| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2012 11:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | I like your idea of kilometers and space units, but perhaps it would work better to have just normal kilometer ranges up to Walker or Starfighter scale, with Space units for everything else. |
Maybe. Or dual ranges. THe tricky bit is the overlap. |
I think the key point is that, for some scale steps (particularly Character and Speeder), we don't need to include a Space Units range, and only need to include ranges for orbital bombard purposes for the larger capital ships.
_________________
"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 Thu Jun 15, 2017 8:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | I think the key point is that, for some scale steps (particularly Character and Speeder), we don't need to include a Space Units range, and only need to include ranges for orbital bombard purposes for the larger capital ships. |
Since they are all on one table, and the range bands overlap, and we have added another range band (extreme) we might wind up with T-16s causing a minor headache or two. But then the transition form kph to SU is a weak spot in D6.
I added in Space Unit Ranges (SUs) and am tweaking the values a little to try and match up the weapon range scales with the typical travel times in the RAW.
It shouldn't be too much of a problem though, since SUs are supposed to vary in size as you get farther away from a planet. So I could keep the SUs constant and just vary their size with each range band.
BTW, where do you want the break point to be for weapons and sensors. I know you want pistols to be better in the 10m band and rifles in the 30 or 100 m band, but are there any other items you want to drop off in a different fashion?
Current Names for Range bands are:
Point-Blank (3m)
Close (10m)
Medium (30m)
Long (100m)
Extreme (300m)
Tank (1000m)
??? (3000m)
Visual (10km)
Indirect (30km)
Low Orbit (100km)
??? (300km)
??? (1000km)
Medium Orbit (3000km)
??? (10 000 km)
??? (30 000 km)
Geostationary Orbit (100,000 km)
High Orbit (300 000 km)
Lunar Orbit (1 million km)
I will match these up to SU equivalents somewhere around the half way point (where it turns orbital). One "bug" is that the Death Star's main cannon has a range on only 100 SU, which is about captial ship scale. Not only doesn't that work out well for the table, but it wouldn't work out too well for the Death Star. With ranges of 1-20/40/100 the thing would have to be a little too close to it's target. at optiomum range
Wookieepedia says the thing had an optiom range of 2 million km, and a "working" range of 420 million km, so I think I will tryt to scale the range bands for the DS to that level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: | | I think the key point is that, for some scale steps (particularly Character and Speeder), we don't need to include a Space Units range, and only need to include ranges for orbital bombard purposes for the larger capital ships. |
Since they are all on one table, and the range bands overlap, and we have added another range band (extreme) we might wind up with T-16s causing a minor headache or two. But then the transition form kph to SU is a weak spot in D6. |
If that's the case, then I would consider dropping numbered rages altogether, and just using general descriptions. Looking back at the films, I can't think of a single instance where they used actual range or speed descriptions. So long as we aren't going for exact conversions, it would address many of your issues mentioned below. Rather than going for a specific range value, you can simply say that the weapon is (or is not) in range.
As far as the 2D steps are concerned, my main issue is that, since I am already using a 4D step scale system, I would rather not expand on it. I like the idea of the scale steps matching the range bands one-for-one because of the simplicity of the idea. Doing it that way includes my original idea for range bands (realism) without adding too much complexity. I'm sorry if I'm not explaining it properly.
| Quote: | | BTW, where do you want the break point to be for weapons and sensors. I know you want pistols to be better in the 10m band and rifles in the 30 or 100 m band, but are there any other items you want to drop off in a different fashion? |
That depends on the ranges in the official stats, IMO. Maybe using the metric ranges as guidelines to generate difficulty numbers for short ranged weapons, like proton torpedoes on starfighters.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: |
If that's the case, then I would consider dropping numbered rages altogether, and just using general descriptions. Looking back at the films, I can't think of a single instance where they used actual range or speed descriptions. So long as we aren't going for exact conversions, it would address many of your issues mentioned below. Rather than going for a specific range value, you can simply say that the weapon is (or is not) in range. |
Fair enough. In fact it helps solve a few headaches.
As far as the 2D steps are concerned, my main issue is that, since I am already using a 4D step scale system, I would rather not expand on it. I like the idea of the scale steps matching the range bands one-for-one because of the simplicity of the idea. Doing it that way includes my original idea for range bands (realism) without adding too much complexity. I'm sorry if I'm not explaining it properly. [/quote]
Fine by me. What are the sclaes you use? I am assuming (dangerous), based on your previous posts:
Character & Vehicle (same scale)
Walker & Starfighter [+4D]
Escort [+8D]
Capital Ship [+12D]
Large Captial Ship (SSD) [+16D]
Huge Captial Ship/Space Station [+20D,]
Death Star [+24D]
| Quote: | | That depends on the ranges in the official stats, IMO. Maybe using the metric ranges as guidelines to generate difficulty numbers for short ranged weapons, like proton torpedoes on starfighters. |
Hmm, with the 4D scale bands I'll have to see how the overlap now. I think we can just shift the bands up or down for some weapons (torps, ion guns) to make then work with abstract range bands.
BTW, I thought of a way to simplify the signature calculation. Assuming that each D is twice the power of the previous value, then:
Take the highest die code (use half the SPACE rating as a die code, i.e. Space 12= 6D) and add 2 to it, then add for scaling.
Weapons can be handled this way by combining the value (so 2 weapons is +1D, 4 is +2D and so on).
Since most ships don't have 60 guns it will be easy to work up the sig.
Just a thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like we'll need a range band between character and walker/starfighter to get the weapon range relationships right.
Long range with a rifle is about point blank for a starfighter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here is the Revised Range Table
-It uses 4D scales, as per orders.
-Extended Ranger added tot he table
-I could keep the atmospheric ans SPACE ranges. The range value is an approximate upper limit to the range, So a Starfighter scale Laser (3/12/25) and A Starfighter scale blaster (5/10/17) are in the same range class.
-Once you hit Capital Ship (Escort) Scale, range stays the same. The Death Star's Superlaser has a range of 1-20/40/100, which is in the same class as a turbolaser (3-15/35/75). We can alter than if desired. IMO the Superlaser should have a better range.
-Weapons have been assigned a range class (RC) that tells you what row to use. Protorps fit in nicely at RC 3. The only bug is the starfighter scale ion guns which are RC 3 but have a RC 5 long range.
-The red zone is the "blind spot" range, that is within the minimum range, that you desired. I'm leery of allowing a too close zone since fighters will dive right for it. Maybe just upping the difficulty to hit would work?
-The orange zone is beyond extreme range.
-Don't know if escort should be in starfighter RC or captial ship RC.
-How's it look? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | Fine by me. What are the scales you use? I am assuming (dangerous), based on your previous posts:
Character & Vehicle (same scale)
Walker & Starfighter [+4D]
Escort [+8D]
Capital Ship [+12D]
Large Captial Ship (SSD) [+16D]
Huge Captial Ship/Space Station [+20D,]
Death Star [+24D] |
I'm using the following:
Character (0D)
Speeder (+4D)
Walker / Starfighter (+8D)
Escort (+12D) - Covers corvettes and such all the way up to WEG cruisers like Dreadnoughts and Interdictors.
Cruiser (+16D) - Covers the larger ships, with the Victory SD as the dividing line between Escort and Cruiser.
Dreadnaught (+20D) - Covers the SSDs and similar large vessels.
Death Star (+24D)
| Quote: | | Hmm, with the 4D scale bands I'll have to see how the overlap now. I think we can just shift the bands up or down for some weapons (torps, ion guns) to make then work with abstract range bands. |
I'll wait to see what you can come up with.
| Quote: | BTW, I thought of a way to simplify the signature calculation. Assuming that each D is twice the power of the previous value, then:
Take the highest die code (use half the SPACE rating as a die code, i.e. Space 12= 6D) and add 2 to it, then add for scaling.
Weapons can be handled this way by combining the value (so 2 weapons is +1D, 4 is +2D and so on).
Since most ships don't have 60 guns it will be easy to work up the sig.
Just a thought. |
Perhaps instead of using Scale, we can used the combined action rules. Take all of the ship's weapons, then calculate as though they were all being coordinated at once, so an ISD with 60 turbolaser cannon would have an additional 20D added to the base damage of the turbolasers for a total of 25D. That's an awfully large number even if we just went with the number before the D, so perhaps divide that number by 10 (rounding up or down). Using that rule of thumb, an ISD I would have:
25D (60 turbolaser batteries @ 5D)+
23D (60 ion cannon @ 3D)+
9D (10 tractor beam projectors @ 6D) =
57D total
57 / 10 = 5.7, rounded up to 6.
So, an Imperial Star Destroyer, with a Hull of 7D, a Space of 6 and 3D of Shields, with the weapons factored in would have a sensor signature of 25 (7 for the Hull, 6 for the Space, 6 for the weapons, plus 6 for being Capital Scale), or 28 with its shields up.
We'd have to come up with a modifier of some kind for Starfighter-Scale weapons, though...
_________________
"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: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | Looks like we'll need a range band between character and walker/starfighter to get the weapon range relationships right.
Long range with a rifle is about point blank for a starfighter. |
That was part of how I was thinking of handling sniper rifles: allowing range bands to be shifted out a step without increasing damage, so that a sniper weapon has Speeder-Scale range, but still inflicts Character-Scale damage (with some exceptions for the big anti-material sniper rifles like the M82).
_________________
"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: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | I could keep the atmospheric ans SPACE ranges. The range value is an approximate upper limit to the range, So a Starfighter scale Laser (3/12/25) and A Starfighter scale blaster (5/10/17) are in the same range class. |
My ultimate concept would be to abandon the ranges completely, and assign the Blaster a higher base difficulty than the Laser at longer ranges because of its shorter range in the 2E stats. The trade-off would be that the Blaster's difficulty would be lower than the Laser closer in.
| Quote: | | -Once you hit Capital Ship (Escort) Scale, range stays the same. The Death Star's Superlaser has a range of 1-20/40/100, which is in the same class as a turbolaser (3-15/35/75). We can alter than if desired. IMO the Superlaser should have a better range. |
I'd rather that the range keep expanding. After all, the Death Star's sensors range out to 5,000 units, and as rare as Death Star scale weaponry would be, I would have no problem with it having a longer range than WEG says it does.
In addition, having the expanding range makes it possible (necessary, even) to modify ship stats to reflect the various weapon ranges available. Rather than the standard 60 turbolaser batteries, an ISD would need the batteries for Escort-scale targets while including heavy turbolaser turrets for Cruiser-scale targets and point defense cannon for starfighter-scale targets.
| Quote: | | -Weapons have been assigned a range class (RC) that tells you what row to use. Protorps fit in nicely at RC 3. The only bug is the starfighter scale ion guns which are RC 3 but have a RC 5 long range. |
Very close to what I was thinking. My idea is that weapon range descriptions would look something like this:
Range: Starfighter (5/10/15/20)
Using that as a base range for a laser cannon, a blaster would look more like this:
Range: Starfighter (3/10/20/30)[/quote]
| Quote: | | -The red zone is the "blind spot" range, that is within the minimum range, that you desired. I'm leery of allowing a too close zone since fighters will dive right for it. Maybe just upping the difficulty to hit would work? |
I addressed that above, in that the blind spot effect would require capital ships and other vessels to be equipped with multiple scale-classes of weaponry to defend against the various possible threats, with one weapon system for use against smaller capital ships, another against starfighters, another against larger capital ships, etc.
| Quote: | | -The orange zone is beyond extreme range. |
Works for me.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | I'm using the following... |
Okay, I'll adjust the table.
Af far as combined fire, scaling and signature, I was thinking of using both. Basically take the highest die code and add 2D. The idea is that with a doubling scale (x2=+1D) the largest system is probably going to be about 25% of the total power.
I'd also use a x2 scaling for guns, rather than the +1 per gun in 2R&E. It fits better with the ship stats. For example, an X-Wing has four laser cannons that do 6D linked. With a doubling progression 4D for one gun, +1D for two, +2D for four, is 6D.
For an ISD, 60 tubolasers would be just shy of +6D, or 10D+2, with +6D for scaling we get 17D add 2D more for 19D, or a signature of +19.
A TIE/ln's best stats are Speed 10 (=5D) and it's laser cannons (total damage of 5D), so it would have a signature of 6D (for two 5Ds) plus the 2D, for 8D, or +8.
But it's just an idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: |
That was part of how I was thinking of handling sniper rifles: allowing range bands to be shifted out a step without increasing damage, so that a sniper weapon has Speeder-Scale range, but still inflicts Character-Scale damage (with some exceptions for the big anti-material sniper rifles like the M82). |
I think speeder scale weapons in the RAW shoot further out though. In the RAW these seem to be the weapons that are too big to carry. But it would work out fine with the range classes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2012 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crmcneill wrote: | | My ultimate concept would be to abandon the ranges completely, and assign the Blaster a higher base difficulty than the Laser at longer ranges because of its shorter range in the 2E stats. The trade-off would be that the Blaster's difficulty would be lower than the Laser closer in. |
We need some sort of range numbers so we can tell what range band the fight is taking place in. If somebody take a pop shoot at the PCs at 200 meters the GM is going to need to have some clue as to if that is medium, long, short or whatever range for the given weapon.
But, we can always cut the top off the table.
| Quote: | | I'd rather that the range keep expanding. After all, the Death Star's sensors range out to 5,000 units, and as rare as Death Star scale weaponry would be, I would have no problem with it having a longer range than WEG says it does. |
Fine by me. I kinda thought it was dumb for a Death Star's range to be not much better than an turbolaser. I can just keep expanding the ranges
| Quote: |
In addition, having the expanding range makes it possible (necessary, even) to modify ship stats to reflect the various weapon ranges available. Rather than the standard 60 turbolaser batteries, an ISD would need the batteries for Escort-scale targets while including heavy turbolaser turrets for Cruiser-scale targets and point defense cannon for starfighter-scale targets. |
Well, according to wookiepeida, it does. The stats there list four big guns and a bunch of smaller ones. Based on the entry on wookiepeida and the power stats provided, I'm fairly certain that TBLs are NOT big guns, but starfighter scale AK-AK. More like .50BMG, 20mm and 40mm that big ships guns.
| Quote: | | -Weapons have been assigned a range class (RC) that tells you what row to use. Protorps fit in nicely at RC 3. The only bug is the starfighter scale ion guns which are RC 3 but have a RC 5 long range. |
Very close to what I was thinking. My idea is that weapon range descriptions would look something like this:
Range: Starfighter (5/10/15/20)
Using that as a base range for a laser cannon, a blaster would look more like this:
Range: Starfighter (3/10/20/30)[/quote]
So you want a blaster to be able to shoot as far out as a laser cannon? That might be a bit too generous. We talking about a difference of a factor of 10 or so, But....maybe the base difficulty could be a factor of range, and get adjusted by weapon type?
| Quote: |
I addressed that above, in that the blind spot effect would require capital ships and other vessels to be equipped with multiple scale-classes of weaponry to defend against the various possible threats, with one weapon system for use against smaller capital ships, another against starfighters, another against larger capital ships, etc. |
Okay. But there is still a problem with starfighters getting in a closer than point blank and unloading with protorps. Maybe a splash damage rule would work? If you shoot within your weapon's read zone, you will be caught in the explosion and take some damage. Seems to me that standing within 10m or a proton torpedo would be hazardous. And the lasers all make big explosions too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | For an ISD, 60 tubolasers would be just shy of +6D, or 10D+2, with +6D for scaling we get 17D add 2D more for 19D, or a signature of +19.
A TIE/ln's best stats are Speed 10 (=5D) and it's laser cannons (total damage of 5D), so it would have a signature of 6D (for two 5Ds) plus the 2D, for 8D, or +8.
But it's just an idea. |
The only problem I have there is the massive power signature of weapons even when they aren't firing. Based on the current calculation, an ISD already has a sensor signature of 19 even when its shields are down. Adding a modifier that doubles that sensor signature, even when the weapons aren't in use, is a bit much.
On the whole, I prefer using just the combined action rules as I described, both because it uses a rule that people are already familiar with, and that it generates a lower signature number that is in better proportion with the sensor signature numbers we are already generating.
_________________
"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: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | crmcneill wrote: |
That was part of how I was thinking of handling sniper rifles: allowing range bands to be shifted out a step without increasing damage, so that a sniper weapon has Speeder-Scale range, but still inflicts Character-Scale damage (with some exceptions for the big anti-material sniper rifles like the M82). |
I think speeder scale weapons in the RAW shoot further out though. In the RAW these seem to be the weapons that are too big to carry. But it would work out fine with the range classes. |
IIRC, speeder-scale weapons still have ranges in the 1-2 kilometer range, which is about where the really good snipers operate. The idea here is that, while the weapon's range may be upgraded to speeder scale, its damage does not. It may be shooting out to ranges reserved for Speeder-scale weaponry, but its damage dice remain in Character scale.
_________________
"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: 16209
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | We need some sort of range numbers so we can tell what range band the fight is taking place in. If somebody take a pop shoot at the PCs at 200 meters the GM is going to need to have some clue as to if that is medium, long, short or whatever range for the given weapon. |
The range band would be dictated by the situation, not the number. The GM would simply look at the situation, decide what range band he wants the combat to occur, then tell the characters that someone has taken a shot at them from long range.
| Quote: | | Quote: |
In addition, having the expanding range makes it possible (necessary, even) to modify ship stats to reflect the various weapon ranges available. Rather than the standard 60 turbolaser batteries, an ISD would need the batteries for Escort-scale targets while including heavy turbolaser turrets for Cruiser-scale targets and point defense cannon for starfighter-scale targets. |
Well, according to wookiepeida, it does. The stats there list four big guns and a bunch of smaller ones. Based on the entry on wookiepeida and the power stats provided, I'm fairly certain that TBLs are NOT big guns, but starfighter scale AK-AK. More like .50BMG, 20mm and 40mm that big ships guns. |
I agree; all the big ships should have had varying degrees of weaponry from the beginning. However, ISDs weren't stated with point defense weaponry until WOTC's 3R&E edition, and the heavy turret weaponry was sourced from the Essential Cross-Sections book. When I restated the ISD, I made the turret weapons Cruiser-Scale, leaving the WEG stock turbolasers and ion cannon at Escort-Scale, and the Point Defense Cannon as Starfighter-Scale.
| Quote: | | -Weapons have been assigned a range class (RC) that tells you what row to use. Protorps fit in nicely at RC 3. The only bug is the starfighter scale ion guns which are RC 3 but have a RC 5 long range. |
| Quote: | | So you want a blaster to be able to shoot as far out as a laser cannon? That might be a bit too generous. We talking about a difference of a factor of 10 or so, But....maybe the base difficulty could be a factor of range, and get adjusted by weapon type? |
No, the idea is that, while both weapons can attack targets in the same range bands, hitting them at Starfighter-Long range is more difficult for a blaster than a laser (representing the blaster's shorter range), but the blaster is more accurate at close range than the laser.
| Quote: | | Okay. But there is still a problem with starfighters getting in a closer than point blank and unloading with protorps. Maybe a splash damage rule would work? If you shoot within your weapon's read zone, you will be caught in the explosion and take some damage. Seems to me that standing within 10m or a proton torpedo would be hazardous. And the lasers all make big explosions too. |
I don't see the problem with starfighters getting in close like that. For starters, it makes starfighters more deadly. Plus, that's why ships would have point defense weapons; to engage starfighters that get in "under the guns" as it were.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
