Beam Weapons and DRv3

[Alex Hart]

So what have we agreed upon for damage?

 

[Toshiro]

I honestly think that this DPS thing isn't necessary once going with the "no truly continuous energy weapons", which shouldn't exist anyway due to heat generation and the most powerful ones needing charged before firing for a longer period. The longer the duration of a shot and charge/cooldown under that interpretation at any given DR, the less "DPS" the shot actually gives. (Weapons which can deliver a massive Tier over an infinite amount of time, with this interpretation, take that infinite amount of time to cause that Tier of damage anyway and would have horribly low 'DPS"...from an IC standpoint, this is likely because the weapon in question has to be weak enough for real-time constant cooling.) The weapons most likely to practically deliver at stated tier in combat are the lower tier rapid fire ones, and it's easy to have a beam weapon have two modes while also sensible from an IC perspective for tactics of use. Eliminate the continuous fire stuff that shouldn't exist and establish a firing rate/cooldown time or two appropriate for the situations desired, and you can calculate your DPS independently without bothering those who just don't want this.

--- Kind of a rant below ---

And honestly? I hate the concept of being forced to calculate DPS, much less make it mandatory for a submission when I feel this should already work to a more than sufficient degree. I did not join this RP to see it gradually transition into the tabletop realm and DPS is where I absolutely draw the line. Not willing to do it, and promised myself that I would not cross that line years ago. I'm sorry if that comes off as biased, but I joined this freeform RP a decade ago and have grown to be repulsed by tabletop mechanics exclusively and entirely by the drama that the DR system and more brought in. It ruined the very prospect of tabletop gameplay for me and my interest in stat-based RPGs overall has plummeted. Not a fault of the system itself...I've just been soured by all the cumulative changes and drama trying to "simplify" things and there's a high threshold of proof and need required for me to support these efforts being mandatory.

Also, when I hear people saying to "borrow x system from y source", that immediately shifts me into panic mode because it usually does not suit SARP's needs and it will fail after excessive politics and drama cause more cumulative damage to the community.

 

[Alex Hart]

I'm much more a fan of no true continuous beam weapons. In fact, I'm still a fan of this;

So maybe if you rake the target over the course of a fraction of a second, it's -3 tier. If you keep only sort of hit it on target (a full second or 2 on target), it's tier -2. If you hit it for almost all the time you meant to but suddenly something causes you to go off target (3-4 seconds on target), it's tier -1. And if you hit with the entire duration of the attack, say 5 seconds total, it's on tier.

This keeps the narrative based form of DRv3 intact while also meeting the needs of determining damage in a definitive way. GMs can choose to describe in terms of seconds if they're feeling analytical and numbers based, or in terms of narrative if they're focusing on that.

 

[Toshiro]

I'm afraid I think even this is impractical, Alex. If people want a glancing blow and define on a case-by-case basis how long and where the beam struck their ship, they can just as easily determine on a case-by-case basis how much damage was taken without resorting to another set of additional rules. If this is used in PvP, the players will need to agree together on the nature of the incomplete hit anyway even before breaking out the math this new concept demands.

A rule meant to simplify something by removing case-by-case judgements misses its point when it necessitates a case-by-case judgment to be made first before computations even start.

If we go down this route, by contrast, it will not stop here. Whispers of even more modifiers like armor type will probably be heard or even outright demanded rather quickly. This last point may just be my paranoia though.

 

[Alex Hart]

That's fair enough I suppose. I've always just been giving my two cents as far as this is concerned.

 

[Fred]

I don't think Alex honestly understood what I actually meant in my previous post. No harm done. I'll be more direct:

Just what is the intended objective of this thread for those participating in it?

It started with this:

@Wes and @Fred - how are the damaging effects of beam weapons handled in DRv3? Does, say, a Tier 10 weapon capable of continuously firing for 10 seconds deals light anti-starship damage every “instant” of those 10 seconds - or does the Tier 10 value describe the sum of the weapon’s output over those 10 seconds?

So, does this thread come to a satisfactory conclusion when the above question is answered (which it was, abundantly) or must some ruling absolutely emerge from it and be set on paper?

I'll reiterate: it sounds like most of the people here pretty much confirmed with each other that their expectations mostly line up, and tastefully so. There's a know reticence to actually word this understanding into a ruling... which is politely indulged, but not to a point that appears contented.

Hence my question: what are you looking for? What do you actually need? Do you actually need it?

 

[Alex Hart]

Personally, I'm fine if everyone JUST agrees upon something without codifying any rules or anything, but I suspect that the worry is that without ruling someone will try to do something silly and then claim that it's fine since there are no rules against it.

 

[META_mahn]

claim that it's fine since there are no rules against it

same tbh

 

[Toshiro]

The only real "change" I can think of is that the understanding of how beams discharge over time has been improved, perhaps noting that trying to abuse high Tier, high discharge time weapons comes with a penalty when used in practice, and that future design ideology can reflect it. However, I don't think that explicitly translates to a rule change as much as a possible 'reference' for future weapon design.

Also, Alex, I wasn't trying to shoot you down. Sorry if it seemed that way.

 

[Rizzo]

Hey, hey, hey, guys....... tier X per second.

 

[Zack]

We could have solved this year’s ago if we just put Tier per second down back when we originally brought this up as a problem.

We’ll have this conversation again in a few months.

 

[FrostJaeger]

Here's a possible rule: Continuosly-fireable beam weapons are no longer allowed within the setting - after all, wouldn't a beam with a sufficiently-high rate-of-fire appear as continuous to the unaided eye?

 

[Alex Hart]

Let's just stop with rules for now OK, and let common sense, GM discretion and NTSE watchfulness handle this.

 

[FrostJaeger]

Please don't make off-topic posts, @Alex Hart.

 

[Rizzo]

I don't think his comment is completely off topic @FrostJaeger. It's not a bad idea to let the NTSE mods just do their thing. I'm personally a fan of common sense. We know when something is OP. Moderator discretion is always paramount to any review.

Maybe we should host a poll to see what the community would prefer to see as a rule?

 

[Fred]

Please do go all uptitty on us, Frost. I think Alex has a valid viewpoint, even if it might conflict with yours. Please stay classy.

Honestly, after all this debate here, I think I could just add some note somewhere in the DRv3 article that when coming across continuous beam weaponry... they could be kind of similar in interpretation as rate-of-fire weapons.

I get the impression a passing mention will put a lot of people here at ease while going light-handed on the rule-lawyering. Does that hold any appeal to you guys?

 

[Alex Hart]

That works for me, but I'd suggest listening to what @Toshiro has to say too since he's very much more in touch with the narrative side of things than I am.

 

[Toshiro]

I like the idea of just advising that "true continuous fire" is to be avoided/interpreted differently and a light touch otherwise, as I think Fred is asking.

 

[Wes]

From my understanding, beams work the same way other weapons do for DR purposes, which is damage per turn, and the length of a turn is the time of the GM's OOC posting cycle.

I think anything else is basically overthinking it and trying to add granularity and complexity to a system made for simplicity, not accuracy.