| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Delkarnu
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 189
Location: Saratoga Springs, Upstate NY
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| obidancer wrote: |
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? |
Ooohhh, a GM-off.
In Space:
If you have a backup hyperdrive as is standard on most freighters, simple repair role to switch over.
But I was an evil GM, and you have a deadline to a rendezvous, that x11 won't cut it. Rip parts from the backup to fix the main. More difficult repair roll, will only make it one trip.
But this is your second barely survivable battle and you were already using the backup. Salvage parts from the rest of the ship(I assume you'd come up with this part) to make a down and dirty patch job. Much more difficult repair roll, and its jury rigged, replace two D in astrogation, with Wild D.
What!? I was so evil a GM that even that wouldn't work (or you just didn't come up with an idea to try)? Hope you are in a well traveled hyperspace lance, so the next traveler will be pulled out by your obstruction, but they may be pirates, bounty hunters, or imperials, and now you have a cell to break out of and their ship to capture to replace your broken one.
But I was using a gambit system you say. add three gambits and roll. Hooray! Its fixed without thought or effort. This IS simpler, and you avoid all that pesky plot. (though not sure where the creativity part comes in)
On Planet:
10,000 is a lot of dough. I'm sure you could find a used one, that won't ever, ever go wrong 
Don't want to go that route, gonna have to make some money. You're the master mechanic, hang around the spaceport bar, work for hire for a bit (GM hits the fast forward button)
But that rendezvous is coming soon, don't have time, guess you'll have to find better paying work, you know, under the table, and I'm sure that will go smoothly
But I was using a gambit system you say. add three gambits and roll. Hooray! Its fixed without thought or effort. This IS simpler, and you avoid all that pesky plot. (though not sure where the creativity part comes in)
Of course, if I know you well enough as a player to know you picked the engineer because you really like to do in depth engineering things. I'll tell you that the power coupling is cracked, let you roll a few repair rolls to learn that the main weapon feeds of a power conduit that uses a similar type of coupling. Of course then you'd have to make a repair roll to modify it (how well you do determines if this part gets fixed or jury rigged) and so on until its fixed. On planet, you could think to check the junkyards, see if there is something that would work, and make the repair rolls.
Last edited by Delkarnu on Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:03 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Delkarnu
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 189
Location: Saratoga Springs, Upstate NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lostboy wrote: | | Im sorry about the personal attack enderandrew it was uncalled for. |
We all fail our willpower rolls sometimes. I'm just hoping for better rolls to happen on the Persuade: Debate specialization. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
obidancer
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 230
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
My question was for endeandrew to answer, but Delkarnu you're along the line I'm heading toward. I just first want to know what Endeandrew would rule my gambit. Who knows, I may be wrong.
(I know we have the same avatar, you may have been confused as to who asked what)
_________________
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 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| obidancer wrote: | My question was for endeandrew to answer, but Delkarnu you're along the line I'm heading toward. I just first want to know what Endeandrew would rule my gambit. Who knows, I may be wrong.
(I know we have the same avatar, you may have been confused as to who asked what) |
I know you posted that (my PER is not that low), but felt that it warranted an example of how a player would use creativity to solve the problem in the basic ruleset, so that when enderandrew posts how this would work under gambits, we can see how it is both simpler and inspires more creativity. And honestly, those were off the top of my head, its well past my bedtime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree with your assesment Delkarnu and nicely done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Delkarnu wrote: | | 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. |
It is simpler to be able to use gambits than rather having a specific rule that just covers the one mechanic of tripping. Because people felt that D6 was deficient in this area, they had to write complex martial arts rules. Yes, those rules are optional but they appeared to fill an apparent void. Gambits reduce the need for optional, complex rules for every scenario. That is one of three ways I've suggested it improves the game.
| Quote: | | 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. |
As I've said before, in theory you can do this with the old system, but in every case you're now asking the GM to make up new mechanics on the fly that didn't exist before, and the ague whether or not those mechanics are fair. For instance, I don't see how Sneak is appropriate.
You invented a mechanism on the fly, which is more complex. Having one core mechanic to handle all of these situations alleviates the need to do that, and makes the game simpler.
| Quote: | | Conning- Roll Con against their Con or Perception, bonus for good roleplay, situation, and creativity... |
You're not even responding to what I'm writing. I have specific examples of how existing skills are made more interesting with gambits. It isn't that you can't con without a gambit. I never suggested as such.
I suggested in a stated example that you want to convince someone that a ship is orbit, it can be seen as a gambit scenario. You can go with an easier lie with a lower difficulty, but it won't scare your target as much. You can pick a bigger lie with a higher difficulty that scares the target even more. You give the player the ability to see how difficult they want to go.
| Quote: | | Everything I've listed now uses ONLY an attribute or a basic skill to accomplish. |
When have I suggested that gambits would be anything different? You still roll an attributes and skills. The only wrinkle is that you allow the player to intentionally raise the difficulty for a desired effect.
Honestly, I'm not sure that you are grasping this.
| Quote: | | 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. |
I've repeated it about ten times and you continue to ignore it.
Instead of having a specific series of tables to consult for droid repair to try and do different things, the entire series of tables can be wiped out with gambits. You want to improve the droid's move rate? What want to repair it faster? You want to jury rig it?
Currently, for each specific scenario we require charts to dictate difficulty. I'm suggesting we eliminate all this cruft and give a common framework to make it easier to determine difficulty, and empower the players at the same time.
Again, how is this bad?
Do me one favor. Try it for a gaming session or two. Use it as an optional rule with your group and see what happens. I guarantee you won't want to go back.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| obidancer wrote: | | 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? |
I'm not sure this is a detriment unless you think the gambit is abusive. If as a GM you don't think the players can pull off the repair unless they have the parts, then you just say they can't.
The GM still has to authorize everything.
I can't simply say I am going to impale Vader's armor with tofu, how many raises is that?
However, if the players are close on costs, then it might not be unreasonable for them to substitute parts, try to make their own, or jury rig a different solution.
As for how I'd adjudicate that particular scenario, it depends how much money the players have, what resources are available, and if there was a decent mechanic who had any reasonable knowledge to justify coming up with a jury-rigged solution.
I'm not going to tell a diplomat who has never touched an engine, roll a 30 and you magically fix it via blind luck. However, if the standard repair is say a 20, and they have to substitute one part for another, then it might be a 30 for them.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Delkarnu wrote: | | But I was using a gambit system you say. add three gambits and roll. Hooray! Its fixed without thought or effort. This IS simpler, and you avoid all that pesky plot. (though not sure where the creativity part comes in) |
Gambits destroy plot?
If you have planned a scenario where the failed hyperdrive leads to an encounter, then simply say they can't fix it.
Never have I said that players can do anything they want with no regards to reason or GM adjudication.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'v read all the for and against posts and i understand how gambits are supposed to work, i think gambits are just one more superflueus rule to worry about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lostboy wrote: | | I'v read all the for and against posts and i understand how gambits are supposed to work, i think gambits are just one more superflueus rule to worry about. |
As opposed to 100 superfluous rules to cover a whole bunch of other scenarios.
Clearly, the concept that a player can raise their difficulty would be terribly difficult to remember.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Players can always influence their difficulty modifier, they can atempt a simpler action(Witch lowers the dif.) or they can attempt a more difficult or complicated action(Witch raises the dif.).
If the player has little choice e.g. must shoot an enemy and their is no way for them to change the dif, then that is what character points and force points are fore.
A player can make a volantary raising of their dif in order to increase the impressivness of an action.
I belive these points render your gambit system irrelivent because the system already caters to altering of difficulty classes by both players and gm's, that is unless you want to rebuild the system to fit your "gambit" mod, but i think doing a hatchet job on the system is a bit much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rerun941
Commander
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 459
Location: San Antonio, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| enderandrew wrote: | | Lostboy wrote: | | I'v read all the for and against posts and i understand how gambits are supposed to work, i think gambits are just one more superflueus rule to worry about. |
As opposed to 100 superfluous rules to cover a whole bunch of other scenarios.
Clearly, the concept that a player can raise their difficulty would be terribly difficult to remember. |
From 2nd Ed R&E:
When in doubt, fall back on the Star Wars rule of
thumb:
"Pick a difficulty number. If the character's skill roll
is equal or higher, she succeeds."
I've also seen it as:
"When in doubt, roll and shout."
Everything else is superfluous.
_________________
Han - "How're we doin'?"
Luke - "Same as always."
Han - "That bad, huh?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| enderandrew wrote: | I'm not saying those things aren't possible. What I'm saying is that having such a system encourages creativity from players. I've seen really good players make the best of all kinds of different systems. However, I've also seen many players who think the only things they can do are the skills listed on their character sheets. Having a gambit system helps encourage creative behavior, and creates a new challenge for players who aren't challenged.
|
Too often when i see something like what you propose, that is all they think of. Creative things just to get that "gambit" bonus.
| Quote: | | Read my post again, I'm not refering to just picking random number, I'm saying, I may pick a diff. 12 to reflect the player is at medium range just barely past is short range |
Correct. Most of the time i use the middle of the 'diff range' to show case a middle of the road difficulty. If it is harder or easier, then i tone it down.
| Quote: | | If you need a system to get players to be creative, you aren't giving them scenarios that encourage being creative. In the groups I've been in, they don't stop being creative, and I always reward it with cool effects or cp rewards. |
Very true delk. I have seen some try and codify 'cinematics; before and rather than make them want to be MORE cinematic, they get less, as they think if it is not covered, they cannot do it.
| Quote: | I gave you an example of using an asteroid for partial cover. Again, this is something that isn't very clear in the rules. It says I can use my piloting skill effectively as a dodge roll, but what about an additional bonus? A gambit mechanism covers most any scenario you can come up with without the need for additional rules for all these scenarios.
|
Cover rules already exist in the book. Whether they are using a cargo crate for cover, or an asteroid. The mechanics are the same.
| Quote: | | What about a sales pitch? You're trying to sell cargo. My difficulty to sell to you is X. I can try a hard line to try and get more money and raise my difficulty. I have a greater chance of missing my difficulty and not selling at all, but now if I succeed, I make more money. |
That is already covered by the Bargain skill.. Opposed against the one you are trying to sell/buy from.
| Quote: | | I've suggested tons of scenarios where it would empower players and make the game more interesting. |
TO my perceptions, it would only "empower" those who already dont think of creative things to do. And how is that making it more interesting?
| Quote: | | So you want players to be more creative, but your opposed to a system that will help with that? |
To be honest. YES. If they need a gimmie to want to do the better thing (like someone in school only striving to get an A if their parents give them 1000 dollars) then to be honest why would anyone else strive to get that A.
It to me, makes the fantastic mudane...
| Quote: | | Human min and max ratings on strength are 1D and 4D. |
Maybe you need to read up. Humans are 2d-4d... not 1d-4d
| Quote: | | 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. |
I have YET to see a gm require advanced rules to adjucate the above in any SW game i have been in. And for note the past 11 years i have gamed with a large group that hits practically every mid west convention.
| Quote: | | We all fail our willpower rolls sometimes. I'm just hoping for better rolls to happen on the Persuade: Debate specialization. |
Maybe you should have called the darkside to increase your skill 
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Obi-Jon-Kaliburr
Ensign
Joined: 09 Feb 2009
Posts: 34
Location: Bury, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The existing WEG rules are fundmentally sound, but individual opinion is partly dependant upon which point a reader considers the rules should end and the gamemaster begins, the blurred, wavering line most of these disagreements sail upon.
I wonder if anybody thinks there are some rules from the very first edition rules which they think need never have been elaborated upon, that WEG got them 'right first time' but continued tinkering with?
What about rules that you think have never been properly considered, all the way through the 2.5 editions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
enderandrew
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 68
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Too often when i see something like what you propose, that is all they think of. Creative things just to get that "gambit" bonus. |
A bonus is giving away character points and force points as has been suggested by others. What I proposed isn't a free bonus that can be exploited. Rather the difficulty is raised. How is that some unfair bonus?
| Quote: | | Cover rules already exist in the book. Whether they are using a cargo crate for cover, or an asteroid. The mechanics are the same. |
The cover rules are saying if I hide behind a wall while sitting still, I have to roll extra dice to determine the cover, and then we need to roll extra dice to see if you destroy the cover, and then we roll normal damage.
The rules don't specify being able to utilize cover while dodging specifically. Regardless the current cover rules require the GM to make extraneous die rolls, and then determine off the top of their head what the strength in dice would if I hide behind an object.
What is the strength rating of that asteroid?
My suggestion is considerably simpler in this example.
| Quote: | | That is already covered by the Bargain skill.. Opposed against the one you are trying to sell/buy from. |
No, it isn't. Are you even reading what I'm writing? A normal bargain check just sees if I can sell the item to you as an opposed check. However, with a gambit I can change the situation. Instead of just selling it, I want to attempt a harder sale to drive up the price, or change the terms of the deal.
| Quote: | | TO my perceptions, it would only "empower" those who already dont think of creative things to do. And how is that making it more interesting? |
Again, you keep calling this a bonus, and empowering. Do you understand that it is a fair trade-off with a higher difficulty number?
As for making things more interesting, it isn't just a matter of declaring the same actions. You allow players to do more complicated things.
| Quote: | | To be honest. YES. If they need a gimmie to want to do the better thing (like someone in school only striving to get an A if their parents give them 1000 dollars) then to be honest why would anyone else strive to get that A. |
This isn't a gimme.
| Quote: | | Maybe you need to read up. Humans are 2d-4d... not 1d-4d |
PCs are 2D to 4D. Humans are 1D to 4D. Read the GM guide.
| Quote: | | I have YET to see a gm require advanced rules to adjucate the above in any SW game i have been in. And for note the past 11 years i have gamed with a large group that hits practically every mid west convention. |
With gambits, such rules wouldn't even need to exist.
_________________
Nihilism makes me smile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
