I believe the point with Deflection is actually enabling it to be used to deflect, given the construction of a lightsaber blade. The bonus is minimal. It would boost the ability of someone (a Jedi) who was good at deflection, but to an untrained individual, it would simply be a shield of sorts. If you keep it in front of you, then an incoming blaster bolt just might hit it and be deflected. A Vibrosword, by comparison, would not have the same innate ability, even if held up as a "shield" in front of you. The Deflection ability makes much more sense being there than not being there if you ask me.
Lightsabers
AluminiumWolf said:
Northman said:
Not to mention the price tag and the general unavailability of a lightsaber. You simply don't buy one. You don't even simply bump into someone owning one, either.
While that might apply to this game, in a Jedi focused game a lot of people will have one. So the game needs to work when there are a lot of lightsabres around.
To some extent, I see this. If your game is successful, getting through a measly decade or less should get the galaxy from "The Jedi are extinct; their fire has gone out of the Universe", where real Jedi are rare, and lightsabers just a relic from the past, owned by few, made by none, and almost a dangerous to the owner, for attracting the wrong kind of attention, to "I am Luke Skywalker, and for to long, the light of the Jedi has been eclipsed by the shadow of the Galactic Empire, but no more. I will reinvigorate the Order, by opening a training praxeum on Yavin IV." Even the heathen edge of the galaxy will feel the changes, if only a little. At this point, Jedi numbers start to grow, by leaps, and Luke already figured out how to build a lightsaber, while Tionne found similar lore in a holocron, thus those who need lightsabers can get them, for free, and their number similarly grows. Such a time will occur, unless you force your game to proceed very differently than the movies, and that will mean the world will have to learn to accept the cheese blade.
So, a quandary. Would the Lightsaber Skill be "special"? Would it cost 10 points (5 + 5 for non-class, this skill is in no class) from 0 to 1, 15 more from 1 to 2, etc. or somehow even more? Would it read like Brawl, or Ranged Defense (Light), and just give you the extra with Lightsaber attacks, or would it get extra crap? I know it's the skill the game doesn't want one to have, because it implies you WILL have this weapon, but it's a weapon I'll eventually want, and I don't see the skill as so bad a thing; it's the weapon the game fears.
GoblynByte said:
Donovan Morningfire said:
As for lightsaber dueling, I'm of the same mindset as Nick Gilliard, in that it's chess at 100 mph and every move is potentially checkmate. The Sense Power's upgrades to upgrade the difficulty of incoming attacks reflects a Jedi's ability to dodge/parry/avoid incoming lightsaber strikes quite nicely I think.
To that point, how many lightsaber duels ended when the opponent was killed? They usually ended in a checkmate move, then the winner gloated. Only then did a finishing move get applied. Hmmm… I think this can be played well, though, with the existing system. A triumph can be used to put one person in a touchy situation and they'll have to psych the other guy out (Cool check, maybe Coerce) to distract him long enough to get out of that checkmate stance. Veeeeerrrry interesting!!
Going by the movies, you really only see duels ending directly in a fatality twice, both in TPM, with Darth Maul impaling Qui-Gon before turning to focus on Obi-Wan, and then Obi-Wan bisecting a dumbfounded Maul just a few minutes later. Had Dooku wished, he could have executed the unconscious Anakin and nearly-helpless Obi-Wan, but was interrupted by Yoda making his Big **** Heroes moment.
I'm thinking that no special rules are needed in regards to Triumph, but rather that the Triumph can be used to upgrade an ability die on a subsequent Coerce check on the round following a particularly telling hit (one that scored a nasty critical in addition to raw damage), such as was the case of Vader pretty much having Luke at his mercy quite a few times during their duel in ESB. Or just to put the other guy at a really big disadvantage, like instantly disarming them or putting them woefully off-balance for your follow-up strike.
Donovan Morningfire said:
Or just to put the other guy at a really big disadvantage, like instantly disarming them or putting them woefully off-balance for your follow-up strike.
Sometimes literally.
AluminiumWolf said:
GoblynByte said:
Dude. I went to film school
Ah well, I did a proper degree with maths and everything, so I know what reality looks like. And it isn't Star Wars!
:-)
Wwwwwooooooowwww! Somehow I missed this post, demeaning my education. Cracker jack! Stay classy, AluminiumWolf.
Is it me, or did this discussion go from "we should have gotten the Jedi book first" to "Jedi do/don't belong in Star Wars?"
Yeah, something like that. Derailed is a light term for what happened here (which I was part of).
Doc, the Weasel said:
Is it me, or did this discussion go from "we should have gotten the Jedi book first" to "Jedi do/don't belong in Star Wars?"
I'm still on "systems always break at high levels". :0)
Doc, the Weasel said:
Is it me, or did this discussion go from "we should have gotten the Jedi book first" to "Jedi do/don't belong in Star Wars?"
As I suggested earlier, best just to ignore the troll and put the discussion back on topic. If people stop feeding it, maybe it'll leave in search of richer hunting grounds.
At this point, I don't even bother reading his posts, as he's proven to have absolutely nothing positive or informative to contribute whatsoever to any of the discussions taking place here.
Well don't come running to me when you wait three years for Jedi and when they turn up they don't work because this system, just like all the other systems, breaks at high level.
Overall I am impressed with the lightsaber (and all the weapons). I think that ffg did a good job emulating what the weapon should do. So far the only issues that I have come accross have more to do with a pet peeve of mine than anything else. I understand the reasoning behind it, but I just don't think that melee weapons should relay on strength (Brawn) to actually achieve success. Actually hitting something with a weapon should be more about hand eye coordination than hard you can swing the weapon (and in fact swinging hard may actually make hitting something more difficult).
But as far as the lightsaber goes I think it's as it should be, a scary weapon, and in the right hands a really really scary weapon.
mbran01 said:
Overall I am impressed with the lightsaber (and all the weapons). I think that ffg did a good job emulating what the weapon should do. So far the only issues that I have come accross have more to do with a pet peeve of mine than anything else. I understand the reasoning behind it, but I just don't think that melee weapons should relay on strength (Brawn) to actually achieve success. Actually hitting something with a weapon should be more about hand eye coordination than hard you can swing the weapon (and in fact swinging hard may actually make hitting something more difficult).
But as far as the lightsaber goes I think it's as it should be, a scary weapon, and in the right hands a really really scary weapon.
In regards to using Brawn to hit with the majority of melee weapons (lightsabers give you the choice of Brawn or Agility), it's probably more of a game balance thing to try and keep Agility from becoming the "god stat" that it was in all the d20-based Star Wars games.
Oddly enough, West End Games' also had brawling under Strength, but put melee weapon usage under Dexterity.
As I said I understand the reasoning behind, it still bugs me. I will probably house rule melee weapons to use agility. But this isn't an agility vs. brawn thread so I will leave it at that. Just wanted to chime in on the lightsaber, and so far I think it is the best version I have seen (and I have played all versions of the star wars rpg).
mbran01 said:
As I said I understand the reasoning behind, it still bugs me. I will probably house rule melee weapons to use agility. But this isn't an agility vs. brawn thread so I will leave it at that. Just wanted to chime in on the lightsaber, and so far I think it is the best version I have seen (and I have played all versions of the star wars rpg).
Fair enough.
And you're right, this version does live up to the hype that lightsabers seem to have in the Star Wars fandom.
Still, the notion of a Jedi with a few levels of Lethal Blows… kinda scary, but does reflect the real danger with these weapons comes from the person using them.
Incidentally, are people familiar with 'The Phaser Problem' as it relates to Star Trek RPGs?
+++++I peeked at the links, but didnt see how you deal with the phaser problem* in the Star Trek setting.
*The problem being that the common handheld range weapon has a "make them glow blue and disappear" setting. Which either limits survivability among the PCs, or has to be danced around in a (probably) clumsy way. Sure, you can use the 'Federation Mindset' and minimum force policy to keep the PCs from going disintigrate-happy, but what keeps the bad guys from doing so? No access to hand phasers or other equally deadly weapons?+++++
+++++The Phaser Dilemma
In settings which include crazy-deadly personal weapons (Phasers from Trek with their insta-kill vaporize settings, or Lightsabers from Star Wars with their commonly interpreted ability to ‘cut through anything’), how do you keep player characters alive- or keep your choice villains alive?
There are all kinds of hacks and fixes for this- some merging into the metagame realm. You can rule that only NPC characters (or ‘Mooks’) ever get vaporized, and you are only chopped in half with a lightsaber when you hit 0 damage points, and every “hit” up to that point was just a near-miss that only slowed you down, or somesuch.
Strikes me that trying to run a game with real hard simulation mechanics would lead to disaster pretty quickly- unless either the setting included comparable defensive technology (as you might get from RIFTS), or combat was only a tiny part of the game.
Any examples of this leap to mind? Any good solutions you like (either printed or personal)?+++++
+++++If a phaser is set to kill, and the phaser hits, the dude dies.
The reason this doesn't happen often is because the writers understand that vaporizing a dude once or twice a season is Drama. Doing it every 20 minutes is Unemployment.+++++
If lightsabers are going to take this game apart for people…I pray you never run into a thermal detonator. Or have boba fett hit you with five advantage on a disruptor pistol shot. Or have a starship vs PCs/NPCs scenario. Or have a fight with someone on a planet like Mustafar. Or get blasted out of an airlock by a hacked droid PC. Or have a <something> collapse on you. Or any other very deadly and extremely dicey scenario. Force forbid anyone should ever be in true and dire peril!
Yeah lightsabers are freaking deadly. Introduce them into your game carefully and make sure to aim the blade end away from your characters' faces.
The phasers in Star Trek are a good example of other settings that have those iconic "thingies" that make for a nightmare the second you put them in the hands of a powergaming mouthbreather that hits numbers with bigger numbers for fun. The only way to solve things like this in your games is to identify them early (in huge rambling threads like this) and then figure out how you plan on dealing with or avoiding the problem. There is no game mechanic applicable to lightsabers that won't either turn them into a joke, or render them gobstoppingly deadly. Based on the Star Wars setting to date? Gobstoppingly deadly seems to be the better emulation. It's not FFG or Star Wars' fault if you aren't up to the challenge of having lightsabers floating around the galaxy.
Worst case scenario…roll up a new character or /quit the game. I'm still going to kill more PCs with falling crates in a docking bay than I ever will with lightsabers, and thermal detonators are going to annihilate more of my lovingly crafted villain NPCs than lightsabers will.
Callidon said:
There is no game mechanic applicable to lightsabers that won't either turn them into a joke, or render them gobstoppingly deadly. Based on the Star Wars setting to date? Gobstoppingly deadly seems to be the better emulation.
Just out of interest, what gaming experience do people have with gobstoppingly deadly liightsabers?
--
As for Thermal Detonators, for a Star Wars game I really think we ought to be looking at something like the grenade rules from Hong Kong Action Theatre! (1st edition):-
+++++When a grenade explodes, the explosion fills a 20 foot square, with the damage delivered to the targets in that area dependent upon their importance:
Grenade Damage
Target Importance Damage
None Killed
Minor Killed
Moderate 100 points
Major Ignore
Extreme Ignore
You read that right. Major and Extreme importance characters ignore damage from grenades. In most action films, characters of that importance are merely blown clear, or find convenient cover when a grenade goes off. This is a Hong Kong Action film after all! (Common sense should prevail here, though - If a character is letting a grenade go off in his hand because he knows he's immune, blow him to kingdom come. This rule was meant to engender a certain style of play, not foster power-gamers!)+++++
(It might be worth noting that in HKAT! you (kinda) play actors staring in movies - so in each new adventure/movie you have to bid 'Star Power' points to secure a role, so a characters Importance can vary depending on the part they are playing in the current movie)
I am also not entirely certain that being killed by a falling crate is the kind of thing I want to happen to PCs in a Star Wars game.
I had a jedi character killed by a falling ceilling in one campaign. It was my own fault though…Used the Force to catch a thermal detonator in mid-air and fling up to the ceilling in a dome on a planet with an unbreathable atomosphere (I didn't stop to consider that the detonator might collapse the rough…good times).
Anyway, I think that iconic weapons like the lightsaber deserve to be deadly simply because they are iconic. if the PCs should see someone weilding a lightsaber, they should consider running the other way because they are dangerous weapons (as they should be), and the person weilding it is probably a dangerous person.
mbran01 said:
As I said I understand the reasoning behind, it still bugs me. I will probably house rule melee weapons to use agility. But this isn't an agility vs. brawn thread so I will leave it at that. Just wanted to chime in on the lightsaber, and so far I think it is the best version I have seen (and I have played all versions of the star wars rpg).
I tend to agree with you on this. Like you, I've heard the reasons before (and people always assume it just hasn't been explained to me), but the reasons just don't always hold water depending on other considerations in the system. For instance, it makes sense in D&D where to-hit is a yes/no question of penetrating armor and breaking active defenses, but it makes less sense in games where armor is treated as variable damage reduction and active defenses are not abstracted (i.e. given their own rolls). This is one reason I favor the to-hit, defense, and armor mechanics of GURPS. It creates a very literal approach that I find easy to translate into visuals.
But soooo many RPGs use the strength = to-hit ability that I've learned to make peace with it.
Donovan Morningfire said:
Oddly enough, West End Games' also had brawling under Strength, but put melee weapon usage under Dexterity.
This was not without some logic since Brawling in D6 included more brute force tactics like wrestling and grappling.
mbran01 said:
Anyway, I think that iconic weapons like the lightsaber deserve to be deadly simply because they are iconic. if the PCs should see someone weilding a lightsaber, they should consider running the other way because they are dangerous weapons (as they should be), and the person weilding it is probably a dangerous person.
Like I say though, being a Star Wars RPG, the system also has to work when most or all of the PCs are armed with lightsabers, and so are a healthy fraction of the enemies they face.
Personally, I like the idea of impactful and deadly Lightsabers. Popping a Lightsaber, especially in the EotE time, should mean “This s@%t just got real”. It is very reminiscent of old samurai movies. Having mechanical “oomph” that supports the deadly imagery portrayed in the movies and most of the expanded universe is very welcome. In d20 Saga characters had to hyper specialize in Lightaber combat to stay competitive with blasters and it never really felt right.
So far my big worry with Lightsabers is the static 2 difficulty dice for melee defense. I would like to see a non-talent all-out defense option for characters who really don’t want to get hit.
+++++Personally, I like the idea of impactful and deadly Lightsabers.+++++
Sadly, I strongly suspect that once people experience the reality of their PCs being one-shotted by a glow stick they will come to realise why games tend to treat them the way their do.
+++++especially in the EotE time+++++
But what about other eras and genres where lightsaber duels are common?
GoblynByte said:
Donovan Morningfire said:
Oddly enough, West End Games' also had brawling under Strength, but put melee weapon usage under Dexterity.
This was not without some logic since Brawling in D6 included more brute force tactics like wrestling and grappling.
I would like to see an option where someone can use Brawn, Agility or Cunning to resolve attacks. Everyone goes round about strength versus agility but the poor cunning combatant gets left out. You know the archetypes: the old warrior past his prime who relies on years of experience, the overmatched underdog who must use dirty tricks and the schemer who beats his opponent before they even cross blades (or Lightsabers, or draw blasters, etc). I rarely see this type of fighter represented in games, which is weird considering their prevalence in literature and movies.
Kobold Wisdom said:
GoblynByte said:
Donovan Morningfire said:
Oddly enough, West End Games' also had brawling under Strength, but put melee weapon usage under Dexterity.
This was not without some logic since Brawling in D6 included more brute force tactics like wrestling and grappling.
I would like to see an option where someone can use Brawn, Agility or Cunning to resolve attacks. Everyone goes round about strength versus agility but the poor cunning combatant gets left out. You know the archetypes: the old warrior past his prime who relies on years of experience, the overmatched underdog who must use dirty tricks and the schemer who beats his opponent before they even cross blades (or Lightsabers, or draw blasters, etc). I rarely see this type of fighter represented in games, which is weird considering their prevalence in literature and movies.
That mismatching of characteristics and skills isn't forbidden in a system like EotE. In fact, it is discussed explicitly in a few places.