OOC: SW Saga: E-i-E - Chap. II: Hope's Gambit - Page 2

Lucretia · 08-01-2012, 09:28 PM

Radiation grenades are so much fun! Very illegal, but still, so much fun!

Major · 08-01-2012, 09:37 PM

I uhh...I got a glowstick? It's kinda like a radiation grenade but without the radiation or the grenade part.

Thundercracker · 08-01-2012, 09:40 PM

I'll post the proposed upgrades for the complete overhaul of the Red Dawn when I get back to my books tonight. Mostly it's going to come down to how much time Ice has available to spend.

Lucretia · 08-01-2012, 09:42 PM

About 525,949 minutes I think, TC.

Felhammer · 08-01-2012, 09:43 PM

So is anyone sneaking anything in?

Major · 08-01-2012, 09:44 PM

Tempting, but I decided a lightsaber is a bit tricky to sneak in. Especially in an era with Sith, Jedi, and Imperial Knights so pretending its a hand warmer isn't as likely to work.

Lucretia · 08-01-2012, 09:51 PM

Lillian will not be sneaking anything in. There's just no space in what she's dressed in!

Binks · 08-01-2012, 09:52 PM

Staen has a stealth score of 3. So yeah, not sneaking anything illegal past. Let's see, here's the equipment I normally carry that I figure is legal to carry here, I'll assume I have it unless told otherwise.

Spoiler

Felhammer · 08-01-2012, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Binks

Verdicator (paranoid)

Everything seems fine except, what is that?

Lucretia · 08-01-2012, 09:56 PM

Oh yeah, that's a good point. I'll definitely be bringing my various detectors that look like jewelry -- the toxin detector, veridicator, radiation thingy. Plus the wrist holocom. *shamelessly follows Binks*

A veridicator determines when someone is lying.

Noedig · 08-01-2012, 09:59 PM

I just walked out of a casino, and now I'm about to walk back into one. The irony was lost on me until this very moment.

Edit: No I'm not sneaking anything in and yes I totally got fired for 'partaking' of the harem. Shore leave, 8 years ago, still not allowed on Nal Hutta. Best shore leave ever.

Binks · 08-01-2012, 10:04 PM

Portable wrist-mounted lie detector. Galaxy of Intrigue page 67.

Scratch that though, I'm leaving it behind. I just re-read the block and it has a secondary function that probably makes it very illegal on the Wheel. It gives a +5 bonus to gamble checks. Didn't know that until just a minute ago, and I bet that makes it both illegal and commonly checked for here.

Major · 08-01-2012, 10:06 PM

Only thing I'm wearing is my utility belt. Doesn't look like anything illegal is in it.

I'm not good at lying, but I don't have to. "Boss sent me here because I apparently need to 'relax and have fun'. Personally I don't see why I love my job and don't need to have fun to get it done."

:P Works with a button pusher here to 'relax and have fun' without requiring any lies or acting on my part.

Lucretia · 08-01-2012, 10:08 PM

I didn't know about the gambling bit, but I'm all for a disguise check to make it appear like a simple bracelet. What would the modifier be on that, Felhammer?

Felhammer · 08-01-2012, 10:13 PM

Verdicator is illegal. Lilly gets a +2 to her check.

Lucretia · 08-01-2012, 10:17 PM

(1d20)[11] + 20

Let's hope this doesn't end up a one. With my luck, it'll be a three.

EDIT: 31 is a respectable number. I believe the gigantic bonus to perception for being able to touch people is to stealth only (as per the wording of the text), not deceptive appearances, so hopefully I won't be found out.

EDIT2: I wonder if I can make a persuasion check to introduce a penalty to the men investigating Tuljei.

Thundercracker · 08-01-2012, 10:31 PM

Ice is armed with his awesome powers of persuasion, and he can build blaster turrets out of fountain pains a la macguyver, so he won't be sneaking anything on board.

Thundercracker · 08-02-2012, 04:39 AM

Ice can earn 3000 per day on his own:

Spoiler

upgrades:

Spoiler

He plans to spend 150k of his own money, which leaves a shortfall of about 27650 credits. This can be made up in 10 days worth of working on blaster pistols, for a total of 60 days for all the upgrades to the red dawn. The extra 3k will be spent on a rotary blaster cannon with tech specialist damage upgrade (3d10+2) for the docking gun port.

One thing I've left out is license fees. Although Ice would not have to go through background checks or pay fees for anything costing less than 7k, many items cost more, and I'm not sure what the rule is on them since we're actually legitimate members of a major military organization. The Red Dawn would be left with a combination of 110 seats/cargo (The existing heavy blaster cannon would be removed in favor of a medium turbolaser. Ice would leave it with 10 seats and 100 tons of cargo space). If he could swing it, he'd try to keep a few droidekas that were originally on board as shipboard defense and upgrade them too.

Feedback welcome.

Spoiler

Edit: It's too bad we don't have a dedicated pilot (or do we?), I wouldn't mind pimping out a snub fighter.

Edit2: Edited due to not needing point defense option.

Lucretia · 08-02-2012, 06:50 AM

Could you use the haggle option in order to cut the cost of the ship upgrades in half? Also, I wasn't aware we could get SR60, I thought SR55 was the largest a Colossal space transport could achieve, unless you've put the tech specialist +5SR on it.

Concerning point defense, the rules don't actually STOP us from putting them on heavy ion cannons and technically they don't say turbolasers can't use the upgrade, just that they normally aren't.

On slave circuits -- what do the advanced ones do? And after the Broadsword incident, are you sure you wanna have some in the Dawn?

Thundercracker · 08-02-2012, 07:07 AM

Already assumed haggle for 1/2 price.

Point defense is only relevant for colossal (frigate) or larger ships; the dawn doesn't take -20 for targeting ships smaller than Colossal so point defense does nothing for us. Combat thrusters means that capital ships treat the Dawn as Gargantuan (thus imposing -20 to hit us unless using a point defense weapon).

SR55 is included higher in the chart, SR60 is a ship designer feat upgrade (tech specialist for starships). It can be upgraded two more times, at a base cost of 75000 and 125000. I just didn't think it was cost effective. Other upgrades are available too, but hyperspace travel can be shaved using computer use (astrogate), and each weapon has to be upgraded separately.

Advanced slave circuits means it only takes 2 people to operate the ship, as opposed to the current 6.

Edit: I think I might have to revise this, as there's a note in the core book indicating turbolasers can only be mounted on frigate or larger ships. Which means gotta yank the two medium turbolasers and replace them with laser or blaster cannons. Starships of the galaxy states colossal or larger though... Felhammer?
Edit2: Found the errata, turbolasers can only be equipped on colossal (frigate) or larger ships. On the plus side, I found out everything gets added together before being multiplied. I will amend the upgrades.

Edit3: updated upgrades:

Spoiler

This requires Ice to work for 18 days, for a total of 62 days, and leaves red dawn with 10 seats and 130 tons of cargo space. He can also add an additional 20 hp for 25k and 5 days worth of work (and 8 days of customizing blasters, so basically 2 extra weeks to add 20 hps).

As a side note, it's possible to stack all the upgrades (quad, linked, enhanced), for +6d10 damage before the multiplier, but that uber-weapon costs 100x base.

Lucretia · 08-02-2012, 07:22 AM

Can you defend the tractor beam? The only time I've used one was a sort of 'scripted event' where not using it would have resulted in the target ship falling back to the planet we were dogfighting above and all that delicious cargo being lost. Other than that, it's pretty much gotten me killed. Also, what's our modifier for it? And is it worthwhile without a plasma torch to cut a hole wherever we've grappled on to?

Is there an item that increases the intelligence rating of the ship? That, and armor, are the only ways I know of to up the reflex defense of a vessel, and armor really isn't all that important because Graff's heroic level will soon eclipse that rating (unless we go to the extreme end and get, like, +20 armor or something [and make the Dawn look like a Lego brick!

]).

Of the weapons, which are pilot-linked and which gunner?

For ship roles, we've got...

Graff -- Pilot
Staen -- Commander
Ice -- Engineer
Lillian -- Gunner
Jarik -- Gunner
Kel -- Gunner

Right?

Also, can you explain why you've decided on two heavy ion cannons instead of additional turbolasers? Without dealing additional damage to the shields, I've found multiple ion cannons can actually be a detriment due to the low upper damage they can produce, by comparison to turbolasers. The ion damage and "not gonna blow you up with this attack" bits are certainly nice, do not get me wrong, but couldn't we achieve the same end result with three turbos and an ion? Give Graff control of the heavy ion and give Lilly, Jarik and Kel big ol' turbolasers.

Also, can't we up the damage of heavy ion cannons with... um, what's it called... there's like a "cannon enhancement" or something of the sort that you can't give to turbolasers.

I think the list you've drawn up is superb, and I cannot have done better. But at the same time, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the above.

EDIT: Whoa there, slow down. Starships of the Galaxy indicates that colossal size is required for turbolasers, not colossal frigates. Since it came out later, I'm of the opinion it replaces what is in the Core Rulebook.

EDIT2: This errata makes no mention of turbolasers at all. I maintain that we are capable of wielding them.

EDIT3: In World War 2, there were many derisive names for the ball-turrets, the most colorful of which I cannot recall. But they were more or less deathtraps. You didn't have room for a parachute, there was pretty much an inch (at most) of some 'reinforced' glass between you and open sky, it was just a bad situation to be in.

Snub fighters are pretty much the same.

Even with their relatively high reflex bonus by comparison to Colossal ships, the ships we'll be fighting (due to rocket tag-etry and such) would obliterate a snub fighter if they got a good hit off. A concussion missile would devastate us and EXODIA... OBLITERATE a fighter. Neither I nor Lillian would ever espouse fighters for PCs. NPCs, sure. But never anyone with a name and destiny points.

Thundercracker · 08-02-2012, 08:00 AM

This is the reference I'm using:
http://community.wizards.com/wiki/SW...onFAQ_Vehicles

It says turbolasers can only be mounted on a colossal (frigate) or larger vehicle, and I'm inclined to agree because otherwise a medium turbolaser is more cost effective by FAR than a laser or blaster cannon. Tractor beam in case we have to tow a disabled VIP ship away from something. Probably not too important, but what would we replace it with?

The +6 sensor array (the free upgrade) adds +6 eq bonus to the ship's int.

Edit: In the updated upgrades above, I changed the heavy ion cannons to enhanced dual heavy ion cannons (for 5d10x5 damage, or 25d10 or 12.5d10 after halving) and the medium turbolasers to enhanced dual heavy laser cannons (for 7d10x2 damage, or 14d10). They'll do almost the same amount of damage, but the ions have a chance to knock down enemy condition tracks, and allow us to disable ships without destroying them. The ions take up 7 emplacement points each and the lasers 4, I guess we could replace one ion with another laser for the bit of extra damage.

Lucretia · 08-02-2012, 08:05 AM

Gotcha on the int, that's good. I thought that upped our perception or something -- although, in hindsight, you use a Use Computer check in lieu of perception whilst in space, so I guess it does that too, huh.

FAQs are, in my opinion, a terrible place to derive rulings from. D&D 3.5's FAQs are a mire of poorly worded 'rulings;' if they had intended SotG to be amended, why not release an errata in the PDF I had linked?

I agree on them being more cost-effective, but I presume things like licenses or simply availability would be the limiting factor for turbolasers, not space or energy-draw.

As for what we'd replace the tractor beam with... um...

I suppose that's a fair point. I can't really argue against it. I thought gunners could fire multiple guns, but a phone call proved me incorrect. That throws so much into disarray!

But wait. Couldn't we get more guns and have droids fire those for us? *shifty eyes*

EDIT: Don't change the turbolasers until Felhammer demands that they be changed!

Those things are deliciously evil, and their range is actually 'realistic' for space combat as opposed to the 0-1 square PBR of those piddly cannons you want to equip now. Don't do it!

EDIT2: Regarding 'realistic' ranges in space, I think Warhammer 40k's Rogue Trader series is the pinnacle for proper ship-to-ship combat, both in terms of range and firing arcs. That a super star destroyer can, by the rules, target you with every weapon it has each turn (because it can supposedly move fast enough to obviate firing arcs) makes me cringe. But c'est la vie.

EDIT3: Regarding how Starships of the Galaxy's errata should have been in the PDF I linked: they have things like KotOR in the errata, which came out a while after SotG. I mean, that was like the second or third book they put out. If there was an errata, wouldn't it have been included in the 'master list'?

Thundercracker · 08-02-2012, 08:16 AM

I think firing arcs were eliminated as a tradeoff for making things simpler.

I have both versions of the upgrades here, and it's on a spreadsheet that calculates how many emplacement points/credits it requires, so if Felhammer allows it, we can slot the turbolasers in no problem. Nothing's final until he OK's it and it goes on the ship's stats :)

The main thing is... I don't fancy the idea of another colossal modified "shuttle" or two blasting _us_ with heavy turbolasers. At least capital ships will take a -20 to hit us.

Lucretia · 08-02-2012, 08:22 AM

While mechanically superior, the notion of the One Sith using heavily modified transports in order to rain down destruction and despair upon the hapless heads of their foes is too comedic for me to take seriously. The Empire made the Death Star, which was wildly cost ineffective. They could have created a hundred trillion star fighters and filled the vacuum of space if they wanted to (this is hyperbole, obviously) but instead they went for the big flashy thing. The One Sith were making the Vicious, and they had the Broadsword. These are beautiful works of craftsmanship, and are effective at showing the power and might of the One Sith.

We're the scrappy underdogs. So we're using a flippin' school bus that's got miniguns strapped to it, a la Twisted Metal.

The only people we should actually be worried about using such a vehicle would be pirates, but then they'd have to use the black market modifiers (no one would sell a pirate military hardware!) which would make it prohibitively expensive. If not prohibitively expensive, expensive enough that they wouldn't have a fleet of them.

This is obviously just my view on the matter, but I will argue and fight for it as firmly as I can.

Thundercracker · 08-02-2012, 08:30 AM

Yeah, it's not in the errata (unless this counts? http://community.wizards.com/go/thre...ilation_Thread ), but personally I just don't think it makes sense; small ships like the falcon didn't have turbolasers, even though they're cheaper, more effective, and flashier than a pair of quad blaster cannons.

It seems gravity well projectors are limited by the same restriction in SotG. Still think it should be colossal (frigate) or larger, but I wouldn't say no to turbolasers. Let's wait for Felhammer's ruling.

We could dump the tractor beam and get a concussion missile / proton torpedo launcher or two :)

Lucretia · 08-02-2012, 08:46 AM

The cost of proton torpedoes (and probably concussion missiles) are pretty extravagant as you get more of them in your hopper -- I think 16 can be held at once, and the price increases after like 4 or something -- but the splash is like 3 square radius in spaceship squares, or something equally ridiculous. At least, that's if my recollection is correct. That would certainly help against fighters and the likes, although vehicular combat would allow them to pilot check against our torpedo roll.

Still, if we had TWO, they couldn't evade both in a single round... wasteful? Yes. Stylish? Without a doubt!

On the Falcon not having turbolasers: well sure, but Han Solo's military days were restricted to pre-Falcon. Getting big ol' turbolasers on that thing would've 1) drawn unnecessary attention to a smuggling ship and 2) been prohibitively expensive. Plus, Lando owned the Falcon before-hand, and I don't think Calrissian would've wanted his smuggling ship to have military hardware, especially in a time where even blasters on ships were looked at with an eye of scrutiny.

Plus, Americans wouldn't have liked it as much if the Falcon had been on equal terms with bigger ships. We've been programmed to cheer for underdogs, for some silly reason.

Binks · 08-02-2012, 08:49 AM

It is in the Errata for Starships of the Galaxy. I'll take a look around for it as I know I've seen it floating around in a semi-official capacity since Wizards wiped their errata databases (which I always thought was ridiculous) but until then the 4th item in the SotG errata states:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Errata

p. 47 - Table 3.5 Weapon Systems
The footnote on the table should read: "1 Colossal (frigate) or larger starships only".

Sorry to rain on anyone's parade but I went through a similar discussion to this one when I was running a Saga game last year and remembered the errata from that.

Lucretia · 08-02-2012, 08:52 AM

I would argue that, since it isn't in the errata I posted (nor any errata I can find), it doesn't exist. Sort of like the Jedi Librarian -- if it isn't in my library, it doesn't exist.

And if it DOES exist and it isn't in my library, I'll dispatch Jedi Knights to dissolve it with Jedi Acid and then take the remains to the Jedi Crematorium to Jedi Destroy the Evidence.

...

I prefer the extended edition, in which the adjective Jedi is applied 75% more often than in the movies.

But seriously, if you can provide an actual errata that describes what you've posted, then I'll continue to argue the point until Felhammer provides a ruling but I'll do so with a sorrowful countenance.

Thundercracker · 08-02-2012, 08:59 AM

Except that... gravity pointed to it being there and...Jedi Librarian was wrong... and..that kid that pointed it out ended up getting cut to cauterized gibbets of cuteness... :p

The official errata compilation thread url I added after the fact in post #56 has it. Don't know if that counts as _actual_ errata or not.