View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone else ever think of just saying "screw the crossover implications" and just calling these things "phasers"? Composite-Beam Laser really is quite a mouthful, and Trek Phasers are almost entirely beam-type, instead of firing blasts. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Darklighter79 Captain
![Captain Captain](images/ranks/captain.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_Other/Manda_Jawa.jpg)
Joined: 27 May 2018 Posts: 529
|
Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But they also use "phasers" for bolt type weapons, both starship and personal.
It is what blaster/laser is for SW: "a general term for energy weapons". _________________ Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Darklighter79 wrote: | But they also use "phasers" for bolt type weapons, both starship and personal.
It is what blaster/laser is for SW: "a general term for energy weapons". |
Trek has multiple types of energy weapons, most prominent being the disrupters used by Romulans and Klingons.
And even then, it would be even easier to co-opt the term and use it as needed. Especially since a composite beam laser is essentially phasing multiple beams of blaster energy with each other. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Whill Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_Whill/Emperor+Vader.jpg)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Posts: 10304 Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Darklighter79 wrote: | But they also use "phasers" for bolt type weapons, both starship and personal. |
Ha. I just found out from Wookieepedia that a single EU publication (a kiddie novel about young Boba Fett) actually entered "phaser" tech into SW continuity. It's an acronym. Ha.
Darklighter79 wrote: | It is what blaster/laser is for SW: "a general term for energy weapons". |
Technically, blaster tech is a specific kind of energy weapon. But it is funny that you say that because in my SWU, the term "blaster" still properly refers specifically to blaster tech but also colloquially refers to energy weapons in general, like how on Earth people use "kleenex" to mean facial tissue in general or "coke" to mean soda pop in general. I made it that way because I wanted to generalize the skill to cover all energy weapons but not change the name of the skill. _________________ *
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose the other option would be Fusion Beamer... _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
jtanzer Lieutenant
![Lieutenant Lieutenant](images/ranks/lieutenant.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/WEG/Ana_Tathis.jpg)
Joined: 01 Mar 2023 Posts: 76
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know I'm a little late to the party here, however, I think I have an explanation as to why we don't see composite-beam lasers in SW more. That reason is that they're finicky - and therefore expensive - as hell to sustain. If you don't maintain precise alignment of the beam emitters, than it won't work correctly - potentially leading to an explosion. This is why the Republic removed them from the LAAT/i, the Rebellion switched to a more 'conventional' weapons set for the B-Wing, and the Empire never mounted them on anything smaller than a Star Destroyer. It's not that they don't scale well - they do - rather that trying to mount them on smaller - and less stable - platforms leads to a maintenance nightmare that even the Empire isn't willing to deal with.
Now, I can already here you saying that the Republic and the Empire can simply throw more money at the problem. However in one of Perun's videos (I forget which one), he explains that even superpowers like the US have to make compromises in their defense budgets. Therefore, I would posit that with the Empire and the Republic simply lacked the budget to design small, easy to maintain, composite beam laser systems. The Republic simply dropped the idea altogether, while the Empire opted to compensate for the alignment issue by simply making the damn thing so massive that alignment ceased to be a problem. All of this stands in stark contrast to the Rebellion, who lacked the resources to even begin to think about building - much less sustaining - the thing.
Of course, the Rebellion has it's own...procurement and sustainment eccentricities, but that's besides the point. _________________ The GM runs a living setting. Players unstick their own s***. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
A worthwhile idea, certainly, but it would necessitate incorporating a repair & maintenance / reliability mechanic. Not that it hasn’t been attempted over the years, but for something like this, it’d need to be more of a snapshot, where the GM decides that x piece of equipment hasn’t been well maintained, and thus suffers reliability issues, maybe becoming damaged or inoperable on a Wild Dice Failure. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
jtanzer Lieutenant
![Lieutenant Lieutenant](images/ranks/lieutenant.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/WEG/Ana_Tathis.jpg)
Joined: 01 Mar 2023 Posts: 76
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
TLDR; it was an attempt at an in universe, not game mechanics explanation.
I understand your point, however game mechanics wasn't even mentioned, or considered. I was merely concerned with the in universe reasons, and I drew on real-world information in an attempt to draw a conclusion that was reasonable and logical. Now, I do agree that a 'degradation' mechanic for equipment is interesting on paper, however I'm concerned of excessive 'weight' of a rule/mechanic that doesn't provide any meaningful gameplay value.
I feel your concern with modeling everything is detrimental to the game. I'm autistic, however I understand that not everything needs to be categorized, standardized, quantified, and placed into a nice, neat, little box and kept there. Modeling everything with an in-game mechanic, especially in a TTRPG, is inherently impossible and impractical. What you are proposing would lead to more bookkeeping that would slow down the game. Not everything needs a mechanic to go with it. Not everything needs to be defined to the nth degree to order to be 'playable'. _________________ The GM runs a living setting. Players unstick their own s***. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
In-universe fluff about a thing’s operational characteristics is useless without some framework for incorporating it into the actual stats. While I personally have no serious need for such a blanket reliability mechanic for everything, incorporating this reasoning into composite-beam lasers in the Rebellion era (presumably when maintenance standards would’ve been most likely to decline) should include a rule mechanic for them to fail occasionally, applied at GM discretion. GMs have a lot on their plate, after all, and having the rule incorporated into the game stats themselves is extremely helpful during tabletop combat. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
jtanzer Lieutenant
![Lieutenant Lieutenant](images/ranks/lieutenant.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/WEG/Ana_Tathis.jpg)
Joined: 01 Mar 2023 Posts: 76
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And that rule is one more that the GM has to remember on top of all the others. So you really haven't addressed either my reasoning as to way we don't see more of them or as to why have a reliability mechanic might be dead weight. If anything, I'd simply rule that there aren't many of them for the exact reasons that I stated. People don't want to deal with the maintenance issues, and so development of the system has been slow, or even degraded, due to lack of interest - interest that drives funding. _________________ The GM runs a living setting. Players unstick their own s***. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I actually did address your reasoning; I said it was a decent explanation, and further proposed a mechanic to be included at GM discretion. You’re awfully antagonistic for a newcomer. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
jtanzer Lieutenant
![Lieutenant Lieutenant](images/ranks/lieutenant.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/WEG/Ana_Tathis.jpg)
Joined: 01 Mar 2023 Posts: 76
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And my point was that they were too difficult and expensive to maintain to be worthwhile, hence obviating the need for a reliability mechanic. And even if a reliability mechanic were to be implemented, it likely would add dead weight to the game. _________________ The GM runs a living setting. Players unstick their own s***. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
CRMcNeill Director of Engineering
![Director of Engineering Director of Engineering](images/ranks/grandMoff.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_StarWars/Bandon.gif)
Joined: 05 Apr 2010 Posts: 16186 Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very well, then, I will reiterate my earlier point. Should characters in the Rebellion Era encounter such weapons and attempt to use them, it can be assumed that they may not be receiving proper maintenance, and will thus be finicky and unreliable. As such, any stat equipped with them in that era should include a rule that reflects that unreliability, which can be applied at the GM’s discretion. And since said mechanic will be included in the stat itself, the GM will have it readily available as a reference every time they look at the stat. If they consider it “dead weight”, they may ignore it if they so choose. Of course, any failure mechanic would likely be based around a Wild Dice Failure, which the GM will almost certainly make use of should it occur. _________________ "No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Last edited by CRMcNeill on Sat Aug 19, 2023 1:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
jtanzer Lieutenant
![Lieutenant Lieutenant](images/ranks/lieutenant.gif)
![](images/avatars/gallery/WEG/Ana_Tathis.jpg)
Joined: 01 Mar 2023 Posts: 76
|
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess the reason why I'm against a reliability mechanic is because I try not have mechanics that are single purpose. I vastly prefer mechanics that emphasize risk-reward. Having said that, here's my writeup for a composite beam laser.
Composite Beam Laser
Crew: 2 (1 min)
Body Strength: 2D
Scale: Speeder
Fire Control: 3D
Damage: 4D (+4D against unshielded targets or targets who failed their shield roll)
Reliability: On a Wild Die roll of 1-2, roll 1D on the following table
1-2: Weapon catastrophically explodes, dealing 4D damage to everyone within 3 meters
3-4: Weapon overheats and cannot be fired for 1D rounds
5-6: Weapon becomes misalinged, suffers -1D penalty to Fire Control and increases the Wild Die threshold by 1. This penalty may stack up to three times, to a total penalty to a total of -3D. After this penalty is reached, treat each Wild Die roll as a roll on this table, ignoring this result. _________________ The GM runs a living setting. Players unstick their own s***. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
Whill Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
![](images/avatars/gallery/_Whill/Emperor+Vader.jpg)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Posts: 10304 Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2023 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
jtanzer wrote: | I feel your concern with modeling everything is detrimental to the game... |
Who's game? His game? Are you a player in his game? If not, you don't need to be so concerned with his game. Your game? He has no say in how you run your game, or anyone else's.
jtanzer wrote: | I'm autistic, however I understand that not everything needs to be categorized, standardized, quantified, and placed into a nice, neat, little box and kept there. Modeling everything with an in-game mechanic, especially in a TTRPG, is inherently impossible and impractical. What you are proposing would lead to more bookkeeping that would slow down the game. Not everything needs a mechanic to go with it. Not everything needs to be defined to the nth degree to order to be 'playable'. |
jtanzer wrote: | And that rule is one more that the GM has to remember on top of all the others. So you really haven't addressed either my reasoning as to way we don't see more of them or as to why have a reliability mechanic might be dead weight. |
jtanzer wrote: | And my point was that they were too difficult and expensive to maintain to be worthwhile, hence obviating the need for a reliability mechanic. And even if a reliability mechanic were to be implemented, it likely would add dead weight to the game. |
SITE ADMIN wrote: | ...if you vehemently oppose an idea and/or don't have anything to add to the discussion, please consider just moving on. |
jtanzer, a couple things.
All stats and rules, fan-made and even official, are optional for all GMs. You are not beholden to use any of his stats or rules. We just share our ideas with each other (and the world), and each GM decides if they're useful to them or not.
And you are characterizing CRM as having rules for everything. There was another guy here who rolls dice to determine if PCs like the taste of new foods they try! So no, CRM doesn't have rules for everything.
And you are also characterizing GMs who are crunchier than you negatively, which are general sentiments that seem like personal attacks when directed at CRM. If you are so passionate about this aspect of game design philosophy, you can always post a general discussion thread not directed at anyone in particular to discuss your ideas for how much crunch you feel is too much crunch. However, in my ample experience GMs all tend to have their own various crunch requirement levels, and it often varies depending on the particular rules (many GMs are crunchier about some things than others), so it commonly boils down to case-by-case considerations.
jtanzer wrote: | I guess the reason why I'm against a reliability mechanic is because I try not have mechanics that are single purpose. I vastly prefer mechanics that emphasize risk-reward. Having said that, here's my writeup for a composite beam laser.
Composite Beam Laser
Crew: 2 (1 min)
Body Strength: 2D
Scale: Speeder
Fire Control: 3D
Damage: 4D (+4D against unshielded targets or targets who failed their shield roll)
Reliability: On a Wild Die roll of 1-2, roll 1D on the following table
1-2: Weapon catastrophically explodes, dealing 4D damage to everyone within 3 meters
3-4: Weapon overheats and cannot be fired for 1D rounds
5-6: Weapon becomes misalinged, suffers -1D penalty to Fire Control and increases the Wild Die threshold by 1. This penalty may stack up to three times, to a total penalty to a total of -3D. After this penalty is reached, treat each Wild Die roll as a roll on this table, ignoring this result. |
Thanks for sharing your version. Readers now have another option. _________________ *
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
|