Not recently, but over they years I have used variations of the published rules to much amusement of all involved.
Zero-G combat
- Thread starter Julius9999
- Start date
Not recently, but over they years I have used variations of the published rules to much amusement of all involved.
Closest I had to that were 2 ships that were docked at 90 degrees to each other (using the minis to visualize and that was the only way to "dock" the lab ship to the other ship as the lab ships airlocks are mostly on the "bottom" for the air/rafts and cargo). There was s 0G spot between the 2 at-angled gravity fields they had to cross. 1 player was a Scout with the tailored vacc suit, no problem. The good doctor actually aced the roll despite not having vacc suit and wearing a standard suit, and oddly the Aslan really screwed up that roll and, as mentioned in a different thread, did not manage to land on her feet. No one made the obvious jokes as she was, despite a low dex, an Imperial agent with a bit if a temper as she was really looking forward to being retired and got pulled into the adventure.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Unpowered being simpler and so without the risk of mechanical failure is a better way to go, but would you include something like to that could interact with all types of materials used in vessel construction? Alternatively, would this just be an aid material of one sort, and players still reliant of Zero-G skill to get about?
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Probably a TL thing, lower TLs have to go magboot.
I would say rolling against zero-G would always be a thing, even with + DMs from tech tools.
It's an easy assumption that any vessel subject to Zero-G and/or changing positive-G will have tether and load-handing tie-downs. It's also an easy assume that Vacc-suits and Battle Dress will have semi-standard harnesses with retractable tethers and some form of connector. Each tether will secure the character in a single dimension. Two tethers and a hard surface will pretty well "glue" a shooter to that surface like a rock-climber bracing against a cliff face.
Assume one combat round to fasten each tether to a tie-down within arm's reach, with the first tether providing +1, the second tether providing +3, and the third tether providing +5 to the "save" target number. The same modifier would also work for attacking someone who is tethered; making tethering without other cover a risky move.
Naturally, characters using more than one tether will effectively be anchored into place and will not be assaulting. However, defenders, snipers and support weapon operators would benefit from being able to fire without having to deal with spinning out of control.
For those who are interested: Zero-G shooters, even if well anchored, will experience enhanced recoil from their weapons. Calculations of recoil energy, factor in the gravitational constant on the weapons mass as a suppressing factor on recoil. This, of course, is not available in free-fall although the weapon's static mass will still retard some of the recoil energy.
Assume one combat round to fasten each tether to a tie-down within arm's reach, with the first tether providing +1, the second tether providing +3, and the third tether providing +5 to the "save" target number. The same modifier would also work for attacking someone who is tethered; making tethering without other cover a risky move.
Naturally, characters using more than one tether will effectively be anchored into place and will not be assaulting. However, defenders, snipers and support weapon operators would benefit from being able to fire without having to deal with spinning out of control.
For those who are interested: Zero-G shooters, even if well anchored, will experience enhanced recoil from their weapons. Calculations of recoil energy, factor in the gravitational constant on the weapons mass as a suppressing factor on recoil. This, of course, is not available in free-fall although the weapon's static mass will still retard some of the recoil energy.
Similar threads
