<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ivanov Annihilator</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/</link>
	<description>All things mechanikal, magikal, clockwerk, and mundane</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 15:37:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnimaRaptor</title>
		<link>http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/comment-page-1/#comment-16276</link>
		<dc:creator>AnimaRaptor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hecate.ca/union/?p=344#comment-16276</guid>
		<description>Yes, the base damage of the weapon without enhancements is certainly impressive from a mechanical standpoint, considering an Orgun Handcannon&#039;s Solid Slug does 4d10 without any bonuses. 

Also remember, the range of a weapon is simply is range increment, not its maximum range. Any weapon is capable to firing much further then listed, but it&#039;s user gets a cumulative -2 for every increment past its stats, hence the invention of scopes to lessen these penalties. A range of 500ft implies that the trajectory of the round is flat and true, and begins to drop slightly beyond that reach. So, it&#039;s not impossible to make shot from 2000ft away with a mundane scope, only that the user would take a -3 to the attack roll instead of a -6. And this is without the Far Shot feat.

And yes, I do believe that the proper use of the weapon (Called Shot, Sniping Shot, Sharpshooter, and so on), the weapon could very well scream &quot;Anti &#039;Jack&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, the base damage of the weapon without enhancements is certainly impressive from a mechanical standpoint, considering an Orgun Handcannon&#8217;s Solid Slug does 4d10 without any bonuses. </p>
<p>Also remember, the range of a weapon is simply is range increment, not its maximum range. Any weapon is capable to firing much further then listed, but it&#8217;s user gets a cumulative -2 for every increment past its stats, hence the invention of scopes to lessen these penalties. A range of 500ft implies that the trajectory of the round is flat and true, and begins to drop slightly beyond that reach. So, it&#8217;s not impossible to make shot from 2000ft away with a mundane scope, only that the user would take a -3 to the attack roll instead of a -6. And this is without the Far Shot feat.</p>
<p>And yes, I do believe that the proper use of the weapon (Called Shot, Sniping Shot, Sharpshooter, and so on), the weapon could very well scream &#8220;Anti &#8216;Jack&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TT</title>
		<link>http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/comment-page-1/#comment-16275</link>
		<dc:creator>TT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hecate.ca/union/?p=344#comment-16275</guid>
		<description>Ok, min damage of 8, maximum of 29, but with the likly magical enhancements people would end up putting on the thing I&#039;m sure that figure would go up. How about the range? 400ft is certainly double that of the rest of the firearms that are listed in the books, but AM rifles of today range up to a mile. Far Shot would automaticaly bump it up to 800ft, but still.

I really am after a rifle which you could seriously call anti-jack. Considering most heavy jacks have 100hp+ even when your ignoring there hardness and DR, +5 is about right for somthing designed to take them out. Called Shots to vital componants might be the way to go for that one. Pretty sure with a average crit from a 3d8+5 round you could destroy a leg servo, crippling the jack if not actualy killing it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, min damage of 8, maximum of 29, but with the likly magical enhancements people would end up putting on the thing I&#8217;m sure that figure would go up. How about the range? 400ft is certainly double that of the rest of the firearms that are listed in the books, but AM rifles of today range up to a mile. Far Shot would automaticaly bump it up to 800ft, but still.</p>
<p>I really am after a rifle which you could seriously call anti-jack. Considering most heavy jacks have 100hp+ even when your ignoring there hardness and DR, +5 is about right for somthing designed to take them out. Called Shots to vital componants might be the way to go for that one. Pretty sure with a average crit from a 3d8+5 round you could destroy a leg servo, crippling the jack if not actualy killing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnimaRaptor</title>
		<link>http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/comment-page-1/#comment-16274</link>
		<dc:creator>AnimaRaptor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 04:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hecate.ca/union/?p=344#comment-16274</guid>
		<description>Also, why such a low DC for reloading and cleaning? I would think that such a device, with its clunky design and intense size would make it more difficult to reload, even with the addition of the breech lock.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, why such a low DC for reloading and cleaning? I would think that such a device, with its clunky design and intense size would make it more difficult to reload, even with the addition of the breech lock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnimaRaptor</title>
		<link>http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/comment-page-1/#comment-16273</link>
		<dc:creator>AnimaRaptor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hecate.ca/union/?p=344#comment-16273</guid>
		<description>Excellent story, but maybe the gun stats could use alittle tinkering. 

Considering that this weapon originally came off of a &#039;jack, and since that stats of the Cannon on the Warmachine card actually shows it as a lower powered weapon compared to others, i feel that a 3d8 would make more sense. To balance this, however, this weapon should have a permanent +3 or even +5 due to the nature of the weapon. Just as the other two Khard rifles have a natural +2, so should this weapon have that minimum level of damage. 

Also, just for fun, how about needing a Str check to carry it? True, this weapon will be fired from prone, but it does need to be transported to the firing range, no? So, sporting a special handle towards the center balance point of the weapon, and Due to the Incredible weight of the weapon (at least 40 lbs), a minimum Str of 15 is needed to carry the weapon into battle without suffering fatigue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent story, but maybe the gun stats could use alittle tinkering. </p>
<p>Considering that this weapon originally came off of a &#8216;jack, and since that stats of the Cannon on the Warmachine card actually shows it as a lower powered weapon compared to others, i feel that a 3d8 would make more sense. To balance this, however, this weapon should have a permanent +3 or even +5 due to the nature of the weapon. Just as the other two Khard rifles have a natural +2, so should this weapon have that minimum level of damage. </p>
<p>Also, just for fun, how about needing a Str check to carry it? True, this weapon will be fired from prone, but it does need to be transported to the firing range, no? So, sporting a special handle towards the center balance point of the weapon, and Due to the Incredible weight of the weapon (at least 40 lbs), a minimum Str of 15 is needed to carry the weapon into battle without suffering fatigue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TT</title>
		<link>http://www.hecate.ca/union/2010/07/20/ivanov-annihilator/comment-page-1/#comment-16271</link>
		<dc:creator>TT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hecate.ca/union/?p=344#comment-16271</guid>
		<description>This one still needs a bit of work, I&#039;m open to suggestions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This one still needs a bit of work, I&#8217;m open to suggestions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

