View Full Version : Comments on Suppressed Heavy Blaster (SWRPGNetwork)

darth maynard
25 February 2002, 02:59 PM
...just what I was looking for. :)

25 February 2002, 02:59 PM
This thread is for comments on the entry entitled "<a href="http://www.swrpgnetwork.com/entry.php?s=&id=1204" target="_blank" title="This link will open in a new window.">Suppressed Heavy Blaster</a>" located on SWRPGNetwork. Please post your comment on this entry below using the "Post Thread" button; you may also post a comment via a link from the entry itself.

1 March 2002, 10:38 AM
I'm not intending to knock the creater of this idea, I'm just pointing out a few reasons why it would not work as described.

1) The report from a blaster comes from the bolt interacting with the atmosphere. The Tibanna gas has absolutely nothing to do with the sound a blaster makes (in the real world when you activate a laser pointer, does it make a noise?). The blaster firing sequence isn't much different from current modern day lasers. The Tibanna gas is contained within a, according to starwars termonology, Xciter. Within the Exciter are super conducting electrical nodes, which draw power from the power pack, and uses the electricity to Xcite the tibanna gas molecules producing the visible light and charged perticles which are the blaster bolt. The bolt is then released through an aperture, not unlike a camera shutter. From there the bolt comes in contact with the surrounding atmosphere and causes the molecules in the atmosphere to rapidly expand, and cause noise, in exactly the same way lightning causes thunder. The Xerrol Nightstinger is a good example that it is the charged particles that produce the damage not the light, the light is just a byproduct. Therefor the "sound sponge" idea has some merit, but only as long as the blaster bolt remains in the barrel.

2) This part is an expansion on why exactly the blaster bolt causes sound to occur. When lightning travels through a section of air it super heats the gasses that make up the atmosphere, causeing the molecules to expand. This does not however cause the sound, the sound comes from new molecules rushing into the vacuum caused by the near instantaneous expansion of molecules. A blaster bolt works the same way.

3) the amount of energy in the blaster bolt is proportional to the volume of molecules of atmosphere it can excite which is directly proportional to how much noise it makes as it passes thru said atmosphere. Adding denser gasses to the mix greatly increases the power required to excite the gasses to create the blaster bolt, but to produce a damaging energy bolt, the energy in the bolt must be great enough to overcome the targets moleculer structure. So, in effect if you want the bolt to do damage you are required to use higher levels of energy, which in turn puts you back at the problems posed in example 2) above.

Its a rather long rant, but I needed something to get my mind into gear for my homework. I'm a physics major :)

Anyways, its a idea with merit, and people use it if you like it, after all if you are the GM it is your game, and you can do as much or as little with it as you like.

Play on.

1 March 2002, 12:39 PM
Thanks for the dissertation. However, since Tibanna gas is a theoretical substance, and since Star Wars physics don't always make sense, why can't we say the new compound simply doesn't excite the atmosphere in the same way as a standard blaster bolt?

4 March 2002, 08:58 AM
Whatever works for you, if your gming the game or your GM approvies it, go for it. :) BTW this is the author of the previous comment, i'm just too lazy to register.

Another solution, You could say that that bolt, after being created in the exciter, is magneticly polarized to draw the molecules of the atmosphere inwards towards the bolt, that way, when the blaster expands the gas, it also recompresses it a nano-second after the expnsion, and that would limit the sound it made, theoretically to a hiss. Possible problems include with it magneticly polarized, it would tend to deviate in flight towards ferrous materials, and the polarization would shorten the range somewhat.

13 March 2002, 09:13 PM
Would it be possible to use the same blaster gas used in the Xerrol in the supressed blaster thereby creating a blaster that is both silent and invisible. Admittedly that would be major league cheap and to quote professor Frink 'Only the five richest kings of Europe' could own one.