Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: The Deb Decker <RJR96326@****.UTULSA.EDU>
Subject: Response to the New Matrix
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1993 21:08:01 -0500
OK, here are some if not all of my comments about the new & improved
Matrix rules submitted by Jason Carter. Let me preface this by saying that
even though I played a decker, I rarely engaged in direct combat, and thus
cannot comment from experience how drastic the changes are.

1: IC have hardening based on rating. This is nice, since it no longer
has to depend on the security rating for defense. It doesn't ad much
(1/4 rating) but will take down the "six-shooter" decker type.

2: Attack program is now essentially a straight "hack attack"; it's now
based on the decker's computer skill rather than a program. I assume the
reason is because in your view, an attack against the program HAS to be
hacked; you can't buy something off the shelf that will effectively nail
encountered IC at the same rate. While I agree that it makes sense, I still
think that Attack should be available as a program, like a general purpose
virus. Hacking dice (or, in your case, Matrix Combat Dice) are used to
reflect the decker's hacking abilities in conjunction with the program.

3: Ah here it is, as I type it in from the printout:
Damage resistance Target Number: Force-Hardening
Ack! Ack! *Force* used as a term in the Matrix? Why not just "Rating"
or even Power Level? I wasn't confused, I just thought it was a little
odd. Magic & the Matrix do not mix. ;)

Overall, it looks pretty good. Just as convoluted as the original
Matrix rules. But they do make sense. I'll decide later if I'll use
them or not, because, as I said before, I don't have much experience
with EITHER set of rules.


J Roberson
If the Net of popular fiction is based on the Internet of today, then
the "New Frontier" that so many hang ten on is over 20 years old.
Message no. 2
From: "Jason Carter, Nightstalker" <CARTER@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Response to the New Matrix
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1993 10:22:57 -0700
>>1: IC have hardening based on rating. This is nice, since it no longer
>>has to depend on the security rating for defense. It doesn't ad much
>>(1/4 rating) but will take down the "six-shooter" decker type.

I decided that it was pretty lame that IC had no defense against the attack of
a decker, but a decker has defense from IC. If I was a IC program, I would put
defensive rountines into my IC, hence the 1/4 rating Hardening. I haven't had
a chance to look at VR lately and add in the Utility and IC options, although
variable damage levels did make it in.

>>2: Attack program is now essentially a straight "hack attack"; it's now
>>based on the decker's computer skill rather than a program. I assume the
>>reason is because in your view, an attack against the program HAS to be
>>hacked; you can't buy something off the shelf that will effectively nail
>>encountered IC at the same rate. While I agree that it makes sense, I still
>>think that Attack should be available as a program, like a general purpose
>>virus. Hacking dice (or, in your case, Matrix Combat Dice) are used to
>>reflect the decker's hacking abilities in conjunction with the program.

What are you talking about? Yes the deckers skill comes into the picture in
the use of combat utilities, but the program rating is still an important part
of the equation. Afterall it adds dice too and decides how many dice you can
add from your Matrix Combat pool. And in the case of attack, it decides the
Damage Level of your attack. Thus it is not just a straight "hack attack", but
there is a lot of hacking going on.

>>3: Ah here it is, as I type it in from the printout:
>> Damage resistance Target Number: Force-Hardening
>>Ack! Ack! *Force* used as a term in the Matrix? Why not just "Rating"
>>or even Power Level? I wasn't confused, I just thought it was a little
>>odd. Magic & the Matrix do not mix. ;)

O.K. replace the word force with power. Are you happy now?

>>Overall, it looks pretty good. Just as convoluted as the original
>>Matrix rules. But they do make sense. I'll decide later if I'll use
>>them or not, because, as I said before, I don't have much experience
>>with EITHER set of rules.

I'm glad you liked it. My goal was not to make the rules any easier. Just to
remove some problems and clear up what I thought were some murky things in the
rules.

See Ya in Shadows,
Jason J Carter
The Nightstalker

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Response to the New Matrix, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.