Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About d4rkwing

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    San Tan Valley, Arizona, United States
  1. Is this the link you were looking for? https://www.facebook.com/PhoenixFFGRPG
  2. In the FFG star wars rpg universe Archaeologist specialists ARE by implication trained in Melee. Look at Stunning Blow and Knockdown. Stunning blow is a melee talent AND is a chokepoint for the the left side of the tree. Knockdown requires at least one rank in Melee to be remotely useful. The other left side talents (other than perhaps well rounded and dedication) are made for someone that gets in a lot of fights. I hear what you're saying about incentives but you're reading things in the talent that don't exist. Either you want a cooperative story or you don't. The talent RAW says nothing either way about it.
  3. I am aware of the talent but you shouldn't be forced to spend one of the choices (or even be forced to spend 5xp) on something that should already be a bonus career skill. I'm all for cooperative story telling, but nothing in the talent rules suggests that. Furthermore, if the GM and players want a cooerative story, they don't need a talent to do that.
  4. I've been playing it over a month and I have to say I'm a little disappointed with the Archaeologist specialization. It has a few flaws. The focus on knowledge is okay but not nearly as good as Scholar. The focus on brawn, basically the entire left side of the tree, doesn't mesh well with other Explorer specializations (namely with respect to Piloting). Even the artwork shows the Archaeologist using a ranged weapon. That being said, I would be okay with the left side of the tree if they changed the artwork and made melee an Archaeologist bonus career skill. The right side is essentially a boring rearrangement of Scholar talents. Except for Museum Worthy, which is probably the lamest unique 25 point talent there is. 25xp for a talent that lets you do a knowledge check to get information (once per session!). Whoever thought of that must be some kind of genius. Getting information is the point of knowledge skills. You don't need a 25 xp talent to use them. To give the designers the benefit of the doubt, they might have intended the talent to mean you can use Education in place of Lore. The problem with that is all Explorers get Lore, and the Archaeologist can even double up on it during character creation because it's one of their Bonus skills. Basically, if you're an Archaeologist, you already have lore (and if you don't you're better off spending the 25xp to get it).
  5. Knocking someone down can certainly be a good use of a Triumph. The talent Knockdown, however, is redundant with the spirit of the triumph rules and is a *bad* talent from a game design point of view. Having the talent there means some GM will go, well, there's a talent for that, therefore you can't do it if you don't have the talent. This is horrible and whichever dev decided it was a good idea should write a public appology.
  6. The other reason for having setback dice is to add to the tension of the roll. If they get too often negated, that whole mechanic/flavor gets tossed out the window.
  7. The main thing you will miss by not having the core rulebook is character creation and talent trees for the various specializations. The other things like equipment and vehicles the GM can explain as they become part of the adventure. Basically if your GM lets you borrow his book when you want to create or upgrade a character you won't need the Core rulebook.
  8. Hi All! I was contemplating making a protocol droid character (like C-3PO) but I was wondering how this would work in combat. Assuming I can't directly attack anyone, what are the best things I can do during combat to help us win? If it matters I was thinking Colonist: Scholar would be the closest match to a protocol droid. Thanks!
  9. I loved Free Fall and Golem but Strange Flesh was, in my opinion, terrible. It wasn't a detective novel (the only detective spent the entire time in the interview room). It didn't make good use of the background setting. The characters were one dimensional and uninteresting. It was everything I never wanted in a book. Does anyone else feel this way? Did anyone actually like it and would like to explain why?
  10. I feel the same way. It took me slightly longer to get into Golem (than Freefall) but once I did it was harder to put down. Both books are excellent in my opinion. I feel like there's been a dearth of good sci-fi detective novels and this series seems to be filling the niche nicely.
  11. Core rule book page 22: "Forfeiting Agendas- Some card abilities require the Corporation or Runner to forfeit an agenda. When a player forfeits an agenda, he selects any agenda in his score area and permanently removes it from the game (it does not go to Archives or the heap). He no longer scores points for the forfeited agenda."
  12. The basic concepts are easy to grasp. But realize it's easy to do things wrong, or miss things, the first few times. For instance, each runner starts with 4 memory units. That is only listed in the rule book once as far as I can tell. Also, some of the terms represent easy concepts, but use a more flavorful name. Like stack and heap. One of them is the draw pile, the other the discard pile. It's easy to confuse which is which the first few times playing but you should be able to tell from context. If a card says pick a card you want from the stack it will also say shuffle it afterwards (by this you can think, oh I have to shuffle it, therefore they must be talking about the draw pile). Or you can just look in the glossary. I know on my first time I accidentally paid the rez cost to install a card. Don't do that. But overall, once you get a few games in, and especially if you're playing with other people that have experience, it should be pretty straight forward. If you don't have anyone experienced to play with, read the rules forum as a lot of the issues posters have are common ones. The good news is everything "makes sense" once you learn how it actually works, it's just not always obvious the first time you experience it.
  13. Our 4e group played Descent 2e and liked it. Or at least I did and I think the others did too. We played it because 2 of our players were out for the week and couldn't play D&D. The guy who DMs really liked the way the quests were written and is planning on incorporating some of the mechanics (specifically encounters with objectives other than killing everything) into our game.
  • Create New...