To me, SWd6 is just house-ruled OD&D!

[Zulgyan]

"All RPGs are just house rules of OD&D" -- Somebody

I run my SWd6 games with the same "mindset/philosophy/assumptions/craft/methods", I have learned at odd74.proboards.com/.

Most of you guys know what I am talking about (right?), so I don't need to get into lengthy explanations. But let's make a list, incomplete, unrefined, of principles and insights from that "OD&D kind o' brain" that we can port into SWd6, with the adaptations demanded by the nature of the beast.

1. Rulings, not rules.

2. There is so much stuff you can do that is not covered by the rules.

3. Speed of play.

4. Don't complicate things.

5. Come up with stats on the fly.

6. Just make up some shit you think could be fun (Gronan).

7. SWd6 is a good as the GM ("D&D is as good as the DM" - Gygax article in The Dragon).

8. You don't need rules for everything (1E initiative! will expand on this later).

9. This is not a game for snowflakes, your character can die.

10. That 70s vibe.

11. Improvisation is key.

12. Many players!

13. Test player skill, not just character abilities.

14. Your PC is much more than the numbers on the character sheet.

15. Bend or ignore rules if it better serves the game.

16. GM judgment is a supreme virtue. Earn the player's respect and you'll be a true judge.

17. Forget game balance.

18. Forget balance between PCs.

19. Have a Caller, when needed. And maybe a mapper too.

20. Not every action needs a roll.

21. "Just describe plainly what you want to do, I'll take care of the rules", said the GM.

22. Narrativism kinda sucks.

23. GMs are not players and players are not GMs.

24. Abstract combat.

25. The rule of cool.

26. (to be continued by you).

Let's kick off this discussion! I have saved some special subjects for later.

   

[Zulgyan]

Falconer said somewhere else:

I'd always heard Star Wars (WEG) was a great RPG, but I was still very pleasantly surprised at how well the original core rulebook reads. It really seems to nail it. There is some stuff I don't like, but it is mainly just advice, that is easily ignored (start in medias res, hand out scripts for the players to read, give them immunity to death).

I agree mister. Just ignore all that advice that is antithetical to OD&D. SWd6 is nothing more than a "pool of dice vs. difficulty number" game after all. 

[Falconer]

Yes! It really seems like in the 80s, even when they had narrativist intentions, the RPGs they wrote still had 70s assumptions in their bones.

The 1E Rulebook in particular is so lite on lore that it gives a very OD&D feel to the universe.

I love the templates (=Classes). I love how there’s one called Alien Practitioner of the Force. What kind of alien? Who cares! A muppet is a muppet!

I got excited when you wrote “Many players!” Yes!! Do you have ideas about what “town” the PCs can return to at the end of a session (so that next session whoever shows up can all be in the same place)? A spaceport or a rebel base or a capital ship?

[Zulgyan]

So far in my campaign, that "town" has been Yavin HQ. But it's not just a military HQ, it's a town of sorts (albeit heavily militarized), with civilians, cantinas, shops and services. Basically the place where PCs can rest and buy and sell stuff (like the typical D&D town).

The 1E Rulebook in particular is so lite on lore that it gives a very OD&D feel to the universe.

You are so right!

[Zulgyan]

SWd6 1E CHARACTERS ARE GENERALISTS

In this they are very similar to OD&D characters. In both games, characters can try everything and are all round competent at doing things. In SW 1E, character skills are broad and apply to many varied actions. If you don't have a specific skill, you can rely on your natural attribute (similar to D&D attribute checks). If you are good at starship piloting, you can pilot ANY ship. I think this represents the movies very well: Luke, Han, Leia, Chewie, Lando: they are generalists. Of course they have their fortes and weakness but they do the most varied activities, all relatively well. The "division" between non force users and force users is similar to the differentiation between fighting-men and magic-users in OD&D.

In SW 2E, we are introduced to "skill specializations" and "advanced skills". Characters become more specialized and they can no longer try everything (or they do it a very significant disadvantage). They become less generalist and more focused.

This is a big reason why I prefer SW 1E over 2E. 

[boot]

Apr 17, 2019 16:07:38 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

SWd6 1E CHARACTERS ARE GENERALISTS

In this they are very similar to OD&D characters. In both games, characters can try everything and are all round competent at doing things. In SW 1E, character skills are broad and apply to many varied actions. If you don't have a specific skill, you can rely on your natural attribute (similar to D&D attribute checks). If you are good at starship piloting, you can pilot ANY ship. I think this represents the movies very well: Luke, Han, Leia, Chewie, Lando: they are generalists. Of course they have their fortes and weakness but they do the most varied activities, all relatively well. The "division" between non force users and force users is similar to the differentiation between fighting-men and magic-users in OD&D.

In SW 2E, we are introduced to "skill specializations" and "advanced skills". Characters become more specialized and they can no longer try everything (or they do it a very significant disadvantage). They become less generalists and more focused.

This is a big reason why I prefer SW 1E over 2E. 

Not to mention designating a character as being "Force Sensitive".  I didn't have a problem with that at first.  In fact, I used to think it a 2E improvement.

But, all the mechanical stuff in 2E about a non-Force Sensitive character becoming Force Sensitive, and the GM recommendation that Force morality play be enforced more stringently against Force Sensitive characters rather than non-Sensitives, just repelled me back to 1E.  

In 1E, that mechanical Force straight jacket is not "forced" onto the  characters, and the GM can keep the Force as a very mystical, not entirely understood "thing".

I remember, in a 2E game, where I thought it would be cool if I started describing these dreams a character had to the player.  The player had become interested in using the Force, and this was my method of putting that in the game.

But, the character wasn't Force Sensitive.  So, by the rules, the character had to become "Force Sensitive" first.  Then, the Force could speak with him through his dreams.  

Yeah, as GM, I could have just broken the rules and did what I thought would be cool, but that's another can of worms being opened when you condone that kind of play in the game.  It is cool now, but it also opens the door to players not trusting the GM because they now know that the GM will blow off rules for a cool part of the game.  What if the GM wants to do something "cool" that is against the players?


No, I think it is better for a GM to respect the rules.

So, 1E suites my play style much better than second edition.

[Zulgyan]

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly! I much prefer not have that "Force Sensitive" concept in the game. Another point in favor of 1E.

[Falconer]

Yes!! In fact I think we are meant to understand Han Solo as using the Force throughout the OT even though he doesn’t believe in it and obviously is not trained in Jedi disciplines. “I’ve got a bad feeling about this” and “Never tell me the odds” and then pulling off some incredible maneuvers…

[Zulgyan]

SCRIPTS AND CUTSCENES*

I mean the dialogue pieces players are supposed to read at the begging of a scenario and the cut-scenes to places the PCs can not see.

I don't like them and don't use them. I just play SW d6 as a fully traditional role-playing game. I just tried using a cut-scene once and it felt so weird to everyone at the table. Never used them again.

I have found that you don't need any of the scripts or cut-scenes in the modules I have played thus far (Tatooine Manhunt, Rebel Breakout and Starfall), for the players to understand the story or what's happening. If I absolutely need to give information to the player's found ONLY on the scripts or cut scenes (almost never the case), I find my way to do that by traditional GMing means.

*This is a repost from another thread. I just want to have all my "SWd6/OD&D" musings in the same place.

[Zulgyan]

INITIATIVE

OD&D has no initiative rules. AD&D "rules" are a mess: the basis is that both sides roll 1d6, lowest goes first. But then Gary delves into many exceptions, addenda and gloss to cover a plethora of situations that can come up in the game. These Gygaxian ruminations about initiative are often misunderstood as hard rules, and people crack their heads to solve all the contradictions and harmonize all the special cases. All attempts have failed. In reality, EGG was just showing examples of how a good DM would go around making up rulings to handle initiative, for more verisimilitude or better gameplay.

Enter SWd6. As in AD&D, one of the most hot topics in SW1E is initiative. A lot of people turn to the more conventional system of an autonomous initiative roll, as presented in IAG or 2E. I was tempted to house rule in from IAG or 2E the separate initiative roll, and let rounds resolve on those strict dice results. But then I recalled the mindset I apply for OD&D and AD&D initiative, and stayed with SW1E. It's working great!

Skill roll vs. opposing Skill role (the standard in 1E) is a great principle if you allow yourself to apply it judiciously with verisimilitude and better gameplay in mind. This can lead to some exceptions to the rule if they are more plausible, fun or cool. In case of doubt, always let a PCs act first, cause they are the heroes.

So there is no hard and fast rule, but a GM who can say who goes first according to reason, genre conventions and a concrete assessment of the situation. Anyway, most of the time, the standard 1E "highest skill roll goes first" rule would apply. The key is to not halt the flow of the game to crack your head around initiative puzzles. 

An independent initiative roll is kind of an abstract artifact that puts the rules on the front of the game experience. Better keep things more cinematic and feeling like the movies.
 

[boot]

FYI, I have a thread started a while back on 1E Nish.

Apr 17, 2019 17:32:04 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

INITIATIVE

OD&D has no initiative rules. AD&D "rules" are a mess: the basis is that both sides roll 1d6, lowest goes first.

Let's not forget Classic Traveller! No roll. Players can do their actions in any order. Consequences of actions, like damage from a hit, happen at the end of the round after every character has acted. 15 second combat rounds. In this fashion, CT ensures simultaneous action (though I'm not a huge fan of waiting to apply damage).



In 1E SW, I love how a character can be "faster" at one skill and "slower" at others, due to his experience in that particular skill. This is lost in 2E when Initiative becomes a PER roll, where, like most RPGs, the character is equally fast or slow on everything that he does.

The way 1E does it, a PC may indeed be a quick draw with a blaster but not as fast as a specialist when racing to reprogram a droid.

[Zulgyan]

Let's not forget Classic Traveller! No roll.

I was not aware of that (never played Traveller). Good to hear that another traditional game eschews inititative.

In 1E SW, I love how a character can be "faster" at one skill and "slower" at others, due to his experience in that particular skill. This is lost in 2E when Initiative becomes a PER roll, where, like most RPGs, the character is equally fast or slow on everything that he does.

Great observation!

[boot]

Oh, heck, I could go on all day about why I like 1E over 2E. 2E is rules thick. Those rules infest everything about the game. Now, it is a good game. I played it for years. 2E does rock. But, it just doesn't serve my preference anymore.

Take space combat, for example. In 1E, you roll dice a couple of times to replicate the actions we see the characters do in the films, and then the GM is describing this awesome Star Wars space situation: "Green spears of deadly light fly by your cockpit! You look down. Yeah, you've got three TIE fighters on your tale. BLAM! One of the bolts impacts your rear shield!" Next round. Roll some dice a few times. The action continues! "You slam the controls forward, your right foot slamming yaw pedal to the cockpit floor! Zip! Down you go! Ninety degrees, headed straight for the planet. But, the Eyeballs are agile! They're right with you!" Round three...

2E space combat is more like a wargame, counting range in space units, looking for modifiers, rolling tasks for sensor locks....it's more dicey, more gamey.

I much prefer the breakneck pace of the 1E system.

[Falconer]

Apr 17, 2019 16:38:50 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

SCRIPTS AND CUTSCENES*

I mean the dialogue pieces players are supposed to read at the begging of a scenario and the cut-scenes to places the PCs can not see.

I don't like them and don't use them. I just play SW d6 as a fully traditional role-playing game. I just tried using a cut-scene once and it felt so weird to everyone at the table. Never used them again.

I have found that you don't need any of the scripts or cut-scenes in the modules I have played thus far (Tatooine Manhunt, Rebel Breakout and Starfall), for the players to understand the story or what's happening. If I absolutely need to give information to the player's found ONLY on the scripts or cut scenes (almost never the case), I find my way to do that by traditional GMing means.

I agree; when I ran Starfall I cut all these; I also cut the NPC who was supposed to tag along and give the PCs information at various points and tell them where to go. It was a hell of a fun crawl, and all the better for making it simpler, freeform.

[Zulgyan]

LOCATION BASED VS. SCENE BASED

Early TSR D&D modules are heavily "location-based" in design, whereas SW WEG modules are much more "scene based" in the way they are supposed to be ran. This is a big difference in module design bewteen gygaxian D&D modules vs. SW WEG modules.

But for example, the module "Tatooine Manhunt" begins as a scene based adventure, but when the players arrive to Mos Eisley, the city is played as an actual location based mini sandbox (one of the best city sandboxes I have ever GMed). After the encounter possibilities of Mos Eisley begging to run out, the adventure goes back to a scene based structure.

So early OD&D-AD&D modules are more location based and more sandboxy, whilst SW WEG adventures are more scene based and "cinematic" or "story oriented" if you will. But modules such as Tatooine Manhunt show that both styles of adventure design can work perfectly in a SW adventure. I think that the scene based design comes more into play when PCs are dealing with massive locations, just a Star Destroyer (Starfall) or the Tatooine desert (Tatooine Manhunt). This also tends to happen in D&D when players explore or travel through vast spaces just as a forest or some mountains.