Crazy Monkey

So, as I don't have a significant background in shipping or economics, can you break down where it goes seriously off the rails?

I like what I'm seeing for the mechanics - it's not perfect, but I think it's a solid improvement in that way. I still plan to not use their Netrunning (Run.NET for me) or world ('cause I have my own (that I want to use your criticisms of their's to improve)) but am adopting their mechanics for a reboot of my 2020 game. First session is Friday (barring holiday disruption) so we'll start the engines and see what falls off.

Well now, that *is* intriguing. Now I feel the need to break this down into Visio or Dia shapes.

Hey! Sorry it took so long to get back to you; I haven't been around.

To call anything I'm doing with this "planned" would be exceedingly generous. That said:

1) A list of brands and models with price points generated by their cost in parts would be shiny! It adds atmosphere and gives the little bit-biters something to want. Having a name for things you want makes wanting better. I'd say go for it & it deserves it's own thread in this section.

2) The idea of adding to skills is interesting! I'd work it like it's a part of the deck's system software, and price it like skill chips. For that matter, I'd make it work like skill chips too - your +2 to Cipher from the deck matters while you have 0 in that, but as you get to a +2 yourself, you've passed what it can help you with. Maybe time to sell that deck and get the Sun Microsystems MegaSPARC 20 with it's ultra-fast switching backplane (or something).

Do you have plans for different brands of cyber deck? how about having brands focus on making certain tasks easier for more inexperienced netrunners. For instance:

 

Sun Systems inc. makes the "Bulwark mk1" cyber deck. Sun Systems inc. focuses on data security in their decks so the basic "Bulwark mk1" comes out of the box with a +2 command (cypher) and a +1 command (scan).

 

As a Ref I wouldn't allow these bonuses to exceed 10 in the command\\target side of the roll. So a runner with a natural bonus of command (cypher) 5 from his Interface skill wouldn't have a command (cypher) 7. The training wheels bonus of the deck however might make it a more attractive option to a Netrunner with a 1 or a 2 in command (cypher).

 

Making a diverse array of decks available at different prices could keep Netrunners constantly in the market for new gear to make up for their own deficiencies as their Interface skill and subsequently their Command\\Target stats change. This would also contribute to the atmosphere of rabid consumer culture that comes with the Cyberpunk genre.

 

I looked through the Run.net rules a few months ago and there didn't seem to be much info on deck brands or diversity so I'm glad to see you're still haunting and updating these forums. With CP 2077 and Cyberpunk Red right around the corner I suspect there will be more traffic here in the coming months. If Cyberpunk Red's Netrunning rules are as awful as CP 2020's are I will certainly see no reason there won't be more traffic here.

Well, I can't say I do (I never actually managed to wrap my head around it, plus it's been years since I ran CP2020 for the last time...) but... I point folks towards it every time somebody is asking for a sensible netrunning rules for CP2020. And from what i hear, they do like it.

 

So no, your work wasn't in vain!

Thanks!

I'm sorry to hear you haven't played in so long. Perhaps with the the new version coming out, we'll both get more chances!

So, I'm putting MU back in for my games. Super-real city-sized virtual realities should take a significant amount of resources. That said, intrusion software & most other things are small enough to not bother counting. The basic deck has 10MU, plenty for hacking purposes, and only really big things (VRs, mostly) need to be counted. Cost to upgrade is 500eb/10 MU (if an extra 10MU costs more than a basic deck, why not just buy one & strip the memory out of it?) to a max of 30MU.

Exactly, but they seem to be using it as an excuse for forcing netrunners to go in with the party physically, which strikes me as the wrong solution to the problem.

I'm pretty sure I'll buy a copy, though the Data Krash/no global net thing strikes me as absurd. At least, if it's presented as a status quo. If it's "this bad thing happened and we're working to fix it," it could be interesting.

Personally I use Deep Space + interstellar exploration

 

"Have a new life in the off world colonies . . . "

That sounds cool. Have you read the novel "Voice of the Whirlwind" by Walter Jon Williams? You might enjoy it.

Is anyone still here/using this? I hope so!

As I was working through how to use these rules, I noticed the cyberdeck hardware isn't really fleshed out. So, working with what's in the 1.2.1a PDF for stats and limits, I came up with:

Basic Deck (1000eb)

Type: Basic

Speed: 0

IC: 0

Availability: C

Reliability: ST

So: B/0/0/C/ST

I haven't figured out what to do with other circuitry types. Quantum should give a bonus to parallel tasks and breaking crypto. Neural would be good for massively parallel actions too. I don't have numbers for these things, yet. Perhaps even Basic processors have a quantum co-processor to make Cipher make more sense.

The Speed rating, to me, is more than just speed - it's also a measure of the quality of the software on the system. Otherwise, adding it to everything doesn't resonate for me.

I'm planning to degrade Speed by 1/year. Used/old decks can be bought with negative speeds, up to -3.

I use IC as a bonus to Secure//Modem rolls that sane runners do at the start of a run & leave as a persistant action. So INT+Secure+Modem+Speed+IC=DV for Infiltrate, Scan, Query against that Modem. No roll, the DV to hack you is the IC rating.

Likewise, I would encourage every hacker to persist a Conceal//Modem at the start of a run to frustrate Locate and Detect actions.

All decks have wireless connectivity, including analogs to modern Bluetooth, WiFi, NFC, and cellular. Most also have wired, and those that don't can connect via a wired interface via the expansion bus (USB-ish) for 30eb.

Upgrades!

Speed: Increasing the speed costs 2000eb to a cap of +3. Used decks with Speed less than 0 are 25% off per negative speed rating. So last year's basic deck costs 750eb, the year befores now costs 500, and the "so old it'll get you killed" special is a mere 250eb. (I'm not fond of this - I'd rather have linear pricing across the range, but then a Speed 0 deck would cost 7000eb!)

IC: Upgrading improves the firewall software, and costs 1000eb/point to a cap of 5.

Availability: This is more of a "set by the Ref" thing. Assault decks would be M, perhaps. Higher specced decks, or decks with unusual features (EMP shielding on a deck designed for the Orbitals, for example) would rate higher than C.

Reliability: Replacing components with higher grade gear (start with the power supply) costs 500eb per step. Decks with crappy components are 500eb cheaper. It could be very fast, just not reliable if it's overclocked, or is made to looser tolerances.

Portable: Just because it's got wireless doesn't mean it's got a battery. A deck with portability built in costs 1000eb more than an otherwise wall-powered deck. You can swap out the power supply and add a battery for 200eb and a successful Cyberdeck Design roll, but the result won't be as sleek (Picture a battery taped to the side, running wires into the power supply.)

So the most uber 'leet deck will cost 13500eb. A pretty penny, and gives the little scamps something to dream about.

On a side note, I'd steal some ideas from Shadowrun and encourage people to slave their wireless gear behind a phone, cyberdeck, or dedicated firewall. That could include home stuff too - coffee makers and the like (obviously, they'd go to a firewall, not phone that is only there part time). I guess, in a lot of ways, it's already in there - the coffee maker is a Remote on the victim's home System. Their Bluetooth headset or pocket spectrometer is a remote on their phone (modem?), etc.

Also, I like the idea of using proxies to really annoy defenders. Break into home systems the usual way, then Control//System to use it to bounce back out to the net. This is a hacker tradition that goes back to outdials in the 60s.

What they said ^^^

I'd be very interested to hear about the shape of things R.Tal.

The thing is he really did not do much, as in he did not accomplish his goal.

How do you know what his goal was?

Actually he accomplished the exact opposite. See his hack only works if the target was using an iPhone or Android. But assuming someone did use a phone on the QR code then he reverse hacked them and looked to see if their IP address matched the IP of a twitter account.

Not IP. He checked to see if a Twitter client on the victim was configured with a user name on his list. No IPs were consulted.

If they matched he messed up their contact list.

Here "raped" means he TOOK their data. All that juicy, juicy private data. Not just contacts, but, "SMS logs, call logs, & phonebooks and (as long as the user was using the default out of the box email client) emails stored within."

Ok now the problems.

1) If the IP address was that easy to match to a terrorist account then the FBI would have been all over that. I mean IP can tell you where a person is so the FBI would have just used the IP to sweep up Anon members. So obviously the IP on the twitter was not linked directly to the Anon members otherwise the Anon members would have been in custody.

Not so much. Aside from the fact that he wasn't targeting IPs, an IP address does NOT reliably tell anyone where you are, if you care. Mid-level bad guys can use TOR (The Onion Router) to hide their real IP. More serious ones will use multiple zombie systems, preferably in jurisdictions that don't get along, with anti-forensic logic bombs to kill any detected trace in progress.

ALSO, if the Feds know what Twitter handles hackers or terrorists are using, they may well not pick up the person responsible. That guy isn't likely to be the leader - instead, you watch Twitter Guy, until he gets a message from someone important, and you start watching that messenger. Wash, rinse, repeat until you find someone worth killing.

2) Out of 1200 people he got 500 back hacks. Ok now as I pointed out in point 1 it is highly unlikely that he got any Anon members in the first place so now he is just hacking 500 innocent people.

Certainly not all of the 500 were interesting, although the author assets that a good number were (his targets are likely the same people who view his Twitter page, so, yeah, that's pretty likely.). The ones not on his 'shit list' had a connection open to his listener until the listener closed (like after figuring out the victim was boring). No harm, no foul (though probably still a felony in CA).

3) He claims to have match a 'serious number of people' to his hit list and proceeded to mess with them. Again he missed his target in the first place so now he is messing with poor fools not connected to Anon.

Saying he missed three times does not make three points.

4) Even after all that he only messed up the contacts on the persons phone. If it was an iPhone that person probably has iCloud on, so it would only take the person a few minutes to restore from backups.

Even if scrambling data was all he did, are you so sure that iCloud would push the changes from the phone to the cloud? After all, if you make a change on the phone yourself, it does. How does the sync software know which is a legit change? Anyway, that's NOT what he did. Instead, he pulled enough data to give a GREAT start in putting together a picture of the victim's social life. And maybe more, considering all the subscription, password reset and business details many people keep in their email.

Really it shows how susceptible the average Joe is. If a guy like that could hack them then they are not safe.

Now THAT we agree on! It ALSO shows how easy it is to pwn people who really outta know better (his Anon victims). I mean, really? You're going to scan a QR Code that a known hacker put up, on a device that can log into anything? Jumpin' jackwagons, that's about the dumbest thing I've heard in a while. I mean, that's almost as dumb as jacking into a random USB power outlet at a hacker conference. My people hurt me inside when they do stuff like that.

I hope this has cleared up a little of what went on for you. It can be tricky to grok a hack of this simplicity and elegance without the necessary background, I know. If you have any further technical questions on this, I'd be glad to help.

Yes absolutely.

Personnally I love electronic music, I'm also DJ.

Techno besides the future.

Wonderful! Do you have tracks available on the net? I love finding new electronic music.

In the US, it seems to commonly take 15-20 years for new dugs to be approved. With the current state of brain controlled prostesis, I doubt a 20 year lead is long enough for the sort of tech in the 2020 rules to be common. The rest of the tech is a mis-mash of unlikely to happen (all modern guns going caseless), more advanced (holographic projection in mid-air) and not advanced enough (comms and computers).

It's the same trap all sci-fi get caught in, witness the original Star Trek, and reference the difficulties in making Enterprise (the show) look futuristic to us, without making TOS look even more dated.

Maybe your operative could bring a couple of these?  Change the communications method from GSM to local radio broadcast if there is no cell service at the facility.  The building is unlikely to be heavily enough sheilded inside to make them useless.  Of course, portions of it could be, giving you some control over when and where people can talk...

And if you're AI computing power might possibly be enough to break the crypto in a timely manner?  Add one bit to the key length, and double the difficulty of breaking the key.  Go from 4096 bit to 8192 bit?  Um, yeah, my poor little calculator won't tell me how much harder.

As far as tea goes, can you imagine a hot equivilent Nestea?  Offensive, to a real tea drinker, as much as sofacaf might be to a coffee drinker.  

Or perhaps the world will simply change drinks.  I've had various soy drinks and they've usually been good.  Then again, I like Bubble Tea so don't listen to me.

BTW, does anyone know where to get almond milk soda in the US?

The standard advice I hear for these tiny mouseguns is to go for the eyebox shot.  It's practically impossible, but maybe if you're rolling on the ground with the guy, and get your arm free somehow...

I recall part of a story (I know I'm screwing up the details, somebody help!) where Mr. Johnson, of Iver and Johnson, was being criticized for not putting sights on their excellent little pocket guns.  To which he responded that the right way to use it was to, "shove it up his nose and pull the trigger."  A course of action that will stop hostilities from most people.

Personally, I find one of the interesting effect of the US's "1994 Crime Bill" otherwise known as the Brady Bill, was the effect of its banning, for civilian use, the manufacture or importation of pistol mags with over 10 round capacity.  What is interesting about this is that it caused gun makers to start creating small pistols in relatively hot chamberings.  The end result is that I've got an NAA Guardian in .380ACP that's not much bigger than a .25ACP, and a 9mm Keltec that's certainly small enough to ride in a pants pocket.  Somehow I doubt that this is what the gun control folks had in mind.

Anyway, the point of the above is that there is much less justification for trying to use a .22 or .25 for self defence that their used to be.

The crystal storage idea sounds like holographic memory.

The reason for the difference between primary (RAM) and secondary (hard drive) memory is simple economics.  The cost per unit of space for hard drives is currently much lower than that of either RAM or flash.  If that changes...

Another change could be some third technology (your crystal storage?) that has a cost below that of hard drives, and a speed sufficient to function as primary storage (a moving target, as CPUs get faster, so must primary storage).  

Either change would be sufficient to remove the usefulness of the distinction.