Jump to content

angelicdoctor

Members
  • Content Count

    255
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by angelicdoctor

  1. This approach may result in unnecessary book keeping and might help to bring the game closer to a papers & paychecks game. Per encounter is fine with me. Well, it could, but the idea was that if you travel for a whole day or more than that without any encounters, the healing trance talent won't heal you ... right? So my hack would be to equate one inactive day to, perhaps, 4 encounters worth of healing... so the idea isn't to create more book keeping, but a simple alternate area of use that does not involve an encounter, nor the need to create unnecessary encounters just for the sake of it. Although 4 encounters in one day of in-game is a bit more than average I think, at least in my games. invictus_1693 has a simple suggestion which intrigues me on this.
  2. Oh no! It is not written in the book so I can't do it! Aigh! Gods of diversity and options save me!! Really, Jeger? From all that has been written thus far you remain steadfast in this opinion of me? Tolerance is not enough, I suppose. I.Must.Approve. Well, I don't. At least not in the manner in which you must have it so.
  3. This approach may result in unnecessary book keeping and might help to bring the game closer to a papers & paychecks game. Per encounter is fine with me.
  4. Commies are certainly good at some things, all right. Deadly efficient, in fact. Best in the world, indeed. I'd write more but the KGB-inspired NSA might be reading this now. I still disagree with it, mouthymerc, and I have yet to read any convincing argument to change the mind on the matter.
  5. I have read your comments but remain unconvinced on one issue. The discussion has caused me to make adjustments in my position, i.e. allowance for side bar, and I have been delighted by your last suggestion with one exception. There. Pat yourself on the back, commie. You've made progress.
  6. Well, I guess unless you live in a communist country, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion as am I regarding what the 'spirit' tells you. Where you see limitations, I see opportunity. Ah, well.
  7. Nice breakdown. I would still be an advocate for the last option to be a sidebar thing at best, however. Having been a Star Wars fan since the beginning, it seems more fitting to the spirit of the overall story to minimize this element.
  8. With as challenging as this game can be, I don't have an issue with this update to the Healing Trance.talent.
  9. Neat trick for the Zabrak. Kinda provides an instant danger for such a character to avoid earning conflict, however. I like it!
  10. I present to you my alternate opening for this adventure. Basically a case of mistaken identity. While sitting in the Mos Eisley cantina and trying to keep a low profile, a tough looking Dug enters the establishment. He stands motionless for a moment with the exception of his head as he scans the bar. He appears to be looking for someone. His eyes lock onto one of your own in the group. Squinting briefly, he then begins to make his way walking on his hands as only a Dug could towards your table. He is alone and appears unarmed but given the reputation of his species for their brutal skill as capable brawlers, this offers little comfort. The Dug introduces himself as Bentalbu and remarks that the inquisitor made mention that you would be in the company of associates but failed to mention that there would be so many. Taking a seat next to you, he begins to talk to you as one would giving a mission brief as coming from orders on high. He insists that you are to travel to the planet Athiss located in the Loro Babis system posing as big game hunters. While there you are to investigate and discover what you can about an ancient temple which the inquisitor is adamant exists on the planet's surface. The inquisitor has quietly made arrangements for you and your associates to stay in one of the guest units at The Far Orbit Resort and Lodge. In addition, your transportation to the planet has also been secured. You and your colleagues are to meet with a Captain Han Solo in docking bay 94 in half an hour. Do not offer up any information to anyone concerning the details of this trip. Failure in this regard will ensure the inquisitor's wrath and a shorter lifespan for each of you. At that moment, the bona fide contacts of the inquisitor's enters the cantina. You know this due to the striking resemblance of the lead member in the group to one of your own. The Dug, having also noticed the resemblance, becomes immediately alarmed shouting something about you being Jedi, spies and imposters. He reaches for his blaster. The newly arrived group at the door reacts in kind, the lead member igniting what appears to be some sort of variation on a laser sword emitting a blood red glow, while the rest also reach for their own ranged weapons. The cantina erupts with excitement as the bartender yells, 'No blasters! No blasters!' What do you think?
  11. I've recently created a Mirialan shaman focused almost entirely on the Force eschewing lightsabers and their forms.
  12. This is why I would not necessarily be opposed to a sidebar, optional approach. Further, to satisfy your appetite for some instant pop tart mechanical benefit, I would not be opposed to maintaining the original mechanic of base 50 or +/- 20 Morality and combine it with one of the other benefits, +10XP, +2500 credits or +5XP and +1,000 credits.
  13. I've had the same thought, but I am not sure what a suitable weakness for "Enthusiasm" would be. "Oblivious"? Strangely enough I'd say the weakness for enthusiasm might be over enthusiasm. Exactly. That is why I chose 'mania'.
  14. Players already had that option prior to the update via GM fiat. This would be my preference. That is all I am and have written about these past many posts. Sigh. Again, as a sidebar this matter could be easily resolved. Something along the lines of... Okay, maybe not that silly.
  15. I've had the same thought, but I am not sure what a suitable weakness for "Enthusiasm" would be. "Oblivious"? I am thinking that the pattern for these strengths and weaknesses lies not in the dichotomy but in the excess. Therefore, I would think that the Achilles' heel for enthusiasm might be more like unto mania. I agree. I guess I was imagining someone being so enthusiastic they are oblivious to everything else. Ah, I see. Makes sense.
  16. Bingo! Personally, I'd rate forcing a sapient being into slavery against their will would be worth at least 8 Conflict points. Sadly, there are societies like the Klatoonians and the Twi'leks that encourage their members to voluntarily enter into slavery as a means of escaping their homeworlds for reasons that can be looked up on Wookieepedia. And there are others who allow their ruling bodies to force 'citizens' to provide from their wages a certain amount to provide for the machines of their respective governments in order to fund imperial activities abroad and intimidation at home. If you fail to pay the sum then the 'citizen' is thrown in jail, has his property taken from him or worse. Is coercion on that list? Ah, yes. There it is. So, yeah, slavery is already there.
  17. I've had the same thought, but I am not sure what a suitable weakness for "Enthusiasm" would be. "Oblivious"? I am thinking that the pattern for these strengths and weaknesses lies not in the dichotomy but in the excess. Therefore, I would think that the Achilles' heel for enthusiasm might be more like unto mania.
  18. Pretty sure he did read the updates, because that is what is being discussed.I agree though, I like the Morality update. Being "at the cusp" just didn't make much sense. IMO, that's want 50 Morality is for; a character with 50 morality can be RP'd on a journey to the Light or Dark, or simply in a struggle to maintain some sense of "grayness." I believe I already addressed this with my concerns, amigo.
  19. Why should it have to be a house rule? In D&D, it's assumed players will be good. But the option for evil is there. It's not a house rule. It's presented as an option. Does it get as much attention? No. I don't see an issue with presenting the dark side as an option, while still focusing on the light. It doesn't make light side games any worse by being an option. The GM is still fully within rights to forbid it as an option, and heck, I'd be okay with it being an option in a sidebar instead of the main text with a specific "Talk to your GM to see if this is an option." call out. But to remove the option entirely from the book and saying "Oh, people can just house rule it." is, in my opinion, a bad choice. You present a less complete view. You enforce a "Oh, you're not playing right." sort of mindset that frankly I don't want to see in a game. And remember, only a Sith deals in absolutes. My response or Fun with emoticons! 1. This isn't D&D. 2. Suggest to remove an option that was never in the original text and this is problematic for some? Curious. Still, your 'sidebar' suggestion makes sense. I might buy that. 3. Only Sith deal in absolutes? Is that an absolute statement? Hey, Jagermeister! There just might be a logical fallacy in this one for you to note to the general public. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'. Oh believe me I understand this isn't D&D. But that was an example. So snarky emoticons aren't needed. The original text has also needed five revisions so far! Seems that there were some problems. I would consider the exclusion of options to be a problem, as well. There's no reason not to include this very simple option in the text. It doesn't force a character to be dark side, it doesn't force them to be light. But your method would force them to be neutral. I don't see the benefit in this. In fact, that looks like a flaw, to me and others. Not needed? But I was having so much fun with them. As I alluded to previously, I may be inclined to agree to the sidebar approach and to move forward with your (A)D&D reference, make it an optional rule like proficiencies. Wow. That dates me a bit.
  20. Why should it have to be a house rule? In D&D, it's assumed players will be good. But the option for evil is there. It's not a house rule. It's presented as an option. Does it get as much attention? No. I don't see an issue with presenting the dark side as an option, while still focusing on the light. It doesn't make light side games any worse by being an option. The GM is still fully within rights to forbid it as an option, and heck, I'd be okay with it being an option in a sidebar instead of the main text with a specific "Talk to your GM to see if this is an option." call out. But to remove the option entirely from the book and saying "Oh, people can just house rule it." is, in my opinion, a bad choice. You present a less complete view. You enforce a "Oh, you're not playing right." sort of mindset that frankly I don't want to see in a game. And remember, only a Sith deals in absolutes. My response or Fun with emoticons! 1. This isn't D&D. 2. Suggest to remove an option that was never in the original text and this is problematic for some? Curious. Still, your 'sidebar' suggestion makes sense. I might buy that. 3. Only Sith deal in absolutes? Is that an absolute statement? Hey, Jagermeister! There just might be a logical fallacy in this one for you to note to the general public. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.
  21. I was just doing some brainstorming on the list of strengths and weaknesses and came up with a few more for your consideration. Strength #1 Humility - The character possesses a quality by which he or she considers his own defects and has a humble opinion of himself and willingly submits himself to the will of the Force and to others for the sake of the Force. Weakness #1 Abjection - This would be considered an excess of humility, and could easily be derogatory to one's dignity as a sentient being; or it might serve only to pamper pride in others, by unworthy flattery, which would encourage a tyranny, another's arbitrariness, and his or her arrogance. Strength #2 Modesty - The character exhibits a high regard for decency in behavior, speech and dress. Rarely does he suffer fools. He disdains rash acts or those which bring unnecessary attention to one's self. Weakness #2 Indifferent - The danger of this character strength is the appearance of or the reality of being aloof, closing one's self from social interaction, the kindness or aid of others.
  22. Again, I am not dogmatically stating that you must start somewhere in between dark and light. If you want your players to start as a dark side demoniac or light side angelic then do so and have fun with that. House rule it and be on your way. However, as Sam Stewart stated recently on an episode of the podcast I never listen to, it is assumed that the characters would start out on the light side. I have read no convincing reason to start otherwise as written in an official set of core rules devoted to Star Wars role-playing. Deviate as it please one, however, it is my opinion that such should be that, a deviation of one's own conjuration. Oy.
  23. Take it easy, amigo. I was just offering my opinion, a dissenting one, but an opinion nonetheless. That is what this forum is for, no? And this based on the precedent set by the six films in their entirety. Agree with me? That's great. No? Then it is no skin off my nose. I am taking it easy, I'm sorry you feel this was an attack on you - which from your post seems to be the way you took it (although I may of course be mistaken), but it wasn't personal nor directed specifically towards you (or anyone else). Whether I agree with your opinion or not is irrelevant. I thought the forum was for discussions using proper arguments, not merely opinions, but sure if opinions is all it's about then why even discuss? Silly me. I thought that we could "use this board to discuss the beta test with the other people involved, post questions and feedback, and get news updates from the Star Wars Roleplaying Game team." Arguments, proper or otherwise, and when done in charity are a bonus. As I have learned in my study of logical fallacies, however, it is almost never helpful to tell someone he or she has erred by way of argumentum ad <fill in the blank>. It assumes you know what you are writing about and is also condescending. As we say here in Texas, 'you attract more flies with honey than with vinegar'.
  24. Sweet little goal-post move there. Basically you are saying if you wanted to play a Maul-like character, you'd have to start him out as an innocent child because...well, just because you don't think the game should allow characters to be started at either Morality extreme with a backstory that got them there. That seems a pretty arbitrary way to sustain your point. Nope. Missed point. Entirely.
×
×
  • Create New...