Lost In Translation

[CRMcNeill]

As much as I love the starship modification chapter in GG6, I do have some issues with it. Several months back, I spoke with another forum member who had a copy of the 1st edition of Tramp Freighters, and he described to me in detail as to the major differences between the two. What he described sounded much more flexible and easily applied than the rules presented in the 2E book, so much so that I just paid $45 to buy a copy on line for my own use.

It got me thinking, has anyone else encountered something in 2E that worked better in 1E?
_________________
"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

[atgxtg]

Quite a few things.

1E was a lot simplier. Characting characters on the fly was a breeze, and Jedi were easier to play and better balanced in 1E. Starship combat was easier as well.

2E did improve a lot of things, and fix some flaws in the D6 system. For example, a lot of the easily abused/overpowered options from GG6 (Speed 7D freighters, maneuvering thrusters, fairly cheap x1 hyperdrives) were corrected or done away with. Alien species were better detailed and character generation improved overall. Everything was better detailed and brought more into step with the films.

But at the cost of more complexity. And some of he changes don't work as well. In 2E your not supposed to build a character "on the fly" anymore-you have to create a template first. 2E initiative rules are easier to handle, and give a more structure sequencing, but there are some scenes in the films that just couldn't work like the do according to 2E rules.

2R&E likewise has it's own merits and shortcomings. At first I thought it really helped to fix a lot of the things I didn't like about 2E, but over time I am starting to consider backsliding on some things, such as movement and combined actions.

There are things I like about each edition, and they are not all compatible with each other. There are even some things I liked about the d20 and SAGA versions of Star Wars.

I would suspect that most of us who are familiar with multiple editions have things that the like and dislike about each edition.

[vanir]

Yup same here. I've the same gaming group that played 1e way back when, so we all get it nicely.

We've tried to keep the old 1e Jedi/Force theme and only conservatively add later edition but still treat it more abstractly as raw use of the control/sense/alter disciplines than selectings power activation like a menu, and we freely mod or adapt powers to suit situations as it is much more realistic, power descriptions are just a guideline to us for how control/sense/alter maybe used, not a wizard spell component recipe.

because of this we use scholar:jedi lore, or jedi histories, or arcane technologies, etc. a lot more in using the Force in game, can I do this with my Force skills or my weapon, oh let's roll a jedi lore, etc. if we're bending things a little, introduce a CP cost for that instance and rule later after we see it in game, whether to include it regularly.

1e really kept the mystical aspect of the Jedi a lot better because of this kind of way of using the Force originally. We try to keep that in game, so they don't turn out like boring wizards and clerics in D&D, Jedi are something different and that's why we love them, they're closest to playable demipowers in D&D we all decided as an analogue. Quite frankly that's just too awesome to lose but I think it takes mature gaming to keep up with it, equivalent to high level gaming so player/GM skill and experience involved.

For the GG6 I remember that well too. Basically everything I say is going to be the same thing you guys found.