• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dbm_

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Preston, Lancashire, United Kingdom
  1. To be fair, they are just trying to drum up discussion, and succeeding. This only influences whether you choose to pre-order. The book will be sold via word-of-mouth once it hits the streets and live or die on that basis. Once you know more, based on flicking through the book or from other people’s feedback, you can make an informed decision. Right now all we have is... a new hope
  2. It’s almost impossible to fluff-up a generic book, since fluff is basically world-info rather than game-info. The closest you can get is example worlds, I suppose.
  3. I’m asking if they support bits-n-mortar, where companies give a free PDF when you buy the book. That would increase book sale, not reduce them
  4. I tweeted them, but haven’t had any reply. Maybe if more people asked we’d get a response?
  5. Really hard to say. Looking at existing products on offer they seem to be either physical or digital but I haven’t found one that offers the choice of both. I’ll ask...
  6. Just pre-ordered via a UK stockist. Do FFG participate in the Bits-n-Mortar scheme?
  7. I would suggest the problem here might be putting too much into a single roll? You wouldn’t typically resolve combat in a single to-hit roll, so similarly don’t set up a single ‘social’ roll to decide an interaction. Let the face-dood have a roll to read the mark, another to use some relevant knowledge or experience to set up a proposition that should be attractive, another roll to read the reaction to that offer and a final roll to close the deal. Split the interaction down into chunks relate to each of these skill uses. This also has the benfit of ‘course correcting’ the interaction. When we play we use this approach and if the player gets a poor roll they will adapt their characterisation, choosing ‘less good’ options or deliberately narrating a clumsy interaction if they got a poor roll. Most of my players are pretty good at this, so we rarely have people ‘playing up’ (i.e. trying to be more eloquent than in real life) but if this does happen then the system still helps, with the GM narrating a positive response from NPCs, providing more insight to help shape the next stage in the process etc.
  8. The similarities between polyhedrals in Cortex vs Genesys are coincidental at best, I would suggest. The interaction between building a pool in the two systems is very different. In general, d4s are a disadvantage in Cortex, so the closest fit would be adding a black dice, I guess.
  9. DnD 4e had a good mechanism whereby you had to fail multiple saves (usually 3) before the fatal effect kicked in. It allowed for countermeasures. In HERO attacks like this generate points of damage and if they do enough to kill you you're dead, but if they don't the power has no effect (IIRC - not a big player of HERO). How does force choke work in SW?
  10. It does, but you can still use the fantasy ones, too, as I understand it from reviews.
  11. Well, in GURPS for example the ability to fly is a power with a cost that can be modified by such things as maximum speed or altitude and whether or not you need wings. The ability to travel at speed on the ground is also a power with a cost that gets a multiplier based on speed etc. Vampires and werewolves (for example) can change shape to access different abilities. So generic powers of flight could apply to a robot transformed into a plane, a jet pack or a spell of flight. Same core rule, just a different price due to implementation. A car or horse or the ability to run like the Flash would also use the same basic power. If Genesys uses an effect based system to build a wide range of powers then very few completely new rules systems should be needed to implement different genres.
  12. @Bellyon My point was that I think it's very unlikely we will get 'fantasy powers', 'sci-fi powers' etc. It's for more likely IMO that we will get a big chunk of general powers followed by genre-specific guidance on how to implement them appropriately. I also think we should anticipate guidance on how to create adversaries plus a small number of examples rather than extensive bestiaries for each genre. A combat droid / iron golem / clank solider could all use very similar stats.
  13. I doubt the game will be structured like that. If you look at a comparable game like Cypher System then a third of the book is focussed on character rules, which includes all the powers and special abilities. Each genre has eight pages dedicated to it, explaining how to use the core rules in a genre-applicable way. That's about one tenth of the overall page count. I would expect a similar approach for Genesys; a core, flexible system for powers or abilities then separate guidance and example mixes to get you started on the genres. The setting books (when they arrive) will predominantly focus on 'recipes' for putting the core mechanics together to support the world, in addition to the 'fluff' of course. Maybe the genre books will include further rules or new powers/ abilities but that is actually a poor way to make a long-lived game. GURPS 3e used that approach and it eventually caused big problems as subsystems and powers / abilities from different world books clashed. 4e took an approach of having as much of the mechanics as possible defined at the beginning and just using the genre books to provide 'recipes' using those rules, for the most part. Since Genesys is built off a fairly deep lineage (WFRP 3e and three lines of SW books) they can hopefully jump to a fairly complete set of powers on their first try.
  14. I suppose it depends whether you are thinking film version or comics version. The film version of the characters are capable but not 'super'. In the comic books some of the Guardians are really powerful. The book professes to address sci-fi, but not supers I think?
  15. A question to anyone who played or ran: with regards the non-combat encounters where there specific sub-systems that applied to different types of activity (like the Dual of Wits in Burning Wheel, for example) or was it more free-from where the GM just chooses a skill based on player actions? I guess one of the things I'm particularly interested in is whether there are more 'mechanically rich' subsystems for non-combat activities.