And would anyone help crowdfund one if it was?

Ironically, it was the introduction of the mobile firing arc that caused me to seriously consider what would be required to "soft-boot" the game knowing what we know now. Far too many pilots, upgrades, and even entire ships simply can’t compete in X-wing currently. The mobile arc also makes so much more sense and is simply more fun than full 360 turrets. So can we go somewhere above simple house-rules and create our own 2.0 or maybe 1.5?

What it would require:

1. Refined costing for the many cards/pilots that never see competitive play. This would obviously be a contentious proposition but it should be feasible.

2. An online and/or app-based squad builder with updated point values. (I would suggest introducing half point values as well.)

3. Extensive beta testing to make sure the adjusted values do not unintentionally break the game. This could easily be a fully open beta with the current suggested point values available at all times during the testing phase.

4. Infrequent updates to the card point values once the beta test is over.

What it could add:

1. Mobile firing arc rules now apply to all Primary Weapon Turret large base ships. This would require a player to purchase a Shadowcaster for each large base turret in their squad or just pencil in the quadrant lines and use any old thing to show the direction of the mobile arc.. Probably remove the “Lancer Class Only” restriction on Gyro Targeting. Would seriously destabilize point values for all turrets but would return the game to a state where maneuver and prediction are important for all ships.

Edit- formatting

It would be like pathfinderRPG, it can be used with dnd 3.x, but it can't be called dnd and would have to be careful about what it uses.

It would be like pathfinderRPG, it can be used with dnd 3.x, but it can't be called dnd and would have to be careful about what it uses.

You would have another problem in that I believe many of the ship names are specific trademarks. You would have to call the X-Wing something like "Quad-Wing Rebel Star Fighter" or something along those lines. Millennium Falcon could be like Century Hawk or Rebel 1300 Freighter.

To sell? Almost certainly NOT! Just to use for yourself or within a small group (houserules) you'll probably be fine with it.

Comparing it to the relationship Pathfinder and DnD 3.5 have is very misleading. You need to remember that 3.5 had an open SRD which other companies could use within their rules. As far as I know FFG doesn't have anything like that for X-Wing so you'd be stepping on a lot of toes if you were trying to sell it and especially if you were branding it X-Wing 2.0.

Maybe if you want the Disney lawyers all over you, sure go for it!

To sell? Almost certainly NOT! Just to use for yourself or within a small group (houserules) you'll probably be fine with it.

Comparing it to the relationship Pathfinder and DnD 3.5 have is very misleading. You need to remember that 3.5 had an open SRD which other companies could use within their rules. As far as I know FFG doesn't have anything like that for X-Wing so you'd be stepping on a lot of toes if you were trying to sell it and especially if you were branding it X-Wing 2.0.

Game rule cconcept can't have a copyright, once a game has been made someone can turn around and make another game with similar rules and such, they just need to be careful about any trademark names

Isn't the FlightPath system owned by someone other than FFG? Didn't they license it from the Wings of Glory creators?

I don't think you could make anything official.

There are a lot of trademarks on the names of pilots and ships.

The mechanics are probably also protected.

The DnD <> Pathfinder thing doesnt apply here as those game rules were open source.

Even if you would change all the names, you would still face lawsuits I think. Especially if you sell or kickstart it.

On those mobile firing arcs (MFA)...

Those were created for a reason. As a counter to the arc-dodging aces. If you play with MFA, you'll once again give the likes of Soontir Fel free range to take easy shots with modifiers on you. If you somehow get lucky and move after them, you'll waste an action on moving your arc and will only fire unmodified shots back at him.

PWT ships usually have limitations built-in: Low agility, less mobility, higher point cost.

I agree that a MFA adds a lot more strategy and tactics to the game, but I would hate to see it replace the PWT, as they have their own advantages and disadvantages.

More options is always better.

Then again, if your version has an improved HWK-290 in it, i'll throw money at it no matter what

NO!

Game rule cconcept can't have a copyright

Really? Because the Flight Path system in in fact trademarked. Also if anyone could use it without permission they why did WizKids license it?

Plus that, there's no way anyone could market a X-Wing 2.0 or any other game based on Star Wars other than FFG and/or Disney.

It would be like pathfinderRPG, it can be used with dnd 3.x, but it can't be called dnd and would have to be careful about what it uses.

pathfinder only works because dnd basically gave away the game for free with its dumb open license thing iirc

youre free to write house rules op, but asking for money for them is really obviously going to get you in trouble

Isn't the FlightPath system owned by someone other than FFG?

No they own it.

Didn't they license it from the Wings of Glory creators?

No, but Wizkids did licence it from FFG for Star Trek Attack Wing and the D&D game.

Game rule cconcept can't have a copyright

Really? Because the Flight Path system in in fact trademarked. Also if anyone could use it without permission they why did WizKids license it?

Plus that, there's no way anyone could market a X-Wing 2.0 or any other game based on Star Wars other than FFG and/or Disney.

Trade mark is different than copywrite, trademark means you can't call it flight path system or use the mana symbol or tap symbol from magic the gathering, you can use have game mechanics that use the same rules they just need to be expressed differently

To sell? Almost certainly NOT! Just to use for yourself or within a small group (houserules) you'll probably be fine with it.

Comparing it to the relationship Pathfinder and DnD 3.5 have is very misleading. You need to remember that 3.5 had an open SRD which other companies could use within their rules. As far as I know FFG doesn't have anything like that for X-Wing so you'd be stepping on a lot of toes if you were trying to sell it and especially if you were branding it X-Wing 2.0.

Game rule cconcept can't have a copyright, once a game has been made someone can turn around and make another game with similar rules and such, they just need to be careful about any trademark names

It is my understanding that ways of doing things cannot have a copyright - which would apply to game rules. I can't copyright my filing system I use at work for example. Therefore, someone could make a Flightpath(ish) game without having a license for Flightpath. However, if the pieces for it start to become too similar (same range values with the same rulers, dials looking exactly the same, etc) you're probably getting into lawsuit territory. Plus, you obviously can't use the name Flightpath. It's important to note that I am not an attorney in any kind of way (I'm a psychologist). But I have worked with numerous testing publishers/creators that run into similar issues with specific subtests.

I'm not suggesting creating a retail product but simply using patreon, kickstarter or the like to raise money to support the effort of compiling and playtesting "corrected" point values and distributing the results. Wouldn't really be that much different than the current squad-building apps. Would just provide meager compensation for the poor souls that would be responsible for hashing a balanced game.

Between Disney and Asmodee it'd be interesting to see how much money your kickstarter could get just for lawyers...

Game rule cconcept can't have a copyright

Really? Because the Flight Path system in in fact trademarked. Also if anyone could use it without permission they why did WizKids license it?

Plus that, there's no way anyone could market a X-Wing 2.0 or any other game based on Star Wars other than FFG and/or Disney.

Really. Trademark =\= Copyright. Also bear in mind that while the game system cannot be copyrighted, the expression of the system can be (and is, actually, automatically upon publication). That being said, trying to make your own X-Wing 2.0 and going to the extent of crowdfunding it is almost certain to get you in a lot of hot water. Also, it is always in your best interest to contact an attorney with questions of this nature, not internet forums.

I'm not suggesting creating a retail product but simply using patreon, kickstarter or the like to raise money to support the effort of compiling and playtesting "corrected" point values and distributing the results. Wouldn't really be that much different than the current squad-building apps. Would just provide meager compensation for the poor souls that would be responsible for hashing a balanced game.

There is still money involved so it's not a good idea. Still, it is highly unlikely that you would be actually sued for it. A cease and desist letter is highly likely though.

If you are going to create a new version of the game, please separate pilots and ships and let our fantasy creates unlimited lists!

I'm not suggesting creating a retail product but simply using patreon, kickstarter or the like to raise money to support the effort of compiling and playtesting "corrected" point values and distributing the results. Wouldn't really be that much different than the current squad-building apps. Would just provide meager compensation for the poor souls that would be responsible for hashing a balanced game.

If you just want to "correct" point cost you are better off not asking for money at all and just making a printable sheet of your houserules to share.

I don't know that you would find a lot of financial support in the community for what amounts to a homemade set of rules and what should be a labor of love. A lot of Gamers make their own house rules, and a lot of them put a whole lot of testing into it. They usually consider this to be enjoyable, or are driven to do it for their own creative purposes. I don't believe that it is common at all to look for compensation for a project like that.

Besides, what makes you think that your group would be better at determining Point values than the company that actually is paid to create this game? You would find just as much contention over your version as we see over the actual one.

Nothing wrong with making house rules: several people have posted such, including MajorJuggler.

If the question is if people will pay you to make house rules the answer is no.

All the legal **** aside, I always am amazed at people who think they can do better, 99% sure you cant.

No, it most certainly would not be legal. In any sense of the word.

I'm not suggesting creating a retail product but simply using patreon, kickstarter or the like to raise money to support the effort of compiling and playtesting "corrected" point values and distributing the results. Wouldn't really be that much different than the current squad-building apps. Would just provide meager compensation for the poor souls that would be responsible for hashing a balanced game.

How much money do you think you'd need to "raise", exactly? Since you'd essentially just be plagiarizing FFG's existing ruleset?

There's plenty of players out there who've honebrewed variants of the cards and rules without spending a penny.

No, everything about this topic sounds wrong to me.