Approved Tech XA-4 'Sliverslash' Galvanic Whipblade

[AMCO]

OUT OF CHARACTER INFORMATION

• Intent: An exotic alternative to lightsabers.
• Image Source: Electric Eel by shou SHI
• Canon Link: N/A
• Permissions: N/A
• Primary Source: Lightwhip, Shock Whip, etc.

PRODUCTION INFORMATION

• Manufacturer: Globex Special Projects
• Affiliation: Globex Special Projects
• Market Status: Open-Market
• Model: XA-4 'Sliverslash' Galvanic Whipblade
• Modularity: Significant, aesthetics and the features noted below.
  • Configurations can be swapped with a briefcase-sized adjustment kit.
  • Can be coated in Voidmetal to (potentially) confuse Force Users.
  • Compatible with 'Riftblade Module' and similar attachments.
• Production: Limited
• Material: Phrik-coated Animatter

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

• Classification: Whip/Sword Hybrid
• Size: Large
• Weight: Light

SPECIAL FEATURES

• The bladed segments from which a Whipblade are tipped with a mono-molecular edge, but in stark contrast to the vast majority of comparable weapons, this edge can be 'retracted' into the body of the segment, blunting the edge at a moment's notice, e.g., to nonlethally restrain a foe.
  • The Animatter that forms the segments' cores links them intrinsically - 'scattering' these weapons in their whip mode is difficult.
• A conventional Galvanic Whipblade can channel powerful electrical - or even ionising - currents through the edges of its segments.
  • The Incendiary Configuration exchanges this for a hotter alternative - the blade glows red with heat or even catches on fire.
  • The Cryogenic Configuration leeches heat from its surroundings and victims. The blade is often enshrouded in white mist.
  • The Thunderous Configuration use high-performance vibro-generators to rip into foes in a blood-splatteringly normal way.
• Can interface with neurochips and other cybernetics to give experienced users a Jedi-like degree of control over the weapon.

STRENGTHS & WEAKNESSES

• Savage Elegance: Flexible and lethal in equal measure, Galvanic Whipblades inflict a dance of death in the hands of a master.
• Gentle Caress: Too light to carry much momentum under ordinary circumstances, Whipblades rely on speed over strength.

DESCRIPTION
Lightsabers are as iconic as they are deadly, but they are not particularly marketable. Sourcing the crystals is especially challenging - an effort that is all too often met with rejection by Force Users insistent on undertaking 'spiritual quests' or 'earning it by strength of arms'. These same individuals are even liable to complain if well-meaning capitalists erect a combined tour guide/hot chocolate/souvenir shop establishment on Ilum!

Deciding that the pockets of the Jedi (or, for that matter, Sith - credits don't discriminate) aren't quite deep enough to justify the expense, Globex was on the verge of giving when an engineer had a clever idea - "If those cultists won't buy our lightsabers, why not make a patentable alternative?"

The Galvanic Whipblades are that alternative. Flexible, deadly, graceful - and just as importantly, new enough to justify a broad patent.

Given the relative rarity of Force Users and their 'unfortunate habit of relying on their own arts and crafts over the free market's innovations', Globex has been aggressively marketing these weapons to other users. Primarily cyborgs, since untrained users have a habit of grievous self-maiming.

 

[MANIAC]

AMCO

This is sick and cool, and I totally love it! Please try to not abuse it.

Approved.

 

[John Locke]

AMCO

This submission has been pulled due to a report.

Please can you separate it into two different subs to better differentiate between them and prevent confusion on the part of other writers.

 

[AMCO]

John Locke

I am not entirely sure how it is confusing in its current state. The Riftblade variant is completely identical to every other Whipblade except as noted in the 'Hidden Depths' Strength; its name is even underlined to keep things clearly separate. I have added another point in Special Features to emphasise this even further. It's mostly a utility feature, anyway - galvanic/incendiary/cryogenic/thunderous are far more different in combat.

If this is insufficient, please note any ways in which the matter could be resolved without splitting the submission, as I prefer not to clog the Factory with a slew of more or less identical clone submissions. That just makes matters more confusing rather than clearing them up, in my opinion.

If it cannot be done without splitting it, I will have to heavily modify the Riftblade variant to differentiate it, but I would really rather not.

P.S. I could make the Riftblade a variant with the same production rating as the default, namely Limited, if this would somehow clear things up. I opted not to do that to emphasise the rarity of dimension-manipulating tech, however, even when used for a minor/harmless purpose.

P.S.S. If there are any general rules against submissions with a high degree of modularity, please note them. Most of my submissions are made to be as customisable as possible, including in many cases Production Rating restricted variants like this one.

 

[John Locke]

AMCO

The confusion with submissions where you try to conflate two different submissions is that an opposing writer might not know what they're facing in a thread and as such end up confused about the capabilities of the weapon they're facing. It is not a direct issue with your submission being unbalanced, it is a balanced and interesting idea, however, but with how it will be used in RP.

I understand and appreciate your desire to not clog up the factory, however, a single submission will not do so and even a handful of submissions will not do so. Especially if it has the advantage of preventing writer confusion down the line making for a smoother and easier RP which is our goal here. You will not have to heavily modify the riftblade to differentiate it, unless you wish to, it could simply be a similar submission with an additional feature. Many submissions exist which are unique or semi-unique versions of a mass-produced or limited submission.

P.S. I could make the Riftblade a variant with the same production rating as the default, namely Limited, if this would somehow clear things up. I opted not to do that to emphasise the rarity of dimension-manipulating tech, however, even when used for a minor/harmless purpose.

While you could that wouldn't solve the core issue here which is, by having two different versions of the weapon in one submission it makes it harder for an opposing writer to understand what they're dealing with.

Regarding the rules:

Modularity: (Can components of this submission be swapped out for other components? Is it especially easy to modify? For most submissions, put 'No'.)

The modularity section of the template allows for components to be changed out, such as changing a gun's barrel, it does not allow for two entirely different submissions to be pushed into one. While I understand that customizability is your desire, in this case, I am upholding the report and as such will need the submission split to prevent any future issues.

 

[AMCO]

John Locke

I believe I understand; it seems I am operating with a somewhat broader understanding of modularity than you are.

Riftblades have been retooled a bit into 'Riftblade Modules', which can be fitted into and presumably removed from standard whipblades, just like the elemental variants. I don't think it's possible for me to preclude any possibility of misunderstandings, however - an (extended) whipblade with riftblade functionality looks more or less exactly the same as one without it. Likewise with galvanic and incendiary, if offline.

I am not entirely sure it's possible to have any degree of modularity without it potentially becoming necessary to ask a user of a modular submission whether they are using an optional feature or not. At least when equipment lists/descriptors are vague.

I don't personally see the issue there, since communication is key to PvP, but your call.

 

[John Locke]

AMCO

That looks like a decent start, but there is one major issue left.

Dimensional Engineering appears to be a form of Gree technology, which is a restricted technology, and therefore can only be subbed at semi-unique or unique. Do you have a canon basis for this technology that isn't gree based?

In terms of modularity. it's mostly meant to be can it be easily adjusted on the fly, if someone is adding a module that make the submission significantly different, or adding a significant new feature, as is the case here, then my preference would always be for them to create a new submission. In most cases modularity might be seen as replacing the scope on a rifle, or adding a silencer. To add new functionality isn't modularity but is creating something new, something that is different from the basis.

While communication is certainly key, if we can help keep things easier for all involved then that's the path I would choose to take.

 

[AMCO]

John Locke

Alright, I see I won't be able to keep it all in one submission. The Riftblade functionality has been stripped away and converted into its own submission, which is linked under Modularity as a compatible device. I trust that won't be an issue?

(For the record, I very much care about ease of use - if someone writes Whipblade in an equipment list, it's normal, and if they write Riftblade it's the Semi-Unique variant. It was always meant to be pretty straightforward, e.g., Galvanic Whipblade versus Incendiary Riftblade.)

 

[John Locke]

AMCO

That looks great, thank you.

APPROVED