| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Darklighter79
Captain
Joined: 27 May 2018
Posts: 529
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:29 am Post subject: |
 |
|
For clarification:
"Impossible" is due to the limited targeting system of a particular weapon at that range or beam coherency period after which it energy completely fades away/disperses?
I am asking cause droids may have superior targeting optics (some example outside of universe) and in some cases Force may come into play...
_________________
Don’t Let the Rules Get in the Way of a Good Story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Darklighter79 wrote: | | "Impossible" is due to the limited targeting system of a particular weapon at that range or beam coherency period after which it energy completely fades away/disperses? |
Correct. I'd like to come up with a way to use my (A) Marksmanship skill to allow shooters to hit further than the listed range, but I'd like to have the basic rules hammered out first.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2021 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Coming back around to this again...
Based on what we see on screen, I've decided to pare down the number of different "settings" from four to three, amalgamating "personal" and "vehicle" into a single range (called something along the lines of either "Surface" or "Ground", I haven't decided which yet).
Rather than trying to overlap all three levels the way I described above, I think it'll be similar to keep them nominally separate, and if a weapon can be used in multiple settings, give it multiple range band Difficulty values, one for each.
For example, a Blaster Cannon mounted on a Walker might have the following Range values (using the six Range Bands of Point Blank, Short, Medium, Long, Distant and Extreme):Surface: -/VE/E/M/VD/-
Atmosphere: VE/VD/-/-/-/- As far as Space Combat, I'm thinking the Ranges should be set up for Capital-Scale ships and weapons; Starfighter-Scale ships might have access to Point Blank and Short Range for the purposes of anti-ship strikes, but all combat between starfighters would be resolved at Atmosphere Range, regardless of whether the combat is occurring in atmosphere or space.
Ship Sensors would have similar ranges, which will also contribute toward initiative in space combat, since if everyone is using the same Range Bands, the ship that has the better rating at that Range Band will have the Detection advantage.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2021 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Giving this a bump on account of a recent discussion in the SWD6 Discord Group. A member named Sen suggested some alternate names for Range Bands that I'm giving serious thought to using in place of the RAW ranges: Touching/Melee, Close, Near, Far and Distant (I'd take my own Extreme onto the end there).
No real progress at the moment (mostly just wanted to post those alternate terms so they don't get lost), but I am still chewing this idea over.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
jtanzer
Lieutenant
Joined: 01 Mar 2023
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2023 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: |
Hold-Out Blaster Pistol: Very Easy / Difficult / Impossible / Impossible
Blaster Pistol: Very Easy / Moderate / Very Difficult / Impossible
Heavy Blaster Pistol: Very Easy / Moderate / Heroic
Sporting Blaster Pistol: Very Easy / Moderate / Difficult / Heroic
Blaster Rifle: Easy / Easy / Moderate / Very Difficult
Sporting Blaster Rifle: Easy / Easy / Moderate / Difficult
Blaster Carbine: Easy (Very Easy*) / Easy / Moderate / Heroic (Spectacular*)
Light Repeating Blaster: Easy / Easy / Moderate / Very Difficult
Medium Repeating Blaster: Moderate / Easy / Moderate / Difficult
Sporting Blaster Rifle: Easy / Easy / Moderate / Difficult
*with Stock retracted.
|
This is neat, however the only problem with it is that shooting a weapon with the stock retracted is harder, not easier, than shooting with an extended stock. The stock gives you a third point of contact with the weapon, increasing it's stability, and therefore accuracy. Ian McCollum "aka Gun Jesus" and Karl Kasarda demonstrate this here with a stockless shotgun. Otherwise, it's a neat concept.
_________________
The best villians are the ones the PCs create. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2023 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jtanzer wrote: | | This is neat, however the only problem with it is that shooting a weapon with the stock retracted is harder, not easier, than shooting with an extended stock. The stock gives you a third point of contact with the weapon, increasing its stability, and therefore accuracy. |
I agree; this rule is mainly designed to duplicate the RAW, where a Blaster Carbine is +5 to Difficulty with the stock retracted. It also incorporates a little bit of real world / house rule in that the folded stock makes the carbine into an essentially a large pistol that’s easier to use at point blank range or in tight quarters.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
jtanzer
Lieutenant
Joined: 01 Mar 2023
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2023 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | jtanzer wrote: | | This is neat, however the only problem with it is that shooting a weapon with the stock retracted is harder, not easier, than shooting with an extended stock. The stock gives you a third point of contact with the weapon, increasing its stability, and therefore accuracy. |
I agree; this rule is mainly designed to duplicate the RAW, where a Blaster Carbine is +5 to Difficulty with the stock retracted. It also incorporates a little bit of real world / house rule in that the folded stock makes the carbine into an essentially a large pistol that’s easier to use at point blank range or in tight quarters. |
Pistols are designed to fired from one hand, carbines are not. The folding stock exists for the sole reason of making it easier to carry when not in use. If you're trying to shoot it with the stock folded, you're going to be less accurate, not more accurate. So even with your logic, it still makes no sense that it should be easier to shoot with the stock folded. And anyway, your point was addressed in the video and repeatedly and thoroughly defeated. It is not, in fact, easier or faster to use with the stock folded. It is in fact harder and less accurate than with the stock extended.
_________________
The best villians are the ones the PCs create. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2023 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
And yet in all the films, never once was a retractable stock used for its intended purpose. Instead, the blasters are used more like hogleg pistols. I’ve made a decision to use house rules to emulate the films as much as possible, and that means there has to be a practical reason why retractable stocks are never used (or at least never seen to be). The closest answer I’ve been able to come up with is that blaster carbines are light enough (and the recoil negligible enough) that they are able to be used effectively as big pistols, and only use the stock when trying to hit targets at long distances. It’s not realistic for firearms, but it is how they are used on screen.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
jtanzer
Lieutenant
Joined: 01 Mar 2023
Posts: 97
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2023 8:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
A large part of the way things are portrayed in the films can be explained as artistic license. Most people wouldn't catch that error. The Sten gun, which served as the IRL base for the E11, has the recoil spring between the bolt and the body tube aft cap. That is what allows for a folding stock, something that the prop makers kept, probably without realizing it. However, that doesn't negate my point - using the stock is always more accurate than not using the stock. It's there for a reason. Additionally, hogleg pistols aren't very accurate due to NOT HAVING A STOCK.
When playing the game, you have to accept that what happens in game is real. Thus, by saying that carbines are more accurate without the stock than with it raises an interesting question: If the weapon is more accurate without a stock, then why include it? The only answer that is they aren't. It's a simple answer, and unfortunately one that most people miss.
_________________
The best villians are the ones the PCs create. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2023 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jtanzer wrote: | | When playing the game, you have to accept that what happens in game is real. |
No one has to accept that. And nothing that happens in the game is real. It is fiction.
| jtanzer wrote: | | A large part of the way things are portrayed in the films can be explained as artistic license. Most people wouldn't catch that error. The Sten gun, which served as the IRL base for the E11, has the recoil spring between the bolt and the body tube aft cap. That is what allows for a folding stock, something that the prop makers kept, probably without realizing it. However, that doesn't negate my point - using the stock is always more accurate than not using the stock. It's there for a reason. |
Regardless of what real-world process went into designing Star Wars guns, I doubt all real-world stock info exists in the SW universe. Here is a very short Wookieepedia article about stocks.
| jtanzer wrote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | | Instead, the blasters are used more like hogleg pistols. |
Additionally, hogleg pistols aren't very accurate due to NOT HAVING A STOCK. |
What does that even have to do with Star Wars? Hogleg pistols themselves apparently do not exist in the SW universe.
| jtanzer wrote: | | Thus, by saying that carbines are more accurate without the stock than with it raises an interesting question: If the weapon is more accurate without a stock, then why include it? The only answer that is they aren't. It's a simple answer, and unfortunately one that most people miss. |
I'm having trouble imagining a stock being used for point blank range attacks in Star Wars. But I am certainly no expert on blaster technology.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pakman
Commander
Joined: 20 Jul 2021
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2023 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jtanzer wrote: | | A large part of the way things are portrayed in the films can be explained as artistic license. |
This right here - we need to remember that lucas was a storyteller first, and game designer ....not even second...or maybe 100th...
We need rules in a game to help keep things consistent and sometimes to make sense as best we can.
Now - some things in the films - we should take as world-building or setting info that should be considered when making the rules for our games - such as the force is real, can move things, a jedi can sense it etc.
or that FTL travel exists, droids have personalities, there is a universal language but many individual ones as well etc.
A few details we can take as well - sensors are decent ("there is a droid on the scanner", "no life forms") - but not incredibly far range or accurate at a distance on details (not being able to find han and luke at a distance on Hoth).
But tons of other inconsistencies ? We just have to let those go - as there was not "they did it this way because.." for most of the things we see on film.
Why didn't they unfold the stocks? - because no one told the actors to do so, and they had no firearms training to know any better.
There are a lot of inconsistencies in our beloved 30 year old game, but not as many in our beloved 40 year old movies...
But to each their own...
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2023 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jtanzer wrote: | | A large part of the way things are portrayed in the films can be explained as artistic license. Most people wouldn't catch that error. The Sten gun, which served as the IRL base for the E11, has the recoil spring between the bolt and the body tube aft cap. That is what allows for a folding stock, something that the prop makers kept, probably without realizing it. |
And you can certainly make the choice to ignore film evidence and make a realistic version of events where the stormtroopers all used their stocks.
| Quote: | | However, that doesn't negate my point - using the stock is always more accurate than not using the stock. It's there for a reason. Additionally, hogleg pistols aren't very accurate due to NOT HAVING A STOCK. |
Point Blank range is within very tight quarters, usually 2-3 meters, close enough that the shooter can be engaged by Melee or Brawling attacks. At that close of a range, in a combat situation where targets can appear at unexpected angles with no warning, the size of the weapon can itself become an impediment to accuracy, particularly when making proper use of a shoulder stock would require shifting the shooter's entire torso to maintain contact. Conversely, a pistol is much more compact and can be more easily and rapidly shifted to bear on targets simply by shifting the arm holding it. It's telling that, when first founded, Delta Force's preferred weapon for room-clearing (effectively Point Blank range) was not a submachinegun with a shoulder stock, but a 1911 (source: Inside Delta Force by Eric Haney). If you look at the rest of the chart, you'll notice that pistols all have lower Difficulty at Point Blank Range than do rifles / carbines, but the carbine does have the option of being used in more compact form to represent that improved... reactiveness when in close quarters.
Ultimately, we struggled to properly represent this in the rules. Properly, it should be an aspect of Initiative, but the Initiative rules don't easily lend themselves to combining with weapon skills. In my Blaster Pistols rewrite, I gave Pistols a bonus of +1D to Blaster at Point Blank Range, as well as the ability to be used one-handed without penalty (larger weapons are penalized at varying degrees if you try). Blaster Carbines, being shorter ranged than Blaster Rifles, got the offsetting advantage of being able to fold their stock and convert into large pistols to take advantage of the responsiveness of the more compact form at Point Blank Range.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2023 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pakman wrote: | | But to each their own... |
Exactly.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2023 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | It's telling that, when first founded, Delta Force's preferred weapon for room-clearing (effectively Point Blank range) was not a submachinegun with a shoulder stock, but a 1911 (source: Inside Delta Force by Eric Haney). |
Then shifted to the small but mighty H&K MP5.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16281
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | | It's telling that, when first founded, Delta Force's preferred weapon for room-clearing (effectively Point Blank range) was not a submachinegun with a shoulder stock, but a 1911 (source: Inside Delta Force by Eric Haney). |
Then shifted to the small but mighty H&K MP5. |
The MP5 entered service in 1966, over ten years before Delta Force was formed. Delta did/does use the MP5 for other things, but they chose the 1911 over it for really close-up CQB.
_________________
"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 |
|
|
|
