Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 5:28 pm
Sounds good to me.Korwin wrote:dont require the mage quality so everyone can branch out into magic
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
http://www.tgdmb.com/phpBB3/
Sounds good to me.Korwin wrote:dont require the mage quality so everyone can branch out into magic
Every character needs to be able to contribute in basically three areas:Ferret wrote:what ADVANTAGE does keeping Rigging and Hacking completely separate give us? Why NOT make them the Tech spellcasting/conjuring split?
We've got plenty of folks saying their iconic set of archetypes is Samurai/Mage/Tech-guy; why not go ahead and make that official?
Well, the Rigger is a mech pilot who also commands upwards of half a dozen military killbots. The Rigger doesn't need to be explained at all. If he is substantially benefited by having a hacker character provide electronic warfare defense, that's good for team synergy and making different characters feel wanted. But the guy who pilots a three tonne death machine that launches smaller death machines armed with chain guns pretty much justifies himself. The real question is why you'd want a Rigger and a Hacker instead of just having two Riggers and accepting that at any given moment some of your murderdroids wouldn't work. SR5 has no answer for that question, by the way. If you made hacking defense valuable enough, you could answer that question, but it still has to be asked.. But the question of why you wouldn't just pass on the metal gear? That's not a question that needs seriously response.Lago wrote:So why wouldn't you just grab two dedicated hackers instead of a hacker and a rigger, then?
Yes. Exactly. I was proposing making them a synergistic whole, not a single inextricable archetype. It would go a long way to discourage people from making hackers who do nothing but pick locks and fuck with cyberware if rigging was, by default, part of the hacking package in the same way that magic is a whole tidy package that you can nonetheless only take parts of if you want. At the same time, emphasize that people who want to play Case are going to want some sort of combat competency and Rigging is right there, in the same way that you don't tell people to make a Face that doesn't have some sort of combat competency.FrankTrollman wrote:It's a skill based system that has soft rather than hard archetypes. If you want to play a Hacker/Street Sam or a Rigger/Face you are of course welcome to do that. You have to split your attributes, skills, and resources appropriately, but it can be done.
I'm not asking in the context of Shadowrun or TTRPGs. I'm asking from a metafictional perspective. It's like I'm asking 'why are clerics and warlocks separate classes with their own line of divergent support' and I get an answer of 'because one of them heals and the other mezzes'.FrankTrollman wrote:Well, the Rigger is a mech pilot who also commands upwards of half a dozen military killbots. The Rigger doesn't need to be explained at all. If he is substantially benefited by having a hacker character provide electronic warfare defense, that's good for team synergy and making different characters feel wanted. But the guy who pilots a three tonne death machine that launches smaller death machines armed with chain guns pretty much justifies himself. The real question is why you'd want a Rigger and a Hacker instead of just having two Riggers and accepting that at any given moment some of your murderdroids wouldn't work. SR5 has no answer for that question, by the way. If you made hacking defense valuable enough, you could answer that question, but it still has to be asked.. But the question of why you wouldn't just pass on the metal gear? That's not a question that needs seriously response.
A better argument for Hackers/Riggers merging is that they both use hot sim VR sensory override to interface with basically a computer program. In another setting/revisionist history I could see VR hacking being a fork off of rigging or vice versa.FrankTrollman wrote:That is probably the dumbest possible way to look at something. You might as well be arguing that Street Samurai should all be Faces because it's all "physical stuff." It's just different skills, different attribute focuses, and different resource allocations. But other than that, it's exactly the same!Korwin wrote:I really dont see the problem, rigging and hacking is tech stuff. Just a different specialisation.
Just like Conjuring and Spellcasting is magic stuff...
![]()
It's a skill based system that has soft rather than hard archetypes. If you want to play a Hacker/Street Sam or a Rigger/Face you are of course welcome to do that. You have to split your attributes, skills, and resources appropriately, but it can be done.
Remember how I just said that Korwin's way of looking at things was about the dumbest way you could look at things? That's... still true. But you're giving him a run for his money.Cyberzombie wrote:Hacking and rigging are synergistic because if you want to use drones effectively, you're going to want to prevent them from getting hacked.
Rigging and Ninjing are synergistic because if you want to use drones effectively, you're going to want to keep them from getting spotted by sentries or blown up with guns. Rigging and Facing are synergistic because if you want to use drones effectively, you're going to need access to rare and restricted equipment. And so on for every other archetype your system supports.
And this is wholly unsurprising, because it's a cooperative storytelling game, and the different archetypes are intended to be synergistic. The fact that a Rigger wants to have a Hacker or a Face on the team so much that he'd consider dabbling in those fields himself just to make sure there wasn't a hole in the team's capabilities is how things are supposed to work. The thing in SR5 where you can make a team of all mages and and bio-juicers and then just have everyone drop off of wireless and ignore enemy hackers entirely, that is a bug.
-Username17
I'm seriously starting to wonder at this point whether it's possible to keep the Street Samurai as a preternatural but ultimately mundane archetype whose basic archetype package makes them the equal of a Mage or a Hacker. Maybe if you keep things at League of Extraordinary Gentlemen level, but once you introduce mechas or drone hordes or futuristic tanks that's when things start going pear-shaped. What if the Street Samurai archetype graduated to Guyver-style hardcases who could take down a squadron of Metal Gear Rexes/Rayes with a superkatana, completely cloak themselves from all but the most hardcore of sensors, and could emit pheremones that would short out electronics and mind-control people without a specific defense for it? And I do mean Guyver-level. Star Wars or even Ghost-in-the-Shell isn't going to cut it.FrankTrollman wrote:You're at the very least going to want to present Street Samurai as a core archetype, and that necessitates figuring out something for them to do out of combat. They almost had that in 4th edition, but it wasn't super well defined. Put some character build advice about maximizing agility skills and perception and you'd pretty much be there.
There is a distinct difference between being able to gain access to the buttons to make the vehicle go, and being able to make the vehicle go well. The hacker can take over the vehicle, but he lacks the ware/skills to be an expert drone pilot. Now you can have a rigger who is also a hacker, but the gear and skills required for each are dramatically different. Being capable of finding exploits and whatnot does not automatically make you a great rigger.So. If you're not going to give the rigger pilots ridiculous superpowers (not even a Charles Atlas one) and in your setting even mundane hackers already have the power to make computer systems -- which any self-respecting vehicle made after the 90s has -- their bitch, why would you not tell a pilot to just go fuck themselves and get a second hacker to control the vehicles? And don't give me a gameplay or balance reason as to why the archetypes are separate. What is the world-building reason why vehicle control isn't just another tool in the hacker archetype's tool? Especially considering that fictional super-hackers flat-out have vehicle control as a superpower when they aren't being blocked by enemy hackers and/or unimaginative authors?
Is that so? While I'm sure that you could point to a ton of futuristic vehicle operators who can't actually hack, the archetype of a hacker that can't at least competently commandeer the robots/vehicles/whatever that they have hacked into pretty much doesn't exist. Which is to be expected, because the first thing the audience expects to hear when the hacker announces that he has control of the CPU of the giant mecha or spaceship he's hacked is to see said hacker use it to wreck shit.Seerow wrote:There is a distinct difference between being able to gain access to the buttons to make the vehicle go, and being able to make the vehicle go well.
If riggers can't hack, then they'd end up losing badly to a hacker, who basically crashes their drone control interface so they can't issue commands, then spoofs a bunch of commands to send the drones to kill each other, run full speed into walls or turn on the rigger and his team and blow them away.FrankTrollman wrote: Well, the Rigger is a mech pilot who also commands upwards of half a dozen military killbots. The Rigger doesn't need to be explained at all. If he is substantially benefited by having a hacker character provide electronic warfare defense, that's good for team synergy and making different characters feel wanted. But the guy who pilots a three tonne death machine that launches smaller death machines armed with chain guns pretty much justifies himself. The real question is why you'd want a Rigger and a Hacker instead of just having two Riggers and accepting that at any given moment some of your murderdroids wouldn't work. SR5 has no answer for that question, by the way. If you made hacking defense valuable enough, you could answer that question, but it still has to be asked.. But the question of why you wouldn't just pass on the metal gear? That's not a question that needs seriously response.
If a street samurai can't counterspell, they'd end up losing badly to a mage, who basically one shots them or mind controls them to turn on their team and blow them away.Cyberzombie wrote:If riggers can't hack, then they'd end up losing badly to a hacker, who basically crashes their drone control interface so they can't issue commands, then spoofs a bunch of commands to send the drones to kill each other, run full speed into walls or turn on the rigger and his team and blow them away.FrankTrollman wrote: Well, the Rigger is a mech pilot who also commands upwards of half a dozen military killbots. The Rigger doesn't need to be explained at all. If he is substantially benefited by having a hacker character provide electronic warfare defense, that's good for team synergy and making different characters feel wanted. But the guy who pilots a three tonne death machine that launches smaller death machines armed with chain guns pretty much justifies himself. The real question is why you'd want a Rigger and a Hacker instead of just having two Riggers and accepting that at any given moment some of your murderdroids wouldn't work. SR5 has no answer for that question, by the way. If you made hacking defense valuable enough, you could answer that question, but it still has to be asked.. But the question of why you wouldn't just pass on the metal gear? That's not a question that needs seriously response.
You'd want to pass on the metal gear if you can't count on the thing not to shoot you in the back.
Not the same, because the mage has to see the samurai to blast him with magic, and at that point the samurai can shoot the mage.Seerow wrote: If a street samurai can't counterspell, they'd end up losing badly to a mage, who basically one shots them or mind controls them to turn on their team and blow them away.
You'd want to pass on the metalhead if you can't count on him to not shoot you in the back.
And that is the exact problem that needs to be fixed. Basement hackers who don't actually go out on runs are a problem, not something to be desired. And if they require LoS to do their thing, suddenly your entire objection goes away, and the team wanting a hacker there to act as a counter-hacker is no different from wanting a mage to act as a counter-mage. It's simply part of their team-support kit.Cyberzombie wrote:Not the same, because the mage has to see the samurai to blast him with magic, and at that point the samurai can shoot the mage.Seerow wrote: If a street samurai can't counterspell, they'd end up losing badly to a mage, who basically one shots them or mind controls them to turn on their team and blow them away.
You'd want to pass on the metalhead if you can't count on him to not shoot you in the back.
With rigger versus hacker, the hacker doesn't require line of sight, he can literally be anywhere in the corporate building, hiding in one of many offices and screwing you over so long as you (or any of your drones) are within signal range. The rigger (and likely the entire shadowrunner team) will end up dying without even knowing where the hacker was.
I see hackers acting on things without LoS to be a unique class identity, not a problem that needs fixing (or in this case neutering). After all, that's the entire point of telecommunications, to be able to affect things at a distance, while not necessarily being able to see them. You can view camera feeds, control drones and do all kinds of stuff remotely. That's what makes a hacker a hacker. If you need line of sight, then you're operating on the same mechanics as the mage, and that's boring and nonsensical. Radio signals don't require line of sight. I can connect to my home network just fine without having line of sight to my wireless router.Seerow wrote: And that is the exact problem that needs to be fixed. Basement hackers who don't actually go out on runs are a problem, not something to be desired. And if they require LoS to do their thing, suddenly your entire objection goes away, and the team wanting a hacker there to act as a counter-hacker is no different from wanting a mage to act as a counter-mage. It's simply part of their team-support kit.
If your class identity is "I don't go on runs, I send these other schlubs and support them when I feel like it", your "class" doesn't deserve to be a part of the game. At all. You are now an NPC while the real characters go out and have fun.Cyberzombie wrote:I see hackers acting on things without LoS to be a unique class identity, not a problem. After all, that's the entire point of telecommunications, to be able to affect things at a distance, while not necessarily being able to see them. You can view camera feeds, control drones and do all kinds of stuff remotely. That's what makes a hacker a hacker. If you need line of sight, then you're operating on the same mechanics as the mage, and that's boring and nonsensical. Radio signals don't require line of sight. I can connect to my home network just fine without having line of sight to my wireless router.Seerow wrote: And that is the exact problem that needs to be fixed. Basement hackers who don't actually go out on runs are a problem, not something to be desired. And if they require LoS to do their thing, suddenly your entire objection goes away, and the team wanting a hacker there to act as a counter-hacker is no different from wanting a mage to act as a counter-mage. It's simply part of their team-support kit.
You realize that's the rigger's identity, right? He's the guy who remote controls a bunch of drones to go kill stuff for him. Unless you're going to require he has LoS to his drones too.Seerow wrote: If your class identity is "I don't go on runs, I send these other schlubs and support them when I feel like it", your "class" doesn't deserve to be a part of the game. At all. You are now an NPC while the real characters go out and have fun.
Flavor does matter, and when future tech is inferior to modern technology, yeah... it's going to cause logical issues.Also trying to use modern networking technologies to justify the way mechanics work for a game several technology generations ahead of us is stupid, and something I thought stopped being accepted around these parts literally years ago.
Well, I could argue that if the hacker is competent the door to the kennel never unlocks.FrankTrollman wrote:You'd have to compare how the Hacker did against all the other matchups, including matchups against opposition that is restricted to NPC security forces like "a kennel full of hell hounds" and such.
What if it's like, a sliding lock? Like a physical lock that you lift, slide, then open the door?kzt wrote:Well, I could argue that if the hacker is competent the door to the kennel never unlocks.FrankTrollman wrote:You'd have to compare how the Hacker did against all the other matchups, including matchups against opposition that is restricted to NPC security forces like "a kennel full of hell hounds" and such.
In the long run, there may come a time in which characters go Super Sayyin. Paths to that are variously open to different characters.Lago PARANOIA wrote: I'm seriously starting to wonder at this point whether it's possible to keep the Street Samurai as a preternatural but ultimately mundane archetype whose basic archetype package makes them the equal of a Mage or a Hacker. Maybe if you keep things at League of Extraordinary Gentlemen level, but once you introduce mechas or drone hordes or futuristic tanks that's when things start going pear-shaped. What if the Street Samurai archetype graduated to Guyver-style hardcases who could take down a squadron of Metal Gear Rexes/Rayes with a superkatana, completely cloak themselves from all but the most hardcore of sensors, and could emit pheremones that would short out electronics and mind-control people without a specific defense for it? And I do mean Guyver-level. Star Wars or even Ghost-in-the-Shell isn't going to cut it.