[rednblack]

That was what I was thinking at first, but then I started wondering about the Host-Slave relationship. I'm totally willing to go with it however you want to go with it, but if the cameras are slaved to the Host, Wraith would be considered to be directly connected to them and they would only use their device rating to resist (since they probably don't have their own Sleaze rating). If she were outside the Host trying to spot them, they would benefit from the sleaze rating of the Host.

Like I said though, I'm willing to go with whatever you want to go with on this one. I was expecting a resistance test of 7 dice before I started considering it.

To my mind, and how I'd like to keep it, it you would only be rolling against DR if you're physically connected to a device slaved to the Host. This goes along with the whole "Get the decker out of the van" bit 5e has going for it.

Another question: since you're specifically looking for cameras would you only spot silent running icons that are cameras -- and potentially those "Wrapped" as cameras? That's my understanding but I'd like to hear your thoughts

[JackVII]

To my mind, and how I'd like to keep it, it you would only be rolling against DR if you're physically connected to a device slaved to the Host. This goes along with the whole "Get the decker out of the van" bit 5e has going for it.

I think most Host's defenses are supposed to prevent a decker from gaining entry remotely in the first place, which is why the direct-connect to a slave hack is so valuable. I guess what I don't want to happen is Wraith ending up in a scenario where we do gain physical access to a location, I get a MARK on the Host through the direct connect hack on a device, but then can't benefit from that access in trying to hack other devices further on in the run without also having to physically direct connect. It mostly defeats the purpose of hacking into the Host for anything other than stealing files.

To put it another way, if we're going to throw out:

If you are in a host that has a WAN, you are considered directly connected to all devices in the WAN.

It changes things considerably for me. I can work with it, just need to know that's the case.

Another question: since you're specifically looking for cameras would you only spot silent running icons that are cameras -- and potentially those "Wrapped" as cameras? That's my understanding but I'd like to hear your thoughts

Totally a GM Call since Matrix Perception, particularly Running Silently, is so poorly defined. Personally, no I wouldn't think that Wrapper would hold up in this situation. The program is intended to defeat cursory inspection of icons by passers-by. If I know there are several silently running icons and I want to find, specifically, a camera icon because I think a strip club is probably going to have cameras set up, I don't think Wrapper would necessarily fool that Matrix Perception check (in either direction), since it isn't changing the underlying nature of the icon, but rather its appearance (which I couldn't see in the first place because it is running silently). If instead, there was only one silently running icon, but I had no clue what it was, then I think Wrapper would work to fool me. Success on the Matrix Perception check would reveal whatever wrapper says the icon is because I'm not specifically asking for a certain type of icon and don't have any reason to suspect that it's something else.

Those are just my thoughts on the matter. Without the specific piece of information clause being able to whittle down silently running icons considerably, the game is largely unplayable (bag of 1000 stelath tags now turns into host full of 1000 wrapped silently running icons etc.).

[rednblack]

To my mind, and how I'd like to keep it, it you would only be rolling against DR if you're physically connected to a device slaved to the Host. This goes along with the whole "Get the decker out of the van" bit 5e has going for it.

I think most Host's defenses are supposed to prevent a decker from gaining entry remotely in the first place, which is why the direct-connect to a slave hack is so valuable. I guess what I don't want to happen is Wraith ending up in a scenario where we do gain physical access to a location, I get a MARK on the Host through the direct connect hack on a device, but then can't benefit from that access in trying to hack other devices further on in the run without also having to physically direct connect. It mostly defeats the purpose of hacking into the Host for anything other than stealing files.

If you're directly connected to the Host, via a device, you will get the benefits of that when trying to hack other devices.  I think that's the question, right?  If, for example, the team physically infiltrates Club Frisco, and you directly connect to a device that's slaved to that host, and get a MARK or three on it, you'll have a MARK(s) on the entire Host, and go up only against DR against other devices.  What I don't know about just going up against DR in this case is that if a Host hands out MARKs to every visitor who comes along through the matrix, it doesn't make sense to me that you'd only go up against DR for devices slaved to that Host.  Does that make sense/rules sense?

Totally a GM Call since Matrix Perception, particularly Running Silently, is so poorly defined. Personally, no I wouldn't think that Wrapper would hold up in this situation. The program is intended to defeat cursory inspection of icons by passers-by. If I know there are several silently running icons and I want to find, specifically, a camera icon because I think a strip club is probably going to have cameras set up, I don't think Wrapper would necessarily fool that Matrix Perception check (in either direction), since it isn't changing the underlying nature of the icon, but rather its appearance (which I couldn't see in the first place because it is running silently). If instead, there was only one silently running icon, but I had no clue what it was, then I think Wrapper would work to fool me. Success on the Matrix Perception check would reveal whatever wrapper says the icon is because I'm not specifically asking for a certain type of icon and don't have any reason to suspect that it's something else.

Those are just my thoughts on the matter. Without the specific piece of information clause being able to whittle down silently running icons considerably, the game is largely unplayable (bag of 1000 stelath tags now turns into host full of 1000 wrapped silently running icons etc.).

That's my understanding as well.  I probably shouldn't have tossed out the wrapper thing because it's tertiary to what I'm asking.  If you're specifically looking for Hidden camera Icons, your Matrix Perception Test would only register Hidden Camera Icons, correct?  For example, if there was a toaster Running Silent, you wouldn't pick up on that, correct because you limited your Perception Test to only cameras?

[JackVII]

If you're directly connected to the Host, via a device, you will get the benefits of that when trying to hack other devices.  I think that's the question, right?  If, for example, the team physically infiltrates Club Frisco, and you directly connect to a device that's slaved to that host, and get a MARK or three on it, you'll have a MARK(s) on the entire Host, and go up only against DR against other devices.

I guess my question is:
If Wraith walks up to a slaved maglock, physically direct connects to the maglock, and MARKs the lock (subsequently MARKing the Host), can she then disconnect from the maglock and still hack other devices slaved to the Host using the direct connect trick without actually directly connecting to those devices?

What I don't know about just going up against DR in this case is that if a Host hands out MARKs to every visitor who comes along through the matrix, it doesn't make sense to me that you'd only go up against DR for devices slaved to that Host.  Does that make sense/rules sense?

Well, I think the main problem there is how that Host is set up. A public Host probably shouldn't have anything critical on it. Even with that said, remember  that even if you have a MARK on the Host, it doesn't give you MARKs on WAN slaves or icons within the Host (the chain only works up, not down). In order to get those, you still have to have some hacking capability along with the commensurate risk. So even if some rando enters your Host, they can't do anything with slaved devices/files/etc (other than spotting the icons) without having a cyberdeck (under Core).

That's my understanding as well.  I probably shouldn't have tossed out the wrapper thing because it's tertiary to what I'm asking.  If you're specifically looking for Hidden camera Icons, your Matrix Perception Test would only register Hidden Camera Icons, correct?  For example, if there was a toaster Running Silent, you wouldn't pick up on that, correct because you limited your Perception Test to only cameras?

Again, the Running Silently rule rears its ugly head. From what I can tell, the test is split in two parts. The first is to simply determine if there are hidden icons running within 100m (and presumably how many). The second is to identify what they are, that's where the opposed test comes into play. I rule a character can skip the first test if they can reasonably expect that there are silent running icons of a certain type and search for that type (basically using the "if you know at least one feature of a silent running icon you can spot it" section of Matrix Perception). But doing it that way doesn't reveal that there are other silent running icons in the area/vicinity/slaved to the Host.

[rednblack]

If you're directly connected to the Host, via a device, you will get the benefits of that when trying to hack other devices.  I think that's the question, right?  If, for example, the team physically infiltrates Club Frisco, and you directly connect to a device that's slaved to that host, and get a MARK or three on it, you'll have a MARK(s) on the entire Host, and go up only against DR against other devices.

I guess my question is:
If Wraith walks up to a slaved maglock, physically direct connects to the maglock, and MARKs the lock (subsequently MARKing the Host), can she then disconnect from the maglock and still hack other devices slaved to the Host using the direct connect trick without actually directly connecting to those devices?

Until re-booting, yes.  That'd be the backdoor way. 

Well, I think the main problem there is how that Host is set up. A public Host probably shouldn't have anything critical on it. Even with that said, remember  that even if you have a MARK on the Host, it doesn't give you MARKs on WAN slaves or icons within the Host (the chain only works up, not down). In order to get those, you still have to have some hacking capability along with the commensurate risk. So even if some rando enters your Host, they can't do anything with slaved devices/files/etc (other than spotting the icons) without having a cyberdeck (under Core).

I forgot about the bolded part.  That would mean Wraith is going up against Host Rating+Attribute should she choose to hack the cameras now.  Should she direct connect later, she'll just be going up against DR.

Again, the Running Silently rule rears its ugly head. From what I can tell, the test is split in two parts. The first is to simply determine if there are hidden icons running within 100m (and presumably how many). The second is to identify what they are, that's where the opposed test comes into play. I rule a character can skip the first test if they can reasonably expect that there are silent running icons of a certain type and search for that type (basically using the "if you know at least one feature of a silent running icon you can spot it" section of Matrix Perception). But doing it that way doesn't reveal that there are other silent running icons in the area/vicinity/slaved to the Host.

Ok, we're of the same mind on this. 

Those rules questions aside, Wraith has located the position of one of the cameras.  What's the next step?

[JackVII]

That would mean Wraith is going up against Host Rating+Attribute should she choose to hack the cameras now.  Should she direct connect later, she'll just be going up against DR.

OK, that's fine. Just needed to know if we were adjusting the RAW. I can work with it. So, basically, you are only considered to be directly connected to all devices in a Host's WAN if you used the direct connection trick to gain access to the Host in the first place.

Those rules questions aside, Wraith has located the position of one of the cameras.  What's the next step?

Probably going to start working on grabbing that file.

Step 1: Matrix Perception [INT (5) + Computer (5) + Hot-Sim (2)] (7): 12d6t5 5
Looking for most recent edit date, presence of data bombs on the file, what rating of protection the file has, and I guess that's it.

[rednblack]

That would mean Wraith is going up against Host Rating+Attribute should she choose to hack the cameras now.  Should she direct connect later, she'll just be going up against DR.

OK, that's fine. Just needed to know if we were adjusting the RAW. I can work with it. So, basically, you are only considered to be directly connected to all devices in a Host's WAN if you used the direct connection trick to gain access to the Host in the first place.

Want to make sure I'm clear on everything.  Am I adjusting RAW?

Probably going to start working on grabbing that file.

Step 1: Matrix Perception [INT (5) + Computer (5) + Hot-Sim (2)] (7): 12d6t5 5
Looking for most recent edit date, presence of data bombs on the file, what rating of protection the file has, and I guess that's it.

Most recent edit date: June 14, 2070
Data Bomb: Nope
Protection Rating: 5

[JackVII]

Want to make sure I'm clear on everything.  Am I adjusting RAW?

I believe you are. The rule I quoted above from p. 233 about WANs states that you are considered to be direct connected to any device slaved to the Host if you are in the Host and the rule doesn't provide a condition for how you gained access to the Host. That should come with all the benefits of directly connecting to a device, including ignoring the Host/Master's attributes if you want to try to MARK or otherwise hack the device. But like I said, I don't think it's a big deal. I'm not really planning on doing much remotely. I was just trying to index the cameras to know what we will have to deal with if we want to try something in the club.

Protection Rating: 5

Yikes. OK...
Cyberdeck: ASDF/4577; Programs: Configurator, Exploit, Signal Scrub, Toolbox [Configurator: ASDF/6468, Programs: Decrypt, Encryption, Hammer, & Mugger]
Switching to Silent Running
Hacking for 1 MARK
Hack on the Fly [Logic (8) + Hacking (6) + Codeslinger (2) + Hot Sim (2) - Running Silently (2)] (7): 16d6t5 4

[rednblack]

Wraith has her MARK.

Want to make sure I'm clear on everything.  Am I adjusting RAW?

I believe you are. The rule I quoted above from p. 233 about WANs states that you are considered to be direct connected to any device slaved to the Host if you are in the Host and the rule doesn't provide a condition for how you gained access to the Host. That should come with all the benefits of directly connecting to a device, including ignoring the Host/Master's attributes if you want to try to MARK or otherwise hack the device. But like I said, I don't think it's a big deal. I'm not really planning on doing much remotely. I was just trying to index the cameras to know what we will have to deal with if we want to try something in the club.

Ok, so we're going to run this like we've been running it, but in the future I'm going to have separate Hosts for sensitive equipment and the like from public access hosts and play it as RAW. 

Which reminds me of another question I've been kicking around for awhile.  Can you have Hosts within Hosts, or would you simply have a Public Library User Host and then a Public Library Administrator Host?

[JackVII]

Okie-Dokie, now for the fun part...

Hitting Configurator
Cyberdeck: ASDF/6468, Programs: Decrypt, Encryption, Hammer, & Mugger

Crack File [LOG (8) + Hacking (6) + Hot Sim (2) - Running Silent (2)](6): 14d6t5 7 (Limited to 6)

Successful Attack action reveals something is up, but the Patrol IC still has to spot me.

[rednblack]

@Jack, I ninja'd you with an edit to my above post, if you haven't already noticed.

Ok, Patrol IC's next action is Matrix Perception to spot Wraith, which it does.  A 1920's era kid in a newsboy's hat gives a sharp look to Wraith.

The Host can't launch IC unless it's at the beginning of a CT.

Shall we roll Initiative? 

[JackVII]

I'm running silently, shouldn't that be an opposed roll?
Opposed Matrix Perception [LOG (8) + Sleaze (5)] (-): 13d6t5 4

Edit: I don't think you can have Host within Hosts, but you could probably have parallel hosts. The books originally had talked about Archives, but then Data Trails took them in a completely different direction, so I don't think that comes into play anymore.

Also, did I crack the file?

[SgtBoomCloud]

You can add Winton as a Loyalty 1, Connection 3 contact, and make a note that he owes you a Rating Two Favor.  Also, glad you enjoyed it.  Well played, btw.  I was wondering if you were going to end up with a potential future antagonist as opposed to a contact.

All, I've got a brief IC post incoming, but it's time to get the team together again.  Should we just abstract that calls are made and you guys find a place to get together, or does somebody want to take the lead there?  Regardless, where do y'all want to meet? 

Noted, glad the play was enjoyed

Made a jab at legitiimizing meeting up, but it can easily be rejected.  If we jump straight to the meetup, I'm cool with it.

[rednblack]

@Jack, yes it should.  The newsboy does not in fact fix Wraith with a hard stare.

[JackVII]

Cool. I guess we still need to roll Initiative, since I imagine the IC is going to keep looking.
Initiative [INT (5) + DP (6) + Hot-Sim (4d6)]: 4d6+11 28

Regardless of what the IC does, Wraith's focus is on copying the file.
Edit File [LOG (8) + Computer (5) + Hot-Sim (2) - Running Silent (2)] (6): 13d6t5 5