Jump to content

ardoyle

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ardoyle

  1. @WolfRiderThe idea that the Inquisition didn't burn witches is historically incorrect. While you're right that their primary 'job' was to root out heretics, this included anything that didn't fit their spiritual sensibilities, including witches. Pope Innocent VII published a papal bull in 1484 explicitly acknowledging witches and sorcerers, and empowering the Inquisition to prosecute them. Heinrich Kramer is the big example, and is believed to have had 48 individuals executed under the belief they were witches, and wrote a famous book on the subject. You could be technically correct that the Inquisition didn't burn anyone during the Middle Ages... Since they weren't around until 1251...
  2. There is one change you could make that would slot into existing rules and systems without causing much trouble, or nessessitate adding stuff to each and every weapon. You should consider rewriting the standard critical injury table into something more lethal, perhaps with death becoming a possibility at a roll of 101 or more. You would have to spend the time to make the new table, but after that work there won’t be any weird rules or janky gear to worry about later.
  3. Building up to a hard science fiction game with no aliens, my prospective players have been mulling over character concepts, and a frequent question I’ve been getting is are there any archetypes that start with 3 agility. After some brainstorming, this is what I designed: The Drifter 2 Brawn, 3 Agility, 1 Intelligence, 3 Cunning, 1 Willpower, 2 Presence 10+Brawn Wound Threshold 10+Willpower Strain Threshold 90 Starting experience 1 rank of Skulduggery It’s not THAT Bad...: Once per session, after you or an engaged ally rolls a dice pool, you may spend one story point to reroll the dice pool. You may keep either roll, but the Game Master adds a Despair effect to the final result. The idea was to create an archetype that could represent a roguish rascal, Han Solo or Nathan Drake type character. Any thoughts? I’m open to comments, and especially criticism.
  4. If this is a real thing, FFG needs to make it easier to find out where the physical locations are.
  5. You actually seem to have a pretty strong grasp on how to use knowledge rolls. Threat: When my players roll threat in a knowledge roll, I ask myself 'what might bite them in the butt later?' Usually I omit an inconvenient detail, and promtp some sort of comedic effect with that detail coming up later. Simple Rolls: If you're worried about threat or failure, a simple roll will work fine, but it's kind of just a distraction. Whenever there's no narrative tension, I usually opt to leave the dice alone. So you may as well... ...Not Require a Roll: The one possible pitfall of not requiring a roll would be if you have a player that's invested effort (xp, game time, ect) into being able to make those rolls effectively. But even if you have such a Player Character, you could make it clear that his/her investment is why the party has such accurate intelligence.
  6. My personal favorite is to have not one, but two fully fleshed out, powerful antagonists working together, in addition to any less powerful or less important minions. Just one enemy, even a powerful one, tends to get mauled very quickly by my players, and the added dynamic of two adversaries complementing each other's abilities and weaknesses is just a lot more interesting than a 1v1 or 1v4 fight. Not to mention the possibility of the players finding a way to divide the two.
  7. I don't think I've ever heard anyone complain about Morality when planning a session or improvising a scene. Similar complaints that I actually have heard are how the mechanic spawns long winded out of character discussions about philosophical and statistical minutiae so inane that the entire discussion becomes morally bankrupt. Personally, I never had issues with planning the stated emotional strengths and weaknesses into a game. But when working with the numbers associated with Morality, I frequently had to either grind the game to a halt, or ignore smaller infractions, unbalancing the whole concept. I never had this issue with Obligation, but I think that was because my players took complete ownership of the mechanic; they never felt like they had to check with me when it went up or down.
  8. Dealing fifteen damage is possible, but doing so regularly? That's bizarrely high. With an enhanced brawn of (I'm guessing) five, a lightsaber skill of three, and a base damage of six, the chances of doing sixteen damage that are less than eight thousandths of one percent. I'm guessing you're letting him add his brawn to damage for lightsabers, which is not how it's supposed to work. Lightsabers have an unmodified base damage, like ranged weapons. This is different from melee weapons, where you add your brawn to their damage (as indicated by an addition sign next to the damage.) On the other hand, if you've been doing everything correct, make him go get you a lotto ticket. Because his luck is insane.
  9. I hope this doesn't come across too critical; I do like the general idea but I'm also seeing a few glaring issues in the details. ---Career skills One thing to note is that you have 2 more career skills for the Force Adept career (8) than any other force focused career, which always have six. ---Physical Adept You should get rid of the Physical Adept talent, both the name and the talent itself. Remember, it will only have any effect at all on a Nemesis, as rivals and minions have no strain, so it's a low level talent that will only have any effect at all on high level foes. A better ability with a similar effect would be to give your unarmed strikes an ability, something like Stun 2. That way the player will have more choices for how to use advantage, as opposed to a nearly meaningless choice about damage as strain/wounds. Also, you could change the name to Disrupting Palm, Low Blow, or something else more descriptive, but it's a really bad idea to use the same name of the specialization for the name of a talent. ---Physical Master This name isn't as bad as physical adept, but it is pretty boring and meaningless. Mechanically, I really like Donovan's Linked suggestion. If you go with that, maybe a name like Flurry of Blows (to steal a bit from d&d...)? Now if you'll excuse me, I need to look up the plural of Nemesis...
  10. As far as I know, the only character in canon to teleport like that was the Father of Mortis, so I'm very curious how you're going to introduce this power into your story. Is this just something that the players can simply buy to pick up, or is there going to be an introduction of some sort? In the original movies, there were these thematic thresholds to what the audience saw of the Force and it's capabilities, and passing them meant something significant. In the first movie, there's very little force action that a very skilled individual couldn't do normally (persuade past a check point, sneak around a battle station with distractions, nail an incredible shot, recall some your mentor's last words to you.) At the beginning of Empire, we see Luke move a Lightsaber a bit after reaching for it several tries, but it's when we meet Yoda and watch him lift a massive ship that Luke (and the audience) learns that the force has no limits based on your physical form, lifting a ship far larger than his muscle mass would ever allow. Interpreted this way, the final threshold of the Force's abilities is crossed when Luke defies the Emperor, who we then see unleash waves of pure energy from his hands, a display that some would consider unnatural. This is explicit in the text; after his first training session, Luke tells Obi Wan that he could feel something, indicating his first conscious connection to the Force, Obi wan responds, "You have taken your first step into a larger world." So what will a power like this mean for your story, world and characters? But on the subject of theme, I'm not a fan of how you called it "a short hyperspace jump." Even if that's what it is in your head, I'd leave details vague, and let the players muddle out what the power means for themselves.
  11. I generally like this a lot, but I have a nitpick with Faulty; mechanically it doesn't seem very bad or significant, especially for requiring two Despair. An item damaged once merely adds one setback to rolls using it until repaired for 25% of the item's base cost, which does not include the mods or attachments. Adding one black die until a character can spend 75 credits just doesn't feel very harsh, and when my players roll two Despair, I like them to feel the consequences. For the positive, I particularly like Practical Design and Subtle Design, I think they're good ideas to include for specifically Lightsabers.
  12. Maybe you have to try 'selling' this game differently. From the post you made, I can see a lot of what you want and hope to get from this game, but you are not the one you have to entice to join you. Give a post about what the game master might get out of it, what will make this special for him or her. Running a game is hard work, even a small one, and you'll need a reason besides "help me get off on my awesome character." Sorry if that came off too condescending, but a good RPG is made by the relationship between the GM and players. I imagine this is doubly true for one on one experiences, and your post is all about you.
  13. Tasks can be a lot trickier when the person performing them has no experience. I've increased the difficulty of rolls for untrained characters in my games a few times, but usually with red or black dice instead of basic purple difficulty dice. I think paying attention to the context of each roll will give better results and feel more real to your players than one general rule will. Take electrical construction, for example. There are elements of general fabrication, such as laying piping or building device boxes. Mistakes here can cause delays or waste materials. On the other hand, sometimes workers have to handle live circuits, during which inexperience can cause dangerous, even lethal mistakes. In my experience, even basic training and skill reduces or eliminates the majority of both problems. In game, both of these tasks would be handled by the Mechanics skill, but I would Increase the Difficulty or add Setback for fabrication checks, while I would Upgrade the difficulty of any checks working with live circuitry for anyone making untrained checks (on top of any initial difficulty and upgrades.)
  14. One way to make an oppressive group seem more sympathetic is to give that group a legitimate problem that they are dealing with, one that is unrelated to the Players. In Star Wars, perhaps the Empire is stomping down on vicious pirates, opposing a nearby despotic warlord, or preventing slavers from running off with captured humans and other sentients. The key is that everything the Empire does against the player characters will (almost) automatically make them bad guys in the eyes of the players, due to our own cognitive biases. By doing something unrelated to the player characters, those players will have a chance to evaluate the Empire from a less biased, less self-centric point of view.
  15. Do you like the chance of a shot hitting allies, but specifically object to it not being mitigated by skill? What if instead of triggering off of despair it triggers of a set amount of threat instead? Despair isn't counteracted by a skilled roll, but Threat is.
  16. This was kind of brought up earlier by LadySkywalker, but Simple Initiative is something I do for every role playing game: Entire sides of the conflict take their actions together. Usually it's the players and all of their their allies, followed by all of the enemies. Vigilance and Cool are often used to allow maneuvers or sometimes actions prior to the turn structure. I don't think a turn based system will ever do a good job of capturing the fluid nature of time in combat, so I did away with the book keeping. It also had the very pleasant side effect of my players suddenly thinking and acting more like a team, but that might have been the specific group in question.
  17. You better batten down the hatches, a Lot of posters here insist that the rules work fine for everyone. Snarkiness aside, can you give more information about your ideas? If the rules as written are too diametric for you, what would be the advantage of a polymetric, five-faceted system be? What would such a system look like mechanically? Would this even be a system, or simply how you view the fictional world you play in? And by far the most important, how would it benefit the GM and players at the table?
  18. The 'flaw,' in very loose quotation marks, is that morality in the real world can be interpreted differently by every person and group. It's not that the way written out in the core rulebook is wrong; it's that there is no Right way that will work for everyone. The part of his post that resonated with me and my frustrations wasn't the mechanical argument, it was his frustration with this forum for belittling his adaptations to a rule that (from my point of view) cannot work for every player, game master and group.
  19. One tactic that has helped me greatly is if (or rather When) the rolling player and I get stumped for ideas or stuck in a rutt of technical back and forth, I prompt another player to get involved, usually the least active one at that moment. They can contribute either in character, or you can get them to comment directly about the shared narrative; either way will help shake up a stale or stagnant mind set. Usually I prompt with something along the lines of "Hey ____, your character has seen this sort of thing before. What was it like then?"
  20. I think that the core of your problem is that there isn't a scaling of stat blocks and challenge for space combat. There's no easy and effective analogue for the minion/rival/nemesis series that ground encounters get to use. One direct way to increase survivability would be to double the hull trauma threshold of the ships the players are using depending on how many hits you think each of their ships would be able to take. You could do the same thing for significant antagonists. Perhaps minion-y enemy ships got down in one hit automatically. This would be less tactical and realistic than many of the house rules for dodging, but at the same time it would be less finicky, and you wouldn't have to teach it to your players.
  21. One aspect to note is how common lightsabers are among your friends and foes. One more soak rarely has an effect on a lightsaber strike, and is usually negated by breach, but defense is not. Plus, the extra chance of threat might help you trigger an improved reflect or parry in response.
  22. Instead of stamping your feet and yelling that everyone here just doesn't get it, how about you describe how you handle morality at your own table? Specifically, I'd like to know the pace at which you hand out conflict. Join the conversation in a positive manner.
  23. I'm sorry for the confusion, ThePatriot, I should have been more clear. My earlier post was entirely referring to the original post made by Sabbad. But since I'm here, should I critique your house rules too? I do love talking about house rules. Of course, the most obvious strength of your rule is it's simplicity. Doing bad acts and using bad pips brings you down on the morality scale. Doing good in the world and using the good pips brings you up on the same scale. It's easy to explain, easy to understand, and easy to put into practice. So many house rules are way too complicated, but not yours. My only real issue has to do with using Light pips to raise your morality in the exact same way as using the Dark pips to lower it, because they aren't quite used the same way by the rest of the Force Power. A light side force user will naturally trend towards Light pips, because light side pips do not require a destiny point and strain to use. This means a light side user will naturally trend up the morality scale, with all other things being equal, and vise versa for the dark side practitioner. One possible answer would be to allow players to use either pip without a destiny point and strain. Which would be interesting, but probably not necessary. Even without seeing hard numbers, I doubt your rule would be as bad as what sometimes happens with the conflict rules as written. And of course, the most important thing is that it works for your group.
×
×
  • Create New...