Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tesuji" data-source="post: 1129600" data-attributes="member: 14119">Got book a few days ago, and Isabel might give me some extra time to digest it.Overall impression is that while it is the most expensive rpg book i have ever bought, it was a bargain. The background info is great, the rules i have read so far look great with a few exceptions, and overall the quality is every bit what i would love to see in other products.Just the early bits of the combat system including fluid initiative and the way they represent cover fire and such seem great! They seem to have hit a good mid-point dancing-on-head-of-a-pin between "simplicity" and "feels right."But...Ok, does anyone else but me not like their approach to the hit points =  vitality system. i mean, basically it looks like standard dnd hit points with an added batch of "wounds" hit points shoved in between hit points and -1 to -9. The only thing differentiating it from the typical "wall of hit points" DND notion is that criticals go against wounds. I was hoping for something more, in my view, reflective of the quick action in the show. I was even looking forward to something like the stun/body we saw in Traveller D20.Anyway, as work begins in earnest for my Stargate campaign, I am already planning to replace the whole hit points thingy with a damage save mechanic akin to MnM... where any hit can KO and most hits will impact you in some way, even if only briefly. (There is some of this in the fluid init system.)Anyway, just curious of what people thought of the way they did VP/Wp and "damage taking" in SG-1 RPG.</blockquote>

Verification