|
treeboy posted:... Thank you for this!
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:31 |
|
|
8one6 posted:Thank you for this! no problem! If you guys have any feedback I'd love to hear it. The high contrast sheet was specifically a request from a member of the FFG forums who said he had really bad vision (and didn't want to waste too much money on ink) and keeping things simpler really helped him read his character sheets. It got really easy when i discovered that FFG saved all their pdf's with the Adobe Illustrator objects intact which makes them suuuuuuuuper easy to modify and mess around with (thus my bastardized versions) Also just finished the first pass at vehicles. EotE Vehicle Sheet v1 EotE Vehicle Sheet High Contrast v1
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
I don't have bad vision, but that is what the FFG provided ones should have been in the first place. They aren't printer friendly at all. Thank you kind sir!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 05:39
|
|
|
treeboy posted:Updated those character sheets again, also created a higher contrast version which should be easier on the ink cartridges if you want to print it out. Thanks. You're doing great work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
Still no free rpg day PDF up on FFG's website. Kinda stinks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
Prefect Six posted:Still no free rpg day PDF up on FFG's website. Kinda stinks. I just ran it. It's good as far as it goes, but it assumes a one-shot with the pre-gen characters: Obligation is treated differently, most notably ("in this scene, if X character took on extra obligation, add two more guards"). It's also definitely short: there are basically four locations, and players may get the info for the final one at the first place they go.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
homullus posted:I just ran it. It's good as far as it goes, but it assumes a one-shot with the pre-gen characters: Obligation is treated differently, most notably ("in this scene, if X character took on extra obligation, add two more guards"). It's also definitely short: there are basically four locations, and players may get the info for the final one at the first place they go. I'm horribly un-creative and could use all the help I can get creating scenarios.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
I'm having a hard time figuring out how critical hits work in this thing. Do they simply cause critical injuries of increasing severity, or do they actually increase the direct damage of the attack? Do they work the same way against NPCs and enemies as the players?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 08:38
|
|
|
cAtf00d posted:I'm having a hard time figuring out how critical hits work in this thing. Do they simply cause critical injuries of increasing severity, or do they actually increase the direct damage of the attack? Do they work the same way against NPCs and enemies as the players? Critical hits do not do cause any additional damage. They work the same for PCs and NPCs, with the exception of minions, which are automatically killed by a critical hit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 14:33
|
|
|
InspectorSpacetime posted:Critical hits do not do cause any additional damage. They work the same for PCs and NPCs, with the exception of minions, which are automatically killed by a critical hit. right. Critical hits are more about subjecting enemies to increasingly devastating status effecting injuries. However an opponent with significant soak value might be tough to whittle down through normal damage, but a string of crits could quickly cause their critical injuries to snowball (since each untreated crit. injury adds +10 to the d100 rolled to determine the injury and outright death is possible at 141+)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 14:41
|
|
|
Ah, ok that makes sense. Many thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 15:41
|
|
|
sure thing. It's also a cool story telling mechanic and provides a framework for grievous injury like losing a hand/arm/whatever. You could potentially get a "lucky shot" that only did one damage but crit and took off a dude's hand. If it's a story character this gives the GM the chance to have him surrender/run away rather than fighting till the (often illogical) bitter end. From the players perspective it introduces some interesting flavor and sidequest plot hooks into the story as you might be forced to now find healing for a crippled arm or a black market cybernetic replacement, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
Prefect Six posted:Still no free rpg day PDF up on FFG's website. Kinda stinks. The people on the FFG forums think that the pdf might go up after Gen-Con. treeboy posted:sure thing. It's also a cool story telling mechanic and provides a framework for grievous injury like losing a hand/arm/whatever. You could potentially get a "lucky shot" that only did one damage but crit and took off a dude's hand. If it's a story character this gives the GM the chance to have him surrender/run away rather than fighting till the (often illogical) bitter end. It also makes Starship Combat more interesting and dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 16:05
|
|
|
i really appreciate how they've kept the two systems essentially identical and made it more an issue of scale. Transitioning to a separate set of rules for space combat was always confusing, jarring, and ultimately resulted in fewer adventures *in* space a travesty for something called Star Wars
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
treeboy posted:sure thing. It's also a cool story telling mechanic and provides a framework for grievous injury like losing a hand/arm/whatever. You could potentially get a "lucky shot" that only did one damage but crit and took off a dude's hand. If it's a story character this gives the GM the chance to have him surrender/run away rather than fighting till the (often illogical) bitter end. Crits and the crit table are also the only compelling reason I've seen to use melee weapons. They tend to have lower crit thresholds, and they also have a lot of the "Vicious" ability, that ramps up what the crits actually do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
Bularin posted:Crits and the crit table are also the only compelling reason I've seen to use melee weapons. They tend to have lower crit thresholds, and they also have a lot of the "Vicious" ability, that ramps up what the crits actually do. Melee weapons can also have pierce, which will ignore soak. One of our PC's is a wookie with a vibro-axe and he easily deals more damage than anyone else. I've seen him take down almost an entire group of minions on an upgraded (and very lucky) swing. It also means he's a huge target and tends to take the most damage. Also keep in mind, if the enemies only have blasters and rifles and they have a PC engaged with them with vibroknives, they have to disengage or try for more difficult attempts to shoot them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
Disengaging is a maneuver, free 1/round, so in the case of knife vs heavy blaster rifle you just trade blows at no penalty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
Yeah, the problem with melee is that there isn't an "opportunity attack"-esque mechanic. This is partially made up by the fact that if your character is specialized in melee you'll probably have critical hits every 2 or 3 attacks, but it can still lead to scenarios where you're just chasing the rifle guy around comically. Edit:I should also add that that rifle guy has a much easier time hitting you on his turn then you have on hitting him. So there's that. devilmaydry fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
devilmaydry posted:Yeah, the problem with melee is that there isn't an "opportunity attack"-esque mechanic. This is partially made up by the fact that if your character is specialized in melee you'll probably have critical hits every 2 or 3 attacks, but it can still lead to scenarios where you're just chasing the rifle guy around comically. I agree with that in a vacuum, sure, but there are a couple of things that make the engage/disengage dance worth doing: It ensures that the disengaging character wastes a maneuver to go from Engaged->Close. They have to spend strain to draw a weapon, get to Medium, or Aim. That's a good advantage, but on its own isn't great. If they don't spend the strain to take a second maneuver, your character has lost literally nothing, while they've wasted the opportunity cost of Aiming. It also means that the ranged members of your crew can probably stay at Medium with regards to the target. This also assures that the target can't go Prone in response to your ranged characters since that would give Melee Guy a big advantage. There's been at least one time in my game too where a disengage maneuver was legally allowed but which made no sense in the context of the scene. That sort of thing is going to vary by table though. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
Can someone please explain mods to me in something that at least resembles traditional English? I've read it like 5 times, and the whole Mod/Options/Traits/Add-Ons/Extensions/Superfluous Spikes thing makes no sense to me at all. If I put a Bowcaster Accelerator on my Wookie Bowcaster, what happens?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
Bularin posted:Can someone please explain mods to me in something that at least resembles traditional English? I've read it like 5 times, and the whole Mod/Options/Traits/Add-Ons/Extensions/Superfluous Spikes thing makes no sense to me at all. I didn't get it at all the first time I read it either. Alas I don't have the book in front of me, so someone is going to need to correct my specifics: You add Attachments to items. This costs the listed number of credits, requires no roll, and consumes a certain number of item Hard Points, which exist only to measure how many Attachments an item can accept. Mods modify Attachments and typically add a few additional perks to an item. Mods do not consume hard points. Instead, each time you add a Mod to an Attachment, you must spend 100 credits and perform an increasingly hard Mechanics check. I can't speak to your specific example because I don't have the book in front of me but I'm sure someone can.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
Well, a Bowcaster Accelerator has to be buit first, but lets ignore that for now. If you have an accelerator that fits your bowcaster, you just put it on. When you put it on, you increase its damage by one point. When you modify the attachment, you have to first get 100 credits worth of materials and make a hard mechanics check. If you succeed, then you install one of the mods listed under Modification options. So you can install 1 +1 damage mod, or 1 Weapon Quality(Pierce +1) Mod. If you fail the mechanics check, you can't install the mod you were planning to ever again, and if you generate despair(I guess if your GM's a dick and spends a destiny point), you lose the attachment, too. To summarize, attaching an attachment to your weapon is super easy, modifying the attachment is when the dice come out. Bowcaster attachments have to be built though, the difficulty on them should be found in the book under any Bowcaster attachment description. Mendrian posted:I agree with that in a vacuum, sure, but there are a couple of things that make the engage/disengage dance worth doing: Even accounting for all of that, when the enemy goes into close range with a rifle, they only have to roll 1 difficulty die in their pool. With baster rifles, that can get REALLY messy really quickly for the Melee Guy. devilmaydry fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
That said, melee does a LOT of damage and has very dangerous properties, it just takes a lot of damage in return with no great ways to mitigate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
devilmaydry posted:Well, a Bowcaster Accelerator has to be buit first, but lets ignore that for now. Well yes but things are going to get messy for him either way. Once you break out, for instance, Auto-fire, Melee is going to look increasingly lovely compared to anything else. A dude with a blaster at Close is going to look pretty lovely too. I think Melee has a pretty big advantage of Ranged (Light). If anything I'd say the real issue is that Ranged (Heavy) is just too awesome. EDIT: There are ways to mitigate damage but there's no way to mitigate Auto-fire really that I can tell. And obviously anything that mitigates damage for Melee Guy applies equally well to anybody else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I didn't get it at all the first time I read it either. Thanks. I won't say it's completely clear, but it's a lot better starting point than the "the gently caress is this, Greek?" position I was in before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:01
|
|
|
It makes me wonder why they didn't just put an attack of opportunity mechanic. With that, the Melee Guy has what essentially amounts to a human shield against other ranged attacks, and he's in his element. As far as I can tell, that'd be a pretty good way to balance it all out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Mods modify Attachments and typically add a few additional perks to an item. Mods do not consume hard points. Instead, each time you add a Mod to an Attachment, you must spend 100 credits and perform an increasingly hard Mechanics check. The thing I would correct here is that additional Mods begin to cost more and more as well. I want to say it starts at 100 and increases by 100 per additional Mod. Starship Attachments/Mods work the same way but have the Mod prices increased by 10. As far as Ranged (Heavy), its main balancing feature appears to be the fact that very few characters will actually be able to take it as a career specialization.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
Attacks of Opportunity slow down gameplay and aren't very cinematic (they weren't in the movies).
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
I'd agree with you if most of the enemies would be using melee weapons that generate attacks of opportunity, but pretty much everyone will be using a blaster. Also, I think attacks of opportunity would only be triggered in engaged range. So you wouldn't run into the problem of puzzling out where you can step anyway, because it's all abstracted enough to where you just didn't step too close to anybody.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
devilmaydry posted:It makes me wonder why they didn't just put an attack of opportunity mechanic. With that, the Melee Guy has what essentially amounts to a human shield against other ranged attacks, and he's in his element. As far as I can tell, that'd be a pretty good way to balance it all out. Ehhhh I would personally hate that and I think it's not really in theme for the game. Really I think something that makes disengaging unpleasant is probably a fine idea but free attacks are probably poor form. Maybe a character receives a setback die on all actions for the rest of the turn after disengaging from an enemy? And then you could even build talents around the same idea that are designed to increase that penalty. EDIT: ^^^If you have AoO, you'll end up with more characters using Melee. With even one character per side per encounter using Melee that's a pretty big cost on the backend. I'd rather impose some kind of immediate, passive penalty that you can roll into other actions since that's much friendlier to the system. It doesn't really endorse superfluous dice rolling. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
alg posted:Attacks of Opportunity slow down gameplay and aren't very cinematic (they weren't in the movies). MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Jul 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:I thought the original scene involving Han Solo was an attack of opportunity. That was winning initiative 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Ehhhh I would personally hate that and I think it's not really in theme for the game. I see where you're coming from when i comes to access rolls on other people's turns and such. I'd be alright with something similar to what you're describing. As long as the cost discourages the issue of the Melee Guy having to chase down the Ranged Guy after they're already engaged. I personally don't think a setback die is really a big enough cost, though. After all, once they're in close range, a difficulty die and a setback die is still easier than the comfort zone of medium range. This is mostly me just wondering how FFG didn't realize how screwed a melee person can get in their system more than actually house ruling the system, really. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
The easy way out would be that the penalty for being engaged doesn't fall off unless you started your turn that way, or reduces to a "mere" setback die if you started your turn engaged, or can be removed by an additional maneuver, etc. e: reading comp is bad, the setback die thing is already suggested
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:The easy way out would be that the penalty for being engaged doesn't fall off unless you started your turn that way, or reduces to a "mere" setback die if you started your turn engaged, or can be removed by an additional maneuver, etc. I like the idea of just keeping the +1 difficulty baked into somebody's turn. That does introduce some weird corner cases (like, for instance, what if you're melee and you disengage? What if you disengage with one melee'r and then engage with another one?) but you could probably smooth it out. In that case with a judicious use of Destiny that difficulty die might become a Despair. And if they roll a Despair on their turn, I can see Melee Guy getting a free attack. Some way of upgrading Difficulty for characters who disengage might be neat but that seems like the purview of talents rather than general maneuvers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
I'm doing a chargen/team-building session tonight, with possibly a mock combat if there's time so everyone can get familiar with the rules. Any suggestions on helping players get a handle on chargen, particularly tricky/unclear things, etc? We have 3+ copies of the real book, plus I printed out little 1-page cheatsheets with page references and the order in which to do things to help them along.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
Tharizdun posted:I'm doing a chargen/team-building session tonight, with possibly a mock combat if there's time so everyone can get familiar with the rules. Any suggestions on helping players get a handle on chargen, particularly tricky/unclear things, etc? We have 3+ copies of the real book, plus I printed out little 1-page cheatsheets with page references and the order in which to do things to help them along. How long term is your game? If it's set to be a regular game with a reasonable amount of XP ahead of them, emphasize Characteristics. They're really hard to raise later on and Skills are comparatively easy. Try to prevent everybody from dogpiling on Combat if you can avoid it. It's realllly easy to end up with 5 people who all take Agility 4 at char gen and nobody takes anything else. If that's the game you want to play ignore me; the game is flexible enough where even if that does happen (it's exactly what happened in my game) it can still be extremely enjoyable. A little more diversity is also fun though. Players won't end up with a lot of defining Talents or Career-based stuff at char gen. That's pretty normal. They won't have enough money for what they want. This is also normal. Encourage players to have related Obligations so things will be easier for you as a storyteller. They don't all need to have identical Obligations but at least one pair is probably a good idea. The reason for this is that I think Obligations work best when you actually work them into the game in a concrete way. The fewer moving parts you have to work into the game the less you have to contort to make that happen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
Thanks. I read about how Characteristics were super-important, and I'll mention it to them. This is for a theoretically ongoing game. As far as combat - are you saying it's not like D&D 4e where players are expected to be good at combat *and* their niche? Do you find that if a player decides combat is their niche they have enough stuff to do while the blaster-bolts aren't flying?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Tharizdun posted:As far as combat - are you saying it's not like D&D 4e where players are expected to be good at combat *and* their niche? Do you find that if a player decides combat is their niche they have enough stuff to do while the blaster-bolts aren't flying?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:31 |
|
|
Tharizdun posted:Thanks. I read about how Characteristics were super-important, and I'll mention it to them. This is for a theoretically ongoing game. It's entirely possible and pretty easy to build a character who is pretty much no good at combat. Granted most Specializations have combat-applicable talents in them somewhere but if you think about it combat is pretty much limited to 4 Skills and nothing forces you to take those Skills. If you know your game is going to include like 50% combat by all means encourage your players to take combat stuff. But yeah it's entirely conceivable that a character might not be good at combat at all, for a character to dabble in combat (I think this is sort of the normal default) and for a character to specialize in combat. It's pretty hard to be good at combat and absolutely nothing else. Remember that for instance a high-Agility character is good at piloting, acrobatics, stealth, and more. Not having Proficiency dice is not the end of the world. Remember that combat is just a Skill test like any other Skill test. Characters who are not very good at combat should still be able to find something to do that isn't shooting. Even rolling just two dice at Close range it's pretty drat easy to deal damage to mooks. Listen to your players and adjust threats accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 22:07
|
|