Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rebelarch86

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

737 profile views
  1. This is a great idea. I would enjoy being a player in this game. Kuala' suggestion is good too. I would use the disadvantage that way and not codify the system strain so you can throw it out as GM when the dice aren't giving an opportunity for it. there is a mobile game I think called space team that would give a ton of ideas and vocabulary for this.
  2. Thanks all. I am going with something similar to Gynesis and have decided to include a standard 52 card deck mechanic. the cards represent info, influence, and evidence. The players collect them and can turn them in as poker hands to accomplish things. At the low end they can escape encounters to bypass encounters with the benefits to major narrative shift like building an alliance or influencing a policy or getting someone punished. the thing I like best about this, is social encounters present a game mechanic threat bc they can lose these cards to the GM who can also use them just slightly different scope.
  3. Will be running a paranoia heavy Cold War style campaign we're talking to the wrong person, saying the wrong thing, or not knowing the right thing is more dangerous than Stormtroopers and pirates. my group does well with the narrative dice and our skill checks are handled better than just a roll, but with the importance of intrigue and espionage in our current game I want some more back and forth and stringing successes together / building success like you do in combat encounters. I have a grid based mini game for chases where squares do special things and represent narrative things happening. thinking about implementing a mental endurance / deception threshold type of number akin to mental hp, and exceeding that gets or loses info/cover. Dont have many ideas for skill checks other than maybe making them complexes with multiple actions needed to pass. Rather than disarm a trap, find the mechanism, learn something about the mechanism, disable the mechanism. thanks for any ideas. I don't like simulation (crunchy dnd stuff) very much into gamey abstraction effects, just looking to get more decision points and interaction.
  4. Passive aggressive? No it's pretty clear I don't like op's personality. Them passive aggressive? Yeah hiding behind rules no one else is using that way bc they obviously don't like squadrons can be seen as passive aggressive.
  5. Keep hoping someone messes up so win. It makes you look cool.
  6. You're trying to win on technicalities rather than playing. Hard pass from getting a game with me. The poster you responded to has the right idea. Anywhere a piece can legally be placed is fine and I want the other player to place in the best position that is legal for their piece. **!* I hold out a pointer so my opponent can see exactly what arc they want to be in or avoid. This isn't a dog fighting game like x wing where we chose our positioning in secret. Yet all your posts sound like you are hoping your opponent loses shots bc their piece didn't go were they clearly wanted to go.
  7. No it's not and I think you are being inappropriately rude about it. some players don't have a reasoning or intelligence problem. They simply have a physical limitation, and your attitude is f the Parkinson's guy his piece is where it ends up, except people with poor eye sight, lazy eye, or 1 eye isn't as physically obvious to you.
  8. Lame. After listening to their design guy on team covenant I was shocked by how much I disagree with him on everything about games. They kept using power creep to sell ships many people have no affinity for. That was the only problem with the game but they are rehauling way too much that was actually working and didn't address any of the few misses. I don't even like the Empire but I don't know why you would fly anything other than Interceptors and Phantoms. I'm glad I play kitchen table bc I will not be buying into this nonsense.
  9. I was throwing 6 dice with Han in 2013 at R1 and rerolling 4times. I am pissed by the power creep though. It was way cooler when only I was doing it.
  10. The most viable strategy in my experience of RAW is have 3 people rush the objectives, take all the hits, get wounded, and it doesn't matter bc the 4th Rebel is avoiding the IP. the rebels rarely need to actually attack bc they can move through IP figures. 1 match where our IP really was disgusted and we had to all agree, he had 14 pieces on the board when we completed the objective. Our 1 player made a bad *** killing machine and found that every time his better play was to move and interact with something. truly none of us Rebels and IP were doing things we wanted bc they felt necessary to win and encouraged by the game. We all talked about the game for 2 hours after to get at how all of us were playing a game the way we didn't want to play. The IP has a lot of cool cards that he had to pay for to have, and he needs to win to get to use them, so he was being cut throat, which made the Rebels figure out the game quick and the name of the game seems to be move. Thats when we decided to approach the game differently.
  11. They completely lost me on Xwing 2.0. 6 years and you need a 2nd edition? What the **** was I playing the last few years, a broken game that needs a redo? I hope not. 2nd edition should be 2-3 years after the original run if their is demand for it.
  12. Yes absolutely! the game around the tiles, like leveling, cards, gear, shop is great. The miniatures on the tile is pretty good, the mission objectives and layouts are a great asset, the structure and parameters are not at all what I wanted or thought I was buying. I was really surprised when in the middle of a game I realized the IP was trying to win. This creates unfun. Where a GM doesn't want to remove challenge, they don't remove the elements of the game that players like. A competitor actively tries to remove the opportunity for players to do what they like. It's like a GM never using undead so the cleric doesn't get to turn, or enemies who can't be critted so rogues can't sneak attack. It's spiteful. Then you get into crap over triggers, and nope you took your finger off the piece and it's your responsibility to know every trigger on the 7 cards I front of you. That's petty. Then you get bad *** villains running rather than engaging or Rebels running through storm troopers instead of fighting. You chz a lot of gamey, probably unintended non-interactions, instead of simulate what a character in a given situation would do. So, I play like a GM and facilitate things players want to do. They can lose and do, but they're not encouraged to do things they really don't want to do. An interesting development in our 1st normal RAW campaign was when the IP said he didn't like it and wasn't having fun and all us Rebel players told him we are rarely spending our activation doing what we want to do either. One player came right out and said it's a bad game, I want to attack things and constantly get told not to by the game itself. we play all the characters and deployment cards as written, all the leveling and gear, but encourage RP choosing what your character would do on the board and role play elements between missions like tracking info down and figuring things out, some puzzles on and off the board to. it's funny the miniature combat is great but the game encourages you to not engage your opponent.
  13. The problem is that competive play inspires really gamey, non-story driven decisions. And the whole play good tactics mentality is a rather macho chz bag response to gameplay mechanics that don't capture what the game is trying to simulate. yes I am absolutely going to be turned off by 1 Rebel hiding in a corner double resting while the others complete a mission or bad *** characters like Bosk avoiding fighting the rebels. It's not about making it hard to win, it's about enjoying the promise of the game. Great characters pitted in combat against classic villains with objectives that will be violently opposed.
  14. Wife ended up getting me boxes I had already. Have core open but not punched or separated, hoth, jaba, and bespin sealed.
  15. Ootl what are these posts about people being disappointed and mad over Armada? is it bc there hasn't been a new release? Man I have been enjoying the **** out of that. I hate anything more than 2 waves a year. i am completely done with Xwing bc of it. They completely flooded the market with product isn't even the main line stuff. Made it to easy to check out once all the original ships were collected. If it was 1 cool addition at a time it would be more appealing to accept new ships.
  • Create New...