Jump to content

Lathrop

Members
  • Content Count

    953
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from FrogTrigger in Buyers guide?   
    I don't think there's any real big compiled post out there like that, at least not one that's quite that comprehensive.
     
    This should help you out a little, it's a list of each of the various books so far.
     
    You can use rpggeek.com to see various people's ranks/comments on the books.
     
    And at least item wise, you can use this to see what's in each book.
     
    Basic info on whatever bonus rules are included, can probably be found with searching for the book's name on the forums and finding whichever threads have a particularly large page number.
     
     
     
    If you want a hard recommendation, I'd say at least 1 Core (whichever one(s) would fit a campaign you want to run), a GM Kit, and some extra dice. If you want to get more extra stuff before playing the game, Fly Casual, in my opinion, has the most generally useful stuff regardless of the Core you use, and all of the Adversary decks are incredibly helpful if you run a less heavily structured game.
  2. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from bradknowles in The Force Awakens Beginner Game   
    Confirmed standalone product by the devs.
     
     
    And in case you're wary, and not sure if the devs are just holding back a Core announcement, the Production Code for the Beginner Game is "SWR09". With SWR 01-05 being the Adversary and Crit decks. So while that doesn't necessarily stop them from putting out any sort of Core-neutral supplements under the "SWR" line, it does pretty much confirm that there is no new Core or full product line associated with it coming.
  3. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from GMRen in The Force Awakens Beginner Game   
    Confirmed standalone product by the devs.
     
     
    And in case you're wary, and not sure if the devs are just holding back a Core announcement, the Production Code for the Beginner Game is "SWR09". With SWR 01-05 being the Adversary and Crit decks. So while that doesn't necessarily stop them from putting out any sort of Core-neutral supplements under the "SWR" line, it does pretty much confirm that there is no new Core or full product line associated with it coming.
  4. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from kaosoe in The Force Awakens Beginner Game   
    Confirmed standalone product by the devs.
     
     
    And in case you're wary, and not sure if the devs are just holding back a Core announcement, the Production Code for the Beginner Game is "SWR09". With SWR 01-05 being the Adversary and Crit decks. So while that doesn't necessarily stop them from putting out any sort of Core-neutral supplements under the "SWR" line, it does pretty much confirm that there is no new Core or full product line associated with it coming.
  5. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Richardbuxton in I can reflect blasters... With a stick?   
    It did, got revised in a Beta update. In the FaD core, it's page 175, it's basically the "... for rules purposes, any weapon that is listed in this section (Lightsabers) is considered a lightsaber," line, which was revised from the original Beta's "... any weapon that uses the Lightsaber skill is considered a Lightsaber ..."
  6. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Kael in I can reflect blasters... With a stick?   
    It did, got revised in a Beta update. In the FaD core, it's page 175, it's basically the "... for rules purposes, any weapon that is listed in this section (Lightsabers) is considered a lightsaber," line, which was revised from the original Beta's "... any weapon that uses the Lightsaber skill is considered a Lightsaber ..."
  7. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Ghostofman in I can reflect blasters... With a stick?   
    It did, got revised in a Beta update. In the FaD core, it's page 175, it's basically the "... for rules purposes, any weapon that is listed in this section (Lightsabers) is considered a lightsaber," line, which was revised from the original Beta's "... any weapon that uses the Lightsaber skill is considered a Lightsaber ..."
  8. Like
    Lathrop reacted to awayputurwpn in Parry in Play   
    You could parry by side-stepping and striking your opponent's weapon hand or hilt out of the way, rather than the blade itself. Parry is just a mechanical implement that reduces damage done to you...it doesn't have to be blade-on-blade.
     
    And going the other way, if you "parry" a Melee or Brawl weapon with your lightsaber, well that can represent you interposing your glowstick between the two of you, and your attacker getting wise and not pressing the attack.
  9. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Takeshi84 in [SPOILERS]: Star Wars: Rebels - Thoughts?   
    If you go by, at least the new canon explanation of restraining bolts, you can program desired actions into the restraining bolt itself if you wanted to, so slapping on some restraining bolts that you set up through your computer onto your droids is probably easier in general for the average joe than popping a droid open and slicing into its brain. It's also probably easier that way to sync multiple restraining bolts to a single caller as well.
  10. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Nevermind in Item Qualities and Multiple Activations   
    This is likely more of an oversight than anything for FaD's core, since the "multiple times" call-out for strain has been present in pretty much everything else, including the FaD GM Screen and Beginner Game.
     
     
     
     
    For the Boost Dice/Setbacks in particular, no. This is for a handful of reasons: dice bloat (imagine constantly adding ~4 Boost Dice on top of whatever you'd typically roll), it promotes being uncreative ("I miss huh? I'll just pass everything into Boost Dice to the next player"), and it could become an unusually large boon (as taking the default table listings once puts a cap on the number of Boost Dice you can pass, which is up to 2, and one of the die has to be used specifically by the next character).
     
    But as Richardbuxton mentions, if you're hitting multiple times and choose to spend the Advantages/Triumphs towards something that could make sense to be activated multiple times, I could see allowing it. Like if two dual-wielding gunslingers are in a duel and the player wants to spend his advantage/Triumph to trigger his second shot, and then proceed to have both shots force the opponent drop his guns, I'd say sure, if that's how he wants to spend his ~8 Advantage (give or take with Triumphs, talents, and attachments).
  11. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from bradknowles in [SPOILERS]: Star Wars: Rebels - Thoughts?   
    If you go by, at least the new canon explanation of restraining bolts, you can program desired actions into the restraining bolt itself if you wanted to, so slapping on some restraining bolts that you set up through your computer onto your droids is probably easier in general for the average joe than popping a droid open and slicing into its brain. It's also probably easier that way to sync multiple restraining bolts to a single caller as well.
  12. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from A7T in [SPOILERS]: Star Wars: Rebels - Thoughts?   
    I don't think I've noticed if they used the song before in Rebels, but did the music of Chopper luring the Stormtroopers in the carrier sound a little Indiana Jones-y to anyone else?
     
     
     
    I was definitely getting some slight Marvin vibes from the droid.
     
     
     
    At least from the way it was worded in the most recent Rebels Recon, it definitely seems like AP-5 will have a recurring role at the bare minimum. Which is good, since he not only seems like a solid character on his own, but he has a pretty great dynamic with Chopper.
  13. Like
    Lathrop reacted to Donovan Morningfire in Shall we discuss morality?   
    No, a lot of posters insist the rules aren't inherently broken, and can actually work pretty well as written within the context of the setting for which they were designed.
     
    There's a fine line between Maelora's example of "these rules don't work for my group, so while I won't use them, that doesn't mean they don't work for others" versus the claim of "these rules don't work for me, so therefore they don't work for anybody!"  The first is perfectly fine, the second borders on sheer arrogance.
     
    As I posted above, the Morality mechanic was written to jive with the core concept that Star Wars is a setting with an absolute morality and a fairly clear definition of light/good vs. dark/evil.  It's possible to play in the shades of grey of the setting (Edge of the Empire being a prime example of this), but even for EotE the PCs are assumed to generally be decent sentient beings as opposed to a pack of ruthless murder-hobos.  Han and Lando did some pretty sketchy things in their pasts, but they were still ultimately good guys.  So in terms of the absolute morality that the Force operates on, the Morality rules work perfectly well as they are written.  It's when the GM wants to go outside the absolute morality of the setting that the Morality/Conflict rules don't work so well, which is to be expected as those rules were written to operate within the setting's absolute morality.
  14. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Orjo Creld in A few force power questions   
    Letting it be just maneuvers (or a maneuvers and actions) by default, would get out of hand pretty quickly since you'd be giving even the weakest/newest force-sensitives the ability to trigger 2 or 3 powers in a round; not to mention it gives them more liberty and willingness to abandon a poor roll and avoid the Destiny point flip/ strain to use dark/light side points since they can just try the roll another few times. It would probably move them into the overpowered side too quickly.
     
    As-is, there's options for pulling off powers as maneuvers in conjunction with other powers/checks (Force Assault, Protect/Unleash), and to do it as a one-off per session thing (The Force is My Ally); and in all likelihood, there might be something vaguely along the lines of a longer lasting Force is My Ally as a Signature Ability. I find FFG's approach reasonable and it keeps the ability to more freely use force powers limited and almost entirely for the more dedicated of force users.
  15. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from DiegoOnasi in A few force power questions   
    Letting it be just maneuvers (or a maneuvers and actions) by default, would get out of hand pretty quickly since you'd be giving even the weakest/newest force-sensitives the ability to trigger 2 or 3 powers in a round; not to mention it gives them more liberty and willingness to abandon a poor roll and avoid the Destiny point flip/ strain to use dark/light side points since they can just try the roll another few times. It would probably move them into the overpowered side too quickly.
     
    As-is, there's options for pulling off powers as maneuvers in conjunction with other powers/checks (Force Assault, Protect/Unleash), and to do it as a one-off per session thing (The Force is My Ally); and in all likelihood, there might be something vaguely along the lines of a longer lasting Force is My Ally as a Signature Ability. I find FFG's approach reasonable and it keeps the ability to more freely use force powers limited and almost entirely for the more dedicated of force users.
  16. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from Donovan Morningfire in A few force power questions   
    Letting it be just maneuvers (or a maneuvers and actions) by default, would get out of hand pretty quickly since you'd be giving even the weakest/newest force-sensitives the ability to trigger 2 or 3 powers in a round; not to mention it gives them more liberty and willingness to abandon a poor roll and avoid the Destiny point flip/ strain to use dark/light side points since they can just try the roll another few times. It would probably move them into the overpowered side too quickly.
     
    As-is, there's options for pulling off powers as maneuvers in conjunction with other powers/checks (Force Assault, Protect/Unleash), and to do it as a one-off per session thing (The Force is My Ally); and in all likelihood, there might be something vaguely along the lines of a longer lasting Force is My Ally as a Signature Ability. I find FFG's approach reasonable and it keeps the ability to more freely use force powers limited and almost entirely for the more dedicated of force users.
  17. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from whafrog in A few force power questions   
    Letting it be just maneuvers (or a maneuvers and actions) by default, would get out of hand pretty quickly since you'd be giving even the weakest/newest force-sensitives the ability to trigger 2 or 3 powers in a round; not to mention it gives them more liberty and willingness to abandon a poor roll and avoid the Destiny point flip/ strain to use dark/light side points since they can just try the roll another few times. It would probably move them into the overpowered side too quickly.
     
    As-is, there's options for pulling off powers as maneuvers in conjunction with other powers/checks (Force Assault, Protect/Unleash), and to do it as a one-off per session thing (The Force is My Ally); and in all likelihood, there might be something vaguely along the lines of a longer lasting Force is My Ally as a Signature Ability. I find FFG's approach reasonable and it keeps the ability to more freely use force powers limited and almost entirely for the more dedicated of force users.
  18. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from awayputurwpn in Did Starkiller base jump from system to system or Shoot across the Galaxy?   
    It moves.
     
    https://twitter.com/pablohidalgo/status/683418491802664960
     
     
    And draining a sun/star and moving into place takes time. More than enough time for an assault to be led or for people to evacuate, not to mention everyone should be relatively fine if they just hop into their starships and get out of a planet's orbit before a sun is completely drained and then they could freely move to another system.
  19. Like
    Lathrop reacted to That Blasted Samophlange in Did Starkiller base jump from system to system or Shoot across the Galaxy?   
    Depends what the goal of the Starkiller was. Wiping out the republic fleet (mostly) as well as the senate in a single blow was a worthwhile cost. The senate was setup in such a way that they move from world to world every few years i think. So after a whole system being destroyed, how many worlds would volunteer their planet to host the next senate? The leadership, and fleet, was wiped out without losing a single ship.
    Even with the weapon being destroyed, it DID its job.
    Now, above is info I found out sfter seing the movie. When i saw the movie, I still figured that the first order showed it had the power to destroy a system from a hidden location anywhere in the galaxy and used this weapon to wipe out the senate, which was keeping the republic unified. One shot fractured the republic. Was this conjecture? Sure. But a logical reasoning for my mind.
  20. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from 2P51 in Did Starkiller base jump from system to system or Shoot across the Galaxy?   
    It moves.
     
    https://twitter.com/pablohidalgo/status/683418491802664960
     
     
    And draining a sun/star and moving into place takes time. More than enough time for an assault to be led or for people to evacuate, not to mention everyone should be relatively fine if they just hop into their starships and get out of a planet's orbit before a sun is completely drained and then they could freely move to another system.
  21. Like
    Lathrop reacted to LugWrench in "My bad!"   
    'The BBEG stops for a moment.  "Scooter?  Is that you?  Oh my gosh, how you have grown!  Why, I remember the day your mom and dad brought you home from the hospital!"  The BBEG's minions tie the group to chairs, while the BBEuncle proceeds to bore the group to tears with baby pictures, and stories, regaling the crew with tales of cutesy halloween costumes, potty training, and first day of school.'

    Hey, if the guy wants to go that route, I'm going to make him earn it.
  22. Like
    Lathrop reacted to Donovan Morningfire in Shooting into engaged combat despair rule   
    Personally, I just ignore the "must take effect" aspect of that rule, especially since it's the only time that a Despair will completely override the effects of an otherwise successful check.
     
    Instead, I treat the "hit the ally that's engaged with the target" result as an option to spend a Despair upon.  To be honest, I think that just having the check upgraded is enough of a penalty, and the forced effect of "shoot an ally" is unnecessarily punitive.
  23. Like
    Lathrop reacted to awayputurwpn in Lets talk Bad Motivator!   
    Yes...this talent gives a *player* the ability to directly influence the narrative, and also have his *character* look cool and knowledgable. It doesn't automatically give the character a "power," but rather puts power into the player's hands, power to own a bigger part of the narrative.
    I've got nothing but love for this talent. I love it as a player, and even more as a GM.
  24. Like
    Lathrop reacted to Desslok in Lets talk Bad Motivator!   
    No, that's YOUR problem with the talent. If I were GMing and someone used Bad Motivator in some of the ways I've used it or as others in the thread have used it, I would love the hell out of it. It's been a pretty goddamed epic ability.
     
    But then, you pretty clearly hate the game engine, so you'll excuse me if I don't give your opinion very much weight.
  25. Like
    Lathrop got a reaction from bradknowles in [SPOILERS]: Star Wars: Rebels - Thoughts?   
    As Raithnor touched on, the new Vader comics (issue 4 specifically) brings up that Geonosis was sterilized, but doesn't go into the methods or exact reasons why.
     
     
     
     
    I've read some speculations that it's an egg from the monster. But apparently it really is just a meteorite.
×
×
  • Create New...