RE: [HOE] re:...Crazy Junker

["Steve Crow" <crow_steve@hotmail.com>]

>Hiya,
>
>A lot of people here have mentioned that the crazy Junker should be having
>problems finding ammo to feed this monster rifle of his, even with the Ammo
>power to manufacture more, but I beg to differ.
>
>Now, as a veteran player who enjoys nothing more than seeing his GM or
>Marshal weep as I destroy his carefully crafted adventure, I have looked
>very carefully at the Gunsmith power and I can tell you that Junkers have
>access to shit that will turn Marshal's white!!
>
>For example, I can provide you with a design for a Junker built rifle which
>does 8d8 damage, has a range increment of 50, 48 shot magazine, and which
>creates it's own ammunition!!   Admittedly, this design only has a RoF of 
>2,
>but at 8d8 damage, you don't need a lot of shots to hit...   Oh, yeah, I
>also forgot, this rifle is Size 4 (about an M60 in size) and it also has
>UNLIMITED potential for Armour Piercing shots.
>

The main problem is, where are you going to get the chemical components to 
make 8d8 damage Ammo?  Depending on your Marshal's stinginess and how he 
interprets the section on chemical components, they can be extremely hard to 
find.  And they should, IMO.

Stinginess in handing out ammo even for the lower calibers isn't hard to 
justify.  For 8d8 rounds, it shoudl be a lot tougher, comparatively 
speaking.

>This is all legal, and possible via the rules.   It's horrific.   It's
>scary.   But it can be done.   The Target number for this thing?   A measly
>NINE!
>
>The solution, easy.   Have someone steal this bad puppy, and start to use 
>it
>against the PC's.   Watch how fast they'll move trying to recover the gun,
>and then watch the rest of the posse nearly lynch the Junker for a) NOT
>making them guns as good!, and b) for losing the one he had in the first
>place.
>


Of course, what happens if the Junker's player gets the idea to _do_ make 
the party similar guns to his own...?

>Another point (so nicely raise by my Marshal).   If I (as a character) has
>bitchin', kick-ass weapons like this, how long is it going to be before
>every scavvie in the local area is wanting to either kill me for the gun, 
>or
>kill me for building the gun in the first place?
>

The primary problem with this (and the "stealing" option above) is that the 
campaign then becomes about the gun.   IMO, if you're going to make an 
encounter or adventure or something just to deal with the gun...why let the 
gun into the campaign in the first place?

>Another point he raised was that the nature and power of the opponents 
>faced
>by the posse would just HAVE to include the awesome weapon of destruction
>that I had designed, meaning that the rest of the posse would be in very
>deep guano indeed, and that's just their own...
>

IMO, the problem with this theory is that you then get into a nuclear 
escalation kinda thing. 8d8 damage (with some AP) is the kind of thing that 
can kill a PC in a single shot.  Having Player/Librarian B take a 8d8 shot 
to the gut because Player/Junker A has a 8d8 weapon doesn't really "fix" the 
problem.

In fact, depending on how it's handled, it can set up a rather...awkward 
relationship between the Marshal and the player(s):

Junker: "Okay, I've got this bitchin' 8d8 junker gun."
GM: "Great. Your next encounter, you run into a renegade Junker. He fires 
and hits your Librarian.  8d8 damage, enough AP to ignore his armor 2...I 
roll well and do (barely) 8 wounds to the gut."
Librarian:  "Hey, I'm low on chips - I'm dead!"
Junker: "Okay, I put the renegade junker down with my next shot, loot the 
Librarian's body, and tuck away his palmcorder for when we get to San Diego. 
  Then I'll take that 8d8 gun and add it to my collection."
GM: "You know, if you didn't have that 8d8 gun, your buddy wouldn't be 
dead."
Fred the Librarian player:  "Yeah!"
Junker: (looking at his loot and the dead opponent and the second 8d8 junk 
gun he just picked up): "Seems like a fair trade to me.  I'll give the gun 
to your next character, okay, Fred?"
Fred:  "Ummm, sure."
GM: "You know, if you didn't have a 8d8 junker gun, you wouldn't have to 
face threats like that."
Junker: "How would my character know that? Besides, if you try it and fail, 
I've got _another_ 8d8 junker gun - seems worth the risk. And if you didn't 
want me to have a 8d8 junker gun in the first place, why'd you let me have 
it? You're going to kill me just because I took a 8d8 junker gun that _you_ 
let me take in the first place?!?"
GM: "Ummm..."

My suggestions would still be basically:

1) Don't let them have the gun in the first place, lest the campaign become 
about the gun.

2) Make it really hard for them to get new ammo, in accordance with the 
established rules.

3) Make sure the stability rules are inforced.  In theory, after 20 days 
they should have some kind of problem (particularly if it's a starting piece 
of equipment).  And that's just for the gun.  For the ammo...?

4) Make sure the gun taint rules are enforced - eventually they're going to 
draw a joker, if they're making ammo that often.

Hope that helps.

>Ashley.
>
>
>To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
>	unsubscribe hoe
>as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>


---

Steve Crow

"Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority."

Check out my website at:  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/4991/

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com