Concise Locket

Members
  • Content count

    536
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Concise Locket

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 06/13/1978

Profile Information

  • Location
    Indianapolis

Recent Profile Visitors

523 profile views
  1. Are you doing anything dramatic with your group that doesn't involve combat? Tense social encounters? Hunts for forbidden knowledge? The majority of "my PCs are too powerful" threads boil down to the GM relying too much on combat to carry the game.
  2. Your group is telling a fictional story set in a fictional space-fantasy setting, not writing a manual on proper starship maintenance and security procedures. If I have a player who wants to stay behind to "guard" the ship, I'll ask him what he plans on doing while everyone else is out adventuring. If he can't come up with an answer other than "guarding" I'll remind him that we, as a group, decided to play this game with the reasonable expectation that every player is going to participate in the story. Metaphorically staying behind is that player abdicating his responsibility to participate with the other players.
  3. There are no keepers of language. There is no review board that approves how words are used. Tradition is not the same thing as law. All that is expected in a commercial production is clear and consistent language. This is the role of an editor.
  4. My previous Star Wars game was a mix of both "Edge of the Empire" and "Force and Destiny" characters. It worked pretty well.
  5. Receiving monetary compensation for the creation of works using someone else's intellectual property is a major no-no. It doesn't matter if your backers are only getting early access, you've essentially set up a pay wall to access an IP that you haven't licensed. A lot of IP holders are cool with fans creating fan work as long as it's for free because they want to keep fans happy. However, as soon as money starts changing hands, those fans immediately get hit with a Cease-and-Desist notice. I've seen it happen to my friends. I'm not a lawyer, but I've done a lot of IP research as it pertains to games development for my day job.
  6. They earn the respect and gratitude of the galactic population for delivering them from evil.
  7. Critical injuries aren't game ending. They're only a problem if they stack up; if the player receives another Critical Injury it increases the likelihood of death on a d100 roll by 10% per injury. A player who knows what he's doing will make an effort to have his Injuries treated during down time. It's easy to be taken out of a fight. It's hard to die. Don't go into the game worried about PC death. If a PC does die, describe their death in a cool way. How you sell the death in the narrative is what makes it palatable to the player. Let them create a new character and introduce the character at an appropriate time. If the players hit a critical point in the narrative, you can assign penalties - for examples wounds or strain - for failing a check rather than stopping the story. If they fail a roll to open a door, you can state that the character bypasses the door controls but gets zapped by an electrical feedback. The game continues on. Alternately, prep a second situation for every fail point in the story... though this is a lot of effort for something that may not happen.
  8. I don't find them inappropriate descriptors when talking about pacing. Even the dumbest sugar-and-caffeine-fueled summer action movies take breaks from the action by slowing the pace of the story. I've found that when my games are high-tension, all the time, my players begin to shut down. The people at my table are fine with parts of the game moving at more of a crawl if the crawl is interesting to them and it seems that the game is still moving in forward direction.
  9. Yeah, that one bothers me too. Droids are a key component of Star Wars.
  10. I definitely use them all. I'll artificially accelerate the pace when the PCs are getting bogged down with unnecessary minutia (i.e. "What should we use to jam this door open? A rock? A piece of rebar?"). I'll slow it down to escalate dramatic tension (i.e. The PCs are chasing a target through a crowded ecumenopolis and, thus, roll dice to overcome obstacles like cars, pedestrians, a runaway hot dog cart, etc.). The trick is to pay attention to your players' reactions. If they seem bored, pick up the pace so they get called on more. If they're really into a scene, let them go with it for as long as they want. Some of the best gaming moments I've had have come from off-the-cuff interactions with NPCs.
  11. For some games, there's an inherent logic to editing out certain player options. A fiddly game like Pathfinder has so many built in traps with character creation that a wise GM may dissuade players from accidentally falling into them by taking the possibility off the board. It would make little mechanical sense to encourage people to take cold based magical powers while adventuring in a wintry realm since cold-based powers would potentially do less damage to cold-themed monsters. If a player insists on playing a frost wizard, I'll either suggest they sit out this campaign or I'll switch my campaign setting. However, eliminating player options because you as the GM find them uninteresting isn't about saving players from bad rules. It's dictating to the players what they should find interesting, thus removing a massive amount of player agency. At that point, you're not adapting your story idea to fit what a player wants to do, you're adapting a player to fit what you want to do. It's one thing to have a generalized set of rules implemented by the social body if there's a mechanical issue with a game. It's a different thing to implement rules to increase someone's level of fun or interest. If your players are cool with this, they're a lot more pliant than any gamers I've ever played with, which would make me question how invested they are. I play Fate games too and Fate points are a different animal from advancement points. Fate points are scene-based and are intended to provide temporary bonuses to players who choose to take risks. Short-term risks make the game interesting and unpredictable without bogging it down. The Fate point economy revolves around the idea of constantly spending and receiving Fate points, much in the same way Dark Side/Light Side points work in this game. Normal RAW XP has fiat bonuses but those bonuses are pretty limited, typically a one-and-done and nothing that's going to propel a PC far into the lead in terms of XP. What you're describing is a game that's less communal and team-building and more adversarial. It encourages players to hog spotlight time in order to get their XP, rather than share in the spotlight together in order to accomplish a goal. When XP rewards are assumed instead of sweated over the game focus shifts from a win-loss (or advance-stagnate) to group problem solving. Everyone swims or everyone sinks.
  12. If you really want to get nitty-gritty, the Arthurian sub-genre you're looking at are the French tales of Lancelot. Arthurian tales are across the board in terms of morality but the modern concept of the "moral white knight" originate from the Lancelot-Grail cycle.
  13. You're nerfing Vigilance and Cool which makes Careers that feature this skill much less appealing to play. To be honest, I think you're coming at this with too many preconceived ideas. I think it's okay to have an idea of what you want to see happen but shoehorning players into it is going to make for a frustrating and, ultimately, un-fun game. I'd suggest opening up a dialog with your players. Share your motivation for this prerequisites and seeing what they say. If they seem reticent, ask them what would appeal to them. Then open up negotiations until you have a game that everyone is happy with.
  14. My overall operating philosophy on keeping this game feeling like a Star Wars movie: I look at the films that Lucas and company ripped off - Akira Kurosawa/samurai movies, monster movies, 1950s "jungle adventure" movies, Spaghetti Westerns, 1950s-1970s mobster/noir movies, and World War 2 commando or spy movies - and I emphasize that Star Wars is a space fantasy setting with a simple good vs. evil morality. If I'm running an adventure and it doesn't neatly fit into one of those categories, I'm doing something wrong. Star Wars is a mash-up of Golden Age and early-to-mid New Hollywood tropes as well as ethics that a child can easily digest. This is not a bad thing. Bad guys can have interesting motivations and can be redeemed but when we start thinking "Well, Jabba the Hutt is sort of right..." you're falling out of Star Wars territory and into Trek territory. Evil is not mundane or banal, as it is in the real world. Every character fits comfortably in the D&D Alignment Chart though they have the freedom to change as long as they are willing to be redeemed... or to fall from grace in an interesting way. Han Solo started out as a drug-running mercenary but evolved into a freedom fighter. That arc is part of his character as he's a Rebel officer for two of the three films. Anakin Skywalker is the inverse of this in the prequels. Edge of the Empire gives players the tools to play selfish, disreputable and flat-out immoral characters but there should be no confusion that what they're doing is unethical. I don't have a problem with Edge players playing an evil gangster. I do have a problem when they start justifying their actions as "good." Jabba the Hutt isn't a criminal and a murderer because Mama the Hutt didn't love him enough or Uncle Ziro got handsy. He's just selfish and wants to protect what he's got. Lean into the evil, don't justify it. Rogue One really opened up the toolbox for playing a Rebel. Not everyone fighting the Empire is a scrappy white knight. While they're still on the side of "good," the method by which goals are reached are sometimes in conflict with Mon Mothma's noble vision. I'm okay with a player killing a potential leak or assassinating a high-level target, like Cassian. I'm not okay with a player (inadvertently) killing civilians like Saw Guerra. Conflict and the dark side are important part of Force use as they act as both story and mechanical checks against abuse. Force powers are expensive but they're also powerful abilities that a character gets to keep, unlike, say, a ship. And when your only tool is Force choking the opposition, every problem becomes a neck to be choked. Players who want to play as Force sensitives have got to be willing to keep their worst instincts in check, else the game becomes very boring, very fast.