Aroooo

Originally posted by Vanguard

Also away of thinking is this. It's also depends on the TYPE of missle you're trying to build.

 

Personally, I would go with something like this. If the missile is something like a Maverick or a Sidewinder, I'ld build as a normal RKA with appropriate Advantages and Limitations. If it was something like a Tomahawk Cruise missle .. Vehicle all the way.

True. Something that takes a long time to target, or is really big, I would build as a vehicle. But for B5 anyway, most ship-to-ship missiles I plan on just making various RKA's.

Aroooo

Vindicated

Okay, I'm not trying to sound like a jerk or anything, but I finally got my copy of TUV, and on page 130, it says you CAN build a missile as a RKA with the Extra Time limitation. I feel vindicated

On a serious note, as I've been working on my B5 ships, it makes more sense building missiles as RKA's instead of vehicles if you use the Dogfighting and Intercept Combat (instead of mapped combat).

Aroooo

Re: Indirect?

Originally posted by SuperBlue

One of my player's characters wants an Optic Blast that he can control the direction of, would this be Indirect - From caster to any location (+1/4)? For all you FRED freaks, I'm still on 4e

If you're talking about an attack that originates from the character's eyes, and travels to the target as a guided, non-straight path, then yes, its the +1/4 advantage.

Aroooo

I checked with Jason last nigiht and got the scoop on the downed server. They are looking for a new one, so in the meantime, you can see everything here:

http://www.iamapsycho.com/fallout/downloads.htm

Just don't click on the Home button

Aroooo

Ah, one of my fav games. I started working on a Hero version, but got sidetracked - by B5 among other things. There is (was?) a great resource on the net for a full blown [fan] pen and paper game here: http://www.iamapsycho.com/fallout/ but has since moved to http://www.falloutpnp.com/, but I can't reach it now - I don't know if its down or what. But while the original site was working, I did download most of the pdf files. The rpg is modeled on the computer game's mechanics, but its a great resource as source material.

If anyone wants copies, I'd be happy to email them to you. Just contaact me off list at tony@aroooo.com. I have five files:

fallout_pnp_2_0.pdf

Errata 2.01.rtf

Bible_Update_03_11_02.pdf

Fallout_PnP_Sheet.pdf

goodmap.bmp

That total a 4.5meg zip file (the character sheet is big-its got a big background graphic).

Aroooo

Originally posted by keithcurtis

Why ST ships in particular? I would certainly consider the Death Star to be a plot device.

 

Keith "It's too small to be a moon..." Curtis

Yeah, but i have the Death Star Tech Manual from West End Games. How many points do you think it would take??? (No answer required, I was being rhetorical )

Aroooo

Originally posted by Tech

Sounds good Aroooo (counts the o's). Buy it as your concept fits. By the way, why'd you pick Aroooo (count's the o's again)? I kinda like it. Gotta werewolf character somewhere? Or is it... YOU'RE a werewolf?!

Won't go OT for too long, but it came from a fantasy game many many years ago. My character was a werewolf, unbeknownst to the rest of the party. We had to assasinate a Noble one day, and it went horribly wrong. We were getting our butts chewed. The party was trapped in a stair well up to the noble's room, door locked, guards coming, when I changed! I was out of site when it happened; got knocked out before we entered the castle. I managed to retain enough control over 'self' to finish the assignment, so I charged up the stairs, through the guards, and through the player party, crushing someone's chest (I stepped on them) in the process. Just before that happened, one of the players saw me coming, ran back up the stairs to the locked door, yelling for everyone to get out of the way, banging insanely on the door. The PC's asked (yelled) what was the problem, and all Jim could say was "You don't want to know!" Ever since then Aroooo (4 of them ) has been my tag line.

Aroooo

(Werewolf? There wolf. There castle.)

I've pondered this point from time to time over the years. If you can take a disad Vulnerable to a particular SFX, then why can't you buy some form of DEF that is immune, or nearly so, to an SFX?

Maybe a +1 advantage 1.5x defense vs. special effect. My 10 ED fire suit gets standard 10 def vs. an electrical attack, but 15 vs. a flame thrower.

Aroooo

Originally posted by Tech

I disagree with BNakagawa's take on Detect Evil. Evil is definably objective. To say evil is not definable means good cannot be definable either. The attack on Sept 11 was definitely evil. Regardless, if your GM says it's you can buy it, go for it. Someone who can detect an evil presence is quite common, whether comic books, fantasy books or whatever else.

Not wanting to get into a 9/11 debate, my opinion is there are two points of view when defining "evil."

There is your 4 color comic book setting, in which case "evil" within that genre I feel, could be strictly defined. The violent destruction of any building would be evil. This also works well for Pulp games.

But if you're playing a more 'realistic' setting like Danger International, then "evil" becomes more subjective. I don't think in this sort of setting you could have a 'universal' defenition of evil. But for the purposes of Detect, the player/character could certainly list their criteria for evil. My Detect Evil may not detect the same things as your Detect Evil, although the power is the same.

Aroooo

Originally posted by GamePhil

As for why it's an OIF, it's because it's attached to the ship. You'd have to break it or spend time detaching it to remove the power.

Okay, that makes sense. I was looking at it from the point of how accessible the actual anchor and/or chain was, not how hard it was to remove it from the ship.

Aroooo

Re: TUV Anchors

Originally posted by BasilDrag

In TUV, p63-67, ther are four examples of anchors. All of them are built as STR, 0 END (+1/2), OIF Bulky (-1), Partial Coverage (-2).

 

Um, Partial Coverage on STR??

 

FrED p.316 says Partial Limitation is for DEF and Body. TUV p.31 mentions "Only Within Affected Area", but that's not what an anchor does. An anchor has "strength" to hold the ship in place.

 

Should those example ships have "Only To Limit Ship's Movement" instead of "Partial Coverage" on their anchors' STR? And is that really worth -2??

I have not picked up TUV yet (still waiting for it to hit my store), but I would imagine its because an anchor is mounted to a specific point on a ship. Therefore if some force were to pull on the ship, there is a chance the anchor could break free - either the chain snaps, or the mount point on the ship breaks. But I do agree a -2 is a bit high.

Also, why would an anchor be OIF and not OAF?

Aroooo

Originally posted by Geoff Speare

What's that URL again? trekrpg.net gets me a sports betting site...

Its http://www.trek-rpg.net/

They got hyjacked or had other dns problems a few months back.

Aroooo

Originally posted by Steve Long

If you want STAR TREK starships, believe me, I gotcher back. Just check out the various books I give away on TrekRPG.Net. If I can ever get the free time to finish it, a book on Romulan ships will join the ranks.

Now that would really rock! We still use LUG's system for our Trek games because of your work!

Aroooo

Wow

This is a great resource! But, is there a way you could make it a PDF too? It takes IE a while to draw it. Have you thought about putting it into an online database too?

Aroooo

A Bad Guy!

For those of you following at home: just an update:

I've posted the Raiders Fighter to the Ships page:

http://www.aroooo.com/rpg_stuff/b5/ships.php

Give you Starfury jocks something to shoot at

Aroooo

Originally posted by archer

A penny is probably something like 4 DEF, 1 BODY, and therefore could never do more than 5d6.

Hu? Keep in mind that I ask this question suffering from severe jet lag, but where do you get 5d6 from? I also think 4 DEF is too high.

Aroooo

I read the Gliding rules today too, and have to say I'd probably apply a -1 Gliding gains no altidude limitation for the Shuttle, since its too heavy to gain altitude from thermal updrafts.

Aroooo

I don't have UMA with me. Can someone design a martial maneuver (if its possible) that is basically a sweep combined with a martial strike? I'm trying to convert one of the B5 martial maneuvers that is basically called "Multiple Attack" and I though sweep would be an effective way to do it.

There's another one called "Rapid Attack" which is basically an autofire HA, but I won't worry about that one for now...

Thanks

Aroooo

Originally posted by AlHazred

So would the reentry be a Gliding power, or would you just handle it as a long, somewhat-controlled fall?

I don't have FRED in front of me, so I can't re-read Gliding, but off the top of my head, I'd say the Shuttle def. has gliding. Apollo, Soyuz, not sure right now. I'll have to dig FRED out of the suitcase first. (Yes, I'm sad; I did bring FRED and SH on vacation with me )

Aroooo

Originally posted by Chaosliege

sounds to me like and NND Killing attack with explosion or area of effect.

Given the nature of liquid nitrogen, I would go for an AVLD instead of an NND. And make it explosion rather than AOE. Less liquid the further from the blast point.

Aroooo

Don't forget to check out the free secion on the Hero site. There are a lot of pdf and Excel spreadsheets for character creation.

Aroooo

All this of course is considered unpowered controlled re-entry (i.e. Apollo, the Space Shuttle). Futuristic ships will no doubt have powered re-entry, meaning they can enter the atmosphere at controlled velocities rather than a free fall.

Aroooo

Update

Just wanted to let everyone know that I've added the Martial Arts section to my B5 site:

http://www.aroooo.com/rpg_stuff/b5/martial_arts.php

Comments always appreciated - esp. since this is my first martial arts package writeup

Aroooo

Originally posted by BNakagawa

nope, it reduces all applicable defenses. Unless you bought the find weakness as only affecting one or some types of defenses...

So does that mean PD or ED defense? Is resistant defense treated as a different applicable defense in this context?

Aroooo

I don't have my books with me (on vacation), but when you make a Find Weakness roll, does it not count against only one defense, not all defenses a character (vehicle) has? If I have Armor and a Force Field, the bad guy's FW must 'target' [apply] vs. one or the other, no?

Aroooo