KommissarK said:

I can say it with a stright face.

@ErikB

A good example of top down was Mutants and Masterminds 3^rd edition.  They said during the design of it that they wanted to get characters like Superman right first (DC adventures). It is a fantastic system. I also think this points into design philosophy flaw. Everyone on here is saying how it needs to be bottom up but D&D is a perfect example of something that has always been bottom up and has always had a difficult time with high level. As with L5R and Some White Wolf Products etc. The bottom up is not always the best way of doing things.

So no I don’t subscribe to the FFG knows what they are doing because they say so. I think they would have been better off releasing the Jedi first. They would have consolidated their base and would (marketing here) pulled in more people who want to play with the Jedi experience over the cowboys in space experience.

Deathwatch is a terrible game from a mechanical point of view, and their attempt at getting Temple Assassins in to Dark Heresy is even worse. I'd have said the 40KRP line is the poster child for why you don't try to make systems do what they were never intended for.

Dance Commander said:

And GURPS is a terrible system for superheros.

Honestly though, I would recognise that the Jedi and Non Jedi players are going to want very different things from their games, and stop trying to shoe horn them both in to a single system that is never going to work for both.

ErikB said:

I want a game with Jedi, and I think two and a half years is a long time to wait. But, I also don't think that FFG should abandon their business plan (and ruin the rest of the game line) to crank out something sooner. 

KommissarK said:

I agree with you that Star Wars is not just Jedi. But I think that Jedi is and always has been a very important aspect of Star Wars. It is even more so now. The EU is (making up  stats here) 80 percent Jedi/Sith, Knights of the Old Republic is 80 percent Jedi/Sith and the clone wars cartoon is well all Jedi/sith for the most part. Even the original serious is based on Lukes quest to become a Jedi.

So putting Jedi off two years later is just an awful idea. Especially if you are a Star Wars fan who was looking forward to playing in a EU game.

Dance Commander said:

Fair enough. Can I take that as meaning you have seen/heard what force users could do with the beta book as written? (e.g. as long as you win initative and have a large enough object sitting around, a comparatvely low xp character you could still essentially kill Palpatine, Darth Vader, and Boba Fett in one attack).

I'll admit M&M 3rd is an awesome set of rules; I just started playing in a game of that. I really enjoy them being the rules enthusiest that I am (love how they do an excellent job of catching where/how PCs can break the game, and just write in a GM rule 0 caveat at that point).

That said, I'm not sure how well that game could work if it tried presenting a set of rules built around PL5-8 characters, and a separte set of rules for PL12-15 characters. In other words it could do a good set of core rules that are especially unfocused, (fine in a generic setting). But here we're trying to have a highly focused setting, Star Wars. As has come up pretty much all over this thread, is that yes, the different games kinda are needed, as the power levels are just drastically different (and thats OK). Obviously the issue isn't so much making M&M3 into Star Wars, but rather its design methodology.

I think that game seriously benefited from the free form universe it could tap into (my character in that game is "The Postman," hes effectively immortal/regenerates, can fly, and wields a mailbox with a damage effect rank 14 "Neither rain, nor sleet, nor pain, or even death shall keep me from my appointed rounds," point is, its a world where almost anything goes). That can probably explain a greater ease at scaling things, even going "top down"; they didn't have to deal with a particular "X is this strong, Y is that strong, make them exist on the same field" The Star Wars label greatly limits that. How strong is a DL-44 compared to an E-11? How valuable is it to have a friend in the bueracratic system? How valuable is a small space transport as opposed to a large space transport, compared to owning a DL-44? Part of it may also be they chose to not want to lay alot of this work on the GM (something M&M 3rd does at the end of the day). While you may get a better game in some aspects by leaving it to the GM, that might not be what some players want.

KommissarK said:

Gendy Tartakovsky, Karen Traviss, Michael Stackpole or J.J. Abrams Star Wars?

ErikB said:

How about a Timothy Zahn Star Wars?

Just so long as it's not a Kevin J. Anderson Star Wars though.

ErikB said:

Easy:

Steve Binder and David Acomba Star Wars.

KommissarK said:

Thanks for that comment K…. I sprayed coke all over my screen…

Lawrence Kasden. Period

Honestly I hope that Disney trashes the entire EU. It has become a vile, bloated miasma that would make HP Lovecraft proud imo.

(I spend a maneuver to dive behind cover… )

Darian Ocana said:

I can't entirely disagree with you.  There's a large part of the Post-RotJ EU that I will shed no tears over if it gets wiped out in the wake of Episodes 7 thru 9, namely most of the stuff from the New Republic era (Thrawn Trilogy and the early X-Wing series being the only things I'd consider a true loss), the entire NJO (hated the Vong from day one), and most of the stuff following that series as well.  The Legacy comics were decent enough if you ignored Cade "Captain McEmopants" Skywalker (seriously, he reads like a reject from the Image comics of the 90's), as it was a pretty nifty setting allowing for a melting pot of ideas, but that's set well after the Original Trilogy (100+ years) and isn't overly dependent on too much of the other post-RotJ material.

Donovan Morningfire said:

Yeah, the best EU stuff for me is the ones that are set so far in the past or future that they can ignore the other EU material (and OT for that matter).

ErikB said:

Yes.  I want to play a Jedi, but I also feel that the time between the release of EotE and the Force book seems *quite* reasonable, because my past experiences with Star Wars systems that *didn't* get the balance right has shown that if the balance *isn't* right, the game suffers for everyone at the table.

Of course, I have a design and development background (software, not RPGs), so I understand how important it can be to acknowledge the difference in importance between 'I want the system done now' and 'I want the system done right'.  Try to rush the wrong things and you get a system that *almost* does what it's supposed to do, but falls over when someone does something even slightly unusual.

So, again.  Yes, I want to play a Jedi.  No, I don't want to play a Jedi in *yet another* Star Wars RPG where either everyone has to play a Jedi or those who don't end up being marginalized, or even useless, during play.  The way to do that is to take the necessary time to design, develop, and test the system thoroughly *before* adding significant amounts of Force-using capability to it.

And, as I've said before, using the Force rules present in the Beta gives you the opportunity to play a character who can do most everything that Luke can do up through the end of Return of the Jedi.  So, by that metric, you *can* play a Jedi using the rules we've already seen.

But then, I don't expect you were actually asking the question honestly, since there have already been *several* people who posted saying that, yes, they want to play Jedi, and yes, they think that the way FFG has things scheduled is the right way to go to make sure that full-blown, trained-at-the-Jedi-Temple-on-Coruscant Jedi characters don't end up completely overshadowing the other character types.

Donovan Morningfire said:

I catch you in a lie, but then its about me… yeah, not so much.  If you think this is about me being upset because you published something in books I didn't buy before I ever knew you existed… how do you warp reason to make that rational?

Donovan Morningfire said:

"Vendetta" would mean I was singling you out, which is giving yourself too much credit.  I would have called BS if anyone I could identify and knew wasn't a dev on Saga Edition made that claim.

Donovan Morningfire said:

Holy ego, Batman!  

You publish some talents, some feats, and some fluff and a stat block or two in splat books that had almost many contributors as chapters…

And you think that gives you claim to place yourself amongst Hershey, Little, and Hensley?

That you have the same perspective that Sterling Hershey has after working on every SWRPG during the last almost 20 years?  You have the same field of vision on game design some who was in charge of building 2 game systems from the ground up like Little? 

… And I got nothing for Hensley, I haven't played anything of his, looks like mostly Savage Worlds and Deadlands.  a quick Google shows he's been active for twenty years, though.  But regardless, 

You've filled their shoes? You've sat in their chair…

Donovan Morningfire said:

Whats the point of this?  We should appreciate you belittling other people opinions when they disagree with you, and the only counter point you present is  "I had two freelance jobs and got offered a third?"

I don't think there's anything elese left to say.

-WJL

Voice said:

Just out of interest, given that they have made a game where you can't play a Jedi, and have penciled another in for long after everyone has died of old age where it sounds entirely possible that you won't be able anything other than a Jedi, what gives you the impression they are even going to attempt this? 

(And given that it has never worked before, why the heck would it work this time?)