[theclaw]

Hi everyone

So, here's the deal. I've just started running a campaign and some of the characters have level 2 or 3 SIN. Level 3 is decent but not something you can really count on, where Fake 2 is pretty much a student fake ID to get beer.

So their first meet with a fixer was in Downtown, and I looked at the rules for checking the SINs and the official rule is opposed test between the SIN rating and the Device rating. So that should be 2 (or 3) dices vs a 4 dice pool. Then my players starting to point out (and I agree with them) that evan a rating 6 would be kinda week in a decently secured environment. I quickly checked the Matrix Internet and found out that most people use a house rule of rolling Device Rating x 2 [Sin Level].

I'm not super satisfied with that rule as it doesn't really considers any attempts from the player to avoid security, by Stealth or by attitude (to defeat the "weird behavior algorithms" of the drones).

Eventually I rolled the standard rule (and they all passed which was a miracle) but I'm thinking of using the following in the future:

Opposed test between the Sin Rating + (Etiquette or Impersonation/Performance or Stealth) skill level and Device rating. If the drone wins then the operator (or the software) runs a second check to confirm. If the drone wins again, then you're busted.

Or

Device Rating x 2 with a threshold of Sin Rating + the same choice of skills level.

Does it sound reasonable or totally crappy ?

[PiXeL01]

You are right. It seems that anything below rating 4 is a waste of money as the rating is the SIN is the threshold of the scanner’s Device Rating x2 test.

I think it’s important to note that in many cases each sin is not checked thoroughly. Instead the scanner simply inquires whether a SIN is being broadcasted or not.

Which is why hackers are so importantly. Either control device to pass the SINs or Resonance Veil to convince the scanner that the people passing all have valid SINs

[Kiirnodel]

First off, are you running 5th edition? The rules have changed somewhat over time. Opposed tests between the device checking the SIN and the rating of the SIN was the rule in 4th for example. In 5th Edition the rule is that the device checking the SIN rolls its Rating x2 and needs to get a threshold of the Fake SIN's rating. Your post seems to indicate that you think the core rules is a house-rule so I suspect there is a misunderstanding somewhere.

Page 364 of the Core Rulebook has the rules, plus a handy chart for seeing what each rating of the SIN Verification device is really doing. So it does tell you a couple things about what sort of security check you need to be going through to hit certain levels of security. For example, if the group isn't going through some sort of checkpoint that is requiring everyone to submit some sort of biometric data (like a thumb-scan for instance) then the Verification Rating has to be 3 or lower. A Rating 2 SIN is going to pass a Verification of Rating 2 or less most of the time, and yes, sometimes bribing the cop to be like "come on man, you don't need to run that again" is kind of expected.

For the most part, SINs aren't checked autonomously. Unless you are going into a high security neighborhood, you shouldn't need to stealth or avoid having your SIN checked just for walking down the street. So yeah, you can do things like try to avoid checkpoints that are running SIN scans, or Etiquette your way past Police that want to check your ID. For the most part, in my games I don't do a check for SINs unless it is important for the area or the story.

[Michael Chandra]

I attached the odds of an RX scanner scoring Y+ hits, for those that want to check the numbers.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

An often overlooked part of the SIN verification process is what the system is checking.  Per the SIN Verification Details sidebar on pg. 364, once you're trying to use your Fake SIN against a rating 5+ verification system, you have to begin providing biometric samples that match your Fake SIN's data.  This enters the realm of having to carry around bladders of someone else's urine, hair, blood, fake fingerprints/retinas, or whatever biometric it is that system checks.

And no, Fake SINs don't use YOUR biometrics.  That's actually the point of having a Fake SIN.

[JudgeMonroe]

It is true: A simple Scanner Rating x2 (SIN rating) test is the 5E RAW for testing IDs. What's missing from this rule is a *Limit* for the test. I could have sworn that was part of the test but I can't find any rule about it now. Anyway, if you want a House Rule to buff Fake SINs, apply the Scanner Rating as a limit to the test:

DR x 2 [DR] (SIN)

This prevents a DR2 scanner from ever flagging a Fake SIN of rating 3 or higher, which also has the benefit of reducing the number of dice you have to roll.

And if you want to know how hard it should be to beat a rating 5+ verification system, watch the movie Gattaca.

[Hobbes]

And no, Fake SINs don't use YOUR biometrics.  That's actually the point of having a Fake SIN.

The higher the rating of a fake SIN the better the match is to you, why would Biometrics be different?  If the Rating 4 SIN a starting character can get isn't useful without the assorted fake retinal, and fingerprint devices/cyberware/adept powers, why bother? 

And as JudgeMonroe points out, SIN scanners should have a limit of Device Rating like every other Sensor and Scanner in the game.  Which would make Rating 3 SINs virtually bulletproof, and Rating 4 SINs overkill for anything short of corporate zero zones and border checks for very hostile countries.  Very few people are going to put up with routine blood testing just to go to work.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

And no, Fake SINs don't use YOUR biometrics.  That's actually the point of having a Fake SIN.

The higher the rating of a fake SIN the better the match is to you, why would Biometrics be different?  If the Rating 4 SIN a starting character can get isn't useful without the assorted fake retinal, and fingerprint devices/cyberware/adept powers, why bother? 

And as JudgeMonroe points out, SIN scanners should have a limit of Device Rating like every other Sensor and Scanner in the game.  Which would make Rating 3 SINs virtually bulletproof, and Rating 4 SINs overkill for anything short of corporate zero zones and border checks for very hostile countries.  Very few people are going to put up with routine blood testing just to go to work.

See page 363 as well as the already cited pg 364. A low rating Fake SIN will either have no biometrics attached, or something obviously incorrect.  Like the example of a fake SIN using the DNA of a chicken.  Once you get up to rating 4, it is:

Casually plausible; sex, age, and nationality
match; supporting data appears valid only on
cursory checks

Once you get into the realm of rating 5+ Fake SINs, you have valid biometrics but they're for some individual other than yourself.

[Michael Chandra]

It is true: A simple Scanner Rating x2 (SIN rating) test is the 5E RAW for testing IDs. What's missing from this rule is a *Limit* for the test. I could have sworn that was part of the test but I can't find any rule about it now. Anyway, if you want a House Rule to buff Fake SINs, apply the Scanner Rating as a limit to the test:

DR x 2 [DR] (SIN)

This prevents a DR2 scanner from ever flagging a Fake SIN of rating 3 or higher, which also has the benefit of reducing the number of dice you have to roll.

And if you want to know how hard it should be to beat a rating 5+ verification system, watch the movie Gattaca.

You're also breaking the rules by blocking scanners from ever busting a fake SIN that way. And are you really that concerned about the 1/10 chance you have to talk your way out of things and 1/81 chance of burning a rating 3 fake?

If you get a simple Rating 4 in chargen, a rating 3 has 10% of tie or better, 1.78% of burning the fake. It's stressful, but it means there's still a risk. If you're that worried, just add 1 extra hit required for burning your fake. That way, you can be scanned hundreds of times without burning.

[JudgeMonroe]

It is true: A simple Scanner Rating x2 (SIN rating) test is the 5E RAW for testing IDs. What's missing from this rule is a *Limit* for the test. I could have sworn that was part of the test but I can't find any rule about it now. Anyway, if you want a House Rule to buff Fake SINs, apply the Scanner Rating as a limit to the test:

DR x 2 [DR] (SIN)

This prevents a DR2 scanner from ever flagging a Fake SIN of rating 3 or higher, which also has the benefit of reducing the number of dice you have to roll.

You're also breaking the rules by blocking scanners from ever busting a fake SIN that way. And are you really that concerned about the 1/10 chance you have to talk your way out of things and 1/81 chance of burning a rating 3 fake?

You're right, it's not a problem as written so long as R4+ scanners are few and far between and the table doesn't turn every Stuffer Shack run into a SIN verification mini game. The "tie goes to the runner" rule is fine; I was just brainstorming for OP's benefit. Putting a limit on the test takes a lot of risk off the table; but you can put it back (overcorrect) by moving the tie rule from "threshold" to "limit" and find yourself using social engineering way too often.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Technically, a tie goes to "start a social encounter".

If
the threshold is reached but not exceeded, the system
reports that something seems “odd” with the SIN and
will recommend that the operator investigate further.
Whether the operator actually does anything is up to
them.

[kyoto kid]

...in Missions season 9 (NeoTokyo) characters usually carry a rating 3 at most.  If you are caught with a rating 4 or higher, it's off to the lockup you go after which you get a criminal SIN.  With a rating 3 or less, all that happens is it is burned and you pay a fine. So in this instance, you do not want a high rating Fake SIN, but it is good to invest in a few low rating burner SINS. 

The Neo Tokyo missions setting is probably the most dystopic I have seen since London and Denver in 2e/3e.

[Cabral]

Once you get into the realm of rating 5+ Fake SINs, you have valid biometrics but they're for some individual other than yourself.

Well, maybe.

See page 367 of SR5.
Rating 5: "...valid biometrics for another person (with samples)..."
Rating 6: "...valid biometrics with samples..."

Rating 6 omits the call out for another person. This could be that it was unnecessary to repeat (since samples are mentioned) or that rating 6 put your samples on file.

It's probably the first case, but there is room for alternate interpretations. I seem to recall in earlier editions that went into more detail on the subject, sometimes the fake SIN creation process involves injecting biometric samples. Sometimes, the objective is not to have a SIN that misdirects away from, but a SIN that represents you. This is not really supported by the core book and I don't think it has been revisited in 5e.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

That doesn't make much sense.  If a rating 6 SIN were to work with your own biometrics, what's the point of coming with samples of those biometrics? You can give your own print/dna/whatever.

Plus it's a serious liability to put your own real biometrics into "the system".  Now you can be forensically ID'd at the scene of your shadowrunny crimes.

[kyoto kid]

...that's why you should always carry a spray bottle of C Squared in your kit.