Just wanted to get some thoughts on allowing players to add attachments to the weapons they've "in-built" to tools and cybernetics using the crafting system. Anyone had a problems with this? What if the attachment in question would bump the weapon over the original 2 encumbrance required for "in-built weapon"? Should you include the encumbrance of the weapon at all times? EX: Does a cyber-arm with a blaster in it always count as 2 encumbrance? Just when in use? At all?

These are the questions that vex me, and I'd love to get your thoughts!

Probably nothing serious to worry about, wouldn't want to ruin their fun

My first instinct is that you probably shouldn't be slapping attachments on in-built weapons. I see those as being more as last resort/surprise weapons than things you'd be using constantly, and narratively, many (if not most) attachments would increase the profile of the weapon to the point where it would not be plausible for it to go unnoticed. That being said, I'd be flexible on attachments that make the weapon harder to detect or that fit thematically. An Overcharge Valve, for instance, fits very well with the idea that you've got one shot with your hidden weapon before your cover is blown, so you need to make it count. And if someone wanted to play a Bothan with a souped up cyber-arm weapon, I'd probably roll with it.

Well the character in question is the lone non-force user of the party, and she wants to use tech to level the playing field. In this case, the player's been using an energy buckler with that electrical attachment (which bumps the encumbrance up to 3). He'd like to integrate the shield into an arm so he is never without a weapon/protection, and is willing to spend his ranks in jury-rig to "make them look like fists" (like Vi in League of Legends). I'm tempted to work with him, because I like the idea. Perhaps I just rule that in-built weapons don't take up any encumbrance while deactivated, but attachments do? The extra weight of the gear weighing down the hands a bit more?

If the player (or you) can figure out a narrative reason why something works, then why not go for it?

So long as both parties are okay with the explanation, I don’t see what the problem should be.

If the player (or you) can figure out a narrative reason why something works, then why not go for it?

So long as both parties are okay with the explanation, I don’t see what the problem should be.

Fair enough. :-) I just always like to get some extra feedback! Thanks everyone!

If the weapons have hard points, i dont see why they can't be taken out, modified, then retrofitted back in.
Otherwise the built-in option would say that the weapon would lose all hardpoints available, which it doesn't.

Just because a weapon is built in doesn't mean it can't be modified. Let the players go nuts within the same rules as for any other weapon.

This is old, but I would say that you CAN add attachments, but NOT if they increase the ENC beyond the 2 point maximum. That would, indeed, make the weapon too big to fit.

Furthermore, if the attachment adds Cumbersome or Unwieldy (which is highly unlikely for an ENC 2 or lower weapon), then that should apply ALL THE TIME for that appendage.