Who Should Make The Next Star Wars TTRPG, And What Should It Look Like?

[MGibster]

Whoever does Star Wars next should make it a rules-light game that’s easy to play so it can be used to onboard new gamers to the hobby. It’s one of the biggest media franchises on Earth and could bring a lot of people into the hobby. If only it were designed with non-gamers or novice gamers in mind.

Your reasoning is sound, but that isn't how it's played out over the years if Star Wars and Star Trek are any indication. I don't think any licensed product is likely to bring in many people new to gaming. If Dallas and Star Trek couldn't do it I just don't know what game would.

 

[innerdude]

With that in mind…throwing money at Shawn Tomkin for a customized, refined Starforged would be nice. A lightweight version of 2d20 or Year Zero would be nice. A super-stripped BRP with no skills but with personality traits and passions would be nice. Something like that.

Starforged was one of the first things that came to mind for me. A few tiny tweaks to combat, with some additional balancing of how to make progress to trigger an "End the Fight" move would be awesome.

Personally, I don't know that Star Wars really needs anything beyond what's already out there.

I know my own personal "white whale" star wars would be some intermingling of Daggerheart with Genesys/FFG, with a sprinkling of narrative components from Starforged and Scum and Villainy.

 

[Reynard]

Starforged was one of the first things that came to mind for me. A few tiny tweaks to combat, with some additional balancing of how to make progress to trigger an "End the Fight" move would be awesome.

Personally, I don't know that Star Wars really needs anything beyond what's already out there.

I know my own personal "white whale" star wars would be some intermingling of Daggerheart with Genesys/FFG, with a sprinkling of narrative components from Starforged and Scum and Villainy.

I think the core of Daggerheart would make a great STar Wars game, although I would do some serious streamlining, especially as it relates to classes.

 

[Gradine]

Something rules-light, written by people who genuinely enjoy all thee trilogies and th ancillary stuff.

It cannot be stressed how important this is. If you don't love everything that Star Wars is, I don't trust you with making a fun game based on the property.

For me, Star Wars is the most cinematic of franchises. Story and style trump realism. It requires a cinematic/narrative-focused game system to properly complement it. Personally, I think FATE is the best fit. Especially when you consider the built-in mechanics to level out characters of differing power levels.

Any system should be relatively streamlined and fast-playing. Star Wars, with its pulp origins, is supposed to dynamic and dramatic. You're off to a cool new location every 15 minutes. Any system that takes an hour to play through a combat is a non-starter for me.

I also think that this is the right way to go. And there genuinely hasn't really been a Star Wars TTRPG that has really managed to capture this feeling, not even the OG d6, as much as I loved and still love it. That said...

I'll stick with what I've got in that case, thanks. I really don't like FATE,

Yeah, I'm not a fan of FATE at all. I don't know if it's a thing that flows more smoothly over time the more you get used to it, but I found it so incredibly clunky and absurdly crunchy for a "narrative-focused" game.

and in general any system that strongly uses mechanics for, as you say, "story and style".

This I can't get behind, though; give me story and style over basically anything else. I'm too old and life (and the extremely limited amount of time I have to game) is too short to worry about anything than having fun with my friends while they get to do a bunch of extremely cool stuff, and that's basically Star Wars.

That's not to say I don't think there's not room for a crunchy Star Wars TTRPG experience; just that, as you say, there's plenty enough of that as it is out there, so those looking for that can "stick with what [they've] got". SW5e in particular I think perfectly captures that feel.

My default answer to "who should develop [X game]" is generally going to be Mongoose, but their games also tend to get a little too thick around the fiddly bits. Still, I'd love to see them get a shot at it anyway.

 

[TwoSix]

My gut feeling is that a Star Wars game should lean in a neotrad direction. Creating a specific character concept is really important in a Star Wars game, and people into Star Wars are also people for whom details generally matter. They want a carbine to feel different from a blaster pistol in play, and see a mechanical difference between Soresu and Ataru lightsaber forms.

Also, most Star Wars characters tend to be variations on a theme (soldier, bounty hunter, mechanic, pilot, Jedi, droid, etc.), and there's an appreciable difference in capability between powerful characters (Darth Vader, the Mandalorian) and common mooks. It's definitely the genre where the hoary old class/level system is actually pretty fitting.

If I had to look for a current game that has a lot of character build options but also leans towards allowing drama and big plot moments, I'd use Fabula Ultima as a base template for a Star Wars game.

 

[GungHo]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of FATE at all. I don't know if it's a thing that flows more smoothly over time the more you get used to it, but I found it so incredibly clunky and absurdly crunchy for a "narrative-focused" game.

Same feeling. It tries to sell itself as smooth but it ends up being crunchy. Its like they labeled the jar of peanut butter wrong.

The problem I have at times with SW as a tabletop game is that the different character types really don't play together. It's not a balanced story. It can't be a balanced game unless you start coming up with tons of guard rails on the fly to explain why someone can't do what they want to do because they've seen it in all the movies and shows. Trying to reconcile all the different stuff everyone can do on the same field becomes a exercise in nonsense once anyone progresses unless you either have no rules beyond flipping quarters or "feels" or unless you're willing to accept that your level 13/13 fighter/wizard is taking some level 1 hobbit rogues to fight level 0 goblin commoners because, while he could just fireball everyone, he'd rather delegate those tasks so the hobbits can feel a little better that day about being hobbits.

 

[Laurefindel]

For me, Star Wars is the most cinematic of franchises.

Agreed

Story and style trump realism. It requires a cinematic/narrative-focused game system to properly complement it.

Such a systems should be able to support the narrative, but not driving the narrative. That would take too much place in a Star Wars game, where there should be at least a semblance of plot.

Personally, I think FATE is the best fit. Especially when you consider the built-in mechanics to level out characters of differing power levels.

Any system should be relatively streamlined and fast-playing. Star Wars, with its pulp origins, is supposed to dynamic and dramatic.

A Star Wars RPG should allow a dynamic and dramatic game, but it should also allow other styles. RPG games don't need to follow the pace of a movie. Movies, books, computer games, and TTRPG are different enough media to explore different rhythms and points of view within the universe. One thing I love about Star Wars RPGs is that we don't have to follow the rhythm of a movie.

You're off to a cool new location every 15 minutes.

Maybe you didn't mean this literally, but I hope not...

Any system that takes an hour to play through a combat is a non-starter for me.

I'm undecided here. Combat in Star Wars is often truncated, uses many ellipses, skips some parts, but is otherwise often painfully slowwww. Particularly in the early movies. I still haven't found the best way to do that, but whole combats resolved in 4-5 rolls isn't it.

 

[Reynard]

My gut feeling is that a Star Wars game should lean in a neotrad direction. Creating a specific character concept is really important in a Star Wars game, and people into Star Wars are also people for whom details generally matter. They want a carbine to feel different from a blaster pistol in play, and see a mechanical difference between Soresu and Ataru lightsaber forms.

I feel like this is a little too much of a generalization, and for lots of people Star Wars is far more vibes than details.

 

[Basic Expert]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of FATE at all. I don't know if it's a thing that flows more smoothly over time the more you get used to it, but I found it so incredibly clunky and absurdly crunchy for a "narrative-focused" game.

It's a great system...from a certain point of view.

Honestly, I think it's a pretty good system that is poorly explained, and I completely understand people not liking it. The modern permutations have gotten progressively cleaner and better, but there are still mechanics of it that aren't as elegant as they could be (the Fate-point economy and stress tracks, primarily). Plus, much like "Feats" of D&D, "Stunt" terminology rubs me the wrong way. Feats and Stunts are something you do, not an ability you have...

PbtA occupies a similar design space, but I would consider that a mediocre game that is abysmally explained.

 

[Gradine]

Same feeling. It tries to sell itself as smooth but it ends up being crunchy. Its like they labeled the jar of peanut butter wrong.

You have my eternal gratitude for turning all of my complicated feelings about this very popular game that I bounced off of hard despite it ostensibly being exactly what I'm looking for into a single pithy phrase. This is not sarcasm. This is perhaps the greatest analogy I've ever heard.