Rules Clarification on Stun

[NukeHavoc]

I was looking at weapon damage today and realized that weapons have started stun damage. eg blaster rifles do 2d8 stun instead of 3d8 normal. I was halving normal DMV dice instead of stun.

(note: This is wrong. The chart damage is incorrect; the body text that says you do half damage from stone is right).

[Jonkga]

Check the errata, Ken. I think that the tables in the saga book are wrong when it comes to stun damage values.

p. 120 – Weapon Qualities
The entry for Stun Damage should read as follows:
“If the weapon has a stun setting, it is listed here. A weapon set to stun does stun damage equal to its normal damage (see Stunning, page 162, for more information). Ranged weapons set to stun have a maximum range of 6 squares unless noted otherwise.”

So, stun damage is the same as regular damage (not different, as on most equipment tables), but the range for stun is dramatically shorter than the regular range increments of ranged weapons.

Also:
p. 122-123 – Table 8-3: Melee Weapons
All damage entries in the “Stun” column of the table should be replaced with the word “Yes” except the stun baton, which should say “Yes (2d6).”

p. 126-127 – Table 8-4: Ranged Weapons
All damage entries in the “Stun” column of the table should be replaced with the word “Yes” except for the stun grenade, which should say, “Yes (4d6).”

[NukeHavoc]

Check the errata, Ken. I think that the tables in the saga book are wrong when it comes to stun damage values.

Ah, ok. That makes a lot of sense. I prefer it the "does half normal damage" way; it makes things simpler, and gives you less to remember. I missed the stun range bit as well (though I don't know that it came into play during Friday's game; I think folks were at pretty close range.

So we did it half right on Friday (I got the damage right, but did the range wrong).

[NukeHavoc]

Reading through the errata, I found a change to the mechanics skill that makes a big difference for Zulen. The Outlaw Tech talent tree has a "Quick Fix" talent that allows a mechanic to jury rig a vehicle that isn't disabled. Based on (original) Rules as Written, you'd only get a +2 jump up the condition track, which is handy if the ship's been taking hits, but not quite compelling enough for me to take that talent.

However, the errata version also allows you to give that vehicle +1d8 hit points, which provides enough of a nudge for me to want to take this talent (esp. when coupled with the "Fast Repairs" talent, which allows me to give a vehicle temporary hit points equal to my mechanics check when I successfully jury rig something.)

p. 69-70 – Mechanics Skill
First full sentence of second paragraph should read “On a result…” instead of “One a result…”
Under the Jury-Rig header, replace the 4th sentence with the following: “A jury-rigged device or vehicle gains +2 steps on the condition track and 1d8 hit points.”
Under the Special header, add the following sentence: “Characters who are untrained in the Mechanics skill can still use the aid another action to assist on Mechanics checks.”

[NukeHavoc]

FYI: The Star Wars Errata page has been updated with a new set of clarifications. The latest episode of Order 66 ( Episode 39 - Knights of the Old Errata ) runs down some of the big changes though I haven't had a chance to listen to that part yet.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=st ... gaederrata

I note this because on Friday night we had a question about humanoid vs. vehicle collisions after Highlife rammed the bounty hunter with the swoop bike. I think the errata covers this with the following:

p. 173 – Collisions
Add the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph:

"Unless the vehicle provides no cover to those onboard, any damage dealt to passengers and crew in a collision is reduced by an amount equal to the vehicle’s damage threshold."

So the question becomes "does a swoop bike provide cover"?

Per the bike's entry on p. 99 of Threats of the Galaxy, it provides total cover.

Thus the bike would have soaked 18 points of damage for Highlife (because of its damage threshold of 18 ) and more likely than not, he would not have taken any damage in the collision.