PDA

View Full Version : SECR Dominance



PsychoInfiltrator
20 June 2007, 06:54 PM
So I realize that what I'm complaining about it actually caused by a very good thing that is working to bring ever more life onto these wonderful boards, so I'll keep it short.

Do you realize just how annoying it is for an RCRBer to open the D20 forum, find half a dozen threads with new posts in the last few hours (a novelty indeed!), and see them all tagged with that SAGA disclaimer?

If not, lucky you.

(Thank you for instituting that disclaimer/warning/whatever oh mighty mods, and saving me GREAT frustration, btw.)

Drendar Morevo
20 June 2007, 07:19 PM
Its probably about as annoying when the D6ers met the d20ers for the First time.

Fingon
20 June 2007, 07:40 PM
Yeah... I can't contribute much to the SAGA discussions... it's kinda sad. I liked to haggle over rules.

Ubiqtorate
20 June 2007, 09:42 PM
As one of those D6ers mentioned just now by Drendar, I'm going to ask a pretty stupid question:

Are SAGA and RCRB really that much different? I was under the impression that it was more of a rules update than a complete redo. I guess you learn something new every day...

Rostek
20 June 2007, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by Ubiqtorate
As one of those D6ers mentioned just now by Drendar, I'm going to ask a pretty stupid question:

Are SAGA and RCRB really that much different? I was under the impression that it was more of a rules update than a complete redo. I guess you learn something new every day...

Different enough for there to be issues discussing it with RCRB players who don't own the book. I'd say the games are 70-80% compatible, which is a pretty big chunk of some key stuff (attacks, defenses, condition track) and some fairly easy to deal with parts (skills feats/talents) which are differing yet more or less of the same conceptual origin.

REG
20 June 2007, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by PsychoInfiltrator
Do you realize just how annoying it is for an RCRBer to open the D20 forum, find half a dozen threads with new posts in the last few hours (a novelty indeed!), and see them all tagged with that SAGA disclaimer?
HA! Now you know how OCR fans felt when RCR came out. :P

REG
20 June 2007, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by Drendar Morevo
Its probably about as annoying when the D6ers met the d20ers for the First time.
Gooood! :P

-- a former bucket-o-dice sufferer who found happeness in d20.

PsychoInfiltrator
21 June 2007, 12:04 PM
Its probably about as annoying when the D6ers met the d20ers for the First time.

Perhaps, but at least D6 and D20 have different forums. (Yes, I know full well that and why no such thing exists for RCR and SECR fans.)


Yeah... I can't contribute much to the SAGA discussions... it's kinda sad. I liked to haggle over rules.

And I like to have a clue what people are talking about, so, yeah.


Are SAGA and RCRB really that much different? I was under the impression that it was more of a rules update than a complete redo. I guess you learn something new every day...

Think of it like the difference between the OT adn Phantom Menace. It's all in the same universe, but some would would swear you'd never know.


Different enough for there to be issues discussing it with RCRB players who don't own the book.

That would be me.


HA! Now you know how OCR fans felt when RCR came out.

Poor saps.

EDIT: For the record, since I was last here, there have been 7 threads updated in the D20 forum. Six with a [SAGA] tag, and the seventh is entitled 'Future Saga Products'. *sigh...

Ubiqtorate
21 June 2007, 02:45 PM
Actually, I had similar issues in D6 when the 2nd Edition and then the 2nd Edition Revised & Expanded came out. Internet wasn't nearly as big a deal back then, so its not like I was trying to deal with keeping everything straight on forums betwen the 1st Edition and 2nd Edition people, but still, I understand your pain. I wouldn't stress about it, though. Saga Edition has been out for how long, now? My guess is that things will straighten themselves out as either the initial rush of Saga posts dies off, or as people adopt SECR to the point where it doesn't matter.

REG
22 June 2007, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by Ubiqtorate
Saga Edition has been out for how long, now?
It hasn't pass the 1-month marker yet.

But at least there are praises. Poor OCR didn't make 30 days before everyone started griping over the rules.

Ardent
22 June 2007, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by REG
But at least there are praises. Poor OCR didn't make 30 days before everyone started griping over the rules.
SECR wasn't even released and people were griping over the rules. ;)

coldskier0320
22 June 2007, 08:18 PM
What ever happened to those devaronian species stats they said would be in there?:?

REG
23 June 2007, 12:21 AM
Originally posted by Ardent

SECR wasn't even released and people were griping over the rules. ;)
Bah. They're old folk who are set in their own "rules." :P

Ubiqtorate
23 June 2007, 07:09 AM
Originally posted by REG
Bah. They're old folk who are set in their own "rules." :P

No need to tell me about that - I'm still set in my own "rules," too. D6 rules, that is... :P

Ronin
23 June 2007, 08:31 AM
I think all the Saga Ed activity is because it's the newest, flashy material that's out there. The activity is natural.
I'm sure once those who have the book have settled down and got used to it, the activity will balance out...actually it'll probably be a good indicator of Saga Ed's popularity if, in a good few month's time, Saga threads are still the majority, then I think it'll show the system's success. If, alternatively, the majority of threads are again RCRB-related, then...the gamers have decided.

Another factor is:
is there anything to discuss?

If you want more RCRB threads...then make them...but you need something to discuss. At the moment Saga owners do have lots to discuss (as did those who adopted D20 when it originally came out) whereas RCRB-stalwarts perhaps don't...

Give it a month or so, Psych :)

Or try to get your hands on Saga and take a look firsthand ;)

Rostek
23 June 2007, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by coldskier0320
What ever happened to those devaronian species stats they said would be in there?:?

Rodney (or Gary, I can't recall) said its coming out in a WE some point soon :)

coldskier0320
23 June 2007, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Rostek


Rodney (or Gary, I can't recall) said its coming out in a WE some point soon :)

Another delay?! *scoffs* :P

In all seriousness, though, while I stil think I prefer the RCRB, Saga isn't quite as bad as I thought it was going to be.

PsychoInfiltrator
26 June 2007, 07:45 AM
Or try to get your hands on Saga and take a look firsthand

The onyl way i'll get my hands on SAGA is if the local Chapters is stocking it, and there's a comfy chair open. So, it might be awhile.

gmjabreson
26 June 2007, 08:14 AM
well I've had Saga for a little more than a month, having picked it up at my bookstore on the "MAY" release date. Everytime I get the chance to look over it, I thank god that I decided to NOT change over the fan-book I've been working on.
As much as I could figure out about vehicle generation in RCRB, I think I'll stick to what I know best for those vessels and vehicles in the NAME Game thread and keep those RCRB, those that want to convert them over to SAGA, go right ahead.

Saga reading just gives me a headache, which I thought would be coming from my school textbooks, not my game books.

darkforcerising
16 July 2007, 07:10 AM
We'll see, y'know. From what I've read, there are a lot of people who aren't real big fans of the SAGA edition, and who are going to continue to use the RCR. If that's the case we might just have to have three sections. D6, d20-RCR, and d20-SAGA. If everyone eventually does come around to using the SAGA, then the [SAGA] disclaimer will no longer be necessary.

coldskier0320
16 July 2007, 08:15 AM
As has been said before, there will be no new forum added so that Saga and RCR will each have their own forum. There is no OCR forum, and Saga is now the current form of the d20 SWRPG, so that is what will be dealt with in the d20 forum. Furthermore, while it is nice that we've taken to tagging Saga stuff, I'm surprised that it isn't the other way around, with all threads assumed to be Saga, and asking for tags on RCR stuff.

Rostek
16 July 2007, 01:56 PM
While the administration will doubtlessly act if it becomes a big problem, I expect that such a splitting of the d20 forum will not be necessary by this time next year.
By that time, I also suspect that we'll be seeing SAGA as the assumed system (as cold suggested).

This is a transitional period-- of course there will be some discomfort, but it won't last, if my experience proves true :)

king_watto
18 July 2007, 04:39 AM
Originally posted by darkforcerising
We'll see, y'know. From what I've read, there are a lot of people who aren't real big fans of the SAGA edition, and who are going to continue to use the RCR. If that's the case we might just have to have three sections. D6, d20-RCR, and d20-SAGA. If everyone eventually does come around to using the SAGA, then the [SAGA] disclaimer will no longer be necessary.

I think this is a good idea. There were mixed reviews for the SECR, and in the end I am just going to stick with the RCRB. It works well for me, and I have just begun to understand it. I don't want to switch to the SECR now, just when I started getting the hang of the RCRB.

REG
18 July 2007, 11:20 PM
Originally posted by king_watto

I don't want to switch to the SECR now, just when I started getting the hang of the RCRB.
You just bought the RCR less than six months ago, didn't you?

You might as well get your money's worth playing it for a year before getting SECR. :P

coldskier0320
19 July 2007, 07:43 AM
You might as well get your money's worth playing it for a year before getting SECR.

Definitely. Give 'em time to publish the Saga Edition Revised Core Rulebook. :rolleyes:

king_watto
19 July 2007, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by coldskier0320


Definitely. Give 'em time to publish the Saga Edition Revised Core Rulebook. :rolleyes:

Yea. From what some reviewers are saying, they are going to need one. :) But I am satisfied with the RCRB for now at least. I will give them time to "work the bugs out of the system" so to speak. :P

boccelounge
19 July 2007, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by coldskier0320
Definitely. Give 'em time to publish the Saga Edition Revised Core Rulebook. :rolleyes:
Uh... your point is taken (I spent an afternoon last week with a fine-point Sharpie, my new (as in not-even-gamed-with-yet) Saga book, and the official errata), but... check the title page, bub: "Saga Edition Revised Core Rulebook" is the actual name of it... :raised: ;)



P.S. To Hell with "reviewers"; make up your own mind. My mind? Saga is fantastic.

P.P.S. But also, don't take my word for it-- if you're having a good time gaming RCR, then keep on keepin' on. :)


EDIT: Heck, that would be an excellent marketing slogan to sell off those piles of old RCR books:

<center>Buy RCR: Because 5 out of 6 Ain't Bad!</center>

king_watto
20 July 2007, 05:23 AM
Originally posted by boccelounge
P.S. To Hell with "reviewers"; make up your own mind. My mind? Saga is fantastic.



Well, unfortunately the bookstores around here either didn't have the SECR in stock, or didn't order it. This means I would have had to order it online, and so I had to rely on gamers reviews to see if it was worth the money. I didn't want to waste money on the book and shipping if it was going to be a complete waste of money. So I decided to stay with the one I know works for me. :)

REG
21 July 2007, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by king_watto

Well, unfortunately the bookstores around here either didn't have the SECR in stock, or didn't order it. This means I would have had to order it online, and so I had to rely on gamers reviews to see if it was worth the money. I didn't want to waste money on the book and shipping if it was going to be a complete waste of money. So I decided to stay with the one I know works for me. :)
Like staying with dial-up after everyone praising about broadband? :P

I have yet to visit a bookstore that won't take special order and reserve a copy of the book in my name. Sounds like the store owners are former Soviet hardliners.

coldskier0320
22 July 2007, 05:25 AM
Like staying with dial-up after everyone praising about broadband?

Meh, more like sticking with regular when everyone else is drinking light, imo. ;)

REG
22 July 2007, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by coldskier0320

Meh, more like sticking with regular when everyone else is drinking light, imo. ;)
Yeah, I prefer complicated bloated stuff I also believe that the distance between two points shouldn't be short like a line but lots of scenic curves and loops. For every one resolution from swinging a vibro-sword to picking your nose, you must undergo at least 12 meticulous steps. That's what RCR offers me.

After all, a RPG is like filing tax forms, and filing tax forms (not letting a CPA do it for you) is fun.

"I should have taken the blue pill." -Cypher.

:P

Grimace
22 July 2007, 06:24 PM
Take it easy on the system slamming, REG. You're getting into awfully touchy areas that can cause others to snap back.

So if you don't like the old system, say so once and leave it be. Let others make their own decision without continually busting on their choices.

coldskier0320
23 July 2007, 10:12 AM
"Saga Edition Revised Core Rulebook" is the actual name of it...

Hmm...so it is...wonder what the re-revised version will be called? :P

But as for how I personally feel about it, I really do feel that, despite what others may think or say, Saga is the dumbed down RPG for minis players. My biggest gripe with the system is the way skills work. It's a system that streamlines everything, which makes combat nicer, but really cheapens the skill system, IMHO, which says to me that the system suggests we gloss over the non-combat encounters so that we can get on to the next juicy grid-based encounter. And for a guy who does most of his gaming anymore in an online form, it kinda takes away from the whole experience.

As with all things, opinions vary wildly. But for me, while Saga is an adequate system, for my needs, the RCR suits me a little better. Still, I'm not going to complain either way, as long as WotC will continue producing material and not just ignore the product line. :)


"I should have taken the blue pill."

And for the record, both pills were placebos, the drug that really wakes them up is dissolved in the water they wash the pill down with. ;)

PsychoInfiltrator
2 August 2007, 02:59 PM
Note: Dear Mods: by the end of this post, I promise to bring it back to the original topic.


Hmm...so it is...wonder what the re-revised version will be called? :P

2nd Edition Saga Edition Revised Core Rulebook?

Oy.


But as for how I personally feel about it, I really do feel that, despite what others may think or say, Saga is the dumbed down RPG for minis players.

I would have either left it at 'dumbed down RPG' or added 'for people who like the newish SW video games' myself, but that's only because I'm sick of ranting about Minis.


My biggest gripe with the system is the way skills work.

Hear, hear!


It's a system that streamlines everything, which makes combat nicer, but really cheapens the skill system, IMHO, which says to me that the system suggests we gloss over the non-combat encounters so that we can get on to the next juicy grid-based encounter. And for a guy who does most of his gaming anymore in an online form, it kinda takes away from the whole experience.

*shiver. Now we can make characters in five minutes, have a major battle in five minutes, and wonder if that's all there is to the system for the next 5 hours. In other words, I agree with Cold.


As with all things, opinions vary wildly. But for me, while Saga is an adequate system, for my needs, the RCR suits me a little better. Still, I'm not going to complain either way, as long as WotC will continue producing material and not just ignore the product line.

Maybe once Saga has statted a pile of stuff the RCR rules have not, it will give us RCRers something to do. (Convert them to RCR stats, or write our own from scratch.)

Anyway, I am happy to note that the D20 forum is finally a safe dwelling place for Psych again, as not *every* thread is devoted to SAGA, and the ones that are are consistently tagged as such, so I have five extra seconds (per thread) for doing something more important.

gmjabreson
6 August 2007, 10:16 AM
Ok, having read Saga for 6-7 times now, from cover to cover. I still don't understand everything. Where did the wacky new way of Stating Starships and Vehicles come from? If they were going to complicate that system of stating, at least provide a way to do it, IN the book.

Surfing for web enhancements, is not my cup of tea (I prefer something with more caffeine). Some aspects of Saga, are ok. Am I overall pleased with the product.....I'd give it a 5 of 10, not bad, but could have been better.

I think the reason there are so many threads about Saga, is that people are trying to show that they learned how to convert things over to the new system set up and are providing us slow learners examples and stats for Saga games.

Again, though, that's just my opinion.

I think overall Saga will continue to dominate, until people run out of things to convert over.

Rostek
6 August 2007, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by gmjabreson
Ok, having read Saga for 6-7 times now, from cover to cover. I still don't understand everything. Where did the wacky new way of Stating Starships and Vehicles come from? If they were going to complicate that system of stating, at least provide a way to do it, IN the book.

That would be from one of Moridin's other works: d20 Future. Can't really argue with the lack of at least a bare-bones builder in the book, but the new SotG for Saga will doubtless have rules galore for such a process (yeah, I know: "I have to buy another book just for...", but that's capitalism for you :rolleyes: ;)).

PsychoInfiltrator
6 August 2007, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by Rostek


That would be from one of Moridin's other works: d20 Future. Can't really argue with the lack of at least a bare-bones builder in the book, but the new SotG for Saga will doubtless have rules galore for such a process (yeah, I know: "I have to buy another book just for...", but that's capitalism for you :rolleyes: ;)).

Well, considering how many RCRBers are/were willing to pay for a Revised SotG, I doubt it will be (considered much of) a problem, at least around here, where most of the SAGA players are still former/current RCR players.

Rostek
6 August 2007, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by PsychoInfiltrator


Well, considering how many RCRBers are/were willing to pay for a Revised SotG, I doubt it will be (considered much of) a problem, at least around here, where most of the SAGA players are still former/current RCR players.

Oh, I quite agree.

I just can appreciate the folks who bought SAGA as a probationary thing (and those who wanted to dive right in) and find that there is an important part of the game that lacks a decent set of rules, then getting annoyed. It can be frustrating-- but as a guy who would have gotten the new SotG whatever the case, I can live with it.

Vash Knives
8 September 2007, 11:48 AM
As a RCR player, it annoys me that around 90% of new topics revolve around the streamlined but soulless SAGA. People don't tend to see that new does not always mean better. For example, the Hachi-Roku is still one of the best cars in its class even though it is over twenty years old.
I intend to use the [D20] tag on my RCR work (which does include stats for the Hachi-Roku ) in the forums when I get around to posting it. Pertaining to the use of the word soulless, I feel I must say this. SAGA did simplify the d20 system, the problem is it was oversimplified, thereby removing its "soul". I mean no disrespect to the creators of SAGA, it's just that SAGA seems more like a stepping stone to RCR than a replacement.

PsychoInfiltrator
8 September 2007, 05:00 PM
I mean no disrespect to the creators of SAGA, it's just that SAGA seems more like a stepping stone to RCR than a replacement.

I'd call it a stepping stone away from D20.

REG
8 September 2007, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by Vash Knives
[B]As a RCR player, it annoys me that around 90% of new topics revolve around the streamlined but soulless SAGA. People don't tend to see that new does not always mean better.
I dunno. Back in 2000, then-new 3e D&D was better than the eleven-year-old 2e AD&D. Had they not created the then-new d20 System I shudder to think what the then-new Star Wars Original Core Rulebook from WotC would have.

*shudders convusively*

Rules have souls??? Don't feel it any rules at all. They're just tools to me. It's the players that put souls in the game.

Ubiqtorate
8 September 2007, 05:06 PM
Humor an old D6 guy. In what way does RCR have "soul" that Saga doesn't?

REG
8 September 2007, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by Ubiqtorate
Humor an old D6 guy. In what way does RCR have "soul" that Saga doesn't?
While you're at it, humor a d20 guy also. :P

Rostek
8 September 2007, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by Ubiqtorate
Humor an old D6 guy. In what way does RCR have "soul" that Saga doesn't?

Rodney's a necromancer by training and preference; ergo, one may assume that SAGA is an undead product (and therefore has no soul). [/snark].

boccelounge
9 September 2007, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by Ubiqtorate
Humor an old D6 guy. In what way does RCR have "soul" that Saga doesn't?

OK, here's my translation: "RCR is comfortable and familiar, SCR is new and unfamiliar."

IMO, Rules are just rules. Good stories and "soul" come from good GMs and good roleplayers. Choosing a ruleset that your group is comfortable with matters far more than which ruleset you choose. ;)

I mean, c'mon, it's Star Wars. ow much more soul can there be? :? ;)

Ubiqtorate
9 September 2007, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by boccelounge


OK, here's my translation: "RCR is comfortable and familiar, SCR is new and unfamiliar."

Yep, that's what I'm hearing. Frankly, d20 scares me a little, whether it's RCR or SCR. That's just because D6 is what I know, and it's probably the only thing I'll ever use. I looked at a copy of Saga, and while I was pleasantly surprised by a few things, my overall impression was that it still concentrates too much on numbers, and not enough on story. That's been my gripe about d20 all along, though, and I actually think Saga is an improvement over RCR in that respect. I haven't used either of them in an actual gameplay setting, though, so it's really hard to say which I'd even like better.

Fingon
9 September 2007, 04:33 PM
still concentrates too much on numbers, and not enough on story.

I agree with you on that... D20 can very easily detoriate into number crunching. I've seen it happen. That said, it does handle some things very well.

SAGA, while it streamlines much of these numbers, concentrates much more on combat than the RCR, which is frustrating to me.

Actually, I'll probably grab some D6 books some time in the future; I recently got into GURPS and I've loved it.

Sarge
9 September 2007, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by Fingon


Actually, I'll probably grab some D6 books some time in the future; I recently got into GURPS and I've loved it.

Years ago, I adapted GURPS advantages and disadvantages to SW d6. It's an easy conversion and works great. Try it, and if you don't love it, I'll give you your money back!

Fingon
9 September 2007, 07:32 PM
Heck, I add the advantages and disadvantages to D20. It actually can work out nicely.

Admiral Zaarin
16 September 2007, 11:52 AM
I disagree about SAGA being "dumbed down." Certainly the rules are simpler, but to me less rules means more roleplaying. I hardly reference the rules anyway, and SAGA just makes it that much more practical to do so. Just my opinion.

coldskier0320
16 September 2007, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by Admiral Zaarin
I disagree about SAGA being "dumbed down." Certainly the rules are simpler, but to me less rules means more roleplaying. I hardly reference the rules anyway, and SAGA just makes it that much more practical to do so. Just my opinion.

So basically, the dumbing down doesn't affect you because you either ignored or dumbed them down in the first place? :raised:

Ubiqtorate
16 September 2007, 02:24 PM
Well, roleplaying shouldn't be the realm of the bean-counter elite. You shouldn't have to have a Ph.D. to understand the rules. Nor should you have to consult the rulebook every time your character needs to use the latrine. D20 and D&D purists will probably call it "dumbing down." I call it "roleplaying." You can't please everybody, I guess.

Fingon
16 September 2007, 04:31 PM
I agree with you, Ubiqtorate, but "hardly referenc[ing] the rules" and "consult[ing] the rulebook every time your character needs to use the latrine" are very, VERY different things.

coldskier0320
16 September 2007, 05:00 PM
See now this is something I don't understand. I've seen people here blame the RCRB for forcing rolls for everything from doing one's business to blowing your nose and I don't understand where this hate is coming from. What do you have to roll for in RCRB that you dont in Saga...or D6 for that matter?

Also, IMHO with the extra rules, its kinda like packing a sweatshirt on a day that might get chilly. It's better to have it and not need it than to want it and not have it. If you dont like a rule its much easier to just ignore it than to have a very spartan accomodation for a particular situation and have to guess at how to handle it, given the bare bones rules supplied.

Idunno, obviously, everyone's entitled to their opinions, I just see alot of bandwagon mentality and groupthink where Saga proponents gather.

Ubiqtorate
16 September 2007, 05:43 PM
Well, that's definitely a valid point, too. And as always, I really have to defer to people who have used the various d20 systems in actual gameplay - there's only so much you can glean just from studying the rulebook. D6 would probably seem really complicated if I just sat down and read it without knowing what to do with it, too. I guess I've just had some bad experiences with d20 players (some in Star Wars, but more particularly with D&D and similar systems and settings) who seem to become so obsessed with the rules and statistics that the story and characters seem to get buried. But I'm sure there are people who do the same thing with Saga, D6, or any of the other systems out there.

I'm not hating on any system here. I'm just trying to understand what inspires such... loyalty, let's call it, among RCR players. Is it merely a matter of being used to one thing, and not wanting to have to adjust to a new system (and buy all of the associated materials, etc.), or is it really because RCR is a better rules system?

PsychoInfiltrator
16 September 2007, 06:03 PM
WARNING: While the following are not intended to be inflammatory, they might be. If you are angered by my post, go away and respond, or not, when you aren't angry anymore.

Well, I never bought anything for the RCR system either, (and don't own any bootleg sourcebooks, either, though some of the squirreled-away material I may have used once and a notable exception may be stretching the limits of legality), so I can honestly and quite clearly state the second.

Ironically enough, the basics of the RCR system were easier to learn than the basics of SAGA, and I'm older now. And I'm young enough that that matters.

It strikes me that the D20 RCR system, at the very beginning, was a system that could do everything, and did next to none of it particularly well, whereas the SAGa system does a couple things well but doesn't really do anything else. Therefore, the people who want to do just a couple things like SAGA, and the people who want to do everything like D20.

Also, I seem to remember that the great customizable thing about SAGA was gonna be talents, but there really aren't many at a;;, their -real value- isn't apparent unless you really know what you're doing, and it is really hard to come up with creative, new, and balanced ones. (Yes, I pay attention to SAGA forum topics when I'm that bored.)

It almost seems as though Talents were supposed to solve the problem of "next to no customization," and, in my eyes, they have failed.

Further, as a final observation, (which is connected to an earlier one,) it seems that, rather than streamlining things in SAGA by making them faster, SAGA was developed to be more streamlined by simply removing the capability to do things. Yes, my observations indicate that things go faster... but not because they are built to go faster, but because there are fewer options to pick from, so nwo the "picking time" is gone.

johnnyputrid
19 September 2007, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by PsychoInfiltrator
Further, as a final observation, (which is connected to an earlier one,) it seems that, rather than streamlining things in SAGA by making them faster, SAGA was developed to be more streamlined by simply removing the capability to do things.

I fail to see how this is so. Aside from there are no longer any official rules for crafting items, and not being able to (normally) make a half-dozen attacks per round, what exactly, in your opinion, has Saga taken away?

You can still attack with a blaster, chuck a grenade, throw a punch, pilot a starship, use the Force, sneak by an enemy, access a computer, bluff a guard, jump a chasm, play a sabaac match, ride a bantha, heal a wound, etc, etc, etc. Essentially, anything a character could do in the RCR system, they can still do in Saga. I have no system bias, as I still dig the RCR plenty. But I haven't really seen anything of great importance in Saga that you couldn't do in the RCR.

Uron Teff
19 September 2007, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by PsychoInfiltrator
Further, as a final observation, (which is connected to an earlier one,) it seems that, rather than streamlining things in SAGA by making them faster, SAGA was developed to be more streamlined by simply removing the capability to do things. Yes, my observations indicate that things go faster... but not because they are built to go faster, but because there are fewer options to pick from, so nwo the "picking time" is gone.

I agree with johnny. And I want to take it a step further.

In the RCR rules if you wanted to create a forged Identity for your character you had to have access to one of the most restricted skill there was. I know the wish to forge an ID is something your everyday hero wouldn't do, but you had to have skill ranks in a skill called Forgery. But if you had not had any skill rank in Forgery skill you were not able to make any check at all. It simply wouldn't work.

Another example of this would Disable Device. This skill was limited to a small group of classes and one was only able to "disable a door-control panel" if one had acquired ranks in this skill.

And there is more. Something like Slight of Hand that even the clumsiest of us humans here on Earth could attempt was a trained only skill with, again, a class that had it as class skill.

Now in Saga every character with a half decent Use Computer skill can at least try to forge his ID. Sure Disable Device is now under a Mechanics skill and can still be only used trained, but why wouldn't a good starfighter mechanic have at bit of insight on how to disable the door-panel?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Saga is trying to get away from the DnD 3.5 skill system where you had to put in ranks in Walk to move properly (I'm exaggerating). Now it's a far more creative and inventive game for both the GM and the players. Rarely situations like "What, no one has a single rank in Disable Device to shut down the Death Star main reactor?". This won't happen anymore.

The game has changed. In a good way, IMO.

Moridin
19 September 2007, 02:08 PM
Originally posted by Rostek


Rodney's a necromancer by training and preference; ergo, one may assume that SAGA is an undead product (and therefore has no soul). [/snark].

It's true. How did you know?

Trying not to take all the "you've created a soulless dumbed-down game that only video gamers and minis gamers would like" jabs personally, I gotta say I'm kinda shocked at the response from some old-time Holonetters here. Having spent a long time on and moderating these forums, I figured some people would embrace these changes, but those people are decrying it as dumbed down and such. Kinda surprises me.

I, obviously, love Saga Edition, and my two campaigns right now are giving me more fun-per-session than I've had in a long while. It seems like everyone's biggest sticking point is the skills system, which when you boil it right down only differs in the rate in which you gain skill bonuses (in large jumps rather than small, granular segments). How this cheapens the system is beyond me, but you're entitled to your opinions.

The response to Saga Edition has been overwhelmingly positive, and it's exceeded everyone's expectations. That my own forums would be the largest bastion of negative sentiment toward Saga Edition makes my cry on the inside. I mean, the guys at RPG.Net give Saga huge praise...and they hate everything!

Sorry you Revised players feel left out in the cold, but there's not much I can do about that. We're neck-deep in all kinds of sourcebooks right now, which I think are going to be super sweet, and so I pretty much think about Saga Edition 24/7. It's no surprise that a lot of players do too.

Moridin
19 September 2007, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by Fingon
SAGA, while it streamlines much of these numbers, concentrates much more on combat than the RCR, which is frustrating to me.


Can I ask why you feel this is so? Honest question, just want to know.

Uron Teff
19 September 2007, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by Moridin
Can I ask why you feel this is so? Honest question, just want to know.

I've had a bit of the impression as Fingon had as I check the feats in the books. There are very few that are not giving bonuses in combat. But this was not directed at me. :)

Moridin
19 September 2007, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by coldskier0320
Also, IMHO with the extra rules, its kinda like packing a sweatshirt on a day that might get chilly. It's better to have it and not need it than to want it and not have it. If you dont like a rule its much easier to just ignore it than to have a very spartan accomodation for a particular situation and have to guess at how to handle it, given the bare bones rules supplied.


Can I ask what rules you think the RCR had that Saga Edition is missing that really affect the game? Crafting rules aside, which (sshh don't tell anyone) are coming back in a new form in the near future.

Moridin
19 September 2007, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by Uron Teff


I've had a bit of the impression as Fingon had as I check the feats in the books. There are very few that are not giving bonuses in combat. But this was not directed at me. :)

I've heard this complaint before. The real issue, though, is that we removed "skill bump" feats in order to cut down on skill bonus bloat. That had the side effect of removing 90% of the non-combat feats, leaving, what, Fame,Influence and Infamy behind (again, removed because the Reputation system was removed to cut down on skill bloat).

Feats should be more engaging than a simple bonus. They should alter the way your character behaves (at least, mechanically) in a certain situation, and outside of combat the most-used mechanic is the skill check. We built in a lot of skill uses and we'll always be adding more, so feats never really strike me as the place to look for things to improve your character's non-combat abilities.

coldskier0320
19 September 2007, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Moridin


Can I ask what rules you think the RCR had that Saga Edition is missing that really affect the game? Crafting rules aside, which (sshh don't tell anyone) are coming back in a new form in the near future.

One of the first that comes to mind, and the reason I said that was both the Force skill Fear and the feat Frightful Presence. I used to run a character based heavily on those two things and with Saga eliminating them, the PC is reduced to a totally different character.

I understand that yu guys dont want to put everything into one book, otherwise future products wouldnt sell. I hope to see things like those fear-based things in the future, but for now, there's nothing for it.

Moridin
19 September 2007, 03:01 PM
Huh. I'd think you'd actually be happier with Adept Negotiator/Master Negotiator/the new mind trick Force power, since those are a bit more elegant mechanically (not to mention that they combine very well with noble talents like Weaken Resolve and Demand Surrender). Or is it just that those are single-target and you want something that turns you into a fear bomb?

Edit: Also, Multitarget Power makes you more fear bomb-y.

Ubiqtorate
19 September 2007, 04:54 PM
Moridin, I'm glad to see you've decided to come back to this thread. Even though none of it really affects me directly (since I'll always be a D6 player, even though I'm thinking of picking up my own copy of the Saga Rulebook just for the sake of having it), it's nice to know that our opinions are at least being heard by someone who can make a definite difference.

The complaint that Saga focuses too much on combat is a common one that I've heard (and I'm sure you have, too). Again, why exactly people feel this way, I couldn't really say, since I'm not familiar enough with either rules system to talk about what changed.

Even without actually playing, I had a similar reaction to the skill system, though. Again, as an old D6er, I'm used to having lots of skills that progress very gradually, but it did seem that skill advances are few and far between. Sure, they're big bumps, but it almost seems like putting all your eggs in one basket.

Again, I haven't actually played, so take that for what it's worth. ;)

Fingon
19 September 2007, 05:25 PM
Can I ask why you feel this is so? Honest question, just want to know.

Because a majority of the feats and talents relate to combat, to the point where it is DIFFICULT to make a character that would not be good at combat. I tried it... 6th level noble. I wanted him to be kind of a leader/diplomat type who would not be very invloved in combat, but I found that unless I wanted to dump all of my feats into skill emphasis, making me excellent at nearly everything instead of just good at everything, I really didn't have any choice but to take combat feats. Same with talents... there are ones which do not tie in directly with combat, but many of them do.

Granted, this is a problem in the RCR, and D20 in general in my opinion, but I feel that it was exapserated in SAGA. For example, by noble, who does have rather good stats, has an attack bonus a +6, Perception of +11, Initiative of +10, Fort Defence of 18, Reflex defence of 19 and a will defence of 21, with absolutely no armor. In the RCR, the same character would still havea +6 attack, but a spot/listen of + 3, Initiative of +2, Fort save of 4, Ref of 5, Will of 8, and AC of 14.

In short, the SAGA edition makes it much easier for ANY character to not only survive but be good at combat. It's harder to get hurt, harder to be killed, and easier to fight back.

I'll post more later... I have to go for a minute

johnnyputrid
19 September 2007, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Fingon
In short, the SAGA edition makes it much easier for ANY character to not only survive but be good at combat. It's harder to get hurt, harder to be killed, and easier to fight back.

And this is a bad thing?:?

I think it gives a GM more reason to up the challenges and really test the mettle of the heroes during combat encounters. Even if non-combat encounters are the focus and big draw for a game, being good at combat when it does count is certainly a nice bonus. :)

Fingon
19 September 2007, 06:48 PM
Sorry about that...

Anyway, SAGA was designed, as said by it's developers, to be a heroic, fast action game. The PC's are SUPPOSED to be able to gun down "generic" thugs, their abilites are SUPPOSED to be centered around combat, and there is very little game mechanic to actually play our anything else. Combat is actively encouraged by the way the game is put togeather.

This is a problem in D20 in general, but I think it is worse in SAGA than the RCR. In the RCR, it was possible to have a character who could not specialize in combat... it wasn't the easiest thing, but perfectly doable. The craft and profession skills gave a catch all to allow your characters to have a life besides going on adventures and fighting people, there were feats to choose from which did not affect combat. The RCR did this poorly, but it's not even really an option in SAGA.

But this is a complain I have about D20 in general... I've played rune quest and recently got into GURPs (which I LOVE), and I've made characters with no combat capabilities what so ever. None... they're actually some of my favorite types of characters to play, more or less ordinary people who get thrown into crazy adventures. I dunno... I think it's fun :p.

Hope that helps at all.


Feats should be more engaging than a simple bonus.

Totally, completely agreed. But I don't think that most of them should have to do with combat.


Now in Saga every character with a half decent Use Computer skill can at least try to forge his ID. Sure Disable Device is now under a Mechanics skill and can still be only used trained, but why wouldn't a good starfighter mechanic have at bit of insight on how to disable the door-panel?

Agreed.


And this is a bad thing?

It certainly can be. If you are building a warrior, then not... but why on earth should a doctor know how to kill people? Why should he be able to dodge attacks better than average joe and be a much better shot? Why should a noble, or a techie, for that matter? I'm generalizing here, but you get the point.

My biggest complain with D20 in general is the lack of realism... I'm sorry, but not matter HOW good you are, you should not be able to take down 20 people by yourself... but in D20, ESPECIALLY in SAGA, this can happen very easially. Characters quickly become so powerful and skilled that it takes another superhuman to even threaten them. Personally, I think this is stupid and takes away from the game. In my opinion, combat should be about brains, not brawn, with a few exceptions.

But... I personally don't really enjoy playing a "super hero" game. It's just my personal preference, and I'm fully aware that MANY people think differently.


It seems like everyone's biggest sticking point is the skills system, which when you boil it right down only differs in the rate in which you gain skill bonuses (in large jumps rather than small, granular segments). How this cheapens the system is beyond me, but you're entitled to your opinions.

About the chunks, it's not how you learn things in real life.... you aren't suddenly skilled in music and can play a Lizt sonata; you start with chopsticks, move up to Fur Elise, etc etc. And it makes it so it is difficult to be MORE skilled in certain areas... skill emphasis adds a bonus, I know, but it's NOT POSSIBLE to focus on a certain skill set... you're either great at something, or just good. In my opinion, ranks, or some similar system, are just a better way to deal with it. Also, it makes most thing too easy at low levels, in my opinion at least.

BUT, other than that, there is very little advancement of skills as your character levels. The 1/2 character doesn't do it for me; somehow, since I'm 15th level, I'm good at everything! It doesn't make sense to me why a character would not be constantly learning the things which he is interested in and does as he gains experience. And as we talked about in the multiclassing thread, you are pretty much "stuck" with the skills you take at 1st level.

Anyway, it just seems to me that SAGA provides very limited options for character creation and development. I don't think it's much worse than the RCR, but I do believe that it is worse.

johnnyputrid
19 September 2007, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by Fingon
It certainly can be. If you are building a warrior, then not... but why on earth should a doctor know how to kill people? Why should he be able to dodge attacks better than average joe and be a much better shot? Why should a noble, or a techie, for that matter? I'm generalizing here, but you get the point.

I do understand where you are coming from, but the main emphasis behind Saga (and all d20 systems for that matter) is that your character is a Hero (with a captial H), not just some random dude. The main characters we see in the films are all Big Damn Heroes (to borrow a Firefly phrase), who tend to get thrust into all manner of perilous situations. That is the jist of the game and the central focus behind the mechanics. Even if the character is a doctor, maybe he picked up a few things from his soldier buddy, or perhaps he's able to put his anatomical knowledge to good use when it comes time to handle the 'shooty' part of the adventure.

There are always non-heroic levels to think about as well. If you just want to play an average Joe, a non-heroic game could be an interesting idea. I had an idea for a 'commoner' game not too long ago. The trials and tribulations of a Coruscant garbage man who gets mugged one day, calls the cops, gets his wallet back and has a grand tale of adventure to tell his kids!

I've always viewed the non-combat situations, of which I think a good portion of any well-balanced game should have, as the realm of the GM. The only mechanic you might need is a skill check here and there. For the most part, words should be the deciding factor in how non-combat situations play out, not dice rolls. IMO of course.

But you are pretty much correct in that Saga is not designed to build characters with little to no combat skill. Conflict is an essential part of the draw of the Star Wars RPG, and that's where the bulk of the rules tend to go. I'm of the opinion that the designeers were thinking the same thing, and that the non-combat stuff is left up to the GM and the players to hash out for themselves.

Perhaps in the near future, we'll begin to see more non-combat oriented talents and feats appear, both in official material and fan-made supplements. As Rodney mentioned earlier, there is some new stuff coming out soon that may address this very issue.

Fingon
20 September 2007, 09:56 AM
But you are pretty much correct in that Saga is not designed to build characters with little to no combat skill. Conflict is an essential part of the draw of the Star Wars RPG, and that's where the bulk of the rules tend to go. I'm of the opinion that the designeers were thinking the same thing, and that the non-combat stuff is left up to the GM and the players to hash out for themselves.

I agree with you, johnnyputrid, and therein lies the problem for me... I don't think that's a good thing.

johnnyputrid
20 September 2007, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by Fingon


I agree with you, johnnyputrid, and therein lies the problem for me... I don't think that's a good thing.

I suppose we just have opposite viewpoints on this matter. I like the fact that the non-combat, pure roleplaying aspect is thin on mechanics. But that's just the way all my RPGing has always been, from the ancient D&D box sets to Saga: heavy on the verbal descriptions, light on the dice rolling. I honestly don't know any other way to play.:)