54 minutes ago, Flavorabledeez said:

Look, you can still like D&D. I still do. But it’s an old system that has name brand recognition and pretty much pushes its own cultural hegemony on the rpg genre. Does that make it the best? No. Does it make it bad? Not at all. But no matter how you tweak it or its trend in popularity, it’s still the same decades old game system at its core.

Well let's compare to FFG's system. It gets by on the strength of the Star Wars brand. Take that away and you have Genesys... which is FAR less widely played (I have never met a Genesys player in the flesh).

36 minutes ago, DanteRotterdam said:

This is quite a different point then the one you were initially making. I don’t think anyone here would have any issues with this changed tune.

Now that expression is played out!

I said I’d rather not see the Star Wars license go back to WotC if they were going to just slap the played out d20 system on it again.

Where was my change in tune?

16 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Well let's compare to FFG's system. It gets by on the strength of the Star Wars brand. Take that away and you have Genesys... which is FAR less widely played (I have never met a Genesys player in the flesh).

So popularity is the only way to judge a game system’s merits?

You must also believe that Ariana Grande is the best vocalist on the planet.

6 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Well let's compare to FFG's system. It gets by on the strength of the Star Wars brand. Take that away and you have Genesys... which is FAR less widely played (I have never met a Genesys player in the flesh).

Doesn't mean we don't exist. 😛 I know of a few groups in town that are playing it, and several more people who are at least buying the books, at least as many who bought CoR based on the sales from our LGS

Not saying that it proves any particular point for or against the debates currently going on, but I have noticed that RPG's tend to go through boom and bust cycles. Star Wars has always been popular to a certain segment regardless of the form the rules have taken.

D&D in it's various incarnations has been the gateway for a good number of the new players I have introduced, simply because it does have a cultural awareness. Star Wars is usually a good second choice.

I run all three systems, and while I like D&D, I prefer the story mechanics and the give and take of my lucky charms. 😛

I have never liked d20. I was absolutely enthralled by this narrative system. The main reason I had any interest in it to begin with was that it was Star Wars, but I would not have been nearly as interested in playing it if it was d20.

While D&D was undoubtly the entry point for me, I played for over a decade solely before dedicating energy on other system, I came to embrace the more narrative systems nowadays, mainly the 2D20 (Conan, Infinity) and Genesys (though it's really not that easy to find players). No wonder, both are literally Jay Little's children. 😁

Though Pathfinder 2 is another guilty pleasure I clearly prefer to D&D 5e. After having played 5e for a short while it's limitations felt so AD&Dish and I had to confess to myself that my preferences had changed over time. But yeah, undoubtly D&D was the entry point for many, even maybe most of us.

25 minutes ago, DarthDude said:

While D&D was undoubtly the entry point for me, I played for over a decade solely before dedicating energy on other system, I came to embrace the more narrative systems nowadays, mainly the 2D20 (Conan, Infinity) and Genesys (though it's really not that easy to find players). No wonder, both are literally Jay Little's children. 😁

Though Pathfinder 2 is another guilty pleasure I clearly prefer to D&D 5e. After having played 5e for a short while it's limitations felt so AD&Dish and I had to confess to myself that my preferences had changed over time. But yeah, undoubtly D&D was the entry point for many, even maybe most of us.

I cut my rpg teeth on AD&D back when I was a wee lad. Then picked at some other d20 games over time.

My current group were all rpg newbies when 5e came out and they wanted me to DM for them. It was a great time. I ran several mini campaigns and then one long one that went for about two years.

During the long campaign we found a lot of holes in the game system, especially when it came to working within the narrative. An example is the players were fighting animated armor in a tower that had broken off of a flying castle and was hurtling end over end to the ground. Needless to say using minis on a map went out the window and trying to work the whole thing within the rule system was going against the fun of the situation. When nearly the only rule you’re using is “the rule of cool” for an entire battle you start to wonder why you’re using the game system at all.

We had a group discussion after that. Most of the players were ecstatic about that combat enough to where we ditched minis and maps more often. It made the fights more dynamic, but they still felt too “pinned up” by the rules themselves. I found I was winging a lot of things far more often rather than doing it by the book, and the results were often applauded and more memorable.

When the campaign was finished I could tell the players wanted more, and the jump to FFG’s narrative Star Wars game was an easy leap. I did lose two players in the switch (putting us down to three and then back up to four with a newbie), but I knew that would happen because they were the type of players who were only there to roll dice and move miniatures (they begrudgingly had a good time with the theater of the mind battles).

The stories we’ve formed with the narrative system have changed how these players recall in game events. Gone are the “bullet point” descriptions of the highlights. Instead they’ve been replaced by back and forths that build up the story, similar to how they actually transpired. It’s been impressive to see the change.

It’s all subjective.

I just would like FFG to get on the ball

9 minutes ago, Flavorabledeez said:

I cut my rpg teeth on AD&D back when I was a wee lad. Then picked at some other d20 games over time.

My current group were all rpg newbies when 5e came out and they wanted me to DM for them. It was a great time. I ran several mini campaigns and then one long one that went for about two years.

During the long campaign we found a lot of holes in the game system, especially when it came to working within the narrative. An example is the players were fighting animated armor in a tower that had broken off of a flying castle and was hurtling end over end to the ground. Needless to say using minis on a map went out the window and trying to work the whole thing within the rule system was going against the fun of the situation. When nearly the only rule you’re using is “the rule of cool” for an entire battle you start to wonder why you’re using the game system at all.

We had a group discussion after that. Most of the players were ecstatic about that combat enough to where we ditched minis and maps more often. It made the fights more dynamic, but they still felt too “pinned up” by the rules themselves. I found I was winging a lot of things far more often rather than doing it by the book, and the results were often applauded and more memorable.

When the campaign was finished I could tell the players wanted more, and the jump to FFG’s narrative Star Wars game was an easy leap. I did lose two players in the switch (putting us down to three and then back up to four with a newbie), but I knew that would happen because they were the type of players who were only there to roll dice and move miniatures (they begrudgingly had a good time with the theater of the mind battles).

The stories we’ve formed with the narrative system have changed how these players recall in game events. Gone are the “bullet point” descriptions of the highlights. Instead they’ve been replaced by back and forths that build up the story, similar to how they actually transpired. It’s been impressive to see the change.

I cut my teeth on Basic and Expert D&D back in Jr High, and then AD&D 2nd Ed before completely abandoning them for better games, such as D6 Star Wars, Cyberpunk, Mekton, TFOS, and the current iteration of Star Wars. I played the D20 RCRB SW RPG as well, but refused to play SAGA Edition, and won't touch D&D.

1 hour ago, HappyDaze said:

Well let's compare to FFG's system. It gets by on the strength of the Star Wars brand. Take that away and you have Genesys... which is FAR less widely played (I have never met a Genesys player in the flesh).

Genesys seems solid from reading it, but is a framework to create games rather than a game in it's own right, as I see it.

13 minutes ago, Darzil said:

Genesys seems solid from reading it, but is a framework to create games rather than a game in it's own right, as I see it.

Depends on the setting, actually. I was able to make up a Space 1889 one shot literally from scratch using just the information from the Genesys CRB in no time. Though if you play in settings with elaborate magic systems, it might take a bit more work to put into.

1 hour ago, HappyDaze said:

that not liking it "says more about the people than the system" is insulting.

Well, doesn’t it say more about them than the system? And isn’t what it says, “It’s not a system that appeals to them?” There’s no game system out there that’s universally beloved by all players, so that response isn’t a flaw in the system (or, for that matter, a flaw in the player). It’s just a matter of preference.

47 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

I cut my teeth on Basic and Expert D&D back in Jr High, and then AD&D 2nd Ed before completely abandoning them for better games, such as D6 Star Wars, Cyberpunk, Mekton, TFOS, and the current iteration of Star Wars. I played the D20 RCRB SW RPG as well, but refused to play SAGA Edition, and won't touch D&D.

Man, I wanted the SAGA edition to be good just because of the amount of materials they were putting out allowed for some serious options for campaigns... but that system... gross

3 hours ago, daggertx said:

It’s all subjective.

I just would like FFG to get on the ball

They couldn't regularly stay on the ball when they had full-time RPG staff. Now they don't so I would not expect an improvement.

2 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

Well, doesn’t it say more about them than the system? And isn’t what it says, “It’s not a system that appeals to them?” There’s no game system out there that’s universally beloved by all players, so that response isn’t a flaw in the system (or, for that matter, a flaw in the player). It’s just a matter of preference.

Your quote of mine is devoid of context; reread the full context of the post I was responding to where the poster made judgemental statements regarding those that don't love FFG's narrative mechanics.

25 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Your quote of mine is devoid of context; reread the full context of the post I was responding to where the poster made judgemental statements regarding those that don't love FFG's narrative mechanics.

I did.

I stand by what I said.

29 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

I did.

I stand by what I said.

You said nothing of consequence.

6 hours ago, Flavorabledeez said:

Man, I wanted the SAGA edition to be good just because of the amount of materials they were putting out allowed for some serious options for campaigns... but that system... gross

Yes, sadly it was kind of broken, though they had some really good approaches. What finally broke its neck was the way, it handled force powers. 😢

8 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

You said nothing of consequence.

Sorry you feel that way.

7 hours ago, DarthDude said:

Yes, sadly it was kind of broken, though they had some really good approaches. What finally broke its neck was the way, it handled force powers. 😢

It's unsurprising that WotC went that way. About the time SAGA was being developed, World of Warcraft was gaining popularity at a remarkable pace (****, WoW, Star Wars SAGA edition, and myself are old).

I still think Saga Edition is great. The next time I play in a Star Wars game (after the FFG Star Wars game I'm running ends in ~3 sessions) it will most likely be Saga. When Saga came out it was hailed for how cinematic it was and it's fairly easy to play it "narritively" (most of that is how you choose to play a game, at this point FFG Star Wars is almost like an RPG with training wheels as players, particularly GMs are free to add narrative touches to actions and complications/advantage to results) and especially if the GM regularly uses the Skill Challenge rules (where narrative play is really ramped up). I'd actually like to see what Star Wars would look like in the current D&D 5e. But to each their own.

1 hour ago, kaosoe said:

It's unsurprising that WotC went that way. About the time SAGA was being developed, World of Warcraft was gaining popularity at a remarkable pace (****, WoW, Star Wars SAGA edition, and myself are old).

There's also the matter that Saga Edition was in several ways used as a test bed for D&D 4e, which was very much a system designed in the vein of MMO-style gameplay. Rodney Thompson even said that when working on Saga Edition, he'd be contacted by Chris Perkins who'd either suggest things for Rodney to try out for Saga Edition or ask how Rodney handled certain things were done in Saga Edition, with one notable instance being CP asking how Rodney had handled the whole notion of "single Athletics skill vs. having individual skills for climbing, jumping, and swimming," which lead to 4e going with a singular skill vs. sticking with 3e's having three individual skills.

It's not too dissimilar to how Green Ronin ultimately used the Dragon Age RPG as a testbed for their in-house AGE system, the later of which addresses a number of quirks and issues that DARPG had.

Well, if we are looking for crunchy yet capable of simulating genre and including narrative touches I'd go with the Hero System. I've actually run Star Wars with it and it works extremely well if you want to do the work. The force can be handled as a variable power pool with the individual powers being skill roll or ego (willpower) roll based and it has a robust and flexible martial arts system. Its just one of those systems that demands the game-master and players invest time in system knowledge, design, and balance.

16 minutes ago, Vondy said:

Well, if we are looking for crunchy yet capable of simulating genre and including narrative touches I'd go with the Hero System. I've actually run Star Wars with it and it works extremely well if you want to do the work. The force can be handled as a variable power pool with the individual powers being skill roll or ego (willpower) roll based and it has a robust and flexible martial arts system. Its just one of those systems that demands the game-master and players invest time in system knowledge, design, and balance.

It is also a system where the GM has to work hard to reign in abusive players. But it can be a fun system with the right gm and group.

4 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

It is also a system where the GM has to work hard to reign in abusive players. But it can be a fun system with the right gm and group.

That's why the last word in my post was balance. I ran Hero almost exclusively from 1991 until just a few years ago. It requires GM prudence and good faith from the players.