Prev: Re: Crowbars, etc. Next: Re: The iCloak

Re: The iCloak

From: "John C" <john1x@h...>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 20:46:01 GMT
Subject: Re: The iCloak

> > Hmmm, how about roll normal die for missiles, subtract 5 for a
> > still, nonFiring iCloak.  Each PDS used counts as a class one
> > against missiles.
>Murphy had something to say about this:  "Tracers work both ways."
>Loosely translated, I'd say that if you want to have the iCloak affect
>missiles, you shouldn't fire at any of them or else the guidance
>on all the other ones will triangulate where those beams came from with
>cathartic, "Hey, there you are!  Thanks, I was having some trouble
>you..."  ;)

I had forgotten about PDS.  My gut feeling is that each active PDS would

give another +1 to the opponent's locking-on roll…my gut has nothing to
this on, though.  Well, other than the fact that it's really looking
to dinner.

>Question:  should a ship with a conventional cloaking device be allowed
>drop it down to an iCloak level as a "medium point" between full-cloak
>full-visible?	I'd think so...

I was thinking of the Fnord device as an alternative to regular cloaks
-- a 
lot of people just plain don't like them.  (I do, although I've never
that good at using them...I keep materializing in the middle of an
which puts something of a strain on my crews).	Using it as an interim
between fully cloaked and uncloaked is an interesting idea, though -- in

this case I would feel obliged to give the Fnorded ship some kind of
penalty, to reflect the way that cloaking renders the ship both
and blind.  Maybe a -1 on all Beam rolls, or something like that.

John Crimmins

   "We're not at home to Mr. Reasonable, sergeant."
   "I do not hear him knockin', sir."
    --Terry Pratchett, _The Fifth Elephant_

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at

Prev: Re: Crowbars, etc. Next: Re: The iCloak