Beam-Burger Compromise?

[Burger]

I'd actually like to see a ACTA to go more like VAS. I really like the targeting roll & then damage roll. Things like traits adaptive armour could force rerolling of sucessfull armour rolls. Beams could have few targeting dice but lot's of damge dice. Just my thought's.

Likely how it would go for a 3rd edition, then you could incorporate stealth and dodge into the hit roll, and ap, super ap, weak and hull values into the damage roll and precise into the attack table/critical table rolls.

why is this likely? I dont like it that much tbh.

I don't like it either. It would make all fleets the same. Currently there are distinct flavours for different fleets: dodge, AA, interceptors, stealth, all work differently. If these were all changed to be simple modifiers to one roll, then it would make the game bland.

 

[Da Boss]

I like the idea of getting extra lucky hits with a beam, but there needs to be a happy medium somewhere.

When we used Burger's beams at Da Boss' tourney, the 2AD beams seemed pretty feeble.

I do wonder if alot of people will feel like this when the beams are more (and IMHO much better) reliable?

 

[Target]

Likely how it would go for a 3rd edition, then you could incorporate stealth and dodge into the hit roll, and ap, super ap, weak and hull values into the damage roll and precise into the attack table/critical table rolls.

why is this likely? I dont like it that much tbh.

I don't like it either. It would make all fleets the same. Currently there are distinct flavours for different fleets: dodge, AA, interceptors, stealth, all work differently. If these were all changed to be simple modifiers to one roll, then it would make the game bland.

Why would they effect one roll, AA would be in the armour piercing roll, dodge would either be incorporated into target score or be a trait that might make you reroll sucessful hit's or access or bonus to a SA.
It also stops the problem of beam runaway roll's as well if it had damage dice instead. It gives more options for flavour instead of lot's things being incorporated to the hull score eg ECM, Armour, size & speed like now.

 

[Triggy]

OK, my point wasn't that it would be specifically as stated above but that the hull value needs to be broken down otherwise you will never solve dodge, stealth, beam and so on issues. Of course the different traits can still exist, they would just act in slightly different ways.

I was not suggesting that any decisions have been made on 3rd ed.!

 

[katadder]

well unless you got inside info 3rd ed hasnt even been mentioned yet, let alone decisions on it

 

[Burger]

Oh well Charlie just rejected the new beam system as an optional rule, for an S&P article. So I guess we'll never see TBS in print unless it is considered for 3rd edition.

 

[H]

what was her justifcation, as Matt is surely in charge of rules etc, did she not like your formatting? I believe she can be a very harsh mistress!

 

[Burger]

I didn't write the article yet, I asked her what the best precedure was and she said to write a summary of the idea, if she liked it then I could submit the complete article. I wrote a summary of why the idea came about, what it involved, and why so many people like it. I explained the idea simply and said I would include graphs, photos from actual playtests etc. I think I did a very good job of selling the idea for a great S&P article.

Response:

Thank you for your submission to Signs & Portents Magazine. I regret to inform you that we are unable to use the material that you have submitted. We thank you for your interest and encourage you to submit future material that you feel is suitable.

 

[H]

not exactly constructive feedback is it :-(

 

[Burger]

No not really!
A copy and paste job in fact.

 

[Da Boss]

Thinking positively it could be a that the idea is still being considered for inclusion in P+P as an optional rule........

I seriously doubt it it but it is a possibility.

Given previous forum and S+P statements by the Powers that Be about Shadow Fighters I had dispaired that they would ever change and it "seems" they could be being made usable........

 

[H]

No not really!
A copy and paste job in fact.

computer says nooo.....

 

[Burger]

ROFL!!

 

[Triggy]

Thinking positively it could be a that the idea is still being considered for inclusion in P+P as an optional rule........

I seriously doubt it it but it is a possibility.

Given previous forum and S+P statements by the Powers that Be about Shadow Fighters I had dispaired that they would ever change and it "seems" they could be being made usable........

Matt's given a direct statement saying optional rules won't be included in P&P (this was when asked by email about including an alternative beam system). He said that anyone with access to the forum can already use it as an option for their games.

I say we create a thread dedicated to its playtesting with feedback and encouragement to use it at events and tournaments but particularly in games at home and campaigns if people will agree. Then we get this thread stickied so everyone will keep it on their agenda.

 

[H]

well.... what are you waiting for, set it up ;-)

I have already mailed the last two other players I know in my area asking if they are prepared to try this out, given the rampant beam rolls in our last game, I suspect they may comply.

 

[H]

ok, my Minbari player is up for it, so can do a couple of tests of it, probably in a couple of weeks though.

 

[katadder]

problem with optional rules is they get lost in the general clutter of threads.

what we need is a stickied post where you can only post house rules with no extra clutter. so all the beam rules could be one post. or all a certain clubs house rules could be another.
this way at least they stay together a bit as it seems we cant get them into S&P

 

[Burger]

The TBS is a bit more than a house rule, though. It is so good that it doesn't really deserve to be stuck in a thread with club's house rules such as "we give g'quan 6 extra damage points cos it sucks"...

 

[katadder]

well i actually like HBS too but true. either one of them should get in and theres no reason why not apart from one person.
perhaps matt is saving it for 3e, like % move crits (another rule that should be in and not a house rule)

 

[lastbesthope]

When Ben Affleck adlibs its an adlib, when Kevin Smith adlibs it's a rewrite.

LBH