TheRPGSite

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3496

This made me think about the other Star Wars RPGs that were published in years past.  Which one of the bunch is now considered the most sought after?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;572619http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=3496

This made me think about the other Star Wars RPGs that were published in years past.  Which one of the bunch is now considered the most sought after?

I am more interested in this than I am in D&D Next.

Looks good but im not sure i can justify $30 for a beta document.

I lost all interest in Star Wars after Episode I, but I am curious to know what the system is all about.

That publication model sounds familiar, but I can't put my genetically-enhanced POWER FINGER on where.

Also, I wonder if it develops from the WFRP3 system, which is a fine core mechanic.

Yes, I think many customers will have learned from their Warhammer RPG book purchases.

Oh dear.

Aside from the ridiculous model processing the setting $30 for a beta just confirms that FFG have lost the plot.

It's hardcopy only, no digital.  So it's not a pdf that gets you a discount on the hardcover, it's a 224-page softcover $30 beta book.

Since it's not a pdf, and they actually had to pay to print this thing, I don't know if they are going to be able to discount the final book.

I realize they want to make big noise at GenCon, and they might do it, but with charging $30 for a Beta that people are going to spend $50-60 for when they get the hardcover, it might just be the sound of laughter.

Never underestimate the power of StarWars fandom, however.

Games Workshop, now LucasArts.  FFG has a penchant for licensing IPs from insane people.

Quote from: CRKrueger;572647It's hardcopy only, no digital.  So it's not a pdf that gets you a discount on the hardcover, it's a 224-page softcover $30 beta book.

Since it's not a pdf, and they actually had to pay to print this thing, I don't know if they are going to be able to discount the final book.

I realize they want to make big noise at GenCon, and they might do it, but with charging $30 for a Beta that people are going to spend $50-60 for when they get the hardcover, it might just be the sound of laughter.

Never underestimate the power of StarWars fandom, however.

Games Workshop, now LucasArts.  FFG has a penchant for licensing IPs from insane people.

Hardcopy? What? This makes no sense. So it's not a beta, it's a finished product they know will be full of mistakes because their writing/editing staff are hopeless. And people are choosing to pay for this? Christian Petersen must be laughing his custom nuts off.

I dont think this has anything to do with the Lucas (or GW in the case of 40K). This is just plain money grubbing from a company I used to respect. FFG have hit rock bottom with this. Someone should tell them from me. Maybe I can hire Malcom Tucker to unleash a shitstorm on them.

If you want playtesters then hire or find some and give them digital files they can print. Then test the game, and then publish it. This is the most ass backwards thing I've ever heard.

Quote from: Ladybird;572636That publication model sounds familiar, but I can't put my genetically-enhanced POWER FINGER on where.

Also, I wonder if it develops from the WFRP3 system, which is a fine core mechanic.

THis is a poor fit for that kind of approach. It works ok for 40k because the different elements (ie character choices) are more exclusive. But here if you want to include force users or even play one you have to wait a couple of years. Whoever signed off on that decision at ffg needs to be fired, absolutely pushed out the door with their p45 and told to catch a bus to the other side of fuck.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;572651Hardcopy? What? This makes no sense. So it's not a beta, it's a finished product they know will be full of mistakes because their writing/editing staff are hopeless. And people are choosing to pay for this? Christian Petersen must be laughing his custom nuts off.

I dont think this has anything to do with the Lucas (or GW in the case of 40K). This is just plain money grubbing from a company I used to respect. FFG have hit rock bottom with this. Someone should tell them from me. Maybe I can hire Malcom Tucker to unleash a shitstorm on them.

If you want playtesters then hire or find some and give them digital files they can print. Then test the game, and then publish it. This is the most ass backwards thing I've ever heard.

Apparently they said at Gencon Lucasarts wasn't comfortable with a digital copy of the book, so that's why they couldn't do what they did with Only War.  Whether they give any discount to the final product or not, is yet to be seen.

And yeah this isn't really a "Beta" since the rules are already inked.  They might catch some proofreading stuff before final layout with art, etc.  It's a way to vacuum up cash at GenCon and get their name out as the new StarWars game.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;572651If you want playtesters then hire or find some and give them digital files they can print. Then test the game, and then publish it. This is the most ass backwards thing I've ever heard.

They'll have done the actual playtesting over the past year or two. This is a cheap ashcan edition of the game.

But by doing it this way, it had better be fucking good, or the poor press will sink it.

Quote from: CRKrueger;572655Apparently they said at Gencon Lucasarts wasn't comfortable with a digital copy of the book, so that's why they couldn't do what they did with Only War.  Whether they give any discount to the final product or not, is yet to be seen.

And yeah this isn't really a "Beta" since the rules are already inked.  They might catch some proofreading stuff before final layout with art, etc.  It's a way to vacuum up cash at GenCon and get their name out as the new StarWars game.

Not being allowed to do a pdf really is immaterial to the beta idea. This isn't a beta, it's a dodgy first print run from a company that knows the first print run will be full of msitakes and don't seem to care. This is the pope of ridiculous.

I will not buying this game at all. Leaving out force users in a fucking star wars game for 2 years is like releasing a star trek game that doesn't have starships.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;572661Leaving out force users in a fucking star wars game for 2 years is like releasing a star trek game that doesn't have starships.

Actually, this has increased my interest.  I'm tired of having an entire universe populated by a minority.

Quote from: Ladybird;572659They'll have done the actual playtesting over the past year or two. This is a cheap ashcan edition of the game.

But by doing it this way, it had better be fucking good, or the poor press will sink it.

Let's be honest, it won't get bad press. People will buy this like the world was ending and everything in the garden will be rosy.

I however, as the lone voice of sanity in a world gone mad, maintain this idea has as much merit as a comic book version of the koran.

Quote from: Rum Cove;572663Actually, this has increased my interest.  I'm tired of having an entire universe populated by a minority.

Why would the inclusion of jedi/sith rules preclude the choice as to whether to use them?

Quote from: CRKrueger;572655Apparently they said at Gencon Lucasarts wasn't comfortable with a digital copy of the book, so that's why they couldn't do what they did with Only War.  Whether they give any discount to the final product or not, is yet to be seen.

Lucasarts has a byzantine licensing for Electronic Media; due to it being drafted in the early 90's, and not really being updated since, digital offerings for licensed games falls into a murky zone of their Video Game licensing.

It's the reason that d20 Star Wars was never offered on .pdf, and why even the Jedi Counseling's had to be careful in what content they offered.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;572666Why would the inclusion of jedi/sith rules preclude the choice as to whether to use them?

The answer lies in the Wizards vs. Fighter thread.

I have no outrage as this appears to me to be a case of "a sucker is born every minute".

If you are dumb enough to pay $30 for a half-assed beta, you are getting what you deserve.

Between the (IMO) abyssmal way FFG has handled its RPG lines and the malaise I have towards Star Wars in general, I wouldn't buy the thing any way.

If the Beta was pdf like OW, then the person just chooses to pay some of the cost up front to get an early look.  Like where you preorder the hardcover and get a free pdf.  If anything OW was easier on the consumer, because if I thought the system was fucked, I just don't buy the hardcover and I'm only out the beta price.  With the traditional Pre-Order hardcover and get pdf for free, I can't just cancel the order if the pdf sucks (well not always, depends on seller).

Hmm, that is a very interesting choice - no Force Users right away.  Ballsy to be sure.  I'm guessing they must be setting the game around Episode 4 time?  If they focus the game on Smugglers/Bounty Hunters, the "Han Solo" campaign, I think people will eat that shit up.  There's a decent section of the SW playerbase that is sick of Jedi.  A Twilek exotic dancer can't swing her head penises without hitting a few hundred of them.

Quote from: Rum Cove;572668The answer lies in the Wizards vs. Fighter thread.

QFT - Jedi Summoner and BMX Smuggler.  Unlike Wizards, Jedi can actually do everything a non-Jedi can do and do it better unless you use niche protection.

There was a time a Star Wars game the focused on smugglers and fringers during the era of the Empire would have definitely caught my attention - not that you couldn't do that with any of the existing Star Wars games anyway.

But as things stand I'm actually really quite happy with Bulldogs! for that kind of thing and I can't but help feeling that the Star Wars brand has been somewhat tarnished but the dreadful prequels.  So unless it really turns out to be spectacularly good, I'm not particularly interested.

*Looks over at Star Wars d6*

*Looks at computer screen*

Hm. No, thanks.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;572666Why would the inclusion of jedi/sith rules preclude the choice as to whether to use them?

Quote from: Rum Cove;572668The answer lies in the Wizards vs. Fighter thread.

Correct.

Quote from: Benoist;572674*Looks over at Star Wars d6*

*Looks at computer screen*

Hm. No, thanks.

Oh, that must be the copy I lost years ago.  Thanks for holding onto that for me.  

You can just send it back now, hang on I'll send ya the address...

:p

Quote from: jeff37923;572622I am more interested in this than I am in D&D Next.

That goes without saying. I think I'd old TV Guide from 1987 would be probably more interesting than D&D Next :-)

I'm confused. There's only 3 Star Wars movies. And there's only 1 Star Wars rpg, and it's d6-based. Are you speaking from an alternate universe? Is it a better universe?
:confused:

Quote from: CerilianSeeming;572681Oh, that must be the copy I lost years ago.  Thanks for holding onto that for me.  

You can just send it back now, hang on I'll send ya the address...

:p

I currently possess 7 copies of d6 Star Wars, Second Edition Revised and Expanded. Would you like one for a reasonable price? :D

I might.

As for this, it is literally the stupidest RPG-related thing I have heard in a long time.  

And the puff text on the website.  Comedy gold.  

Way to screw up a license so quickly, FFG.

I dont necessarily mind specialty dice. But this means there will have to be a core package, rulebook+dice in some form. Will they copy how The One Ring did it, which wasn't bad. Or will be some giant bottomless pit of cardboard irrelevance? I can't think this is good for retailers. Selling product as books is much easier for retailers who routinely get stung (not least of all because they don't know what they are doing). But how many retailers will be wary of another FFG box of expensive delights?

I saw "custom dice allow for a rich tapestry of narrative possibilities", and pretty much lost interest. I don't want to play Warhammer Fantasy Star Wars 3rd edition.

And this:
"For example, you might succeed in wrestling a Gamorrean to the ground as you planned, but in doing so your blaster might fall from its holster and slide just out of reach. On the other hand, you might utterly fail in your attempts to lie to an Imperial customs officer, but in doing so discover that he's open to bribery. The ever-present potential for success with complications or failure with advantages adds a compelling layer of realism to all your endeavors."

Isn't this why we have imagination? And their crack on "other RPGs with binary systems" doesn't take things like degrees of success into account.

Nope, not interested. I can fix the holes in my d6 Star Wars books and be happy as a clam.

The custom dice are also used in the X Wing boardgame.

The custom dice app is not free.

Though someone surely will make their own app that will be free, ffs.

So d6 Star Wars is the better RPG for Star Wars out there?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573402So d6 Star Wars is the better RPG for Star Wars out there?

Yes, absolutely.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573402So d6 Star Wars is the better RPG for Star Wars out there?

I think both it and d20 have a lot to recommend about them.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573402So d6 Star Wars is the better RPG for Star Wars out there?

General opinion seems to be yes.  It is certainly the simplest.

It also only really concerns itself with the events of the original trilogy, which may be an advantage or disadvantage depending on your point of view regarding the prequels.

I wonder if anyone at the seminars they had for this game (presumably along the lines of the WFRP3 seminars) or at the sales desk had the balls to criticise FFG. I wish someone would. If i'd been there that's exactly what would have happened and I'd probably be on youtube looking stupid.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573422I wonder if anyone at the seminars they had for this game (presumably along the lines of the WFRP3 seminars) or at the sales desk had the balls to criticise FFG. I wish someone would. If i'd been there that's exactly what would have happened and I'd probably be on youtube looking stupid.

Do you know if players of the WH RPG books have compained to the FFG guys at convention panels?  I'd like to see that on YouTube if there is a video.

Quote from: Piestrio;573409I think both it and d20 have a lot to recommend about them.

I agree.

Also, despite being extremely skeptical, no one has really had experience with FFG's effort to be able to write it off just yet. Anyone claiming to know the most widely accepted best edition of Star War is IMO most likely a fan of that edition simply voicing their own bias.

Quote from: Skywalker;573433Anyone claiming to know the most widely accepted best edition of Star War is IMO most likely a fan of that edition simply voicing their own bias.

Well, yeah.

At least in my case it is.  :D

That's cool. I am a mild fan of both D6 and D20, and recognise that both could be improved on significantly. So, I have no horse in that race. FFGs attempt does not look like the edition to make that improvement from what I have seen so far.

I still want to satisfy my curiosity about FFG's Star Wars, but not at the current price for the Beta. I'm going to wait and see.

Definitely.

I would not pay to playtest for ANY company.

If a company wants playtesters, they need to pay ME. Or, at least, they need to provide the playtest documents to the testers at no charge.

I wouldn't pay for a beta of a computer game, why should I pay for a beta of a pnp game?

Normally, a beta tester of game software gets an early price discount for being a tester.  I pay all the time for beta games.  Books or software.  But only if I get the final version at no extra cost.

The reverse is I beta for free and buy the game when it is released.  I've never paid for both though.

I don't beta test operating systems since I don't have spare computers or the time to deal with driver issues.

No Jedi and custom dice?  Give me some decent space combat rules and I'm sold.  Not much for beta-testing though, so somebody else can handle that.

Cursory flip through the new book (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxCWpTJ9v8M&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Ok, that's a lot nicer looking than what I was expecting.
There also does appear to be Force rules in this book, so you're not totally hosed on that end.

I'm becoming less skeptical the more I see. $30 for a "trashcan" version of what will no doubt be a $50-70 finished project is not bad, given what I've seen. Especially since I'm willing to bet there will be no PDF's, due to the agreement with Lucas Licensing.

Now, I can agree with the criticism about "3 books?", but that's more a criticism of FFG's business strategy, than anything about the game itself.

Retailers can order this in and sell it.

If i were retailing i'd telll the FFG representicock to fuck his own arse with his custom dice. This is getting ridiculous. We're happy to sell beta copies of a playtested game in shops now? They can't even give away the dice app for free (queue custom apps of course).

This whole situation just beggars belief in my view. Why is noone shouting at FFG at Gencon? Fie on them!

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573599Retailers can order this in and sell it.

If i were retailing i'd telll the FFG representicock to fuck his own arse with his custom dice. This is getting ridiculous. We're happy to sell beta copies of a playtested game in shops now? They can't even give away the dice app for free (queue custom apps of course).

This whole situation just beggars belief in my view. Why is noone shouting at FFG at Gencon? Fie on them!

I guess some people don't give as much of a fuck.  You're welcome to shout, I guess?

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573599Retailers can order this in and sell it.

You're right. This is stupid.

QuoteThey can't even give away the dice app for free (queue custom apps of course).

Why should they? They'll be paying licensing fees for that app, same as all their other SW products.

I hear the Dark Eldar will be playable PCs in this new Star Wars game.

I think a DarkSide deck of cards with Force and Destiny is far more likely.

Quote from: Ladybird;573634You're right. This is stupid.



Why should they? They'll be paying licensing fees for that app, same as all their other SW products.

That's their problem.

Quote from: This Guy;573631I guess some people don't give as much of a fuck.  You're welcome to shout, I guess?

If I was there I would. I'd be on youtube as the 'gencon nutter'. It would be worth it.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573661If I was there I would. I'd be on youtube as the 'gencon nutter'. It would be worth it.

It would certainly attract a great deal of attention to the product, yes.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573660That's their problem.

And they have found a solution.

For reference, the WFRP3 app is £1.99 at the moment on iTunes, does the dice thing, and can calculate various stats on your rolls. I'm not going to buy it to give a detailed explanation, though.

Quote from: Novastar;573597I'm becoming less skeptical the more I see. $30 for a "trashcan" version of what will no doubt be a $50-70 finished project is not bad, given what I've seen. Especially since I'm willing to bet there will be no PDF's, due to the agreement with Lucas Licensing.

Now, I can agree with the criticism about "3 books?", but that's more a criticism of FFG's business strategy, than anything about the game itself.

Doing some math here... $70 x 3 books... Hmmm... vs buying D6 Star Wars for dirt cheap somewhere.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573848Doing some math here... $70 x 3 books... Hmmm... vs buying D6 Star Wars for dirt cheap somewhere.

Doesn't the math have to have some variable for how much you value the product you are buying? I am pretty sure many people don't purely make buying decisions based on the price tag without reference to the product they are buying.

Quote from: Skywalker;573852Doesn't the math have to have some variable for how much you value the product you are buying? I am pretty sure many people don't purely make buying decisions based on the price tag without reference to the product they are buying.

Just based on a low probabilty of ever running a SW game.  So I would be buying as a collector/gatherer.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573855Just based on a low probabilty of ever running a SW game.  So I would be buying as a collector/gatherer.

Cool :cool:

The dice I don't mind really, Jay Little running the thing I mind a great deal as I know right there this game will not be for me.

Quote from: CRKrueger;573866The dice I don't mind really, Jay Little running the thing I mind a great deal as I know right there this game will not be for me.

What aspects would you say defines a "Jay Little project"?

Quote from: CRKrueger;573866The dice I don't mind really, Jay Little running the thing I mind a great deal as I know right there this game will not be for me.

I don't hold a lot of faith in the man to design RPGs I like either.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573848Doing some math here... $70 x 3 books... Hmmm... vs buying D6 Star Wars for dirt cheap somewhere.

I've been finding d6 books more difficult to find, over the last 5 years.
The spining is just starting to give out on the "perfectbound" copies, which makes me happy I bought hardbound books, when possible.

Age of the books (my original Star Wars RPG is 25 years old now), is requiring me to destroy the books and make PDF's, else risk losing the content forever.

Quote from: Rum Cove;573869What aspects would you say defines a "Jay Little project"?

Jay Little is a big supporter of Forge and Ron Edwards opinions, ask Dan White aka One Horse Town, a WFRP Freelancer if you don't believe me, or look it up here on site.

As a result, he brings a narrative style to his games, that even if aren't full-blown Shared Narration or Conflict Resolution, have a higher proportion of metagame elements about them usually couched in "Story" terms.  Examples would be WFRP3 and the more Storygamey parts of Deathwatch.

Quote from: CRKrueger;573916Jay Little is a big supporter of Forge and Ron Edwards opinions, ask Dan White aka One Horse Town, a WFRP Freelancer if you don't believe me, or look it up here on site.

I just read this article by Ron Edwards (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/20/) that mirrors exactly my own experience about what "D&D" was/meant to me and my local gamers in the late '70s.

Because for years now, whenever I say "D&D" to someone, it encases a few years of doing an activity involving some strange social groups.  The term did not specifically refer to one single product version of D&D.

Quote from: CRKrueger;573916Jay Little is a big supporter of Forge and Ron Edwards opinions, ask Dan White aka One Horse Town, a WFRP Freelancer if you don't believe me, or look it up here on site.

As a result, he brings a narrative style to his games, that even if aren't full-blown Shared Narration or Conflict Resolution, have a higher proportion of metagame elements about them usually couched in "Story" terms.  Examples would be WFRP3 and the more Storygamey parts of Deathwatch.

It's worth noting that though he may be a big supporter of those ideas, he shows a general failure to understand them and an inability to design mechanics that convey them. Honestly, whatever you may think of the ideas he espouses, he is just a plain poor designer first and foremost.

Meh, lost interest in Star Wars and it's total lack of internal consistency a little while ago. Not only that, the only interesting bit, KotOR was unceremoniously dumped (comic series cancelled, some shitty MMO made in place of KotOR III) so there isn't really anything that appeals to me any more.

My group isn't exactly hot on Star Wars anyway, and we much prefer Mass Effect for soft-ish sci-fi.

Quote from: Kiero;573953Meh, lost interest in Star Wars and it's total lack of internal consistency a little while ago. Not only that, the only interesting bit, KotOR was unceremoniously dumped (comic series cancelled, some shitty MMO made in place of KotOR III) so there isn't really anything that appeals to me any more.

My group isn't exactly hot on Star Wars anyway, and we much prefer Mass Effect for soft-ish sci-fi.

That would have been the license I would have pursued, had I (rightly) been in charge of Fantastic Fuckup Games. Star Wars is obviously still popular, people will buy this beta bollocks in the droves. On the other hand a decent Mass Effect game would be more interesting. SW has lost all it's steam imo. When you have Half Maul running around with his robot legs swearing vengeance on kenobi you've not just jumped the shark you've done the kessel run in 12 parsecs over it.

Quote from: Skywalker;573952It's worth noting that though he may be a big supporter of those ideas, he shows a general failure to understand them and an inability to design mechanics that convey them. Honestly, whatever you may think of the ideas he espouses, he is just a plain poor designer first and foremost.

Sadly, that seems to sum up FFG's staff abilities.

I used to have a hell of a lot of respect for them. Knizia's LotR boargame is great. Even despite being broken out of the box (which actually is a big deal), the Game of Thrones boardgame was a lot of fun. But lately they just don't know what they fuck they are doing: rules are routinely poorly written and incomplete, Elder Sign, frx, was a mess. Their rpg writing staff need to get a clue. Surely it cannot be hard to find competent staff; they had a call for submissions several months ago. Did they not find anyone capable of game design?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573951I just read this article by Ron Edwards (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/20/) that mirrors exactly my own experience about what "D&D" was/meant to me and my local gamers in the late '70s.

Because for years now, whenever I say "D&D" to someone, it encases a few years of doing an activity involving some strange social groups.  The term did not specifically refer to one single product version of D&D.

(http://i429.photobucket.com/albums/qq12/xasurax113/Cool-Story-Bro-.jpg)

Quote from: Skywalker;573952It's worth noting that though he may be a big supporter of those ideas, he shows a general failure to understand them and an inability to design mechanics that convey them. Honestly, whatever you may think of the ideas he espouses, he is just a plain poor designer first and foremost.

BTW, is there a game on earth you would say actually possesses narrative mechanics? :p

Quote from: CRKrueger;573959BTW, is there a game on earth you would say actually possesses narrative mechanics? :p

I want to say Zork I.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573954That would have been the license I would have pursued, had I (rightly) been in charge of Fantastic Fuckup Games. Star Wars is obviously still popular, people will buy this beta bollocks in the droves. On the other hand a decent Mass Effect game would be more interesting. SW has lost all it's steam imo. When you have Half Maul running around with his robot legs swearing vengeance on kenobi you've not just jumped the shark you've done the kessel run in 12 parsecs over it.

It definitely benefits from having been designed with some nod to internal consistency in mind. Quite clever in a way how everything springs from just one item of taking license with reality: element zero and the so-called mass effect.

Plus all the "magic" is basically nuanced telekinesis, which avoids all the mystical mumbo-jumbo that plagues the Force in Star Wars.

Of course, as always, there's plenty of scope to just mod your preferred system to do it. We're playing an nWoD hack (http://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/Mass:_the_Effecting) to great effect.

I'm looking through some GURPS Star Wars rules that have been posted on the net to see how "the force" is handled in that game system.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;573980I'm looking through some GURPS Star Wars rules that have been posted on the net to see how "the force" is handled in that game system.

If it's another one utilising that worthless Control/Sense/Alter paradigm we've been lumbered with since WEG/D6, you're probably best passing.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573956But lately they just don't know what they fuck they are doing: rules are routinely poorly written and incomplete, Elder Sign, frx, was a mess.

I really like Elder Sign. What problems did you have with it?

Quote from: Kiero;573982If it's another one utilising that worthless Control/Sense/Alter paradigm we've been lumbered with since WEG/D6, you're probably best passing.

which is actually how the jedi operate.

Quote from: Ladybird;573984I really like Elder Sign. What problems did you have with it?

for one the monster rules completely omitted how you place monsters in certain situations (iirc when there were no monster spaces left). Some of the characters abilities were so vague as to be broken. Read Boardgamegeek. It's all on there.

Quote from: Kiero;573982If it's another one utilising that worthless Control/Sense/Alter paradigm we've been lumbered with since WEG/D6, you're probably best passing.

The GURPS rules I'm looking at now does have those three powers in its mechanics.  What problems did your group have with them?

Quote from: stouty;573040"For example, you might succeed in wrestling a Gamorrean to the ground as you planned, but in doing so your blaster might fall from its holster and slide just out of reach. On the other hand, you might utterly fail in your attempts to lie to an Imperial customs officer, but in doing so discover that he's open to bribery. The ever-present potential for success with complications or failure with advantages adds a compelling layer of realism to all your endeavors."

Isn't this why we have imagination?

Indeed it is.

And while we're at it, lets also ditch random character generation and Lifepath systems like we have in Traveller and CyberPunk too, because IMAGINATION! Oh, and all those random tables for encounters, planets, scenarios, aliens, and all that really kick me in the imagination too, so out they go. And I absolutely HATE how those critical hit/miss tables undermine my imagination, so woosh.

Oh, almost forgot the baby and the bathwater. Also excluded middle.

Imagination needs to be inspired, and that's one of the key purposes of using a game system in the first place. If the game results are not giving players a seed of an idea to go with, then it's just as bad as giving them a blank piece of paper and asking them to draw something. And I far prefer the inspiration to be easily inferred from the dice rather than look up some stupid table.

Some people are wondering if this is representative of the finished product: ie will it have all the extras that WFRP ended up with?

This is more likley than it would seem IMO because the product is likely to be boxed in order to ship with the rules and the dice. If they don't at least package the basic product with dice and expect them to be sold separate then that's crackers.

Gencon seminar. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VigBZ6m_X6k)

'we've really learned a lot from 40k'.

Nope.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574010The GURPS rules I'm looking at now does have those three powers in its mechanics.  What problems did your group have with them?

Every iteration that treats the Force as three skills produces Jedi who are incompetent compared to their equivalent non-Force-users, because they have a massive resource-sink in just being competent with the Force. Which doesn't match any of the Jedi we see in the prequels, Clone Wars or KotOR.

I was so glad when Saga Edition finally killed that sacred cow and produced a single Use the Force skill. Not that it stops the number of fan conversions that slavishly adhere to the three-skill model.

The prequels were shit.

So is Wushu.

No one cares, Kiero.  Do you even play games?

Quote from: J Arcane;574101The prequels were shit.

So is Wushu.

No one cares, Kiero.  Do you even play games?

I'd say the same of the original trilogy, which lacking nostalgia-taint is pretty average at best.

Yes, I play games, thanks, so fuck off and go bother someone else.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;574034Some people are wondering if this is representative of the finished product: ie will it have all the extras that WFRP ended up with?

This is more likley than it would seem IMO because the product is likely to be boxed in order to ship with the rules and the dice. If they don't at least package the basic product with dice and expect them to be sold separate then that's crackers.

There are some countries where book + dice is categorised as a "board game", and taxed differently - T1R was released separately in some places (I want to say Germany, but I could be wrong) for that reason. In the UK and US, it will probably be a book + dice set.

Quote from: Kiero;574078Every iteration that treats the Force as three skills produces Jedi who are incompetent compared to their equivalent non-Force-users, because they have a massive resource-sink in just being competent with the Force. Which doesn't match any of the Jedi we see in the prequels, Clone Wars or KotOR.

It sounds like Jedi characters for GURPS would need to start with more points than general public characters would start with.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574211It sounds like Jedi characters for GURPS would need to start with more points than general public characters would start with.

If you can sell your players on that, more power to you. Good luck either way.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;573993which is actually how the jedi operate.

Only because those are the rules WEG wrote. The influence of the WEG RPG on the EU is immense, but there's nothing in the original trilogy to suggest the Control/Sense/Alter triumvirate is inherent.

Quotefor one the monster rules completely omitted how you place monsters in certain situations (iirc when there were no monster spaces left).

I generally find FFG's rulebooks to be poorly organized and written, but this is factually untrue. The first paragraph on page 11 of the rulebook (right smack dab in the middle of the "Monsters" section) reads:

"If there are no monster tasks in play not already covered by a Monster marker, the active player chooses any 1 Adventure card and places the Monster marker under the bottom task of the card, adding an additional task to the Adventure card."

Quote from: Kiero;574078Every iteration that treats the Force as three skills produces Jedi who are incompetent compared to their equivalent non-Force-users, because they have a massive resource-sink in just being competent with the Force. Which doesn't match any of the Jedi we see in the prequels, Clone Wars or KotOR.

Really?
Cause I found it the opposite problem; while everyone else had to sink points into a dozen skills to get better at their archetype, Jedi just pumped it into Control, Sense, and Alter (with the occasional investment into Lightsaber, in case they run into Jedi Killers), and rapidly advanced to God Mode.

And really, from what we see of the Jedi in the movies, all their powers can be broken down into: Telepathy, Telekinesis, and Prescience.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574211It sounds like Jedi characters for GURPS would need to start with more points than general public characters would start with.

Or you know, they don't. Because contrary to the wannabe kungfu wankery of the prequels, none of the Jedi we see on screen in the real trilogy are that much more powerful than their peers, just with a different set of skills.

It was only in the EU Tales of the Jedi and the prequel periods that they started turning Jedi into walking fucking demigods like something out of fucking Exalted.

Jedi need no more special compensation than any other spell caster or psionicist character within the rules, it's just entitled Wushu-worshipping swine like Kiero that want their fucking special snowflake Jedi.  No one I ever played SWD6 with in real life ever had a problem with it.

If you're going to toss weak insults around like a child, the least you could do is get up to date.

Both OT and PT centre on a protagonist who becomes a Jedi during its course and neither are the most powerful person in the story. Any SW RPG needs to cover adequately cover this aspect.

Assuming Jedi are more powerful than everyone else is a foundation for only the poorest SW stories IMO.

Quote from: J Arcane;574101No one cares, Kiero.  Do you even play games?

For the last couple of years, sure.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;574015Imagination needs to be inspired, and that's one of the key purposes of using a game system in the first place.

I have to disagree with this. The purpose of a game system is to simulate actions and results in a particular setting with various degrees of abstraction. Imagination is what makes a mechanical system more than just a system. My imagination is inspired by books, movies, games, comics, and real life. I don't mind dice doing that, as long as they're not locking me into a no choice situation.

QuoteIf the game results are not giving players a seed of an idea to go with, then it's just as bad as giving them a blank piece of paper and asking them to draw something. And I far prefer the inspiration to be easily inferred from the dice rather than look up some stupid table.

The result given by the system varies. Binary systems are the least inspirational being just success or failure. I prefer systems with degrees of success myself, but that's a personal preference. Just like your preference is inspiration inferred from the dice rather than looking up a table.

Is either wrong? No, it's just our preferences. Mine is lighter rules, and the thought of multiple custom dice doesn't fit that. Maybe I'm wrong and the system is great - don't know. I'll wait for reviews and feedback before plopping down cash. For the record, I've never played WFRP 3e, the lots 'o bits thing turned me off.
C"est la vie.

EDIT: Is getting bashed by Chaosvoyager a RPGsite right of passage, do I get an achievement or anything?

Quote from: Kiero;574233If you can sell your players on that, more power to you. Good luck either way.

The same would be for GURPS characters that have magic powers.  They would be given more points to spend than those characters that are just everyday joes.  The SW rules for GURPS that I'm looking at say to replace all magic with The Force.  Your players in your group didn't like the magic user characters having more points to spend than theirs?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574463Your players in your group didn't like the magic user characters having more points to spend than theirs?

The whole point of point-buy systems, is to give everybody an equal amount of points.
They're supposed to be the original "balanced" RPG.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574463The same would be for GURPS characters that have magic powers.  They would be given more points to spend than those characters that are just everyday joes.  The SW rules for GURPS that I'm looking at say to replace all magic with The Force.  Your players in your group didn't like the magic user characters having more points to spend than theirs?

I haven't played GURPS in over a decade. I'm talking more about the general principle of giving players unequal resources in a point-buy game (which can be a hard sell - especially if magic gives a PC disproportionate power-flexibility).

Quote from: Novastar;574467The whole point of point-buy systems, is to give everybody an equal amount of points.
They're supposed to be the original "balanced" RPG.

The point of points is to limit what a player's character can do.  Some GMs don't want their players to buy every skill in the book and afford to use every advantage and disadvantage that's listed.

If a GM decides that every player gets 250 points to spend, it's not for game balance and it's not for player balance.  It's because the GM wants to limit his or her players to spending 250 points to create their character.

If, out of the bunch of players, one is planning on using magic (or The Force) on top of what their character can normally do, I as a GM would give that player another 150 - 200 points to spend so they can have the type of magic they're going for.  Why not?  Those points would just be for magic and not mixed in with the points their character has assigned already.

Quote from: Kiero;574487I haven't played GURPS in over a decade. I'm talking more about the general principle of giving players unequal resources in a point-buy game (which can be a hard sell - especially if magic gives a PC disproportionate power-flexibility).

GURPS is the only point-swapping RPG I've played.  But any RPG that uses a points system for generating characters will have those concerns.

All I have to watch out for as a GM is the one player that wants to create a Jean Grey character if I give them too many points to spend.  I run a sandbox game.  But a Jean Grey or a Molecule Man or heck, even a Beyonder character, can perform cold reboots on my universes.

Quote from: stouty;574380EDIT: Is getting bashed by Chaosvoyager a RPGsite right of passage, do I get an achievement or anything?

PM me your address, I'll send you a copy of the Star Wars Introductory Adventure Game as a prize.

(Damn, I hope I don't have to ship this internationally....)

:D

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574488The point of points is to limit what a player's character can do.  Some GMs don't want their players to buy every skill in the book and afford to use every advantage and disadvantage that's listed.

If a GM decides that every player gets 250 points to spend, it's not for game balance and it's not for player balance.  It's because the GM wants to limit his or her players to spending 250 points to create their character.

If, out of the bunch of players, one is planning on using magic (or The Force) on top of what their character can normally do, I as a GM would give that player another 150 - 200 points to spend so they can have the type of magic they're going for.  Why not?  Those points would just be for magic and not mixed in with the points their character has assigned already.

That's an...interesting interpretation of what point-buy games are about. The much more commonly accepted wisdom is that equal points should equal equivalent impact on the game and spotlight time. It's not a limitation on the players, it's a mechanical enforcement of balance.

Sorry, but I can't see anyone who's playing a non-Jedi thinking it's fair that the Jedi gets to be as good as them at mundane things as well as having the Force as a force multiplier. Especially when they could find lots of things to do with the same extra 100-150 points.

Which is the fundamental issue in the way some implementations of the Force in RPGs are done. There's little evidence in the prequels that being a capable Jedi prevents you being a good pilot or or mechanic or diplomat or doctor or whatever else. In terms of having to divert time and attention away from those things. Though that's partly because Jedi of the time don't have meaningful social lives.

I don't follow the SW prequels.  I heard Christopher Lee and Yoda were jumping around like crickets on speed.  And Obi and Ani were on a lava ride of some kind.  And 5-year-olds standing arms length from each other in a daycare school, each brandishing a lightsaber while blindfolded.  A bit over the top for Jedi behavior.

I've never understood that interpretation of point buy. It completely depends on what type of game I'm running. If I'm running victims & heroes, or children & adults, or humans & super/preternatural beings there's going to be asymmetry in point allocation. But then I would also state up front that the game's pitch is X and asymmetrical PCs is part of the starting premise.

I do understand if you find yourself adhering to that sort of play due to player whining. Playing with your friends is important and not every group can handle each and every game premise. So from my standpoint point-buy equality isn't part of the system, just a norm for certain tables to avoid group tension. For your tables well, that's how you see it, but it is inapplicable to mine.

Quote from: Opaopajr;574513I've never understood that interpretation of point buy. It completely depends on what type of game I'm running. If I'm running victims & heroes, or children & adults, or humans & super/preternatural beings there's going to be asymmetry in point allocation. But then I would also state up front that the game's pitch is X and asymmetrical PCs is part of the starting premise.

Like players as cops/detectives in an agency building of some kind will probably be very good at doing crime research and record/database searching, while one of their co-workers now has some superpower they didn't have before.  The player with the doctor character is probably trying to find an explanation for their power.  And the player with the new power is trying to fit into their daily routine at work still, helping their partners track down those that exposed him/her to the drug or radiation or whatever that mutated that character.

But for the younger crowd, I've seen equal point-buy assigned just so the players can't start killing eachother.  They're not interested in any story.  Just clobbering.  It could be from the Thing vs the Hulk comics.  Thankfully, GURPS combat is leathal.  So fights end rather quick.  I do not like fight scenes involving dodging lasers and lightsabers from all directions all day.  Or Jedi that can simply absorb/eat laser fire.

Quote from: Opaopajr;574513I do understand if you find yourself adhering to that sort of play due to player whining. Playing with your friends is important and not every group can handle each and every game premise. So from my standpoint point-buy equality isn't part of the system, just a norm for certain tables to avoid group tension. For your tables well, that's how you see it, but it is inapplicable to mine.

I've seen games where the players whine about wanting the same points for everyone.  So everyone gets the same points to start with.  Then they whine because one of the players has min/maxed their character using stuff from the books that do not really make sense to have in the game's setting.  Such players are going to create problems for the other players no matter what the GM tries to control.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574520I've seen games where the players whine about wanting the same points for everyone.  So everyone gets the same points to start with.  Then they whine because one of the players has min/maxed their character using stuff from the books that do not really make sense to have in the game's setting.  Such players are going to create problems for the other players no matter what the GM tries to control.

I agree with you on that, I just don't think that the solution is to let some characters just be better than others because the player said the right words to the GM.

I mean, fine. The wizard character has trained for years blah blah blah. The starting skill points represent the life the character has led before the first play session begins (Because PC's rarely spring into being as soon as a player shows up, they've lived in the game universe for all their lives before then, and will continue to do so when the player stops playing them... unless they die or whatever).

So you're giving the wizard extra skill points to represent all the time that he's spent learning to wizard, and also giving him the same skill points that the other characters got for the lives they've led before the session starts. The wizard is effectively getting to count his life experience twice. I don't think that makes any sense either in-game (Unless we're giving character points based on character age, which is okay but needs to be paired with ageing rules) or out-of-game ("You had to make tradeoffs in your character build to buy your nice things, I got a bonus to get the things I wanted. So nice!").

Hey, my character has spent the same amount of time training as the wizard has, but I've spent my time becoming a master at arms. Could I have another 150 - 200 points to become the best fighter ever, please? What about if I became a master engineer, able to build a trap out of junk in a few minutes?

(All this is just to do with freeform points-based systems! I'm not talking about random-generation or pick-x-of-y systems, because they're self-balancing.)

Quote from: Ladybird;574543I agree with you on that, I just don't think that the solution is to let some characters just be better than others because the player said the right words to the GM.

Ha ha.  If that happens, then the other players are going to have to have a really good explanation for why they should have such and such.  I'd be running a sandbox for them, so in theory they can be whatever they create at the end of the day.  My NPCs scale up or down in points depending on how the players act with them.  I don't mean the NPCs change their points during a game (they stay static).  But they're generated to match the player's point change.

Quote from: Ladybird;574543Hey, my character has spent the same amount of time training as the wizard has, but I've spent my time becoming a master at arms. Could I have another 150 - 200 points to become the best fighter ever, please? What about if I became a master engineer, able to build a trap out of junk in a few minutes?

The key there is "I've spent my time becoming a master at arms."  So no extra points for them if they are younger than the wizard.  They simply allocate their points into being a master at arms.  They can't also be a brain surgeon.

But... depending on the wizard, if age is a problem they do not get extra points to be a wizard.  They steal points from other things.  Part of the aging process.  If age is not an issue (long lifespan?) they get the extra points to be wizard-like.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574574The key there is "I've spent my time becoming a master at arms."  So no extra points for them if they are younger than the wizard.  They simply allocate their points into being a master at arms.  They can't also be a brain surgeon.

But... depending on the wizard, if age is a problem they do not get extra points to be a wizard.  They steal points from other things.  Part of the aging process.  If age is not an issue (long lifespan?) they get the extra points to be wizard-like.

I genuinely don't understand, and I would like to. Do you give out additional points in general for older characters, to represent life experience before the player joined in? Does your game world assume that a "starting" player-level wizard is going to be older than an "average" starting adventurer?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574488If, out of the bunch of players, one is planning on using magic (or The Force) on top of what their character can normally do, I as a GM would give that player another 150 - 200 points to spend so they can have the type of magic they're going for.  Why not?  Those points would just be for magic and not mixed in with the points their character has assigned already.

Why not? How about, because you're allowing them to be unequivically better than the rest of your players, based on favoritism?

Seriously, who's going to choose being Han Solo, when you can be Han Solo with Force Powers!, if you butter up the GM rightly.

Quote from: Ladybird;574543I agree with you on that, I just don't think that the solution is to let some characters just be better than others because the player said the right words to the GM.

A thousand times this.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574574The key there is "I've spent my time becoming a master at arms."  So no extra points for them if they are younger than the wizard.  They simply allocate their points into being a master at arms.  They can't also be a brain surgeon.

But...that's exactly what you're doing for Wizards! :banghead:
You're allowing them to build a master-of-arms, then tacking on spellcasting as well. Mattering on the game world, more useful than neurosurgery...

Quote from: Ladybird;574657I genuinely don't understand, and I would like to. Do you give out additional points in general for older characters, to represent life experience before the player joined in? Does your game world assume that a "starting" player-level wizard is going to be older than an "average" starting adventurer?

If a player says they want to play a 21-year-old that will eventually become a wizard some day, they start with no wizardly skills.  So they get no extra points.

If a player says they want that same 21-year-old character to be a wizard already, they get extra points so they can buy wizardly skills.

I let players decide the age of their characters.  They then need to have a good backstory explaining how they got to be.

An older character with the same wizardly powers as the 21-year-old would get more points just for being alive longer.  Those points would go for non-wizard stuff and non-attribute stuff and more for life experience stuff.  If the player wants to take actual aging into account (for role-play purposes), I'll take points away from their attributes and health.

Quote from: Novastar;574703Why not? How about, because you're allowing them to be unequivically better than the rest of your players, based on favoritism?

Are you saying that I favor one of my players over the others?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574718Are you saying that I favor one of my players over the others?

If they're playing a wizard, pretty obviously.
400 pts versus 250 pts is pretty severe (at least in HERO, and I imagine GURPS is much the same). It's the difference between a street Superhero (Captain America, Batman) versus a cosmic superhero (Silver Surfer, Green Lantern).

Quote from: Novastar;574732If they're playing a wizard, pretty obviously.
400 pts versus 250 pts is pretty severe (at least in HERO, and I imagine GURPS is much the same). It's the difference between a street Superhero (Captain America, Batman) versus a cosmic superhero (Silver Surfer, Green Lantern).

I'm still not sure why you think I favor one player over the other.  And when you say "versus", what do you mean?  Why are you comparing Captain America with the Silver Surfer?

Quote from: stouty;574380I prefer systems with degrees of success myself, but that's a personal preference. Just like your preference is inspiration inferred from the dice rather than looking up a table.

Um, that's what degrees of success ARE, they're just a far more limited version of it.

In almost every system I have seen, Degrees of Success/Failure have been used to add things which were a product of events outside of the character's direct control, such as a gun jam, or an official being open to bribery, or a princess finding a painted picture pretty, or a warlord being very impressed with how gracefully you leapt over a 3 foot wall, etc.

And that's exactly what Edge of the Empire claims to do, which you have a problem with, which doesn't make sense. Unless you handle Degress of X differently.

Quote from: stouty;574380Is getting bashed by Chaosvoyager a RPGsite right of passage, do I get an achievement or anything?

Quote from: jeff37923;574502PM me your address, I'll send you a copy of the Star Wars Introductory Adventure Game as a prize.

Wait, I'm not only a culturally signifigant part of theRPGSite, but I get people free shit too?

I ROCK! :D

Quote from: chaosvoyager;574742In almost every system I have seen, Degrees of Success/Failure have been used to add things which were a product of events outside of the character's direct control, such as a gun jam, or an official being open to bribery, or a princess finding a painted picture pretty, or a warlord being very impressed with how gracefully you leapt over a 3 foot wall, etc.

In a few games, I'm starting to hear where players get automatic critical success results.

Quote from: Ladybird;574657I genuinely don't understand, and I would like to. Do you give out additional points in general for older characters, to represent life experience before the player joined in? Does your game world assume that a "starting" player-level wizard is going to be older than an "average" starting adventurer?

Depends, but usually yes. If I'm running the scenario premise of a novice jedi, veteran older rogue, and a young twelik dance troupe of victims, yes they're going to have different starting pools. Same applies to assumed profession competency: a fresh out of med school intern will not have the same pool as the veteran instructing surgeon.

(I should also add, to the second question about "starting" characters, that I do, but it's based on the setting and premise. In In Nomine playing a mixed party of Celestials with usually less powerful beings like Ethereals, Undead, or Humans assumes a power differential. Not everyone likes that, but I'm fine with it; it's a setting conceit, you either get it or you don't. Same applies to other settings and premises.)

Note, I also do this for class based systems. If the premise is asymmetrical, it will have differing class levels. Further, if a player willingly takes Middle Aged or Venerable, with the according +/- and knowledge of increased chance of early PC retirement, then I talk to the table and the player to determine an acceptable starting level greater than the premise average.

I understand it is a matter of taste, but I've had no problems with it.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574740I'm still not sure why you think I favor one player over the other.  And when you say "versus", what do you mean?  Why are you comparing Captain America with the Silver Surfer?

I'm going to proceed as you're honestly asking, rather than being willfully obtuse (but it is a close thing).

You're favoring one players choice of archetype over everyone else's choice. It'd be like telling everyone at a D&D game to make 3rd-level characters, except for John, since he's playing the Wizard, so he starts at 9th-level. Your skewing the game, to favor your chosen archetype.

Versus is, as you yourself comment in the next sentence, a comparison of two things.

Because it's a valid comparison. While Cap is a heroic superhero, a paragon even, he does not have the same options as the Surfer, who wields the Power Cosmic and can handle situations that Cap is out of his league in. That is because their power levels are different, which in a point-buy game is the difference between their starting points (Cap is a regular superhero, where as the Surfer is Cosmic level).

Quote from: Novastar;574806You're favoring one players choice of archetype over everyone else's choice.

Actually, I'm letting players make whatever character they want.

Quote from: Novastar;574806It'd be like telling everyone at a D&D game to make 3rd-level characters, except for John, since he's playing the Wizard, so he starts at 9th-level. Your skewing the game, to favor your chosen archetype.

If a player wants to make a wizard, they can.  I don't force players to make characters that I like.  I'm going to have plenty of NPCs to play with.

Quote from: Novastar;574806Versus is, as you yourself comment in the next sentence, a comparison of two things.

Because it's a valid comparison. While Cap is a heroic superhero, a paragon even, he does not have the same options as the Surfer, who wields the Power Cosmic and can handle situations that Cap is out of his league in. That is because their power levels are different, which in a point-buy game is the difference between their starting points (Cap is a regular superhero, where as the Surfer is Cosmic level).

And so...?

(http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1212/1377609963_3aa1d88661_z.jpg)

I don't see where the problem is.  You've read Jack Kirby's work, correct?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;574710If a player says they want to play a 21-year-old that will eventually become a wizard some day, they start with no wizardly skills.  So they get no extra points.

If a player says they want that same 21-year-old character to be a wizard already, they get extra points so they can buy wizardly skills.

I let players decide the age of their characters.  They then need to have a good backstory explaining how they got to be.

I'm sure it works at your table, and I'm trying to understand in good faith what you're doing, but it really does sound like you're letting players talk you into giving them extra character points, because they have a good backstory. Could my 21-year-old who is already a master of combat get extra points to spend on his fighting skills? His millionaire parents were killed by thugs, and he's used their fortune to walk the earth, seeking the tutelage of the mightiest warriors and rogues alive.

I'm not actually objecting to giving characters varying power levels; obviously your table is happy with it, and unlikely to care what a Man From The Internet says. I just don't see the need to quantify exactly how much more powerful some party members are than others; I don't see a real reason to use GURPS for that game (Or even assigning a character points limit), instead of something lighter or more freeform, or just saying "take what you feel the character needs" and trusting your players to be reasonable.

From rpg.net where someone hath the rules

QuoteThe group rolls for Destiny Points by each PC rolling a Force Die at the start of a session. Light side points and dark side points are tallied. The players spend the light side points and the GM the dark side points. When a point is spent, it moves to the other side. Force users and some Talents call on Destiny points as well.

The Force will ebb and flow between light and dark every session.

Er? Why would points go to the other side? Is that how the force works?

Thanks for passing that along.  Now I can ignore the rest of this thread.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;574889From rpg.net where someone hath the rules

Er? Why would points go to the other side? Is that how the force works?

Actually, I quite like the sound of that, though it will depend on seeing the mechanic in full. If PCs are quick to use the Force to overcome adversity then it is a move toward the dark side i.e. quick, seductive and more powerful.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;574889From rpg.net where someone hath the rules



Er? Why would points go to the other side? Is that how the force works?

It's an alright mechanic, but it's a "winds of fate" mechanic, not a "lure to the dark side" mechanic.

Better would be:

"The player can just state that they succeed at any one skill check (Basic success, whatever that equates to in the system). In exchange, the player gets two Dark Side points. The GM can spend them at any time to have the character fail in any way the GM decides at a skill check. A player with DS points cannot use the autosuccess rule until they are spent.

GM Advice: Make hard and direct moves, but don't kill the PC as that is boring. Use your tokens to fuck their life up; the players asked for this, remember, so give it to them. You can't use DS points to ruin an autosuccess."

Yeah, I gotta agree with that. There is potential in that mechanic, though the washing back and forth without more is lacklustre.

Saga Edition works quite well for me, even with some of its shortcomings.

It was the first Star Wars RPG that captured the Force correctly (for the most part). At least the way that I see it.

I have little interest in paying for a beta test.

I have zero interest in specialty dice mechanics.

I don't care much for split core rule books covering different PC themes.

So I guess I can skip this.

Quote from: Ladybird;574877I'm sure it works at your table, and I'm trying to understand in good faith what you're doing, but it really does sound like you're letting players talk you into giving them extra character points, because they have a good backstory. Could my 21-year-old who is already a master of combat get extra points to spend on his fighting skills? His millionaire parents were killed by thugs, and he's used their fortune to walk the earth, seeking the tutelage of the mightiest warriors and rogues alive.

I'd give you the extra points without that backstory.  If your character is 21-years-old on some other planet, but on Earth his age comes out to be 90 years of age, then I would like to read the backstory because that kind of stuff interests me and I can customize NPCs to match.

In Star Wars, Jedi seem to be able to jump around and swing dual lightsabers with ease and pull walls and ceilings down on people with their minds, regardless of how old they are.  A half-nekked blue chick is rather young, while Yoda is an old fart that barely walks upright.  Yet both would be a tie in a fight for minutes at a time in battle.  Yes, minutes.  Maybe longer.  Because in the prequels, fights are dragged out far too long.  But that is the Kill Bill style of combat now.  I prefer the older Star Wars movies where combat lasts only as long as the hallway being run through and how quick an airlock opens.

Quote from: Ladybird;574877I'm not actually objecting to giving characters varying power levels; obviously your table is happy with it, and unlikely to care what a Man From The Internet says. I just don't see the need to quantify exactly how much more powerful some party members are than others; I don't see a real reason to use GURPS for that game (Or even assigning a character points limit), instead of something lighter or more freeform, or just saying "take what you feel the character needs" and trusting your players to be reasonable.

I put point limits on what players can use for their character attributes, skills, and personal property.  But I don't let the players jumble all their points together (playes can't give up all their intelligence points to receive more points for how strong The Force is with them, for example).

If I don't use point limits, a crooked player will buy everything in the Basic Set for their character.

Quote from: chaosvoyager;574742And that's exactly what Edge of the Empire claims to do, which you have a problem with, which doesn't make sense. Unless you handle Degress of X differently.

I handle it that way. I just don't need custom dice to do it. I don't see the need to shell out cash for custom dice when the same effect can be replicated with your average, plain, old, boring, non-custom dice. Of which I have way too many already.

I see though I haven't been clear, mea culpa. My big gripe isn't so much the mechanic as the "use our special awesome dice" thing. Could have done the same thing with regular dice. Maybe, as someone suggested, it's a form of anti-piracy. I don't know. I just know I don't want to deal with the special awesome dice.

Cheers,
stouty

Quote from: PaladinCA;574965I have little interest in paying for a beta test.

I have zero interest in specialty dice mechanics.

I don't care much for split core rule books covering different PC themes.

So I guess I can skip this.

Agree with this.

Given who's going to make it, this will be total ass.

RPGPundit

FFG makes some really good stuff, high quality, I don't see it being a flop.

I have the book and it's not what everyone's been saying it is, most everyone on the forums have been wrong in more ways than one.  It reads great and looks fun so far.

Quote from: flyingcircus;576333I have the book and it's not what everyone's been saying it is, most everyone on the forums have been wrong in more ways than one.  It reads great and looks fun so far.

How's the space combat?

Quote from: flyingcircus;576333FFG makes some really good stuff, high quality, I don't see it being a flop.

I have the book and it's not what everyone's been saying it is, most everyone on the forums have been wrong in more ways than one.  It reads great and looks fun so far.

Care to enlighten us on how everyone is wrong?

Some details?

QuoteVigilance & Cool: This is the Initiative system for EotE, and represents the two different states that things can generally occur in. Vigilance is essentially a rating of how constantly paranoid and alert your character is, whereas Cool is how well they handle sticking to a plan for the long haul. Different characters can be using a different stat in the same conflict.

Presumably this is based on the stance system in WFRP3.

I don't know what to make of this. Need more information. It could be interesting to see a 'customised' approach to initiative, if that's what this is, and if it works.

Haven't got to space combat yet but the character creation is nice.  It doesn't use cards or fiddly little trinkets like WHFRP3E like some have said around the net on forums (not just here, I should have been clearer) and you can play as a failed Jedi or Padawan or a Dark Jedi (if your GM permits), these things have been said did not exist in the game, that you would end up having to wait until book 3 to play Jedi, well yes Full Jedi as this book takes place after the Jedi order purge, so most True Jedi are goners anyhow.  From what I have read so far in combat, it kinda reminds me of Traveller with the Range bands, which from the side bar says Space combat uses the same Range Band system only with a different and larger scale.  Ground/Personal combat range bands consist of Engaged, Close, Medium, Long & Extreme.  I am just getting into the combat section but so far it looks pretty easy.

I got the Star Wars Dice App for my Ipad yesterday as well and it is worth the $4.99 you basically get a full set of dice plus your basic D&D dice as a bonus so its good for any game, quick to setup a pool of dice and roll right on the Ipad, really nice.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;576458Presumably this is based on the stance system in WFRP3.

I don't know what to make of this. Need more information. It could be interesting to see a 'customised' approach to initiative, if that's what this is, and if it works.

Basically you roll Cool if you know or expect combat, it is also to remain calm to spring into action for a gunfight, quick draw or spring an ambush.  Vigilance is for if you may expect combat in a dangerous area but don't know the who, when, how or why's of the situation or either an Ambush or you or both parties are Surprised in the GM's decision.  If nobody really knows or the GM can't decide, intiative automatically defaults to Vigilance rolls for all.  I actually like it from a GM perspective.

Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

Edit: Yeah 3:16 is Full.Retard too.  :D

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;574889(...)Er? Why would points go to the other side? Is that how the force works?

I'm not sure I got this right, but will it be possible in this system to, either on purpose or by accident, end up with a neutral jedi or is this "Force balancing" thing only applied to the group as a whole?

Quote from: stouty;575038I handle it that way. I just don't need custom dice to do it. I don't see the need to shell out cash for custom dice when the same effect can be replicated with your average, plain, old, boring, non-custom dice. Of which I have way too many already.

I see though I haven't been clear, mea culpa. My big gripe isn't so much the mechanic as the "use our special awesome dice" thing. Could have done the same thing with regular dice. Maybe, as someone suggested, it's a form of anti-piracy. I don't know. I just know I don't want to deal with the special awesome dice.

I also think numbers or values are way easier to interpret than weird icons and colors.

I must say the whole thing sounds way too gimmicky, fiddly and potentially clunky for something I'd consider using for Star Wars.

Quote from: CRKrueger;576601Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

Edit: Yeah 3:16 is Full.Retard too.  :D

Well I can see there's no use in explaining anything to you anyhow, you already have your mind made up that the game sucks, so be it....

I will mind my own business and play the game-we like whats in it so far, I just tried to answer some questions but to no avail...Haters will hate and there's no reasoning with them.:p

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;576608I'm not sure I got this right, but will it be possible in this system to, either on purpose or by accident, end up with a neutral jedi or is this "Force balancing" thing only applied to the group as a whole?


I also think numbers or values are way easier to interpret than weird icons and colors.

I must say the whole thing sounds way too gimmicky, fiddly and potentially clunky for something I'd consider using for Star Wars.

Not really but I'm not arguing with people about it online anymore.

Quote from: flyingcircus;576618Not really but I'm not arguing with people about it online anymore.

For what it's worth you've got me a little more interested.

Quote from: CRKrueger;576601Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

Edit: Yeah 3:16 is Full.Retard too.  :D

Because the setting was always very big into the nitty-gritty of how far a blaster could fire or how many shots it had.

Quote from: flyingcircus;576579Haven't got to space combat yet but the character creation is nice.  It doesn't use cards or fiddly little trinkets like WHFRP3E like some have said around the net on forums (not just here, I should have been clearer).

Ok, this is a little better. I'm glad to hear it doesn't have all the little pieces to keep track of. I'm still turned off by the dice, but I'll wait till the finished product comes out and see if there's a way to hack it to normal dice.
Thanks for the info.

Cheers,
Mark

Has anyone got any more details on the attack success rate and defence discrepancy?

In WFRP3e, attackers hit about 80% of the time on average and the only real way to improve defending oneself is to wear armour as there is no defensive skill/talent in the game. This both appear to have been inherited unchanged and seem contrary to how Star Wars combat normally looks.

From flyingcircus' descriptions, it sounds like they kept a lot of what I like about WFRP3 (dice, abstracted combat ranges, etc) and dumped what I don't like about WFRP3 (oh god the fiddly bit tokens, etc).

I may have missed it in the press releases but are they going to release a box set or separate books and dice?

Quote from: flyingcircus;576616Well I can see there's no use in explaining anything to you anyhow, you already have your mind made up that the game sucks, so be it....

I will mind my own business and play the game-we like whats in it so far, I just tried to answer some questions but to no avail...Haters will hate and there's no reasoning with them.:p

Protip: Educating someone on the mechanics of the game, does in not in fact mean that they will like said mechanics even though you might.

I know how the ranges work in WFRP3, I don't like it at all.  I especially don't like the fact that there's not even an option for more concrete and less narrative combat.

SW went down the same road, I won't be following.

Quote from: CRKrueger;577082Protip: Educating someone on the mechanics of the game, does in not in fact mean that they will like said mechanics even though you might.

Yes.  I (and others here) need to know the machanics of a game to see if we'll like them or not. :)

Quote from: fellowhoodlum;577061From flyingcircus' descriptions, it sounds like they kept a lot of what I like about WFRP3 (dice, abstracted combat ranges, etc) and dumped what I don't like about WFRP3 (oh god the fiddly bit tokens, etc).

I may have missed it in the press releases but are they going to release a box set or separate books and dice?

They've not really said yet, at least on the FFG forums they all seem to think its going to be 40K hardback like books with dice packs separate, I get this as well as I talked to one of the customer service reps and he hinted at a hardback copy as well, with dice separate.  But with my Ipad SW dice app, I won't be buying the dice later anyhow, not needed.

Quote from: CRKrueger;576601Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

I've always wanted to like the concept of abstract ranges. But in practice they all seem to fall apart the minute the bad guys and/or good guys split up into two groups and go to different ranges.

Does WFRP3 or FFG's Star Wars address that issue?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;577905I've always wanted to like the concept of abstract ranges. But in practice they all seem to fall apart the minute the bad guys and/or good guys split up into two groups and go to different ranges.

Does WFRP3 or FFG's Star Wars address that issue?

WFRP3 did not, running a bog standard WFRP combat ie. a coach on a forest road ambushed by bandits/beastmen in 3-4 different locations using a combination of ranged and melee weapons) becomes a nightmare of determining representational ranges between all the groups of combatants, when a simple range system delivers the information much easier.  What's even more annoying is that even though WFRP3 doesn't use ranges, it still uses fucking minis, just with tokens to determine ranges from other combatants.

I've always preferred "zones" as a measuring system for RPG, because it's a nice half-way between a grid and range bands. Counting the amount of zones a shot has to go through works fine for ranged weapons, and if each zone is small enough, melee attacks are easy ("Anyone in the same zone", simples). It avoids the problems Justin identifies of S/M/L range systems.

Definite ranges and range bands don't really work with non-minis RPG combat - Gleichman is right, without figures on the board you can't tell the exact distances between combatants, so it comes down to a DM call whether you're in range or not anyway. And there's nothing wrong with that, it's a system that works great and has done for decades, but... players should admit that's how things play out, and accept that range is handled fuzzily in games.

Quote from: CRKrueger;577910WFRP3 did not, running a bog standard WFRP combat ie. a coach on a forest road ambushed by bandits/beastmen in 3-4 different locations using a combination of ranged and melee weapons) becomes a nightmare of determining representational ranges between all the groups of combatants, when a simple range system delivers the information much easier.  What's even more annoying is that even though WFRP3 doesn't use ranges, it still uses fucking minis, just with tokens to determine ranges from other combatants.

yeah, in a game system that was pretty much full of stuff I don't like - the way WFRP3 handled ranged combat was by far my least favourite thing.

Quote from: Ladybird;577947I've always preferred "zones" as a measuring system for RPG, because it's a nice half-way between a grid and range bands. Counting the amount of zones a shot has to go through works fine for ranged weapons, and if each zone is small enough, melee attacks are easy ("Anyone in the same zone", simples). It avoids the problems Justin identifies of S/M/L range systems.

Yup. Zones have always made sense to me because, basically, they're not that dissimilar from the way I mentally conceptualize complex battlefields: That group is all "in the kitchen"; this other group is all "in the living room"; and so forth. And the specifics of what's going on within a given area can get fluid.

Quote from: Ladybird;577947Definite ranges and range bands don't really work with non-minis RPG combat - Gleichman is right, without figures on the board you can't tell the exact distances between combatants, so it comes down to a DM call whether you're in range or not anyway. And there's nothing wrong with that, it's a system that works great and has done for decades, but... players should admit that's how things play out, and accept that range is handled fuzzily in games.

I'm not really clear on how your second statement is meant to justify the claim that range values don't work in non-minis RPG combat. Just because the difference between 95 ft. away and 105 ft. away might get fuzzy without concrete representation, it doesn't follow that the difference between 95 ft. and 50 ft. is meaningfully fuzzy at all.

Yeah, somehow we've managed to do distances in combats without miniatures for about 20+ years now in all of my games.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;580508Yeah, somehow we've managed to do distances in combats without miniatures for about 20+ years now in all of my games.

RPGPundit

You were obviously cheating. Cheater!   :rolleyes:

Quote from: Justin Alexander;580229I'm not really clear on how your second statement is meant to justify the claim that range values don't work in non-minis RPG combat. Just because the difference between 95 ft. away and 105 ft. away might get fuzzy without concrete representation, it doesn't follow that the difference between 95 ft. and 50 ft. is meaningfully fuzzy at all.

If the difference is obvious, yeah, using exact measurements as a shorthand works okay. 50ft vs 95ft, yeah, that's a clear distinction. It's in situations where the difference between 95ft and 105ft matters that it breaks down; if we're playing a game with range bands for missile fire, say, the best you could really say is "the characters are 100ish feet apart". Everyone is constantly in motion; the characters will time their actions as best they can, they'll be dodging and blocking and whatnot - combat is a mess, a damned mess.

And that's even without considering that a target won't suddenly become harder to hit just because they've crossed an arbitrary line. If your system requires that sort of level of detail, at the boundry lines, it becomes a GM call. Hell, if you're shooting at a closing target, even if you get the initiative... they're still going to be spending all the combat turn moving closer to you. Most systems would say that if you go first, you'll get your shot at their initial distance... but I've never really been happy with that as a solution. It feels too artificial and gamey.

You don't need Gleichman accuracy to have a fun game. I don't even think it's desirable to get to that level. But the systems games tend to use pretend that they're working to that level of accuracy, when in reality, they aren't.

Quote from: RPGPundit;580508Yeah, somehow we've managed to do distances in combats without miniatures for about 20+ years now in all of my games.

RPGPundit

You can, it'll work, as everyone knows. Estimates are plenty good enough. I just think people should admit that they're using estimates and not exact distances. "50ish ft" is plenty accurate enough for game purposes, and what most groups are actually using.

Quote from: Ladybird;580538Everyone is constantly in motion; the characters will time their actions as best they can, they'll be dodging and blocking and whatnot - combat is a mess, a damned mess.

Following this logic, one could conclude that miniatures on a 5 ft. grid aren't precise enough because they don't sufficiently distinguish between 98 ft. and 101 ft.

In reality, it's just foolish to expect more precision from your method of measurement than your method of measurement is capable of providing.

QuoteAnd that's even without considering that a target won't suddenly become harder to hit just because they've crossed an arbitrary line.

This is my friend Abstraction. You guys should get acquainted.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;580580Following this logic, one could conclude that miniatures on a 5 ft. grid aren't precise enough because they don't sufficiently distinguish between 98 ft. and 101 ft.

Actually, yeah, I do find 5 ft grids to be too artificial and stupid. Two characters in squares next to each other aren't going to be slugging it out like American Gladiators, they're going to be in each other's squares, stepping into adjacent squares...

QuoteIn reality, it's just foolish to expect more precision from your method of measurement than your method of measurement is capable of providing.

Yep. And I also think that it's foolish for games to use rules that claim to require that level of precision but don't have a way of acquiring it.

Traditional exact distance rules work great on a one-dimensional battlefield. It's when you get to two dimensions that things start to break down. Sure, pythagoras theorem works great, but can you really be bothered to do it for every individual combatant? No, you won't. And that's fine. But, perhaps down to the wargame origins of the hobby, rules are still written on the assumption that you will be... but you won't, because actual play tends not to involve minis much, and as lot of players get very hostile at the thought of them. So writing those rules is a waste of time for the designers, it's a waste of time for the players to read them.

I suppose the difference between me and Gleichman is... Gleichman would say that without a battle mat, you're cheating the game. I would say that without a battle mat, you're wasting your time pretending to give an accurate answer when a "good enough" answer... is plenty good enough.

Quote from: Ladybird;580629Yep. And I also think that it's foolish for games to use rules that claim to require that level of precision but don't have a way of acquiring it.

I'm just not clear on why you think writing "100 ft." is the height of intellectual dishonesty but writing "roughly 100 ft." is some sort of triumph of game design. What actual utility are you proposing?

QuoteSure, pythagoras theorem works great, but can you really be bothered to do it for every individual combatant? No, you won't.

I've got a reference chart for that on my GM screen, actually. ;)

Quote from: Ladybird;580538You can, it'll work, as everyone knows. Estimates are plenty good enough. I just think people should admit that they're using estimates and not exact distances. "50ish ft" is plenty accurate enough for game purposes, and what most groups are actually using.

Clearly. The real issue is what distances are needed for.  And the answer is that you need them to track movement, ranges for missile weapons and ranges for spells. You need nothing that will be more accurate than what's necessary to accommodate these.

RPGPundit

Get on the crippleware train, ye kids!

First review's out.

http://rpggeek.com/thread/913690/a-weird-deathless-fugue

The dice look even MORE confusing than Warhammer 3rd. I can't properly discern the differences without a CLOSE up. And death is story'd away. I wonder how that will go down on this forum...

Quote from: Windjammer;619568Get on the crippleware train, ye kids!

First review's out.

http://rpggeek.com/thread/913690/a-weird-deathless-fugue

The dice look even MORE confusing than Warhammer 3rd. I can't properly discern the differences without a CLOSE up. And death is story'd away. I wonder how that will go down on this forum...

Heh, it'll get moved to the Other Games Forum.

Since this has started up again, I notice the game has range bands, which are shit.  You don't need a grid to use numbers.  This guy is 50ish feet to my right, that guy is 30ish feet to my left, they are 80ish feet from each other.  That's a fuck of a lot easier then figuring out well since two Short Range bands equal a Medium, and two Mediums equal a Long, what does a Short plus a Medium equal?

Sounds like they took all the narrative/abstract bullshit from WFRP3 and then fucked up the one cool thing about it, the Dice system.

Quote from: SW-EofE rules bookWhile even the most stalwart character cannot survive everything, the Star Wars®: Edge of the Empire™ Beginner Game does not include rules for Player Character death.

...

...

...

(http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/images/smilies/rollbarf1.gif)

Ok, unless they changed this since the Beta rules, pg143 has pretty clear rules for Death. It even says Droid Death can not be overcome. Time to make a new character.

Ah, re-reading it, this "No Death" is part of the Beginner's Box.
Not how I would have done it, but for an intro into the game, maybe it works for a demo.

He is correct, the text has been altered, it's only the beginner's box that says that.  In the Beta document theoretically you can die.

However, the only way you can die is to get a high roll on the critical hit chart,a roll so high that you need to have 3 or 4 critical hits already to even make it possible.  By that time you would already be unconscious.  So unless your unconscious body get shot a few times or gets caught in a couple grenade blasts, I don't see how you can die.  You can't expire from sheer number of wounds taken.

FFG's Star Wars is very Narrative.
To me, it's a lot closer to a StoryGame than the more traditional d6 or d20 incarnations.
I find most StoryGame's place a high barrier to character death, since that ends the character's "story".

(Which I've never understood;
"Death ruins the character's story!"
"Really? I'll be sure to tell Christians that Jesus Christ's death makes for a horrible story. I'm sure they'll all agree!")

Quote from: Novastar;619596FFG's Star Wars is very Narrative.
To me, it's a lot closer to a StoryGame than the more traditional d6 or d20 incarnations.
I find most StoryGame's place a high barrier to character death, since that ends the character's "story".

(Which I've never understood;
"Death ruins the character's story!"
"Really? I'll be sure to tell Christians that Jesus Christ's death makes for a horrible story. I'm sure they'll all agree!")

A horrible story...for Jesus. The reason being that he can no longer participate. So yes, of course it ruins his story! Unless you believe the wierd bloodline conspiracies.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;619601A horrible story...for Jesus. The reason being that he can no longer participate. So yes, of course it ruins his story! Unless you believe the wierd bloodline conspiracies.

I'm probably going to surprise everybody, sorry for the spoilers on the story and everything but... ever heard of the Resurrection?

(http://www.funnypictures4u.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Youre-special-kind-of-idiot-are-you.jpg)

Quote from: Novastar;619596FFG's Star Wars is very Narrative.
To me, it's a lot closer to a StoryGame than the more traditional d6 or d20 incarnations.
I find most StoryGame's place a high barrier to character death, since that ends the character's "story".

(Which I've never understood;
"Death ruins the character's story!"
"Really? I'll be sure to tell Christians that Jesus Christ's death makes for a horrible story. I'm sure they'll all agree!")

It's more like, random unexpected death ruins the character's story, because it ends it right there. Expected death is fine, because it lets you die a good one. Jesus died at the right times for his story, so it's cool.

Me, I'm of the opinion that, if you die, that's it. That's your character's story. They don't get to die a hero just because of the voice in their head telling them what to do.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;619601A horrible story...for Jesus. The reason being that he can no longer participate. So yes, of course it ruins his story! Unless you believe the wierd bloodline conspiracies.

The absolute best gaming story I have ends in my character's death.

It would not be such a fondly remembered story had the character NOT died (or if he had come back, blah blah blah).

Furthermore his death was a FAILURE, he died and that led to shit getting much much worse for everyone else.

That's kinda what makes the story heroic. He died reall really trying to make shit work but it just didn't.

In fact it wasn't even a fight, he was one-shotted and died without ever getting a die-roll (aside from initiative).

And it was awesome.

QuoteThe Star Wars: Edge of the Empire Beginner Game is a very good introduction to the roleplaying hobby and Fantasy Flight Games’ newest RPG. It explains the rules clearly and, for old-school gamers like myself who like their dice numbered, it really helps with interpreting the symbols and their meaning. It also captures the feel and adventure of the Star wars universe really well, so even though I do feel as if the character creation rules should have been included to expand a gaming group’s options, I have no problem recommending this to new and experienced gamers alike.

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/15/15785.phtml

Ahhh RPGnet. Don't ever change. :rolleyes:

Well, for a product that includes no rules for character creation it makes sense that the prefab characters that come with the game are not supposed to die... otherwise FFG would have to keep investing in providing freely downloadable new characters. :banghead:

How cheap can you get? After seeing what came in the Pathfinder box, anything less would be uncivilized.

Quote from: Benoist;619605I'm probably going to surprise everybody, sorry for the spoilers on the story and everything but... ever heard of the Resurrection?

makes for an interesting story, yes :rolleyes:

and once again, a good game gets fucked up.  stick with WEG star wars.

The weird thing, is I was thinking the "Advantage/Disadvantage" FFG "fiddly dice" mechanic could work with d6. Rather than have "exploding success/failure" with the Wild Die, you could have standard die rolls determine success and failure, and a 1 on the Wild Die creates Disadvantage, and a 6 creates Advantage (regardless of success/failure).

Same mechanic, more simply done.