Star Wars Saga, the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

[LostSoul]

This is why I like destiny points, actions points, whatever you want to call them, they fill in the flexibility gap that a poster talked about a few posts up. They allow players to break the rules and make the scene happen the way they want it, regardless of how the rules would play out.

Erm, not really. The example above is resolved through GM fiat.

There's a much simpler way of handling it.

Vader's player says "I want to kill Palpatine to save my son."
So Vader:
-Activates Battle Strike (yeah, he doesn't have it in the book, why he doesn't I don't know), gets a nice roll of 27, spends a Force Point, and does an additional 5d6 to his next attack.
-Spends a Destiny Point to get a critical hit on his next attack.
-Makes an unarmed attack at 2d4+10d6+6 damage. Rolls 40 something; higher than Palpatine's Threshold.

The GM narrates this as Palpatine falling down the reactor shaft, to his death.

edit: I guess that would mean Palpatine was down low on the condition track. Ah well.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Let's be frank

Can I still be Baby Samurai?



Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[Destil]

Well, I just absorbed most of the book (giving it a quick once-over), and played a short session and over-all I'm rather impressed.

And of course I must nit-pick, but right away I'll say I would happily run this with only ...4? house rules, and I don't say that often.

So has anyone else picked up on:

Multiclassing: You only get 1 of the 3-4 starting feats when you multiclass into a class. That's good. But these feats aren't on the class bonus list, so you need to spend a character level feat to get them!?! you're telling me a scoundrel who becomes a jedi and takes force sensitive can't, with her 2nd jedi level, take lightsaber proficiency as a jedi bonus feat? I've reread these rules a few times now just hoping I'd missed it, but I'm still not seeing it... House-rule #1

Too many Str skills!!! It makes the score less useful, not more. That's my house-rule #2: Climb, Swim and Jump are Athletics, any class that had any one of these as a class skill gets Athletics instead. Any race that has a conditional bonus feat with one instead gets it with athletics, but only with one form of locomotion. #2

No way to train in a nonclass skill short of multiclassing. I think simply allowing Skill Training to apply to any skill of your choice, and change the bonus feat list for each class to instead include Skill Training (only in a class skill) is the most elegant solution. #3.

Two squares per diagonal. This would actually be my house rule #1, but if I run this I don't think my players will notice the change (I doubt any of them know that it's 1 then 2 squares now), so I'm simply not bringing it to their attention in the first place. So we'll call it 3.5.

 

[Asmor]

Two squares per diagonal. This would actually be my house rule #1, but if I run this I don't think my players will notice the change (I doubt any of them know that it's 1 then 2 squares now), so I'm simply not bringing it to their attention in the first place. So we'll call it 3.5.

Waaah? I'm totally confused now, wasn't there a whole big thing in this thread earlier about how movement in Saga IS always 2 squares per diagonal, instead of D&D's 1-2-1-2 pattern?

 

[Destil]

Waaah? I'm totally confused now, wasn't there a whole big thing in this thread earlier about how movement in Saga IS always 2 squares per diagonal, instead of D&D's 1-2-1-2 pattern?

Sorry, it is. That's what I'm referring too, I just got a bit confusing there in my tendency to twist grammar.

 

[LostSoul]

What I didn't like about the game:

The Gamemastering advice. All sorts of stuff in there I don't like, from advice that tells you to lie to your friends (last paragraph first column pp245), "GM's can't really cheat", to the metagaming "should always be discouraged because it detracts from real roleplaying" (italics mine).

 

[Henry]

The Gamemastering advice. All sorts of stuff in there I don't like, from advice that tells you to lie to your friends (last paragraph first column pp245), "GM's can't really cheat",

Definitely discussion for another thread, but really, they can't - they could just as easily add more foes as take them away, they could fudge die rolls to try and enhance the evening's entertainment, they could improv rules for a cool and exciting action that a player wants to try with a destiny point, etc. DM fudging and misinformation has been hotly debated since the beginning of RPG's, but some of the best DM's I've ever known are masters of rules manipulation and die manipulation on the fly - just like some of the worst I've ever known are, either.

to the metagaming "should always be discouraged because it detracts from real roleplaying" (italics mine).

I need to look that up. Someone actually used the phrase, "REAL ROLEPLAYING" in the Star Wars book? THIS I gotta see.

 

[Relique du Madde]

Erm, not really. The example above is resolved through GM fiat.

There's a much simpler way of handling it.

Vader's player says "I want to kill Palpatine to save my son."
So Vader:
-Activates Battle Strike (yeah, he doesn't have it in the book, why he doesn't I don't know), gets a nice roll of 27, spends a Force Point, and does an additional 5d6 to his next attack.
-Spends a Destiny Point to get a critical hit on his next attack.
-Makes an unarmed attack at 2d4+10d6+6 damage. Rolls 40 something; higher than Palpatine's Threshold.

The GM narrates this as Palpatine falling down the reactor shaft, to his death.

edit: I guess that would mean Palpatine was down low on the condition track. Ah well.

The problem is that this example is also resolved by DM fiat but to a lesser extent since the GM robbed the player of the oppertunity to tossing (or doing something else to) the Emporer prone body himself.

 

[Faraer]

All sorts of stuff in there I don't like . . . "GM's can't really cheat", to the metagaming "should always be discouraged because it detracts from real roleplaying" (italics mine).

What RPG has ever given advice contradicting these?

 

[LostSoul]

What RPG has ever given advice contradicting these?

Oh, there are a few.

It's not like that advice is necessarily bad or anything; it could be bad, depending on the group, but so could the opposite advice.

It's just that I don't like it.

The "real roleplaying" thing is hilarious.