StarWars d20

[LostSoul]

LostSoul, my dislike of the WEG system is largely personal taste My only real concrete problems were the mech and tech ability scores and the setting info for Jedi, dice pools were merely an annoyance.

I have to admit, I didn't really like the Jedi stuff either. Personal vision, I guess. We didn't play with Jedi characters, though (there was only one throughout the years). When I finally did, I messed around with the system.

 

[Aaron L]

Where did the "imbuing crystals with the Force" to make a lightsaber thing come from? It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Lightsabers are not magical. They are laser (plasma?) swords. It always really bothered me, and I was upset when it got transplanted into the new system.

Go here for good stuff
http://www.synicon.com.au/sw/index.html

 

[Ranger REG]

When used for attack yes it should give a DSP if force strike does. Moving yoda isn't for attack, subdual is not necessarrily for attack,though hitting them with rocks, or throwing them off cliffs is. Yet as writen I can beat people to death with their own guns using move object, and I'd only get a DSP if taking their gun and shooting them with it would give me a DSP. But if I dare to use force strike on a living being bang DSP. That's just dumb.

Because Force Strike inflicts damage directly. If you use Move Object to prevent the person from charging you without harming him, then that should NOT give you DSP. But using Force Strike to harm him DOES.

HOWEVER, if you move that person over a cliff like Wile E. Coyote and then release him to his falling death, then YES, that guarantees a DSP.

That's why I said that GM will have to ultimately decide if you gain a DSP.

Sheesh! Having one DSP is not the end of the world. I can see your PC as one depressed Jedi because of 1 DSP. "I'm a dirty, naughty Jedi. Spank me."

 

[teitan]

The current debate about using move object to as an attack of oppurtunity is moot because Move Object is a full round action and AOPs are not full round actions. Yes, what you are discussing is an attack of opputunity. This only proves that force strike is Force Push. Aside from that I can see several ways to defend myself as a character in the scenario presented that would not require the use of the force, mainly whack his fuggin head off with my lightsaber.

Jason

 

[Jack Haggerty]

Where did the "imbuing crystals with the Force" to make a lightsaber thing come from? It's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Lightsabers are not magical. They are laser (plasma?) swords. It always really bothered me, and I was upset when it got transplanted into the new system.

Go here for good stuff
http://www.synicon.com.au/sw/index.html

If you read through the "lightsabre" essay on that excellent web-site, you'll find that it was WEG that originally introduced the "magic crystals" into lightsabers. Actually using the Force to make a lightsaber first comes from the novel I, Jedi, I believe... Corran Horn must quickly build a makeshift lightsaber out of a speederbike handlebar, and a few spare parts. While building the new weapon, he uses the Force to make up for his lack of experience and of proper tools.

So now, all of a sudden, you MUST use the Force to build a lightsaber. Guh.

Star Wars (hack) writers of all sorts have a habit of latching on to non-canon suggestions like that, and expanding it into something utterly stomach-churning.

 

[Ranger REG]

Unfortunately, GL* allow it. And you know how GL* and Lucasfilm Licensing deal with their license. They do have a strict approval process before the product can hit the market. They could have stopped it.

*And I mean George Lucas, not Green Lantern.

Besides, you do not need the Force to build a lightsaber, especially when you have to build one for a Padawan, or for those little Padawans that are enrolled in Yoda's Romper Room.

 

[Agback]

I really like(d) the d6 version, so I'm always interested to hear why others don't.

First there is the variance problem. The standard deviation of Nd6 scales with SQRT(N). Now if it scaled with N the ratios of rolls would be constant, and we'd be able to adjust difficulty by multiplying the target number by difficulty factors. And if it were constant we'd be able to adjust difficulties by adding to or subtracting from the target number. But as things stand there is no way to alter target numbers so that it has the same effects at different parts of the scale. Adding x% to the target number has more proportionate effect onlarge dice pools than small, and adding x to the target number has more proportionate effect on small dice pools than large.

Second there is the rubbish they wrote about Jedi pacifism.

Third there is the fact that that made lightsabers (a) magical and (b) much too hard to use. A Jedi in that system couldn't hit a lightpole with his lightsaber unless he had sunk all his generation points into DEX and lightsaber skill.

The world reason that only Jedi use lightsabers is not that you need Force skills to hit an opponent with one. It is that you need Force skills to deflect balster bolts with one. A non-Jedi relying on a lightsaber in combat will be shot dead before he gets to melee range. Obi-wan Kenobi tells us that lightsabers are survivors of a more elegant age, which Jedi retained when everyone else abandoned them. This implies that once they were used by non-Jedi, and makes a nonsense of the rules that make non-Jedi unable to hit the side of a barn with a lightsabre.

I'm not saying that you ought to dislike the system. You asked why I disliked it and I'm answering.

IMHO YMMV YDWYDWP.


Agback

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Because Force Strike inflicts damage directly. If you use Move Object to prevent the person from charging you without harming him, then that should NOT give you DSP. But using Force Strike to harm him DOES.

HOWEVER, if you move that person over a cliff like Wile E. Coyote and then release him to his falling death, then YES, that guarantees a DSP.

That's why I said that GM will have to ultimately decide if you gain a DSP.

Sheesh! Having one DSP is not the end of the world. I can see your PC as one depressed Jedi because of 1 DSP. "I'm a dirty, naughty Jedi. Spank me."

But by the rules I likely woudn't get a DSP for using the wiley coyote trick unless I'd get one for just kicking them off the edge. And that's the point. I can cause direct damage with move object by pummeling people with rocks and no DSP, but if I do direct damage with FS I auto get a DSP.

And no 1 DSP isn't the end of the world I never said it was you twit. All I am talking about is a lack of consistency in the rules. And that putting that consistency in the rules would make a better system.

 

[Ranger REG]

"Twit"???

* pauses *

The rules do not determine when I should penalize a character with DSP, any more than the D&D rule telling me whether I should penalize a wizard for using fireball spell on innocent villagers by changing his alignment, unless it is blatant.

If the PC knowingly and willingly indirectly cause the loss of life of a living being, whether you use Move Object to push him off the cliff or in front an accelerating speeder, then the GM must make the call. Even if there is no rule, the GM must use reasonable judgment based on the interpretation of the Force and make the call.

P.S. I admit, the Force and its will is still a mystery to me.

P.P.S. Oh, one final thing. If you don't want to agree with me, then don't agree with me. I will not tolerate name-calling nor will I condone personal attacks.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

"Twit"???

* pauses *

P.P.S. Oh, one final thing. If you don't want to agree with me, then don't agree with me. I will not tolerate name-calling nor will I condone personal attacks.

Please you asked for it with your totally rude dirty naughty boy crap. You want people to be civil with you then start by being civil with them, instead of thinking you can just be a rude sarcastic jerk without any repercussions.