Has anyone found a place where they will be house ruling anything?
Due to the ~2 hour length of my weekly session I will have the players roll for destiny points as normal, but instead of flipping one to another when used, they will just be used and gone for the rest of the session.
Post your house rules here!
I will have the players roll for destiny points as normal, but instead of flipping one to another when used, they will just be used and gone for the rest of the session.
I like that idea. using dark side tokens seems too much like fighting my players when all i want to do is cheer them on.
So far the only thing i'm doing is with the crit chart. I am probably not going to use the high level one that causes a player to lose a ability point. Mostly it just depends on if it ends up coming up very much. I think that could take away some fun from them. Especially if they get it more than once. Then they may not want to play that character.
While there is stuff like the characters losing limbs and such I don't mind those since that can actually add something to the character in the long run.
I'm going to house rule the encumbrance rules for starships, because as written they're just silly. I'll use the West End Games stats and assign ships cargo capacity in tons instead.
I'm likely going to house rule the stacking of cover + armor; as stated in the rules they don't stack, but that just doesn't make sense to me. I'll take the narrative as my guide here - if someone's behind a wall with a suit of armor on, yeah they stack. I'll charge a maneuver to pop up from cover.
I realize this is due to the size of dice pools, but when someone already has 10 dice in their hand, what's another 2-3? I have 3 sets of dice and 4 more at the table so it's not an issue for me.
Taking a page from the excellent idea of the Republic Commando PC Shooter, I am going for a gritty, less colorful/happy approach for my Star Wars interpretation. I thus encourage smart, tactical gameplay to a certain extent, and want my opponents to be formidable in a realistic way.
Armor + Cover bonus for Defense stacks.
Almost all adversaries have the "Adversary" talent, with most Stormtroopers and other supposedly advanced enemies having it at 2, going all the way up to 4 or 5 for the truly BBEGs.
You can automatically kill anyone being unconscious or otherwise completely helpless by engaging them and spending your action for an attack, basically performing a coup de grace. The idea behind this is that it pays off to cover your fallen friends in combat, and the very realistic "safety shot" which can also be seen in Episode 4 in the beginning, when Stormtroopers clean house.
The 5 non-removable points of Obligation any character has are "living up to the laws/standards of the Empire, Hutts or whoever else is in power at the place where you are", allowing for the typical, probably erroneous, run-in with the law over some obscure issue. For dramatic reasons, I only check for this is the player has paid off his debts/bounties or whatnot, otherwise I dont see how he/she would overly care for getting a ticket or whatnot.
Lightsaber skill purchasable at double cost IF you have a lightsaber and time to train with it. (force sensitive NOT required, I fail to see how to plays into the skill of fencing)
I am still pondering whether to change the interaction of soak and penetration/breach.
I am definitely not happy with the encumbrance rules. I think we'll just go with "whatever sounds right." Similarly, other size/silhouette issues will likely come up.
Since we are converting from Saga, there are a number of custom equipment rulings, but most conversions on equipment are "lossy," meaning the benefits are likely gone. The main example I have there is for Mandalorian armor, which has been heavily customized. The Free Traders & Freebooters PDF has been of use in that regard, but I've tweaked it beyond their suggestions.
I'm going to house rule the encumbrance rules for starships, because as written they're just silly.
I keep seeing people say this, and I haven't heard anyone say why they think they're silly or broken or wrong.
The devs have said that a) encumbrance is a factor of both weight and unwieldiness, and b) that a crate of 20 blaster rifles does not have an encumbrance value of "blaster rifle x 20", which is where I think a lot of the disconnect is coming from.
I will have the players roll for destiny points as normal, but instead of flipping one to another when used, they will just be used and gone for the rest of the session.
I like that idea. using dark side tokens seems too much like fighting my players when all i want to do is cheer them on.
Ah I just mean that we won't be trading back and forth. At the start of the session if the party rolls 4 light side and 3 dark side destiny points then the party will have 4 to use for the session and I'll have 3. Normally if someone uses a destiny point it you flip it over and it changes to the opposite kind. I am house ruling that instead of them flipping over, they are just used and gone.
I'm likely going to house rule the stacking of cover + armor; as stated in the rules they don't stack, but that just doesn't make sense to me. I'll take the narrative as my guide here - if someone's behind a wall with a suit of armor on, yeah they stack. I'll charge a maneuver to pop up from cover.
I realize this is due to the size of dice pools, but when someone already has 10 dice in their hand, what's another 2-3? I have 3 sets of dice and 4 more at the table so it's not an issue for me.
In the core book on page 213 under the Cover entry I read "...being behind some sort of cover--a rock, crate, wall, or vehicle, for example--increases the character's ranged defense by 1 and can add a set back die to certain skill checks...the GM made add additional setback dice if the target is particularly well covered, such as a target firing from within a trench...The same holds true for the increase in ranged defense."
I took this to mean cover stacks with armor for defense "increases the character's ranged defense by 1..." is pretty clear to me. I don't know if there is an official rule debate going on somewhere concerning this, but in my mind it's pretty cut and dry.
Taking a page from the excellent idea of the Republic Commando PC Shooter, I am going for a gritty, less colorful/happy approach for my Star Wars interpretation. I thus encourage smart, tactical gameplay to a certain extent, and want my opponents to be formidable in a realistic way.
Armor + Cover bonus for Defense stacks.
Almost all adversaries have the "Adversary" talent, with most Stormtroopers and other supposedly advanced enemies having it at 2, going all the way up to 4 or 5 for the truly BBEGs.
You can automatically kill anyone being unconscious or otherwise completely helpless by engaging them and spending your action for an attack, basically performing a coup de grace. The idea behind this is that it pays off to cover your fallen friends in combat, and the very realistic "safety shot" which can also be seen in Episode 4 in the beginning, when Stormtroopers clean house.
The 5 non-removable points of Obligation any character has are "living up to the laws/standards of the Empire, Hutts or whoever else is in power at the place where you are", allowing for the typical, probably erroneous, run-in with the law over some obscure issue. For dramatic reasons, I only check for this is the player has paid off his debts/bounties or whatnot, otherwise I dont see how he/she would overly care for getting a ticket or whatnot.
Lightsaber skill purchasable at double cost IF you have a lightsaber and time to train with it. (force sensitive NOT required, I fail to see how to plays into the skill of fencing)
I am still pondering whether to change the interaction of soak and penetration/breach.
I too am aiming for more tactical game play. When my players just stand in the open firing at a group of enemies, they'll use any sort of terrain as advantage. In my experience with RPGs it's pretty much always been like terrain gives you a little bonus, but it's not really necessary when standing in the open works just fine. So I am going to encourage much more tactical fighting.
I like the coup de grace idea, as well as the 5 unavoidable obligation being given a story cause.
As long as non-force wielders expect to not be able to reflect blaster bolts then I am good. It is the Jedi reflexes that make blaster bolt deflection/reflection possible at any kind of regularity.
Another thing I was considering was changing the cover bonus from defense to soak. The idea is that when an enemy is shooting at you and you duck behind a barrel, the enemy knows you're there. He can shoot at the barrel, effectively "hitting" where you are, but the damage is absorbed by the thing you are behind. When I think of defense I think of it in terms of hitting or missing, if an enemy is invisible with no cover you have a higher chance to miss because you don't know where he is. Cover doesn't make it harder to hit a PC's location, with a greater chance of missing the location, if he is behind a barrel. It just gives him another layer of soak. Another good example is if a PC throws a thermal detonator at a brick wall that the enemy has hidden behind and then runs away. Sure the enemy is going to be more protected from the blast than if he weren't behind the wall, but if the PC saw him duck behind a wall it doesn't change the miss percentage since the enemy, the wall, and anything else in short range is going to take some serious damage.
I keep seeing people say this, and I haven't heard anyone say why they think they're silly or broken or wrong.
The devs have said that a) encumbrance is a factor of both weight and unwieldiness, and b) that a crate of 20 blaster rifles does not have an encumbrance value of "blaster rifle x 20", which is where I think a lot of the disconnect is coming from.
It's probably more of a factor that it's such a break from the long-standing tonnage rules that have been in place since the WEG days. I'll admit, picturing how much cargo equals to X number of metric tons (roughly) is a much simpler figure than trying to figure how much cargo equates to X number of Encumbrance, particularly when Encumbrance is a somewhat squirrelly value to start with. Much as some folks are heavily against the shift from your typical "pass/fail" dice system to EotE's dice system, some folks just don't or can't make the transition from tonnage to Encumbrance.
I'm going to house rule the encumbrance rules for starships, because as written they're just silly.
I keep seeing people say this, and I haven't heard anyone say why they think they're silly or broken or wrong.
The devs have said that a) encumbrance is a factor of both weight and unwieldiness, and b) that a crate of 20 blaster rifles does not have an encumbrance value of "blaster rifle x 20", which is where I think a lot of the disconnect is coming from.
Very true, but a bit more discussion of how it would work would be very helpful.
Allowing both Computers and Perception for ship sensors, etc.
That's it for me.
Due to the ~2 hour length of my weekly session I will have the players roll for destiny points as normal, but instead of flipping one to another when used, they will just be used and gone for the rest of the session.
I am considering doing this, except that they would be gone for the encounter rather than the whole session.
You may consider having the talents that run off of DPs have some other trigger to balance it out. Maybe once per encounter or something along those lines.
I had a thought that, to create more consistent difficulties, any roll has a minimum number of failures equal to the difficulties dice + the challenge dice - 1. Thus a pool of two difficulty dice automatically scores a minimum of 1 failure. That way a cliff doesn't become suddenly easier for the next person to climb.
I am really disappointed in the Vehicle/Starship combat rules. I have had an entire encounter where one player was just going evasive the whole time... rather boring. Working on revamping them where is more opposed rolls, and you are trying to go from head on, to advantage, to tailing. Also adding wingman assisting.
Does anyone have a house rule regarding disengaging from 2 or more enemies?
This question came up with the following scenario:
A player character using a blaster pistol has 2 npc enemies engaged with him. He obviously takes a penalty and gives the attackers a boost die if he stays next to them to try and blast them. So he wants to disengage, costing 1 maneuver.
The question is, does that 1 disengage maneuver disengage the PC from both enemies or just 1 of them, thus having to spend a second maneuver to disengage from both?
Just wanted other people's thoughts on this, though I plan to house rule that it takes 1 maneuver to disengage from each enemy the pc is currently engaged with (1 for 1, 2 for 2, etc).
Or maybe this is more clearly defined in the rules but we haven't been able to find anything on it.
I will have the players roll for destiny points as normal, but instead of flipping one to another when used, they will just be used and gone for the rest of the session.
I like that idea. using dark side tokens seems too much like fighting my players when all i want to do is cheer them on.
Ah I just mean that we won't be trading back and forth. At the start of the session if the party rolls 4 light side and 3 dark side destiny points then the party will have 4 to use for the session and I'll have 3. Normally if someone uses a destiny point it you flip it over and it changes to the opposite kind. I am house ruling that instead of them flipping over, they are just used and gone.
Eh, cant say I'm a huge fan of the One and Done force points. Back in the WEG days, a force point was goddamned huge! You're the last one to take the shot on the exhaust port before the superweapon blows up your homeworld huge. You have to dodge fifty TIE fighters all gunning for you on the way down to the planet huge! You're facing down your life long nemesis after hunting him across the galaxy for months huge.
But the EotE force points, I like the idea of a constant flow of little boosts here and there. Let the players do things that may not shake the pillars of heaven, but will add all sorts of color to the game in the long run.
I'm going to house rule the encumbrance rules for starships, because as written they're just silly.
I keep seeing people say this, and I haven't heard anyone say why they think they're silly or broken or wrong.
The devs have said that a) encumbrance is a factor of both weight and unwieldiness, and b) that a crate of 20 blaster rifles does not have an encumbrance value of "blaster rifle x 20", which is where I think a lot of the disconnect is coming from.
First of all, there's no discussion or examples of how encumbrance work related to starships instead of characters.
Second, there's no way to determine price per encumbrance for any type of cargo.
It doesn't help in the least to say that a crate of 20 blaster rifles doesn't have Encumbrance = blaster rifle x 20. You need a specific number. Also, what does a crate of 20 blaster rifles cost? The price of one multiplied by 20? More? Less? The whole encumbrance system for ships is so vague you have no choice but to house rule it.
I don't really like house ruling in general, since it's confusing for players when they play the same game with a different group, so I try to keep to RAW.
I don't really like house ruling in general, since it's confusing for players when they play the same game with a different group, so I try to keep to RAW.
That's fair. It's not for everyone. I see house ruling as a way to customizing to your group.
We're going to put in at least 10 sessions and see what doesn't exactly work for us. Start as RAW and once we feel we've got a handle on the system, start adding minor tweaks if necessary.
We've only had one session so far. Unless something smacks me in the face and derails the game, I'll try to play as is until I have a much firmer grasp of the rules.
I want to master the system as is before changing things. It can often prevent pain further down the line.
We've only had one session so far. Unless something smacks me in the face and derails the game, I'll try to play as is until I have a much firmer grasp of the rules.
I want to master the system as is before changing things. It can often prevent pain further down the line.
Actually, that's not quite entirely true - we do have a house rule. Everyone gets one point in a fun Color Skill. It cant be something potentially useful, like piloting or deception - it has to be a hobby (like knitting or singing) or knowledge (like wine tasting or Shockball team rosters) - something that you normally wouldn't sink points into that adds flavor to your character (and very occasionally comes in handy).
The more I look into the encumbrance rules the more I am considering house ruling it. Even something as simple as: starships and vehicles that are over encumbered reduce their handling to 0 or -1 and it takes two maneuvers to accelerate/decelerate vehicle's current speed by one.
I may nab the "flavor skill" rule.
My group has 3 GMs and I finished fairly recently, so it's likely that I won't be on deck until we get a look at Age of Rebellion. Right now, though, I would probably keep it pretty low-key.
My current group has 2 Jedi, so I will likely add a Jedi career. I have some concerns about the power levels of some of the Force upgrades, so I may put a pre-req of Force 2 or even Force 3 on some of them.
I will probably create a new career (Pirate, with Specs of Swashbucker, Raider, and Slaver) and a Pistolero spec for the Hired Gun... but that's mostly for my own entertainment and because my campaign has been pretty pirate/gunslinger heavy. Also, one of the ways I get a feel for a system is by fiddling.
Maybe something with martial arts... only because one of my PCs is a martial artist.
Basically, other than some fine-tuning to accomodate already-existing characters and ideas... not much.