Mecha tabletop system

>>46737961
Is that an Evangundiom?

>>46738019
Yes

>>46737961
Looks really cool, but I'm not sure how you'd go about putting Evas and Gundams in the same setting. I mean for one Evas have a power tether, so their movement would be extremely limited, plus Evas are fucking huge compared to Gundams.

>>46738295
Size of a robot does not necessarily correlate to its power level. For instance Voltron/Go-Lion is huge but in terms of power it is not particularly powerful.

The big thing with Evas is the AT Fields. Though I imagine some newtype fuckery from Gundam might be able to create holes in them, especially crazy shit like the Unicorn's NTD system which can literally steal control of psychically controlled weapons. The only other suits with weapons that stand a chance of punching through would be, the V2 Assault Buster's , X/Double X, Wing/Wing Zero, Black History Turn A, 00 Qan[T], and G-Self Perfect Pack.

>>46738737
>specifying black history Turn-A like the in-show version hasn't got some of the biggest weapons in the franchise

But yea, mostly the big stuff like Wings of Light, Moonlight Butterfly, or Satellite Cannon would be needed for most anti-Angel work. I'd say that the Zeta era or so could get through an early show Eva's AT Field with just a Mega Beam Launcher or something.

>>46738737
Your examples are super robots, which Gundam are often not.

Unicorn's powers are hyper powerful, but very, very specific and would be nigh-useless against an EVA with AT intact since they're almost all focused on manipulating electronics combined with brute force. The latter not counting for much since Eva tower over it, even though it's bulky as hell for a Gundam type.

Most of the others wouldn't do much either, since N2 mines weren't able to do enough damage. 00, G-Self PP and Turn A for their specific power types may stand a reasonable chance/could be written to effect them, but the others rely on bruteforce which typically doesn't work on ATs.

Don't get me wrong, mix them if you want to, you're just going to have to jump through so many hoops to keep it internally consistent, if only because they're very different kinds of robots* doing very different jobs.

>>46738928
SRW made it work.
Not saying your point is invalid, just citing an example that has done it.

Battle Century G. It's the final release version of Giant Guardian Generation, if you remember that.

Was made to run Super Robot Wars games, so it can reasonably run any mecha shit. The rules aren't super crunchy, but I don't think you're going to get Mobile Suits and Evas in the same setting with crunchy, detailed rules. It'd just suck.

>>46738928
>Eva
>Towering over anything
That implies they have a consistent height.

>>46737961

GURPS. Use Spaceships, the Fighters and Carriers PDF, and then the pyramid article on mecha. It includes design switches for both series, and the mecha will be points-balanced against one another. Because of the way GURPS scales, most of the rules are identical to normal GURPS, just scaled up a bit.

It won't match a dedicated wargame, but as RPGs go, it's one of the few games that can handle this idea out of the box.

>>46739348
There's even mental trauma rules in the Kickstarter updates if you want to play up THAT side of Eva.

>>46739299
Honestly, though, a friend tried to recreate SRW in a tabletop game and it didn't work very well. It was much too imbalanced.

>>46738928
So, I've been attempting to make a tabletop game that uses both Evas and Mobile suits from various Gundam series and this is the exact problem we've been having. How does Battle Century G do it?

>>46740113
Holy shit thanks!

>>46741873
By not getting too specific. BCG paints in very broad strokes; it's trying to emulate the mecha GENRE, rather than a specific series.

If you want to get into the nitty gritty of how mobile suits and evas would interact, including detailed mechanical representation of AT fields, BCG probably isn't for you. It would handle Evas and Mobile Suits in a pretty simple way; by making them functionally identical.

Like, you could maybe throw some active defenses on the Evas to represent the AT field, but other than that, what's the real difference? Power? There's a design hindrance for that. Size? Eva's inconsistent as hell with size, but you can represent size differences pretty easily with different stats; you don't really need special rules for it.

>>46742178
Here's the upgrades/downgrades I'd add to all Evas by default;

Shielding Aura (to represent the AT field)
External Upgrade (10)
Effect: In response to the results of an Enemy Might Test against you, you may spend 1 Energy to increase your Defense by 3 against it. You may also use this Upgrade to protect an Ally within a number of Zones equal to your Systems. This will not stack with Active Defenses of said Allies.

You could probably add some other active defences to represent different uses of the AT field, but this functions fine as a default.

Limited Battery Time (duh)
Design Flaw (+20 MP)
Effect: At the beginning of your Turn, you must either spend an amount of Energy equal to the current Tension or take enough Damage to lose your current Level of Threshold.

For the limited battery time, I'd probably add some stipulation that it only applies when you're not plugged in; maybe represent this mechanically by having you count as plugged in whenever you're on NERV controlled territory? Not sure. You'd probably want to adjust the point cost accordingly.

>>46742399
I had been thinking of ways to run Eva in BCG. An idea I had for the cables is that any time you would lose a layer of threshold, you can choose to have your cable severed instead and keep that layer with 1 point left in it. Alternatively, any time you would take damage at all you can just choose to have the cable severed and go untouched. Either way, the limited battery time flaw activates immediately afterwards.

>>46743075
That's probably a good way to handle it. Maybe use the odd/even dice thing BCG has going on to decide who gets to make the choice?

So, odds, the enemy can choose to either fuck you up or sever your cord, evens, you choose.

Not sure if that'd give the enemy too much of an edge though. Depends how hard it is to re-attach your cord I guess.

>>46743128
You could just have a new special terrain type that's an umbilical cord port. When you stand on it you can use a utility action to connect a new cable. Easy. You could also have a custom reinforcements power that creates new ports on the map, the fluff being that those mobile energy unit things are being deployed and set up.

Something else to consider is that blast, burst, and line weapons should probably have some bonus to severing the cable. Maybe on any successful hit with those weapons, the angel can choose to instantly sever the cable at the cost of dealing half/no damage?

>>46743216
Yeah, that'd be a pretty good way to handle things. Possibly make the ports destructible too, would add some extra stuff to account for tactically.