Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

Edit: Yeah 3:16 is Full.Retard too.  

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;574889(...)Er? Why would points go to the other side? Is that how the force works?

I'm not sure I got this right, but will it be possible in this system to, either on purpose or by accident, end up with a neutral jedi or is this "Force balancing" thing only applied to the group as a whole?

Quote from: stouty;575038I handle it that way. I just don't need custom dice to do it. I don't see the need to shell out cash for custom dice when the same effect can be replicated with your average, plain, old, boring, non-custom dice. Of which I have way too many already.

I see though I haven't been clear, mea culpa. My big gripe isn't so much the mechanic as the "use our special awesome dice" thing. Could have done the same thing with regular dice. Maybe, as someone suggested, it's a form of anti-piracy. I don't know. I just know I don't want to deal with the special awesome dice.

I also think numbers or values are way easier to interpret than weird icons and colors.

I must say the whole thing sounds way too gimmicky, fiddly and potentially clunky for something I'd consider using for Star Wars.

Quote from: CRKrueger;576601Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

Edit: Yeah 3:16 is Full.Retard too.  

Well I can see there's no use in explaining anything to you anyhow, you already have your mind made up that the game sucks, so be it....

I will mind my own business and play the game-we like whats in it so far, I just tried to answer some questions but to no avail...Haters will hate and there's no reasoning with them.

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;576608I'm not sure I got this right, but will it be possible in this system to, either on purpose or by accident, end up with a neutral jedi or is this "Force balancing" thing only applied to the group as a whole?


I also think numbers or values are way easier to interpret than weird icons and colors.

I must say the whole thing sounds way too gimmicky, fiddly and potentially clunky for something I'd consider using for Star Wars.

Not really but I'm not arguing with people about it online anymore.

Quote from: flyingcircus;576618Not really but I'm not arguing with people about it online anymore.

For what it's worth you've got me a little more interested.

Quote from: CRKrueger;576601Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

Edit: Yeah 3:16 is Full.Retard too.  

Because the setting was always very big into the nitty-gritty of how far a blaster could fire or how many shots it had.

Quote from: flyingcircus;576579Haven't got to space combat yet but the character creation is nice.  It doesn't use cards or fiddly little trinkets like WHFRP3E like some have said around the net on forums (not just here, I should have been clearer).

Ok, this is a little better. I'm glad to hear it doesn't have all the little pieces to keep track of. I'm still turned off by the dice, but I'll wait till the finished product comes out and see if there's a way to hack it to normal dice.
Thanks for the info.

Cheers,
Mark

Has anyone got any more details on the attack success rate and defence discrepancy?

In WFRP3e, attackers hit about 80% of the time on average and the only real way to improve defending oneself is to wear armour as there is no defensive skill/talent in the game. This both appear to have been inherited unchanged and seem contrary to how Star Wars combat normally looks.

From flyingcircus' descriptions, it sounds like they kept a lot of what I like about WFRP3 (dice, abstracted combat ranges, etc) and dumped what I don't like about WFRP3 (oh god the fiddly bit tokens, etc).

I may have missed it in the press releases but are they going to release a box set or separate books and dice?

Quote from: flyingcircus;576616Well I can see there's no use in explaining anything to you anyhow, you already have your mind made up that the game sucks, so be it....

I will mind my own business and play the game-we like whats in it so far, I just tried to answer some questions but to no avail...Haters will hate and there's no reasoning with them.

Protip: Educating someone on the mechanics of the game, does in not in fact mean that they will like said mechanics even though you might.

I know how the ranges work in WFRP3, I don't like it at all.  I especially don't like the fact that there's not even an option for more concrete and less narrative combat.

SW went down the same road, I won't be following.

Quote from: CRKrueger;577082Protip: Educating someone on the mechanics of the game, does in not in fact mean that they will like said mechanics even though you might.

Yes.  I (and others here) need to know the machanics of a game to see if we'll like them or not.

Quote from: fellowhoodlum;577061From flyingcircus' descriptions, it sounds like they kept a lot of what I like about WFRP3 (dice, abstracted combat ranges, etc) and dumped what I don't like about WFRP3 (oh god the fiddly bit tokens, etc).

I may have missed it in the press releases but are they going to release a box set or separate books and dice?

They've not really said yet, at least on the FFG forums they all seem to think its going to be 40K hardback like books with dice packs separate, I get this as well as I talked to one of the customer service reps and he hinted at a hardback copy as well, with dice separate.  But with my Ipad SW dice app, I won't be buying the dice later anyhow, not needed.

Quote from: CRKrueger;576601Oh god, abstracted ranges were stupid enough in WFRP3, in a game with lasers, grenades, etc, it's Full.Retard.

I've always wanted to like the concept of abstract ranges. But in practice they all seem to fall apart the minute the bad guys and/or good guys split up into two groups and go to different ranges.

Does WFRP3 or FFG's Star Wars address that issue?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;577905I've always wanted to like the concept of abstract ranges. But in practice they all seem to fall apart the minute the bad guys and/or good guys split up into two groups and go to different ranges.

Does WFRP3 or FFG's Star Wars address that issue?

WFRP3 did not, running a bog standard WFRP combat ie. a coach on a forest road ambushed by bandits/beastmen in 3-4 different locations using a combination of ranged and melee weapons) becomes a nightmare of determining representational ranges between all the groups of combatants, when a simple range system delivers the information much easier.  What's even more annoying is that even though WFRP3 doesn't use ranges, it still uses fucking minis, just with tokens to determine ranges from other combatants.

I've always preferred "zones" as a measuring system for RPG, because it's a nice half-way between a grid and range bands. Counting the amount of zones a shot has to go through works fine for ranged weapons, and if each zone is small enough, melee attacks are easy ("Anyone in the same zone", simples). It avoids the problems Justin identifies of S/M/L range systems.

Definite ranges and range bands don't really work with non-minis RPG combat - Gleichman is right, without figures on the board you can't tell the exact distances between combatants, so it comes down to a DM call whether you're in range or not anyway. And there's nothing wrong with that, it's a system that works great and has done for decades, but... players should admit that's how things play out, and accept that range is handled fuzzily in games.