I'm sorry you feel overwhelmed and not helped here. I really am. No sarcasm. In some of my other posts I talked about some of my early problems getting used to this system.

I have found that distance is arbitrary and range band size change on circumstances. When fighting in enclosed spaces, like a large wharehouse, Starport, or ship, I make my range bands "smaller" in that short range is a shorter distance, and so is medium, and hence long range. If I have a fight in a more open area, like a football field, then people can shoot "further".

I have found that I don't have to tell my players that a baddie 20 meters away or 30 meters away. That is medium range. All I have to say well, the baddie is around 25 meters away, so that medium range. I don't get bogged down into if it's 20 or 30. There is no point in this system. Any more, now that we have been playing together for awhile, I don't even use numbers, I can just say medium range.

But does it really matter if that house across the street is 100 feet, 30.48 meters, or medium range away? It all the same the same thing. Just medium range can be a range from "here to here". I use a white board and can draw medium range on it then show the house in the middle of it. It doesn't change the fact that it is still in medium range. Just like in WEG where medium range for a gun could be 30-75 meters. It really didn't matter if it was 30 or 75, it was Medium range for that gun.

I have to say, in all honesty, I really don't use the range bands that much. Most of my combat happens in close/ medium range, and we don't do ship combat right now. We do do some vehicle stuff, but not much.

If you have any other questions or concerns feel free to PM if you want. It's a bummer to want to enjoy something and not. I have found this to be the best Star Wars RPG so far, but not everyone agrees. I have had some players who can't stand it, and others who adore it. I had one player who really wanted a lot more out of Astrogation than what this system provides, especially before the smuggler book came out. He wanted to sit down with a star chart and really plot out in depth detailed routes... And he was the only one who wanted to. So this game is not for everyone, nor is Pathfinder or Shadowrun or D&D 5.0.

I have run 3 sessions for my group and my complaints are felt throughout.

My group has had over 80 sessions and it’s been fine. Most missions have had very loose range bands. However, when exact distances were an integral part of an encounter, like when we played Huttball, we included more precise measurements. It all depends on the needs of the story. Adjusting our approach according to the overall narrative and the situation at hand hasn’t been a problem.

"Sensing an ambush, you stumble out of the front door of the cantina into the bright noonday sun. There's a disheveled man huddled in the next door down, lighting up a death stick. There's a gunman leaning against a lightpost across the boulevard, doing his best to be nonchalant despite him obviously eyeing you up. Down at the far end of the block is a repulsortruck, two more seedy looking men at the wheel. The best avenue of escape is probably the towering, rugged cliffs, looming behind the establishment."

Everyone has a good idea how wide a two lane boulevard is, everyone has a pretty good idea how long a city block is. Disheveled smoker is at short, Nonchalant Gunman is at Medium, the Van is at Long, and the cliff is really f'ing tall. The setting has been firmly established in the mind's eye, the players now have a good idea what the setting is like and there's not a number to be seen anywhere.

^ this. Honestly rgrove, no offence but if this example doesn't stick, then you and this game are just not a good match. At this point it's like arguing about preferring the taste of ice cream vs gelato, with you picking one of them and telling us you're amazed we can even eat the other.

And perhaps it's an acquired taste: as others have said, some aspects of the game took a while to get used to, and I honestly *never* use space combat for anything but chases. But it's not a problem: chases are a staple of the genre, and it helps with pacing and encounter management, so it's actually a good thing.

But if you don't want to go through the process of acquiring the taste, or you think Desslok's description above is lacking in some way, then there's no point. But we're not wrong for liking what we like, and our players aren't crazy for enjoying it.

There are any number of solid space-RPGs, some even have Star Wars conversions. West End Games (the original) is out of print, so I don't feel bad telling you that if you search for "D6 Holocron" you can find almost everything as a PDF. There's also Saga, but some of it can get costly to buy. Savage Worlds has several online conversions. Then there's Traveller (original or D20) with lots of useful add-ons, even SpaceMaster (like Rolemaster for sci-fi), both are available as PDFs from RPGNow.com. There are any number of options that are crunchier and might suit you better.

Ok guys, I just deleted a ridiculously long post that would have failed utterly to make my point.

Let me just say instead that I totally get the narrative/rules light/heavy on creativity light on mechanics approach. I really do. I actually prefer these types of games to the more crunchier ones because they tend to curb the creative juices, limit story and bog the action down. Im determined to get through this and appreciate each and every post. Even the really impatient ones!

Ill try once more to highlight my group's issue with the inconsistencies of the range band system in a prolonged example, complete with GM narrative so you can see Im not talking about playing this thing like a tactical game on a graph. Hopefully you will see my issue and perhaps find a way to talk me through it. So far many of you have tried valiantly but you seem to miss my problem, assuming things that must slip into my posts unbidden. Lets see how this one goes.

GM: " You have been scanning the horizon for a couple hours, the rubber on the electrobinoculars sticking to your face with sweat. The almost ancient combat crawler you have been assigned has a ventilation system but no cooling. There is nothing wrong with the medium blaster cannon though and its the gun that you are expecting to need."

Player:"No means of sneaking up on us right, no lines of approach I need to be concerned about?"

GM: "No, you picked your spot well, atop that small rise and overlooking the dry riverbed. In fact, you notice a puff of dust out at the end of the valley, something headed your way at high speed. Maybe two somethings."

Player:"Finally, I tell the gunner to get them on his scope and prepare to fire. They in range?"

GM:"No, not nearly. They are a good, oh 40+ kilometers out - or so says the rangefinder on your binocs. Lets say they just came into Medium Range. Your Blaster Cannon is Close Range only."

Player: "So how long before they get here? Do we have time to get that Patrol Speeder back in support before they arrive? He said he would standby in the area if we got into trouble."

GM: "Well lets see, They are moving pretty good. Umm, if I remember right its two maneuvers for them to go Medium to Short and then another to go Short to Close... so if their drivers aren't pushing it, they should be in range in just a few minutes. 3 rounds looks like.

Player:"Three rounds? You said they were 40 kilometers away, way out of my gun range!"

GM:"Yeah, that's right but they are coming in quick."

Player: "Ill say, that's over 10km a minute, that's 600 kilometers per hour, whats that like 350mph? ****!"

GM: "Well it might be a bit longer than that, that would be if they came straight on."

Player: "Well ok, **** I guess we better get ready. So what's the range of our gun again? How far away can we engage."

GM:"Close range for the Blaster Cannon"

Player: "Ok, yeah but Im trying to get a visual here. Is that on the slope in front of us or down in the riverbed? I don't want them right up our ass when we shoot, this crate is slow, they start circling us and we are dead. I wanna shoot with some breathing room."

GM: "Hmm, well its a little vague on that in the book. Its longer than Extreme Personal range which we figured the other night was probably a bit over a thousand meters, sniper rifle range or so. Id say off hand, I guess, maybe a couple kilometers, 3 or 4 at the maximum."

Player: "Ok, Ill jot that down. You'd think something as important as the operational range would be in the stats somewhere."

GM:"Well it is in the stats, Close Range."

Player: "Fine I guess but even you had to think about it to figure out just what that meant. To roll the dice sure, Close Range if fine but Im trying to plan an attack here. I kind of need to know the lay of the land, what Im working with. Especially with targets that go from the horizon to up my crack in 3 minutes. Wait a minute, does that mean that I cant shoot until they get like one round away from me?

GM:"That's about right, once they are in close range, they are gonna be on top of you the next round."

Player:"Geeze this thing must fire really slow! One shot while the target advances from its maximum range to point blank."

Ok, I made the players a smart ass. I Hope this simple example shows how we have experienced a disconnect between our narrative and the rules. Its not unsurmountable but is unnecessarily distracting. This could have been even worse had I started the targets out at extreme range, where they would have crossed 10 times the distance in just another couple rounds.

If the movement rules aren't supposed to be used this way, then Im curious how they are supposed to be used. If the distance equivalents of the range bands aren't supposed to give an indicator of what they represent, I have to wonder why they are there? If the distances they equate to are somehow variable by the nature of the encounter, how is that weapons ranges and vehicle speeds don't scale with them?

I also included a little exchange there

Hoping for some help here, not an argument.

Yes! So in combat, rather than "it's 150 meters away," why not, "It'd take you a couple rounds to get there on foot." I certainly don't look at a space and think in feet or meters. If anything, I think in more general terms, like "I could probably run that length in 20 seconds;" or, "It'd probably take me about 4 minutes to get to the bottom of the hill."

I would think you are in the extreme minority there.

You have to consider why you want the measurements. What are they for? Why do I need them? If I need to know how long it would take me to get from Chalmun's Cantina to Docking Bay 94, why would I want an answer in distance? I'm just gonna need to do math in my head to convert the distance to meters per second. Best to say, "it'll take you 5 minutes, maybe half that if you hussle." That is what I need to know.

Then you roll the dice, maybe add your Shortcut talent Boost dice because you're in a chase, and come up with some massive success...hey, you found a shortcut! Only took you two minutes.

Or say you need to be able to estimate distance so you know what you can shoot at. All you need to know, when looking, is "could I hit that target with my gun?" That's where the range bands come into play. "Your blaster pistol isn't accurate/powerful enough to shoot that far, but that rifle you got off the stormtrooper could sure handle the shot." That is what I need to know.

I can't think of any situation where I'd need to know the exact measurements for the sake of knowing the exact measurements. Unless I'm doing interior decorating or something. And even then...

If the rules say that meters aren't important, then I would urge you to run it as written. Don't hand out distances in meters. You don't need to be all "It's just short range, get over it!" with your players, but you can say "It's a real easy shot from here, or you can just sidle on over that way in less than one round." That's all they need to know.

We need to know precisely because this is a narrative based game. We need to visualize the scene and despite what some are saying here we visualize according to our perceptions of distance. The house across the street is about 100 feet away, that car down the road is maybe 50 yards away, that cliff looks maybe 70 feet high. Etc. This is how things are described and game rules should convert.

You DO NOT NEED TO KNOW EXACT MEASUREMENTS for the Narrative. As everyone keeps telling you you do not ever know exact measurements in real life unless you have some device for measuring. All you ever have is approximations. Your perceptions of distance are NEVER accurate. Even snipers who are REALLY good at estimating distance are using approximations. LET GO of the numbers. The numbers do not matter. What actually matters is what range band are they in and describing the scene accurately and accurately means how does the character perceive it. I have lived nearly my entire life with out needing accurate measurements of distance for anything other than building things.

Ok guys, I just deleted a ridiculously long post that would have failed utterly to make my point.

Let me just say instead that I totally get the narrative/rules light/heavy on creativity light on mechanics approach. I really do. I actually prefer these types of games to the more crunchier ones because they tend to curb the creative juices, limit story and bog the action down. Im determined to get through this and appreciate each and every post. Even the really impatient ones!

Ill try once more to highlight my group's issue with the inconsistencies of the range band system in a prolonged example, complete with GM narrative so you can see Im not talking about playing this thing like a tactical game on a graph. Hopefully you will see my issue and perhaps find a way to talk me through it. So far many of you have tried valiantly but you seem to miss my problem, assuming things that must slip into my posts unbidden. Lets see how this one goes.

GM: " You have been scanning the horizon for a couple hours, the rubber on the electrobinoculars sticking to your face with sweat. The almost ancient combat crawler you have been assigned has a ventilation system but no cooling. There is nothing wrong with the medium blaster cannon though and its the gun that you are expecting to need."

Player:"No means of sneaking up on us right, no lines of approach I need to be concerned about?"

GM: "No, you picked your spot well, atop that small rise and overlooking the dry riverbed. In fact, you notice a puff of dust out at the end of the valley, something headed your way at high speed. Maybe two somethings."

Player:"Finally, I tell the gunner to get them on his scope and prepare to fire. They in range?"

GM:"No, not nearly. They are a good, oh 40+ kilometers out - or so says the rangefinder on your binocs. Lets say they just came into Medium Range. Your Blaster Cannon is Close Range only."

Player: "So how long before they get here? Do we have time to get that Patrol Speeder back in support before they arrive? He said he would standby in the area if we got into trouble."

GM: "Well lets see, They are moving pretty good. Umm, if I remember right its two maneuvers for them to go Medium to Short and then another to go Short to Close... so if their drivers aren't pushing it, they should be in range in just a few minutes. 3 rounds looks like.

Player:"Three rounds? You said they were 40 kilometers away, way out of my gun range!"

GM:"Yeah, that's right but they are coming in quick."

Player: "Ill say, that's over 10km a minute, that's 600 kilometers per hour, whats that like 350mph? ****!"

GM: "Well it might be a bit longer than that, that would be if they came straight on."

Player: "Well ok, **** I guess we better get ready. So what's the range of our gun again? How far away can we engage."

GM:"Close range for the Blaster Cannon"

Player: "Ok, yeah but Im trying to get a visual here. Is that on the slope in front of us or down in the riverbed? I don't want them right up our ass when we shoot, this crate is slow, they start circling us and we are dead. I wanna shoot with some breathing room."

GM: "Hmm, well its a little vague on that in the book. Its longer than Extreme Personal range which we figured the other night was probably a bit over a thousand meters, sniper rifle range or so. Id say off hand, I guess, maybe a couple kilometers, 3 or 4 at the maximum."

Player: "Ok, Ill jot that down. You'd think something as important as the operational range would be in the stats somewhere."

GM:"Well it is in the stats, Close Range."

Player: "Fine I guess but even you had to think about it to figure out just what that meant. To roll the dice sure, Close Range if fine but Im trying to plan an attack here. I kind of need to know the lay of the land, what Im working with. Especially with targets that go from the horizon to up my crack in 3 minutes. Wait a minute, does that mean that I cant shoot until they get like one round away from me?

GM:"That's about right, once they are in close range, they are gonna be on top of you the next round."

Player:"Geeze this thing must fire really slow! One shot while the target advances from its maximum range to point blank."

Ok, I made the players a smart ass. I Hope this simple example shows how we have experienced a disconnect between our narrative and the rules. Its not unsurmountable but is unnecessarily distracting. This could have been even worse had I started the targets out at extreme range, where they would have crossed 10 times the distance in just another couple rounds.

If the movement rules aren't supposed to be used this way, then Im curious how they are supposed to be used. If the distance equivalents of the range bands aren't supposed to give an indicator of what they represent, I have to wonder why they are there? If the distances they equate to are somehow variable by the nature of the encounter, how is that weapons ranges and vehicle speeds don't scale with them?

I also included a little exchange there

Hoping for some help here, not an argument.

I see several problems in this description...

You and your players are getting WAY to bogged down in numbers that you did not need and if you did not use would lead to far fewer problems. This is the reason they specifically do not use numbers. Because people get all wrapped around that axle for no gain in the amount of fun. In fact you just created a detriment to the amount of fun you are having. Also I am surprised your players do not know repulsor vehicles are really really fast.

The other thing you are missing is range bands are logarithmic in nature. From short to medium is 1 maneuver. From medium to long is 2 maneuvers. From long to extreme is 2 maneuvers. That means 5 maneuvers to cover that distance. At vehicle scale it is the same thing with the caveat that vehicles have a speed trait and depending on their speed can cover more ground in one maneuver. page 238 for the speed chart.

Rgove, a couple things you could do different:

1. Don't start combat so far out of every combatant's weapon range. Or if you do, make sure they're piloting vehicles that can perform the Gain the Advantage action. Otherwise, you're in for a couple dry rounds.

2. Don't let your players get into the mindset that "one roll equals one squeeze of the trigger/one swing of the lightsaber." An action represents much more than that.

Ok I'm done. This is pointless. I appreciate your time guys, really I do.

A round is about a minute. a players turn is a time slice of that. Distance numbers do not serve any purpose but to cause needless aggravation to those who cling to them. An action is more than a single blaster bolt, lightsaber swing, button push.


Sigh...

Ok guys, I just deleted a ridiculously long post that would have failed utterly to make my point.

<snip>

GM:"No, not nearly. They are a good, oh 40+ kilometers out - or so says the rangefinder on your binocs. Lets say they just came into Medium Range. Your Blaster Cannon is Close Range only."

Why did you say 40+ km? Why did you even reference it? This problem is entirely of your own manufacture, because now you have to justify "3 rounds of travel" to engage. Just say they're at medium range. If the player asks for a real distance, you don't have to give one, if they insist you slap them with a wet noodle and say "this a game, deal with it". If you feel you have to give one (which you don't, but for the sake of one last attempt, I'll posit), then you pick a distance that makes sense for that encounter.

Not that it even matters because they can't engage until Close range in your example, so the player worried about "breathing room" isn't going to get any...because there is no such granularity at Close range.

Hoping for some help here, not an argument.

I'm starting to not buy it. You keep doing exactly what people have explained you shouldn't do and using the same kind of example over and over again. Wash, rinse, repeat. So you're either not bothering to read everyone's help, or you're just being obtuse.

Let me just say instead that I totally get the narrative/rules light/heavy on creativity light on mechanics approach. I really do.

Are you sure? I'm starting to not buy that either.

Ok guys, I just deleted a ridiculously long post that would have failed utterly to make my point.

<snip>

GM:"No, not nearly. They are a good, oh 40+ kilometers out - or so says the rangefinder on your binocs. Lets say they just came into Medium Range. Your Blaster Cannon is Close Range only."

Why did you say 40+ km? Why did you even reference it? This problem is entirely of your own manufacture, because now you have to justify "3 rounds of travel" to engage. Just say they're at medium range. If the player asks for a real distance, you don't have to give one, if they insist you slap them with a wet noodle and say "this a game, deal with it". If you feel you have to give one (which you don't, but for the sake of one last attempt, I'll posit), then you pick a distance that makes sense for that encounter.

Not that it even matters because they can't engage until Close range in your example, so the player worried about "breathing room" isn't going to get any...because there is no such granularity at Close range.

Hoping for some help here, not an argument.

I'm starting to not buy it. You keep doing exactly what people have explained you shouldn't do and using the same kind of example over and over again. Wash, rinse, repeat. So you're either not bothering to read everyone's help, or you're just being obtuse.

Let me just say instead that I totally get the narrative/rules light/heavy on creativity light on mechanics approach. I really do.

Are you sure? I'm starting to not buy that either.

When I write an example its an EXAMPLE of how we play. People think in real terms, not game terms. Especially in a narrative based game I would think that would be obvious. The less we talk about turns and wound thresholds and range bands the better. We should be discussing minutes, bleeding and distances. From the sound of it you guys term your whole game in rule-based abstraction. That wouldn't pass with my group, or me, for a second. We might forgive the occasional mention of such things when its necessary to clarify something in the rule mechanics but that's now how we communicate.

"You take a solid blaster shot to your right arm, you hold back a scream as the flesh and cloth there vaporizes. Take 8 wounds."

Very similar to "The Star Destroyer looks to be about 150 kilometers away, a bit higher up in orbit. Lets call it Medium range." don't you think?

Your comment about breathing room is troubling. If real world tactics have no place in the game, screw it then. My players and I take our gaming pretty seriously. If Im limited to "well its my turn, I shoot at him" type of exchanges, I wouldn't game at all.

Im amazed that a game heralded as a narrative wonder is played by a bunch of players that are so hindered in their imaginations.

I still haven't heard how someone would have handled that situation in their game. Granted there wasn't any firing going on but two opposing groups were aware of one another and maneuvering to fight, its combat and they were at least at medium range - yet one could close on the other in a couple minutes, despite being at a range AS DESCRIBED IN THE FRIGGING BOOK, as 50 kilometers.

Somehow no matter what I say this point just doesn't get across. You guys are either doing something weird with the rules or ignoring them entirely.

Oh, and you cant just pick a distance that makes sense for a particular encounter when the weapons ranges and vehicle movements rely on them to be consistent. Otherwise in one setting your blaster cannon shoots 100 meters while in another it reaches out to 1 kilometer. Your Sand Crawler lumbers along in one combat while it zooms hundreds of meters in another. What player group would tolerate that sort of nonsense.

You can whizzle this away but never stating real world perms and instead using only game terms but seriously, nobody does that, do they?

I guess I just don't run a combat heavy game where my guys are fortified in with a HUGE open area around them. The trouble seems from the encounter design. Not to be mean or anything.

Why even have the encounter set up that way? You have set your self up for trouble from the get go. I can't image trying to look at anything 25 miles away!!! Even with binoculars. Man. And 30 miles or 40 KM is not Medium Range for personal scale. So for a vehicle to go that distance would take more than two rounds.

Again, why even design your game this way? It seems from the description you are playing AoR?

My advice, bring the game down to a personal level, forget the vehicles and ships for a bit. I know Star Wars is about all that too, but start your games smaller, get to know the basics first, then start working your way up.

I don't know if your have a lot of experience as a GM or a new one, both have their advantages and disadvantages, but either way, new or old GMs, should always start a new system with the basics. I know the beginners box set tried to give a little bit of everything, as they were trying to showcase the system, but for your own adventures, keep it personal.

The old GM can bring with them a lot of baggage and "well it 'should work this way'" or "in the other game it worked this way" which can be worse than ignorance. It took a bit for me to unlearn and forget some of the "bad habits" of other systems. Like rolling for everything...

But why does it really matter to your players exactly how far the baddies are? It shouldn't. Just tell them you have X amount of time until they are in range. That be game time or table time. Yes, REAL TIME!!!! I sometimes have to put limits on players as they can try to plan the Battle of Hoth for every encounter and it can drag. So, I give them 5 minutes to talk it out!

Again, I'm sorry you feel this pointless. If you don't want any more suggestions, just tell us to stop or ask the moderators to lock the thread.

We had similar difficulties early in our play. Not that the abstraction of distance snagged us, it was the estimated distances provided in the core rules didn't synch logically, much like what you're describing with your group. I spent quite a bit of time thinking about it, actually, and fiddled with various "remedy" house rules.

From the get go I really tried to avoid stating actual distances and speed, saying things like "It's just a short distance to the other side of the room" and "The speeder is clipping along at a steady rate", but it wasn't the abstract that snagged my players, it was that visualization and spacial awareness don't always come easy to all players.

One day while at work I stopped and stared at a paper funnel, and it clicked in a different way. Obviously, the larger end of the funnel is more voluminous than the smaller end, and I started thinking of distance in terms of volume rather than linear. So moving from "Zero Point" to short meant covering less volume of space than moving to medium, and so on.

We use a hex grid battle mat. I've drawn 4" hexes over the permanent 1" hexes. Almost all players like hexes. They put their mini or token in a hex and they're happy as pigs in mud. I then consider the encounter environment and assign a range band ratio such as one 4" hex equals one range band, or 3:1 if I want the encounter to be in a tighter environment. We also use a black battle mat marked with white 1" hexes for vehicle combat where the ratio is always 5:1. I rarely state actual distances; on the personal-scale mat a 1" hex might be 2m or 5m or 20m, regardless of ratio...it's whatever volume I need or want based on the encounter narrative... but it only becomes an issue when vehicle-scale and personal-scale coexist in an encounter, at which point I just assume vehicles quickly outpace people on foot and up the difficulty of ranged attacks on them (range, fast moving target, rooster tail of obscuring dust, etc). At vehicle-scale, a single 1" hex within short range might represent 1m to 1km, and 1km to 100km at medium range, again with more emphasis on band than actual distance. The point being my players now understand the volume of space between them and point B or target X is larger than where they are before they move or shoot.

I agree it can be difficult to reconcile long range as 150m, or whatever the core estatimates, especially when you are using ranged weapons like sniper and hunting rifles. It's at that point I and my players just disconnect out realism meters, otherwise headsplode.

My "house rules" for range bands aren't much more complex than the core, just some minor concepts like Fumble Zones to facilitate player involvement in dressing scenes and interacting with their environments.

If I had better 'net access I'd PM you. As I'm sure you've discovered, sharing anything on these forums can be like walking a mine field, so I'm afraid I can't be any more helpful.

One of the most honest and helpful posts I've read. Thanks so much. There is an oddity in the range rules but there are ways to deal with them. Amazing!

I guess I just don't run a combat heavy game where my guys are fortified in with a HUGE open area around them. The trouble seems from the encounter design. Not to be mean or anything.

Why even have the encounter set up that way? You have set your self up for trouble from the get go. I can't image trying to look at anything 25 miles away!!! Even with binoculars. Man. And 30 miles or 40 KM is not Medium Range for personal scale. So for a vehicle to go that distance would take more than two rounds.

Again, why even design your game this way? It seems from the description you are playing AoR?

My advice, bring the game down to a personal level, forget the vehicles and ships for a bit. I know Star Wars is about all that too, but start your games smaller, get to know the basics first, then start working your way up.

I don't know if your have a lot of experience as a GM or a new one, both have their advantages and disadvantages, but either way, new or old GMs, should always start a new system with the basics. I know the beginners box set tried to give a little bit of everything, as they were trying to showcase the system, but for your own adventures, keep it personal.

The old GM can bring with them a lot of baggage and "well it 'should work this way'" or "in the other game it worked this way" which can be worse than ignorance. It took a bit for me to unlearn and forget some of the "bad habits" of other systems. Like rolling for everything...

But why does it really matter to your players exactly how far the baddies are? It shouldn't. Just tell them you have X amount of time until they are in range. That be game time or table time. Yes, REAL TIME!!!! I sometimes have to put limits on players as they can try to plan the Battle of Hoth for every encounter and it can drag. So, I give them 5 minutes to talk it out!

Again, I'm sorry you feel this pointless. If you don't want any more suggestions, just tell us to stop or ask the moderators to lock the thread.

I guess I just don't run a combat heavy game where my guys are fortified in with a HUGE open area around them. The trouble seems from the encounter design. Not to be mean or anything.

Why even have the encounter set up that way? You have set your self up for trouble from the get go. I can't image trying to look at anything 25 miles away!!! Even with binoculars. Man. And 30 miles or 40 KM is not Medium Range for personal scale. So for a vehicle to go that distance would take more than two rounds.

Again, why even design your game this way? It seems from the description you are playing AoR?

My advice, bring the game down to a personal level, forget the vehicles and ships for a bit. I know Star Wars is about all that too, but start your games smaller, get to know the basics first, then start working your way up.

I don't know if your have a lot of experience as a GM or a new one, both have their advantages and disadvantages, but either way, new or old GMs, should always start a new system with the basics. I know the beginners box set tried to give a little bit of everything, as they were trying to showcase the system, but for your own adventures, keep it personal.

The old GM can bring with them a lot of baggage and "well it 'should work this way'" or "in the other game it worked this way" which can be worse than ignorance. It took a bit for me to unlearn and forget some of the "bad habits" of other systems. Like rolling for everything...

But why does it really matter to your players exactly how far the baddies are? It shouldn't. Just tell them you have X amount of time until they are in range. That be game time or table time. Yes, REAL TIME!!!! I sometimes have to put limits on players as they can try to plan the Battle of Hoth for every encounter and it can drag. So, I give them 5 minutes to talk it out!

Again, I'm sorry you feel this pointless. If you don't want any more suggestions, just tell us to stop or ask the moderators to lock the thread.

I don't set up most of my encounters, the players choices and cicrcu mm stances typically indicate how things appear. After over 30 years of GMING I like it that way. As far as AoR, it doesn't matter, it's the same system. Why do the players need to know distances? Because we aren't playing a boardgame, it's an RPG. A narrative based one at that. They need info to properly visualize the scene. That visualization has to link with the rules though, and as I have been trying in effectively to say, sonetimes,they dont.

When I write an example its an EXAMPLE of how we play. People think in real terms, not game terms. Especially in a narrative based game I would think that would be obvious.

Do you not understand the definition of the word “narrative”?

Or are you incapable of comprehending that concept?

The more of your posts I read, the more I start to wonder if you’re actually just trolling us, and you don’t actually care about the subject in question — it’s just a subject you’ve latched onto that allows you to continue to torture us.

You can whizzle this away but never stating real world perms and instead using only game terms but seriously, nobody does that, do they?

Actually, yes — I do. I think a lot of people are bad at judging distance, many of whom are people who seem to think that they’re GOOD at judging distance. In fact, I’ve generally found an inverse relationship between people who THINK they’re good at judging distance, and those who actually ARE good at judging distance.

Those who THINK they’re good at judging distance tend to know the numbers out their wazoo because they memorized every single one of them, but they know little else.

Those who actually ARE good at judging distance don’t seem to care too much about what the actual numbers are, but what the final results are. Am I close enough that I can shoot at that target and have a reasonable expectation of hitting it? Can I slow down my vehicle in time to avoid hitting that kid that just ran out into the road?

Since just about everything in the movies, the TV series, and everything else in Star Wars runs at PLOT SPEED, over PLOT DISTANCE, with PLOT ARMOR, and suffering PLOT DAMAGE, why on $DEITY’s Blue Terraform Planetoid do you find it necessary to try to throw in a spanner into the works and screw everything up by insisting on hard distance measurements?!?

Again, I'm sorry you feel this pointless. If you don't want any more suggestions, just tell us to stop or ask the moderators to lock the thread.

I’m beginning to think that we should label the OP as an “Obvious Troll”, and start reporting his posts. If he doesn’t want to get this thread locked, then I’m wondering if maybe we need to do that for him.

Your comment about breathing room is troubling. If real world tactics have no place in the game, screw it then. My players and I take our gaming pretty seriously. If Im limited to "well its my turn, I shoot at him" type of exchanges, I wouldn't game at all.

Then your example was misleading, because you don't even understand the ranges. You used vehicle/starship ranges in your example, and weapons generally only have a range of Close at that scale, at least for the kind of ships and vehicles characters usually are using. There are different kinds of tactics at that scale, which you'd know if you had read the book in even a minor way. The tactics are not the same as in personal scale.

Your examples are wrong (and extreme), you continually misrepresent and mock what is stated, and when someone tries to clarify you re-misrepresent or simply go back to your misconceptions from the first post.

I can't help but think you're trolling at this point.

Again, I'm sorry you feel this pointless. If you don't want any more suggestions, just tell us to stop or ask the moderators to lock the thread.

I’m beginning to think that we should label the OP as an “Obvious Troll”, and start reporting his posts. If he doesn’t want to get this thread locked, then I’m wondering if maybe we need to do that for him.

So now you're the self-appointed judge, jury, and executioner for what is and what isn't acceptable forum content? Three comments in a row brow beating the OP?

Hello, Kettle? This is Pot. You're black.

It seems pretty obvious. Even the posts he's been "thankful" for haven't registered in any way because he keeps posting stuff contrary to the stuff he's supposedly appreciated. And great example posts like Desslok's (#100) are completely ignored.

What can you do in a round, and how long is it? I`ll use two games as examples:

- Dnd 4e combat: one action, one move, one minor and the round/turn lasts for 6 seconds. You can move the number of tiles your character`s movement allows, one tile is 5 feet- Very narrow, crunchy, tactical, tilebased.

- Dnd 4e skill challenge: one skill check, anything from some seconds to days and weeks. You move as much or as little as makes sense in the explanation of your skill check - Very abstract, narrative and open, depending on the situation.

- Marvel Heroic Roleplay: Anything that can been done in a comicbook panel, so as long as it is a cool description, you can take out all the minions in the room ine one action, like wolverine would be able to do.
Taking out your claws isn`t an action, jumping from wall to wall isn`t a series of actions, the descrption makes them all one, big narrative scene that is one action. That makes sense in the genre and the story.
Just like fireing a series of blaster shots at a group og minions in Edge of the Empire can be one single combat skill check.

Some games are crunchy and hard wired, some are more fluffy and narrative, some are in between, some are a mix and have elements of both.
None of them are wrong! At least they are not the wrong kind of fun. If you are having fun, you are doing it right. However, there are different tastes, preferences and philosophies of gaming.

Big, crunchy, rules heavy systems may feel clumsy and clunky and unmanagable to some, while others find fluffy systems too abstract and hard to grasp. Some like one type, many like noth and in between.

After 15 (great)years of just playing dnd I find myself pulled towards more narrative systems these days. Crunchy systems that feel boardgamey can be great and lots of fun,
but what I find interesting now are games that have storyenhancing tools to help you play out and tell a fun and exighting story. Some details just does not matter in these kinds of games.

What is close or long range depends on the situation in a system like that. "Can I hit them ?" - "Yes you can" or "no, they are too far away"; all you really need to know.
Many narrative systems don`t even bother with "range bands", because it is all about scene description and creative storytelling.

Rules and game mechanics are never laws of physics, they are gameplay and/or storytelling tools and sometimes genre/setting emulators.

Try out different games and systems, like I finally did after 15 years of sticking to the same rpg franchise. It is worth it!

Your comment about breathing room is troubling. If real world tactics have no place in the game, screw it then. My players and I take our gaming pretty seriously. If Im limited to "well its my turn, I shoot at him" type of exchanges, I wouldn't game at all.

Then your example was misleading, because you don't even understand the ranges. You used vehicle/starship ranges in your example, and weapons generally only have a range of Close at that scale, at least for the kind of ships and vehicles characters usually are using. There are different kinds of tactics at that scale, which you'd know if you had read the book in even a minor way. The tactics are not the same as in personal scale.

Your examples are wrong (and extreme), you continually misrepresent and mock what is stated, and when someone tries to clarify you re-misrepresent or simply go back to your misconceptions from the first pos8t.

I can't help but think you're trolling at this point.

Close it then moderators, by all means. No argument from me. If anyone would like a SERIOUS discussion on the subject, feel free to message me.

It's been said before but I think it bears repeating.

• Page 209 in the EotE CRB: Under Planetary Scale Ranges the first paragraph. "The distances and range bands presented here are based on the personal scale for characters. Starships and vehicles may use these range bands , or much larger range bands, based on the needs of the story."
• Page 239 in the EotE CRB: Read the Planetary Scale in Space and on the Ground sidebar.
• What we take from all this is that distance is relative to the needs of the scene. It can change from personal to planetary and are nebulous so that they can be adapted as needed.
• There is nothing wrong with using actual distances if you so choose to.
• There is also nothing wrong with saying that a vehicle will take longer to traverse a distance, say from medium to short range, due to terrain or traveling slower or whatever reasons as well. As GM it is your narration that informs the players. And it is up to you as GM to give your players the information that makes sense to them. So if they want more exact measurements then give them.
• There is also nothing wrong with changing from planetary to personal scale when it serves the narrative.
• Time is also nebulous in the game. Much like the original D&D, rounds can be about a minute taking into account a variety of actions, but only a few have any actual possibility of impact. That minute, though is just a suggestion. Rounds can take longer, so that enemy out at 40 km (medium range) could take longer to reach short range even though it amounts to two rounds.
• Maybe if your group demands more exact measurements or of a more tactical nature you should consider a game which leans more towards that like Star Wars Saga or the earlier CR/RCR version to suit your needs.