Re: [FT]Star Trek rules?

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Phillip Atcliffe wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 10:44:15 -0400 (EDT) Roger Books 
> <books@jumpspace.net> wrote:
> 
[...]
> 
> > Phasers work fine as beams. Photons work fine as p-torps. Disruptors
> work fine as beams also. Remember the most phasers we ever see fired 
> are two. <
> 
> I agree about phasers and disruptors, although some differentiation 
> gives the game a better feel. The SFSFW idea of disruptors being 
> short-ranged but more powerful (e.g., a class b/3 disruptor has the 
> range of a class-2 beam, but one more die at each range band) worked 
> well. As regards 

What about using Phalon pulse batteries as disruptors?

Just a random thought. No more posting for me; back to work...

Mk

> > At most one photon. I don't remember a ship firing more than 
> one disruptor. <
> 
> That's a bit iffy. The thing about photorps is that they have a high 
> rate of fire -- one every couple of seconds, or even faster. That 
> argues multiple tubes (not visible on screen) or a really rapid
loading 
> cycle. I can remember several instances of ships having more than one 
> tube (movie ships in particular), and ISTR the Excelsior firing from 
> both tubes during the final fight with Chang's ship over Khitomer.
> 
> As for disruptors, any TOS episode which showed a Klingon BC firing 
> showed twin disruptor shots (one from each engine nacelle).
> 
> > Plasmas would need work. <
> 
> Nova cannons are sort-of large plasma torps (equivalent to the
original 
> Romulan BoP weapon), but rather too long-ranged, I think. House rule 
> time, I guess.
> 
> Phil
> ----
> "I think... I think I am! Therefore I am... I think?"
>					 -- The Moody Blues
> I think _I_ am Phil Atcliffe (Phillip.Atcliffe@uwe.ac.uk)
>