So...Breach 1 lets you ignore 10 Soak or 1 Armor and 1 point of planetary scale weapon damage equals 10 points of personal scale. So does that mean that 1 point of personal scale is then 1/10 of planetary scale? And how does this affect things like using Lightsabers or Blasters vs. speeder bikes?

Allen

It's hard to hurt vehicles with small arms. Aiming at a specific part of a vehicle can help, but that's all at GM discretion. Some groups come up with house rules to make small vehicles only a 5x multiplier, it just depends on your needs.

There are Lightsabers in FaD with Breach 2, and the really big personal weapons have that as well. Land mines are a better choice, or killing the driver.

With regards to Lightsaber vs Walkers. I like how Luke handles the AT-AT opposed to Kanan and Ezra. Boarding the walker and cutting a hole is more interesting to me than slicing off the legs. If a player attempted to pull a Luke, I wouldn't handle it with a standard lightsaber check. I would probably make it a simple check. If no successes are rolled, then that would either mean that Luke was too busy keeping his balance beneath the walker to bring his saber to bear or the armor was thick so it's going to take another round to cut through.

The Kanan/Ezra example of cutting a walker's legs off is a little more sticky. I would be tempted to use the called-shot version of the aim maneuver to cripple the walker. But the situation hasn't come up in our games so I don't know for sure how I would handle it.

The Kanan/Ezra example of cutting a walker's legs off is a little more sticky. I would be tempted to use the called-shot version of the aim maneuver to cripple the walker. But the situation hasn't come up in our games so I don't know for sure how I would handle it.

If you look closely at the legs of a walker, they have pins and connecting arms that are actually relatively thin. You might be able to cut through one or more of those without too much difficulty.

So, for me, it all depends on the narrative of how the player presents their action. If they specify that they’re targeting the pins or connecting arms, then I’d let them do a Called Shot aim maneuver, and while they wouldn’t be cutting all the way through a leg they could still wind up with a result that would cripple and potentially immobilize a walker.

I'm with you brad. If your sending a walker at your PC's you need to have a reason, and also planed ways for them to disable or destroy it. Cutting the legs of a vehicle is almost a Mechanics check tbh, and I would absolutely allow it. The walker will be repairable but either slowed or stopped until fixed.

Mechanically there's also a small point that's overlooked by new players. You only need to beat the armor of a vehicle to be able to crit it. Unlike people you don't have to cause Hull Trauma. While not usually an instant kill, crits have a serious effect on vehicles.

So with small arms and similar, you need to cross reference the damage, breach/pierce, and crit rating (vicious too if the weapon has it.)

So like a lightsaber with damage around 10, crit 2, and breach 1 can crit and armor 2 vehicle pretty easy...

Also worth noting that Luke specifically says the armour on an AT-AT is too strong for blasters. If you're going to shoot it with anything less than explosive ordinance your expectations should be modest at best.

I also agree with the point made about the Kanan/Ezra approach. I would be tempted to house rule a more cinematic outcome, which is that your lightsaber players do what Qui-Gon did on blast doors, and melt part of the limb. This cripples the AT-AT but doesn't destroy it. Otherwise yeah, just hop up on a leg and saw through it

I need to double check the book, but I'm almost certain the damage scaling only goes for Vehicles to Personal Scale, not the other way. So Vehicle weapons get the x10 vs. a Personal scale target, but Vehicle Wound Thresholds are NOT like Armor and count as 10 for 1. Again, I have to re look at the book though.

EDIT: Disregard. It's spelled out in the AoR book under a sidebar.

The only thing that doesn't scale is Pierce. Pierce 10 has zero effect on a vehicles Armour.

The only thing that doesn't scale is Pierce. Pierce 10 has zero effect on a vehicles Armour.

Really?

The only thing that doesn't scale is Pierce. Pierce 10 has zero effect on a vehicles Armour.

Really?

Pierce only talks about reducing Soak, while Breach specifically calls out that it reduces Armour by 1 or Soak by 10.

Perhaps the intention is that 10 Pierce would reduce Armour by 1, but usually (such as in the case of Breach) that kind of thing is specifically highlighted as an option.

This is in that grey area where the rules don't say either way so it's probably up to the GM. Personally I think if there was no difference between Pierce 10 and Breach 1 then what's the point of 2 different weapon qualities? Why do Lightsabers have Breach 1 not Pierce 10? Only for simplicity?

This is in that grey area where the rules don't say either way so it's probably up to the GM. Personally I think if there was no difference between Pierce 10 and Breach 1 then what's the point of 2 different weapon qualities? Why do Lightsabers have Breach 1 not Pierce 10? Only for simplicity?

IMO, they do that to keep the numbers lower.

Personally, I would totally allow Pierce 10 to be exactly equivalent to Breach 1.

Of course, in my game I don’t think anyone would ever get more than Pierce 5 before making the leap to Breach 1, so that issue is not likely to ever come up for me.

I guess the other reason they both exist is to prevent stacking, a weapon with Breach 1 that you add Pierce 1 to shouldn't ignore 11 points of Soak.

I definitely agree actually getting Pierce 10 would be very unlikely.

Edit: unless your using the Seek power upgrade with Cunning 5 & Perception 5

The only thing that doesn't scale is Pierce. Pierce 10 has zero effect on a vehicles Armour.

I am not so sure about that and would handle it different. You could argue that when armor gets transfer into personal scale it becomes soak and thus even fractions like pierce 6 apply. But I admit, it is a lot easier to argue the other way around if your group likes keywords at least and dislikes common sense. I do dislike common sense.