Just thought I'd share an idea I had. Let's say your PCs are headed to a fancy party or a high end casino. Perhaps somewhere closer to the core. The doormen may be able to provide a "stun lock" that is fastened to the weapon similar to a restraining bolt. Once fastened the weapon may only be fired using the stun setting. Stun locks may only be used with weapons that have a stun setting. Furthermore, it requires a DAUNTING mechanics check to remove the stun lock. Alternatively, at the GM's discretion the PC may use the appropriate weapon skill to remove it (e.g. ranged light or ranged heavy). Alternatively, the lock may be removed with the appropriate tool (usually by the doorman upon exit).

(optional) The "stun lock" may have a mod that allows the weapon to be remotely disabled from a central computer for 3 rounds.

I don't recall seeing this in the books nor so I think it has any sort of canonicity It just seems like a nice option that would allow your PCs to bring weapons to a party that might not otherwise allow it.

Thoughts?

I'd be shocked if casinos allowed weapons in at all since they're essentially mints with a RNG....

39 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

I'd be shocked if casinos allowed weapons in at all since they're essentially mints with a RNG....

Sure. Just providing an example. Of course the application would be based on the GMs discretion.

Mechanically I see no issue with the idea. Practically the difference between being rendered unconscious or killed to the target and the shooter is irrelevant, the target's stopped. Point being lethality isn't needed unless it's an assassination, so any place concerned with one would by default concerned with the other.

7 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

Mechanically I see no issue with the idea. Practically the difference between being rendered unconscious or killed to the target and the shooter is irrelevant, the target's stopped. Point being lethality isn't needed unless it's an assassination, so any place concerned with one would by default concerned with the other.

I see your point but I don't agree that they are totally equal. Stun settings are highly disadvantageous especially due to their short-range nature. If the guards are equipped with normal blasters and blaster rifles they have a large tactical advantage over someone with a stun-only blaster. It's similar to the idea there are places where you could bring a taser but you would not be able to enter with a hand gun. I totally get that this might not be allowed for high-security facilities (casinos, banks, governor's mansion) but there are probably a number of social arena's that would allow it. High society party, etc. I mean, many situations in SW allow them to carry normal blasters as a standard affair, especially in the Outer Rim. More to the point, for story purposes, there may be some instances where it's more fun to allow the PCs to have weapons somewhere that might not otherwise permit them. Plus, it adds a complication, which is often a good thing, from a narrative standpoint.

But if I sneak a gun by your guards won't necessarily know, and if they're accustomed to people having guns I can close distance easily enough. Once I've done that whether it's on Stun is again irrelevant. As opposed to no one has weapons and anyone that does is a threat.

2 hours ago, VadersMarchKazoo said:

I see your point but I don't agree that they are totally equal. Stun settings are highly disadvantageous especially due to their short-range nature. If the guards are equipped with normal blasters and blaster rifles they have a large tactical advantage over someone with a stun-only blaster.

Inside most buildings/starships/spacestations, Short range is plenty, but I agree with 2P51 that having any weapons allowed in a casino is a bad idea. OTOH, if this is something that an entire colony/settlement requires, then it might make more sense. For extra fun, have the lock put a large blaze orange-colored piece around the end of the barrel.

Even if the locale is fine with stun blasters, it would still be both unpractical and risky to allow people in with "real" blasters, deactivated or not. And given that's it's probably not terribly hard to disguise a blaster as a stun blaster, I can't see anyone in their right mind having their guests check all their blasters at the door, stun or otherwise. The only possibility I could see is a casino possibly lending a VIP guest one of their own stun blasters, but it's probably more likely they provide him with one of their own armed guards if there is a need for extra security.

If you want to give your players a challenge to get in there still armed, make that challenge getting their blasters past security. Hiding blasters is an excellent excuse for making silly fashion choices after all.