Stun Setting

[Whill]

In Star Wars combat, it is usually more important to take someone out of the battle than wound or kill them. Any unconscious result means they stop shooting at you. Someone can keep going with two wounds but one wounded result on stun setting takes them down. I always thought that seemed off because we don't see everyone shooting at each other with the stun setting on in the films.

So I adjusted it so that a "wounded" result from a weapon in the stun setting results in a stun (identical to a "stunned" result), and any result of "incapacited" or higher results in unconsciousness. This makes the lethel setting slightly more tactical for wounded results because they last longer (cannot be recovered from for the rest of the battle) and they can add up to incapacitated faster than cumulative stuns can knock stronger characters or creatures out. But for characters that specifically do not want to kill, the stun setting does not significantly disadvantage you in combat because incapacitated results or higher take the target out of the battle just as easily in both settings.

I've never considered lowering range for the stun setting, but probably wouldn't just to keep things simple. Maybe a flat-out max stun setting range for all blaster weapons, but maybe not even that.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage

[garhkal]

[Bren]

"I don't allow thunderers (or any other pistol or rifle like blaster set to 6d or more damage) to be configured to stun, nor any repeaters..."

We had a player running a bounty hunter who looked like Clint Eastwood in the Dirty Harry days, your comment made me think of the following:

"But being as this is a DL-44 the most powerful handblaster in the world, and would stun you really, really hard, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?"

Just doesn't have the same sudden impact when you say stun.

[Bren]

Whill, your modification would certainly work for me, 8) though I would still be inclinded to lower the range just cause I can't see that stun ringy thingy traveling as far as a blaster bolt.

There must be a tactical reason not to choose stun, else we would see it more in the movies and what not. Whill's mod does this. It gets my vote.

I can also see gharkal's point that a souped up, extra damage weapon may lose the ability to stun.

[ZzaphodD]

[Whill]

[Whill]

[Bren]

I use extra damage for rolls well above the to hit number, but I am occassionally tempted to switch to allowing characters to take a swap two dice from their chance to hit and add 1 die to their damage instead.

But Whill, I agree this probablly should all move to another thread. I think we have talked out the pros, cons, and whatnot of stun 'less someone has something new regarding stun.

[Tusk BloodFlail]

We have a very simple way of dealing with this issue. At point blank range the weapon deals full stun damaga. At every range increment after that reduce the damage -1D. So a stun shot at Long range is at -3D to damage.

I know its not official, but it works really well for my group.
_________________
You should not fear your enemies, they should fear you!

[Gry Sarth]

That is a very interesting solution. I will consider adopting it for weapons set for stun (but not for stun only weapons).
_________________
"He's Gry Sarth, of course he has the stats for them."

[Tusk BloodFlail]

I should have made that more clear, we do not apply that to "stun" weapons. Only the stun setting
_________________
You should not fear your enemies, they should fear you!

[garhkal]