StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I rencently became interested in the game and I don't see anything wrong with it. I'm curious as to why it has such a negative reputation here.

Class system
Level System
Combat System

That sums up the major points. It's actually not that bad, but it isn't that good either.

Do you have any tips on how to make it better?

Xess wrote:Do you have any tips on how to make it better?

West End Game's D6 SWRPG.

SirNitram wrote:West End Game's D6 SWRPG.

Thanks, I'll look into that.

Out of curiosity what makes it better than the D20 system though?

Another problem - that a Y-Wing will defeat a TIE Int in a dogfight 9 times out of 10.

That a stormtrooper is nothing but a low-end thug.

That the entire system is so HORRIBLY skewed in the Rebels favour that its just not funny.

It's more freeform. Any character can learn to do anything, a scale system makes attacks and damage more realistic, and the growth of characters is more gradual in that it's a continuous process rather than the stairstep method of D20.

Do watch out for technical specs, though. The damn 8 km Executor is a WEG-caused dilemma.

The Dark wrote:It's more freeform. Any character can learn to do anything, a scale system makes attacks and damage more realistic, and the growth of characters is more gradual in that it's a continuous process rather than the stairstep method of D20.

That does sound much better, although I do like many of the D20 aspects so I'll probably try to mix them up to my liking.

Do watch out for technical specs, though. The damn 8 km Executor is a WEG-caused dilemma.

I knew that, and shall be wary of the specs.

WEG D6 has its own fair share of problems. The scaling and damage system usually work, but a GM should keep an eye on them and be ready to modify on the fly. And, as mentioned, the Stormies are too weak.

Mostly its biggest flaw is that it's too generic. The classes are boring and restrictive, the feats are underwhelming (and missing far too many d20 feats), mostly consisting of "+2 to each of two skills". Space combat in the original version was absolutely horrible, though has been somewhat fixed in the revised edition.

It's also way too heavily focused on the "good" side, and more specifically, the jedi. Jedi get tons of attention and all the most interesting character development/feats, and it's almost like the other character classes are just a supporting cast for the jedi heroes. And the rulebooks are filled with a childishly simple black and white morality, assuming that you're playing a lawful good party. You have to buy additional books to get even a slight hint of the gray/black sides of the universe and how to play them.

For a D6 (or even D20) player, I recommend looking at the Dark Lords of the Sith. The Rancor Pit is more amusing than useful in my opinion, although the Empire Invades Earth pdf is a hoot. There is also a moderately well-done Starcraft fan supplement. I used to have a website with really good supplements detailing every model of X-Wing, some new equipment, and a Stormtrooper sourcebook that actually made them decent, as well as giving data for Swamp, Sand, Rad, and Spacetroopers also. If I can find that again I'll post it too.

If you absolutely go D20, I recommend getting the Dark Side Sourcebook. Rebellion Era is not worth it in my opinion, NJO is mediocre unless you enjoyed the novels (and it doesn't cover the whole series), and the only other one I have is Starships, which is wrong technically on more than it's right about.

Edit: Well, I found the Star Wars RPG Links that I had been using...now to find the good pages from that.

I think most people who remember me from similar topics know my opinions on d20 games. I'll try to refrain from letting my virulent loathing of D&D and its incarnations affect this post too much.

That said, if you like d20, there are a few problems with SW. Mainly, the space combat system, which is just plain ridiculous. You're better off inventing a brand new space combat system than trying to use it out of the box. It is, frankly, beyond me why anyone would want to know how much damage an ISD's turbolasers can do against a person on the ground; this is information you do not want and therefore the system should not concentrate on delivering it to the detriment of relevant information. Worse, the damage statistics, the implementation of shields, weapons and miscellanous functions are all incredibly broken, with a pro-starfighter bias that exceeds that of the X-Wing games by a fair margin.

The next problem is that Dark Side characters are actually made weaker than light side characters. This leads to amusing situations where Darth Maul cannot concievably be as strong and fast as he is in the movies, because he would have deteriorated too quickly for that to be possible.

Another problem is that the main characters of the movies are beefed, which is just stupid. If the characters are badasses, simulate this by raising levels - it's your god damn mechanism for powerful characters. Instead, all characters have rolled consistently high on their vitality scores for no good reason. Stupid.

The next problem is that of Jedi, which I have pontificated on earlier. Basically, the design insures that every high-level character eventually reaches Jedi-like abilities. This, to me, is a decision that obviously comes from slavish adherence to the d20 mindset, rather than any rational thought.

Okay, I'll try harder not to bash the system.

Final problem is the level cap. The characters aren't allowed to progress beyond level 20. This has a number of unfortunate consequences, which all can be summed up into two choices, both equally unpalatable:
1. You create a character grown naturally from level 1 into a full-fledged level 20 hero. He or she can now no longer learn anything at all - it is impossible for this person to even take up knitting in his or her spare time and be good at it, even after practicing for 200 years. Worse, the levels you've taken in a class you don't use work against you. They block your ability to advance further. Your character is now as static as a fly caught in amber, and a lot less interesting.
2. You draw up a "character plan", in which you've carefully delineated the desired path of advancement for your character. This plan carefully uses the loopholes of the system to achieve the most effective character composition.
Words fail me to describe just how immeasurably sad this practice is, but there's no denying that it leads to a much more optimised character. It would be unnecessary in a skill-based system, of course, but there you go...

Edit: Changed "nerfed" to "beefed".

The level 20 cap is a hinderence, but you can somewhat sidestep that by going out and buying the D&D Epic Level Handbook. It requires some tinkering to make it work but a friend who ran a high level d20 game was able to make it work. You might even be able to incorporate some of the epic feats.

Of course, this requires you to shell out money for a sourcebook for a different genre game that you really can't get to much other use out of.

Anomie wrote:The level 20 cap is a hinderence, but you can somewhat sidestep that by going out and buying the D&D Epic Level Handbook. It requires some tinkering to make it work but a friend who ran a high level d20 game was able to make it work. You might even be able to incorporate some of the epic feats.

Of course, this requires you to shell out money for a sourcebook for a different genre game that you really can't get to much other use out of.

You can't really make it work with d20 Star Wars without tinkering. That should really not be necessary for a game that fancies itself complete.

'nother problem with d20 Star Wars is that, in Star Wars, the heroes were fairly capable to begin with, and they were distinct characters in their own right. In d20 SW, they begin as weak-ass, bland stereotypes. You're really only able to flesh them out when they level up.

Worse, the designers opted to use every d20-specific rule they could find, without questioning its usefulness in the SW context. This should in no way be done, of course. A good gaming system is exemplified by the lack of system-inherent rules that fail to promote the setting in some fashion.

I'll illustrate the problem with the following little gem:
"Resource access - Once per day, Emperor Palpatine can make a Charisma check to secure resources, the value of which can be no greater than 500 x the result of the Charisma check (in credits). The resources can take virtually any form the Emperor chooses and are his to do with as he pleases."

Boy, Palpatine sure is lucky to be able to afford a used tramp freighter if he saves up for a few days, isn't he?

I would point out 3 problems with everyone's rants

#1- If you don't like D20, then don't play it.
#2- No system is perfect.
#3- It's hard to make up realistic or even quantifiable stats for someone with the power and resources of Emperor Palpatine without giving him Divine abilities

Solauren wrote:I would point out 3 problems with everyone's rants

#1- If you don't like D20, then don't play it.

I don't .

#2- No system is perfect.

True, but even within the limitations of D20 the Star Wars game has problems, in that the character classes are rather bland and generic, and early heroes are incredibly weak. I've seen single blaster pistol shots take down low-level heroes, which shouldn't happen to heroes.

#3- It's hard to make up realistic or even quantifiable stats for someone with the power and resources of Emperor Palpatine without giving him Divine abilities

Then they shouldn't have tried to quantify some of it. Just say "he has access to all the resources of the Empire." DM fiat works a lot better than being hog-tied to the rules. That was why D6 worked - it was highly flexible and much more freeform.

Solauren wrote:I would point out 3 problems with everyone's rants

#1- If you don't like D20, then don't play it.

Ah, the cornerstone of a nutritious d20 defense. Seen a million times, and always laughed at because of its inherent absurdity. The reason for that is that it isn't a defense per se - it's an excuse to look away from the system and pretend it isn't utterly and tragically flawed.

I don't play it. I've tried, many times. I gave it a chance to present itself as something other than a stunted wargame hobbled by weak rules and worse gaming tips. I gave up after realising it couldn't be done.

I have the right to mock a poor system all I want. I am perfectly justified in laughing at a system that seems determined to simulate the tactical depth of Final Fantasy. And I especially feel the need to laugh upon hearing people claim that d20 is not hurting the gaming world when a barely-usable version of an already deeply flawed system is packaged and sold as the only official SW game.

#2- No system is perfect.

Difficult here to determine what you really mean. Either you're saying, "no system is perfect, therefore all systems are equal," or you're just presenting a red herring. But it seems obvious that what you really claim is the first, and that is a textbook tautology. It's also blindingly stupid.

Of course every game has flaws. That doesn't mean that the mountain of shit that is d20 doesn't have a million more flaws than the average game. It says nothing about the number of problems with that game contra other games, nor their severity, nor the amount of patches one must perform.

It only really says something about d20 proponents, who generally present rote "points" of this kind. Right now, I'm waiting for "if you don't like it, change it" and "you're interpreting it wrong". It's so charmingly predictable.

#3- It's hard to make up realistic or even quantifiable stats for someone with the power and resources of Emperor Palpatine without giving him Divine abilities

Are you really this dumb? I'd really like to know. Correcting the rule is no harder than writing "this is Emperor Palpatine. He can commission what he wants and it will not cause any ripples, up to and including a fucking Death Star."

See? I just wrote a rule beyond the understanding of the people at WotC. But of course, that's not too hard, considering they can't even grasp the fact that, as a unique title, "Emperor" can't possibly be described by anything other than a unique rule. Linking resources to level and other stats is a piss-poor way of doing it anyway, which is probably why d20 does it.

Eleas wrote:Final problem is the level cap. The characters aren't allowed to progress beyond level 20. This has a number of unfortunate consequences, which all can be summed up into two choices, both equally unpalatable:
1. You create a character grown naturally from level 1 into a full-fledged level 20 hero. He or she can now no longer learn anything at all - it is impossible for this person to even take up knitting in his or her spare time and be good at it, even after practicing for 200 years. Worse, the levels you've taken in a class you don't use work against you. They block your ability to advance further. Your character is now as static as a fly caught in amber, and a lot less interesting.
2. You draw up a "character plan", in which you've carefully delineated the desired path of advancement for your character. This plan carefully uses the loopholes of the system to achieve the most effective character composition.
Words fail me to describe just how immeasurably sad this practice is, but there's no denying that it leads to a much more optimised character. It would be unnecessary in a skill-based system, of course, but there you go...

There is no level cap, Eleas. It only seems that way thanks to the way the rulebook is written. You can go over level 20 as it is a simple enough matter of number progression. They just cut it off at level 20 because otherwise they would run out of space on the page. (and because 20 levels fits with the motif of d20s... )

Therefore, 1. is wrong in that your level 20 hero can become better as time progresses. He can level up to 21, or higher. This may not be in the rulebooks as such, but frankly I no longer slavishly devote myself to the rules as written and prefer to tweak them. Its my game, its my rules. I use the book as a kind of jumping off point, and nothing else. (if I may preempt your rebuttal, yes characters like Yoda, Palpatine et al should be higher than level 20. Im not sure how much higher, however. But like I said, just because they dont write these characters as higher levels doesnt mean that you cant reach 20+ levels - so the rulebook is specifically bad, but the ruleset dont preclude anything. It is more of a problem with D&D and SWd20 than with the D20 rules, IOW.)

2. remains a problem which, frankly, I cant see solving other than hoping to get players who like to role-play as opposed to roll-play.

Frankly, Id much rather play with Travellers D20 system, with some elements of SWd20 making a presence (ie a homebrew as opposed to off-the-shelf product ). The setting is far more interesting, layered, there are psionics in the game but it doesnt get preferential treatment the way the Force and Jedi get in SWd20, and the class system was tailormade for multiclassing, combat is suitably dangerous to the point where a single gunshot wound could kill you (which helps defeat munchkinism IMO), and skills matter more (an example of comparison would be: in SWd20 a character with the skill Use Computer can angle the deflectors, ping the sensors, target the weapons, tweak the engines, etc... all in the one super-skill. Lets not forget that the character can also slice into any terminal, and is an expert software programmer as well on the side, simply because Use Computer relates to just about any conceivable use of a computer console, no matter what its role is. In Traveller T20, skills are more specialised. To use sensors, you need a skill called Technical/Sensors, to use a computer you need T/Computers, and just like in real life, it is very very hard to be an expert in all of it. A far better system in my oh-so-humble opinion. It is still d20 though, so you will probably frown and stick your tongue out though )

The Dark wrote:True, but even within the limitations of D20 the Star Wars game has problems, in that the character classes are rather bland and generic, and early heroes are incredibly weak. I've seen single blaster pistol shots take down low-level heroes, which shouldn't happen to heroes.

Why is that necessarily a problem? IMO it makes fights a lot more dangerous, requiring careful planning and tactics as a result. Players might, who knows, take cover when brought under fire, like they would in real life. And the fights youd do win have a greater sense of accomplishment.

Stofsk wrote:

The Dark wrote:True, but even within the limitations of D20 the Star Wars game has problems, in that the character classes are rather bland and generic, and early heroes are incredibly weak. I've seen single blaster pistol shots take down low-level heroes, which shouldn't happen to heroes.

Why is that necessarily a problem? IMO it makes fights a lot more dangerous, requiring careful planning and tactics as a result. Players might, who knows, take cover when brought under fire, like they would in real life. And the fights youd do win have a greater sense of accomplishment.

To echo Stofsk, I played WEG Star Wars for about 2 years and characters (experienced ones to boot) getting dropped with one blaster shot happened there. So did a number of completely ridiculous combat events. (4 stormtroopers opening up on my bounty hunter in a barren corridor at almost point blank range and failing to land a single hit. Repeatedly). D6 has its share of flaws and its strong points, but it's combat system could produce ludicrous results unless a GM was willing to modify on the fly.

Even though Star Wars D6 is gone here is something yopu may be able to kit bash if from..


++http://www.westendgames.com/html/catalog.html++

and yes a revised 1st edition of Torg is coming.

Stofsk wrote: There is no level cap, Eleas. It only seems that way thanks to the way the rulebook is written. You can go over level 20 as it is a simple enough matter of number progression. They just cut it off at level 20 because otherwise they would run out of space on the page. (and because 20 levels fits with the motif of d20s... )

That is true, and I feel I must modify my point accordingly. It's the specific rulebook that sucks in that sense. Not only does it strongly imply that the character progression ends at level 20 - it also seems to consider every prestige class to be limited to a maximum level of 10. This is bad, IMHO.

Therefore, 1. is wrong in that your level 20 hero can become better as time progresses. He can level up to 21, or higher. This may not be in the rulebooks as such, but frankly I no longer slavishly devote myself to the rules as written and prefer to tweak them.

Defacto I agree with you. However, in principle, a system should be judged on how it is unmodified. If the tweaks are simple (as yours is, or relatively anyway), that could of course be a point in its favour.

Its my game, its my rules. I use the book as a kind of jumping off point, and nothing else. (if I may preempt your rebuttal, yes characters like Yoda, Palpatine et al should be higher than level 20. Im not sure how much higher, however. But like I said, just because they dont write these characters as higher levels doesnt mean that you cant reach 20+ levels - so the rulebook is specifically bad, but the ruleset dont preclude anything. It is more of a problem with D&D and SWd20 than with the D20 rules, IOW.)

Granted. However, I do feel that d20 levels are far too granular. A single increase in character level is an enormous step up, and that precludes cautious character development. But that's a different can of worms altogether.

2. remains a problem which, frankly, I cant see solving other than hoping to get players who like to role-play as opposed to roll-play.

I agree here as well, but there's a point I'm willing to state:

I've never seen this phenomenon in another game. Ever. Not once.

Frankly, Id much rather play with Travellers D20 system, with some elements of SWd20 making a presence (ie a homebrew as opposed to off-the-shelf product ). The setting is far more interesting, layered, there are psionics in the game but it doesnt get preferential treatment the way the Force and Jedi get in SWd20, and the class system was tailormade for multiclassing, combat is suitably dangerous to the point where a single gunshot wound could kill you (which helps defeat munchkinism IMO), and skills matter more (an example of comparison would be: in SWd20 a character with the skill Use Computer can angle the deflectors, ping the sensors, target the weapons, tweak the engines, etc... all in the one super-skill. Lets not forget that the character can also slice into any terminal, and is an expert software programmer as well on the side, simply because Use Computer relates to just about any conceivable use of a computer console, no matter what its role is. In Traveller T20, skills are more specialised. To use sensors, you need a skill called Technical/Sensors, to use a computer you need T/Computers, and just like in real life, it is very very hard to be an expert in all of it. A far better system in my oh-so-humble opinion. It is still d20 though, so you will probably frown and stick your tongue out though )

Probably.

No, it does sound better. Though d20 SW had a few things I found to be fairly unsucky - the Vitality system was a good idea, for example, as it reduced the effects of the dreaded "hit point yo-yo". Also, the notes on how to crew a capital ship with the player characters were also very welcome.

Of course, there was nothing else useful in the book, but still.

Stofsk wrote:Why is that necessarily a problem? IMO it makes fights a lot more dangerous, requiring careful planning and tactics as a result. Players might, who knows, take cover when brought under fire, like they would in real life. And the fights youd do win have a greater sense of accomplishment.

I think a good solution is the one used in Västmark, where there are three kinds of wounds - Scratch, Wound, and Serious Wound. A mook given a Serious Wound is dead automagically. A character, on the other hand, is just down, in pain, comatose, bleeding, etc. Anything worse is up to circumstances, the GM, and the stupidity of the given situation.

For example, the player of a young Jedi jumps from a catwalk down into a group of three thugs with blaster rifles, who are exchanging fire with the other player characters. In the first round the Jedi lands attacks on two of them, one a Serious Wound, another a Scratch. One of the mooks have a -1 to his moves, the other topples to the ground in two smoking halves. Then, however, one of the mooks fires blindly, hitting the character.

Now, charging into these three thugs wasn't really suicidally stupid (they're using blaster rifles in melee, which is hardly ideal), so the GM doesn't feel there's much reason to even consider that the shot was lethal. And since the Jedi's friends are charging from cover, blasters blazing, the thugs have neither reasons nor time making sure the character is dead.

Basically, in any situation the GM feels justified in saying "you're hopelessly overmatched, have no help coming, and the enemy is out to destroy you utterly", character death would be expected to occur. Otherwise it wouldn't be likely.

This, though, doesn't mean the characters can't for instance slowly bleed to death. A Serious Wound is, after all, serious. The idea is to give the character a chance, rather than killing him/her outright at the whim of a die.

Warhammer Fantasy also has some advanced career path planning, but it's so fluid in that regard that it really isn't comparable to the D20 min-max fest.

Imperial Overlord wrote:To echo Stofsk, I played WEG Star Wars for about 2 years and characters (experienced ones to boot) getting dropped with one blaster shot happened there.

One shot kills in Star Wars has been called "ridiculous" twice now, and I don't understand why. Why should anyone be able to survive a hit from a weapon that can do this?

A Star Wars system should recognize that no one in Star Wars ever survives a direct hit from a blaster without good armor or shields. The system doesn't have to be set up as if two opponents are standing on a featureless plane. Rules for cover and the like can make combat exciting, nuanced, and non-arbitrary even with one-shot-kill weapons.

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:

Imperial Overlord wrote:To echo Stofsk, I played WEG Star Wars for about 2 years and characters (experienced ones to boot) getting dropped with one blaster shot happened there.

One shot kills in Star Wars has been called "ridiculous" twice now, and I don't understand why. Why should anyone be able to survive a hit from a weapon that can do this?

A Star Wars system should recognize that no one in Star Wars ever survives a direct hit from a blaster without good armor or shields. The system doesn't have to be set up as if two opponents are standing on a featureless plane. Rules for cover and the like can make combat exciting, nuanced, and non-arbitrary even with one-shot-kill weapons.

That's actually something that I like about the d20 version, you can't survive multiple hits. If you read carefully enough, you'll see that your vitality points aren't really traditional hit points. Instead, a "hit" to your vitality means you just barely dodged in time (using up some of your limited supply of luck/stamina/whatever). Only hits to your wound points involve an actual hit. And in that case, a direct hit is either going to kill you or seriously wound you. A stormtrooper rifle does 3d8 damage (average 13-14, vs. typical con score of 12-14), enough to leave an average character lying in a pool of their blood dying. Only the toughest characters can survive an average rifle hit, and even then, an above average roll will still drop them just as easily.