Star Wars - SAGA vs. Revised

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Jedi are no longer the end-all, be-all type of characters they were under RCR, with everyone else being brought up to the Jedi's level. Anyone can be a decent Force-user; characters that take their 1st level in Jedi just getting a running head start. One point to be wary of is that Force-users, especially those that took Skill Focus (Use the Force) at an early level, will frankly dominate the game in the early levels, but once the bad guys' Defense scores start catching up, it becomes much more difficult to affect them with Force powers.

I've got to disagree with this point. The Jedi / non-Jedi divide is still huge in the game (as it has been in every d20 SW game). The Jedi is the Swiss army knife in a stone-age world. The Jedi can easily play the role of medic, diplomat, party face, fighter, and mystic all with one skill (Use the Force) and picking up the feat that gives extra force powers. About the only thing a Jedi doesn't do is pilot (except for the talent that lets the Jedi roll Use the Force for pilot checks). I actually prefer the revised rules for handling the Force: many skills and feats that, when used, expended the Jedi's vitality points. This forced the Jedi to specialize in certain powers and helped (a little) in toning down the Jedi's power.

Many people have brought up the point about Skill Focus: Use the Force. It was suggested that this feat have a level requirement of nine by a person I respect highly. We played it this way, and while the +5 bonus was still huge at level 9, it is no where near as disruptive as it was at level 1. For those new to the SAGA edition, Use the Force is a skill check that is often used against a target's defenses. Skill Focus: Use the Force ends up giving a +5 to hit at level 1 which is just way too good.

 

[Remathilis]

I've got to disagree with this point. The Jedi / non-Jedi divide is still huge in the game (as it has been in every d20 SW game). The Jedi is the Swiss army knife in a stone-age world. The Jedi can easily play the role of medic, diplomat, party face, fighter, and mystic all with one skill (Use the Force) and picking up the feat that gives extra force powers. About the only thing a Jedi doesn't do is pilot (except for the talent that lets the Jedi roll Use the Force for pilot checks). I actually prefer the revised rules for handling the Force: many skills and feats that, when used, expended the Jedi's vitality points. This forced the Jedi to specialize in certain powers and helped (a little) in toning down the Jedi's power.

The main reason people find Jedi in Saga more balanced is that a.) The Force is available to all PCs at the same power level; Jedi are only more specialized at its uses and b.) Class abilities for the other four classes have been beefed up. A solider CAN take down a Jedi now (before it was a no contest Jedi win) and Jedi who wishes to tie all his skills to UtF wastes all his talents to do so; effectively becoming a jack-of-all-trade PC but without the amazing talents that make scoundrels great pilots, Nobles great negoicators, or Scouts great, uh, scout.

I WILL give you that a PC with the Force IS more power than a non-Force user, but that's the breaks. No system can accurately represent Jedi and be balanced against non-Jedi. I mean, what's next, Fighters who are as powerful as wizards?

Many people have brought up the point about Skill Focus: Use the Force. It was suggested that this feat have a level requirement of nine by a person I respect highly. We played it this way, and while the +5 bonus was still huge at level 9, it is no where near as disruptive as it was at level 1. For those new to the SAGA edition, Use the Force is a skill check that is often used against a target's defenses. Skill Focus: Use the Force ends up giving a +5 to hit at level 1 which is just way too good.

My personal HR for that is Skill Focus grants a feat bonus equal to your character level, to a maximum of +5. So a 1st level PC has a +1, 2nd level a +2, etc.

 

[humble minion]

I've never played SAGA, but I will advise to stay the hell away from Revised. It's just a bad, bad ruleset, and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. It's a pretty-much-direct 3.5e port, with the magic items hacked out regardless of the effects on game balance, a half-hearted Force system grafted on, and with minimal if any playtesting done on the resulting mess.

I ran a long campaign in Revised, and while by the end I'd managed to cobble together a voluminous set of house rules that at least made the system function, it was a giant headache, and even with all the work I put into it, it still didn't feel like Star Wars, which was a big, big problem. Definitely not the sort of thing you want to be subjecting your 9 year old to.

 

[Glyfair]

Big-Time Caveat #1: I can't stomach 4e D&D. (However - If you do, more power to you.) I understand 4e wasn't quite the follow-on from SAGA that most people thought it would be - but if SAGA is just 4e-lite, then I already know it's not for me. While I'd be running the game for my son, if I can't stand the system, neither of us will be playing.

If 3.5 is New York City and 4E is Los Angeles then Star Wars Saga is Cincinnati (in a distance sense). Saga is far closer to 3.5, although it has a number of things that are "on the way" to 4E. IMO, they are among the best things about 4E.

 

[Connorsrpg]

Saga!
It is far better and easier than Rev. It is not 4e, but you can see where 4e branched out from. Some part of me wishes they had kept parts of 4e more like Saga. The character generation system and progression is very easy, yet with choice.

C

 

[The Highway Man]

I liked Revised, but since I tasted Saga, I wouldn't be able to go back. It's just a lot easier to play and a lot more fun when you "get" the level of abstraction of the game's design.

It'll be much easier for your son to get into.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Saga. I've heard people say that Saga is what 4e should've been.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

According to this thread, SWSE sounds fund, but:

SWSE uses the Saves-as-Defenses mechanic like 4e. There is no AC, and all attack rolls are vs. one of the 3 defenses. There are no saving throws.

How are things like disease or poison treated without saving throw? Attack vs. Defense and the victim suffers HO damage? Any long-term effects?

 

[Obryn]

How are things like disease or poison treated without saving throw? Attack vs. Defense and the victim suffers HO damage? Any long-term effects?

The poison, effect, or whatnot makes an "attack" against the PC's defenses, just like everything else.

It feels odd when the "attacker" is inanimate, but it works exactly like saving throws, in practice.

-O

 

[small pumpkin man]

Most poisons are attacks vs fort, success generally means you're moved steps down the condition track. I don't remember rules for disease, but I would assume it would be like hunger/thirst, an endurance check, not an attack vs fort, and failure would move you a -1 persistent step down the condition track.

For the record, I would put SWSE as the best iteration of d20 ever. Only M&M comes close.