So I come from games like Imperial Assault with a slight campaign and heroclix, no campaign. In my mind I follow the instructions to the T, but I know the gm is the be all end all.that being said in my group I'm the Gm. I see people talking about doing actions before the slice is made(hot wiring ATST and such, but in the text it acts as though that has just happened and there's one action per character before troops show up.

So my question are these groups just more free form and build in exploration time, or am I missing some time gap.

Thanks!

Generally speaking, this RPG is pretty loose and free compared to the tactical board games such as Imperial Assault. The players will suggest what they want to do, and as the GM, your job is to figure out if the rules support that, and if not, how can you help the player do the cool thing they wanted to do. The player may have to do the cool thing over 2 turns rather than in the same turn, or you may decide that it's not game breaking to allow a character to fire a few bolts from his blaster before sliding into the AT-ST and firing her up in the same turn.

But you are right, normally a character only has 1 action and 1 maneuver.

It's difficult to break out of that rigid mindset, but once you'll find a sweet spot that works for you where the rules work for you, but you also don't feel constrained by them. Just play lots of games and make sure you and your players are having fun.

Generally speaking, this RPG is pretty loose and free compared to the tactical board games such as Imperial Assault. The players will suggest what they want to do, and as the GM, your job is to figure out if the rules support that, and if not, how can you help the player do the cool thing they wanted to do. The player may have to do the cool thing over 2 turns rather than in the same turn, or you may decide that it's not game breaking to allow a character to fire a few bolts from his blaster before sliding into the AT-ST and firing her up in the same turn.

But you are right, normally a character only has 1 action and 1 maneuver.

It's difficult to break out of that rigid mindset, but once you'll find a sweet spot that works for you where the rules work for you, but you also don't feel constrained by them. Just play lots of games and make sure you and your players are having fun.

Awesome thanks so much. I'm really excited about this. I had the d20 core rule book when I was a teen, but couldn't get into it. Now I'm super stoked to try it, plus I like the streamlined system.

One part you may have already coming out of wargames, is the ability to separate "descriptive Action" from "mechanical roll". This tends to be part of any Wargamer who likes to talk/write about what their models are actually doing in the field. (ie. "No hit at a foot away, he must have been reloading, etc.)

This is a good thing to bring into RPGs, particularly one like this. Mechanically, your character might be doing Aim, attack, getting a boost on an attack roll . Narratively, one character might be " steadying his pistol with his other hand, Lan ignored the blaster bolts around him and focused on centering his shot. Holding his breath, he pulled the trigger." Another character, however, might say "Nal didn't care anymore if she got hurt, that Stormtrooper had to die. Holding her pistol out, she emptied as much of the powerpack as she dared into her target's chest."

So, often, the art is translating description into mechanics, and/or mechanics into description without getting too locked into what things are 'called' in the rules.

One part you may have already coming out of wargames, is the ability to separate "descriptive Action" from "mechanical roll". This tends to be part of any Wargamer who likes to talk/write about what their models are actually doing in the field. (ie. "No hit at a foot away, he must have been reloading, etc.)

This is a good thing to bring into RPGs, particularly one like this. Mechanically, your character might be doing Aim, attack, getting a boost on an attack roll . Narratively, one character might be " steadying his pistol with his other hand, Lan ignored the blaster bolts around him and focused on centering his shot. Holding his breath, he pulled the trigger." Another character, however, might say "Nal didn't care anymore if she got hurt, that Stormtrooper had to die. Holding her pistol out, she emptied as much of the powerpack as she dared into her target's chest."

So, often, the art is translating description into mechanics, and/or mechanics into description without getting too locked into what things are 'called' in the rules.

Man this would make an awesome article. That's also super helpful. Thanks for the advice. I feel like they put the map in the box for guys like me to transition vs just in the adventure guide.

As kaosoe hinted, be prepared to go off the rails. The players are extremely unlikely to follow the script, and will probably do things unaccounted for in the module. This is one of the big perks of RPG gaming IMHO, but it takes some getting used to, and it's hard to learn both that and a new set of rules at the same time. So if you're just getting your feet wet with this game, it's completely reasonable to ask them to roughly stick with the story for the first session just to get your bearings.

Also note that there is a free PDF followup for this beginner box that is excellent (IMHO), and more freeform with roughly 3 times more story.

I saw that it is available, but haven't looked at it yet. I'm still in the mindset of "winning the mission" vs. an experience. Can something go so off the rails that you never really accomplish the main objective yet still win? Or is winning not even a good term?

Most people will say winning is not the term you want to use, succeeding is a better one. I don't mind the term myself, but put the following caveat on it - winning is in the character's perspective, not the players, and the character's don't know the plot.

The character's see that they destroyed an imperial base, as members of the alliance, they count this as a win. Sure, the module might have called for them to do something significantly different, (maybe capture intel instead) but they missed that and headed off in a different direction.

In my experience, though, players (particularly AoR players) rarely completely fail the primary objective, where they go off the rails is how they get from their starting point to the primary objective. (For example, in one module which listed going in the front door or the back door, we assaulted via the roof.)

The big thing to not have happen is the feeling or idea the the players will win or lose against the GM. The Rebels are struggling to win against the Empire, the Players are not struggling to win against the GM.

I saw that it is available, but haven't looked at it yet. I'm still in the mindset of "winning the mission" vs. an experience. Can something go so off the rails that you never really accomplish the main objective yet still win? Or is winning not even a good term?

It also helps to approach RPGs less like a video game. so rather "Hey let's play these 6 characters, Han, Luke, Leia, Chewbacca, C3PO, and R2D2, and do this Death Star escape level I downloaded last night" and more like a those times as a kid where you would play make-believe (cops and robbers, things like that).

The GM presents the situation you are in and the players with guidance from the GM, come up with a way to work through the situation. The story he wrote or read may say they must sneak in through the garage and reprogram the droid to get into the Imperial base, but they may want to climb in on top of the roof and enter through the Shuttle landing pad. Both are viable solutions and come with their own set of challenges.

With that being said, since you and your group are new to RPGs. You'll probably want to stick close to the rails of the story just to get a feel for the game and how it's run. A lot of people RPGs as an acting outlet. You may find you really enjoy the roleplaying and pretending to be another person.

As noted, the traditional concept of winning doesn't apply to this type of game. As an example, I started one group of players on the Edge of the Empire beginner game. In that game the players are on the run from Teemo the Hutt, and in the end they're supposed to steal a ship from Trex (an agent of Teemo's). The PDF followup for that has the players still on the run, hiding out and getting their ship fixed, then solving some local problems that weave into the bigger picture, piecing together some evidence, gathering allies and material, and finally taking out Teemo and his entire operation.

Except here's how the adventure actually went: after stealing the ship from Trex and making their getaway, one of the players rolled a Triumph while fixing the ship, so he decided that he found a stash of spice. Then they wanted to dump the spice and cash in, so the next adventure was them looking for a dealer. To try to weave it back into the main narrative, I figured the spice was actually Teemo's payment (via Trex, who wasn't dead yet) to an Imperial agent looking to sell some old battle droids. Except that in all the chaos of the players trying to sell the spice, and the Imperial wondering where Trex was, then Trex showing up and the agent realizing he was being scammed, and a nutty chase through the old subway system...none of the intended plan came to be. Instead the characters were captured by Zygerrian slavers (who promised Trex they'd give Teemo a cut), ended up taking over the slave ship, got some information from the Zygerrian captain about a lost Clone Wars era ship that had previously disappeared, and I ended up running the middle third of the Beyond the Rim module. Teemo is still out there, and he thinks the characters are dead.

Did we win? I'd say so, because it was a hoot all around the whole way. There were times where I was only a couple steps ahead of the players in terms of planning what the next scene was. Sometimes you just have to roll with what the players give you.

The big thing to not have happen is the feeling or idea the the players will win or lose against the GM. The Rebels are struggling to win against the Empire, the Players are not struggling to win against the GM.

This is key. I've played with GMs who can't handle diversion from their own script. I recall one GM that tried to lure us into an alley with cries of "help help!" We decided it was a trap, so we tried to walk on by. But it was actually how the GM was going to start the adventure, so he ruled a sandstorm whipped up and swirled us into the alley and we had no choice about it. We finished the game session to be polite, but didn't return. That kind of thing removes player agency and participation, which is the opposite of what you want. So it may not be a game where you "win", but you can certainly "lose".

One advantage to this system is the dice. As the player is rolling all of their dice, it doesn't feel as opposed as other systems (less you versus them). This helps to set a different tone for these games. If possible, try to think non-mechanical for advantages, threats, triumphs and despair. It is easy to only use them to make things better or worse for combat, but that is only one avenue to use. Think of what would happen in a movie... you wouldn't see an advantage as the character suddenly shooting better. It would be more likely that a rolling piece of debris tripped up the opponent and knocked him down (no physical damage, but a definite advantage for the player). Three threat on a successful attack? The stormtrooper falls in a heap, but behind him you see a door open and another group of stormtroopers look out with raised guns. Or the stormtrooper attacks you and misses but he gets three advantage? His shot goes wild... because they always do, but his shots ricochet and take out the last support holding the catwalk above your party.

If at all possible, get your players tell you what their advantages and triumphs are while you get to describe the threat and despair. Honestly, I think this is one of the best aspects of this system for actual Roleplaying versus Roll-playing. Soon it will feel like your adventures actually were in one of the movies.

An analogy I always liked is that an RPG is like a movie that caught your eye in a rental store (back when there was such a thing). You didn't see any trailers and no one has told you about it you read the back of the box so you have a clue as to what it is going to be about but that is it.

The best written game can be thrown off course by the PCs. That is also no a bad thing. There have been several times that while running a game my players have gone in directions I didn't think of. Rather than just saying no to a good idea (note good not dumb not silly but good) just rolling with it can leave you and the group suprised at the outcome. The rules are there so you always know how to resolve an action so once you have a good handle on them feel free to let your players shape your stories and direct some of the action. I know as GMs sometimes we want to view the written outline as a holy tome but I swear some of my best games have been when I let the players imaginations contribute just as much to the overall narrative as mine did.

That beings said being a new GM you may need things to be a little more straightforward while you learn a system. That is fine but if you feel comfortable letting a player think outside the box don't be afraid to follow that lead it may take you for an amazing ride.

I saw that it is available, but haven't looked at it yet. I'm still in the mindset of "winning the mission" vs. an experience. Can something go so off the rails that you never really accomplish the main objective yet still win? Or is winning not even a good term?

I have to say our group has had more the a few unconventional results from our missions. Ulitmately the versatility of the mechanics really support those cinamatic moments when a player can let thier characters obligations and emotions compromise the integrity of a well planned encounter.

So go ahead and don't be afraid to derail. I can say the experience can really diversify your players and lead to a more engaging session!