On ‎05‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 5:10 PM, Archlyte said:

I recently met a new player who actually shares my views on the setting. I noticed in talking with this person that similar to me he was born early enough to have seen Star Wars when it wasn't referred to as ANH, and grew up with the notion of Star Wars that I did.

I'm that age, have never and will never refer to the original movie as 'Episode 4' or 'A New Hope' (mostly for reasons that involve 1990 Jennifer Aniston romcoms...)

My players are mostly in their 40's and 50's. But absolutely none of us wanted to recreate the original movies in our role-play.

It's almost like different people have different opinions or something.

Me, I think its a broad church, and what's important is that each table find its unique theme and feel that it enjoys.

I think the concept of having some universal 'no-list' is doomed to failure, even in 'canon'.

25 minutes ago, Maelora said:

I'm that age, have never and will never refer to the original movie as 'Episode 4' or 'A New Hope' (mostly for reasons that involve 1990 Jennifer Aniston romcoms...)

My players are mostly in their 40's and 50's. But absolutely none of us wanted to recreate the original movies in our role-play.

It's almost like different people have different opinions or something.

Me, I think its a broad church, and what's important is that each table find its unique theme and feel that it enjoys.

I think the concept of having some universal 'no-list' is doomed to failure, even in 'canon'.

Yep. Saw the original in theaters, still refer to the original as “Star Wars.” And yet don’t share the “1x1 piece of the large canvas” limitation on what Star Wars “is.”

3 hours ago, Maelora said:

It's almost like different people have different opinions or something.

That's one of the quintessential elements of roleplaying games, is it not?

Add me to the "I saw Star Wars in the theatre when I was in grade school" club. I daresay anyone trying to tell me how I can and cannot run my games can kiss a mynock.

51 here. I do refer to the 1977 movie as "Ep 4" or "A New Hope", but mostly for convenience. When I saw it at its opening night in Australia and lined up with my parents for 2 hours in the line that went around the block at the Astra Theatre in Parramatta, it was my early 11th birthday present. I saw it five times in the next six weeks. I drove my family spare because I wouldn't shut up about it. I had the novels. I had the toys. I've been to every midnight screening up until TFA, at which time work commitments prevented me being out until 3 in the morning. My wife and I met and first bonded at a Star Wars video night where everyone else was talking and drinking and she and I lay in front of the TV reciting the dialog to each other. I've played Star Wars RPGs since the 1st edition of the WEG D6 system, and every single one since. I have an original movie theatre poster of Star Wars (not ANH, not Episode IV) framed on my wall which I've had since 1980.

I will stack my "Star Wars Street Cred" up against anyone .

In "feel", our games are a mix of the Original Trilogy, Rogue One, Rebels, and The Clone Wars, with lots of dashes of other things thrown in as "very special episodes". There is no "right" or "wrong" way to play Star Wars . Actually, strike that: there is a wrong way. Not having fun. That's the wrong way.

5 hours ago, Maelora said:

I'm that age, have never and will never refer to the original movie as 'Episode 4' or 'A New Hope' (mostly for reasons that involve 1990 Jennifer Aniston romcoms...)

My players are mostly in their 40's and 50's. But absolutely none of us wanted to recreate the original movies in our role-play.

It's almost like different people have different opinions or something.

Me, I think its a broad church, and what's important is that each table find its unique theme and feel that it enjoys.

I think the concept of having some universal 'no-list' is doomed to failure, even in 'canon'.

You walk into Mos Eisley

Oh ok where are the hookers? I know there must be hookers?

Sure you see some hookers, they say 15 cr love you long time.

Ok what about a burger, I want a burger.

Sure there is a Burger stand right near the Starport with a big yellow M in Aurabesh for its sign.

I go up to the counter. Give me a ****** burger yo.

Everyone laughs, sips beer, etc. That's really not fun for me when I could just play a random sci fi game and not scuff up Star Wars in the effort.

5 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

Yep. Saw the original in theaters, still refer to the original as “Star Wars.” And yet don’t share the “1x1 piece of the large canvas” limitation on what Star Wars “is.”

Cool. What is Star Wars then? Go ahead and lay it out for me since you have this definition that you want to apply to me.

9 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Cool. What is Star Wars then? Go ahead and lay it out for me since you have this definition that you want to apply to me.

All I’m applying to you is an analogy that you agreed applies to you (the “1x1 piece of a larger canvas”). Well, that and the insults you level at those who don’t share that view.

1 hour ago, Archlyte said:

You walk into Mos Eisley

Oh ok where are the hookers? I know there must be hookers?

Sure you see some hookers, they say 15 cr love you long time.

Ok what about a burger, I want a burger.

Sure there is a Burger stand right near the Starport with a big yellow M in Aurabesh for its sign.

I go up to the counter. Give me a ****** burger yo.

Everyone laughs, sips beer, etc. That's really not fun for me when I could just play a random sci fi game and not scuff up Star Wars in the effort.

Um, that's kind of...

... no, not replying.

I don't think you want to debate at this point.

Hope you find what you're after.

Marcy

13 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

The thing of it is, I get that. Logic suggests that someone who routinely insults others for those different opinions doesn’t.

But, yeah...I’m the one who should have a Frozen moment.

Here is the thing about Internet debates: nothing that matters depends on them. The same is true of most in-person debates, for that matter. People have opinions about things. People state those opinions in all sorts of ways. Most of those people and their opinions aren't relevant (including mine and this one). A lot of what people say, even eloquent with degrees, is overstated preference and prejudice. Taking offense and getting outraged over opinions wastes time and diminishes dignity. I mean, really, who cares what he thinks of how other people play? He's just pixels on a screen to you.

"Some dude on the Internet has this opinion...."

Yeah, that's a shocker.

1 hour ago, Vondy said:

Here is the thing about Internet debates: nothing that matters depends on them. The same is true of most in-person debates, for that matter. People have opinions about things. People state those opinions in all sorts of ways. Most of those people and their opinions aren't relevant (including mine and this one). A lot of what people say, even eloquent with degrees, is overstated preference and prejudice. Taking offense and getting outraged over opinions wastes time and diminishes dignity. I mean, really, who cares what he thinks of how other people play? He's just pixels on a screen to you.

"Some dude on the Internet has this opinion...."

Yeah, that's a shocker.

To be blunt?

He's someone who went out of his way to knowingly and directly insult someone I know well because (brace yourself...here's the egregious crime) he was told that person plays a droid PC.

So, yeah...I've chosen to call him on his BS whenever it appears.

19 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

All I’m applying to you is an analogy that you agreed applies to you (the “1x1 piece of a larger canvas”). Well, that and the insults you level at those who don’t share that view.

What actually happened is that I made an assertion and invited discussion. I was attacked. I politely responded trying to keep it civil. I was attacked again. I tried responding a few more times with discussion, but some people on here just want to fight about it.

I don't care about your games that don't meet my minimal criteria for viability, I don't, so whatever you do is what you do. I was looking for some discussion around a point of niche preference, but that was too much to ask.

I see that you have no ideas of your own, you just attack people who share their ideas. I await some sort of explanation of your bright view of this subject and the details of how you achieve your great success.

12 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

To be blunt?

He's someone who went out of his way to knowingly and directly insult someone I know well because (brace yourself...here's the egregious crime) he was told that person plays a droid PC.

So, yeah...I've chosen to call him on his BS whenever it appears.

Oh cool it's personal and you are crusading on the internet for someone whom I imagine is a full grown adult themselves. I imagine that person probably gave no F's about what I said and moved on, which I respect. Quixote you should do the same bro, and just drop it. That's my Christmas wish for you.

I hope nobody needed therapy for my contention that Droids are inferior as a choice for main characters.

18 hours ago, Maelora said:

Um, that's kind of...

... no, not replying.

I don't think you want to debate at this point.

Hope you find what you're after.

Marcy

Yeah I was very disappointed that you chose to respond to me in the way you did. There are two sides to every coin, so I wanted to demonstrate that. Obviously there is no such thing as your fun is bad. I simply do not enjoy your fun and thought I had been respectful of that in this thread. I don't have to ascribe to the most common form of the game, nor do I have to acknowledge it as superior.

1 minute ago, Archlyte said:

What actually happened is that I made an assertion and invited discussion. I was attacked. I politely responded trying to keep it civil. I was attacked again. I tried responding a few more times with discussion, but some people on here just want to fight about it.

I don't care about your games that don't meet my minimal criteria for viability, I don't, so whatever you do is what you do. I was looking for some discussion around a point of niche preference, but that was too much to ask.

I see that you have no ideas of your own, you just attack people who share their ideas. I await some sort of explanation of your bright view of this subject and the details of how you achieve your great success.

No, sir.

You expressed your views and invited discussion. Others engaged in civil discussion while disagreeing with your points and provided examples as to why they disagreed. You declared this disagreement to be “attacks,” attempted to play the victim, then proceeded to insult or belittle those who disagreed with you.

Despite your claims to not care about how others run their games, you went out of your way to insult those players and/or their manner of play that doesn’t fit your admittedly narrow restrictions on the game.

I would agree, though, that attempting civil discussion with you about “points of niche preference” is doomed to failure, as such discussion and examples from others demonstrating that other methods work (despite your claims otherwise) are met with insults and derision, followed by an encore of the victim act and doubling down on the insults.

What really drives it all Home is that we’ve had civil discussions even after your stream of insults (here’s the key) when my comments are in line with yours. But, if I dare diverge from the path that you repeatedly present as the only way to do it “right,” you start right back in with the insults and derision.

8 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Oh cool it's personal and you are crusading on the internet for someone whom I imagine is a full grown adult themselves. I imagine that person probably gave no F's about what I said and moved on, which I respect. Quixote you should do the same bro, and just drop it. That's my Christmas wish for you.

I hope nobody needed therapy for my contention that Droids are inferior as a choice for main characters.

Well, after you did that, I specifically stated it was personal at that point, so kudos to you for your astute understanding of subtlety.

It has absolutely nothing to do with what that player’s reaction was nor their age (neither of which you’re aware of, nor, as you make clear, you care about). It has everything to do with the fact that you felt (and apparently still do feel) justified in blatantly, directly, indisputably outright insulting someone - not just saying, “Not my thing,” but insulting someone - for playing the game differently than you like. That’s compounded by your continually playing the victim and lamenting online “attacks” on the one hand, then expecting to insult and attack with impunity. At one point, others and I even gave you the benefit of the doubt that it was miscommunication resulting from a silent medium, but upon receiving those concerns, you doubled down on the insults.

If you want your little Christmas wish to come true, maybe stop with the insults and condescension directed at those who simply disagree and are trying to engage in the very sort of conversation you claim you’re seeking. In short, follow the axiom of DBAD. Or, in the words of Agent J, “Don’t start nothin’, won’t be nothin’.”

Oops. I mentioned a different franchise around the Star Wars RPG. How “casual” of me.

5 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Yeah I was very disappointed that you chose to respond to me in the way you did. There are two sides to every coin, so I wanted to demonstrate that. Obviously there is no such thing as your fun is bad. I simply do not enjoy your fun and thought I had been respectful of that in this thread. I don't have to ascribe to the most common form of the game, nor do I have to acknowledge it as superior.

I can understand your disappointment. After all, who in their right mind wouldn’t think that openly mocking Marcy’s campaign was “being respectful?”

The Christmas cheer in here... it's suffocating...!

For my particular group we have very few absolute no's. Our particular group is essentially the black ops decision of the alliance and thus we do a lot of things that the on screen heroes wouldn't be seen doing. Torture? Check, though any implementation of such is really treated as a mention rather then reenactment. We have drugs (though only two PC's in it's entire 4 year run had brought into the regular use; for Tobin it was booster blue, for Galish it was alcohol and death sticks). Ask awkward questions to Luke about how he's going to return to farm life? Check (oh boy. I remembered all of us going "wtf" on that one). And we have had more then a few operations which have resulted in large civilian collateral despite our best intentions. We are generally good people trying to do the right thing (generally, there are a few absolute cassians in there, and worse that are tolerated rather then liked, even by the squad.)

There are a few no's however; we don't cover procreation on screen, we don't embellish evil acts in any detail (e.g. It's mentioned to establish truly twisted characters but it is not acted out) and we most certain are working for the alliance and thus at the end of the day anyone who betrays them will have to leave unless it is a systematic change in direction (everyone left.). So far it's worked out pretty fine, we have been civil and only a couple of characters had to be removed from the party; one PC was trained by a Jedi but got possessive over the holocron from the gatekeeper quest, though the betrayal didn't work out for him as he was curiously absent whenever the serious action went down and (to quote) "lost the holocron" by ejecting it out of a starship. His main issue was he wanted to become a villain but hadn't spoken to the GM before hand and was terrible at actually building a poker hand, thus he ended up just running out with an inquisitor cutting us off. The other was a member who had killed an entire crusier of rebellion personal during a staged departure (to fool imperial spies), infact, the loss of life was so great we had to stop the staged departure to track the traitor down. I wasn't present for either of those sessions for reasons but I recall being extremely disappointed in a lot of people; some for a lack of participation.

While we can have edgy heroes, absolute villians are frowned on unless their motives can be adquitly concealed; I tried to do it one time but in the end the GM didn't actually provide enough resources to actually make betraying the rebellion worth the effort; so In Character I decided not to go through with it. Absolute villians and heroes do not mix in our groups, so thats one of the tropes we have maintained.

Our game has Space Mavericks and Dr Palpatine.. we like the pop culture references as long as we can make them Star Wars relatable. Any definite no-no's? Hmm, please don't spill your drink on the table.

I can understand where you're coming from. Explicit scenes really don't add to the narrative and are usually only something one character can enjoy. We however have gone with the rated-R version, no sex scenes, but my players do enjoy the thought of a more brutal approach to an execution or a high critical roll.

To each their own though.

On ‎1‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 8:59 AM, LordBritish said:

For my particular group we have very few absolute no's. Our particular group is essentially the black ops decision of the alliance and thus we do a lot of things that the on screen heroes wouldn't be seen doing. Torture? Check, though any implementation of such is really treated as a mention rather then reenactment. We have drugs (though only two PC's in it's entire 4 year run had brought into the regular use; for Tobin it was booster blue, for Galish it was alcohol and death sticks). Ask awkward questions to Luke about how he's going to return to farm life? Check (oh boy. I remembered all of us going "wtf" on that one). And we have had more then a few operations which have resulted in large civilian collateral despite our best intentions. We are generally good people trying to do the right thing (generally, there are a few absolute cassians in there, and worse that are tolerated rather then liked, even by the squad.)

There are a few no's however; we don't cover procreation on screen, we don't embellish evil acts in any detail (e.g. It's mentioned to establish truly twisted characters but it is not acted out) and we most certain are working for the alliance and thus at the end of the day anyone who betrays them will have to leave unless it is a systematic change in direction (everyone left.). So far it's worked out pretty fine, we have been civil and only a couple of characters had to be removed from the party; one PC was trained by a Jedi but got possessive over the holocron from the gatekeeper quest, though the betrayal didn't work out for him as he was curiously absent whenever the serious action went down and (to quote) "lost the holocron" by ejecting it out of a starship. His main issue was he wanted to become a villain but hadn't spoken to the GM before hand and was terrible at actually building a poker hand, thus he ended up just running out with an inquisitor cutting us off. The other was a member who had killed an entire crusier of rebellion personal during a staged departure (to fool imperial spies), infact, the loss of life was so great we had to stop the staged departure to track the traitor down. I wasn't present for either of those sessions for reasons but I recall being extremely disappointed in a lot of people; some for a lack of participation.

While we can have edgy heroes, absolute villians are frowned on unless their motives can be adquitly concealed; I tried to do it one time but in the end the GM didn't actually provide enough resources to actually make betraying the rebellion worth the effort; so In Character I decided not to go through with it. Absolute villians and heroes do not mix in our groups, so thats one of the tropes we have maintained.

Having watched Rogue One many, many, times now I think that the stuff you mention sounds very cool to me. The idea of a Spec Ops or Infiltration Unit is something I think that can carry the game into darker areas. I think that ends justifies the means can go too far, but it seems to me like the players in your game sort of illustrated that and I liked your solutions. The drugs thing is touchy because on the one hand I think it makes sense, but a lot of scene time wated in depicting use or the debasement of characters seems a bit in-star wars to me. Sometimes a scene has an ugly turn that it uses to make its point, and I like that. What I don't like is any kind of time waster dialogue (Hey I couldn't help but notice you just opened that door. Me too.) or description, and too often the really drek stuff is about someone going with the first idea that pops in their head and is dark in some way. There are lots of Star Warsy ways to do that without just using what is most convenient and having apathy for the theme/feel of the setting. Thanks for your post I enjoyed it very much.

On ‎1‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 2:10 PM, Quigonjinnandjuice said:

Our game has Space Mavericks and Dr Palpatine.. we like the pop culture references as long as we can make them Star Wars relatable. Any definite no-no's? Hmm, please don't spill your drink on the table.

I can understand where you're coming from. Explicit scenes really don't add to the narrative and are usually only something one character can enjoy. We however have gone with the rated-R version, no sex scenes, but my players do enjoy the thought of a more brutal approach to an execution or a high critical roll.

To each their own though.

Absolutely right, and while I wouldn't do the Dr. Palpatine thing I think that it's not a giant deal either way. I think I've said it before but the original novelization of Star Wars was pretty brutal as I recall. That Tantive IV firefight was gory, not too mention a couple of burnt skeletons on the ground that used to be Luke's family. Stormtroopers scored 151+ with Flame Projectors I guess.

On 24/01/2018 at 5:42 AM, Archlyte said:

Having watched Rogue One many, many, times now I think that the stuff you mention sounds very cool to me. The idea of a Spec Ops or Infiltration Unit is something I think that can carry the game into darker areas. I think that ends justifies the means can go too far, but it seems to me like the players in your game sort of illustrated that and I liked your solutions. The drugs thing is touchy because on the one hand I think it makes sense, but a lot of scene time wated in depicting use or the debasement of characters seems a bit in-star wars to me. Sometimes a scene has an ugly turn that it uses to make its point, and I like that. What I don't like is any kind of time waster dialogue (Hey I couldn't help but notice you just opened that door. Me too.) or description, and too often the really drek stuff is about someone going with the first idea that pops in their head and is dark in some way. There are lots of Star Warsy ways to do that without just using what is most convenient and having apathy for the theme/feel of the setting. Thanks for your post I enjoyed it very much.

For Tobin Stryder his drug problem was directly associated to the threats he faced every day; in his later outlaw days and his first couple of years in the rebellion he had a sith saber with a spirit bound to it. Initially he noticed nothing but his own obsession to keep the device close, but as time went on these "red sabers" began to actively hound him, to the point where he was forced to engage one in a duel, which ended with a dueling pistol to the face. As such he was a fairly ordinary merc who went from dealing with relatively trival jobs, to getting involved in a job that pitted them directly against the ISB, and when they tried to blackmail them with deathstar footage? Well, their merc careers were offically over.

Needless to say, as someone who only had the resolve to seek revenge on one man and had only really started to handle guns with any regularity, suddenly being on the other side of an oppressive empire was difficult on him both mentally and physically, first day on the job he encountered dark project like stormtroopers with breach cannons so he turned to anything that gave him an edge, perceived or otherwise. That was when his booster blue addiction became frequent; though after killing his first inquistor he found, only then, did he put aside some of his materialism to feel the force, and a cold voice from the lightsaber.

"Oh, you woke up? It took you long enough."

and with his discovery of the force he found that edge he needed and more; along with an addiction to the fast and easy route that he struggles against even to this day.

His booster blue problem was never a formalised obligation addiction; it just served a narrative purpose of exactly how hard this war was to someone from an ordinary life with a lack of formal training in war. Though even today he keeps a vial close by, never drinking it but just to pull out and tap the cap of the vial a couple of times to ease his worries.

Yeah I am still feeling like the need to remove material makes this more like sculpting than other art forms. You can remove too much, and relatively I understand that to most people I take out more than they would remove, but I use the movies and other material to try and make sure that doesn't happen. Take out too much for your personal tastes and it's not Star Wars, take out too Little it's not really Star Wars either. That sort of thing.

Had to necro this thread because recently a friend of mine who thinks of the setting in a very similar way to my own preferences was talking about how terrible things happened in world war II, but very often the survivors would not go into detail. That made me think about Why they didn't go into detail, and I realized that social interaction between people was more restrained in those days. It reminded me a bit of Tolkien having seen the worst of people in WWI but still being able to write about an idyllic world with detailed gruesome or lascivious realities taking place off-screen rather than explicitly in the narrative. The world still had prostitution, opium, recreational dismemberment, but it was all located in between the lines.

That's when I thought that a good guideline for Star Wars is: if it isn't something you could broach in mixed company and polite conversation, then it's not necessary for the narrative.

I really thought that was an elegant and somewhat flexible way to look at it. It varies of course from person to person, and by taste, but over all I think it's easy enough to apply if you are at all used to controlling content in conversation. I know that may people have cultural and generational habits that do not square with this, and other people simply view such niceties as vestigial, but I think that the tone of the original movies was very much created by the speed of the narrative and the contrast between the unsaid and the said (depicted).

The movies achieve a pace and feel we cannot fully replicate, but in the quest to get close, and in the face of actually having to be able to live in the Galaxy, this may be one way to try and meter details to keep the narrative feeling like Star Wars.

It's been my experience that gamers who insist on "mature" themes of gruesome violence and what-have-you are covering up for a lack of creativity and ideas. Shock is easy to do. It's why horror movies that reply on jump scares rather then genuine dread are usually terrible. Most (male) tabletop RPG players, if they start when they're tweens and teens, go through a "I Hump the Hobgolin!" Phase. It's expected that they'll grow out of it.

Rogue One feels like the most "grown-up" Star Wars movie but, thematically-speaking, there's nothing you wouldn't see in a WW2 movie from the 1950s.

It's not unreasonable for a game master or a player to expect a Star Wars game to feel like, y'know, the Star Wars they know from the movies. If you want something else, play Original Traveller Universe or the plethora of other space-based RPGs on the market.