Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 9497499" data-attributes="member: 85870">Hmmm, not so much trying to "redesign" the character, so much as help the player find better alignment with the goals of the campaign. The player has struggled at times with what I perceive to be remnants of "trad" gameplay sensibilities that run counter to the "platonic ideal" of how FFG Star Wars runs.If player wants to continue to be motivated solely by the "leveling progression treadmill," I mean, sure . . . he's free to do so. FFG Star Wars isn't anywhere close to being the best model for that, but I guess it's not the worst either.The idea is that if you shift intrinsic character motivation, you shift the way the character interfaces with the game world, and you shift the player's thought process for how to embed mechanics into the fictional positions and results. One of things "trad" players struggle with, in my experience with FFG, is that they don't know how to interpret Advantage or Threat as anything other than direct mechanical representations. So they quickly tire of it, or it gets boring as "same old, same old."The entire second axis of resolution (Advantage / Threat) is a cue to the player to think about fictional positioning at least as much, if not more than the numbers. Advantage / Threat is very frequently best served by inserting "quantum gamestate" elements into the mix. So you rolled an extra 4 advantage this turn? Great! I don't know what that means yet, but it will definitely factor in against future stuff that's about to happen.It's actually really fun for both players and GM to look back at something that happens and go, "Remember when you rolled that extra 4 advantage two turns ago? Well guess what---here's the cool thing you get from that."In a sense I get where you're coming from, because EotE is supposed to be the "scum and villainy" scoundrel thing. But Star Wars has just so many residual assumptions baked into the setting meta, and the structure of the game itself --- Triumph vs. Despair, Advantage vs. Threat, the Force die, Obligation -- that all point to this idea that characters are connected to the game world in ways that go beyond pure mercenary intent.Well, first off, there is no beskar armor in the core EotE rulebook. If he wanted to set himself off on a path to find some already existent (no matter how rare) set of armor already documented in the book, sure, whatever.But the whole idea of beskar goes beyond mere progression. It's going from, "I want to improve my character," to, "I want to use my knowledge of the setting meta to force the GM to houserule something whole cloth that isn't in the book, and not only is it not in the book, it basically is supposed to narratively make me impervious to damage, because RAWR MOAR POWER FOR ME, LOLZ!"Yeah. No offense, but screw that crap. I will tell a player to cut that out, vocally, forcibly, and without concern for their feelings. That's not the game I want to run, and I will tell them to walk away if they insist on continuing with it.</blockquote>

Verification