[Kincaid]

"Brute Force" and Hack on the Fly are you tricking or forcing ill gotten marks on something this is inherently different than "invite mark," They are not the same they will never be the same. The first two are attacks the last is something that requires you to be the owner to do.

To reiterate: they are different means to the same ends.  There is no rational reason to believe the ends are somehow different for deckers than for TMs.

Its also not something most TM will ever be able to use, puppeteer to do as they have to use puppeteer on the owner of that device to get them to issue the marks. which causes other issues like the fact they don't understand why there persona just randomly gave marks to some unknown so your likely using resonance veil to mask there own matrix actions form them. But once that is all done your left with legitimate access for a set time.

Your use of the word legitimate is entirely interpretive.  Which is fine, but you should be upfront about it.  Again, I have discussed the contextual reasoning behind my interpretation and you have not.  I'm sure you will, but right now I just have you adding words like "legitimate" into your readings without support.  I see no reason to privilege your interpretation as legitimate absent evidence.

Is it possible for someone to check records and start wondering why you were given access? Yes which is why you hurry but that spider as far as he knows the person in charge gave you access. Hell he might even start calling people but this is not instant. He has got to go through the chain of command, because while you having access might seem odd if he attacks you and you did have legit access its his ass.

So design really decided that decker marks, TM marks, and authentic marks were in fact all different things that had very slightly different rules associated with them but never decided to spell out those differences?

I challenge you to go look at those three abilities and tell me they are not fundamentally different.  Any ability that requires you to be an owner is in a different class than other actions.

They are not fundamentally different.  For the purposes of answering the question "How does my PC get marks?" the differences (aside from rolling different dice polls) are entirely stylistic.  All three abilities are (roll dice, get marks).  These abilities have other secondary uses that are different--Hack on the Fly can jump grids, Puppeteer is obviously more versatile--but since this discussion is about marks, there's effectively no difference.

Rules in SR5 transpose all the time.  Want to crack open a maglock?  Roll Locksmith + Agility v. Rating x2.  Want to crack open a file?  Roll Hacking + Logic v. Rating x2.  Want to crack a mana barrier?  Roll Magic + Charisma v. Force x2.  I'd be willing to bet if some other thing showed up needing cracking, it would roll Rating x2 on the opposed roll.  Want to initiate?  Look up the mechanical rules for submersion and swap a few words.  The only difference between the two processes is fluff.

You're arguing that in a game full of rules transposition, marks are the exception.  This is despite the fact that 2 of the 3 ways of obtaining marks are clearly rules transpositions with the differences between Brute Force and Hack on the Fly.  But Puppeteer is its own special snowflake.  Special to the extent that it circumvents the core "You need to roll dice to do things" design element of SR.  I just don't buy it and I cannot see how from a game balance/game design standpoint, there's any reason to think that's how it works.

[Unahim]

-snip-

Puppeteer lets you make the target do any action without having any Marks on them, and since "Owner" is pretty much just an extension of the Mark system, there's absolutely no rules reason why you'd have to use Puppeteer on the Owner in order to Invite Mark. Else you'd have to use every other Puppeteer function on a persona with the right amount of Marks too, and you do not.
[/quote]

The reason is because owner is required to "invite mark" and a device or persona can only do a matrix action it is able to do. So yes you could puppeteer a spider to invite mark but if they are not the owner they won't be able to do it.

If you’re the owner of a device, file, persona, host, or
IC program, you can offer other icons the opportunity
to put a mark on your device, file, etc.

You could also puppeteer a device to invite 3 marks to itself, but since a device does not own itself this would do nothing.
[/quote]

Read this:

For all intents and purposes, owning an icon is the same as having four marks on it.

So, for all itnents and purposes, "owner" is just an extra, hard-to-reach Mark level, of which there can only be one; therefore, if Puppeteer cannot do something with the Owner requirement without being the owner, it can't do anything with another Mark requirement without having those Marks as well.

In that case, Puppeteer can't make a device do any of the following matrix actions:

- Control Device
- Crack File
- Crash Program
- Edit File
- Erase Mark
- Format Device
- Invite Mark
- Jack Out
- Jam Signals
- Jump Into
- Reboot Device
- Send Message (in some cases)
- Set Data Bomb
- Snoop
- Spoof Command
- Switch Interface Mode
- Trace Icon

So essentially 90% of all Matrix actions. Your interpretation makes Puppeteer, a Level + 4 Fading CF, completely useless.

(I will flat-out ignore any reasoning based on there being a structural difference between being Owner or having 1-3 Marks on something, because by RAW "for -all- intents and purposes", there is not.)

[Typtrich]

Read this:

For all intents and purposes, owning an icon is the same as having four marks on it.

So, for all itnents and purposes, "owner" is just an extra, hard-to-reach Mark level, of which there can only be one; therefore, if Puppeteer cannot do something with the Owner requirement without being the owner, it can't do anything with another Mark requirement without having those Marks as well.

In that case, Puppeteer can't make a device do any of the following matrix actions:

- Control Device
- Crack File
- Crash Program
- Edit File
- Erase Mark
- Format Device
- Invite Mark
- Jack Out
- Jam Signals
- Jump Into
- Reboot Device
- Send Message (in some cases)
- Set Data Bomb
- Snoop
- Spoof Command
- Switch Interface Mode
- Trace Icon

So essentially 90% of all Matrix actions. Your interpretation makes Puppeteer, a Level + 4 Fading CF, completely useless.

(I will flat-out ignore any reasoning based on there being a structural difference between being Owner or having 1-3 Marks on something, because by RAW "for -all- intents and purposes", there is not.)

Puppeteer

You push Resonance commands into a target, forcing it to perform a Matrix action...

You can't make the target do a matrix action it can't do by the rules.

INVITE MARK
(SIMPLE ACTION)
Marks Required:Owner

Test:none (Data Processing action)
If you’re the owner of a device, file, persona, host, or
IC program, you can offer other icons the opportunity
to put a mark on your device, file, etc. When you make
the offer, you choose the number of marks allowed, their
duration, and how long the offer stands. The invitee can
then mark your icon with a Free Action. You may revoke
your offer at any time before the mark is placed, but
once another icon has a mark, you need to either use
the Erase Mark action or reboot your device to remove it
before the duration you chose expires.

Only an owner can perform invite mark.

You can force a persona to jackout. but you can't force a device to jackout, for the same reason. Devices don't own themselves, and the jackout action requires you to be the owner.
I just wan to add as further explanation, its not the ability Puppeteer that requires owner, its the action you want to do (invite mark) that requires it. Forcing something to make an action doesn't not stop that device/persona from having to follow the rules, it just means you force them to use their abilities to is a single matrix action. They still follow rules and have to roll dice etc.

[Psikerlord]

on reflection the problem is puppeteer - which should be amended to say you cannot force any action that requires owner. issue fixed.

[rumanchu]

on reflection the problem is puppeteer - which should be amended to say you cannot force any action that requires owner. issue fixed.

Given that Puppeteer seems to be supposed to be powerful (due to the crazy L+4 fading and thresholds required to do anything with it), I'd say that it's more reasonable to amend it to say that you can force an action as though it was being performed by the owner.

[Unahim]

Also, the Owner performs Invite Mark -through- the device. The Owner isn't letting you Invite Marks on himself, after all. So making a device Invite Marks on you (assuming that Puppeteer acts regardless of Marks, which it should) is completely legit.

[Psikerlord]

But that's the problem, forcing owner actions like invite mark are too good because it makes you a legitimate user from one dice roll. Even for puppeteer, too good (imo). What else can puppeteer do as owner matrix actions - jack out, or make target go into VR from AR - that's bloody strong!!

 

[SoulGambit]

I would assume defensive rolls play like this: The owner/user defends against every action, even their own, by default. They may opt to forgo this defense if they feel the action is legitimate or benefits them.

This does assume that you -can- choose not to defend against something. I feel this is a reasonable assumption, and creates the best play environment.

As for Puppeteer, you guys are getting really pedantic. If you're going down this road, devices don't take independent matrix actions at all. People in the meatworld use devices to take actions. Since Puppeteer can't target those people (it targets Devices), Puppeteer does nothing at all and the writers really just felt like wasting their wordcount and confusing us. Woo~.

Sarcasm aside, there is a certain amount of common sense that has to be applied to make an ability work. That said, when it comes to Invite Mark, I'm not sure its intended for Puppeteer to be a good method of using it. Even if it works (I'm debating, the "Owner" is always the one defending against the action, after all) you have the sticky issue of this line:

"You may revoke your offer at any time before the mark is placed, but once another icon has a mark, you need to either use the Erase Mark action or reboot your device to remove it before the duration you chose expires."

So it goes something like this: "I puppeteer you to invite mark." "Whatever, I immediately revoke your permission as a non-action." "I... well, shit." Resonance seems to be more about bypassing the mark system entirely for short duration than feeding into it.

And yes, a Security Spider worth his salt is going to have an Agent monitoring every mark on every device under his care. If something shows up he, the person, does not recognize then it would have action taken against it. This has to happen, or otherwise sleaze specialists would just troll everything.

All of -that- said. The Owner thing is a tad odd in respect to companies, especially in regards to Full Matrix Defense.

[Typtrich]

"You may revoke your offer at any time before the mark is placed, but once another icon has a mark, you need to either use the Erase Mark action or reboot your device to remove it before the duration you chose expires."

So it goes something like this: "I puppeteer you to invite mark." "Whatever, I immediately revoke your permission as a non-action." "I... well, shit." Resonance seems to be more about bypassing the mark system entirely for short duration than feeding into it.

Obviously if your persona suddenly is sending out an invite to mark that you didn't actually do  your going to immediately rescind the mark (as long as your paying attention) and even if you weren't paying attention surely you will either erase mark or reboot. But if the TM is smart  and uses resonance veil to make the owner see nothing then there's no reason for them to even think an invite to mark went out.

And I agree Resonance is about about bypassing it which is why I agree with the premise that the mark system doesn't account for legitimate users and marks as it makes no sense for someone who is supposed to be using and manipulating those file to have to roll hacking checks which currently will happen if that user is a PC. Lets say you have a strange game where for some reason a corp hires you to be a spider by the rules even though you have 3 marks on everything in the node you would still have to roll to do anything, does that really make sense?

[deek]

This is how we've been playing it.  You need to get your mark on the individual devices, not the host to start controlling things.

Problem is that, by the rules, if you have 3 Marks on a Device -and- on the Host, you still can't make a Device automatically do actions it's supposed to be able to do without hacking. Even a door made to be opened through the Matrix with Command Device would require any legitimate user who tried to open it to hack, since there's no dicepool associated with it.

Say what you want about SR4's terrible hacking system, but at least user privileges and accounts were clear in what you could or could not legitimately do with them.

Why would a legitmate user (of a door) need to do anything through the Matrix? What I mean is, wouldn't that legitmate user have an RFID, passcode, voice/retinal scan, etc. so they would just walk up to the door and authenticate? The legitimate user doesn't need to hack.

But the hacker without legitmate access, walks up to the door and then needs to get a mark on it and Command Device (both illegal actions).

[RHat]

This is how we've been playing it.  You need to get your mark on the individual devices, not the host to start controlling things.

Problem is that, by the rules, if you have 3 Marks on a Device -and- on the Host, you still can't make a Device automatically do actions it's supposed to be able to do without hacking. Even a door made to be opened through the Matrix with Command Device would require any legitimate user who tried to open it to hack, since there's no dicepool associated with it.

Say what you want about SR4's terrible hacking system, but at least user privileges and accounts were clear in what you could or could not legitimately do with them.

Why would a legitmate user (of a door) need to do anything through the Matrix? What I mean is, wouldn't that legitmate user have an RFID, passcode, voice/retinal scan, etc. so they would just walk up to the door and authenticate? The legitimate user doesn't need to hack.

But the hacker without legitmate access, walks up to the door and then needs to get a mark on it and Command Device (both illegal actions).

Marks aren't concerned with legitimacy; for any user to do anything Matrix wise, marks are required.

[Xenon]

Why would a legitmate user (of a door) need to do anything through the Matrix? What I mean is, wouldn't that legitmate user have an RFID, passcode, voice/retinal scan, etc. so they would just walk up to the door and authenticate? The legitimate user doesn't need to hack.

But the hacker without legitmate access, walks up to the door and then needs to get a mark on it and Command Device (both illegal actions).

A legitimate user (of a door) would open the door by altering an augmented reality object (ARO) in their augmented reality heads-up display. If the user have DNI this would be the free action Change Linked Device Mode and without DNI this would be the simple action Change Device Mode.

To fool the door to open you would either hack a mark on the icon's owner and then spend a complex action to fool (Sleaze as limit) the door that it is receiving a legitimate command from it's owner (by using his Hacking skill and Intuition attribute to spoof a command in the name of the owner)
- or you would hack a mark on the door and use a free action to fool (Sleaze as limit) the door's ARO to open (by using his Electronic Warefare skill and Intuition attribute) similar to if he would be a legitimate user.

[StagCutlery]

I kind of assumed that everything had two levels of security: Marks and "passwords". A hacker, Deck or TM, firsts establishes level of access (places marks), then "works their magic" to verify that access. Otherwise the alternative would be to spend months getting hired and promoted to the level of clearance you need.

I don't think it has anything to do with the legitimacy of the mark; the mark is or it isn't. I think it has everything to do with your verification, which your skill check is supplying in lieu of clearance.
Renraku employees probably carry a keycard with them that game-wise counts as a device with the proper marks and verification to get them through all the doors/security checkpoints that they need to get by in order to do their jobs. Your fixer shouldn't be denied the opportunity to acquire one of these keycards just because there's a hacker in your group. Your hacker should be there for situations that you didn't prepare for, or didn't go as planned, like a keycard with the proper RFID verification, but the marks aren't right.

What I want to know is, how exactly does Puppeteer work with Invite Mark? I'm kind of okay with the fact that metagame-wise I spend a simple action to invite the mark - except it isn't a Jedi mind trick, so I'm not okay with it - but where does it say the puppeteer has that much control over all of Invite Mark's parameters? This is what I see:
"I have to Invite Mark you? Okay, you can have one mark that lasts .1 seconds. You have .1 seconds to decide."

[RHat]

What I want to know is, how exactly does Puppeteer work with Invite Mark? I'm kind of okay with the fact that metagame-wise I spend a simple action to invite the mark - except it isn't a Jedi mind trick, so I'm not okay with it - but where does it say the puppeteer has that much control over all of Invite Mark's parameters? This is what I see:
"I have to Invite Mark you? Okay, you can have one mark that lasts .1 seconds. You have .1 seconds to decide."

Let me turn that around for a second - on what basis would you suggest that the target, which doesn't know what the hell is happening and very well may not be remotely capable of decision-making, gets to have that kind of control over the action it is forced to take?

[StagCutlery]

Let me turn that around for a second - on what basis would you suggest that the target, which doesn't know what the hell is happening and very well may not be remotely capable of decision-making, gets to have that kind of control over the action it is forced to take?

Just posted in the other puppet/mark thread, but I'll try and sum up...

From the way Invite Mark reads, it doesn't sound like the device is the one doing the inviting, it sounds like the owner is inviting marks onto the device. Also, according to Aaron (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=11514.msg230175#msg230175, no. 3), it sounds like the owner is aware of what happened... although from his answer, it sounds like the device is doing the inviting. Either way, the device's owner seems aware based on his reply (which I understand is only semi-official).