[taukarrie]

Found nothing in the book for this but network the team coms to the team decker is the common answer I keep seeing for questions like, "how do I protect my street sam's smart gun from enemy deckers?".

Ideally id like to see an example of the actions in a combat round for a decker trying to hack through such a network to get to a particular drone or gun or whatever. But I at least would like to know how this is established and what the rules for doing it are. It seems similar to whatever is done for one person nesting commlinks, another thing that lacks any official rules for doing.

What does this even look like in the matrix? does the decker maintain a single icon in a sort of host format that all the other comnlinks are behind? So if im a decker and i wanted to get a street sam to eject his smartgun clip i have to first brute force past his decker's firewall, then brute force into the sam's commlink, and then spoof his gun to eject the clip, all while opening myself up to the attack from the networking decker?

In the case of a rigger pulling this networking move with an RCC i would guess its the same accept that the rigger couldnt force me out without rebooting the RCC.

Also, somewhat related question; since probing or brute forcing is a test vs willpower+firewall how does that work if im just hacking a commlink carried by an average non-decker person? How is their willpower part of the roll if they arent actively monitoring the device?  Or even if they are using the device is "monitoring" meant only to describe when a spider is patrolling a network? What if some guard is watching AR porn when I decide to hack his commlink to see what cyberware hes got wireless that i can mess with? Shouldn't I be rolling against the device's firewall alone?

[Banshee]

It's pretty straight forward and the backbone of how I built systems to work ... I do realize though that it is not clearly spelled out in the CRB.

Each team member can link their gear to their commlink, the the decker or whoever is playing matrix overwatch can link each commlink to their cyberjack (or whatever is providing the network firewall).
Each commlink would represent as separate icons in the matrix but is defended by the decker in this case. If linked together you would not need to brute force the street Sam's commlink after getting past the decker .. getting past the deckers firewall gets you in the system.
If a lone commlink user is not linked to a network it still gets to use that users willpower.. this basically represents that users security settings not the fact that they are actively monitoring at that very moment.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

You're imagining daisy-chaining entire PANs to the decker's PAN?

[Banshee]

Basically yes, that is the whole point of my matrix rules being based on network systems and not PAN's

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Basically yes, that is the whole point of my matrix rules being based on network systems and not PAN's

That certainly does make things easier for the Decker to defend the team from matrix threats.

[Michael Chandra]

I must admit, it makes streamlining much easier. 'Okay all is connected to the deck, everyone has X Firewall against hacking, just add your default Matrix of Willpower + Firewall resist to your cheatsheet.' (I forget, in 6w, do you use own Willpower inside a PAN? Or that of the PAN's owner?)

[taukarrie]

It's pretty straight forward and the backbone of how I built systems to work ... I do realize though that it is not clearly spelled out in the CRB.

Each team member can link their gear to their commlink, the the decker or whoever is playing matrix overwatch can link each commlink to their cyberjack (or whatever is providing the network firewall).
Each commlink would represent as separate icons in the matrix but is defended by the decker in this case. If linked together you would not need to brute force the street Sam's commlink after getting past the decker .. getting past the deckers firewall gets you in the system.
If a lone commlink user is not linked to a network it still gets to use that users willpower.. this basically represents that users security settings not the fact that they are actively monitoring at that very moment.

So when doing this does each of the team's commlinks count as a slaved device for the decker for the purpose of tracking max devices allowed by their cyberjack/commlink? I'm running a group of 7 right now and that would pretty much make it impossible to get everyone linked without the very best hardware.

[Finstersang]

It's pretty straight forward and the backbone of how I built systems to work ... I do realize though that it is not clearly spelled out in the CRB.

Each team member can link their gear to their commlink, the the decker or whoever is playing matrix overwatch can link each commlink to their cyberjack (or whatever is providing the network firewall).
Each commlink would represent as separate icons in the matrix but is defended by the decker in this case. If linked together you would not need to brute force the street Sam's commlink after getting past the decker .. getting past the deckers firewall gets you in the system.

I really like this, but admittingly, it could have used a bit more explanation and more examples. It´s nice to know how it´s supposed to work, but I really didn´t get that on the first read.

Guess the pages were running out after all those super necissary bits about Spray weapons, Focus Crafting and Ritual spellcasting. You know, basic stuff that needs to be in the Core rules 

If a lone commlink user is not linked to a network it still gets to use that users willpower.. this basically represents that users security settings not the fact that they are actively monitoring at that very moment.

Guess it takes Willpower to not click on every virus link and install dozens of toolbars 

[Banshee]

I must admit, it makes streamlining much easier. 'Okay all is connected to the deck, everyone has X Firewall against hacking, just add your default Matrix of Willpower + Firewall resist to your cheatsheet.' (I forget, in 6w, do you use own Willpower inside a PAN? Or that of the PAN's owner?)

It would be the willpower of the decker .. or whoever is playing the active matrix defender role

[Banshee]

It's pretty straight forward and the backbone of how I built systems to work ... I do realize though that it is not clearly spelled out in the CRB.

Each team member can link their gear to their commlink, the the decker or whoever is playing matrix overwatch can link each commlink to their cyberjack (or whatever is providing the network firewall).
Each commlink would represent as separate icons in the matrix but is defended by the decker in this case. If linked together you would not need to brute force the street Sam's commlink after getting past the decker .. getting past the deckers firewall gets you in the system.
If a lone commlink user is not linked to a network it still gets to use that users willpower.. this basically represents that users security settings not the fact that they are actively monitoring at that very moment.

So when doing this does each of the team's commlinks count as a slaved device for the decker for the purpose of tracking max devices allowed by their cyberjack/commlink? I'm running a group of 7 right now and that would pretty much make it impossible to get everyone linked without the very best hardware.

Yes, but shouldn't be a big deal. If not in CRB then check errata the limit should be device rating X 3 (I think that's what we settled on)

[Banshee]

It's pretty straight forward and the backbone of how I built systems to work ... I do realize though that it is not clearly spelled out in the CRB.

Each team member can link their gear to their commlink, the the decker or whoever is playing matrix overwatch can link each commlink to their cyberjack (or whatever is providing the network firewall).
Each commlink would represent as separate icons in the matrix but is defended by the decker in this case. If linked together you would not need to brute force the street Sam's commlink after getting past the decker .. getting past the deckers firewall gets you in the system.

I really like this, but admittingly, it could have used a bit more explanation and more examples. It´s nice to know how it´s supposed to work, but I really didn´t get that on the first read.

Guess the pages were running out after all those super necissary bits about Spray weapons, Focus Crafting and Ritual spellcasting. You know, basic stuff that needs to be in the Core rules 

If a lone commlink user is not linked to a network it still gets to use that users willpower.. this basically represents that users security settings not the fact that they are actively monitoring at that very moment.

Guess it takes Willpower to not click on every virus link and install dozens of toolbars 

Oh I know, more a casualty of final time crunch combined with page count. Honestly didn't stand out to me until people like you guys read it ... then it was oh crap your right I didn't cover that in detail did I.

[Macbrea]

Your decker can get away with slaving a large parties commlinks to two or three of the deckers personal commlinks slaved to their deck.   Note this adds more protection to the party.

[ZeroSum]

It's pretty straight forward and the backbone of how I built systems to work ... I do realize though that it is not clearly spelled out in the CRB.

Each team member can link their gear to their commlink, the the decker or whoever is playing matrix overwatch can link each commlink to their cyberjack (or whatever is providing the network firewall).
Each commlink would represent as separate icons in the matrix but is defended by the decker in this case. If linked together you would not need to brute force the street Sam's commlink after getting past the decker .. getting past the deckers firewall gets you in the system.
If a lone commlink user is not linked to a network it still gets to use that users willpower.. this basically represents that users security settings not the fact that they are actively monitoring at that very moment.

So when doing this does each of the team's commlinks count as a slaved device for the decker for the purpose of tracking max devices allowed by their cyberjack/commlink? I'm running a group of 7 right now and that would pretty much make it impossible to get everyone linked without the very best hardware.

Yes, but shouldn't be a big deal. If not in CRB then check errata the limit should be device rating X 3 (I think that's what we settled on)

I'm not sure I understand, still.

Let's say I have a party consisting of three samurai and a decker. Each samurai has 6 devices in a PAN, including the commlink that forms the PAN. That's a total of 18 devices, including the commlinks forming the PANs. The decker only has a Device Rating 4 deck, meaning they can protect 12 devices, and they have 6 devices of their own, including a cyberdeck and a cyberjack.

Scenario 1: The decker protects their own gear and all of the team gear (6 devices, plus 4 PANs), for a total of 10 "devices" protected; all 24 actual devices are protected.
Scenario 2: The decker has to choose specifically which 12 devices to protect, for a total of half of the teams wireless gear (12/24 actual devices)
Scenario 3: I missed something, and the actual answer is neither of the above. Elaborate?

Also, I see a lot of different references to networks. Has a common nomenclature been decided on? Are we still talking about networks and slaved devices, or are we purely now talking about devices, networks, and hosts? Any clarification you could offer here would be most appreciated.

[Banshee]

It's Scenario 1

Basically everything is a network made up of devices now ... it's either a PAN which is a network made up of mobile devices or it's a Host which is just a "mega" device that is not mobile and can support near infinite devices

[ZeroSum]

It's Scenario 1

Basically everything is a network made up of devices now ... it's either a PAN which is a network made up of mobile devices or it's a Host which is just a "mega" device that is not mobile and can support near infinite devices

Thanks!

EDIT: This is very useful, and I personally think this represents a much needed simplification of architecture for the purpose of bringing the hackers into the game alongside the team.

1st through 3rd Edition required a LOT of knowledge of the rules and the ability to engage in non-linear/highly theoretical thinking. Hackers in these editions were basically playing a different game from the rest of the team, in my experience.

4th improved upon this by simplifying the architecture dramatically, putting it more in line with real-world networks and required a much more practical and logical approach. However, hackers often ended up being better off not accompanying the team on a run, instead hacking from another location.

I never played 5th Edition, but from reading the books it took a step in the highly theoretical direction, back towards 3rd. Hosts, and especially the Foundation, was something with very few real world parallels, and it seemed hard to wrap ones head around just how certain things worked. I'm not sure how hackers operated in 5th, to be honest, as it seemed like they had options for both remote and in-person hacking.

From my limited exposure to 6th, it seems like this edition has once again taken a more rational, logical approach to network architecture, and this seems to indicate that the Matrix will be more practical than it has been in the past. I hope this is true, because few things would make me happier than being able to merge the hacking aspects of the game with the social, combat, and magic aspects. Cheers!