One of my PCs oh-so-desperately wanted a jetpack. It may turn out to be a pain in the ass to manage, but I aim to let them explore the SW universe as they like.

To set the bounds, I've come up with a quick-reference sheet for the jetpack ( like other vehicles ), which has fleshed out the rules for jetpacks as they aren't really covered in the Beta rules. It actually requires a roll for maneuvers, which I recognize is not really part of the normal rules, but I want to make it possible to do things like fly and shoot while not making the flying a freebie - flying a jetpack can't be that easy!

Feedback/ideas on the jetpack rules quickref are welcome.

Tea

in my ever so humble opinion, i dislike this since it seems a little over powered. Some good ideas but it needs to be taken down a few notches

ever figure out the cost and Rarity? Maybe have handling be -1 or -2.

I would increase the encumberance to 6 or 7 (-3 if worn)

Using a jetpack should use the Vehicle combat rules, you would still be Silouette 1.

Should be 2 or 3 advatage to knockdown an opponent (as per Knock down ablility) and get rid of rocket wash.

Nix rocketeer, and break it down. you are doing a brawl check to grapple someone at engaged, then manuvering, and dropping them (they get an atheltics check to avoid falling badly)

my 2 credits worth.

In the movies, Boba and Jango never really used the jetpack for more then just "Hops". Your player might have thier own idea of how it works. And be thinking of Iron man, or the Rocketeer movie. This is somthing you might want to discuss with your player, what HIS ideas of what it can do. And I certainly would have to make him work for it through credits and roleplaying.

I'm pretty sure the beta book covers this, simply by stating that the user of a jetpack becomes a silhouette 1 vehicle with speed 2 and handling 0. So for all intents and purposes its a tiny speeder.

The extra manoeuvres and actions you include would fit better as talents of some specialisation tree for jet-troopers or something, although it might be too specialised for that.

I agree with previous poster, this seems kind of over powered.

Giving upgrade on attack seems also unfair, particularly 2 upgrades like that. Rocketeer is kind of cool, but also very powerful - additionally, range bands are both vertical and horisontal, specifying numbers of floors goes against the relative and abstract range measuring in this system. Cannonball has way too many effects for 1 advantage a piece.

Moving as a vehicle basically means, if I remember correctly, that you can move within all the personal range bands as 1 manoeuvre (from short to extreme). I know that is pretty beard, and I'm not entirely sure about it, but I seem to remember reading that all the personal scale range bands are found within the close range band on planetary scale, and a vehicle with speed 2 should be able to move wherever within its close range band as 1 manoeuvre. I'd think.

Adding limitation on use, like fuel or use only every second round, I can understand, but here I'd just wing it instead of forcing down recharge or fuel rods. I did something similar for some additional jetpacks I conjured for my blog, but I'm not too keen on the idea really. Although I must admit that your limitation is a more elegant solution than mine. I let my players fly about as much as they want, I mean, its not like they can sneak, its not like they can hide mid-air, the jetpacks are loud. I mean, a despair result or 5+ threats would possibly result in no more fuel and falling damage and some stuff like that.

kinnison said:

In the Clone Wars cartoon, Cad Bane uses the rockets on his boots to perform some pretty advanced flying maneuvers. I just wanted to throw that in there as another reference.

Farsox said:

Discounting that Clone Wars action tended more towards "over the top" and "looks cool" than practical, Cad Bane's tricks were like the result of specalized training, Which in this system, would likely be the result of having various talents that provide him mechanical perks when using his jet boots.

I think the main perks of using a jet pack is that when considering range bands in character scale, a jet pack lets you move two range bands with a single manuever, and the fact that you're flying means you'd ignore any terrain constraints that would hamper a character on foot.

Jegergryte said:

Yep page 119 (Beta). And you are correct on the range bands. All the personal range bands fall under the close range of planetary scale. And a Speed 2 vehicle can move anywhere within that range band (close) as 1 maneuver. You need Pilot (Planetary) to use said jetpack. I think that the ability to move anywhere within the range bands is all the ability you need to have. It's pretty good all on its own. As to fuel running out, as noted, a despair result, much like ammo, can be used. Or even a 3 threat or despair result, like heavy blasters.

Donovan Morningfire said:

The cartoon is definitely more over-the-top, and much of Bane's jet boot use absolutely defies physics. Still, I think it might serve as a good reference for some. The Beta Book suggests to err on the side of fun, and I imagine that some campaigns will be run a bit more whimsically than others. It all depends on the players and what the GM will allow.

I think that you are spot on with the talents. If a GM does want to allow players to get a little fancier with their jetpacks, it should require them to invest some XP.

Some cool stuff in there.

@kinnison:

• I'm also a little worried about it being OP. Players know I may tone it down. That was the reason I did the every other round recharge rule - I didin't want them hopping all over the place.
• I'll be adjusting Cannonball to make it 2 difficulty per, good point on you and Jergergryte.
• For cost/rarity I used it from the Beta rulebook - 4,500, rarity 7. It cost them about 25,000 in the end.
• I took the encumbrance from those rules too, which was 2.
• I like your take on rocketeer, and will probably work it that way.

@Jergergryte:

• I agree it can be OP, and what you say about the speed 2 vehicle makes sense. But a speed 2 vehicle, compared to personal scale zips all over the place. I was actually trying to tone it down by limiting the range bands and repeated use. It was interesting to try and develop because if I only let them hop, someone running can catch them easily by using 2 maneuvers. I would expect with a jetpack that I could fly out of range of someone quickly (or at least my players expect that). Treating it as a speed 2 vehicle just didn't cover the nuances.
• I like the idea of treating the extra ones as talents. I might add it as house rule to that player's tech tree.
• I will be making the cannonball cost 2 per, not one per.
• I think you misunderstood on the upgrade - shooting while flying imposes two difficulty upgrades.

@Donovan: Concur that it should let you change two range bands in single maneuver, but dislike that someone could simply run really fast and catch up, which is why I added Scramjet. But because they always have to roll, even for a maneuver, they don't get a free ride.

Thanks for the help guys. Changing the costs, probably going to adjust rocketeer, and maybe building a small talent tree.

El Tea

No, I didn't misunderstand, I think the two difficulty upgrades when using a jetpack is unfair and while I can see the reasoning, I disagree on implementation. With the rules you make, there is little point in using a jetpack. I can only use it once every second round, so its not a get-away device/vehicle anymore. If using it I am suddeny at a disadvantage when trying to attack my opponents.

Farsox said:

He he he he, on the other hand the hyperdrive engine is based on Newtonian physics right?

Interesting. So some of you are not going to treat this as a vehicle? Imposing limitations that other vehicles do not have to follow? Or take it completely out of being a vehicle? Make it more a personal equipment device and therefore falling under personal movement rules? Just curious.

mouthymerc said:

I think implementing a jet pack as personal equipment makes a lot more sense than implementing it as a vehicle. The primary way we see jet packs used in the movies is for battlefield mobility (Jango Fett on Kamino and in the Battle of Geonosis (AotC) and Boba Fett at the Pit of Carkoon (RotJ) ).

In segments of the game with Structured gameplay (i.e. combat), I would rule that a jet pack lets the character take an action to move to any other location in the encounter. They move where they intend, and then make a Coordination check. On a success they have a safe landing, on a failure, they land prone. Advantages can be spent to put them in a more advantageous position, threats land them in disadvantageous situations, Despair means the jet pack ran out of fuel, Triumph does something appropriately cool.

I think that's all the rules you need for structured game play, especially since I've seen so many posters in these forums railing for keeping the system rules light. The GM can use dramatic liscense to determine whats appropriate and limit use, e.g, If the GM thinks someones been in the air too long, the jet pack starts to over heat.

Beyond structured game play, the uses of jet packs need be only limited by player creativitiy. They can be used to ascend cliffs or buildings rapidly, travel distances, make dramatic entrances or exits (as shown by Jango Fett taking off after killing Zam Wesell with the saberdart) etc.

You can explain away the difference in utility of the jet pack between structured and narrative game play by simply stating that in combat the more dramatic uses of the pack (fast travel, ascension, etc) aren't possible because of the precision required in a tactical environment.

Or whatever other reason tickles your fancy.

So, I guess I don't understand why you would implement this as a vehicle at all since that would only pull in a whole new set of rules that don't play well with the personal combat rules used in the situations where jet packs have been seen to be used.

As for jet pack stunts, you could either allow them anytime based on player creativity without creating a whole new talent tree. However, if the players are abusing a stunt over and over for bonuses/benefits that were provided once for clever narrative play, then there should be some expenditure of XP to continue to recieve the bonus.

Anyway, just my thoughts after reading all this. Keep it light, keep it simple, and keep it fun.

-WJL

LethalDose said:

I definitely like the idea of the coordination check. It would take some talent to land properly with a jet pack (for some reason I am picturing the old Moon Lander game), especially in a stressful situation.

Yepesnopes said:

Haha, I knew this comment was coming… I was trying to cover myself by saying that the cartoon is more over-the-top.

Farsox said:

I could also see a case being made for using Pilot (Planet) in regards to proper navigating and controlled landings when using a jet pack during combat. Either skill works, though a character is more likely to have a rank or two in Pilot (Planet) than in Coordination.

As for 'special stunts,' I'd suggest that those be limited to effects of a Triumph result, especially if it provides some kind of tangible mechanical benefit beyond a mere boost die or setback die.

Donovan Morningfire said:

RE: Pilot checks, I understand your PoV, but respectfully and completely disagree simply by merit of the fact that I don't see jetpacks as vehicles (I explained that above), and if they're not vehicles, why use pilot? The inspiration for using coordination comes from the old TSR 'Alternity' RPG, where Daredevil specialty of the Acrobatics skill was used in place of some piloting for hangliders, hoverboards, etc.

RE: Triumph for stunts, yeah, I totally agree that triumph results should be allowed to activate stunts. BUT, I get nervous because players are going to say "I want to attempt a stunt", and if you require triumph to do that, you're in one of two situations:

1. Make a roll for the stunt, but only allow it to be successful if a Triumph is rolled. To me, this is very concerning because we start ignoring successes rolled to determine the success of a declared action (Do a stunt).
2. Make a roll to move and hope for a Triumph. This is also concerning because now players are declaring actions that they really don't care about so they can roll dice and hope for a Triumph. (I've already seen similar rule abuse by players taking actions totally irrelevant to the combat at hand, but that give them boost dice so they can roll advantages and recover strain).

So… yeah. I basically allow characters to attempt to intentionally 'stunt' for effects as long as they can clearly explain what they're doing and judge the effects on the full roll (not just triumphs). If they try the same thing multiple times in an encounter or session, I declare their opponents were ready for that and they lose the action. Price of not being original.

-WJL

LethalDose said:

I can see the point of view for both Coordination and Pilot Checks. If the character handles the controls of the jetpack (piloting) well enough by knowing exactly when to hit the thrusters for a soft landing, he will not need to rely on any athletic ability to stay on his feet. I guess that could depend on whether or not the GM condsiders the jetpack thrusters as piloting. I think you could decide what works best for your group and use it.

As for the stunts, I think I would allow triumphs to equal stunts when a player wasn't intentionally attempting one. It would result in added flair. If the player was trying to perform a stunt, I would probably updgrade the difficulty of the check appropriately.

Thanks all for the good discussion.

I've had one playtest so far and they worked well. I definitely hear people about keeping it "rules light", which is why I like the sheet as a quick-ref to typical actions - most anything else they can riff off of.

My group seems to like the idea that it requires Pilot (planet). If it wasn't that, I think it would be its own skill. However, as many pointed out, jetpacks just don't work thematically well as a vehicle within the personal space range. So in the end, we're using that skill, but have put the movement limits on it as laid out on the sheet I wrote up.

I definitely think this is one feature that each GM and group will customize to what they find fun - strict, loose, vehicle, stunt-wise, etc. It fits in a weird middle-ground that will invariably strike some as needing tinkering.

Tea