@ borithan - Amongst the Indy games - a term best understood as games published by the designer and whose copyrights are still owned by the game designer - some are exceedingly crunchy. Take a look at Burning Wheel…. the 5x8x2" brick of a 500pp rulebook is almost purely rules material. Half of BWG is character generation. The term is best dropped when trying to describe the nature of the systems, as the indy games vary from almost systemless through megacrunchy stuff well beyond even Burning Wheel.

I started with D&D - back in summer of 1981. Started on Traveller in 1983. FASA-Trek  and Palladium in 1985, other GDW and FASA games in 1986, as well as GURPS, RQ3, and Car Wars. I've run campaigns of over 50 systems, and one-shots of over a hundred more. I've seen light mechanics in mainstream game companies' line ups, and übercrunch in indy games that no-one seems to have heard of.

@YIDM

SW:EOTE isn't narrativist. It's rules-medium, bordering on rules-light, and while it has a few narrativist elements (namely Destiny Points being allowed to define stuff in the fiction), it's still, at the core, a simulationist system. Rolls to hit, rather than to accomplish the scene goal. Damage described by what's taken out, and mechanical effects derived from there. A zillion talents with similar effects, differing only in when they apply and how they're described. (More narrativist games would provide 1-3 kinds of generic talents, and tell you to give it a label when taken, and let you negotiate with the GM for when it applies.)

SW:EOTI is different from most mainstream games in that it has two axises upon the roll - Success/Failure and Advantage/Threat. And that leads to supporting a low-prep, high improvisation style of play…

… but many extant mainstream games can do that, too. WEG's d6 system does that pretty well by being a simple, flexible mechanic that's easily memorized. And, for me, no d20 system game hit that point. Even the rather more crunch WFRP1E and 3E support that fast-n-loose "Winging it wildly" style. The rather crunchy Burning Wheel supports that….

The trick is consistency and simplicity of the core mechanic, and optional layers of complexity.

Since we all seem to be talking about our background. I’ve GM-ed or played in quite a few different systems over the years, not just d20 products.
d20 based
D&D (all editions), Pathfinder, Mutants & Masterminds, SAGA ed. Star Wars
Non-d20
Amber (diceless), Call of Cuthulu & Trail of Cuthulu, Decipher’s - Lord of the Rings, Dr. Who, Eclipse Phase, FASA Star Trek, FATE, L5R (Legend of the Five Rings), LUG Star Trek, Marvel Super Heroes, Palladium (various, including TMNT), Paranoia, GURPs (various), Savage Worlds, Shadowrun, Warhammer 40k (Deathwatch), WEG d6 Star Wars, World of Darkness & NWoD (all systems)

And after all those myriad systems, I really only like a handful of them (a third of which are d20 based, the ones in italics are one’s I’ve routinely run). I replaced WEG d6 Star Wars with SAGA ed. when I found it to be more “simulationist” representing what I saw on the big screen.
And, I’m not a fan of levels, a “d20”, or hit points. They’re all rather unrealistic if you ask me. Good for an MMO or video game, not so good for an RPG. I prefer mechanics that are more bell curved or normalized (it’s the engineer in me I guess).

The rules in the various systems never bugged me in the slightest as I have a near photographic memory (recalling page numbers of rules / abilities quite easily; I’ve been called a rules lawyer on an occasion). My experience as a GM has been to use the RAW published rules, variants, optional rules, templates, page sidebars options, online web enhancements, or game designers official statements to create exactly what I want in any given system (using rarely used or unknown things by my players). I typically find, if you look hard enough you can create about anything.
(A quick SAGA edition example: I introduced the subelectric converter implant [JATM] to use mind trick on a Rakatan nanite droid swarm, created for the Swarm War, called the “Fizz”; they needed to accomplish something at the cellular level that only a machine could do, and mind tricked the droid swarm to do it). 

I’ve never had an issue with “strict” systems like d20 in the slightest. I’ve had more issues with rules light systems like FATE. Then again this is probably due to the fact that I have had a greater than average share of power-gamers (honestly I attract them like a magnet).
I manage weed out most to find the “rare cream of the crop” power-gamer that wants more than a mini’s wargame and can actually roleplay exceptionally well (and can pull off appearing to be a normal gamer to the average onlooker). Most GMs wouldn’t even realize many of my players are die hard power-gamers / munchkin’s (with solid RP bent). Deep down though, when push comes to shove and the story or bad guy gets tough, my typical players are ruthless (and can smash through a GMs carefully planned encounter in minutes). They construct characters that dwarf most “normal gamers” in terms of power and ability (bordering on system mechanic game abuse / loopholes). The catch is, I’m better at it than they are, and it’s how I maintain balance. I’ve always got one up on them, thinking two steps ahead, and of course, I have an unlimited budget of resources as the GM.
My typical players know the rules exceptionally well (and were the break-points are), and exploit them as far as I’ll allow. I always have a few select houserules (to cover system loopholes; like “pun-pun” and insta-kill combos). All this has clearly tainted my view on “open” or less strict systems like EotE. Anything that can be abused (like abilities to flip all the Destiny to the light side, and then leave it there so the GM can’t mess with your rolls) WILL be utilized by at least one player (if not more) if they feel “pushed” by a challenging encounter.

As I said, I’ll try the “kung-pow” chicken of EotE, but I have to research it thoroughly and find every break point before my players do. Any supplement that gets published I have to go through with a fine tooth comb before letting my players at it. It can be a lot of work, especially when the system has lots of grey areas on Threats / Advantage. What (2) points of Advantage can do will be memorized by my players so once I set a precedent, I have to be careful. With SAGA edition, everything is spelled out in black and white, so I have less holes to fill.   Does this help others to see where I am coming from?
aramis said:

Yes a good core mechanic can be a lifesaver. I found M&MM to be that way. Everyone is Power Level 10…and it's clearly defined what that means. As we use PL tradeoffs and drawbacks for powers that can add optional complexity.

Once again though, I would really like the EotE system, when complete, to be able to reproduce what I saw on the big screen. Just as an example, when Obi-Wan and Anakin fought in the 3rd movie and used the Force on each other. They seemed to be locked in a Force on Force power lock for a second or two, they it appeared it rebounded and they both were sent flying apart. I would like the EotE system mechanics to duplicate that effect somehow.  SAGA edition did, it's a Force thrust or move object followed by a rebuke then a counter rebuke. If the dice roll just right (with 5 points of each other), both attacker and defender take the full force of the power and "fly apart" just like in the movies… A "perfect" simulation of what I saw on screen. I hope that EotE, when complete has something like that (or an optional variant to that effect).

Thoughts?

YIDM
 

 Thoughts? I'd prefer to ignore SW:TPM entirely, and see JarJar removed from the SW universe…

As for force combat, Jedi are a different power level than edge, and FFG has a history of handling multiple power levels in one engine.

aramis said:

On that note (and I'm sure that many will disagree with me on it):

In my mind, the only major problem with JarJar was that he succeeded *because* of his incompetence, not *in spite* of it.  Sure, there were other minor issues (his voice, for example), but those aren't significantly worse than select other characters from the other movies that no one has any real issues with.  Luke's "power converters" line, for example is roundly mocked, but the character is accepted despite that.  As another example, 3PO's voice grates on the nerves of several people I know, and he serves largely the same role in the original trilogy, but where he fails he fails, and where he succeeds it's either because of dumb luck (remembering to turn the comlink back on in the Death Star), or because of his strengths (getting R2 bought, the Ewoks, etc.).

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Lucas does Plot, Pacing, and Action well, and even does a passable job with intrigue, but the man *can't* write dialogue to save his life.  Unfortunately, the surrounding Myth meant that no one had the guts to sit the man down and *tell* him that for the prequels.

Voice said:

I find that 3PO is much better a character than Jar-Jar - he has a narrow skill set, and shows competence within it. Jar Jar lacks ANY area of competence.

3PO is only mildly annoying; Jar Jar is exceedingly annoying, as what Lucas thought of as Cute is merely Insipid. Even my kids hated Jar Jar from the get go.

In game terms, JarJar is spending destiny so fast that the party has to be 8+ players…. and in order for Jar Jar to have it back to spend again, the GM is having to beat the party within an inch of their lives. So, let's see… Jar Jar, Anniken, Quigon, Obiwan, Amidala, R2, C-3PO… uh, hm… Ok, that's 7…

TPM also has the annoying Anniken being WAY too competent for his age, and almost as lucky as Jar-Jar. TPM is a pair of marty-stu's on a rampage, showing up the pair of Jedi… and doing it with a wink and a nod, as well.

TPM was a commercial success and an intellectual failure. And makes an excellent warning for GM's of what NOT to do.

EOTE CAN model both Anniken and Jar Jar… with a deep enough pool of destiny. But it's going to annoy players with splitting the party, hogging the destiny, and hogging the spotlight. WEG can't do TPM; it can do all the others. EOTE can do them all, except for force lightning, force choke, and force-based-healing, as is.

YIDM said:

Sounds like that might be able to be done with the dice used in the EotE system. A sucess with a disadvantage result while trying to move/thrust your force using opponet maybe. You suceed at moving/thrusting your opponet away from you but your opponet uses the same power the struggle occurs and you go flying back as well.

chall said:

I don't disagree with either model, but I don't think either matches my take on things.  I hate that specific powers need to be used in opposition.  I think a Force lock can be entered simply by two determined Force-users.  Why do they both have to be using "Move Object" (to name a specific power).  Why can't they both try to be stopping the other's heart while sabers are locked.  Or one constricting a blood vessel in the brain while the other is trying to pry fingers from blade.  Or one advancing while the other is trying to fling him across the room?  Or one using Force-augmented strength against the others' Force-telekinesis augmented strike.  Or two sabers locked when one has Force Strength vs. Force speed.  For me, it's enough that either or both are simply using some type of Force power against/on the other during saber combat that enters the lock.

In this regard, I think the abstractness of WEG's very basic 1st Ed. rules is better match than worse: Control adds to damage, Sense substituted for prowess if better, and allowed the parrying of blaster bolts.  It's fault was that because it was so abstract, it wasn't a very exciting or dynamic model to play.  Various people had house rules to simulate more dynamic combat or more accurate modeling of things like the saber lock, but nothing ever got it for me.  Enter D20 with its dizzying array of options, including separate rules for all of the individual Forms.

The one place which absolutely nailed the Saber Lock / Force Lock during saber combat for me, was not a pnp, but rather The Force Unleashed.  There needs to be a way for a battle of wills/Force power to be going on at the same time the test of physical combat is occuring; the two should be in parallel.

GM Chris said:

I'm getting major déjà vu. Has GM Chris used the cheeseburgers vs. king pao chicken thing before?

Genghis12 said: