This Anniversary Core set is written for First Edition D6 Star Wars. Some of you may want to know the difference between this set of rules and those that came later.

First, consider the many rule versions for D6 SW.

1. First Edition Star Wars D6 Core Rulebook

2. Rules Upgrade (This was a four page insert that was provided with most adventures and supplements).

3. The Rules Companion (This is a supplement book that provided various new and altered rules for the game).

4. Second Edition Star Wars D6 Core Rulebook

5. Second Edition Revised & Expanded Core Rulebook

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 1E AND 2E?

Any version of the D6 Star Wars game is a fantastic game. I've played them all, and I enjoy all of them. Pick the version that best suits your tastes.

I started with the core book that is part of this Anniversary set. I added the Rules Upgrade, and then I used rules from the Rules Companion. I ran my longest single campaign using the Second Edition rules. It took seven real years to play, where the same players played the entire campaign.

Today, my preference is for 1E. I like the simplicity of it. I like how fast it plays, and I like its focus on roleplaying, fast action. To me, the First Edition rules best emulate the incredible Space Opera action that we see in the original trilogy of films. The Second Edition game--a brilliant game in its own right--is crunchier and more like a standard set of roleplaying game rules. If you will, think of the 1E version of the game as the Lite version, where 2E has all the bells and whistles.

For example, you will throw more dice with the 2E game. There are Character Points and Skill Specializations, and 2E uses the exploding Wild Die. All of this results in bigger handfuls of dice to throw, more to count. 2E also has a larger list of skills, and 2E flat out uses more task rolls (like Initiative). 1E doesn't have this stuff--it's a slimmer, more action focused game that promotes more roleplaying and less rule lawyering.

There are more task rolls in 2E. Initiative has its own roll, as with most RPGs. There's a rule system for using Sensors. You may need to roll for Movement. Space combat count a ship's move using "Space Units". In 1E, all of this is glossed over. Sensors work if its important to the plot. The GM may require a quick roll, but often, the sensors are used by the GM to enhance the drama. "Sensors are being jammed! Pick up your visual scanning!" Space combats are quick and breathless, using a few rolls for this and that. Movement just happens--there's no rolls to make (unless the GM decides that there is!)

When you think of 2E, think of a standard set of roleplaying game rules.

When you think of 1E, think of a quick set of rules that allows you to experience that breath-taking, slam-bam-thank-you-ma'am action that is Star Wars.

Again, both are excellent games. But, don't think of 1E as inferior. It's not. It's my favorite version of the rules. It's just meant for a different style of play--play that is less concerned with rules and more focused on incredibly exciting Star Wars action.

1E is about a swashbuckling hero, grabbing a princess to his hip, and swinging across a metal chasm while a horde of stormtrooper sharpshooters blast away at him. It's not about minute details and a rule for everything (that's more like 2E). It's about breath-taking moments, your GM telling you, "OK, you've got her on your hip! Your other hand has a grip on the rope. Go! Go, man! Go!" And, the blaster bolts zip buy as you feel the rope tighten in your grip and the wind lift your hair!

A NOTE ON CONVERSION

If you compare the stat blocks from a 1E adventure to that of a 2E adventure, it becomes obvious, quickly, that 2E adds a lot of crunch and detail to the game rules. Therefore, it is fairly easy to use 2E materials in a 1E game. You just have to ignore the stuff that is not used in 1E (and, you do have to add a thing or two, like Speed Codes).

But, the reverse is not true. It is much harder to covert from 1E to 2E than it is the reverse.

I ran a SWRPG 1E game for the first time in 20 years Saturday. I had forgotten just how easy and enjoyable the system was to GM, let alone play. We ran Rebel Breakout right from the source book, it took us about 3 hours from start to finish. I got a phone call first thing Sunday morning. "Hey, can we play another mission today?"

That's awesome man. Yeah, 1E is where it is at, as far as I'm concerned. And I'm talking bare bones 1E. No Rules Upgrade. No Rules Companion. The Core Rulebook has everything that you need to run an excellent Star Was game. The other rules, imo, just make the game heavier.

On 8/13/2018 at 8:45 PM, player3412539 said:

That's awesome man. Yeah, 1E is where it is at, as far as I'm concerned. And I'm talking bare bones 1E. No Rules Upgrade. No Rules Companion. The Core Rulebook has everything that you need to run an excellent Star Was game. The other rules, imo, just make the game heavier.

It does, but in my experience it really works best with 2 or 3 players. The narrative flow without initiative that you so eloquently outlined does fall apart a bit with larger groups.

I disagree. 2eR&E is far superior to the 1e version in many, many ways. When I want to wind back to simplicity, I don't go 1e, I go MiniSix:Bare Bones Edition. It has static defenses which speed up play, melee is better balanced, and 4 Attributes are plenty for me.

All rpg systems that focus on single characters work best with 2 or 3 players, but I can't agree that the system falls apart with larger groups. I think it works quite well.

What I normally find when I see comments like this that alternate rules are used. If you use 1E exactly as written in the core rulebook, large groups are no problem at all.

GMs should start a combat round with description of that seen by the characters, setting the stage, so to speak. Then, allow every player to say what he's going to do (The Declaration Segment). With large groups, the GM must break up the action into smaller groups.

Do those actions that don't require any roll first (or leave them for last). But, just describe them.

The smaller groups should each consist of characters and foes that can effect each other--such as people shooting blasters at each other.

One of the rules that I often see changed is the auto stun rule on a hit. Any hit, under the 1E Core rules, will stun the target and keep him from acting. I've seen GMs change this rule not really understanding how important it is to the 1E combat system. It's the mechanic that makes large groups easy to play.

I haven't quite figured out how to have the words to which I'm replying at the top of a post...hmmm...

But, to HappyDaze, my response is that I'm not about to say that 2E is not a good game. I played it for years, and it is an excellent game. It's more about taste, in my opinion.

I would ask, though...in what way is 2E superior to 1E, because I don't see that at all.

Examples?

Just now, player3412539 said:

I haven't quite figured out how to have the words to which I'm replying at the top of a post...hmmm...

But, to HappyDaze, my response is that I'm not about to say that 2E is not a good game. I played it for years, and it is an excellent game. It's more about taste, in my opinion.

I would ask, though...in what way is 2E superior to 1E, because I don't see that at all.

Examples?

I like the options to use character points to influence rolls when they matter. I like rules for raising Attributes (even if they are really tough). I like having rules for starship sensors. I like the more defined rules on learning Force powers. I like the general clean-up they did. The only thing I really didn't prefer was the skill bloat in Mechanical and Technical skills.

44 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

I like the options to use character points to influence rolls when they matter. I like rules for raising Attributes (even if they are really tough). I like having rules for starship sensors. I like the more defined rules on learning Force powers. I like the general clean-up they did. The only thing I really didn't prefer was the skill bloat in Mechanical and Technical skills.

Ah, that's how the quote works...

Um, yeah. That stuff is good and is what makes 2E an excellent system, but it doesn't make 2E A BETTER GAME, SUPERIOR TO 1E.

As I keep saying, I do like 2E. Nobody can go wrong with the game. But, it's not superior. It is different. Clearly, your taste is with more crunch.

In response to what you way, a 1E fan might say...

..that Character Points just make for big hands of dice. Throwing 2-4 or 2-6 D6, on average, is preferable to the whopping handfuls of dice.

..that, if you look at the official write ups for Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker, and all the others, that not one of them increased an Attribute over the years. Not one. Even in 2E. And, i my 7 year long 2E game, not one of my six core players improved the Attribute of their character--not even one time.

..that, in the movies, sensors are rarely referenced. If a 1E GM wants a roll, he can call for a Mechanical roll. There's not even a skill in 1E for Sensors. Extra skills like that rob the character of points that help the character in more important areas. If a situation comes up where Sensors are important, then the GM can just come up with a quick roll, if he wants--just like he does in response to any other point like this comes up in a game. Roll-n-go! Forget detailed rules that are not used often. In my 2E game, I used sensor rules about as many times as sensors were important in the original trilogy of films--which is about zero times.

..Adding Force Sensitivity to the game hampers the spirit of Star Wars and the game by defining those who can have Force Powers. In 1E, people can just discover that, what they thought was an excellent Sixth Sense or super Lucky streak, was really the Force speaking to them. Anybody can take on the Force--forget Force Sensitivity. Maybe in a personal game, Han Solo discovers that his incredible piloting skills is really the result of his connection to the Force, and he never knew it. He doesn't have to be Force Sensitive.

As I said, 2E is more crunch. More rules. 1E is quicker, more roll-n-Go! And, because the rules have a lower focus in 1E, Roleplaying is promoted over it.

But, heck, 2E may be the correct game for you. Sounds like it is.

2E is just not superior to 1E. 2E is just a crunchier way to play the SW D6 System.

32 minutes ago, player3412539 said:

AAs I said, 2E is more crunch. More rules. 1E is quicker, more roll-n-Go! And, because the rules have a lower focus in 1E, Roleplaying is promoted over it.

But, heck, 2E may be the correct game for you. Sounds like it is.

2E is just not superior to 1E. 2E is just a crunchier way to play the SW D6 System.

Don't believe the lie that a lower resolution of the rules magically promote roleplaying (or, if you prefer, that more detailed rules hamper roleplaying).

As I also said, if I want a lighter set of rules, it would not be 1e. I would instead go with Mini Six . Check it out. It's FREE!

12 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Don't believe the lie that a lower resolution of the rules magically promote roleplaying (or, if you prefer, that more detailed rules hamper roleplaying).

As I also said, if I want a lighter set of rules, it would not be 1e. I would instead go with Mini Six . Check it out. It's FREE!

It's not a lie. I've lived it, playing the heck out of 1E. IT's a great game. And, at least in my experience, it does promote more roleplaying and living in the skin of a character with the lower focus on dice and mechanics.

I know about Mini Six. I just don't see a need for it since the 1E base rules are so doggone good. ☺️

1 minute ago, player3412539 said:

I just don't see a need for it since the 1E base rules are so doggone good. ☺️

If that were true, WEG wouldn't have felt the need to go to a 2e, and then to Revise & Expand from there. But hey, enjoy them sweet lemons.

7 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

If that were true, WEG wouldn't have felt the need to go to a 2e, and then to Revise & Expand from there. But hey, enjoy them sweet lemons.

LOL. You sound like an experienced gamer. You actually think that RPGs reach new editions because there is a gaming need? RPG companies are publishing companies. They need product to publish.

Do you actually think that D&D 2, 3, 4, and 5 were printed because they were needed? Or that their companies wanted to boost sales? You buy a new edition, then you need new supplements, new adventures, etc.

Is the new Pathfinder edition really needed?

Nah.

8 hours ago, player3412539 said:

Do those actions that don't require any roll first (or leave them for last). But, just describe them.

Dex is used for initiative of no-roll-needed actions
2E is better in several categories of better:

• providing real ranges for weapons
• improving the skill verisimilitude with specializations and advanced skills
• much more realistic and flexible alien PC creation rules (making it possible to use them for standard template, even)

Not everyone agrees, but it's generally held ...

• 2E Improved cinematic feel, due to wild die, and spending character points for extra dice in urgent situations
• 2E improved combat added map-driven combat for vehicles/ships, instead of the very fuzzy distance-only method of 1E
• 2Er has better scaling rules (I disagree with this one, but almost all 2ER fans consider it the big improvement worth the most)
• Better explained rules
• better examples.

2E have a lot of solid, fan-made supplements than 1E

4 hours ago, AK_Aramis said:

• 2Er has better scaling rules (I disagree with this one, but almost all 2ER fans consider it the big improvement worth the most)

This is one of the things that FFG's house system really needs. As is, their personal/planetary divide is too big and doesn't account for anything in the middle.

4 hours ago, AK_Aramis said:

Dex is used for initiative of no-roll-needed actions
2E is better in several categories of better:

• providing real ranges for weapons
• improving the skill verisimilitude with specializations and advanced skills
• much more realistic and flexible alien PC creation rules (making it possible to use them for standard template, even)

Not everyone agrees, but it's generally held ...

• 2E Improved cinematic feel, due to wild die, and spending character points for extra dice in urgent situations
• 2E improved combat added map-driven combat for vehicles/ships, instead of the very fuzzy distance-only method of 1E
• 2Er has better scaling rules (I disagree with this one, but almost all 2ER fans consider it the big improvement worth the most)
• Better explained rules
• better examples.

1E has ranges for weapons, just like 2E. In fact, the ranges are identical. The difference is that 1E emphasizes eyeballing range and getting on with the game rather than counting range squares to the meter. That's GM's choice, of course.

As I said above, a 1E player would argue that specializations, advanced skills, and the wild die add unnecessary complication to the game requireing bigger handfuls of dice. Why roll big, whopping handfuls of dice when just a couple or a few will do....roll-n-go.

1E's alien creation is both more simple and a lot more flexible than 2E. It's a one-size fits all rule where the creator's imagination is the limit.

1E has a map driven combat option.

1E has scaling rules--they're just embedded in the text.

Nothing you've said makes 2E a superior game. Plus, it looks as if your understanding of the 1E rules is lacking in some areas.

2E may be your preference, and if it is, that's great. I love 2E. It is a fantastic game.

But, all you've shown above is that 2E is more crunchy, as I described in the OP.

1E is still a viable, excellent game in its own right.

24 minutes ago, player3412539 said:

Nothing you've said makes 2E a superior game.

And for you, it never will since you've now mastered moving goal posts at lightspeed.

9 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

And for you, it never will since you've now mastered moving goal posts at lightspeed.

No, I just recognize both are different games and both are good games. I could easily play 2E, but my preference is for 1E.

And, I argue against your contention that 2E is a superior game.

The only "superior" game is the one that a GM and their group most enjoy playing.

If a group prefers 1e d6 Star Wars over any other Star Wars RPG, then for them it's the superior game no matter what a bunch of faceless trogs on the internet might say.

So if the OP and their group have the most fun playing 1e rather than any of the other WEG versions, then more power to them. 'Nuff said.

2 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

The only "superior" game is the one that a GM and their group most enjoy playing.

If a group prefers 1e d6 Star Wars over any other Star Wars RPG, then for them it's the superior game no matter what a bunch of faceless trogs on the internet might say.

So if the OP and their group have the most fun playing 1e rather than any of the other WEG versions, then more power to them. 'Nuff said.

Thank you. That's true. My point in this thread is this, above. But, my point is also that a game shouldn't be relegated to the "no good" pile once a new edition comes out. Many thought that 4E D&D was inferior to 3E. Is 1E AD&D a worse game than, say, 5E? No, it's not. 1E AD&D is still a very viable game with strong following. Many think 1E AD&D is superior to the other versions.

All I'm saying is, don't count it out. 1E Star Wars is a fantastic game just by itself.