Jump to content



Photo

A different idea about 100+ Obligation


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Skie

Skie

    Member

  • Members
  • 322 posts

Posted 23 August 2014 - 01:07 AM

Inspired by the Duty mechanic, while taking a shower I thought about a different idea about what happens when group obligation reaches 100 (I really hate the current mechanic o limiting experience/character progression).

 

Once group obligation goes over 100 two things happen:

 

a) The group gains Notoriety rating 1

b) Obligation ratings reset to 0. It doesn't mean they go away - the characters still have debts to pay, bounties on their heads, etc. 

 

Notoriety means that people just don't want to deal with characters who are in so much trouble - they are reluctant to help, suspicious etc. Notoriety also means that all those burdens weigh the PCs down and remain as a shadow on their thoughts. Translated into game mechanics it results in upgrading all social checks by 1 and (or?) decreasing ST by 1.

 

Once the group "cleans" 100 points of Obligation, Notoriety goes down.

 

What do you think?


  • Josep Maria and Kainrath like this

#2 evileeyore

evileeyore

    Member

  • Members
  • 893 posts

Posted 23 August 2014 - 01:29 AM

Sure...


Or I could just do what the rules say and the only real "penalty" is the PCs can't spend EXP and always start with a reduced Strain Threshold.



Also... since the only way the PCs exceed 100 is because I said so... I don't think it'll be an issue often enough to require new rules to deal with it.

#3 Shawnacy

Shawnacy

    Member

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 23 August 2014 - 08:55 AM

The problem with this is that the core book suggests that obligation can have positive aspects to it too, such as when dealing with criminal organizations. A Hutt would rather do business with someone with obligation than without, and vica versa with "law abiding" or civilized citizens such as politicians.



#4 Peroxis

Peroxis

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 23 August 2014 - 12:35 PM

Im definitely going to changing it for myself. Not have it as some vague thing where NPCs magically know how obligated they are,  Ill just track it like they have good or bad standings with whatever person/faction.  
And so for starting players it will be like choosing someone to have bad standings with from the beginning.

Feels like will function similarly just not going to be a score of between 0 and 100.



#5 Dupre Vanhaus

Dupre Vanhaus

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 23 August 2014 - 06:45 PM

Im definitely going to changing it for myself. Not have it as some vague thing where NPCs magically know how obligated they are,  Ill just track it like they have good or bad standings with whatever person/faction.  
And so for starting players it will be like choosing someone to have bad standings with from the beginning.

Feels like will function similarly just not going to be a score of between 0 and 100.

 

In the game that I am running, I am using "faction" to represent how much the group/characters have done for various groups (ie Hutts, Black Sun, Rebellion, Empire etc. )  This represents the liklihood that they may get aid, or hunted down.  If the party has a lot of rep w/ Rebellion, they won't be doing as well with the Empire...   Obligation plays some part, primarily for story, but the faction helps determine when they get in trouble, who they can go to, and who they can't...


  • bradknowles and TXRyanLee like this

Rebellion: X(4), E(4), Y(2), A(2), B(2), Z-95 (3), HWK (3), GR-75(1), CR-90(1)

Empire: TIE/F(4), TIE/A(1), TIE/I(2), TIE/B(3), TIE/D(3), TIE/P(4), Firespray(1)

RPGs: Edge of the Empire, Age of Rebellion, Firefly, Battlestar Galactica


#6 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,095 posts

Posted 24 August 2014 - 10:43 AM

I think the current Obligation system deals just fine with these RP consequences. The higher your Obligation, the less that more reputable people want to deal with you.

#7 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,095 posts

Posted 24 August 2014 - 10:47 AM

The problem with this is that the core book suggests that obligation can have positive aspects to it too, such as when dealing with criminal organizations. A Hutt would rather do business with someone with obligation than without, and vica versa with "law abiding" or civilized citizens such as politicians.

This...and also, just because Jabba is willing to deal with you, doesn't mean it's a good thing for you... :) As the old adage goes, "There is no honor among thieves...in spaaaace."
  • Skie and NicoDavout like this




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS