Search results

I agree with you. A PC can be an expert in Saga in any skill with just 1 level of multiclassing and 2 feats (you don't need to stay in the class to spend those feats). So the extent of the issue of granularity seems to be that 1st (and to an extent 2nd) level PCs can not dabbled more in one...

I thought the license was for at least X products a year. It seems strange to me that they would have a cap, especially considering the number of RPG products announced for next year. The delay is simply due to the late adoption of the designer and decision to support the main book.

Not really. First, it means Force Adepts aren't necessarily less capable of learning the Force than Jedi. Second, it means restrict the Jedi in gaining Force Powers too quickly, which are very powerful. I think it was the right decision.

My bad. You are right. In that case, I would probably drop the Force Training for level 2.

As an idea using the Soldier class: Force Warrior [Human Female Soldier 1] Str 14 Dex 15 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 13 Cha 8 HP: 31 BAB: +1 Grp: +5 Melee Attack: Unarmed Strike (+3 to hit, 1d6+2 damage) Reflex Defense: 10 + 1 (Soldier) + 2 (Dex) + 1 (Level) +1 (MA) = 15 Fortitude Defense: 10 + 2...

Exactly. That's how it should be if you play Star Wars the way it is presented in the movies.

In pulp, such as Star Wars, even the non-combative PCs should be capable in combat when push comes to shove. The further you get away from how Star Wars is presented, you will find it harder to use Saga to cover all the options.

There was also an Antagonists book mentioned. I imagine a combination of NPCs, monsters and other threats.

I value width more than height. Nobilis was awkward on the shelf. Saga is unusual but the small size makes it much easier to use and is less intimidating to new buyers.

1. It looks awesome and really stands out. 2. It can more easily be put with RPG books and digest sized books, yet stand out against both. 3. It lies flatter on a table. 4. It is less intimidating than a full sized book, so good for newbies.

There is already an excel sheet on the WotC forums of that size. Its pretty good.

Mechanically, the compatibility is low. They may serve as good inspiration of general things like classes and levels but the mechanics are substantially different.

They are the same size as the book - http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12510682&postcount=15

No. They are posting under different handles. Grubman is a long time RPGnetter.

The adventures are good but they are tied into the Celtic world of Slaine a fair bit. It would take quite a bit of conversion to use D&D as the magic system and much of the world is drastically different from that in D&D.

:) The WotC boards are kind of special that way.

As saves are based on level and the one time class bonuses don't stack, multiclassing will only achieve a very small bonus to saves. I don't think this will provide a great incentive to multiclass (unlike in SW RCR).

This is correct and confirmed. Skill Focus does indeed have trained as a prerequiste. All of this stuff has been set out in the previews released so far.

BFRPG is almost identical to the Moldvay Basic Set and Cook/Marsh Expert Set except races aren't classes and ACs are ascending. As such, it will play almost identical to that experience. For me, it was so retro as to be not worth my time as it didn't translate at all to me 25 years on :)

I agree, a per session or per adventure resource makes much more sense to me. Personally, I will go with have the per level amount apply per adventure (3 to 4 sessions). Most adventures are 1 level anyway but I prefer it when expressed this way.