Jump to content

MaddockKrug

Members
  • Content Count

    203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MaddockKrug

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Salzgitter, Lower Saxony, Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No, of course not. However I have found that I work better that way. It is just a weird habit I guess... Yes, makes sense. I think having templates will aid you a lot. So I don't question the method as such.
  2. Hi. Do you really need a template in order to write down your ideas? The GM Holocron idea struck me so hard that I have started my own thread on the O66 forums, in which I toss in ideas for NPCs, locations, adventure hooks and adventure-superstructures on a more or less regular basis. And I don't use any template at all. I just keep writing. Best wishes! Mad
  3. Pure dedication displayed in magnificent work! Just awesome. Nothing else to say there! Best wishes! Mad
  4. I'd like to play a game that way, but from my experience Pbem can be time-consuming to a certain degree; so I wonder if it is OK if I may just "watch" and read. I enjoy other gamers' ideas a lot.
  5. I see I'm not the only who thinks about mining in space. I don't know if its minecraft or EVE or what....but mining always ends up in our games somehow. Not sure about MineCraft, but certainly EVE - EVE is either about pewpewing and being a d*ck (enjoying the game IG TIME) OR mining and building cool stuff and selling cool stuff.
  6. Hi. My bad - haven't payed close attention and thus have not understood this question is based on the beta. Yes, in that case I agree: no rules for this specific situation, therefore no reason to 'trick' the system. Maybe narratives alow forsomething based on the situation, but then this should not be used to create a generell rule ... Best wishes! Mad
  7. Ranged (light). CRB pg 122Weapons table CRB pg 160
  8. Hello. Light ranged weapons are those that can generally be wielded in one hand, ... Heavy ranged weapons are those that generally must be wielded in or directed with both hands, ... Melee weapons can be either one- or two-handed, ... (SW EotE CRB pg 154) Gaffi sticks require two hands to wield. (SW EotE CRB pg 166) A Vibro-ax requires two hands to wield. (SW EotE CRB pg 167) These are the only two melee weapons with a specific "handedness"-mentioning; any other melee weapon has no such entry in the description. The weapon-table on SW EotE CRB pg 161 offers no extra-data. And the generall descritption for melee weapons indicates nothing special about what might happen, if you use a one-hand weapon two-handedly. And in the combat-section of the book I have found no advice about how to handle such a situation either. I have not found the line you, BradPlogsted, have quoted. Where is it? What would I do? 1. I would look at the pictures of the weapon and ask myself: Would such a weapon be reasonably wielded in only one hand (like the combat knife) or more liekly in two hands (light sabre) or something inbetween (vibrosword)? 2. If it is a one hand weapon based on my reasoning, I would then ask: would it be possible that this weapon could be used with two hands, and that in a way that based on the circumstances with a reasonable benefit ? (combat/vibroknife: no, truncheon: maybe, virbosword:yes) 3. How would this benefit look like? "Apply more force to his blows" - sounds like more damage - like what? +2 damage per net-success or +1 extra damage per 2 advantages, maybe reducing the number of advantages by 1 in order to create a critical injury, or maybe generally adding an extra 1/2 of the brawn characteristics (rounded down) to the damage? I guess I would discuss this with the gamers at the table, how we would like to handle this - on a circumstantial basis or as a general (house-)rule applicable for the players' characters as well as their opponents ... Best wishes! Mad
  9. OT: You may recognize that I have "liked" most of your postings. This does not necessarily mean that I share each opinion, although this is trues for most thoughts shared; my "likes" are more about liking each (valuable) of your contributions to this topic and the questions I have raised. I enjoy everyone's opinion. Best wishes! Mad
  10. Hello everyone, today I have watched a documentary on the Star Wars Saga on the European TV brodcasting service "arte". In this documentary Episodes I through VI have been compared with classic literature (Greece Literature, Shakespearean plays, epic poetry), historical events (Roman Empire, Era of Napoleon, German Third Reich, other Dictatorships), Genres (Wild West, pulp adventures, Romantic Horror (especially Frankenstein)), and religious sources (especially texts from the old testament, and secondary religious texts about the Fallen Angel). And this documentary was very awesome. Although I have some trouble believing or accepting that George Lucas had all these resources or sources in mind when he has developed and created Star Wars, I admit that there are plenty of parallels and references available - or at least "you may see them". The bottomline of the documentary is that Star Wars is today's epic tale which is on par with the Greece Tragedy from the old ages, the tales from medieval times up to what Shakespeare's Tales were supposed to be in their times. And I am willing to accept this easily. What's your take on this conclusion? Best wishes! Mad
  11. Hello. I humbly ask for you accepting me to use this as my signature on this forum ... Best wishes! Mad
  12. I interpret the last line on p210 "Finally, he determines his target" to imply you're only going for one target. Plus, here are some other things to consider... *each weapon can only attack one target (damage multiple, yes; attack multiple, no) *you must declare which target you're attacking *different targets could have different ranges or setbacks (ie cover or prone), creating a different dice pool for each *you can only activate the use of the second weapon if the initial declared attack succeeds and generates enough advantage *the second weapon (if successfully activated) is considered an automatic hit If you were able to automatically hit a second target based on the attack results against a first target, I think that would open too much possibilty for loopholes. If the first target is standing in the open and rolled threat his previous turn (giving a +1 boost to whoever attacks him next) and is hit, you could auto hit his buddy with the second weapon even though he has generated no threat and is prone (no boost, +1 setback). While the range and difficulty would be the same, the boost/setback dice +/- 1 can really change the outcome. However, I guess the other way of thinking about it would be if you're using two ranged weapons, firing both could be seen as an autofire attack with one weapon. Autofire can damage others around a target. I guess yet another way of thinking about it could be that when the CRB says "more difficult" or "higher/highest difficulty" in reference to attacking a target, it could be implying that you should consider not only the range and weapon difficulty, but also the boost/setback inclusion towards a target as well. In which case, when using autofire with the intent of hitting multiple targets, you always need to attack the target least likely to be hit (with most difficulty and setback / least boost) - and that theory could also transfer to hitting multiple targets with a multiple weapon attack. All that long-winded description in mind... Just say it's GM's choice. It would be real easy to say "yes" or "yes, but," especially if a player wants to damage multiple targets and goes for the more difficult to hit as the primary target. Just ... WOW! This is very interesting and a revelation about the complexity of this game ...
  13. Hi. I understand the rules of two-weapon combat in that way that the only limitation is this: each weapon must be of such a built that it can be reasonably used with a single hand - thus you may combine a melee weapon and a Ranged(light) weapon. The drawbacks are more seriois, though, than what you have with two somewhat identical or similar weapons, because instead of dificulty +1 you have difficuilty +2, and the worse skill ranks and characteristics of the involved skills get applied. Kind of challenging would be the question: would it be possible to strike an engaged target while simultaneously shooting another one within short or medium range?
  14. Thank you and all of you verifying my maths and rules-application. As for the Accuracy 2 I have just quoted the orighinal question. The major concern of the original poster on the O66Podcast was that the two-weapon combat method would totally neglect the Accuracy available for only one of the two weapons. He has thought this because he understood the two-weapon combat in that way that the dice-pool was based on the weapon with the lesser chance of successfully hitting. But I told him that two weapon combat is based on skill and characteristics, and not one weapon qualities. To cut things short: I did not double-check, if it is possible to give a Ranged(light) weapon an Accuracy of 2. To me this looks like D&Ding SWEotE ... aka minmaxing ... Best wishes! Mad
×
×
  • Create New...