Jump to content

Joker Two

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Joker Two

  1. It means that Devastator is meant more as a tank. You throw it up forward to attract enemy firepower, discard all of your tokens after attacks, then unload punishing volleys. At speed with 2 banks on the first turn, your front arc is going to interdict a very nasty zone of the board ! It doesn't give you extra dice when you discard them, it gives you extra dice as long as you have discarded them. Every bow attack for the whole game. So more along what Moffzen said.
  2. I also contest your asssertion about required ship counts. The top table in the final round at a tournament at FFG a couple weeks ago was 2 Vics and 9 TIE Bombers against an Assault Frigate and a Nebulon-B with 7 mixed Rebel squadrons. I don't think either of them won, because they fought to a draw that game and someone else jumped ahead by a point or two, but the Imperial player had spent the whole day up there.
  3. As of Force and Destiny they are; text in the "Lightsaber" section of the armory. Doesn't invalidate your point, though, there's a fair number of examples of non-Force-Sensitive lightsaber wielders in the EU, and a couple of instances in the new canon. It's also possible in the RPG, a non-F-S can still take a spec from a F&D career that grants Lightsaber as a career skill, and then train ranks as normal. Hmm, that's an interesting character concept. As for House Rules, I do a 5x personal/vehicular scale conversion for damage, rounding down. Gives personal scale a chance at least, albeit a minor one. Also require a Fly maneuver from the pilot of an air- or spacecraft every round, but combine that with Gain the Advantage. More of an actual dogfight that way. Oh, and Stimpacks inflict a Strain on the person they are applied to.
  4. You've got a point about Tallon, but unless he's on a ship with Squadron 1 you're either wasting some of your orders or activating a few other ships too. You paid for Rogue, (hopefully quite a bit, since it seems very powerful) so whenever you activate them with commands you're wasting that investment. There are definitely times you'd want to, I agree. A couple of Rogues alongside conventional squadrons could be a good finisher.
  5. I'm a little torn between Melee and Brawl myself. It'd be a lot easier if there was a published bayonet, but there isn't (bayonets are pretty grim for the official presentation of the Star Wars universe). A bayonet fight is awfully close to a grapple in some ways. The same is true of many other aspects of close-combat though; I've got some experience with armored swordsmanship and frankly the only reason that doesn't devolve into a grapple is because we don't want anyone to actually get hurt. I decided on Melee when I realized that every published Brawl weapon leaves the hands free to grab, while even Improvised Weapons still use the Melee skill (they're in the Combat section of the rulebook). You're right, if you deconstruct it too far a lot of things start to break down.
  6. Ha! I knew I wasn't the only one on here. As to Lightsabers, I go with a middle route. You can't buy ranks in Lightsaber unless you're a F&D career. If a Despair comes up, I probably won't have you cut yourself, but I reserve the right to do so, and the likelihood of me invoking that right is inversely proportional to how cinematic and plot-relevant your action is. Pick up your fallen mentor's lightsaber and Despair while facing down the Dragon? I'll do something to the terrain or maybe have him knock it out of your hand. Juggle it to impress that cute Rodian dancing girl (or boy)? Someone's waking up in a bacta tank and you'd better hope it's you... EDIT: I guess censorship disapproves of synonyms of "pick up" that imply rapidity.
  7. Of course it would be to his advantage to use the Lightsaber skill, for all of the reasons you listed above, but that doesn't mean it fits. The relevant skill is not determined by the primary striking surface of the weapon. A number of Brawl weapons are blades or even blasters, but they use that skill because they complement unarmed fighting techniques and leave the hands free to grapple. Ranged - Light is used for one-handed weapons, whether fired or thrown, while Ranged - Heavy covers two-handed weapons and Gunnery is for heavy weapons that are operated rather than wielded; none of these distinguish between the type of projectile involved. Every single published weapon that is used with the lightsaber skill is a light, streamlined weapon with minimal physical components and a massless striking surface. Even the lightsaber pike, the only lightsaber with a physical haft of any significant length, is made of super-metals that are both lightsaber-resistant and incredibly light; other than its length it shares none of the vulnerabilities or potential drawbacks of conventional polearms. All of these features mean that the weapons that currently use the Lightsaber skill have distinct handling characteristics unique to their grouping, namely the ability to be wielded with an incredible amount of manual dexterity regardless of the physical strength of the user. They also mean that the lightsaber can be used in ways that other weapons simply cannot. A lightsaber bayonet, while attached to a ranged weapon, would share few of the handling characteristics of a lightsaber. The physical body of the rifle has much more mass than any lightsaber hilt, and the inertia of that alone would impair the handling of the weapon as a whole. Furthermore, that mass would not be distributed in the symmetrical manner of a lightsaber pike or even a conventional polearm, as the various components of the weapon are attached in different directions at different angles, unbalancing the weapon and offering a number of protrusions to catch up the wielder. There is also the issue of the construction of the rifle itself; the components that make up the majority of the rifle-bayonet combination are not exactly intended to be part of an impact weapon and are certainly not capable of resisting blaster fire or weapon strikes like a lightsaber is. All of these aspects together suggest that in terms of handling characteristics and fighting styles, a mounted lightsaber-bayonet has almost nothing in common with a traditionally-wielded lightsaber. Finally, there is the issue of the various forms of lightsaber combat. These techniques were developed specifically for use with traditional lightsabers to take advantage of their unique characteristics in comparison with conventional melee weapons, and are practiced in an almost ritualized way by the few lightsaber-wielders in the galaxy. As I have demonstrated above, a lightsaber-bayonet has much more with any number of metal-bladed weapons that make use of the Melee skill than a lightsaber. Now, everything I have said only applies to a shoto while it is mounted as a bayonet. Once removed, it could be wielded like any other lightsaber, and would certainly use Lightsaber skill and the various lightsaber forms as normal.
  8. Falcon's supposed to be a century old, Z-95s and Firesprays both predate the Empire as well. Not sure about HWK-290s or YV-666. The TIEs and alphabet soup are all Civil War-era onwards (with the sole exception of the Y-Wing).
  9. Why not just increase the rate of XP gain? The cost of some talents isn't represented solely by their listed XP, it's in the route you have to take. Some very powerful talents are in the early or middle rows, but are on isolated branches.
  10. I'll have one in my alphabet soup, he either hangs back and then darts out to lock down enemy Bombers at a critical point, or I commit him against the enemy's main fighter force so that the rest of my squadrons can chew on ships uninterrupted for a round.
  11. Colonist (Politico) or Explorer (Trader), (although if we had AoR at the time the latter probably would have been Ambassador [Quartermaster]). Stat-wise? Presence obviously, and a mix of Intellect and Willpower. A fairly amount of early talents too. Not sure what exactly, they mostly handle their own sheets. Frankly, I don't care too much about maximizing a specific character's potential. Five years of WH40kRPG wore me out on that. I try to run long-term campaigns, and maxing out a character's specialty early-on is detrimental to both their own enjoyment and the party's balance. I encourage players to spread out their characteristics, it's something of an unspoken rule for us that the only characters who should increase any characteristic more than once at creation are Droids. Come up with a cool personality, tell a story, have some fun. In one campaign I've got a deadly assassin droid searching the galaxy for love, a delusional Bothan clerk moonlighting as a vigilante cop, and a Drall whose criminal ambitions are only matched by his queasiness at the sight of blood! While they've each got some serious ability in a certain field, that's not the focus of their character, and the most enjoyable moments are when they dive headlong into things their stats say they shouldn't touch with a 3.05-meter staff. You're right, it is kinda hard to compare Droids to other species creation-wise, a lot of their stuff is just totally different. I only thought of the Gand comparison myself because a droid PC tried to space one last week. Yeah, I also tend to run combat-light campaigns, but I do a pretty poor job of tying in the environment, or at least the atmosphere. Terrain and weather I do regularly, and gravity I've done although I usually choose not to. In that situation, yes, it makes sense that I (and my players) would value those Sorry to all for the series of replies instead of just one. They all came in as I was replying to the last one. Thanks you, though, for the comprehensive replies. Color me convinced. Yay, another one! Have you made the characters prepare their food yet? I did that once when they were on a long hyperspace journey to see how well their stocks would last and how much strain they'd take from hunger and frustration. We actually changed someone's mind...on the internet? Glad we could help!
  12. In order: I've GM'ed something close to 40 PCs from creation on up, at least 30 different players in 6 different campaigns. Every single starting party had at least one droid, usually a combat specialist who easily outperforms everyone else in its chosen field. While their capabilities outside that field are limited, it's a lot more fun for everyone than you might expect. And while the occasional protocol droids isn't good in a straight-up fight, it's also clearly a noncombatant and can cause a lot of trouble behind the NPCs backs. You're probably right that larger parties allow for more specialization. In purely mechanical terms? Those are easily bottom-row talents or even Signature Ability-level effects. Constant near total immunity to anything other than direct combat damage. The only other thing in the game that comes close is a Gand, and that's a 10-point difference for atmosphere alone. This may be because of different styles of GMing; I mostly run fringer or civilian campaigns, so combat is scarce. I also try to tie in the environment whenever possible, make it more immersive, so terrain, weather, gravity, etc. all are involved. The aversion to openly-displayed cybernetics is part of Star Wars lore, especially so towards people who intentionally "upgrade" themselves. Sort of a "losing your humanity" kind of thing. Edit: Also, droids are most often considered property. As such, unless they draw attention for some reason (a combat droid's armament) they'll often be overlooked, which lets them get away with an awful lot. Droid self-repair is RAW, in the healing section. Edit: I see someone else got there first.
  13. A token and a dial both resolve the command. Unless a card specifies one or the other, either or both can be used. The command still goes off normally unless the card specifically says otherwise (i.e. Nav Team gives you the choice of yaw instead of changing speed). The command symbol followed by text just means "Whenever you resolve this command, the following happens:" For Yavaris, it's [When you resolve a Squadron command]: Each squadron you activate can attack twice if it does not move. Emphasis mine to clarify the point. When you are resolving a squadron command, each squadron that you activate can choose to attack twice if it does not move. So yes, some may double-tap while others move and shoot (or shoot and move).
  14. I ran up against a very successful use of it in conjunction with character X-Wings to tarpit and eventually destroy many of my fighters. I knew exactly what it did, but Distance 1 is a decent area, so he sent his squadrons out with a command and then moved the ship up to follow them. I still won, but it neutered by squadrons for most of the game. It also makes both squadrons and ship essentially immune to any squadron other than Major Rhymer, which is kind of a big deal since only one faction can take him. It doesn't suit my playstyle, though (frankly Assault Frigates as a whole don't). It may be worth it to not use character squadrons in conjunction with it; generics will at least take some damage so your opponent may be more willing to attack, whereas characters will usually mitigate it entirely and be seen as invulnerable.
  15. "Special Abilities: Droids do not need to eat sleep, or breathe, and are unaffected by toxins and poisons... Mechanical Being: Droids...cannot be affected by mind-affecting Force Powers." If that is not the great equalizer for any combination of characteristics and skills, I don't know what is. In a science fantasy setting, with spaceships and poisonous atmospheres and deadly assassins and psychic wizards, droids have the single most gameplay-altering ability in the rules. There is so much a Droid can do that any other species would need extensive gear to attempt to replicate, and some things nothing else can replicate at all.
  16. You're welcome, glad to help! Was more worried that he's trying to "pull one over" on you, actually. I'm not a big fan of secrecy about the general premise of a campaign; way too many ways for that to go wrong. Game Master (or GM) is the usual term, although I've been called Galaxy Master and even God Man once or twice! As far as Force Powers go, Sense is always a good investment, and Enhance might be helpful. Neither of them are very flashy, and you can include them without the character being aware they're F-S at first, just thinking they're "lucky".
  17. What everyone said above. I'm just going to give an example of character advancement to make sure the difference between careers and specializations is clear, because that's what's important. Initial Creation - Character chooses Career; treats relevant skills as Career skills (getting ranks in some of them) and acquires Talents - Character chooses first Specialization within that Career, treats relevant skills as Career skills (getting ranks in some of them) and acquires Talents Further Advancement - Character may choose additional Specializations. When they do so, they treat the relevant skills for that Specialization as Career skills (but do not automatically gain ranks in them) and gain the relevant Talents. The Career that Specialization belonged to is ignored entirely, except that if it matches the Character's Career (or is Universal) for XP costs. There is no way to acquire a new Career. Here's an exhaustive walkthrough: - Character is created as Bounty Hunter. Treats Skills from Bounty Hunter as Career and gets ranks in some of them. Gains access to Bounty Hunter Signature Abilities. - Character chooses first specialization from available Bounty Hunter Specializations. - Character is created as Gadgeteer. Treats Skills from Gadgeteer as Career and gets ranks in some of them. Character is Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer) - Character acquires the Assassin specialization, which is part of the Bounty Hunter career. Treats skills from Assassin as Career. Character is now Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer, Assassin) - Character acquires the Doctor specialization, which is part of the Colonist career. Treats skills from Doctor only as Career. Does not treat skills from Colonist as Career, and does not gain access to Colonist Signature Abilities. Character is now Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer, Assassin, Doctor) - Character acquires the Driver specialization, which is part of the Explorer and Ace careers. Treats skills from Driver only as Career. Does not treat skills from Explorer or Ace as Career, or gain access to their Signature Abilities. Character is now Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer, Assassin, Doctor, Driver) - Character acquires the Force-Sensitive Emergent specialization, which is a universal specialization. Gains Force Rating 1 Talent. Character is now Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer, Assassin, Doctor, Driver, Force-Sensitive Emergent) - Character acquires the Starfighter Ace specialization, which is part of the Warrior career. Treats skills from Starfighter Ace only as Career. Does not treat skills from Warrior as Career, gain its talent, or gain access to its Signature Abilities. Character is now Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer, Assassin, Doctor, Driver, Force-Sensitive Emergent, Starfighter Ace) Note that the character is not a Colonist, Explorer, Ace, or Warrior, only a Bounty Hunter. That was probably excessive, but it's a very important distinction and I wanted to make sure it was conveyed.
  18. Haha, look up some of the side stories about him, you aren't too far off! Kept trying to clean up but fell right back into it every couple of years. I think he was actually in treatment on Alderaan when it was destroyed. As to the original question; I'm in favor of a gradual wear-off, with the deception not discovered unless something else brings it back up. Otherwise the public at large would know a lot more about the Jedi, and be a lot less happy about them. Some of the later Legends stuff goes into this actually; the more the New Jedi Order intervenes, the more people know about Jedi, and the less they like 'em.
  19. I'll go one further. From what we've seen of the Rogue keyword, I'm convinced that it's a trap! Now, don't get me wrong, an independent move and attack is quite powerful. There are certainly some very good uses for that ability, and hopefully it will be appropriately expensive. To get full use out of that ability (frankly, any use at all), you need to avoid activating those squadrons with Squadron commands. While that seems like what so many people have been looking for, it's also a serious drawback. Firstly, there's the matter of timing. In a battle between two fleets with squadrons, the one that uses Squadron commands will activate first. Not just some of its fighters, but potentially all of them. They will get into position and deliver their attacks against an enemy who cannot respond until it is too late. Rogue squadrons will be locked down by their conventional counterparts in unfavorable engagements, while enemy Bombers will be able to launch their strikes uncontested. If the player does devote Squadron commands to Rogue squadrons to prevent this, they will be negating the abilities they've already paid for and fighting at a much lower level of efficiency. Similarly, each Rogue squadron will be fighting on its own. Without activation by a Squadron command, it cannot benefit from any of the powerful upgrades currently available. No Yavaris double-taps or Corrupter speed-runs, no Tallon rolls or Chiraneau shenanigans, no avalanches of blue dice from Flight Controllers, and who knows what else is coming. It can still be activated by Squadron commands to gain these benefits, but the same problem from before applies. You've already paid for Rogue and are not using it. If you do use it, you don't get any of the other Squadron-related benefits you may have also paid for. Even character squadrons that buff their nearby allies will have limited effect; they would have to be moved into position beforehand, exposing them and telegraphing your Rogue squadons' future location, and then survive until your Rogues activate much later. Rogue will make it easier for many players to include squadrons in their fleets, but the power of those squadrons will be additive, while the existing squadron synergies are multiplicative. Intel, on the other hand, fits much more closely into the existing squadron framework and will allow dedicated squadron forces to bypass the token fighter screens many people field to deter Bombers. In short, Rogue makes it easy to get something out of your squadrons (which has frustrated many people so far) but Intel will make it possible for a skilled player to get everything out of them.
  20. Yup. Rungok hasn't said much about what kind of campaign this is (and it sounds like they don't know too much if the GM is being so secretive). Being a force-sensitive or a force-user in no way obligates one to be a Jedi and/or use a lightsaber; that does seem to be the common expectation though (and my guess is the overwhelming majority of actual Jedi have a lightsaber, regardless of their skill with it). Rungok, you might want to run your soldier-with-the-Force idea past the GM just in case their planned story is something meant more for movie-style Jedi (I've got a bad feeling about this "super-secret-must-be-a-Force-User-story" thing). The character and weapon (and the style of fighting that implies) wouldn't fit in very well with a more traditional Jedi plot, and could easily rub some people the wrong way. As to how to represent a lightsaber-bayonet in the rules, there aren't any melee-weapon attachments for ranged weapons in any of the books I have (and I have all of the combat-oriented ones). The under-barrel ranged weapons from the AoR Core and Hired Guns point to them being pretty much a straight translation of their standalone versions. I'd recommend something pretty close to OfficerVan's "Bayonet Ring", although I'd suggest it being a "Bayonet Lug" and being an attachment for the ranged weapon (Ranged-Heavy only) instead. For the weapon's profile, just take a shoto add that it's two-handed, apply any Cumbersome quality the weapon it's mounted on has, and ignore any "hilt" attachments (Duellist, Balanced, Personalized-Superior, etc) to the lightsaber while it's mounted. Perhaps adding Defensive 1 as a modification to the attachment to represent reinforcing the rifle itself so that it's sturdy enough to be used to block attacks. If the Sunder quality is triggered against it, it should affect both weapons. As I said before, when wielded as an attachment for a rifle the skill to use it should be Melee, not Lightsaber, and it shouldn't benefit from Lightsaber-specific talents; you simply can't do a lot of things that make lightsaber fighting special with a rifle sticking off the hilt.
  21. Oh man, now that's a cool idea. I'm gonna gather up my books and get back to you. Initial thoughts: 1: It's kinda lame the GM's making you be a F-S. Plot? Snot. There's plenty of ways to work around it, and having someone who isn't part of the Mystic Mob thrown into the mix makes for more interesting contrast. Oh well. 2: Now onto the weapon. I think a Shoto is the right way to go here. Except it really shouldn't use the Lightsaber skill when attached as a bayonet. Few, if any, of the aspects of a traditional lightsaber that make it such a different weapon come into play. The mass of the rifle and its cumbersome aspects (not the trait, just a description) means you can't pull off the kind of whirling flippy-tricks that lightsaber duellists can. Furthermore, most of your weapon is not invulnerable like a lightsaber is. Bayonet fighting isn't just the pointy end, it's the whole thing, and frankly resembles what Brawl would be used for almost as much as Melee. The same thing could be said for knives, of course. So anyway, Melee is the skill to use. I'll elaborate more on this later if you want.
  22. First off, a vessel's Handling only applies to Piloting checks, not Gunnery. That alone looks like it contributed heavily to your result. Secondly, I will agree that the existing pilot rules are lackluster. For what it's worth, the rules for chase scenes at least are solid, and allow characters to put their Pilot skill and talents to use. A dogfight in open space is pretty similar to a firefight in an empty parking lot; the only useful thing to do is shoot and that makes everyone bored and dead. I use some house rules and would be happy to elaborate on them, but I'm not sure that's what you're looking for. Finally, just like with personal combat, exceeding a vessel's Hull Trauma threshhold does not mean it is instantly destroyed and the characters on board perish. Like personal combat, it depends on whether the ship is crewed by Minions, Adversaries, Nemeses, or Player Characters. Turning random TIEs into fireballs is perfectly fine, but there's much more flexibility for PCs and major NPCs. The ship takes a Critical Hit when it exceeds its threshhold, and is disabled so none of its major systems work Only incredibly high critical hit results (140s-150s) will actually destroy the ship outright, and even then it is perfectly acceptable to have characters survive with critical injuries of their own. Repairs can still be attempted, characters can survive inside or escape. An Imperial capital ship may come to capture them, or scavengers may rescue them in exchange for their ship. Maybe the crippled hull falls back into the planet's atmosphere, and the PCs have to struggle to hold it together long enough to survive the crash. The Star Wars RPG rules do result in combatants (whether personal or vehicular) being incapacitated relatively quickly compared to most other mainstream RPGs. Death, however, is much harder to come by and is mostly a matter of plot. Personally, I think both of these are good things; the former keeps combat quick and emphasizes tactics over attrition, while the latter keeps players engaged and strengthens the story.
  23. As a primarily Rebel player, I had my bomber wing get completely worked over by the point-defense of a pair of Gladiator IIs and a Victory I Dominator in a recent game (if you read this, you know who you are ). Worst squadron casualties I've ever taken. On the other hand, his ships got hammered in return. The only reason to consider a Gladiator II is for the anti-squadron firepower. One red die is not worth it; It'll whiff almost half the time (remember the accuracy result is useless without other dice in the pool) and at close range a black die beats it both on maximum damage and consistency. You're already paying for all those black dice, you shouldn't pay more for a reason to stay back and not use them. Opening Salvo is more useful the larger a pool you already have, to the point where I will happily hold my fire entirely for a better shot.
  24. I'd say a big part of it depends on whether or not they're using their Force powers to do it. I might give Conflict for an assassination, but the only time I'd do it for military sniping is if the target was unsuspectingly engaged in some mundane activity the character might empathize with (i.e., if they shoot someone taking a bathroom break, or while showing a buddy a holo of their kids, or who is a noncombatant like a medic or injured being). On the other hand, if the PC is actively using their Force powers to assist with the shot, or even to lull the target into a false sense of security, I'd almost certainly give Conflict for that. Especially if Force Power: Influence was involved, since they'd have touched the target's mind just before killing them. Good point, as well. I generally try to take my own advice and use the Morality/Conflict systems as guidelines. Sniping random strangers for fun and profit? Conflict and a lot of it. Sniping an Imperial governor who's terrorizing the populace? Probably Conflict, but not a lot. Of course, unless I'm way off, the Alliance doesn't generally condone assassination as it can hurt their cause if painted as terrorism. That's a different argument, though. Man, I love the themes in Star Wars! Yeah, in a lot of cases it's not that they wouldn't like to; there's some pretty monstrous Moffs out there. But they need the support of the galaxy's populace, and with the capabilities of Star Wars technology there's a fine line between interstellar guerrilla warfare and galactic terrorism.
  • Create New...