| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
Lead a band of explorers and help shape the fate of the galaxy!
| Page 2 of 2 (25 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
I would like to see a lot of similar, refrence tables in the back of the book, for all the combat, and ship actions, basic Advanctage/Threat Triumph/Despair uses etc.
also I'm totally on board with the crew damage if X happens to the vehicle/ship they are in.
Although making Resiliance vs the damage (slippery slope) will only make Resiliance a must have skill for everyone. Maybe only some strain damage instead.
On the Athletics to make repairs.Mechanics does make more sense to me, but in ESB Han is twisting around in the bowles of the Falcon, flipping switches, etc. making repairs, just before entering the asteroid field. And I can personally vouch for athletics, running up and down a ladder multiple times both to set up and winterize the swamp cooler every year.
Maybe it just needs a side bar as a suggestion for GMs, to allow someone to use it for repairs in a pinch.
Without Signature
Odd place for this, but how may erratas ago did someone way disruptors aren't important to Star Wars, and pull their primary effect? Was it because nobody likes "save vs death" effects? Because while I agree I don't, either, it seems weird to have disruptors that don't disintegrate people. I think they are still high Vicious, and maybe that does cover it, but I am still sort of surprised that the whole mechanic was pulled.
"You were warned, and chose not to heed our words. Thus, your fate is your own."
venkelos said:
Odd place for this, but how may erratas ago did someone way disruptors aren't important to Star Wars, and pull their primary effect? Was it because nobody likes "save vs death" effects? Because while I agree I don't, either, it seems weird to have disruptors that don't disintegrate people. I think they are still high Vicious, and maybe that does cover it, but I am still sort of surprised that the whole mechanic was pulled.
IIRC, the disruptor does its damage based on breaking up the molecular bonds that hold a target together. It takes more than one hit to completely 'debond' the target's constituent atoms. However, having a high damage rating coupled with vicious is good enough, IMO, to represent that.
The "insta-death" thing was never part of disruptor weapons. It was perpetuated when people see the final shot that does in the target, but that was after a few good hits already.
-EF
EldritchFire said:
The "insta-death" thing was never part of disruptor weapons. It was perpetuated when people see the final shot that does in the target, but that was after a few good hits already.
Yes.
Yes it was.
pg 111. Top of the first column. Any hit can spend 5 adv and reduce the target to dust. The target is permanently, irrevocably, completely f*cking dead.
-WJL
"All models are wrong, but some models are useful."
-George E.P. Box, Ph.D.
"It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simpleas few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience."
Albert Einstein, Ph.D.
venkelos said:
Odd place for this, but how may erratas ago did someone way disruptors aren't important to Star Wars, and pull their primary effect? Was it because nobody likes "save vs death" effects? Because while I agree I don't, either, it seems weird to have disruptors that don't disintegrate people. I think they are still high Vicious, and maybe that does cover it, but I am still sort of surprised that the whole mechanic was pulled.
This was pulled on week 3. I thought it was actually earlier.
-WJL
"All models are wrong, but some models are useful."
-George E.P. Box, Ph.D.
"It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simpleas few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience."
Albert Einstein, Ph.D.
LethalDose said:
EldritchFire said:
The "insta-death" thing was never part of disruptor weapons. It was perpetuated when people see the final shot that does in the target, but that was after a few good hits already.
Yes.
Yes it was.
pg 111. Top of the first column. Any hit can spend 5 adv and reduce the target to dust. The target is permanently, irrevocably, completely f*cking dead.
-WJL
I think he is referring to other sources - like EU novels, comics and the like - when saying this about disruptors - not the beta book. And I tend to agree with him, can't recollect any sources (except the beta-book) that had this take on the weapon. Although I haven't really checked or looked for it.
"What about the future…? We can only hope, we cannot however account for the minutiae of the quanta, as all accidents in an infinite space are inevitable."
Jegergryte said:
LethalDose said:
EldritchFire said:
The "insta-death" thing was never part of disruptor weapons. It was perpetuated when people see the final shot that does in the target, but that was after a few good hits already.
Yes.
Yes it was.
pg 111. Top of the first column. Any hit can spend 5 adv and reduce the target to dust. The target is permanently, irrevocably, completely f*cking dead.
-WJL
I think he is referring to other sources - like EU novels, comics and the like - when saying this about disruptors - not the beta book. And I tend to agree with him, can't recollect any sources (except the beta-book) that had this take on the weapon. Although I haven't really checked or looked for it.
Yeah, sorry. I meant that the insta-death was never part of the EU disruptors. They were nasty, and hurt like a bitch - much worse than a blaster bolt - but we're never actually capable of 1-shot kills.
-EF
EldritchFire said:
Yeah, sorry. I meant that the insta-death was never part of the EU disruptors. They were nasty, and hurt like a bitch - much worse than a blaster bolt - but we're never actually capable of 1-shot kills.
-EF
This is pretty much correct. We didn't start to see 1-shot kill disruptors until the "EU" spawning from video games. The Jedi Knight series comes to mind, with Jedi Knight II and Jedi Knight III: Jedi Academy being the major culprits, here. 
Peace, Love,Good Gaming!
GM Chris said:
EldritchFire said:
Yeah, sorry. I meant that the insta-death was never part of the EU disruptors. They were nasty, and hurt like a bitch - much worse than a blaster bolt - but we're never actually capable of 1-shot kills.
-EF
This is pretty much correct. We didn't start to see 1-shot kill disruptors until the "EU" spawning from video games. The Jedi Knight series comes to mind, with Jedi Knight II and Jedi Knight III: Jedi Academy being the major culprits, here.
You mean Dark Forces III and Dark Forces IV? I mean, the Jedi Knight game's full title is Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight. They decided that Kyle Katarn, the main character of Dark Forces, needed to be a Jedi. So they made the second game his "coming of age" story. Then they did two more games with Kyle Katarn in his Jedi role, and just seemed to forget the actual title of the series :p
[/soapbox]
I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
-EF
EldritchFire said:
You mean Dark Forces III and Dark Forces IV? I mean, the Jedi Knight game's full title is Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight. They decided that Kyle Katarn, the main character of Dark Forces, needed to be a Jedi. So they made the second game his "coming of age" story. Then they did two more games with Kyle Katarn in his Jedi role, and just seemed to forget the actual title of the series :p
[/soapbox]
I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
-EF
ROFL! Tru.dat
Kyle was much, MUCH cooler before becoming a Jedi. But it sure was fun stompin' around with your lightsaber, then spying a rodian on a far-away ledge on Nar Shadaa, switching to first-person with my Disruptor Rifle, then VAPORIZING him! Muahahahahaaa!
Peace, Love,Good Gaming!
| Page 2 of 2 (25 messages) | « First page... 1 2 |
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS