OT: Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones...

8 views
Skip to first unread message

C. Baize

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 12:27:10 PM4/22/02
to
'STAR WARS': THE EMPIRE BOUNCES BACK?
It's official: a confidential Lucasfilm marketing
pitch to Hasbro dealers about part two of the new "Star Wars" trilogy, obtained
by Newsweek, states in boldface type that "The last movie did not live up to
expectations."
In the April 29 issue of the magazine, Associate
Editor Devin Gordon reports that writer and director George Lucas has two jobs
on the new film, "Attack of the Clones" -- which opens May 16 -- make a better
movie than "The Phantom Menace," one that recaptures the magic of the original
trilogy, and woo back a jittery fan base.
Even though "The Phantom Menace" is the fourth
highest-grossing film of all time and even though it made almost $1 billion
worldwide, the movie was a dud for Lucas. It was a lame kiddie flick and the
dialogue hurt, said Gordon.
After "Menace" finished its run in theaters,
Lucas knew he had work to do. In his opinion, sources said, his chief blunder
was allowing the merchandise tie-in bonanza to get out of control. But he also
realized that his film-making skills were "rusty" on "Menace" -- his first
directorial effort in 22 years -- and that its juvenile tone alienated many
devoted fans. "George is now much smarter about what he should do and should not
do," said one associate with no stake in the sequel. "He's not a stupid man. He
doesn't want to hurt the franchise."
The Hasbro marketing pitch promises that "Attack
of the Clones" will be an action-packed movie with a "darker feel, closer to the
original saga" and "no silly characters or kids." Yes, Jar-Jar Binks is in the
second movie but his role is greatly reduced.
As to merchandise tie-ins, Lucas reportedly has
sliced the number of licensees for "Attack of the Clones" by two-thirds. The
tie-ins will still be everywhere, but not quite as obnoxiously everywhere as
last time. There will not be a soft drink sponsor as there was for "Menace" and
Hasbro -- according to Jim Silver, publisher of trade magazine The Toy Book --
has scaled back dramatically.

Eskil Lauritsen

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 1:49:20 PM4/22/02
to

"C. Baize" <cba...@intrepidheroes.com> wrote in message
news:3CC439DE...@intrepidheroes.com...

> 'STAR WARS': THE EMPIRE BOUNCES BACK?
> It's official: a confidential Lucasfilm marketing
> pitch to Hasbro dealers about part two of the new "Star Wars" trilogy,
obtained
> by Newsweek, states in boldface type that "The last movie did not live up
to
> expectations."
[SNIP]

I have great expectations of this movie and I have a good feeling about it
too.

Here's for a great movie!

-Eskil Lauritsen


Bill Silvey

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 1:55:29 PM4/22/02
to

"Eskil Lauritsen" <esk...@nospamstud.ntnu.no> wrote in message
news:aa1ieu$39e$1...@tyfon.itea.ntnu.no...

Buddy of mine (hi, Gregg!) is doing some CGI and Avid work as a
subcontractor at Lucasfilm*; he's seen it in it's full glory (completed
effects, full music) and says it really, really fixes things. Fixes as in
it's so good it makes Ep. 1 not suck so bad.

This is from a guy who called Episode One "Plan Nine From ILM".

He says it's good, I'm crossing my fingers...


*it's contractual only, and that wraps in a few weeks so I won't have an
insider for Ep.3 - I will have one of my best friends living back in Florida
though :-)
--
http://home.cfl.rr.com/delversdungeon/index.htm
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
> I don't think anything short of no-boot would put Macists off Mac.
> The last stable OS was System 6.0.8. So long as system messages
> are phrased as if a patronising aunt were addressing a retarded
> 4-year-old, they will continue to love it. - Patrick Ford


Reginald Blue

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 2:26:46 PM4/22/02
to
"C. Baize" <cba...@intrepidheroes.com> wrote in message
news:3CC439DE...@intrepidheroes.com...
<snip>
> Hasbro <snip> has scaled back dramatically.

I wonder if that will have any impact on the D20 Star Wars...probably not,
but still...


Sea Wasp

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 3:42:38 PM4/22/02
to
Eskil Lauritsen wrote:
>
> "C. Baize" <cba...@intrepidheroes.com> wrote in message
> news:3CC439DE...@intrepidheroes.com..
> > 'STAR WARS': THE EMPIRE BOUNCES BACK?
> > It's official: a confidential Lucasfilm marketing
> > pitch to Hasbro dealers about part two of the new "Star Wars" trilogy,
> obtained
> > by Newsweek, states in boldface type that "The last movie did not live up
> to
> > expectations."
> [SNIP]
>
> I have great expectations of this movie and I have a good feeling about it
> too.

It will suck like a Hoover. Like a black hole.

Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it can't afford
to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a dozen times.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.htm

C. Baize

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 3:59:25 PM4/22/02
to
Reginald Blue wrote:

I seriously doubt THAT... Hasbro won't let financial opportunities pass...

C. Baize

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 4:02:01 PM4/22/02
to
From: "C. Baize" cba...@intrepidheroes.com

What's interesting is that Star Wars Gamer magazine may fold, after only 11
issues.

:(

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; figures: I finally subscribe,
and two issues later, no more magazine . . .

--
http://delinquents.keenspace.com/d/20010703.html
Damn the tree and all its kind!
Nothing's impossible in the hot soul.
Hell damn crap fun!

C. Baize

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 4:15:32 PM4/22/02
to
"Aaron F. Bourque" wrote:

> From: "C. Baize" cba...@intrepidheroes.com
>
> >Reginald Blue wrote:
> >
> >> "C. Baize" <cba...@intrepidheroes.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3CC439DE...@intrepidheroes.com...
> >> <snip>
> >> > Hasbro <snip> has scaled back dramatically.
> >>
> >> I wonder if that will have any impact on the D20 Star
> >> Wars...probably not, but still...
> >
> >I seriously doubt THAT... Hasbro won't let financial opportunities
> >pass...
>
> What's interesting is that Star Wars Gamer magazine may fold, after only 11
> issues.
>
> :(
>
> Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; figures: I finally subscribe,
> and two issues later, no more magazine . . .

Will you get a refund???

C. Baize

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 6:57:21 PM4/22/02
to
From: "C. Baize" cba...@intrepidheroes.com

>> Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; figures: I finally
>> subscribe, and two issues later, no more magazine . . .
>
>Will you get a refund???

If publication *does* indeed end, then I better, or get an "until
the subscription runs out" deal on another WoTC mag.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; or Wizards's is gonna have
40 pissed of former customers . . .

Fumblor

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 10:22:04 PM4/22/02
to
aaronb...@aol.comstat (Aaron F. Bourque) wrote in message news:<20020422185721...@mb-ct.aol.com>...

> From: "C. Baize" cba...@intrepidheroes.com
>
> >> Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; figures: I finally
> >> subscribe, and two issues later, no more magazine . . .
> >
> >Will you get a refund???
>
> If publication *does* indeed end, then I better, or get an "until
> the subscription runs out" deal on another WoTC mag.
>
> Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; or Wizards's is gonna have
> 40 pissed of former customers . . .

Only 40 people bought the game eh? I think even Alternity did better than
that.

I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game from people who have played
both WOTC and WEG versions of it.

--
Fumblor

Jeff Wilder

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 10:28:32 PM4/22/02
to
"Fumblor":

[ Of RPGs based on "Star Wars." ]

| I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game
| from people who have played both WOTC and
| WEG versions of it.

I played and GMed the WEG version extensively. I've only played
one lengthy session of the d20 version (and read the rules).

Much as I hate to say it (as I have a good friend who's invested
a fair amount in the d20 game), WEG did it much, much better.
The mechanics are smoother, resolution is more abstract, and
consequently the Star Wars "feel" is maintained.

By contrast, the d20 game plays way too much like a tactical
game. That's fine (or at least okay) for D&D, but Star Wars is
about fast-talking blaster-slinging, not about cover and ambushes
and tracking hit points.


Jeff


Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 10:30:37 PM4/22/02
to
From: Fum...@hotmail.com (Fumblor)

>> Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; or Wizards's is gonna
>> have 40 pissed of former customers . . .
>
>Only 40 people bought the game eh? I think even Alternity did
>better than that.

I don't know the exact numbers, but it'd have to be low if they
really are going to axe the mag 'fore the twelfth ish.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

--

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 10:35:05 PM4/22/02
to
From: "Jeff Wilder" wild...@REMOVETHIShotmail.com

My opinion is the opposite. While WEG's d6 version did some
things well, the d20 system fits the Star Wars mold so well,
none of my players felt any difference when we played. They
joked about the "funny-lookin' dice" and worried about levels and
classes, but after one game, they didn't care.

And the Force rules are, for the most part, simple but elegant. I
really think the 3e Psi rules should have been more like the SW
D20 Force rules. Ah, well.

Sorcier

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 10:50:25 PM4/22/02
to
Fumblor wrote:
>
> I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game from people who have played
> both WOTC and WEG versions of it.

Once again: <g>

I found WEG's version almost unplayable.
Skills were based on a straight addition between your stat and skill
which made skills TOO dependant on their requisite Characteristics.
Could never quite design the character I wanted.
And force based characters either were walking criples or
combat monsters depending on options chosen.
The rules were very non-intuitive at points and down-right clunky at
others.

d20 version I ran and absolutely enjoyed.
My only major complaints would be the lethality (lucky hits can be
deadly)
and that so many good rules from D+D were dropped in favor in space.
Once again Jedi seemed to dominate plot wise, but they weren't
dominating
mechanics wise.
I liked that.
(And I could have changed the plot...)
It's easy to learn, easy to teach, easy to run, and simulates the movies
very well (especially Ep I.)
Starship combat is a little odd but we haven't done much with that in
either WEG or d20 yet.

Only things I'd give WEG the nod on are: ease of adding a new race
(although it would just have different characteristic levels and skill
adds)
and excellent source material.
If d20 has any longevity I'd expect both will be solved.


--

"Trust, but verify."
- St. Thomas (?)

Sorcier

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 10:52:06 PM4/22/02
to
Jeff Wilder wrote:
>
> Much as I hate to say it (as I have a good friend who's invested
> a fair amount in the d20 game), WEG did it much, much better.
> The mechanics are smoother, resolution is more abstract, and
> consequently the Star Wars "feel" is maintained.
>
> By contrast, the d20 game plays way too much like a tactical
> game. That's fine (or at least okay) for D&D, but Star Wars is
> about fast-talking blaster-slinging, not about cover and ambushes
> and tracking hit points.

The weird thing is I observed just the opposite.
In WEG we had to continually debate mechanics and modifiers and effects.
In d20 we just played.

Edmund E. Freeman

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 11:37:15 PM4/22/02
to
Earth to Lucas: Get actors. Not teenagers that read lines.

+---------------------------------------------------+
| Edmund E Freeman If there is no such thing|
| www.blarg.net/~efreeman as magic, why do we have |
| the word? |
+---------------------------------------------------+

Kevin Lowe

unread,
Apr 22, 2002, 11:57:10 PM4/22/02
to
In article <kF3x8.5790$2E4.257...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
"Jeff Wilder" <wild...@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> wrote:

> "Fumblor":
>
> [ Of RPGs based on "Star Wars." ]
>
> | I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game
> | from people who have played both WOTC and
> | WEG versions of it.
>
> I played and GMed the WEG version extensively. I've only played
> one lengthy session of the d20 version (and read the rules).

Haven't played the d20, but I was subjected to the WEG version.

> Much as I hate to say it (as I have a good friend who's invested
> a fair amount in the d20 game), WEG did it much, much better.
> The mechanics are smoother, resolution is more abstract, and
> consequently the Star Wars "feel" is maintained.

You shoot stormtroopers over and over again with blaster pistols and
they don't fall down. Starting characters felt more like Biggs than
Wedge, let alone Han Solo. *Armour* was so effective you wanted a nice
big suit of it to wear everywhere. I though WEG SW sucked rocks as a
Star Wars system.

> By contrast, the d20 game plays way too much like a tactical
> game. That's fine (or at least okay) for D&D, but Star Wars is
> about fast-talking blaster-slinging, not about cover and ambushes
> and tracking hit points.

Except that in the movies cover and amushes were regular features, and
even Han took cover and attacked from ambush whenever he had the chance.
Luke was the only idiot who ever stood out in the open exchanging
blaster fire with the enemy, and even he was smarter than that most of
the time.

Kevin Lowe,
Brisbane, Australia.

Ed Chauvin IV

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 12:46:25 AM4/23/02
to
Mere moments before death, Sea Wasp hastily scrawled:

I could cut 4 words from TPM and it would ROCK.

"Midichlorians"

"Jar"

"Jar"

"Binks"


Ed Chauvin IV

--

It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the Beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.

"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:39:15 AM4/23/02
to
Sea Wasp wrote:
> Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it can't afford
>to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a dozen times.

There's really nothing structurally wrong with TPM. The only serious flaw in
TPM was that Lucas was apparently unable to distinguish between a joke which
should be told and a joke which should not be told.

And while everyone may say "oh, he's improved" on this point, I remain highly
skeptical: He didn't improve after the botchery of the Special Edition (ESB
emerged improved; but both ANH and ROTJ suffered some serious blows).

If he has improved, fantastic. AOTC will kick ass. But, like I said, I remain
skeptical.

Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:41:04 AM4/23/02
to
Fumblor wrote:
>I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game from people who have played
>both WOTC and WEG versions of it.

I've played both. The WEG version is superior in almost every respect. The WotC
version is a botched design and a botched iteration of the D20 engine.

Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:44:00 AM4/23/02
to
Aaron Bourque wrote:
>I don't know the exact numbers, but it'd have to be low if they
>really are going to axe the mag 'fore the twelfth ish.

I felt the biggest mistake they made was the preponderance of STAR WARS short
fiction in each issue. I don't feel it attracted the people who read the STAR
WARS novels, and IMO (as a gamer) it was a colossal waste of space. The
magazine never seemed able to find an identity, or to really fulfill a
recognizable role.

Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com

Jeff Wilder

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:16:22 AM4/23/02
to
Kevin Lowe:

[ Of WEG's Star Wars RPG. ]

> You shoot stormtroopers over and over again with
> blaster pistols and they don't fall down.

Never saw that happen. Not once in hundreds of hours.

> Starting characters felt more like Biggs than
> Wedge, let alone Han Solo.

Ridiculous. Average skill in WEG SW is 2d6 to 3d6 or so for a trained
NPC. For a trained starting PC, average skill is somewhere around
5d6.

> *Armour* was so effective you wanted a nice
> big suit of it to wear everywhere.

Oh, please. The ubiquitous armor (Stormtrooper armor) adds 1d6 to STR
solely for the purpose of absorbing damage and subtracts 1d6 from DEX
for EVERYTHING ELSE. WEG SW discourages armor viciously.
Bounty-hunter armor is a partial exception to the "armor completely
sucks" rule, but it carries its own hefty RP price.

> I though WEG SW sucked rocks as a Star Wars system.

You apparently never played it, despite your claim. Or you played
under an incompetent GM and didn't understand the rules yourself.

If you didn't like it, fine. No problem. But everything you've said
about the game so far is simply incorrect.



> Except that in the movies cover and amushes were regular features

Oh, you must mean the opening scene of Star Wars, wherein the rebels
took cover in a featureless white corridor. Or Han, running and
yelling into an ambush and turning tail to escape completely
unscathed. Or the ambush scene on Hoth where the snow-speeders
ruthlessly ambushed the AT-ATs. Or the escape sequence from Jabba's
yacht with all the cover and ambushes that entailed.

Cover and ambush in Star Wars were used, but they were plot elements,
not combat elements. You used cover when you were trying to escape
and you used ambushes to gain a few precious seconds to spend dancing
and congratulating yourself (if you were an Ewok that just took out
some Imperials).

Combat in the Star Wars movies is NOT tactical. It's swashbuckling,
fun, and often silly (from a real world perspective).

WEG SW, with its low target numbers (compared to PC scores), low
lethality level for PCs, and elegant mechanic for performing multiple
actions in a turn, encourages that swashbuckling feel. On the other
hand, d20 SW, with it's "one lucky hit and I'm dead" system, one
action per turn, and relatively higher DCs for common actions (such as
blasting Stormtroopers or piloting a starship) encourages careful,
grim, Marine-recon, grab-every-advantage-you-can-get style combat.

Maybe that's what you like. But it's not Star Wars, as far as I'm
concerned.


Jeff

Tim Fitzmaurice

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 9:26:21 AM4/23/02
to
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Sorcier wrote:

> Fumblor wrote:
> >
> > I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game from people who have played
> > both WOTC and WEG versions of it.
>
> Once again: <g>
>
> I found WEG's version almost unplayable.

Huh? It is to my mind about the most playable system I have ever had to
deal with. Yes it has some faults (what system doesnt) but overall I'd
rate it as one of the sucess stories of RPG design, the revision of 1st ed
rules dealt with most issues I had with it.

I found commerical product adventures quite often severely lacking in ways
that made playing them fristrating but not the system itself.

I would rate it as one of my prime systems for introducing a new player to
RPGs ever. The theme coupled with a classless skill driven system and a
bunch of basic templates for characters makes it very easy to get a new
player into and the fundamental core of I say a number you roll a set of
dice to beat it for success is pretty basic.

> Skills were based on a straight addition between your stat and skill
> which made skills TOO dependant on their requisite Characteristics.

I would disagree with that significantly. THe average 3D6 for a hero means
that on an average activity in a skill they have a roughly 50/50 chance of
doing it. Add an extra dice for a specialist in a attribute area
(rememebring this is balanced by an equal loss elsewhere) and you are
still not at 50/50 for DC15 which is moderately difficult. Even at 2d6 you
are odds on for a basic activity (DC5) in a skil area. Skill increases on
top then directly drive in. By adding 2D6 a non specialist (3d6 attribute)
bumps up to doing moderate stuff in a specific skill. And then can advance
from there. Sorry but I have no problem with the system on this front. A
4D6 att or higher represents a high ability in a whole series of skills.

> Could never quite design the character I wanted.

Umm how did this fail? The system is as flexible as a system can be,
unless you are wanting a start character that does everything anyhow nd
then we start talking gae balance.

> And force based characters either were walking criples or
> combat monsters depending on options chosen.

Hmm, they lost skill power from the std 6 attributes and gained them
elsewhere in a wider range of skills. Thats not a cripple. Even the most
abstracted force character an alien student of the force, with maxed
starting force skills (3D in each) still has 3 pips to ply in vital skills
like Dodge and blaster. But heck we are talking the ultimately force
oriented skill character here, why shouldnt that sort be weak elsewhere.

Force users of other types eg Minor Jedi will have 1 dice lost from their
18 across 6 attributes, and even if maxed on force skills (ie 3d CONTROL)
has then 5 dice to throw about in the other skills. That nots going to
create a combat monster.

> d20 version I ran and absolutely enjoyed.

Ive not played...only been through the rules...

> My only major complaints would be the lethality (lucky hits can be
> deadly)

Same as WEG. No difference between the systems there...though it is a
question to ask about as to why. I didnt spot quite the level of direct
interaction in an opponents attacks on you (ie the dodge system of WEG) in
D20



> Once again Jedi seemed to dominate plot wise, but they weren't
> dominating

I found them overly much in D20 though possibly that was more due to the
scope of the ruleset covering a wider range of history than the core of
WEG. WEG deliberately wanted them rare and of course had the slight push
to rebels and goodness. Im not sure I like the whole structure in D20...I
just find it difficult to get a Star Wars feel from a

> Starship combat is a little odd but we haven't done much with that in
> either WEG or d20 yet.

Ive done a lot in WEG. Vehicle rules are difficult in any systen I think.
WEG took an abstracted system and ran it quite well but its really
designed for chases not 3D combat. though later additions did help on that
front and they produced a comapnion starfighter game for big combats. Like
many systems that have big ships (from traveller on) a number of people
end up just hangin on in a starship fight....

Tim
When playing rugby, its not the winning that counts, but the taking apart
ICQ: 5178568

Sea Wasp

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 10:42:13 AM4/23/02
to
Ed Chauvin IV wrote:
>
> Mere moments before death, Sea Wasp hastily scrawled:
> >Eskil Lauritsen wrote:
> >>
> >> "C. Baize" <cba...@intrepidheroes.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3CC439DE...@intrepidheroes.com.
> >> > 'STAR WARS': THE EMPIRE BOUNCES BACK?
> >> > It's official: a confidential Lucasfilm marketing
> >> > pitch to Hasbro dealers about part two of the new "Star Wars" trilogy,
> >> obtained
> >> > by Newsweek, states in boldface type that "The last movie did not live up
> >> to
> >> > expectations."
> >> [SNIP]
> >>
> >> I have great expectations of this movie and I have a good feeling about it
> >> too.
> >
> > It will suck like a Hoover. Like a black hole.
> >
> > Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it can't afford
> >to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a dozen times.
>
> I could cut 4 words from TPM and it would ROCK.

No, it'd be better, but not rockin' yet.

>
> "Midichlorians"

Which was a key point in TPM. If they ignore it, they'll be admitting
that TPM was wrong from the get-go. Wonder if Lucas has the guts?

>
> "Jar"
>
> "Jar"
>
> "Binks"

Well, duh, everyone knows THAT.

The problem *I* had was that the Jedi were supposed to be Good Guys
-- in tune with the Light Side of the Force. In TPM, they talked a
good game, but in actuality appeared to be nothing more than enforcers
and bodyguards with a few principles. You'd think that slavery would
be something that the Jedi just wouldn't countenance, if they were
really good guys.

I say Yoda is on the Dark Side, really. He taught Palpatine, and
between the two of them they're now putting into motion the
destruction of the Jedi.

Sea Wasp

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 10:44:59 AM4/23/02
to
Justin Bacon wrote:
>
> Sea Wasp wrote:
> > Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it can't afford
> >to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a dozen times.
>
> There's really nothing structurally wrong with TPM.

Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.

Jedi who are supposed to be good guys but who appear to be nothing
more than enforcers. Where's the HEROES in this group? I don't see any
indication that the Jedi Council gives a crap about right and wrong,
or even that right and wrong enter into Qui-Gon's calculations all
that much.

Fumblor

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:03:01 AM4/23/02
to
tria...@aol.com (Justin Bacon) wrote in message news:<20020423014104...@mb-bj.aol.com>...


So not only is the game bad, but they implemented the d20 engine in a bad
way? The second part intrigues me. Justin, can you give an example of how
the d20 engine was botched in the star wars rpg?

I think one of the main reasons I was attracted to WEG's version of star
wars was its approach at scaling damage between large and small objects.
When I heard about the d20 version, I was afraid they would try to replicate
the damage scaling system using the damage resistance rules. Is my fear
justified?

--
Fumblor

Jason Corley

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:09:14 AM4/23/02
to

I disagree. Just the revamping of the Force alone gives the D20 version
/something/ that is better than the WEG version.

Both games are excellent, both do what they do very well. The WEG version
has simplicity, ease of learning and use, high abstraction and it /moves/.
The D20 version has a workable Force system, it's easier to design for
because of the level system, and the experience curve is smoother.

The unforgivable messup in the D20 version is vehicle rules and combat.
That is such a huge part of the SW movies (more than non-Jedi personal
combat, that's for sure) that it needs a quick, fun, involving system. WEG
abstracted it, and SWD20 should have either done that or made something
good. Instead there is a jumble.

--
***************************************************************************
"Today's public figures can no longer write their own speeches or books,
and there is some evidence that they can't read them either." ---Gore Vidal
Jason D. Corley | ICQ 41199011 | le...@aeonsociety.org

RPHawtin

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:19:17 AM4/23/02
to

> Yes, Jar-Jar Binks is in the
>second movie but his role is greatly reduced

Everyone hated C3P0 when he 1st appared, maybe Jar Jar will grow on people, or
maybe he will get run down by a pod racer....

Jason Corley

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:20:32 AM4/23/02
to
Jeff Wilder <wild...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> [ Of WEG's Star Wars RPG. ]

> [doofy criticisms of previous poster snipped ]

> If you didn't like it, fine. No problem. But everything you've said
> about the game so far is simply incorrect.

Right. WEGSW was a terrific game. However...

>
>> Except that in the movies cover and amushes were regular features

> Oh, you must mean the opening scene of Star Wars, wherein the rebels
> took cover in a featureless white corridor.

That says to me that GMs should hand out cover bonuses generously, not
that they were not taking cover.

> Or Han, running and
> yelling into an ambush and turning tail to escape completely
> unscathed.

Totally doable in SWD20 - being fully defensive makes you /very/ hard to
hit. It is hard to run and shoot effectively, and that is exactly what
happened in the movies. The firefights that actually dropped significant
amounts of badguys all took place while the protagonists were stationary.

Exception: Jedi fights during Phantom Menace. Action choreography has
significantly changed since the early 80s.

> Or the ambush scene on Hoth where the snow-speeders
> ruthlessly ambushed the AT-ATs. Or the escape sequence from Jabba's
> yacht with all the cover and ambushes that entailed.

Vehicle rules are a disaster in SWD20, and a big one. But I think the
Jabba-escape sequence was a fine example of the sort of crazy melee the
attack of opportunity rules are designed to produce if everyone is jumbled
up with their enemies.

> WEG SW, with its low target numbers (compared to PC scores), low
> lethality level for PCs, and elegant mechanic for performing multiple
> actions in a turn, encourages that swashbuckling feel. On the other
> hand, d20 SW, with it's "one lucky hit and I'm dead" system, one
> action per turn, and relatively higher DCs for common actions (such as
> blasting Stormtroopers or piloting a starship) encourages careful,
> grim, Marine-recon, grab-every-advantage-you-can-get style combat.

I agree to some extent. This can be solved by making the characters higher
level. We started at second and it /does/ make a difference.

Criticals that can kill a character at one go are /so/ rare as to be
vanishingly nonexistent. We only had one PC suffer a critical during our
whole 6-month game - the Jedi who was attacked about 10 times more often
than the rest of us. ;)

Jeff Wilder

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:26:14 AM4/23/02
to
"Jason Corley":

| The D20 version has a workable Force system

A couple of people have mentioned this, but I don't get it.
First, what's wrong with the WEG SW Force system? I love the
Control-Sense-Alter triangular interaction. Second, what's good
about the d20 Force system? It feels like a hodge-podge to me,
rather than a smooth whole, and it seems like every Jedi is going
to have odd holes in her training, due to the granularity of the
Feat system (as opposed to the spectrum of the
Control-Sense-Alter system.).

| it's easier to design for because of the level
| system

I don't get this, either. WEG SW uses a dice=skill/attribute
system. How hard is it to design for target numbers based on
your PCs' skills and attributes? WEG SW is one of the simplest
games to design for that I've ever GMed.

| and the experience curve is smoother.

Maybe, but I'm dubious. SW d20 is different enough from 3E D&D
that my group got constantly thrown off and had to consult the
rulebook. (BTW, SW d20 has one of the ugliest and illegible
rulebook layouts ever.) On the other hand, WEG SW is so easy to
play that really the only person that needs to know the rules is
the GM.

| The unforgivable messup in the D20 version is
| vehicle rules and combat.

As you say, these are a couple of pretty major things to mess up,
when one is talking about Star Wars.


Jeff


Jeff Wilder

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:28:47 AM4/23/02
to
"RPHawtin":

| Everyone hated C3P0 when he 1st appared

Buh?

C3PO is comic relief done right. Until right now, I've never
heard of anyone hating Threepio.


Jeff


Brad Murray

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:29:23 AM4/23/02
to
Sorcier <sNoEr...@cavtel.net> wrote:
S> Starship combat is a little odd but we haven't done much with that in
S> either WEG or d20 yet.

The starship combat rules in d20 Star Wars are incredibly elegant.
They pleased me more than anything else in the rules as this is
usually a major failing in any science fiction game (usually resulting
in a tactical mini game that has nothing to do with the main role
playing game at all).

--
Brad Murray * Always carry a short length of fibre-optic cable. If
Perl Geek * you get lost, then you can drop it on the ground, wait
VSCA Founder * ten minutes, and ask the backhoe operator how to get
Magnet Oper * back to civilization. (Alan Frame)

Steve Miller

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:38:45 AM4/23/02
to
"Jeff Wilder" <wild...@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> wrote in message news:<kF3x8.5790$2E4.257...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...

> "Fumblor":
>
> [ Of RPGs based on "Star Wars." ]
>
> | I'd be interested to hear opinions of the game
> | from people who have played both WOTC and
> | WEG versions of it.
>
> I played and GMed the WEG version extensively. I've only played
> one lengthy session of the d20 version (and read the rules).
>
> Much as I hate to say it (as I have a good friend who's invested
> a fair amount in the d20 game), WEG did it much, much better.
> The mechanics are smoother, resolution is more abstract, and
> consequently the Star Wars "feel" is maintained.

*shrug*

My game group likes both systems and I've got "Star Wars" campaigns
running for both systems. (Our long-standing (just had its sixth
anniversary) WEG Star Wars system campaign is the main one while the
D20 one serves as a pick-up game for when the "Forgotten Realms" DM
can't make.

And whatever my feelings about the WEG system, it does not handle
high-experience PCs well, particularly not Force using ones. The game
was obviously designed for one-shots and short term play, something I
suspect you must have noticed if you've played and GMed it
extensively.


Steve Miller, Writer of Stuff
Visit my web site: http://www.stevemillersband.com

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:40:13 AM4/23/02
to
From: Jason Corley cor...@cobweb.scarymonsters.net

>> Or the ambush scene on Hoth where the snow-speeders
>> ruthlessly ambushed the AT-ATs. Or the escape sequence
>> from Jabba's yacht with all the cover and ambushes that
>> entailed.
>
>Vehicle rules are a disaster in SWD20, and a big one. But I
>think the Jabba-escape sequence was a fine example of the sort
>of crazy melee the attack of opportunity rules are designed to
>produce if everyone is jumbled up with their enemies.

Okay. I have run several vehicle chases, a couple of races, and
several large, miniature Endor space battles between wings of
starfighters and capital ships, and I have *absolutely no problem*
with the vehicle/spaceships rules.

What am I doing wrong?

C. Baize

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:43:24 AM4/23/02
to
Sea Wasp wrote:

This is an interesting theory... with which I must disagree... They kept talking
about bringing balance to the force, without realizing what that meant...
Thousands of Jedi
2 Sith...

Do the math as to what two possibilities there are for bringing balance to the
force...
Either recruiting thousands of Sith, or killing all but two Jedi...

Perhaps Yoda sees that a balance is necessary, and is willing to sacrifice his
position of authority and superior numbers, and possibly even his life to bring
about that balance?

C. Baize

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:51:28 AM4/23/02
to
From: Sea Wasp sea...@wizvax.net

>Justin Bacon wrote:
>>
>> Sea Wasp wrote:
>> > Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it
>> > can't afford to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a
>> > dozen times.
>>
>> There's really nothing structurally wrong with TPM.
>
> Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.

What's wrong with midiclorians?

> Jedi who are supposed to be good guys but who appear
>to be nothing more than enforcers.

a) This is during the decline of civilization, before the Empire
takes over and revitalizes it in ways both good and bad. This also
means that the Jedi are on the decline. You'll note that only two
Jedi actually *do* anything in this movie; all the others are too
busy sitting in their council chairs.

b) these two Jedi were asked to work in an official capacity by
the Chancellor. One would presume that, if the Jedi had taken
matter in their own hands, they would have acted a bit differently.

>Where's the HEROES in this group?

Qui-Gon Jinn. Queen Amidala. Anakin Skywalker.

>I don't see any indication that the Jedi Council gives a crap
>about right and wrong,

See "decline of civilization" above. The Jedi are supposedly
becoming more and more isolated in their ivory towers. Too much
thinking, not enough implementing.



>or even that right and wrong enter into Qui-Gon's calculations all
>that much.

His interpretation of right and wrong is just different from yours.
He latches onto Jar-Jar (your opinion of Jar-Jar notwithstanding)
because he considers it the "right thing to do." He also considers
himself constrained by his duties and responsibilities as a Jedi
and enforcer of the Republic. He cannot free all of the slaves on
Tatooine for several reasons, not the least of which being the
political hurricane it would cause when the Senate learns of it.
He cheats at a bet because the Force tells him the boy is
important, and in his mind he is allowed to bend morality for the
good of Force and prophecy.

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:53:32 AM4/23/02
to
From: Jason Corley cor...@cobweb.scarymonsters.net

>The unforgivable messup in the D20 version is vehicle rules and
>combat.

Am I the *only* person without a problem with eitehr of these?

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; makes me unique, but
makes me alone . . .

Aaron F. Bourque

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:57:16 AM4/23/02
to
From: Brad Murray bjm-...@phreeow.net

>Sorcier <sNoEr...@cavtel.net> wrote:
>S> Starship combat is a little odd but we haven't done much

>S> with that in either WEG or d20 yet.


>
>The starship combat rules in d20 Star Wars are incredibly
>elegant.

<gasp!>

>They pleased me more than anything else in the rules as this is
>usually a major failing in any science fiction game (usually
>resulting in a tactical mini game that has nothing to do with the
>main role playing game at all).

I AM NOT ALONE!

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

--

John Peralta

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 12:12:32 PM4/23/02
to
> > > Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it can't
afford
> > >to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a dozen times.
> >
> > There's really nothing structurally wrong with TPM.
>
> Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.

I don't get this. I've seen several people mention this and I don't
understand why it's a problem. Could someone explain it to me? Just
wondering.


Jeff Wilder

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 12:37:49 PM4/23/02
to
"John Peralta":

[ "Midiclorians suck." ]

| I don't get this. I've seen several people mention
| this and I don't understand why it's a problem.
| Could someone explain it to me? Just wondering.

It's actually kinda hard to explain. It's just ... cheesy.
Prior to TPM, the Force was mystical and mysterious (and thus so
were its users). With TPM, we find out that Force-using is just
a matter of science.

That's not a great explanation, but it's as close as I can get.
Midiclorians just don't feel right as an explanation for the
Force. (Although, truthfully, I don't think anything would feel
right.)


Jeff


Hong Ooi

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 12:49:13 PM4/23/02
to
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:26:14 GMT, "Jeff Wilder"
<wild...@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> wrote:

>"Jason Corley":
>
>| The D20 version has a workable Force system
>
>A couple of people have mentioned this, but I don't get it.
>First, what's wrong with the WEG SW Force system? I love the
>Control-Sense-Alter triangular interaction.

I pressed Control-Sense-Alter, and my midichloran counter rebooted.


--
Hong Ooi | "I'm "playing D&D alone" RIGHT NOW,
hong...@maths.anu.edu.au | if you know what I mean (and I
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/ | think you do)."
Canberra, Australia | -- JMB

Sea Wasp

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 12:46:55 PM4/23/02
to
Aaron F. Bourque wrote:
>
> From: Sea Wasp sea...@wizvax.net
>
> >Justin Bacon wrote:
> >>
> >> Sea Wasp wrote:
> >> > Unless it utterly ignores over half of "TPM" -- which it
> >> > can't afford to do -- it's already shot itself in the foot half a
> >> > dozen times.
> >>
> >> There's really nothing structurally wrong with TPM.
> >
> > Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.
>
> What's wrong with midiclorians?

Not mentioned throughout the first three movies. All of these make it
clear that the Force is a mystical thing, and that you SENSE it. They
didn't look for a midichlorian test in the middle of Star Wars, Darth
Vader said "The Force is strong in this one!" Yoda didn't talk about
how these midichlorians connect you to the Force, he described the
Force in mystical terms -- as part of all things -- and said that the
Force was strong in the Skywalker family.
"Midichlorians" sounds like someone was trying to get
pseudoscientific, connected the idea with the mitochondria (which DO
exist) and threw it in because they thought it sounded Kewl. But it
violates the way in which the Force was painted -- as a true mystical
thing -- in the original series.

> >or even that right and wrong enter into Qui-Gon's calculations all
> >that much.
>
> His interpretation of right and wrong is just different from yours.

He seems to recognize that slavery is bad, but there's no indication
that he intends to do, or even say, anything about it. Acceptance of
evil is possibly evil, and certainly Not Good. ("All that is necessary
for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.")

Malachias Invictus

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:13:09 PM4/23/02
to

"Jeff Wilder" <wild...@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> wrote in message
news:P4fx8.800$b33.27...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...

I definitely have not either. All the kids I used to play with liked him.
Hell, he was a well-written comedy relief character, *unlike* Darth Binks.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley


Jason Corley

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:32:16 PM4/23/02
to
Aaron F. Bourque <aaronb...@aol.comstat> wrote:
> From: Jason Corley cor...@cobweb.scarymonsters.net

>>The unforgivable messup in the D20 version is vehicle rules and
>>combat.

> Am I the *only* person without a problem with eitehr of these?

It's possible I just didn't understand them, but here's some things WEG
does much better in this regard:

---- Greater party participation in starship combat. In SWD20 you can't
just rush into the gunwell and start blasting and hope to accomplish
anything. Whenever we did starship stuff it was the GM and one other
person, sometimes two. The rest of the group just sat there.

---- Easier to do the really crazy maneuvers: because it was all
abstracted description. There was no need to worry about speeds or flanks
or any of that. It moved /fast/.

---- Greater pilot participation in non-starship roleplay. So much has to
be invested into being a good (or, god forbid, a great) pilot in SWD20
that you don't have a lot of room to do much else.

Chris

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:33:22 PM4/23/02
to
Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote in message news:<3CC573...@wizvax.net>...

>
> The problem *I* had was that the Jedi were supposed to be Good Guys
> -- in tune with the Light Side of the Force. In TPM, they talked a
> good game, but in actuality appeared to be nothing more than enforcers
> and bodyguards with a few principles. You'd think that slavery would
> be something that the Jedi just wouldn't countenance, if they were
> really good guys.

I guess I never real got the whole "good guy" thing from the other
movies. Yoda never seemed to stress right and wrong so much as
control of emotion. Although I won't deny that the slavery gig did
bother me. <shrug> Get rid of JJB, mideklorians and all of the
stupid, hokey statements meant to be comic relief, and I would have
enjoyed it.

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:45:46 PM4/23/02
to
Sea Wasp wrote:
> The problem *I* had was that the Jedi were supposed to be Good Guys
>-- in tune with the Light Side of the Force. In TPM, they talked a
>good game, but in actuality appeared to be nothing more than enforcers
>and bodyguards with a few principles. You'd think that slavery would
>be something that the Jedi just wouldn't countenance, if they were
>really good guys.

Isn't that kind of the point, though? The Republic ignores any actual problems.
The Jedi support that policy of non-action by maintaining their own policy of
non-involvement. And the whole system slowly starts coming apart.

Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:48:33 PM4/23/02
to
Chris wrote:
>I guess I never real got the whole "good guy" thing from the other
>movies. Yoda never seemed to stress right and wrong so much as
>control of emotion.

Reading between the lines, it seems that Yoda gets a wake up call between TPM
and ESB. Compare and contrast "fear leads to anger" with "I'm not afraid/you
*will* be".

>Get rid of JJB, mideklorians and all of the
>stupid, hokey statements meant to be comic relief, and I would have
>enjoyed it.

Well, there's nothing inherently wrong with JJB. Once you remove all of the
hokey comic relief elements, the character is perfectly tolerable. (The
character would also have very little in common with the character who actually
appeared on screen. <g>)

And I don't really have a problem with midichlorians.

JB

Anivair

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:49:04 PM4/23/02
to
>Jedi who are supposed to be good guys but who appear to be nothing
>more than enforcers. Where's the HEROES in this group? I don't see any
>indication that the Jedi Council gives a crap about right and wrong,
>or even that right and wrong enter into Qui-Gon's calculations all
>that much.

I'm not certain right and wrong enter into Luke's calculations either. Barring
when they directly affect him and his friends.

I thought it was assumed that the Jedi were fairly neutral and were good guys
by default because they fight the dark side of the forse which is evil.


--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com

Anivair

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:51:52 PM4/23/02
to
>> What's wrong with midiclorians?
>
> Not mentioned throughout the first three movies. All of these make it
>clear that the Force is a mystical thing, and that you SENSE it. They
>didn't look for a midichlorian test in the middle of Star Wars,

It seemed to me that Luke was in no position at any point in time to understand
the concept. and the technology to measure may have been lost in the huge war.
Further, I wouldn't think that Yoda would need to double check to see if
Anakin's son can use the force.

>Darth
>Vader said "The Force is strong in this one!" Yoda didn't talk about
>how these midichlorians connect you to the Force, he described the
>Force in mystical terms -- as part of all things -- and said that the
>Force was strong in the Skywalker family.

That's just Yoda. He didn't talk about Midichlorians in TPM either. If
someone else had trained Luke it might have been different.


--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com

Anivair

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:53:09 PM4/23/02
to
>> Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.
>
>I don't get this. I've seen several people mention this and I don't
>understand why it's a problem. Could someone explain it to me? Just
>wondering.

Despite my defence before I have to say, they're dumb. It's just stupid and
not needed. Explaining magic ruins the trick. Nobody wants to see the
magician make a rope whole when he tells them he's not really cutting it. No
trick. Nobody wants to see the force do anyhting if it's a group of little
bugs. It's a bit Lame.


--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com

jere7my tho?rpe

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:54:01 PM4/23/02
to
In article <0vgx8.768$Ij5....@news.abs.net>,
"Malachias Invictus" <capt_ma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I definitely have not either. All the kids I used to play with liked him.

That's the key -- kids loved C-3PO; a lot of grown-up fans found
him annoying and mincing. I was five, and thought he was hilarious; I
had a fannish uncle who snarled about him. Kids I talk to love Jar Jar
(unless they've hit the "cool" phase, in which case they hate whatever
they're told to hate); the trouble is, all us folks who were kids when
we saw "Star Wars" have turned into my uncle. :)=

----j7y

--
*************************************************************************
jere7my tho?rpe / 734-769-0913 "Homo sum: humani nihil a me
http://homepage.mac.com/jere7my alienum puto." ---Terentius

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 1:54:51 PM4/23/02
to
>C3PO is comic relief done right. Until right now, I've never
>heard of anyone hating Threepio.

And the key here is that:

a) C3PO never undermined the story.
b) C3PO never undermined the world.

The comic elements in TPM did both. You have the strong impression that if the
George Lucas who did TPM had done ANH, we would have had the following
exchange:

Obi Wan: "You will never see a greater hive of scum and villainy."
C3PO: "Oh dear, I seem to have stepped in stinky dog doo."

That seen actually *happens* in TPM.

And we come pretty close to it in the Special Edition of ANH, where we are
treated to droids behaving like the Three Stooges and small aliens falling off
of large lizards. Scum and villainy? Looks more like a carnival act to me.

Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 2:07:40 PM4/23/02
to
Sea Wasp wrote:
> Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.

I don't really see anything wrong with midichlorians. The fact that the Jedi of
this era have a certain "lack of faith" is disturbing, but I think it's meant
to be.

> Jedi who are supposed to be good guys but who appear to be nothing
>more than enforcers. Where's the HEROES in this group? I don't see any
>indication that the Jedi Council gives a crap about right and wrong,
>or even that right and wrong enter into Qui-Gon's calculations all
>that much.

Just as this is *meant* to be disturbing. There's a reason Anakin becomes
disillusioned and vulnerable to corruption.

The Jedi Council we're seeing is obviously Not Getting It(TM). Look at their
bizarre insistence that a 5 year old is too old to be trained in the force.
Based on the previews for AOTC, it looks like there are even more amoral (or
possibly even immoral) regulations the Jedi Council has imposed.

JB

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 2:09:12 PM4/23/02
to
Bourque wrote:
>His interpretation of right and wrong is just different from yours.
>He latches onto Jar-Jar (your opinion of Jar-Jar notwithstanding)
>because he considers it the "right thing to do." He also considers
>himself constrained by his duties and responsibilities as a Jedi
>and enforcer of the Republic. He cannot free all of the slaves on
>Tatooine for several reasons, not the least of which being the
>political hurricane it would cause when the Senate learns of it.
>He cheats at a bet because the Force tells him the boy is
>important, and in his mind he is allowed to bend morality for the
>good of Force and prophecy.

And notice that the Council doesn't agree with him. The Council doesn't think
in terms of good and evil (or light and dark, really); they seem to think in
terms of rules and regulations.

JB

Malachias Invictus

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 2:18:35 PM4/23/02
to

"Anivair" <ani...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020423135309...@mb-ch.aol.com...

> >> Midichlorians. This is an important plot point.
> >
> >I don't get this. I've seen several people mention this and I don't
> >understand why it's a problem. Could someone explain it to me? Just
> >wondering.

<snip>

> Explaining magic ruins the trick.

<snip>

Exactly. That was what did it for me. That, and the obvious Mitochondria
parallel.

Justin Bacon

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 2:13:49 PM4/23/02
to
Fumblor wrote:
>So not only is the game bad, but they implemented the d20 engine in a bad
>way? The second part intrigues me. Justin, can you give an example of how
>the d20 engine was botched in the star wars rpg?

The classes are muddled in terms of identity -- they are not strong archetypes.
The game also liberally changes the core D20 mechanics in a plethora of minor
ways, which defeats the entire purpose of using the D20 engine. On a larger
scale, the VP/WP system is a bad idea that doesn't seem to accomplish much of
anything while greatly increasing special case rules and bookkeeping.

Look to CoC for an excellent iteration of the D20 engine. In that game, Monte
Cook does a great job of executing just a handful of deft changes which achieve
the effect he is looking for while maintaining almost total compatibility with
D&D3.

JB

Malachias Invictus

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 2:16:37 PM4/23/02
to

"Justin Bacon" <tria...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020423134833...@mb-fl.aol.com...

> Well, there's nothing inherently wrong with JJB. Once you remove all of
the
> hokey comic relief elements, the character is perfectly tolerable. (The
> character would also have very little in common with the character who
actually
> appeared on screen. <g>)

The accents - the stupid accents...

We all the tlade fedelation - feal us!

Ben Sisson

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:44:07 PM4/23/02
to
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002 15:28:47 GMT, "Jeff Wilder"
<wild...@REMOVETHIShotmail.com> (if that IS his real name)
conspiratorially whispered:

>"RPHawtin":
>
>| Everyone hated C3P0 when he 1st appared
>
>Buh?
>

>C3PO is comic relief done right. Until right now, I've never
>heard of anyone hating Threepio.

It has become hip for TPM apologists to point to things like threepio
in the earlier movies in an effort to claim TPM wasn't any different
or lower in quality.

In other words, its mostly fanboy propoganda.

C-3PO was nowhere near, not even remotely close to being near to being
as annoyingly out of place as JJB was. The only thing that came close
were the Ewoks, and he made them better than JJB by frying a few of
them (though, the Lucas of today probably wouldn't show Ewok dying
scenes).

Another example is when you comment on the name: Attack of the Clones.
Attack of the Clones is beyond awful as a name of a movie. It's so bad
even the actors in it don't like it. The apologists (fanboys) point to
the earlier movies and claim their names are bad too, so Attack of the
Clones is okay. They aren't bad, they are *acceptable*. Attack of the
Clones is not.

--

Ben Sisson

"Yes, Captain. I am a lying, boneless, toady dweeb
but I am YOUR lying, boneless, toady dweeb!"

-The Dnyarri, Star Control 2

maddman

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:53:03 PM4/23/02
to
A guy I know said recently

"Unless they are giving out hamburgers and handjobs in the theatre you
couldn't drag me to another fucking Star Wars marketing-o-rama to have
another part of my childhood raped."

Agree completely. I'm not going...I might see it on cable sometime,
but I'm not giving Lucas another dime.

He needs to see Peter Jackson on how to deliver on a promise.

Sea Wasp

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:01:53 PM4/23/02
to
maddman wrote:
>
> A guy I know said recently
>
> "Unless they are giving out hamburgers and handjobs in the theatre you
> couldn't drag me to another fucking Star Wars marketing-o-rama to have
> another part of my childhood raped."
>
> Agree completely. I'm not going...I might see it on cable sometime,
> but I'm not giving Lucas another dime.

I wasn't even interested in this set of movies to begin with, to be
honest; I went to see TPM because I had two sets of SW junkies in my
group of friends, and so it was a social outing.

We already KNOW what happened in this sequence, Georgie. The only one
*I* was interested in seeing were the three movies AFTER RotJ -- which
you now say won't be done, because all of a sudden (and it is all of a
sudden) the whole series is about Anakin Skywalker. Which is such BS.
Even JMS's occasional Bab5 retcons are minor compared to this crap.

Bill Silvey

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:14:34 PM4/23/02
to

news:20020423141349...@mb-fl.aol.com...

> Look to CoC for an excellent iteration of the D20 engine. In that game,
Monte
> Cook does a great job of executing just a handful of deft changes which
achieve
> the effect he is looking for while maintaining almost total compatibility
with
> D&D3.

Why is "...total compatibility with D&D3." necessary or even desirable for a
D20 game? I for one fear and will always avoid Jedi on Greyhawk, Giant
Polyps terrorizing Tatooine, or any other cross pollination idiocy.

D20 is fine; it's an easy system to learn and (apparently) modular enough
that it can fit lots (but not all) of the game genres out there, but a game
that uses D20 shouldn't *have* to be D&D3 compatible. If, for example, I
were going to do a superhero D20 then a great deal of "D&Dness" would be
excised and I doubt if the game would be all that backwards compatible with
D&D...

Just sayin'.

--
http://home.cfl.rr.com/delversdungeon/index.htm
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
> I don't think anything short of no-boot would put Macists off Mac.
> The last stable OS was System 6.0.8. So long as system messages
> are phrased as if a patronising aunt were addressing a retarded
> 4-year-old, they will continue to love it. - Patrick Ford

Douglas Bailey

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:30:16 PM4/23/02