Ryan, I like the electronic gun idea but I think it will be discarded because of logistics and cost. The number of guns in a Star wars larp is going to be quite large, equipping crew and players with a range of blasters is going to be expensive.
But before we go that far:
How much is a pistol or blaster going to cost and what will they look like?
Will they be robust and can you retro-fit existing toy guns?
The cost comparison is that of the old lazer gun from the cupboard being instantly useable with a call system.
I know which I prefer but knowing larpers, it won’t be easy to go for the costlier option.
Back to the simplification debate:
Most of what I am saying hinges on medium complexity and the assumption that a call system will be used regardless of what we argue.
Simplification doesn’t mean the eradication of tactical options, so using an assumed called gunfight system, the following idea might work “target id, zap (standard call for 1 damage in global HP)” and tactical option A “target id, zap zap zap” represents a burst, tactical option B “target id, blast” represents bigger damage, tactical option C “target id, blast, armour” represents armour damaging. For option C “armour” isn’t a call but part of the identifier.
The tactical abilities would be listed on the characters sheet but all the other players would need to know is that zap is 1 damage, blast is 2.
Tactical option D “target id, blast” can also represent the THROUGH ability, except that a skilled character can do this with a weapon that normally only goes ZAP.
Tactical option E “target id, zap, *limb” whereby *limb could automatically represent a DISABLING shot. Otherwise all shots are assumed global (torso). This might mean that any disabling shot (limb) only requires a single shot to work, so if this is altered by race then you only need to let the members of that race know that. Balance this ability by making it expensive etc.
By doing this all you have to brief players on is zap, blast, limb and armour, you loose locational HP but still have all the same tactical options.
Now the obvious problem here is that zap and blast become calls for ranged damage, which means if you want bigger damage for melee then you need another set of calls to represent this. I’d go for one. Attach suitable IC call. Bash/smash/crush etc.
Force powers - now while I agree in theory that many of them could do without calls, visual only stops working at night or in impeded.
deflect blast - no call really needed, just RP it.
reflect blast - player with lightsaber in hand makes a normal ranged call “target id, zap”. I would suggest reflected shots only do “zap” representing lost energy from the bounce.
Only the player reflecting needs to know they are reflecting, other players should assume a lightsaber weilder can do this. no extra call needed.
Choke - short range - player using it states “I will CHOKE the life from you” and the call becomes more IC
Some of the others may be more problematic than this. Instead of having force speed, how about those characters who has this power simply have more dodges? Dodging can be RP’d and player could say “Can’t hit me!” of an identifier is need. Again no extra call needed.
Others:
Dive - if only people with dive can “Dive” then is a call needed?
For creatures immune to a damage type rather than saying “immune” the monster could say IC “you weapon can’t hurt me puny one” or some such.
I have more ideas than this but you can see, although calls are still being used, they have been heavily reduced and made a little less game mechanical.
EDIT: Damn simultaneous posts (Ryan). His points are similar, the same tactical situations can be achieved with a few standard calls.
