So, annoying as I am, I have here the latest update on the fringer supplement I'm constructing.

I have done most conversions myself - although other people here on the forums have inspired some of it and others have given feedback on some of the stuff. They should be included, although if you feel left out, I either apologise or encourage to participate

Please comment if you feel like telling me if I missed the mark on some of these things. New to this version is a lot of weapons - I'm one of those pesky people that like named models and small variances. Yes. I'm sure some are against this stance, that's fair and please do voice your opinion - although I do not care much about the discussion of "if" this is necessary or not. If I didn't think so and feel that if informed and improved my game, I wouldn't have done it.

There are some attachments in there as well, some of which is very much Boehm 's work - I have only streamlined and packed stuff together - these I want commentary one in particular (thank you Boehm for supplying me with ideas!). I have also a version of the retractable/attachable stock - I can't find the thread it was discussed in so this is from what I remember and from the SE take on it. I think it looks ok, if not great. Also, the weapons, please comment, here or there.

EDIT: Should be the correct file now.

Oh my, it seems its the odt file and not a pdf. Give me a sec.

Great work!!!

I have now changed a lot of the weapon specific rules into weapon qualities and added some attachments too. The sporting rifles have also received a make over, most of them now come with targeting scopes (not the same as the multi-optic sight in EotE - they're cheaper). Also the detachable mod that Boehm talked about is inherent in a few of these, so I made it into a attachment/mod very much along side Boehm's suggestions. Once I have done some more I will post an update.

Well done. I had some notes to do a similar document, but you beat me to it.

Please post it, I'd love to see a different, or another, take on these things. I'm mainly just jotting down what I deem to be "about right" adding rules or qualities or attachments as I go - when the ones in EotE doesn't fit.

I have now a 1.8.5 doc, not uploaded yet (perhaps tomorrow), with melee weapons too, slugthrowers, repeaters, sporting rifles, ion guns. I have not done the disruptors - mainly because these were never used by my players, nor have I done dart pistols, wrist weapons or flechette launchers. Dart and wrist weapons I want to, but I'd like some help or inspiration on that.

Additionally I need some ideas for armour conversions, more armour attachments and more general fringers gear and equipment. EotE is pretty ok on that part, but there's always room for more.

double-post galore. I might as well use it for something else.

I have been inspired by some of your work Sturn, so you're credited (at least in the 1.8.5+, I didn't find the thread before after posting the 1.8 version so I couldn't remember who) - particularly your retractable/detachalbe stock and the take on the DL-22 loosened some obstacles in me head.

Here is the latest version.

Any feedback and commentary is appreciated.

I've been performing some smaller adjustments to guns, attachments - like the blaster actuating module flop I managed to put in there, its gone now, it made no sense to replace a maintenance penalty with an inaccuracy quality. It will be gone in the next version.

Furthermore I have two very similar negative qualities, poor stun setting and weak stun setting - these usually pop up in pistols that have boosted damage from the get go. The poor stun setting adds setback dice to stun attack, but stun damage is the same. Weak stun setting decreases stun damage, but is as easy to hit with as a normal lethal attack. I'm not sure both are needed, but looking at the A&EG description of some of the guns, it seems its warranted. I'd like feedback on these, if they are scaled well, if they are pointless or anything reall.

The Magenitc-pommel attachment, inspired by someone on these boards, need some suggestions on how to be handled.

The Improved Stun Capabilities attachment could probably also benefit from some feedback, alongside the improved stun setting quality.

Feedback on how to handle the Fragile and Durable weapon qualities better would be nice, alongside the High-maintenance quality.

Auto-fire friendly needs some commentary and suggestions for improvement… both in mechanics and a new name.

Limited range has been changed to upgrading difficulty instead of increasing it. I wonder if this should be tiered quality in some way. Some ideas here would be nice.

Quiet and Silent are very much the same really, should these be merged? Same with High-energy consumption and Small Power pack really, they are mainly distinct because during conversion and reading about the different weapons their limited ammo or tendency to run out of ammo where rationalised differently - hence two very alike qualities, should they be made into one for simplicity?

What are your thoughts on the Slow reload quality?

The Reach quality - its dumb I know, but for some reason it was the only thing I came up with when converting the Great Force Pike with reach…

All weapons have been updated and adjusted, like the ones that got inaccurate due to my misreading of blaster actuating module - will in the next version not have this quality, that is unless their weapon description in A&EG or some of the WEG sources states that its inaccurate or similar.

Any of the not already mentioned weapons attachments need adjustment and commentary - perhaps not so acutely as the ones above though.

I'd really, really, really like some comments and feedback on the starship. I know they are not very well balanced as they are now. I need in particular comments on silhouettes, Hull Integrity, Strain Threshold, customisation hardpoints, defences and armour. Of course anything is up for debate, except names and production company

A note on encumbrance: I have not converted tons to enc - the capacity is still in metric tons. If anyone has a good idea of how to convert metric tons to encumbrance, please tell me.

Oh yeah, one more thing. I know the starship weapons are not updated as per week 8 update. It will be done for the next version.

I love your work!

Small thingy I noticed though: I think the V-Wing is not in the correct section since its a starfighter….

Locksathy said:

Thanks for the praise.

The V-wing is not in the wrong place, as I've been sorting the different starships after manufacturer not type or size. It is, aside from the uglies, the only starfighter in there - if I remember correctly - and it might be a better fit for the known threats supplement, although initially there was only going to be one supplement for pirates, smugglers and everyone.

So, I'm getting close … if anyone is missing a ship they want converted and included in this supplement please holler and wave. Same goes for any gear and other stuff that you want to see converted and fits into a guide of this nature.

1.9.5

Woohoo! Our work on the Wayfarer is in this update!

Edit: I'm 'Theo' from the d20radio forums.

Huh?

Ah! I see! Yes, I added the updated version, simply because it is now superior collaboration takes us to a better tomorrow methinks!

Jegergryte said:

Google Docs can auto-convert them…

That is certainly true.

Here's the latest version .

Changes includes some boxes for special ammo, grappling suggestions. New font to look and feel slightly more like EotE - the actualy font costs somewhere between $20 and $70 so I'm not paying that. Additionally I've added some more "mundane" gear for those that feel that is needed - some rules on datapads and data archives. I have also added two starship attachments that Jedimerc did most of the work on.

Furthermore I've added a few weapons here and there, I think, not sure how much new weapons since last version, but some.

I have also, I think, added more armour and armour attachments - unless they were in the last version too (I loose track doing this simultaneously with a depressing research project).

There might also be other stuff in there that I have not mentioned here.

Now please, I beg - once more - for feedback. While I do enjoy praise and ego-stroking, I do wish for constructive and maiming critique too - as long as its within the premises of the supplement. I know that lots probably think that having detailed and very minor differences between certain guns is pointless, and I can see that reasoning, but I'm not in complete agreement, which is why I'm doing this. So… yes. What I want feedback on is stuff like hardpoints, hull threshold, strain threshold for starship (I have yet to add any other types of vehicles), hardpoints for weapons, the attachments (weapons, armour and starships), the new qualities and… yes. That's about it…

EDIT: Managed to mess something up. Should be ok now.

EDIT2: FFS! Now… at least I won't mess with it anymore even if its still messed up (its only a minor detail, but I'm peculiar about that).

I think, from the perspective of the game setting itself, you have a great catalog of items. I had forgotten how many YT-series transports alone existed (between SW Gamer and Pirates and Privateers, quite a few transports overall). I think the feel would be more complete, especially in the weapon entries if the damage was simply listed instead of the entries 'like blaster pistol'. I admit, it can be tedious to have the same damage, and since this is not a random damage dice system one cannot make damage variances really (no 3d4+1 or 3d6-2, etc). Still, maybe it is from seeing the way those states were constructed in the A and E book and Gallandinium's and other supplements, it does not feel right to my eye. I think it is probably aesthetic more than anything. Otherwise, the overall effort and work makes for a very solid supplement. It is nice to see so much fan-created stuff so early on before even the game is fully released. It will be interesting to see what the designers come up with and change if they release similar supplements.

Yeah I thought about the stats stuff, but I was wondering about the soundness of reproducing stats from the published book… it was also easier when I started it because I didn't have the EotE book with me at the time. I'll consider that for the next version. Thanks

A couple of suggestions.

In regards to the ships and their encumbrance, rather than list the tonnage, try to convert it to an encumbrance rating. I'd probably go with multiplying the tonnage listed by 1.5 to 1.65 (just going with the yt-1300 having 100 tons in say, Saga, to 165 encumbrance in EotE. Then round up or down depending on how you feel the ship should be modified. A HWK-290 I'd round down, as all the deckplans I've seen don't even give a cargo bay (at least one accessible in flight),

Secondly, in regards to weapons, I'll be honest this is a section I skipped over. Detailing every single weapon has become a sore spot in gaming to me. It might just be the group I have, or my change in perspective, but I dislike that some weapons become a clear cut better choice than others because of stats - I want much of what my character uses to be chosen because I feel it suits the character, or I think it looks 'cool'. I prefer to not be punished by choosing a statistically inferior weapon. What I would suggest, rather than detail every single weapon, I'd take a page out of Borderlands 2, and make templates based on the different companies/manufacturers of weapons - So, for example, Blastech weapons, do 2 extra points in damage, but they sacrifice 1 hardpoint. Merr-Sonn weapons with the blast quality activate said quality for one less Advantage. A smaller company that manufactures low-quality knock offs could have the price reduced, but all weapons get the inferior quality, etc. This lets a character have a unique weapon, without inundating the players with hundreds of weapons that are almost identical.

About encumbrance. I have gone with the tonnage, simply because there is no good way of converting. Whereas the YT-1300 seems simple enough, the Action VI has 10,000 enc, but 90,000 tons in Saga. The hwk-290 is also listed with a lot more tonnage in the Saga source (TFU listed 150 tons), so I lowered it quite a bit. I could of course list a suggested encumbrance - something like a multiplier as you say, but that would be very vague and sometimes quite off mark.

Template for manufacturers is a good idea, they did that in Saga too - perhaps I'll add that as an alternative to the stats provided (at least to the standard type weapons). Thank you for that suggestion. Although I think a +2 damage for a -1 HP is a bit too good, perhaps a 1 for 1 is better.

I do agree that some weapons should not simply be better, but I've tried to reduce HPs or add some quality that reduces its effectiveness, sometimes increased encumbrance of the weapon - of course that is pointless unless the group keeps track of such things. The weapons that are better should also be more expensive, but I do admit that I've not always compared to EotE prices, as RCR and SE sources have a slightly different pricing convention. I can go over this and adjust - and simply make better weapons more expensive, rarer and perhaps more freely use the restricted label for the better weapons.

Only one of my players have actually used the supplement to find a new weapon - same guy that gave away a heavy blaster rifle because he wanted a pistol instead - and due to reduced funds, rarity and the like, he went for a slighty stronger heavy blaster only (SoroSuub Kylan-3: got 1 more damage, but less hardpoints) - spent the cash and bough an attachment. Of course now he's beardy (got point-blank, jury rigged and blaster actuating module), but that weapon is now a signature of his (people will recognise him and it in the long run), its bought on the black market, so no license, its big and modified which is highly irregular - therefore lots of more trouble in imperial space. I know not every group and GM cares too much about that, but I do.

But yes thank you for the suggestions - considering the time I've spent doing this I don't mind spending more, to adjust prices, rarity and the like. Although I probably won't remove the long list of weapons, but I can perhaps offer an alternate way of gaining stylish/signature weapons, through the template idea of yours. That will result in less variance - perhaps - but also more easily balanced over all.

Although I must admit that the template way does put limitations on my desire for unique weapons - the Merr-Sonn underslung rotary blaster carbine should be a beardy auto-fire only weapon; few blaster weapons have the blast quality, and I'm not sure I feel that it adequately covers the difference (I know that is was only an example) - of course I could add the blast quality instead of an auto-fire only quality, but I'm not sure that adequately covers the auto-fire only side of it - but it does make sense in a balancing way (considering how insanely beard the auto-fire quality is). Additionally, the BlasTech is - as far as I know - one of the more if not the most common brand of blasters, hence the standard, stock, models should really be BlasTech - but then what do I do about the Thunderer? the DY-225? DT-12? or the DL-22? The Thunderer (DT6) is a lot more powerful than the DL-44 (stock heavy blaster), but no stun setting. The DY-225 is better at stunning, but have inferior damage to the DL-44, the DT-12 is less accurate than the DL-44 and slightly more powerful. The way I have solved the DT-12 might be a bit off, it could get a better crit value, but same damage, and keep the inaccurate quality - crits are auto-kill on minions, but doesn't necessarily cause more wounds on henchmen, nemesis and PCs faster… but I think that a crit of 2 is very good…

I have not yet started to make suggested template, simply because I need more time to consider it. My first idea to extrapolate on this was to introduce templates for various types of weapons - pistols, carbines, rifles (which includes heavy blaster rifle), repeaters… still. The trade-offs are stopping me from doing this yet, because I need some more time to think. Suggestions, beyond what has already been mentioned would go a long way towards getting this alternative method in motion - because while I'm skeptical I do like it somewhat.

I have started to adjust weapons - I've done one run. This included adjusting prices, rarity and some stats I saw where off due to earlier versions not being corrected after attachments and qualities were generated and added. It's not yet ready for upload though.

I have also pruned the grappling suggestions.

You're right that BlasTech and maybe Sorusuub should be the 'baseline' models. As to Merr-Sonn weapons, the idea I threw out was based on the fact that they tend to manufacture a lot of things that go "BOOM!". Just as Tenloss is pretty much the sole manufacturer of Disruptors. If you have access to the Del Rey book The new essential guide to weapons and Technology, that would be a good place to start to get a feel for what the templates could do.

As to the different feel of weapons, or having a unique weapon, personally,I think that's better done with weapon mods. I know I want kyle Katarn's Bryar pistol's charge up from Jedi: Outcast. That would eat up a lot of Hard Points. What makes the Bryar was that it could 'charge' up a shot. (also it was a originally a rifle with the barrel removed). Really, making new add-ons for weapons would go a long way, to getting the feel you want for a signature weapon. I'd save the entries for new weapons for NEW weapons such as the Concussion Rifle (which I'm working on), or the Verpine Shatter gun.

As always this is my opinion and: the world doesn't move to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you, may not be right for some. It doesn't matter that you've got not a lot, so what. You'll have yours, they'll have theirs, and I'll have mine. And together, we'll be fine. 'Cause it takes diff'rent strokes to rule the world.

I have none of the essentials book, except the Jedi/force thingy … at least I had it, its in some box somewhere I hope, been moving around a lot the last few years.

Whereas the blasters might be better treated with attachments - I have btw made a bryar attachment if you looked over the new attachments I made. It might need a bit of tweaking, but its a start - I have also converted a lot of other stuff, various slugthrower types, sniper rifles, dart pistols and writs weapons. I have also added a few new armour attachments.

I think most of my weapons could actually be made with the various attachments - except I think there is no damage module for pistols that doesn't add a setback die (i.e. inaccuracy). Which is balancing sure, but doesn't always work well with more powerful pistols that are as accurate - except perhaps heavier, less or more durable and the like… but I haven't looked that closely in the EotE book lately for these things.