Hello,

I am curious how do you handle this attachment+mod if a player picks up a NPC weapon and tries to use it. Do you grant a player a check to notice this modification? If yes, what difficulty do you propose?

I'd allow the check if the player stated that he's examining the weapon before picking it up. If he just goes "Dibs!" and snatches it up, too bad.

I'd say a Hard: Perception. The way I read it it's a chip-sized contact point in the handle with the rest of the components being internal, so it's not all that much to see from the outside.

I think in the core book it mentions using the skill to fire the weapon in lieu of Mechanics for weapon maintenance. I think I'd allow either the weapon skill, mechanics, or perception baseline... another skill if given a good enough explanation. My reasoning being:

1.) Weapon Skill - If you're good with a specific type of weapon, odds are you're going to notice 'extra bits' even if they're minor.

2.) Mechanics - Similar to weapon skill, though more along the lines of "huh, that's weird, why's there a small aperture on the weapon grip?"

3.) Perception - Well, just noticing stuff in general.

As for difficulty... probably 2 dice for the basic attachment, maybe 3 with a setback for the 'splodey version. I kinda view the basic lock as the weapon equivalent of the loud voice yelling "WARNING! THIS CAR IS PROTECTED BY VIPER!" while the version that explodes is malicious in its intent, and designed as a trap.

Take that with a grain of salt, as I'm generally a player more so than a GM with this system.

I wouldn't bother at all with a check for the non-exploding variant. That just entails that the PCs pick it up and discover they can't use it. I take it for granted that they would at least test-fire the new blaster before trying to use it in combat and so finding out it won't work.

I haven't allowed my players to notice it, either, but I've only used it once.

Give them a Vigilance check. Otherwise, it's a GM "gotcha." Not cool.

On the other hand, it can discourage rampant looting. In either case, I'd recommend a Vigilance check (or other skills as Pyrus suggested, perhaps at a +1 Difficulty markup).

Give them a Vigilance check. Otherwise, it's a GM "gotcha." Not cool.On the other hand, it can discourage rampant looting. In either case, I'd recommend a Vigilance check (or other skills as Pyrus suggested, perhaps at a +1 Difficulty markup).

I don't know if it's as much a "gotcha". In my case, they picked up the weapon after it was dropped by a member of an elite group of paramilitary soldiers who were pretty well geared. All their weapons were gene locked. The problem is, if you give the players a check, they know something is wrong. Maybe roll a silent check for them…?

Give them a Vigilance check. Otherwise, it's a GM "gotcha." Not cool.On the other hand, it can discourage rampant looting. In either case, I'd recommend a Vigilance check (or other skills as Pyrus suggested, perhaps at a +1 Difficulty markup).

I don't know if it's as much a "gotcha". In my case, they picked up the weapon after it was dropped by a member of an elite group of paramilitary soldiers who were pretty well geared. All their weapons were gene locked. The problem is, if you give the players a check, they know something is wrong. Maybe roll a silent check for them…?

They'll know something's up, but it'll be resolved as soon as the dice have been rolled, so it's not a big deal. Either they notice and they don't put their hands on the Gene-lock, or they don't and they do.

I don't know if it's as much a "gotcha". In my case, they picked up the weapon after it was dropped by a member of an elite group of paramilitary soldiers who were pretty well geared. All their weapons were gene locked. The problem is, if you give the players a check, they know something is wrong. Maybe roll a silent check for them…?

Did the players make a "quick roll and run"? IE did they just grab up the guns and go? If yes, no check. They get a check when they spend at least some time examining the weapons.

Did they examine the weapons? IE were they checking to see the condition of the weapon, ammo count, etc? They get a check. If I'm worried they "might meta-game it", I'd phrase the check as so: "As you quickly loot your downed foes and check their gear... Did you guys set a Look Out? Give me a Vigilance check everyone."

It's a little bit of misdirection. The players immediately think "maybe we're being watched or about to be ambushed" when instead it's a check for the weapons and gear. Or something else.

If they picked it up and immediately tried to use it... well... I might allow a Vigilance check for an experienced weapons pro. But a rube kid fresh from the moisture farm? Nope. (of course there also wouldn't be a Gene-lock Bomb on the weapon either)