Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About penpenpen

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Location
    Malmö, Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

848 profile views
  1. The DH-17 carbine was statted out in Forged in Battle (I think) as an Enc 2, ranged (heavy) weapon with damage 8, inaccurate and auto-fire. That makes it something like an Star Wars Uzi.
  2. penpenpen

    Are "zip ties" in the game somewhere?

    And also probably usable as makeshift hand restraints in a pinch. Encasing someone's hands in hardened foam should be fairly quick and effective, depending on how fast it hardens and how hard it gets.
  3. You're right. There shouldn't be. Yet here we are. Hence the trolling theory. Also, considering your usual tone, that must be a cosy glass house you've got there, seems to have a pot and a kettle and everything.
  4. Truly this must be trolling. I refuse to believe that people are actually equating hearsay with first-hand experience. If this is true, we are currently looking down toward the point where we imagined peak stupidity would be. And as for "regurgitating other people's opinions", there is a slight difference between "I repeat these points someone else made, because based on my experiences of the topic at hand, I agree with them." and "I have no direct knowledge of the topic at hand other than what someone else has told me, and since I have no first hand knowledge, I can't be sure that I would agree with them". The second statement is not necessarily invalid, but it's a pretty poor substitute for first hand knowledge, and terrible for subjective judgement. It's fine to read film reviews and decide that a film is probably not for you, but you can't make an informed critique about it. Sure, you can have an opinion, but it's not an informed opinion and you have nothing to contribute in a discussion of the film's qualities. Also, it's kind of hilarious and sad that someone who refuses to spend 2-3 hours seeing a film they might not like spends a 2-3 times (or more) that amount of time trying to argue the points of said film.
  5. Well to be fair, those answers are very easily missed for those who haven't seen the film. Just because we have doesn't mean we can get on our high horses and claim that their criticism makes no sense and that our opinion is more informed. EDIT: And due to the very real chance of running into Poe's Law, I will clarify that that the above statement was intended as sarcasm.
  6. penpenpen

    Are "zip ties" in the game somewhere?

    Which also means that if you have a tool kit, you're quite likely to have some already. And/or mesh tape.
  7. penpenpen

    Our GM has no Hope!

    Since there are people (quite a few, actually) that actually like and think TLJ is a good film, you're demonstrably and objectively wrong about that, which is one h*ll of an acheivement when discussing subjective qualities.
  8. penpenpen

    Alternative Social Skills

    This is pretty much exactly how I'd handle it, except I'd probably skip a separate roll for mechanics/knowledge/etc and just hand out some boost dice based on the character's skill level (or possibly setback dice if they're faking competence/knowledge they don't have). As working out the result of check can be fairly complex compared to simple pass/fail checks, I usually avoid making extra checks unless they can lead to interesting results. If the case is something like a character's mechanics skill might be to their advantage in a social check, I'd cut out the middleman and just modify the social check with boost dice and possibly upgrades. Of course, the inverse is true as well. If you're trying to bluff your way out of a situation with a faked reactor leak or weapons malfunction, but have the technical aptitude of a scruffy nerf herder, I might throw some setback dice your way.
  9. penpenpen

    Our GM has no Hope!

    Double post.
  10. penpenpen

    Our GM has no Hope!

    Interesting perspective. Simply lifting something is more about having the fore lifting something for you, and pulling something towards yourself requires a "tether" to be established. Possibly, these two effects could be combined to pull something large towards you. And if you pull something large towards you without lifting it with the force could indeed instead pull you towards the object. For all we know, it could be how Force Leap works. But yeah, taking the scientific approach to something which's most defining characteristic is telling the laws of physics to shut up and sit down while it does it's thing, might be a moot point anyway.
  11. penpenpen

    Our GM has no Hope!

    Well, we generally don't see Jedi levitating although they seem to be able to lift each other. They also do not seem to bear the weight of what they are lifting either, so it's probably not an equal reaction sort of thing, because in that case, instead of pulling something heavy off the ceiling the Jedi would instead lift themselves up, and we don't see that happening. Of course, I have this nagging feeling that we've seen a force user levitating at some point, but I can't really think of where that would be. Regardless, I don't think it has to do with the classic way they use pull. Rather, I think it has more to do with force jumping and falling. We've seen countless examples of force users launching themselves through the air reaching great speed and height, and also plummeting to the ground and landing precisely at the right point with no harm whatsoever. Just look at Obi-wan's and Anakin's antics during the speeder chase in AotC or Luke falling with pinpoint precision into a narrow chute at the end of TESB. Jedi might not be able to make their own body defy gravity completely, but it seem quite evident that they can exert quite a bit of control over their position in freefall, just not that much in the up-down axis. You know which direction is up and down in space? None. There is no gravity to fight, so if a jedi in gravity can control their fall well enough to fall into the seat of a speeder, on top of another speeder or into a narrow chute, a jedi in no gravity can most likely "fall" in whichever direction they please. Think of it as Leia impelling herself in the same way as with a force leap, with no gravity or air resistance to slow her down. OR... Just say "It's space magic!" for an equally valid point.
  12. penpenpen

    Our GM has no Hope!

    You know, telling someone "I'm not going to call you an a-hole, because I wouldn't get away with it" isn't really different from calling someone an a-hole. But, hey at least you're accidentally honest about it. I find it hilarious that you think this is a balanced sample size. It also seems to mean that you to haven't talked to a single person that liked it and considered things from their perspective. Again, that's not really better. Have you ever considered even the remote possibility that it could be the other way around? You're perfectly willing to accept that a lot of people who hated the movie aren't going to bother going online and spew hate about it, but have you considered that the same could be true for a lot of the people that loved it? I mean, I haven't really crunched the numbers but if you look at the parts of internet where people opine about culture, I think it's fairly safe to say that it's more popular to rage about stuff than gushing about it. And if we're going to go down the rabbit hole of fake accounts, there has at least been some evidence to it going the other way, but I haven't really seen anything apart from pure speculation supporting your preferred version of it. So, yeah. In this case, it is a little far fetched.
  13. penpenpen

    How Corrupt Was Your Republic?

    The republic itself? Variably, where a lot of it depended on the individual member states/planets. I think the republic as a whole had very little power to deal with internal matters of individual members and the power it had was rather slow an unwieldy due to massive size of the republic and senate. This was probably by design. I don't see the republic as much as single state as much as an alliance or a union, much like the EU or UN, concerned mostly with inter-member policy. However, contrary to the UN it didn't have easily defined super powers with veto rights. On the whole, members of the republic had pretty much equal say in matters (in theory at least), which meant that a tiny member planet with perhaps just a couple of hundred thousand or million citizens would wield equal power to powerhouses like, say, Corellia or Coruscant. This could of course be exploited by a much richer planet essentially buying the small planets vote with advantageous trade deals, foreign aid, military alliances and whatnot. This is of course, not good, and there's also not that much the republic could do about it. On the other hand, the republic's insistence on committees provided a lot of oversight and insight on the decision-making process, making it harder to get away with the most blatant kinds of individual corruption. The empire of course did away with with this oversight in the name of efficiency and so corruption could run pretty much rampant there. As for the separatists, I don't see them as much as disenfranchised minor powers, but more like corporatist powers that chafed under republic regulations that limited their ability to throw their economic weight around. And as we see with the EU and UN today, it's quite easy to whip up a populist outrage against someone presented as foreign overlords far away that interfere with the local way of doing things. I'm sure they were painted that way, and while true to some extent, it was the Empire that started to outright invade planets like Kashyyk, Mimban and Ryloth. That's a whole new level of exerting control compared to forcing regulations on someone through a quasi-democratic system.
  14. penpenpen

    Another Character Generator

    Does anyone have a dummies guide for keeping a shared data folder online? Like through dropbox or gdrive?
  15. penpenpen

    Our GM has no Hope!

    I'm finding this thread hilarious as normally the people who like the new stuff, TLJ in particular, are the ones who are usually being derided as easily triggered snowflakes. I'm trying to sympathize with someone's love of old stuff being ruined by release of new stuff, but to me it only comes off as, well, entitled whining. Old stuff was fine before, but now new stuff is out old stuff must be thrown away? Methinks you invest more in your identity as a fan of a franchise than you care about the media itself in that case. Dislike the new stuff all you like, but if it ruins the old stuff for you, maybe you need to take a step back and consider what exactly it was you liked about all that stuff you've decided to throw away. I mean, I can relate to the dissapointment, but not the reaction. It's not like I burned my Judge Dredd comics after the Sylvester Stallone movie*. *for those who are lucky enough not to know, this movie is such a foul abomination that having Jar-jar in it would actually improve it.