On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 9:26 AM, Nytwyng said:

Well, in one group I play in, it would totally prohibit the character in the group who’s turned out to have one of the strongest character arcs and the best RP of the group.

An IG assassin droid who likes blowing things up, was secretly reprogrammed by another PC with loyalty protocols to the group in general but that PC above all else, and who recently purged that programming, and single-handedly defeated a Mandalorian warlord in trial by combat, assuming command of the warlord’s organization.

But sure...sidekick.

That story about the IG droid sounds like a side kick to me. He was programmed by another player to obey lmao. But I'm sure anyone here could put up some anecdote about how droids are the best PCs because whatever, I have never seen it so I'm going with the defense against miracles.

On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 5:57 AM, Nightone said:

I really have to ask... Is your setting an Empireal one? That would clarify this xenophopia... Or is it just you how don't like anything that is not Human?

is this rule there to protect your Player from beeing hated by you because they wouldn't be able to gain your full GM support as Human-Chars would do? (and thus getting lower EXP through you strange XP "forward loan"/ "backward rushing" earnings?)

I don't really get your point here, at one point you say you don't want the PC to be even near the same skilltrees but than they all have to be Humans or fight over the ONE alien spot during sessions zero? or have to take the "alien but look like Human" versions... No Wookie, Gand, Verpine, Muun combis?

And no droids because you think they are sidekicks? that said it sounds as if only you see them as Sidekicks and thus again you will treat any player that plays a Droid as an Sidekick?

For your XP system... well it is total confusing... you should let any character start with more exp than any other (no "loans" as you call them) that way this character will mostliky hog most of the spot light just because he will overshadow those lower ones in most cases thanks to better talents, more skills and most likely higher attributs due to dedication.

Tht way the low starting PC will have a hard time to catch up since they won't be able to act in the rare spot light that they have to share enought.

and if you turn it around by saying "They will get so much more ep until they catched up for everything they do" then the "higher" player will grow unsatisfied over time since all his doing will give him only so much as breadkrums... while the low starting pilot gets tons of EXP just for sitting in the Fly-Simulator Offscreen...

That is no really good base to keep all players satisfied espacially not that poor guy that isn't as strong in RPing than some others and is played to the wall and may even don't have a better than plan for his char than to gain EXP to better Gun-Man... "poor guy s**ks to be you, no plan, not as great in RP as the rest... so no EXP."

If you now say "But then I'll went back to give him session XP" all other players will get Grumpy "He get's Exp for doing nothing While i get Breadkrums for fantastic RPing?"

Long text short: I'd start with everyone at the same lv and keep it fair with the exp, make it group EXP for the sessions and some small bonuses to reward the strong RPler.
Just remember if you want you don't have to reward in steps of five. (E.g. I give reward in steps of 5 for sessions and story rewards, RP-ing is rewarded by 1-3 EXp so that bouns would get out of hand but will accumulate over the long run)

About your "narrative" initative system, while I am sure that this system works well with some RP-systems and groups, I am afraid that you'll here will nerf a lot more than just cool and vigilant...
How do you handle Talent and Powers that allow the players to alter the initative check out comes? Like "Rapid Reaction", or most of the "Forsee Power"? you would just right of kill those if you swap the initative by not making check "Hey Mr. Gunslinger you don't mind to invest 25 of your hard earned XP into ranked talents that won't bring you ANYTHING! Oh and you Mr. Forcy how about buying into Forseen, just don't bother to buy in the big left side of the tree since we don't check for initative here!"

your PG and opposite sex rules are obviously taste questions - if you or anybody in the group had bad memories about something that happend before it is absolutly ok to enforce this rules...

Only don't make any exceptions ether it counts for everybody or for nobody, other wise the second player that wants to play that way and get the NO while the first get the GO will be salty

Thank you for this thoughtful post. I really appreciate someone who can argue the points and do so in a way that actually invites discussion.

• It's not an Imperial setting and the galaxy looks like it should, but on the meta I am gating the species and all that because I want PCs who are protagonists with room to grow and a nature that is easy for the players to relate to during play. I want them to have some easily accountable notion of romance, family relationships, ambition and psychology. For me the easiest way to get this is to go mostly human and near-human.
• lol the XP system is confusing, I grant you that. The idea is that instead of the linear system in the book the player decides how they want their XP disbursed. The ranges are not a big deal I will allow someone to start with 275 or 300 XP but they won't get XP for a long time and then it will be according to milestones or story needs.
• Narrative Initiative is just plain fun. I know it's not for everyone but man I have to tell you I can't go back now. Talents and Powers concerning Initiative get deference and can even overcome common sense situations where one combatant would go first under normal circumstances. Because I do Narrative Initiative it's important to remember that it is assumed in my combats that actions are mostly simultaneous. That helps to make the whole thing a bit more easy to grasp.
• I try to be fair about such things but I also expect the players to be able to hash these things out. If someone has a really great idea I work with them, but the idea here is to mainly try to achieve the most likelihood of a coherent setup that I can get before game start. I am promoting a culture in the game of being aware of problems and being discerning of the final product.

On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 9:31 AM, Nytwyng said:

If these restrictions and homebrew rules work for your group, great. Have fun. Personally, it’s not a game I’d want to play in. Such a large sandbox, but only allowing access to a single bucket of sand, and then setting further limits on what you can build with that small bucket’s worth.

All jousting aside, I hope that your games are fun as well. I would hope that forum discussions aren't being taken personally. I assure you no players were hurt in the filming of this movie. Despite our differences, I feel that all of us are more alike than not because of our love for this hobby.

On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 1:50 PM, Darzil said:

The stuff that has worked best in games I've played has been where Players and GMs (normally from a background idea from the GM, pitched to the players to see if they are interested) have met together and brainstormed group backgrounds and composition til they come up with something that enthuses everyone. I think for me I'd want an outline framework from the GM, not a rigid box.

I'm thinking in particular of : Nobel Lady and retinue trying to restore her lost lands in Holy Roman Empire (Ars Magicka) and Entrepreneurs trying to make it rich out west (Deadlands).

I think that every group is different, and I don't presume that this one solution would be good for other groups. But what I did want to do was discuss these things so that others could help me see possible pitfalls and also to generally express ourselves on the things we hold dear in the hobby. I think the problem is always when you like chips and I don't, and for some reason I get made because you like chips. I agree that something that enthuses everyone at the table is the goal, but have you been out there lately gathering players from the community? It's strange out there I can tell you. lol

1 hour ago, Archlyte said:

That story about the IG droid sounds like a side kick to me. He was programmed by another player to obey lmao. But I'm sure anyone here could put up some anecdote about how droids are the best PCs because whatever, I have never seen it so I'm going with the defense against miracles.

No, the other PC programming him had nothing to do with the droid’s status as a sidekick and everything to do with that PC deciding to exert control over the droid and prevent the droid from fooling that other OC’s own schemes.

But, sure...sidekick.

1 hour ago, Archlyte said:

All jousting aside, I hope that your games are fun as well. I would hope that forum discussions aren't being taken personally. I assure you no players were hurt in the filming of this movie. Despite our differences, I feel that all of us are more alike than not because of our love for this hobby.

Nah, nothing being taken personally at all. Other than my being personally mystified by being presented with a large canvas but cutting out a 1”x1” square piece and telling the players that’s all they can paint on. ?

2 hours ago, Archlyte said:

I have had games numbering probably in the hundreds where I allowed the PCs to make whatever. Despite the ideal, what you will get is a weird combination of stuff that is about each player coming up with some idea and then that idea interfacing with the actual game.

There is a middle ground between allowing players to create characters independent of the campaign and laying down restrictions which might seem to them to be arbitrary. You sit down with all participants and lay out what you have in mind for the campaign; and once everyone is on the same page, then you have them start thinking about characters. It accomplishes the same thing, but is far less likely to make the players feel like they're being pigeonholed.

3 hours ago, Vorzakk said:

There is a middle ground between allowing players to create characters independent of the campaign and laying down restrictions which might seem to them to be arbitrary. You sit down with all participants and lay out what you have in mind for the campaign; and once everyone is on the same page, then you have them start thinking about characters. It accomplishes the same thing, but is far less likely to make the players feel like they're being pigeonholed.

So if I throw a dart in the right area it's ok, but if I construct a blind to make sure the dart hits that area it's not ok.

4 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

No, the other PC programming him had nothing to do with the droid’s status as a sidekick and everything to do with that PC deciding to exert control over the droid and prevent the droid from fooling that other OC’s own schemes.

But, sure...sidekick.

The droid is an IG-88 model killing machine right? So tell me how this character has any kind of a personality that anyone can relate to? Is he basically just an HK-47 rehash like every other assassin droid? He lacks free will because that other player basically changed his programming, and could probably do it again. Is there some dynasty of family your droid will be promulgating into your campaign? How about personal relationships that define the character, and I mean other than the threat of killing people if they don't comply? I am quite certain that character is a ball of stats in an action figure body that has no humanity what so ever. So yeah, worse than a sidekick. But go ahead and tell me how your player made Abraham Lincoln in droid form and he was awesome.

I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying it doesn't happen. Player is first and foremost thinking about either how they want to be immune to sleep and charm, or they are trying to distance themselves from a character that has emotional depth.

4 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

Nah, nothing being taken personally at all. Other than my being personally mystified by being presented with a large canvas but cutting out a 1”x1” square piece and telling the players that’s all they can paint on. ?

I have had 34 years to explore that canvas. I have seen it, there isn't anything I'm interested in outside of that 1x1 area.

16 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Player is first and foremost thinking about either how they want to be immune to sleep and charm, or they are trying to distance themselves from a character that has emotional depth.

You have a very dim view of players' motivations, don't you? You just sound cynical and mean at this point.

On 11/6/2017 at 11:58 AM, Archlyte said:

I will say I have a droid character in my campaign, he is a Law enforcement droid that has taught itself how to not only stop crime but also heal the injured. He has become a combat medic he was built specifically to help the empire and has formed his own consciousness since is primary programming is to help people, working with the empire it slowly realized that his primary programming and the secondary programming didnt align thus it rebelled and joined the Alliance. Essentially the Age of Rebellion book AND the edge of empire book heavily suggests to treat droid players very different then most droids as they shouldnt be "side kicks" or even just pure programming but something has happened to make them stand out among droids, that has made them have real personality and sentience that most would think they would not have essentially any droid character SHOULD be more then the sum of their programming whether because their memories have not been wiped in forever or like we had it happen the droid slowly found conflicts within its own programming so decided to correct them thus creating a character with a lot more free will then the typical droid.

Edit: the reason he chose droid was because he didnt want to just be human and he liked the idea that droids were "highly specialized" towards a single task, he thought it would be fun and interesting to play a character that wanted to help, but since his programming would not fulfill everything the droid would want to help WITH he would have a character that would need to work past its limitations and rely on the help and support of others whom he would protect.

Edit 2: I will say I do make sure to ask my players before they make a droid if they are sure they want to make a droid, it comes with a lot of limitations like they can never become force sensitive and they will be very pigeon holed into a particular role that they choose, AND I make it clear that the model droid they pick matches their characteristics and likely their intended career. I don't mind an assassin droid looking like an R2 unit, but when that R2 unit has the brawn of a wookie I start to question it hard as that starts to look like power gaming which I think is what Arch is worried about, but honestly I havent had much issue with that, but my players are fairly new to the game so they can only 'power game" so much and because of that they are more focused on having a fun character that works well with the team rather then an "OP" one.

3 hours ago, Archlyte said:

The droid is an IG-88 model killing machine right? So tell me how this character has any kind of a personality that anyone can relate to? Is he basically just an HK-47 rehash like every other assassin droid? He lacks free will because that other player basically changed his programming, and could probably do it again. Is there some dynasty of family your droid will be promulgating into your campaign? How about personal relationships that define the character, and I mean other than the threat of killing people if they don't comply? I am quite certain that character is a ball of stats in an action figure body that has no humanity what so ever. So yeah, worse than a sidekick. But go ahead and tell me how your player made Abraham Lincoln in droid form and he was awesome.

“Abraham Lincoln in droid form?” WTF does that even mean, man?

Personality that anyone can relate to? Most every session, he picks up some sort of odd souvenir, ranging from the silly (a giant mixer...a long story that actually turned out to benefit the group in an infiltration), to the disturbing (an animal head that he sometimes wore as a hat). In point of fact, the player has made a point of steering clear of cribbing HK-47’s shtick. And, GM ruling will prevent the other PC from reprogramming him again; the GM regrets letting it happen in the first place, as it robbed the droid player of a degree of agency. Aware that his status as a droid can limit his acceptance by the galaxy at large, he briefly disguised himself as a Cerean using sytnthetic flesh. Fittingly, this disguise was burned away as he regained his personal agency. His relationships with the other party members are just as varied as anyone else’s, with no threats of blowing another party member up. As previously noted, the GM - who currently oversees a half dozen campaign groups, has more than once openly congratulated the player on displaying the strongest RP among all of his players.

But, clearly, you, sir, are the expert on droid PC’s. Knowing nothing about this character other than what I’ve said here, you clearly know best and are able to declare, with certainty, that the character is “worse than a sidekick.”

3 hours ago, Archlyte said:

I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying it doesn't happen. Player is first and foremost thinking about either how they want to be immune to sleep and charm, or they are trying to distance themselves from a character that has emotional depth.

And I’m saying you’re wrong. It does happen. The player is first and foremost thinking about having a good time in the game. Concern over immunity to sleep and charm has never once even been hinted at by the player, and if he were “trying to distance himself from a character that has emotional depth,” I highly doubt the most recent session of that campaign would have played out as it did.

But, I keep forgetting...you’re the authority on the approach and motivations of all players that you’ve never encountered or communicated with.

3 hours ago, Archlyte said:

I have had 34 years to explore that canvas. I have seen it, there isn't anything I'm interested in outside of that 1x1 area.

I feel sorry for you, then. But not as sorry as I feel for your players.

I ran a one-shot where the entire party was droids, and the opposition were droids as well. Strangely, all those pernicious elements of droids just never came up. I think it's because I have 35 years of training.

1 hour ago, themensch said:

I think it's because I have 35 years of training.

nice one!

14 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

“Abraham Lincoln in droid form?” WTF does that even mean, man?

Personality that anyone can relate to? Most every session, he picks up some sort of odd souvenir, ranging from the silly (a giant mixer...a long story that actually turned out to benefit the group in an infiltration), to the disturbing (an animal head that he sometimes wore as a hat). In point of fact, the player has made a point of steering clear of cribbing HK-47’s shtick. And, GM ruling will prevent the other PC from reprogramming him again; the GM regrets letting it happen in the first place, as it robbed the droid player of a degree of agency. Aware that his status as a droid can limit his acceptance by the galaxy at large, he briefly disguised himself as a Cerean using sytnthetic flesh. Fittingly, this disguise was burned away as he regained his personal agency. His relationships with the other party members are just as varied as anyone else’s, with no threats of blowing another party member up. As previously noted, the GM - who currently oversees a half dozen campaign groups, has more than once openly congratulated the player on displaying the strongest RP among all of his players.

But, clearly, you, sir, are the expert on droid PC’s. Knowing nothing about this character other than what I’ve said here, you clearly know best and are able to declare, with certainty, that the character is “worse than a sidekick.”

And I’m saying you’re wrong. It does happen. The player is first and foremost thinking about having a good time in the game. Concern over immunity to sleep and charm has never once even been hinted at by the player, and if he were “trying to distance himself from a character that has emotional depth,” I highly doubt the most recent session of that campaign would have played out as it did.

But, I keep forgetting...you’re the authority on the approach and motivations of all players that you’ve never encountered or communicated with.

I feel sorry for you, then. But not as sorry as I feel for your players.

So that's just being insulting. You don't need to pity anyone, we are all having a good time. My players wouldn't come back each week if they weren't, and they have other groups they play with so I'm not the only game in town. Yeah you seem to be playing a Star Wars skinned sci-fi game and you like the way the droid character is coming along because you are getting to explore common tropes and the group feels like they got this. That character, and this isn't an insult, just bores me man. I honestly find him to be not at all interesting. It just sounds like time wasted that could be better spent with that player playing a character with actual agency and a real personality so that the drama he encounters is real, and reflects somehow the life of a living character. In the science fantasy world that character is a tin man or a goblin, he isn't a character in the best sense. He is a gimmick that the player gets brownie points for working hard to try and approximate a real character.

3 hours ago, themensch said:

I ran a one-shot where the entire party was droids, and the opposition were droids as well. Strangely, all those pernicious elements of droids just never came up. I think it's because I have 35 years of training.

I'm going to chalk it up to expectations and standards. They would not have met my standards. The all-droid game would not have been something I would have enjoyed. Now I am saying this just from the viewpoint of what I want, not as an attempt at defining objective standards. What you like is what you like, but what I don't like is offensive.

I have friends whom I played with in high school who still play, and they are still doing the same thing they did back then (power gaming, etc.). So a long career isn't proof against this stuff, so you're right, but I brought up my time in the hobby for the one point of saying that I'm not mistaken in knowing what I like and what I don't. I didn't start last year so it's not like I don't know yet, which is what some people seemed to assert.

26 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

So that's just being insulting. You don't need to pity anyone, we are all having a good time. My players wouldn't come back each week if they weren't, and they have other groups they play with so I'm not the only game in town. Yeah you seem to be playing a Star Wars skinned sci-fi game and you like the way the droid character is coming along because you are getting to explore common tropes and the group feels like they got this. That character, and this isn't an insult, just bores me man. I honestly find him to be not at all interesting. It just sounds like time wasted that could be better spent with that player playing a character with actual agency and a real personality so that the drama he encounters is real, and reflects somehow the life of a living character. In the science fantasy world that character is a tin man or a goblin, he isn't a character in the best sense. He is a gimmick that the player gets brownie points for working hard to try and approximate a real character.

Oh, but that isn’t insulting?

Projecting your own prejudices and preference for dictating limitations to players onto people and games you know jack to the power of squat about about is the height of civility?

I bow to your infinite wisdom and authority on how to properly run an RPG. I - and I dare say many others - would disagree with your sage conclusion that games that don’t meet your narrow definition aren’t “really” Star Wars games.

Thank you very much for your condescension regarding a player and character that you know virtually nothing about, and determining based on that scant information that the character lacks “real personality.” But, hey...maybe you’re right. Maybe only characters created within narrow confines of arbitrary GM-dictated limitations are the only good characters in RPGs.

In this and your “no no list” thread, you’ve gone out of your way to insult and dismiss everyone who doesn’t play your restrictive way - “casual,” “not discerning,” and now they don’t have “a real character,” then turn around with wide eyes playing the poor, put-upon victim of insult when someone points out real live honest to goodness examples that contradict your myopic vision of Star Wars gaming.

I hope your players genuinely do enjoy their game time. Different approaches for different campaigns and all. If they enjoy their itty bitty living space, more power to them.

For the record, yeah...I’m taking it personally now. Because when speaking in the abstract, there’s no offense to take. But now you’re just plain insulting a player I know quite well, all because he dares to defy your expectations of a droid PC.

Enjoy your 1x1 piece of canvas. Fortunately for most of us, we enjoy the entire picture.

15 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

playing the poor, put-upon victim of insult

I think most of his posts are only there to facilitate this, at this point.

This thread is starting to feel a bit like an attempt to recreate the I hate alien characters thread that got closed, it honestly felt like that since the first post but it’s definitily is like that now.

Funny how that works

Speaking generally, I think trying to box in what Star Wars "is" is a pretty futile effort that will only stifle your players and your own storytelling.

Regardless of if you adhere to Disney canon Star Wars exclusively, or pay attention to the EU, Star Wars stories cover a huge range of genres and often play pretty fast and loose with stuff like tech level and tone. It's a very malleable setting that can easily be chopped and changed to suit what your players want out of the game without actually violating the canon at all. I think that's a strength of Star Wars, not something to be avoided. I mean, obviously you're entitled to have fun however suits your table, but it really seems like you're stifling yourself from a lot of really nice options, for both you and your players.

Just saying R2 and 3PO were just as much main characters of Star Wars as Han or Leia. I mean how many times did R2 save the day, and in RotJ the cast would have been eaten without 3P0 and they had PLENTY of personality, or how about K2 SO in Rouge One, he was one of the main 3 characters from the movie, just saying Droids DO have personality in Star Wars, in most cases yes they are a "side kick" but both options that were explored here are viable Star Wars Droids as seen by the movies and the shows and again the book itself suggests to treat a droid character different from a droid Npc which from what has been stated thus far everyone does.

Droid characters not only have their own personality, but even their own prejudices that NPCs have with them, it is really no different then playing an alien like a Mon Cal or a Bothan.

I keep getting into this pattern where I will make a statement about a preference, someone attacks my preference so I defend it, and then they take offense at my defense, and the whole thing becomes a big argument over I don't like what you like. I see advantages to doing things the way most people here seem to do it, but I don't experience enough of an advantage in it to not do it the way I have learned works best for me. I guess this kind of stuff just isn't something that the FFG game demographic can really hang with, and that's pretty disappointing. I was hoping people would make some positive points about why they like what they like, but it's always just attacks. I think the general idea around here is that everything goes, and if not you're a terrible person who must be torturing players.

It's a shame this isn't so much a discussion board but a place to ask rules questions, post art, and argue against anything but the most common way to play the game. Oh well. That's cool.

25 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

I keep getting into this pattern where I will make a statement about a preference, someone attacks my preference so I defend it, and then they take offense at my defense, and the whole thing becomes a big argument over I don't like what you like. I see advantages to doing things the way most people here seem to do it, but I don't experience enough of an advantage in it to not do it the way I have learned works best for me. I guess this kind of stuff just isn't something that the FFG game demographic can really hang with , and that's pretty disappointing . I was hoping people would make some positive points about why they like what they like, but it's always just attacks. I think the general idea around here is that everything goes, and if not you're a terrible person who must be torturing players.

It's a shame this isn't so much a discussion board but a place to ask rules questions, post art, and argue against anything but the most common way to play the game. Oh well. That's cool.

I think people are fine with having conversations, I do and I feel i have explained why I do like it. I have no problem with banning droids or any species from play because it doesnt fit a particular style or you have seen it get abused rather then used well. HOWEVER, your tone has A LOT of passive aggressiveness to it. For example the bolden portion of your statement can be seen as a very clear attack to everyone that likes the FFG RPG games, not even just the star wars game and multiple of your posts contain personal attacks like these, others have responded in kind and may even start up the aggressiveness so they are not innocent but neither are you. For an example when someone dared suggest that they had a different way and a droid character worked for them you did everything you could to tare down a character they loved playing with "a side kick, or worse then a side kick" and even tore down the PLAYER of that character whom the person you are debating with rather then just letting it go and admitting that it's possible that while you have had issues with droids a lot of people haven't while you have had issues with aliens a lot of people havent, and NONE of those people are any less experienced or less "hard core" about either Star Wars or RPG's. Right now I am fully willing to admit I am a happy miracle as a new GM with new players who has always looked for a game but never really found one in which we are all having fun with varying characters, we dont have a lot of aliens in the group simply because half the group has little knowledge on star wars but they like me from our DnD game and wanted to play an RPG and since I was running it I picked this one. They play humans cus they are playing what they know and enjoying every moment of it, my group would probably be on the "lesser" side of things by many GM standards when it comes to character development simply because we are all just happily bumbling around figuring it all out and yet when we look back at everything that has happened in game we start to really see how far the characters have come since we started, not just in XP but in goals, ideals, hopes and dreams Table Top RPGs are really amazing in that light.