Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (https://forums.sjgames.com/index.php)
-   GURPS (https://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   GURPS Shadowrun (https://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=73445)

Fred Brackin 09-29-2010 03:29 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding (Post 1055727)
Couldn't you just build a VR model of something and then use sympathetic magic to manipulate it? Then you don't need all this "induction" handwaving; deckers can hack your gun with electronic voodoo.

That just leads to electronics-free guns.

Celjabba 09-29-2010 03:29 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by CousinX (Post 1055682)
Absolutely. If we want to start paring out the "unrealistic" things about Shadowrun, or even Gibsonian Cyberpunk in general, VR and/or wireless netrunning is one of the smaller issues.

So true.

I don't know SR4, i only played the earlier editions.
But i have trouble understanding peoples who say 'wireless netrunning' is too unrealistic for 'shadowrun'.

Magic,Spirits, dragons (and dragon POTUS), millenium elves, adult mutating in another race, shiawase decision, cyberzombie, move-by-wire, AI, shadowrunners, ... No problem.
But wireless networking. No. that's impossible.
Seriously ? Can someone explain?

In another setting, i would understand. But in shadowrun ?


Celjabba

CousinX 09-29-2010 03:29 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth (Post 1055716)
That's not software security, that's hardware security. I'm all for hardware security totally destroying this concept, though I probably wouldn't bother with active hardware defenses.

EM induction 'hacking' is going to be acting at the absolute lowest level, necessarily, since it's directly twiddling the physical hardware. If the only thing you do with that power is plug an unauthorized virtual terminal in, you're really wasting the potential.

No, it's hardware devices directed by a software algorithm (or decision-making apparatus). Software can't run without hardware to run on, and hardware doesn't do anything much without software to tell it what to do. See above re: the hazy distinction between hardware and software. At the level of smartgun electronics, etc, there's not going to be a lot of difference between the two ... the functions of the device will be mostly hardcoded in, and "software" will probably be more along the lines of firmware.

Godogma 09-29-2010 03:30 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1055729)
Incidentally (and I'm not really trying to cause another discussion loop) my question was _why_ do you want this thing? What I got was a statement that you did want this thing and a long list of jump/hoop jump/hoop iterations designed (or perhaps the word is intended rather than designed) to result in the thing you wanted.

Why not just write-off the decker "class/archetype" as unsuited to group/tabletop adventures?

I'm not saying it needs to be written off, but I obviously from my previous statements have pointed out an extreme case of DO NOT WANT! (excuse my Icanhazcheezburgerism) to wireless devices being everywhere and in everything just to make decking viable and less of a pain in the ass for a GM to run for.

The GM is free to rule that it indeed isn't suitable for desktop play if he doesn't want to do the extra work or somewhere in between. But personally, it'd be mighty rough on the Decker if I was around, it'd probably a shoot on sight or witch burning world indeed if a computer jockey could do the things that have been listed as a possibility with all this wireless decking talk that's been going around in here.

I just wouldn't find it fun to play and I honestly couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to want to run it - I turned my SR4 book in for store credit personally.

Crakkerjakk 09-29-2010 03:32 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055722)
Except for one little problem - you have the TL issue (in GURPS) also, you forget, technology is generally pioneered for military use FIRST then trickles down to the consumer market.

Why is that a problem? Just cause GURPS says it's TL 11^ doesn't mean I can't be like, "oh that? Invented in 2050 in my game. Yeah, freak breakthrough."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055722)
The first generation cyberware (what little we have now) aside from some specific things was made to repair battle damage. Smarlink - by definition military hardware, and if we're using the SR description its installed with connections between all the interconnected parts - its not wireless.

... the whole point is it doesn't matter if it's wireless. I can still hack it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055722)
I could go on and on, mainly I don't find it feasible - thus I'm not willing to play in a game where its an ubiquitous part of the game and where I have to prepare and plan for it and install stuff that doesn't fit my character in his meat bod in order to stop it from wirelessly hijacking my eyeballs or my gun or any number of other things.

Yeah, I streamline the process by building equipment packages for players that don't want to deal with it. There's the low-cost, "Take my mind, please!" package, the "Security Conscious" mid-cost package, and the "Black Helicopters" premium package. They're not that spendy, like I said it boils down to giving you an unpenalized resistance roll, so it's not complex mechanically for non-deckers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055722)
Yes, its hard on the GM to run a parallel virtual world for the decker - but the decker himself is going to need either Compartmentalized Mind or he can only take actions in one or the other; and it takes more than a second to break the security then make the gun eject the clip. In one second I can shoot him in the forehead. OR if he can make it happen in one second, just how many points in this skill does he have? 30? Since the penalties are going to be enormous without compartmentalized mind just for him to function and walk around and talk at the same time much less in a combat situation for which he'll get even more negative modifiers without some form of perk or advantage to mitigate trying to do a complex task on a computer in the middle of a firefight.

Well, yeah, I didn't want to make deckers better in a firefight than a street sam. I just want to let them make a difference via hacking. In the time it takes most deckers to eject one corpsec guy's mag or turn off his cybereyes or coopt a combat drone, the street sam has shot four people in the head. But that's because combat is his thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055722)
I don't equate technology with magic. Technology I can weigh, measure and investigate - thus it has to fit my suspension of disbelief. As much as I dislike the magic system in GURPS sometimes its an entirely different section of its own and is governed by its own rules.

Except there's some technology that is magic. We call it superscience, but it's still magic. If you're telling me you never run games with superscience, well, okay, but that's all this is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055722)
Decker does not = technowizard.

No it doesn't. I haven't mentioned technomancers yet, since both you and Fred have mentioned you prefer 3e, and I'm generally assuming you don't use Otaku. But Technomancers can do some genuinely crazy stuff.

Fred Brackin 09-29-2010 03:38 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk (Post 1055743)
No it doesn't. I haven't mentioned technomancers yet, since both you and Fred have mentioned you prefer 3e, and I'm generally assuming you don't use Otaku. But Technomancers can do some genuinely crazy stuff.

Otaku were a 3e invention.

.......and I might actually prefer 2e.:)

3e got kind of tight-assed and dull.

Seriously I don't think I have Godoma's specific issues about wireless. My problems are more about 'No,no, no! You can't jack out! We have to preserve the viability of the Hacker class no matter what!".

Godogma 09-29-2010 03:39 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
So, it doesn't matter if its wireless you can still hack it... Alright, what are the skill penalties (in this example lets use the SR 3 cyberware - it's all custom purpose designed and doesn't have all this wireless stuff to communicate that leaves this nice little loophole) its hardened, because it was designed to resist (not nullify but resist) electromagnetic interference and it has its own custom firmware to interface with the neurological system of the human body.

How does this work? What are the penalties? (A link to an article with some indication of where the example is will suffice if you don't want to type it out).

Celjabba 09-29-2010 03:40 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Godogma (Post 1055740)
But personally, it'd be mighty rough on the Decker if I was around, it'd probably a shoot on sight or witch burning world indeed if a computer jockey could do the things that have been listed as a possibility with all this wireless decking talk that's been going around in here.

I just wouldn't find it fun to play and I honestly couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to want to run it - I turned my SR4 book in for store credit personally.

That is the big problem with decking (wireless or not) and magic.
In book, it work very well because the character are restricted by the plot.
Around a gametable, a few imaginative players can ruin a game with such tools, unless the GM start blockading the setting with arbitrary restriction or witch-hunting.
Just take a modern world and access to some utility Gurps:magic spells, and player will found so many abusive but logical loophole the game will degenerate fast without extra care.
I am not sure i would allow wireless netrunning in any game i could run for that reason.
Not because it is unrealistic.
But because it is potentially far too powerfull and unpredictable.
Damage abilities are easy to balance.
Control abilities, not so.

Celjabba

Godogma 09-29-2010 03:40 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1055747)
Otaku were a 3e invention.

.......and I might actually prefer 2e.:)

3e got kind of tight-assed and dull.

Seriously I don't think I have Godoma's specific issues about wireless. My problems are more about 'No,no, no! You can't jack out! We have to preserve the viability of the Hacker class no matter what!".

I might actually prefer 2e as well, I kinda use them interchangeably because its been many years since I have actually played either but I still have tons of the books and such handy and I can't remember the differences.

Crakkerjakk 09-29-2010 03:42 PM

Re: GURPS Shadowrun
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1055729)
That's the thing. If the item has no normal access channels how is adding software that limits legal access going to improve security?

It's active, rather than prescriptive. It's not saying "deny all access attempts," it's watching for changes and then immediately acting to counteract them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1055729)
So, yeah in a world of ultimate computer paranoia (except it's not paranoia if the fear isn't irrational) I'd jack out rather than jack in. I might shoot deckers on sight too.

I think everyone might. Rather than world where deckers and their computers rule I think these sort of ideas would lead to a world where they were burned at the stake like witches.

Capability is not culpability. I own a firearm, that doesn't make me a murderer. Lots of people own firearms but aren't murderers. But if someone uses their firearm to try to murder me, then yes, me and my friends might band together to get him first. I expect you'd see just as many lynch mobs as you get going after mages. But, just like mages, the reward is worth the risk. Except you don't have to have a genetic fluke to be good at computers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1055729)
Actually i'd say that it's not just the Shiawase Decision (or lack thereof) that marks SR as an "alternate future history" it's basic things about how computers and networks function.

Very true. Plus encryption, and quite a few other things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin (Post 1055729)
Why not just write-off the decker "class/archetype" as unsuited to group/tabletop adventures?

Because it's a part of the fiction, it's a cyberpunk trope that I enjoy, and because it adds another archetype to give the players more options that they can choose to play.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.