Jump to content



Photo

Supporting Accessories


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 The Thing In The Attic

The Thing In The Attic

    Member

  • Members
  • 205 posts

Posted 08 September 2012 - 05:46 AM

I hope FFG are going to support this better than Wizards did; with minis and floorplans.

Wizards biggest mistake they made with D&D and Starwars was making minis really hard to get by only packaging them for their mini's game, with rarities often costing  packet to purchase singly. The floorplans had stuff all over them that they were mainly useable in home brew adventures rather than published adventures. 

Although you don't need mini's and floorplans to play an RPG they sure create a special encounter or session.  So i really hope FFG put out some supporting mini's and generic floorplans.

 



#2 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 September 2012 - 12:16 PM

 I think this go around we are seeing a reaction against the battlemap and minis approach of DnD 3/3.5/4 and so they will be focusing on 'the theatre of the mind' and 'narrative' play.

Which does have its advantages. But I kinda think the NEXT go around, people will remember the advantages a map and minis bring to the table in terms of gameplay and things will lurch back in that direction. I feel it may alternate.

So, I don't really expect there will be much of a rush to provide floorplans and minis, as those are so last generation.



#3 MILLANDSON

MILLANDSON

    Playtester

  • Members
  • 3,356 posts

Posted 08 September 2012 - 12:35 PM

The rules are more conducive to narrative play, rather than miniatures and maps like the d20 versions of Star Wars were. With no actual solid ranges for weapons or the distance you can move (the rules use abstract range bands, rather than specifically saying a blaster pistol fires 50m optimal range, etc), plus the fact the rules state that a round covers about a minute or so in-game time, and miniatures and floorplans just don't work all that well with it.

As someone who dislikes using miniatures and floorplans, etc, in RPGs anyway, I hope they don't focus much effort on them, and stick to the books and rules.


~Yea, Tho I Walk Through The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death, I Shall Fear No Evil~

 

Posts/views/opinions are in no way representative of FFG, and are entirely my own.


#4 LethalDose

LethalDose

    Member

  • Members
  • 782 posts

Posted 09 September 2012 - 05:45 AM

I agree with the MILLANDSON and AluminumWolf that it will be much less important to have minis for this game than it was for the previous, heavily grid based editions from West End and WotC.  However, I think we will be seeing FFG produce Star Wars minis.  During the in-flight report where the game was announced, it was made very clear that, while FFG does not have board game rights, they have rights to publish star wars table top RPGs, card games, AND MINIATURE GAMES (like X-wing).

When an audience member asked if we could be expecting a line of tactical minis, the presenter (I think it was Chris Petersen) said he can't speak about what future, unannounced products may or may not be planned, just that they do have the rights to produce that kind of game.

The audience member then gently pushed for more, asking if it was likely, Chris ordered one of his Stormtrooper minions to level his blaster rifle at the nice man's head.

I'm not making any of that up.

 

-WJL


"All models are wrong, but some models are useful."  - George E. P. Box


#5 I. J. Thompson

I. J. Thompson

    Member

  • Members
  • 964 posts

Posted 09 September 2012 - 10:28 AM

 Just playing devil's advocate here, but WEG's Star Wars rpg was never grid-based. The option to use miniatures (on a grid-less tabletop using rulers to measure range) was there, but was never a requirement. I ran that game for nine years, and I think I only ever used minis for one combat! 



#6 LethalDose

LethalDose

    Member

  • Members
  • 782 posts

Posted 09 September 2012 - 11:17 AM

 Yeah, i'll concede that it wasn't grid based, but It used discrete ranges and movement, measured in meters, which is close enough for government work.


"All models are wrong, but some models are useful."  - George E. P. Box


#7 Stacie_GmrGrl

Stacie_GmrGrl

    Member

  • Members
  • 140 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 04:51 AM

LethalDose said:

I agree with the MILLANDSON and AluminumWolf that it will be much less important to have minis for this game than it was for the previous, heavily grid based editions from West End and WotC.  However, I think we will be seeing FFG produce Star Wars minis.  During the in-flight report where the game was announced, it was made very clear that, while FFG does not have board game rights, they have rights to publish star wars table top RPGs, card games, AND MINIATURE GAMES (like X-wing).

When an audience member asked if we could be expecting a line of tactical minis, the presenter (I think it was Chris Petersen) said he can't speak about what future, unannounced products may or may not be planned, just that they do have the rights to produce that kind of game.

The audience member then gently pushed for more, asking if it was likely, Chris ordered one of his Stormtrooper minions to level his blaster rifle at the nice man's head.

I'm not making any of that up.

 

-WJL

 what…no new SW boardgames??? :(  much sadness… I was really hoping for some new Star Wars boardgames… Especially a Descent style boardgame. 



#8 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 September 2012 - 08:08 AM

 FWIW I think having a map adds enormously to the 'tactical' nature of combats.

Mapless RPG combat, IME tends to be entirely worthless from a gamist point of view, running entirely on GM fiat with no tactics employed what so ever.

Mapless combat does have some advantages though - it is much quicker, and for some reason it seems to be easier for people to convince themselves that they are doing some 'deep interactive storytelling' of 'great intellectual merit' if no battlemap is involved. 



#9 GM Chris

GM Chris

    Member

  • Members
  • 395 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 08:33 AM

AluminiumWolf said:

 FWIW I think having a map adds enormously to the 'tactical' nature of combats.

Mapless RPG combat, IME tends to be entirely worthless from a gamist point of view, running entirely on GM fiat with no tactics employed what so ever.

Mapless combat does have some advantages though - it is much quicker, and for some reason it seems to be easier for people to convince themselves that they are doing some 'deep interactive storytelling' of 'great intellectual merit' if no battlemap is involved. 

Since the designers have stated a solid and pre-defined goal of going completely away from "tactical" combats for the RPG, as well as a non-gamist philosopy (narrative, instead), it's clear this RPG is not going to be something you'll probably like, Wolf.

Are you gonna play it?


Host of The Order 66 Podcast:  http://www.d20radio.com

 

Find all the EotE Order 66 Episodes right here:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/Order66


#10 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 September 2012 - 08:53 AM

GM Chris said:

Are you gonna play it?

Honestly? I dunno. 

I mean, I sort of get the impression the game isn't entirely mapless, having range bands that could be represented with some kinda abstract board, and rules for moving between them, and that might be enough to make the game.

But seriously, I have done a lot of mapless combat and it has always been terrible from a game point of view. We might as well not have bothered having rules at all. Not saying this game is like that, but if it is it can die in a fire.

I short, I think the complete rejection of map combat seen in DnD next and (maybe) this is throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don't like endless map based combat with no roleplaying any more than the next story gamer, but I don't want to go back to completely worthless combat with no tactical play at all.

A happy medium must exist!



#11 GM Chris

GM Chris

    Member

  • Members
  • 395 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 08:56 AM

AluminiumWolf said:

A happy medium must exist!

Maybe. 

But having run this game a few times now - I can tell you - this isn't it.    Even with range bands - there's NO TACTICAL NATURE to "combat".  In fact, combat isn't even the primary focus of the stories the rules support.

For those of us who've grown tired of tactical combat in our RPGs, I guess we'll have to settle on "dying in a fire" (as you put it) with this game.

 

But you're not gonna like it.


Host of The Order 66 Podcast:  http://www.d20radio.com

 

Find all the EotE Order 66 Episodes right here:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/Order66


#12 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 September 2012 - 09:13 AM

GM Chris said:

there's NO TACTICAL NATURE to "combat".

Well, is it at least as much fun as playing a quick game of Top Trumps?



#13 Donovan Morningfire

Donovan Morningfire

    Looking for a saint? Look elsewhere.

  • Members
  • 3,641 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 09:47 AM

AluminiumWolf said:

GM Chris said:

there's NO TACTICAL NATURE to "combat".

 

Well, is it at least as much fun as playing a quick game of Top Trumps?

For you, probably not.  But hey, you can always have your own fun playing your tactical-heavy video games while the rest of us are having a blast playing a decidedly non-tactical table-top RPG.


Dono's Gaming & Etc Blog - http://jedimorningfire.blogspot.com/

"You worry about those drink vouchers, I'll worry about that bar tab!"


#14 Guest_Not In Sample_*

Guest_Not In Sample_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:18 AM

 I dunno. I guess I think having a fun combat system is more important than being able to say it isn't like a video game (or whatever).



#15 GoblynKing

GoblynKing

    Member

  • Members
  • 330 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:57 AM

AluminiumWolf said:

 I dunno. I guess I think having a fun combat system is more important than being able to say it isn't like a video game (or whatever).

You could expand upon this particular philosophy and say that having a fun SYSTEM in general, that's able to successfully model combat, social interaction, and other story based elements that help make the game FUN!



#16 Rassilon

Rassilon

    Member

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:57 AM

I really hope concrete ranges are included, or at the very least suggested in future iterations of the rules, or it's going to really turn away a good number of gamers who like to use maps, or terrain and miniatures for their games.



#17 Donovan Morningfire

Donovan Morningfire

    Looking for a saint? Look elsewhere.

  • Members
  • 3,641 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 12:04 PM

AluminiumWolf said:

 

 I dunno. I guess I think having a fun combat system is more important than being able to say it isn't like a video game (or whatever).

 

 

If the posts here are any indication, you're idea of a "fun combat system" has nothing in common with the majority of posters' idea of a "fun combat system.'  Then again, we've actually bothered to read the rules and give EotE's combat system a try, two things you've admitted to not doing.

Sort of like a person whining about how riding a bicycle is too hard when they've never so much as seen a bicycle.

Actually, I think I'm just going back to my default habit of skipping your posts, as you've long since proven time and time again to have nothing useful to contribute to any of the discussions you've remarked on.


Dono's Gaming & Etc Blog - http://jedimorningfire.blogspot.com/

"You worry about those drink vouchers, I'll worry about that bar tab!"


#18 GoblynKing

GoblynKing

    Member

  • Members
  • 330 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 01:34 PM

Rassilon said:

I really hope concrete ranges are included, or at the very least suggested in future iterations of the rules, or it's going to really turn away a good number of gamers who like to use maps, or terrain and miniatures for their games.

This same topic has popped up numerous times over in the Warhammer Fantasy RP threads, and the simplest solution is to just convert the abstract range bands into an equivalent number of squares on a gridded map/battlemat. It's a pretty easily implemented house-rule….which is something I'm noticing both systems have in common, hackability/ease of house rule implementation…..which doesn't require a ton of math, or any kinda official ruling from FF.

 



#19 MILLANDSON

MILLANDSON

    Playtester

  • Members
  • 3,356 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 02:17 PM

Rassilon said:

I really hope concrete ranges are included, or at the very least suggested in future iterations of the rules, or it's going to really turn away a good number of gamers who like to use maps, or terrain and miniatures for their games.

I don't see it happening, sorry. The game is entirely focused on abstract narrativist style rules, which really doesn't fit map-based tactical combat (ala DnD).

Why don't you try not using miniatures? Is it really that much of a requirement that your combats be mapped out with miniatures for everyone? I'm just curious, since all my experience has shown me that maps and models slows a game down to a crawl, and makes it closer to a TT wargame than a roleplay game (since you can see where enemies are on the map, when your character possibly doesn't know they're there, etc).


~Yea, Tho I Walk Through The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death, I Shall Fear No Evil~

 

Posts/views/opinions are in no way representative of FFG, and are entirely my own.


#20 Callidon

Callidon

    Member

  • Members
  • 599 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 02:47 PM

MILLANDSON said:

 

 

Why don't you try not using miniatures? Is it really that much of a requirement that your combats be mapped out with miniatures for everyone? I'm just curious, since all my experience has shown me that maps and models slows a game down to a crawl, and makes it closer to a TT wargame than a roleplay game (since you can see where enemies are on the map, when your character possibly doesn't know they're there, etc).

 

It's hard for some people not to jump to extremes.  They hear "gridless combat" and "abstract <anything because they've already begun breathing into a paper sack with a panic attack>" and immediately jump to "massive melee in a complex battlefield where no one knows what range they are and Edgar has just fallen asleep in his bowl of doritos." 

 

Very few people consider the middle way of using a map and placeholders (minis, popcorn, beads, push pins, a marker dot, a finger) to keep everyone up to date with spatial locations of various combat participants.  Or that they can simply and easily define range bands specific to that encounter.  Maybe you only have Close range in this fight, maybe Medium, and Close…what distance makes sense for a particular range band (6", 10cm, a pen length, "that far")?  The important thing is what information is on the map you use, not the scale.  Can you determine if a player can get from here to there?  Who can they hit?  Are there environmental things they can use to advantage or things they need to be warry of?  None of that requires a grid.  Just a poorly drawn blob on a bit of paper labeled "Sarlacc Pit" with an eraser used to represent the sand skimmer, and a couple push pins to show where C3P0 and Lando fell.

In abstract combat I've seen a map as small as a note card, to one the size of my dining room table.  I have used random maps photocopied from old issues of gaming magazines, doodled up maps on some scratch paper, used really cool flip mats, or drawn big complexes on a vinyl mat.  For placeholders I've used pins, beads, candy, marker dots, actual bona fide minis, squinkies, a polly pocket, Monopoly pieces, matchbox cars and a chip.  All that for the same abstract game.

Or…theater of the mind works too when you forget to bring that lovingly drawn map with you to the game.


STUFF:

Edge of the Empire: Talent Trees; Force Powers; Character Sheet

 





© 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