Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kelann08

  • Rank
  • Birthday 02/16/1982

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Rockwall, Texas, United States
  1. I'm looking for some resources akin to those made for Edge. I know it's early in release, but I'm hoping someone is working on a character creation sheet that incorporates both Edge and Age. I would expect many people are just treating them as the same game even though FFG sees them as separate lines. Any suggestions? I've found talent trees but that's about it so far. Something that includes a breakdown of character creation options would be very helpful.
  2. I put together an updated version of Gribble's sheets to bring it up to date with the Core Rulebook: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B81dmvsSRmGHZ1NOMEU1ZzkzcWs The formatting isn't perfect, but all the page numbers and statistics should be correct. Let me know if anyone finds an error. Brilliant, I've been looking for this. Now we just need it updated to the AoR core book...
  3. I hope they continue to tackle this divided by sectors. I like the regional designation. It helps me better physically sort my homebrew adventures.
  4. My group played there once and I've seen a few playing there on Saturdays. We are sticking to playing at my house right now and are pretty full up but I bet if you dropped by and asked around, you might have some luck. I know Madness has a guild on Board Game Geek so you might try posting in their forums. If you find a group, let me know. I'm GMing right now and I'd love to be in a group as a player.
  5. All the game companies I've had experience with use fourth quarter to mean Oct/Nov/Dec. The only companies who consider fourth quarter any differently are usually financial companies.
  6. Got mine yesterday at my FLGS, was very please/surprised.
  7. 1. I've answered most questions posed towards me. If I missed some, please point them out to me. Sometimes, I didn't answer specific lines because I was focused on another line of conversation that was going on in the thread, because that portion was more important to me at the time, so there are probably a few I really did miss. 2. As opposed to running people off by accusing them of not being roleplayers, of not understanding the game, of not understanding roleplaying, of being minmaxers? The only thing I actually badgered anyone about was them telling me I was factually wrong about something without providing a single shred of evidence I was wrong. Factually wrong. Not an opinion. FACT. I'm sorry, but if someone is going to accuse someone of being wrong, they don't get to just get it accepted as truth, they have to prove it. 3. Oddly, we are three conversations away from where I started in this thread, yet for some reason you can't catch on that I'm not talking about the same thing anymore, and so have obviously dropped that line of discussion, yet for some reason you are implying that I am still arguing the same points. Very difficult when we aren't even having the same conversation. We are currently discussing whether the specific names of careers and specializations have meaning or if its the capabilities that they embody that has true meaning. You are welcome to join the conversation of course, but you don't seem to actually want to, instead content to warn people off from discussing things with that person who is badgering on the same points even though we are three conversations away from the original point he joined. The topic may have shifted, your tactics have not. Why would I wade into yet another debate when all it does is fuel your need to argue? This has gone well beyond any kind of rational discussion and has instead become a way for you to get all the attention you crave. Also, you missed three questions in the post you quoted.
  8. Your character has been sniped many times, he just doesn't know when to lay down and be dead. That's a metaphor.
  9. I ask questions because some of the statements are absurd. If someone is going to insinuate that I do not find roleplaying important because I don't adhere to the idea of the names of careers and specializations being 100% literal, then I ask questions because that is a leap of logic that makes ZERO sense. If someone is going to accuse someone of something with a shaky foundation, don't be surprised if questions that point out those shaky foundations are posed. Its a basic debate method, with a history spanning two and a half millennia, and if debate is not allowed on this forum, I'm not sure why the forum exists. Also, I'm not even sure you are reading my posts. I've made many a long post in which I defend my position and the reason for it. I've also made several posts that are just one question, because people always seem to avoid answering the questions that are included in the longer posts of my position. If people can't answer questions about their view, its probably not a strong position now is it? And at least I'm asking questions about the actual discussion taking place, rather than an offtopic post taking potshots at someone because they have a different point of view than me. So unless you have something that actually addresses the actual subject of conversation, rather than accusing me of being oh so bad for debating my point of view, I suggest you kindly be on your way. Maybe if you treated it less like a debate and more like conversation, you'd get better responses. I've been reading your crap since the beginning and have just decided its better to warn people off of you than attempt to convince you of something you won't be convinced of. Why bother with the discussion when you can't come to a resolution? Is the end of it all everyone telling you you're right? Is that how you see this ending? I'm sorry if that's the case, because it isn't going to happen. And running everyone off because you've badgered them to death with your questions and lack of answers doesn't count as a win.
  10. The thing you're missing, Freak, is that he IS trying to be argumentative. Many of his posts consist of more questions that answers. He doesn't make a statement to defend his stance, he asks you to defend yours so he doesn't have to. That's the very definition of argumentative.
  11. I'd like to restate your initial assertion - see below. Norton is running a house rule. That's fine for him. We may disagree on the end result how it applies to players but if that makes him and his players happy, so be it. You, on the other hand, are trying to justify this house rule by saying the rules don't say you can. That's a completely different animal and you're flat out wrong. Its not a disagreement of opinion - its a factual certainty. First, by definition, you're trying to prove a negative. If you don't know what that means, admit it so we can move on. Saying you aren't is just ignorant. So you want us to prove that the game says you DON'T get XP back for buying specializations in which you have already bought non-career skills. I'd like you to prove where it says you CAN. Because as I read it, it doesn't say that you can. Inherently, the book asserts that if it doesn't say that you CAN do something, then you can't. We don't need to prove that the book says you can't because it doesn't say you can. How is it penalizing your players? They knowingly chose to buy those skills with the added tax. They had full information of what they were doing and they did it anyway. There's no penalty there. How does applying the rules as written "piss off" your gamers? If members of my group did that, I'd get a new group. Again - its not a penalty. He chose to buy those skills. He knew he was paying extra. When the life of his character suddenly took a dramatic turn, that's how the game works. Its part of being in a growing and living game. If you let them plan it out to the nth degree and never throw a curve ball, where's the fun? Worse yet, you let them plan it out, throw a curve ball and then FORGIVE them for planning years in advance and not being prepared for the unknown? None of this is a penalty. Its the game. Its about exploring and adapting and, sometimes, making mistakes. It wasn't a mistake at the time and it doesn't cripple your character. Setbacks are a part of roleplaying and real life. We overcome them and move on. Don't give freebies because of it.
  12. The rules also don't say that you cannot hold your GM at gun point for all the XP you want but it doesn't mean you can do it. The absence of a rule does not mean that you can do it. The player DID spend 193 XP. If he bought non-career skills its more expensive. It doesn't mean he didn't spend the XP. He chose to gain those skills at a more expensive point in his PCs life. Regarding Order 66 Podcast, I'll have the check the episode, but that fan podcast regularly has the DESIGNER of the game as well as co-designers and developers on for rules questions. There's a very, very good chance that question was answered by Jay Little (lead designer, Edge of the Empire), not GM Dave or GM Chris. Don't be so quick to write off a "fan podcast".
  13. At this point, I couldn't care less. You're painting a massive target on your back with this tracking crap and its getting in the way of the actual discussion - whether or not your house rule is equitable or not. Maybe that's your plan - get the focus off of your rule, which has been proven to be skewed toward the player who purchases non-skill ranks before purchasing the specialization, and hope people get flustered enough to just go away before you have to admit your house rule is unfair. This isn't remotely a matter of opinion. The fact of the situation is that Player A has an advantage in one or more games over Player B. Player B is being penalized in those games because he chose to buy into the specialization before buying ranks in the skills. This is encouraging power gaming and min/maxing. If you can't see this, you're being intentionally obtuse. If you want people to stop picking on you about the tracking stuff then stick to the original topic and ignore the rest.
  14. Please tell me what I'm having to track extra. I've made huge points about this already. If there is added tracking, list ONE situation with added tracking. ONE. All it takes for you to be right is to actually have ONE case. I'm getting irritated in this thread because everyone keeps saying "you will have to do x" over and over and over again, and providing ZERO examples of why I would have to do x. I'm tired of restating the same thing 80 times. Provide ONE example of a situation where I would have to track anything. There. And I've explained like 5 times now, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HOUSE RULE. That was a discussion that that is the only thing you have to track IF YOU WANTED TO TRACK TOTAL XP SPENT. Normally if you want to track total XP spent, you have to track two things, double up stuff form starting character and when you bought specializations. The house rule eliminates the need to track the second one. That has NOTHING to do with the house rule adding any tracking. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Can you please READ WHAT I'M WRITING. I'm having trouble tracking all the posts you're not responding to. Is it because you can't refute them? Maybe I should get an excel spreadsheet....
  • Create New...