2e Vorlon Beam Deflection?
- Thread starter Alexb83
- Start date
Greg Smith
Mongoose
Alexb83 said:
Not every single detail needs to be explained by a separate action, rule or ability. Sometimes abstraction of multiple things into a single streamlined rule is a better way to handle something in the game.
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
hiffano said:
but did they have them in the show? :wink:
a lot of this speculation is based on very flimsy evidence
Well, the notion that 'it's only seen once' and therefore isn't established is ridiculous - we have things in the game that are only seen once (JP bombing prime example from Tank there). We also have beams vs. interceptors in the Clarkstown vs Alexander battle. We have ships which are /never/ seen in the show. But when we have things which /are/ seen in the show which aren't in the game, I think its a clear oversight.
Where do you draw the line at what is 'established' and what isn't? Surely nearly every Narn ship we see gets blown up - should all crits against Narn be counted as 6/6? It's established that they should be blowing up!
As for this rule in particular, IMO Vorlons do need it, especially where in 2e they are going to be taking crits, as well as losing AD - they need some mechanism of avoiding fire whilst they try desperately to get close enough to fire back, and it needs to be something more reliable than the remote possibility of getting terrain to hide behind. The mighty vorlon empire malingering behind asteroids and hoping that the enemy is stupid enough to close to within 12 inches, or running a suicidal gauntlet of 30 inch beams is not in keeping with the show at all.
Where do you draw the line at what is 'established' and what isn't? Surely nearly every Narn ship we see gets blown up - should all crits against Narn be counted as 6/6? It's established that they should be blowing up!
As for this rule in particular, IMO Vorlons do need it, especially where in 2e they are going to be taking crits, as well as losing AD - they need some mechanism of avoiding fire whilst they try desperately to get close enough to fire back, and it needs to be something more reliable than the remote possibility of getting terrain to hide behind. The mighty vorlon empire malingering behind asteroids and hoping that the enemy is stupid enough to close to within 12 inches, or running a suicidal gauntlet of 30 inch beams is not in keeping with the show at all.
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Tank said:
but that definitely happened....... :wink:
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Alexb83 said:
so you are convinced the Vorlons need this for 2nd ed? :? We've only begun playtesting them.............. :roll:
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Greg Smith said:
Very well put Greg.
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Alexb83 said:
no we see a beam clash against a Vorlon itself about to fire....
you keep ignoring my point about EA pulse cannons intercepting one another.....
No, I don't - I simply haven't adressed them in this thread. If it's something you wanted, perhaps it should be in another thread like this one?
From what I understand, escorting fighters will be able to shoot down incoming fire, so at least in part you seem to have your wish.
What I've heard of 2e Vorlons so far has no indications that their range or speed will change at all - so my justification for them needing this ability stands.
As for it hitting the Vorlon, I think others have pointed out earlier in this thread, it doesn't hit the ship - it dissipates before it his the ship, or at best, it hits the vortex between the pylons and dissipates there.
Greg's point is well taken - but abstraction is one thing, in the episode we have two clear instances of the Vorlon getting shot at - in one, it is hit, and takes minimal damage (I would attribute to the armour). In another, it stops a beam blast from hitting it in the first place.
From what I understand, escorting fighters will be able to shoot down incoming fire, so at least in part you seem to have your wish.
What I've heard of 2e Vorlons so far has no indications that their range or speed will change at all - so my justification for them needing this ability stands.
As for it hitting the Vorlon, I think others have pointed out earlier in this thread, it doesn't hit the ship - it dissipates before it his the ship, or at best, it hits the vortex between the pylons and dissipates there.
Greg's point is well taken - but abstraction is one thing, in the episode we have two clear instances of the Vorlon getting shot at - in one, it is hit, and takes minimal damage (I would attribute to the armour). In another, it stops a beam blast from hitting it in the first place.
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Alexb83 said:
my point is not everything needs an individual special rule. If Vorlons got this extra ability then the Primus would have to get an energy field
that is based on well documented screen evidence and direct quotes from JMS
and again we are only starting to playtest the Vorlons, anything could change
it hits the Vorlon's own weapon!
Semantics - it doesn't hit the ship, at best it hits a big energy field generated between 4 bits of the ship which if I remember the scale correctly are a few hundred meters apart.
You're right that everything doesn't need a special rule - however I think in this case it's clear that this is something other than adaptive armour, and does deserve a special rule.
And if you're playtesting Vorlons, is this suggested rule going to go in for playtesting?
Also, I've never disputed fighters acting as interceptors - it's shown in the series and I'm quite happy with it going into the game. As other people have pointed out elsewhere, pulse weapons cancelling each other out could simply be the capital ships version of interceptors or point defence fire (whereas B5 has a new-fangled dedicated interceptor gun). For someone who doesn't want seperate rules, I'm surprised you brought it up
You're right that everything doesn't need a special rule - however I think in this case it's clear that this is something other than adaptive armour, and does deserve a special rule.
And if you're playtesting Vorlons, is this suggested rule going to go in for playtesting?
Also, I've never disputed fighters acting as interceptors - it's shown in the series and I'm quite happy with it going into the game. As other people have pointed out elsewhere, pulse weapons cancelling each other out could simply be the capital ships version of interceptors or point defence fire (whereas B5 has a new-fangled dedicated interceptor gun). For someone who doesn't want seperate rules, I'm surprised you brought it up
emperorpenguin
Mongoose
Alexb83 said:And if you're playtesting Vorlons, is this suggested rule going to go in for playtesting?
As other people have pointed out elsewhere, pulse weapons cancelling each other out could simply be the capital ships version of interceptors or point defence fire (whereas B5 has a new-fangled dedicated interceptor gun). For someone who doesn't want seperate rules, I'm surprised you brought it up
I brought it up because a case could then be argued for those weapons cancelling each other out, they aren't interceptors. Interceptors are different. I don't want special rules, I'm pointing out that (with the Primus example too) that you can bog the game down in nothing BUT special rules if you go this way
There are no plans for that rule
The pulse issue doesn't need a special rule - you just make it an issue of ship design that ships armed with pulse weapons also have an interceptor trait to represent their main batteries' ability to intercept some incoming fire.
Same with the primus - afterall, interceptors are described by JMS both as a web of energy over the ship (probably like polarised hull plating in Enterprise) and active weapons systems.
Same with the primus - afterall, interceptors are described by JMS both as a web of energy over the ship (probably like polarised hull plating in Enterprise) and active weapons systems.
emperorpenguin said:
Then what have you got to lose by adding this into the mix and play testing it?
I personally like my idea of a trait (it being my idea and all with a nod to Alex for mentioning it in the 1st place), it could be another unique feature of the Vorlons, being an ancient race and all that I find it sorta nice they could just zap a beam weapon and ignore it.
emperorpenguin said:
Whats to say the Vorlon didn't fire exactly then with that very aim in mind.... Which would again fit into my weapon trait idea.
As for EA and the other races allow them the chance but they have to roll for it, against the Vorlons getting it as an automatic. Although I feel this would take away the specailness of the Vorlons doing it.
