Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Bahamut_A6M5

  1. She was already sick when the SG-1 unfroze her, afflicted by the Ori bioplague which wiped the ancients. And the asgard genetic engineering wasn't their downfall; it was the lack of original genetic material, forcing them to clone their clones time and time again. Otherwise, Asgard make for a perfectly playable race, as they don't have special powers, they just rely on very advanced technology. I'd go one step closer and say superpowers in Stargate kill you if you aren't evolved enough XD
  2. You are mistaking an animal friend with a trained animal. You don't need to be a scout or a specific race to order a trained animal to perform its routines; that's something almost anyone could do. So, there's no need for a background, just a skill in the line of Handle Animal and rules for teaching tricks to animals. Also, note an animal companion is not the same as a trained animal. The first is a friend, the second is a tool. That's a subtle difference most D&D players completely miss: you don't put a friend willingly into danger but most people won't hesitate throwing their animal companion into battle first (it's no surprise that most people choose animals like bears or wolves as "animal friends"). This fact jeopardizes the whole concept of "animal companion". Actually, neither feats nor an extensive chapter on dealing with vehicles are needed. As it's been said, Wyvern Gaming is turning away from the heavy combat focus. So, the chances PCs are going to use a vehicle in combat are going to be rare, rare enough as to warrant that some general rules would suffice rather than a whole section of rules. Also, if you notice, in the series, vehicles most of the time are used for transport purposes and only in a few episodes have an actual importance (and even then, issues are more related to repairing the vehicle or fixing some problem than handling a ship). SGP is multispecies, yes. There are Unas, Tok'ra, Aturen, Jaffa,... But species such as the Nox or the Hok'tar were never intended to have relevant weight in SG-1 (to be main character, so to speak). They were there for the sense of wonder ("whoa, did you see what that alien did?"), but never to be a permanent part of the show (Jonas Quinn developed precognition in a chapter as a plot device, just to lose it because his life was endangered; ascended Daniel Jackson made occasional appearences but never did a thing and the time he was about to strike Anubis down, he was stopped). The same way shows don't revolve around those abilities, neither a Stargate RPG should do. Powers such as telepathy and the like are to be beholden, not owned, by PCs in Stargate; otherwise, you risk trivializing them.
  3. That could have to do with the fact sekhmets aren't canon, but a species appeared in a suplement for AEG's Stargate SG-1 RPG not everyone knows or have access to.
  4. The list of weapons may be endless but the general categorization you could do about them is shorter and use it to sort proficiencies out. Weapon proficiency (melee) could cover axes, blades, bludgeons, flails,...; weapon proficiency (hurled) could include bows, crossbows, slings, thrown weapons, blowguns,... Weapon proficiency (handguns) would qualify a character with pistols, revolvers, etc. while Weapon proficiency (longarms) would comprehend rifles, shotguns and submachine guns. Weapon proficiency (heavy weapons) could include flamethrowers, machineguns, RPGs, missile launchers,... And for vehicles, with a few skills would be enough. Boating for handling waterbound vehicles, Piloting for airbound (or spacefaring) vehicles and Driving for landbound vehicles. Finally, drones could be handled by either a specific check from the previous skills or having a proper one (such as Remote Controlling).
  5. It could be a good idea for druids in D&D. But this is Stargate. An animal friend would be shunning contact with most alien species (as they do in D&D with the most weird monsters, such as undead, aberrations, etc.). Too specialized class, a character of that kind would be fiddling her fingers most of the time, waiting for her chance to shine. And that would imply having in every mission at least a fragment where a vehicle would be involved. Better to have pilot/driving skills every character has access to than a specific class revolving around it. No. Those kind of things are what give a sense of wonder when PCs behold them. But they aren't intended to be handled by PCs. Also, what you call "special abilities" related to a class are actually racial features or skills developed by a specific species (such as the Nox "rituals").
  6. That's an advanced idea to discuss later. For now, I am more interested in a basic idea: rather than having a bland, generic and nondescript list of weapons (which may lead to unwanted results, such as a P90 being a "longarm" with 1.000 meters range), creating a list with the standard issued weapons of the SGC, with their particular traits and stats as a base for further modifications (as you propose). This way, game still has a relatively short list of firearms while it keeps some flavor (for me, at least, it's more descriptive saying "characters bring M9s on their belts" than "they are carrying sidearms"). Also, this would allow for some diversity even within a "category": M9 vs M1911, MP5 vs P90,...
  7. A quick point. So far, in most games I've seen handling medical skills, a constant was a character was unable to provide medical assistance to self. Reasons vary, from wounds being in hard to reach places to pain preventing the character to keep a steady hand. In any case, I'd suggest dropping Physician Heal Thyself and replace it with Guiding Hand (temporary name). Guiding Hand As a standard action, a Medic can instruct an adjacent character (assisting character) on medical procedures to help tend wounds or afflictions on the Medic. As long as the Medic is conscious and able to freely communicate with the assisting character (they share a common language or have means to understand each other), the assisting character is considered proficient with medkit tool and Medicine skill. If the assisting character is already proficient with Medicine, she can use the Medic's Medicine total bonus or hers, whichever is higher. This effect last for as long as the treatment requires, the Medic is conscious and she and the assisting character can communicate with each other. This effect also applies to a specific treatment; additional uses and Medicine checks may be in order to tend for several conditions (if the Medic is wounded and poisoned, a use of Guiding Hand would allow for a single condition to be tended. A second use of Guiding Hand would be required for the second condition).
  8. I noticed the tau'ri firearms "department" is rather generic. I understand the basic premise about that, as we have a stunningly broad variety of weapons and trying to reflect that would require a whole suplement on its own. But there's the point about SGC, as a military organization, running a policy on standard issued weapons, which would limit the actual range of a potential weapon table to a selected few. So, I suggest some ideas to look into and debate: Handguns Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special Beretta M9 2 1d6 Piercing 37m/75m 15 1 action 1 - Colt M1911A1 2 1d8 Piercing 37m/75m 7 1 action 1 Knockdown (I would be dropping the "pistol" quality, as most firearms, if not all, don't suffer from accuracy issues at point blank ranges. In fact, it's at that distance when they are more lethal. Also, changed the damage dice to represent the greater stopping power a .45 ACP round has over a 9 mm. round, but decreased clip capacity shows .45 rounds are bigger and take more space up, so less ammonition available per clip. I'd consider giving handguns an easier concealability due to their smaller size compared to other weapons). Shotguns Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special Franchi SPAS-15 (shot) 2 1d8 Piercing 22m/45m 6 2 actions 2 Scatter Franchi SPAS-15 (slug) 2 1d10 Piercing 22m/45m 6 2 actions 2 Knockdown (Pointing out different stats for using different shells, either shots or slugs, to represent the same weapon behaving differently with either ammonition). I've broken Longarms down into several subclasses to point out the obvious differences (also, shotguns should be considered longarms, proficiency-wise). Assault Rifles Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special Colt CAR-15 2 2d8 Piercing 93m/187m 30 1 action 1 Automatic, Snub Colt M16A3 2 2d8 Piercing 187m/375m 30 1 action 2 Automatic Submachine guns Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special H&K MP5A3 2 1d6 Piercing 22m/45m 30 1 action 1 Automatic, Snub FN P90 2 1d6 Piercing 45m/90m 50 1 action 2 Automatic, Armor Piercing (Armor Piercing would increase weapon tech level by X points in order to determine if armor resistances are bypassed). There could also be sniper rifles made into Longarms, but I don't recall any being used onscreen, so I won't list them (though, I have stats for one, which could be posted for additional debating). Heavy weapons Machine guns Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special M60E4 LMG 2 1d10 Piercing 225m/450m 100 3 actions 2 Automatic, Belt Fed, Recoil Compensation (Would consider increasing Bulk in 1 point). Grenade launchers Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special Colt M203 2 3d8 Force 75m/150m 1 2 actions 2 Blast 3m (Stats provided are for fragmentation grenades being fired. Other types could be considered, as in the case of shotguns; white phosphorus grenades could have lesser damage, fire damage type and a DoT like Melf's Acid Arrow). Missile launchers Weapon TechLevel Damage Type Range Capacity Reload Bulk Special Hughes Stinger IV AAML 2 6d6 Fire+Force 600m/1200m 1 3 actions 3 Blast 5m, Armor Piercing
  9. The issues with Medic class could be avoided simply by renaming it as Field Medic or Paramedic. Also, US military doctrine has no actual medics deployed in combat; paramedics are rather riflemen with either some sanitary certification or gone through a first aid crash course during training. So, they stabilize the wounded, then evacuate them to proper hospitals, where real medics can tend for them. All the problems you are running into with the Medic class are rooted on the design idea about medic being a cleric of sorts. Congratulations are in order for your efforts in avoiding that pitfall. Keep up the good work!
  10. Issue is, this is an inaccurate statement. SG-2 isn't an archaeologists team, nor SG-7 is a geologists team, nor SG-9 is a diplomats teams, nor SG-11 is an anstrophysicists team. There are no such things, you are mistaking "assignment" with "specialization". According to AEG handbook (pag. 42), an exploration team is suggested to be formed by at least 4 people, being one team commander, one heavy weapons expert, one lingual/cultural expert and one technical mission specialist. Team commander is expected to have a minimum of 5 years experience in Special Forces (either with USAF or other branch). Heavy weapons expert is expected to be qualified with common weaponry and be a certified marksman. Cultural/lingual expert must be fluent in at least 3 languages and have Master or doctorate in anthropology/archaeology. Mission specialist should have at least 2 Masters or doctorates in technical fields of study. Usual mission profiles for exploration teams are defense, diplomacy, emergency aid, exploration, intelligence, military operations, scientific operations and trade. Finally, it is stated that exploration teams are SG-1, SG-2, SG-4, SG-10, SG-14, SG-15 and SG-17 (by season 6). So, where the hell do you get that SG-1 is an exception and performs duties unlike the other exploration teams? Or that SG-2 and the rest don't follow the same requirements as SG-1 to be designated? Shouldn't the SG-2 team commander have at least those experience years in Special Forces, just as O'Neill has? Shouldn't the SG-4 cultural expert meet the languages specification and degree requirement and perform in a similar fashion than Daniel Jackson from SG-1? Now, let's take a look to a combat team (AEG handbook, pag. 42): Suggested personnel, 6: one team commander, one intelligence officer, two heavy weapons experts, two mission specialists (a combination of either sniper, demolitions or weapon expert). All members are expected to have marksman and jump certifications from the USMC, as well as proficiency with all the SGC weaponry. Usual mission profiles for combat teams are defense, emergency aid, intelligence and military operations. Stated combat teams are SG-3, SG-5 and SG-18 (by season 6). Of course, they are different than an exploration team and their member requirements are others. Their assignment is "combat", not "exploration". Then again, SG-3, 5 and 18 are expected to meet the same criteria and be able to handle the same mission profiles. But no one expects them to perform as exploration teams, even though they share mission profiles. Also, don't forget they are all marines (thus the USMC certifications) because, since Vietnam, US Army is disgraced and USMC is the go-to standard combat force. Or check the diplomatic team (pag. 41): 4 suggested personnel: one team commander, one negotiator, one lingual/cultural expert and one mission specialist. Members are expected to have Masters or doctorates in law, world affairs, economics or judicial experience, according to the mission. Their usual mission profiles are diplomacy, exploration and trade. Again, different professional profiles than a combat team (of course) or an exploration team (even though they share some common mission profiles). They are a diverse bunch of people, like SG-1, but not a "diplomats team" (there's a subtle difference with "diplomatic team"). And I could go on and on, discussing every assignment and teams specifications but, in the end, the point is teams are designed with certain mission profiles in mind yet that doesn't make them "astrophysicists team" or "geologists team". They are exploration teams, or combat teams, or scientific teams and they are expected to perform a range of duties within their qualifications. Of course SG-1 is "special"; it's the flag team and, as the SGC field commander team, it has some "privileges" other teams may not have. But they are still an exploration team, like SG-2 or 4 or 17.
  11. Seems we are coming to terms, though we are still struggling with some meanings. There's the issue. SG teams are designed to handle a range of problems with a common "theme". Basically, it could be said SG teams are "thematic" rather than "specialists". Exploration teams, for example, should be able to handle missions ranging from reconnaisance and scouting to first contacts, etc. Or medical teams should be able to deal with bullet wounds, blunt traumas, diseases, poisoning or lending humanitarian aid. Regarding this issue, I've re-read the chapter on SGC and SG teams organization from Stargate SG-1 RPG handbook and found nothing about SG teams having "specializations" at all, neither. Closest thing it mentions is, when discussing scientific teams composition, that a scientific team may swap mission specialists and borrow people from other teams, if possible, to match a mission profile. That has me wondering how it is possible for AEG, back then, and now Wyvern Games to trip into the same pitfall... Unless they haven't and NickEast's statement "Only SG-1 was a team of mixed disciplines, all other teams were more or less specialized (Marines, archaeologists, geologists, diplomats, etc.)." is inaccurate and the "lore error" in itself (because SG-2 or 4, as exploration teams as they are, should be also mixed disciplines. And SG-9 being a diplomatic team doesn't mean it's just diplomats; it also needs a range of disciplines such as Laws, Economics, Political Sciences or International Affairs, making it as multidisciplinar as SG-1 without being an exploration team). The reading also recalled a few interesting points. For example, scientific teams are often acompanied either by a combat or engineering team; this could explain SG-11 presence during the "archaeological" survey in P3X-888 without it being a scientific team. Or the fact Base Commander rarely changes a team's assignment, and only when the most dire circunstances happen, such as a team suffering severe casualties or the like. Even then, there's an exception: a team's original assignment is never changed if it's the only team performing that duty. So, unless new teams are added with certain assignments, teams such as SG-6 (search and rescue), SG-9 (diplomacy) or SG-11 (engineering) will keep their assignments even if reformed.
  12. I admit Astrophysics maybe isn't the best example because how tighly related is to Astronomy and the needs it has for knowledge from other Physics disciplines (by the way, there's Nuclear Physics and Particle Physics, with the latest being born from the previous and nowadays both are taught in association), but the idea of a team made of scientists from various fields rather than a "monolithic" team is still valid and matches the military doctrine of having small forces being as broader specialized as they can be to cover the widest possible range of skills or abilities with the fewer number of members. Don't forget about SG-2, SG-4, SG-10, SG-14, SG-15 and SG-17. They are also exploration teams like SG-1, they must be as prepared and able to deal with anything they come across as the latest. SG-3 isn't a "specialized" team: it's a combat team and must be ready to perform combat duties ranging from assaults to defenses, entrenchment to escort,... Also neither SG-3, SG-5 nor SG-18 are entirely made of riflemen; there are heavy weapon experts, snipers, demolition experts, etc. in them. Same goes for medical support teams, such as SG-8 and SG-12; they aren't wholy made of nurses nor medics; there also are surgeons, paramedics, microbiologists,... in them. They must be prepared to deal with missions going from humanitarian assistance to dealing with plagues. Or SG-9, a diplomatic team that needs to cover negotiations of very different natures (economic treaties, science exchange deals, diplomatic incidents,...) and require knowledge about Economics, laws, Politics,... The only advantage teams coming after exploration ones have is they have more information about what is going on in the planet, so they can prepare strategies and make plans beforehand. Also, remember, SGC is a secret program; they don't have as many available people to specialize their teams in such a way they could say "Send SG-39, as it is made of 4 marital lawyers, to negotiate the divorce of the king and queen in P9C-069". Oh, and send SG-43, which has 4 SEAL specialized in evacuations, in case SG-39 gets stranded in 069", without making the stargate a voiced over secret.
  13. I am very aware of how broad and inclusive is the term "science" compared with the relatively exclusive that specific scientific fields are. There's a pattern. In both cases, those teams were wiped out (half the original SG-9 basically went nuts) and the SGC had to reform them with the candidates at hand. That circunstance alone could explain a reassignment of functions if new members had other expertises. Also, a possible continuity issue can't be ruled out in the case of SG-11; that is, scriptwritters might forget which assignment gave them last time the team appeared. "The First Ones" is a very slippery episode to walk on. Jackson and Rothman are seen doing paleontological work and making statements regarding bone and muscle structure on fossils (up to that point, it was established both were archaelogists, not paleontologists nor biologists). If that's the case, it would point out that Rothman had also several degrees and he wasn't a SG-1 member. Thus, other SG team members may have been as qualified as Carter (in different fields, that is). In the same episode, Rothman states he likes bossing those soldiers around and we see other SG-11 personel performing menial duties (digging, carrying samples,...) as instructed by Rothman and Jackson. Maybe they aren't qualified to conduct archaeological (¿paleontological?) research? Also, there's never an on-screen statement about SG-11 being a four archaeologists (¿paleontologists?) team; rather, it is said they are doing an "archaeological (¿paleontological?) survey". In any case, in this instance, I see a more probable composition of team as one paleontologist, one biologist, one geologist and one physicist (for date measurement) rather than a four paleontologists team. Reasons? SG teams operate with limited members (an average of 4 to 6 people per team). Military philosophy for that kind of small forces is having each teammate specialize in a different field; that way, a team with few members can cover the widest possible array of skills. Thus, rather than assigning a four astrophysicists team to investigate a massive corona eruption, the team would include one astrophysicist, one astronomist, one light physicist and a nuclear physicist so they can carry out the more complete survey about the phenomenon. In short, SG teams are multi and interdisciplinar (combat, medical and search and rescue teams being probably the most restricted due to their more focused duty).
  14. You are wrong. No SG team is specialized in a specific knowledge field, as each team has people with different expertises. There are no SG archaeologist teams, nor SG astrophysics teams,... Even combat teams, such as SG-3 or 5, have diffent specialists such as sniper, demolitions expert or weapon specialist. Just for reference, here follows a list of SG teams and their general assignment: SG-1, exploration SG-2, exploration SG-3, combat SG-4, exploration SG-5, combat SG-6, search and rescue SG-7, scientific research SG-8, medical support SG-9, diplomacy SG-10, exploration SG-11, engineering SG-12, medical support SG-13, covert ops SG-14, exploration SG-15, exploration SG-16, scientific research SG-17, exploration SG-18, combat SG-19, covert ops As you can see, there aren't enough teams to actually specialize them in specific knowledge fields.
  15. SG-2, 4, 10, 14, 15 and 17 are exploration teams, like SG-1. Thus, they are interdisciplinary, as an exploration team is composed at least by a team commander, a heavy weapons expert, a lingual/cultural expert and a technical mission specialist. In fact, even other teams aren't as homogeneous as you seem to think they are. A diplomatic team (SG-9, for example) includes a team commander, a negotiator, a lingual/cultural expert and a mission specialist. Also, in this kind of teams, degrees in law, world affairs or economics are expected to be held by members (resulting in a diverse bunch of diplomats, economists and/or lawyers). Or take SG-7, a scientific team. It's made of a team commander, a head researcher and four mission specialists. The team commander in this type of team is expected to be military and to have a master degree in a physical or space science field. Researcher and mission specialists are expected to be experts in their fields and to have at least a professional accreditation; military background is preferred but not demanded on them.
  16. Cyberpunk 2020 handbook explained there's been instances of cops being wounded by several (too many) rounds and they still kept moving for minutes before their brains realized they were dead. And the opposite; cops dying to a single shot in a foot. Of course, those were extreme examples to justify how Interlock handled combat. On the matter at hand, Logan Cipher has a point. In D&D 3.x, a goblin could be killed with just one blow; at best, a monster the same CR as PCs party's level could withstand two rounds, maybe three, of punishment. And dragons could be felled in under 10 rounds (or TPK the party in one ). In Stargate SG-1 RPG, combat was fast paced and the only thing making them last longer was throwing hordes of jaffa at the PCs; by round 4, it was pretty possible to have wiped at least several unnamed jaffa and having some PCs being wounded.
  17. The bonus feat at 1st level has been pretty much the human defining racial trait since feats were implemented. I'd vote for sticking to that.
  18. Stargate SG-1 RPG had a table of tables to run through in order to create random planets and civilizations. Things such as climate, atmosphere, biosphere, water masses or technological state, government type, attitude towards aliens,... could be determined with a series of die rolls. And some results in a table could conditionate another in a diferent table (such as no rainfall if a planet temperature was cold and similar examples). Having a system like this, or some variation, might be greatly welcome in order to create worlds with a distinctive flavor on the fly.
  19. Incidentally, I think this whole argument comes down from the fact people is ignoring AC is an abstraction representing chances for a target to be hit (it consider factors such as size or mobility) AND be damaged. This notion of "attack roll failing to meet AC means failure" doesn't automatically imply a hit/shot missed the target; it could also be the hit was deflected by armor (strike actually connecting but failing to "penetrate") or absorbed (a round hits but the armor absorbs the energy and results in just a bruise).
  20. Interesting to see how, in that list, reol aren't even mentioned. Seriously, those cunning bastards could make their way through a goa'uld facility with their chemical deception ability, sabotage it and walk away as nothing had happened. Now, wouldn't that make for at least an option to be considered? Also, reol would be less broken than a self replicating lego toy. Or an arrogant ascended being (they make for interesting NPCs just to poke PCs XD ). Still, I have my doubts about including Tok'ra as a playable choice, less a goa'uld. Even though Stargate SG-1 RPG allowed for both to be played, it didn't allow for both host and parasite/symbiote to be played simultaneously. A player acting as one had to create either the host or the symbiote and the other was a NPC (in the case of Tok'ra).
  21. Let's put it into a more "graphical" way. You suggest three ACs for armors. Let's imagine a kevlar vest under your idea: ballistic AC: 14+DEX (same protection against a bullet, arrow, bolt, ¿hurled weapons?) energy AC: 10+DEX (same protection against fire, electricity, radiation) touch AC: 12+DEX (same protection against blunt and bladed weapons) A fireproof suit: ballistic AC: 10+DEX energy AC: 14+DEX touch AC: 10+DEX Or the ordnance disposal armor: ballistic AC: 14+ limited DEX energy AC: 18+ limited DEX touch AC: 14+ limited DEX Now, as weapons might behave differently against various materials, the kevlar vest as it should look varying from you "different ACs" approach: bludgeoning AC: 14+DEX (standard bullets, sling bullets and blunt weapons would fall here) slashing AC: 10+DEX (kevlar doesn't bode well against cutting weapons) piercing AC: 12+DEX (AP ammo, arrows, bolts) fire AC: 10+DEX (laser, plasma, fire,... Note that I think this should even be broken further, as a fireproof suit shouldn't provide protection against a ma'tok blast) electricity AC: 10+DEX (zats, wraith stunners, electrical shocks) concussion AC: 10+DEX (explosives mainly) ¿radiation AC: 10+DEX (particle weaponry)? From this viewpoint, a fireproof suit: bludgeoning AC: 10+DEX slashing AC: 10+DEX piercing AC: 10+DEX fire AC: 14+DEX electricity AC: 10+DEX concussion AC: 10+DEX radiation AC: 10+DEX Or an ordnance disposal armor: bludgeoning AC: 14+ limited DEX (hard materials, like ceramic or steel plates, improve its efficiency against blunt trauma) slashing AC: 14+ limited DEX (hard materials, like ceramic or steel plates, compensate kevlar vulnerabilities) piercing AC: 14+ limited DEX (hard materials, like ceramic or steel plates, compensate kevlar vulnerabilities) fire AC: 12+ limited DEX (added minor fireproof protection against deflagrations) electricity AC: 10+ limited DEX concussion AC: 18+ limited DEX radiation AC: 10+ limited DEX Finally, what I proposed: Kevlar vest, single AC 14+DEX, strong against firearms (half damage from them), weak against everything else (full damage from any other source) Fireproof vest, single AC 10+DEX, strong against fire, weak against everything else Ordnance disposal armor, single AC 18+ limited DEX (or no DEX at all), strong against firearms, fire, explosives, weak against everything else (Then again, the "everything else" could be a varying amount of categories for damage sources. Also, this "strengths and weaknesses" system could also be carried to weapons and ammo).
  22. Right now, Stargate RPG is in beta stage; there's placeholder texts and equipment list isn't final. There's no way to know which armors, weapons or items would appear when the game is released. That said, ordnance disposal armor isn't a made up thing; it actually exists (that weird suit worn by people defusing explosives). I simply mentioned it to stablish a comparison between what would be an armor performance against a different one. Melee weapons hitting against touch AC is an oversimplification again. A blade (knife, sword,... even rapiers, which pierce rather than cut) or a blunt weapon are all melee weapons. Touch AC would imply the same armor grants equal protection against all melee weapons (even though you've recognized my point about kevlar barely protecting against bladed weapons). So, according to your proposal, the touch AC bonus of a kevlar made armor is the same for all melee weapons, including blades. In short: Firearms and projectiles (arrows, bolts): ballistic AC. Wrong. Arrows and bolts behave more like AP rounds, so an armor ballistic protection wouldn't be the same for those as it is for a standard bullet. Energy discharges (fire, laser, plasma, shocks,...): energy AC. Same. An insulated suit (or a fireproof one) or the anti ma'tok armor plate the SGC developed wouldn't provide the same protection against a flamethrower attack, a zat or radiation. Melee blows: touch AC. I won't repeat what I've said up to this point. Armor as DR was also handled by Stargate SG-1 RPG, by AEG (developed under 3.x SRD, a d20 system). Your suggestion comes, as you stated, from Starfinder. I fail to see your angle in this issue. About switching armors topic... I barely see why tau'ri and jaffa would want to do that. Jaffa worn chainmail seems as useless against ma'tok discharges as the tau'ri worn kevlar. In any case, jaffa would probably want that kind of switching, as their chainmail apparently doesn't work well against bullets. On a more lighthearted note, have you noticed how jaffa chainmail is bulletproof in Children of the Gods, as the stargate guarding troops barely managed to kill two jaffa with 9 mm. rounds but, as the show progresses, those same rounds seems to pierce through that same armor with ease?
  23. You are oversimplifying the issue for your reasons' sake. Even if fireball and/or lightning bolt have REF/DEX save for half damage, a target with energy resistances would still aply them, no matter if save was successful or not (eg: a fire giant could roll a save for half damage against a fireball yet it wouldn't take damage from the fireball as it is impervious to fire damage). Same goes with the grenade example: two targets, one wearing an ordnance disposal armor and another a kevlar vest, could save for half damage and yet each one receives different damage points from the same source because an ordnance disposal armor provides better protection against explosive blasts than a kevlar vest. Also, risks for oversimplifying bring you to comparing an arrow/bolt/bullet impact, a blow from ma'tok/mace/club and a swing from a blade against a ballistic AC as if each of those attacks behave the same. A kevlar vest is nearly useless against a blade, while it can stop standard bullets or bludgeoning blows. An arrow/bolt could pierce through the vest in a very similar fashion an AP round would do. In the same way, a fireproof suit could provide protection against a flamethrower blast but still be totally ineffective against a zat discharge. I stand on a single AC for any type of direct attack, saves for indirect attacks and armor strengths and weaknesses for both. It would improve even more the equipment choices.
  24. The problem is, you are taking as a given that the end result would be "a couple types of AC". But you would need an AC for every damage type, then add the corresponding variations for touch attacks dealing that kind of damage. Also, where do melee weapons such as knifes of ma'tok blows fall into? It's neither energy nor ballistic. So far, you would need ACs for slashing, piercing and bludgeoning damages; add then energy types (burning or similar for fire, laser, plasma,..., shocking for zat discharges, tasers, wraith stunners, etc.) Up to this point, I am counting five different ACs, they go up to 15 if you add the ACs against melee and ranged touch attacks. Too many numbers to keep track of. It would be easier having weaknesses that would perform in ways such as causing full damage with certain damage types while armor strengths (those damage types not vulnerable to) would cut damage in half, for suggesting something.
  25. Rather than creating lots of ACs, you could go the route AEG went: create armor weaknesses, which reduce efectiveness against certain types of damage. That way, the tactical vest (a type of armor in Stargate SG-1 RPG) was vulnerable to attacks of chemical nature (fire, gas, poison) or explosives. So, earthling armors could be effective against ballistic weapons but perform rather poorly against energy weaponry.
  • Create New...