Do any of you allow reskinning? I have a player that wants the stats of a YT-2400 but the looks (skin) of a YT-2000. He wants to pay the costs of the YT-2400 and in all ways treat it mechanically as that ship, but he finds the asymmetric shape of the YT-2400 very unappealing. I'm not really seeing an issue here, as it could have been a YT-2000 custom-built to.the standards of the later YT-2400 if an explanation is required.

I'd see no problem with this, not really.

From the MF owner's manual (I think) we know that the 1300 comes in various shapes, with the cockpit moving about.

I'd perhaps increase the rarity 1 and/or add a setback or two to the negotation/streetwise check, considering it's a non-standard version. If these mechanics apply to your game when looking for/buying a ship.

When its something this minor, and even from the same manufacturer I don't see a problem with it. In the case of different manufacturers, you could just rename it to a completely new, less known subsidiary if you wanted. There's million jillion stars blah blah. We just use the same names over and over to help reinforce the fact that its Star Wars.

Appearances can be really important to some players, and if its a purely cosmetic change its one of the things I find easiest to give them their way on.

In our group we use a YT-1300 wich also doesn't really look like a YT-1300.

It is much more bulky and has a square shaped cockpit in the middle front and a large freight compartment on the side that would go beyond what a YT-1300 could actually hold.

But it is purely cosmetic. We didn't want it to look like the Falcon so someone grabbed a picture from the net of a ship that would roughly qualify.

As long as it doesn't grant mechanical advantages, I don't see the problem.

Ah, "counts-as"... are there sweeter words?

PCs can reskin whatever they like in game imo when there are no mechanical issues involved.

I would have absolutely no problem with this. Hell, the game we just wrapped up, some 4,000 years prior to the 1300 production run, we did the same. Took the stats and slapped it on an all-new body.

Actually, we did this in the beta game I ran for EoE. The captain wanted a YT-1300, but he wanted it visually distinguishable from the Millennium Falcon and asked if the cockpit could be in the center rather than the side. With the help of Wookieepedia I ruled that the cockpit was modular and could be ordered from CEC on the starboard, port, or center of the ship.

Re-skinning/re-fluffing is a time honored rpg tradition. I, and every GM I've played under, would have no issues with it at all.

[devilsadvocate]

Form is function, and function is form. People all over the galaxy will understand that a TIE Fighter's capability, for example, is largely proportionate with their experience of its physical construction. This is an intuitive relationship and not necessarily based on engineering experience, but it does carry meaning. It's a matter of trust and common experience.

As annoying/pedantic as it might be, I'd suggest that the original cost of the 2400 should stand, and an additional modding cost be levvied to change its structure/layout to resemble that of the 2000. It doesn't have to be a substantial cost, but even a nominal nod to its modification should be given.

The look/feel/shape/layout of things should not merely be related to whether it conveys advantage/disadvantage on a mechanical level.

[/devilsadvocate]

[devilsadvocate]

...

As annoying/pedantic as it might be, I'd suggest that the original cost of the 2400 should stand, and an additional modding cost be levvied to change its structure/layout to resemble that of the 2000. It doesn't have to be a substantial cost, but even a nominal nod to its modification should be given.

The look/feel/shape/layout of things should not merely be related to whether it conveys advantage/disadvantage on a mechanical level.

[/devilsadvocate]

The player wants to call the ship, metanarratively, a YT-2000. He doesn't want to modify at 2400 in-game to look like a 2000, he wants the ship to be a 2000.

He pays the price, he rolls with the exact mechanical description, and just runs it with a different model number and swaps out one graphic for another graphic that he likes better? And is willing to work with the GM to handwave mechanical similarities as customisations of the "original" product? This is a very good way of handling things.

I support re-skinning at all levels.

Player: "I want my blaster pistol to shoot a solid beam!"

Me: "Will its stats remain the same?"

Player: "Yes."

Me: "DONE! It shoots a solid beam! And looks awesome! You are your blaster are beautiful and unique snowflakes!"

Player: "Squee!"

I support re-skinning at all levels.

Player: "I want my blaster pistol to shoot a solid beam!"

Me: "Will its stats remain the same?"

Player: "Yes."

Me: "DONE! It shoots a solid beam! And looks awesome! You are your blaster are beautiful and unique snowflakes!"

Player: "Squee!"

WHOA now, that's crazy talk. Just hold on right there with your solid-beam shenanigans.

(cap: bon qui qui "you can have a coke")