That is certainly true.

Here's the latest version.

Changes includes some boxes for special ammo, grappling suggestions. New font to look and feel slightly more like EotE - the actualy font costs somewhere between $20 and $70 so I'm not paying that. Additionally I've added some more "mundane" gear for those that feel that is needed - some rules on datapads and data archives. I have also added two starship attachments that Jedimerc did most of the work on.

Furthermore I've added a few weapons here and there, I think, not sure how much new weapons since last version, but some.

I have also, I think, added more armour and armour attachments - unless they were in the last version too (I loose track doing this simultaneously with a depressing research project).

There might also be other stuff in there that I have not mentioned here.

Now please, I beg - once more - for feedback. While I do enjoy praise and ego-stroking, I do wish for constructive and maiming critique too - as long as its within the premises of the supplement. I know that lots probably think that having detailed and very minor differences between certain guns is pointless, and I can see that reasoning, but I'm not in complete agreement, which is why I'm doing this. So… yes. What I want feedback on is stuff like hardpoints, hull threshold, strain threshold for starship (I have yet to add any other types of vehicles), hardpoints for weapons, the attachments (weapons, armour and starships), the new qualities and… yes. That's about it…

EDIT: Managed to mess something up. Should be ok now.

EDIT2: FFS! Now… at least I won't mess with it anymore even if its still messed up (its only a minor detail, but I'm peculiar about that).

I think, from the perspective of the game setting itself, you have a great catalog of items.  I had forgotten how many YT-series transports alone existed (between SW Gamer and Pirates and Privateers, quite a few transports overall).  I think the feel would be more complete, especially in the weapon entries if the damage was simply listed instead of  the entries 'like blaster pistol'.  I admit, it can be tedious to have the same damage, and since this is not a random damage dice system one cannot make damage variances really (no 3d4+1 or 3d6-2, etc).  Still, maybe it is from seeing the way those states were constructed in the A and E book and Gallandinium's and other supplements, it does not feel right to my eye.  I think it is probably aesthetic more than anything.  Otherwise, the overall effort and work makes for a very solid supplement.  It is nice to see so much fan-created stuff so early on before even the game is fully released.  It will be interesting to see what the designers come up with and change if they release similar supplements.

Yeah I thought about the stats stuff, but I was wondering about the soundness of reproducing stats from the published book… it was also easier when I started it because I didn't have the EotE book with me at the time. I'll consider that for the next version. Thanks

A couple of suggestions.

In regards to the ships and their encumbrance, rather than list the tonnage, try to convert it to an encumbrance rating.  I'd probably go with multiplying the tonnage listed by 1.5 to 1.65 (just going with the yt-1300 having 100 tons in say, Saga, to 165 encumbrance in EotE.  Then round up or down depending on how you feel the ship should be modified.  A HWK-290 I'd round down, as all the deckplans I've seen don't even give a cargo bay (at least one accessible in flight),

Secondly, in regards to weapons, I'll be honest this is a section I skipped over.   Detailing every single weapon has become a sore spot in gaming to me.  It might just be the group I have, or my change in perspective, but I dislike that some weapons become a clear cut better choice than others because of stats - I want much of what my character uses to be chosen because I feel it suits the character, or I think it looks 'cool'.  I prefer to not be punished by choosing a statistically inferior weapon.  What I would suggest, rather than detail every single weapon, I'd take a page out of Borderlands 2, and make templates based on the different companies/manufacturers of weapons - So, for example, Blastech weapons, do 2 extra points in damage, but they sacrifice 1 hardpoint.    Merr-Sonn weapons with the blast quality activate said quality for one less Advantage.  A smaller company that manufactures low-quality knock offs could have the price reduced, but all weapons get the inferior quality, etc.  This lets a character have a unique weapon, without inundating the players with hundreds of weapons that are almost identical.

About encumbrance. I have gone with the tonnage, simply because there is no good way of converting. Whereas the YT-1300 seems simple enough, the Action VI has 10,000 enc, but 90,000 tons in Saga. The hwk-290 is also listed with a lot more tonnage in the Saga source (TFU listed 150 tons), so I lowered it quite a bit. I could of course list a suggested encumbrance - something like a multiplier as you say, but that would be very vague and sometimes quite off mark.

Template for manufacturers is a good idea, they did that in Saga too - perhaps I'll add that as an alternative to the stats provided (at least to the standard type weapons). Thank you for that suggestion. Although I think a +2 damage for a -1 HP is a bit too good, perhaps a 1 for 1 is better.

I do agree that some weapons should not simply be better, but I've tried to reduce HPs or add some quality that reduces its effectiveness, sometimes increased encumbrance of the weapon - of course that is pointless unless the group keeps track of such things. The weapons that are better should also be more expensive, but I do admit that I've not always compared to EotE prices, as RCR and SE sources have a slightly different pricing convention. I can go over this and adjust - and simply make better weapons more expensive, rarer and perhaps more freely use the restricted label for the better weapons.

Only one of my players have actually used the supplement to find a new weapon - same guy that gave away a heavy blaster rifle because he wanted a pistol instead - and due to reduced funds, rarity and the like, he went for a slighty stronger heavy blaster only (SoroSuub Kylan-3: got 1 more damage, but less hardpoints) - spent the cash and bough an attachment. Of course now he's beardy (got point-blank, jury rigged and blaster actuating module), but that weapon is now a signature of his (people will recognise him and it in the long run), its bought on the black market, so no license, its big and modified which is highly irregular - therefore lots of more trouble in imperial space. I know not every group and GM cares too much about that, but I do.

But yes thank you for the suggestions - considering the time I've spent doing this I don't mind spending more, to adjust prices, rarity and the like. Although I probably won't remove the long list of weapons, but I can perhaps offer an alternate way of gaining stylish/signature weapons, through the template idea of yours. That will result in less variance - perhaps - but also more easily balanced over all.

Although I must admit that the template way does put limitations on my desire for unique weapons - the Merr-Sonn underslung rotary blaster carbine should be a beardy auto-fire only weapon; few blaster weapons have the blast quality, and I'm not sure I feel that it adequately covers the difference (I know that is was only an example) - of course I could add the blast quality instead of an auto-fire only quality, but I'm not sure that adequately covers the auto-fire only side of it - but it does make sense in a balancing way (considering how insanely beard the auto-fire quality is). Additionally, the BlasTech is - as far as I know - one of the more if not the most common brand of blasters, hence the standard, stock, models should really be BlasTech - but then what do I do about the Thunderer? the DY-225? DT-12? or the DL-22? The Thunderer (DT6) is a lot more powerful than the DL-44 (stock heavy blaster), but no stun setting. The DY-225 is better at stunning, but have inferior damage to the DL-44, the DT-12 is less accurate than the DL-44 and slightly more powerful. The way I have solved the DT-12 might be a bit off, it could get a better crit value, but same damage, and keep the inaccurate quality - crits are auto-kill on minions, but doesn't necessarily cause more wounds on henchmen, nemesis and PCs faster… but I think that a crit of 2 is very good…

I have not yet started to make suggested template, simply because I need more time to consider it. My first idea to extrapolate on this was to introduce templates for various types of weapons - pistols, carbines, rifles (which includes heavy blaster rifle), repeaters… still. The trade-offs are stopping me from doing this yet, because I need some more time to think. Suggestions, beyond what has already been mentioned would go a long way towards getting this alternative method in motion - because while I'm skeptical I do like it somewhat.

I have started to adjust weapons - I've done one run. This included adjusting prices, rarity and some stats I saw where off due to earlier versions not being corrected after attachments and qualities were generated and added. It's not yet ready for upload though.

I have also pruned the grappling suggestions.

You're right that BlasTech and maybe Sorusuub should be the 'baseline' models.  As to Merr-Sonn weapons, the idea I threw out was based on the fact that they tend to manufacture a lot of things that go "BOOM!".  Just as Tenloss is pretty much the sole manufacturer of Disruptors. If you have access to the Del Rey book The new essential guide to weapons and Technology, that would be a good place to start to get a feel for what the templates could do.  

As to the different feel of weapons, or having a unique weapon, personally,I think that's better done with weapon mods.  I know I want kyle Katarn's Bryar pistol's charge up from Jedi: Outcast.  That would eat up a lot of Hard Points.  What makes the Bryar was that it could 'charge' up a shot.  (also it was a originally a rifle with the barrel removed). Really, making new add-ons for weapons would go a long way, to getting the feel you want for a signature weapon.  I'd save the entries for new weapons for NEW weapons such as the Concussion Rifle (which I'm working on), or the Verpine Shatter gun.

As always this is my opinion and: the world doesn't move to the beat of just one drum.  What might be right for you, may not be right for some.  It doesn't matter that you've got not a lot, so what.  You'll have yours, they'll have theirs, and I'll have mine.  And together, we'll be fine.  'Cause it takes diff'rent strokes to rule the world.

I have none of the essentials book, except the Jedi/force thingy … at least I had it, its in some box somewhere I hope, been moving around a lot the last few years.

Whereas the blasters might be better treated with attachments - I have btw made a bryar attachment if you looked over the new attachments I made. It might need a bit of tweaking, but its a start - I have also converted a lot of other stuff, various slugthrower types, sniper rifles, dart pistols and writs weapons. I have also added a few new armour attachments.

I think most of my weapons could actually be made with the various attachments - except I think there is no damage module for pistols that doesn't add a setback die (i.e. inaccuracy). Which is balancing sure, but doesn't always work well with more powerful pistols that are as accurate - except perhaps heavier, less or more durable and the like… but I haven't looked that closely in the EotE book lately for these things.

Question: The decksweeper and some of the rifles have an odd mechanic of hitting everyone infront of them - could this be better represented through the Blast quality perhaps?

EDIT: I mean, I assume that the blast quality is also intended to represent the shotgun effect?

Jegergryte said:

I think that would be the simplest and most elegant solution.  Possibly a "Decksweeper" attachment for blaster rifles?  Adds blast quality, 1 hardpoint, Reduces range down 1 band.  Just a thought. 

Yes. At least 1 range band - minimum short. There is already the spread barrel attachment though which serves pretty good for that. The only issue then is how to interpret +2 blast… does that mean Blast 2 or something else, like half damage +2? I mean, for a rifle with damage 9 (I believe) - 2 is pretty crap as a Blast quality penetrates only the weakest of soaks, but a 6 or 7 (depending on rounding up or down) is more akin to what I'd imagine, perhaps a tad high, but a minimum of 5 should apply I think.

So, template-idea. I can't really get it out of my head.

First off my idea is to have certain manufacturers provide access to certain attachments at reduced prices - this of course only goes for the 1 attachment, for example a 30 or 40% discount if paid when buying the weapon. This increases rarity by 1 at least - sometimes making them gain R too. Furthermore I think that for a price the weapons can also gain qualities, like for example the prototype template could gain a mix of both the superior and inferior qualities. For instance if netting only advantages, add one, if netting only threats, add one. So its better when its better, and worse when its worse. Damage can remain the same, or increased by one, or crit can be modified. Although the crit mod should be limited.

What do you think Samo? Supply me with more meat and ideas please

Reducing the price for attachments would be good for certain manufacturers, representing their primary design focus, while some manufacturers should just modify pricing while adding a quality or two.  I know there was at least one manufacturer in the Star Wars galaxy that produced low quality weapons, these would obviously have the inferior quality, but be half the listed price. 

As to the prototype..  having both the inferior and superior seems a little strange.  As the prototype means limited numbers, I'd increase the rarity by 2 or 3, add 500 credits to the price as well as making it restricted as a draw back - to represent this showing up on the black market.  As for advantage, increase (or decrease in the case of crit rating or encumbrance) any one statistic of the weapon by 50%.  So a weapon could be roughly half the weight, have incredible damage, or have more hardpoints, etc. 

As I typed this, a couple more thoughts just came into my head about template companies, perhaps they could simply be a bonus when modifying a weapon attachment along their design focus.  For example, certain companies could add more modification options to certain mods.  Increasing the damage on a spread barrel from 0-2 to 0-3.  Not a huge increase, but it gives a enough variety to want a specific manufacturer, without adding too much to the base weapon.

Also, a "Known Manufacturer" Quality could be added to the weapon and modification, what this does is when you add a mod from the same company, you get an increased effect - similar to how weapon sets work in many computer/video game RPG's.   So if you have a Weapon with the Known Manufacturer Czerka, and a mod with the Same Known Manufacturer (Such as the under barrel flame projector) the mod takes ONE less HP.  I'd keep the rarity increase you mentioned though, just to represent trying to find a particular brand.   This could help create a "brand loyalty" for a character, as they'll want to find attachments that are extra compatible.  The advantage to this method is that it doesn't overshadow any existing weapon or mod, and not necessarily available right away.  Give a character something to work for. 

Nice suggestions! I'll put this into the supplement as times goes on - deadlines and stuff coming up so mid-December is when I can get proper time for this it seems. Hm. Perhaps I'll get my hands on a few fluff-book till then.

Right. Now I only need a list of the most common manufacturers (and a few rare ones too of course) and some idea of who has what trademark traits. I hope wookiepedia can help me out here, and the old SE templates. Hohum. I now wish I had some technology and weapons books for Star Wars.