| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:40 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
But what if they have a low perception and even if they tried would normally fail to call on the Dark Side?
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
<shrug> Then they'd better invest in Willpower. I guess these would be the in-game equivalent of someone who goes into a blind rage and either shoots himself in the foot or knocks himself out by running into a door.
Personally, I've never been too fond of the premise that all non-FS use Perception to resist the Force. Too much with Force powers just doesn't fit. After all, if someone is using Telekinetic Kill on your character, it is a physical attack, not a mental one, so why does the character resist with Per, not Strength?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That doesn't gel too well with me, if someone is up for creating a non-FS combat monster and skimps on perception and willpower they should find it very difficult to call on the Dark Side making it easier for them to do bad things without losing themselves to the Dark Side.
That sort of build should have a number of disadvantages but I just don't see having Force Points stolen to do things you didn't want to do being one of them.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | That sort of build should have a number of disadvantages but I just don't see having Force Points stolen to do things you didn't want to do being one of them. |
And it does have a number of disadvantages.
GM: Larry, Maris is talking to the Hoodin in his native language. Do you have Language: Hoodin?
Larry: Ummm...what's that under.
GM: It's a Language specialization. Look at your Knowledge skills.
Larry: I have Intimidation?
GM: Alrighty then. Well Hoodin is pretty obscure, but go ahead and roll your base 2D Knowledge.
Larry: I roll an 8.
GM: OK then. Larry, Master Blaster can't understand the hooting and fluting of the Hoodin language. Why don't you go out to the kitchen and grab a coke while Maris talks to the Hoodin.
I agree on the loss of a FP. It's a (possibly unintended) consequence of taking over the character from the player. Not one I would enjoy. Especially if it was my PC's only FP.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14228
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | | But often when we play the GM is so delighted that someone thought of a half-way decent plan that we tend not to be too strict on who thinks up what as long as it reasonble that someone actually there could have conceived of the plan. We have a lot of tactically challenged players. |
And that is where i see issues. such as someone not used to imperial proceedure, 'devising' a tactical plan that incorporates infiltration of the imperial base to include codes etc...
| Quote: | Actually I believe it's a perception check to call on the Dark Side so they might actually fail to call on the Dark Side and have to spend one of their own Force Points which wouldn't be returned so the GM essentially steals a Force Point from the player.
|
Yup. Calling the dark side is a perc roll.. Moderate.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Bren wrote: | | But often when we play the GM is so delighted that someone thought of a half-way decent plan that we tend not to be too strict on who thinks up what as long as it reasonble that someone actually there could have conceived of the plan. We have a lot of tactically challenged players. |
And that is where i see issues. such as someone not used to imperial proceedure, 'devising' a tactical plan that incorporates infiltration of the imperial base to include codes etc... |
That's why I specifically said it needed to be reasonable that the party member could conceive of the plan, i.e. a character with the background and skills to come up with the plan.
Are you seeing an issue with that, and if so, could you clarify what issue you are seeing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | That doesn't gel too well with me, if someone is up for creating a non-FS combat monster and skimps on perception and willpower they should find it very difficult to call on the Dark Side making it easier for them to do bad things without losing themselves to the Dark Side. |
With what I'm trying to build, it would be based almost solely on the Willpower roll, in that if you lose control and go into a blind rage or a mad panic and commit an evil act, you get a DSP that way.
| Quote: | | That sort of build should have a number of disadvantages but I just don't see having Force Points stolen to do things you didn't want to do being one of them. |
Yeah, it's a bit of a minefield, for sure. I'm not blind to the challenges, and I do want it to be fair, but I also want to make it so that the decision regarding the action receive a DSP is not solely in the hands of the player. IMO, the character needs to have some sort of input.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14228
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: |
Are you seeing an issue with that, and if so, could you clarify what issue you are seeing? |
Issues such as
Pc with little tactical acumen, and NOT being assisted by a combat guy, coming up with 'great' tactical plan for rescuing captured combat guy.
Pc with little to know underworld experience knowing who 'da boss' is for some major underworld groups (more metagaming than other things)..
Pc on his or her own, and gets in trouble others then "know he is in trouble" and plan tactics to help.. but they are not even there to know what is going on.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Bren wrote: |
Are you seeing an issue with that, and if so, could you clarify what issue you are seeing? |
Issues such as
Pc with little tactical acumen, and NOT being assisted by a combat guy, coming up with 'great' tactical plan for rescuing captured combat guy.
Pc with little to know underworld experience knowing who 'da boss' is for some major underworld groups (more metagaming than other things)..
Pc on his or her own, and gets in trouble others then "know he is in trouble" and plan tactics to help.. but they are not even there to know what is going on. |
Are you making a tangential comment or are your issues intended to relate to the previoius discussion?
You might want to reread the line prior to the one you quoted:
| Quote: | | Quote: | | That's why I specifically said it needed to be reasonable that the party member could conceive of the plan, i.e. a character with the background and skills to come up with the plan. |
|
While I am familiar with the issues you raise, but I don't see how they relate to my examples. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14228
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps its just me, but to my pov those things are related..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Perhaps its just me, but to my pov those things are related.. |
Pray tell, please explain how your example of a PC with no tactical acumen or assistance coming up with a great tactical plan is related to my example of a a PC with significant tactical acumen and military experience coming up with a great tactical plan? I'm just not seeing it.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14228
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For someone to come up with something, they have to be thinking about it.. That you did all the thinking, then pushed that idea on to them, is almost akin to a pc on his own having a great idea cause 2 other players back in the main group told him what it is.. and neither have comlinks to talk back and fourth on.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bren, here's an thought on my willpower vs. DSP idea. The way I figure it, committing a DSP risk act is something that a moral, ethical "normal" person wouldn't normally commit, i.e. something along the lines of murder. What if, for those sorts of people who don't have a DSP and have never had one, it actually required a Willpower roll to commit the act that would earn the DSP? A normal person would have a Difficulty of Very Difficult or Heroic to perform the act, but the Difficulty would be lower for characters who either already had DSPs or had experienced some sort of horrible trauma, such as some combat veterans. Thoughts?
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esoomian
High Admiral
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 6207
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've considered that in a different (homebrew) game.
Damage done is not just a function of the persons strength but also the willingness to actually do harm. The idea behind it is that 'normal' people just don't have it in them to beat someone to death without some form of special circumstances. Attributes were a range rather than a static number and circumstances could modify where a player's attribute was at any given time.
Of course this game was set in a very mundane environment so the need to beat someone to death was almost nonexistant.
Not sure how it'd work in a game where life is cheep and blasting someone under the table is considered OK though.
_________________
Don't waste money on expensive binoculars.
Simply stand closer to the object you wish to view. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16326
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Esoomian wrote: | | Not sure how it'd work in a game where life is cheep and blasting someone under the table is considered OK though. |
Maybe something along the lines of a scale, where characters can start off relatively innocent and it's very difficult for them to commit those sorts of acts, but also almost impossible for them to earn DSPs (outside of horrific exigent circumstances), and as you progress from innocent to jaded, it becomes easier for you to commit said acts, but also easier to earn DSPs.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
