[LordGrizzle]

I have been playing 5E for quiet a while now, but the matrix still confuses me and maybe one of you can help me with the following problems I have with the matrix:

If a device is slaved to a cyber deck/comlink the master's ratings are used so effectively it acts as a buff in a sense, or as a supportive relationship between the two devices with the master also taking the risk of being found and marked when the slave is under attack. Do I understand this correctly that effectively a master is not really a master anymore, as nowhere in the book is it stated that the master has any control over it's slaves. If the master doesn't have a mark on it's slave it can't even issue commands to it's slave, but still it acts as it's master, is that correct or am I overlooking something (Do consider I am only talking about PANs, WANs are in my opinion much more well explained).

And then there is the ownership. If I am an owner I have full control over something. Now here is what I am wondering, and some examples in the book seem to support this: If I have marks on an owner I have access to everything the owner owns without separately marking all the devices the owner owns but I am not sure if I read this correctly.

I would appreciate if you could clarify these things :-).

[Shaidar]

The Master-Slave relationship is what creates a PAN/WAN, which are identical in all respects but 1, that WANs are created with a Host as the Master in all of its relationships.

Owners are people and cannot be Marked, only devices can be Marked.

[LordGrizzle]

The Master-Slave relationship is what creates a PAN/WAN, which are identical in all respects but 1, that WANs are created with a Host as the Master in all of its relationships.

Ok, then I think I need clarification on both. Let's say I slave a camera to my host. Does that automatically mean that the host controls all functionality of the camera (reading the image feed, turning it on and off, moving it's angle and position). Or does the host need marks on that camera as well? Because nowhere in the book is one very logical thing stated: that a master has full permission to direct it's slaves.
On the same note, If my friend slaves his gun to my deck and I want to be a dick to him and eject his clip, do I need marks as well, or do I automatically count as having enough permission to do so as soon as I have slaved it to my system?

[DeathStrobe]

Grey part of the rules. I say masters don't have marks, but people should still give the master a mark so they can spot them while the device runs hidden.

If you mark the owner's commlink or whatever they make a persona with, you can then spoof commands to the rest of their gear. But you do not get marks on the rest of the gear. But spoofing is usually much quicker than needing to mark someone's stuff.

[Namikaze]

If a device is slaved to a cyber deck/comlink the master's ratings are used so effectively it acts as a buff in a sense, or as a supportive relationship between the two devices with the master also taking the risk of being found and marked when the slave is under attack.

The first issue I see in your understanding of this relationship is that you are looking at it in a very "gamey" fashion.

Do I understand this correctly that effectively a master is not really a master anymore, as nowhere in the book is it stated that the master has any control over it's slaves. If the master doesn't have a mark on it's slave it can't even issue commands to it's slave, but still it acts as it's master, is that correct or am I overlooking something (Do consider I am only talking about PANs, WANs are in my opinion much more well explained).

This is where things get kind of funky.  The way I see it, the master should have "ownership" marks on the slave.  But the way the book says things work, there's nothing giving a master control over a slaved device just by creating the PAN/WAN.  Though it stands to reason that a slaved device would offer marks to the master device.

And then there is the ownership. If I am an owner I have full control over something. Now here is what I am wondering, and some examples in the book seem to support this: If I have marks on an owner I have access to everything the owner owns without separately marking all the devices the owner owns but I am not sure if I read this correctly.

Ownership is a funky subject as well.  I anticipate that we'll get a LOT more info on marks in Data Trails.  If I had to guess, I'd say that we'll see a special type of mark for owners, which gives unique access.  We might also see other types of marks, but honestly this is all conjecture.

Operating just off the normal rules (which you should do unless you're prepared to go down the house rules rabbit hole), if you have marks on the owner, you only have marks on the owner.  Master/slave relationship rules apply here.  If you get a mark on a slave, you get a mark on the master.  Also, remember that a device that has created a persona (like a commlink) is no longer a part of a PAN.  The persona is still the owner, but is no longer part of the PAN.

If all this seems confusing, just remember that the Matrix is basically just like magic.  The technology used for the Matrix is complete fantasy and has almost no correlation with real-world technology.  Any attempts to use real-world technology knowledge to understand the Matrix will result in you driving yourself insane. 

[Darzil]

I see the PAN as being somewhat akin to a LAN in real world. The master device is acting as the gateway to the matrix, the slaves access the matrix via it. When you attack the slave, you are going via the gateway, the master, so you use it's defences. When you mark a slave, you also mark the gateway device, the master. Being the gateway device doesn't convey any particular privileges to the slave (though I'd probably allow master to block the slave from the matrix, and allow a player to specify what their slave device does if it cannot access the matrix via the master - default to it's own connection or stay offline), but it can be given such privileges.

[Raven2049]

I see the PAN as being somewhat akin to a LAN in real world. The master device is acting as the gateway to the matrix, the slaves access the matrix via it. When you attack the slave, you are going via the gateway, the master, so you use it's defences. When you mark a slave, you also mark the gateway device, the master. Being the gateway device doesn't convey any particular privileges to the slave (though I'd probably allow master to block the slave from the matrix, and allow a player to specify what their slave device does if it cannot access the matrix via the master - default to it's own connection or stay offline), but it can be given such privileges.

thats how i always saw it as well

[Namikaze]

I see the PAN as being somewhat akin to a LAN in real world. The master device is acting as the gateway to the matrix, the slaves access the matrix via it. When you attack the slave, you are going via the gateway, the master, so you use it's defences. When you mark a slave, you also mark the gateway device, the master. Being the gateway device doesn't convey any particular privileges to the slave (though I'd probably allow master to block the slave from the matrix, and allow a player to specify what their slave device does if it cannot access the matrix via the master - default to it's own connection or stay offline), but it can be given such privileges.

That's probably the best way to perceive the PAN.  But daisy-chaining isn't a thing in 5th edition (not yet anyway) so the metaphor begins to fall apart when scrutinized.

[Xenon]

No.
SR5 PAN is nothing like an old fashioned LAN.
SR4 PANs are, not SR5.

SR5 PANSs act more like blue tooth devices. But with unlimited range.

The master does not have control over the slave.

The owner does not need to slave a device to his commlink before he can control it. He can control the device directly. No matter where in the world or is, as long as it is connected to the mesh network we like to call the matrix.

A hacker can impersonate the owner sending commands to the device as if he is the legit owner (marks on the owner and using Spoof) or directly control the device (marks on the device and using Control Device).

[LordGrizzle]

So, while it's not exactly clear how it technologically works I have a clearer picture now and now I know I have been not thinking about spoofing at all and totally did slaving wrong.

Thanks!

[BeCareful]

So, 4 years later, and there's still something of which I'm unsure:

Does one have to be the owner of both the master device and all devices slaved to it?

I never saw it stated, but the repeated mentions of letting an ally slave your gear to their higher-Firewalled device while you still get the slave's wireless bonus makes it sound like something both owners can mutually do during downtime. Still, wouldn't it mean your device becomes part of your ally's PAN? Then, is all this independent of marks?

It'd help if there was a "Slave to PAN" Matrix Action. As it stands, it seems simpler to just buy the highest-rated commlink you can out of chargen, and if anyone asks about a device on your character sheet, it's slaved to that.

EDIT: Wow, immediately after posting this, I found this, which more or less answers what I asked: https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=11787.msg220471#msg220471 Sorry.

[RickDeckard]

All this begs the question: how do you steal shit and make YOU the owner of, say, a car or smartgun? I don’t really see anything mentioned about that other than the Owner will always legally be the owner and that info seems to be unhackable. So what rights does an Owner maintain over his stolen car and can you even drive a stolen vehicle or use a stolen gun without the Owner interfering?

[Michael Chandra]

All this begs the question: how do you steal shit and make YOU the owner of, say, a car or smartgun? I don’t really see anything mentioned about that other than the Owner will always legally be the owner and that info seems to be unhackable. So what rights does an Owner maintain over his stolen car and can you even drive a stolen vehicle or use a stolen gun without the Owner interfering?

There is a Change Ownership Hardware+Logic (Extended, 24 hits, 1h interval) test, which requires online connectivity.

For using stolen goods before you toss/fence them: Just turn off its wireless, either through physical switch or by hacker command.

[mcv]

My impression has always been that master/slave is a misnomer (as it so often is). The master doesn't control the slave, the owner does. The master just protects it. (Like some others here, I've always seen this as all incoming traffic to the slave getting routed through the master, which might mean why you also get a mark on the master if you get one on the slave.) Controlling the master doesn't give to control over the slaves, though it does make it easier to get a mark on them, because they don't have the protection of the master anymore. And you don't have to own all slaves, or the team wouldn't be able to slave all their vulnerable devices to the decker's cyberdeck.

Stealing devices (which is nearly anything physical) is surprisingly hard in Shadowrun. Data is much easier to steal.

[BeCareful]

That's true, mcv.

The way my decker would explain it to new PCs, "Okay, now set your guns to 'Invite MARK' from my Persona for the next 9 seconds. One MARK, until one of us reboots. Then I can link your guns up to my deck, which'll use my deck's Firewall to protect from attacks over the Matrix. Just in case, link all your other devices to your commlink. The one you use for your Persona, not your burner Meta Link."

Then later, if anyone tries to take a shot at me for whatever reason, "You try, but it doesn't fire because the safety's on."