL hackers by messing with Access IDs. You only make Matrix Perception tests on icons on the same node. If you need the Access ID of something, for example, on the node to get in the node, there's nothing you can do. Don't forget, nodes can totally refuse you without rolling dice for not having an Access ID (Unwired p. 99) or for having an Access ID they don't like (Unwired, p. 101), which can totally be "every Access ID that isn't the one I accept." Before you try to be clever and go on about spoofing one of those Access IDs, you need to share a node with one of the icons that already has one of the accepted Access IDs. If a system doesn't put any of its icons that are allowed into the restricted areas into non-restricted areas, you can't hack it.
No offense, but I'm not sure you really grok the Matrix rules.
Access IDs do not create an impregnable data fortress. Access ID level security is used for things like garage door openers. With all due respect, if you cannot hack a garage door opener, you need to re-read the Matrix rules, specifically Hacking the Matrix, starting on SR4A 235.
If you don't have an Access ID for a node, you can either hack it, or your can simply spoof it. Spoofing is not the impossible task which you seem to think - all you have to do is either sniff the traffic going into and out of the node, or simply observe an authorized user.
The only nodes that don't have any traffic or users are "black hole" data islands. That sort of node would only be used by either the Government, major Corp, or other major league badasses like Dragons and the Vorovskoy mir, and then only for data that they really really want to protect, but don't need to access. You can still get in, you just have to hack it. My advice would be, before attempting to hack such a node, you should look at the bones. Look at the bones, man!
With that out of the way, off topic and onto the tone:
This thread is in a death spiral. Some people, when they ask for advice, are actually looking for help with the rules. Other people are simply seeking affirmation. If you are the former, your tone (whether you mean it or not) is coming across as defensive and combative - if you want people to respond to you in a more civil tone, first look to your own posts. If you are the latter, godspeed. There are tons of incredibly knowledgeable people on these forums, more than willing to help, but they're not going to bow down and kiss your ring.
As the saying goes - if you want respect, first you have to give it.
Or, as the other saying goes:
"If everyone thinks you're being an ass...you probably are."
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
So, anyone up for actually being constructive, rather than putting down and insulting the new guy? I wasn't looking for affirmation of my house rules, and was honestly more interested in advice with the setting/plot.
I hope you have found my input constructive virgil, I don't think I've put you down or insulted you, even when you became combative. And I know it seems everyone is just being dicks when all you're hearing is "you're doing it wrong", but truly the vast majority of input has just been long-time players and GMs attempting to guide you to what they have found to work for a rewarding and fun gaming experience.
The point of gaming should be the RP and the story, the rules are just the framework. Even if the frame doesn't meet end-to-end in some places, it's easy enough to bridge the gaps (adjust target numbers, adjust die pools, adjust whatever - on the fly) so that it makes a good story. You don't need to build a new frame.
My constructive advice:
1. Give Karmagen a try, do the 750 Karma) buy (375 limit to Attributes), plus my formerly mentioned BP Cost = Karma Cost for Metahumanity. If you want to free up a few additional Karma for skills for you players, give them CHAx2 free Karma for Contacts and INT+LOGx4 free Karma for Knowledges. This is actually my favorite way to do Karmagen - though I've never found a GM (yet) who would do it. If you really feel you need to help out Magicians/Adepts (in addition to using Ways and Optional Adept Geasa rules), take MAG out of the 375 Attribute limit.
2. Don't take the Matrix too seriously - which is to say, don't try and take make it as complex as it really should be. You can easily bog down a run, leaving your non-hackers staring at their phones. I'm not familiar with Ends, so I don't know what it does, but IMHO - extract the most salient concepts/programs and use them, water-down the rest, and just strike a balance between a) keep things moving with as few checks as possible as is necessary to b) challenge your Hacker appropriately and c) represent the complexity/difficulty of the system - with a heavy weighting towards keeping things moving.
3. You said your players have played 3rd, so maybe this won't be an issue, but don't be too much of a hard-ass in the beginning - do make their actions (i.e. stupidity) have consequences, but go easy at the outset. The "Big-Brother is Everywhere" thing is where me and my group struggled at the beginning - covering our asses.
4. It's a little cliche to go with the "No Run is as simple as it seems." approach or the back-stabbing Johnson, and while they're both good tools - and should be employed - don't over do it. Some runs should be as straightforward as they seem. But (with advice 3 in mind) then what are the unexpected consequences? Who were those bulbs actually meant for? What is the client doing with the bulbs, and could it come back to bite the players later on? Who's gonna be pissed and looking for the guys that took 'em? What else did they fence that can be used to track them? Have it come down through the grape-vine. Use contacts as integral characters in your story. It's unfortunate when they're just used as proxy checks for acquiring stuff or finding out stuff or mending wounds, etc., in the best Cyber-punk - the "Contacts" are characters you care about and your players should care their Contacts (appropriate to their Loyalty ;D). Make their Lifestyles a living part of the story, the Neighborhood and Security are given ratings for a reason. Make the story come to them, if they living in a crappy neighborhood (or even if a nice one) and have lax security, thugs see them come and go with fly gear (high-postin', as they say), maybe the get broken into while they're gone and have their stashes stolen - having them get it back is the fun part.
5. Have fun, don't get hung up on the rules.
-
Thank you, emsquared.
T99 needs the bulbs for weapons research, specifically to investigate the viability of making anti-spirit lasers and high speed astral photography. I haven't quite figured out the goal of the Illuminates in getting the bulbs, possibly for PR by using them to highlight the use of magic in front of laymen or general astral security (expensive floodlights, but they're loaded).
-
If you don't have an Access ID for a node, you can either hack it, or your can simply spoof it. Spoofing is not the impossible task which you seem to think - all you have to do is either sniff the traffic going into and out of the node, or simply observe an authorized user.
Of course, even if you manage to spoof the Access ID, the IC can choose to instead of attacking your icon to just toggle the permission for the Access ID the intruding character is using to "No." Indefinitely, after a cool down, or even after one round; it does not matter because now the player has to start all over on trying to get in without a single opposed test to resist. If spoofing your Access ID grants diplomatic immunity against IC and security spiders, then all of those other Matrix rules are pointless.
-
If you don't have an Access ID for a node, you can either hack it, or your can simply spoof it. Spoofing is not the impossible task which you seem to think - all you have to do is either sniff the traffic going into and out of the node, or simply observe an authorized user.
Of course, even if you manage to spoof the Access ID, the IC can choose to instead of attacking your icon to just toggle the permission for the Access ID the intruding character is using to "No." Indefinitely, after a cool down, or even after one round; it does not matter because now the player has to start all over on trying to get in without a single opposed test to resist. If spoofing your Access ID grants diplomatic immunity against IC and security spiders, then all of those other Matrix rules are pointless.
That depends entirely on the permissions the IC has. And as far as Spoofing the ID goes, you do need to remain within the permissions that that ID has, and use whatever other authentication might correlate to that ID.
-
If you're the GM, and you set out to break the game, or allow your players to break the game, I don't have sympathy if you then hold up the jagged pieces and cry to the uncaring skies that it is broken.
A man said to the universe, "I exist."
"Yes," the universe replied, "The fact has not created in me a sense of obligation."
Of course, the poster asked for feedback more than 'say no' (though "reconsider changes" is still feedback that I think isn't being shown to be considered), though I sense more combativeness than is probably good for getting good answers from the veterans here.
If you really feel you need to help out Magicians/Adepts (in addition to using Ways and Optional Adept Geasa rules), take MAG out of the 375 Attribute limit.
Magic/Resonance and Edge are already separate from the 375 attribute limit:Players may not spend more than half their total BP on Physical
and Mental attributes (for a standard 400 BP character, this means a
cap of 200 BP).
Back to the opening question, the setting seems to leave enough room for any particular specialty-type of character to have something to do, so I can't think of anything to add. The security mentioned might seem light, but a surprise roving patrol could change all of that...
-
If you really feel you need to help out Magicians/Adepts (in addition to using Ways and Optional Adept Geasa rules), take MAG out of the 375 Attribute limit.
Magic/Resonance and Edge are already separate from the 375 attribute limit
Not in Karmagen they're not.
-
If you don't have an Access ID for a node, you can either hack it, or your can simply spoof it. Spoofing is not the impossible task which you seem to think - all you have to do is either sniff the traffic going into and out of the node, or simply observe an authorized user.
Of course, even if you manage to spoof the Access ID, the IC can choose to instead of attacking your icon to just toggle the permission for the Access ID the intruding character is using to "No." Indefinitely, after a cool down, or even after one round; it does not matter because now the player has to start all over on trying to get in without a single opposed test to resist. If spoofing your Access ID grants diplomatic immunity against IC and security spiders, then all of those other Matrix rules are pointless.
Unwired 67 has rules for attempting to terminate a connection. A check is required.
An Access ID is like using a security badge to enter a building. Once you're in, they can deny further access to that badge, but f they want you out, they have to throw you out.
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
Magic/Resonance and Edge are already separate from the 375 attribute limit
Not in Karmagen they're not.
This.
-
Just simple advice (this goes for all RPGs).
If your running the game for the first time and the players playing the game for the first time too. Then just use the designated core book/books (core races, core classes, core rules), simply put play Vanilla first. And only after that start house ruling stuff and allowing additional books.
This advice goes for every RPG. Just imagine allowing Vampires and AI and stuff like that in you first ever session of a game that you and the players just started playing. XD