Adding HT-equivalent variety to your UT weapon tables

[vicky_molokh]

Greetings, all!

It is probably obvious that the weapon tables for each given weapon category in High-Tech are much more rich than the Ultra-Tech tables (which are more comparable to Basic Set's selection - a single 10mm Storm Carbine, a single 7mm Assault Rifle etc.). Now, obviously GMs can add variety by writing up similar yet not identical weapons. The question is, what guidelines should be followed that there aren't any Überwaffen in the new tables? There are supposed to be tradeoffs, but what should be used for said tradeoffs?

Thanks in advance!

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Greetings, all!

It is probably obvious that the weapon tables for each given weapon category in High-Tech are much more rich than the Ultra-Tech tables (which are more comparable to Basic Set's selection - a single 10mm Storm Carbine, a single 7mm Assault Rifle etc.). Now, obviously GMs can add variety by writing up similar yet not identical weapons. The question is, what guidelines should be followed that there aren't any Überwaffen in the new tables? There are supposed to be tradeoffs, but what should be used for said tradeoffs?

Thanks in advance!

To convert UT weapons to HT equivalent change the weight, cost and number of shots by + or -10% and most importantly change the name, then note minor and sometimes pointless variants of that weapon by adding numbers and letters behind that name.

Option #2 is to skip this as being a waste of time.

[panton41]

For TL9 games I just use the TL7 and 8 listings from HT, but give them Smartgun Electronics and +P by default. Then again that's for Cyberpunk games intended to have the "look and feel" of the 1980s and 90s fiction.

[jbalsle]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Greetings, all!

It is probably obvious that the weapon tables for each given weapon category in High-Tech are much more rich than the Ultra-Tech tables (which are more comparable to Basic Set's selection - a single 10mm Storm Carbine, a single 7mm Assault Rifle etc.). Now, obviously GMs can add variety by writing up similar yet not identical weapons. The question is, what guidelines should be followed that there aren't any Überwaffen in the new tables? There are supposed to be tradeoffs, but what should be used for said tradeoffs?

Thanks in advance!

I suspect we're waiting for VDS for the 'correct' rules for weapon design for both beams and guns. Until then, I'd just hand-wave any stats I need and call it 'good enough'. If later, after VDS comes out and if it has the rules to make 'correct', you can either decide to retcon the stats to the correct stats, or just say your world works slightly different, or that the gun stats you came up with are optimized or inherently flawed.

The real fun part will be making the companies that will make all the various firearms and beam weapons in your UT setting that has a realistic gun set. :D

[panton41]

Originally Posted by jbalsle

I suspect we're waiting for VDS for the 'correct' rules for weapon design for both beams and guns.

That's assuming Vehicle Design has it. There's been talk of a separate "Armory" book specifically for weapons. (And presumably HT and above, as Low Tech and its companions pretty much have that end covered.)

Even then I never found the results from Vehicles 2nd Ed. to be all that great or detailed for personal weapons. Part of why real world weapons behave differently is because of things that would fall below the resolution of a "generic" design system for gamers.

Now Mr. Cole has the opposite end of that spectrum, which is a spreadsheet designed for people who understand the intimate details of firearms. It gives good results that are generally accepted as accurate, but if you want to construct a real-world weapon you pretty much need its factory specs to get it right. That is to say, it's not good for the "exploratory" weapon designing that gamers like.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Greetings, all!

It is probably obvious that the weapon tables for each given weapon category in High-Tech are much more rich than the Ultra-Tech tables (which are more comparable to Basic Set's selection - a single 10mm Storm Carbine, a single 7mm Assault Rifle etc.). Now, obviously GMs can add variety by writing up similar yet not identical weapons. The question is, what guidelines should be followed that there aren't any Überwaffen in the new tables? There are supposed to be tradeoffs, but what should be used for said tradeoffs?

Thanks in advance!

Take the guns in UT and vary them with every gunsmithing option you can find in Tactical Shooting. Particularly bullpup conversion, shortening a longarm, weight reduction, and the various levels of Fine and Very Fine for both Accuracy and Reliability, as well as Presentation quality. Call Cheap (Unreliable) -2 to HT and -1 to Malf, for 85% of list price, and Cheap (Inaccurate) 65% of list price for -1 to Acc.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

Take the guns in UT and vary them with every gunsmithing option you can find in Tactical Shooting. Particularly bullpup conversion, shortening a longarm, weight reduction, and the various levels of Fine and Very Fine for both Accuracy and Reliability, as well as Presentation quality. Call Cheap (Unreliable) -2 to HT and -1 to Malf, for 85% of list price, and Cheap (Inaccurate) 65% of list price for -1 to Acc.

It seems like you could pretty easily create a random table for this.