Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Gamemasters' Lounge => Topic started by: MarmaladeEffect on <03-04-13/1418:01>
-
So one of my players is playing a technomancer. I try to give him interesting stuff to do - lots of opportunities to hack unusual things, even in combat-heavy scenes. However, he just goes and hacks the guns of whoever they're fighting. It works really well, and I can only believably pull "this guy has a gun without Matrix connectivity" or "this guy's got a longbow" every so often (especially since there's a longbow wielder on the team), but it sort of feels like I'm doing something wrong - if nothing else, it gets pretty repetitive. It also means that non-mage ranged opponents become melee opponents pretty fast.
-
Why do you think disabling wireless on a weapon would be so uncommon? Have your baddies skinlink their smartgun systems (this should be the norm for anyone who's more savvy than a Ganger, I'd think), at least that puts a commlink in between the Techno and it, should at least slow him down.
-
First, is he hacking the guns directly, or the shooter's PAN? If it is the gun directly, then the signal range is not going to be that high (Signal 0 or 1). This means the TM has to be up in the guy's face to do his hacking.
Second, is he doing this in VR or AR? VR may be quicker, but remember it leaves you all kinds of vulnerable.
Third, why don't any of these guys have basic matrix security? The gun nodes will all be Hidden, natch, and their PANs should be, as well. Extended test to find them. Analyze program on the PAN and a decent Firewall helps keep hackers out. Throwing some encryption or IC on there will slow him down. Not to mention skinlinking the gun. None of these are expensive.
-
First, is he hacking the guns directly, or the shooter's PAN? If it is the gun directly, then the signal range is not going to be that high (Signal 0 or 1). This means the TM has to be up in the guy's face to do his hacking.
Second, is he doing this in VR or AR? VR may be quicker, but remember it leaves you all kinds of vulnerable.
Third, why don't any of these guys have basic matrix security? The gun nodes will all be Hidden, natch, and their PANs should be, as well. Extended test to find them. Analyze program on the PAN and a decent Firewall helps keep hackers out. Throwing some encryption or IC on there will slow him down. Not to mention skinlinking the gun. None of these are expensive.
Mutual Signal Range is not required. Routing is an option.
However, these guys should have their PAN slaved to their commlinks, and their commlinks should have decent security. You cannot directly hack into a slaved device, though you can spoof it. To hack it you have to hack the master node. If the enemy is running a centralized tacnet, the master node is probably gonna be a freaking fortress.
-
However, these guys should have their PAN slaved to their commlinks, and their commlinks should have decent security. You cannot directly hack into a slaved device, though you can spoof it. To hack it you have to hack the master node. If the enemy is running a centralized tacnet, the master node is probably gonna be a freaking fortress.
Not necessarily - tech-savvy paramilitaries might have the desire to string together a tacnet but wouldn't have massive firewalls with black IC roaming around. Still, you've got a point.
I can't really think of what else a technomancer would be hacking if a combat situation is starting up. What else would he use? Skinlink echo and melee them, disabling their gun and then messing them up in successive IPs? Mind Over Machine echo and send parked cars into pursuing gangers, or into their guns and instruct the guns to eject clips and go into a diagnostic mode? Not sure how viable these would be in actual combat situations.
-
However, these guys should have their PAN slaved to their commlinks, and their commlinks should have decent security. You cannot directly hack into a slaved device, though you can spoof it. To hack it you have to hack the master node. If the enemy is running a centralized tacnet, the master node is probably gonna be a freaking fortress.
Not necessarily - tech-savvy paramilitaries might have the desire to string together a tacnet but wouldn't have massive firewalls with black IC roaming around. Still, you've got a point.
I can't really think of what else a technomancer would be hacking if a combat situation is starting up. What else would he use? Skinlink echo and melee them, disabling their gun and then messing them up in successive IPs? Mind Over Machine echo and send parked cars into pursuing gangers, or into their guns and instruct the guns to eject clips and go into a diagnostic mode? Not sure how viable these would be in actual combat situations.
I said centralized, which means everything goes through the primary node. Your example would be decentralized.
-
Why not simply equip some of your bad guys with weapons that are not using a smartlink. A simple, basic revoler, shotgun, or whatever you choose has nothing that can be hacked. Another option would be to have them retaliate with melee combat when he hacks their guns.
-
Why not simply equip some of your bad guys with weapons that are not using a smartlink. A simple, basic revoler, shotgun, or whatever you choose has nothing that can be hacked. Another option would be to have them retaliate with melee combat when he hacks their guns.
So, make the enemies less effective? :P
-
I think the hacking cyberware/guns thing is kind of contrived, myself. Who the heck would leave a weapon's wireless turned on when they know it can be hacked? Same thing for 'ware like wired reflexes. Maybe if turning wireless off wasn't so simple, or skinlinks weren't so cheap, this Ghost In The Shell-type hacking would make more logical sense. But the way the rules are now, the only people with wireless turned on should be gangers like emsquared said, or people with a complicated PAN setup that can't really be hacked within the relatively short time from of combat.
-
Hacking guns and ware is lame imo. I don't do it in my games. I can see why others like it, but I don't. I think it would be more fun for the Technomancer to actually participate in combat instead of just hacking stuff during it. And before anyone says "that makes Street Samurai op", eh, I find it boring so I don't do it :P
-
I'll just say, Shadowjack, that since TMs don't have access to initiative boosters unless a mage casts a spell on them, they take (potentially quite addicting) combat drugs, or hamstring their power with ware, then being in AR/VR and hacking things is probably the best contribution they can make to combat. Sure, if they submerge a couple times and choose the right echoes, they can grab an echo that gives them extra IPs in the meat, but that's a LONG way down the road.
Mutual Signal Range is not required. Routing is an option.
However, these guys should have their PAN slaved to their commlinks, and their commlinks should have decent security. You cannot directly hack into a slaved device, though you can spoof it. To hack it you have to hack the master node. If the enemy is running a centralized tacnet, the master node is probably gonna be a freaking fortress.
You still have to be subscribed to a node within signal range of the node you want to hack, RHat, and be able to find that node in the first place. Also, you don't slave the PAN to the commlink. The PAN is run through the commlink. If you mean that they should be slaving the gun to the PAN, then yes, you're absolutely correct, which is why it is almost always easier to hack the PAN than it is the gun itself.
This is separate from the issues of a tacnet. In a centralized tacnet, the PAN itself is not slaved to the tacnet, but the tacnet is run out of the centralized node. The individual PANs of the tacnet members can still be hacked on their own. Of course, if a hacker gets into one of those PANs, they can then use the tacnet connection as a way into the central node, which they would have to then hack in order to compromise the tacnet proper.
I think the hacking cyberware/guns thing is kind of contrived, myself. Who the heck would leave a weapon's wireless turned on when they know it can be hacked? Same thing for 'ware like wired reflexes. Maybe if turning wireless off wasn't so simple, or skinlinks weren't so cheap, this Ghost In The Shell-type hacking would make more logical sense. But the way the rules are now, the only people with wireless turned on should be gangers like emsquared said, or people with a complicated PAN setup that can't really be hacked within the relatively short time from of combat.
I've always said that the idea of hacking an implant or gun directly is downright silly. You (or a device you're subscribed to) need to be within 3m of someone's cyberware to hack it. That is NOT subtle. What happens, unless someone is blatantly disregarding the rules, is that your PAN gets hacked, and they play with things from there, since all those devices are subscribed to your PAN. What this means is that practicing even basic matrix security can keep you from being an easy target.
But let's just be perfectly honest here. Just like it is theoretically possible to rob Fort Knox, it is possible to hack any system, no matter how secure. All you need is time, a bit of luck, and good enough programs. It is the 'time' thing that makes even a rating 3 Firewall and Rating 3 Analyze and Encrypt programs enough generally to keep you from being hacked long enough to get through combat. That Rating 3 Firewall can come from one of a couple stock operating systems in the core book, and even if you don't get them as part of a package, the Analyze and Encrypt programs together would only run 300 nuyen. Compared to the cost of your ware, that's a pittance. Remember, the secret to not getting robbed isn't to have an impenetrable fortress, it is to make it inconvenient enough that they will likely get caught before they can get in and get the goods, while another guy down the road is a much softer target. Which is why, barring sammies who don't know how to secure their PAN, it is simpler usually to hack the car nearby and run over the sammy.
-
Mutual Signal Range is not required. Routing is an option.
However, these guys should have their PAN slaved to their commlinks, and their commlinks should have decent security. You cannot directly hack into a slaved device, though you can spoof it. To hack it you have to hack the master node. If the enemy is running a centralized tacnet, the master node is probably gonna be a freaking fortress.
You still have to be subscribed to a node within signal range of the node you want to hack, RHat, and be able to find that node in the first place. Also, you don't slave the PAN to the commlink. The PAN is run through the commlink. If you mean that they should be slaving the gun to the PAN, then yes, you're absolutely correct, which is why it is almost always easier to hack the PAN than it is the gun itself.
This is separate from the issues of a tacnet. In a centralized tacnet, the PAN itself is not slaved to the tacnet, but the tacnet is run out of the centralized node. The individual PANs of the tacnet members can still be hacked on their own. Of course, if a hacker gets into one of those PANs, they can then use the tacnet connection as a way into the central node, which they would have to then hack in order to compromise the tacnet proper.
1: You require mutual signal range or a subscription - a subscription does not specifically require you to subscribe to another node in MSR. It just requires that there be at least one other node in MSR which has MSR to at least one other node and so on, whether or not you have access. That's how the mesh works. If a hacker in Seattle wants to hack something in Neo-Tokyo, he doesn't need to hack a chain of nodes to get there.
2: The PAN is run through the commlink, but anyone who has the least reason to be security-aware slaves the PAN to the commlink.
3: In a centralized tacnet, the rest of the team slaves their commlinks over to the master node. This is made explicit in the description of centralized tacnets - see Unwired, page 125.
-
Did I miss a mention of the palm chip cyber safety?
With that, plus cyberware image link / smart link, you need never go wireless with your own guns. Security forces with better pay grades than mall cops should consider these.
-
Did I miss a mention of the palm chip cyber safety?
With that, plus cyberware image link / smart link, you need never go wireless with your own guns. Security forces with better pay grades than mall cops should consider these.
I do this on any of my characters, and the cost is negligible (175 for the chip in your hand, 0 essence cost, 200 for the chip on the gun, no mod slots). There is no reason at all anybody but the poorest goons shouldn't have this.
-
Note that the wireless override applies only if you have a cyberware smartlink.
-
1: You require mutual signal range or a subscription - a subscription does not specifically require you to subscribe to another node in MSR. It just requires that there be at least one other node in MSR which has MSR to at least one other node and so on, whether or not you have access. That's how the mesh works. If a hacker in Seattle wants to hack something in Neo-Tokyo, he doesn't need to hack a chain of nodes to get there.
2: The PAN is run through the commlink, but anyone who has the least reason to be security-aware slaves the PAN to the commlink.
3: In a centralized tacnet, the rest of the team slaves their commlinks over to the master node. This is made explicit in the description of centralized tacnets - see Unwired, page 125.
RHat, the PAN can't be slaved to the commlink, the PAN IS the commlink! It is your desktop when you boot up your PC.
As far as routing goes, that is true for nodes that are Public, but Hidden nodes you still have to search for, and that means you need access to a wireless system's processing power to run your scan program. Doesn't mean you need admin access, or even have to hack it if it is a node with a public access feature, but you have to have access to a node to run programs on the node, and Scan is a program. For argument's sake, let's assume that the guys you're fighting aren't complete morons, and have their commlinks in hidden mode.
I concede your point on number 3. It had been a while since I read that.
However, the gun will almost always be slaved to the PAN, which means the easiest way to hack in is to hack the PAN.
-
A single device cannot per definition be a network. So, given that a PAN is your Personal Area Network...
As for Hidden mode: If you haven't found it yet, that would be the one time you need MSR. But that's what the sam's commlink is for.
-
I'll just say, Shadowjack, that since TMs don't have access to initiative boosters unless a mage casts a spell on them, they take (potentially quite addicting) combat drugs, or hamstring their power with ware, then being in AR/VR and hacking things is probably the best contribution they can make to combat. Sure, if they submerge a couple times and choose the right echoes, they can grab an echo that gives them extra IPs in the meat, but that's a LONG way down the road.
Good point. Personally, I would prefer just to fire a shot or two and contribute that way. Even moderately skilled combatants can still deliver some game changing attacks.
-
A single device cannot per definition be a network. So, given that a PAN is your Personal Area Network...
From the rulebook
Almost everyone has their own personal area network (PAN), a micro-network linking together all of their personal devices with their commlink as the central router and Matrix hub.
So yes your commlink is your point at which you hack someones PAN, even if its there only electrical device.
-
Precisely. The commlink is the core of the PAN, just like the master node is the core of a slaved network.
-
It would be interesting to get a run down from the OP of what a typical combat turn involving the Techno looks like.
Because assuming he's done the whole find hidden node stuff before combat starts he's just ejecting the clip from one mook per turn which is still less than the multi-kill per turn the Sams would be doing.
-
Note that the wireless override applies only if you have a cyberware smartlink.
It's about 2000 nuyen for the lot, retail. (cybersafety palm chip, gun mod, image link and smart link cyberware) Less if you're getting a bulk deal, are a subsidiary of a manufacturing corp, etc.
-
First, thanks a lot for the help, everyone. Next combat is going to go a bit differently.
It would be interesting to get a run down from the OP of what a typical combat turn involving the Techno looks like.
Because assuming he's done the whole find hidden node stuff before combat starts he's just ejecting the clip from one mook per turn which is still less than the multi-kill per turn the Sams would be doing.
The rest of the party is a face, a sniper (who doesn't believe in 'ware or drugs and isn't an adept), and a troll street sam with a tank build. The sniper only kills one mook per turn, and so does the troll, since she either melees (complex action) or uses a bow (which is really devastating, but also a complex action). The face only kills a guy if he gets lucky. I encouraged the sam to get wired reflexes, but she didn't want to, which means the technomancer is the only one with more than one IP.
And, like I said, I do try to provide other interesting stuff for the technomancer to do, like cars to drive into people, turrets to take over, fire suppression systems to activate/deactivate, doors to hack, drones to hack, etc.
-
So in other words, the main cause of the problem doesn't lie with the technomancer, but with the fact that your group intentionally gimped themselves for style points. Cool characterization, but it does affect the balance of things.
-
Note that the wireless override applies only if you have a cyberware smartlink.
It's about 2000 nuyen for the lot, retail. (cybersafety palm chip, gun mod, image link and smart link cyberware) Less if you're getting a bulk deal, are a subsidiary of a manufacturing corp, etc.
My point was that many people don't have cyberware at all, especially if the security team includes adepts or mages.
-
It's not uncommon for awakened corp security to have 'ware.
-
It's not uncommon for awakened corp security to have 'ware.
Depending on the GM, I suppose. All I'm saying is don't assume everyone has it.
-
So in other words, the main cause of the problem doesn't lie with the technomancer, but with the fact that your group intentionally gimped themselves for style points. Cool characterization, but it does affect the balance of things.
Also, the techomancer is the only one who's totally familiar with the system and into optimizing characters. The others are under the impression that they've got decent stats. And I'm not sure they don't, for very specific circumstances like fighting a heavily armored opponent.
-
So in other words, the main cause of the problem doesn't lie with the technomancer, but with the fact that your group intentionally gimped themselves for style points. Cool characterization, but it does affect the balance of things.
Also, the techomancer is the only one who's totally familiar with the system and into optimizing characters. The others are under the impression that they've got decent stats. And I'm not sure they don't, for very specific circumstances like fighting a heavily armored opponent.
Now that you mention this, it strikes me that the technomancer might actually be trying to stay (relatively) low profile in combat and not just eat everyone else's spotlight. Or maybe he just likes battlefield control effects. Disabling an enemy is effective at that level of group optimization, keeps him alive and everyone else feels like they're contributing. If that's not the case you may have an issue though, but from what you're saying no one feels massively overshadowed.
Just make sure you don't back him into a corner (though from what you've said he should have plenty of background objects to turn on corpsec).
-
So in other words, the main cause of the problem doesn't lie with the technomancer, but with the fact that your group intentionally gimped themselves for style points. Cool characterization, but it does affect the balance of things.
Also, the techomancer is the only one who's totally familiar with the system and into optimizing characters. The others are under the impression that they've got decent stats. And I'm not sure they don't, for very specific circumstances like fighting a heavily armored opponent.
Now that you mention this, it strikes me that the technomancer might actually be trying to stay (relatively) low profile in combat and not just eat everyone else's spotlight. Or maybe he just likes battlefield control effects. Disabling an enemy is effective at that level of group optimization, keeps him alive and everyone else feels like they're contributing. If that's not the case you may have an issue though, but from what you're saying no one feels massively overshadowed.
Just make sure you don't back him into a corner (though from what you've said he should have plenty of background objects to turn on corpsec).
Against a single, heavily armored opponent, perhaps they do. Against anything else, however, not so much. This is the kind of group that could take out a main battle tank in the surprise round, but get wasted by a group of low level gangers who just got their first wires second-hand. The face is understandable, as there are other considerations there, but if the sniper and samurai are actively avoiding getting extra IPs, then they are the reason the technomancer looks so good.
What you may need is an object lesson in the power of additional Initiative passes. Wait until the next time they run against Renraku, and have a squad of Red Samurai on site. Whether that is in the intel or not is up to you, but I'd go with surprising them. Use the stats in the SR4A book, and have a four-man squad. Be nice, and put gel rounds in the assault rifles. The reason being that there are things in the area that react badly to bullets, in the "Oh god, we're all gonna die" kind of way. Any of the group that gets knocked out gets to play the "offer you can't refuse" game.
Or, if you want something more towards their level, but still showing an object lesson in the power of IPs, have a rigger work against them, with several drones in concert. Show them what a difference having just one extra IP means, especially when there is someone in the system keeping the TM from simply waltzing in to disarm the threat.
I say this from personal experience as a player. A TPK, now and then, can be a good learning experience, especially when you didn't know there was a lesson you needed to learn. Now, should every encounter be trying to wipe the players out? Of course not. But every once in a while, you have to throw a fastball in on their hands to keep them honest.
-
I say this from personal experience as a player. A TPK, now and then, can be a good learning experience, especially when you didn't know there was a lesson you needed to learn. Now, should every encounter be trying to wipe the players out? Of course not. But every once in a while, you have to throw a fastball in on their hands to keep them honest.
Whereas I feel that if a TPK occurs while I'm running, that I have failed as a GM.
-
I say this from personal experience as a player. A TPK, now and then, can be a good learning experience, especially when you didn't know there was a lesson you needed to learn. Now, should every encounter be trying to wipe the players out? Of course not. But every once in a while, you have to throw a fastball in on their hands to keep them honest.
Whereas I feel that if a TPK occurs while I'm running, that I have failed as a GM.
Not so. Sometimes, the dice gods hate your players. Sometimes, they make really stupid decisions. Sometimes, they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Now if you throw a Dire Tiger against a party of Level 1s because it came up on the random encounter chart, then yes, you fail as a DM. Throwing a tough encounter at the party that they need to be clever to overcome, or should to run like hell from? If it is something appropriate for the facility they're hitting, and they get wiped, that's just the way things go. Have them wake up in a 'secure facility' with an 'offer they can't refuse'.
-
I say this from personal experience as a player. A TPK, now and then, can be a good learning experience, especially when you didn't know there was a lesson you needed to learn. Now, should every encounter be trying to wipe the players out? Of course not. But every once in a while, you have to throw a fastball in on their hands to keep them honest.
Whereas I feel that if a TPK occurs while I'm running, that I have failed as a GM.
Not so. Sometimes, the dice gods hate your players. Sometimes, they make really stupid decisions. Sometimes, they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Now if you throw a Dire Tiger against a party of Level 1s because it came up on the random encounter chart, then yes, you fail as a DM. Throwing a tough encounter at the party that they need to be clever to overcome, or should to run like hell from? If it is something appropriate for the facility they're hitting, and they get wiped, that's just the way things go. Have them wake up in a 'secure facility' with an 'offer they can't refuse'.
"Tough" is relative, and far too easy to go too far on. I'd rather err on the side of caution and end up going a bit too low than risk going overboard and ending up slaughtering them all. Better to end up things being a bit too easy than to cause them to end up wasting their time with making that character. (The "wake up in a secure facility" thing is just contrived, and can far too easily end up turning into railroading)
-
I'm used to the groups I'm playing in having wildly differing optimization levels, and only sometimes realizing that. We had everything from a straight-up powergamer to the classic bard, in the same group. It was. . . interesting. In such a group, its often easier to take a battlefield control or buff/debuff style build and optimize that than it is to get the other people to step up their game.
That said, all the pregens I'm building for my test session will have 2 IPs or a damn good reason not to. I intend to show them the power of IPs the easy way rather than the hard way (and the jump from 1 IP Profession 4 goons to 3 IP Profession 5 goons seems rather steep).
-
There are some that will say that extra IP's hurt their game, that it breaks with what they think the world should be like, that the means to get them are too easy and therefore broken, and other things. Most of your players are new to the game, as I understand it, so they may get that opinion if confronted with opponents with those extra IP's. Here is something that should be asked of them should they acquire such an opinion:
If extra IP's are so broken, then why haven't you taken them to stay alive?
-
The rest of the party is a face, a sniper (who doesn't believe in 'ware or drugs and isn't an adept), and a troll street sam with a tank build. The sniper only kills one mook per turn, and so does the troll, since she either melees (complex action) or uses a bow (which is really devastating, but also a complex action). The face only kills a guy if he gets lucky. I encouraged the sam to get wired reflexes, but she didn't want to, which means the technomancer is the only one with more than one IP.
Yeah, I missed this post at first, but I have to agree with Mirikon: The technomancer is not your problem. Your players need to understand that in Shadowrun, power comes at a cost. If you won't get multiple passes in any method at all, you're just boned. That's just how the world is.
Of course, for the sake of character development... Throw some weak multi-pass enemies at them - even just gangers who are all on combat drugs would do. They should probably lose that fight because of the fact that they just don't have enough passes. Demonstrate the failings of not having more passes. If you want to make sure that losing won't carry too much risk of character death, than just change the goal of the encounter - maybe they have to stop the gangers from doing something specific (use an Extended Test with a Complex Action interval, perhaps).
Extra IPs, at least in your specialty (social stuff aside) is something of a must-have; this isn't overpowered due to the simple fact that this is how it's supposed to be.
-
Things like street sam and anything that supposed to be a combat monkey "should" have more then one init pass..as would a combat mage..however stuff like the face or rigger, hacker can do with only 1 in the meet world..sure more pass would help for those random encounters but not everyone wants to take rank two wired reflex or improved reflex for all ther characters. I mean I dunno if what you guys throw at your playes but im just looking the Seasons Missions sets and theres no encounter that iv been in that requires every to have 3 init pass..also remind you players about Cram..its a nice way to get an extra IP even if there not combat monster for those do or die situations
-
Noone's saying everyone should have 2 or 3 passes all the time. But for combat characters it is not optional to have multiple combat passes - and none of the OP's players took multiple passes, not even the combat characters.
-
I have made mention of this elsewhere, but this is a good place to reiterate it:
Technology uplifts those who utilize it, and subjugates those who ignore it.
Ignore it at your peril.
-
Technology uplifts those who utilize it, and subjugates those who ignore it.
Ignore it at your peril.
AMEN! And you don't have to have a top of the line 'link frozen solid with Black IC, either. Just having some basic encryption and IC that simply alerts you to the presence of intruders is enough to deter most hacking attempts, or making it difficult enough that they can't hack in during the span of combat.
-
But for combat characters it is not optional to have multiple combat passes - and none of the OP's players took multiple passes, not even the combat characters.
Except that, in fairness, right there in the core book we offer up stuff like the Weapons Specialist, that kind of tells people otherwise (or at least heavily implies otherwise). It sounds to me like this dude's campaign is built at the archetype level (including some of the stinkers in there), is all. If it's working for him except for this one optimized dude, then...well...good for him. I hope he reads over published adventures carefully before kicking up a fight they don't have much chance of winning, but otherwise it sounds like that lower level is working out for 'em okay.
It all comes down to the threat level the GM wants to run at, and the game world the GM wants to present.
-
When I first asked my group if they wanted to try out SR, a friend of mine exclaimed: "Dude, it's fraggin' CYBERPUNK! I'll love it even if I have to play a noodle vendor!"
If they are enjoying the game... why bother? Slightly nudge them in the right direction from time to time, but don't spoil the fun with "oh noes! You are doing it wrong!" stuff.
And The Red Samurai definitely don't qualify as a slight nudge. Look up Jazz in the book - Lone Star cops use it when they encounter runners and the dispenser looks cool. A fight with a bunch of Jazzed up rent-a-cops might change the perspective ("how come these fat-bags shoot us twice in a round?"), but it won't make them suffer.
As for the TM - well, he is having fun, right? As long as he contributes and doesn't steal the spotlight - let him do what he likes. Or maybe he just doesn't understand his own capabilities: you can always simply ask the player why he isn't hacking all that scenery.
-
Not sure how much of an option this is but check out strong encryption pg66 Unwired. Pretty sure that would stop combat hacking for any device it is on.
-
Not sure how much of an option this is but check out strong encryption pg66 Unwired. Pretty sure that would stop combat hacking for any device it is on.
A: Requires massive setup
B: Cannot be used for signals encryption, so certain vulnerabilities (including to Spoof, generally the bread and butter of combat hacking) remain.
-
Okay, I was under the impression that you could not get the matrix id of a node that was encrypted so wouldn't be able to send spoof commands from it. Guess I am gonna have to brush up on the matrix rules a bit more.
-
If that were true, you'd be able to conceal your own access ID merely by encrypting your commlink. Also, for spoofing, it's not the target node's ID that you need, but rather the ID of a user with the right authorization. Further, you send spoof commands from your own device, but you're making it LOOK like it's coming from somewhere else.
-
The troll can really get nasty if she takes Krav Maga and gets the free reload perk of it. Then she could shoot twice. And a tanky troll shooting twice with a bow is...painful. And it wouldn't force a 'ware/power choice and isn't stupid expensive karma wise either.
IP's are nice. 20 Dice pools are nice. But they aren't required if that's not the style of the game.