Fun idea: delayed rolling.
I doubt this is an original idea but I think it’s worth mentioning for others.
Ship Engineer decides he wants to attach a Class 2 rifle to the outside of a Class 2 shuttle so it can be fired from inside. He has the skills and tools to do it, so it’s a pretty normal Patch Up roll. However…
I told him that he can do it, but will make the Patch Up roll before he fires it in combat. We’ll see how much skill he has when it matters.
This is definitely a fun idea, and I really like it. The way I see it, its totally valid too. Its basically Permission with a Cost… “Yeah, you can do that… but there’s really no way to tell if it will work until the moment of truth. We’ll roll when that happens.”
I figured there was no real drama in the roll to get it installed. My other option was that if he got less than a 10+, I’d tell him the consequence when he used it
While you can absolutely do that, I feel you (as the GM) are missing out on doubling down on the potential complications. The Patch Up is the act of installing it, and the complications from a failed or partially successful installation will likely be a cost (time, resources, special materials, hired experts, etc). But “the proof is in the pudding… err firing”.
No matter the level of success of the Patch Up, this sets up the potential for a hard GM move when they fire it for the first time. A 10+ on their Open Fire means yep, it was installed correctly, well done. Plus you blasted your target. A 7-9 means something went wrong with the installation, even if the weapon still “works” (misaligned, jammed aiming servos, faulty power coupling, etc). On a 6-… well it turns out the installation wasn’t nearly as good as expected!
The theory is still there; you don’t really know if you installed it well until it comes time to use it. BUT, instead of using it as a separate check, we’re using it as a plausible cause for bigger consequences on the attack roll.