Search results

I mean, it seems impossible to.enclunter more 3.5 GMs than players....

No it isn't. Both of my statements there were players stating action and intent.

I always kind of Marvel at people who have never been struck with deep, existential dread when contemplating the size and age of the universe. How can you not be diminished to a whimpering mass by the endlessness of it all when you a such a finite, insignificant thing?

Another import change for theoretical. 6E: they stop assuming their customers are idiots. It is okay if things are a little bit complicated.

Now there's some amoral mind control via madlibs.

Except people like blowing stuff up.

Then I am.not sure how it qualifies as different. "I rough up the locals until.someone squeals." "Okay. Roll." How is that different than "I pick the lock."?

I can appreciate that, but for me personally Star Wars is about the next weird planet and crazy superweapon and long lost force tradition*. These things don't need much "lore" and I don't want established lore getting in the way. Clone Wars did a ton of this. *when it isn't the space French...

While this is an interesting idea,I am wondering how exactly one would overhaul the combat system in order to make these inherent support casters feel just as important and impactful as the damage dealers.

We were talking about how broad the games were for different sibgenres of sci-fi, not playstyle preferences.

I don't understand this complaint with regards to the subject at hand. We are specifically talking about a GM facing tool.

That's not the point.

You have a well documented preference for A5E, so it is reasonable to guess that you are more forgiving of Voidrunner than you might be of Starfinder.

I'm saying that Star Wars does not need deep world building, and in fact directly benefits from its shallow worldbuilding.

Sure. But A5E and ToV both did a pretty good job of back working a system in, and Alphastream put together a solid set of trends that is useful for design based on the 2024 MM. WotC could have done it if they wanted to.

I am not sure I have ever encountered a "roll for intent" game, at least not one that doesn't want a fairly detailed explanation of action. And that I would call more a "one roll resolution" system than a roll for intent system. The biggest problem with roll for intent as described in the OP is...

You can have a detailed system of monster creation and still have some CR failures in edge cases.

The problem.here goes well beyond NPCs. The lack of detailed mobster creation rules in either (or both) the DMG or MM is a major oversight, and really the only reasonable take away is that WotC did not have detailed monster creation rules with which they set CRs etc.

No deeper worldbuilding in Star Wars is from Lucas or even Disney. Most of it comes from WEG because when you sell books full of prose you have to have something to say. And I don't think Star Wars has particularly benefited from areas where writers of game supplements or novels have aimed for...

One of the great things about Star Wars that makes it so accessible is its shallow worldbuilding, including its built in morality.