[Bobboau]

p.s. If you could think of something convicing to explain how they work, and a gameplay mechanic to make them work, they might be pretty cool.

videoGAME

[chief1983]

videoGAME

lol

But seriously, I do want to have convincing explanations of technology for most of the stuff in the tech room, either that were already established in canon, or that we have to retcon or something.  I don't think it has to be terribly convincing, but most sci fi geeks expect a bone thrown to the attempt, or at least for it to sound like it's over their heads.  We can't go around saying there's air in space or anything.

[JGZinv]

*cough* http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Seismic_charge

[chief1983]

That still sounds pretty bad, and fails at actually trying to explain how it works.  It's just a statement of what it appears to do. Which is stupid too, because it says "briefly detonate into a blue ball, which appears to have the unusual side-effect of removing all sound from a given area around it."  There wasn't any sound around to begin with, it's space!  They just tried to describe what it looks like it does in the movie.  But yes, I know that games and movies all show sound in space.  It has to do with immersion obviously.  But actually saying there's a weapon that capitalizes on this immersion gimmick and further perpetrates this falsehood?  I have no problem with the shockwave effect, but saying it has to do with sound just seems too corny.  However we write it up in the tech room, it won't mention that.  I like the part about the star going supernova better.  That could be useful for describing it.

[Cobra]

Some of the info in the Wikia is just plain wrong, anyways, like how it says Han Solo was in Attack of the Clones.

[maje]

Folks, folks.... let's all calm down here.  If we start omitting sounds in space, we'll have to start omitting things like how a TIE Fighter can fly in an atmosphere despite having issues with simple aerodynamics and the like.

[Cobra]

It's magic!

[chief1983]

I don't want to eliminate all the skews in reality, but the concept of an item whose sole existence is explained by one of those skews in reality is just a bit odd.  I'm not saying eliminate it either, just don't say, directly, in the _tech_ room, that there's sound in space.  That's where the hardcore nerds are going to want to see how good a job we're doing sticking to the technical aspects.

[Scourge of Ages]

Hey, I have an idea:
Since it's called the seismic charge, we could just say that it got it's name from the effect it has when detonated near, on, or under a planet's surface. For that purpose, it's just a big bomb and you would only need to explain how it causes "a good bit of fracas."