Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: farfromnice on <01-25-16/2140:33>
-
Ok I Have a really hard time wrapping my head around the idea of Host
I'm running a game now and I have a lot of players who are new to the setting. When they're asking question on host and Matrix topography I froze most of the time.
I have an Aunction House, where the players have to stole a map's quarter. My decker ask me if he could up on the host and find a list of potential buyers. Since the Aunction House want to sell their objects, they have a host who agreed to have mark put upon. After that a Matrix Perception test to find the list and an Edit test to copy hit. This seems pretty easy I think
for the next quarter They will have to hijack a security truck if they hack the host of the security provider who buyed the truck (and I'm not sure of this) they will automatically have a mark on the truck and the commlinks of all of the agents ... this seems a pretty big security risk, no ?
If the 14 Knight Errant Precinct Host give the permission to mark their host for wathever reasons a nobody could have a mark on every cops, cars and weapon of the precinct ... I'm sorry but this is the worst way ever to work the matrix
I'm missing something, am I
-
Marks go up the chain, not down. If you hack the slaved car you gain a mark on the host, but if you hack the host you won't get a mark on every connected device that way.
-
So If I hack the precinct I don't have a mark on a SmartWeapon but I don't have noise penality. Did I get it right ?
-
Right. As long as you are in the host, you aren't influenced by the outside matrix - that includes convergence.
-
Also a cop's smartweapon will not be slaved to the host, so if you get a mark on a cop's gun you don't auto mark the host.
Although the cop's weapon will be owned by the corp that owns the policing contract, and as we know ownership makes it trivially easy to track anyone possessing said equipment (providing that wireless is on) that does not mean that the gun is slaved to the corp's host.
-
The Knight Errant Host entry in Data trails (pg 95) says that most field gear is slaved to the Host, but also mentions that lots of cops are unhappy about having to slave their stuff to the host for security concerns and some don't do it.
-
So basically an Host run would be :
go to the Host and up in (Logic+Haking[sleaze/attack] vs. rtg.+firewall)
search the thing you want (Matrix perception)
put a mark on it (Logic+Haking[sleaze/attack] vs. rtg.+firewall)
Edit or Spoof it
and get out
-
The Knight Errant Host entry in Data trails (pg 95) says that most field gear is slaved to the Host
That's pretty dumb.
-
The Knight Errant Host entry in Data trails (pg 95) says that most field gear is slaved to the Host
That's pretty dumb.
It probably costs less to have a security host with a stupidly high firewall guarding all the gear then to get a commlink (max firewall of 6-7) for every officer out there. Plus it makes it easier for logistical and monitoring oversight purposes and gives the home office a way to deal with/track officers who've gone rogue or the gear that some punk ganger or dumb runner though it would be a good idea to steal.
-
Exactly. The regular Cop is going to have about 8 dice to defend if he's lucky. One slaved to the host gets 15 dice. That's a significant difference too. Think about the number of hacker threats who can defeat 8 dice versus 15. It's not ideal for sure, but taken as a whole, it reduces credible threats, saves money and gives the spiders a chance to help guys in the field.
-
so am'I right ?
So basically an Host run would be :
go to the Host and up in (Logic+Haking[sleaze/attack] vs. rtg.+firewall)
search the thing you want (Matrix perception)
put a mark on it (Logic+Haking[sleaze/attack] vs. rtg.+firewall)
Edit or Spoof it
and get out
Slaving to an Host is particullary cost efficient, the thing I don't get is that someone calling a Knight Errant Precinct could have access to a SmartWeapon
-
I got another question to
if I mark an Host and it launch IC on me, do I have mark on the ICs ?
-
The Knight Errant Host entry in Data trails (pg 95) says that most field gear is slaved to the Host
That's pretty dumb.
It probably costs less to have a security host with a stupidly high firewall guarding all the gear then to get a commlink (max firewall of 6-7) for every officer out there. Plus it makes it easier for logistical and monitoring oversight purposes and gives the home office a way to deal with/track officers who've gone rogue or the gear that some punk ganger or dumb runner though it would be a good idea to steal.
I'm not sure about that, I would think they would want all officers to have a work comm forming their work PAN that the company has easy access to, and can easily reach them using.
-
The Knight Errant Host entry in Data trails (pg 95) says that most field gear is slaved to the Host
That's pretty dumb.
It probably costs less to have a security host with a stupidly high firewall guarding all the gear then to get a commlink (max firewall of 6-7) for every officer out there. Plus it makes it easier for logistical and monitoring oversight purposes and gives the home office a way to deal with/track officers who've gone rogue or the gear that some punk ganger or dumb runner though it would be a good idea to steal.
I'm not sure about that, I would think they would want all officers to have a work comm forming their work PAN that the company has easy access to, and can easily reach them using.
They'll all have coms for communication (don't know if they'd be full commlinks, but probably are), but it still makes sense to slave those to the host as well. The higher firewall will then also not just stop hackers from stealing/breaking your stuff, but they'd probably find it far easier to encrypt and safeguard communications from outside eavesdropping, something I'm sure The Star and the pawns are eager to avoid. Buying basic (rating 2) coms for communication saves some 4,000 per unit over a secured commlink (rating 6). While host costs are monthly (I assume) and commlinks are one time buys, you factor tech reconditioning when transferring to a new employee and repair/replacement of damaged units, plus SOTA upgrades to keep up with deckers code exploits, and the bean counters are going to just say a host is better, which it pretty much is, unless the decker is good enough to crack the host, but they're less in number then those who can crack commlink PANs.
That said, those would be work coms and the cops would also have personal coms, which is what they'd slave their stuff to when they want to stay a bit apart from the precinct for any number of (mostly nefarious) reasons.
-
As long as there is a separate host dedicated to slaving devices only, that could make sense.
I hope the device slave limit doesn't apply to hosts though!
-
WANs are not limited in the number of devices they can slave.
-
I hope the device slave limit doesn't apply to hosts though!
Core pg 233 :
"A host can have a
practically unlimited number of devices slaved to it, but
because of the direct connection hack you rarely see
more devices than can be protected physically."
-
I got another question to
if I mark an Host and it launch IC on me, do I have mark on the ICs ?
me too.
-
No because that's not how marking hosts works.
-
Then what about noise?
If the slaved car is half a world away for instance, does the firewall get reduced by noise?
Also, other than actually getting inside the host , is there any benefit from marking a host,
or marking it more thAn once?
-
No. As a rule resistance checks are not reduced unless the attribute itself is affected.
Also, as long as you are in a host, you don't have noise penalties. Consequently it doesn't matter where the slaved car is - as long as you don't have a direct connection you'll be dealing with the hosts defenses instead of the slave's.
-
Well, hacking a camera slaves to a host gives you a free mark on that host (which in turn allows you to take certain actions versus that host), and can be easier than directly marking the host.
-
Well, hacking a camera slaves to a host gives you a free mark on that host (which in turn allows you to take certain actions versus that host), and can be easier than directly marking the host.
Technically you're hacking the host if the camera is slave to it (after all it use rtg and Firewall of her master host), so it make sense that you have a mark on the Host to
-
The key there is that if you can physically connect to the device in question, you are rolling vs the device firewall, no longer against the host firewall. This is why the comment in the rules about not slaving things you can't physically protect. If you are wirelessly hacking a camera, it has the hosts defense. But if the mage makes the decker invisible, and the decker opens the device case to access a port, he has a direct connection, therefore bypasses the hosts defenses.
I could easily see a site having external video cameras not slaved to a host (or to a separate host), and having the internal cameras, doors, security, etc slaved to a different host, since they can reasonably prevent direct connections on the interior stuff.
-
Yup.
Running cables to cameras is fun ;)
-
Yup.
Running cables to cameras is fun ;)
Crawler drone + gecko tips + drone cyberarms = remote wire access!