Lit Fantasy Flight Games and the Star Wars TCG

Myron, I think you must have missed where this conversation started; no one is going out of their way to simply state that the RPG material has no bearing on canon. That might be approximately what's being said, but it's meant as a direct response to people who, for instance, take the RPG books to task for changing details about starships for the betterment of gameplay despite not playing the game. The point is that those people have no ground to stand on, as the first priority of the RPG books is balanced gameplay, and those non-players couldn't possibly make an accurate observation about what's best for the game. This is a thing people still try to do, and that's what we're talking about here. That doesn't seem to have anything to do with what you're talking about.

Additionally, the point was made that Zahn was specifically told to use the details described in the West End Games books. At the time it was a useful tool for building the world, but that is no longer the precedent; now, all books are equal at best, and in this case, games are given special exemption to canon constraints for the purposes of STATS. All stats. If it affects mechanical gameplay in any way whatsoever, it is a stat. It's a trend that certain folks have developed a selective sight about that.

Ender summed it up better a few posts back.

Regardless, I'm talking about their entire approach; I can't give you examples, because the whole point is that the devs don't just sit back and talk about lore. They talk about game mechanics. If they do talk about lore, it's only for the purpose of describing how they translated lore into game mechanics. I can't quote something if the whole point is to tell you what isn't talked about.

So what I'm saying is, anybody can read these books, but if you're not a gamer, you're probably not going to get as much use out of them. Maybe somebody likes the pictures... I'm happy for them. That's fine. But the minute an entitled complaint is raised by someone who doesn't play the games, that's when it stops making sense. Maybe that's not always how it was, but that doesn't matter; that's how it is now. Certain people won't accept that. You are a roleplayer, so I don't understand what your issue is.

 

As far as I'm aware, he was encouraged to do so, but not forced. Zahn admitted that it made his job easier, certainly - another reason why FFG used and continued to use established past material, regardless of whatever declarations have been made. And let's not forget that WEG prior to that was not 'canon'. They were making an RPG tie-in like any other, and honestly, it was rather sparse - just comparatively less so than the existing background material for the movies, which was approximately nil. It was after they worked in tandem with the other secondary material, and formed the EU, that the RPG blossomed. And might have continued, if WEG hadn't made some boneheaded decisions, but that's tangential to the discussion.

I'm guessing that the devs still haven't announced their relationship with the NEU? I haven't heard anything, personally. But the inclusion of the prior established history of the Rebel Alliance's origin, including even Force Unleashed, certainly makes one wonder.
Whether or not it is voluntary, rather than confined by a corporate-imposed canon system, FFG seems to be following what was established by prior EU material. E_S has made the point that they aren't "telling stories" (well, apart from the adventure books, in a sense) so it doesn't matter. But it does matter if you citing the StoryGroup's line - if FFG's books deviate from the NEU and continue to do so (as some think they'll start towing the line with whatever next supplement is coming out at that time), and they are either being ignored or just mined for individual bits of lore, that sounds awfully similar to something else...

Again, I don't recall that being the case in the EU days. "Stats" such as the length of ships (which both WOTC and FFG generally provide, anyways) or weapons weren't 'exempt'. Now, it's more of an intellectual exercise for the reasons outlined above. But for non-gamers to complain about changes to hard information for the purposes of a game? They have the right to complain about it, certainly. I was profoundly irritated by WOTC's decision to arbitrarily make a vaguely-described MonCal cruiser into a Super Ship based solely on their desire to have an Alliance equivalent to the Executor. I didn't have to play the miniatures game or listen to the devs explain it away to understand that there were plenty of other alternatives - like, I don't know, using one of the NR Executor classes? Or just coming up with a brand new ship if they needed something?
I digress. But however I felt about it, it became part of the overall lore because of a game dev decision. Do you really think StoryGroup would've said 'you are exempt' if they were supposed to be an 'equal' portion of the NEU? If they are as hardline as the pretend to be, they wouldn't - and if they weren't, well, we're back at square one.
The point is that it seems that all the material to date draws heavily on the LEU to the point that they are de facto adding to the LEU canon, even if they are not officially. So non-gamers certainly have the right to grouse, just as devs have the right to not care. (Although see below with regard to the 'devs')

With the amount of lore that is appearing in their books, someone is certainly responsible. I don't think that LFL is doing all of that for them, and then FFG only working on rules. If you're talking about the podcasts... well, yes, they're not much of interest to those not really enthusiastic about rule design. So if you're recommending that non-gamers avoid the podcasts at all costs, I completely agree.
FFG's Star Wars RPG isn't GURPS. One of the draws of the game is an immersive universe and setting, and it forms a significant portion of the game itself. Whether or not they talk about it during the podcasts, it's there in print.

And I disagree with the point. Certainly I'd recommend Suns of Fortune to an EU fan wanting to read up on the Corellian Sector, just like I'd recommend reading some of the novels to a SW gamer that wasn't familiar with them and was looking to read stories in the setting, or just get some inspiration for designing an adventure.

I find a good, consistent setting to be just as important as a workable game system; and in fact, I've been known to forgive quite a bit for a setting I like. But that is because I'm generally the DM, and I take Paranoia's stance that "all rules are optional". A bad setting... well, it's easier just to ditch and use another.

 

Yeah, this.

Myron, one the examples given were the re-statting of the TIE Defender in Age of Rebellion for game balance - it is now as fast as a B- or Y-Wing (and thus slower than an X-Wing), which was emphatically not the case in say, previous RPGs, books, and games.

The expressed intent of Andrew Fisher, FFG's lead developer on Age of Rebellion, was to balance it mechanically from its previous iteration as a, and I quote, "god-fighter" so that GMs didn't have an unbeatable ship that PCs couldn't take down in a fight without significant fudging (and then, what's the point?).

Admittedly I think non-RPG fans wouldn't be looking at speed charts, it's the weapons and fluff that bothers them more so it's only really been a howling issue on the FFG boards. If they'd dropped the length, then you can be sure it'd be raised in this thread.

In any event, the TIE Defender's stats not align with the expected stats of a TIE Defender and this occurred for game balance only. It is a decision that was taken, undoubtedly, with blithe indifference to how non-gaming collectors of the books may feel.

Also, I think the point above about non-players griping about RPG "stats" is a good one and I'm not sure too many other IPs get this kind of overlap with their roleplaying games/wider continuity. Excepting D&D IPs like Forgotten Realms etc, of course.

 

Oh come on, its not like there were any stats on the Viscount, or even the Mediator to explain Jaina's statement from Vector Prime, prior to what WotC did.

 

Bolter damage in the 40K based RPGs by FFG. That is all.

On Viscount and Mediator, the former was merely a name-drop in Vector prime, and Mediator ill described. WotC later decided to make the Viscount into the Light Side equivalent of the Executor for Starship battles (they could have used Lusankya, but then it would have been 2 SSDs in the box with merely different paintjobs) and greatly expanded the lore and details on the Viscount and her class to be more than a name and a vague description of relative sizes. The mismatch in stats between the fluff and game resulted in one of the few terrible decisions of the EGtW, giving us a "prototype" ship that is about 1/6 the length of the length and 1/180 the mass/volume of the class she is supposed to be a part of.

In the Viscount's case, I much prefer the WotC fluff and stats over the two sentences of vague description we got in Vector Prime, but the whole fiasco is one of the problems with game designers fudging with stats in the all-inclusive continuity like Star Wars used to have.

 

Sorry, are you saying the 40K tabletop's bolter damage was affected by the FFG RPG?

 

People keep saying the RPG books cause problems, as if they're coercing authors into using stats that were created with game balance in mind. However, the fact is, the game developers know the actual information and decide to change it; it's the novelists who apparently failed at their research and adopted inaccurate descriptions, because they couldn't get through their heads that game stats are not the end-all, be-all descriptor---same as folks here.

But this is more psychological than that. This is a matter of loyalty, plain and simple. The very fact that one doesn't play the game is what makes one see the RPG books as the "other," with the novels being one's own private ward. One ends up seeing the novelists as having been brainwashed and hoodwinked by those nasty, pesky, ignorant RPG developers. It's biased and absurd; the RPG developers know what they're doing---literally, they know when they're changing things. By the very nature of their job, they're required to do deeper research than any given individual author, so they're making informed decisions. It falls to the novelists and their editors to interpret source material correctly, and those creating content for a completely separate purpose bear no responsibility for the faults of those novelists.

 

You know as well that any deeper analysis of stats would cause modest annoyance when Luke isn't statted to do all the things he can in novels, right?

 

In a best case scenario, yes, the game designers are making fully informed and logical decisions. But proclaiming that RPG developers do more thoughtful and in depth research than authors or other creative artists working in the same universe is equally as biased and absurd.

 

Could you be any more condescending?

This has been going on for page after page. Not a single person has fundamentally disagreed with you that gameplay function comes first, but you seem to take it extremely personally that us unwashed non-gamers have the temerity to crack open your splatbooks without listening to a hundred hours of developer podcasts first. I fully understand that I'm not FFG's or WOTC's or WEG's primary audience, but my money into their pocket is just as good as yours, even if I don't get the same things out of it you do. The RPGs feed the novels which feed the RPGs which feed the novels. This is how it's worked since pretty much forever.

And stuff like this is just strawmanning:

No one's characterizing them as anything like this. Maybe when you dig into it a figure like "10 turbolasers" doesn't actually mean "10 turbolasers" in the "real" setting, but I'd say readers and especially those pesky ignorant novelists (who have a daunting job to do in a limited timeframe) can be forgiven for opening up the book, assuming the number means what it says, and just getting on with it.

When it comes down to it I actually agree with you more often than not, but it's like this in every thread. Your posts just stress me out.

 

Well, no, there's two points that you guys keep missing:

1) If you find there's an "error" in stats that has no impact on gameplay, or has been done to support gameplay, then it should be viewed solely in that context.

2) I'm sorry, I know this sounds awful but no. Your money isn't the same as ours in their pocket. It isn't for two reasons. One, you don't buy all the supplements and by this I don't just mean the sourcebooks. How many dice packs do you own (2, plus the beginner box set from EotE, plus the app for iOS). How many of the card decks for adversaries, designed to provide GMs with a quick reference tool for accessing villains to use in a pinch, will you buy?

And two - how many betas will you sign up for, and give feedback on? How many interactions with the devs will you have that enhance the gameplay? The Order 66 Podcast provides a forum through which fan questions can be put to FFG directly, and FFG seem to have actually taken some suggestions on board.

RPGs are a difficult market to grow, and the smartest thing FFG did was basically market a line of products to 30-something gamers who grew up on WEG and the OT. The know we've had a bad run with the PT and the WotC books and d20 Star Wars. They know we don't need to play Obi-wan off the bat as probably started playing a Scoundrel or Brash Pilot in WEG. They know we have a nostalgia factor and disposable income and they want our input so they can win our loyalty. Prae and I will on average spend more on FFG stuff than you do, and we'll interact more with the FFG devs than you will. This isn't a value judgement - we are core consumers of that product. You are ancillary consumers and a nice revenue stream. But what they want is a loyal gaming audience who will give the product longevity, and that means they will absolutely seek to engage - not alienate - that audience.

EDIT: To draw a point of comparison - with The Old Republic, BioWare will probably give priority to the consensus of subscribers over preferred over free-to-play for a similar reason...

 

It's not a sleight; there are ten times as many people working on a given RPG book than on a novel.

Yes, it could... by me not meaning it. I'm legitimately trying to cover my bases and make it clear that I'm not saying anyone is barred from reading these books for their own reasons; just that when people get outraged by them for reasons other than gameplay, it's weird and misplaced and doesn't line up with their intent.

I'm not taking anything personally; I, like Ender, repeatedly see people take issue with stuff that's irrelevant to the book's purpose. I'm trying to rhetorically explain what's actually going on with these books to those people. They're not all clustered right here, but it's a prevailing trend on various boards. And while your money in FFG's pocket is just as good as mine, they're not near as likely to get yours. They're targeting gamers who collect the full product line. That's marketing.

First of all, I'm not ragging on novelists. I don't care about any of those details. I'm speaking rhetorically about the arena of fact in which those who DO care about those details reside. Even if the authors aren't to be blamed, it falls to the editor and continuity people to handle those discrepancies; I'm not blaming the authors for anything, I'm simply telling people that if there's blame to be had, it doesn't fall on the people trying to make a completely different product with its own autonomy. I'm not saying you're hefting any blame here, but just as an example, you're openly acknowledging being willing to forgive the authors. That's how a lot of people are. By default, most people naturally side with the product which is more relevant to them, and if there's blame to be had, they consolidate it in the place which means the least to them. It's not strawmanning, it's just basic human tendency. Mind you, I'm mostly talking about people on other boards with that one anyway; I've seen non-gamers go out of their way to sign up and post on the FFG boards themselves about this stuff, which is... I mean... come on.

And secondly... Sorry? People disagreeing with Ender by shucking and jiving and ignoring valid points stressed me out when I read it. But frankly now I'm mostly talking to people who agree with me, not against those who don't. At this point, it's rhetorical, except what was said to blackmyron, whose angle I simply wasn't sure about.

 

Just reading from the start... did you ever play the game? It was astonishingly awful, mind numbingly terrible and just fantastically crap. Cap ships had no range, so no reason to move. Luke's X-Wing and Anakin's Jedi fighter were too hard to hit and could take ISDs down thanks to the poor point-defences on the latter. I just... it was horrid. All those good models... wasted.

Armada should remedy this.

 

Erm sorry, let me clarify - cap ships had no range restrictions, and were easy to hit, so whomever won initiative would usually win the cap ship battle. It was just.. awful.

 

Nope, never played it. Just bought it for the cool models. Remember, I am the guy who buys products from an RPG company but doesn't actually role play.

--Adm. Nick

 

No that is a good thing AdmNick. The minis game was really good; the starship minis game did those models a disservice.

 

Incidentally, though it will likely be horribly expensive to play large fleets, Armada looks like it borrows from the mechanics of the X-Wing game but readjusted for capital-scale combat.

To be fair, the WOTC SSB game lifted from the WOTC Minis game too, and both X-Wing and SW Minis were/are really damned good gaming systems. SSB was not.

Here's a preview on Armada http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=5116



Lots of the components look similar. I see vehicle cards, upgrade (i.e. pilot, mounted weapon) cards, including Tarkin in the very bottom right. Damage/critical tokens too, as well as what looks like an updated weapon lock token and new dice (of course, new dice).

Main difference is that the maneuvers dial looks like it's now got 3 tiers.

In X-Wing, each ship has a dial (which is two pieces of circular hardened cardboard stuck together by a tab) which gives you movement options (Forward, hard turn, banking, and K-turns or 180s). Each move has a colour coding - green is easy and removes strain; white is neutral, and red adds strain. Strain means you can't use abilities in your attack phase (such as adding a green die to your defence roll).

The neat thing is that let's say I'm playing Iello. We have 4 ships each. We set the move for each dial and place it face down, revealing what we selected during the movement phase. Hilarity can ensue when you think your opponent will do one move and they do something totally different such as fly into you. It's also good when you think your opponent will expect you to move in one direction, you do something totally different and they're in your fire arc whilst you're out of theirs. Take that, TIE Interceptor #1! Take that, Iello!

The dial in Armada looks like this:



The dial has three tiers - Command; Speed and Shield Dial.

X-Wing deals with shields in a certain way; you have a shield value of X, a hull value of Y, and if you get attacked you lose the points value of shields first. Having R2-D2 on your X-Wing enables you to bring them back up, but generally they're gone. TIEs have no shields but are harder to hit, etc etc.

Having a shield dial (and having hull zones for damage rather than a static value) enables you a depth of options when taking damage - as well as attacking options for concentrating fire on a section of hull. Very interesting; the WotC game of course had no such consideration since the capital ships just fired and never bothered moving.

Hmmm the more I read of this the more I'm resigned to spending $300 on a fleet...

For AdmNick, Jello etc - if you're ever keen to play, find out if your FLGS has a regular game and ask if the players can teach you. Generally speaking, if it's not league play they will be glad to find a new convert and who knows... you could become gaming addicts like the rest of us really erm, enjoy it!

 

Heroes of the rebellion
preview two heroes from imperial assault

 

Yep ok, that link as a nice insight into the "mini-RP" experience I was talking about:



So as you go along you'll get XP (and you'll start with some) to buy the above cards that boost your abilities in game for your hero. Levelling up will have an XP cost too (or at least does in Descent) that allows you to flip the character card to its reverse side and use the updated stats.

 

Ah ok, there's another preview for gameplay: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=5112

In addition to the XP cost of abilities the players in Descent earned treasure in certain situations (looting monsters, finding chests etc). That gave them access to items, which from memory (haven't played in a long time) could either be bought if the party had enough cash on it, or sold and the cash used to buy XP or something. Either way, here's one item that any character could use:

 

No, people here are saying the RPG books are full of lore of interest to non-gamers.

Yet you're making exactly the same type of judgments here. Skip to the last line of the post.

One would question, then, why to include it in the first place - especially since they really weren't around at the time to begin with. What exactly was the point in including the ship in the first place, when there are plenty of other TIE variants already in existence? Or, I don't know, create a new ship?

Personally, I just ignore it as an early prototype of the Defender - not that I'd ever include it in a game set in the classic gaming era (circa 1-2 years after ANH) anyways.

In any case, this is Lit, and the focus for the RPG thread here has been on lore and the EU because of this - so be a little more forgiving towards non-gamers addressing lore issues, especially since there are threads devoted strictly to the RPG elsewhere on the board.

 

I think we get that, and I for one have been encouraging non-gamers to try the system because of the sheer fun they'll have roleplaying in Star Wars (or engaging in ship combat).

The issue isn't that; it's that we're asking the books to be viewed in the correct context, that's all.

 

And I'm saying - as a long-time gamer - that devs aren't infallible geniuses that can do no wrong. There's a litany of egregious mistakes and bad decisions that I've had issues with in the various incarnations of the RPG over the years.

V_K already summed up the most of what needs to be said. If you're truly trying to encourage non-gamers to play the RPGs, I'd suggest a different course of persuasion.

 

No, that's what you are saying, and I agree with you. I'm not arguing with you; you're putting yourself in the line of fire but I haven't directed any of this at you. You're conveniently ignoring the lines of debate being carried on by others.

It's not bias to give a legitimate reason why the blame doesn't fall to RPG developers for decontextualized use of their material. Is a court judge "biased" for ruling in favor of one party or the other? No, the difference is that those who feel the need to aim their frustration at RPG books often do it in direct defiance of canon standards, and even try to cite made-up canon standards to try to prop up those feelings of frustration. My point is, a frustrated opinion is perfectly fine, but people frequently try to make it a matter of objective right and wrong. When they do that, they fail. The facts don't support it.

You really should read my next post after the one you quoted, Myron. I've clarified a lot of the positions you're attempting to argue with. The fact is, this isn't just an issue here, but across all boards relating to these FFG products.

 

I seem to recall taking the devs to task for indeed just what was being mentioned - alterations for the sake of game design, specifically for the TIE Defender.

Because, again, devs make bad decisions like anyone else, as I mentioned in the post immediately preceding yours.

And again, this is a thread about FFG's games in the context of Literature. There's a separate Games forum at tf.n, and various other boards that directly deal with RPGs directly. Understand that there's a history of non-gamers coming here to discuss the lore aspects of the game.