Jump to content
WarrenH

Spitfire Talent

Recommended Posts

I think it's a fairly stupid argument to suggest that firing one pistol at a Nemesis with Adversary ranks should be harder than doing the same while also firing a gun in your other hand at a random object. You may think this is a sign of the boards being worse than they used to be. I see it as a sign of the arguments being worse than they used to be. You want to shoot the Nemesis? Declare him as the target of your two-weapon combat check. If you get two net advantages, put the shot from the other pistol into whatever you choose. But you don't get to argue that Spitfire allows a character to shoot a chair and then deny a Nemesis his adversary ranks and defense dice with their second shot, and then try and claim that's a perfectly defensible, mechanically consistent interpretation of the rules. That's absurd. That's a "It doesn't specifically SAY you can't do that..." type of argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a fairly stupid argument to suggest that firing one pistol at a Nemesis with Adversary ranks should be harder than doing the same while also firing a gun in your other hand at a random object. You may think this is a sign of the boards being worse than they used to be. I see it as a sign of the arguments being worse than they used to be. You want to shoot the Nemesis? Declare him as the target of your two-weapon combat check. If you get two net advantages, put the shot from the other pistol into whatever you choose. But you don't get to argue that Spitfire allows a character to shoot a chair and then deny a Nemesis his adversary ranks and defense dice with their second shot, and then try and claim that's a perfectly defensible, mechanically consistent interpretation of the rules. That's absurd. That's a "It doesn't specifically SAY you can't do that..." type of argument.

What part of "ANY target with in range" is hard for you to understand? Or are you saying that FFG are a bunch of illiterate people who don't know what words mean? Because apparently this was written went through play testing was printed and released and no one had a problem with this as written. So I am gonna go with you guys are panicking about an ability that is no where near the problem you are making it out to be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What part of "ANY target with in range" is hard for you to understand? Or are you saying that FFG are a bunch of illiterate people who don't know what words mean? Because apparently this was written went through play testing was printed and released and no one had a problem with this as written. So I am gonna go with you guys are panicking about an ability that is no where near the problem you are making it out to be.

 

It's not hard for me to understand, but it is an argument that presupposes that a bizarre interpretation of the rule (declaring an inanimate object as a target in order to bypass standard defense rules on a different, more difficult target) is more appropriate than the basic understanding that a target means an opponent/s you are shooting at. I don't think FFG is a bunch of illiterates, but I equally don't think that whoever wrote that rule meant it to be anything more than a simple "split your two attacks between two baddies, in contrast to pumping them both into the same baddy" talent. It's not panicking to point out an obvious, logical interpretation of a very simply worded rule isn't intended to entitle the player to deny defense dice via a creative misrepresentation of what a 'target' is in a combat check.

 

I think in future you should stick to reading my posts instead of attempting to misinterpret them in a very disingenuous manner, as some sort of imagined knock against my emotional state. It's quite rude.

Edited by Lumidingo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telling someone the concept of the system has been lost of them, and lecturing about criticizing people? Kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?

It's called being pissed off and letting you get to me. Gotta go back to meditation and focus on not letting that happen. However I learned my lesson. Just skip post like yours. They are liked by some and might have a valuable point that I just won't read due to the delivery

Edited by Kilcannon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet you guys are so focused on any inanimate object idea. Which no one here has suggested. The only thing suggested here has been dropping a chandelier on someone. Which would be cinematic. The only one suggesting any thing inanimate at all is 2P51. I only have pointed out how is this different than shooting a minion with it? A bush is likely to be a couple purple and a set back or 2 based on size or whatever. Same as a minion. But I don't know any player that would go around shooting bushes to get off shots on a nemesis when their are other bad guys to shoot. Jumping to the extreme case to try and claim the talents rules don't mean what they say they do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're focused on it because it's exactly the type of rules-lawyering nonsense that relies on a very strange and subjective interpretation of a simple rule as an exploit. I don't agree that the rule should be interpreted that way, because it results in situations like having a vastly easier time of hitting a Nemesis by shooting at something other than the Nemesis, as opposed to using one blaster and needing to get past upgraded defenses, or putting both shots into the Nemesis with a Two-Weapon Combat check and needing to get past upgraded defenses. It doesn't make sense to interpret a rule that, paraphrased, allows you to hit a different target with your second shot instead of the same target (a logical, obvious, simple advantage over the regular Two-Weapon Combat rules) as suddenly allowing a player to ignore Adversary ranks by shooting at an object in the environment.

 

A bush is not likely to be 'a couple purple'. It's an inanimate object that has no ability to defend against a simple shot. It wouldn't even require a roll. The difficulty checks are based on shooting an opponent that is trying to evade/defend against your attacks, not inanimate objects. If you point a missile launcher at a door and pull the trigger, the door isn't going to jump out of the way. You're going to hit the door, no roll needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telling someone the concept of the system has been lost of them, and lecturing about criticizing people? Kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?

It's called being pissed off and letting you get to me. Gotta go back to meditation and focus on not letting that happen. However I learned my lesson. Just skip post like yours. They are liked by some and might have a valuable point that I just won't read due to the delivery

No, insulting someone's lack of understanding of the game and then lecturing about not criticizing is called being a hypocrite.  Let me clear that up for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad rules are your friend here :)
You can't target the minions linked to a big bad mofo using the squad rules, you must target the Nemesis in the group and he can choose to soak it up with a minion if he chooses.

So if you're afraid your players will dual wield and shoot at bushes with Spitfire to target the big bad, then put him in a minion group and send one minion down the drain when he's hit...

 

But frankly, I don't think you'll ever see this come up...

Two weapon fighting is pretty hard, you need some good dice pool to use it effectively. At that point, I'm pretty sure the player will feel secure to hit with both weapons regardless of ranks in adversary and defensive bonus. On the other hand, I would piss myself if one of my players decided to shoot a bush with Spitfire instead of the big bad mofo and missed his shot, not even hitting the bush... I think we would make fun of him for a few dozen sessions before stopping... and we would probably remember that scene once every christmas just for laughs.

 

{ In combat, when you're running around, dodging behind crates and tables, evading incoming fire, I'd put a difficulty on hitting the door with that missile launcher anyway}

 

Why shoot a bush and have a chance to hit ONCE the big bad when you can shoot the big bad and maybe hit him twice ?

 

I think Spitfire is a great talent that prevents the player from wasting shots... you want to take out that single minions and then focus on the bad guy, NOW you can with Spitfire... you want to take out that minion about to push the alarm but would also love to put a bullet down the trooper aiming at you, NOW you can with Spitfire... I think it adds flexibility to a Two-pistol gunslinger.

 

 

Instead of thinking how to break the game using a talent, maybe we should think about how to make a awesome encounter where that talent can shine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telling someone the concept of the system has been lost of them, and lecturing about criticizing people? Kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?

It's called being pissed off and letting you get to me. Gotta go back to meditation and focus on not letting that happen. However I learned my lesson. Just skip post like yours. They are liked by some and might have a valuable point that I just won't read due to the delivery

No, insulting someone's lack of understanding of the game and then lecturing about not criticizing is called being a hypocrite.  Let me clear that up for you.

Will you please just stop. Your lecturing how we are cheating by our outlook is what started it. I hate when people go on an insulting rant then when someone lashes back they can't just take it. You insulted me and several others. Be a man take it. And understand when you insult someone else they will be a hypocrite and sometimes even worse since you treated their viewe like crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The only one suggesting any thing inanimate at all is 2P51.

You might wanna go back and re-read.  I'm not the one who posed the example of shooting at a chandelier as the primary target, and then using extra hits generated to strike a Nemesis and thereby completely bypass Adversary and Defense qualities.  

 

I'm the one that pointed out that's an absurd exploitation of a loophole, because it is.  I'm the one that posted the link to the rule in the GM section of the CRB that specifically points out PCs shouldn't do that when they find loopholes.  I'm the one that pointed out a 25 xp Talent interpenetration that allows a PC to remove all ranks of Adversary and Defense for no Strain cost, no DP use, no once per session restriction, is absurdly OP, because it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telling someone the concept of the system has been lost of them, and lecturing about criticizing people? Kind of makes you a hypocrite don't you think?

It's called being pissed off and letting you get to me. Gotta go back to meditation and focus on not letting that happen. However I learned my lesson. Just skip post like yours. They are liked by some and might have a valuable point that I just won't read due to the delivery

No, insulting someone's lack of understanding of the game and then lecturing about not criticizing is called being a hypocrite.  Let me clear that up for you.

Will you please just stop. Your lecturing how we are cheating by our outlook is what started it. I hate when people go on an insulting rant then when someone lashes back they can't just take it. You insulted me and several others. Be a man take it. And understand when you insult someone else they will be a hypocrite and sometimes even worse since you treated their viewe like crap.

So once again you don't feel the need to apply the same standards of conduct to yourself that I am supposed to follow. Once again, you are a hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad rules are your friend here :)

You can't target the minions linked to a big bad mofo using the squad rules, you must target the Nemesis in the group and he can choose to soak it up with a minion if he chooses.

So if you're afraid your players will dual wield and shoot at bushes with Spitfire to target the big bad, then put him in a minion group and send one minion down the drain when he's hit...

 

But frankly, I don't think you'll ever see this come up...

Two weapon fighting is pretty hard, you need some good dice pool to use it effectively. At that point, I'm pretty sure the player will feel secure to hit with both weapons regardless of ranks in adversary and defensive bonus. On the other hand, I would piss myself if one of my players decided to shoot a bush with Spitfire instead of the big bad mofo and missed his shot, not even hitting the bush... I think we would make fun of him for a few dozen sessions before stopping... and we would probably remember that scene once every christmas just for laughs.

 

{ In combat, when you're running around, dodging behind crates and tables, evading incoming fire, I'd put a difficulty on hitting the door with that missile launcher anyway}

 

Why shoot a bush and have a chance to hit ONCE the big bad when you can shoot the big bad and maybe hit him twice ?

 

I think Spitfire is a great talent that prevents the player from wasting shots... you want to take out that single minions and then focus on the bad guy, NOW you can with Spitfire... you want to take out that minion about to push the alarm but would also love to put a bullet down the trooper aiming at you, NOW you can with Spitfire... I think it adds flexibility to a Two-pistol gunslinger.

 

 

Instead of thinking how to break the game using a talent, maybe we should think about how to make a awesome encounter where that talent can shine.

But my player isn't thinking about how to break the game. For him it's a one time thing or very situational. If he was intending for breaking the game then he wouldn't be playing in my game.

Spitfire makes many situations cool and then if abused there would be consequences. Sometimes consequences with more threats or enemies. Guess I just don't have players that would ever use something like spitfire to consistently hit a chandelier or the hypothetical bush mentioned. Also I'm not a GM that wouldn't come up with a creative way to come back at the consistent chandelier or bush attacker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But my player isn't thinking about how to break the game. For him it's a one time thing or very situational. If he was intending for breaking the game then he wouldn't be playing in my game.

Spitfire makes many situations cool and then if abused there would be consequences. Sometimes consequences with more threats or enemies. Guess I just don't have players that would ever use something like spitfire to consistently hit a chandelier or the hypothetical bush mentioned. Also I'm not a GM that wouldn't come up with a creative way to come back at the consistent chandelier or bush attacker.

 

 

Yeah there are always those pesky religious orders like the "Knights of the Fallen Chandelier" or the "Great Order of the Holy Bush"... mess with the Chandelier or the Bush and you're bound to have them show up at your door to exact holy punishment :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But my player isn't thinking about how to break the game. For him it's a one time thing or very situational. If he was intending for breaking the game then he wouldn't be playing in my game.

Spitfire makes many situations cool and then if abused there would be consequences. Sometimes consequences with more threats or enemies. Guess I just don't have players that would ever use something like spitfire to consistently hit a chandelier or the hypothetical bush mentioned. Also I'm not a GM that wouldn't come up with a creative way to come back at the consistent chandelier or bush attacker.

 

 

I certainly wouldn't allow it. "Nah, that's ridiculous. Now who are you shooting at?" I don't mind if someone plugs a minion and allocates their second shot into a Nemesis, you can talk your way through dropping a thug the Nemesis is currently using as cover, catching him by surprise and unloading into his chest with your other pistol. But shooting a nearby barrel in order to somehow negate their Adversary ranks with your follow-up just sounds ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 The only one suggesting any thing inanimate at all is 2P51.

You might wanna go back and re-read.  I'm not the one who posed the example of shooting at a chandelier as the primary target, and then using extra hits generated to strike a Nemesis and thereby completely bypass Adversary and Defense qualities.  

 

I'm the one that pointed out that's an absurd exploitation of a loophole, because it is.  I'm the one that posted the link to the rule in the GM section of the CRB that specifically points out PCs shouldn't do that when they find loopholes.  I'm the one that pointed out a 25 xp Talent interpenetration that allows a PC to remove all ranks of Adversary and Defense for no Strain cost, no DP use, no once per session restriction, is absurdly OP, because it is.

 

Yeah and how easy do you think shooting a chandelier to cause it to fall on people is going to be? last I checked the place you need to hit in order to drop a chandelier on someone is a very small target like one or 2 inches wide(increase difficulty for silhouette size and 2 setback for shooting specific part...). And this is star wars which means the target is probably at least medium range because spaces in star wars are big. So yeah I don't think shooting a chandelier is going to be an easy target and therefore I don't think it would be any easier to do this trick than it would be to just shoot a bunch of minions. And last i checked this game is supposed to be a yes and system. 

Who is being the rules lawyer the person wanting to do something cinematic like dropping a chandelier on minions or the GM who says no that's exploiting the rules...

Edited by Daeglan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now we are inventing armored chandeliers swinging in a cat 5 hurricane as our excuse for this?  Maybe it's Darth Vader's chandelier so it's Adversary 4?

Really??? Per the aiming rules you add setback to hit specific areas. Per the silhouette rules a smaller target increases difficulty just like shooting at a rancor is easier because they are big targets. Do you even know the rules? Cause no where did I say anything about hurricanes. All I did was apply the rules as they are written. Near as I can tell it does not matter if the target is a living being a vehicle or an inanimate object. You can shoot at them. You should apply the rules no matter what the target is. Most chandeliers I have seen are smaller than a man. Most chandeliers the part you need to get them to drop is tiny. The rules state smaller silhouette means increase difficulty. Shooting a specific area on the target means setback per the aiming rules. I hope I never play in one of your games. You are so rigid I don't think it would be fun...Can't allow creative uses of talents now can we? Cause that would be wrong fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So now we are inventing armored chandeliers swinging in a cat 5 hurricane as our excuse for this?  Maybe it's Darth Vader's chandelier so it's Adversary 4?

Really??? Per the aiming rules you add setback to hit specific areas. Per the silhouette rules a smaller target increases difficulty just like shooting at a rancor is easier because they are big targets. Do you even know the rules? Cause no where did I say anything about hurricanes. All I did was apply the rules as they are written. Near as I can tell it does not matter if the target is a living being a vehicle or an inanimate object. You can shoot at them. You should apply the rules no matter what the target is. Most chandeliers I have seen are smaller than a man. Most chandeliers the part you need to get them to drop is tiny. The rules state smaller silhouette means increase difficulty. Shooting a specific area on the target means setback per the aiming rules. I hope I never play in one of your games. You are so rigid I don't think it would be fun...Can't allow creative uses of talents now can we? Cause that would be wrong fun. 

 

Can't respond fully.........we're on red alert...........3 squadrons of Tiffany chandeliers inbound armed with halogen bulbs.....get your head down man!!!!.............. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah come on guys...

Drop it already...

 

You're both great members of these forums and offer great insights into the rules for more casuals members and readers.

You're both great contributors to these forums.

 

But this stupid argument has devolved into bickering.

You guys are better then this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So now we are inventing armored chandeliers swinging in a cat 5 hurricane as our excuse for this?  Maybe it's Darth Vader's chandelier so it's Adversary 4?

Really??? Per the aiming rules you add setback to hit specific areas. Per the silhouette rules a smaller target increases difficulty just like shooting at a rancor is easier because they are big targets. Do you even know the rules? Cause no where did I say anything about hurricanes. All I did was apply the rules as they are written. Near as I can tell it does not matter if the target is a living being a vehicle or an inanimate object. You can shoot at them. You should apply the rules no matter what the target is. Most chandeliers I have seen are smaller than a man. Most chandeliers the part you need to get them to drop is tiny. The rules state smaller silhouette means increase difficulty. Shooting a specific area on the target means setback per the aiming rules. I hope I never play in one of your games. You are so rigid I don't think it would be fun...Can't allow creative uses of talents now can we? Cause that would be wrong fun. 

 

Can't respond fully.........we're on red alert...........3 squadrons of Tiffany chandeliers inbound armed with halogen bulbs.....get your head down man!!!!.............. :o

 

I guess you have never seen any movies at all. I have seen people swing from them in movies drop them on people...You do know that Star Wars has part of its roots in swashbuckling right? Did you see the three musketeers ever? 

But then I guess you don't really have a valid counter do you? Since you have to resort to mockery of something that is a staple of movies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So now we are inventing armored chandeliers swinging in a cat 5 hurricane as our excuse for this?  Maybe it's Darth Vader's chandelier so it's Adversary 4?

Really??? Per the aiming rules you add setback to hit specific areas. Per the silhouette rules a smaller target increases difficulty just like shooting at a rancor is easier because they are big targets. Do you even know the rules? Cause no where did I say anything about hurricanes. All I did was apply the rules as they are written. Near as I can tell it does not matter if the target is a living being a vehicle or an inanimate object. You can shoot at them. You should apply the rules no matter what the target is. Most chandeliers I have seen are smaller than a man. Most chandeliers the part you need to get them to drop is tiny. The rules state smaller silhouette means increase difficulty. Shooting a specific area on the target means setback per the aiming rules. I hope I never play in one of your games. You are so rigid I don't think it would be fun...Can't allow creative uses of talents now can we? Cause that would be wrong fun. 

 

Can't respond fully.........we're on red alert...........3 squadrons of Tiffany chandeliers inbound armed with halogen bulbs.....get your head down man!!!!.............. :o

 

I guess you have never seen any movies at all. I have seen people swing from them in movies drop them on people...You do know that Star Wars has part of its roots in swashbuckling right? Did you see the three musketeers ever? 

But then I guess you don't really have a valid counter do you? Since you have to resort to mockery of something that is a staple of movies. 

 

Nope, I've just decided there's no point in beating this dead taun taun anymore.  I have set my phasers to maximum silly and I am ready to launch a full spread of sarcasm torpedoes from here on out.....be careful though, in this next asteroid cavern I think there might be a flock of unruly disco balls awaiting us......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK team, we have rock solid intel.........Vader has just gone into the Lamp's Plus, he's picking out new ceiling fans for his apartment on Coruscant..........We're gonna roll up in there hard..aim for the fans and let the Sith SOB have it with every off hand shot! 

 

Equipment check!  Primary hand......super soakers, check!  Off hand, Superior laser sighted Disruptor pistols, check!  Lets' get hot troopers! Go! Go! Go!................ :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...