Narrative gameplay, does it really come out that way?

[Sunseeker]

I'm a little burned on roll-play at the moment thanks to D&D 5E and I'd like to expand into a game that occupies a fandom I enjoy (in this case, Star Wars) but I'd like to keep away from the d20+alphabet soup gameplay. The weird dice threw me for a loop at first but I got a nice app that sums it all up for me, other than that, after reviewing the game books thanks to a friend who owns it, I'm curious if it actually turns out as a more story-like "cinematic" play the books advertise as opposed to your typical "throw dice at it until you win" D&Disms. I was not pleased with SWSE, it was far to close to the crunch-happy 3.X system I dislike.

So after reviewing the other couple threads on it here, I don't have a very clear picture of what I'm looking for: Does it play in practice in the more narrative style that it advertises?

 

[bone_naga]

So after reviewing the other couple threads on it here, I don't have a very clear picture of what I'm looking for: Does it play in practice in the more narrative style that it advertises?

In my experience it does. The hardest part for our group was that everyone was initially hesitant to try to influence the narrative the way the game intends, probably due to years and years of playing D&D. As the GM I've had to throw in suggestions for players when they don't know what to do with advantage, but overall I'd say it definitely has a cinematic feel to it.

 

[Sunseeker]

In my experience it does. The hardest part for our group was that everyone was initially hesitant to try to influence the narrative the way the game intends, probably due to years and years of playing D&D. As the GM I've had to throw in suggestions for players when they don't know what to do with advantage, but overall I'd say it definitely has a cinematic feel to it.

That was one of the things that kept nagging at me. What to do with all these advantages/disadvantages? It seems to come up so often I was afraid a lot of the results would be too common to be really worth it or to general to be satisfactory.

 

[bone_naga]

That was one of the things that kept nagging at me. What to do with all these advantages/disadvantages? It seems to come up so often I was afraid a lot of the results would be too common to be really worth it or to general to be satisfactory.

Like any system it starts off kind of slow but it picks up as you get more familiar with it. For me it was like when we first started learning D&D, it took a bit of thinking at each roll (this was in the days of THAC0) to figure out if it was a hit or not, and having a +3 sword subtract 3 from your attack was confusing, but pretty soon we picked it up and you could just look at the die roll and instantly know if you hit or missed.

It's similar with advantage/threat. At first you struggle a bit with narrative descriptions but pretty soon it becomes second nature. Now that they're getting used to the system I've been putting the use of advantage onto the players instead of regularly reminding them or offering suggestions. Actually I find Triumph and Despair more difficult in some cases (how do you achieve the equivalent of a critical hit/success while still explaining how you failed the check?), although those don't come up nearly as often.

There are also some fairly standard uses of it. Advantage can recover strain or add a boost die to the next roll. Threat can cause strain or add a setback die to the next roll. Just toss in a narrative reason to explain it and there you go. There are also charts with common uses for advantage and threat.

I would suggest using the beginner game first (including the downloadable follow-on adventure). It helps provide examples throughout the adventure to help the GM and players. It includes things like "sure you sliced the computer and got the files you need, but your intrusion was also detected and triggered the security system". It also has a scenario where untrained militia members are helping the party. Instead of giving each of them a turn and bogging down the combat, players can spend advantage to have a militia ally deal damage to an enemy within range, and the GM can spend threat to take out those allies.

 

[aramis erak]

It provides for more player input than 5E... but it doesn't provide less mechanical interaction than 5E.

The mechanics it does use do tend to provide for more player input.
The 2-axis results encourage more creative interpretations.
The destiny points mechanic provides for players to directly add elements to the fiction. Need an Axe? "There happens to be one in that fire closet there, Mr. GM..." (flips destiny from light to dark.)

So - more narrative, but not mechanics-light.

 

[the_cowley]

its very cinematic feel. ive only played a few sessions of this game, but when my pilot manage to barely steer a crashing speeder into cover, instead of just into the street, was a fantastic way for me to use an overwhelming number of advantages on a failed check to keep the speeder driving after getting just absolutely trashed by the following gangsters.

It takes quite a bit of reprogramming coming from "combat is king" dnd, and gives the legitimate feeling of being able to accomplish a goal with out firing a single blaster shot.

 

[Chimpy]

As previous posters have mentioned, the players need to get away from the d20 mindset and switch into more of a collaborative story-telling mode.

When I first played EotE I quite liked it, but it got put on a shelf after a few sessions because the players were looking for a more tactical game with in-game rewards of treasure and items. I've recently come back to the game with a group of more experienced roleplayers and we're having a blast.