cyberpunk BW or BE (decking)

[ghashsnaga]

I was looking to adapt the socal conflcit mechanics in BW for use in hacker vs. network (or ICE). Has anyone worked on a similar mechanic?

I browsed through the BW forum to see what other people had done for a cyberpunk setting.

Thanks.

Ara

[Iskander]

We've done cracking as opposed rolls between Security systems and the cracker's appropriate skill. I can see it being expanded into a DoW... just be very sure to keep applying a lot of cool colour, otherwise it's gonna get dull.

[khelek]

Loks like oyu got your job for the next month! I would be curious to see what you come up with! I love cyberpunk, but became dissillusioned with Shadowrun 4.

[IronWhim]

There is the one trick with netrunner type stuff, as most people who've ever played Cyberpunk know all too well. It's hard to run netrunner stuff and really real world stuff at the same time. The play goes in two distinct sections, and balancing between the two can be tough. If you can work around that, it's tremendous fun. What we ended up doing is having two GMs for the more important times, when one group was taking care of on the ground action and the netrunner was making their way easier for them. Of course, getting two GMs can be tricky... Made for a kick-ass game tho.

[skandall]

There are a couple of other options as well:

1) Bring the virtual world into the real world. Cyberpunk v3 and Cybergeneration both did this to help avoid the split game problem. It also allows all of the players to participate in net actions. It's a solution that works well and IYAM is closer to what the future will be like.

2) If, like me, you happen to have a fair number of Netrunner TCG cards about, you can use them to quickly resolve net activities. There is a Cyberpunk supplement that explains all of this, for CP2020 of course. For BW you could treat the Strength as the programs exponent. Advantage and FoRK dice based on the netrunners programming skills.

[zabieru]

Don't think that would be a problem with the sort of mechanics being discussed here. You either run the Duel of Decks first, or cut away from the main action to do it when you need it (the first time you try the identification the decker was supposed to add to the corporate security net, or when the automated turrets pop up, or whenever). I prefer the second unless it's something where they're getting maps so you can plan or something, that way everyone's engaged.

A DoW based system should be shorter than a regular DoW, and shouldn't take much more than 15 minutes to play out. Shadowrun and CP2020 have historically had problems with this, but I don't think that means we should just say "Oh, well any game that has substantial rules for hacking will need another GM because it just has to take so long and be stupid." Time-limit that shit, or cross-cut hardcore. Remember the bit in Neuromancer where Case is getting his hack on and Molly and the Panther Moderns are rolling old-school? Was that boring for Molly's player? All that's happening there is a switch-off between an exchange of decking and a test or some narration for the break-in. Easy to do if your hacking rules don't take a million years, which honestly I don't think anyone wanted them to do in the first place.

One thing I'd do is make it explicitly asymmetrical. Make it, say, Will or Decking, rolled, plus Deck rating as Body of Attack, versus something else for Body of Defense (actually, what you could do here is make BoD be a roll of system security rating plus a bonus based on what you want, similar to Resources or Circles rolls. If the decker wins, he gets what he wants. If the system wins, it takes that shit out on the decker, trashing his files, frying his deck, or burning his nervous system, depending. Now, give the system no defensive maneuvers, limited options for stalling an attacker, but several maneuvers to damage the attacker's BoA or up the stakes. Give the attacker a limited time to do his job before his obstacles start stacking up.

[Dwight]

There is the one trick with netrunner type stuff, as most people who've ever played Cyberpunk know all too well. It's hard to run netrunner stuff and really real world stuff at the same time.
I've found that SR4 has managed to pull off integration of the Matrix and the meat world fairly well. Whatever exactly has turned off khelek, and I know SR4 definately has some shortcomings, it has at least dragged hackers/Technomancers (sort of a wireless version of Otaku) out of their mother's basements to walk around with the team and has them acting right in the same initiative pass with everyone else. So it's integrated right into combat.

That's why I think having a completely different DoW based netrunner/Matrix conflict resolution is ultimately a bad idea.

Instead I've decided to bring the Mountain to Mohammed. I'm just finishing (if I can ever stop my players from taking trips, and finally show up to play the game :p ) some 'playtesting' of Circles and Resources inspired house rules for SR4. It replaces the collective disarray that is Contacts, Fake SIN, Lifestyles, Availability, Nuyen and such with a (IMO) more coherent approach that is based on a single new Attribute. Finally adhoc contacts and the Enmity Clause comes to Shadowrun. :eek:

[skandall]

A DoW just doesn't seem right to use for dealing with hacking a terminal, opening a door, shutting down an auto-gun, or something similar. The network security for things like this would be preset. It would be something that the runners would have researched and learned about before going on the run. So, if you did end up using a DoW, this type of system would use the same preset script every exchange. However, a DoW would be totally fitting if the player is going up against an actual Sysop NPC.

[Dwight]

A DoW just doesn't seem right to use for dealing with hacking a terminal, opening a door, shutting down an auto-gun, or something similar. The network security for things like this would be preset. It would be something that the runners would have researched and learned about before going on the run. So, if you did end up using a DoW, this type of system would use the same preset script every exchange.
It is generally assumed in these games that automated protection is close enough to passing a Turing Test in their limited specific field that you treat it a lot like an NPC. Further any research about specific system exploitation methods are usually abstracted away, so it is rare that you are operating at that level.....because that'd perhaps closer to reality, and Realism™ tends to get in the way and suck. ;)

BTW when I suggested that a DOW mechanism would be bad, I didn't mean that it would always be bad, but that if you don't have the option of making it part of combat. Imagine if bows couldn't be used in Fight!, only in Range & Cover.

[luke]

We use Security Rigging for all of that stuff -- that's what it's there for. It's opposed by Security, whether automated or manned.

If you want to get into AI cracking, then you need to add another skill to the game: Robopsychology. It's a Will/Per root and acts like Rhetoric in a Duel of Wits with machine intelligent entities. Practice as Psychology.

-L