39 minutes ago, whafrog said:

Why create these artificial boundaries? Does anyone really care? Half the time the game I'm hosting could be "Heat", or "Blade Runner", or the "Maltese Falcon". That's the beauty of Star Wars, the world-building has such depth, you can really run any kind of genre inside it.

I have systems that can handle those genres better, and if it's going to be like that (with Blade Runner or Heat) I would rather just do that than to re-skin it with Star Wars. Star Wars is too important to me to dilute it. That's just me though.

1 hour ago, Vondy said:

Why flip out over a quip?

? Who's "flipping out"? It was just a question.

I guess some people are touchy about their genre purity. Have at it, ****.

Edit: I just noticed FFG starred out a word, which I find totally weird because it wasn't swearing or anything like that, just a commonly used idiomatic expression

I admit I struggle to understand the 'genre purity' crowd (though I greatly support the right for anyone to play as they wish at their own tables). I mean, the old EU had hundreds of different authors, each with their favourite genre, each with their super-special Jedi chosen one, each with their superweapon-of-the-week and villain-of-the-week that had to be bigger and so much more badass than everything that came before. I've barely scratched the surface compared to most, but I've read comedy, tragedy, film-noir, horror, war-stories, romance and plenty of other genres under the 'Star Wars' banner.

Now we have the new canon, so we're only talking about dozens of writers, each with their own favourite Mary Sue inserts and concepts of how the Force works or what certain elements should be like. And those dozens will grow until the current 'canon' is as cluttered as the last one, and someone else will start a new 'official canon', retconning most of what Disney did. Star Wars is like Haiti in that its never had an unsuccessful revolution.

So following canon is fine, if that's your thing, but that's a concept that's always changing anyway. This is an RPG, so every table can decide if there are Grey Jedi or midichondria-whatsits or whatever. Other sci-fi has liberally borrowed from Star Wars over the years (the original 'Mass Effect' is essentially Drew Karpyshyn's love-letter to the series) and has liberally borrowed from other sources itself. Is 'Star Wars' a children's show like 'Droids' or 'Caravan of Courage'? Is it a young adult cartoon series like 'Rebels' or 'Clone Wars'? Is it straight-up sci-fi horror like 'Death Troopers' and 'Red Harvest'? It can be all these things, or none of them.

I love hearing about other people's games and interpretations, even on threads where I just lurk, but let's not get 'purer than thou', huh? (or the FFG Forum will literally blank out every word we write and we'll just be reading stars , so **** ****!)

6 hours ago, kaosoe said:

New adventure idea. Deep below Jabba's sex dungeon, through the sewage system, sleep the Mods. They are an ancient species that existed long before the twin suns scorched Tattooine into the desert wasteland it is now. But the loud debauchery of the mighty Jabba has woken them from their slumber - and they are hungry. Armed with their banhammers, they loose themselves upon the wicked and unjust.

*PLOT TWIST!*

After the players have completed 'Revenge of the Banhammers' and stand victorious, they discover the entire thing was a set-up, and they were being filmed by 'Alliance xXx: Your Own Private Rebellion!' as a prelude to the events unfolding in Jabba's Sex Dungeon (TM). With the Mods vanquished, the debauchery (involving the elomin starlet Herylcha Tyk Rhinann in her first full feature, and veteran zabrak performer Bayla Bae, winner of 'Best Alien Scene' at the ABA21 Mind Evaporator Awards!) can progress to its climax (available for a mere 5000 credits from a reputable HoloNet channel near you)

58 minutes ago, Maelora said:

I admit I struggle to understand the 'genre purity' crowd (though I greatly support the right for anyone to play as they wish at heir own tables). I mean, the old EU had hundreds of different authors, each with their favourite genre, each with their super-special Jedi chosen one, each with their superweapon-of-the-week and villain-of-the-week that had to be bigger and so much more badass than everything that came before. I've barely scratched the surface compared to most, but I've read comedy, tragedy, film-noir, horror, war-stories, romance and plenty of other genres under the 'Star Wars' banner.

Now we have the new canon, so we're only talking about dozens of writers, each with their own favourite Mary Sue inserts and concepts of how the Force works or what certain elements should be like. And those dozens will grow until the current 'canon' is as cluttered as the last one, and someone else will start a new 'official canon;, retconning most of what Disney did. Star Wars is like Haiti in that its never had an unsuccessful revolution.

So following canon is fine, if that's your thing, but that's a concept hat's always changing anyway. This is an RPG, so every table can decide if there are Grey Jedi or midichondria-whatsits or whatever. Other sci-fi has liberally borrowed from Star Wars over the years (the original 'Mass Effect' is essentially Drew Karpyshyn's love-letter to the series) and has liberally borrowed from other sources itself. Is 'Star Wars' a children's show like 'Droids' or 'Caravan of Courage'? Is it a young adult cartoon series like 'Rebels' or 'Clone Wars'? Is it straight-up sci-fi horror like 'Death Troopers' and 'Red Harvest'? It can be all these things, or none of them.

I love hearing about other people's games and interpretations, even on threads where I just lurk, but let's not get 'purer than thou', huh? (or the FFG Forum will literally blank out every word we write and we'll just be reading stars , so **** ****!)

I wouldn't even say for me that it's about canon, cause that doesn't really describe what I like either. I guess I am a Star Wars minimalist. I like it to have just enough to feel like Star Wars and nothing more. I really didn't like all of the EU stuff though because it felt like they were doing exactly what you said they did with their own story just put in a Star Wars setting, rather than having been written from the roots up to be a good sibling to the movies. They also make official star wars toothbrushes and fruit snacks, so there's no limit to how much of this kind of thing that has gone on.

I have my tastes and that's just what they are. If I say better, then I obviously mean I think it's better.

2 hours ago, Maelora said:

I admit I struggle to understand the 'genre purity' crowd (though I greatly support the right for anyone to play as they wish at heir own tables). I mean, the old EU had hundreds of different authors, each with their favourite genre, each with their super-special Jedi chosen one, each with their superweapon-of-the-week and villain-of-the-week that had to be bigger and so much more badass than everything that came before. I've barely scratched the surface compared to most, but I've read comedy, tragedy, film-noir, horror, war-stories, romance and plenty of other genres under the 'Star Wars' banner.

Now we have the new canon, so we're only talking about dozens of writers, each with their own favourite Mary Sue inserts and concepts of how the Force works or what certain elements should be like. And those dozens will grow until the current 'canon' is as cluttered as the last one, and someone else will start a new 'official canon;, retconning most of what Disney did. Star Wars is like Haiti in that its never had an unsuccessful revolution.

So following canon is fine, if that's your thing, but that's a concept hat's always changing anyway. This is an RPG, so every table can decide if there are Grey Jedi or midichondria-whatsits or whatever. Other sci-fi has liberally borrowed from Star Wars over the years (the original 'Mass Effect' is essentially Drew Karpyshyn's love-letter to the series) and has liberally borrowed from other sources itself. Is 'Star Wars' a children's show like 'Droids' or 'Caravan of Courage'? Is it a young adult cartoon series like 'Rebels' or 'Clone Wars'? Is it straight-up sci-fi horror like 'Death Troopers' and 'Red Harvest'? It can be all these things, or none of them.

I love hearing about other people's games and interpretations, even on threads where I just lurk, but let's not get 'purer than thou', huh? (or the FFG Forum will literally blank out every word we write and we'll just be reading stars , so **** ****!)

I'm not into "genre purity." I just want the "fantasy re-skinned as space opera" feel of the films. Wars is mythic, but never quite rises to being a fully-realized morality play, and is always a ripping good yarn before it is anything else. I also enjoy a bit of escapism in my games, which is to say, I don't typically play role playing games as a vehicle for social criticism or commentary, or as a metaphor for exploring contemporary issues. In fact, Wars has more often blithely and obliviously run afoul of that kind of criticism than engaged in it. As a result, treating Wars as social science fiction rather than space opera just doesn't "feel right" to me. For me, that kind of story telling is much more in line with the Trek and way of telling tales. Indeed, I have run Trek games and gone there. It's worked just fine, but for Star Wars I prefer not to use that approach. Others may disagree and I encourage them to do what is right for them .

My own Wars game is strictly AU and the canonical events are not sacrosanct. Indeed, if all goes to plan, the events of the OT won't ever come to pass. But, as a rule, I assume the baseline for establishing the zeitgeist is the films and just the films. This is for two reasons. Firstly, it gives a distilled and minimalist baseline for how things works that my players are well familiar with. They don't have to do additional reading / research / homework to play. Seconds, the EU / Legends materials are so vast, so self-contradictory, and so comprehensive that assuming it's all in serves (in my personal experience) as a creative straight-jacket. I want my group to make its own legends materials, not be beholden to the legends of others. Also, while I really like some EU materials, I found a lot of it groan-worthy or simply too divergent from how I myself like my Wars. To that end, I take what inspires me and skip the rest.

That said, my own game, vacillates between "network" and "cable" in terms of content and has an infusion of noir aesthetic. I would say, sex and violence-wise, it's often "R-Rated." I also think that's a fair interpretation. The films imply / hint at a darker and more adult galaxy than they actually show. I also like to play with hard-boiled detective and spaghetti western tropes. I have stolen a few famous plots outright (and the Clone Wars, for instance, did the same!). I think you can tell a lot of different kinds of stories, with a deft adjustment of tone and rating, in the Star Wars universe. The main question is, does the game-master have "the knack" to tweak it without losing the Wars zeitgeist, and are the players flexible enough to make the most of it. I don't see this as a question of objective "right" and "wrong," but as a subjective "is it right or wrong for your group?"

6 hours ago, whafrog said:

? Who's "flipping out"? It was just a question.

I guess some people are touchy about their genre purity. Have at it, ****.

Edit: I just noticed FFG starred out a word, which I find totally weird because it wasn't swearing or anything like that, just a commonly used idiomatic expression

I just find it odd that, on the internet, quips expressing personal preferences require lectures from people with different preferences. Who needs that? That said, It's not a question of genre purity. It's a question of zeitgeist and story-telling style. I find Trek is tooled for anvilicious social criticism whereas Wars is more likely to run afoul of it. To that end, I prefer to avoid that in my Wars games because it often "vibes wrong" for me . I can tell a wide variety of stories with varied tones in the Wars-verse. That is absolutely true. But, what I don't want in my Wars, are ideologically motivated this-world parallels. If someone else enjoys that and can make it work, more power to them . But, personally, if I want to run a game that serves as a preachy hyper-politicized boomer woo-woo social criticism of contemporary culture, I'll run Trek. After all, that is what Trek was made for!

My personal bias is to leave the Original Trilogy alone I really don't see any point changing that given the immense size of the Star Wars Galaxy and that as long as they're busy over there they can't be involved in whatever I'm planning meaning I can establish there's more to the force than JUST Jedi & Sith and even more to the galaxy than JUST the Force!

Now I'll just settle back into the crowd and reread this discussion!

I have to say that I agree with Vondy about not wanting to have the mountain of refuse and treasure that is the EU material be a hindrance to the game itself. I had one player who was very versed in the EU and also loved to look that stuff up. He presented this material most often as an attempt to confound some ruling I had made, often being of no consequence to the action or story (# of moons Ord Mantell has, HoloNet like the internet and his Slicer able to basically hack the world from wherever, and the assumption that every character in the EU was there for him to metagame into leverage for his schemes), but as a supremely annoying reminder that there has been a lot of people making the soup over the years. Eventually I just told him: Hey, you can stop with all that. If you want to know if something exists I will tell you. But even if it exists that doesn't mean your character automatically knows about it anyway.

10 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

the mountain of refuse and treasure that is the EU

Haha, now I want that on a t-shirt! We might disagree on the ratio of 'baby' to 'bathwater' but most agree there's both.

My point was that 'canon' is ever-changing and feels silly - 'hey guys, those Genosian blasters you got from the Beginner game? They, um, don't exist any more because Disney just said so' (and in a few months they'll have retconned that anyway!)

However, I know I'm lucky to have players who contribute and say 'hey, here's this cool thing I found, could we fit it into our game somewhere?' Trying to use the EU to rules-lawyer is beyond obnoxious, and I don't think that's the materials fault here. The more I hear about some of your players, the more I'm tempted to agree with Desslok that 'they suck'. And honestly, if you can't talk them around, you'd be better off without them. I know that sounds harsh and I'm in a lucky situation to game with people a) I like and b) who fit well into my play-style, but honestly I couldn't play with someone like that at my table. I couldn't world-build or enjoy myself like that.

Maybe sitting that guy down over a post-game beer and having a long chat about your aims and goals would help. But I imagine you've already tried that, in which case I'm not sure what anyone can say

2 minutes ago, Maelora said:

Haha, now I want that on a t-shirt! We might disagree on the ratio of 'baby' to 'bathwater' but most agree there's both.

My point was that 'canon' is ever-changing and feels silly - 'hey guys, those Genosian blasters you got from the Beginner game? They, um, don't exist any more because Disney just said so' (and in a few months they'll have retconned that anyway!)

However, I know I'm lucky to have players who contribute and say 'hey, here's this cool thing I found, could we fit it into our game somewhere?' Trying to use the EU to rules-lawyer is beyond obnoxious, and I don't think that's the materials fault here. The more I hear about some of your players, the more I'm tempted to agree with Desslok that 'they suck'. And honestly, if you can't talk them around, you'd be better off without them. I know that sounds harsh and I'm in a lucky situation to game with people a) I like and b) who fit well into my play-style, but honestly I couldn't play with someone like that at my table. I couldn't world-build or enjoy myself like that.

Maybe sitting that guy down over a post-game beer and having a long chat about your aims and goals would help. But I imagine you've already tried that, in which case I'm not sure what anyone can say

Thank you Well on that account I should say that I did bring that behavior to a stop successfully, and it two times of stopping and telling him, but it seems to have stuck on the 2nd attempt. I also had to say several times that something didn't exist before he stopped trying to use it lol. You are right, however, that had he not been able to adapt then I would have had to have him not play in my game. When I choose to be a player in a game it requires that I adapt to someone else's tastes, and I do that even though sometimes it can be hard. Because of that I have little patience for people who are not willing to give me the benefit of the doubt, and to be respectful of my narrative control as is commensurate with this system. I think then that some of see canon as an unhelpful tool for the most part in playing games, because as you said they can take stuff out whenever. I saw a thread about Bothans being non-canon! Many non-specific spies died to bring us these plans. What??lol

1 hour ago, Archlyte said:

Thank you Well on that account I should say that I did bring that behavior to a stop successfully, and it two times of stopping and telling him, but it seems to have stuck on the 2nd attempt. I also had to say several times that something didn't exist before he stopped trying to use it lol. You are right, however, that had he not been able to adapt then I would have had to have him not play in my game. When I choose to be a player in a game it requires that I adapt to someone else's tastes, and I do that even though sometimes it can be hard. Because of that I have little patience for people who are not willing to give me the benefit of the doubt, and to be respectful of my narrative control as is commensurate with this system. I think then that some of see canon as an unhelpful tool for the most part in playing games, because as you said they can take stuff out whenever. I saw a thread about Bothans being non-canon! Many non-specific spies died to bring us these plans. What??lol

"We cannot confirm nor deny the existence of Bothans."

It's one of the reasons playing in canon sucks, because you'll always be playing catch-up depending on who's in charge this week.

It's something many people have against using the Forgotten Realms in D&D; it's faddy and fickle, in thrall to whatever's currently in vogue, changing its colours with every new edition. The original 'grey box' setting was excellent, until it was ruined by a series of increasingly-stupid 'Wreslemania' events like the 'Time of Troubles', 'Spellplague' and 'Great Retcon Sundering'. Gods and cities and nations are killed off on a writer's whim and then arbitrarily brought back. I wouldn't want to play in a constant state of flux, which is why settings like Keith Baker's Eberron were intended to be static, so they change at the will of the players and GM rather than the whim of the writers and their plot-of-the-week.

It must suck to be playing a Bothan, who were one of the eight PC races in both EOE and AOR. 'Sorry dude, your species no longer exists! Wanna be a Shihtzuvanen instead?'

2 minutes ago, Maelora said:

It's one of the reasons playing in canon sucks, because you'll always be playing catch-up depending on who's in charge this week.

It's something many people have against using the Forgotten Realms in D&D; it's faddy and fickle, in thrall to whatever's currently in vogue, changing it's colours with every new edition. The stupid 'Wreslemania' events like the 'Time of Troubles', 'Spellplague' and 'Great Retcon Sundering'. Gods and cities and nations are killed off on a writer's whim and then arbitrarily brought back. I wouldn't want to play in a constant state of flux, which is why settings like Keith Baker's Eberron were intended to be static, so they change at the will of the players and GM rather than the whim of the writers.

Yeah and I don't like FR anyway because it's too generic and obviously designed to fit skin tight to the rulebooks and monster manual. I like Eberron, but I am a Greyhawk guy at heart. You can see how Greyhawk emerged organically from years of play, but it is also smart and iconic D&D. Are you a writer Marcy? You sure sound like one.

5 minutes ago, Maelora said:

'Sorry dude, your species no longer exists? Wanna be a Shihtzuvanen instead?'

A what?!

Is that like a talking Shih Tzu with a light blaster?

18 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Are you a writer Marcy? You sure sound like one.

I'm a lifelong GM who's been playing D&D since she was ten. That sharpens both the opinions and the vocabulary

Got to admit I've never cared for Greyhawk; I was about to give up on D&D because it didn't match the epic adventures I read in Lord of the Rings and Wizard of Earthsea. Then along came Dragonlance (as deeply flawed as that was) and I hit my teens and started dating my players. I see why people would like Greyhawk - it's inspired by Howard and Lieber, old-school 'Swords & Sorcery'. But I couldn't take the names seriously; Gleep Wurp the Eyebiter, Fnast Dringle, Philotomy Jurament and Fonkin Hoddypeak are all indelibly etched on my brain

6 minutes ago, Vondy said:

A what?!

Is that like a talking Shih Tzu with a light blaster?

Basically

It's my term for a Shistavanen. Lucas had to use an old 'wolfman' mask in the cantina scene because he ran out of costume budget. Then someone wrote some horrible fan-fiction that became EU canon, about this wolfman who fell in love with a giant lamprey gal. That's too extreme even for the MarcyVerse.

I'm a colossal smartass. You're relatively new around here so you may not know that

Just don't use that 'Episode One' or 'A New Hope' nonsense and we'll be fine. Because I saw the first episode in 1977 and it was called 'Star Wars'

19 hours ago, Vondy said:

I just find it odd that, on the internet, quips expressing personal preferences require lectures from people with different preferences.

Hmm, first it's "flipping out", now it's "lectures". Then you proceed to lecture that X-types of storytelling should use Y-genre. Hyperbole and projection and lectures all rolled into one...sweet!

2 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Yeah and I don't like FR anyway because it's too generic and obviously designed to fit skin tight to the rulebooks and monster manual. I like Eberron, but I am a Greyhawk guy at heart. You can see how Greyhawk emerged organically from years of play, but it is also smart and iconic D&D. Are you a writer Marcy? You sure sound like one.

I pretty much hate any setting with a meta-plot that my players and I aren't driving. I want setting materials, not an ever advancing plotline I have to keep adjusting, adapting, and compromising my own game's continuity to suit. The original grey box for the Forgotten Realms was playable, and the Volo's Guides were fun, and a very few of the region books were well done, but the ever growing morass of continuously retconned products and badly written Mary-Sue infested novels? Gott in Himmel! Nein! Nein! I do like Greyhawk. It has an old-school and fun feel to it, and is infinitely adaptable for private campaigns. However, my favorite published D&D setting remains Al-Qadim.

5 minutes ago, Maelora said:

I'm a lifelong GM who's been playing D&D since she was ten. That sharpens both the opinions and the vocabulary

Got to admit I've never card for Greyhawk; I was about to give up on D&D because it didn't match the epic I read in Lord of the Rings and Wizard of Earthsea. Then along came Dragonlance (as deeply flawed as that was) and I hit my teens and started dating my players. I see why people would like Greyhawk - it's inspired by Howard and Lieber, old-school 'Swords & Sorcery'. But I couldn't take the names seriously; Gleep Wurp the Eyebiter, Fnast Dringle, Philotomy Jurament and Fonkin Hoddypeak are all indelibly etched on my brain

yeah, unfortunately Gary had some stupid naming tastes.

10 minutes ago, Vondy said:

However, my favorite published D&D setting remains Al-Qadim.

Al-Qadim was a labour of love for someone. It was lost in the 2nd edition mix unfortunately. We didn't play it much; I was pretty much enraged by the idea that 'honour' killings of uppity women could be seen as a good-aligned thing. I liked the Sha'ir class though.

My favourite setting was what became known as 'Mystara'. It's the only metaplot in my 38 years of gaming that I actually thought worked.

I liked Planescape too, and actually met Tony DiTerlizzi and he signed my books. I was a total fangirl! Planescape ended with the worst metaplot in role-playing history though, which scars my memories of it a la Mass Effect 3.

2 minutes ago, Vondy said:

I pretty much hate any setting with a meta-plot that my players and I aren't driving. I want setting materials, not an ever advancing plotline I have to keep adjusting, adapting, and compromising my own game's continuity to suit. The original grey box for the Forgotten Realms was playable, and the Volo's Guides were fun, and a very few of the region books were well done, but the ever growing morass of continuously retconned products and badly written Mary-Sue infested novels? Gott in Himmel! Nein! Nein! I do like Greyhawk. It has an old-school and fun feel to it, and is infinitely adaptable for private campaigns. However, my favorite published D&D setting remains Al-Qadim.

Yeah and I use Greyhawk like I use the SW universe lol, I ignore stuff I don't like lol. I agree about big meta-plots for the most part, but I do like to have those things if the players can actually affect it.

1 minute ago, Maelora said:

Al-Qadim was a labour of love for someone. It was lost in the 2nd edition mix unfortunately.

My favourite setting was what became known as 'Mystara'. It's the only metaplot in my 38 years of gaming that I actually thought worked.

My first D&D experiences were in Mystara because of the old modules. I love it too.

23 minutes ago, Maelora said:

Al-Qadim was a labour of love for someone. It was lost in the 2nd edition mix unfortunately.

My favourite setting was what became known as 'Mystara'. It's the only metaplot in my 38 years of gaming that I actually thought worked.

I liked Planescape too, and actually met Tony DiTerlizzi and he signed my books. I was a total fangirl! Planescape ended with the worst metaplot in role-playing history though, which scars my memories of it a la Mass Effect 3.

We are of an age, it would seem. I was given a blue-covered Basic D&D box set when for Christmas in 1977 at the whopping age of 7! I never once looked back. My only "brush with gaming glory" was meeting Dave Arneson at a con when I was 12. I played in a game he ran. He was very nice about having a kid in the mix and kindly took the time afterward to talk to me for quite some time. I distinctly remember that he explained "hit dice" in a way few people ever applied the rule.

Vis-a-vis the "honor killing" thing in al-Qadim: most cultures have some suck, most writers have some blind spots, and I always feel free to ignore or deemphasize the things I don't want at my table.

The early modules that gelled into Mystara did have a wonderful vibe to them.

I found Planescape very creative. It was a lot of fun to play, though it was a different style than my usual games.

I also enjoyed the early Ravenloft setting, though you had to do tone control to avoid it becoming too bleak and "crapsack" to enjoy.

The Van Richten's guides and Masque of the Red Death setting were quite playable.

21 minutes ago, whafrog said:

Hmm, first it's "flipping out", now it's "lectures". Then you proceed to lecture that X-types of storytelling should use Y-genre. Hyperbole and projection and lectures all rolled into one...sweet!

I have a pithy and muscular mode of expression that you clearly took exception to from the get go.

I can only shrug and let that go. I am who I am and you are who you are.

I have a three-pass rule in internet debates: if after three exchanges positions remain entrenched, move on.

I am moving on. I bid you well.