I would say yes according the rules. My R2 player asked this, as he is considereing crosspecing Gunner into his engineer build astromech.

I'd allow it.

I'd allow it in an instant.

I thought so, too. R2 does it all the time (watching The Clone Wars finally), as well as Chopper. I just had the slightest doubt so I wanted the approval of you guys.

Now there stands nothing in the way of the Gunnermech Droid.

Just remember each weapon system on a vehicle can only be fired once a round. So if the pilot fires the forward laser cannons, the astromech cannot fire those same laser cannons on their turn.

Isn't there some qualifier for ship weapons regarding the type of crewmember that can fire them? E.g. some weapons are classified as "pilot" weapons?

I just have a hard to accepting this idea that anyone but the pilot can reasonably used fixed wing weapons. Those require the pilot to maneuver the ship into a firing position. The actual act of firing the weapon is trivial.

Thus, I could see an astromech operating a turret weapon remotely, but not firing wing mounted guns remotely.

Isn't there some qualifier for ship weapons regarding the type of crewmember that can fire them? E.g. some weapons are classified as "pilot" weapons?

I just have a hard to accepting this idea that anyone but the pilot can reasonably used fixed wing weapons. Those require the pilot to maneuver the ship into a firing position. The actual act of firing the weapon is trivial.

Thus, I could see an astromech operating a turret weapon remotely, but not firing wing mounted guns remotely.

You're thinking tactical combat simulation where each roll indicates a single movement. The game is narrative for a given round of combat which can last a minute, so the PC firing the fixed weapons simply waits until the target comes into their arc. They are likely on the comm to the Pilot telling them 'line me up for another pass!'.

In the twoseater B-Wing variant the pilot maneuvers and the gunner can concentrate on the targeting computer to see when the perfect shot is aligned and react much faster. This emulates real life, as it works the same in fighter jets, basically. In the Clone wars catroon we can see it happen, as well as in Rebels, tha an Astromech inside it's socket is taking control of the whole ship, piloting it and firing the weapons.

Isn't there some qualifier for ship weapons regarding the type of crewmember that can fire them? E.g. some weapons are classified as "pilot" weapons?

I just have a hard to accepting this idea that anyone but the pilot can reasonably used fixed wing weapons. Those require the pilot to maneuver the ship into a firing position. The actual act of firing the weapon is trivial.

Thus, I could see an astromech operating a turret weapon remotely, but not firing wing mounted guns remotely.

You're thinking tactical combat simulation where each roll indicates a single movement. The game is narrative for a given round of combat which can last a minute, so the PC firing the fixed weapons simply waits until the target comes into their arc. They are likely on the comm to the Pilot telling them 'line me up for another pass!'.

My point is more that its an action on the part of the pilot, not an action on the part of the droid, unless the droid is actually the pilot of the ship.

I can see the operation of ordnance and turrets, but I can't see fixed wing weapons being operated by anyone other than the one with the flight stick.

As far as I'm aware, WSOs don't fire the cannons on fighter craft. They drop bombs and launch missiles, but they don't actually line up the crosshairs and shoot the gun.

Isn't there some qualifier for ship weapons regarding the type of crewmember that can fire them? E.g. some weapons are classified as "pilot" weapons?

I just have a hard to accepting this idea that anyone but the pilot can reasonably used fixed wing weapons. Those require the pilot to maneuver the ship into a firing position. The actual act of firing the weapon is trivial.

Thus, I could see an astromech operating a turret weapon remotely, but not firing wing mounted guns remotely.

You're thinking tactical combat simulation where each roll indicates a single movement. The game is narrative for a given round of combat which can last a minute, so the PC firing the fixed weapons simply waits until the target comes into their arc. They are likely on the comm to the Pilot telling them 'line me up for another pass!'.

My point is more that its an action on the part of the pilot, not an action on the part of the droid, unless the droid is actually the pilot of the ship.

I can see the operation of ordnance and turrets, but I can't see fixed wing weapons being operated by anyone other than the one with the flight stick.

Why? Even current generation aircraft are all fly by wire and computer controlled. Missiles on drones are fired by people in trailers in Nevada at targets in the middle east.

I doubt a Vulture droid was pulling a trigger on a flight control stick.

Isn't there some qualifier for ship weapons regarding the type of crewmember that can fire them? E.g. some weapons are classified as "pilot" weapons?

I just have a hard to accepting this idea that anyone but the pilot can reasonably used fixed wing weapons. Those require the pilot to maneuver the ship into a firing position. The actual act of firing the weapon is trivial.

Thus, I could see an astromech operating a turret weapon remotely, but not firing wing mounted guns remotely.

You're thinking tactical combat simulation where each roll indicates a single movement. The game is narrative for a given round of combat which can last a minute, so the PC firing the fixed weapons simply waits until the target comes into their arc. They are likely on the comm to the Pilot telling them 'line me up for another pass!'.

My point is more that its an action on the part of the pilot, not an action on the part of the droid, unless the droid is actually the pilot of the ship.

I can see the operation of ordnance and turrets, but I can't see fixed wing weapons being operated by anyone other than the one with the flight stick.

Why? Even current generation aircraft are all fly by wire and computer controlled. Missiles on drones are fired by people in trailers in Nevada at targets in the middle east.

I doubt a Vulture droid was pulling a trigger on a flight control stick.

1. I am saying I am fine with a droid firing missiles. My complaint is with fixed wing weapons.

2. Its more a matter of dictating who the pilot is. If a droid is going to operate the fixed wing weapons, then the droid is the pilot. I have my concerns about letting players swap out the pilot on the fly.

My point is more that its an action on the part of the pilot, not an action on the part of the droid, unless the droid is actually the pilot of the ship.

I can see the operation of ordnance and turrets, but I can't see fixed wing weapons being operated by anyone other than the one with the flight stick.

As far as I'm aware, WSOs don't fire the cannons on fighter craft. They drop bombs and launch missiles, but they don't actually line up the crosshairs and shoot the gun.

Stay on Target elaborates on astromechs being slotted into a vehicle (particularly starfighters) and for PC astromechs (separate rules for NPC ones where they're more limited), and they are indeed capable of everything the pilot can do (and a bit more), including flying the ship and using a weapon system that has not been used in the current round.

My point is more that its an action on the part of the pilot, not an action on the part of the droid, unless the droid is actually the pilot of the ship.

I can see the operation of ordnance and turrets, but I can't see fixed wing weapons being operated by anyone other than the one with the flight stick.

As far as I'm aware, WSOs don't fire the cannons on fighter craft. They drop bombs and launch missiles, but they don't actually line up the crosshairs and shoot the gun.

Stay on Target elaborates on astromechs being slotted into a vehicle (particularly starfighters) and for PC astromechs (separate rules for NPC ones where they're more limited), and they are indeed capable of everything the pilot can do (and a bit more), including flying the ship and using a weapon system that has not been used in the current round.

Fine then. Don't have Stay on Target, so I'll have to take your word for it. And at least it does clarify that the droid is functionally the pilot, which does resolve my point of contention.

If the button on a flight stick just sends a signal to a computer, that then sends a signal to the cannon to fire, why couldn't there possibly be any other way to send that signal? Astromechs plugged into the computer could most likely send that signal. Heck, a button wired next to the flush lever in the fresher unit could also send the signal. Weapon systems are tools, they're meant to be used. If the pilot is too busy doing Evasive, Evasive, Gain the Advantage, let the astromech fire the fixed guns. It keeps things from getting to the point of, "No, you can't do that, stop trying to be a useful character," instead of, "Sure, blast those dirty bad guys!"

The only problem with firing FIXED, DIRECT FIRE weapons is that the entire craft has to be lined up to take the shot -- the pilot controls where the craft is pointed and the angle of attack. It makes very little sense for a "backseater" to fire those weapons, and in modern aircraft, they don't. As noted, they fire or drop the other weapons, manage the defensive electronics, etc.

What if that backseater had a direct link to the targeting computer and knew exactly when to shoot?

If the button on a flight stick just sends a signal to a computer, that then sends a signal to the cannon to fire, why couldn't there possibly be any other way to send that signal? Astromechs plugged into the computer could most likely send that signal. Heck, a button wired next to the flush lever in the fresher unit could also send the signal. Weapon systems are tools, they're meant to be used. If the pilot is too busy doing Evasive, Evasive, Gain the Advantage, let the astromech fire the fixed guns. It keeps things from getting to the point of, "No, you can't do that, stop trying to be a useful character," instead of, "Sure, blast those dirty bad guys!"

The problem I have more is that the actual act of aiming those weapons is a matter of flying the ship.

If the pilot is evading, someone else trying to aim the fixed guns is literally fighting with the pilot on the direction the craft is going. In other words, you can't both fly straight to shoot the target and be evading the fire all at once. If the rules want to let players do it, fine.

What if that backseater had a direct link to the targeting computer and knew exactly when to shoot?

And that should have the same firing difficulty as being able to fly the ship and shoot?

Why not? Do we give gunners in turrets a higher difficulty to shoot things even though they have no control over the ship, and as such don't know when it's going to lurch around?

Why not? Do we give gunners in turrets a higher difficulty to shoot things even though they have no control over the ship, and as such don't know when it's going to lurch around?

No, but turrets have the free ability to angle the guns as needed. This idea of someone in the backseat just firing the -fixed- guns when they line up doesn't have that freedom.

Hence, the pilot and astromech are fighting each other for control of the craft. Again, fine, if Stay on Target wants to handwave it and claim its that easy, fine. Keeps it simple and narrative. It just feels like a bad ruling to me, and I'm saying why.

If the button on a flight stick just sends a signal to a computer, that then sends a signal to the cannon to fire, why couldn't there possibly be any other way to send that signal? Astromechs plugged into the computer could most likely send that signal. Heck, a button wired next to the flush lever in the fresher unit could also send the signal. Weapon systems are tools, they're meant to be used. If the pilot is too busy doing Evasive, Evasive, Gain the Advantage, let the astromech fire the fixed guns. It keeps things from getting to the point of, "No, you can't do that, stop trying to be a useful character," instead of, "Sure, blast those dirty bad guys!"

The problem I have more is that the actual act of aiming those weapons is a matter of flying the ship.

If the pilot is evading, someone else trying to aim the fixed guns is literally fighting with the pilot on the direction the craft is going. In other words, you can't both fly straight to shoot the target and be evading the fire all at once. If the rules want to let players do it, fine.

That's my original point, you're making the assumption that everything is happening exactly simultaneously over a round. The gunner isn't firing the weapons when the pilot is doing some loop, they are doing it when a target presents. The movement is all abstract and narrative.

A gunner is never going to know technically which way the pilot intends to go regardless, so fixed weapons or in a turret, direction of travel is an unknown to a gunner always.

Too much over thinking it. None of Star Wars space combat makes a lick of sense anyway.

Moot issue now, but in the Apache, the gunner has full control over all of the weapon systems. Fixed or otherwise. While the pilot in the back just flies. However, there are redundant systems, where if one of the operators get knocked out the other can take over.

Moot issue now, but in the Apache, the gunner has full control over all of the weapon systems. Fixed or otherwise. While the pilot in the back just flies. However, there are redundant systems, where if one of the operators get knocked out the other can take over.

Yeah, but isn't the only fixed weapon that would matter in this case the FFARs? The gun is a turret, and the other fixed weapons are missiles that are smart enough that it isn't totally a factor of angling the aircraft?

Look, I'm just saying that on fixed guns, if the droid is attacking with them then they're overriding the controls, and undoing whatever other cool mechanic the pilot is engaging in.

How is it undoing anything? There are still plenty things the pilot can be doing. If there was nothing else for the pilot to do, then of course they can shoot the guns. But maybe that round they fired their X-Wing's torpedoes, and the astromech fired the lasers. Or the pilot fires the lasers, and the astromech fires the torpedoes. Either way, in the end, whatever the shot them at still got shot at, so what does it matter who fired what? The level of rigidity I see when some people try to mix reality and gaming, with comments of, "But an F-WTF27 pilot can't do that," Just blows my mind sometimes. This is a game. In space. With no basis in reality. With barely any links to real physics. Reality shouldn't be used to try to prove a point in an unrealistic game.

Moot issue now, but in the Apache, the gunner has full control over all of the weapon systems. Fixed or otherwise. While the pilot in the back just flies. However, there are redundant systems, where if one of the operators get knocked out the other can take over.

The Apache also has the cannon in a turret, and fires all the other weapons from a hover or at slow speed from a distance -- it's nothing like a fighter.