Quote from: Christopher Brady;876103One of my pet peeves of WEG's system was anything with with a high physical stat was literally immune to blaster fire.  Wookkies, Trandoshans, Gamorreans...

Don't get me wrong, I loved the system to bits, but serious parts of it were kinda borked.

Hard to damage, yes. Which can be a problem. Especially if the GM never penalizes the PC by requiring them to roll something from their 2D stats. But I have not seen "literally immune." And I've run PCs (and NPCs) of those and similarly strong species. Typically a PC would have about STR 5D which is far from immune. A standard blaster rifle or heavy blaster pistol does 5D damage.* So odds are about 50/50 to get a stun result or better with a single hit. Five stun hits and the big guys go down even if they aren't wounded. And its not unreasonable to roll enough damage to wound a character with a single shot, especially if several shots hit.

And then there is "Concentrate your fire on the Wookie!" Combined actions add to damage.  In addition, I allow called shots to do extra damage (if the to-hit roll is successful). Shooting the Wookie in the face, open mouth, or eye should hurt a lot more than just blasting him in the side. Called shots  makes point blank shots more dangerous since the to hit difficulty is very easy at point blank range so you can afford the to hit penalty to aim for the face.


* If the PC is boosted to STR 6D it does become significantly harder to damage them. But in that case, those extra 3D have to come off the other stats so the PC is going to be at 2D for half their attributes.

Now if the group runs 6D STR Wookies in custom made Mandolorean Powered Armor the sure damaging that PC will be very difficult without a laser cannon or a thermal detonator. But as problems go, that one should not come as a surprise to anyone.

Quote from: Lynn;876081Introducing an 'icon level' translation layer adds no value to the game, but only additional, unnecessary complexity. That unnecessary complexity provides specific benefit to FFG, but not the user, which makes it even more onerous.

Not so for everyone. I know some people who are averse to numbers and math and find the use of symbols to be much easier.

Of course, the much larger middle ground are people who can handle either numbers or icons without a strong adverse reaction.

Quote from: Omega;876123So you are saying that lizard people, carpet people, and pig people cant dodge or shrug off stuff?

Actually, no.  They didn't dodge, they simply didn't take any damage.  At all.  Couldn't harm them.

Quote from: Bren;876126Hard to damage, yes. Which can be a problem. Especially if the GM never penalizes the PC by requiring them to roll something from their 2D stats. But I have not seen "literally immune." And I've run PCs (and NPCs) of those and similarly strong species. Typically a PC would have about STR 5D which is far from immune. A standard blaster rifle or heavy blaster pistol does 5D damage.* So odds are about 50/50 to get a stun result or better with a single hit. Five stun hits and the big guys go down even if they aren't wounded. And its not unreasonable to roll enough damage to wound a character with a single shot, especially if several shots hit.

And then there is "Concentrate your fire on the Wookie!" Combined actions add to damage.  In addition, I allow called shots to do extra damage (if the to-hit roll is successful). Shooting the Wookie in the face, open mouth, or eye should hurt a lot more than just blasting him in the side. Called shots  makes point blank shots more dangerous since the to hit difficulty is very easy at point blank range so you can afford the to hit penalty to aim for the face.


* If the PC is boosted to STR 6D it does become significantly harder to damage them. But in that case, those extra 3D have to come off the other stats so the PC is going to be at 2D for half their attributes.

Now if the group runs 6D STR Wookies in custom made Mandolorean Powered Armor the sure damaging that PC will be very difficult without a laser cannon or a thermal detonator. But as problems go, that one should not come as a surprise to anyone.

Actually, each shot counted as a separate attack, which meant that most of the time, concentrating fire didn't have a different effect.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;876133Actually, each shot counted as a separate attack, which meant that most of the time, concentrating fire didn't have a different effect.

Then you are doing concentration of fire wrong. That isn't how combined action works in the rules.

In Second Edition: A squad of six Stormtroopers requires a moderate command roll to command. Assuming a 4D command (not unreasonable for a commander) we would expect the commander to succeed in commanding 6 troopers (expected roll 14). The bonus for coordinating 6 people is +3D (from table on page 69). From page 70 of the 2E rules:

QuoteIf the task has two rolls, such as hitting in combat and then rolling damaging, apply the bonus to both rolls.

5D+3D is 8D damage. What kind of PCs can shrug off 8D of damage round after round?

In Revised and Expanded, the rules changed (mostly in the PCs favor). Now the 4D commander can only command 4 troopers, but the difficulty is at most Easy (page 82) the bonus is +1D for every 3 characters combining (page 83). So that would be a bonus of +1D+1. The bonus must be split between to hit and damage. Makes sense against big hairy targets to put the bonus solely to damage.

Now the PC has to shrug off 5D+1D+1=6D+1 damage. Min: 7 pts, Avg: 22 pts, Max: 37 pts. What kind of STR do these PCs have that they never roll lower than the expected value of 22 points, much less the 30 or more points that show up on a good damage roll?

Quote from: Bren;876139Then you are doing concentration of fire wrong. That isn't how combined action works in the rules.

In Second Edition: A squad of six Stormtroopers requires a moderate command roll to command. Assuming a 4D command (not unreasonable for a commander) we would expect the commander to succeed in commanding 6 troopers (expected roll 14). The bonus for coordinating 6 people is +3D (from table on page 69). From page 70 of the 2E rules:

5D+3D is 8D damage. What kind of PCs can shrug off 8D of damage round after round?

The players?  No, but most of the NPC enemies that were Gammoreans did.  Regularly.  With average rolls.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;876159The players?  No, but most of the NPC enemies that were Gammoreans did.  Regularly.  With average rolls.

How?

Seriously. How? Gamorreans have a Max STR=5D. Average roll on 5D=17.5, let's call it 18.

So for the examples given,

• WEG 2.0 average damage on 8D is 28. Difference is 10 points = Gamorrean is INCAPACITATED.

• WEG 2.RE average damage on 6D+1 is 22 points. Difference is 4 points = Gamorrean is WOUNDED.

Again, I have to ask what rules were you using?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;876133Actually, no.  They didn't dodge, they simply didn't take any damage.  At all.  Couldn't harm them.

So they toughened themselves up to the point that blaster fire just left singe marks. That kinda follows through in some of the peripheral source material where really tough creatures and beings could take a blaster and keep on going.

I mean if a gammoran can survive being eaten by the Ranchor... :jaw-dropping:

Quote from: Omega;876173I mean if a gammoran can survive being eaten by the Ranchor... :jaw-dropping:

Wait what?  How is that possible?

Quote from: Snowman0147;876179Wait what?  How is that possible?

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Jubnuk

To be fair, the source was "Jabba's Palace Pop-Up Book," a kid's book which most fans didn't even count as canon before Disney came along and nuked everything.

Quote from: Skywalker;876127Not so for everyone. I know some people who are averse to numbers and math and find the use of symbols to be much easier.

Of course, the much larger middle ground are people who can handle either numbers or icons without a strong adverse reaction.

If you can point us all towards some documentation that provides evidence of some real value to using the symbol system then I am sure everyone here would welcome it. It is contrary to my understanding of educational psychology.

How often have you encountered rpgs that use math beyond basic addition - the sort of thing you learned in elementary school?

There are theories of learning styles that claim people learn better one way or another; hence you get 'visual' learners, tactile learners and the like. Its so common that people shy away from one methodology or another because they self categorize. It is easy to pitch then, a 'visual' method to people who self-identify that way, as many do.

The fastest way to learn something is to build on preexisting skills.

Basic addition is a preexisting skill.

Learning and associating symbols like these don't leverage any preexisting skill. These symbols have no value outside of the game itself.

Quote from: Lynn;876183If you can point us all towards some documentation that provides evidence of some real value to using the symbol system then I am sure everyone here would welcome it. It is contrary to my understanding of educational psychology.

Can't speak for the FFG Star Wars dice. However, the dice used in the WEG Xena/Hercules games made the numbers added smaller since it counted successes rather than pips. So most dice had a value of 0 or 1.

QuoteLearning and associating symbols like these don't leverage any preexisting skill. These symbols have no value outside of the game itself.

I'm no proponent of funny dice. I think they are a gimmick designed to increase switching costs for proprietary game lines and to force/strongly-incent people who want to play the game to buy the game version of chachkies or pet rocks.  But for the sake of discussion, humans are pattern recognizing animals. We innately look for and recognize patterns. Funny dice build on that innate human ability. Can we agree on that?

As to whether it is easier for some people to use funny dice rather than learning to add faster and more accurately. I have no data. I doubt anyone else has any reliable data.

However, it seems possible that some people would be better at image recognition. After all, some people really, really suck at arithmetic. And for the innumerate or math phobic, doing math is stressful. Maybe for those folks, learning funny symbols is less stressful than practicing their addition.

And probably some people think that using funny dice with no numbers is hip or with it or something.

Quote from: Bren;876184And probably some people think that using funny dice with no numbers is hip or with it or something.

Like Fudge dice.

Quote from: Bren;876184Can't speak for the FFG Star Wars dice. However, the dice used in the WEG Xena/Hercules games made the numbers added smaller since it counted successes rather than pips. So most dice had a value of 0 or 1.

I ran my share of WEG SW over the years and it didn't take much for people to get it.

Quote from: Bren;876184I'm no proponent of funny dice. I think they are a gimmick designed to increase switching costs for proprietary game lines and to force/strongly-incent people who want to play the game to buy the game version of chachkies or pet rocks.  But for the sake of discussion, humans are pattern recognizing animals. We innately look for and recognize patterns. Funny dice build on that innate human ability. Can we agree on that?

What pattern though?

Does one symbol suggest the next symbol?

Does one symbol suggest a logic that can be applied to the study, understanding or benefit of the symbols?

The symbols themselves can suggest a certain meaning (and in combination with color), but I am not seeing a progressive pattern in this case.

Quote from: Bren;876184As to whether it is easier for some people to use funny dice rather than learning to add faster and more accurately. I have no data. I doubt anyone else has any reliable data.

I doubt anyone has made a study with this in particular. However psychologists that specialize in learning have made plenty of studies into how people learn and build one skill on top of the next.

A lot of kids do poorly in math because either they didn't master the basics before pushing on (very, very common in the US), or they see little real world value to themselves - and that contributes to a dislike / avoidance of math.

Quote from: Bren;876184However, it seems possible that some people would be better at image recognition. After all, some people really, really suck at arithmetic. And for the innumerate or math phobic, doing math is stressful. Maybe for those folks, learning funny symbols is less stressful than practicing their addition.

There have been a number of RPGs that throw more math at you than simple addition and subtraction, and I can see how that can cause some people to shy away.

I am not against alternative methods to generating outcomes (cards, weird dice, coins, etc); what I am against is learning a methodology that isn't one of these:

- dirt simple
- adds to the atmospheric quality or fun of the game
- teaches me something useful outside of the game

All I detect is marketing spoor.

Quote from: Lynn;876183If you can point us all towards some documentation that provides evidence of some real value to using the symbol system then I am sure everyone here would welcome it. It is contrary to my understanding of educational psychology.

No more than you can in refuting it. My comment was based on my own experience in that I encountered a number of players who stated a preference for the use of symbols over math.

As said, the vast most people don't have an issue either way given the simplicity of both TBH

Quote from: Lynn;876183How often have you encountered rpgs that use math beyond basic addition - the sort of thing you learned in elementary school?

Not many. However, it's not a matter of absolutes. For example, the quantity of basic math (such as the often 6+ (that can be easily as high as 14 or more in starship combat) numbers to be added for each and every attack and again for each and every defence in WEG) can prove more difficult than learning to interpret the meaning of 7 symbols for some people.

Quote from: danbuter;875155I like the game mechanics, even with the funky dice. My issue is that the rules are basically "collectible".

Want ships? Buy Age of Rebellion.

Want wookies? Buy Edge of Empire.

Want jedi? Sorry, they don't exist in this game..., but you can be force-sensitive if you buy Force and Destiny!   (And seriously, who the fuck thought leaving jedi out of a Star Wars game was a good idea? All of the movies are ABOUT jedi.)

I wonder if more people would be buying an FFG D6 Star Wars game instead of what FFG did release? I'm guessing Star Wars fans are buying the FFG game anyway. Game mechanics may not matter that much to them.