Jump to content



Photo

House ruling a difference between Blasters and Slug Throwers


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#21 DanteRotterdam

DanteRotterdam

    Member

  • Members
  • 988 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:14 AM

I can't suspend disbelief that an energy weapon bolt would travel slower than a solid projectile.


Boy, you must really hate Star Wars then... with all the bolts flying about slow enough for us to see them... ;)

Edited by DanteRotterdam, 15 May 2014 - 10:31 AM.

  • Sturn, Doc, the Weasel, armlessbaby and 2 others like this

#22 Jamwes

Jamwes

    Member

  • Members
  • 293 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:32 AM

They already are different. Slugthrowers do less damage and cannot have a stun feature. What more do you need?

 

Edit - Forgot about the Field Sports Model 77 Air Rifle which has stun damage. Except for outliers, Slugthrowers typically don't do stun while every base blaster has a stun option.


Edited by Jamwes, 15 May 2014 - 10:34 AM.

  • DanteRotterdam likes this

#23 DanteRotterdam

DanteRotterdam

    Member

  • Members
  • 988 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:33 AM

The lack of stun is particularly crucial!
MY PC's almost exclusively use stun on other sentients...
  • Kshatriya likes this

#24 Kshatriya

Kshatriya

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:47 AM

 

I can't suspend disbelief that an energy weapon bolt would travel slower than a solid projectile.


Boy, you must really hate Star Wars then... with all the bolts flying about slow enough for us to see them... ;)

 

Nah I just don't like to try and impose unrealistic mechanics on what are clearly cinematic decisions. It doesn't make sense for me that a plasma bolt travels slower than a bullet, even if it's actually moving slower than lightspeed for whatever reason.



#25 Jegergryte

Jegergryte

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:50 AM

1) A houserule we used was that you could/buy make your own ammo. Either with a mechanics check or paying extra funds and finding a crafter of specilty ammunition.

 

2) I believe there is fan resource, Free-Traders and Freebooters that had some custom slug rounds that dealt strain instead of wounds, gained the pierce ability (armor pierce) and also gained the blast ability. This would encompass some light armor piercing rounds, rubber bullets and buckshot rounds.

 

1) That is a nifty idea, and a nice rationale for the spare clip talent.

 

2) It's called Cartol's Emporium now :ph34r: and yes, there's stun bullets there (page 14). The older version, Free-Traders and Freebooters, did have it too, but the updated CE follows the FFG way of making alternate types of ammo.


  • Lukey84 likes this

Make sure your brain is engaged, before putting your mouth into gear.

"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."

GMLovlie's/Jegergryte's Cubicle direct link to supplements here.


#26 Doc, the Weasel

Doc, the Weasel

    Pretending to be many, many things.

  • Members
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:52 AM

 

 

I can't suspend disbelief that an energy weapon bolt would travel slower than a solid projectile.


Boy, you must really hate Star Wars then... with all the bolts flying about slow enough for us to see them... ;)

 

Nah I just don't like to try and impose unrealistic mechanics on what are clearly cinematic decisions. It doesn't make sense for me that a plasma bolt travels slower than a bullet, even if it's actually moving slower than lightspeed for whatever reason.

 

 

Realism : Star Wars

Oil : Water


  • kaosoe, CT1522 and ddbrown30 like this

Listen to my actual play podcasts at BeggingForXP.com.

 

Take a look at my Talent Trees (Edge of the Empire and Age of Rebellion), YT-2400 deck plans for the Lazy Bantha, as well as my other handouts.


#27 vodswyld

vodswyld

    Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 11:16 AM

A lot of people are talking about plasma and such, but from what I understand blaster bolts are not actually plasma bolts. They seem more like charged particle clouds.

 

A charged particle cloud makes more sense, and fits all the seen examples.

 

1) Damage: Damage from a blaster bolt is closer to flaying than it is to burning. It is like being hit with a super sand blaster. Every particle in the cloud that hits the target has a decent chance of passing part way into it before hitting another particle, and when it does it would shove whatever particle it hits and agitate other particles, causing a ripple effect until the energy bleeds off enough to stop effecting nearby particles. It would feel like a burn and look like a burn too. It is even possible to explain stun settings with this if you use a more less charged and less dense cloud. With the lower overall charge it is less likely to interact with objects and more likely to pass through. If enough of the cloud breaches the skin and passes by nerves, they are highly likely to agitate them, and if you do this over enough of the body at once it will cause shock.

 

2) Speed: A charged particle cloud would move at whatever speed it was projected at. Since the cloud is charges, the most likely projection method is using railgun like electromagnetic coils. These can move objects very quickly, but not light speed. 

 

3) Maximum range: Blaster bolts disperse after a certain distance. This is simply the cloud not being able to maintain coherence enough to do effective damage. This especially plays a part in space. A charged particle cloud would be bouncing internally to the cloud, thus causing it to disperse. A laser or slug will continue along its path basically forever.

 

4) Deflection and redirection: In this case, you are not actually parrying the particles, but bringing the charged field of the lightsaber into line with the charged field of the blast. Same charges = repelled bolt. Same goes for deflection shields. All they are doing is producing a charged field that interacts with the field of the bolt. As the charges interact it would even cause some stress on the generator, thus being able to blast through them with enough power.

 

So what all this means with slug throwers and blasters:

 

1) They probably have about the same penetration, just in different ways.

 

2) A blaster bolt would be as fast as the projector is set to and still maintain the coherency of the clouds. Bullets are as fast as.. well... bullets.

 

3) Blasters have and bullets both have an effective range in a gravity well, but the bullet likely should have a longer range. Outside a gravity well, the bullet doesn't stop but the bolt stops being effective eventually.

 

4) Blasters can be parried and redirected. Bullets might be destroyed, depending on material, but could never be redirected.

 

Chunks of this are a result of reading though wookiepedia as well as some of my own interpretations based on various things said about blaster bolts and how they react to the enviroment.

 

I just realized that was way longer than I thought it would be.


  • awayputurwpn, Vonpenguin, Haggard and 3 others like this

#28 Kshatriya

Kshatriya

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 12:24 PM

Realism : Star Wars

Oil : Water

 

In a lot of cases, not really. The movies may be epic space opera cinema but they don't go full-bore unrealistic gonzo in the way of law-of-physics defiance. If slugthrowers were so much better than blasters (faster shots etc) they'd be more widespread among security forces.

 

If you want to argue that Star Wars shouldn't follow some realism, do you also claim that the movies shouldn't follow easy questions of logic? Consider this.

 

Slugthrowers are not that widespread in use; blaster technology has been extant and dominant for millennia. And there are certainly existing reasons for blasters to be more prevalent (more ammo in a magazine, rechargeable ammunition store, usable without an atmosphere for powder ignition, assuming Star Wars slugthrowers would mostly use chemical propellant instead of magnetic acceleration). But if slugthrowers had better stopping power or their shots were harder to dodge/deflect, there's no logical reason they wouldn't be used more often, especially in atmospheric conditions.


Edited by Kshatriya, 15 May 2014 - 12:26 PM.

  • Haggard and whafrog like this

#29 swiftdraw

swiftdraw

    Member

  • Members
  • 186 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 01:32 PM

The biggest things I've read against chemcial propellant slugthrowers is that, against comparative sized blasters, they're are less powerful, easier to defeat with armor, are heavier, carry far less ammo, are effected by recoil more and the ammo isn't as interchagable between guns as gas is between blasters.

 

On the pro side, they can be silenced and don't fire the equivilant of a tracer round every shot thus giving away your position. They can extend their range by firing on a ballistic arc where blasters just peter out and specialty ammo can defeat darn near anything if your willing to develop it or pay the credits to obtain it. Finally, the weapons themselves tend to be cheaper.

 

Other style of slugthrowers, such as railguns, are far more powerful than the chemical propellant variety. However, they tend to be very expensive and rare. Most vehicle slugthrower weapons fell out of favor after the advent of particle shielding, which easily defeated even the most powerful slugthrowers (as per Essential Guide to Warfare, so that no longer may be the case.) Laser and ion weapons ended up being far more effiecient at battering down shielding, so the switch was made and no one looked back.


  • Vonpenguin and Kshatriya like this

#30 Deve Sunstriker

Deve Sunstriker

    Member

  • Members
  • 225 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:02 PM

Slugthrower rifles can fire deadly poison tipped darts that apparently kill people dead in mere seconds. That's a pretty neat advantage over blasters that apparently can be shrugged off if It's Not That Bad.


“I cast bad motivator on Darth Vader’s legs!”


#31 LordBritish

LordBritish

    Member

  • Members
  • 74 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 03:58 AM

The differences are already sangificant.

Slug throwers are generally inferior anyway. Lower crit rating damage as standard, much cheaper

Cannot benefit from upgrades that would benefit blaster only. Spin, blast. Barrels for example. You would have to invent mod to raise damage on slug thrower, since superior is only option. Czerka adventurer is the example of a high floor, low ceiling weapon, since it's mod potential is low in terms of raw dps, but starts off amazing)

Harder to spot (bullet instead of plasma bolts)

Easier to pass through customs (bullet weapons are generally taken less seriously, can be used as sign of big game hunter or other occupation.)

Will ignore energy absorbing tech, so may counteract shields.


So generally, there are a large number of differences. Ideally, blasters would deal less damage, but would alway have percice, slug throwers would have higher base damage, but less damage overall due to general lack of armour penetration except on lightly armoured targets. As of it is, perice is basically a crappy form of damage that is unneeded on most weapons, unless it has a lot of it to raise the base damage of the weapon on heavily armoured targets. I have had arguments before, as I generally treat perice 1-2 guns as damage, since nothing we fight generally have less soak then that

As that isn't the case, atm most slug throwers are weapons you give to deprived npc', though if you have mechanic, you can devise damage upgrades. Exclusive weapon upgrades, explosive/ poison tipped rounds anyone?

Edited by LordBritish, 16 May 2014 - 03:59 AM.


#32 Sturn

Sturn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,096 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 05:36 AM

I've added the heavy blaster trait of "GM can spend 3 threat or 1 despair" to force any slugthrower to run out of ammo. Other then that, I think they are fine as is. But I've also added options such as Extended Extra Reloads (like normal, but Maneuver not needed to reload on FIRST out-of-ammo result) and Ammo Belts (ignore 3 out-of-ammo results, but action to reload, adds 2 to weapon cumbersome via a required weapon attachment*, and maneuver to prepare to fire after moving).

 

*A further modification to this attachment is the "Ammo Can" which removes these penalties and cuts cumbersome to 1.


Edited by Sturn, 16 May 2014 - 05:55 AM.


#33 Ebak

Ebak

    Member

  • Members
  • 243 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 06:01 AM

As a House Rule for Slugthrowers, I say that instead of them adding wounds to the character they lower the wound threshold because the bullet is lodged in there or they are bleeding out as a result.



#34 Kshatriya

Kshatriya

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 07:37 AM

As a House Rule for Slugthrowers, I say that instead of them adding wounds to the character they lower the wound threshold because the bullet is lodged in there or they are bleeding out as a result.

And what would be the mechanism to get it out?

 

That seems too good.



#35 Haggard

Haggard

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 08:50 AM

I find it really interesting that so many people are invested in making slugthrowers more effective.  They're not supposed to be competitive with blasters except in certain niche roles, like sniping.  They're already incredibly cheap, easy to get ahold of, and reasonably lethal.

 

IIRC some of the early Star Wars material (might have been from WEG) extrapolated that the Rebel Alliance didn't use slugthrowers unless they had to due to the difficulty in supplying and carrying the ammo (easier to trace, and much heavier per round than blaster power cells) and because Stormtrooper armor rendered them almost worthless without difficult-to-obtain specialty rounds.

 

If anything I'd house rule that any kind of hardshell armor (laminate and above) gets double its soak value against slugs.  Yes, that would put the typical Stormtrooper at soak 7 versus slugthrowers.  The weapons should be fine against low-tech opponents (modern body armor probably qualifies as padded, tops) but obsolete on the galactic scale for a reason.


  • Kshatriya and Aservan like this

We tell each other the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we, too, can be great.


#36 Inquisitor Tremayne

Inquisitor Tremayne

    Member

  • Members
  • 169 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 11:59 AM

Do slugthrowers not already have the Limited Ammo quality?  If not, just give them that quality and issue solved.



#37 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,339 posts

Posted 16 May 2014 - 12:12 PM

 

As a House Rule for Slugthrowers, I say that instead of them adding wounds to the character they lower the wound threshold because the bullet is lodged in there or they are bleeding out as a result.

And what would be the mechanism to get it out?

 

That seems too good.

 

It's definitely too cumbersome. Obligation already has a chance to lower Strain Threshold at the beginning of sessions (like AoR has the chance to raise WT)...

But doing that sort of things multiple times during combat would be annoying. 



#38 Sturn

Sturn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,096 posts

Posted 17 May 2014 - 08:32 AM

I agree that we should be doing nothing to make them more effective compared to blasters. Do that (slugs compareable to lasers in effectiveness) for some other scifi game, but don't try to do it for Star Wars. Obviously blasters are the best weapon to use in Star Wars (versus slugs) or the slugs wouldn't be so rarely seen. If you change that, you are changing a facet of Star Wars. 


  • Haggard likes this

#39 Icosiel

Icosiel

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 17 May 2014 - 05:10 PM

Off topic a bit, but here's one thing that concerns me: the sniper slugthrower from Enter the Unknown (forget its name. Away from my book at the moment). The constant argument is that slugthrowers are ineffective against stormtrooper armor. Sure, that makes some sense for regular slugthrowers, but the sniper from EtU has Pierce Goddamn 5. That eats through nearly anyone's armor. How do we reconcile that? I have a player using one now, and with its Accurate 2 this thing is an absolute beast. I guess one could argue that it is a .50 BMG style round, but in that case, shouldn't it totally have Slow Fire and Limited Ammo?



#40 2P51

2P51

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,538 posts

Posted 17 May 2014 - 05:16 PM

Off topic a bit, but here's one thing that concerns me: the sniper slugthrower from Enter the Unknown (forget its name. Away from my book at the moment). The constant argument is that slugthrowers are ineffective against stormtrooper armor. Sure, that makes some sense for regular slugthrowers, but the sniper from EtU has Pierce Goddamn 5. That eats through nearly anyone's armor. How do we reconcile that? I have a player using one now, and with its Accurate 2 this thing is an absolute beast. I guess one could argue that it is a .50 BMG style round, but in that case, shouldn't it totally have Slow Fire and Limited Ammo?

I think they forgot the limited ammo, it does list I think a 3 shot mag in the write up, so that should have been included.  I assume the 5 pierce was a mod?  

 

If you asking about a slugthrower being able to pierce in reality some big game rifles are more like small bazookas in reality and wouldn't have trouble piercing a hell of a lot of armor.


My group's Obsidian Portal campaign site: It's All in the Trigger Squeeze





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS