View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 1:03 pm Post subject: Kashyyyk Long Gun |
|
|
WotC has stats for a weapon seen in RotS called the Kashyyyk Long Gun. It is a weapon specific to wookiees, similar to the bowcaster.
We've tossed around alternate rules for bowcasters before (most of us tend to agree that 4D is not enough damage to replicate what a bowcaster does on screen).
For reference, in WotC's rules, a blaster rifle does 3d8 damage. A bowcaster does 3d10 damage, and the long gun does 3d12.
Both the bowcaster and the long gun require a strength of 15 (well above human average, slightly above heroic average... slightly above wookiee average, incidentally) in order to operate the weapon to full effect.
The blaster rifle has a range increment of 30m (which means it's max range is 300m), while the bowcaster and long gun each have a range increment of 10m (max range of 100m) The bowcaster and blaster rifle both have an increased chance of scoring a critical hit (twice as often as "normal" for d20 weapons... or, 10% vs. 5% for typical weapons; the long gun has a 5% chance).
Using that info for comparison, I'm looking at statting out the long gun. Here's my first try:
Skill: Kashyyyk Long Gun
Ammo: 10
Range: 2-8/40/100
Cost: Not usually available for sale (2000 credits)
Availability: 4, R or X
Damage: 6D+2 or 7D (??? Not sure what makes most sense; thoughts?)
Game Notes: Any character may fire this weapon once each round. In order to fire more than one shot in a round, a character must make a lifting check (moderate difficulty) in order to fire a second or subsequent shot each round. Characters with at least 5D in lifting may ignore this requirement. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bren Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010 Posts: 3868 Location: Maryland, USA
|
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The gun range seems too short. Why have a "long" gun with a shorter range than a blaster pistol.
Re: bowcasters: I use 4D Speeder-scale damage. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14168 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'd set it at 6d damage, and give it a bonus to shoot at short range, say of +2d, dropping to +1d at medium, representing the long gun part of it. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bren wrote: | The gun range seems too short. Why have a "long" gun with a shorter range than a blaster pistol.
Re: bowcasters: I use 4D Speeder-scale damage. |
"Long gun" just means that it's a shoulder-fired weapon (as distinct from a "hand gun"). The "long" portion is not an indicator of effective range.
Here's some info (there's not much out there) along with a pic: https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Kashyyyk_long-gun/Legends
A shotgun, for example, is a long gun, but it's effective range (around 30-40m) is typically less than that of a typical hand gun (50m or more).
The fluff text in WotC's rules indicate that the Kashyyyk long gun does not have sights on it, which is why it's range increment is short. For what it's worth, WotC's blaster pistols have a range increment of 10m, with heavy blasters having a range increment of 8m. If a direct conversion is desired, we could just give the long gun the same range stats as a blaster pistol
Now, for your interpretation of the bowcaster, do you grant character scale targets the +2D bonus on dodge rolls against shots fired from a bowcaster?
Last edited by Naaman on Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote: | i'd set it at 6d damage, and give it a bonus to shoot at short range, say of +2d, dropping to +1d at medium, representing the long gun part of it. |
You mean because it should be more accurate than a pistol? |
|
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 Jun 16, 2019 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IMO, comparing shotguns and rifles is an apples & oranges scenario, as the two are designed for a different purpose. It's also noteworthy that hunting shotguns are used for hitting targets at greater ranges than riot shotguns, which are optimized for close quarters.
My first thought would be to make this a variant of the bowcaster, using the same ammo (as described here), but with double the listed range, and with an ammo capacity of 10. _________________ "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 |
|
|
Ray Commodore
Joined: 31 Oct 2003 Posts: 1743 Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, North America, Western Hemisphere, Earth, Sol, Western Arm, Milky Way
|
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bren wrote: | Re: bowcasters: I use 4D Speeder-scale damage. | I've done the same with my group. It shoots like a Character-Scale weapon, but does Speeder-Scale damage. The limited ammo combined with Strength check keeps it fairly well balanced.
As for the long gun, yeah, range looks a touch short. Maybe start with Blaster Carbine ranges, and cut those down a bit. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CRMcNeill wrote: | IMO, comparing shotguns and rifles is an apples & oranges scenario, as the two are designed for a different purpose. It's also noteworthy that hunting shotguns are used for hitting targets at greater ranges than riot shotguns, which are optimized for close quarters.
My first thought would be to make this a variant of the bowcaster, using the same ammo (as described here), but with double the listed range, and with an ammo capacity of 10. |
There seems to be a hang up on the term "long gun." Any gun that is too large to be a hand gun is a long gun, and that is the only criteria for classifying a weapon as a "long gun." It can be a rifle, a shotgun, a light machine gun, a PDW or even an SMG.
With regard to the range increment, I have considered that modifying the weapon by adding sights to it should extend it's range increment, but since it's standard design is assumed to be sightless, the standard range increment would need to be reduced; or, you could impose penalties on the attack roll... for anyone who wants to assign a value to sights (that is, sights on a gun account for 1D or 2D... or whatever... of the character's blaster skill).
In this case does it make more sense to extend the range increment and apply a penalty, or to keep the short range increment, or is the consensus that the range should be increased a bit to make it a "long" gun, but so much as to eclipse a blaster rifle? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
garhkal Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 14168 Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman wrote: | garhkal wrote: | i'd set it at 6d damage, and give it a bonus to shoot at short range, say of +2d, dropping to +1d at medium, representing the long gun part of it. |
You mean because it should be more accurate than a pistol? |
Yup.
Or you could just up its range to even 150 meters.. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bren Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010 Posts: 3868 Location: Maryland, USA
|
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman wrote: | There seems to be a hang up on the term "long gun." | Well I didn't think the name was supposed to be ironic, like calling a big man "Tiny." Since Wookiees aren't stone-age primitives like Ewoks (after all they make repulsorlift craft and Chewiee can fix the Falcon), it seems inaptly named for a weapon with the range of a smoothbore musket. I suppose if the intent is for this to be the Wookiee version of a WWII bazooka without any sights it kind of makes sense, but the rationale for needing a long barrel is totally missing.
re: Speeder-scale Bowcasters: what I do is essentially the same thing as Ray described. |
|
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 Jun 17, 2019 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Indeed. Bringing up shotguns to disprove the point is very much an apples and oranges fallacy, as there are other factors that affect why a "long gun" shotgun has shorter range than would a rifle with a shorter barrel. It's better to compare within type: rifles with other rifles, and shotguns with other shotguns. And all other things being equal, a longer barrel will have greater accuracy at longer ranges than a short barrel, in trade for being more cumbersome at close range.
Naaman, is it possible you're getting too hung up on a literal interpretation of "long gun" at the expense of asking why a weapon that is similar to a bowcaster would need a barrel that is so much longer? _________________ "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 |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, sure. I suppose its possible. I just approached the topic with a notion that "long gun" is not an indicator of function but of size. No biggie in the end.
With respect to accuracy and barrel length (in case you're interested), for SW, I can see this being a thing, but in reality its not really the case. Barrel length does not correlate directly to accuracy but to velocity. Barrel rigitity (which varies inversely with barrel length) is what affects accuracy. For each bullet and application, there is an "optimum" barrel length which determines maximum deadly range. The shorter the barrel, the less likely all the powder will be burned, thus reducing the force behind the bullet. A slower bullet will run out of steam sooner and fall to the ground sooner.
On the other hand, a barrel that is longer than optimum will also reduce velocity since the powder burns up before the bullet is free of the barrel's friction.
A more rigid barrel (due to material or thickness) will flex less, thus discharging the bullet straighter.
In any case, shooting far is a question of matching powder charge to barrel length, while shooting accurately is a question of barrel rigidity. Shooting far and accurately requires the correct barrel length (not too long and not too short for the particular round/load/application) with the heaviest barrel profile that is practical for the weapon's intended use/role.
/tangent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ray wrote: | I've done the same with my group. It shoots like a Character-Scale weapon, but does Speeder-Scale damage. The limited ammo combined with Strength check keeps it fairly well balanced.
As for the long gun, yeah, range looks a touch short. Maybe start with Blaster Carbine ranges, and cut those down a bit. |
I think the forum is unanimous (or nearly so) that 6D-ish damage is about right for the bowcaster.
I, myself could live with 5D+2, but I also have this "thing" that a bowcaster should be more than just a weapon, but somewhat of a right of passage for wookiees (and that owning/fighting with one is an indicator of station in wookiee society). I also like the idea that bowcasters are made to order (if not made by the owner himself for personal use) and so no two are the same (kinda like lightsabers).
I don't see the long gun as being "special" in the same way, but I think the idea is that it is supposed to be meaningfully more powerful than a bowcaster.
For me, +2 pips is the threshold for "meaningfully more powerful." But, what to others think? If a bowcaster is doing 6D damage, does 6D+2 make this weapon worth consideration even in light of any drawbacks it might have when compared to a bowcaster?
(In case it matters, one advantage that I think a bowcaster should have over other types of weapons is versatility in ammo selection, while having a lower ammo capacity between reloads. I think that the long gun could be more powerful with it's base damage, but would not have access to specialized rounds. I could also see it having a higher capacity than the bowcaster. So perhaps 6 shots for a bowcaster, and 10 for the long gun.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naaman Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011 Posts: 3190
|
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
CRMcNeill wrote: | Indeed. Bringing up shotguns to disprove the point is very much an apples and oranges fallacy, as there are other factors that affect why a "long gun" shotgun has shorter range than would a rifle with a shorter barrel. It's better to compare within type: rifles with other rifles, and shotguns with other shotguns. And all other things being equal, a longer barrel will have greater accuracy at longer ranges than a short barrel, in trade for being more cumbersome at close range.
Naaman, is it possible you're getting too hung up on a literal interpretation of "long gun" at the expense of asking why a weapon that is similar to a bowcaster would need a barrel that is so much longer? |
I didn't catch that bit about similar to a bowcaster before, so let me clarify:
The long gun is similar with respect to it's range increment to a bowcaster (at least, according to WotC), but such similarity is merely incidental: its operating system is completely different, and therefore the reason for its short range increment is also different.
Like I mentioned before, adding sights to it could easily extend its effective range (which is what I understand the weapon's "range" stat to represent), but sights are not standard on the weapon. I do agree, though, that the weapon's deadly range (assuming a hit is achieved either by astonishing luck or uncanny skill) would be much greater than 100m. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bren Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010 Posts: 3868 Location: Maryland, USA
|
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naaman wrote: | For me, +2 pips is the threshold for "meaningfully more powerful." But, what to others think? | For me whether +2 is meaningful or not depends, e.g. 3D+2 is meaningfully better than 3D. 11D+2 is not meaningfully better than 11D. If I wanted something meaningfully better than 6D, I'd be inclined to go up an entire +1D. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|