[olg707]

I have a few question about the matrix in 5th edition.

1. Can a device [not a persona] invite marks? According to SR5 page 236 "Only personas may mark icons." It seems that marks are something shared by a persona ;A persona can only [invite marks] to icons they have access to. More importantly, only the owner may send "invite marks". Is a device the Owner of itself?

Lets look an an example. Lets's say the Street Sam had his trusted Decker register all of his gear except his Commlink. [for security purposes]. This means the Decker has Ownership of the devices. The Decker uses the matrix action Invite Mark[SR5 pg 240] to give the Street Sam access to the gear. The invitation is for a standing offer of 3 marks that never expires.
Now the Street Sam spends a free action to place marks to get access to his gear. He adds the gear to his own PAN, with his own Commlink as the Master. The Street Sam can now perform matrix actions that require marks, such as Control Device [eject smartgun clip] or Trace Icon [where did I lose my shoes last night?]
Now the Street Sam spends a simple action to use the matrix action Invite Mark to show off his goggles. Since the Street Sam is not the owner, he should not be able to perform the matrix action Invite Mark.

I think this example demonstrates both Ownership and marks if this example is correct. If I am wrong so far, please point it out. Lets look at the another example.

A matrix ganger spots the Street Sam, and decides to cause some havoc on his goggles. The matrix ganger manages to place 3 marks on the goggles and contemplates what to do next.
So far, both the Street Sam and the matrix ganger have 3 marks on the goggles, while the owner is not present currently.
The matrix ganger tries to share his marks on the goggles with a fellow ganger, by using the matrix action Invite Mark. The matrix ganger should fail because he is not the owner, and cannot perform that action [the ganger was a newb]
Realizing his mistake, he decides to use the matrix action Format Device and is successful. Next he performs the matrix action Reboot Device, leaving the goggles shut down for good. Now he reboots and sneaks off, hoping was not caught.
Both the Format Device and Reboot Device matrix actions require 3 marks, but not ownership.
This also demonstrates Ownership and marks, following the above logic.

Next, I look at Technomancers.
A Technomancer spots the Street Sam and decides to cause some trouble.[it's one of those days] She decides his persona would look better with cartoon dog ears and a tail and uses the complex form Puppeteer [SR5 pg 252]  targeting the Street Sam's Commlink.
She is succesful in forcing the Commlink to perform the matrix action Change Icon[SR5 pg 238].

Can she cause this to happen to the Street Sams Commlink? The Street Sam and his persona are the owner of his Commlink so I think it should work.

Amused by the Street Sam's new look, the Technomancer decides to interfere with his Ares Predator V. She again uses the complex form Puppeteer and succeeds in forcing resonance commands into the gun.

What can this gun be forced to do? Can she force the gun to use the matrix action Change Icon on itself, since Change Icon requires Owner?

 What about the matrix action Invite Marks? Since only personas can have marks, does the device "have marks to share"?
Clearly, she could have used Puppeteer and targeted the commlink, forcing the Commlink/Persona to Invite Marks, thus giving her marks over the pan and allowing control like she seeks.

Can the gun use the matrix action Invite marks?

[Imveros]

Well puppeteer can also affect the device owners persona

P252 Each complex form entry has a Target describing
what it works on. A complex form with a Device target
can also be used to target a persona.

So in my understanding, she targets the gun, which then inadvertently targets the party rigger, and forces him to invite the marks.  This could however lead to a rude awakening when the techno realizes this wasn't as easy as she first thought it was, but the end result is the same, she still has her marks

[Alchemyst]

As soon as I saw the title I knew that Puppeteer was coming up. There are probably 3 or 4 recent if not active posts about this at the moment.

As Imveros has stated, Puppeteer can target a device's persona. If the persona is an owner it can invite marks.

[olg707]

"Well puppeteer can also affect the device owners persona"

I think I addressed this in my example. "Clearly, she could have used Puppeteer and targeted the commlink, forcing the Commlink/Persona to Invite Marks, thus giving her marks over the pan and allowing control like she seeks."

So I agree with you that Puppeteer can target a persona, but that does not answer the specific question.

"So in my understanding, she targets the gun, which then inadvertently targets the party rigger, and forces him to invite the marks.  This could however lead to a rude awakening when the techno realizes this wasn't as easy as she first thought it was, but the end result is the same, she still has her marks"

The Street Sam has a trusted Decker, I never mentioned party rigger. While the trusted Decker has Ownership over the gun, it is a part of the Street Sams PAN, and he is the owner of his Commlink.
Lets forget all that, perhaps my example is poor.

A Technomancer is facing a Street Sam. The Street Sam is the owner of all his gear. He is running a Commlink as a master of his PAN. The Technomancer is hidden, and has already spotted the Street Sam.
The Technomancer uses Puppeteer targeting the Commlink/ Persona of the Street Sam. Succeeding with 3 net hits, she can force the Commlink/Persona to do any free, simple or complex action. She could Format Device or Reboot Device, as those just require marks. She could force a Change Icon, which required Owner. She could force Invite marks to her own persona, and have control over the PAN.
All of these seem pretty clear, and look valid.

Now, the Technomancer uses Puppeteer targeting the Ares Predator V of the Street Sam. Succeeding with 3 net hits, she can force the  to do any free, simple or complex action.
Clearly, this could be used to control device, like making the gun eject clip, change mode, fire, or reboot.

Is a gun capable of taking its own matrix actions? Can she force the gun to perform matrix actions? If she can force the gun to take actions, are there restrictions on the kinds of matrix actions it can take?

My understanding is that personas take matrix actions, and not devices. I don't think devices make matrix actions, but rather have matrix actions performed on them.
If a persona has marks on a device, then it can control the device. These marks come from Ownership or being invited by someone with Ownership. Only personas can mark icons. Can a device make the Invite Mark icon?
Reading the Invite Mark action, it states
 "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."
So the real question is, is a device the owner of itself? Can the gun be forced to perform the matrix action Invite Marks?

[Top Dog]

As soon as I saw the title I knew that Puppeteer was coming up. There are probably 3 or 4 recent if not active posts about this at the moment.

Indeed there are.

As to the question at hands, no, devices cannot (normally) Invite Marks by themselves; only owners can. Puppeteer can probably make them do it because magic, but how exactly it does that is a bit unclear (I'd say it can't be via the owner's persona because that might not even exist at the moment). But read the discussion for more opinions and such (here).

[Imveros]

I apologize i misspoke when i typed rigger i meant decker ~_~

In that context i think the gun itself is not the final target. When the techno targets the gun, it then targets the decker, who then ejects the clip, invites the marks ext and not the gun itself.

[Top Dog]

I apologize i misspoke when i typed rigger i meant decker ~_~

In that context i think the gun itself is not the final target. When the techno targets the gun, it then targets the decker, who then ejects the clip, invites the marks ext and not the gun itself.

But then what would happen if you target a (wirelessly active) gun who's owner happened to have his commlink turned off?

[grid_roamer]

I apologize i misspoke when i typed rigger i meant decker ~_~

In that context i think the gun itself is not the final target. When the techno targets the gun, it then targets the decker, who then ejects the clip, invites the marks ext and not the gun itself.

But then what would happen if you target a (wirelessly active) gun who's owner happened to have his commlink turned off?

The better question would be  'Can the user invite marks on their own wireless device without his/her commlink?' If the answer were no then a requirement of placing/inviting marks would include a commlink as a master device in a PAN since it would be the most likely environment. Or even just posessing one not included in a PAN.

Since it is not a requirement either way, then placing/inviting marks is only requirement is 'wireless mode' that is assuming (rightly) the device has some ability to utilize wireless Matrix communications....

[Imveros]

I apologize i misspoke when i typed rigger i meant decker ~_~

In that context i think the gun itself is not the final target. When the techno targets the gun, it then targets the decker, who then ejects the clip, invites the marks ext and not the gun itself.

But then what would happen if you target a (wirelessly active) gun who's owner happened to have his commlink turned off?

Hmm that is a good point. I would still assume you still get your three marks because of wuju resonance magic? I think we are all just over thinking. If they meant for their to be exceptions like this they would have mentioned something about it somewhere wouldn't they?

[Top Dog]

Hmm that is a good point. I would still assume you still get your three marks because of wuju resonance magic? I think we are all just over thinking. If they meant for their to be exceptions like this they would have mentioned something about it somewhere wouldn't they?

Overthinking is good, because it makes you consider the exact implications of how something works and it's effects. But, for game purposes, it's not always very practical. Within game rules, things get abstracted and unclear; at some point you have to say "Okay, maybe this isn't entirely inconsistent, but this is how it's probably supposed to work so it does that, and let logic be damned." I think that, for Puppeteer, we've reached that point.

[olg707]

Lets forget Puppeteer for the moment.
The street Sam has Ownership over all his gear. All his gear is slaved to his Commlink. The Street Sam wants to show off his new goggles. First he tries to control object his goggles, to make perform the matrix action Invite Mark.
Obviously, with the same simple action the Street Sam could instead just make the Invite Mark action himself, but this Street Sam is a little slow. Instead of having his persona make the Invite Mark action, he instructs his goggles to do it for him.

Would the goggles send invites? Are the goggles the owner of themselves? Since only personas have marks, and Ownership is like having 4 marks, I am inclined to say no.

I have seen several other threads about puppeteer, and matrix in general, but I made this post because of a specific question; Can the goggles from this example take the matrix action Invite Marks?
It seems to me that marks are a persona thing; only personas can  mark icons and more importantly, only owners can invite icons to access their gear. In short, marks are like sharing access with someone else. So an owner can Invite Mark action to another icon, giving conditions like A) how many marks B) expiration date C) one time or standing offer D) what icon/s are being shared with others E) whom the invites are to be given to.

Is this example wrong?
What about my earlier examples, did they follow the rules of Ownership and marks?

[Greblin]

I think a question that can be fleshed out more is does a persona own a device ?

"Every device, persona, host, and file has an owner". p236

If the persona is owned by Bob the shadowrunner , the persona does not have ownership. Bob is the owner of the persona, the persona does not own anything. The persona cannot make an action that requires ownership. Bob can make that action, through a persona, because Bob is the owner of the device.

"This is a special relationship that offers special privileges" p236

Ownership is not a clearly defined state, as the book doesn't specifically go into detail as to how the ownership is manifested, just that it is not a normal type of mark relationship. It acts like one, but is not specifically based on marks. This is shown if you power down a device. it will lose its marks, but you do not lose ownership.

An easy way to visualize this relationship is is look at ownership requirements as a password verification. You can take control of Bob's deck, but you can't invite marks without Bob entering his super secret code, or whatever the "special relationship" shadowrun equivalent is . If you want to do an owner necessary action, you need to control the owner.

[grid_roamer]

I think a question that can be fleshed out more is does a persona own a device ?

"Every device, persona, host, and file has an owner". p236

If the persona is owned by Bob the shadowrunner , the persona does not have ownership. Bob is the owner of the persona, the persona does not own anything. The persona cannot make an action that requires ownership. Bob can make that action, through a persona, because Bob is the owner of the device.

"This is a special relationship that offers special privileges" p236

Ownership is not a clearly defined state, as the book doesn't specifically go into detail as to how the ownership is manifested, just that it is not a normal type of mark relationship. It acts like one, but is not specifically based on marks. This is shown if you power down a device. it will lose its marks, but you do not lose ownership.

An easy way to visualize this relationship is is look at ownership requirements as a password verification. You can take control of Bob's deck, but you can't invite marks without Bob entering his super secret code, or whatever the "special relationship" shadowrun equivalent is . If you want to do an owner necessary action, you need to control the owner.

I assume that any device that can be marked can invite that mark. And device that can be marked is already wireless-on...

 Matrix actions seem simpler like that.
And don't forget Agents.
They should be able to invite marks too as an extension  of a device's functionality as they can perform any matrix action. This, I assume extends to their own hardware not taking commands directly form the owner. Like their own, independent cyberdeck.....

[rumanchu]

There has to be *some* way to automate the process of inviting marks, otherwise the example on p.220 ("For example, the Seattle Public Library invites over 50,000 marks per day...") doesn't seem practical.

(Of course, this could just be an example of Hosts acting differently than other devices do, with the rules left out of the core book because the average PC isn't going to be in the position of caring about the administrative minutiae of Hosts.)

[olg707]

There has to be *some* way to automate the process of inviting marks, otherwise the example on p.220 ("For example, the Seattle Public Library invites over 50,000 marks per day...") doesn't seem practical.

I assume that an IC would authenticate SINs and pass approved library applications, and an agent running on the Owners deck would perform the invite mark action on all vetted personas. All performed autonomously, while the spider is watching the trideo.