Jump to content

Ferretz

Members
  • Content Count

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ferretz

  1. So, I've always thought the rules for collisions were a bit unspectacular, and after seeing Rogue One a couple of times (loved it!), I found that I wanted to expand on the rules for ramming that appears in Stay on Target. So I wrote up some ideas today, and I thought I'd share them here, to see what you guys think. Note that I didn't want to change any existing rules with this, but rather add to the rules as they are in the book. I also very much like to keep the rules similar to other rules in the game. I've not playtested this yet: Expanded Ramming Ramming can be used as a risky, but effective tactic for vehicles, especially those equipped with a ram attachment. Ramming follows the regular rules as described for collisions in the core book, and for ramming in Stay on Target, with a few additions. When a vehicle decides to ram another, it must be in Close range of the target and make a Piloting (Space or Planetary) Check. The difficulty is decided by the speed of the two vehicles, and uses the table for Gain the Advantage (see page 247 of AoR). If the Piloting Check is successful, the rammer hits his target. All successful ramming attempts are considered major collisions. In addition to the regular modifiers, an additional modifier equal to the rammering vehicle's Silhouette × current Speed is added to the rammed ship's Critical result. Each s on a ramming attempt increases adds 2 to the Critical Damage roll on the rammed vehicle, and any uncancelled a reduces the result on the Critical Damage roll for the ramming vehicle. In addition, T can be spent to hinder the rammed vehicle, preventing it from taking any Maneuvers or Actions until the end of its next turn (can be activated up to two times). Each t adds +2 to the ramming ships Critical roll, and any d rolled can be spent to prevent the ramming ship from taking any Maneuvers or Actions until the end of its next turn (can be activated up to two times). Vehicles described as Massive add 10 per level of this trait to the Critical Damage roll rammed targets. They also subtract 10 per level of this trait to the Critical check to themselves in when ramming. Example: In a desperate attempt to save the rest of the fleet, the captain of a Nebulon-B Frigate sets full speed and attempts to ram an approaching Imperial-I Star Destroyer. The frigate has Speed 3 and Silhouette 6, giving it a +18 to the Critical Damage roll when ramming. The destroyer has a speed of 2, making it easy for the frigate to catch the slower ship. Both ships roll for Critical Damage when they connect. The Frigate rams with its front into the side of the destroyer, so its modifier is -10. The destroyer has stronger shields than the frigate, but due to the modifiers from the size and speed of the ramming ship, and the Massive trait of the destroyer, its total modifier is -17. If a ramming starship rams another ship or object that has no power on its own, the ramming ship can spend aaa or x to move the target one Range Band in any direction, possibly colliding it with another object.
  2. Ferretz

    VCX-100 Light Freighter

    They based it on a b17 flying fortress bomber. 'Nuf said. It aint dodging like a fighter plane. Yes, they did. But I think that was limited to the visuals, not its role in combat. I mean, a Nebulon-B is much more agile and just as fast as the VCX-100 as the stats stand now. If they'd made it a Silhouette 4 ship, however, I could understand the poor Handling, as it is big for a ship on that Silhouette. But it being a Sil5 ship, at least it should have a much better Handling, as it is the smallest Sil5 ship I've seen so far. But the Ghost, it does some pretty hefty maneuvers, and I guess we'll see more of that in upcoming Rebels episodes.
  3. Ferretz

    VCX-100 Light Freighter

    I wouldn't call that gain the advantage necessarily. I would say that is just Hera is a REALLY awesome pilot. Well, that maneuver really is what Gain the Advantages is described as in the book. Also, in the rpg, there just isn't any talent or attachment that makes a Silhouette 5 ship able to do that.
  4. Ferretz

    VCX-100 Light Freighter

    Well, maybe the devs really think the VCX-100 should be Sil5, but I do believe that the team behind Rebels really compares it more to the Falcon. In this short, the Ghost even pulls what seems to me to be a Gain the Advantage.
  5. Ferretz

    VCX-100 Light Freighter

    Well, comparing the stats for the VCX-100 and the CR90, the CR90 is a much more agile ship. It just doesn't seem right. The CR90 is listed as 126,68m long, and the VCX-100 is 43,9m long. I suspect this is an error, and that the VCX-100 is meant to be a larger Silhouette 4 ship, seeing the Handling is -3. It can be in a dogfight, but it will be sluggish compared to other light freighters. Which really described well how the Ghost appears in Rebels.
  6. Ferretz

    VCX-100 Light Freighter

    But surely, the VCX-100 is closer to a YT freighter than a CR90 in size, shape, maneuverability etc etc?
  7. Ferretz

    VCX-100 Light Freighter

    I think the VCX-100 is clearly a Silhouette 4 ship, and I treat it as such in my games. This screen shot from Rebels is quite clear, I think.. https://i.stack.imgur.com/cnDIc.png
  8. I found a Word-file template online somewhere that had all the symbols in it, and I just copy-pasted them where I needed them, then I copied the text from my Word-file into this post.
  9. Thanks, I hadn't seen this. It clears it up a bit, even though the official rules, as they stand now, is pretty silly. Hoping for that re-evaluation.
  10. Be that as it may, this is a conversation which has been had numerous times elsewhere on the forums, and will likely not be settled until FFG gets around to a thorough revision of the defense rules. I think in the meantime, OggDude has the right idea in sticking to a stricter interpretation, as many players take their rules cues from the character generator, and it is generally easier for a GM to relax the expected rules than to tighten them. But it is not really an interpretaton, is it? As the FAQ clearly says that "increase Defense" means that you add it to the static defense.
  11. Of course, but look at what the FAQ says. That's from the developers. "When a character can choose between two static defense values, (for example, if he is in cover and is wearing armor that has a defense value), he chooses the better of the two values. Then any armor, talents, and item qualities he has that “increase” his defense value are added to the static value he chose." -Edge of the Empire FAQ
  12. Short answer. Defense doesn't stack. Longer answer. Rules As Written: Multiple sources of defense do not stack. However, the character always uses the best defense rating available to him. If the PC possesses a defense rating of 1 against all attacks but a defense rating of 2 against melee attacks, he applies the defense 2 against all close combat attacks directed at him. So if you test the program out and add equip a Voss Warspear (Defensive 2) your character will have Rng 1/Melee 2 But I seem to remember there being a difference between "gain Defense 1" and "increase Defense by 1". So there is no difference? Perhaps you are thinking about mods, and improvements to mods, where gain Defense 1 would mean you get 1 defense, whereas increase defense by 1 would mean get one extra on the item, to 1 if you had 0 before, or higher otherwise. Well, it comes up in every campaign. It is a bit unrealistic that armor defense should not stack with cover, and a character with for example, Armored Clothes, Vibrosword and Parrying Vibrodagger should have the same Melee Defense as a character with only Armored Clothes. However, in our group, we're allowing, for example, two Defensive items to stack (vibrosword and parrying vibrodagger), but we're not allowing General, Melee or Ranged defense to stack with each other. I think this is the intent of the rules, actually, but I would be happy to hear from the writers on this (so happy, in fact, that I sent them an e-mail about it earlier today). Edit: What confuses me, if what you say is correct, is this from the FAQ: Q. Some armor, talents, and item qualities provide a static defense value, while others specifically increase a defense value. How do they interact? A. When a character can choose between two static defense values, (for example, if he is in cover and is wearing armor that has a defense value), he chooses the better of the two values. Then any armor, talents, and item qualities he has that “increase” his defense value are added to the static value he chose. E.
  13. Short answer. Defense doesn't stack. Longer answer. Rules As Written: Multiple sources of defense do not stack. However, the character always uses the best defense rating available to him. If the PC possesses a defense rating of 1 against all attacks but a defense rating of 2 against melee attacks, he applies the defense 2 against all close combat attacks directed at him. So if you test the program out and add equip a Voss Warspear (Defensive 2) your character will have Rng 1/Melee 2 But I seem to remember there being a difference between "gain Defense 1" and "increase Defense by 1". So there is no difference?
  14. I'm sure this has been up plenty of times before, so I'm sorry if I'm drag it up yet again. I did a test character in this excellent program, to chech out the Defensive/Deflective issue that the rules system doesn't seem to agree with itself on. I understand it like this: some things (armor, cover) grant Defense (either Melee, Ranged or both). Other things increase Defense (like Defensive, Deflective from weapons). If something increase Defense, it adds to the base defense. So having Armored Clothes (grants Defense 1) and wielding a Vibrosword, that character would have Ranged Defense 1, Melee Defense 2. Right? The software doesn't seem to take this into account. -E.
  15. I'm very curious about what's in Savage Spirit, especially since I'm going to play a Seeker in an upcoming campaign this summer. So, anyone's got it yet? Care to share? -E.
  16. Ferretz

    So Savage Spirits is out?

    So, I'm curious about what's in the book apart from new specialities and talents. How about beasts? What kind of new animals are included? And what space ships/vehicles? -E.
  17. Love this program. We're using it alot in our campaigns. One feature I would wish for is being able to export the character into a form fillable pdf. Or maybe even a funksjon that lets us make a character sheet to use during play on a tablet or laptop. -E.
  18. As for Defensive, the one I tried was to make a character with a Vibrorapier and a Parrying Vibrodagger, for that "swashbuckling" feel. He had Armored Clothing on. The program calculated both defenses as 1. Autofire is extremely powerful, I agree. But even though we have a "Heavy" in the current group of characters, armed with a light repeating blaster, he hasn't been able to abuse the RAW. But it will come, I'm sure... A new FAQ/errata would be in order soon, I think. E.
  19. I love this character generator, and we're using it, and the GM tools, regularly in our ongoing campaign(s). Recently I've noticed one small issue. The item qualities Defensive and Deflection is described as "increasing the wearer's Defense" as opposed to gaining a new Defense. I know that different sources of Defense doesn't stack, but when it says it increases Defense, I take it that it is added to the characters existing Ranged or Melee Defense values? The program doesn't seem to calculate this bit as it only gives the highest Defense, be it from armor, Deflection or Defensive qualities. Here is from the Edge of the Empire FAQ: Q. Some armor, talents, and item qualities provide a static defense value, while others specifically increase a defense value. How do they interact? A. When a character can choose between two static defense values, (for example, if he is in cover and is wearing armor that has a defense value), he chooses the better of the two values. Then any armor, talents, and item qualities he has that “increase” his defense value are added to the static value he chose. (Cover has been clarified in the errata to reflect this.) -E.
  20. Love this program, and we use it all the time in our campaigns. However, lately, Norton Anti-Virus keeps flagging it as unsafe, and removes several files from it the moment I install it. :/ -E.
  21. I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, and if I've missed something in the rules, but when it comes to tractor beams in the game, the rules really don't take into account the sizes of the ships involved, do they? So a Firespray with a very small tractor beam could in theory slow down and stop a Star Destroyer. I'm sure I've misread something, as this sounds completely bonkers. Any thoughts? -E.
  22. Very nice! However, in Force & Destiny, the Lightsaber skill can change what characteristic it is based on, depending on your speciality. Can this be supported by this sheet, in some way? -Eirik
  23. So, this has come up several times in our campaigns, and I would like the forum's thoughts on it. So, when can one spend Advantages and Threats on bonuses or penalties on the combat table? Some argue that these can be used with Advantages/Threats generated by any skill check, as long as it is in combat. Others argue that these can only be used on actual Combat Checks (using a combat skill to attack). In the first point of view, Coercion could be, for example, used in combat to give an enemy Setback dice, without the need for any Talents. In the other point of view, combat is more rigid, and Setback dice could only be inflicted on an enemy as the result of an attack. To me, the first alternative is way to loose, and the other is a bit rigid. What do you guys think? -Eirik
  24. Well, the issue that keeps coming up is using non-combat skills IN combat, and then using that Spending Advantages in Combat table for the result. How are you guys handling it in your campaigns? E.
  25. Reading over the rules for combat, especially Peform a Skill Check, Perform a Combat Check og Use a Talents, there seems litte doubt that you can't for example use a Triumph from a Persuasion check to have that bounty hunter firing at you put down his weapon. Combat Checks are for Combat Skills and they are the only skills that can use generated Advantages on that Combat Table. This is how I read it. E.
×