| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2021 5:10 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | CRMcNeill wrote: | | Whill wrote: | | What is contradictory about saying PCs need game balanced to each other but NPCs do not? This is the norm of most all RPGs. |
Seconded. PCs are not representative of galactic demographics. It's entirely possible for one species to be, on average, superior to another in every respect; Star Dragons are an excellent example. Even NPC Star Dragons start with 18D in Attributes, plus they can fly, survive in space, and have ~1/3 chance of being Force Sensitive. Very few other species can even approach that, never mind match it.
But a GM would be unlikely to allow a Star Dragon PC, and for the exact same reasons. The point is not that species should be balanced, but that the characters be balanced against each other. |
Yeah see the mess that is created by not having a eye on Races being balanced? Now you create the situation of why a PC is less effective than a typical of his species. |
He said no such thing. He never said GMs should nerf typical star dragons to allow them to be PCs. What he actually said is that a GM would be unlikely to allow a star dragon PC in the game at all. RAW even addresses this:
| Chuck Truett (WEG author of 2e revisions to GG4) wrote: | | Note: Because of their power, it is suggested that players not be allowed to play Duinuogwuin characters. |
Under RAW's "Typical+6D rule" a star dragon PC would have a whopping 24D in attributes, far above standard human PCs. If I allowed these as a playable PC species in my game, a PC's attribute dice would be exactly equal to the typical of these species, not "less effective than a typical of his species."
But a typical star dragon's "power" is not only from their total attributes dice. They are a munchkin's wet dream with four attribute maxes of 5D or higher. But even worse than that, look at their special abilities and Move. A typical star dragon can survive in space and with the power to fly faster than many starships. This alone is enough to warrant WEG's suggestion against star dragons being PCs, and why most GMs would not allow these as PCs in their games. I acknowledge that you are an exception who would.
In my game, there would be no "mess" created by my insistence for a modicum of game balance here. Star dragons are just not on my allowable PCs species list. A star dragon NPC would be as powerful as he needed to be for his role in my game, whether that would be less than typical, typical, or more than typical.
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Whill I find that you said that species shouldn’t be balanced against everyone (which is fine) but then having Players have to be balanced (which in and of itself is fine) to be contradicting. |
It is not contradictory in the slightest. The only reason I even mention species as a whole, is because the objection I occasionally get is always stated to be in reference to species. The point has always been that PCs should be balanced.
When I have stated I chucked the "+6D" rule in the past, a vocal minority of other GMs (never my players) sometimes criticize that by stating that "Species don't evolve equally so they should be differently abled." I don't disagree with that sentiment and have to explain I make no effort to balance different species to each other. A typical Wookiee doesn't have to be balanced to a typical Ewok in attribute dice or special abilities. Typical characters are all NPCs. The vast majority of characters in the galaxy of all species are NPCs.
Each individual NPC of any species should be whatever the GM feels that character should be, and NPCs don't have to be balanced to each other. Other than individual attributes being within their ranges, there aren't and shouldn't be any rules for individual NPC attribute dice totals for any species. NPCs can be all over the place. Species attribute ranges for many species allow a small subset of NPCs of that species to have 18D attributes or more. All GMs could have an NPC with 18D attributes when the GM deems that is warranted for the NPC, and in my game I just deem is it always warranted for PCs to have 18D (PCs being an even smaller subset of all 18D members of the species).
The objection I get doesn't actually address my house rule because my rule only affects less than 1% of 1% of 1% of the members of any species. In my game, no effort is made to balance species as a whole, or to balance typical members of species to typical members of different species. All PCs having 18D has absolutely no effect on the species, so I am not doing anything to ruin species or the inherent inequities of evolution.
The objection I get to balanced PCs all having 18D in total attribute dice is always based on an oddly dogmatic adherence to a single official rule. If balance between PCs of different species is not important, then why is "+6D" to make PCs so important? Why that specific value? Or any specific value? Why do PC attribute dice totals have to be have to be based on typical members of the species? Why is it so important for typical species inequities to be forced on the PC group? I can back up why I chucked "+6D" and replaced it with another simple rule ("18D PCs").
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Fwiw I’ve played game systems where (in theory) everyone is balanced and others where no one is at all and I’ve enjoyed each. |
That's worth a lot to me. If you have enjoyed games where there is an attempt made to balance PCs to each other, then maybe you would even enjoy playing my game. But then again, my players never call me contradictory. If they don't understand something they ask for further explanation until they understand there is no contradiction. So maybe you wouldn't enjoy it.
I've been a player in WEG Star Wars games where PCs of different ability levels are forced to play in the same adventures, and I have not enjoyed that aspect. All PCs should have approximately equal moments to shine in their various strengths. When some PCs overshadow others in the same group, the players of weaker characters may feel they are just along for the ride and not fully participating in the co-creation of the story. I can tell you from personal experience as a player, that feeling sucks. As a GM, it is my personal mission to do everything I can for players to never feel like that. Replacing "Typical+6D" with "18D" is one very simple way to help with that endeavor. It doesn't break the game or affect species in general.
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Not because of Story but of “Balance”. |
In my experience, PC imbalance effects the story negatively. What I do is for the sake of the story, because all players should be equally invested in the story to truly make the story great.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2021 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Yeah see the mess that is created by not having a eye on Races being balanced? |
Because characters and species aren't the same thing. It's not at all uncommon for one species to be superior to another in nature. You're confusing the natural world with gameplay. It is not the purpose of gameplay to simulate nature; its purpose is to tell a story about a group of characters whose relative strengths and weaknesses counterbalance each other and allow them to face threats approximate to their collective strength. Gameplay and character design are not an accurate demographic representation of life in the galaxy as a whole.
| Quote: | | Now you create the situation of why a PC is less effective than a typical of his species. Not because of Story but of “Balance”. |
Because the average player character is well above average for a being of their species, and a group of PCs is a group of above-average beings. The point is not that the species themselves be balanced out, it's that the characters be balanced relative to each other. As characters, not as species.
You're inaccurately conflating two separate concepts: biology and narrative.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Last edited by CRMcNeill on Sun Dec 26, 2021 6:56 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2021 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Exactly!
| Whill wrote: | WEG fluffed and statted some characters as stereotypes of their species. Here are 13 examples that stand out in my mind...
Can you think of other examples?
Do you embrace the alien types or do you change the species fluff for your game? Even with embracing the species fluff, does your game have characters who fulfill the types, oppose the types, or both? Is it only PCs that can be exceptions?
NPC-wise, I personally enjoy having alien characters that reinforce the types then slipping in rarer characters who defy expectations for that species. I encourage players to play an alien PC against species type. |
Anyway, this recent discussion is tangent from the topic about WEG fluffing (and statting) out species in such a way that makes the characters they are based on stereotypes of the species. How attribute dice are calculated for PCs is not important to the topic.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ninja-Bear
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 209
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
On point, when going through my old notes I’ve found several Rodians. One is a Bounty Hunter but the twist is he is trying to take a target by Less than Lethal means. Not that he won’t use deadly force if needed but I created a separate category for the Bounty Hunter Guild-Non lethal-which he is trying to take top spot. Another is a Scout-who works for the Alliance. And I think I have a Trader too. So in retrospect, I look at WEG’s fluff and it’s nice shorthand for use but I’m not bound by it either.
Just a thought, you could think of WEG’s fluff as Imperial official descriptions to the Galaxy Inner Core. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sounds like a mash-up of the Rodian Pacifist and Bounty Hunter templates. What an interesting idea.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ninja-Bear
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 209
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CRMcNeill wrote: | | Ninja-Bear wrote: | | Yeah see the mess that is created by not having a eye on Races being balanced? |
Because characters and species aren't the same thing. It's not at all uncommon for one species to be superior to another in nature. You're confusing the natural world with gameplay. It is not the purpose of gameplay to simulate nature; its purpose is to tell a story about a group of characters whose relative strengths and weaknesses counterbalance each other and allow them to face threats approximate to their collective strength. Gameplay and character design are not an accurate demographic representation of life in the galaxy as a whole.
| Quote: | | Now you create the situation of why a PC is less effective than a typical of his species. Not because of Story but of “Balance”. |
Because the average player character is well above average for a being of their species, and a group of PCs is a group of above-average beings. The point is not that the species themselves be balanced out, it's that the characters be balanced relative to each other. As characters, not as species.
You're inaccurately conflating two separate concepts: biology and narrative.
|
No sorry but I’m not conflating anything. And you seem to be misrepresenting Narrative. Balance has more to do with gameplay, especially with a group of players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16173
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | No sorry but I’m not conflating anything. And you seem to be misrepresenting Narrative. Balance has more to do with gameplay, especially with a group of players. |
Now you're just splitting hairs. The point of the gameplay is to tell a narrative. Balance exists so that the characters in the narrative have a roughly equal chance to participate in the story being told. Getting to be part of the narrative of Star Wars is a huge part of the attraction to the system, not just the gameplay itself.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.
The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ninja-Bear, you got on point for one post, and then went right back to the tangent. And it seems like you ignored my post. Don't. I think your position on this tangent is well stated and you can stop arguing now. Thanks.
| Whill wrote: | | Ninja-Bear wrote: | | ...Not because of Story but of “Balance”. |
...In my experience, PC imbalance effects the story negatively. What I do is for the sake of the story, because all players should be equally invested in the story to truly make the story great. |
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 3:19 pm Post subject: WEG Stereotyped Aliens |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | when going through my old notes I’ve found several Rodians. One is a Bounty Hunter but the twist is he is trying to take a target by Less than Lethal means. Not that he won’t use deadly force if needed but I created a separate category for the Bounty Hunter Guild-Non lethal-which he is trying to take top spot. Another is a Scout-who works for the Alliance. And I think I have a Trader too. So in retrospect, I look at WEG’s fluff and it’s nice shorthand for use but I’m not bound by it either.
Just a thought, you could think of WEG’s fluff as Imperial official descriptions to the Galaxy Inner Core. |
Great ideas.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ninja-Bear
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 209
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| One thing I try to avoid when breaking a stereotype is doing the exact opposite of the stereotype. (I wish I had a better term for this). For example having a Gamorrean as a Bounty Hunter is a little bit of a twist because BH are usually considered “smarter” than straight thugs. I wouldn’t cross off Blaster off his template because he’s a Gamorrean buddy I won’t put any extra dice in the skill either. Now to me to do the “opposite” would be to him be a Brash Pilot. This an opposite because the primitive brute is now using the galactic high tech. (Does this make sense?) Caveat here is that if a player really wanted to play this concept, I’m usually lenient enough to allow something like this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Bidlo
Commander
Joined: 24 Nov 2021
Posts: 439
Location: Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | One thing I try to avoid when breaking a stereotype is doing the exact opposite of the stereotype. (I wish I had a better term for this). For example having a Gamorrean as a Bounty Hunter is a little bit of a twist because BH are usually considered “smarter” than straight thugs. I wouldn’t cross off Blaster off his template because he’s a Gamorrean buddy I won’t put any extra dice in the skill either. Now to me to do the “opposite” would be to him be a Brash Pilot. This an opposite because the primitive brute is now using the galactic high tech. (Does this make sense?) Caveat here is that if a player really wanted to play this concept, I’m usually lenient enough to allow something like this. |
It is also a departure for a Gamorrean because the Gamorrean BH is 1) free and 2) ending the freedom of others by hauling them in for the bounty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10297
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Gamorrean PC a player of mine had was a bounty hunter by profession, but it was for a hunter campaign I ran. He was part of a small independent guild. He only worked as part of a group of hunters, and never operated on his own. But even with a 2D Technical, he was probably one of the smartest Gamorreans in the galaxy.
I had designed a Gamorrean Bodyguard PC template but lost it in a transition from PC to Mac. It was probably mentioned on a previous page of this thread that there is an unofficial Civilized Gamorrean PC template in a gaming magazine from back in the day. I want to adapt it for my game, just in case a player ever wants to play a Gamorrean who breaks stereotype.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TauntaunScout
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 970
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ninja-Bear wrote: | | One thing I try to avoid when breaking a stereotype is doing the exact opposite of the stereotype. (I wish I had a better term for this). |
Let us invent such a term. I really need it for history. A common problem when people learn that a stereotype is historically inaccurate, is to do a 180 and get stuck in defending their "newfound revelation" that the opposite of the stereotype is the truth. For example. When someone finds out that the North's motivation in the civil war was a mere 95% about slavery, they erroneously maintain that the civil war wasn't about slavery. Someone else will learn that unlike in Hollywood, a knight's armor was really quite maneuverable and reliably stopped most blows. They then decide a knight's armor must've been utterly impervious to all strikes so any medieval sources that show armor being broken in combat must be discarded as untrustworthy. Which is also wrong.
As I've said before the stereotypes in WEG's aliens are kinda ok with me because they ARE dealing in species not races tho. The miniatures game (WEG's finest work  ) addressed this stereotype problem, actually. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
