Jump to content

Allavandrel

Members
  • Content Count

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Allavandrel

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Bergen, Hordaland, Norway
  1. This may have been discussed before in the forum, but it is unclear to me how fire arcs work in space fights. Since you do not record the relativ positions of all spaceships involved in a fight (except for range of course), how does it matter that a gun is pointing forward or dorsal? When does a pilot know whether she needs to manoeuvre her starship first before the crew is able to target a dorsal gun towards an eligible enemy? How will the crew know whether there is an eligible secondary target in another position? I might have overlooked something in the rulebook, but it will be really nice to understand the standard mechanics before we have our first game.
  2. It should be fun to play a Trader!! And your characteristics, skills and talents should be just as useful and important for the party as those of a combat-focused PC. IMO there should of course be a basic set of rules for trading in the core book for those of us who play games where buying/selling is a significant part of the storyline (and for GMs who haven't time to make homerules or new GMs who don't have any experience in making up solid mechanics for things like this). Other GMs are free to ignore the system and/or make their own. Here is a suggestion for how a simple system could work: When the PCs have obtained a cargo (or perhaps even before they obtain it) they want to make determine the best location to sell the cargo. The GM roll a Knowledge (Outer Rim) test -> the GM comes up with selling prices for a few nearby planets/stations based on a Base Price multiplied by a Planet Selling Modifier (based the wealth, civilization status etc. of the planet/station) provided in the Planet Characteristics -> Advantages/Threats could be used to give the PCs true/false rumours on market fluctuations at a given location -> Despair could indicates that the seller has tampered with the cargo. When the PCs sell their cargo, the GM sets the default price based on a Base Price multiplied by a Planet Selling Modifier and modified by any market fluctuations. The PCs roll an opposed Negotiate test against a generic merchant to determine the final offer -> the PCs then decide whether or not to accept the final price. The PCs might want to Charm or Deceit the merchant before negotiating the price to affect his/her attitude towards them or his/her estimation of the value of the cargo (modify the Negotiate test dice pool). When the deal is concluded, the PCs pay a standard 5% or 10% custom duty (the percentage should be playtested!) which can be lowered by a Knowledge (Education) test. When the PCs want to purchase a cargo, the GM consult the Planet Characteristics for Major Exports and roll a number of d100 on a Cargo Table (based on the wealth of the Planet) to determine which commodities are available for purchase. Then the GM sets the default price based on a Base Price multiplied by a Planet Buying Modifier and modified by any market fluctuations. The PCs roll an opposed Negotiate test against a generic merchant to determine the final offer -> the PCs then decide whether or not to accept the final price. Again, the PCs might want to Charm the merchant before negotiating the price to affect his/her attitude towards them (modify the Negotiate test dice pool). There are of course other systems that would work just as fine, but the suggested mechanics here are simple and make use of the relevant skills and talents … and narrative play keeps the focus on the characters and their skills, and not on the mechanics. What is needed from the developers to make this system work are: - A set of rules on legal trading in the core book, - A cargo table of 10-15 standard commodities including Base Prices and a d100 randomizer, - Planet characteristics including Planet Selling Modifier, Planet Buying Modifier and Major Exports. … and then the system should be playtested! Upcoming supplements could contain more information on commodities and mechanical details (e.g., determination of how many Enc can be bought or sold; more on market fluctuations and customs).
  3. Throughout the rulebook there is a lot of flavour text about legal trade and intergalactic commence. The players are likely to start out with a light freighter and the group may include a PC trader. Legal trading is likely to be the backbone of a long-term campaign while the PCs are doing a bit of smuggling on the side and help people they meet on their way. Meanwhile, the PCs are accumulating more and more finances which they use for investments in better equipment, infrastructures, projects etc. in order to increase their influence in the galactic hierachy. At the end, they might gain enough influence to be important players in the future of the galaxy and buy themselves a seat in the senate - at least, that is what they hope for. This has been the general structure in our RPG campaigns in the past, and it is also how we envisaged to play SW RPG. Therefore, for our group it is a disappointment that no rules on legal commence and taxation are presented in the beta version. I recommend that characteristics such as major exports and major imports and some sort of trade and taxation modifiers should be listed in the location characteristics for planets, moons, spaceports etc. A list of ordinary cargos, rarity and base price should be in the Gear and Equipment chapter along with rules for determining the amount of available cargo, negotiation of prices, and cargo manipulation. I could certainly use some help in setting the base prices of one encumbrance of Tibanna gas or Kriin wood?! Also, how do PCs become members in a trade federation or guild and what are the advantages and disadvantages? Please use this thread to give your thoughts on trade and taxation mechanics.
  4. The 'Under the Shadow' card in the video has a card text, which is different from the 'Under the Shadow' card text in the English version of the rules, but similar to the card text in the French version of the rules. This seems a bit weird!
  5. Why do you think there will be three copies of each card in the adventure packs? The update on adventure packs said that "These fixed 60 card decks include a new Hero, three copies of nine unique player cards, and the Encounter and Quest cards devoted to the included scenario". The will only be one Hero card and one of each Quest card. As there is 60 cards in each pack, we may assume that there will be one of each of two other cards as well.
  6. I guess the scenarios show how to build the encounter decks by showing which enemy 'spheres' to include in the encounter deck for each scenario.
  7. So, this was the first month without any news... ... let's hope the coming month brings some light into why FFG has neglected the announced update. One can only start guessing - licence problems, difficulties for the game producer, game mechanic trouble?!?
  8. This was rather disappointing! I cannot remember that FFG has misinformed their customers in this way before. Hence I am very sure that they must a good reason to postpone the announced game teaser.
  9. ... and now the error is fixed in the product description.
  10. In the product description it is said that there is 16 hero cards in the core set, but in the Hopeless Gamer interview designer Jason Walden says that there is only 12 heroes. I am confused!!! Do anyone know what the correct number is?
  11. We have town maps (Middenheim/Marienburg/Bögenhafen/Kemberbad/Delberz etc.) placed on the table in front of the players with markers showing the positions of PCs. There are so many visual informations on these maps, which are difficult to communicate to the players, and they provide both players and the GM with ad hoc ideas during play.
  12. stanmons said: Hi, We usually spend most of our sessions in story mode making skill checks. We never run anything else but combat in encounter mode basically because encounter mode tends to slow the pace unnecessarily. In our last session we had a situation where intimidation of NPCs was run in story mode but when things got a little too hot and weapons were drawn we converted into encounter mode and threw initiatives. Our wardancer woodelf acted first and perfomed a stunt to have her blade on a NPC leaders throat. We interrupted encounter mode and reverted back to story mode in which new intimidation check was done with huge bonuses. This happens a lot and game mechanics have difficulties to support this. For example, card recharges and power equilibrium are managed very loosely because time dimensions shift a lot. Not a problem as such but some action cards become questionable as they rely on more managed style of gameplay. It is almost obvious the game designers support a certain style of play but it is not said explicitly what. I hated the adventurers toolkit action cards as they are so tediously complex: have this card recharging while activating that card and so and so. You can see the conflict with our style of gameplay. No one even bothers taking these cards and they comprise of majority in that expansions unfortunately. What are your experiences, have you found any game mechanics to support your style of gameplay? I definitely agree with you that the the game mechanics have difficulties to support social interactions. The combat mechanics work well, but the social encounter mode doesn't. The reason may be that the developers have introduced some 'advanced' social Action Cards, but the 'basic' social Action Cards are missing so most players have to use skill checks instead. We have introduced a modified version of A Song of Ice and Fire RPG ' social encounter rules (there is a thread on this), which works fine for us because we played that system before. Hopefully, the GM toolkit or a later supplement will clarify this!!
  13. We were very sceptical about the idea of a rigorous structure for social encounters when we started playing 'A Game of Thrones' RPG. We used some of the same arguments as used in this thread - that it will interfere with good role-playing discussions, make things depend on die rolls rather than good arguments etc. However, we agreed to try it out. Now, we are glad we did because it has made social encounters much more interesting for us. The structure is in fact not as rigorous has it looks like in the book, and when you know the rules it goes fast with die rolls. The example above by Herr Anulfe is no problem using structured social encounter system; in fact, it looks exactly a standard social encounter in a structured system. The players often start out with one objective and change it during the negotiations, and they almost always use a variety of tactics to influence their opponent. As several people already have pointed out most social interactions can be handled with no or a single test; these simple social encounters do not use a structured system and these are not was this thread is about. Standard social encounters are the ones where the intended outcome is physically or socially dangerous to your opponent or out of character; and they are most often between the players and a major NPC. They have long-term consequences for the story. Complex social encounters are a series of standard social encounters that run for several sessions and the outcome has far-reaching consequences. Complex social encounters often involve a number a major NPCs. The players may try to influence Graf Boris to send his army to invade Nordland because they have been expelled by Theodore Gausser and now they want revenge. In order to influence Graf Boris they have to built a friendship to him and his advisors over a long period of time; and they may try to get his attention by a combination of heroic deeds and simple/standard social encounters. As a GM, the structured system has made me think more about how to handle specific social encounters before play. In the last year I have worked a lot on the potential negative outcome of social encounters. Before I 'cheated' a bit by giving the players the same outcome no matter the result of their skill test in order to keep to story rolling, and they hated me for that because they felt that social skills became useless, especially compared to combat skills. Now, I make a 'dual' storyline and always prepare on how the players may turn a negative social encounter outcome to something less bad or see alternative solutions in order to keep them optimistic.
  14. Munchkin said: Ok, two simple questions that I'm pretty sure I know the answer to. If a mage wants to cast a spell which costs less than his/her wp they don't have to channel power they can just cast the spell. Does this count as a quick cast?In other words, does a mage always have to channel regardless, is it part of the spell casting ritual? At the moment I'm playing that if they have the power they can cast the spell without channeling and it doesn't count as a quick cast. If a spell casting check succeeds but generates a miscast does the spell still go off as intended? I told you they were simple questions. It doesn't count as a quick cast. Quick cast is only when you channel first in the same action window. The spell still goes off as intended.
×
×
  • Create New...