can a weapon be mounted on a drone only if the drone has a strength: armed?

10 thoughts on “can a weapon be mounted on a drone only if the drone has a strength: armed?”

1. To me, +armed does mean that the drone is impressive. He looks armed and it is fearful. Therefore, a weapon can be mounted on a drone without this advantage.

2. I don’t think so, Benjamin. Drones are not “fighters”, usually, so a drone without “armed” is just a drone, like our standard surveillance drones. An “armed” drone is just as the tag suggests: a drone with a weapon aboard.

3. You’re right : the question is about the strength, not the look. Note for self : never answer so early in the morning.

4. Thank you!

5. Now I’m on the book. I think the text is pretty clear (pag.72): Armed: a weapon can be mounted on the drone. The size of the weapon is determined by the size of the frame. etc etc.

   So, if with “Armed” you can mount a weapon, if it’s NOT Armed, you can’t mount it.

6. The difficulty is that “Armed” is both a look, a strength, and a category.

7. True. Armed is a strength only for drones (maybe a different tag name could be better… Something like “Weaponized”!? 😀 )

8. Well, appearances can be deceptive. A drone can be armed without looking like it’s armed… or conversely, could be made to look dangerous but not actually equipped with functioning weapons. Form and function need not agree.

9. (actually, drones cannot be “Armed” looking, only “Armed” as Strength, at least not by “canon”).

10. Yes, as they don’t have an “appearance”. Only vehicles do have one (it’s the origin of my initial mistake). Similar rules, but not the same exactly. A vehicle could look “armed” without any weapons, but a drone can’t.

Comments are closed.