Quite a few things popped up in the Last Jedi that need to be explained away so it doesn't become an issue in future gaming sessions. GM's let us arm ourselves for the inevitable hyperspace bombs coming our way.

SPOILERS BELOW

First, a list of what may need to be explained or receive rules changes? Please respond with other issues and I will edit this list.

1. Slow-moving capital ships can be destroyed by kamikaze ships launching into hyperspace. Why haven't we seen this before? How can we make this a rare, over-costly, or extremely hard to do option for our PCs to avoid, "I'm putting my astromech in this battered Z95 and having it hyperspace into that pirate Corvette!"
2. "Bombers" exist that for some reason must get close to attack (as opposed to launching missiles like a Y-wing) and have bombs that fall....in 0G.
3. Force powers have taken a leap in what they can do. "I want that ultimate protection that Leia has so I can brush off huge explosions and survive in space....and she was only a force sensitive btw". or "But, Move can be used to toss aside large amounts of heavy boulders or demolish small buildings, so why can't I do it too?"
4. Turbolasers are much less effective (less damage) at longer ranges (which don't seem to be very far) per a quote during the space chase. Rule change needed?
5. Hyperspace fuel.
6. .......

2 minutes ago, Sturn said:

"Bombers" exist that for some reason must get close to attack (as opposed to launching missiles like a Y-wing) and have bombs that fall....in 0G.

I'll start with an attempt at this one.

Why have bombs when you can shoot missiles from a distance?: More ammo can be carried. Each bomb doesn't require its own propulsion, so space is saved and thus you can carry many more bombs vs. missiles.

Bombs fall in 0G?: Since the bombs don't have their own propulsion, there has to be a method of launching them at a target. Those bomb racks have some sort of electromagnetic propulsion system that flings the bombs out of the bottom of the bomber and it only has a Close range.

27 minutes ago, Sturn said:

I'll start with an attempt at this one.

Why have bombs when you can shoot missiles from a distance?: More ammo can be carried. Each bomb doesn't require its own propulsion, so space is saved and thus you can carry many more bombs vs. missiles.

Bombs fall in 0G?: Since the bombs don't have their own propulsion, there has to be a method of launching them at a target. Those bomb racks have some sort of electromagnetic propulsion system that flings the bombs out of the bottom of the bomber and it only has a Close range.

The visual guide confirms this. Here is how the bombs are described.

"Bomb's don't technically drop in microgravity, but are impelled from their racks by sequenced electromagnetic plates in the clip. The bombs are then drawn magnetically to their targets."

I don't agree that anything needs to be "explained away ," just that things should be grounded in whether they're narrative or mechanical, and then the mechanical things should be explored. But I'm totally down with the core concept of "how can my players do the things they saw in The Last Jedi ?" So I'm going to try my hand:

59 minutes ago, Sturn said:

1. Slow-moving capital ships can be destroyed by kamikaze ships launching into hyperspace. Why haven't we seen this before? How can we make this a rare, over-costly, or extremely hard to do option for our PCs to avoid, "I'm putting my astromech in this battered Z95 and having it hyperspace into that pirate Corvette!"

Mass matters. It matters for the target: a corvette is still pretty maneuverable, so it could dodge something like a Z-95. It also matters for the projectile: something with a smaller mass has less of a "realspace run-up" to get into hyperspace, so the Z-95 would pop into hyperspace almost immediately. When we see a star cruiser do it in TLJ, it a.) takes a comparatively long time to get into hyperspace, thus it can interact with realspace matter for a little bit longer, and b.) it's targeting a dreadnought, which doesn't have the ability to maneuver quickly.

Further, as you say, it's costly. It completely destroys the projectile with no guarantee of destroying the target—the Supremacy was still largely intact, enough that the First Order was still able to launch its assault on Crait, while the cruiser that Holdo was piloting had its components scattered across multiple dimensions. It also requires somebody to be there to manually override the hyperspace safeties constantly. It could be too complicated for a simple astromech, in which case you need to sacrifice someone with more computing power, like an actual person or an astromech that's been around people (read: PCs) long enough to pick up its own personality.

This should be a Formidable , if not outright Impossible Piloting (Space) check , no matter the craft being used.

Quote

4. Turbolasers are much less effective (less damage) at longer ranges (which don't seem to be very far) per a quote during the space chase. Rule change needed?

I would argue the rules already cover this with range limitations. This was clearly the cruiser staying just outside the turbolasers' range, explained narratively as the shots losing too much power and being unable to penetrate the shields. This is a chase scene where neither ship is able to outpace the other (they're both the same speed) and the cruiser has a reason to not want to jump away. Speaking of...

Quote

5. Hyperspace fuel.

Wasn't this always a thing? Isn't this why Despairs exist? It's certainly why I don't make my PCs pay for fuel, so I can use the "been a while since you fueled up, I guess" reason as to why a Despair on an astronavigation check leaves them stranded in one particular system. It ensures random but believable consequences for their actions, and it gives me fodder for adventure ideas. This could have been a cat-and-mouse game of the First Order always showing up at the most inconvenient moment until the PCs realize they've found a way to track the ship, but because of that Despair leaving them without fuel and a success on a Knowledge (Warfare) check, it forces the issue early and the PCs figure it out.

1 hour ago, Sturn said:

Hyperspace fuel.

I seem to recall a lot of chatter about this in the canonical novels - so I presumed they glossed over fuel like they gloss over going to the bathroom.

8 minutes ago, themensch said:

I seem to recall a lot of chatter about [hyperspace fuel] in the canonical novels - so I presumed they glossed over fuel like they gloss over going to the bathroom.

It’s at least been a canon thing since 1999.

Ric Olie:
There's not enough power to get us to Coruscant...the hyperdrive is leaking.

Qui-Gon Jinn:
We'll have to land somewhere to refuel and repair the ship.

Regarding hyperspace fuel, I have a "yeah but". Hyperdrive fuel (hypermatter) has been around for a while in EU/Legends and I've included rules involving such in my Vehicle Ops series. The reason I put it in this list above is that it was always hand-waved before, but now made much more important in TLJ. We now have something concrete regarding fuel for hyperdrives. This movie spoke of having enough fuel for X number of jumps. If we had this in the WEG days, we would probably have ship stats detailing, "Carries 3 Jumps of Fuel" or something similar.

Did it also suggest hyperdrive fuel is the same as that used for thrusters? I don't recall for sure. The admiral was loading up the shuttles with fuel and I thought it was at least implied this was the same fuel the cruiser needed. But, they may have just been speaking of sublight fuel to keep the cruiser moving so it isn't caught versus fuel for the shuttles to flee. So, it could be explained by saying they were speaking of two different fuels and thus we can save the hypermatter for hyperdrives from Legends instead of having to make "fuel" be the same for thrusters and hyperdrives.

I could see the fuel thing going either way. Maybe there are two different types of fuel, or maybe they use the same fuel but the hyperdrive needs much more per jump than the thrusters and sublight engines need for normal operation.

18 minutes ago, Sturn said:

Regarding hyperspace fuel, I have a "yeah but". Hyperdrive fuel (hypermatter) has been around for a while in EU/Legends and I've included rules involving such in my Vehicle Ops series. The reason I put it in this list above is that it was always hand-waved before, but now made much more important in TLJ. We now have something concrete regarding fuel for hyperdrives. This movie spoke of having enough fuel for X number of jumps. If we had this in the WEG days, we would probably have ship stats detailing, "Carries 3 Jumps of Fuel" or something similar.

As with any type of fuel in any genre, it’s hand-waved until the needs of plot, at which point it’s much more important.

In TPM, the plot needed to detour them to Tatooine and keep them there for a bit. Hyperdrive broken and out of fuel.

In TLJ, the plot needed to keep them from just running to fight another day and to demonstrate how thin the Resistance’s resources were at the moment. Limited fuel.

Meanwhile, on The Walking Dead, scrounging for fuel used to be a regular occurrence. Now - years into the zombie apocalypse with no new gasoline being produced - they drive everywhere. It used to be important to the plot, and now it’s hand-waved.

TBH in my opinion.... If it's not in the Episodes IV, V & VI it's not vaild ....

3 hours ago, Sturn said:

Hyperspace fuel.

Like ammo reloads, that's what Despairs are for. I believe WEG had rules for fuel, something like:

• every ship could store 50 units of fuel
• each unit was scaled to the size of the ship (Sil3 units were smaller than Sil6 units)
• 1 unit had enough juice for an hour of combat operations
• hyperspace entry required multiple units (minimum 5...?), while once in hyperspace you needed 1 per day... (again...?)

I don't recall the details, but they would be easy to recreate. But honestly, to refer back to the ammo analogue, who needs to bean count all that?

16 minutes ago, whafrog said:

I don't recall the details, but they would be easy to recreate. But honestly, to refer back to the ammo analogue, who needs to bean count all that?

That's where I always end up. I don't like playing Edge of the Spreadsheet so I also reserve the "out of resource" complications for when the dice indicate the possibility. Unless, of course, there is plot afoot.

The only thing I'm recalling from my one viewing that gave me pause was Leia surviving the vacuum, using the force to save herself, and then actually coming out of that unscathed, not even a burn mark or a lost finger! I wish Carrie herself had been so resilient.

Just now, themensch said:

The only thing I'm recalling from my one viewing that gave me pause was Leia surviving the vacuum, using the force to save herself, and then actually coming out of that unscathed, not even a burn mark or a lost finger! I wish Carrie herself had been so resilient.

For me, it came across as blatant wish-fulfillment. Which, incidentally, I was and am 100% on board with.

As for having it happen in the game, I'd reserve it for extremely powerful NPCs. I could see PCs managing it at very high levels (over 2,000 earned XP, maybe?) but only at great cost—Leia might not have been visibly hurt, but she still ended up in a coma.

1 minute ago, CaptainRaspberry said:

For me, it came across as blatant wish-fulfillment. Which, incidentally, I was and am 100% on board with.

As for having it happen in the game, I'd reserve it for extremely powerful NPCs. I could see PCs managing it at very high levels (over 2,000 earned XP, maybe?) but only at great cost—Leia might not have been visibly hurt, but she still ended up in a coma.

Man, having Leia die alone in the cold vacuum of space would have really been a great twist and a shocking end to her saga. I can see why they didn't allow that to happen but really, if this movie was supposed to be about breaking the cycle, they could have done it justice there. I guess if Ezra can ride a space whale in the vacuum of space and survive, Leia can too.

1 minute ago, CaptainRaspberry said:

For me, it came across as blatant wish-fulfillment. Which, incidentally, I was and am 100% on board with.

As for having it happen in the game, I'd reserve it for extremely powerful NPCs. I could see PCs managing it at very high levels (over 2,000 earned XP, maybe?) but only at great cost—Leia might not have been visibly hurt, but she still ended up in a coma.

Meanwhile less experience characters just have cheap gear to achieve the same thing.

2 hours ago, Sturn said:

Quite a few things popped up in the Last Jedi that need to be explained away so it doesn't become an issue in future gaming sessions. GM's let us arm ourselves for the inevitable hyperspace bombs coming our way.

SPOILERS BELOW

First, a list of what may need to be explained or receive rules changes? Please respond with other issues and I will edit this list.

1. Slow-moving capital ships can be destroyed by kamikaze ships launching into hyperspace. Why haven't we seen this before? How can we make this a rare, over-costly, or extremely hard to do option for our PCs to avoid, "I'm putting my astromech in this battered Z95 and having it hyperspace into that pirate Corvette!"
2. "Bombers" exist that for some reason must get close to attack (as opposed to launching missiles like a Y-wing) and have bombs that fall....in 0G.
3. Force powers have taken a leap in what they can do. "I want that ultimate protection that Leia has so I can brush off huge explosions and survive in space....and she was only a force sensitive btw". or "But, Move can be used to toss aside large amounts of heavy boulders or demolish small buildings, so why can't I do it too?"
4. Turbolasers are much less effective (less damage) at longer ranges (which don't seem to be very far) per a quote during the space chase. Rule change needed?
5. Hyperspace fuel.
6. .......

1. Because the tactic can be countered by laying particularly intensive fire on the target as it is making the jump. The reason the tactic worked was that the ship was dismissed as a target until the very last minute, by which point it was too late. That and turning around meant it would no longer be able to run away; it was a one shot tactic that would sacrifice a major asset and evacuating the transports before hand would have left them exposed if they chose to preform this move before it was "apparent they were desperate". In a sense, Finn's and Roses gigantic blunder provided an opportunity to hit the flagship directly while they were otherwise preoccupied.

2: The one bomber that did make it to the dreadnort completely wiped out the target vessel. Usually though, I imagine the protection detail would be much more then the resistance could actually offer; given that they were facing several ships worth of Ties. As for why bombs fall? I donno. That does seem pretty stupid to me; just I guess the director wanted to continue that WW2 dog fighting theme that the OT set up.

3: Most of the uses of the force were preformed by experienced, legecy era characters or were preformed thematically. Leia's space walk was something to show how powerful even a untrained skywalker was (not that we know how well she was trained; for all we know she had decent training but chose not to use the force most of the time to appear as a simple diplomat. Everyone knows Luke to be a powerful one man army, but the same wasn't true for his sister. It was that survival training that allowed her to save herself.). Lifting a bunch of rocks, shattering a hutt and so fourth are easily applicable; is the GM going to be anal and specify that "no, there's 1000 small rocks you can't lift all of them, because you can't use enough magnitude upgrades", no, the whole lot would be treated as a sil 3 and moved.

That and the force was always potent; just the limitation of technology in the OT and the lack of practioneers means almost no one knows how capable a well trained force user is. Luke played on that lack of information that he played on the New Order's and Kylos fears by appearing as he did within the legends. His solo defence of the entirety of Kylo Ren's army achieved much more then an act of brute force ever could.

4: I am not familiar with how the rules for longer range combat works though it makes sense in the universe; the vast majority of space combat takes place in relatively close ranges. The start of episode 3, the battle of Endor. Capital ship warfare isn't actually covered all that much throughout the movies though; most of the time the fighters are much more dangerous then the other side gave them credit for.

5: Episode 1 had this too, and just because fuel wasn't specified before, doesn't mean fuel doesn't exist. It was just never of narrative importance. I would probably make this the result of a despair or a situation check. E.g. "escape or cripple the interdictor before your fleet gets wiped out. Since your battle group has been running lean for a while, the power reserves on several ships are running low." or "you hyperspace to the wrong location; a warning indicator beeps that fuel is inadquit for further jumps. Meanwhile, a star destroyer hangs over a uncharted planet, it is hailing you...

12 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

Meanwhile less experience characters just have cheap gear to achieve the same thing.

Haven't you heard about those giant space worms breaking down atoms from eating asteroids which are converted in their digestive system creating a trace atmosphere?

This is all I wanted when creating this thread. Something like we've done before to clear up issues such as the Ep IV space slug. And possibly some hints at rules for new things like hyperspace ramming.

We have the same gear used on open space as well. So apparently that must include some energy fields to keep you alive some time. Han and Leia had an argument right while floating in space in one of the more recent comics and there are some other really old scenes with Han fighting a zero G blaster duell with just an bigger breathing mask and iirc some jump boots.

7 minutes ago, LordBritish said:

2: The one bomber that did make it to the dreadnort completely wiped out the target vessel. Usually though, I imagine the protection detail would be much more then the resistance could actually offer; given that they were facing several ships worth of Ties. As for why bombs fall? I donno. That does seem pretty stupid to me; just I guess the director wanted to continue that WW2 dog fighting theme that the OT set up.

They simply don't fall. Conservation of momentum applies and they get literally thrown out of the bomb bay. Not with high velocity or anything, just a sweet little nudge when moving them down and out of the bay.

Though the visual guide has some magnetic railing systems and targeting on top. So they get drawn to their target on top for better aim. Not totally dumb bombs, just no real propulsion system.

3 hours ago, CaptainRaspberry said:

This should be a Formidable , if not outright Impossible Piloting (Space) check , no matter the craft being used.

I don't have the rules in front of me, but I was also thinking of using the RAW ramming rules while increasing the difficulty and damage results severely. It's very hard to do and results in much more damage to your ship unless you are equal in size or greater then the target ( thus you would be losing equal or more then the target). Makes it something never attempted unless there is no other choice.

10 minutes ago, Sturn said:

I don't have the rules in front of me, but I was also thinking of using the RAW ramming rules while increasing the difficulty and damage results severely. It's very hard to do and results in much more damage to your ship unless you are equal in size or greater then the target ( thus you would be losing equal or more then the target). Makes it something never attempted unless there is no other choice.

Given how effective it could be, I think if the PCs manage it, the damage should be focused on the best outcome for the narrative. The ship will be heavily damaged and possibly destroyed, but you could take advantage of that for the sake of your story.

It's like one of my earliest GMs did for me. When my character became an actual aspect of Death itself and received a scythe, I bugged him about the fact that the stats he gave me didn't have anything for damage. He snatched my character sheet out of my hand, wrote "PLOT" in the damage box, and gave it back.

2 hours ago, ExpandingUniverse said:

TBH in my opinion.... If it's not in the Episodes IV, V & VI it's not vaild ....

For my own campaign, I made it clear to my players that only Episode IV could be fully accepted as fact.

7 hours ago, Sturn said:

Slow-moving capital ships can be destroyed by kamikaze ships launching into hyperspace. Why haven't we seen this before? How can we make this a rare, over-costly, or extremely hard to do option for our PCs to avoid, "I'm putting my astromech in this battered Z95 and having it hyperspace into that pirate Corvette!"

It may not be Canon, but it is in FFG (Strongholds of Resistance pg 34) that a heavy cruiser hyperspaced into Pammant killing billions. It both wiped out the planet and killed by radiation everyone within the shipyards in orbit. So it isn't the first time we've seen hyperspace jumps causing damage.

So maybe why we haven't seen it before is you wouldn't use it near your own fleet, or near your own fighters, or near an inhabited planet, or near any force sensible enough to bring an Interdictor, or against an enemy with a fighter screen, or against an enemy with weapons trained on you.

7 hours ago, Sturn said:

Quite a few things popped up in the Last Jedi that need to be explained away so it doesn't become an issue in future gaming sessions. GM's let us arm ourselves for the inevitable hyperspace bombs coming our way.

SPOILERS BELOW

First, a list of what may need to be explained or receive rules changes? Please respond with other issues and I will edit this list.

1. Slow-moving capital ships can be destroyed by kamikaze ships launching into hyperspace. Why haven't we seen this before? How can we make this a rare, over-costly, or extremely hard to do option for our PCs to avoid, "I'm putting my astromech in this battered Z95 and having it hyperspace into that pirate Corvette!"
2. "Bombers" exist that for some reason must get close to attack (as opposed to launching missiles like a Y-wing) and have bombs that fall....in 0G.
3. Force powers have taken a leap in what they can do. "I want that ultimate protection that Leia has so I can brush off huge explosions and survive in space....and she was only a force sensitive btw". or "But, Move can be used to toss aside large amounts of heavy boulders or demolish small buildings, so why can't I do it too?"
4. Turbolasers are much less effective (less damage) at longer ranges (which don't seem to be very far) per a quote during the space chase. Rule change needed?
5. Hyperspace fuel.
6. .......

1. I've mentioned this in another thread, but I've been looking at this like I would nuclear weapons. Once you let that cat out of the bag... Admittedly, this theory doesn't necessarily work when we aren't discussing space nazis, so YMMV.

5. Plot devices exist to change/alter/move the plot. This didn't bother me at all.

I didn't read anything in this thread because I haven't seen The Last Jedi yet, so I'm avoiding the spoilers but . . .

For My Star Wars RPG's I'm ignoring everything post ROTJ because it's all garbage. (I liked Rogue One but even that had Galaxy breaking continuity issues).

Heck, I realized this morning that I have NEVER flown a TFA era vehicle in any of my games of X-Wing, even though I own a handful. I hate TFA with that much vehemence I refuse to do anything with it besides hunt them down and dispatch them with unbridled enthusiasm.

Maybe one day, I'll break out a T-70 and use it . . .