Jump to content

TCBC Freak

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TCBC Freak

  1. I'm a little concerned that the player is the issue, not the character. It seems likely that the player will simply take his next character down the same path. Gaining morality is so easy in Force and Destiny that unless you want to drop it you shouldn't lose morality ever or should be able to recoup quickly. It seems that he wants to play dark side and is only giving lip service to the ideas of redemption. If I was in a game with four or five other people and everyone entered into a contract about playing light side and I wanted to play the game, I'd have to say I'd likely agree. Even if deep down I wanted to play dark side. Now, I'm mature and skilled enough to play against what I prefer, but not everyone is. Maybe he wants to play dark side and only agreed with y'all's contract because he couldn't play otherwise. A lot of people will agree to an ultimatum given about something they want to do. This is why ultimatum's are a death sentence in a relationship. It sounds a bit like you and the other players may have given an ultimatum, perhaps not, it just seems that way. So I'd go to the player alone and ask if he wants to play a Dark Sider and only agreed not to at first because he felt he had to agree just to allowed to play. And then tell him its okay if he does want to play dark side; talk it out honestly. Ask him if he makes a new character if he's going to drag them to the dark as well. Consider even telling him he can play more dark leaning, a dark gray character instead of black or white but he just has to be smart about it, find balance. A player can play a dark sider working with light siders. The Dark Side isn't stupid, Count Dooku worked with people (many of whom were very good people) all the time. A dark character is just working with the others for a more selfish reason. A dark player working with the light might have a long term goal to take over the Empire, or simply gaining power because he hates feeling weak. Too many people play evil (or dark side in this case) as stupid murder hobos, but that's just being dumb yourself. I once played an Lawful Evil character in DnD who worked for years with a group of Lawful Good/Neutral players to overthrow a king, his brother, who was more evil than him. After taking out his brother he instilled himself as the ruler, but still went on adventures with his friends, because evil people can have friends. The idea is, "I hate everyone, and everyone is my tool and worthless... except you guys, you guys are my friends, and anyone who crosses or hurts my friends will face all my evil wrath." Also don't forget that a dark side character can love and trust people he knows, in fact they may even be better at loving others than a Jedi because they don't try and suppress emotion. If you take nothing from my post, please take this at least: NEVER give your players an ultimatum (aka, a final demand or statement of terms, the rejection of which will result in retaliation or a breakdown in relations). Either they will take it and not mean it (which will result in resentment), or they will walk away and you may miss out on having an awesome player at the table. You can give character's ultimatums, but never give them to players.
  2. Everything you listed only matters in a city fight, and even then huge rubble piles from massive sky scrapers falling will block a chimera. And if they are in the wilderness and have to repel down (or climb up) a cliff for a strike mission that only a mobile squad could reach in time, like destroying a bridge before the enemy crosses, and you have two day, and its three days march, but a chimera could get there in half that time, but the last two hour is a climb up a shear face and you're behind enemy lines, or something. That's off the top of my head and its a reason you'd have to leave the chimera behind. To the topic at hand. I either have the squad take a test to conceal it if they have to leave the chimera behind, and if they pass then it is concealed well enough to not be find, if they fail then it might get spotted, may not. Or I have some NPC's who stay with it to protect it or run if it get attacked, or to come back with it for the rest of the squad at an appointed time. And even in massive pitched battles I focus on the squad and their hard point, fighting off red shirts and maybe a commander in relatively small waves at a time with a few minutes between each attack. And I do a lot of search-and-destroy missions or scout missions, and the like, they are fun and easy.
  3. But it would take another psyker to know it wasn't just a normal sword or staff or such, so if you kept it away from other psykers and didn't abuse it around folks who might rat you out (of the party shouldn't be, cause you having a force weapon is helpful to everyone) then no one should be the wiser.
  4. So by this logic, a psyker or commissar in a rough rider regiment doesn't get a horse or equivalent form of transportation? Attacthed to a armored regiment? To bad, you don't get to ride in the tank cause you're only on loan... you have to walk. You're in a recon regiment that has chameleon? No cloak for you mister commissar. You're in a drop regiment, well too bad, I hope you can fly cause you don't get the standard kit. The main thing is this, People keep saying there is no reason to give them standard kit because they are "on loan," but the real point is that there is also no reason NOT to. Nothing is gained by not giving the psyker a lasgun or full guard flak armor if he is in a line regiment... in fact all you are doing is hurting the player, he has less armor, a weaker weapon (and is missing other stuff to, like a chameleon cloak by the logic of most people here it seems), and has to waste time and dice rolls getting what is supposed to, by definition, be standard. Let's quote the book here, page 75: "Support Specialists are elite members of the Imperial Guard who possess advanced training or unique natural talents.... No matter their rank or position withing the Imperial Guard, theses specialists' first priority is the same as the rank-and-file Guardsmen with whom they serve..." This whole section indicates that they are not even on loan to the guard, they are party of the Guard, and nothing in this section leads to them not getting the same equipment as everyone they serve with. Still have trouble, read the black box on page 58, I'll let you see one line, "...Support Specialists characters gain all the benefits and abilities of the Home World of the regiment they are serving alongside..." if they gain the benefit for being from a world they aren't from, then why would they not get the kit that is given out to all they squad mates on the battle field? And as the final nail in the coffin, I would think, on if they get the kit of not... page 164: "Furthermore, some characters may be issued standard kit that they never actually use. For example, every character is issued his regiment's standard model of lasgun. This includes specialists who might always wield another weapon..." The fact that is says character here and not guardsman, contextually means all characters, regardless of specialty. Now GM's and players can decide to ignore this; that is their right, but at least be honest that that is what you are doing. There is no reason, in the game or lore, not to give them full kit.
  5. I created (or should say am creating as it is still a work in progress) an RPG. It is based on a d10 system with d6 used for some things so it is easy to pick up if you play Only War. It has Endurance, not Toughness, but functionally they are similar enough. There are no "hit points," you have injuries (bruises, small cuts, even hair fractures you can muscle past, ect...) and wounds (open gashes, broken bones, major trauma, ect...). You can take a number of injuries as half again (rounded up) your endurance bonus (so if you had an endurance of 40, you could take 6 injuries) and a number of wounds equal to your endurance bonus (so the 40 means 4 wounds). Endurance bonus doesn't subtract from damage, only armor does. The two ways to take wounds are when you run out of injuries you start taking wounds and if an enemy does double you endurance bonus in damage (after armor, so with the 40 example they'd have to do 8 damage after subtracting any armor) in a single hit you take both an injury and a wound (meaning that if you are out of injuries and take double damage you take two wounds), wounds cause a cumulative -10 penalty in my system to all tests but they don't have to in an Only War conversion. Wounds also must be treated medically to remove the -10 and also they may become infected if not treated; while injuries heal on their own over time with simple rest (1 a week or so, I forget the exact time and am too lazy to get my thumb drive from the other room, lol). When you run out of wounds you are unconscious and will die in a number of rounds equal to your endurance (so 40 rounds (roughly 4 minutes narrative time) from our example) if you don't get first aid to be stabilized, also you will die if you take another wound (which is any damage over your armor value). So in this system regardless of how much damage is done (if it is 1 point over your armor or twenty, a higher damage weapon is valuable because it is more likely to cause double a persons endurance bonus in damage), you either get one injury, one wound, or an injury and a wound, depending on the number of previous injuries or wounds. I think it could be modified easy to fit in Only War, instead of having 0 wounds making you unconscious you just start taking crit damage (I would say that damage goes on the crit table as in the core rules, so instead of only one point of either a wound or injury no matter the damage total if you get, say, 3 damage past armor, you are now at 3 on the crit table instead of just one point). And obviously you use Toughness not endurance. I'd also say that a lot of weapons cause wounds only in Only War, most guns and all the explosives may be strait to wounds. Or have a special rule that if it goes over your toughness bonus in caused damage it is a automatic wound (so our example gets hit with a grenade, if it does only 4 damage after armor he take an injury but 5+ he gets a wound, while if he is stabbed normal rules apply so he takes an injury (a glancing blow or minor cut) unless it does 8 damage in the hit). One of the things about this is it also keeps righteous fury as is if you use the crit table instead of the instant knock out when you hit 0 wounds. I might also rule that some armors make some weapons cause no damage, ever. Like Power Armor will always stop a rock from hurting you, even if they righteous fury but that'd just be me. The Medicae skill doesn't change much either as infection and such still come into play and wounds need to be treated and medical treatment could help injuries heal fast, such as two a week instead of one. I think my systems use of wounds/injuries would work for any one who doesn't like the Only War Toughness Bonus being skin armor. If there are any issues around combat for Only War that I didn't address modifying my system to handle then I probably can find a way to fix it, just point it out. And likewise if anything doesn't sound right or is confusing just ask, I'll try and explain better, I may run into a problem of knowing what I mean so it sounds right to me but makes no sense to anyone else, lol. And if you think my system for injuries and wounds is dumb and I wasted my time sharing it here then that is fine too, it is a free country.
  6. Ah, right. Anyway, yeah, I would definitely give the Psyker the Regimental Standard Kit, seeing as how it's a standard kit assigned to everyone in the regiment, and the Psyker actually being attached to that regiment n'all. That said, as a personal judgement, I wouldn't let him trade in that Lasgun (or whatever) for a Laspistol (or whatever) unless he specifically asked for it and did either some grovelling or begging - unless the quartermaster(s) or local command is incredibly reasonable. Hah, who am I kidding?; there's nothing reasonable about this. It's the Departmento Munitorum and the Imperial Guard. They'd assign him bananas if the sheet said bananas. Exactly, here's the thing, the Department Munitorum doesn't care, they don't see people (psykers or otherwise), they see numbers and words on a page. It'd go like this... DM quartermaster, "Okay, Id card please - okay, says here your with the Cadian 982 Mobil Infantry. Here's your Lasgun, 3 charge packs, boots, flack armor, uniform, ect..." Psyker, "But I'm a Psyker, I'm just attached to the regiment. Shouldn't I get something else." DMQ, "I don't give a dang if you're the Emperor himself, your ID says you're in the 982, the sheet here says you're in the 982, sheet says this is what you get if you're in the 982. You need special gear tell you CO, get him to fill out an A626 form, the blue A626 form, not the green one; and if we get around to getting it confirmed we'll see about getting you something special, but as long as you're in the 982 you get all this... and remember, you lose any of my gear, and I will have you brought up on charges Now, you can't use it? Well, just keep it clean in your locker till you leave, then turn it in nice and easy." They get the standard gear because the DM says they do. All regiments are supposed to be uniform with their kind, all infantry regiments are supposed to have the same number of guys when they are mustered and equipped for their first engagement, in practice this isn't true but it's the way the DM sees it. If a regiment has 1000 men (I forget what the number is supposed to be) then the department sends 1000 lasguns, it doesn't care if it came from a feral world and so they really have 2000 men, or if they are down to 400 men after an accident in flight to the warzone. The Department doesn't care if 10 of that 1000 guys are psykers or ratlings, it just knows there ought to be X number of dudes. The page says they are an infantry regiment so they get the infantry regiment gear. Now as time goes by and the regiment fights and gets to know the quartermaster and the ins-and-outs of the department then they may be able to finagle a bit, but not a lot. Now, to the question at the start of this thread, yes, psykers who are able (which the PC psykers should be because they shouldn't be "freaks" locked in cages or such) should often use their more mundane weapons whenever possible. And also, about staffs, you don't holster a staff, you never see Gandalf holster his staff. You carry it, then set it down if you aren't using it, they don't make holsters for it. You can get straps for it on, like, a back pack but only to carry it out of the way, not to draw it from in battle. A staff is at least as tall as up to your neck, so they aren't just something you can put away easy. In moves and such people may carry longs swords and even great swords on their back, but that was never the case in real life, it is impossible to draw a weapon from your back that is longer than your arm, in fact if it's more than 2/3 your arms length it can't be drawn.
  7. I think I'd rather see the Sullustan with all base 2's and maybe an few extra XP to compensate. Not every species aside from Humans needs a 3 and a 1. This was my thought as well. It's kind of strange that every alien has a 3 and a 1, as if only humans can be balanced, there are many that seem well balanced. I was surprised that Twi'leks were not all 2's, they never stuck me as physically deficient in anyway and, after all, having a history of slavery where your women are forced to dance half naked doesn't scream that a species has some innate charm or charisma.
  8. To be good at combat is easy, in almost ever RPG ever made. You only need one or two characteristic to be high and one or two skills and then bang, you are good at combat. Being good at anything else almost always makes a character a one trick pony, that is all they get to do, and it only comes up every once and a while; and they are a detriment to the party if they aren't doing their one thing. And the reason is because most systems divide up their skills so much. Consolidating skills allows a player to be a mechanic and not feel like that is all they are; in combat they sit around and do nothing, because they can't really fight very well. I've never been against house rules, I use them myself. But when you start house ruling one game to be like another I would stop and ask if modding one game is the best idea, or just playing the other game is better; I don't mod Dark Heresy to play a Space Marine, I just play Deathwatch. Or if you start changing the rules so that only one type of player (the one who wants to be smart slicer or mechanic and not a kill everything hired gun who only needs two skills) is punished by having to divide up the xp even more, then I have to pause and ask, "really, lets take a step back and make sure that's for the best?" Because I think that adding more skills just to make that one player who wants to be a mechanic have a harder time, is not better for the game, the group and most of all it is not better for that player who now has to buy a dozen skills instead of one while everyone else only needs one skill to do their job and be useful.
  9. Okay, now I get it. And now I know that my comparison to the Warhammer 40K line is perfect. Dark Heresy doesn't have rules for ships, it doesn't have rules for Space Marines, or for playing chaos. It doesn't even let you play in the Imperial Guard. so this isn't a unique or new thing, for FFG in particular. But even DnD does this. You want to play in the Underdark, you need the book that lets you do that, if you want to play the game period, you need no less than three books, each one over $30, and none of them complete to even start to play the game. If you want to play any race not in the Player's Handbook 1 (or you want to play a class that wasn't Arcane, Divine, or Martial; such as a Primal hero like the classic Barbarian), of which I think there was only 6 race options? maybe 8 (I gave my DnD stuff a friends so I don't have it on hand) available, you have to get Player's Handbook 2 or 3, or one the "Heroes of the..." books (Feywild, Underdark, Elemetal Chaos). What I'm trying to show is that one core book and 50 supplements, vs. 3 core books and twelve supplements doesn't matter in the end. No game is complete by that standard. All games are growing and developing.
  10. I did read what you said, but your assumption that because AoR reprints many of the rules found in EotE means that neither is complete is nonsensical. EotE is a complete game and so is AoR, it's like buying Dark Heresy and then Deathwatch, that's why I used that example. The rules for the two are identical, the skills and talents cross the two platforms and so does the majority of the lore regarding the Warp and Demons and the Imperium. Now, there are some differences, just like there are differences between Edge and Age. But the core is the same. So one of the best things about this beta is that you get to buy AoR like you would a supplement, for $30 instead of $60 in over half a year; most supplements cost between $30-60 anyway. But if you don't have Edge and have no desire to play it (just like if you never wanted to play a lowly acolyte to an Inquisitor [Dark Heresy] but always wanted to be a Space Marine [Deathwatch]) then just get Age of Rebellion because it will let you play as Rebels, or wait for Force and Destiny if you only care about Jedi. You have to stop thinking of Edge of the Empire and Age of Rebellion as one game, they are two different games that are cross compatible thanks to using the same rules set. Just like Dark Heresy and Only War, or Deathwatch or Black Crusade, or Rogue Trader. When I mean incomplete, I mean that I prefer one generalized Core, not "different games" that are actually redundant core rulebooks of the same game system and game world but just with material focusing on particular character types. In the WEG version of the game (and in many other RPGs), you could make practically anything you wanted with the material provided. You had complete stats for Star Destroyers, Alliance cruisers/fighters, freighters, scouts, Jedi - it was a generalized core rulebook for the system and universe. There were then tons of supplements that provided further material on particular subjects that were of interest to you, but none of them were reinventing the wheel and reprinting the base game just to give you access to that material. I am honestly confused now, because that doesn't make any sense to me. You'd rather have one core book and tons of supplements that expand on the core book and that's good. But having three core books (for three different but compatible games) so that people can just play the game they want, and then have a few supplements for those games (so people can expand on the game they want without getting shoehorned stuff from other games) that is bad? You are on one hand saying that WEG put everything you need in one book... but then saying on the other that they had a bunch of supplements to cover all the other things that weren't in the core book... I'm not trying to be a jerk, I am honestly confused. I have no experience with that system. But I have a lot of experience with DnD and the Warhammer 40K line, and Pathfinder, and some other smaller lines and they all seem to fit this bill. A core book and supplements. And then many put out different games with "re-skins," Like Saga, it was just DnD with a Star Wars paint. I thought I got what your problem was and addressed it, but now after you said this, I don't know. Edge of the Empire has everything you need to play the game, and so does Age of Rebellion. They are complete games and have supplements and are compatible.
  11. I did read what you said, but your assumption that because AoR reprints many of the rules found in EotE means that neither is complete is nonsensical. EotE is a complete game and so is AoR, it's like buying Dark Heresy and then Deathwatch, that's why I used that example. The rules for the two are identical, the skills and talents cross the two platforms and so does the majority of the lore regarding the Warp and Demons and the Imperium. Now, there are some differences, just like there are differences between Edge and Age. But the core is the same. So one of the best things about this beta is that you get to buy AoR like you would a supplement, for $30 instead of $60 in over half a year; most supplements cost between $30-60 anyway. But if you don't have Edge and have no desire to play it (just like if you never wanted to play a lowly acolyte to an Inquisitor [Dark Heresy] but always wanted to be a Space Marine [Deathwatch]) then just get Age of Rebellion because it will let you play as Rebels, or wait for Force and Destiny if you only care about Jedi. You have to stop thinking of Edge of the Empire and Age of Rebellion as one game, they are two different games that are cross compatible thanks to using the same rules set. Just like Dark Heresy and Only War, or Deathwatch or Black Crusade, or Rogue Trader. Edit: And look, I'm not trying to convince you to buy the game. If you are happy with WEG or Saga or just playing something else that has nothing to do with Star Wars, that's fine, if you don't like the new mechanic or this vision of RPG rules and dice as narrative tools, that's fine. Just understand that saying that, "FFG has some kind of horrid business practice going on and so I refuse to support it," is nonsensical.
  12. And as for the last (and weakest) argument - stats for X-wings and Star Destroyers and such - if I need those, someone here will tell me what they are. It's not like the people who've bought the beta have been forced to sign an NDA, or anything! I would actually say that's the best argument, though maybe not worded right. The fact that there's no actual Core rulebook with EoE and AoR being sourcebooks for it has made me decide to not buy into this game and just continue using WEG's version of SW. I know I'm probably a minority and I don't wish the game ill, but the EoE Core just felt unfinished, and I've no desire to have to get multiple, partially redundant Cores for a complete game, spaced over a long period of time. Then what FFG games do you play? Because everything from Dark Heresy to the Game of Thrones living card game does this, you get the Core Dark Heresy book but what to be a radical Inquisitor? Well, you'll need to get the Radical's handbook for $50, want to play a sister of battle? Blood of the Martyrs ($40); want to have more than one X-wing and two TIE's in you X-wing miniatures game? That's $15 a pop, and $30 for the Falcon or Slave 1. EotE is for people who want to play fringe elements in the Star Wars Universe, AoR is for those who want to play Rebel Agents, Force and Destiny is for those who want to play Jedi (I assume), you want the option to play all three then yeah, buy them, but each one is complete. The, "This isn't finished because I demand Jedi (or X-wings, or whatever)," stance is the biggest straw-man argument I've heard. Dark Heresy doesn't have Space Marines, the most iconic thing in Warhammer 40K, but it was a complete game and Deathwatch only has Space Marines. And this is how every game works, want to play a dark elf in DnD, you'll need to buy a special book for that, does that mean that the Player's Handbook 1 is incomplete? Maybe, but that is part of the RPG hobby. And if you have ever bought into any RPG you have added to that way of business. And saying you aren't going to support this product because it does something that every other game out there does makes no sense to me.
  13. You may have missed that edit before you posted, I understood that this was the main issue after my post when I re-read some of what you said, and then tried to add in my rebuttal. above, but you may haev read my post before I edited it. FFG is not asking you to pay for the privilege of editing their book. They are asking the following, "Would you be willing to pay to have an advanced copy of the rule book sent to you for $30 (a good price for a printed book of this size and content) knowing that it may have some errors and may undergo some changes which we as FFG will allow you to print out for free. And if you would like, we are taking feedback if you find any errors, or have any suggestions." Your perception is bent to see this as them screwing you. You are ignoring that you are getting a fully printed book for $30 (a very fair price considering the quality), and that you are not required to help them in any way, nor are you required to buy the final book later, and that they facilitate you not needing the final book by giving the updates out for free. Now, many people who have been commenting since the first few are being argumentative just to be that way. I am trying to help ease you mind here. How you respond to this, now that I have clearly addressed all 3 of your issues, will determine if you really are being honest about your issue or if you have simple decided to want to fight about this non-issue. Edit: I'd also like to note that the AoR books adds new race options and gear and ships (possible more as I'm still waiting to get my copy) to the EotE game, so buying the beta as you would a supplement for 30 dollars (and just using the updates to bring it in line with the final product) is a good deal. The very first supplement for Dark Heresy was the Inquisitor's Handbook, all it did was add new background options, a new career and then a bunch of gear (which was little more than retooled old gear). It is 50 dollars. So even waiting for the AoR full book and buying it just as a supplement for EotE for $60 is not a bad price.
  14. No, you're not just whistling into the wind. You are posing a issue you have and getting well thought out responses. I think the major issue is that you are upset based on two main assumptions. 1. That the beta has delayed the final product. This is not unreasonable to assume, but it still an assumption. It is possible that they were mostly done with game and in final revisions (a process that takes between 4-10 months depending on the product) and then said, " it's June now, by the time we are done with final revision it will be Q1 2014, lets put out a beta and get more eyes on this to help make it the best it can be." You assume that FFG was done, and then put out the Beta and delayed the release, I assume here in my theory that FFG was still 8 months from done when they put out the Beta. We are both assuming and could both be wrong. 2. That the majority of people who buy the beta now will buy the core book later. Once again, perfectly reasonable, but not factual. It is just as likely that only a small percentage of those who partake in the beta will buy the full rules later and not the majority as you assume. The Beta with the update is the core book for half price (-fluff which people with the EotE game have, and much of it is available on wookieepedia for free), a very reasonable deal, and many people (if the EotE game is any clue) will not buy the core book because of that. Feel free to ignore this bit if you only want to address the topic at hand but I feel I must clarify: And just as an off topic aside, there is more similarity between the Warhammer 40K games and the Star Wars line then you think. My analogy was fair. The same mechanic, the same skills and talents (with very little revision and improvement), and the same careers for the most part (rogue trader is just high level careers from Dark heresy and Deathwatch is just more powerful versions of the same careers [the same as Ascension, which makes Dark Heresy characters on par with Deathwatch] as well when you actually remove the "fluff" surrounding the games and look at the core concepts and mechanics). Only War is the culmination of the mechanic, fluff aside, and the game's line. The Star Wars line is trying to avoid what Dark Heresy, and most RPG's, did, release a game and then spend years and four more games fixing problems and flaws all while releasing splat book and junk which will be irreverent to anything that comes before or after them. Like DnD 3, then 3.5, and then 4 and now Next. DnD releases stuff for free all the time because they have made millions off incomplete products that don't stand on their own. This bit goes back on topic some, so feel free to tune back in folks: You want to play DnD? You need the Players handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide and the Monster Manual. That's 60 bucks right there, then you want to have more, actually cool monsters? That's the MM2 and 3 for the really good stuff, want more character creation options? Well you need Player's handbooks 2-3... Now you've spend upwards of $150. I'll take one core book for the scum and villain, one for the rebellion and one for the force any day over the piece by piece tactic of DnD and Pathfinder and even FFG's own 40K lines any day. TL;DR - You are free to not like FFG asking people to pay for the beta, but don't think that no one hears you just because we disagree that FFG is doing something wrong and thus deserving of some kind of boycott. and don't just dismiss our responses as if we, "Just don't understand what you are saying." We do understand, we just disagree, and for sound reason we have shared. Edit: You are also making a 3rd assumption. That FFG is asking you to pay to be in the beta. This is not the case, it's a matter of perspective, but a big one. FFG is asking you to pay for a printed rules book. You aren't really paying for the beta, you're paying for the book. And 30 dollars for that isn't that bad when the average graphic novel cost 15-40 and is less pages and ink. Edit/Edit: It isn't FFG that is not allowing PDF's either, which would have let them do what they did with some other beta's they have done (buy into the beta for a discount later on the final product) it is lucasarts, so it is their business practice that is at fault for that part not FFG.
  15. It's also kind of like saying that because FFG put out Deathwatch, that making Only War was a money grab. Wasn't Dark Heresy really just a beta for Rogue Trader and then Rogue Trader just a Beta for Deathwatch which was, in fact, a beta for Only War since Only War really is the perfected (IMO) version of the d10 rules built for Dark Heresy all those years ago?
  16. Brawn doesn't just have to do with strength. They are from a volcanic world, and they may not be "strong," but they are resilient. And cunning is more about how conniving a person is, how good they are at double talk and deception. Sullustan's don't strike me as being overly good at that in fact a little lackluster perhaps, they are more matter-of-fact in most of the EU stuff you see them in. Growing up on a harsh world has made them less about BSing their way around things. Just my two-cents. Cunning is as much about Perception and Survival as it is about Deception and Streetwise. I think that Sullustans should have a 2 Cunning as a default. Fair, but then what do you make 1? Or do you just give them 2 across the board as a house rule. Which to be fair I did in my edit to the Species Menagerie.
  17. They duplicate the specs because you don;t need both games. FFG is not assuming that anyone has both, which is what they need to do. So someone who wants to be a rebel pilot needs to have that option.
  18. They can't really be crazy odds or the players would lose all the time. You need to give the impression of the players being the underdogs and yet still have them win most of the time. They will win if they plan and don't just charge in blaster firing. They have to think like Rebels. They should avoid straight fights, they win the long game because they plan around the Empire's strengths. The Empire is large, highly disciplined, well trained and well equipped. So how do you beat that? You watch, for days. They have regular patrol patterns, they have standardized defense at most bases, but they often change small details, what is different about this base? Plan, even in space battles the players need to scout and plan. Don't have your X-wings marked up with rebel symbols and the Empire may even ignore them, or at least you can bluff past them (even easier with Y-wings, Z-95, and other fighters that aren't just used by Rebels like the X-wing often is). I don't nerf the Hutts in EotE either; if my players charge into a Hutt palace to free a captured comrade then they will die, they need to do what Luke, Leia, and Lando did. Planning, Planning, and more Planning.
  19. Believe me, I think the Rebel's are the cool side; and they should, and do ultimately, win. But I'm not nerfing the Empire for my players to "feel powerful," either. I want them to know they really accomplished something when they win a battle or hit a target without losing a single man, or even setting off any alarms until that Imperial outpost went up in flames. My players will want to play the Rebels because they are the underdogs fighting for freedom. Not because the rebels can't lose and are all powerful. Edit: it is much more satisfying to know you really overcame something hard then to have you GM hand you victory on a silver platter. And maybe that means the first attack on that Imperial base failed, but then we go back in with a better plan and next time when we win, it'll be even more awesome.
  20. The game is built to be more narrative, so mechanically you are right. But in the narrative sense padded armor is showy, people will see it, you can't really hide it like you can Heavy Clothing or Adverse Environmental Gear, and you should remind the players of that, give them setback dice if they are wearing padded armor while negotiating with a local noble or with local cops or even just the owner of a shop, because the NPC sees the armor and is a little worried that he is dealing with thugs (after all almost all of Jabba's men in RotJ were wearing padded armor) or other types of miscreants who might kill him if they get angry.
  21. So we would say that a critical advantage of the Rebellion is that their superior command structure allows they to more rapidly react to changing situations, while the Empire which tends to drill initiative out of its commanders is generally slow to react and pursue? Cause if you want the Rebels to run away they need to be able to run faster than the bad guys. More like the Rebellion relies on individual initiative and differing tactics, while the Empire relies on discipline and overwhelming numbers which yes makes them slower to react in many ways, but initiative isn't drilled out of them, there are examples in the EU of Imperial officers who are a real thorn in the rebel's sides because of their skill at command and their ability to anticipate the rebel actions and over come them. I wouldn't say either is is superior, they're just different tactics and both work better in some situations. The Empire won far more often than the Rebellion, but the Rebellion won key battles. In the end it was Darth Vader's betrayal of the Emperor that let the Rebels win, not a military victory. If it had come down to military ability, because the two were different sides of the same coin, the stalemate they had would have gone on. Edit: also this is fiction, so all the real world logic we use to say if and what should happen means very little. The rebellion was meant to win, and so they did. And rightly so I say. I wish it worked that was in the real world.
  22. Brawn doesn't just have to do with strength. They are from a volcanic world, and they may not be "strong," but they are resilient. And cunning is more about how conniving a person is, how good they are at double talk and deception. Sullustan's don't strike me as being overly good at that in fact a little lackluster perhaps, they are more matter-of-fact in most of the EU stuff you see them in. Growing up on a harsh world has made them less about BSing their way around things. Just my two-cents.
  23. Is that going to work in Age of Rebellion where the players work for the Rebels and their active goal is to take down the Empire? Their called hit-and-run strikes for a reason. When I start using the AoR stuff they'll play like Rebels. If the empire hits their base in force, they'll run, if they attack an Imperial outpost it'll be to take out one objective and then they will be out of there as fast as possible. And the Death Star run was 30 fighters of which 3 made it out (not counting the late arrival of the Falcon). The Rebels rarely stood and fought to the last man, they just didn't have much choice against the Death Star.
  • Create New...