Jump to content

Glororhan

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Glororhan

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Northampton, Massachusetts, United States
  1. Even requiring two advantages, auto-fire is pretty bananas in terms of raw damage output vs a single target. I think a simple fix is to only allow it to be used to hit multiple targets, so no stacking multiple hits on one target. So an autofire weapon is really good at taking down or damaging multiple targets, but not particular good for focused fire. That makes higher damage non-autofire weapons more attractive if you're just trying to take one person down or harm high soak individuals.
  2. I feel I try to play fairly competitively when it comes to making killer builds and trying to make the best moves possible. However, where I am a lot more casual is forgiving silly mistakes, as I'd prefer superior tactics and strategy to be the deciding factor in a win. If someone forgets to take a focus action or accidentally sets a move on their dial they clearly didn't intend to make, I am fine letting that sort of thing slide. Truthfully, I make enough of those mistakes myself that I appreciate the good will . Of course, there is no excuse for just being a bad sport even if you play ultra by the book.
  3. Doesn't he lose his free boost when you use PTL? So without a stress reliever, he's in pretty bad shape, right?
  4. I call any build with Wedge and some unnamed pilots in it "Eat your Wedgetables". Because it really is time.
  5. My assumption for turrets is that each can be either manned by someone, in which case they get 360 degree fire, or fired by the pilot or co-pilot, in which case they are locked forward. Again, this is just something I made up but that seems to fit the movies and lore . As for the question of why someone adding weapons wouldn't just ALWAYS add a turret, I do the following in my games: -No missile turrets. Maybe there are some examples of specific ships with these, but they seem a little too silly. -Silhoutte 4 ships and below can only have two turrets, one at the top of the vessel and one at the bottom, as my assumption is that they don't have room for more turrets!
  6. Agreed with most posters, the X-Wing shouldn't be so obviously better than all other starships that you'd never want to fly anything else. I think going down to armor 3 or 4 would accomplish this pretty well. Also, I'm fine with the X-Wing being the default choice that is a little more powerful than most ships, but I shouldn't feel like an idiot for wanting to fly something else.
  7. The way I have been running it is that only the pilot, copilot, and "gunner" crew can fire a ship's weapons. The exception are turrets, which I assume have their own stations, a la The Millennium Falcon. However, I recognize this is a fairly arbitrary distinction.
  8. Frankly, all the careers feel very similar to edge of the empire counterpoints, with only a few unique talents (like incite rebellion). It is kind of weird. It also creates some annoying consequences if you let players branch out into both since ANY build can hyper specialize this way. For example, I have a trader in my group who pointed put he could pick up two more ranks in wheel and deal by picking up another career from rebellion, making him even more godly at selling legal goods. As things stand they are so similar I probably won't allow mixing the careers from both books in my games. Mostly the sameness is annoying when making a new character. The GM in one of my games said we could switch over to Rebellion characters using the same XP we'd already earned and I was dissapointed to see that options mechanically were nearly identical to edge of the empire.
  9. Hmm, wookipedia says they were created to defend heavier slowly moving fighters, such as X-Wings and Y-Wings. The initial impetus for their creation was how close a few TIE Fighters came to causing a defeat at the battle of having due to their superior speed. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/RZ-1_A-wing_interceptor
  10. Speed 2 is very slow for an imperial star destroyer. Didn't Han brag about being able to outrun these like it was kind of a big deal? If so, shouldn't they be at least as fast as a stock YT-1300?
  11. The A-Wing seems awfully fragile. The X-Wing can take 4-5 hits from a TIE fighter, but the A-Wing is blown apart after only 1-2 hits! The rebel craft should all be designed so that PCs can feel bad-ass flying them. As it is, it's hard to imagine a PC stepping into one of these deathtraps. Even the sensor jammer doesn't help protect against other silhouette 3 ships, which I believe is what interceptors generally are supposed to go up against. To make matters worse, they cost even more than an X-Wing, which seems pretty hard to justify.
  12. Oh, good idea about upgrading the check instead of increasing the difficulty. At the very least, I think that makes a lot of sense after difficulty 5 (normal max difficulty). Some of the mods, such as the hanger bay, go up to 5 mods of the same type, which would mean 7 difficulty dice for the final mod!
  13. To each their own, I'd say. My players don't really see my house rules rule as a penalties, as they like not feeling pressured to focus on soak to be as effective as possible in combat. And the one melee guy in my group really likes being able to lock people down in melee (plus he still has a ton of HP) so it works out pretty well, especially since everyone knew the house rules during character creation, so they went in with eyes wide open. And I'm happy for combat to feel a little deadlier (for both sides).
  14. My house rule is to cap soak from Brawn at 2, so even someone with a brawn of 6 or 7 only has a soak of 2 from brawn. A bit draconian, yes, but I think it makes things a little less silly; after all, it doesn't seem like being super strong and tough would make you nearly invulnerable to most small arms fire (certainly doesn't help much in real life). I've also house ruled that Enduring doesn't stack with itself. So people who already have enduring can skip that entry in the talent tree, which I believe is already a rule for talents that don't stack with each other. To make up for house ruling brawn, I've given melee combatants a free attack (a la d&d opportunity attack) against people trying to move out of engaged range with them (unless they spend their action moving out of the way, in which case they can't make an attack).
  15. Yeah, I think damage is pretty reasonable in this game for most builds. For really high soak builds (high brawn + talents), the damage is actually pretty low, but that's a problem with high soak builds more than the damage. Also, it's worth noting that blaster pistols take quite a bit more hits to take a PC down against an armored PC with average brawn. In fact, in my game I boost all blaster pistol damage by 1 to make them a little more deadly. Even a standard blaster rifle might take 3 hits to take down a PC. Finally, stimpacks are a very useful tool for giving PCs added survivability, since their liberal use can easily make up for a couple hits.
×
×
  • Create New...