Re: [GZG] QUESTION: are SAWs becoming less significant...?

>On Mon, February 2, 2009 11:24, Ground Zero Games wrote:
>>  An interesting point, Mark; while I'm not writing a Traveller
>>  ruleset, of course, but one that is as generic as possible, you do
>>  raise a good question as to how low a tech level should we start the
>>  scale with.
>>
>>  I guess the question is whether anyone really wants to play with
very
>>  low-tech forces (I'm talking early-mid 20th century level here, not
>>  "archaic" tech)? Obviously there are the alternate-history games to
>>  consider, with aliens vs WW2 troops and such, but how common might
>>  these be compared with "straight" SF games with future-tech forces?
>
>Would it complicate things too much if weapons had properties
>other than a straight FP rating? For example, increased or
>reduced range bands, or reducing effects of cover (e.g.,
>advanced fusion guns with explosive shots).

This will all be factored in; the FP rating is only one property of 
the weapon types, it's simply a raw rating of how much fire can be 
directed onto a target.

>
>This might allow more advanced/primitive weapons without
>having to extend the 1-5 scale.
>
>--
>Be seeing you, 	   http://www.glendale.org.uk
>Sam.			   xmpp:sam@glendale.org.uk
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gzg-l mailing list
>Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
>http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l