Jump to content

LStyer

Members
  • Content Count

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About LStyer

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday December 21

Profile Information

  • Location
    Huntington, WV
  1. I certainly hope so. Not sure if there are enough new stat blocks to fill them, but I hope that as soon as there are, we get them.
  2. Absolutely the price is debatable. I'm really not sure that at a time I was playing a lot more, playing a more consistent campaign so that I was getting attached to my PCs and painting miniatures regularly that I wouldn't have believed that $30 wasn't too much. At this point, though it seems too much. Granted that there are 2,500 people who believe that $30 mini doesn't cost too much. (In fact, since this is a Kickstarter, they believe it's worth $30 for the chance to maybe get that $30 mini, because it's not as if no one has ever collected funds through Kickstarter and then failed to fulfill). I'd venture that there are a lot more out there than that who are in that category. The Kickstarter isn't all that far along, so I expect at least some growth in the number of buyers, and I pretty regularly run into already closed Kickstarters that I would have happily funded if I'd "met" them in time, and I can't imagine I'm unusual in that respect. My question, though, is will this be the sort of product/service that will largely attract repeat business? I can imagine being willing to drop $30 on the perfect mini for my favorite PC. I have a harder time imagining myself, even in my mini-friendliest days, being willing to drop $30 on a mini for just any old PC. For this to remain viable long-term, then, there either needs to be a lot more people willing to pay $30 for one mini or some smaller population willing to pay $30 per mini several times. That question of longevity may be a reason to go ahead and order through the Kickstarter if you're on the fence.
  3. Plus the skill / talent to do anything with it once you've gotten ahold of the software and the hardware, which is just as great an impediment for me. From what I saw on the Kickstarter video they've done the vast majority of the design work. The customer's input is more like choosing elements from a menu. That is almost certainly more than enough "input" from me if I were going to try this out. Much more than that and I'd end up ruining the mini!
  4. Presumably, though, that $5k table (super classy bragging on the price of purchases and hourly rate, by the way, presumably your consulting isn't on the topic of how not to sound nouveau riche) offers features significantly beyond those provided by a $100 folding banquet table. I'm really not sure that an unpainted 28 mm figure, even customized, offers features sufficiently beyond a $5 to $10 unpainted miniature.
  5. I get the impression that what the Kickstarter is offering requires a bit less technical and design proficiency that does getting "literally anything you want." For someone like me who lacks technical and design proficiency, that's worth some premium, though probably not $20 to $30 per 28 mm figure.
  6. $20 to $30 per figure seems to me higher than the closest-in-size-but-still-larger FFG X-Wing miniatures, which I already feel are overpriced. When you further consider that the (cheaper) X-Wing minis are provided painted and these aren't, I think the comparison breaks down further. I think these are best considered as a sort of boutique product, priced higher than "comparable" products but offering some sort of unique or at least unusual quality that the comparables don't offer. In this case that quality would be customization, which I'm not aware of being generally available in the realm of gaming miniatures. The question then becomes whether there exists enough demand for customized gaming miniatures at this price point to support this is as an ongoing concern. I tend to think that this sort of service will be more about finally getting the perfect miniature for someone's favorite player character than it would be about getting a selection of minis for generic use or army building. In other words, I don't know that many individual customers are going to want more than a few of these. I can imagine a hard core D&D gamer wanting a mini of his PC and a mounted version, which sort of doubles or even triples his order. And I can see a play group going in together to get figures for their whole party printed up, too, which also potentially increases the number of orders. There was a time I would have liked custom minis for a few of my PCs, but my mini-painting days are generally behind me and I haven't felt super attached to a PC in a while, either. Plus, I have a hard time imagining dropping $30 on one 28 mm miniature even if it was the perfect representation of my guy. So I'm pretty clearly not the target audience for this. All that said, I can easily imagine being willing to pay "normal" minis prices for some of the sample minis they show on the Kickstarter page. I wonder if it would be practical for them to mass produce non-custom figures.
  7. I think "unnecessary" may be the key to making this work. Engaging in violence when it's "legitimately" necessary probably shouldn't negatively impact the character's obligation (Though that may not be realistic - if someone held a gun to a habitual binge drinker's head and forced him to drink a few shots, I don't know that it wouldn't still trigger a binge -- with a player who is looking for combat, you don't want to totally disincentivize combat). Give the character opportunities to start unnecessary fights and when she does, increase obligation by a point or two and when she resists the temptation, reduce by a point or two. There's no need for huge swings either way. In sessions when the obligation is triggered, she is feeling the itch -- have her roll a Willpower or Discipline check if she wants to resist the urge, but leave those checks out when she isn't triggered.
  8. LStyer

    Credit Laundering?

    I'd say it makes a fair bit of sense for someone who is employing criminals to pay them in cash, but some people "pay" criminals involuntarily. In that case, the thieves may be the ones who don't want to leave a trail when they spend.
  9. Has anyone given any thought to the topic of credit laundering? If so, what do you think it should cost (in terms of a percentage)? How long should it tie up the funds? How difficult should it be to find a credit launderer? The issue came up in my last session, and I ended up basically hand-waving it into an off-screen, basically instant process costing 10%, but I'm rather unsatisfied with that result, so I'm interested in figuring out some "rules." As far as finding a credit launderer goes, I'd probably treat it just like finding a Restricted Rarity X item for sale, with a Streetwise check modified by location. Looking at the black market and restricted items in the Core Rulebook, Rarity 8, which is the equivalent of a cargo container of Glitterstim strikes me as a reasonable starting point for an NPC money launderer who can handle a decent number of credits. My reasoning is that Glitterstim is sort of the iconic drug of the Star Wars universe, and a single dose (analogous to finding a small-time dealer) is Rarity 7, a crate (analogous to finding a minor drug lord) is Rarity 8. Thoughts and suggestions?
  10. That play style obviates the whole issue, though. You said your players skipped the hyperdrive upgrade. If travel time is completely out of player hands, then it make a lot of sense to skip the upgrade -- it would be a complete waste of credits and hard points. One might argue that replacing the hyperspace travel time rules with speed of plot is, itself a house rule. I can see the impulse to house rule this in either direction, though I lean toward the side of making really high speeds harder to attain.
  11. The speed of a ship matters to storytelling when the speed of the ship matters to the story. If "how long are we in hyperspace before arriving on Hoth" is an insignificant detail, then ship speed doesn't affect storytelling, but travel time can matter to a narrative. Maybe if the Bounty Hunter PC can get to Tatooine before his target does, he can set a trap. If it takes the Bounty Hunter X hours to get to Tatooine and the target Y hours, then X-Y is how long the Bounty Hunter will have set his trap. Ship speed sounds like a factor that is affecting storytelling Or, reverse that. Maybe the PCs learn that an NPC Bounty Hunter is after their friend and there's a race to the friend's location. Getting there faster could be the difference between getting their friend away to safety or mounting a rescue. Maybe there's a time limit on the adventure as a whole. A faster ship means less travel time and more time to deal with other aspects of the scenario. Ship speed sounds like a factor that is affecting storytelling. Characters never travel through hyperspace during adventures? Edge of the Empire is, to some extent, a game of resource management. Time is a resource, including time spent traveling during adventures.
  12. The thing is, if the rules really are set up so that stunning is a superior tactic (and I'm not saying it is), then there aren't very many "situations where people would normally not" use stun, because people normally do what works. The characters live in a reality governed by the game rules just as we live in a reality governed by physics. If I need to move something heavy and I put it on a hand truck rather that just dragging it across the ground, am I "powergaming"? I'm certainly taking advantage of "the rules" to accomplish my task more efficiently. If the rules make a given tactic more effective than others, then that tactic is going to be encouraged. Knowing that and designing accordingly is a great way to encourage particular play styles. On the other hand, If the rules inadvertently make a tactic more effective, that will still encourage particular play styles, but the fault doesn't lie in the player who has been encouraged. Well, I'd question whether playing the game the way the rules encourage should be characterized as not playing "right." It might be more accurate to say "Those that then play the game the way I'd prefer get a bonus. Of course, what you're suggesting here is changing the rules to encourage the play style you want them to encourage, which isn't wrong, but isn't superior to the hypothetical folks who are stunning a lot because the rules hypothetically encourage it. If under the rules stunning is the most efficient way of taking an enemy out of the fight, then stunning makes a ton of sense from a role playing point of view. From a role playing point of view, the character is fighting for his life, and is going to do what it takes to stop the guys who are trying to kill him, even if that means stunning them instead of shooting to kill. That's because characters in a film live in a reality whose rule is "the tactic the writer wants to work is the one that works."
  13. Also bindles. Hoboes are the leading carriers of bindles.
  14. Yeah, it may also go along with that "Generalist" theme a few people have been hitting -- dropping in seemingly random skill-enhancing talents as a way to "round out" the career skills. Honestly, I've not paid much attention to the Explorer career, so I could be on the wrong track entirely. The problems you're seeing in the Explorer career and its specializations may be why it is the subject of the first and so far only announced career splat.
  15. This may be a glass half empty vs. glass half full sort of issue. When you look at the Scout and see a talent that supports the Stealth skill, but don't see the Stealth skill on the career skill list, you see an omission. But remember, that untrained characters can still use skills, and the untrained character who has a talent that supports the Stealth skill will be better off than an untrained character who lacks that talent. Perhaps that was the designers' intent -- a sort of half-step between untrained and trained, giving the Scout a leg-up on other specs that lack Stealth as a career skill, but not putting them on even ground with those careers that include it. So, where you see the Scout's "glass of Stealth" half empty, the designers may have intended it to be half full.
×