FrondPetalson
-
Content Count
14 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by FrondPetalson
-
-
Do only I feel so or do only the rebels roll for the mass combat? Is it always so that only one side is rolling the mass combat pool?
It would seem (from my reading of the Arda 1 "example") that the mass combat rules allow for a funky & enjoyable abstract narration of a (somewhat) predetermined story arc ... even if the rebels "win" every round on Arda 1, the best they do is get more time and more of their troops survive to fight another day. This is fine if you're playing against a well-crafted and pre-planned scenario (such as the thoroughly documented & fun-looking Arda 1 module)
but I wonder how one could create "contested" rolls - lets say two factions of PCs went to war against each other! (ie: neither side were 'NPCs' but EACH SIDE deserved a 'fair roll' at winning)
I imagine that (as in Arda 1's rules), the basic dice pool is based on the average quality (&/or firepower) of your troops - then modded by the leadership skill of the lead officer. One can imagine that the "other side" does the same. But then TWO QUESTIONS come to my inexperienced mind:
(1) how do you cope with relative force sizes? against the GM you select purple difficulty dice according to table 1-2 (and tweaked according to the "enemy" leadership skill) ... but if this is a CONTESTED fight between two PCs then how should we handle it? ... the book's Table 1-2 kinda stops making sense at that point (eg: add two skill (aka 'difficulty") dice to EACH side because numbers are 'even' sorta seems odd - if not meaningless - but then again, maybe it adds to the chaos! - i just dont know)
(1a) ... since the "bad" side should be more than an NPC paper-tiger (it has a Player after all) then, should we allow the 'purple' side to build their dice pool based on quality/firepower as well (seems fair) and then TWEAK according to relative army sizes *OR* should we build BOTH dice pools according to relative size (but how?) and then TWEAK according to relative 'quality/firepower' ?
(2) how do you cope with complication & advantage (blue & black dice)? - this seems to me to be somewhat less of a problem tho (but i dont know if I've grasped the concept correctly): ... if one Player controlled side is arbitrarily assigned "good" colours (yellow/green/blue) and the other Player controlled is arbitrarily assigned "bad" colours (purple, red, black) then I guess the GM can just add blues & blacks accordingly [i assume its much the same to add a blue to "good" if the "bad" side has a problem, or if the other side has an advantage &/or visa-versa?]
any thoughts anyone?
ALSO: (and forgive me if this has been dealt with elsewhere): is there a FLEET BATTLE equivalent? or are we supposed to use the new "STAR WARS Armada" tabletop miniatures game for that? - which is cool but given some RPGs are online/G+hangout/Roll20/PBeM which means that people may not be physically present or in temporal synch, then tabletop mechanisms for combat resolution can't always apply ...
-
stop putting me down and I will
-
*sigh*
how many mea culpa's before I'm allowed to post without being put down?
I could observe that a response that allows itself to be led by erroneous assumptions in the question,is not an answer.
A number of 'answers' actually described house rule style play interpretations as if they were in place and operating - and that indicates that they, too, were operating under the same error that I had made ...
so, yes, I unwittingly "led" the question, but some of the answers described above give "past-tense solutions" (we already play it like this ...) which I could not have influenced ...
so, perhaps, can we get past MY many obvious intellectual shortcomings, quit with the ad hominems, accept my apology and just discuss the game & its rules?
-
as promised, here is the reply I got from from FFG [i have redacted the staffer's full name, and my own]:
Hi. Thanks for your question. Here is what I found out for you:
Page 26 of the Beta addresses all the "basic" ways that anyone can spend Destiny Points. In addition, there are certain powerful talents that give you additional ways to spend Destiny Points. [emph added]
Hope that helps!
Tony
Customer Service Team
as you can see, FFG themselves have either missed the point of my question, &/or ALSO didn't spot the "AS IF" clause in the "Careful Planning" talent ... note above where FFG's Tony speaks of talents that give you "additional ways to spend Destiny Points" . Now, of course some few talents do just exactly that (I believe) ... but the specific one I asked about (and a few others, I believe) do NOT do that at all (as we now know).
... interesting. So, perhaps I'm not alone in being possessed of a mere and imperfect "human mind".
-
I do genuinely apologise if I upset people.
I can see now that the phrase "AS IF" in the talent text (which I'd obviously missed), makes all the difference ... that is exactly the sort of clarification/explanation/answer I'd hoped for (ie: one which resolves the contradiction I *thought* I'd seen)
let me just say this however:
(1) the bulk of the initial responses here, though helpful and well intentioned, were ALSO explaining the talent in terms of the scientist spending DP, which means that the phrasing of the talent text in the AoR book has confused more people than just myself
(2) it would be nice if one didn't have to resort to expressing frustration (which i should NOT have done - i admit) before having a genuine (if misguided) question addressed
aside: I *did* send a direct question thru the website even though there is no place there for a rules question, and i have yet to get an answer. If I get one, I'll post it here - but I suspect it would also simply point out the "AS IF" clause, which I now believe resolves the issue entirely. -
Hmmm ... well that is disappointing ... why do they bother having boards for a beta I wonder ...
Oh well ... guess they're as bad as Margaret Weiss Games after all then (whose boards excluded anyone that asked an embarrassing question )
Shame though, ... just as this was lookin' very very promising.
-
"talent allows scientist to have it on his person ... which is not ... etc"
Nice work around, but not what the rules say
-
All nice ideas ... all admirable
And all are dancing around the issue ...
play the way that is fun is always best ... yes absolutely
But I don't buy the sort of 'speed of plot' crape that less well engineered gaming systems rely on to side step their weak mechanisms and logic gaps ...
So come on FFG, give us some clarity please
Its a simple question !!
-
mmm, so your (entirely reasonable) house rule is to essentially gloss over this contradiction - which is fine,
but I'd really like an FFGer to clarify what THEY intended us to do ... -
we hear FFG reps speaking about spending destiny (force) points to influence the game (the example is "i suddenly remembered i DID pack a set of re-breathers!") ...
HOWEVER
the Scientist specialisation of the Engineer career has access to the talent "careful planning" which PERMITS the spending of a destiny point for EXACTLY this purpose.
SO: either NO-ONE else can do what the FFG reps describe! (ie: no-one in EotE !!) *or* an engineer-scientist is wasting his XP in buying this talent ...
so: which is it ? ... if its the first, then are destiny dice HIGHLY restricted and may ONLY be spent IF a PC has a talent that specifically permits destiny point spending ?
-
Am I missing something? But the description for codebreaker (in AoR beta at least) seems contradictory ... one off difficulty per rank in decrypting, but two lines lower says only can have one rank ... what gives ?
-
SUGGESTION for Talent Trees
currently each Talent Tree (in either book, EotE or AoR:beta) the Talent Trees show us if they're passive or active by colour - this is great. UNFORTUNATELY we have to refer to the talent table (in chapter four) to check if a talent is "Ranked" (can be purchased multiple times) or not.
Can we please have some small icon or colour etc on the Talent Trees themselves, which indicates ranked-talents ? -
Missing talents
unless i really missed something ... I have found two talents "Utinni!" & "Black Market Contacts" which do not appear on the talent Table and also have no explanatory text in the talent chapter.
Arda 1 info?
in Star Wars: Age of Rebellion RPG
Posted · Edited by FrondPetalson
The only official example, battle at Arda1, has four phases ... so no, its not always just one dice event. but I agree it is a narrative device, not a set of 'wargaming' rules, of course.
Hmmm. A look over table 1.3 on page 18 of the AoR core book shows you're right.
Blue boost dice (+ve context) are slightly stronger than Black setback dice (-ve context), Green ability dice (+ve attribute) have one more success and one less 'advantage' than Purple difficulty dice (-ve attribute), and Yellow proficiency (+ve skill) have one extra success over Red challenge dice (-ve 'skill').
FF's dice are indeed skewed towards player (green) success over GM (purple) and are thus unsuited to fair direct competitive checks (if used as Green vs Purple 'sides'). The skew seems designed to produce a default result of "you succeed but something goes a bit wrong" (which is very 'classic' Star Wars). This is enhanced by the slight Force dice skew toward the dark side (8 of each, but more instances of black over white).
Even FF's own rules (AoR core pp32) suggest that if two PCs compete (at, say, a drinking game), then they each roll 'green' dice against some arbitrary 'purple' difficulty set by the GM. Higher win 'wins' and mutual loss = draw.
What a shame.
I had half imagined drawing up some tables to present here as a suggested house rule: perhaps Table 1.1a in which two opposed 'armies' (each with a base dice pool based on troop type and leader skill) are modified according to relative army sizes (using standard upgrade process, where attribute die (green or purple) can become skill die (yellow or red)) ...
About same size, no change
Larger side, add one attribute dice
Double size, add two attribute die
Overwhelming, add three attribute die
Then Table 1.2a in which all the effects from Table 1.2 are joined (such that, for example, a Triumph or a Despair each may be spend on any of the options currently available to either, etc.
And drawing on the Arda1 example, perhaps a suggested Table (1.3?), which could offer some guideline 'Ebb and Flow of Battle' result interpretations ... such as ... 10% loss of heavy weapons, or demoralisation (strain) at unit level (making it easier for them to 'break' later) etc.
I did not intend turning mass combat into a tabletop war game, but if we could have just a little less abstraction (sometimes, if the scenario and play-game-GM style calls for it), then we could resolve a large 'competitive' battle over a small number of rounds (say, 6 or less) and perhaps in more than one 'zone' (say, an arbitrary Left Flank, Right Flank, Middle) with some extra context dice (blue, black) awarded for other factors such as 'successful ambush' (based on PC action, leadership checks etc)
I guess one could STILL do so, rolling two sets of 'green' dice (separated by a few seconds of course) and allowing success cancellation etc as is usual with green-vs-purple. Sadly that would probably produce dice-flinging rule-lawyering munchkin play of exactly the type FF is trying to avoid in their RPG philosophy.
May yet give it a try in the privacy of my own game.
Just really seemed that after much anticipation and hoopla, the long awaited squad rules and mass combat rules were so brief and restricted in scope (quite aside from being just 2 pages each, hidden inside not-cheap optional extras - a topic already discussed-to-death here. No need to revisit as result is already settled: "true fans will spend the money").