Bug report:

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but if you are adjusting your morality score to anything above the default the notes section disappears. My notes section was blank when I changed the numbers but still happens if you add text. You get locked out once you go above 50. If you change the number back to 50 the notes section will come back.

11 hours ago, Mattimeo84 said:

Bug:

Added a Hard point to my Bola/Net just to see what it's options were. Possible options include:

Laser Sight
Gene Lock
Wrist Mount
Paired Weapons
Removed Safety Features
Set Trigger
Stripped Down
Under-Barrel Grapnel Launcher

Are all of these meant to be accurate?

Adding HP to things is tricky because the current attachment system is set up with only inclusive limits. Meaning that if he wants to let all ranged - light weapons have the option of a laser sights but not a bola he would have to give it to each item individually. Given that Tinker lets you add a HP to a bottle of rum, it's to be expected that not every zero hard point item has/will be tested with hard points and the rules adjusted to accommodate it. Ideally we'd have exclusive rules as well, but those can quickly get cumbersome to maintain.

One of the players in my group wants to wear Heavy Power Armor without the helmet. Not sure if there are any rules to this or if it is even allowed. Does anyone know of a rule or mention of it, one way or the other?

What sort of rules are you looking for? I'm not aware of any, but then I don't think you really need any. I wouldn't penalize his or her protection from the armor, personally, but I also wouldn't allow him or her to benefit from anything that requires a helmet (vacuum/amphibious seals, helmet-mounted comlink, special visual sensors) unless they state that they have something on which to mount such attachments (a headset, for example).

<deleted>

Called shot to the head (+2 setbacks). Hit bypasses the armor's 3 soak since the target isn't wearing a helmet. All within the RAW.

<deleted>

Excuse me? "Not RAW"? You just quoted the relevant RAW. I understand that you think it's reasonable, but saying it isn't RAW is pure rule-lawyering. Aiming at a person's head isn't equivalent to aiming at a limb (which is a narrower, more difficult target to hit IRL)? It's "not RAW" because a head isn't technically a limb, and limb is only what the RAW explicitly mentions? Or is the "not-RAW" assertion because I assumed that if the shot hits it bypasses the armor, since there's no armor in that spot to be hit? (Per literal RAW the armor — magically — still provides soak, even though there's no actual armor in the spot struck, because the RAW doesn't explicitly discuss hit locations, partial armor coverage, and the effects of called shots.)

1 hour ago, ShadoWarrior said:

Excuse me? "Not RAW"? You just quoted the relevant RAW. I understand that you think it's reasonable, but saying it isn't RAW is pure rule-lawyering. Aiming at a person's head isn't equivalent to aiming at a limb (which is a narrower, more difficult target to hit IRL)? It's "not RAW" because a head isn't technically a limb, and limb is only what the RAW explicitly mentions? Or is the "not-RAW" assertion because I assumed that if the shot hits it bypasses the armor, since there's no armor in that spot to be hit? (Per literal RAW the armor — magically — still provides soak, even though there's no actual armor in the spot struck, because the RAW doesn't explicitly discuss hit locations, partial armor coverage, and the effects of called shots.)

I believe that he is saying what you said isn't RAW because you didn't mention the Aim Maneuvers, one of which is a requirement.

11 minutes ago, SilindeT said:

I believe that he is saying what you said isn't RAW because you didn't mention the Aim Maneuvers, one of which is a requirement.

Thanks, but that reasoning is quibbling. My not mentioning the rule by name and location in which book doesn't make it any less RAW. Besides which I wasn't citing a rule, I was giving a rules-legal example of what could be done within the FFG system.

<deleting stupid off topic stuff>

Gentlemen, please. This is not the thread for this conversation.

Please start a new thread so that others can easily partake in the conversation.

Are there any plans to introduce a integrated update feature? So that we don't have to go manually download it every time there is an update.

I just updated from v. 2.0.1.0 to 2.1.0.1

I had no idea that there was an update until I came downloaded it.

25 minutes ago, DarkHayZe said:

Are there any plans to introduce a integrated update feature? So that we don't have to go manually download it every time there is an update.

I just updated from v. 2.0.1.0 to 2.1.0.1

I had no idea that there was an update until I came downloaded it.

If you use the web install version, it will auto-update.

1 minute ago, Nytwyng said:

If you use the web install version, it will auto-update.

Where is the web install version?

1 minute ago, DarkHayZe said:

Where is the web install version?

You can find it the same place you find the manual version: Oggdude's profile page.

I actually always came to this thread to grab the manual... so that is news to me, but thank you.

On 4/17/2017 at 8:09 AM, ShadoWarrior said:

The best way is to go to Oggdude's profile page and click on the About Me tab on the upper right of the page. It has the current version number, release date for that version, and links to installers and docs.

Repost, for the benefit of those who haven't been reading this thread since the start of this week.

Web install has been around for years and is the best way to keep current.

OggDude,

An error from Savage Spirits that I forgot to mention until now:

The 'Mk. III Modular Backpack' is supposed to increase Encumbrance by 2 without any additional pouches. In your generator, it boosts it by 3 without pouches.

Suggestion for a future release:

In the GM Tools/Adversaries, I was putting together a custom weapon to have some but not all of the qualities of a thermal detonator, but discovered a cap of 10 to the Blast quality for custom weapons. I changed the value to 15 in the .xml file, but it's still reflected as 10 if I pull up the adversary in question. I presume this is by design, but would it be possible to raise the cap?

Breach is starship scale. Sure you didn't intend Pierce? A proton torpedo, something a bit too large to carry around, has a large baradium charge and is only Breach 6.

Apologies if this has been covered...

Since going to 2.1.0.1 everytime I start GMTools or Char Gen for the first time after booting the laptop it Recaches all the time. It's always doing a new cache like I cleared it but I didn't. It will stay if I leave the laptop on and don't shut down the app.

Is this a bug? Deliberate? Just me?

47 minutes ago, ShadoWarrior said:

Breach is starship scale. Sure you didn't intend Pierce? A proton torpedo, something a bit too large to carry around, has a large baradium charge and is only Breach 6.

Nope. Breach. Aside from pulling that straight from the thermal detonator stats, it's to replicate the E-XD infiltrator droid's self destruct proton warhead.

6 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Nope. Breach. Aside from pulling that straight from the thermal detonator stats, it's to replicate the E-XD infiltrator droid's self destruct proton warhead.

When I look up Thermal Detonator, it only appears to have Breach 1. It has Blast 15 though. So maybe Ogg capped it at 10 for whatever reason - breach 10 is pretty dang high it seems like to me.