That argument again relies on supposition of an entry point vector being required for an impact, which is not confirmed but merely assumed. The fact that hyperspace collisions do occur in canon should be sufficient to disprove it. I agree, especially since we see in TCW vulture droids used as Kamikazi ships. This again reinforces the need to have a proper explanation in canon. Meaning a reference to hypermatter radiation or some such mitigating factor that would result in Pyrric victories. Clearly there is a disproportionate advantage to the side using smaller hyperspace weapons. (Loved the tonnage comment, reminds me of the WWII tallies for uboat victims.) again though, wouldn’t it be awesome if they used this “tech” to explain the Great Hyperspace War? Would really throw people off the way I think many were when we discovered the clone wars involved droids lol. They needn’t make the entire war revolve around the weapon but maybe it’s introduction and then the subsequent effects of its use. That would explain away the problems some have with this while building on the canon of the universe.

I never understood the argument that you must be close for this to work. There is actually no evidence this is true. In fact, evidence we have suggests that you wouldn’t need to be. For example, in Catalyst we have ships performing in-system micro jumps. (In Catalyst we also have drone piloted ships) This means you need not be close, but rather merely plot a course accurately, with variables causing it to be increasingly hard to hit if it’s performing evasive maneuvers etc. But if it’s a stationary or very large object, well then that’s a breeze. The argument I see being made for the run up distance seems to be that of Holdo turning the ship around. Likely the delay is merely her plotting a course, not one or distance to target. And even then, does she really go very far from turning around to jumping? Like 20-30 seconds? That’s not really conclusive proof of anything.

Thank you to the links to the ramming rules, I thought there was something but couldn’t remember. I think that’s a reasonable mechanics ruling. I don’t know of any source of canon reference to the radiation though, is that something that has been done? If so, we would then have to figure out some checks against resilience or something.

The novel Catalyst: A Rogue One Novel covers Galen creating them, but they didn’t work.

Galen Erso created synthetic kyber crystals during the Clone Wars but they lacked some element (the living force?) and did not function anywhere near where they should have.

Oh for sure, the starfighters that are employed are hella effective already, which may discount the need for any sort of hyperspace-utilizing weapon, but the point was more about necessity as the mother of invention... so if it’s necessary we now know it is possible. Cost benefit analysis and effectiveness would be determinations for the leadership of whichever force to conduct, but the canon possibility opens up the door... and therefore if our players wanted to make use of it in games, technically it wouldn’t be out of the realm of possibility. But GMs are the final arbiter of their sessions and will have to evaluate how they do or do not allow these things. It would be a can of worms, but technically, FFG or SW itself should address this canonically so that there is a reference point for scope and scale beyond the visual storytelling of TLJ... that leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Most people can’t even agree whether it was effective in destroying Snooks ship etc. Maybe a better question we need to start asking if we accept that this is canonical, is that of, “How do we deal with this mechanically if it is enacted in our sessions?” (I.E. what checks are involved, how do we calculate damage etc. I believe there was already a discussion of ramming ships after Rogue One in one of the forums and either RAW or unofficial mechanics for that. There is a ram attachment, no? Seems like there must be rules for ramming? We might just need to evaluate how (if at all) these rules would change with hyperspace use?

Why use a ship when a missile will do? Comparing real world v space opera is a crap shoot, but let’s face it, if we required a capital ship sized unmanned bomb to get the job done, we’d build it. The First World War involved an explosion so loud it was heard from Belgium all the way to England. The 1,000 Bomber air raids during the Second World War laid waste to whole city blocks. If there is a necessity, it would be a reality. In Star Wars, whatever size needed to destroy a ISD or something on the scope of the DS1 or DS2... they would have built it. These are desperate people backed into a corner. Look at the Kamikazi pilots of Imperial japan. Look at the Suicide Bombers of ISIS. The point I think everyone needs to take from the new canon is that if this is now possible and permissible, that only a writers own restraint withholds this from being the reality.

This is perhaps relevant to the discussion; micro jumps in-system and drone ships filled with explosives used in the canon novel Star Wars Catalyst: A Rogue One Novel. So clearly it’s possible and been done, twice, in canon.

I guess you haven’t heard of drones.....

Thanks for the update! It’s always interesting to see the game through other groups’ eyes.

Again, I was referencing how this affects our understanding of the universe. Yes, we know hyperspace is potentially dangerous, but the source I quoted includes canon references to two other elements; drone ships used as explosive weapons and micro in-system jumps. With these elements available as story vehicles there are a number of additional possiblities that become available in the universe moving forward. (And bc it isn’t “new” to the universe, going backward as well into previously untold stories) As someone pointed out, they may just not address it bc its space opera, but in all seriousness having something mentioned to disallow its use as a potential weapon at all times might be handy for future stories told in the universe. “Did you know that hypermatter released in hyperjump accidents causes spatial anomalies/radiation etc in the area” (thereby allowing all future instances of why didn’t they do X to be bc they didn’t want to “pollute Space” etc.) That’s the beauty of science fiction/space opera, simply hand wave a solution to the potential use of some expedient solution and move on. GMs in games do it everyday. Additionally, they could lean into it... maybe the Great Hyperspace Wars were really Wars fought using hyperspace as weapons! ****, we always thought the Clone Wars was between Clone armies.

I didn’t try to post that to criticize the movie, although it might open the door, that’s another argument entirely. More so I just wanted to discuss the implications of these being two canon sources that now allow for hyperspace weapons to be possible.

So I can’t remember if it was this thread or another but there was a discussion of hyperspace travel and questions as to what is possible. Warning: Minor Spoiler Content from Rogue One’s prequel novel to follow. Per the new canon in Catalyst; A Rogue One Novel, in-system microjumps are possible, and trivial. Both sides use the jumps to attack each other around the Salient System. In fact, a capital ship piloted ala a drone is used to open the engagement. With this canon and that of the TLJ we might see potential hyperspace capable, microjumping drone ships as weapons in future installments. That is, unless they can explain away the possibility by introducing a counter. Who know what that might look like? Maybe a localized Micro-Gravity Well generator that prevents hyperspace within a small cordon around capital ships powered by excess hypermatter from a ships drives? On either side of the “hyperspace-as-weapon-divide” I think we could welcome some nod to why this tactic is not employed more substantially beyond the postulations around cost/benefit analyses and scientific limitations/lucky applications. Leaving this an a viable last ditch effort might also be fine to some, like a more powerful version of (don’t hate me for the reference in this setting) “Perhaps today is a good day to die! Ramming Speed!” (Worf aboard the Defiant, Star Trek: First Contact) But having extra possible solutions to presented problems then causes writers to have to insert a “why didn’t we just do X.” Type statement. Again, I’m sure some are fine filling in those gaps themselves and enjoying the content without, but it is still an unrealized option.

Just because the same couple of guys dogpile on anyone with a difference of opinion with regards to this movie, does not mean everyone feels that way. Agree to disagree and move on. These pointless arguments are getting excessive.

Well that’s handy!

Wow! That’s a lot of personality at one table to handle! You must be adept at steering through the quagmire to keep something like that going for 400 xp. Normally people try to avoid clashing character personas but if done correctly where the players dont actually get offended but work together to craft the story, it can create one of the most amazing dynamics. In a pathfinder game a few years ago my brother decided to play a Barbarian (really a Viking) who was violently afraid of magic... of course I played a shady Raistlin esq mage. The first meeting in the bar had his character try and intimidate me, so I used ghost sound to convince a group of Half Orcs he had spoke ill of their upbringing. The resultant bar brawl and chaos was the opening scene of our play together and eventually we developed a Raistlin/Caramon style bond that saw us become inseperable. Sometimes, some conflict is just what is needed!

I like it! You’ve got a good vibe going. The crew does there jobs in the galaxy and in their own way shape their corner of it, but without the fate of everything hanging in the balance. I’ve started in a few games where I just wanted to live in the universe but for one reason or another they tend to grow beyond the fringe life to a more central/political/military style game. My favourite characters have been the ones who wanted to use their skills to open small businesses and retire to the Outer Rim. I wanted to ask you, how do you run your hunts? I see you have a nemesis as a hunter and such... what kind of game? How do you set the tone? Do you use the location and creature to play on the tones of the setting? (i.e. horror themes, suspense, fantasy, mystery) How have you handled hunts in the past? I see you have swoop bike racers and gangs, how have you incorporated these elements? (We ran something similar for a time, the other players ended up making a Sons of Sullust video or something to play off the sons of anarchy parody)

I’m in no rush, we’ll see what comes. I have a few games on the go at the moment anyways. Just keep me in mind if you guys do need an opening somewhere down the pipe.

Count me a lurker. I had seen it show there were still openings for the Far Orbit game and so I read up on the previous episodes (love Dac!). If an opening comes along let me know. I always play a mechanic/slicer/scientist etc. if you have need.

That’s badass! You guys have been playing for so long that the world must seem more real than the canon universe at this point. The plots and intrigues are imaginative and the characters seem well fleshed out. If you guys have a blog or something link that, I’m sure people, like myself, would love to see more!

Nice! I like it, and thanks for the links, yours might be the most accessible pbp for others to check out with it all situated here in the forums! Once my GM finishes the conversion to Obsidian Portal I’ll see if I can’t do similarly, it’s a rambling, raccous adventure but it might be easier to show than to tell! Lol Intrigued to see what others have in their games!

Wow, you wouldn’t admit you were dying if you were staring through the hole in your chest. Lmfao. Well, the rest of us can see the truth.

This forum is full of some of the most imaginative and amazing gamers who exist. Share a bit of your roleplay and maybe others can draw from this for their own games! Briefly describe the campaign setting you are playing in. Where is it situated? Who are the characters? What makes your “big bad” unique/memorable/scary etc.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Shields/Shield2.html Here’s an example of the computation of shield strength given what is seen in the movies. Note the specific mention that in ROTJ ISD’s and Mon Cal’s fire on each other for 40 minutes which goes on to elaborate that the shots in ROTS clearly indicate a battle which has raged for some time, as anyone can tell. https://www.wired.com/2012/05/star-wars-blaster-speed/ Here’s a breakdown of what is shown on screen of the relative speed of Blaster shots. Note how they specifically make mention of how speeds of shots shown in the movies would indicate blaster shots are equivalent to baseballs or nerf guns in terms of meters/second. Want to see more proof, “from the movies?” Heres a breakdown of the relative ranges for effective firing as shown in Star Wars. http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSW-WeaponRange-Wars.html Note the specific mention that dogfighting as seen in the movie takes place within 1 km of each other in space! Capital ships are also shown to have a tiny effective range comparatively. So how much closer do you expect them to get before your blaster bolts become Death Star bolts? Clearly if the shields are capable of sustained fire for 40+ minutes in a pitched battle than simply closing to range to ram another ship is not going to be stopped by simply applying the fire at a closer range. The increased strength of the bolt would be insignificant. This is reinforced by the very game we play in, where closer range does not increase weapons power but only their accuracy.

I will reiterate what I began this discussion with - that I am not actually taking a side in favor of or against the ram as it is a Space Opera as pointed out again above. That said, I then went on to show how one of the arguments presented is not consistent within its own logic, that is, that any attempt to ram a ship could be stopped by firing upon it. There are multiple factors behind such a claim; 1) that the soon to be abstract art can have time to open fire. 2) that it is able to accurately strike the target 3) that the speed of said target will not prevent it being struck 4) that the speed will amplify the damage presented due to the doplar effect. 1) let’s assume they are already firing upon the ship for simplicity’s sake bc if they weren’t and someone just flipped the switch you wouldn’t have time to even process the jump. 2) let’s assume that you are zero’d in on the target in a straight line of approach vector so that the shot and the ship must connect bc any other angle would miss something moving at the speeds to make 4 plausible. 3) In all but those few approach vectors that a ship is coming at those shots wouldn’t have left the thought of the gunners mind let alone travel at anywhere near the same speeds. 4) the ship is firing a screen along the only approach vector and there are one if not many shots in the path waiting to be struck by a ship which is approaching light speed. We then insert your belief that the doplar effect should come into effect in this version of the Star Wars Story. Physics amp up the Damage considerably and the ship is destroyed! Except that if that were the case the Supremacy would have been vaporized by the impact of the Mon Cal Cruiser. Okay, but let’s discount that. Then, the shot resolves and the ship explodes. Okay, so you have wreckage and exploding material heading at near light speed into its intended target still accomplishing its goal. The realization of the level of physics you want to employ would disprove your own argument. I don’t want to bring physics into Star Wars bc it follows its own internal logic, and, it’s not intended to be viewed through that lens. If you want to, fine, but your statement is still wrong either way.