Jump to content

Kirdan Kenobi

Members
  • Content Count

    352
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I think there are two answers to this question. The first answer is that that these types of things become relevant to gaming when one is attempting to play accurately based on lore. The issue becomes though, what material takes precedence over others? The second answer is that non-rpg Star Wars discussions happen here from time to time.
  2. I'm not promising anything at this time, but if I came up with simple formulae for implementing my first and/or second suggestions, would you consider implementing them?
  3. Given that there were a ton of things in prequels that contradicted the original trilogy, it rather devalues the significance of Lucas' stated intent, I think. Personally I think what matters is what is actually shown in the movies, not what George intended to be in the movies, especially two decades after the fact. Though I certainly wouldn't argue that Jedi were meant to be emotionless, the prequels make it very clear that attachment is forbidden. Attachment and possessiveness are not anywhere close to the same thing. When put into context with Yoda's advice to Anakin, it seems that the prescribed Jedi way, as actually portrayed in the movies, is to avoid caring about anyone or anything on a personal level. I've taken this to be a large reason why the Jedi fell. Another thing to consider is that some (though hardly all, or even a majority) of the EU novels were simply better stories than the prequel trilogy, and more consistent with original trilogy. Though George Lucas came up with the original ideas for Star Wars, the story we ended up with in OT was not solely the product of Lucas. Though I look far more favorably upon the prequels now, after seeing what Disney has done with the franchise, they remain as an example of the difference between George's imagination + yes men vs George's imagination + creative partners. I think the biggest reason for the problems that Lucasfilm had with continuity errors was that they kept using authors who didn't do their research into the established lore. I also think it was rather demeaning for Lucas to tell authors that their works could be overwritten, yet make no effort to future-proof them by reading them and suggesting changes.
  4. Hey there, I've been part of this community since the early days of Edge, and though I haven't posted anything for a long time, I've still lurked around here from time to time, and I've had my eye on this project. I have a love-hate relationship with the crafting rules as a whole, and I appreciate what you're doing. I thought I would contribute some thoughts. 1) Since you're using the VSL mechanic and Silhouette for most things, why not use it for frame templates as well? Unless I'm missing something, under the existing rules, using Elegant Design to make a Silhouette 4 Patrol Ship/Boat with the Gun Ship Hull costs about twice as much as using Larger Scope to make a Silhouette 5 Transport (Frame) with the Gunship Hull. This doesn't really make any sense, because the cost of the frame should largely reflect the size of the vehicle (I realize that Hull and Final Assembly do this, but this would be true of frame as well), yet is unaffected by Silhouette mechanically. 2) Related to the above: do away with Elegant Design and Larger Scope. A vehicle would be designed from the outset to be a certain size, and it doesn't make much sense for the vehicle's size to be changed as a kind of improvement in the midst of construction. Vehicles that are variable in size (likely anything but speeder bikes) could have a Silhouette Range that represents the available silhouettes that can be chosen for that frame. Crew Requirements, Passenger Capacity, and Encumbrance Capacity for all templates would need to be adjusted to be variable based on size. 3) The Single Ion Coil and Electron Baffled Engine seem too good. The former is so cheap in terms of both cost and hard points that if you allow swapping engines, there's not much reason not to do this on a party landspeeder, provided you've got someone good at mechanics. The latter Engine, though it costs 4 HP, seems like to obvious choice for any ship that is likely to see combat. Though it's more expensive in hard points, it's cheap in credits, but more importantly, when fully modded it can provide up to Speed 6, 4 Aft Defense, and 6xSil System Strain Threshold. I'd pick it for basically any kind of starship, and that should be a warning sign. 4) Rename either the Transport frame or the Transport hull. Having the same name for two different things has a lot of potential for confusion. Rename the Patrol Ship frame to Patrol Craft. Not only would this be a more generic term for starships of this role of varying sizes, but it also would help avoid confusion due the fact that the Patrol Ship is the only frame with the word 'ship' in its name, whereas 4 out of the 7 hull templates use the word 'ship.' 5) It seems like the modular pod system rules are still in the works, but I would recommend adding more clarification as to the distinction between the Modular Pod Docking Clamp and the Mothership Docking clamp. I had to read that section at least three times before I understood the difference. 6) Though the Enhanced Prisoner Lockup attachment already allows for this, I think it would be worthwhile to add an option for adding something comparable during ship construction. It could be done several different ways, but one idea I had was to allow the conversion of Silhouette # of Passenger Capacity into secure holding for that number of prisoners at the cost of 1 hp (0 HP for the patrol ship frame or the gunship or ship of the line hull, but only once) and an appropriate number of credits. Such an attachment could have modifications to allow for additional conversion, probably at the rate of 1 passenger to prisoner per mod. Hope you find something I suggested helpful.
  5. For one thing, I would say that Death troopers aren't minions--they're rivals. Just because they fight as a group most of the time doesn't automatically make them minions. The emperor's royal guard are each nemeses. If being the best <.1% of stormtroopers isn't justification for higher stats and/or wound threshold, I don't know what is. Assuming your players can stand up to normal stormtroopers, the 501st won't seem like anything special unless you make them a bigger threat. A couple nifty abilities beyond what regular stormtroopers have does not an elite trooper make, especially if said troopers get murdered by autofire before they can act.
  6. I'm of the opinion that the 501st should be scary, even to experienced players. I would go ahead and tack on Adversary 1. Definitely give them a higher wound threshold. Probably 7 or 8. They might have higher characteristics too, i.e. Brawn and Agility 4. After all, these are the best stormtroopers in the empire. I like Jedi Killers, especiallly, since it gives them the opposed check they wouldn't normally get. How about this: Vader's Fist - At the start of an encounter with 501st Stormtroopers, all opponents must make an average fear check. For extra fun, give them Lethal Blows 2. Only Imperial Stormtroopers are so precise.
  7. So is your F&D game kind of like Exalted D&D (above and beyond simply being good and heroic, but being so noble you you will heal fallen enemies to try and get them to change their ways)? Such games can be interesting, but the catch is it's vital that everyone be on board with the idea.
  8. A Mandalorian Jedi hunter nemesis with an autofire weapon could be interesting, especially if it's a heavy blaster rifle and he starts at long-range. Deflecting multiple hits a round will eat through your strain really fast (be sure to back him up with some novice minions, probably using the squad rules so that the minions can take damage for the nemesis) Another interesting encounter would be a Morgukai (sp?), the nikto warrior cult that hunt force sensitives. There are stats for a Morgukai Cortosis Staff in one of the books. You could back him up with regular nikto minions or less experienced Morgukai. As they are trained to resist the force, give him some kind of resistance, such as an automatic success on discipline checks to resist force powers, or that force powers require an additional pip to activate against him. Imperial Sniper: give him a good sniper rifle (Perhaps a slugthrower with a suppressor) that can shoot from extreme range, a holographic ghillie suit or something else that boosts stealth, and have him take shots at the group. He should be really hard to spot. Also, remember you can't use reflect if your lightsaber isn't out yet ;-) For maximum frustration, give him a jetpack or speeder bike behind cover, so when they get too close, he can just run away to harass another day.
  9. Like in any RPG, a party that can cover all it's bases, i.e. Knowledges, Mechanics, Computers, Medicine, Social, Combat, Piloting will be more successful at a variety of tasks than a party that struggles in some of those areas. Obviously, a single character can cover more than one roll, especially if one of them is combat or they involve the same attribute. You're right though that the issue of being unique and bringing your own set of skills to the party is the most important consideration, apart from what the player wants to play and will enjoy playing. If a player really wants to play a marauder, and you already have a melee character in the group, sure there will be overlap, but the player finding a character they will enjoy playing is paramount.
  10. I said the PCs will start coup de gracing once you start bringing nemeses 'back from the dead.' This is doubly true if there are negative narrative consequences for their survival, for instance, if that ISB agent or bounty hunter or whatever saw they were using lightsabers and decided to call in the inquisitors on them, especially if their characters would have no reason to suspect that such a thing would happen. Also as I said it then becomes the smart thing to do to ensure their survival (and further keeps the nemeses in question from hurting anyone else). Look, we could argue all day about whether it's moral to finish off an helpless bad guy who will most likely harm them or others in the future (I have no interest in such an argument, as I this being an issue of honorability more than morality), but whether it is immoral or not, this is not something I want to see in my games, and I think it's bad GMing to punish behavior that the GM has encouraged (in this case, by making it seem necessary to the group's continued welfare). Point being if a GM doesn't want to see a particular behavior in his games, he shouldn't make the players feel that behavior is necessary, especially on a continual basis. While there's nothing wrong with the occasional moral dilemma in an RPG, especially if that's something your players enjoy, other players don't like moral dilemmas, especially if they're presented with 'damned if you, damned if you don't' situations. What I'm looking for with this thread is alternative ways to treat defeated nemesis, as I see foresee these problems I've mentioned with using them as written, where they automatically survive, unless the crit table says otherwise. As an aside, with the exception of something like fear or other mind-effecting abilities, I don't think it's a good idea to require rolls for what the player has decided their character wants to do if success or failure is not an issue (I'm pretty sure shooting someone in the head who can't resist is automatic) Sure a nice GM might allow something like a knowledge roll to see if their character knows (even if the player doesn't) that the proposed action could be disastrous, such as making a social faux pas with an important NPC, but that doesn't prevent them from taking the action, it just gives them more information.
  11. The party was in a high-end cantina making important social rolls and the droid got bored. The droid was a custom cybernetics droid with the doctor and mechanic specializations. He decided he would play scientists and spike a random person's drink with anesthetic and observe the effects. Fortunately, the random person turned out to be the group's scoundrel pilot, and not the alien he was trying to sweet talk. In a different incident, the politico used our ship's comm to convince some space pirates that we vanguard of a larger force. When they realized it was just a YT-1300 attacking them, their reaction was "A kriffin' freighter!?"
  12. The some people are flat out saying Palpatine would have every force power tree mastered, I'm not sure this is the case. He certainly would have foresee, move, battle meditation, sense, influence, enhance, and unleash, and at least part of all the other trees. The one I'm least sure on is harm, which I see as force choke. Do we ever see him force choke anybody, in the books or on screen? I'm not sure what Lightsaber form Palp was canonically supposed to use, though I've heard some people say Juyo, but I think Niman probably fits him best mechanically.
  13. Would you rather get hit by a truck or a train?
  14. I'm not positive if this is strictly RAW or merely the likely RAI as stun only weapons do not have a Crit Value, but my interpretation has always been that stun weapons and weapons set to stun or to do stun damage cannot crit, as crits are serious injuries, and the whole point of inflicting strain damage is to avoid that (The GM could use a despair to inflict a crit on someone the PCs were trying to capture unharmed, through a weapon malfunction of some kind, but I think that would be the only exception).
  15. Not to derail the thread, but I think these are bad ideas. The first is an issue because everything in this game either has a drawback or is more expensive and/or has a higher rarity (meaning it would be difficult to find, and possibly more expensive than listed) than the core items. Also, as far as attachments to weapons and armor go, the ones from the core books tend to be the most powerful. The custom grip you mentioned for instance, sure it's one of the better attachments, as removing a setback die and giving a boost (from the accurate +1 mod) is probably worth the circumstantial penalty of two setback dice for non-owner usage, but is it really that much better than a Blaster Actuating Module, which, with a good mechanic, can give you +3 damage and Pierce 2 with the tradeoff of a setback die. Even if the setback die came up as a failure, if you still hit, you still net +4 damage from the mod? The mono-molecular edge and augmented spin barrel are probably the best attachments for their respective eligible weapons, and those are both core attachments too. I would be very cautious about reducing talent and trait soak. I've heard of GMs reducing Brawn soak before, but never talent soak. It's a bad idea from a game play perspective because these are talents that your players have spent xp on (and sometimes have to in order to advance through their specialization trees). Nerfing those specific talents just simply isn't fair, when those talents sometimes must be taken, and serve no other mechanical purpose. It's one thing to say that Jury rigged can't be used to reduce the cost of auto-fire, because jury rigged is a versatile talent and can be used on a number of things besides autofire. (Personally, I think the best approach is to say it can only be used once per round, if used to reduce the cost of autofire.) Talents like Enduring and Armor Master can't be used for anything else. Reducing everyone's soak, especially he bad guys, is going to lead to rocket tag, where initiative ends up being the most important factor. This is especially true if you have someone with autofire and made worse by the initiative slot system. The PCs can just give the guy with autofire the first slot, and he will destroy at least half of the opposing force, and if you reduce soak, they might not even act at all. On the other hand, if the PCs lose initiative, a group of stormtroopers (or anything with blaster carbine/rifles or larger) could mess somebody up pretty fast. This is doubly true if you nerf healing too. My experience is that talents like dodge and sidestep rarely prevent you from getting hit, at least by competent enemies, but what they do do, is reduce the number of net successes and advantages the attack generates, making you take less damage and fewer crits. This is particularly important in the context of soak, as someone with say 6 soak, who reduces a blaster rifle hit to one success will only take 4 damage. If you nerf soak, Dodge, sidestep, defensive stance, parry, and reflect, won't be nearly as meaningful. Altering such a core mechanic like soak can have unintended consequences on game play, as I hope I've demonstrated. Edit: It's your game, so it's your call on any alterations you want to make, but I would take the advice of people here and add more minions, and make your rivals and nemeses stronger before changing rules. Rules in RPGs usually exist for a reason, and changing them, as I said, can have unintended consequences. I'm not trying to be a negative Nancy, but I do want to help you with your game. =)
×
×
  • Create New...