The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Some Thoughts on Blaster Weapons
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech -> Some Thoughts on Blaster Weapons Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kartr_Kana
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been skimming through this thread, and I had a couple of thoughts.

In the real world you have 6-7 basic types of cartridges:

Small Pistol - .380, .38, etc.
Standard Pistol - 9mm, .40, .357(sometimes considered large pistol, due to it's energy)
Large Pistol - 10mm, .45, .44magnum, .50ae, .50gap, etc.

Intermediate Rifle - 5.56x45/.223, 7.62x39 (the AK-47 round), .300 Blackout, 6.8 Grendel, etc.
Standard Rifle - 30-06, 7x57 Mauser, 7.62x51/.308Win, 6.5x55 Swedish, etc.
Magnum Rifle - .375H&H, .300Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, .416Ruger, etc.

Anti-material - .338 Lapua Mag, .50 BMG

The pistol cartridges are fairly self explanatory, smaller diameter means less power. Rifle Cartridges are more interesting.

Your traditional "Hunting Rifle" are the Standard Rifle category. These are large, heavy rounds usually with cases 50mm or longer. These develop very high pressures, very high velocities and good long ranges. These are also the early smokeless powder military cartridges used in rifles such as the M1 Garand, M14, Lee-Enfield, K98 Mauser and other military rifles that saw service in wars from WW1 to the Korean war. However these cartridges fell out of favor for service rifles shortly after the Korean war and were superseded by the Intermediate Cartridge.

Studies conducted by the US military after WW2 showed that the volume of fire was tied directly to the number of casualties inflicted. The side that fired more shots killed more enemies and usually won the fight. This lead to a push for automatic weapons in the hands of every soldier and was the genesis for the M14. However the military quickly realized that the full size rifle cartridge generated too much recoil for controllable automatic fire in a service rifle type package, and the size of the ammunition limited the amount a soldier could carry. Enter the idea of an "intermediate" cartridge, a cartridge with a much smaller case, much less powder, recoil, energy and reach. The Soviets were already doing it with the 7.62x39 in the AK-47 and the NATO forces adopted the 5.56x45. These intermediate cartridges are much smaller (more ammo), and produce much less recoil allowing for more controllable automatic fire and form the basis of all modern military service rifles and light machineguns.

Magnum cartridges were originally developed for hunting dangerous game (lions, buffalo, bears, elephants, etc.) and are rarely seen in military applications, though some military organizations are starting to go to them for sniper applications due to the longer ranges they can achieve over standard rifle rounds, without going all the way to the huge recoil and weight of anti-material rifles.

Standard Rifle cartridges are still used in, Hunting Rifles, Medium Machineguns, and Sniper Rifles. Intermediate cartridges are used in all military carbines and rifles, as well as light machineguns and civilian "sporting rifles." Magnum cartridges are your really powerful hunting rifles and occasional military sniper rifle. Your heavy machineguns are going to be chamber in some sort of anti-material round like the .50BMG or larger.

So my suggestion would be as follows:

Holdout Blaster - longer point blank range because of it's smaller, handier size and lower recoil. (the small pistol category)
3D+1, 4-6/8/12
Sporting Blaster - Honestly I'd get rid of this category for pistols, because in the real world any "sporting pistol" is essentially a standard pistol that has been turned into a "race gun" with all sorts of accessories like holo-sights, flared mag well, slide cuts, lightened spring, etc.
Blaster pistol - baseline weapon. (standard pistol category)
4D, 3-10/30/120
Heavy Blaster pistol - more damage, shorter range or less ammo (latter makes more sense compared to the real world.) (heavy pistol category)
5D, 2-10/30/120 Half the shots per power pack

Sporting Blaster (rifle) - The civilian version the blaster rifle, this would lack a stun setting to keep it cheap, and lack "autofire" if that's something the blaster rifle gets.
5D, 2-30/100/300, F, R or X
Blaster Rifle - The baseline Military weapon, stun and "kill" and possibly autofire.
5D, 2-30/100/300, R or X, Autofire (trade 1D of fire control for 1D of damage, up to 2D)(firing on burst or fully automatic plays hell with your accuracy in the real world, it also doesn't really let you target multiple enemies, the best you can do is spray their position.)
Blaster Carbine - the big advantages to carbines are their short lengths which make them easier to carry in vehicles and easier to wield when clearing buildings. From personal experience I'd rather carry a carbine when clearing a room than a pistol.
5D, 10-30/80/250, R or X, Autofire (as above)
Hunting Blaster - This is the standard rifle cartridge and magnum rifle categories lumped together and what you'd take hunting Dewbacks or Rancors, it's also what military's would convert to sniper rifles.
6D (standard) to 6D+2 (magnum), 2-100/300/500, F, R or X, half as many shots per power pack as a blaster rifle.
Heavy Blaster Rifle - the anti-material/.50bmg category.
7D, 2-150/400/800, R or X, one third the shots per power pack as a standard blaster rifle.

Light Repeating Blaster - LMGs
6D, 2-30/100/300, X, Improved Autofire (As Autofire, but 2D damage for every -1D to fire control up to -2D), can take standard blaster rifle power packs or be hooked up to a portable generator.
Medium Repeating Blaster - standard rifle cartridge category
7D, 2-100/300/500, X, Improved Autofire (as above), can take standard blaster rifle power packs or be hooked up to a portable generator, half the shots of a standard blaster rifle per power pack.
Heavy Repeating Blaster - anti-material/.50bmg category
8D, 2-150/400/800, X, Improved Autofire, can take standard blaster rifle power packs or be hooked up to a portable generator, one third the shots of a blaster rifle per power pack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 11937
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kartr_Kana wrote:
I've been skimming through this thread, and I had a couple of thoughts.

Welcome to the Pit.

Quote:
In the real world you have 6-7 basic types of cartridges:

I think you'll find a few people on this forum who are of like minds. If I might make a recommendation...

Quote:
Holdout Blaster - longer point blank range because of it's smaller, handier size and lower recoil. (the small pistol category)
3D+1, 4-6/8/12

Increasing the Point Blank range is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure it fully represents the advantages of a pistol at that range.

Quote:
Sporting Blaster - Honestly I'd get rid of this category for pistols, because in the real world any "sporting pistol" is essentially a standard pistol that has been turned into a "race gun" with all sorts of accessories like holo-sights, flared mag well, slide cuts, lightened spring, etc.
Blaster pistol - baseline weapon. (standard pistol category)
4D, 3-10/30/120
Heavy Blaster pistol - more damage, shorter range or less ammo (latter makes more sense compared to the real world.) (heavy pistol category)
5D, 2-10/30/120 Half the shots per power pack

The problem is that, if we are drawing parallels between real-world weapons and blasters, WEG consistently shorted the ranges of the rifle-type weapons while giving the Blaster Pistol a relatively long range that is out of proportion with the reduced ranges on other weapon equivalents. I made the decision to swap the ranges of the Sporting Blaster Pistol with the standard Blaster Pistol, justifying the extended range by making it, as you say, a race gun, either for competitive shooting or for shooters who prefer precision over firepower.

Quote:
Autofire (trade 1D of fire control for 1D of damage, up to 2D)(firing on burst or fully automatic plays hell with your accuracy in the real world, it also doesn't really let you target multiple enemies, the best you can do is spray their position.)

We've put quite a bit of work into the current version of Auto-Fire over the years. I'd prefer to put tighter restrictions on using Auto-Fire to hit multiple targets than to toss it out entirely. After all, if there are a group of soldiers standing within a few meters of each other, firing a burst of shots does increase the chances of hitting more than one of them.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kartr_Kana
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Kartr_Kana wrote:
I've been skimming through this thread, and I had a couple of thoughts.

Welcome to the Pit.

Quote:
In the real world you have 6-7 basic types of cartridges:

I think you'll find a few people on this forum who are of like minds. If I might make a recommendation...

Quote:
Holdout Blaster - longer point blank range because of it's smaller, handier size and lower recoil. (the small pistol category)
3D+1, 4-6/8/12

Increasing the Point Blank range is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure it fully represents the advantages of a pistol at that range.

Quote:
Sporting Blaster - Honestly I'd get rid of this category for pistols, because in the real world any "sporting pistol" is essentially a standard pistol that has been turned into a "race gun" with all sorts of accessories like holo-sights, flared mag well, slide cuts, lightened spring, etc.
Blaster pistol - baseline weapon. (standard pistol category)
4D, 3-10/30/120
Heavy Blaster pistol - more damage, shorter range or less ammo (latter makes more sense compared to the real world.) (heavy pistol category)
5D, 2-10/30/120 Half the shots per power pack

The problem is that, if we are drawing parallels between real-world weapons and blasters, WEG consistently shorted the ranges of the rifle-type weapons while giving the Blaster Pistol a relatively long range that is out of proportion with the reduced ranges on other weapon equivalents. I made the decision to swap the ranges of the Sporting Blaster Pistol with the standard Blaster Pistol, justifying the extended range by making it, as you say, a race gun, either for competitive shooting or for shooters who prefer precision over firepower.

Quote:
Autofire (trade 1D of fire control for 1D of damage, up to 2D)(firing on burst or fully automatic plays hell with your accuracy in the real world, it also doesn't really let you target multiple enemies, the best you can do is spray their position.)

We've put quite a bit of work into the current version of Auto-Fire over the years. I'd prefer to put tighter restrictions on using Auto-Fire to hit multiple targets than to toss it out entirely. After all, if there are a group of soldiers standing within a few meters of each other, firing a burst of shots does increase the chances of hitting more than one of them.


Thanks for the welcome! I'll check that thread out.

The problem is, I don't think the holdout really has any advantages other than it's small size. Now I didn't increase the total range increments, but honestly it would make sense to do that. Maybe: 6-12/30/50 since 50m is generally the max effective range of most pistols. Personally I disagree with giving it a bonus to being drawn, because that really comes down to how it is holstered and holdouts are really small so not as much to grab for. Now maybe a rule "a concealed Holdout Blaster does not suffer the -1D for being drawn, if it's drawn during a surprise round" to represent the advantage of having a concealed weapon? And of course they should have some advantage towards being concealed "+1D to rolls made to conceal the weapon" or something?

The ranges are definitely off, I didn't really spend any time adjusting them when I first posted. I certainly agree that the sporting blaster ranges make much more sense as the standard blaster ranges, but I still think that the sporting blaster should be nixed as I don't really see the need for the extra category. I think any sort of "race gun" set up should be handled between the GM and player modifying a personal firearm in the game. That would make it more meaningful to the player I think, taking a Blaster Pistol "template" and then customizing their "DL-22" during down time to have things like reflex scopes, light triggers, flared powerpack ports, etc.

Another thought, looking at the ranges for the blaster rifles, WEG seems to have gone with ranges that are more towards the "standard engagement" ranges than max effective ranges. The general rule of thumb in modern combat, is that it almost always takes place at a range of 300m or less. It's one of the reasons that Intermediate Cartridges are effective despite their lower power levels. Perhaps a fourth(fifth) range bracket should be added? 3-10/30/60/120 for blaster pistols, 2-30/100/300/500 for blaster rifles, and 2-150/400/800/1500 for hunting blasters, to represent a truly heroic shot.

In the real world, a burst setting (like the 3 round burst on the M16) happens too quickly to move it across multiple targets. All three shots are fired and down range before your mind processes the three recoil impulses. The idea for burst (at least as told in the Marine Corps) is to defeat body armor and other barriers, with multiple impacts landing extremely close to each other both in time and location.

Fully automatic is a different beast altogether. While a 3-round burst is fast enough that you can still achieve a fair degree of accuracy with it, fully automatic becomes a real chore to keep directed on target without some sort of mount or serious training. In fact when the military uses medium and heavy machineguns on a tripod, the gunners are actually trained to use the adjustment mechanisms on the tripod to mechanically adjust the aim rather than just "freehand it" for greater accuracy.

So this is where I'm torn, yes it should be easier to spray the fire over a group of enemies with a fully automatic weapon, but at the same time you're not really aiming at any of them reducing the chances you'll hit. I think a "suppressing fire" rule would be more accurate for what you're trying to represent. Something along the lines of "when targeting multiple enemies, take the multiple target penalty as normal (or reduce by 1D), but all targets after the first are required to make a full round dodge." This would more accurately represent that automatic fire is less accurate, but is extremely useful for suppressing enemy forces while other elements move into position to take accurate shots, or use grenades. Which is exactly what doctrine is for machineguns in modern militaries.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2425

PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like the idea of suppressing fire triggering the target's full dodge, but I'd be inclined tto "encourage" rhe full dodge rather than require it.

The way I have always thought of it is that a character has three choices in a fire fight, and he can do two at a time:

Shoot, dodge and use cover. Choose two. A character being supressed CAN shoot back and if he is confident in his cover, then why not? Or, he can dodge and take cover (essentially keeping his head down) or he can shoot and dodge, breaking cover to maximize his chance of destroying the enemy (react to near ambush inside grenade range, for example).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kartr_Kana
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
I like the idea of suppressing fire triggering the target's full dodge, but I'd be inclined tto "encourage" rhe full dodge rather than require it.

The way I have always thought of it is that a character has three choices in a fire fight, and he can do two at a time:

Shoot, dodge and use cover. Choose two. A character being supressed CAN shoot back and if he is confident in his cover, then why not? Or, he can dodge and take cover (essentially keeping his head down) or he can shoot and dodge, breaking cover to maximize his chance of destroying the enemy (react to near ambush inside grenade range, for example).

Forcing a Dodge or Full Dodge is probably better. The only reason I went with forcing a Full Dodge, is if you're taking a -3D or -4D MAP you should get something for it. The way I see it, if I know the guy with the Autofire weapon is going to be at a -4D penalty while trying to suppress the group, I'm not going to bother dodging because the odds of him hitting me are terribly low.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2425

PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Right. In such a case, I'd argue that a character who doesn't attempt to dodge is MORE likely to get hit, despite the MAP.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kartr_Kana
Cadet
Cadet


Joined: 14 Oct 2016
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Right. In such a case, I'd argue that a character who doesn't attempt to dodge is MORE likely to get hit, despite the MAP.

How do we do that?
Autofire: When a character uses the "autofire" feature to target multiple enemies, he takes the MAP as normal, but all targets must take a Full Dodge action or the difficulty to hit them is reduced to easy.

would that work?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2425

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure if it can be done without reworking the mechanical concept of autofire.

The way I've handled it (which is under review yet again) is that a target who is being suppressed that attempts to move from cover or return fire triggers a free attack from the shooter (no MAP). If no cover is available, they can go prone and increase the difficulty of being hit (and the MAPs apply, further increasing the value of going prone).

Or, if just "spraying" an area, then the shooter gets a bonus based on cyclic the rate of fire of the weapon. All targets in the area must attempt to dodge. Anyone who fails takes damage as if hit once by the weapon. A full dodge of course works to offset the bonus provided to the shooter, while also having the suppressing effect that we want for dumping all the ammo and taking all those MAPs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 11937
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2016 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Been meaning to get back to this, but it has been a busy week at work, with not a lot of time left over to break out the laptop.

If it's not too much trouble, please keep quoted text to a minimum, as it makes things a lot easier for mobile users like me if I don't have to spend five minutes holding down the Backspace button on my iPhone while typing up a reply.
Kartr_Kana wrote:
The problem is, I don't think the holdout really has any advantages other than it's small size.

Sorry, I should've been clearer. The best solution we came up with for the modified stats was to give all pistols (including the carbine when the stock is folded) a +1D to Blaster at Point Blank Range. It doesn't fully encapsulate all the advantages of smaller weapons, but it is the closest I have yet been able to come.

My reply was based on the premise that you were removing that bonus, and I didn't think increasing the Hold-Out's Point Blank range did enough to compensate.

Quote:
The ranges are definitely off, I didn't really spend any time adjusting them when I first posted. I certainly agree that the sporting blaster ranges make much more sense as the standard blaster ranges, but I still think that the sporting blaster should be nixed as I don't really see the need for the extra category.

To each, their own. If I may, I get the feeling you are trying to interpret blaster weapons through the lense of your own extensive experience with real-world firearms. There is nothing wrong with that, but my approach has been more to incorporate as much of the WEG Star Wars as possible, with the understanding that it is a different universe, where weapon technology has likely gone in different and interesting directions that the real world has not. As such, retaining the Sporting Blaster is a choice I made simply because I couldn't see an in-universe reason to throw it out, and (with the stat changes) plenty of reason to keep it. YMMV.

Quote:
Another thought, looking at the ranges for the blaster rifles, WEG seems to have gone with ranges that are more towards the "standard engagement" ranges than max effective ranges. The general rule of thumb in modern combat, is that it almost always takes place at a range of 300m or less. It's one of the reasons that Intermediate Cartridges are effective despite their lower power levels. Perhaps a fourth(fifth) range bracket should be added? 3-10/30/60/120 for blaster pistols, 2-30/100/300/500 for blaster rifles, and 2-150/400/800/1500 for hunting blasters, to represent a truly heroic shot.

My thinking was to keep the existing ranges, but then add an Advanced Skill that allowed for longer ranges. I know we've discussed it here in the past but I can't seem to find it. IIRC, it looked something like so:
    (A) Marksman
    Prerequisites: Search 5D, and any Ranged Weapon Specialization at 5D
    Effect: Adds an additional Range Bracket to any Ranged Weapon: Extreme Range. Shots at Extreme Range are Heroic Difficulty. To generate Extreme Range, roll the Marksman skill on the following chart:
      Very Easy = Maximum Range x 1.5
      Easy = Maximum Range x 2
      Moderate = Maximum Range x 3
      Very Difficult = Maximum Range x 4

    Marksman skill is rolled for every shot to generate range. Additional Difficulty steps may be added as necessary.


Quote:
In the real world, a burst setting (like the 3 round burst on the M16) happens too quickly to move it across multiple targets. All three shots are fired and down range before your mind processes the three recoil impulses. The idea for burst (at least as told in the Marine Corps) is to defeat body armor and other barriers, with multiple impacts landing extremely close to each other both in time and location.

That makes sense. So maybe restrict weapons with only 1D of Auto-Fire to applying it to either accuracy or damage, but not as a MAP offset. It would still apply to the Parry Difficulty of a Force user with a Lightsaber.

Quote:
Fully automatic is a different beast altogether. While a 3-round burst is fast enough that you can still achieve a fair degree of accuracy with it, fully automatic becomes a real chore to keep directed on target without some sort of mount or serious training. In fact when the military uses medium and heavy machineguns on a tripod, the gunners are actually trained to use the adjustment mechanisms on the tripod to mechanically adjust the aim rather than just "freehand it" for greater accuracy.

However, as an offset, film evidence strongly suggests that blaster weapons have greatly reduced recoil compared to firearms, which would make fully automatic blaster weapons easier to control when firing a long burst at a target (or group of targets). Various attempts have been made at recoil rules, but I've never really seen one I like. I do think that any realistic recoil rule would need higher penalties or Difficulty for Firearms vis--vis Blasters.

Quote:
So this is where I'm torn, yes it should be easier to spray the fire over a group of enemies with a fully automatic weapon, but at the same time you're not really aiming at any of them reducing the chances you'll hit. I think a "suppressing fire" rule would be more accurate for what you're trying to represent. Something along the lines of "when targeting multiple enemies, take the multiple target penalty as normal (or reduce by 1D), but all targets after the first are required to make a full round dodge." This would more accurately represent that automatic fire is less accurate, but is extremely useful for suppressing enemy forces while other elements move into position to take accurate shots, or use grenades. Which is exactly what doctrine is for machineguns in modern militaries.

It's important to remember that a character's Blaster or Firearms skill is primarily a measurement of how well they can get the weapon to do what they want it to do. The rules we generate are approximates for a general effect. In this case, if a shooter wants to hose off a stream of blaster bolts at a group of stormtroopers, his Blaster skill combined with his weapon's Auto-Fire rating represents the probability that he will be able to score a hit on multiple targets with the same burst. He's not taking aimed shots at five troopers, he's spraying 20 shots at a group of 5 troopers, with the 2D Auto-Fire reducing the MAP to -2D for a chance of hitting all five troopers with one shot apiece.

Again, not realistic, but the concept is there...
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5428
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
If it's not too much trouble, please keep quoted text to a minimum, as it makes things a lot easier for mobile users like me if I don't have to spend five minutes holding down the Backspace button on my iPhone while typing up a reply.

You post some d@mn epic posts from a mobile phone! (I assume when you're on the road). I find using this site on even my tablet to be difficult. I'm sure I've never accessed it on my phone. It is frustrating just thinking about it. My fingers are not nimble enough for long posts with a touch screen, let alone a small one. I need a keyboard.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 11937
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
You post some d@mn epic posts from a mobile phone! (I assume when you're on the road). I find using this site on even my tablet to be difficult. I'm sure I've never accessed it on my phone. It is frustrating just thinking about it. My fingers are not nimble enough for long posts with a touch screen, let alone a small one. I need a keyboard.

I break out my laptop for most of the epic ones, especially the ones involving stats. The biggest stat I ever wrote on my tablet was the Bowcaster from a few weeks back. Honestly, I prefer iPhone's keyboard interface to Android's but I bought my tablet primarily for reading ebooks on Kindle, and iPhone has more limited access to books on Kindle due to Apple's tight-@$$edness on product licensing. Six of one, and all that.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Naaman
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 2425

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2016 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I uave "recoil rules" but they are digused as MAP bonuses. Basically the standard MAP takes recoil into account. Weapons which have compensators and buffers and such gain a bonus on attack rolls when taking a MAP thus offsetting the penalty.

I relate to Whill concerning the tablet/keyboard thing. I've stopped trying to make my posts perfect when on my phone. Just way too many errors that are way too inconvenient to try and correct... usually end up ruining the post if I try to back track.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 11937
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2016 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
I uave "recoil rules" but they are digused as MAP bonuses. Basically the standard MAP takes recoil into account. Weapons which have compensators and buffers and such gain a bonus on attack rolls when taking a MAP thus offsetting the penalty.

In a way, I did as well. While I use a Coordination Bonus chart based on a formula of +1D = x2, the Auto-Fire bonus dice is based on a +1D = x4 for the 1D Auto-Fire, then +1D = x5 for the 2D & 3D Auto-Fire. In application, rather than firing 2 shots to get a +1D bonus, the gun fires 4, then 20 for the 2D Auto-Fire, than 100 for the 3D Auto-Fire. My main motivation was to get more rounded ammunition consumption values, but controlling recoil at Full-Auto is also a factor.

Seeing as how blasters are the "baseline" weapon of the SWU, I'm thinking that any rule regarding recoil should be based around them, with the normal application of MAPs reflecting the recoil of firing the weapon multiple times in rapid succession. Heavier weapons, such as various firearms and the like, would have higher MAP modifiers. JMO.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 11937
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Update, for those of you who copied these stats. I made a few changes to the original stat post, clarifying both the Two-Handed rule and the updated version of my Auto-Fire rules.
_________________
"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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
MrNexx
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 1324
Location: Houston

PostPosted: Tue May 30, 2017 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I can't find the conversation, but I know we've had it, about the idea that Walker-scale blasters should have a degree of area of effect; the example cited was the battle on Hoth, where shots from the AT-ATs seemed to cause explosions, tossing people around. And, it came to me while driving this morning, a simple way to do it:

Weapons have a diameter of effect equal to their scale modifier. When fired against same-scale targets, this really doesn't matter... but when fired against smaller targets, this could have a big impact.

A walker's cannons have a 4m diameter of effect. It will definitely get you and your closest friends. A speeder's have a 2m diameter of effect. It will get you and one of the people you're next to... but probably not the one on the other side. A turbolaser from a Capital Ship is going to cause damage in about a 12m diameter. The immediate point of contact for a Superlaser is 24m... though your real problem here is the thing beneath you blowing up.

It's not an idea designed to stand up to heavy scrutiny, but it also works on a scaled level. A walker firing at a couple speeders. If the speeders are within 2m of each other, it might hit both. If they're 4m apart, with people scattered between them, it will hurt all of the people, but only one of the speeders, since the scale difference for speeders knocks it down to 2m... the ancillary effects of the blast aren't enough to affect a speeder at that range.
_________________
"I’m telling you, you’ll never have a deeper sleep than curled up in a Wookie’s lap."
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Ships, Vehicles, Equipment, and Tech All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 10 of 12

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0