How would you guys stat the inquisitor TIE, The tracking missile, etc.

Pretty sure the Inquisitor Tie was just a Tie Advanced, and we already have guided missles.

For the Inquisitor's TIE, I'd probably use the base TIE/ln profile, giving it a +2 to Hull Trauma and System Strain Thresholds. From what little we've seen, there's not been much to say that it performs significantly better than the standard TIE fighter.

As for the tracking missile/beacon, that's really more of a plot device than something that truly needs to be fully stated. Just allow the pilot to make a Gunnery check that deals no damage, but if successful the tracking beacon is attached to the ship.

Pretty sure the Inquisitor Tie was just a Tie Advanced, and we already have guided missles.

Sure didn't look like a TIE/Advanced. The wings were more rounded than Vader's TIE/Advanced. The body is just the ball with no flat body shape behind it.

Vader's TIE:

VS Star Wars Rebels TIE Advanced:

It's a TIE Advanced prototype

Must be a different prototype from Vader's.

It's possible that Vader's is the standard model and no longer a prototype. That may have fallen into the Legends bucket.

It might also be possible that Vaders TIE is another prototype, if no other reason it looks different. I would also add that Vaders TIE won't actually be seen until something like another 3 years later. Maybe his TIE was based on the one seen in Rebels but with more improved technology!

Vader's Tie was Hyperspace capable, regular Ties aren't so it's likely just another type of Advanced Tie.

It could have even been an earlier prototype that wasn't hyperspace capable. Prototypes are just that, prototypes... more than one prototype could have been in place.

Then again, earlier in part 1 (I've not seen part 2 yet), they rolled out one of these which the Rebels blew up, but then the Inquisitor gets into his own. I'll be curious to see.

Brings up good questions about the Imperial aqustition and developmental and operational test programs...

Looks like the Empire has bidders manufactuer an entire run, them ships them out to VIP evaluators for operational testing in actual field operations....

Interesting methodology... also explains Bad Motivator.....

I think at one point in the EU/Legends, Vader's TIE was an Advanced model, one equipped with limited shields and a hyperdrive, but overall had such high power requirements that even the extended ion panels just barely put its performance at that of the standard TIE fighter. It was ultimately proven to be too costly for how the Empire used TIE Fighters, but Vader being as highly-placed in the Imperial hierarchy as he is opted to take the ship as his own personal craft and quite possibly as a testbed for various other potential modifications, much as he did during the Clone Wars with his personal Delta-7 fighter in Legends.

Just posting this out there since the topic is about gear from the Rebels show...

Two-Piece Hilt (originally posted on d20 Radio Forums)
While the majority of lightsabers are constructed to be a single hilt, some wielders find that being able to break the weapon down into two or more components is conducive to keeping their status as a Jedi a secret until such time as necessary. The standard method is to enable the emitter to be detached from the rest of the hilt and then stowed separately in an easy-to-reach location.
Base Modifiers: Decrease the difficulty of checks to conceal a lightsaber with this modification by one. A lightsaber with this attachment that is split into its separate components requires an Incidental to assemble before using as a weapon. A lightsaber with this attachment requires a Maneuver to be split into its separate components.
Modifications: None
Hard Points Required: 1
Cost: 100 credits; Rarity: 5

Notes: Yep, totally taken from Kanan's lightsaber in the "Spark of Rebellion" pilot. It's pretty much the lightsaber version of the shortened barrel attachment from the EotE and AoR core rulebook in that it's easier to hide. There's no mechanical drawback, but if one of the two (or more) component pieces get stolen by a pick-pocket, your Jedi could be in a bit of a bind next time they need to break out the beatstick.

For Ezra's (eventual) blaster-saber combo weapon, I'm thinking that'd cost about 400 credits, require 1 hard point, and have the same stats as a light blaster pistol, with the user being able to change modes (blaster or lightsaber) once per round as an Incidental.

Not quite going to touch the Inquistor's buzz-saw design just yet. It just comes across as too impractical to provide a solid combat benefit, other than perhaps waiving the "requires two hands to use" if a double-bladed lightsaber had that requirement already (which it doesn't; just checked the book and the Beta updates and zip on that front). It might grant an added rank of Linked... or given how it's described as being a gimmick to unnerve less experienced opponents (such as partially trained Padawans or novice apprentices and leave them open to the actual strike), perhaps give it an effect similar to that of the dual-phase modification works, bypassing the target's Melee Defense. Which the more I think about it, sounds like a pretty solid idea.

the drawback to Kanan's Lightsaber is it qould slow down a quick draw into a normal draw.

the drawback to Kanan's Lightsaber is it qould slow down a quick draw into a normal draw.

Not really, as the show seems to indicate that it doesn't really take him all that long (an extra second or two) to take out and assemble the two parts when he needs to use it, though he does seem to need more time to break it down and clip the parts to his belt.

If this were a game system were combat rounds were measured in a handful of seconds, then I might consider it having the drawing part negate the Quick Draw talent. But since combat rounds generally default to a minute, I don't see a valid justification for doing so.

I wouldn't say it negates quick draw. It is just you have to draw 2 items. So quick draw works on one part and your maneuver for the second part.

I wouldn't say it negates quick draw. It is just you have to draw 2 items. So quick draw works on one part and your maneuver for the second part.

Except that you're then penalizing the player for taking this attachment by effectively negating a talent that they've paid XP to acquire, since they'd still have to spend a maneuver to draw and assemble the two-piece lightsaber, just the same as a PC without Quick Draw would to draw their weapon. In effect, you'd be asking the player to pay 100 credits for an attachment that's of occasional usefulness while sacrificing the XP spent to acquire Quick Draw. And in a similar vein, what about a PC that doesn't have Quick Draw but wants to make use of this attachment? Going by what you're suggesting, said PC would have to spend two maneuvers to draw both parts of the weapon.

The weapon attachments that have an inherent drawback (Augmented Spin Barrel, Blaster Actuating Module, Filed Front Sight, Shortened Barrel, and Blaster Energy Dampener) do so in ways that can hinder the player but don't flat-out negate any of their talents.

The spin barrel's drawbacks only applies to Mechanics checks under a fairly specific circumstance while being rather costly. The principle drawback (reduced range) of the Filed Front Sight and Shortened Barrel can be easily worked around, simply by attacking at short range. For the blaster actuation module, it's fairly cheap and offers a substantial combat boost to any Ranged (Light) weapon, but even then the penalty is only a setback die, which for a skilled shooter (3 or more Proficiency dice) isn't that much of a penalty, since it's equivalent to the target having +1 Ranged Defense.

The blaster energy dampener (found in FaD for those without access to the Beta) has a reduction in damage in exchange for making the weapon easier to conceal, with a further Mod option to make the weapon harder to detect when fired, and can be applied to pretty much any weapon that uses Ranged (Heavy) or Ranged (Light) as it's governing combat skill. Put this on a heavy blaster pistol or blaster carbine, and you've got a weapon that's easier to hide, harder to detect, and still has some definite stopping power.

Frankly, it's just less hassle to roll the "draw and assemble" aspect into the same act it takes to draw the weapon, as presumably the character is going have practiced the "draw and assemble" as well as putting the parts in places where they can very quickly get to them, especially if they've bought the Quick Draw talent. Then again, I'm a nice enough GM that I'm willing to allow a PC that's made dual-wielding a core part of their character to draw both weapons as an incidental using Quick Draw, or both on the same maneuver without.

It is a trade off. If you want it in separate parts it takes longer to draw and assemble. Kanan does not always break down his lightsaber. Watch the shows again. When he goes into a situation where he thinks he will need it he assembles it and hangs it on his belt thus gaining the benefit of quick draw.

Has anyone written up rules for Zeb's Bo-Rifle?

Has anyone written up rules for Zeb's Bo-Rifle?

Blaster rifle/electrostaff with a maneuver to switch between them.

Has anyone written up rules for Zeb's Bo-Rifle?

Blaster rifle/electrostaff with a maneuver to switch between them.

Probably the simplest way to to handle it. Price tag would be fairly high and with a high Rarity value since they apparently were never mass produced, what with being meant for the Lasat Honor Guard and all.

Watch the shows again. When he goes into a situation where he thinks he will need it he assembles it and hangs it on his belt thus gaining the benefit of quick draw.

I have, quite a bit. Particularly the Spark of Rebellion scene where he demonstrates the "quick assemble" scene while striding out to make himself a very tempting target for Kallus and the stormtroopers, all before taking up a defensive pose (likely using Circle of Defense talent to add ranks in Ranged Defense to himself and the Wookiee prisoners). Maneuver to put himself closer and out of cover, Incidental to draw and assemble his lightsaber due to having the Quick Draw talent and the Two-Piece Hilt attachment as I've written it, and finally his Action to use the Circle of Defense talent.

So unless you've got a direct quote from Dave Filoni or the episode's writer that spells out how that sequence of events operates under FFG's system, then my interpretation is just as valid as yours.

The PC has paid for the attachment's benefit (a situational reduction in difficulty) both with credits and one of the weapon's hard points. Adding an additional cost (an extra maneuver) boils down to the GM veering into being antagonistic, as the only grounds in forcing the character that's purchased this attachment to have to spend an additional maneuver to draw a single weapon is really just an overly strict reliance upon the rules as written and a lead designer's response to a question about drawing two different weapons can't be done at the same time.

I guess a related question would be: If a player described their character carrying a tool kit has having it spread out amongst their person (such as various parts stowed in jumpsuit pockets) rather than concentrated in a single place, would you require that PC to spend more than one maneuver to pull out various tools simply because they're not all in the same place, even though it's a single item?

Watch the shows again. When he goes into a situation where he thinks he will need it he assembles it and hangs it on his belt thus gaining the benefit of quick draw.

I have, quite a bit. Particularly the Spark of Rebellion scene where he demonstrates the "quick assemble" scene while striding out to make himself a very tempting target for Kallus and the stormtroopers, all before taking up a defensive pose (likely using Circle of Defense talent to add ranks in Ranged Defense to himself and the Wookiee prisoners). Maneuver to put himself closer and out of cover, Incidental to draw and assemble his lightsaber due to having the Quick Draw talent and the Two-Piece Hilt attachment as I've written it, and finally his Action to use the Circle of Defense talent.

So unless you've got a direct quote from Dave Filoni or the episode's writer that spells out how that sequence of events operates under FFG's system, then my interpretation is just as valid as yours.

The PC has paid for the attachment's benefit (a situational reduction in difficulty) both with credits and one of the weapon's hard points. Adding an additional cost (an extra maneuver) boils down to the GM veering into being antagonistic, as the only grounds in forcing the character that's purchased this attachment to have to spend an additional maneuver to draw a single weapon is really just an overly strict reliance upon the rules as written and a lead designer's response to a question about drawing two different weapons can't be done at the same time.

I guess a related question would be: If a player described their character carrying a tool kit has having it spread out amongst their person (such as various parts stowed in jumpsuit pockets) rather than concentrated in a single place, would you require that PC to spend more than one maneuver to pull out various tools simply because they're not all in the same place, even though it's a single item?

Except it is no longer 1 weapon its drawing 2 parts and assembling them. And when Kanan wants to be fast he puts it together before going out. And per RAW drawing each one would be a maneuver. You can run it the way you want but RAW says each time you pull an item out it is a maneuver. And a Turn is about a minute. Your characters actions are a time slice of that. And the attachment is trading speed of access for concealability. This system is all about not having your cake and eating it too. You can have a quick access lightsaber or you can have a couple parts that will not set off warning bells but can be assembled into a lightsaber. You don't get to have it both ways.

and we do see Kanan Quickdraw the lightsaber when it is already assembled.

In answer to your second question yes. Because it is no longer a convenient bundle but a bunch of stuff spread across your person.

Would you allow a person to quick draw a sniper rifle like you see in the movies where they open a brief case and pull all the parts together and assemble it?

The thing is quick draw is pulling a gun from a holster and having it ready. It is not pulling multiple parts together and assembling it. You don't pull multiple parts and assemble them as an incidental.

The way I see it Kanan climbs on the box as a maneuver then spends an action and an incidental(quickdraw) pulling out the parts and assembling the weapon. Thats the end of his turn.

The sniper rifle is a very different case, as it's literally stored in a case and not designed for quick reassembly, due in large part to said rifle being a high-precision instrument that has to be carefully put together in order to work at its intended level of operational efficiency.

By contrast, in the case of Kanan's lightsaber, said weapon is literally designed for rapid assembly. During Rise of the Old Masters, there wasn't any reason for him to break the weapon down in between uses, because the group was storming a high security Imperial prison compound; being caught with a lightsaber wouldn't change the fact that getting caught was effectively a death sentence to begin with.

I've used the Two-Piece Hilt mod in my own games, and as written it's not caused any game imbalances, whether the character had Quick Draw or not. If anything, it's come across as "hey, that's pretty neat" and lead to a couple of fairly cool bits of narrative. Which, this being primarily a narrative game as opposed to a tactical combat game, is generally the point.

But given your answer on the tool kit, I'm glad you're not my GM, because said answer proves that you're being a rules-lawyering jerk of a GM that's not the least bit hesitant to screw over your players simply because of a descriptive element that provided zero benefit to the player, even if per the rules it's still tracked as single item for purposes of Encumbrance. Which I guess is the core difference between us in this particular discussion: I'm willing to give the player a break for something that is ultimately a descriptive element (more so if a cost was already attached to it), while you're fine with screwing them over for the same. I'd rather my players have fun than adhere 100% to every little rule, where your idea of fun is apparently to enforce the RAW 100% and the players be damned if they don't find it to be fun.

You don't like the Two-Piece Hilt, then don't use it and just pretend I never posted it. I've tried to point out that there's more to balancing an attachment than you want to admit, but since that's fallen on deaf ears, really not any point in wasting any more of our time on the matter. If other folks see it, like it, and want to use it, more power to them. You obviously don't like it, so don't use it, and if you and your group are having fun playing 100% RAW with zero flexibility, then good for you.

Although I agree that assembling Kanan's Lightsaber isn't exactly like assembling a cased sniper rifle it does require some attention greater than a simple draw. I would allow a Quickdraw but require spending the two Strain on an extra Maneuver to assemble, exchanging a Maneuver for enhanced concealability is a fair trade.