This video brings up an interesting question.
Namely range in Star Wars (for blasters, at least).

The TL;DR version of the video is that all blasters, including turbolasers, lose effectiveness over range. Not just accuracy, but actual damage capacity.
It shows that this has been the case in Star Wars since the first movie, but TLJ really shines a light on it.

Have a look and see if you agree.

I'm certainly going to add houserules for damage loss over range.

well I normally use the weaponrange to determin that the damage loss is to big to really have any effect once the range of the weapon is reached. (otherwise it is hard to explain why a gunslinger can hit a target at 15 meter with a heavyblaster but not with a holdout blaster.

So yes I think range matters for damage, but I don't need housrules therefore, with in range the damage is normal, out of range the hit a narrative and won't do any harm.

It's plamas it cools down eventually

Characters with the talent [sharpshooter] know how to tweak a little bit more out of the weapon ^^ (and the damage loss is introduced by the additional difficulty dice, since it come extra with normal range difficulty)

Still, feels strange that a weapon would do full damage out to its maximum range and then suddenly do no damage at all.

16 minutes ago, OddballE8 said:

Still, feels strange that a weapon would do full damage out to its maximum range and then suddenly do no damage at all.

Think of it this way: the increased difficulty per range band is handling the decrease in damage, by way of more chance to roll failures which decreases damage output. Once you go past a certain range, a pistol is gonna be just too inaccurate, regardless of your master gunslinger skills.

Certain pistols only have an effective range of short which is roughly 40-50ft. Beyond that they are just not going to be effective, whether it's in damage output or in accuracy, sometimes both.

I think the rules already cover this. Even for capital ships

Naw, I wouldn't. Seems a bit fiddly to me.

That's already partly the case as longer range = higher difficulty = fewer successes = lower damage. Anything else is just going to bog down gameplay by adding an extra step to resolution.

I'm not sure reducing damage is going to fix what is already a bungled mess for space combat. TLJ also demonstrates (as if the other movies didn't already) that shields are damage soaks, not a slightly reduced chance of hitting. Band-aid on a broken leg...

1 hour ago, whafrog said:

I'm not sure reducing damage is going to fix what is already a bungled mess for space combat. TLJ also demonstrates (as if the other movies didn't already) that shields are damage soaks, not a slightly reduced chance of hitting. Band-aid on a broken leg...

I think of shields as more like slope armor than soak. If you dont hit square with enough force your shot will be ineffective.

2 hours ago, whafrog said:

I'm not sure reducing damage is going to fix what is already a bungled mess for space combat. TLJ also demonstrates (as if the other movies didn't already) that shields are damage soaks, not a slightly reduced chance of hitting. Band-aid on a broken leg...

I'm still a fan of adding shield points and as they go down the black dice are removed. So shields serve double duty but when they're down you are in trouble.

4 hours ago, Talkie Toaster said:

That's already partly the case as longer range = higher difficulty = fewer successes = lower damage. Anything else is just going to bog down gameplay by adding an extra step to resolution.

And fewer advantages, so less chance to do linked, autofire, criticals, etc.

TL DR: NO!

If you want to be realistic about it, sure. But in most RPG's we also want sufficient simplicity that we don't get bogged down with the game mechanics.

I DO love how GURPS uses a half damage range in its game, and that works very well while retaining both realism & simplicity. If you are totally grokking for that kind of realism, you definitely want to check out GURPS lite for a primer.

But as a Star Wars GM, I'm okay with the RAW. The narrative dice also provide sufficient random results in combat and they're simple and quick to resolve.

After reading your responses, I realize that I'm still too stuck in old ways of thinking.

higher difficulty = fewer successes = lower damage in total.

You guys are right, there's no need to lower the base damage based on range as the game already does that with its mecahnics.

Still an interesting video, though.

On 21/03/2018 at 6:20 PM, whafrog said:

I'm not sure reducing damage is going to fix what is already a bungled mess for space combat. TLJ also demonstrates (as if the other movies didn't already) that shields are damage soaks, not a slightly reduced chance of hitting. Band-aid on a broken leg...

Honestly my preferred fix is 'shields let you convert damage up to shield rating -> system strain per hit, Evasive Maneuvers gives Defence = Handling'.

Shielded rebel ships effectively gain a 2nd HP bar, one that regenerates if they have a good astromech (just like in X-Wing TMG). Makes the typical PC ships harder to kill, and more able to do multiple fights in a row. High agility ships like TIEs are great in the hands of aces that can suffer strain to take 2 maneuvers, but fold like paper when flown by minions. Reproduces what we see in the films.