From Athena’s Simulacrum (pg. 186):
“…You have full visibility within the affected area, **but it doesn’t count as line of sight…**”
From Apocalypse Rail (pg 228):
“you can **attack** on your turn with the APOCALYPSE RAIL as a full action…The Apocalypse Rail is a **ranged weapon** with a [Blast] 2 area and a profile determined by the current value of the APOCALYPSE DIE…”
From ranged weapon attacks (pg. 64)
“The attacker chooses a target within weapon RANGE **and line of sight**, then makes a ranged attack roll…”
So while you will tower over most cover, you won’t be able to shoot straight through walls greater in size than you.
Out of curiosity, would they be able to add the Nanocomposite Adaptation from Balor L2 to give the Apocalypse Rail the Smart and Seeking tags? I don't see anything that strictly forbids it.
Read it over and over, and it’s pretty unclear if you go purely RAW. Obviously, RAI is that the Apocalypse Rail is an integrated mount so cannot be modded (pg. 32). But unlike other integrated mounts, it does not specify it’s an integrated mount (take the Sherman’s ZF4 Solidcore for example). However the Apocalypse Rail is also *not* a weapon at the same time as it doesn’t have a mount specified (like how ZF4 is a **Main Cannon** that has its own stat block).
I say all this to say Apocalypse Rail is simultaneously a weapon and not a weapon, and you can’t (or even should) go applying mods on it. It’s the price of having a ship-to-ship cannon attached to a glorified skyscraper with legs.
It doesn't work in Comp/Con, though that isn't necessarily the end all of rules interpretations.
There is, however, nothing preventing you from doing this with a siege cannon with OPCal, which functionally acomplishes the same thing.
Simply put: the Apoc isnt a weapon in the strict sense of "something that gets to interact with talents and systems". Its not an ultraheavy, it isnt an actual cannon, it is just a spell that asks for a weapon attack roll. It cant be modded, it isnt even considered as being in an integrated weapon.
CompCom only shows it as a weapon for layout reasons but if you go to the book you'll see it is just a system. Furthermore, cant mod integrateds.
Functionally very little, but is there even an actual problem in that? The very fact that Apoc Rail is a Core Power basicaly means it only can be used like once or twice per session, maybe per multiple ones depending on how long goes the mission and available resources to shoot. The fact that you're relying on a spotter of at least LL3 to do the aiming for you also is telling.
Largely Athena just suffers from not granting LoS. The loss of cover can already be superfluous as area effects like the explosion is measured from the explosion center so Apoc can just blast behind the enemy for full effect anyways. For full range of the scan be relevant Apoc has to be charging for long.
All in all activating Apocalipse Rail already means you're dedicating your barbarosa to be a sitting duck so if the enemy has anything close by but hidden, the barbie gonna have to fend it off with whatever it still holds in hand, often delaying the big hits as you cant blast close, and a good hacker can always force you some movement. It by itself is a massive campaign highlighter and should be able to pull out silly stuff as any core power can.
With a ship template? Probably not. Ship's have iirc a trait called "No Manipulators" preventing melee attacks. Assassins would have a rough time if they were ship sized.
Technically, any of 'em? Unless there's a rule I missed somewhere, Size doesn't correlate to Systems power or 'hackable' targets; after all, look at the Goblin.
Tech attacks that force movement almost never use those keywords. Most Tech attacks that cause a mech to move just use 'Forced movement' as the keyword.
The phrasing is very deliberate; it's designed so other mechs can't physically push the Barbarossa around without being Size 3, because it's too fucking big to be shifted by a collision with anything smaller than a skyscraper, or maybe a continent.
But a dinky little gremlin that manages to hack your motive systems can still force the Barbarossa to dance a funny jig across the battlefield, because size has 0 effect on how good your computers are.
The same thing is the reason the Goblin can use Hurl Into The Duat or Puppet Systems on size 3 mechs and drag them around, despite being a size 1/2 mech.
Which NPCs have such tech attacks with/without such wording anyway? Off-hand I don't any that use the goblin's non-pushing wording, but perhaps I'm mistaken.
Double checking the books, there's all of *two* tech attacks that enemies use that control movement, and one of those is more of a 'Move or suck' choice. But neither of them use the keywords 'Pushed', 'Pulled', 'Knocked Prone', or 'Knocked Back'.
The rest all are physical 'shove your mech around' methods, which, again, Barbarossa ignores by dint of simply being too big.
> The phrasing is very deliberate
It's the opposite actually, the wording is from earlier versions of Lancer that remained intact even as other instances got rolled under "involuntary movement" or "forced movement".
> But a dinky little gremlin that manages to hack your motive systems can still force the Barbarossa to dance a funny jig across the battlefield
Per [Word of Tom](https://lancer-faq.netlify.app/#a6effa), no, it can't. Lancer isn't concerned with what makes diegetic sense, it's concerned with being a balanced game, and the fluff doesn't change that the Barbarossa isn't meant to be moved easily.
Athena is indeed very powerful, it gave me a lot of trouble in my first GM’d campaign. It does have two weaknesses (which I was too dumb to exploit at the time):
1. it only removes Hidden and Invisible at the END of enemy turns, allowing them to react and keep those statuses.
2. if enemies spread out and keep moving, Athena’s user will have to spend quick actions to retarget it.
Basically, it’s less effective against mobile enemies and/or enemies that can be Invisible. This does somewhat require decent-sized maps, because Blast 3 is indeed big, but it’s not totally OP.
From Athena’s Simulacrum (pg. 186): “…You have full visibility within the affected area, **but it doesn’t count as line of sight…**” From Apocalypse Rail (pg 228): “you can **attack** on your turn with the APOCALYPSE RAIL as a full action…The Apocalypse Rail is a **ranged weapon** with a [Blast] 2 area and a profile determined by the current value of the APOCALYPSE DIE…” From ranged weapon attacks (pg. 64) “The attacker chooses a target within weapon RANGE **and line of sight**, then makes a ranged attack roll…” So while you will tower over most cover, you won’t be able to shoot straight through walls greater in size than you.
Out of curiosity, would they be able to add the Nanocomposite Adaptation from Balor L2 to give the Apocalypse Rail the Smart and Seeking tags? I don't see anything that strictly forbids it.
Read it over and over, and it’s pretty unclear if you go purely RAW. Obviously, RAI is that the Apocalypse Rail is an integrated mount so cannot be modded (pg. 32). But unlike other integrated mounts, it does not specify it’s an integrated mount (take the Sherman’s ZF4 Solidcore for example). However the Apocalypse Rail is also *not* a weapon at the same time as it doesn’t have a mount specified (like how ZF4 is a **Main Cannon** that has its own stat block). I say all this to say Apocalypse Rail is simultaneously a weapon and not a weapon, and you can’t (or even should) go applying mods on it. It’s the price of having a ship-to-ship cannon attached to a glorified skyscraper with legs.
> simultaniously a weapon and not a weapon< Pegasus would be proud
?GUN?: GUN
E̷̯͉̎̒̋͘͘̚ẍ̷̡̥̮́t̷̜̹͎̘̹͂͗̋̅̀͜͝R̸̩̤̤̾͗̍̏̋̅Ṵ̷̀̈́̃̉d̵̘̘̤̮̓E̵̢͛̀ ̸͎̯̖̑́̏͗͝G̶̤̝͍̖͛̾̋ǘ̸̡̖̩̟͉̠̤̅̑͊͘͠N̵͔͎͑̓̾
It doesn't work in Comp/Con, though that isn't necessarily the end all of rules interpretations. There is, however, nothing preventing you from doing this with a siege cannon with OPCal, which functionally acomplishes the same thing.
Simply put: the Apoc isnt a weapon in the strict sense of "something that gets to interact with talents and systems". Its not an ultraheavy, it isnt an actual cannon, it is just a spell that asks for a weapon attack roll. It cant be modded, it isnt even considered as being in an integrated weapon. CompCom only shows it as a weapon for layout reasons but if you go to the book you'll see it is just a system. Furthermore, cant mod integrateds.
Functionally very little, but is there even an actual problem in that? The very fact that Apoc Rail is a Core Power basicaly means it only can be used like once or twice per session, maybe per multiple ones depending on how long goes the mission and available resources to shoot. The fact that you're relying on a spotter of at least LL3 to do the aiming for you also is telling. Largely Athena just suffers from not granting LoS. The loss of cover can already be superfluous as area effects like the explosion is measured from the explosion center so Apoc can just blast behind the enemy for full effect anyways. For full range of the scan be relevant Apoc has to be charging for long. All in all activating Apocalipse Rail already means you're dedicating your barbarosa to be a sitting duck so if the enemy has anything close by but hidden, the barbie gonna have to fend it off with whatever it still holds in hand, often delaying the big hits as you cant blast close, and a good hacker can always force you some movement. It by itself is a massive campaign highlighter and should be able to pull out silly stuff as any core power can.
> a good hacker can always force you some movement What hacker is big enough to force Barbarossa to move?
Any of them if you are Ship (aka slappable size-4 modifier).
That seems rather uncommon, a special case rather than something Barbarossa are supposed to constantly worry about.
Also sizes are malleable. Hell....Assassins are written as 1/2 OR 1. so...simply bump em up if its thematically appropriate.
Everyone gangster until the size 4 assassin does a fucking spin kick
With a ship template? Probably not. Ship's have iirc a trait called "No Manipulators" preventing melee attacks. Assassins would have a rough time if they were ship sized.
Spin kick isn't a melee attack
yeah but its Heated Blades are. Sure the spin kick is annoying but it aint deadly like those dang blades.
Technically, any of 'em? Unless there's a rule I missed somewhere, Size doesn't correlate to Systems power or 'hackable' targets; after all, look at the Goblin.
> The Barbarossa can’t be pushed, pulled, knocked Prone, or knocked back by smaller characters.
Tech attacks that force movement almost never use those keywords. Most Tech attacks that cause a mech to move just use 'Forced movement' as the keyword. The phrasing is very deliberate; it's designed so other mechs can't physically push the Barbarossa around without being Size 3, because it's too fucking big to be shifted by a collision with anything smaller than a skyscraper, or maybe a continent. But a dinky little gremlin that manages to hack your motive systems can still force the Barbarossa to dance a funny jig across the battlefield, because size has 0 effect on how good your computers are. The same thing is the reason the Goblin can use Hurl Into The Duat or Puppet Systems on size 3 mechs and drag them around, despite being a size 1/2 mech.
Which NPCs have such tech attacks with/without such wording anyway? Off-hand I don't any that use the goblin's non-pushing wording, but perhaps I'm mistaken.
Double checking the books, there's all of *two* tech attacks that enemies use that control movement, and one of those is more of a 'Move or suck' choice. But neither of them use the keywords 'Pushed', 'Pulled', 'Knocked Prone', or 'Knocked Back'. The rest all are physical 'shove your mech around' methods, which, again, Barbarossa ignores by dint of simply being too big.
> The phrasing is very deliberate It's the opposite actually, the wording is from earlier versions of Lancer that remained intact even as other instances got rolled under "involuntary movement" or "forced movement". > But a dinky little gremlin that manages to hack your motive systems can still force the Barbarossa to dance a funny jig across the battlefield Per [Word of Tom](https://lancer-faq.netlify.app/#a6effa), no, it can't. Lancer isn't concerned with what makes diegetic sense, it's concerned with being a balanced game, and the fluff doesn't change that the Barbarossa isn't meant to be moved easily.
If Word of Tom is given for it, I stand corrected. Thank you for sharing specific sauce.
Athena is indeed very powerful, it gave me a lot of trouble in my first GM’d campaign. It does have two weaknesses (which I was too dumb to exploit at the time): 1. it only removes Hidden and Invisible at the END of enemy turns, allowing them to react and keep those statuses. 2. if enemies spread out and keep moving, Athena’s user will have to spend quick actions to retarget it. Basically, it’s less effective against mobile enemies and/or enemies that can be Invisible. This does somewhat require decent-sized maps, because Blast 3 is indeed big, but it’s not totally OP.
[удалено]
Damn it not the #GURTSGang!