[CigarSmoker]

thats sad, hackers can be very powerful. By RAW you can easily use at least one ONI Drone as little Helper. The ONI has Pilot rating 3 so he can run 3/2 = 2 Programs, thats 3 with Virtual Machine. So enough for Weapon, Evasion, Maneuver (switch Weapon with Stealth if needed). Slaved to the Deck the ONI can be controlled with 1 Minor Action and has like all Drones 4 Initative Dice giving him 1 Major +4 Minor Actions.

I'd like to know more about this? I'm not familiar with ONI. Can you direct me to some sources?

page 302 Nissan Samurai/Oni

the Oni is listed under Medium Drones but is actually a large Drone (see the description text p.300)

for more information how drones work Rigger chapter, the retractable Blades can be handled as Ramming from Rigger Chapter (that would be 5P)

[Xenon]

The jammer in the gear section states that a standard jammer emits a jamming field equal to its rating that drops off by 1 for every 10 meters from the center of its spherical area....

SR6 p. 270 Jammer
...The jammer only affects devices that are within the jamming area, but it affects all of them...

[taukarrie]

The jammer in the gear section states that a standard jammer emits a jamming field equal to its rating that drops off by 1 for every 10 meters from the center of its spherical area....

SR6 p. 270 Jammer
...The jammer only affects devices that are within the jamming area, but it affects all of them...

Yes, I quoted this as well a bit further back. Part of the debate happening here is if a jamming field should cause some sort of interference for devices outside of its radius attempting to interact with things inside or through the radius, or if the field is somehow visible to matrix users perceiving the area near it. I liked Devil Rat's suggestion that devices designated exempt to the jammer by its wireless function are also not protected by it. That along with this quote mostly solve the issue for me. But im still not sure how i would handle someone trying to locate a nearby active jamming field for the purpose of avoiding or investigating it.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

But im still not sure how i would handle someone trying to locate a nearby active jamming field for the purpose of avoiding or investigating it.

I would say that the Jamming signal should probably still be detectable from ranges beyond where it's strong enough to actually be Noise.  It's hard to find ideas for what the Electronics Warfare specialization of Cracking would be used for, but I daresay this would be an example.  Since a Jammer is just a device screaming RF waves, it ought to be an unopposed test to identify what the signal is and potentially the direction and distance its coming from.  Probably threshold of 2 for the former, and maybe 4 or so for the latter.

[Iron Serpent Prince]

There must be something that limits the effectiveness of this thing   

I'm all for clear guidelines / rules being set up.  If for no other reason than to reduce the size of the questionnaire players have to submit to GMs to know how that specific instance of the game world works.

Without it, it is pretty much left up to each table to work out on their own.  Most of the GMs I've ever experienced handwave / ignore Noise.  Of course, that was 5e, where Noise couldn't stop a Meta Link from making a call...

Here is a Noise survival guide to hold people over until / if official rules are handed down:

• Noise isn't "real"

Now, I'm not talking about the mechanic, it obviously exists.  I mean Noise itself isn't any "real" thing in the game world.  It is heavily abstracted, and based on a bunch of (in-world) mechanical assumptions that don't make a whole lot of sense, so you can't expect Noise to make a whole lot of sense in itself.

The sooner you can make peace with that, the less headaches you will have.

• It's purpose is respectable, however it's existence is questionable

The primary purpose is to make things "interesting" (in the Chinese curse kind of way) for Tech characters.  It is very much like Background Count for Mages in that sense.  "What's Background Count?  It isn't in the Core Book..."  Exactly my point. 

(It is one of the legs of the MagicRun complaint.)

• It is often trivialized

If you are a character the will likely run into Noise frequently, it is often very easy to negate it most of the time.  Or, at least, come close to negating it.

It only really ever plays a part on those next to the character that will likely run into it frequently.

• It is a level of complication that some GMs won't even bother with

While it is okay to theorycraft and try to figure out how it works in RAW, it may never come up in games.  Depends on the GM, and the characters at the table.  If the group doesn't have any Deckers/Riggers (quite common in 5e), there isn't any real need for it except as a plot point.
If the group does have a Techie, if it becomes clear that Noise will never really impact them, then it will likely get sidelined as a rule not worth the effort.



All of this is a YMMV topic, of course.

But im still not sure how i would handle someone trying to locate a nearby active jamming field for the purpose of avoiding or investigating it.

Ehh...  That is a much more difficult question.  It would depend heavily on the character in question and what mode they are in.  I would think it would be much easier for someone in VR to "spot" a distortion field caused be a Jammer...

Mechanically, I would suggest have the most likely individual make a Matrix Perception check, with a Threshold of 6 - Jammer Rating (or equivalent) to notice the distortion.

I mean, if you are using it as a plot point, there isn't any real need to make it more complex than that.

[CigarSmoker]

Handwaving rules away, as you write, away is  the same as making up houserules. *we as a group decide not to use rule y" (y being Noise in that case). Its not that formal but that is exactly what happens. If the whole Group gives the GM the right to make up houserules thats not different.

Now when you want to talk with other groups there must be some kind of mutual agreement what is lore, rules and whats not.

In 5th Edition the Noise may have been pointless. But in 6th it shuts devices down and a decker can only reduce it by 2, a Rigger by 8.

The 8 being interesting because it is the maximum Range penalty. But hacking on another Continent is harder because of Distance, thats RAW.

Edit:
(and yes with Satellite Uplink its actually -5 max Range penalty kind of a must have together with Signal Scrubber Program for Deckers)

[Shadowhack]

This makes sense to me and I wish i could just run with it. But unfortunately the description of the jammer fouls this all up.

"This device floods the airwaves with electromagnetic jamming signals to block out wireless and radio communication. The jammer generates noise equal to its Device Rating. The area jammer affects a spherical area—its rating is reduced by 1 for every 10 meters from the center. The directional jammer affects a conical area with a thirty-degree spread—its rating is reduced by 1 for every 30 meters from the center. The jammer only affects devices that are within the jamming area, but it affects all of them. Walls and other obstacles may prevent the jamming signal from spreading or reduce its effect (gamemaster’s discretion). Jammers are available with ratings from 1 to 6. Wireless bonus: You can set your jammer to not interfere with devices and personas you designate."

Weve got noise coming directly from the jammer and weve got a wireless bonus that allows an unlimited amount of devices and personas that can be set to ignore the jamming. So theoretically a rigger wouldnt have to worry about a thing as long as the RCC and all the drones are on that whitelist.

Ive got a group of 7 teenagers, all first timers coming off a DnD game, about to start running and no one wanted to be a decker. So now theyre all digging through the options to make themselves as deckerproof as possible. the Jammer is the favorite option so far so I need to decide how im going to allow this device to be used as an active countermeasure, if at all.

I have a simple solution. Pick the option that will be the most fun for your teenagers.

[penllawen]

I totally get what you're saying, Local Noise plus Distance is sane and easy.  And trying to figure out how many spam zones or salt water fish tanks (Hacking around Seaworld is just impossible I'd guess) are between you and your target a couple klicks away isn't something a sane GM would want to fiddle with.  But some of the more common Matrix counter measures are things like Jammers and Anti-Wireless paint, they just don't work if the Hacker is a block away?  I should think Jammers and Anti-Wireless paint would fall under the specific trumps general clause.  YMMV.

I'm with you on this.

Noise local to one end of comms and noise local to other end of comms makes a lot more sense to me than only considering one end, and doesn't feel unbearably complex. Instead of one pretty arbitrary GM-made-up number, we have two, added together [1]. It would be very weird if a decker was crippled with noise while trying to hack something in the next room but could make the noise vanish that by driving a half-klick up the road. I mean, who possibly thinks that's reasonable? Either mechanically or in fluff terms? My players would laugh me out of the room. And rightly so!

Noise in-between the two things communicating can easily be handwaved away though -- it's a mesh network, it routes around noise automatically, it's almost impossible to disrupt all possible routes through the mesh from A to B, yadda yadda. That keeps things practical.

[1] Unless you want to say that Noise isn't cumulative and only the single highest score counts -- which might be a decent idea, I think?

[penllawen]

Wireless bonus: You can set your jammer to not interfere with devices and personas you designate."
...
Ive got a group of 7 teenagers, all first timers coming off a DnD game, about to start running and no one wanted to be a decker. So now theyre all digging through the options to make themselves as deckerproof as possible. the Jammer is the favorite option so far so I need to decide how im going to allow this device to be used as an active countermeasure, if at all.

Have you considered outright dropping the wireless bonus? That's a lot of the source of your problem, and I don't think it makes the jammer underpowered if you simply remove it. I don't think jammers offered this in 5e.

[CigarSmoker]

@penllawen
In 5th Edition Jammer had the same Wireless Bonus p.441 5th Core Rulebook.

I think the way to go is really if your device is not jammed, by wireless bonus, its not protected either. Even if you stand next to it, why is the Device not affected when it accesses - for example - the Weather Channel but its "positivly jammed" when a Hacker accesses it ? (the same as Stainless Steel Devil Rat has written with different words ^^)

I would really like the Noise like you suggested to be calculated like that:
Range + Highest Noise Source affecting either Hacker or Target

[penllawen]

@penllawen
In 5th Edition Jammer had the same Wireless Bonus p.441 5th Core Rulebook.

Well for pity's sake, keep it quiet so my players don't find out!

[Michael Chandra]

@penllawen
In 5th Edition Jammer had the same Wireless Bonus p.441 5th Core Rulebook.

I think the way to go is really if your device is not jammed, by wireless bonus, its not protected either. Even if you stand next to it, why is the Device not affected when it accesses - for example - the Weather Channel but its "positivly jammed" when a Hacker accesses it ? (the same as Stainless Steel Devil Rat has written with different words ^^)

I would really like the Noise like you suggested to be calculated like that:
Range + Highest Noise Source affecting either Hacker or Target

With 5e we got the really weird clarification that wireless functionality ONLY meant wireless bonus, not actual wireless functionality (which meant headjammers literally could not block a commlink from calling, even though their description said so). The biggest differences between SR5 and SR6 Noise would be that now it explicitly can kill your connection with the Matrix, and that static/spam zones are not explicitly described anymore.

Anyway, yeah, I would go with 'your own noise determines whether you can get online, and when dealing with a target the highest of target/you is added to the range noise' myself.

[Ghost Rigger]

Ah, but is the physical hardware generating a hotel's host in the hotel, or is it a life support system somewhere in the PCC desert that's keeping a dead technomancer's brain going, which is what's linking the Host to the Foundation?

Making the matrix closely parallel to magic was a mistake.

[Banshee]

Ah, but is the physical hardware generating a hotel's host in the hotel, or is it a life support system somewhere in the PCC desert that's keeping a dead technomancer's brain going, which is what's linking the Host to the Foundation?

Making the matrix closely parallel to magic was a mistake.

For what it's worth... I do support that particular piece of lore and is not referenced directly in the CRB  matrix chapter for a reason.

[taukarrie]

In 5th Edition the Noise may have been pointless. But in 6th it shuts devices down and a decker can only reduce it by 2, a Rigger by 8.

How can a rigger reduce it by 8? I thought they only had access to the same scrubber programs the deckers use.