Talking about doubling equipment

[Markdoc]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

I'm unsure this is really the intent of the rule. That is the interpretation I read into it initially' date=' but aren't there published characters with Sword and Another Sword, 5 points, who use these in MPA's? Perhaps these characters should instead be buying bonuses to Sweep (rrapid attack if it's ranged) to get two attacks in a half phase at no OCV/DCV penalty.[/quote']

 

I think this is something that came along later, once the +5 = doubling thing was established.

 

As for buying bonuses to sweep or other options, instead, I agree 100%.

 

cheers, Mark

[OddHat]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

I'm unsure this is really the intent of the rule. That is the interpretation I read into it initially' date=' but aren't there published characters with Sword and Another Sword, 5 points, who use these in MPA's? Perhaps these characters should instead be buying bonuses to Sweep (rrapid attack if it's ranged) to get two attacks in a half phase at no OCV/DCV penalty.[/quote']

 

Based on TUV, I'd say that it the dobling rule can allow for MPAs. I agree that requiring levels with Sweep is a viable alternative; the two weapon fighters I've built have used Sweep, Two Weapong Fighting Style, and Rapid Attack rather than the doubling rule.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

Yeah, you should fix that. Two out of three of those powers should work with just one pistol.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

It's also used for vehicles with multiple weapons. A big starship with many zappificating guns sticking out. In this case I would only allow multple ones to be used at the same time only if there is a person manning each gun (or a computer with the appropriate ability).

 

And there's also a problem here (seen in TUV): the +5 points is the same no matter what the thing is or how many points it's built on. An extra pair of night vision goggles or an extra nuclear bomb both cost the same +5 points.

 

There's at least one published starship in TUV that has something like:

 

100 pts. - Big Honking Gun

50 pts. - Secondary Gun

20 pts. - Total of 16 Secondary Guns

So you get one big'un and a bunch of smaller ones, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but based on the doubling rule, why would you do this when you could have had 16 Big Honking Guns, and not bother with the little ones and save 50 points!

First part - good point.

 

Second part - because it's not in the concept of the ship to have 16 big honking guns, but 16 secondary guns. Not everything is an exercise in min/maxing.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

First part - good point.

 

Second part - because it's not in the concept of the ship to have 16 big honking guns, but 16 secondary guns. Not everything is an exercise in min/maxing.

 

From a practical perspective, however, why can't the ship use the 5 point doubling rule on the big gun and voluntarily have the "duplicate" guns be less powerful than the main gun?

 

It hardly seems fair that it would cost significantly more to have extra guns that do less damage than to have extra guns that do the same damage.

[OddHat]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

From a practical perspective, however, why can't the ship use the 5 point doubling rule on the big gun and voluntarily have the "duplicate" guns be less powerful than the main gun?

 

It hardly seems fair that it would cost significantly more to have extra guns that do less damage than to have extra guns that do the same damage.

 

Not a bad plan in a campaign where players pay points for vehicles. How about building the mini-guns and doubling them out to 16, then paying for +Xd6 to one of the Mini-Guns and calling it the Big Honking Gun.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

Not a bad plan in a campaign where players pay points for vehicles. How about building the mini-guns and doubling them out to 16' date=' then paying for +Xd6 to one of the Mini-Guns and calling it the Big Honking Gun.[/quote']

 

Seems fair.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

While a fair idea. . . The doubling for an Exact Copy.

[OddHat]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

While a fair idea. . . The doubling for an Exact Copy.

 

Each gun would still be an exact copy from a mechanics POV. The ship would just have one +Xd6 enhancer which, for -0, could only be applied to one of the guns. The gun that recieves the +Xd6 is, as an SFX, the Big Honking Gun.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

Each gun would still be an exact copy from a mechanics POV. The ship would just have one +Xd6 enhancer which' date=' for -0, could only be applied to one of the guns. The gun that recieves the +Xd6 is, as an SFX, the Big Honking Gun. [/quote']

Oi, my brain the confused.

 

Your idea is great. Works well.

 

It was Hugh's comment I was trying to comment back on.

 

I couldn't have made that less clear. . . (it's the heat, I blame the heat.)

[JmOz]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

Oddhat, great idea, and I would rep you, but I need to spread some around first

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

Second part - because it's not in the concept of the ship to have 16 big honking guns' date=' but 16 secondary guns. Not everything is an exercise in min/maxing.[/quote']

Yes, but I hardly think not wanting to pay 50 *more* points for a concept that's far *less* powerful is unreasonable. That's why I would have suggested the Advantage method: =1/4 for each 2x pieces of equipment, that way you're paying a proportionally smaller amount for the extra small guns than you would for the extra big guns.

 

Oddhat's method works also, but it still leaves the extra small guns at the same price as the extra big guns. But I suppose that's tolerable.

 

In any event, I see another notion expressed on this thread that I must disagree with: Backup equipment that's "back at HQ" should no cost any additional points at all! (Unless it's bought Independant) If you paid X points for a piece of equipment (with a Focus Limitation), then you have that piece of equipment available be default, normally. During the course of combat or other activity, the Focus might be taken away/broken/used up/etc., but those are still your character points. The +5 rule should, IMO, only be used for backups that are readily available. And also, IMO, they should not be allowed to be used at the same time. If you want to do twice as much damage, then pay twice as many points. If you want to simulate "two guns" you can buy the total damage and apply Reduced Penetration, and OAF (say at -3/4, to indicate that you have to be disarmed twice to fully take away the power, or you could even leave it at -1, since getting back your two stolen guns is twice as hard as getting back one stolen gun).

 

Example: The Mighty Warrior (of Great Fighting Stock), goes out hunting Wabbits with his spear and magic helmet. During the hunt, a Wascally Wabbit (the worst kind) knocks off the magic helmet. If MW(oGFS) can simply grab another magic helmet out of his back pocket, he has to pay +5 points for the backup. If MW(oGFS) has to make a strategic withdrawal back to the Hunting Wodge to get a new magic helmet, or if he has to go retreive the helmet that the Wabbit knock off, then he doesn't have to pay any extra. If he paid full price for two helmets, he could theoritically use them both at the same time (although thematically, this might require an extra head, or perhaps the magic can be invoked with the helmet on a mannequin head that he carries around, or maybe it just works by itself even if there's no head under it, or maybe he can wear both on one head, stacking them together like plastic lawn chairs).

 

And I recall another starship example from TUV: a Life Support system for ~20 points, and then an auxilliary Life Support system for ~10 points, in case the main one fails or its power source is depleted. The auxiliary system didn't have as much "stuff" - fewer LS powers, a smaller END reserve, etc. But why would you pay 10 points for a smaller LS system when you can have a duplicate of the main one for 5 points? In this example, there isn't even the issue of using them both at the same time. Yes, I know it's part of the concept of the ship and it's not about "minimaxing." But it simply doesn't seem fair to pay more and get less. I don't think that makes me a "minimaxer." I think it's an inherent problem with the +5 doubling rule.

[Fryguy]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

A player just asked me today about what I think of the 5 point doubling ability. Basically, he want to create a duplicate MP of weapons and defenses in a power suit and use them independently. Ie, fire in two directions at multiple targets or use Force Field from one MP and RKA from another. All that for just +5 points?! After reading this thread and all or your pros and cons I am going with my gut. He can use it to create a spare suit if #1 gets destroyed or stolen but that's the most I will allow. Thanks for the input!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Talking about doubling equipment

 

I only use doubling when I'm trying to get away with something sneaky.