Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958
Equipment muisings
Recent Chat Activity (Main Lobby)
Join Chat

Loading Chat Log...

Prefer not to see ads? Become a Community Supporter.
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 53

  Click here to go to the first special guest post in this thread.   Thread: Equipment muisings

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    32
    Posts
    70
    Blog Entries
    1
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Equipment muisings

    Prefer not to see ads?
    Become a Community Supporter.
    Anything for clarifying equipment issues and/or advice.

    I'll start off.

    Should the jet pack really be only 300 credits?

    It only get's 10 squares of movement before re-fueling. But how much should we charge for fuel?
    Last edited by canadiansatan; 12-20-2008 at 01:58 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis
    Age
    37
    Posts
    23
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    A standard jet pack contains 10 charges. Using a jet pack grants a character a fly speed of 6 squares per turn and can be used continuously from round to round. New fuel cells are 100 credits. SWSE page 136.

    It isn't clear in the book but I would think that this 6 squares counts as movement and so using a jet pack costs a move action each round. I'm not sure if you can double move per turn, but if you can I would say you are using one charge per move action.
    Where are the horses? What! What dragon? Oh, shit . . .

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    32
    Posts
    70
    Blog Entries
    1
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Well done exactly the point of this section!

    Next, a lightsaber with a bondar crystal does stun damage. Does this "training lightaber" still ignore the DR of objects?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis
    Age
    37
    Posts
    23
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    SWSE page 122: The blade of a lightsaber is generated by an energy cell and focused through crystals within the hilt. The saber can cut through most materials (except another lightsaber blade, an energy shield, or a few exotic materials), given enough time.

    SWSE page 162: Only creatures can be stunned. Droids, vehicles, and objects are immune to stunning effects.

    KotOR page 66: Bondar Crystals convert the energy of a lightsaber blade into a different kind of energy. A lightsaber constructed with a bondar crystal deals stun damage instead of normal damage. Training lightsabers are made with bondar crystals.


    Objects are not effected by stunning, so a training lightsaber cannot damage objects. Technically, I think it would be ignoring the DR of the object, but since a lightsaber with a bondar crystal cannot damage an object, ignoring DR of an object isn't very useful.
    --- Merged from Double Post ---
    Rereading the passage on stunning, I am going to change my mind. Here is another passage about stunning on page 162 of SWSE:
    When you make a successful attack with a weapon that deals stun damage, subtract half of the stun damage from the target's hit points.

    So a training lightsaber can damage objects, only doing half as much damage as a normal lightsaber does. It just cannot effect it, in other words, it can't knock it unconscious or push it down the condition track because of stunning.

    Does anyone know where it is stated that a lightsaber ignores DR? It certainly makes sense, given what we see lightsabers cut through in the movies, but I don't see it in the description of lightsabers or on the chart on page 122 of the Sage Edition book.
    Last edited by Cy the Wander; 12-21-2008 at 01:53 PM. Reason: Automerged Double Post
    Where are the horses? What! What dragon? Oh, shit . . .

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    32
    Posts
    70
    Blog Entries
    1
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    So would a bullet from a slugthrower still burn up in a bondar lightsaber? Since this lightsaber does not cut through objects like a normal lightaber, would deflect effect the metal bullets?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,362
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Cy the Wander View Post
    So a training lightsaber can damage objects, only doing half as much damage as a normal lightsaber does. It just cannot effect it, in other words, it can't knock it unconscious or push it down the condition track because of stunning.
    This is correct.

    Thus you can still deflect with a training lightsaber. Without getting into too much minutia that training lightsaber is still doing damage thus should be able to still destroy a slug shot at it.

    However, it is my belief that it is really the skill of the wielder that is deflecting the shot. This is why a level 1 padawan with deflect and a training lightsaber can still deflect shots. Or another way to look at it is, that is why Deflect is a talent for a character to take and not an inherent property of a lightsaber.
    Last edited by Inquisitor Tremayne; 12-29-2008 at 09:06 AM.
    "I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. About a great, many things."

    "It is not the rules that make or break a game, it's the GM and the players."


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    32
    Posts
    70
    Blog Entries
    1
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    There is the heart of the issue. The stun lightsaber would do half damage to objects (still pleanty to take out a tiny ball of metal).

    However, does the stun lightsaber ignore the DR of objects? If not, then metal slugs would sometimes pass through the blade.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,362
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by canadiansatan View Post
    There is the heart of the issue. The stun lightsaber would do half damage to objects (still pleanty to take out a tiny ball of metal).

    However, does the stun lightsaber ignore the DR of objects? If not, then metal slugs would sometimes pass through the blade.
    I would say yes.

    It IS still a lightsaber, the only thing that has changed is its "setting". It is only non-lethal in the sense that it is not going to kill any living creature, just knock them unconscious, therefore it should still ignore the DR of objects.

    By that reasoning, you can still do whatever you normally would do with a lightsaber, block, deflect, redirect, etc...
    "I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. About a great, many things."

    "It is not the rules that make or break a game, it's the GM and the players."


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Rowlett
    Posts
    2,525
    Blog Entries
    7
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I'm of a particularly mixed persuasion on this issue, but one that comes from an attempt to make internal sense of the circumstances rather than any rules consideration. Consider the following:

    Training lightsabers (which deal stun damage) are intended to allow one to practice the weapon without causing permanent harm to another being. When the blade of the saber strikes someone, it delivers a jolt of low-level energy which can sufficiently disorient (stun) if applied appropriately but is otherwise harmless and does not penetrate the skin (such as when Leia is stunned aboard the Tantive IV).

    If the weapon's energy dispersal is set such that it will not break skin, it is difficult to consider that it would penetrate anything more dense than skin (such as the metallic alloys of vehicles, buildings or droids). As such, any "damage" inflicted on a material struck (animate matter or not) is simply the release of the energized "shock" the weapon delivers upon contact.

    Thus, I would say that a training saber would be incapable of penetrating most matter aside from negligible materials such as paper instead repelling off such a surface upon contact and energy discharge. As such, this would thus render any ability to ignore DR moot.

    That said, from a rules standpoint, I would still allow players to use training sabers to use all their normal talents and abilities such as Block and Deflect, even if it only means that the deliverance of energy redirects physical projectiles away from it rather than incinerating them.

    Likewise, it makes sense to me that a Jedi wielding one could not use it in conjunction with the Severing Strike talent. The saber is incapable (because it is specifically designed as such) of parting flesh, which is not such a rigorous material.
    Last edited by Webhead; 12-29-2008 at 09:24 PM.
    HARRY DRESDEN WIZARD
    Lost items found. Paranormal Investigations.
    Consulting. Advice. Reasonable Rates.
    No Love Potions, Endless Purses, or Other Entertainment.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vancouver
    Age
    32
    Posts
    70
    Blog Entries
    1
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Thank you webhead. I would add that just like severing strike would make no sense, block and deflect would only work against other energy weapons.

    If anyone's ever seen the "lightsaber" in the garage sale episode of Venture Bros. that's my thought.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,362
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Webhead View Post
    *snip*
    In the abstract world of hit points this is too specific, breaking the skin or not breaking the skin is not and should not be brought up, that is simply one possible way a lightsaber can damage someone. You can't set a lightsaber to "not break skin" setting, you are setting it to stun, which according to game mechanics still deals damage, even though it is damage that won't kill you just knock you out.

    I haven't read over the entry for this specific crystal but IIRC, in game terms, it is only changing the damage type. Thus the damage type should be the only thing that changes, you aren't changing any other properties of the lightsaber. Just like when you set a blaster pistol to stun, it is still a blaster pistol, the only thing that has changed is the damage type.

    I can't remember the specifics of severing strike, but I doubt it would come into play here. For severing strike to work you need to deal damage to a character that is over their DT and it is highly unlikely that one would be able to deal that much stun damage to a character. So using severing strike as a reason for doesn't work either, and if someone were able to deal that much stun damage (keep in mind you apply half of whatever stun damage you actually rolled to a character) then I would allow severing strike to work.

    Lets try to break it down anyway, lets say and 8th level Jedi Knight with severing strike and this stun lightsaber attacks someone, lets say they spend a destiny point to auto-crit also, then they roll damage, let's say they have a Str of 16 and are wielding it two-handed also, that is 2d8+6 (from Str) +4 (from level). Lets say they also roll max damage = 26 points of damage x2 for the auto-crit = 52 points of stun damage. That means the target is obviously going to be moved 2 steps down the CT and they are taking 26 points of actual damage. If that 26 points of damage is over their DT then, yeah I would allow severing strike to work in this case. It seems extreme but yeah, it actually is cause the character spent a destiny point, got lucky and rolled max damage, etc...

    So in the right hands a lightsaber is a deadly weapon, even a stun lightsaber. Is it logical to use one all the time? No, because you are actually only dealing stun damage, so you will never be able to kill someone with it, just knock them out. Should you pick up one instead of a stun baton? Well, given you still need to be proficient with a lightsaber to use one I would say, it couldn't hurt to have one around if you are a Jedi.

    Also, yes these are the Jedi's training lightsabers, and given the fact that if Jedi are training with them, I 1) doubt that Jedi over say 3rd level would be using them regularly and 2) that Jedi that are sparring with training lightsabers would ever using severing strike against each other.
    "I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. About a great, many things."

    "It is not the rules that make or break a game, it's the GM and the players."


  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Rowlett
    Posts
    2,525
    Blog Entries
    7
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Inquisitor Tremayne View Post
    ...*snippity*...
    As I said, I was attempting to apply some internal logic based upon my understanding of the purpose of the training lightsaber within the diagetic space of the setting rather than the reprecussions of the rules mechanics.

    In the Star Wars universe, a person can accidentally chop someone in half with a regular lightsaber with a simple, misguided flick of a wrist. No intent to harm is needed, only carelessness or lack of skill. The weapon is simply that dangerous. So dangerous that one can even accidentally injure/kill oneself with the weapon if not careful.

    Because of this, training lightsabers were invented to prevent young and unskilled students from maiming or killing each other while sparring. The saber was designed to reduce the power output so that contact with the blade would only deliver an uncomfortable shock of energy rather than dismemberment. Its equivalent to the safety switch on a firearm. It is intended to prevent accidental injury.

    Here's a little info from Wookieepedia:

    Training lightsabers, also known as practice sabers, were low-powered lightsabers used by Jedi Initiates and younglings.

    Using the training weapons, younglings learned the basics of wielding a lightsaber. Like a regular lightsaber set to low power, they could not sever limbs or pierce flesh. Skin contact was painful, producing burns which could cause serious welts and bruises.
    As such, it was my personal stance to consider training sabers to be incapable of penetration and that the "damage" delivered by the saber was the damage of the discharge of energy, not of the saber physically seperating matter.

    What that says to me in game terms is that the saber still delivers stun damage normally, even to inanimate objects, but strikes and repells off surfaces and cannot penetrate them. Thus, I would not allow a training saber to slice through a metal door, but with sufficient persistence, could be used to "shock" a droid into submission (by dealing enough damage to it to reduce it to 0 hit points).

    To me, it is an issue of internal logical application (i.e. what makes sense within the established setting based on what I know), not about its interaction with the abstraction of Hit Point systems.

    In the fictional reality of Star Wars, a character doesn't have to intentionally have and use the "Severing Strike" talent to purposefully or accidentally cut someone's hand off with a lightsaber. If you strike someone's wrist with the weapon, their hand will come off. The training saber was built as a safeguard against such eventualities.

    To me, it's a "I use a club to cut the rope" scenario. Even though a club deals damage and a rope has hit points, logic dictates that no amout of badgering a hanging rope with a club will severe the rope. Likewise, since my understanding is that a training saber is incapable of penetrating flesh, logic dictates to me that it is incapable of penetrating anything more dense than flesh and thus I would not allow such activity within the game.

    My 2 long-winded credits...
    Last edited by Webhead; 12-30-2008 at 11:13 AM.
    HARRY DRESDEN WIZARD
    Lost items found. Paranormal Investigations.
    Consulting. Advice. Reasonable Rates.
    No Love Potions, Endless Purses, or Other Entertainment.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,362
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    GASP!

    Webhead, I never thought this day would come! When you and I finally do not agree on something!

    While normally I might agree that it is a judgment call on the part of the GM, I actually do not think so in this case simply because it is spelled out in the description of the crystal.

    However, this is a good question overall to bring up, can stun damage actually deal damage in the sense that it will break/destroy something? Applying logic to the SW universe one might say no and be fully correct under normal circumstances.

    In this case, and in the end I guess it is the GMs game thus it should be left up to the GM.
    "I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. About a great, many things."

    "It is not the rules that make or break a game, it's the GM and the players."


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Rowlett
    Posts
    2,525
    Blog Entries
    7
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Inquisitor Tremayne View Post
    ...In this case, and in the end I guess it is the GMs game thus it should be left up to the GM.
    Exactly. I'm not saying that other GMs couldn't or shouldn't allow training lightsabers to act otherwise. I was just trying to set down my particular understandings and thus how I would treat them in my game (regardless of system used).

    So, if you use a training lightsaber in my game, don't expect to slice through stuff!

    The same can be said of how I handle blasters set on "stun". It has been observed in the movies (and a couple other sources), that shots from blasters set on "stun" are not bolts of energy, but a dispersed pulse or "wave" of low-level energy. As such, I do not allow the Deflect talent to be used against blasters set to stun because there is no specific projectile to deflect. You are being hit by a wave of energy. Now, the rules don't make any distinction between "stun" and "kill" bolts and thus suggest that players can deflect them normally. And if a GM wishes to handle it that way in their games, that's totally fine. But in my games, I choose to make that distinction.

    I do it for 2 primary reasons: 1) it holds a certain internal logic for me, and 2) it gives another option for attacks that can be effective against Jedi besides explosives and exotic weapons like "sonic blasters" or cortosis weapons, which feel kind of contrived when they show up every combat.
    Last edited by Webhead; 12-30-2008 at 02:43 PM.
    HARRY DRESDEN WIZARD
    Lost items found. Paranormal Investigations.
    Consulting. Advice. Reasonable Rates.
    No Love Potions, Endless Purses, or Other Entertainment.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,362
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Another option is to, as GM, decide what "Droids, vehicles, and objects are immune to stunning effects" means in regards to stun damage or for ion damage "creatures are immune to ion effects".

    In my games we interpret this to mean that you take some damage, but you don't get knocked down the condition track at all, regardless of the damage taken.

    Cause if you have a stun lightsaber... OH! I just thought of this too! Those training lightsabers are often used for younglings like we see in episode II, that means those lightsabers are the SMALL version, meaning they are only doing 2d6 damage on a hit. So if you use a small size stun lightsaber against a droid, object, or vehicle you are going to be doing even less damage, regardless of the DR anyway.

    I still think they should ignore DR, the amount of damage they are doing on average in minimal compared to how effective a non-stunning lightsaber would be. On average a lightsaber deals 9 points of damage, if it is a stun lightsaber that is half the damage actually being dealt to the object, vehicle or droid, or 4 points of damage. Even with a Strength bonus of +3 that is still only 6 points of damage being dealt with a stun lightsaber.
    "I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken. About a great, many things."

    "It is not the rules that make or break a game, it's the GM and the players."


Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Some d20 Star Wars Musings/Adjustments
    By USFPutty in forum Sci-Fi / Futuristic
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-16-2008, 12:42 PM
  2. Genre musings
    By Stormhound in forum Feedback
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-16-2008, 06:42 PM
  3. [DM / Player Tools] Chapter Six -- Money and Equipment
    By tesral in forum Campaign Resources
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-23-2008, 12:27 AM
  4. Musings on balance, flexibility and 4e
    By Maelstrom in forum Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 06-16-2008, 03:21 PM
  5. Star Wars Saga Equipment
    By GBVenkman in forum Sci-Fi / Futuristic
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 01:01 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •