Jump to content

MaliciousOnion

Members
  • Content Count

    142
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MaliciousOnion

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Jabber
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Australia
  1. I don't get it. Are women more predisposed to be on the cutting edge of traditional roleplaying game mechanics?
  2. Aptitudes don't give the power to the GM, they keep it within the ruleset. A GM saying no is a very different thing.
  3. Social skills can always be used to give bonuses to subsequent Influence tests, particularly for large things. Think of it as the haggling before the transaction.
  4. I want to point out that, statistically, a 50% chance to hit in TT (i.e. 4+) is exactly the same as a 50% chance to hit in DH, regardless of number of hits.
  5. C'mon, that was an easy one. Let me make this sarcasm thing easier for you to understand: next time I'm being sarcastic, I'll underline it. By the way, I really like your posting. (Seriously though, my point was that your attempt to JUDGE BY THIS THREAD was flawed and shouldn't have occurred.)
  6. I just did a census of every single person alive and can confirm that GauntZero and MILLANDSON are the only two people in the entire world who like the new presentation. (I like it, too.)
  7. I'm no game designer but I imagine there's potential problems in combat when adding psychic powers (including navigator powers) and/or vehicles (including space ships). Sure, these things work OK (mostly) in the individual rulesets but not so well together. I'm really confused as to how you think that FFG can just mash five separate rulesets together and call it a day.
  8. I just wanted to point out that I think this is a terrible idea, forcing prospective players (ie. us) to buy a minimum of two books just to play the game. Even if the individual books are cheaper, even if they're packaged in a starter bundle, there's a chance you'll alienate new players through perceived complexity. Ideally, you either have each module stand on its own (much like the current games as a whole, except have them work together properly), or you have a base core rulebook that is playable on its own across a broad but shallow range of settings, then additional splatbooks delve down into finer detail (like any single current game). Like cps says, it's not just a matter of fixing characteristics or psychic powers or advancement, etc. You need to make sure that every element works with every other element, for every possible scenario. It's not impossible, as I said, just very time- and resource-consuming. Which means FFG need to divert those resources from maintaining their current lines in order to create this hypothetical universal ruleset, and while they're doing that, they're not generating revenue from new products in the current lines.
  9. There's no way a unified system would work with either the system as it currently is, or a moderately modified system. It would require extensive re-writing of the rules, across all aspects. Then there'd be an inordinate amount of testing to ensure everything works properly and scales well. It's probably more effort than FFG's willing to dedicate for a system that may or may not be more profitable than what they've currently got - not to mention the costs involved in developing such a game.
  10. So you're judging the rules without having actually used them? Not to mention your argument is grossly subjective. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by an obduction report. According to the Oxford dictionary, obduction is "the sideways and upwards movement of the edge of a crustal plate over the margin of an adjacent plate".
  11. Exactly! What I think they should do is publicly release the rules in an unfinished state (let's call this a beta state, in honour of the alternative video format from the 1980s). Of course, to protect their intellectual property, they should only release it for a nominal fee, say $20. Concurrent to this they could run some sort of discussion group (to borrow from the ancient Romans, let's call it a forum). My idea is that prospective consumers can buy this beta version and test it out with their friends, then go to the forum (which could be made available online to facilitate global interaction) and discuss their thoughts and ideas. FFG could then take these discussions and make changes to the beta version, perhaps in incremental releases. What do you think?
  12. This is my opinion, and I stand beside it. If anyone takes insult from it, methinks they protest too loudly. I've always said that someone's opinion can't be wrong. I stand corrected.
  13. A loss of fluff potential? Before they had absolutely no character, they were just midless automatons bent on destroying everything. They could have easily been a grey goo type of threat and they would have had the same level of personality. Basically, by making a race of xenos unknowable, you're making it difficult for some people to define their motivations. By giving them character, a person can look at them and say, "ok, I know what they want and I know how I can use that." I'm not saying that everyone's going to face this problem of an unknowable xenos race but a lot more people will be able to understand a knowable one.
  14. Seconding MILLANDSON's anger at your posting. Had you ever considered that the alpha playtesters had broken the ruleset and had reported it to FFG, but FFG hadn't done anything about it?
×
×
  • Create New...