09-02-2022, 03:36 AM | #41 |
Join Date: Mar 2013
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
OK, Star Wars Blasters, we've got technical descriptions on how they work and they're plasma weapons. Someone seems to have taken the workings of a real laser weapons and modified them until they got something matches what we see on screen, so instead of the lasing gas emitting light it's thrown out the gun. Through a focusing crystal, mind you. Probably best you don't think on that too hard. Or how the gas stays together.
|
09-02-2022, 07:39 AM | #42 | ||||||
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
Quote:
I was indeed misremembering the rad modifier, however - I believe that's only on antiparticle blasters. That said, if you find the stats of UT blasters work well for you for Star Wars games (or in settings inspired by Star Wars), hey, that's great! But that doesn't mean SW blasters are the same as UT blasters - any more than someone who finds using the stats of TL 6-7 firearms for blasters works well would mean SW blasters are the same as TL 6-7 firearms. *Blaster bolts, if they were particle beams, would have to be neutral so they don't fly apart more-or-less immediately upon exiting the "barrel." From what I understand, in atmosphere you can actually just fire a charged beam and it will effectively make itself neutral itself on contact with the air - but SW blasters clearly also work in vacuum, so they'd need to be neutral particle beams (which IIRC is +1 TL, making Star Wars a TL 12 setting for having space-capable blasters). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And if everyone followed that advice from UT, I wouldn't have a pet peeve about people using the pure-superscience tech from a setting for determining its numerical TL. But a lot of people will insist Force Screens aren't available before TL 11^, Disintegrators and Teleporters require TL 12^, etc, and use that to assign too high of a TL to various fictional settings (which is what got us off on this tangent). I don't think the UT authors were necessarily in the wrong by suggesting a progression for their pure superscience, I just kinda wish they would have simply assigned such things TL ^ and then had a note about what TL's might be appropriate for each technology.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
||||||
09-02-2022, 07:46 AM | #43 |
Hero of Democracy
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
It'd also be nice to have TL10^ force screens with a specific DR, as the TL11^ ones can be stronger than desirable for the rest of the tech.
__________________
Be helpful, not pedantic Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog Check out the PbP forum! If you don't see a game you'd like, ask me about making one! |
09-02-2022, 09:04 AM | #44 |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
True. I could see cause to basically give every pure-superscience technology an entry for each UT TL (9-12), and have a rather explicit note that in many settings such technology won't exist prior to some given TL (say, 11 for force screens), but that the table includes earlier TL's for those settings where they show up earlier. Alternatively, maybe give the performance at the nominal TL, and include a note on how to adjust it - "While personal conformal force screens are typically TL 12^, in some settings they may appear much earlier. They have 1/3 their listed DR at TL 9^, 1/2 at TL 10^, and 2/3 at TL 11^."
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
09-02-2022, 09:34 AM | #45 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
Quote:
<shrug> The purpose of UT is to act as a gear catalog and telling palyers "Buy anything you want from TLs 10 or 11 with no active nano or bioplastic and dn't bother with armor" is what you need a TL for. Assigning a "perfect" TL to Star Wars for discussion purposes is irrelevant.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
09-02-2022, 10:30 AM | #46 |
Join Date: Oct 2019
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
Varyon is correct. UT blasters have halved Acc and divide range by 5 in vacuum. UT Designer's Notes has the neutral particle beam option that eliminates this, and states they come one TL later, so TL12 for handheld version.
|
09-02-2022, 10:51 AM | #47 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
|
09-02-2022, 11:08 AM | #48 | ||
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
Quote:
Quote:
Unless that was a dig about the way such vessels maneuver (which would be consistent with them being in atmosphere, even all the way out in space).
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
||
09-02-2022, 11:14 AM | #49 |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
Field Jacketing is available at TL10^, even before blasters. TL11^ brings the possibility of FTL beams which do everything Field Jacketing does and halve range modifiers.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
09-02-2022, 11:47 AM | #50 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Using 3e's Tech Levels, or adding more Tech Levels beyond 12.
Quote:
But if someone wants to just call Star Wars "TL SW" (it's kinda a mishmash anyway), that will probably be more accurate than giving it an actual numerical TL... even if doing so means you can't really use UT to get an idea of what tech not covered in the canon is likely to be available.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
Tags |
sci-fi, ultra-tech |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|