General star wars talk/discussion/complaining

[Zardnaar]

Thanks but no thanks. I have no real interest in learning a new RPG system at the moment.

Technically its an old one.

Might buy it myself.

 

[Maxperson]

IS there any recent good star wars fiction? The last one I read and enjoyed was Twilight Company, the surprisingly good military-sci-fi Battlefront tie in. I did not like Inferno Squad as much.

A bunch of sparkling vampires with blasters?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Star Wars D6 is a great ruleset, and relatively simple to learn. It even has relatively straightforward rules for “I shoot the Death Star with my blaster pistol”. It had a good selection of adventures and supplements as well.

 

[Zardnaar]

Star Wars D6 is a great ruleset, and relatively simple to learn. It even has relatively straightforward rules for “I shoot the Death Star with my blaster pistol”. It had a good selection of adventures and supplements as well.

I ran it years ago for university rpg club.


Explained the rules in 5 minutes. Basically DC 5,10,15,20 etc. Hit that number or opposed rolls.

 

[Aeson]

A bunch of sparkling vampires with blasters?

You know there is fanfic. I mean there has to be, right? If nothing else, some slash stuff with Edward/Anakin.

 

[Reynard]

Star Wars D6 is a great ruleset, and relatively simple to learn. It even has relatively straightforward rules for “I shoot the Death Star with my blaster pistol”. It had a good selection of adventures and supplements as well.

I run it sometimes at cons when I want to do real EpIV style stuff. But generally I prefer Savage Worlds.

 

[MarkB]

While I like the SWSE mechanics, I really felt like d20 was not the right game system to use for Star Wars. The 1-20 level spread was too much. Star Wars needs a flatter game mechanic system. I've never tried the newer FFG version or the old d6 WEG version.

Most of the wild variance in SWSE's math isn't down to the base d20 rolls, it's down to the weird differences in bonus progressions between different classes, and between attack bonus progression and skill bonus progression. A lot of the system's issues would be alleviated if it were reworked using 5e style bounded accuracy.

 

[pukunui]

Most of the wild variance in SWSE's math isn't down to the base d20 rolls, it's down to the weird differences in bonus progressions between different classes, and between attack bonus progression and skill bonus progression. A lot of the system's issues would be alleviated if it were reworked using 5e style bounded accuracy.

Agreed.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Most of the wild variance in SWSE's math isn't down to the base d20 rolls, it's down to the weird differences in bonus progressions between different classes, and between attack bonus progression and skill bonus progression. A lot of the system's issues would be alleviated if it were reworked using 5e style bounded accuracy.

Agreed.

That, and making some of the feat and talent trees shorter, or making the first feat or talent in the tree worthwhile on its own, and you'd have damn near my favorite game.

 

[MarkB]

That, and making some of the feat and talent trees shorter, or making the first feat or talent in the tree worthwhile on its own, and you'd have damn near my favorite game.

I agree that a lot of them could do with simplification, but I really like their general implementation, especially the easy multiclassing.

I always thought SWSE was only a few steps away from being an actual classless system - get rid of some of the class-based bonus progressions (that's where the bounded accuracy helps) and then just pick from any talent tree at odd levels and any feat tree at even levels, subject to some basic prerequisites.