| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Grimace
Captain
Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 729
Location: Montana; Big Sky Country
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 1:16 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| jmanski wrote: | | Yeah, but the part about Bossk demanding deliveries at any time is sheer genius to me. I just don't see a problem with it the way it is. |
Don't get me wrong, putting in the condition that Bossk can call on the PCs to do him a "favor" while they're paying on it is a good idea. I like that aspect! I don't like the idea of needing it to be paid off in a year otherwise Bossk goes hunting for them.
If he goes after the PCs for not paying him month after month, that's one thing. I think the PCs would have to be stupid to not pay a bounty hunter every month for a ship they're buying from him.
But simply putting a one year time limit on it is just silly. Why a year? What happens after a year? Why is it important that its done in a year?
Basically, it's an unnecessary plot inclusion that doesn't make sense. Sure I might be "overthinking" it, but one thing I hate to see, and attempt to warn other GMs from making the same mistake, is wild inconsistancies in the universe. Doing something that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever simply to "do it" is just as bad as having one character die from falling off a cliff and another character survive from falling off the same cliff. It's inconsistant and meaningless.
Including meaningless stuff, especially when you're taking the time to consider whether a particular ship would be "too unbalancing" to a game is just wasted effort.
I don't have a problem with the ship. I think it's a great ship for a group of PCs. It's not combat heavy, in fact it should probably stay away from combat for a while, but it's fast. If you add more character to the ship by making it rundown or glitchy is also a thing I think is good. It helps the players get more invested in their ship and helps with roleplaying.
Including Bossk instead of a loan shark is a novel idea. I like that. Saying that Bossk may call on the characters to do a delivery for him while they're buying off the ship is another idea I think is neat. The problem I have is the strange fiat of a one year payback otherwise Bossk suddenly comes hunting for them. It's inconsistant. If it's that important to him, he'd get payment in full and be done with it. If it's not important enough to him to get payment in full and if he's willing to accept payment from the PCs, then there's absolutely NO reason why he'd suddenly decide he needs to hunt them down if they haven't paid in full in one year's time.
So rather than starting out the game by making a built-in mistake of inconsistancy, I'm simply suggesting changing something. Either ditch the idea of the one year shtick, or ditch the idea of using Bossk to use the PCs as an occasional errand boy and have them buy the ship outright from him and make them pay back a loan shark for their troubles. That's all I'm suggesting is wrong with the whole idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Raven Redstar
Rear Admiral
Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Posts: 2648
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
What if Bossk was the hunter sent to collect a payment for the loan shark and the ship's owner didn't have the cash on him? Bossk saw an opportunity to put a small fry under his boot for a favor and covered a couple of payments in return for his own little percentage in addition to being able to call on the ship's captain for a "no questions asked favor" whenever he wanted.
You tie in Bossk, but also make it a little more realistic, since most bounty hunters very rarely hand out favors. Maybe Bossk doesn't like this particular loan shark or perhaps the smuggler managed to charm him enough to stay his blaster for the time being.
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tetsuoh
Captain
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 505
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed - both of us have also come to the same conclusion about the one year deadline.
Our campaign takes place some years after the events of RoTJ, and Bossk is currently believed to be retired from bounty hunting.
In truth he is bidding his time and gathering support and funds to try once again to destroy what remains of the opposing side of the Bounty Hunter's Guild.
Our smuggler turned Yacht Pilot used to run goods for Bossk years ago, though only through an intermediary at Jabba's Palace. He was consistently on time and loyal, though the two had never actually met. He appears to be a good opportunity at the moment.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmanski
Arbiter-General (Moderator)
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: Kansas
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Grimace wrote: | | jmanski wrote: | | Yeah, but the part about Bossk demanding deliveries at any time is sheer genius to me. I just don't see a problem with it the way it is. |
Don't get me wrong, putting in the condition that Bossk can call on the PCs to do him a "favor" while they're paying on it is a good idea. I like that aspect! I don't like the idea of needing it to be paid off in a year otherwise Bossk goes hunting for them.
If he goes after the PCs for not paying him month after month, that's one thing. I think the PCs would have to be stupid to not pay a bounty hunter every month for a ship they're buying from him.
But simply putting a one year time limit on it is just silly. Why a year? What happens after a year? Why is it important that its done in a year?
Basically, it's an unnecessary plot inclusion that doesn't make sense. Sure I might be "overthinking" it, but one thing I hate to see, and attempt to warn other GMs from making the same mistake, is wild inconsistancies in the universe. Doing something that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever simply to "do it" is just as bad as having one character die from falling off a cliff and another character survive from falling off the same cliff. It's inconsistant and meaningless.
Including meaningless stuff, especially when you're taking the time to consider whether a particular ship would be "too unbalancing" to a game is just wasted effort.
I don't have a problem with the ship. I think it's a great ship for a group of PCs. It's not combat heavy, in fact it should probably stay away from combat for a while, but it's fast. If you add more character to the ship by making it rundown or glitchy is also a thing I think is good. It helps the players get more invested in their ship and helps with roleplaying.
Including Bossk instead of a loan shark is a novel idea. I like that. Saying that Bossk may call on the characters to do a delivery for him while they're buying off the ship is another idea I think is neat. The problem I have is the strange fiat of a one year payback otherwise Bossk suddenly comes hunting for them. It's inconsistant. If it's that important to him, he'd get payment in full and be done with it. If it's not important enough to him to get payment in full and if he's willing to accept payment from the PCs, then there's absolutely NO reason why he'd suddenly decide he needs to hunt them down if they haven't paid in full in one year's time.
So rather than starting out the game by making a built-in mistake of inconsistancy, I'm simply suggesting changing something. Either ditch the idea of the one year shtick, or ditch the idea of using Bossk to use the PCs as an occasional errand boy and have them buy the ship outright from him and make them pay back a loan shark for their troubles. That's all I'm suggesting is wrong with the whole idea. |
So take away the year time limit and make it monthly payments? Certainly sounds much better.
I didn't understand what exactly you were not agreeing with earlier. If that's it, then, shucks, I think we agree! 
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcbobbo
Ensign
Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 41
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
No doubt you've settled on what to do by now, but I see a few ways you can shore up some of the issues:
If the one year thing strains belief, you could easily say that Bossk simply told that to this noob pilot to put some pressure on him to pay. Once the year tolls around, Bossk uses the opportunity to remind him. Leaves a scar, perhaps, and gives another year, with interest, of course.
As for the condition of the ship, perhaps Bossk did the damage to it himself. He took the original owner by force, disabled the engines, cut a hole in the hull, used a thermal or two on the inside, that sort of thing. When he turns the capture in, Bossk learns that the ship is part of the payment. Rather than cause priblems he doesn't need, he takes it and finds someone to dump it on... Any repairs to make it space worthy again were done for the bottom dollar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kinfo_howlingwolf
Cadet
Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 13
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Like someone somewhat mentioned earlier, maybe Bossk himself doesn't actually own it and is willing to "sell" it cheap, cash up front.
Something else that would be cool is maybe instead of a Baudo star yacht it's a "Baudo" star yacht.
Make note of the " 's
Those aren't a good thing.
Maybe they found a fixer upper Baudo from a honey-tongued merchant, they check it out inside and out, its a little musty from a few too many parties, and a few dents and scratches on the hull from a hard docking or two, so they PC's are offered a bargain of a price for it.
They head back to do the paperwork, trade the credits, watch their "Baudo" (once again, note the ") pull up, they hop in and
"pull back curtains, big reveal"
They are in a freighter ugly slapped together (maybe a Barloz based hull originally that seems somewhat similar) made to resemble a Baudo! But before they even have a chance to go back to the crook, the R1 astromech (ha, i really hate your PCs apparently) that came with the ship kicks on the hyperdrive to who knows where, and let the fun begin!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
