| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
It isn't a valid point in that I have said if you still want to modify them, go ahead and do so. Nobody is stopping you.
However, the numbers should be consistent to begin with. It actually gives GMs more freedom, not less.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
obidancer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 230
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oy Ve!
| Quote: | | So I am supposed to hand out character points every time a character attempts something more difficult? Now that sounds broken. |
No, you're rewarding them more cp for more creativity. If a player come up with a creative way to get rid of a squad of storm, without having to spend rounds and rounds of "I shot at the storm", Yes I'll give him extra point. Not because he decided to shoot a harder to reach part of the body to get more damage point.
| Quote: | | I do consider the base difficulties to be consistent. A moderate roll will always be between 11-15, a difficult roll between 16-20. |
| Quote: | | The range of human minimums and maximums is 3D in attributes. That is 9 pips. The range within the moderate difficulty is 5 points. That is more than half the distance from the weakest human and the strongest human. That is like saying a fair range for the same difficulty is more than half the difference between someone who can't bench 50 lbs and someone who can bench 500 lbs. I don't see how changing numbers over a 5 point range is consistent, where as using the same number as a base is in fact consistent. |
What??! you lost me there!
| Quote: | | Well, I just searched through Gry's Weapon Stats.pdf and there isn't a single weapon that is 3-10/50/120. There are plenty that are 3-10/30/120. So again, you're picking arbitrary numbers here, but because most GMs aren't going to remember the range numbers of every weapon, they're actually going to pick the wrong difficulties here and screw their players over. |
Ok, ok, ok! 3-10/50/120 I made that up without even thinking how you would be so picky about this. It was just an scenario, a completely imaginary one, to feed my example. My apoligize for not having checked through Gry's book for the authenticity of my words. Totally arbitrary indeed.
| Quote: | The best part in your example is that this is apparently the weapon that all of your players use, and you're not familiar with the correct ranges. As I suggested, giving everyone the same final difficulty (which isn't even what I suggested, I suggested the same base) would actually be more fair that how you're giving the wrong difficulty to certain players.
If you can't recall off hand the range for the one weapon every player in your group uses, then what if they switched weapons for different occasions, or if each person used different weapons, or the bevy of different weapons your NPCs are supposed to use?
And again, I said if you can keep track of those ranges and you want to modify the numbers for being closer to the top or bottom of the range, then so be it. However, having a consistent base number is better for most people. |
Apart from poking at my obvious, outrageous and unexcusable lack of range recollection; my bad and shameful GM demeanors of forcing my players to use the same non-standard piece of equipment for fear of having to remember their differences, what's the point here of these personal attacks and assumptions expressed with a total lack of experience and knowledge of how I actually GM my games? Probably none.
However, you'd be so kind to actually answer the question of my previous post, that I can reiterate again:
Both players, standing next to one another, have the same weapon: a standard blaster rifle with the following range 3-30/100/300. Meaning between the 31m and 100m targets are at medium range, thus a medium difficulty to hit them. One target stands at 33m away from the PCs, another one at 99m. It's a beatiful day, perfect visibility, flat ground, no breeze. Would you rule the two shots have both the same difficulty of 15, when one target is three time further away then the other? Please let me know how you would rule that and say it's fair to both PC.
Hoping this time none of these numbers seems arbitrary
for you.
| Quote: | | If you're taking the time to try and figure out ratios of range modifiers (and remembering incorrectly to boot) you're slowing down gameplay for a complex feature that D6 tries to avoid at most costs. Then you spit out an arbitrary number. Since I use a consistent base, if the number is different, the players know there must be a modifier. And I'm happy to tell them why I'm modifying the number. |
That brings me to my next question then, How do YOU handle blasters range then, as it seems such a bad thing that I can't recall the proper range of every single weapons ever made. I'm interested in knowing what would be your take on this in the 3rd Edition.
By the way I just noticed you just join the board! Well Welcome! Don't see no harm to this heated discussion, we're very friendly we just like to give our opinions of things when we're asked for, and well... you asked for it... 
_________________
www.obidancer.com - RPG Character Portraits and Art.
Malicia "Rogue" Darkholmes - Character in Alcon's Thractin Campaign |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Delkarnu
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 189
Location: Saratoga Springs, Upstate NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| enderandrew wrote: | | Delkarnu wrote: | I never said it was detrimental, just completely unneccessary for a good gm or player group. You have not given a single solitary example of how this would improve the game aside from nudging uncreative players to be creative, when it is the GM's job to give players scenarios in which to find creative solutions.
There is a saying, "When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." If you only give your players nails to solve, they will never need more than a hammer. |
Funny, I have listed several examples.
For one, it would remove cludge rules and make the game simpler.
I've suggested tons of scenarios where it would empower players and make the game more interesting.
You've yet to come up with one scenario where it would be bad. |
Again, I never said is was bad, just completely unecessary.
"It will remover cludge rules" is not an example, it is a statement that could use an example to illustrate it.
In regards to this I ONLY posted about it being unnecessary. I made one misread that I admitted to, the rest of my posts have still not been countered by you. You seem unwilling or unable to read what someone else posts if it does not support your position and provide a reasoned counter-point to their statements.
You said it could be used to trip a guard, and I posted how it is already covered by existing rules (and not clutter rules, just sneak and Dex) I have asked you for an example of a gambit that would illustrate your point and you have not given it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
obidancer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 230
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | 1 - I said if a GM wants to modify the numbers here for degree of distance to range modifiers, then let them. You're stuck on insisting I've said otherwise when I never have. I've clarified my statements here about three times. You're attempting to misquote me and insist I said something that I haven't. If you want to change the difficulty and modify it, then do so.
2 - You were adamant about your numbers because you said all of your players have that blaster. You demonstrated that many GMs can't keep track of these things to fairly give a varying difficulty for range for every character with different weapons, and all the possible weapons different NPCs are going to have.
You insisted TWICE that those were your numbers for all your players. I suggested that perhaps they were using different weapons because the numbers didn't jive, but you were pretty convinced otherwise. I didn't feel the need to point out that you were definitely wrong, until you really pressed the issue.
All you've done is prove that you feel you have to absolutely give different difficulties based on range modifiers that you can't keep track of. |
Yeah, that was me not Delkarnu, I take the blame. But reading this post I'm feeling like I missed something, but maybe my english was very bad somewhere:
| Quote: | 2 - You were adamant about your numbers because you said all of your players have that blaster. You demonstrated that many GMs can't keep track of these things to fairly give a varying difficulty for range for every character with different weapons, and all the possible weapons different NPCs are going to have.
You insisted TWICE that those were your numbers for all your players. I suggested that perhaps they were using different weapons because the numbers didn't jive, but you were pretty convinced otherwise. I didn't feel the need to point out that you were definitely wrong, until you really pressed the issue.
All you've done is prove that you feel you have to absolutely give different difficulties based on range modifiers that you can't keep track of |
Did you see all of that in just my first example with that not so conventional blaster? Whao... speechless.
I feel Delkanrnu said it all here:
| Quote: | I never said it was detrimental, just completely unneccessary for a good gm or player group.
There is a saying, "When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." |
Nobody said the Gambit rule is detrimental... why would we try to defend this point. Did we say useless... Yes, we may have said that... 
And the range problem is another problem on it's own not to be mixed I feel. I'll wait until you can finally answer my previous example on how You would rule it.
_________________
www.obidancer.com - RPG Character Portraits and Art.
Malicia "Rogue" Darkholmes - Character in Alcon's Thractin Campaign |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| obidancer wrote: | | No, you're rewarding them more cp for more creativity. If a player come up with a creative way to get rid of a squad of storm, without having to spend rounds and rounds of "I shot at the storm", Yes I'll give him extra point. Not because he decided to shoot a harder to reach part of the body to get more damage point. |
So you want players to be more creative, but your opposed to a system that will help with that?
| Quote: | | What??! you lost me there! |
Human min and max ratings on strength are 1D and 4D. So a weakling had a 1D, and Mr. Universe has 4D. The difference between 1D and 4D is only 9 pips. That is all that separates the wimp from Mr. Universe. Yet the range from 11-15 in the Moderate difficulty range is 5 points. So the same difficulty rating actually covers more than half the distance from the weakest wimp to Mr. Universe. That doesn't sound very consistent.
| Quote: | | However, you'd be so kind to actually answer the question of my previous post, that I can reiterate again: |
My suggestion is to make the base difficulty (not the final difficulty) a consistent number. What you're discussing here is a modifier. If you want to modify that number for how relative the range is the minimum or maximum for that range, then free to do so.
| Quote: | | That brings me to my next question then, How do YOU handle blasters range then, as it seems such a bad thing that I can't recall the proper range of every single weapons ever made. I'm interested in knowing what would be your take on this in the 3rd Edition. |
Personally, I'm pretty good at memorizing rules and minutia. I haven't looked at a D6 book in over 5 years, and off memory I was pretty sure of the range on a standard blaster and a DL-44.
However, I think it somewhat goes against the quick, cinematic aspect of D6 to try and keep track of details like that.
It is part of the reason I think having a consistent base helps. If a GM doesn't want to try and remember if a player is on the low or high side of those numbers, the GM can just "round" everyone and be fair.
| Quote: | | By the way I just noticed you just join the board! Well Welcome! Don't see no harm to this heated discussion, we're very friendly we just like to give our opinions of things when we're asked for, and well... you asked for it... |
Thanks! It has been years since I've looked at a D6 book. I don't even own any the books anymore, except a 2nd Edition core book. I don't even have R&E anymore.
I wanted to come here to look for some tips and advice before I started a new campaign. And I also wanted to spend some time putting together a small player's handout with my homebrew rules since none of the players own D6 books, and I only have one.
I've thought about expanding the handout to a lengthier full revision of the WEG rules, and then I saw another thread only a couple of days old on that very subject.
Honestly, what I've thrown out are just suggestions. I think the gambit rules really help. I'd be content seeing them listed as optional rules. And I didn't expect people to agree with all the suggestions. No one seems to like the idea of stopping CP usage after a 1 on a CP die, though I think it adds tension.
That being said, there are bigger core mechanics that should be looked at and addressed. I'll make a new post on those.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ankhanu
Vice Admiral
Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 3089
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
K guys, step back, take a breath, try to see the convo from the other person's eyes... all that jazz. This is getting too close to being a fight for the Rancor Pit. One of the great things about the Pit is the lack of ego and fighting, let's not change that.
As for the assertion that's been put forth several times: You've yet to come up with one scenario where it would be bad.
Again, as mentioned by other posters, no one thinks it's bad, just that it is redundant and unnecessary. Most examples have demonstrated that it's already covered by the rules... you yourself have stated as much... we're in agreement 
As such, call it what you will, Gambit, modifiers, what have you... just play.
_________________
Hotaru no Hishou; a messageboard about games, friends and nothing at all.
Donate to Ankhanu Press |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
You know enderandrew i thought i knew the worlds biggest rule lawyer but after reading your posts i think i owe him an appology. You'r post's indicate that you are so pedantic and offensive that i can only conclude that the title belongs to you.
ALL HAIL THE KING OF RULE LAWYERS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
obidancer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 230
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | This is getting too close to being a fight for the Rancor Pit. One of the great things about the Pit is the lack of ego and fighting, let's not change that. |
Did I just get my fingers slapped?
A la Homer ::: D'ho!:::
_________________
www.obidancer.com - RPG Character Portraits and Art.
Malicia "Rogue" Darkholmes - Character in Alcon's Thractin Campaign |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Delkarnu wrote: | | Again, I never said is was bad, just completely unecessary. |
And yet, I've shown how it is necessary.
We have extraneous rules for a smattering of circumstances. This is cumbersome and less effective that a good core mechanic that can be applied across the board.
The absolute best aspect of D6 is the simplicity. A strong core mechanic goes a long way.
| Quote: | | "It will remover cludge rules" is not an example, it is a statement that could use an example to illustrate it. |
You reference my examples and then insist I've never made any.
Specific combat actions including and beyond called shots, such as tripping, disarms, knock downs, feints, etc. These are covered in advanced combat rules, martial arts specializations, etc. Except these rules are needlessly complex.
The same simple basic precept that can cover all of those scenarios can cover my asteroid example.
The same basic precept can cover my example for conning, haggling, repairs, upgrades, force powers, etc.
I gave tons of examples.
And since you want to talk about existing trip mechanics, since when was trip handled by a sneak roll?
| Quote: | | You said it could be used to trip a guard, and I posted how it is already covered by existing rules (and not clutter rules, just sneak and Dex) I have asked you for an example of a gambit that would illustrate your point and you have not given it. |
I already listed called shots, carving your name, disarming, tripping, knockdowns, evasive piloting, lightsaber duels, force powers, sales pitches, conning, repairs, upgrades, etc.
I think that qualifies as at least one example. Again, you've responded to some of these, and referenced them, and then insisted I never gave you a single example.
I'll quote myself since you're insistent that I gave you no examples.
| enderandrew wrote: | What about knocking down an opponent? Again, there are complex martial arts rules to handle this, except that now you have needlessly complex rules, and you're saying people without martial arts skills can't knock each other over. Now the rules are actively prohibiting players. In a gambit system I might suggest it takes three raises to knock a player over in a lightsaber duel, raising your attack three difficulty levels from moderate to heroic. That 15 just jumped to a 35. Do you dare risk it? On the other hand, if you succeed, your opponent is basically defenseless afterwards.
Raises can be used with Force Powers to enhance the effect of the power, increase the number of targets, make it last longer, use the power quicker, etc.
...
Gambits can be used for basically every skill out there.
Name a skill or a scenario, and I can probably come up with how gambits will make it more interesting. |
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile.
Last edited by enderandrew on Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:59 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
obidancer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 230
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Lostboy, I'm with Ankhanu on this one, no need for name calling, even if it's nice name.
Endeandrew and I... and Delkarnu... are only exchanging points of view.
Though what you said isn't necessary mean it can easily be misinterpreted.
_________________
www.obidancer.com - RPG Character Portraits and Art.
Malicia "Rogue" Darkholmes - Character in Alcon's Thractin Campaign |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lostboy wrote: | You know enderandrew i thought i knew the worlds biggest rule lawyer but after reading your posts i think i owe him an appology. You'r post's indicate that you are so pedantic and offensive that i can only conclude that the title belongs to you.
ALL HAIL THE KING OF RULE LAWYERS. |
I'm advocating simplifying rules and eliminating a whole bunch of rules. Clearly that is the behavior of a rules lawyer.
Man, you've got me dead to rights.
Now, please drop with the personal attacks. They are unwarranted.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
obidancer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 230
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | drop with the personal attacks. They are unwarranted. |
And uncalled for. Sorry that happened.
Now, you wanted detriment, I think I can bring you detriment.
I'm a Master Mechanic, The hyperdrive broke and the moderate repair would cost 10000c {this is an example! my brain fails to recall the price of this sort of repair! } to do it. Our team doesn't have that sort money right now, close but definitely not there yet. I call for a gambit, after all I'm a Master Mechanic I can handle harder difficulties. I want (like you mentioned earlier) to reduce the price of the repair for a harder repair roll.
What do you offer for this gambit?
_________________
www.obidancer.com - RPG Character Portraits and Art.
Malicia "Rogue" Darkholmes - Character in Alcon's Thractin Campaign |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm only 12 pages into D6 Space, and I'm already regretting purchasing this. I hoped and assumed it would be a logical progression of Star Wars D6, and provide some good ideas for a new revision of the Star Wars rules. In just the first few pages I spot the following changes:
Attribute caps of 5D for humans - Inconsistent with previous D6 offerings, and making this change would invalidate all existing alien and NPC stats. Plus, it allows for uber-specialized, very powerful characters off the bat. It also downplays alien races since humans can now be very specialized.
Random body points - I was curious how they handled hit points. You get one random die roll at character creation, and that determines how much damage you can take. It isn't fair or consistent. And your ability to withstand damage is pretty important.
Strength Damage - Now you remove pips, and then half your strength to determine how much damage you can do with strength modifiers. Hitting someone with a melee weapon requires you get to melee range in a world where most people use ranged weapons. The most lethal melee weapon is a lightsaber in the hands of a Jedi, and that gets no strength bonus. Despite the fact that melee is already at a major disadvantage, they felt the need to gimp melee combat. I may be in a minority, but I think if you have a high strength, and you take the time to get in my face (knowing that I can just run backwards and still shoot at you) and swing a vibro-axe into me, then that should be pretty lethal. So I don't like this change very much.
3D for a skill - You can assign 3D to a specific skill at creation, and then specialize on top of that. Can you imagine a brand new character with a 5D attribute, 3D into a skill, and then a specialization? A brand new character can start with 9D in a specialization at character creation.
Funds - The templates aren't very fair with who gets to start with what equipment, and there isn't a good mechanic in Star Wars to determine how wealthy you should be, or not be at character creation. That is a deficiency. In D6 Space, most people get 3D Funds at character creation. I suppose this is an improvement on the current system, but still not the best way to go about it.
However, I am seeing some good ideas:
Advantages and Disadvantages - This is something Star Wars 3E should definitely borrow. In fact, I think this is also the best way to handle wealth and equipment as well.
Optional Point Based Character Creation - Not a huge deal, but point based creation is arguably more fair than assigning dice currently. I like it as an option.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Im sorry about the personal attack enderandrew it was uncalled for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Delkarnu
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 189
Location: Saratoga Springs, Upstate NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Saying a bunch of random actions would work better is not an example, showing how they would work better would be an example. You've listed actions, but not how a gambit system would work better than the basic ruleset. I want to know how your system would improve the game. But all you've said is that it would improve it, and taken it personally everytime someone has questioned how.
Tripping-you want to have a gambit system where the GM figures out an increased difficulty so you can roll and see if you trip and say its simpler. I say tripping is sticking your foot in front of someone without them noticing so they trip over it, so its a simple sneak role to do that. The get a simple per check to notice. No optional rules, or complex ones. If you meant tripping as actively knocking someone over by kicking their feet, roll brawling against their STR.
Martial arts is an OPTIONAL rule in Rules of Engagement if you want more advanced rules. | Quote: | | In a gambit system I might suggest it takes three raises to knock a player over in a lightsaber duel, raising your attack three difficulty levels from moderate to heroic. That 15 just jumped to a 35. Do you dare risk it? On the other hand, if you succeed, your opponent is basically defenseless afterwards. |
You want to knock someone over with brawling, kick their legs, you want to disarm them, grab their weapon or kick their hand. roll brawling or melee combat vs brawling or melee parry.
Conning- Roll Con against their Con or Perception, bonus for good roleplay, situation, and creativity
Repairs- have parts, roll repair. No parts, find parts. Can't get parts, roll repair at a much higher difficulty to jury rig it to work until you can get parts.
Everything I've listed now uses ONLY an attribute or a basic skill to accomplish. To make them simpler you'd have to get rid of skills and just roll attributes for everything. I punch you, roll STR. I knock you over, more difficult, roll STR. I grab you by arm, swing you around into other guy, ohh, very difficult, roll STR.
| Quote: | | Raises can be used with Force Powers to enhance the effect of the power, increase the number of targets, make it last longer, use the power quicker, etc. |
Already covered. more targets multiple actions, -1D for an average increased difficulty of 3.5. Last longer, keep power up, -1D , making other actions more difficult by 3.5 on average. Quicker, most powers are up in one turn. If it uses multiple abilities, -1D per ability it used or 3.5 per. CS&A skill, takes three rounds to raise but if you want to do it in one, -2D to each roll.
Hide behind an asteroid. make a piloting roll to get behind, if you are fully blocked,they lose you on sensors and need to find you. Partially blocked, they can shoot at you, but its more difficult.
Trip, con, repair. Your Examples. Please, Please show me how these would work and be SIMPLER in your system. All you have said is that these would be simpler, not why and not how.
And Yes, repairs can be a very complex process, but thats because a lot of players like an in-depth repair system, because they want to play a ships engineer. If not they can roll bargain to hire someone to fix it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
