Chapter VII: Starships and Vehicles Comprehensive Overhaul

Homebrew & House Rules
#1

Many, me included, have complained about the starship and vehicles rules. Various minor fixes have been suggested, and even some very complicated substitutes.

However, they are often incomplete, self-contradictory, and leave holes in the system because they aren’t compatible with some of the remaining RAW.

I have completely rewritten the chapter, changing everything I thought needed changing and trying to synchronize everything.

I clearly label what is modified or brand new, for ease of study. Please give me any feedback you have, I want to polish this until it shines: Chapter VII: Starships and Vehicles Overhaul

2 Likes
Starships. How do they Work?
P-47's Fix-It Shop
#2

Impressive body of work. I look forward to driving in and reviewing the material.

1 Like
#3

impressive

1 Like
#4

I have yet to read it in its entirety, but I especially like the idea of weapon targeting silhouettes. No more shooting at starfighters with heavy turbolasers.

1 Like
#5

Interesting work, I need to delve deeper into it. Question about the shielded/defense system. I understand the need for separation from a lore point of view. Mechanically if I read it correctly the only difference is that the shield value gives you a “Reflect/Parry-like ability”.

My question is wouldn’t be less complicated if the shield generators were simply another part of the ship instead of stats (giving bonus defense in all defense zones - which is modifiable with the angle deflectors maneuver) and simply stating that the Shielding ability is a “Active Shield Generator only” incidental.

I’d go that far that I’d make it a pilot only maneuver not an on attack activation, similar to evasive maneuvers. (Still would require active shield generator).

This way you don’t need a new line of stat, just another ship part. The attack roll calculation is still the same. And pilots/co-pilots have one more thing to do in combat.

1 Like
#6

Ships can only take 1 Pilot Only Maneuver per turn, except some small ships which can suffer 2 SS to take a second Pilot Only Maneuver.

Leaving that aside, I think you’re saying give them an “item” that provides +X Shields and the Shielded incidental?

Most of the time, it isn’t going to matter. Most ships only have Shields, making it very simple. So I think that the way I did it makes the most sense in almost all situations. Additionally, making it virtually identical to Parry/Reflect simplifies it for new players to understand and makes it part of the ship, meaning it doesn’t take anything from the action economy (aside from Angle/Boost Deflector Shields).

Also, it isn’t really a new line of stats. You’d just use the Defense section. The only time you’d need a distinction is with something like the Hammerhead Corvette, which (likely) has non-shield defense in the forward defense zone. In that case, I’d just note 1+X or whatever, X being the Shields.

#7

Glad you like it!

Just to make sure it’s clear, though, it doesn’t prevent you from shooting at starfighters with heavy turbolasers, just makes it much harder to do so so that they aren’t just as good as dedicated anti-starfighter weapons.

#8

But if you use 2 stats, all shipcards should include both, for sake of consistency, even if it’s 0. I just see it unnecessary, to make up a new stat from design point.
Or just leave the old stats and shields should be an on/off trait / part like the hyperdrive whether or not you can use the Shielded incidental (I like this new move). Just thinking about making it more streamlined.

#9

The Shielded incidental needs to have a dynamic number to go along with it so that some ships can have more powerful shields than others.

I get what you’re saying about two stats, but I disagree.
Reasons:

  • Changing this system (for the worse, in my opinion) isn’t worth making it fit with the basic ship sheets.
  • It’s easy to adapt existing ship sheets to this method, by putting a backslash through the cell, writing X+Y, or various other methods. Or in the case of something like SWSheets, putting Defense in the appropriate “Defense” box and putting Shields in the “Current” box.
  • For the vast majority of ships and vehicles, no distinction will be necessary.
  • Finally, they are two sides of the same coin. Making them have similar effects but be recorded separately and differently would be an odd design choice.
1 Like
#10

Things I still have yet to do:

Interstellar Travel: I actually overlooked this on the initial release, but I have some fairly extensive figuring to do as I figure out travel times and such.

Tightening: Through play, I have noticed a few things that could do with some clarification or polishing, and some things that I really ought to adjust (such as some crits).

It will probably take me a little while to get around to these, but I do intend to. In the meantime, please do direct me to any mistakes, discrepancies, or vagaries that you happen across, in addition to any other comments you have.

2 Likes
#11

Changed “Small Craft Combat: Dogfight” from:

On success, the pilot suffers no penalties. If he fails, he is forced to Decelerate, slowing by one speed. 2 Advantage grants a Boost to his next Piloting or Gunnery check, 2 Threat adds a Setback to his next Piloting or Gunnery check, Triumph may be spent to upgrade the Ability of his next Piloting or Gunnery check. If he generated a Despair, he suffers a Minor Collision with an opponent or obstacle, but if he failed the check, he suffers a Major Collision instead. At GM discretion, the collision may be with a friendly ship of silhouette 5 or more.

To

On success, the pilot suffers no penalties. If he fails, he is forced to take the Decelerate incidental, slowing by one speed. 2 Advantage grants a Boost to his next Piloting or Gunnery check, 2 Threat adds a Setback to his next Piloting or Gunnery check, and a Triumph may be spent to count as successfully performing Gain the Advantage on a ship that failed its Dogfighting check. If he generated a Despair, an opponent instead counts as successfully performing Gain the Advantage on him. Two Despair on a failed check may be spent to cause the acting character to suffer a Major Collision with an opponent or obstacle. At GM discretion, the collision may be with a friendly ship of silhouette 5 or more.

#12

This is very interesting! A lot to digest… It looks like I have some reading to do. So far, it seems to address some serious issues, I’ll have to do some checking to see how it all interacts with the system in general. So far though, this is pretty solid!

2 Likes
#13

After a first reading, I’m loving this. It solves a lot of the issues I have both with the Star Wars and Genesys versions of the rules.

Just some clarifications though, as the targeting rules were a bit more complicated:
Target vessel is silhouette 4 or smaller: Difficulty is based on the target’s speed or, if the weapon’s targeting silhouette is greater than the target’s silhouette, on weapon-target silhouette difference, but the difficulty may not exceed Formidable. Upgrade by the lower of the two numbers. Increase difficulty by one for each band past close. If this would increase the difficulty past Formidable, the check becomes Impossible difficulty.

So if two starfighters both are Sil 3 ships travelling at Speed 4 they’re popping off shots at each other at difficulty 4, regardless if they’re using laser cannons with targeting silhouette (TS henceforth) 3 or turret mounted blaster cannons with TS 2. Should one of them have crammed in a heavy laser cannon (TS 4) the difficulty is upgraded once (so 1 red and three purples) if the cannon is turret mounted, but if it’s in a fixed forward position, the heavy laser cannon defaults to the Starfighter’s silhouette of 3?
And since the heavy laser has short range, it could engage the other fighter at Short range for +1 difficulty? But picking of a starfighter moving at speed 5 at short range would push the difficulty to 6, making it an impossible check?

Target vessel is silhouette 5 or larger: Difficulty is based on the range to the target or, if the weapon’s targeting silhouette is greater than the target’s silhouette, on weapon-target silhouette difference. Upgrade by the lower of the two numbers.

Assuming all weapons are turret mounted, shooting a Sil 5 ship at medium range with a light turbolaser (TS 5) is a straight up Difficulty 2 check, but a medium turbolaser (TS 6) would be upgraded once? And should someone mount a big gun in fixed forward position on a Star destroyer (Sil 8), the TS would be 8, making the difficulty 3 for difference in Sil and upgraded twice for medium range?

Target is personal scale: Difficulty is based on personal-scale range, or is Average, whichever is higher. Upgrade by the lower of the two numbers. Despair may be spent to halve damage before Soak. When the target is within short range, it is up to GM discretion whether or not it can be targeted.

So if I understand this correctly, to target a person at medium range, where the difficulty based on range, is already Average (Difficulty 2), the final difficulty would be average, upgraded twice (two reds)? In effect, always upgrade the difficulty twice (since the difficulty is never Simple/0)?
Does this apply to personal scale weapons as well, like the Ground Buzzer, or light repeaters on speeder bikes?
Is this regardless of targeting signature, or do you increase difficulty based on that as well?

Regardless, my hat is off to you. This is solid work.

1 Like
#14

If turreted, a weapon uses its own targeting silhouette. If mounted, a weapon uses the ship’s silhouette. So a sil 3 starfighter’s fixed weapons are always Targeting Silhouette 3, even if a heavy laser cannon might usually be Targeting Silhouette 4.

So everything you said there is correct.

Yes, that is correct.

Your example is accurate.

Personal-scale weapons operate like standard personal-scale weapons. The only exception would be if you wanted to make a distinction with personal-scale weapons in fixed mounts, such as on a speeder bike, but I would not make that distinction. The main reason for the rule distinction is to make it harder to kill people with planetary-scale weapons. Personal-scale weapons do not have that issue.

This is regardless of targeting silhouette (the Average difficulty is instead of TS). I generally assume that a weapon’s AOE will correspond with its TS.

Thank you! I’m glad you like it. I put a lot of effort into making it work well, while remaining true to the system.

1 Like
#15

Ah. I see. It makes sense as an abstraction rather than considering whether or not turbolasers should have blast rating in personal scale or not. If you have big enough gun, close is indeed close enough.
I like the idea of despair being used to halve damage before soak, but I’m torn between wanting to expand on it and keeping it simple. I’m all for vehicle scale weapons being devastating and all, but it I’d also like it if they weren’t automatically so devastatingly overkill.

Perhaps reducing (vehicle scale) damage by 1 for each point of difference between sil and TS? Successes on combat checks adding personal scale damage against personal scale targets? Both? Too complicated?

Oh and by the way, the reworking of shielding and the shielded incidental? Brilliant!

1 Like
#16

It verges onto “too complicated,” necessitating an additional step of computing targeting sil (which is less second nature than in vehicle-on-vehicle combat).
Mixing personal and planetary is very odd. In most circumstances, it won’t really have an effect anyway. With something small like an Autoblaster, in just the right sequence of events, it could protect the target from being incapacitated, but most of the time it won’t make much of a difference.

Thank you! I’m glad you approve. I thought it fit the system well, being like Reflect and Parry.

#17

Just another few clarifications…
Starfighters making attack runs on capital ships don’t roll for dogfight, right? Since it would be unopposed and just be a a way to farm advantage/triumph. This means that with a fast enough ship (Speed 6 isnt that hard to get with full throttle and/or and ion turbine upgrade) you can harass capships with near impunity as they need to blow destiny points to even try to hit you at speed 6, and since you’re not making dogfight rolls, there’s no need to slow down either… A blanket barrage can make it harder and slightly more dangerous to attack, but not very.

I’m thinking impossible rolls is a bit much, since if left undisturbed a fighter with just medium lasers can troll most non-star destroyer capships to death by stacking crits.

Also, this caught my eye.

“This only applies to ships of silhouette 5; anything larger is unable to enter a planet’s atmosphere.”

An odd thing to say when Acclamators (sil 7) have landing gear and have been seen landed multiple times. There’s also the Star Destroyer form Rogue one on Jeddha. It’s not landing, but it’s most definetely within the atmosphere.

#18

Starfighters can only make one starship maneuver to move, and must end their movement within range of a capital ship in order to attack. Either they start their turn in range, take an action, and then jet away, or they move into range and make an attack. Either way, they’re easily targetable.

But you’re right that Blanket Barrage helps. Also, fighter cover is important for fending off enemy starfighters.

Also, note that I say speed CANNOT push the difficulty up to Impossible. It’s only a combination of speed and range that can push the difficulty up to Impossible.

Right, and Venators can land on a planet as we’ve seen before. I’m not sure where my head was at when I wrote that. I’ll follow up and get back to you.

1 Like
#19

Oh, haha, that was easy. That’s the RAW, I was just quoting the crit table from the CRBs.

Because it’s minor and quotes RAW, I’m inclined to leave it as-is. The crit should only be chosen for ships where it would be a significant effect anyway. However, I’m certainly open to further comment on the matter.

#20

This has been itching on my brain for a while now. First of all:

This is a very clunky way to say Difficulty is based on personal-scale range, upgraded twice, which is effectively the same (unless the difficulty is simple, which is it pretty much never is).

Secondly, while this solution is is quite elegant, it just kinda rubs me the wrong way that it means that smaller, dedicated, anti-infantry weapons aren’t as useful for their stated purpose as just using bigger guns for everything. The elegance of Targeting Silhouette is wasted here.
Maybe base difficulty on targeting silhouette alone? This would make light blasters frighteningly efficient of course. You could upgrade by (personal) range as well, but that puts us in the same place as upgrading by targeting silhouette, making turbolasers all but useless.
The more I think about it, maybe personal scale range shouldn’t be much of a factor with vehicle scale weapons? Maybe switch things around so base difficulty is average, and the upgrade by TS? You’d pretty much always be rolling a bunch of reds, but that’s reasonable considering the risk of collateral damage. Or maybe upgrade by half of TS, rounding up?

I kind of like the idea that “close is close enough” with a big enough gun, and perhaps that could be expanded. If big guns are too hard to hit personal scale targets to be any threat at all, maybe add a rule for vehicle scale weapons that 3 advantages on a miss lets them deal their base damage as personal scale damage to a target, kind of like Blast.

Or you can turn things around; if vehicle scale weapons are too easy to hit with, maybe a hit on a personal scale target is a “close enough” hit, and deals personal scale damage, unless advantages are spent (2? 3? Same as crit rating?) on making it a full on hit, dealing planetary scale damage.

Just some thoughts.