Jump to content

penpenpen

Members
  • Content Count

    864
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About penpenpen

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Malmö, Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

1,048 profile views
  1. The Lucky Blaster from Unlimited Power is Enc 3 and has 1 hardpoint. Should be Enc 1 and 2 hp.
  2. Also, remember back in TPM? The Jedi showed to peacefully negotiate an end to the hostilities between the Trade Federation and Naboo, and the Trade Fed. tried to outright murder them without listening to a single word, AND blew up an unarmed diplomatic cruiser, murdering the entire crew when they were helpless in the hangar. With the Trade Federation involved with the separatists to the extent that they were, it seems only prudent to come armed and ready for trouble during the next attempt to "talk things out". Turns out, they weren't armed and ready enough. I'd say their attempt at peaceful negotiation was a genuine effort, rather than a token gesture. Rather than let Windu speak for the Jedi alone, he could have brought a squad of skilled knights to where the separatist. leadership was seated, positioned to strike a decapitating blow. You could argue it was stupid of the Jedi not to try that, but another valid reason could be that surrounding Dooku and pals with a dozen Jedi would be seen as overly threatening, and they abstained from doing it out of fear of escalating the situation needlessly. That didn't quite pan out, but it wasn't because the Jedi weren't trying hard enough for a peaceful solution. If anything, they tried too hard and played right into Dooku's hands.
  3. I dunno. To me it seems like complaining that we didn't get a scene where Luke did or didn't get landing permission on Cloud City the way we got with the Falcon. They needed an army because there was another army coming. They might've had some reservations initially, but from the end of AotC to we skip several years to the beginning of RotS and there is a lot of stuff we are just asked to accept happened, such as the Jedi having grown to trust the clones.
  4. There's a lot of talk that the Jedi should have looked into the clone army, but the really sneaky part it is... It's pretty much exactly what it's claimed to be. A grand army to defend the republic ordered by a loyal jedi master who took matters into his own hands. The troops were loyal and effective, exactly as advertised. Order 66 wasn't a secret, just buried among several other contingency orders. The inhibitor chips weren't a secret, but their entire purpose wasn't disclosed. Nothing says the Jedi didn't investigate the matter. It's perfectly reasonable the actually did miss the fairly cleverly hidden plot, particularly when there is a war going on.
  5. You're seriously comparing Star Wars tech to one that can barely reach orbit with any consistency? A universe that plays fast and loose with what we consider immutable laws of physics? You can pile on more technical facts, but it's not going to make you come off as smarter or more reasonable, but as a petulant child demanding that their toys should be played with correctly. If you're so insistant on convincing people to stop having fun, might I suggest doing it in a way that flatters your intelligence, because your current approach does not. EDIT: Also, you're flat out wrong about the rocket boots, which can be used for up to four rounds, which is significantly more than a single jump.
  6. Being of a foreign persuasion, I play a lot of swedish games. Haven't gotten around to play Tales from the Loop, but other stuff from Free League, such as Coriolis and the Mutant series. Not sure if they've released those two on english yet, but Mutant: Year Zero was released as video game last year. A good primer if you want to get an idea of the setting. As for fantasy, my preferred game,bar none, is Eon by Helmgast. Only system that gives Star Wars/Genesys a run for it's money. No, there are currently no plans for a translation though. Another Swedish game due for a release in english is Western, which is pretty much exactly what it sounds like; a Wild West rpg on the gritty and realistic side. Sure, you can vary the level somewhat, but even the most cinematic and heroic campaigns are more likely to be The Unforgiven rather than the Lone Ranger. The default state is akin to Deadwood or H*ll on Wheels. A friend of mine is pretty enthusiastic about the new Vampire edition so I'll probably give that a shot too. If we're running a one shot, I do love Dread, as well as Fiasco.
  7. Bobas jetpack is perhaps on the large side, but to provide lift in star wars, you dont need more than Cad Banes tiny rocket boots. So a jet pack could conceivably be a lot smaller than Bobas.
  8. Selfishness, or at least a disregard for others, and a lust for some kind of power tend to be common denominators.
  9. I know it's not there, I'm lamenting that it's missing and that I haven't figured out a good way to implement it myself. And it's not exactly a punishment I'm looking for, more guidelines, or limitations. To a point, table 9-2 serves this purpose, but only until you fall.
  10. And that means essentially nothing once you fall as far as the rules are concerned. That is what's bothering me. You can pop dark side pips like candy and all it does is shuffle your wound and strain threshold around a bit. All while you're being just the nicest guy.
  11. No, I'm saying there's no encouragement to avoid OR indulge in them anymore, as conflict doesn't matter. Using the dark side should be corrupting. It isn't. Maybe I play ridiculously goody two shoes characters, but the stuff on table 9-2 isn't generally something even my more cynic characters do on a regular basis. I guess there is an argument to be made for logic, that if you've fallen to the dark side where conflict barely matters, you're less resistant to doing stuff that grants conflict, be it snide remarks, theft or torturing someone to death. Problem is, it doesn't really matter if you do or you don't from a mechanics perspective. Also, it's not enough that it gets "easier to be evil", it should be harder to be "good". Because my problem is with the selfless, heroic darkside user who still has a single digit morality rating due to a steady diet of dark side pips. Don't get me wrong, I love that you can fall simply from using the dark side, trying to do good while giving in to fear, hate and anger. Problem is, falling barely means anything. "Did you hear? Dave fell to the Dark side last week!" "Oh bummer. He's still on our team though. Right?" "Yeah, why wouldn't he be! Still our great buddy Dave! He ran out to pull me out of the crossfire just yesterday, shielding me his own body, and just this morning he rescued a litter of kittens from a burning orphanage! Force choked the flames, he did!" "Wait... kittens?" "Well, after the orphans of course." "Right, of course. But still, the dark side?" "Oh, most definitely. You can tell from the way he's always testy during his heroics. Once he even said something really rather mean. He apologized right away of course. Good ol' Dave." "That Dark side sure is insidious..."
  12. Well, you could draw a parallell with this and the increased use of tasers by police. The idea was that you would reduce the use of firearms by having a less lethal option, and there for reducing the level of violence overall. Turns out that in practice it often didn't raise the threshold for using firearms so much, but lowered the threshold for violence overall, since tasers are non-lethal and therefore more likely to be used when not strictly necessary, such as against non-violent but non-compliant people. I'm generalizing to make a point here, and being intentionally nonspecific to avoid this turning into a discussion about use of force by law enforcement in some country or other, so please work with me on this. Carrying a lightsaber without a stun setting (it's a possibility to have one in the game) may be intentional, serving as a constant reminder that if a situation turns violent, someone is likely to get killed or maimed. Meaning that for both the Jedi him-/herself and whoever they're confronting (assuming that they know anything about Jedi), it's in everyone's best interest not to let the situation escalate into violence; Violence is to be avoided if at all possible, but if unavoidable, use it to decisively resolve the situation as quickly as possible. Ie, don't win the fight, end it. EDIT: I realize I quoted the wrong post, but iirc @HappyDaze has me on ignore anyway, so maybe that doesn't matter so much.
  13. You're not wrong, but let's not get too hung up on Yoda as the source. In the vein of "actions speak louder than words", let's consider some of the more powerful Jedi victories: Obi-wan letting vader destroy him, Luke refusing to kill Vader and Luke not fighting Kylo Ren. It does set some kind of precedence that not fighting is the better choice. Of course there are shades of this, Obi-wan defeats Anakin when Anakin attacks his defense, but the lines get a bit blurry when you start calling physically moving your lightsaber through someone's limbs an act of pure defense. You could also argue that if Obi-wan did what he did years later back on Mustafar and let Anakin cut him down, that might have snapped Anakin out if it. Of course, that is putting a lot of faith in the Force. Anyways, we're talking game design here. If we look at it from the perspective of granularity, one could argue that the pacifist path should aware less conflict than simply not being overly violent, and if the latter path already gives you the minimum amount (zero), is this a problem that needs to be addressed? For bonus points, I'd love to see you argue both sides of this.
×
×
  • Create New...