4 hours ago, Archlyte said:

I was hoping people would make some positive points about why they like what they like, but it's always just attacks.

That's usually the result of attacking people first, yes.

People can have different opinions without them being less committed, more casual, poorer role playing, taking the easy way out or any of the other personal ways you put it regarding people who differ from you.

in among this you make interesting points, but are too easily distracted into talking down to people with different opinions, rather than thinking that isn’t for me and moving on.

What we enjoy in Star Wars May be different, it may be the same, it may overlap. That is a feature, not a problem to be fixed. Vive la difference!

8 hours 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.

In the bolded, I believe, lies the heart of the problem.

Someone - anyone - providing examples that demonstrate experiences that run counter to your preferences or discussing why your laundry list of restrictions seems to run counter to the nature of the game/setting (I’m going to bold this here, so maybe...just maybe...it will make an impact) is not inherently attacking your preference . It’s taking part in a dialogue...an exchange of thoughts and ideas.

Based upon your responses to such posts - condescension and insults (and you even ladled some of that condescension into this very reply of yours) - it would appear, though, that - despite stating your preferences in a forum intended specifically for dialogue, that you don’t want that; you’d prefer a monologue, with the rest of us simply applauding your infinite wisdom in determine the undeniably best way to run a Star Wars RPG.

So reading through the original post I was confused by something.... "story based xp" I thought that was the way the game already worked outside the Beginner game. From my understanding of the Core rule book players receive XP at the end of a session based on what the group has accomplished in the story in addition to gaining bonus xp for sticking to a motivation or the like. I don't really understand the difference between the way the system currently works and "story XP".

The other thing I find kind of weird is "narrative initiative" it sounds cool and like it would be a lot of fun, however I worry about a class like a Commander from Age of Rebellion and I worry even more about any character that decided to put points into Willpower for a characteristic. Willpower only has 3 skills that it is associated with, Discipline, Coercion and Vigilance, the 2 most used in my games are Discipline (keeping your character's emotions in check especially against charm and fear) and Vigilance (making sure you are ready for "anything") for players that end up going Willpower they seem to just like getting Coercion as a side effect rather then the main purpose. By heavily diminishing Initiative rolls especially with Vigilance I feel like one of the weakest Characteristics is simply made weaker as really all the player would want to do is put points into Discipline and just let their willpower sit at 1 if they can get away with it. I would think in this case you may just want to tie Coercion and Discipline into another trait and eliminate Willpower altogether so that players dont fall into the trap of using that trait, maybe tie them both to Cunning or Intelligence or Presence not sure which one really. Presence and Diplomats also take a small hit for the same reason, I know this would wreck both the characters I have played's usefulness since 1 was a Commander with good willpower specifically taken to help avoid fear checks and to help the real fighters go first. The Diplomat I went Heavy into the money making talents took 3 in Agi so I wouldnt be TRASH at shooting should it arise and then finally I had multiple points in Vigilance if everyone showed up the only thing my character was good at was rolling initiative for a our heavy hitters and being a massive annoying distraction to the empire so my team could slip in and out unnoticed other then that I was just kind of there I didnt have computer skills I couldnt shoot and my brawn was 1 so anything that looked at me funny made me drop taking away initiative would have made both the characters I played from Meh kinda useful to... why are you even here.

On 11/6/2017 at 2:58 PM, Archlyte said:

I am planning a new Star Wars Campaign and I have decided to try a new formula for shaping the game. The players are relatively new to me but we have played for a few months now so I have gotten to know them and their problems as I see them for being able to play to the theme and tone of the setting. I wanted to post my plans as a contrast so many may see this as a do not do list lol, but maybe some will find it interesting and we can discuss the points. Here is my plan:

• Players will choose from general archetype slots to make their characters with no more than 2 of each: Soldier, Survivalist, Underworld, Social/Healer, Force Sensitive. There can be hybrids.
• No Droid PCs
• One Non-Human Alien, No more than 2 Near-Human Aliens
• Opposite Sex character to Player are limited to one unless a convincing argument can be presented in Session 0 as to why the character works better as non-player sex. No limitations on orientation.
• All Technology, Social Systems, Customs, and Equipment are not assumed to function as real-world or germane to likely usage. Players need to either not specify how something occurs, or ask as to how it works in that instance.
• Terminals are the way to contact persons and organizations. Comlinks are for buddies.
• The HoloNet is NOT the Internet. Slicing is more often done at the source. TeleSlicing is dangerous as all get out and will probably get you hunted.
• Story-Based XP: XP given at rate defined by each character's arc and role. XP will be given for advancement goals the players define for their concept.
• Narrative initiative will be used so points in Vigilance and Cool won't be used as much as in Standard Initiative.
• Character backstory needs to either be concise, or if elaborate must not create a character that does not actually fit in the game that will be played (don't make the Guildmaster Protege of the Bounty Hunters because you will resent being put in other types of stories).
• Real World cussing is largely out the window. Also Graphic sex, torture, alien cross-species sexual notions, etc. PG
• If you read it in the EU it probably didn't happen. Don't count on Wookieepedia lore being correct. It may very well be the way it is on the site, but it may not.
• Science Fantasy not Science Fiction. The point is that the setting is a place where technology creates a world we don't know, but Technology isn't the main character. Deep themes about tech are also not explored such as AI, Transhumanism, etc.
• Character Death is usually fatal. If your character actually dies, they are dead.

Many of your posts are about control. Do you see it as your game and not the groups game?

9 hours ago, Rebelarch86 said:

Many of your posts are about control. Do you see it as your game and not the groups game?

I see the need to add some controls to keep the game from the inexorable slide into a predictable form that I have experienced happen when no controls are applied. It's not a 100% negative type thing usually, but I want to avoid certain anti-theme elements when I play Star Wars. When I play a generic Fantasy or Sci Fi game I generally open it up to whatever, especially if we are using something like FATE. I think there must be a tendency to look at my posts as if they are an absolute attack on player agency etc., but given that the players themselves don't complain (and I invite it and respect it when they do), this to me seems like some sort of a psychological reaction to a post on a forum; as if it somehow applies to the reader. In my Star Wars Campaign I am trying to get the players to focus their creative gifts into specific avenues, while not devoting time or attention to things that as the referee I feel are anti-theme. There are no tears, no pouty faces, and anyone is free to exercise their voice. The players are adults who have no familial or professional ties to me, and they have enough other groups to choose from that they could simply go to one of those other groups (whom they are familiar with and know people from) at any time.

Also I consider TTRPGs art to some degree, and having a form, are subject to subjective critique and editing/erasing/removing material to produce a final form that is aesthetically what I am looking to produce. I communicate this to my players, and they know what my tastes and intentions are.

I have seen that not only are my views not shared by most people here, they provoke an aggressive and personal response. Most of the users here are happy with the everything goes approach. That's great, but it doesn't work for me. I wouldn't be happy in your game or running it your way, same as you don't like mine. I would appreciate it if you didn't do like some here though, and take it as a personal crusade to try and inflict a game style on me I quit using 20 years back.

To directly answer the question: It is a collaborative but not egalitarian activity. I have editing responsibility and I exercise it. Beyond that, the players know the parameters of their input, and I know mine. We have an at-will social contract in place that is if anything, overly defined.

51 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

I have seen that not only are my views not shared by most people here, they provoke an aggressive and personal response.

No, sir.

What you have seen is that your constant condescension, derision, and personal insults directed at those who don’t share your views provokes an expectedly aggressive and personal response.

Your “innocent victim” act (like the one here) not only doesn’t change that, but escalates the problem.

4 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

No, sir.

What you have seen is that your constant condescension, derision, and personal insults directed at those who don’t share your views provokes an expectedly aggressive and personal response.

Your “innocent victim” act (like the one here) not only doesn’t change that, but escalates the problem.

I thought that I had apologized for that, but may be I didn't. So I am sorry if I offended anyone with the way I stated my opinions. Except for the retort posts, I was not intending to be offensive or anything like that. I still have my same views on game concepts, but I didn't want to start fights with my posts, so I'm sorry about that.