|
6 years ago ::
Oct 05, 2007 - 9:50PM
#1
|
|
|
You can see it here!What we mean when we talk about streamlining the system is this: making design decisions that make learning and using the game less difficult, while keeping the system just as robust. And making it more fun as the result.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 05, 2007 - 10:53PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Apr 20, 2006
|
I see. Nothing earth-shattering or even in the least bit surprising.
Nice to see it affirmed, however.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 05, 2007 - 11:01PM
#3
|
|
|
I see. Nothing earth-shattering or even in the least bit surprising.
Nice to see it affirmed, however.
I am not surprised one bit either, but I am very pleased to know that my favorite aspect of the SWSE rules made it over to 4th-edition.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 05, 2007 - 11:07PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
It looks like they have gone with the four defense model with AC being seperate from Reflex or Fortitude.
Touch attacks are Reflex defense now instead of part of AC. This was expected.
It was nice that they have the part on how traps interact with the AC and Reflex defense.
I wonder if they should change the term AC for Armour Class to AD for Armour Defense. This would line up the term so that all four are now Defense. This would help group them in people's minds instead of thinking of the three defenses and the other 'lost sheep' AC.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 05, 2007 - 11:10PM
#5
|
|
|
I wonder if they should change the term AC for Armour Class to AD for Armour Defense. This would line up the term so that all four are now Defense. This would help group them in people's minds instead of thinking of the three defenses and the other 'lost sheep' AC.
AC looks to be one of those Sacred Cow names that they still are afraid to take on.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 05, 2007 - 11:39PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2009
|
AC being split from Reflex Defense is a relief. In SW Saga it's a tricky knot to unravel. I'm happy to see this article just for the confirmation that these sorts of topics will finally get discussed. I'm getting more hopeful that the streamlined rules will be worth the project of stripping out the unwanted fluff.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 06, 2007 - 12:01AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
Meh, I love the tension that comes from rolling a saving throw... then again, I also loved active defenses in GURPS, even though they make combat take twice as long. I just love rolling dice, ya know?
There's a thrill when your fate is in your hand, and you cast the dice and pray to Lady Luck, when you need a twenty and you need it NOW, like an addict needs his fix, and if you don't get it you die, so sorry, try again, roll a new character and this time don't suck, but if you get it, you live to see the next round, and maybe the next room, and maybe even the next adventure.
Back on topic, attack rolls are nice, but there's more excitement when you're on the receiving end. I'd like to see opposed checks, even though the rolls would tend to overwhelm the modifiers... just blame the chaos of battle and be done with it. Both sides get to roll, which is what's cool. I may just houserule that, since essentially everyone is "taking ten" on their defense roll at the moment. Just have everyone roll d20 and take that as their base AC, instead of 10. I'm too lazy to run numbers, but my intuition tells me it would mostly average out in the end, since a d20 roll averages 10.5 anyway.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 06, 2007 - 12:11AM
#8
|
|
|
AC being split from Reflex Defense is a relief. In SW Saga it's a tricky knot to unravel. I'm happy to see this article just for the confirmation that these sorts of topics will finally get discussed. I'm getting more hopeful that the streamlined rules will be worth the project of stripping out the unwanted fluff.
I don't see how its a tricky knot to handle.
SWSE's Reflex Defense is 4th-editions AC, just with a different name.
If SWSE had a need for a Touch AC/Reflex Defense, it would have had one. This Touch AC/Reflex Defense is 4th-edition's Reflex Defense.
Back on topic, attack rolls are nice, but there's more excitement when you're on the receiving end. I'd like to see opposed checks, even though the rolls would tend to overwhelm the modifiers... just blame the chaos of battle and be done with it. Both sides get to roll, which is what's cool. I may just houserule that, since essentially everyone is "taking ten" on their defense roll at the moment. Just have everyone roll d20 and take that as their base AC, instead of 10. I'm too lazy to run numbers, but my intuition tells me it would mostly average out in the end, since a d20 roll averages 10.5 anyway.
I've experimented with that a few times with SWSE, it works. Yeah, it slows down a little bit, but not overwhelmingly so.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 06, 2007 - 12:35AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2009
|
Yeah this article was pretty useless.
Stop with all the secrecy and just embrace your audience already.
We buy the books as much for their look and feel as their use as reference.
Tell us what's happening already.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Oct 06, 2007 - 1:11AM
#10
|
|
|
The Article is only disapointing from a ya we kind of figured that already angle.
On the up side it's a change that kind of makes sense.
But they are giving us mechanical information and not just fluff. and that's something right there.
They don't want to promise us an animal companion we won't get or something like that.
|
|
|
