Jump to content

GameboyAK

Members
  • Content Count

    144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GameboyAK

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

194 profile views
  1. To me, I would apply it for both. Because someone else messing up doesn't allow for you to push your body any harder than you could naturally. With that, I still rule at my table that you cannot take more than two maneuvers in a round. But thats just my view, so you do you when it comes to something like this, but wording is key to balancing an item like this.
  2. I can see the argument for Slow Firing 2, and its a fair compromise. I just know in single combat (where this weapon shines), having it fired once every three rounds is pretty often for how powerful it can be on a relatively nimble opponent with any sort of extra movement (jetpack, rocket boots, force jump etc). To me, its a last resort or ace-in-the-hole tool, meant to get someone off balance to either gain a permanent edge or quickly end a fight, hence the SF 3. As for the threat, I think 3 is fine with defense ratings, talents, and additional setback, a melee attack attack generating that number is faidly common, as well as the fact that, yes, two can be used as a Maneuver (which you only get two of in a round) vs an incidental (which you can technically have an unlimited number of, and is more valuable at that rate as it allows more movement, talents, aiming etc). It just requires the player to actively use their talents to stack the dice in their favor, which they already should be. Not to mention, a Despair can already technically trigger this as well.
  3. I'm not sure how I feel about this weapon being short range rather than engaged. I've always seen it as a defensive option, but with it going out to short, I can see tons of offensive use with no penalty. There is a lot going on with this sort of weapon, which runs the risk of being overloaded (by which I mean a lot to remember at one time for both GM and player, which tends to get overlooked a lot in favor of simpler/straightforward equipment). So, lets trim the fat a bit to get to the core purpose. As shown in Rebels, it appears to primarily be a tool for two purposes. A) Put distance between two melee fighters to allow one to gain the upper hand temporarily or B) to put distance between the two fighters so one can use ranged weapons effectively. In comparison with the rest of the tools, I would personally say Slow Firing 2 would be the lowest I would go. Having 8t at Slow Firing 1 encourages spamming it in tandem with Concussive to prevent any sort of melee fighter of standing a chance without having the Hard Headed talent. SF 2 would allow the melee fighter against this to have a chance at counter play while still having it be a real threat, but I would up it to 3 personally just to allow a wider gap between uses. As for the actual disengagement mechanics, its gonna be tricky no matter what. I like what you've done for the most part and think that's probably the closest generally you can get without further playtesting. Here is my personal take: Repulsor Blast: (Custom) Vambrace Attachment: (Ranged [Light]; Damage - ; Critical - ; Range [Engaged]; Concussive 1, Disorient 3, Knockdown, Slow-Firing 3. 650/8. Spend 2 Advantage on Ranged [Light] to allow user to disengage from target as an incidental. This effect can also be triggered by spending 3 Threat from a melee attack targeting the user. A Triumph/Despair can also be used to activate Knockdown. On a completely unrelated note, for the actual vambraces, I might suggest including a special rule for Sunder where damaging the vambrace also damages all attached weapons one step.
  4. I would be inclined to say no, Vader was not the Sith'ari. He did not resurrect the Sith and make them stronger, instead just outright destroying them (temporarily). Palpatine is an easy argument for the Sith'ari, but I feel Bane is still probably the most ideal fitting of the description.
  5. This is probably this best way to go about this kind of issue with prices
  6. The 2 extra damage per success isn't enough to justify charging 5 concussion missiles per shot with this thing. This weapon can only be RAW fired at a single target, with a required 5 shot burst, whether it be a speeder bike or a walker. It being a Limited Ammo 2 also doesn't help, meaning you're spending 5000 credits to destroy one, maybe two targets, since the scaling of firing a single concussion missile from a launcher rather than the 5 from the pack doesn't really justify the cost/benefit difference
  7. Since I've been staring at vehicle grade concussion missiles for the past couple of days, and looking over the Arakyd profile, I would personally rule that the price for the Arakyd missiles is for a rack of 5. If it wasn't, every time you fired, whether you hit or not, would be 2500 credits down the drain at a base cost. I dont know how much money you plan on giving your players, but mine could never justify the cost vs benefit of such a weapon, especially when, damage wise, they're better off with using standard concussion missiles. However, I'd also rule these missilies are only compatible with the missile pack, as they have miniaturized patented tracking tech that allow them to be fired in clusters like they are.
  8. Pst... Bantha laser sight gives a free advantage and makes it that much easier to trigger dual wielding/any qualities. Good luck to ya!
  9. Might I recommend looking at some of the Spy specializations? I feel like there might be some fun things in there that might make this a more intriguing villain, even when just out of reach of the PCs
  10. I both agree and disagree with this statement. We as GMs have the power to make NPCs as we want to, with whatever talents are necessary to make the character capable in their respective fields. HOWEVER, I'm typically of the mind that NPCs should showcase the capabilities of what players can within a respective career, rather than just mashing a bunch of talents together. Using the specializations is a good way to get the core of a character down, flavor wise, and then adding various talents on top of that for what you need.
  11. And I can understand what you mean, but I mean more the "beam laser that is used to damage a capital ship in a more efficient/unique way to other weapons" theme rather than the concrete two-shotting a full health CR90
  12. I appreciate all the input, everyone. Makes little tasks like this far more enjoyable. That being said, I suppose now should be the time to clearly define the goal of this particular weapon. A) Overall game balance while coinciding with greater general lore B) Achieve flavor feel of what was shown on screen either narratively or mechanically depending upon A C) Make it a viable option outside the other two anti-capital ship weapons without making it a good choice for anti-starfighter combat With those in mind, let's get down to business.. to defeat the scum (sorry, I had to) After much deliberation, I have come to agree with the @P-47 Thunderbolt that the first draft has too much base damage, thanks to some loose testing with three grades of pilots. However, while we don't know exactly how this weapon functions (yet), I think it would be safe to assume that the bomb bay in the second pod is replaced with a reactor for this weapon (which begs the question, can power for this reactor be diverted to other areas of the ship?). This means that it has to choose its loadout prior to taking off, choosing between this weapon, proton torpedoes, proton bombs, or concussion missiles. Each weapon has a specific role, with concussion missiles being mult-role in fighting either starfighters or capital ships, proton bombs being designed for hard to breach surface targets, and proton torpedoes for raw destructive power that can be guided for harder to make shots. So what makes this weapon viable in comparison to the rest? Well, there's several ways we can look at it, but some number crunching is required. I like to divide things into Damage Per Round (DPR)(single success with no threat or advantages) and Potential Damage (PD)(Single success while activating any Linked/Autofire qualities in a single round) in a vacuum and then an ideal target for a ship of this class. Obviously this misses out on a lot of nuances, like shields and pilot skill, etc, but it gives a good baseline as it accounts for Slow Firing. Vacuum Concussion Missiles (Slow Firing 1, Linked 1): DPR - 3.5 / PD - 14 Proton Bombs (None): DPR - 8 / PD - 8 Proton Torpedoes (Slow Firing 1, Linked 1): DPR - 4.5 / PD - 16 This paints a pretty clear picture that Proton Bombs are designed to be more consistent and used in repeated strikes (as bombs should be) and twin missiles/torpedo launchers have more overall burst, requiring short strafes (which makes sense). Now for a target, I've chosen the already mentioned CR90, which has an Armor rating of 5. CR90 Corvette (Armor - 5) Concussion Missiles (Breach 4): DPR - 3 / PD - 12 Proton Bombs (Breach 8): No change Proton Torpedoes (Breach 6): No change Obviously, only the concussion missiles see any changes to their numbers as the Armor outclassed its Breach rating. We wont see anything change for any proton weapons until we look at a true cruiser, such as the MC80 Liberty Type Mon Cal Cruiser. MC80 Liberty Type (Armor - 9) Concussion Missiles: DPR - 1 / PD - 4 Proton Bombs: DPR - 7 / PD - 7 Proton Torpedoes: DPR - 1.5 / PD - 6 And with that, I think we have a pretty decent idea of what this composite beam weapon should be capable of in terms of keeping it in line with the rest of the weapon options, especially if we're going to be incorporating any sort of Auto Fire or Slow Firing. Any thoughts so far before I start getting too deep into Version 2?
  13. It is meant to simulate the look of a composite beam weapon. It also is present on the composite beam cannon of the Onager, which has Slow Firing 2. You're right in the fact we haven't seen a whole lot, but that's why it's a first draft. As for it being too powerful, I would like to point out that the standard complement of proton bombs is equal in damage to a heavy turbolaser, simply because of its ridiculously high breach rating, rather than just a high base damage. However, when I did make this without looking at the stats for a heavy turbolaser and may dial the damage back in favor of a higher Breach rating.
  14. First draft of beam weapon. Balancing in accordance to gameplay rules has not yet been fully taken into account, just an attempt to replicate what was shown on screen TIE/tn "Titan" Assault Bomber (Uses all the same stats for the frame (speed, sil, WT, etc), replacing the missiles/proton bombs with the following) Heavy Assault Beam Laser Cannon Damage: 13 Range: Close Crit: 2 Qualities: Auto-fire, Breach 3, Inaccurate 2, Slow Firing 3
  15. Short story Just saw the Star Wars: Squadrons reveal, and during the reveal, there is a case of a couple TIE bombers assaulting a CR-90 where a sustained laser from two of the bombers annihilated the corvette. Whether it is a composite beam or not its impossible to tell, but something tells me this weapon will replace the physical ordinance due to having the need for a larger reactor. Gonna start tinkering with stats and make a special name variant to distinguish it from the standard bomber. Anyone got any suggestions or thoughts? Anyone else hyped for a dedicated starfighter game? Here is the trailer if you have yet to see it!
×
×
  • Create New...