Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SanguineAngel

  1. Ah yes I do really agree with this. When I assign XP for things it's never really predicated on success but on getting past the encounter at all. If they didn't engage with it at all that is one thing, but if they resolved it in a manner that may be viewed as failure (such as getting captured, or thrown off a cliff) then they're still getting xp. In fact I want to encourage failure because this is a narrative system and failure is usually when the most interesting narratives occur and often leads into further interesting scenarios where there's chance for even more xp gain!
  2. I usually write my own modules and I assign xp values to particular things. Often is a discretional xp range. At the end of the session, or the episode usually - maybe multiple sessions - I tot up the XP and award it to the players as a group, detailing where it all came from. I enjoy it, and my players seem to like it. I think it makes their actions feel like they had meaning. Helps that I am writing the modules myself so I can set xp as per my understanding of the group and pace modules accordingly. I do it for table play and pbp. Hopefully it's fun for my players!
  3. Hey all, Thank you very much for the positive feedback. Since there has been so much good constructive stuff and at least one person seems interested in using it - I went ahead and made a few more changes based on the above. I Re-resized the Talents (to suit my own personal prefereces I am afraid) I also added in a lot more Talent entries on the 2nd page so there should hopefully be plenty even if you do want to write fuller descriptions. I have private version where I put an XP tracker in that space for my players but I suspect that's less relevant for others. I also added in a Large Ship sheet which is 2 sides. My players haven't gotten there yet but I can certainly see that it'd round out the set. I've put it what I think will be useful based on my limited capital ship experience but I am fully open to suggestions from others regarding better use of that space. The 2nd page in particular is a bit plain since I anticipate further changes may be coming. @AceSolo5 I am flattered to hear you'll be using my sheet! I am very familiar with the scrawlings issue and this is partly what prompted me to begin designing my own sheet in the first place. @MrTInce I tried out a number of Vector software solutions: Inkscape, Illustrator and Gravit. In the end, I settled with Gravit as I found it to be the best fit for me, but I could have achieved the same on any one of those solutions. As a warning, I found tranferring files between them to be impractical as they don't convert terribly well into each other. In the future I'll stick to Illustrator as my wife has a copy for work, even though it's a bit more temperamental. Gravit's pro version is free for 2 weeks but without it I won't be able to export to the fidelity I am after. @Mark Caliber Thanks! I am sorry about the lack of hexagons! I found with the amount I wanted to cram into an itty bitty space - a lot og embalishments were just too busy. Let me know how you get on with resizing though - if necessary, I can share the .svg files with you.
  4. Holy moly! I'll be really impressed if any of my campaigns - at the table or pbp last long enough to end up with a character like that. Unlikely as we mix up what we play pretty regularly.
  5. Thanks all. @Varlie @Tramp Graphics I've updated with a version of the sheet that has expanded rows for Talents. It halves the number but gives room from a brief description. Don't think I prefer it myself - there might be a way of rejigging for extra space... I also changed the presentation of Morality. I previously had morality on the front sheet as that's where my players keep seraching for it. And without a value on the back sheet, I just rolled Strengths/Weaknesses into general character background. Now it has a dedicated section which I appreciate is probably what most people would expect to see. @MrTInce cheers. I think the price and rarity is useful to have but I suppose you could get rid and have more descriptive space. I'll probably keep it though. @Bishop69 thanks! I'm actually in the UK so Specialisation is with an "s" not a "z" for me. Also why armour is spelled with a "u" and probably some other small differences. If it IS something that people want to actually use, I could probably do an american english version but I'd need a pair of NA eyes to check it over. Probably I could make this form fillable! I'll probably wait an make sure I'm happy with the exact layout before I do though
  6. Thanks guys, I've implemented changes and update the sheet on the drive. Recurved the uncurved Rarity label Renamed Armour Condition. I also added provisions to the ship sheet. I'm still experimenting with the Ship silhouette but I'm not quite sure what direction I want to go with.
  7. Ah yes, this is where my other creation comes in - I created playing cards with the Talents on (and gear) since these guys have quite a CCG background I thought it'd be a nice way to present that information to them.
  8. Hey guys, I know the character sheets are a dime a dozen nowadays but I was having a bit of trouble finding a character sheet that satisfied my own group's personal requirements. I wanted something comprehensive that would fit onto 2 sides of A4 as most of my group are bang into writing back stories and creating interesting characters but not so fond of managing multiple sheets of paper. Anyway, I've been producing a sheet for my own needs and thought I would put it out here on the off chance that anyone else liked it! https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yShh2iATU486YbWY5qKUcJJy6deYa8Ss If anyone spots anything glaringly obviously missing, please do let me know. I also apologise right now to any actual designers whose eyes will surely bleed. Thanks
  9. Hey guys! Thanks for the input on this topic,. Also thanks for the amusing side-nonsense. A true treat! Just thought I'd check in and let you know that I eventually went with colours established by the crystal. It's not canon anymore but I find it a lot more concrete and personally satisfying. Everyone who got their crystal from the same source got the same colour blades. One crystal came from elsewhere and got a blue blade. Anyway, cheers again for the input. You may resume squabbling 👌
  10. Hey all, Apologies for raising this topic - which I know has come up once or twice in the past. I'm hpong that things may have changed or solidified since the last post I could find. I'm about to have my players create their lightsabers in an F&D game and I have a couple of (silly?) questions for you fine folks. 1. Is there a consensus amongst the GMs here as to whether they prefer to have Lightsaber colours be dictated by the crystal (Legends) or by attuning to the character (Canon)? 2. If you prefer attuning for colour - is there a good guide for what colours mean what or an actually official canon stance on that? (I've seen a couple of interpretations but they seem so hackneyed I think they must be unofficial)
  11. I think the thing that gets me here about this is that in the inexplicable context of the situation in that film - where everything about that battle is already white hot nonsense - we really are only able to go on what the exposition tells us. And that is that the resistance is in an untenable situation, with a handful of people and an even smaller number of ships on the verge of utter destruction. The priority at that point for resistance leadership is to preserve what little forces they have left presumably for a guerilla war to buy as much time as possible. For those purposes the bomber squadron would have been invaluable. It's a decision that wasn't Poe's to make. The larger objective at that point was not destroy as many FO for as few Resistance as possible, which is a short sighted goal that ultimately achieves nothing. Rather, it seems the hope (not plan) was to survive long enough to continue small strikes as long as possible and create a groundswell of resistance. In that respect I'd say Poe was no hero. As it happened, the script contrived to created that groundswell through some poorly explained mythology mechanism that meant Poe's error was largely irrelevant. But it showed a lack of trust, an all too eager willingness to subvert the command structure and a lack of long term thinking. If anything I think he got off way too lightly but then, they couldn't really afford to lose their best pilot. However, those things are fine as far as a character goes. He's no hero but an interesting charcter. There are other things about Poe that I find annoying but all that's for a different thread.
  12. Thanks Darzil, simple and perfect reassurance!
  13. Hello all! Silly question but I think I have misinterpreted this in my current game and am second guessing myself so would like to tap the hive mind: Does silhouette difficulty modifier apply to melee/Brawl combat? Or is it only on ranged? Thanks for any help!
  14. Ah, welcome back @Ruakar! Great news, looking forward to seeing what you come up with.
  15. Encumbrance capacity is intentionally vague - allowing the GM and players to use apply some common sense rules to the enc of, say, a cargo container full of x-wing parts without being too prescriptive or requiring a lot of reference. As far as I know, there's nothing in RAW that prevents transporting people in the cargo hold. The issues are more likely to be: space, life support and supplies. And to me, that's just a case of potentially supplying potential fodder for the next interesting situation. Probably, you'd only transport people a short distance in these circumstances or you might find yourselves in an emergency situation! "Life support's overloaded and you're living on scraps! You need to pull in for repairs soon and find something to do with these people but the only port inrange belongs to the Black Sun."
  16. Ah, apologies i didn't get that from your previous posts. Thank you for taking the time to respond. To be honest, though, I think I still disagree with this. To my mind, it is not necessary for character progression to reinforce the original character concept. To me, the concept is your starting point. At the beginning of the game this is who your character is. But that character will change and develop over the course of a dynamic story. Unlike a book or film, where the characters development is predetermined, it is the nature of the game to adapt. However, in both cases I'd consider it unusual to actively prevent character development (by which I mean narrative development - their personal growth). It does occur to me that another thing you might mean is maybe you're not satisfied with the talent trees? I can see that in order to purchase some talents you must first purchase other talents that you might be less interested in. Again, I don't see that as an issue personally as I believe the trees do a good job of producing thematically consistent talents and would still expect a person to develop subsidiary skills without necessarily intending to. However, from a mechanical standpoint I could see that not necessarily suiting every player. Of course, there is still no requirement to spend xp or to traverse the talent trees unless you want specific talents. In the end, I would consider the players responsibility to develop their character as they see fit. But I'd struggle to think of a concept that can't be catered to with the degree of latitude in character progression.
  17. Am I understanding correctly that the issue you are referring to is one of "preserving" a character concept throughout play? So a naive farmboy could remain a naive farmboy throughout? If so then that seems counter-intuitive to me. I believe a primary purpose of the XP progression systems ingrained into most (but not all) rpg systems is to approximate the growth and development of a character through life experiences. Especially those systems like this one that don't reward through combat alone. Add to that, this game is explicitly based on narrative source material and uses the narrative dice system. The entire focus seems to be on telling a story and a crucial part of most traditional stories is that of character development. However, it is also a roleplaying game and both the nature of how a character acts or reacts, and the direction of character growth are firmly in the player's hands. If the player wishes for their character to obstinately refuse to learn from life experience they can choose to a. Act accordingly in game and b. not spend xp. However, there must quickly come a point at which you have to wonder what sort of character that is? Certainly the sort that would wear thin on any travelling companions in the real world... I certainly would not call progression compulsory in this or really any system. However, people who don't learn run a real risk of falling behind, as they would in any real life analogue.
  18. man, where's @Ruakar these days? His deck plans were flipping excellent and, unlike most of the deckplans I see around seemed to be at a realistic scale.
  19. Yeah, to be honest, I also think they did a good job of demonstrating a more jaded, cynical Han at the end of the film. They didn't expressly demonstrate the kind of man he becomes but the path he was set on at the end was pretty clearly implicit. I don't think another film would be required for that. Of course deep down we know he's a good guy but that only makes sense given that he demonstrates as much in OT. However, I'd watch the heck out of some more Edge stories films. They don't need Han to draw me in. They can approach different genres happily, as RO and Solo have both done, and that's a trend I'm interested in. I'd like to see what Donald Glover would have done with his Lando idea but to be honest I agree with the @2P51 when he says main characters aren't required. If anything they can be a real detriment. To my mind, cramming the same characters into every piece of media in a franchise of this nature only serves to shrink the scale of the universe.
  20. I had a great time with it. I thought that the Kessel Run was nonsense but everything else was a blast. A light, fun western heist movie that added texture to the universe in a way I found pleasing. It didn't blow me away like RO but I don't necessarily want that from every movie. This was comfortable and enjoyable. I'd actually forgotten that Rian Johnson had gotten his own trilogy. I can't say I'm keen on the idea personally but I've sort of hived off the sequel trilogy narrative in my head as a seperate thing so I'm sure i can do the same with those if they're disappointing to me. I've enjoyed them in themselves but for some reason I kinda consider them to be akin to fanfic. Probably this mental partitioning is easier since it's already been done with Legends and Canon and when I play swrpg I tend to just pick and choose what I want anyway? Oh man, I can't agree - I thought Glover was incredible. However, I know where you're coming from. I recall the 1st Star Trek reboot everyone raving about Karl Urban who did what I thought was just a funny impression of Bones. Meanwhile, I felt like Chris Pine was amazing, inhabiting the Shatner Kirk so naturally in the subtle physical movements but didn't get anywhere near the recognition. I guess to me, the difference between Urban and Glover is that I really felt like, while Glover did defnitely do a few things that felt like an impression, so much of his physical performance felt so natural and the voice just oozed out of him.
  21. I apologise for the slight white Knighting here. Honestly, I have to say that I think OP has displayed in many threads a keen enthusiasm for the system and a manifest desire to discuss all aspects of it. I might not always agree with them but I respect their passion and I really think that they have clearly approached many topics with an open mind and willingness to listen and I've noticed them change their mind on several occasions. Above all, I think it is admirable that they have remained cordial and polite at all times that I've seen. Besides, these discussions have helped me crystallised my own views and theories as I respond so that is also nice. Apologies for the derailment, just though I should say something.
  22. I think the situation you are describing is the player anticipating trouble and either preemptively drawing their weapon or making their weapon easily available for during the fight. Either of those would be well within the rules as written and wouldn't overlap with quick draw - if its taking place before combat initiates then it's not within structured play/time. If the player is rushing to cram in this prep as you're saying the words roll initiative or just after, it'd be a judgement call but usually I'd say they missed their chance.
  23. Apologies, I wasn't very clear here, was I? What I mean to say is that, because your action is an abstraction, you have a lot of latitude in how you describe your what happens, whether it is an attack or activation of a force power. So you could simply flavour your attack narrative to have elements of force use, or describe your force use as a part of a physical attack. It's all about how you interpret the results of your roll. Dual Wielding is another abstraction that allows the player to potentially deal more damage at the cost of a reduced chance of success. Again, it does not specifically represent 1 specific hit with each weapon - rather a cumulative effect of your attack. Really, it'd only be if utilising specific qualities of either weapon that you'd necessarily need to call out a particular weapon narratively. You could also use the existing mechanics - by using advantage to inflict strain you could spin that as further force use. As a GM, I would (personally) rule that you could not use Harm as a weapon in dual wielding mechanically. Dual wielding depends upon the difficulty to hit but Force Harm is not a physical attack and so doesn't require a combat roll to use. (Compare this to Force Move as an attack, which is still a dedicated action but is combined with a ranged attack roll). Instead, it requires concentration, thus requiring a full actiont to use; just like any other force power and wouldn't benefit from one or two hands in any meaningful way. So, my perspective would be flavour your attacks and your force useage as appropriate for your character (though I'd encourage variety, as doing the same description repeatedly could be boring for you) and utilise the existing systems to add flair with advantage and the like. I hope that's a little clearer! Sorry, I typed my previous response pretty much as I was going to sleep ?
  24. I would say it is because the mechanics of turn, action and maneuver are abstractions. A single attack does not simply represent a single strike with one weapon or two with two, it represents a full exchange that can narratively last a second or full minutes. Therefore, when you narrate the results of your attack, you could in theory describe a number of attempted attacks. Ultimately, though, the mechanics of a successful attack reference the economy of a single Action. Therefore the effects are applied from whatever you determined was the focus of that action, probably as the greatest chance of successfully achieving your goals.
  • Create New...