# is it me? FFG Star Wars



## JeffB (Sep 3, 2014)

I downloaded a Edge of Empire fast play adventure freebie thing, and the resolution mechanics seem crazy complicated to me. Probably the whackadoo dice make it worse when reading, but IS it a scomplicated as it seems? My first reaction is " I would never get into RPGs, if this was my first experience with a rulebook".


I am burnt out on D&D for the Kids group and looking to try something completely different. The kids like Star Wars. I am a big fan of the old D6 game, but not of the first two D20 versions (never bothered with Saga because of them).

Is it worh printing this thing out and buying some of the dice? I want fast cinematic Star Wars. Not involved tables and complex dice mechanics.


----------



## JeffB (Sep 3, 2014)

And while I appreciate suggestions, I really do not like Savage Worlds


----------



## dbm (Sep 3, 2014)

In my experience it isn't actually difficult, just _different_. You fairly quickly get used to pairing up positive and negative icons to look for a net effect. You just need to do it I on two axis at once. 

To be honest, I find that Fate suits me best for cinematic games and it achieves a lot with a very simple set of core mechanics at it's heart. A Fate Star Wars hack would potentially be the work of moments unless you wanted specific mechanics for the Force (not a given in Fate - you could just  make a simple implementation if you preferred that approach).


----------



## Ratskinner (Sep 3, 2014)

If the kids are familiar with the SW universe, then I'd actually recommend Fate Accelerated Edition. There's folks already doing just that. Check out that Google+ community for it. 

Personally, I've heard such mixed reviews about the FFG SW system that I'm very leery of it... despite finding the central mechanics very intriguing.


----------



## Ratskinner (Sep 3, 2014)

Duplicate...cross posted with myself.


----------



## Torg Smith (Sep 3, 2014)

You can get used to the dice pretty easily. What the dice bring is two results. You have success and failure as one result and advantage and disadvantage as the second result. You can get any combination and this adds some interesting affects. I kind of like what it can bring.


----------



## TrippyHippy (Sep 3, 2014)

There was a really good free Star Wars supplement for RuneQuest 6, that made use of the very well suited and dynamic combat rules of that game just as it was released. Alas, they decided to withdraw the pdf downloads for fear of trademark prosecution. 

Other than that, the original D6 rules are quite easy to find on fan sites still.


----------



## mips42 (Sep 3, 2014)

i Have been playing in a Edge game for a bit now and, while it does take some getting used to, in a way it's actually better than the straight 'hit or miss' of a lot of games. You can hit but cause a problem (alerting Stormtroopers is BAD), miss and cause problems (Accidentally shooting the controls to the elevator you  were going to use) miss but cause something good or hit and cause something good.
 For the game to be it's best, you need a GM who knows the story, is good at interpreting the dice results and storytelling the results in a way that makes sense.


----------



## Jan van Leyden (Sep 3, 2014)

What the others said; it takes some learning but actually prompts you for a vivid narration of the scenes. Especially with younger players still having this spark of spontaneous creativity it leads to very colorfull scenes.

I started a game for my son (then 12 years old) and his friends which was Big Fun!!! But even though their are Star Wars fans, they informed me that roleplaying have to include swords, spells, and dragons.


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 3, 2014)

I humbly (well, not really) offer up my own conversion of Microlite to Star Wars.

http://jdyal.webs.com/Star Wars m20.pdf


----------



## Crothian (Sep 4, 2014)

It's different but not good different. The dice add a level of extra thinking to convert all the symbols without a worthwhile payoff. The classes don't have enough uniqueness about them to feel mechanically different and the races are even worse. The books I felt were over priced for the small amount of useful content in them. The adventures were also pretty sub par. We played for about 9 months but it always felt like we needed to make the game feel like Star Wars as the game seemed to want to be generic Firefly.


----------



## FreeXenon (Sep 4, 2014)

The FFG Narrative Dice is great and flexible. It allows narrative scenes that you would not normally get in a normal system. The dice do take some getting used to it, but once you do a whole new story world opens up for you. The books are gorgeous too.


----------



## fjw70 (Sep 4, 2014)

I love. Star Wars and want to like the FFG game, but I am not totally sold yet.


I love the boost and setback dice idea and I like the complication of not just succeeding or not succeeding.  One potential problem is that is plays slower in my experience. You can't just have the play say "I shoot the stormtrooper," roll dice, and the GM declare a hit or miss.  There is usually threats or advantage (and possible triumph or despair) to deal with before moving on. I think I would like it better if the threats and advantages didn't come it as often, but that is a personal preference.


I also don't care for the idea of soak/DR in RPGs. I am an old D&D player so I like just having a pool of HP better. Again a personal preference.


The game is also a little to crunchy for me. With talent trees, force power trees, equipment mods, etc. there seems to be too much of a focus on character building for my taste.


That said. I want to give it another shot. However, I would love to see a slimmed down basic rule set for the game with options to remove soak, but I am not holding my breath.


----------



## innerdude (Sep 4, 2014)

JeffB said:


> And while I appreciate suggestions, I really do not like Savage Worlds




But . . . but . . . but . . . 

*sigh*


----------



## Crothian (Sep 4, 2014)

JeffB said:


> And while I appreciate suggestions, I really do not like Savage Worlds




For a suggestion on what to play Star Wars with I would suggest mini 6. It is a free game so big plus there. It plays like the old d6 Star Wars but the dice don't get as out of hand as they could in that game. It is nicely simplified and very flexible of a system.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Sep 4, 2014)

JeffB said:


> I downloaded a Edge of Empire fast play adventure freebie thing, and the resolution mechanics seem crazy complicated to me. Probably the whackadoo dice make it worse when reading, but IS it a scomplicated as it seems? My first reaction is " I would never get into RPGs, if this was my first experience with a rulebook".
> 
> 
> I am burnt out on D&D for the Kids group and looking to try something completely different. The kids like Star Wars. I am a big fan of the old D6 game, but not of the first two D20 versions (never bothered with Saga because of them).
> ...




It's much more unusual than complicated.  Once you know instinctively which symbol means "Success", which means "Fail", which means "Lucky", and which "Unlucky" (something that takes about a dozen rolls if that) resolution becomes extremely fast.  You just throw the dice, pick the cancels off the table and then count the rest.  IME it's both faster than a d20 with modifiers and much more evocative because of the lucky and unlucky results.

Now if you don't have official dice and have to use a lookup table it's hideous.

And for an alternative Star Wars system with kids I'd look at Fate Core - or even Fate Accelerated and just go for it.


----------



## JeffB (Sep 5, 2014)

Thanks everyone for the feedback! 

I ended up checking out some vids on yootoob, and they helped explain the dice mechanic quite a bit. I agree it is very different and seems promising from a story perspective. EotE/AoR overall seems like a nice departure, and I know *I* would enjoy playing it, and enjoy the dice, but running it for the kids is a different story. As it is, they hate any games that do not move at a quick clip,  and combats that take 15 minutes or more drive them nuts  (we play mostly OD&D/S&W with some watered down PF and 4E ish feats/powers/healing)

I have put the feeler out there for them to try the EotE quick start as just a one-shot, and see what happens..so far no responses. I can always try to pick up a WEG D6 book and adventure on ebay or Amazon (I sold my collection a while back). 

I will check out the suggested systems as well. Also need to go find my old PDF copies of Stars Without Number, and Terminal Space and give 'em a quick once over. Maybe one of those might be the answer.


----------



## JeffB (Sep 5, 2014)

Crothian said:


> For a suggestion on what to play Star Wars with I would suggest mini 6. It is a free game so big plus there. It plays like the old d6 Star Wars but the dice don't get as out of hand as they could in that game. It is nicely simplified and very flexible of a system.





I just took a looksee and downloaded the PDF.

SUPER Cool. 

I am thinking I can run a quick one-shot with this to see how the Kids dig it, and then it looks to be very easy to work with old WEG SW materials**



**I am a unashamed non-fan of the prequel trilogy, and  have never bothered with learning anything about the Expanded Universe, other than reading Splinter of the Minds Eye 35 or so years ago,  so it will be a Rebellion era game anyway


----------



## Crothian (Sep 5, 2014)

JeffB said:


> I just took a looksee and downloaded the PDF.
> 
> SUPER Cool.
> 
> I am thinking I can run a quick one-shot with this to see how the Kids dig it, and then it looks to be very easy to work with old WEG SW materials**




If you find that you need a little more complexity there is also d6 Space which I think the PDF is free and I've seen copies of the hardbound book for as low as $5 at cons. When I ran Mini 6 last summer I mostly used it but I borrowed skill idea and other character option from the more complex books to add in when needed. 

For the most part using these with d6 Star Wars should be cake. You will find things like skill specialization and advanced skills won't be there. Also the force stuff might need to be simplified if you are going to use it.


----------



## Darth Quiris (Sep 5, 2014)

IMNSHO this is the best officially published version of Star Wars ever. FFG really nailed it here and the dice, while different, add a lot to the game because they are different. 

And they are easy to understand. Sure it looks and appears to be kinda complicated, but after you roll a few skill checks it will become second nature. There are not many charts at all and the only one that is necessary is the critical chart for combat and its rare that it comes up. 

If you like the smuggler/firefly idea of game than get Edge of the Empire. If you like the idea of being part of the rebellion taking the fight to the Empire get Age of Rebellion. All you need is one book and you're set.


----------



## Darth Quiris (Sep 5, 2014)

fjw70 said:


> I love. Star Wars and want to like the FFG game, but I am not totally sold yet.
> 
> 
> I love the boost and setback dice idea and I like the complication of not just succeeding or not succeeding.  One potential problem is that is plays slower in my experience. You can't just have the play say "I shoot the stormtrooper," roll dice, and the GM declare a hit or miss.  There is usually threats or advantage (and possible triumph or despair) to deal with before moving on. I think I would like it better if the threats and advantages didn't come it as often, but that is a personal preference.
> ...




I agree with the notion that if players and the GM want to interpret each and every single dice roll for all the Advantage and Threat stuff than it could slow the game down but I don't feel that it has to be done with every die roll. Sometimes all we need to know is if something is successful or not. 

I think that if I ever do run this game I will let the players determine when they roll if they want to take advantage of the Advantages they rolled or not and if there is higher Threat than I would have the opportunity to use them or not but I don't think I would do it all the time... only when it is dramatically appropriate, which is how I feel that its supposed to be. 

I also like the idea of sharing Advantages that are rolled. I am not sure if it's actually in the rules or not, or if this is just the domain of Talents but I feel that stealing from Fate games here could work in that if one player rolls the dice and gains some Advantage than that player can share it with the next player to act so that player can use it instead.


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 5, 2014)

JeffB said:


> **I am a unashamed non-fan of the prequel trilogy, and  have never bothered with learning anything about the Expanded Universe, other than reading Splinter of the Minds Eye 35 or so years ago,  so it will be a Rebellion era game anyway



That mostly describes me, but what brought me back into excitement for the franchise again were a handful of products--_Knights of the Old Republic_ and the CGI Clone Wars TV show.  I'm also fairly excited for the launch of Rebels here soon.


----------



## Elven (Sep 18, 2014)

JeffB said:


> I downloaded a Edge of Empire fast play adventure freebie thing, and the resolution mechanics seem crazy complicated to me. Probably the whackadoo dice make it worse when reading, but IS it a scomplicated as it seems? My first reaction is " I would never get into RPGs, if this was my first experience with a rulebook".
> 
> 
> I am burnt out on D&D for the Kids group and looking to try something completely different. The kids like Star Wars. I am a big fan of the old D6 game, but not of the first two D20 versions (never bothered with Saga because of them).
> ...




I wouldn't say its suitable for kids, I think the dice system has a steep learning curve to it, (and yes while it does add colour to the game, it is also a lot less intuitive and will pull you out of the flow of the game, I'm old school WEG's Star Wars 2nd Ed, Rev, fan, anything else seems to suck, )

I would look elsewhere first,


----------



## Neonchameleon (Sep 18, 2014)

Elven said:


> I wouldn't say its suitable for kids, I think the dice system has a steep learning curve to it, (and yes while it does add colour to the game, it is also a lot less intuitive and will pull you out of the flow of the game, I'm old school WEG's Star Wars 2nd Ed, Rev, fan, anything else seems to suck, )
> 
> I would look elsewhere first,




I'd have said the opposite, that the dice would be particularly good for kids, the learning curve is pretty shallow, and the people the dice pull out of the game are those who've been playing for 20 years or more and are used to using dice in a specific way.


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Neonchameleon said:


> I'd have said the opposite, that the dice would be particularly good for kids, the learning curve is pretty shallow, and the people the dice pull out of the game are those who've been playing for 20 years or more and are used to using dice in a specific way.




Not true at all, the dice system demands a degree of thought on the system that acts as a distraction to the game, (while D6 is a lot less intrusive to game play) anything system that makes you focus on the mechanics is always to the detriment of game flow, 

But I will say this, it is more likely to fit those who play "board games" 
Or prefer a more "narrative" type of play,


----------



## Scorpio616 (Sep 19, 2014)

innerdude said:


> But . . . but . . . but . . .
> 
> *sigh*



Sorry man, Savage Worlds is very swingy and a bit too rewarding of _cation to the wind_ style play. When the main Dev goes on for multiple posts trying to justify why taking Full Defense is worse than Normal Defense action, there is a problem that goes beyond that section of the rules.


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Scorpio616 said:


> Sorry man, Savage Worlds is very swingy and a bit too rewarding of _cation to the wind_ style play. When the main Dev goes on for multiple posts trying to justify why taking Full Defense is worse than Normal Defense action, there is a problem that goes beyond that section of the rules.





Yeah, Savage worlds is a buggy system, but it real does play better than it looks on paper,


----------



## Jhaelen (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> But I will say this, it is more likely to fit those who play "board games"
> Or prefer a more "narrative" type of play,



I'd say kids tend to prefer a "narrative" type of play, and if you think about using Star Wars to introduce them to rpgs, all they have as a reference would be board games (or just 'roleplaying').


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Jhaelen said:


> I'd say kids tend to prefer a "narrative" type of play, and if you think about using Star Wars to introduce them to rpgs, all they have as a reference would be board games (or just 'roleplaying').




That make no sense, their reference would be the movies, now do you think it would be easier to play in first person or third,
(are they putting themselves in to that position, or watching someone else from a distance, i think they may find "narrative" a little too abstract)

And the toughest hurdle to get over in understanding the concept of RPGs is to get away from the board game mindset,  


So, nope sorry, disagree there


----------



## Neonchameleon (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> Not true at all, the dice system demands a degree of thought on the system that acts as a distraction to the game, (while D6 is a lot less intrusive to game play) anything system that makes you focus on the mechanics is always to the detriment of game flow,
> 
> But I will say this, it is more likely to fit those who play "board games"
> Or prefer a more "narrative" type of play,




Given that narrative play is almost the opposite of board game I'm not sure what you think you are trying to say.  And I'm not entirely sure why your scare quotes are necessary.

The only thing I can figure out is that you personally find the mechanics difficult due largely to the lucky/unlucky axis or the unfamiliarity of the dice, and you are so personally used to adding up collections of d6s with (in at least one edition) one behaving differently from others that you personally find it unintrusive.


----------



## Chimpy (Sep 19, 2014)

My group finds the dice system rather unwieldy as well. We like our combats quick and snappy, and the EotE system makes it hard work. We don't find it so bad for non-combat checks but often it's a hassle to deal with assembling the pool and interpreting the results for every check in the game.


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Neonchameleon said:


> Given that narrative play is almost the opposite of board game I'm not sure what you think you are trying to say.  And I'm not entirely sure why your scare quotes are necessary.
> 
> The only thing I can figure out is that you personally find the mechanics difficult due largely to the lucky/unlucky axis or the unfamiliarity of the dice, and you are so personally used to adding up collections of d6s with (in at least one edition) one behaving differently from others that you personally find it unintrusive.




Thats just loaded with assumption, 

Narrative due to the dice mechanic, Board game due the narrow system (I'm guessing the designers are use to creating/playing board games)
The two are not the same, and never said they were, just different perspectives of the same game, 

You did not figure out, you are wrong, 
One of the things i dislike about FATE is that the game system can pull you out of the moment, if you don't play it narrative,
Is that dice system also to complex for me to handle?, (four six sided fudge dice, not that hard, i hope you agree)
So, no, both game systems (if not played in "narrative") can be intrusive, 
But I find the Star Wars dice system in this game more intrusive, (in forcing more attention away from the game flow, and towards the mechanic)

Now, which would be more easier for a young child to pick up and play, FFG Star Wars or WEG Star Wars?
I've seen adults take time to pick up the FFG system, I can imagine the frustration a child may have,


And "scare quotes" never heard it called that before, whats so scary?


----------



## Neonchameleon (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> Thats just loaded with assumption,
> 
> Narrative due to the dice mechanic, Board game due the narrow system  (I'm guessing the designers are use to creating/playing board games)
> The two are not the same, and never said they were, just different perspectives of the same game,
> ...




OK.

Game design 101: _Every RPG there has ever been_  can be intrusive.  WEG Star Wars isn't mysteriously non-intrusive.   Every time you roll a bucket of dice and have to add it up that's  intrusive and throws people out of the game (and WEG Star Wars goes  high).  And Fate is not intrusive _if you accept the premises_.   It's hella-intrusive if you don't.  In my experience Fate is easy, very  easy, to teach to RPG newbies.  But the more D&D experience they  have the harder it is.  Because you do things differently in Fate from  in D&D so, although Fate is far more like their baseline fiction  (making it much easier for newbies) people who try to force Fate into a  D&D mold struggle.

As for your imagination, many adults IME have trouble picking up FFG's Star Wars _because they are used to other RPGs_.   This does not apply to kids.  Neither is anything approaching hard -  but there is a conceptual leap in Edge of Empire where success and luck  are separated.  This does not come close to a system like D&D - but  any kid can imagine it.

So I'd say that an adult with 20 years of  D&D experience will pick up WEG's Star Wars faster.  A kid?  I'm  giving the edge to the FFG version.  The problems of teaching veteran roleplayers who came up through D&D include _unteaching_ them - and that's why they struggle.

Scare Quotes are a common rhetorical technique.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> One of the things i dislike about FATE is that the game system can pull you out of the moment, if you don't play it narrative,






Neonchameleon said:


> OK.
> And Fate is not intrusive _if you accept the premises_.   It's hella-intrusive if you don't.  In my experience Fate is easy, very  easy, to teach to RPG newbies.  But the more D&D experience they  have the harder it is.  Because you do things differently in Fate from  in D&D so, although Fate is far more like their baseline fiction  (making it much easier for newbies) people who try to force Fate into a  D&D mold struggle.




I'd add:  FATE is typically easy for newbies, and for folks who play a wide variety of games, so that they've already seen a bunch of different mechanics.  If you focus on one game, or one type of game, FATE (or any game with base mechanics really different from what you're used to) can give you a speedbump.  That'smore about mental habits than anything else.

And, FATE can pull you out of the moment if you don't play it narrative?  Well, yes.  It is designed, specifically, to work with narrative play, and it doesn't pretend otherwise.  You can play it whatever way you like, but if you aren't leaning to the narrative side of things... why are you using FATE?  We have enough systems out there that there's no call to force the square peg into a round hole.  Pick a system that does the job you want to do well!


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

That again is a hugh amount of wrong assumption, 



Neonchameleon said:


> OK.
> 
> Game design 101:




You are going to try to teach me game design?
Its sort of a hobby of mine...



Neonchameleon said:


> _
> Every RPG there has ever been_  can be intrusive.  WEG Star Wars isn't mysteriously non-intrusive.   Every time you roll a bucket of dice and have to add it up that's  intrusive and throws people out of the game (and WEG Star Wars goes  high).  And Fate is not intrusive _if you accept the premises_.   It's hella-intrusive if you don't.  In my experience Fate is easy, very  easy, to teach to RPG newbies.  But the more D&D experience they  have the harder it is.  Because you do things differently in Fate from  in D&D so, although Fate is far more like their baseline fiction  (making it much easier for newbies) people who try to force Fate into a  D&D mold struggle.




Did I ever say all games are not intrusive to some degree?
But some games are far more intrusive than others,

And again did I say FATE was hard?, no, I said FATE was intrusive if not played a certain way, (it has nothing to do with premises its the systems mechanics)

And yes you can roll a lot of dice in WEG Star Wars but its far more intuitive than FFGs,

Btw: I've actually played more FATE than D&D, 
so, again you are wrong,

You seem to have a D&D fixation (Look, I've only played a couple of games of D&D ever, it did not gel with me, until the current version,
I have tons of 3.5 btw, but i convert everything) 




Neonchameleon said:


> As for your imagination,




Wait, What?, you are doing it again, when did i mention "imagination"?




Neonchameleon said:


> many adults IME have trouble picking up FFG's Star Wars _because they are used to other RPGs_.   This does not apply to kids.  Neither is anything approaching hard -  but there is a conceptual leap in Edge of Empire where success and luck  are separated.  This does not come close to a system like D&D - but  any kid can imagine it.




So, are you trying to tell me that a child would find FFGs Star Wars easier to play than WEGs Star Wars?
(cuz that would be very wrong)

Again, not D&D,



Neonchameleon said:


> So I'd say that an adult with 20 years of  D&D experience will pick up WEG's Star Wars faster.  A kid?  I'm  giving the edge to the FFG version.  The problems of teaching veteran roleplayers who came up through D&D include _unteaching_ them - and that's why they struggle.




Thats ridiculous, 

Again, not D&D 

I think you need to understand game design, 
Anyone can learn any game given long enough, but to try to claim adults would have trouble because they are stuck in their ways is ridiculous,

(unless you have been playing with a bunch of OAP's (Old Age Pensioners) 



Neonchameleon said:


> Scare Quotes are a common rhetorical technique.




Ha, wiki is always a solid body of information,  (right?) 
I use quotation marks to focus attention to key facts or points, (and not in some sort of cynical fashion, maybe its a British English thing (I'm English), but i personal don't did that)


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Umbran said:


> I'd add:  FATE is typically easy for newbies, and for folks who play a wide variety of games, so that they've already seen a bunch of different mechanics.  If you focus on one game, or one type of game, FATE (or any game with base mechanics really different from what you're used to) can give you a speedbump.  That'smore about mental habits than anything else.
> 
> And, FATE can pull you out of the moment if you don't play it narrative?  Well, yes.  It is designed, specifically, to work with narrative play, and it doesn't pretend otherwise.  You can play it whatever way you like, but if you aren't leaning to the narrative side of things... why are you using FATE?  We have enough systems out there that there's no call to force the square peg into a round hole.  Pick a system that does the job you want to do well!




Yes I already know this, but i don't remember it being explicitly said or implied that it should be played "narratively" 
(as you may understand not everyone whats to play that way)
And has someone already mentioned, it doesn't do horror/thrillers well, why?, because those types of settings rely heavily on pace and flow to create mood/tension, something FATE will tend to break, 

And again, I never said that it was hard to play, (but it may not be everyones cup of tea)

And Yes, I know I have many options, I have a large collection of RPGs,


----------



## Neonchameleon (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> That again is a hugh amount of wrong assumption,




You mean in the post you just made?



> You are going to try to teach me game design?
> Its sort of a hobby of mine...




Mine too.  And you seem to be making textbook faulty game design assumptions.



> Did I ever say all games are not intrusive to some degree?
> But some games are far more intrusive than others,




Yup.  Edge of Empires is not particularly intrusive once you've stepped over the first hurdle of the weird dice.



> And yes you can roll a lot of dice in WEG Star Wars but its far more intuitive than FFGs,




This is one of your faulty assumptions.

Almost no tabletop RPGs in history have ever been inherently intuitive.  (Some one-pagers _might_ get there).  What makes an RPG intuitive is a mix of two things.

1: How little you need to look up in the course of play and how easily it is to hand.  So you can get back to the game.
2: Your familiarity and level of acceptance of the game mechanics in question.

On  point 1 the two versions of Star Wars are not meaningfully different.    But I've heard people declare both Rifts and Rolemaster to be intuitive  and simple.  Because it's what they were used to.

Point 2, you  seem to be making the claim that "Successful and unlucky" is either  something you are unfamiliar with or that it is conceptually difficult  to grasp.



> You seem to have a D&D fixation (Look, I've only played a  couple of games of D&D ever, it did not gel with me, until the  current version,




This is a D&D message board.   Assuming the baseline on a D&D message board (set up for the launch  of 3.0 and that is heavily dominated by D&D) to be D&D is fairly  obvious.  Were this RPG.net or Storygames or any of a couple of dozen  other places I'd make different assumptions.



> So, are you trying to tell me that a child would find FFGs Star Wars easier to play than WEGs Star Wars?
> (cuz that would be very wrong)




Taught by you, yes it absolutely would be wrong - but note the qualifier.



> Thats ridiculous,




Nope.



> I think you need to understand game design,
> Anyone can learn any game given long enough, but to try to claim adults  would have trouble because they are stuck in their ways is  ridiculous,




And I think that you've just demonstrated  that you don't understand game design and writing games to your target  audience.  Or some of the reasons for the d20 glut being so big.  If  you've only done things one way then that way feels right - and every  other way feels wrong.

Game design isn't just about the game.   It's about the audience for that game.  One of my current games is  almost abandoned, not because I think it lacks potential or ideas, but  because I can't work out the gaming group it would fit.  Audience  matters and a big part of audience is that audience's assumptions.



> (unless you have been playing with a bunch of OAP's (Old Age Pensioners)




One of my regular gaming group is, yes.  He's not particularly stuck in his ways.



> Ha, wiki is always a solid body of information,  (right?)




It's  a very good introductory source, crushing most others (including almost  all popular books and  non-specialist encyclopedias including the  Britannica).  Not always solid - but a very good place to start.  



> I use quotation marks to focus attention to key facts or points,  (and not in some sort of cynical fashion, maybe its a British English  thing (I'm English), but i personal don't did that)




Fair enough.  That said, scare quotes are the normal meaning I see of quotes used for emphasis.


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Neonchameleon said:


> You mean in the post you just made?




LOL, okay, I read that far, and I'm not going to waste my time on the rest,

I think you will find you have been wrong on every assumption so far (which i have explained)

I will not waste any more time trying to help you escape your very invalid baseless assumption,


----------



## Umbran (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> Yes I already know this, but i don't remember it being explicitly said or implied that it should be played "narratively"




The FATE Accelerated SRD itself has an entire section of "Telling Stories Together".

The FATE Core SRD has this to say:

"_*DRAMA IS BETTER THAN REALISM*

In Fate, don’t get too bogged down trying to maintain absolute consistency in the world or adhere to a draconian sense of realism. The game operates by the rules of drama and fiction; use that to your advantage. There should be very few moments in the game where the PCs are free of conflicts or problems to deal with, even if it’d be more “realistic” for them to get a long breather.

When you’re trying to decide what happens, and the answer that makes the most sense is also kind of boring, go with something that’s more exciting than sensible! You can always find a way later on to justify something that doesn’t make immediate sense._"

They don't use the word "narratively" specifically, because that's a Forgism you'd not expect most folks to know.  But that section, right there, seems pretty explicit, clear, and straightforward.  That's not an implication, but a straight up statement that story, narrative, drama, are the key to FATE.



> (as you may understand not everyone whats to play that way)




I certainly do understand that.  But, for whatever style of game people want to play, they should pick the appropriate tools.  You don't pick up a baseball when what you want to play is soccer.  If the players are new to RPGs, or if the rules are not clear about what the game is designed to do, we can have some sympathy for folks.  But, when you do know your style, and the game is clear about style (as FATE is, demonstrated above), and you play a mismatch, then you lose the right to gripe about how the game performs.  



> And has someone already mentioned, it doesn't do horror/thrillers well, why?, because those types of settings rely heavily on pace and flow to create mood/tension, something FATE will tend to break,




FATE doesn't do horror well, but I think you get the reasons wrong.  FATE gives the GM and players great control over pace and flow.  That's not the problem.

However, the base assumption of FATE is that characters are _competent_ (FATE SRD: "What Makes a Good FATE Game:  Competence").  The characters are the right people for the job, and they are involved because they have a good chance of being able to resolve it for the better.

This, of course, is contrary to the needs of horror.  Fear and dread call for character that are pretty clearly in over their heads, ignorant of what they're up against, and in some major sense fragile and vulnerable.  Generally, in horror, the characters are busy responding to the works of the villain/antagonist, in a responsive mode.  Meanwhile, FATE calls for them to be proactive.


----------



## Elven (Sep 19, 2014)

Umbran said:


> The FATE Accelerated SRD itself has an entire section of "Telling Stories Together".
> 
> The FATE Core SRD has this to say:
> 
> "_*DRAMA IS BETTER THAN REALISM*_



_1) Realism is relative to the story or setting, if i want to play Star Wars in a simulationist way, it stays realistic to the setting,
But not to the real world,

2) It still does not explicitly state "narrative play only"
So to find out otherwise would need trail and error, or word of mouth (internet etc) 

_


Umbran said:


> _
> In Fate, don’t get too bogged down trying to maintain absolute consistency in the world or adhere to a draconian sense of realism. The game operates by the rules of drama and fiction; use that to your advantage. There should be very few moments in the game where the PCs are free of conflicts or problems to deal with, even if it’d be more “realistic” for them to get a long breather._



_
That is relative to the game being played, FATE is a sandbox system, that assumption can not apply to every game/genre 
(nobody wants "draconian (well...unless you are playing Dragonlance....)  even "Real life" is not draconian)

_


Umbran said:


> _
> When you’re trying to decide what happens, and the answer that makes the most sense is also kind of boring, go with something that’s more exciting than sensible! You can always find a way later on to justify something that doesn’t make immediate sense._"




That would not always fly (its an okay formula for say pulp, (gets boring? NINJAS!!!1) 
But imagine a game of Star Trek, where well thought out reason/ethics/morales prevail, that kind of "random" would not make sense)
Nor would any thoughtful type game, do you think Conan Doyle or Agatha Christie would use such tactics? (i doubt you would have heard of them if they had, there is a reason why pulps are called pulp)




Umbran said:


> They don't use the word "narratively" specifically, because that's a Forgism you'd not expect most folks to know.  But that section, right there, seems pretty explicit, clear, and straightforward.  That's not an implication, but a straight up statement that story, narrative, drama, are the key to FATE.




BS 



Umbran said:


> I certainly do understand that.  But, for whatever style of game people want to play, they should pick the appropriate tools.  You don't pick up a baseball when what you want to play is soccer.  If the players are new to RPGs, or if the rules are not clear about what the game is designed to do, we can have some sympathy for folks.  But, when you do know your style, and the game is clear about style (as FATE is, demonstrated above), and you play a mismatch, then you lose the right to gripe about how the game performs.




See thats why its BS, you can't claim its the fault of the experienced RPGer, then claim you don't use the term "narrative" because "most folks" wouldn't know it, 

You can't have it both ways...

Fact is, most RPGs that are produced are for experienced gamers, and only few aimed at the newbies,
It would take little to preface the game with the statement "FATE supports Narrative play" done n dusted...but it doesn't   




Umbran said:


> FATE doesn't do horror well, but I think you get the reasons wrong.  FATE gives the GM and players great control over pace and flow.  That's not the problem.
> 
> However, the base assumption of FATE is that characters are _competent_ (FATE SRD: "What Makes a Good FATE Game:  Competence").  The characters are the right people for the job, and they are involved because they have a good chance of being able to resolve it for the better.
> 
> This, of course, is contrary to the needs of horror.  Fear and dread call for character that are pretty clearly in over their heads, ignorant of what they're up against, and in some major sense fragile and vulnerable.  Generally, in horror, the characters are busy responding to the works of the villain/antagonist, in a responsive mode.  Meanwhile, FATE calls for them to be proactive.




Are you telling me your can't make a vulnerable character? (cuz thats not true, is it?)
And are you telling me that the GM has no options to veto/control the game? (yes he does, right?)

So i refer you to my original statement, this is something neither the players nor GM can change without it being a different game,
And hence the core problem why this system has trouble in running those genre,


----------



## Umbran (Sep 19, 2014)

Elven said:


> [1) Realism is relative to the story or setting, if i want to play Star Wars in a simulationist way, it stays realistic to the setting,
> But not to the real world,




Only to some gamers who take part in internet discussions, and who hold to certain Forgisms, who are in a minority even among gamers.  For most folks, "realism" means "like the real world".  If you ask most folks if Star Wars is realistic, they will say, "No."  By extension, and game that mirrors Star Wars will also not be realistic.



> 2) It still does not explicitly state "narrative play only"




With respect, you're reaching at straws.  The game tells you in clear, normal human language what it expects and does well.



> That would not always fly (its an okay formula for say pulp, (gets boring? NINJAS!!!1)




Take it up with the people who wrote FATE.  They tell you the expectations.  If you then see that, and try to use the game for something else that is not a flaw in their system.  Don't use a screwdriver to hammer in nails.



> See thats why its BS, you can't claim its the fault of the experienced RPGer, then claim you don't use the term "narrative" because "most folks" wouldn't know it,




A person who isn't familiar with Forgisms - the majority of the people on the planet, and I expect the majority of gamers, will read FATE and still see what the game focuses upon, and what is should be expected to do well. There's no BS about that.  A person who is familiar with the Forgisms should still be able to get the idea without the jargon.  If they can read English, it is spelled out for them.  The specific words "narrative play" are not required to make the point.



> Are you telling me your can't make a vulnerable character? (cuz thats not true, is it?)




 I am saying that the game's designers are up front with the fact that the game works best with competent characters.  The skill pyramid is designed, specifically, to create characters who are, broadly, good at stuff.  The game is designed for the player to, by their own choice, generate significant success beyond even their base skill level.  Even a character who has no skill can, though cooperation, generate significant successes in combat if need be.



> And are you telling me that the GM has no options to veto/control the game? (yes he does, right?)




The GM has such rights, but only within certain parameters - the rules specifically call for most control to be thematically appropriate for characters and drama, and will often call for giving a character resources for exerting control.  



> So i refer you to my original statement, this is something neither the players nor GM can change without it being a different game,
> And hence the core problem why this system has trouble in running those genre,




Yes.  And my point is that FATE, of all games, tells you a great deal of what it can, and cannot do.  It is like criticizing a fish for not being beef.  It never *claimed* to be otherwise, so there's not a lot of grounds for complaint on that basis.


----------



## JeffB (Sep 20, 2014)




----------



## Elven (Sep 20, 2014)

Okay, this is going around in circles, I've already said what I've needed to say on this subject, 
I do not feel your counter argument (as in a different way of thinking, not as in an act of aggression) does not invalidate what i have said,
My points stand,

But (again needless to say) you have the right to your opinion, 
(As long as those different opinions can be disputed in a constructive civil fashion, without agenda)



Umbran said:


> Only to some gamers who take part in internet discussions, and who hold to certain Forgisms, who are in a minority even among gamers.  For most folks, "realism" means "like the real world".  If you ask most folks if Star Wars is realistic, they will say, "No."  By extension, and game that mirrors Star Wars will also not be realistic.




You are being pedantic in your version of "realism"
Allow me to be equally pedantic in saying "simulationist" does not need to be "realistic"

(realistic in game terms to me means anything that keeps "authenticity" within the setting, even in "the real world" the perception of what is reality is subjective, I hold up a coin, you see tails, i see heads, we could bitch and whine about who's right and wrong all day, when in fact we are both looking at the same coin,)


----------



## edemaitre (Sep 23, 2014)

*Star Wars RPGs*

I've role-played in various _Star Wars_ games, using everything from the official D6, D20, and FFG versions to GURPS and _Savage Worlds_. Yes, each rules system makes slightly different assumptions and encourages different styles of play, so YMMV depending on Game Master and player preferences.

That said, I like that D6 _Space_ is free and backward-compatible with the wealth of classic WEG materials, I prefer _Saga Edition_ to other D20 implementations, and I'd seriously consider FATE (_Starblazer Adventures/Mindjammer_ 2e or _Core/Accelerated_) if I were to start up a _Star Wars_ game now.

I agree that FFG's custom dice can be confusing and that _Savage Worlds_ can be swingy (partly by design as a pulp-oriented game). I myself prefer streamlined, cinematic combat and character influence over story direction, but some folks like more realistic tactics with minis or plots with different levels of complexity.

Whatever system you choose, it should enable you to tell space opera stories like those in _Clone Wars_ with a minimum of fuss and a maximum of fun for your children! May the Force be with you -- always....


----------



## Jhaelen (Sep 24, 2014)

Elven said:


> That make no sense, their reference would be the movies, now do you think it would be easier to play in first person or third,
> (are they putting themselves in to that position, or watching someone else from a distance, i think they may find "narrative" a little too abstract)



Have you ever asked a child to tell you a story? They have zero problems to talk about themselves in the third person.

And have you ever been asked by a child to tell you a story? In my experience, they will often try to influence the story while you are telling it.
Children are naturally born roleplayers and storytellers.

What children _aren't_ born with, is a tendency to follow rules. That's something you have to teach them, e.g. by introducing them to board games.
And even if they acknowledge the existence of rules, they'll want to make up their own rules, too.


Anyway, I assume you are making too many assumptions 

So let's agree to disagree. Because, personally, I feel you couldn't be more wrong.


----------



## Stan Shinn (May 11, 2015)

edemaitre said:


> I've role-played in various _Star Wars_ games, using everything from the official D6, D20, and FFG versions to GURPS and _Savage Worlds_.




Edemaitre -- I'm gearing up for a Star Wars campaign and I've narrowed it down to WEG d6 and Savage Worlds. Between those two, which would you prefer if running today? Any why? Love to get your advice. 

(We've ruled out FFG EotE and Fate; we've tried both and had issued in my particular group. EotE is great to play but I'm color blind and old and FFG's books are very hard to read for both these reason, plus too much crunch on the GM side. Fate we've tried for other games -- couple of my players really need hand-holding with regard to crafting Stunts and it's a little too loose for my group's style).


----------



## JeffB (May 11, 2015)

Wow. Necro of my own thread.

Mos Eisley Playset. Based on Dungeon World/World of Dungeons. Google it. Awesome.


----------



## Jiggawatts (May 16, 2015)

Umbran, the proper word is verisimilitude, not realism. I could care less about realism in games I play, but I very much care about verisimilitude.

Realism: Reference in which something is correlated to its real world counterpart.

Verisimilitude: Plausibility within the internal consistency of a setting.

When it come to games there tends to be two perpendicular elements that go into their design. One is where it scales on the simulation ---- narrative line, the other is where it scales on the mechanics/rules/crunch light ---- heavy line. I personally prefer games that are more simulationist in nature and about medium/light-ish on the mechanics/rules scale. FFG Star Wars is heavily narrative and very crunchy, the opposite ends of my enjoyment factor on both scales. Now I have played it, and the dice really arent that hard to figure out, and this is coming from someone who has played D&D as his main game since 2E (skipping over 4E). I havent disenjoyed the campaigns I have participated in, but it is by no means my preferred Star Wars system.

(With that said I pretty much disagree with everything else Elven said in this entire thread). And Elven, it is a scientific fact that children learn faster and easier than adults, the prime example being that it is vastly simpler to learn additional languages in your youth vs trying the learn them as an adult. Kids would have no problem picking up the FFG dice pool system easily.


----------



## aramis erak (May 16, 2015)

JeffB said:


> I downloaded a Edge of Empire fast play adventure freebie thing, and the resolution mechanics seem crazy complicated to me. Probably the whackadoo dice make it worse when reading, but IS it a scomplicated as it seems? My first reaction is " I would never get into RPGs, if this was my first experience with a rulebook".
> 
> 
> I am burnt out on D&D for the Kids group and looking to try something completely different. The kids like Star Wars. I am a big fan of the old D6 game, but not of the first two D20 versions (never bothered with Saga because of them).
> ...




In a nutshell:

Stars are successes, triangles cancel them.
Rebel wreaths are advantage, imperial hexagons oppose them and are called threat.
the Triumph is a a special star; the despair a special triangle. The star and triangle effects of them can be cancelled, but each is a side effect that cannot be canceled.

If you have more total stars than triangles (including triumph and despair), you succeed at the core action.
If you have more wreaths than hexes, good side effects (even if you failed the core action).
If you have more hexes than wreaths, bad side effects.
If you have a triumph, you get good side effects  or you crit.
If you have a despair, you get bad side effects or you fumble.

As long as you're using the real FFG dice, it's pretty intuitive in play. Players having ONE table of standard combat lookups for spending their advantage (wreaths) or their opponent's threat (hexagons) speeds up a lot.


----------



## JeffB (May 17, 2015)

Thanks for the FYI. This is a pretty old thread. I figured out the dice/etc awhile back and never pursued the game. I would enjoy it, but I knew it would not work for the group.


----------



## Red Dice Diaries (Sep 17, 2015)

If you are interested in a Fate Star Wars hack, Ryan M. Danks made one available online a while ago:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByVpAo4rxDGuX09IWkVydDcyOFE/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Chimpy (Sep 18, 2015)

For players that enjoy high-narrative systems and a lot of improvisation and lateral thinking, I think FFG Star Wars works really well. The dice system is very different and isn't for everyone, but if you get into it I think it's really fun. I love the level-less talent and skill system.

The careers and specialisations don't play much differently at the start, but as players invest experience points, they begin to diverge and after a while characters do become very different in what they can do proficiently.

Ship and vehicle combat is a bit of a mess imo, which is my main gripe with the system.

The books are beautiful too.


----------



## Merkaile (Sep 22, 2015)

Way late to the thread but I'd jump in to say you can't really go wrong with Fantasy Flight Star Wars.  It's my favorite of all the rpg systems that have ever been put out by far.  The character build freedom is rather nice in my opinion.

The dice, once you get used to them are really very quick and easy to interpret.  My kids (11 and 9) picked them up much faster than the traditional rpg dice.  

As has been mentioned more than once, the artwork is awesome.


----------



## robus (Dec 23, 2015)

For speeding up combat would it be possible to ignore the advantage/disadvantage (unless the PC indicating they were pulling off some fancy maneuver)? I.e. just go with successes vs failures?

Looking into running this over the holidays and concerned about combat bogging down.


----------



## The Fighter-Cricket (Dec 24, 2015)

Well, you certainly can omit the advantage/threat results in combat if you want to have quicker fights. Nobody stops ypou from doing that and it also doesn't really brake the system. Critical hits from certain weapons won't be working though, because they rely on a number of rolled advantages to be fired off.
But you can tweak the system to your preferences by saying that you won't use threat/advantage for narrative results but only for suffering strain and/or critical hits. Voila, now you have incorporated the advantage/threat symbols but don't have to get super creative all the time about how the symbols affect the narration of the fight.


----------



## Chimpy (Dec 25, 2015)

robus said:


> For speeding up combat would it be possible to ignore the advantage/disadvantage (unless the PC indicating they were pulling off some fancy maneuver)? I.e. just go with successes vs failures?
> 
> Looking into running this over the holidays and concerned about combat bogging down.



You could, but if you just do:

advantage = add boost dice to own next check
threat = add setback dice to self next time
then it's a quick and easy interpretation. Also advantages can be spent to trigger critical hits.

From experience, combat is usually over in about 2 or 3 rounds anyway - it's very quick in the FFG system, although can be quite brutal with some unlucky rolls.

Do what works for you and your group


----------



## aramis erak (Dec 29, 2015)

The Fighter-Cricket said:


> Well, you certainly can omit the advantage/threat results in combat if you want to have quicker fights. Nobody stops ypou from doing that and it also doesn't really brake the system. Critical hits from certain weapons won't be working though, because they rely on a number of rolled advantages to be fired off.




That DOES break the system, and actually lengthens many fights; It means no "kill one minion per 3-4 adv/1 Tri". So minions last considerably longer. It also prevents fight shortening extra damage from blue dice and using adv for extra damage to non-nemesis opponents.

Many actions require counting advantage to trigger: autofire, two weapons use,  area effect attacks, and a number of feats, plus every critical using weapon.


----------



## aramis erak (Dec 30, 2015)

Chimpy said:


> You could, but if you just do:
> 
> advantage = add boost dice to own next check
> threat = add setback dice to self next time
> ...




It's worth noting the statistical values of the dice

dieSuccessAdvTriumphBlue8/2416/240Black-8/24-8/240Green15/2415/240Purple-12/24-18/240Yellow16/2418/241/12Red-14/24-18/24–1/12
Note that situational modifiers (blue) provide extra advantage ... A black doesn't actually cancel a blue; a black plus blue has an expected result of 1/3 advantage; 3 black plus 3 blue has an expected result of +1 advantage (but can range from +3S to –3S and +6A to -3A).

Most of my fights run 5-7 rounds, but my players and npc's both tend to take cover, which does reduce the damage per round. Most of the minions are taken out with crits, not accumulated damage.


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 21, 2016)

JeffB said:


> And while I appreciate suggestions, I really do not like Savage Worlds




I don't play Savage Worlds, but I know a lot of people like it.  From what I've seen (and I haven't studied it), it's similar to D6 Star Wars where a character has a dice code for his stats and throws that when he needs to roll for a task.

What is it that you don't like about Savage Worlds?


----------



## JeffB (Jan 23, 2016)

Water Bob said:


> I don't play Savage Worlds, but I know a lot of people like it.  From what I've seen (and I haven't studied it), it's similar to D6 Star Wars where a character has a dice code for his stats and throws that when he needs to roll for a task.
> 
> What is it that you don't like about Savage Worlds?




Not a major thing but first up- all the stupid gambling/poker terminology.

The preference for minis/grid

Cards for initiative

Raises

Damage Soak

Bottom line-  just don't like a game where It takes a couple rolls and a couple decisions (and possibly another roll) to arrive at an outcome. 

 Its not nearly as bad as EXALTED, for example...but it's not my thing.


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 23, 2016)

JeffB said:


> Not a major thing but first up- all the stupid gambling/poker terminology.
> 
> The preference for minis/grid
> 
> ...




 Sounds horrible.


----------



## JeffB (Jan 23, 2016)

Well alot of people love it, so cant be that bad, its just not to my tastes.

There are plenty of quick starts available for free where you can check it out yourself...You may like it.


----------



## innerdude (Jan 23, 2016)

JeffB said:


> Not a major thing but first up- all the stupid gambling/poker terminology.
> 
> The preference for minis/grid
> 
> ...




1. There's an excellent gridless combat / TotM fan adaptation here: http://www.pegforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=36098

2. Cards for initiative --- Feature, not a bug. Cards for initiative is one of the system's best features. Seriously. Once you try it, everything else feels weak in comparison. 

3. Raises --- Feature, not bug. Adding even a single element of degree of success adds a freshness to the system that I never felt with D&D / d20.

4. Damage Soak --- This is admittedly a potential pain point for a lot of people, and I'll admit even now it's probably my least favorite part of the system ... but ultimately it allows for an entirely different kind of fiction in terms of combat damage, injury, healing, and recovery that isn't possible for other systems. 

Namely, when you suffer an injury, _you know without a doubt that it actually caused physical damage. _There's no Shrodinger's Injury adjudication after the fact; you don't have to try and rationalize what a "healing surge" is or does; you don't have to rationalize or justify away what hit points are.

Also, it allows for ongoing injury and fatigue effects. Ultimately Savage Worlds' approach to "soaking wounds" is identical to "healing surges" only in reverse---soak checks stop damage from happening "in the moment" in the fiction by basically pushing the "rewind" button; healing surges "restore health" after the fight is over. Ultimately you end up in the same place. The difference is, soak rolls allow for more plausible injury and healing conditions without all the hassles of hit point tracking and rationalizing the fiction along the way. Change the name of both "bennies" in Savage Worlds and "healing surges" in 4e and 5e to "Hero pool," and it's pretty close to functional equivalence.


----------



## innerdude (Jan 23, 2016)

Water Bob said:


> Sounds horrible.




As much as I want to do the whole, "I respect your opinion, and tastes differ," etc., there's a part of me that wants to scream at the top of my lungs "YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG!!!!" 

 

So instead, I'll offer up some actual evidence --- Savage Worlds is the only game that's not a flavor of "D&D" to register a high enough percentage of games played on Fantasy Grounds to show up on the pie chart as its own segment. No other non-D&D game comes close. Savage Worlds has more games being played on Fantasy Grounds than all of the entire Star Wars variants _combined_. 

http://www.enworld.org/forum/conten...t-Played-On-FANTASY-GROUNDS-In-2015-(Hint-D-D!)

It's definitely doing something right, even if JeffB isn't a fan.


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 23, 2016)

The soak idea sounds interesting.  The cards really turn me off.  I dislike gimmicky mechanics.  Thanks for the info, though.  I'll hold judgement until I have a chance to look at it further.


----------



## Chimpy (Jan 24, 2016)

innerdude said:


> Savage Worlds has more games being played on Fantasy Grounds than all of the entire Star Wars variants _combined_.



I didn't think Fantasy Grounds supported FFG star wars? If that is the case then it might explain that statistic.


----------



## amerigoV (Jan 24, 2016)

Water Bob said:


> The soak idea sounds interesting.  The cards really turn me off.  I dislike gimmicky mechanics.  Thanks for the info, though.  I'll hold judgement until I have a chance to look at it further.




In Savage Worlds, while cards are used in a few other ancillary systems, 90%+ of the players and GMs interaction with the cards is for Initiative. As one who went from playing D&D (3rd edition) to Savage Worlds, I can tell you its not a gimmick - its a slick way do initiative in a visual manner. If you ever wanted to do the "roll initiative by PC/monster group every round" alternative in D&D (and I presume the D20 based Star Wars system), its one of the best ways I have seen. Instead of everyone rolling every round, having to gather up numbers and sort them - you just deal the cards. People leave them out/prop them up (some cool people even get place-card holders) and its a easy to see who goes next, who wants to go on hold (flip your card down), the general order of initiative so players can be thinking about their turn, etc. There are Edges (feats) that allow additional cards for those that feel its important to go sooner. 

It is a very fast and smooth mechanic, one of the many that are a part of Savage Worlds once you "unlearn what you have learned" from d20/other systems 

Anyway, I am a Savage Worlds convert so I will stop at that. If you have questions after looking the system over, feel free to PM me.


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 24, 2016)

amerigoV said:


> .... you just deal the cards.




Interesting.

I think there's no real advantage to rolling initiative every round.  In fact, I think it hurts some games, especially where movement is concerned.  In most d20 games, a character can move an unbelievable distance before he is shot with a missile weapon (like an arrow) if he goes last in one round and first in the next round--basically giving the target two rounds of movement (and the archer big penalties) before the archer can let loose a single arrow.

The best way to handle initiative, I think, is to roll it once, when the character enters the fight, and leave it at that.  The character has the same initiative count each round (but can change it in the round by various methods to a new number--depends on the actions he takes).

I don't see grabbing a deck of cards and dealing them out to everybody as being any faster than players rolling dice.

But, my big question would be:  *How does a character's traits effect initiative when using cards?*

When using dice, initiative is modified by DEX or Reflexes or whatever.  How do you modify the value of a card dealt to you if you've got a quick character?


----------



## amerigoV (Jan 24, 2016)

Water Bob said:


> Interesting.
> 
> I think there's no real advantage to rolling initiative every round.  In fact, I think it hurts some games, especially where movement is concerned.  In most d20 games, a character can move an unbelievable distance before he is shot with a missile weapon (like an arrow) if he goes last in one round and first in the next round--basically giving the target two rounds of movement (and the archer big penalties) before the archer can let loose a single arrow.




I only did a bit of 4e, but from what I remember it would not have fared well under this approach (you stun someone at the end of the round and they might get their save right off the bat the next).

In my formative days of D&D we just did a d6 every round to see which side went first. I still fondly recall the tension of a big fight when the HPs were low and who won Initiative was a key moment. So I have always favored that approach - but I never did it under 3.x due to the tracking hassle (and that included using DMGenie to track combat)




> I don't see grabbing a deck of cards and dealing them out to everybody as being any faster than players rolling dice.




The speed is not the cards or the dice, its the tracking of it. Unless you are just letting a computer do it - you need to collect the numbers and sort them (players will want some idea when they are going to go versus other players and critters). Some use white boards, etc. Its one of those things that most people do not do it as the hassle > return. 

Having the cards visible on the table eliminates the hassle as everyone can see the order naturally. Plus as GM I can do a bit of drama - a big round I might deal the cards slowly just to build some tension.



> But, my big question would be:  *How does a character's traits effect initiative when using cards?*
> 
> When using dice, initiative is modified by DEX or Reflexes or whatever.  How do you modify the value of a card dealt to you if you've got a quick character?




You take the Quick Edge - it allows more cards (and Agility [equivalent of Dex] at a certain level is a minimum to take the Edge). In Savage Worlds, there is not the granular +1 or +2 that you have in D20. A +1 in Savage Worlds is more like a +4 or +5 in d20. So what the system does is use the Attributes to linked learn skills easier and access Edges (think very strong Feats) vs. being a direct bonus. Attributes are also used extensively in actual play vs. being a static modifier.

There is also a couple of other Initiative Edges that can give cards  based on Smarts (Int) - basically instead of being faster of reflex your character is better at diagnosing the situation and acting sooner.


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 26, 2016)

JeffB said:


> Not a major thing but first up- all the stupid gambling/poker terminology.
> 
> The preference for minis/grid
> 
> ...




You left out my reason for disliking it - it's way too swingy because of the combination of small dice pool (2d) and open ending. 

Which makes encounter planning rather difficult...


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 26, 2016)

innerdude said:


> As much as I want to do the whole, "I respect your opinion, and tastes differ," etc., there's a part of me that wants to scream at the top of my lungs "YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG!!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And, for dead tree, Star Wars outsells it by a considerable margin... which means there's a lot of people buying the SWRPG...

Fantasy Grounds is not a fair sample of the gaming in general, because, while it's VERY reliable as a data generator, it measures a segment that is strongly different from the general playerbase of RPGs. Many of us won't touch FG no matter what - either because of price or because we don't care for play via VTT, or because they use other VTT's... 

It also doesn't hurt that Pinnacle specifically released a FG ruleset pack... something which FFG cannot legally do due to the license.


----------



## hawknsparrow (Jan 18, 2017)

Also, watch the You Tube videos put out by Runeslinger.  A must watch for a new FFG GM.  This and the starter set is all you need.

Sent from my SM-N900P using EN World mobile app


----------



## hawknsparrow (Jan 18, 2017)

Star Wars RPG (FFG): https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZfuKgeD5fl5wy96C6G-FdqwBp3qhsdSz


Sent from my SM-N900P using EN World mobile app


----------



## cmad1977 (Jan 18, 2017)

I'm playing in a SW game now.
I like it. I have some issues with it. 
The dice: not that complicated after a few throws. I do run into issues of narration. Sometimes I just want to start the ship and go, not narrate a wacky triumph/despair/complication. Other times I just don't have the 'juice' to make stuff up on the fly.
The Rules: probably just an issue at my table, our GM has all the books. It's too many rules for me sometimes. Why do I need the rules for modding my blasters mods? Even some of the basic rules seem a little too convoluted for the payoff.

One good thing though, one of our players started with D&D and didn't like it. However she really likes SW. The non-binary resolution helps when her dice are cold. In D&D, if your rolling 7's... sometimes it feels like you're not doing anything. In SW oftentimes even if your dice are 'cold' you're making something happen. 

I'm having fun, give it a shot. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 18, 2017)

cmad1977 said:


> The dice: not that complicated after a few throws. I do run into issues of narration. Sometimes I just want to start the ship and go, not narrate a wacky triumph/despair/complication. Other times I just don't have the 'juice' to make stuff up on the fly.




Doesn't sound like I'd like it at all.

I'll stick with D6 for Star Wars.


----------



## jimmifett (Jan 20, 2017)

Water Bob said:


> Doesn't sound like I'd like it at all.
> 
> I'll stick with D6 for Star Wars.




It's like orphan tears, you don't know how good it is until you've tried. The FFG dice mechanics are fantastic. I tried d6 and couldn't stand it. Goofy as all get out. Knowing WHY you get a negative die is fantastic.

It's normally average difficulty to cross that tightrope, but you're holding on to a kid while doing it, so upgrade a purple to a red. Oh, It's also raining, so add a setback die. Now Roll.

1 success, 2 threat, and a despair.

You managed to make it across, but along the way, you slipped, barely holding on by your fingers to the rope, so it took longer to cross than you wanted. Oh yes, despair, you dropped the kid an he disappeared into the cloud layers beneath the speeder lanes. But hey, YOU made it across


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 20, 2017)

jimmifett said:


> It's like orphan tears, you don't know how good it is until you've tried. The FFG dice mechanics are fantastic. I tried d6 and couldn't stand it. Goofy as all get out. Knowing WHY you get a negative die is fantastic.
> 
> It's normally average difficulty to cross that tightrope, but you're holding on to a kid while doing it, so upgrade a purple to a red. Oh, It's also raining, so add a setback die. Now Roll.
> 
> ...




Seems much too...I don't know...random, I guess.  Too gimmicky.

Like the poster before, I like interpreting dice rolls.  I don't like being forced to interpret EVERY dice roll.

The D6 system is one of the best systems ever designed, imo.  It can be gritty.  It can be swashbuckling.  It's fun and fits Star Wars like a glove.



It also seems like it might lead to un-necessary arguments with some groups:  "Hey, you rolled a dispair.  You dropped the kid."

"I dropped the kid?  No way I did that.  I nearly fell on the tight rope, caught myself, and my blaster pistol jiggled out of my holster and fell to the depths.  I don't have a weapon any more.  But, I'm still gripping the kid."

"Nope.  That's not how I interpret the dice.  You dropped the kid."

"When Jimmy rolled that despair about an hour ago, you weren't this hard on him!"

"Sure I was--and he wasn't holding a kid while trying to cross a tight rope!  You dropped the kid!"

"Man, this game sucks.  Let's go back to D6."


----------



## aramis erak (Jan 21, 2017)

We get it Bob, you hate everything new...

That said, it's a great game for emulating the feel. Better than WEG, and WEG was never bettered by anything WOTC did.

As for "Start and go" - when you want to start and go, if you're the GM, you can just "Say yes" and move on.


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 21, 2017)

aramis erak said:


> We get it Bob, you hate everything new...




I don't hate good rules.

I'll grant that FFG SW does have a following.



And...



> That said, it's a great game for emulating the feel. Better than WEG, and WEG was never bettered by anything WOTC did.




I doubt that you're in the majority of opinion, there.


----------



## cmad1977 (Jan 21, 2017)

I wouldn't use WeG rules again. FFG Star Wars is the only system I'd play in. 
But that's really neither here nor there so... 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 21, 2017)

cmad1977 said:


> IBut that's really neither here nor there so...




Agreed.


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Jan 21, 2017)

WEG's SW game is awesome.  It also has bad points as well as good.
FFG's SW game is awesome.  It, too, has it's good and bad.
I've run both (less FFG than WEG), and I enjoy both - but they prompt slightly different kinds of SW games.  Both lend themselves to fast, free-flowing, cinematic action that most SW games will thrive on but they take quite different approaches to how they get there.  FFG's approach no doubt seems a radical and nigh incomprehensible departure from a more traditional RPG, but it's ultimately not all that... alien to the kind of game that results from WEG's.

I prefer FFG over WEG only because it has fewer problems with force/jedi characters.


----------



## jimmifett (Jan 23, 2017)

Water Bob said:


> Seems much too...I don't know...random, I guess.  Too gimmicky.
> 
> Like the poster before, I like interpreting dice rolls.  I don't like being forced to interpret EVERY dice roll.
> 
> ...




As a player, the DM determines the outcome of your despair, just like the players could determine how despair affects hostile NPCs, tho GM has final call. Sure, you could have dropped your pistol from the despair, in fact, I ask my players what they think would be good for the outcome, and if I like it, it sticks, if they can't come up with something, I get carte blanche. Sometime's I'll even pocket that Despair for later. The players will know something bad will have come from it, and it will be tied to what happened, but i'll spring it later.

Ex:
GM:You cross, barely, and the kid is safe, but you have a bad feeling about this...
20 minutes later during escape in speeder...

GM:As you fly around in your airspeeder, remember that tightrope you crossed earlier?
PC: Yeah...
GM: Actually, no, you don't, that despair is now coming to bite you. You slam into the cable, rips free, and gets sucked into your intake.
You need a piloting check to keep control, followed by mechanics or something else creative to prevent engine damage...
PC: NOOOOoooooooo
GM: Quoting the prequels just gave you an additional setback die


----------



## cmad1977 (Jan 23, 2017)

jimmifett said:


> As a player, the DM determines the outcome of your despair, just like the players could determine how despair affects hostile NPCs, tho GM has final call. Sure, you could have dropped your pistol from the despair, in fact, I ask my players what they think would be good for the outcome, and if I like it, it sticks, if they can't come up with something, I get carte blanche. Sometime's I'll even pocket that Despair for later. The players will know something bad will have come from it, and it will be tied to what happened, but i'll spring it later.
> 
> Ex:
> GM:You cross, barely, and the kid is safe, but you have a bad feeling about this...
> ...




The fact that you give setbacks for quoting the nonexistent prequel films shows you're a GM who knows what they're doing. 

Despite my occasional 'discomfort' with the dice mechanics(I'm olde) the game often feels like a Star Wars film. 

Our party could totally have starred in Rogue1. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 23, 2017)

jimmifett said:


> Sometime's I'll even pocket that Despair for later. The players will know something bad will have come from it, and it will be tied to what happened, but i'll spring it later.)




That just seems horrible to me.  It's one step removed from just making up something bad to happen to the players "just because".    I know my players sure wouldn't go for it--holding something like that for later, when the Ref gets around to implementing it.  I say that, and I believe in a strong game master, too.  It's his world to say what happens when.  But, what you describes goes against my grain.  It seems unfair to me and bad game design.

What I don't like about this is that it's an obstacle for the players tied to a game mechanic--a meta-game influence on the game.  Obstacles should be, in my book, tied to logic and story driven.  Here, you've given an example driven by the fact that the players had a point of Despair that need to be paid.  It wasn't that the player drove the air speeder into an area in the game where the obstacle was already placed.  The obstacle wasn't there whether or not the players flew that way.  It's an obstacle applied to the players simply because they owed "something bad" happing to them.

(shakes shoulders)

Yeah, that game design just creeps me out.  Not for me at all.

Different strokes, I guess.


----------



## jimmifett (Jan 24, 2017)

Water Bob said:


> That just seems horrible to me.  It's one step removed from just making up something bad to happen to the players "just because".    I know my players sure wouldn't go for it--holding something like that for later, when the Ref gets around to implementing it.  I say that, and I believe in a strong game master, too.  It's his world to say what happens when.  But, what you describes goes against my grain.  It seems unfair to me and bad game design.
> 
> What I don't like about this is that it's an obstacle for the players tied to a game mechanic--a meta-game influence on the game.  Obstacles should be, in my book, tied to logic and story driven.  Here, you've given an example driven by the fact that the players had a point of Despair that need to be paid.  It wasn't that the player drove the air speeder into an area in the game where the obstacle was already placed.  The obstacle wasn't there whether or not the players flew that way.  It's an obstacle applied to the players simply because they owed "something bad" happing to them.
> 
> ...




So no dropped children into the clouded skylanes of coruscant or cables sucked into the air intakes, just a dropped weapon. Where is the fun, danger, and excitement in that? 

Ah well, have fun with your pip fiddling and broken Jedi, i'll have my gripping action movie


----------



## Water Bob (Jan 24, 2017)

jimmifett said:


> Ah well, have fun with your pip fiddling and broken Jedi, i'll have my gripping action movie




I prefer 1st Ed. D6 Star Wars, but all editions are great. The games I've had are quite fun and Star Wars-sy.  I don't refer to as the best set of game mechanics ever designed to fit a particular gaming world ever created for nothing.

And, the Jedi are quite good, for the era the game was designed.


----------



## JeffB (Jan 29, 2017)

I really wish were able to delete our own threads. This thing just won't die.


----------

