Bio-Energy Expulsion Vents

[RiftJunkie]

You get 5 blasts per melee, any more than that you get penalties.

Is that PER Bio-Energy Expulsion Vent, or total since it's based off of your PE? I would tend to think it's total because it's based off of your PE, but then what would be the point of more than one?

[RiftJunkie]

Also, if you got the "Super-Upgrade", does that mean you could get 10 shots before penalties? Or do you think the PE thing would over-ride the upgrade?

[boxee]

Your right it would be total, and yes the upgrade would double it I would think, but ask your GM.

[krispy]

Boxee is correct, the penalty is for the total shots fired in one melee round from any of the vents you have in the design.
the thing about incorporating more than one vent is, if you had 2 vents on each forearm, and one on your head, or tail; you could fire the 2 from the R forearm simultaneously at the target, then the 2 on the L forearm simultaneously, followed by the one on the tail. making 3 attack with 5 vent shots in the melee round

if you wanted you could put all 5 on one forearm, wrapping around the entire forearm, and all of them could fire simultaneously for the 5 shot limit, in one awesomely damaging shot, if it hits

[boxee]

Can you link them like that?????

[Slight001]

Can you link them like that?????

Don't see why you couldn't after all you can link super light cells and they are also separate units.

[Tor]

Where does it mention the ability to simultaneously fire? I don't think we should assume other weapons can duplicate the light cell tactic.

[The Galactus Kid]

Can you link them like that?????

Don't see why you couldn't after all you can link super light cells and they are also separate units.

Since it mentions that specifically in the Super Light Cell ability, I would say that it is possible, but I would require a Bio-E expenditure to build in that capability since it is not inherrent in the enhancement.

[Shark_Force]

i'd be pretty disinclined to give such a powerful burst for such a relatively low cost as to grant 5 fire-linked bio-e vents. particularly since it isn't 5 per round, but rather 20 per minute... which means you can just tear apart 4 enemies in the first round with your first 4 actions, and then switch to something else.

front-loaded damage like that is extremely strong. it can deny an enemy the chance to act by just destroying it in the first turn. it's the reason that omega is even worth looking at when there are much less expensive damage options out there.

it may not be the most total damage relative to bio-e cost in the game, but it is an extremely inexpensive way to get such massive amounts of burst, and i'd be very cautious about allowing it.

[boxee]

Kinda agree with shark here guys.

[Tor]

front-loaded damage like that is extremely strong. it can deny an enemy the chance to act by just destroying it in the first turn. it's the reason that omega is even worth looking at when there are much less expensive damage options out there.

That and the Omega's range... and it being a very well protected weapon system, and not running out easily like physical weapons systems.

Course the Photon cannon eventually got higher range

[Shark_Force]

front-loaded damage like that is extremely strong. it can deny an enemy the chance to act by just destroying it in the first turn. it's the reason that omega is even worth looking at when there are much less expensive damage options out there.

That and the Omega's range... and it being a very well protected weapon system, and not running out easily like physical weapons systems.

Course the Photon cannon eventually got higher range

if the omega had the long range, and was well-protected, but only did 4d6 damage, it would not be worth looking at for the current cost.
if the omega had current damage, but only a 500 foot range, and was no more well-protected than any other weapon system, it would still be worth looking at for the current cost (though obviously not quite as good as it is now).

i'll grant that the repeating portion is important (the fact that you can use them 1-2 times per round is very important).

EDIT: but only because of the damage. physical systems don't run out very fast when they're only fired once per round, unless you're talking about something like rockets; i can carry around a pod rifle that costs next to nothing and so long as i'm shooting once per round i'm good for 32 rounds, which is frankly more than i'm likely to need

the main reason for the cost is damage. the other features are nice, but it's the ability to wipe an enemy out with a single shot (potentially) that makes it worth so much.

edit: another way to look at it, compare the cost of increasing range to the cost of increasing damage with the weapon upgrades. range is definitely worth something, but it obviously isn't valued as highly as damage

[kaid]

Kinda agree with shark here guys.

I would also agree since in just rereading a bunch of the splicer book stuff last night the things like light cells and a few other things that allow for linked fire capability all seem to specifically describe that and the damage boots for doing it.

Random side note in paying more attention to the level upgrades that are involved man light cells require some serious planning a head to make good use of them. Basically two levels of increasingly good flash lights before finally getting damage capability out of them at level 3.

[Razorwing]

@Kaid

I think you are mistaken about the Super Light Cell Upgrade... as it only needs a Glow Cell, thus allowing you to get it by 2nd level.

The progression is Glow Cell to either a Simple Light Cell or a Super Light Cell.

That is unless there has been some errata that I've missed... in which case, please provide a link to such Errata.

[The Galactus Kid]

@Kaid

I think you are mistaken about the Super Light Cell Upgrade... as it only needs a Glow Cell, thus allowing you to get it by 2nd level.

The progression is Glow Cell to either a Simple Light Cell or a Super Light Cell.

That is unless there has been some errata that I've missed... in which case, please provide a link to such Errata.

I believe you are correct.