nobble

Members
  • Content count

    75
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About nobble

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 04/01/1969

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Cymru
  1. I paid by credit card, and am talking to them to get a refund I feel like they have treated me terribly and the smug final reply i got just cemented the fact that they truely do not care about there community, we are just ways to make money The refund was only the cost of the product not the shipping, which was 150% of the product cost. So they can enjoy the products they make, but i will not be buying anymore
  2. it gets better... Ok I am officially devastated, I feel utterly let down by a company I championed in my local area, one I have brought many to buy their products by 'converting' many gamers and even introduced non gamers to the hobby using their products. People who have gone on to buy FFGs books and games. And now they are basically telling me we gave you an option to use an extremely dodgy method of shipping, one that cost over $30 mind you (for three decks of cards!!!!!!) I got it sent to a place that I have never had problems getting things sent to before.. a place I have had products sent to from all over the world. No more.. they have effectively stolen $50+ from me .. so I am afraid I have only one recourse. FFG you are now black listed.. I will never purchase another of your products, I will never run another one of your games, I will never suggest anyone purchases your products.. in fact I will use this example of how shodderly I have been treated as an example why people should spend their money else where.. I know this means nothing to the bottom line but it is the only thing I can do now. I will be selling the whole of my back catalogue of games, first to friends and then on ebay
  3. Do get me started on the Adversary decks If you do order them from Fantasy flight, and pay the ridiculous shipping costs. They then get delivered at my work before anyone was there and then you get the run around for 9 weeks as USPS don't answer any inquiries and FFG palm you off by saying it will take up to 8 weeks to deliever and they will not do anything before that time, and now I'm 9 weeks in and they are now ignoring my emails.. So I'm $50+ out of pocket I don't have the adversary decks and I'm just leave feeling completely deflated and betrayed by a company I thought cared about its customers, seriously thinking about black listing them, selling all my books (i have everything for Star Wars) and never buying another FFG product
  4. Plus if you do order them from Fantasy flight, and pay the ridiculous shipping costs. They then get delivered at my work before anyone was there and then you get the run around for 9 weeks as USPS don't answer any inquiries and FFG palm you off by saying it will take up to 8 weeks to deliever and they will not do anything before that time, and now I'm 9 weeks in and they are now ignoring my emails.. So I'm $50+ out of pocket I don't have the adversary decks and I'm just leave feeling completely deflated and betrayed by a company I thought cared about its customers, seriously thinking about black listing them, selling all my books (i have everything for Star Wars) and never buying another FFG product
  5. Awesome package, an exception is caused when you try to edit the gungan energy shield in weapons, due to its damage mod of -1, any chance of a fix as i'm home brewing the damage lower across the board and it'd be nice to still use the package
  6. So I've had my first play test of these rules... first opinion is .. needs more playtesting but my feeling of the system went from, do not want to play this system any more, at the start of the session, to mmmmm I may have something here... which is a good sign. stuff that needs work on, new armour rules need more looking at.. .talent trees still need work... possible reworking of the Natural (skill) talents to run from Destiny points instead of once a session... Combat flowed just as quickly, which was good.. but first of all i need to run another few combats with no changes and see exactly the impact of my changes prior to changing more.. oh yeah and finially I House ruled in a good dog fighting rule system totally based on pilot skill, that needs expanding and work on Start combat with an opposed piloting role, modified by talents and the handling of the ship you are in. If you win you get behind the opponent, into a better position etc.. difference in successes increases the losers attack chance, difference in advantage adds set back to the attacks. a basic idea but has a few legs, also nicked DarthGM's (off of Order 66 podcast) idea of Swerve (a parry like manoeuvre) that allows ships to soak damage with system strain, this added lots to the combat... even though in the one test fight we had, it did run a little long.. a high pilot skill vs a highly talented pilot.. the talented pc won in the end.. work in progress
  7. So the big musclebound tough guy shouldn't bit able to take more damage the the small mousy guy why? Because they don't in the movie, will be his answer I'm sure. that is a little mean ... but I'd have to echo Yepesnopes.. they do they have more wound threshold.. what you are advocating is the strong tough guy should be able to take significantly more damage than the small mousey guy... and yes they should.. but how much is that So a human with Wound threshold of 15 and brawn of 2 could take 8 normal wookie punches (normal being 1 success, from a wookie with 3 brawn) A Bothan (soak 1, same wnd threshold) could only take 5.. but a wookie could take 20+.. more wnd threshold and soak of 3 The whole thing gets worse with higher brawn.. a soak 4 or 5 wookie could take normal hits from the brawn 3 wookie until the cows come home.. The issue is because damage comparatively is so low, small changes to brawn have bigger impacts than if there was more damage and higher wnd thresholds... If we for instance doubled all soak from armour, soak from talents and brawn has a lesser impact, as long as we also upped the damage weapons do, doubling perhaps.. doing this would lessen the impact of a high brawn stat, and perhaps get brawn to where it should be.. it should have some effect on damage soak, but it currently has too much.. while would this idea may be a better system (after balancing) would require a lot more changing of the system and this is not what I want.. I want a simple change that doesn't invalidate other parts of the system... Though it may not seem it to some I am trying small changes to improve the system (imho)
  8. Hi I've been playing this game since the original beta, running the EOTE beginner game about 8 times now, I am currently running a campaign that only meet 3 times a year, but we do large sessions about 12-14 hours. My other group is on hiatus but we did about a year meeting every week (only had 2 or 3 missing sessions, when i was out of the country) so they have about 600xp post character gen. Starting up again when I've finished the One Ring Game I'm running (a game that actually does a brilliant job of replicating its setting), and I've finished tweaking with this system so it no longer grates on me.. Over this time I have noticed that at the beginning every game was awesome, it really had that sweet spot of danger, combat misses and peril. As time progressed and the characters got more experienced, damage went up. dice pools when up, soak went really high and they were missing less, as were the bad guys, damage to most was a lot and people were going down very quickly having only acted once.. maybe twice.. initiative became more and more important.. and who ever went first won the combats.. the dice pool bloat got a little unmanageable.. The whole soak mechanic grated on me, as not very star wars-y, plus some of my players complained about the talents as the were mostly pointless roadbumps to get to dedication... the layouts of the talent trees seems bizarre and illogical and just punished some specs with no reason. Slicer and Mechanic especially have these issues with only one path through the whole tree.. soo it is just one long road bump... on the other hand some were laid out well with talents, leading to improved talents and finally master talents.. Then you have the issue with the stalker talent... why is this talent alone in all 'Bonus to 2 skills' talent that it gives a boost dice and not remove a set back dice like all the others do (apart for inventor and that does other stuff as well)... All other boost dice giving talents only give them under specific circumstances... There seems to be no rhyme and reason for this ... Why does Brawn not only increase your wound threshold, but also your soak.. so high soak has a double dip effect of stop you taking damage but also increase the amount you can take prior to detrimental effects... Why does brawn give you WAY more soak than armour that is designed to stop the damage... this puts too much onus on brawn and leads to situations where systematically you can have character ignore small arms fire (lets not go into the narratively here I'm talking pure system) Why does combat not effectively recreate Star Wars.... why does space combat not take into account the skill of a pilot (one roll, gain the advantage, that hotshots can ignore)... The long and short of it is This is a brilliant system the narrative dice mechanic I love, I love loads and loads of it.. it just has niggles and I want to fix them so I love the system more.. Not play-tested as yet, but will be soon I'm not 100% sure about the skill costs, they may be too high, currently testing them with a couple of my old groups. I don't want to completely stop people getting high skills, but I want it to cost, hopefully boosting the 'value' of talents I like the idea of gm ok for the higher skills, but basically any change/advancement is with the GM say-so, but it is nice to pre-warn players they may not get / be able to buy an upgrade. For attribute increases I removed dedication completely, as it cheapened the talents, and players seem to rush through the tree to get to dedication. Also some trees the 'path' to dedication was 90ish exp others (slicer) was close to 180exp.. this is a little inexplicable... Removing Brawn from soak I feel is needed, but I'm not sure if it will mean that too much damage creeps through, and players have a chance of being one shotted, which is never fun.. i like the cover giving soak, and I feel this would work for thinner cover than could be shot through.. need to think that through, at the moment I still prefer the increase in difficulty to shoot someone in cover.. Engaged combatants do not have cover from each over, so we may need something else here to bridge the short fall.. again needs playtesting... but I don't feel giving soak because someone has a lightsabre is the best way to do this Total Cover as i believe someone else mentioned is definitely a common sense rule.. Rules cause problems if they do not recreate the setting they are meant to be simulating.. these rules currently do not do this... high soak is too good, too effective in this system I didn't give my players anything, they earn everything through long play sessions and searching for items.. .the wookie's earned 1 Brawn from dedication to take him to 5 brawn (6 with force powers), he bought the 2 points of enduring and padded armour takes him to 10 soak.. Your advice is good though, rule do not cause problems it is how you implement them, which is why I am trying to make my changes to the system easy to use and not requiring huge/any changes to existing material Thank you all once again... (I'm glad I didn't mention my Tree-less Talent systems I'm working on in the background )
  9. Thank you all for your replies, mega busy tonight so I'll reply more fully tomorrow morning .. to the people still staying I see no need for this.. thank you for your opinion, but do you feel you may be clogging the thread now with the same opinion quoted over and over.. to everyone else I'll read over your excellent replies.. thank you again
  10. I totally understand how to relax and bend the rules.. It really may not seem that way but I'm really not focused on rules and getting them right all the time, but I like to be consistant, I never fudge the dice, I roll openly and don't use a gm screen (apart for as a table lookup) so players if they are so inclined can read my notes upside down... they would only be cheating them selves if they did so..... My mods are to build a firm foundation on which I can blather about ... if someone comes up with something cool... i'll let them break the rules a bit.. but rule of cool only works once, max twice... but again straying into GM style and narratively working around issues in the system, I want to try to fix them
  11. Going to start at the bottom an unskilled human shooting at medium range as you described above, who aims twice will hit 32% of the time, remove 1 level of cover, or down to short range (its the same) and it equates to 41% chance, someone skilled (YG) it goes up to 46% This is think is about right.. going to the level i was dealing with with my prior group (YYYYY) it goes up to 87% The fights may miss more, but with the changes to soak, hits are going to hurt more, either wnd threashold or strain (parry and duck) Force Sensitives haven't been nerfed they still have these options and they get the improved versions which are pure awesome.. By allowing non sensitives to use these talents I feel I have just plugged a gap in the system and added something that should have been added since the beginning The Dive manoeuver is for situations where cover is not an option... yes cover is always a better choice, but some player may also want to run down that corridor charging the bad guys etc... About the skill cost.. yes I may need to look at this, but currently one of my group is sitting at the 600 xp mark.. we played for over a year every week, hiatus atm.. my other group not so much of a problem only sit at 150xp mark.. but this is version 1 of my mods.. I am not submitting a finished product.. beta testing etc is needed but thank you for the comments
  12. I'm sorry you took my prior post to mean that I didn't want comments, I do, I like them, but if the comments state over and over that I shouldn't need to change the system, and then quote me lots of examples on how I can work around the issues.. then they are just repeating over and over and over something I understand, so I apologise again if I may have come across a little short about those type of comments... I understand all of this I can narrate around lots of things, but I feel the system needs fixing, and I've been thinking over how to do this since EOTE beta... this is my current fix.. This is fun to me I like trying to work our perceived flaws in systems I hope it will make me a better GM and designer of stuff for my players
  13. My issue isn't with roleplaying games in general or how to actually play to player/characters strengths or weaknesses. My issue is I feel that the FFG role playing system can do better in simulating the Star Wars feel.... Roleplaying systems are designed, or are required to simulate in some way the look and feel of the genre you are wanting to play. The current vanilla FFG system is an amazing system, it would be brilliant at simulating the feel of all the 40k RPG games out there, better in my opinion than the existing systems by FFG. It is not a good system for star wars.. Star Wars is about fast quick combat where the heroes dodge out of the way of incoming fire and the bad guys wear lots of armour.. its about space dog-fighting.. its about the force... I am trying to adjust this current system to enable it to capture that feel... starting with combat and then moving on to other areas I feel are lacking... emphasis on the I. I'm sure other people may love the system RAW, but I'm putting these rules together as an optional set.. if you don't like how X works perhaps this may work better. Now I'm sure we could discuss ad infinitum the pros and cons on what I am doing here, but that is by the by I understand other people may not like what I am doing, but I'm putting this stuff up for those that might.. and may even go 'I like what you did here but wouldn't it be better if you did Y...' I really don't need to be convinced that the system is better RAW and how I need to narrate around the issues, I feel that specific topic has had many many many posts, in many many many threads... These are my alt rules.. I think that they may work.. I hope they will.. and I hope some of you out there may like them
  14. A fair point, and it doesn't always feel realistic to have the toughest guys always take on the toughest target. But again this is true of almost any game. A Paladin and Wizard in D&D will have different ACs and hit points, and if the Wizard is hit he's probably down, so you have to structure your encounters accordingly. On the player side, the job of the heavy is to run interference, so if the Wizard/Slicer pacifist is being threatened, the heavy is supposed to jump in there and put his body in the way...one of those unwritten rules of player conduct. If your games are like most others, your players will develop Nemeses over time and those Nemeses will probably have a good idea of the strengths and weaknesses of their opponents. Imagine the Nemesis conferring with his henchman about how to neutralize the players, destroy their armour, stun them, hack into their data pads, etc...there's no reason you can't bring all that to bear. Most definitely I can do this, once or twice, but it will feel like GM dickery, if I break the wookies vibro-ax or steal their equipment or have mobs that target specific weakness, all or most of the time... I prefer to delay that issue or even solve it so it will never happen(i hope), so I don't have to think up weird and wonderful thing to do to my players every week... sometimes yes.. not all the time though.. I guess my bottom line and answer to people saying you can work round all the issues in the system is... Why should we have to? Why should be have to narrative around the system short comings, why should I change the way the rules work from situation to situation (this is a terrible idea, as it breaks what I feel is the gm/player compact, and is a little bit of gm dickery) I really like this system I love the dice mechanic and I'm trying to propose/find a solution to the issues I feel the system has and from what some people are saying, how they narrate around stuff like that.. plot armour etc.., other have issues as well
  15. Wouldn't a group of 5 stormtroopers (with the really big rifles) do enough damage to start laying in the hurt? Two minion groups far enough away from the target will get several rounds to shoot before they're in danger or being turned to paste by the Marauder. Throw one of those glue grenades into the mix to slow him down (or even just generic grenades) and some "set for stuns" and your Walking Carpet is going to be the Walking Dead in short order. I am not saying I can't kill or challenge this wookie, I most certainly can, but I'm worried that something that will be challenging for the wookie will obliterate any of the other characters in my group... going to the other extreme the slicer pacifist with a soak of 3... By almost leveling the playing field. the wookie would have 4 soak, under my alt rules, I can put in blaster pistol wielding thugs and threaten the wookie and not completely splatter-cate everyone else in the group. These rules also slow down the progression to huge dice pool where no-one has any chance of missing and everyone does oodles of damage and its whoever wins initiate win the combat... boring combat... my players (i hope) now have more options in combat and more choice in what to do. How to mitigate damage, avoid being hit etc... but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and well I'm chowing down at the end of the month for a good long session with one of my gaming groups.. the other is on hiatus as I'm currently running another game for them