| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:51 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Matthias777 wrote: | | Lightsaber vs. blaster: Lightsaber wins. Blaster bolts can be deflected, even redirected back at the shooter, whereas a blaster cannot block a lightsaber blow, much less return in kind. Lightsaber vs. firearm, though...firearm has the edge, as bullets/pellets can only be sliced in half, not deflected/redirected, and firearms can be used at much longer ranges than lightsabers can. These assessments, of course, assume all other things are equal, which they never are. |
One advantage for Firearms over Blasters vs. a Lightsaber? Two words: Cortosis Bullets. Think about it. Firearm Jedi shoots at Lightsaber Jedi. Lightsaber parries successfully, but the cortosis bullet shorts out his lightsaber for a critical second or two, giving Firearm a free shot.
EDIT: And if we're going for movie crossover conversions, how about rules for bullet curving, ala the film version of Wanted?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm seriously considering transitioning over to JT Swift's idea here (9th post down), which would completely eliminate Lightsaber Combat as a power, and beef up Combat Sense to cover a Jedi's personal combat abilities. I have a few tweaks of my own in mind for it, but the core idea is there.
EDIT: By which I mean expanding the power to include all forms of personal combat, but capping bonuses based on the character's actual skill level, not just his Sense dice.
With regards to Jedi using blasters (and other ranged weapons), IMO, they would refrain from using auto-fire weaponry (due to it being clumsy and random), and practice the artistry of precision fire, either with sniper style weapons, or with a blaster pistol...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: |
With regards to Jedi using blasters (and other ranged weapons), IMO, they would refrain from using auto-fire weaponry (due to it being clumsy and random), and practice the artistry of precision fire, either with sniper style weapons, or with a blaster pistol... |
I could imagine a Jedi speeding up his recoil recovery enough to handle automatic fire, or producing semiautomatic fire at similar rates. I would also expect a Jedi blaster to be very accurate, long ranged, and of variable power (so, for example, you could bring down a problematic door and injure--but not kill--an enemy with the same gun.)
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| If I were the GM, a sniper Jedi would fall to the dark side pretty quickly... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matthias777
Commodore
Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Posts: 1835
Location: North Carolina, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | I asked about RAW for lightsaber precisely because there are so many variants on these forums. Without knowing which one was in use, it would be hard to know what kind of power level we're talking about in order to develop a house rule Force power for it.
Off the top of my head, I could see it being a control/sense power, with sense being the skill that amplifies the attack rolls and dodge rolls, and control granting additional actions or increasing the range. As for the actual math, that much I'm not sure of yet (and it would probably depend on how lightsaber combat is used in the game). |
Sorry, for some reason I completely missed that you asked about the RAW specifically. My bad. Sitting here thinking about it, I realize that my rules for this power wouldn't bear more than a passing resemblance to the RAW for Lightsaber Combat. The short answer is that I don't have a RAW-based answer for you. Normally, you'd use the character's Sense dice as a bonus to hit/parry because the character is sensing where the correct intercept for an attack is, or sensing where the vulnerabilities in an enemy's defenses are. Control is then used as a modifier for damage (up or down), since the character is fine-tuning his swing to do more or less damage. With a blaster or firearm, this power is only going to help you with an attack, not a parry, simply due to the nature of the weapon. Sense is going to give you a better idea of where your target will be when you pull the trigger, and Control is going to allow you to fine-tune your shot so that it does more (headshot, center of mass, etc.) or less (graze, shoot the guy's toe off, etc.). Not everyone likes the RAW for Lightsaber Combat, but for a lightsaber, it still works. The problem is that, to be applied to other weapons, I'd definitely be rewriting Lightsaber Combat to use it at all. 
One thing to note is that while Lightsaber Combat allows you to add damage via Control, a lot of people use the (optional) rules for additional damage based on how much you beat the difficulty/opposing roll by (I think this is in the SpecForce Handbook, not sure though)...which makes the RAW for Lightsaber Combat insanely damaging. Like, "look Ma, I just cut the Executor in half" damaging.
| Naaman wrote: | | If I were the GM, a sniper Jedi would fall to the dark side pretty quickly... |
I can see why you'd say that, but for me it would really depend...the range at which combat is conducted does not necessarily correlate to the "purity" of the action.
_________________
Arek | Kage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree, and even as I wrote it, several scenarios went through my head of situations to snipe without getting DSPs. The only problem is that the Jedi would virtually always need to be an "intervention" sniper, shooting at a target that poses an immediate threat to someone else, since the Jedi himself would rarely find himself in any danger from his sniping targets.
As for lightsaber combat, I don't use the RAW. I still allow control to be added/subtracted to damage, but sense is used (by itself) to parry blaster bolts. The Jedi may forgo adding any number of his control dice to damage in order to gain a +1 bonus to his lightsaber skill per die (this represents the Jedi boosting his speed/strength/focus to actually land a hit/avoid a hit).
So, if this were my game, I'd do something like this:
Add a +1 bonus to blaster skill for each die in sense. For every 2D in control, you can make one additional shot for free, or you can extend the range of your shots by X (I'd be tempted to make this a "one or the other" option since shooting extra far requires more careful aim, although, allowing the character to fine tune his shot(s) taking only one or two extra at a little bit further range might not be too bad). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | I agree, and even as I wrote it, several scenarios went through my head of situations to snipe without getting DSPs. The only problem is that the Jedi would virtually always need to be an "intervention" sniper, shooting at a target that poses an immediate threat to someone else, since the Jedi himself would rarely find himself in any danger from his sniping targets. |
I'm not sure Jedi are in much danger when they hack people's arms off, though. I'd handle it like any other combat. If he's just murdering folks from a clock tower, he gets DSPs, but if he's in battle or has a mission to complete or something like that, and he's picking off stormies or ISB officers or what have you, he'd be fine.
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: |
With regards to Jedi using blasters (and other ranged weapons), IMO, they would refrain from using auto-fire weaponry (due to it being clumsy and random), and practice the artistry of precision fire, either with sniper style weapons, or with a blaster pistol... |
I could imagine a Jedi speeding up his recoil recovery enough to handle automatic fire, or producing semiautomatic fire at similar rates. I would also expect a Jedi blaster to be very accurate, long ranged, and of variable power (so, for example, you could bring down a problematic door and injure--but not kill--an enemy with the same gun.) |
Well, given the plethora of cheesy force powers one can imagine almost anything being done with the force..
In the end it just a matter of taste really. What 'feels' right in your universe.
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallon Kell wrote: | | I could imagine a Jedi speeding up his recoil recovery enough to handle automatic fire, or producing semiautomatic fire at similar rates. I would also expect a Jedi blaster to be very accurate, long ranged, and of variable power (so, for example, you could bring down a problematic door and injure--but not kill--an enemy with the same gun.) |
That would be where the Sense bonus comes into play by offsetting MAPs when shooting multiple targets. Several have made the point that a Jedi using a blaster under cover would, of necessity, use a more commonly available blaster, with little or no modification. That doesn't mean that a Jedi of a sect that included blaster training with LSC (or used a blaster exclusively) wouldn't have a more ornate and capable weapon...
EDIT: Sorta like this
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Last edited by CRMcNeill on Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, who cares what kind of blaster it is. An ornate blaster doesn't in any way identify someone as a Jedi. Unless there is a model that is widely recognized as the "Jedi" blaster (/irony) then it doesn't matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | Yeah, who cares what kind of blaster it is. An ornate blaster doesn't in any way identify someone as a Jedi. Unless there is a model that is widely recognized as the "Jedi" blaster (/irony) then it doesn't matter. |
But it does matter, depending on the circumstances. If the Jedi is truly undercover, he will be trying to make himself as inconspicuous as possible. As far as weapons choices, a simple DL-18 blaster pistol accomplishes that much more effectively than some customized, chromed out super-pistol covered in engraved artwork and carried around in a hand-tooled cut-down quick-draw holster. Not that there isn't a place for both, but depending on the circumstances, one will be more appropriate than the other.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LOL!!!  Allow me to clarify what I meant...
To the layman, an effective/custom/as-close-to-perfect-as-possible battle pistol is indistinguishable from a "stock" weapon. Now, you're talking about a barbecue gun, which is a highly accurate, highly functional piece of art, that really has no place in a real fight (i.e. it's not something a person would carry around for self-defense). Even to an expert eye, it would take actual up-close examination to recognize that a custom (read: custom tactical) pistol was any more special than a duty-issue gun.
As for "ornate" I really don't see how that's going to ruin a Jedi's "cover" if all he's trying to do is cover up the fact that he's a Jedi. He could just be a hobbyist or collector or a somewhat eccentric megalomaniac who likes to carry a "pretty" gun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: |
EDIT: Sorta like this |
In support of what Naaman's been saying, I'm fairly comfortable around firearms, but I doubt I could distinguish the stripped down nature of the revolver used in the video clip, without actually placing my finger on the trigger. Especially in a galaxy that probably has thousands of blaster manufacturers, I'd say anything built by one of the major manufacturers could have any modification a Jedi would use, without threatening his or her cover. Even a superheavy pistol says "bounty hunter" not "Jedi". Adding a large, cruel bayonet with engravings of heads spitted on pikes and stuff like that could do as much to protect the Jedi's identity as to give it away.
Who sees a blaster with, for example, a spiked handguard and says "ahh, the owner of this gun must be a Jedi"?
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can see your point, but mine still has some life left in it, IMO. Suppose there was a sect of Jedi that used blasters, but put as much attention to detail into their blasters as other Jedi do into their lightsabers. Jedi may not be much for distinctive markings, but an educated person would be able to recognize the weapon as a Jedi weapon, which in turn attracts Imperial attention, even if the weapon isn't as distinctive as a lightsaber. A wise Jedi, trying to conceal his identity, either undercover before Order 66 or hiding from the Empire after, would not risk even the remote chance that a unique weapon might single him out. A likely course of action would be to custom build a pistol of his own that incorporates the features of the "Jedi Blaster Pistol" while appearing to be a stock or common model...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Right. I agree. I think I may have misunderstood some of what you wrote. I thought you were suggesting that a blaster could not be "high performance" and still be discreet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
