[barsoomcore]

Originally posted by Wyvern
Threat ranges that are less than the current grid size are treated as zero. This means that characters aboard a vessel will be able to make melee attacks of opportunity against vessels in their own square.
You need to make this latter point clear in the chapter itself. Otherwise, people are likely to interpret a threat range of zero as no threat range.

Done.

...if the character makes a melee attack against a target that is not moving in parallel to her vessel, she applies the Charge bonus to her attack roll and suffers the Charge penalty to her AC against any similar.
I really don't see the purpose of this rule.

Agreed. It's gone.

When using a guided weapon, the opterator makes a ranged touch attack... ignoring any armour bonus, shield bonus or natural armor bonus.
When you say "shield bonus", I assume you're referring only to physical shields and not magical or technological force fields, right?

That was the idea, but what I had thought was that "shield bonus" was a particular type of bonus. I will remove the reference since it seems that "shield bonus" is a subset of "armour bonus".

The loss of hit points may be stopped by a successful Repair check (DC 15), but the vessel remains disabled.
This brings up the issue of whether to include a Repair skill. BlackJaw was in favor of using the Craft skill to cover repairs, and I conceded the point, but now you're adding the Repair skill back in. We need to come to a consensus on this.

Not in fact adding, just duplicating from a previous version of the rules. The reference is changed to Craft.

When a vessel's hit points drop to -10 or lower, it is immediately destroyed and begins to spiral. The pilot cannot use the Regain Control stunt in order to stop the spiral as the vessel is too damaged to respond to her efforts.
You need to update this to remove references to spiraling and the Regain Control stunt.

Done.

Vessels always ignore subdual damage.
I think this should read "vehicles" (since flying creatures aren't immune to subdual damage).

Done.

On a related note, are you plannning on treating vehicles as objects in the sense that they only take half damage from energy attacks and personal ranged weapons?

This should be covered in vessel descriptions. Vessels that are objects ought to be treated as object. Vessels will have descriptors like "undead", "contructs" or "humanoid" just like creatures will.

It is possible to direct attacks specifically against a weapon or other feature on a vessel.
I'd recommend changing "feature" to "component" in this sentence and the ones following.

I don't see the need.

The feature uses its own size modifier. Damage taken by a feature is not applied to the total damage taken by the vessel.
Does this mean that BlackJaw is going to have to include size and hit points in his component descriptions? What about components that are spread througout a vehicle (such as life support)?

One reason to use the word "feature" rather than "component". This does need to be made more clear. I'll contemplate.

It is not possible for vessels to bull rush each other, but any pilot may attempt a ramming attack.... She chooses a single vessel in that square and makes a Piloting skill check against that vessel's AC.
Shouldn't this be touch AC? If armor doesn't protect you against an accidental collision, it shouldn't protect you against a deliberate one either.

Agreed.

Somewhere in here we need to include rules for critical hits on vehicles (since we all seem to agree that they should be vulnerable to them).

I disagree. Such information should be contained within the vessel description. Since we cannot predict the kinds of vessels users might create, we should isolate that information with the vessels we create, not enclose it in the general combat system.

A chart of possible effects would be more interesting than just applying extra damage.

And lots more work, and again, applicable to specific vessel designs. I agree that this would be good material to have, but it does not belong in the Combat section. The Monster Manual describes the effects of critical hits and so on on creatures and so our "Vessel Volume" (or section or chapter or whatever) ought to be where we keep that information for this system.

We also need to address the effects of a hull breach in water or vacuum, and what might cause one (e.g. crash-landing, critical hit, limpet mine, piercing ram, going to negative hit points).

Again I disagree. Such information belongs in either the vessel descriptions ("At 50% hit points, these vessel suffer a hull breach") or in the environment descriptions ("Exposure to vacuum causes blah blah blah"). Not in combat.