Which do you PERFER

WOTC definatley, I liked WEG but it was complicated to learn, to do anything you had to have a skill for it (it wasnt a general skill). WOTC is easier for me as a veteran to teach my greenhorn players (Unfortunatley for me all my players are greenies) the system is easier to grasp and is written on a level for all to understand.

 

I play both systems.

 

For a game system, I found WEG's Star Wars to be the least heroic game system I have ever seen for playing a super heroic genre like Star Wars. Yes, you needed a skill for everything, piloting an X-wing was not the same as piloting a Y-wing, Beast Riding: Tauntaun wasn't the same as beast Riding: Ronto. And god help you if you wanted to play a Jedi, because not only did you need to raise your mundane skills, but now you had to put points into Jedi powers as well, and thanks again to WEG, there were over a hundred Jedi Powers.

The Wizards of the Coast version of modified D&D3 rules is vastly superior in everyway, though I still think they screwed the pooch on starships. In the end, play what you like, it's your choice.

 

The game system I prefer is the one used for the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG. One of the better systems I think.

 

I play both. GMing its a toss up, one group I GM is crossing over from D&D and the other started on WEG. When I play, and this is tainted by a absolutely horid game, I prefer WEG.

 

WEG

 

I think WEG is way easier teaching "greenies". It's much simpler and much better. But the thing from WOTC I hate most is the level thing, the character advance way to rapidly.

 

Yeah, I tend to agree here with regards to levels. Perhaps doubling or trippling the XP chart might work to solve the problem. WEG's game system was unheroic, IMHO, and being a Jedi meant getting hosed since you lierally had DOUBLE the amount skills (Skills + Force powers) to maintain with XP. Wizard's modified D20 system works best, and I think it's easier to teach overall, because anyone who has played even 2nd Edition AD&D will at least be familiar with the concepts, so I don't believe it's a huge leap to 3rd.

 

"I liked WEG but it was complicated to learn. To do anything you had to have a skill for it (it wasnt a general skill). WOTC is easier for me as a veteran to teach my greenhorn players (Unfortunatley for me all my players are greenies) the system is easier to grasp and is written on a level for all to understand."

This just confuses me. I've GM'ed dozens of newbies, all cutting their teeth on the D6 system in one form or another (be it Star Wars or Ghostbusters), and I've never seen this. I've had them all up and running in half an hour with no problems at all. It's fast, and amazingly flexible (no classes to worry about).

"Yes, you needed a skill for everything, piloting an X-wing was not the same as piloting a Y-wing, Beast Riding: Tauntaun wasn't the same as beast Riding: Ronto."

No you didn?t. Sure you could specialize - but it was hardly mandatory. The most you would need to cover EVERY starship piloting would be three skills - starfighter, space transports and capital. Where did you get the idea that you needed EVERY ship broken down like that?

"And god help you if you wanted to play a Jedi, because not only did you need to raise your mundane skills, but now you had to put points into Jedi powers as well."

It's called game balance. Jedi could do SO much, and be SO unstoppable that they need a checks and balance system. Any game with psionics will have something along that line.

"and thanks again to WEG, there were over a hundred Jedi Powers."

Um . . . so?

 

Where did you get the idea that you needed EVERY ship broken down like that?

Most ship listings had a skill requirement, usually listed as "Pilot: Ship Type".

It's called game balance. Jedi could do SO much, and be SO unstoppable that they need a checks and balance system. Any game with psionics will have something along that line.

I think it was over kill in some instances. Because if you wanted a decent spread of mundane and Force skills, the Jedi character might start to lag too far behind other characters.

I just don't find the WEG system as heroic as Wizards. On the same token I admit that I had a crappy GM for Star Wars. Contrived plots where we had to decipher a page of smudged text that spent six hours working on in PhotoShop then have his NPCs solve the situation instead of us. Maybe if I had a decent GM I'd like it more. I ran my own and it worked out just fine.

 

"Most ship listings had a skill requirement, usually listed as "Pilot: Ship Type"."

That was the specialization used for the ship/vehicle in question - but that was not a requirement. Space Transports Piloting (or whatever scale the vehicle is) is more than sufficient.

"I think it was over kill in some instances. Because if you wanted a decent spread of mundane and Force skills, the Jedi character might start to lag too far behind other characters."

I never really saw that - but then in my game the GM has always played huge role in striking a balance with the other characters. They may have started out slower, but quickly caught up.

On the whole, Jedi advancement has never really bugged me since it is only three more skills after all (with a WHOLE bunch of uses associated with each skill).

It sounds like it's a pity your GM was substandard. You have my condolences.

 

That was the specialization used for the ship/vehicle in question - but that was not a requirement. Space Transports Piloting (or whatever scale the vehicle is) is more than sufficient.

What did specialization grant you? i.e. specialization: pilot: X-wing?

I never really saw that - but then in my game the GM has always played huge role in striking a balance with the other characters. They may have started out slower, but quickly caught up.

I guess my overal problem with the Force skills is I felt that some powers should have been merged into one power.

On the whole, Jedi advancement has never really bugged me since it is only three more skills after all (with a WHOLE bunch of uses associated with each skill).

Referesh my memory, don't you have put points into the sub skills to raise them?

It sounds like it's a pity your GM was substandard. You have my condolences.

Ugh, you have NO idea.

An actual event:

Players: "We load the land speed up with thermodetonators with proximity fuses and ram it into the doors of the building."

GM: "The speeder crashes and explodes violently, but does no damage."

I quit soon afterwards.

 

"What did specialization grant you? i.e. specialization: pilot: X-wing?"

The specialization made the skill cheaper to increase - but could only be used towards that application. So,

For example, lets say Bob the Fighter Jock has Starfighter piloting of 6D - to increase the skill to 6D+1 costs 6 points. Now if Bob had Piloting: X-Wing of 6D, the cost to increase to 6D+1 is only 3 points - half cost. The down side is that if Bob wound up having to flee a Star Destroyer in a stolen TIE fighter, he cant use the specialization.

"Referesh my memory, don't you have put points into the sub skills to raise them?"

Nope . . . well sort of. Normally the character gets one power per pip in each of the three Force Powers - telekinesis, telepathy, etc. These individual powers can be bought individually without increasing the base Force Power - but it's a purely voluntary action. Players don?t have to spend points if they don?t want to (and frankly, it's more economical to increase the base Force Power than buy the individual ones by themselves).

"I quit soon afterwards."

Ouch! I know that a good game is a balance between both GM and player - but this just seems like a lost cause from the get go. I don?t blame you for hauling ass.

 

Speaking as a fan of the WEG version and consquentely a defender of said version I have a plethora of statements to render in the defense of the D6 system. I was a gamer before I became a Star Wars fanatic, and therefore was familiar with both systems the D6 and the D20 amongst others. Granted, that the D20 version I am speaking of is Second Edition Dungeons and Dragons the rules have not changed that significantly. In addition, I have always found the D20 system flawed in this fact: it is not skill based. It wasn't back then and it's doing a lazy half attempt at it now. Even back in the early 80's all of the good companies and all of their good product line RPG'S were skill based thus offering a higher degree of believability, this the D20 system did not do. Even after this trend became apparen, the 1989 release of the second edition did not at all follow said trend it in fact, continued on its non-skill based way. But now we come to the crux of the matter. The D6 version of Star Wars was superior in the fact that is was skill based. In addition, it was also very easy to learn to get new gamers in the hobby who will henceforth be refered to as " newbies". Nevertheless, this game anybody could play since virtually anybody owns six sided dice in one form or another.The rules are quite simple as well you simply add the number of dice together by looking at your attributes and skills and beating the difficulty set by the gamemaster. Where as in the D20 system the system is far more complicated, which leaves me baffled as to why one of the people who posted on this board said that the WEG version was too hard and that the WOTC version is easier, which begs the question is that man entirely sane? But, I digress, also, WOTC as made Magic a very bad game it used to be quite well indeed now it is just crap. It introduced the great evil itself Pokemon * shudder *, and even furhter crapified ( please excuse made up word) the D@) system with third edition D&D and Star Wars to make it appealing to newbies. Now, everywhere I go and people start discussing how superior the D6 version is people bring up the quality of the source material, has anybody actually read the dark side handbook its crap?! As well as the quality of the writing and game ideas. Also, the style and art in the WOTC version appears more juvenile to attract younger players, and not the more serious tone and demeanor which WEG gave it. All of this factors combined make it the superior system, and I urge anybody to play the WEG and WOTC version in the same day and see which system is more superior and fun.

 

WotC got my vote, because they had the gall to push the D20 system. Besides, they make Star Wars games now.

 

yeah, in WEG its only addition and subtraction of dices and 1/3 dices and there is no timeconsuming tables you need to look in. Also the second edition rulebook so much better than the new core rulebook, loads of pictures that raised the star wars feelin and all the skilles were described as taken from the films.

 

All of this factors combined make it the superior system, and I urge anybody to play the WEG and WOTC version in the same day and see which system is more superior and fun.

Isn't it ultimately a matter of taste?

And 'crapified' is a perfectly cromulent word.

 

It's PREFER. Sweet lord...

 

Speaking as a fan of the WEG version and consqu6entely a defender of said version I have a plethora of statements to render in the defense of the D6 system. I was a gamer before I became a Star Wars fanatic, and therefore was familiar with both systems the D6 and the D20 amongst others. Granted, that the D20 version I am speaking of is Second Edition Dungeons and Dragons the rules have not changed that significantly.

This is news to me. Having played both 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Editions combined for nearly 20 years, 3rd Edition is apples to oranges different mechanically than 2nd or 1st Editions. Sure some concepts remain similar- like Armor Class, basic stats, but 3rd Edition is a pretty far departure from 2nd in the magic systems, combat, experience, movement, classes, etc.. There are very few rules that existed in 2nd Edition that carried over to 3rd. Unless of course you include the late 2nd Edition black-bound ?Combat & Tactics? and ?Skills & Powers? books.

In addition, I have always found the D20 system flawed in this fact: it is not skill based. It wasn't back then and it's doing a lazy half attempt at it now.

This is news to me since both versions of Star Wars have essentially the same methods for arriving at skill results. In D6 you roll a listed amount of dice to arrive at a target number with bonuses and penalties as applied by the GM or the wild card die. In D20 you roll a D20 +/- bonuses/penalties + Skill Level, both are shooting for a Target Number.

Even back in the early 80's all of the good companies and all of their good product line RPG'S were skill based thus offering a higher degree of believability, this the D20 system did not do.

Largely incorrect. Skills were introduced into AD&D 1st Edition in Oriental Adventures in 1986. And in certain games systems, like Space Opera or Role Master, you were buried in skills.

Even after this trend became apparen, the 1989 release of the second edition did not at all follow said trend it in fact, continued on its non-skill based way.

Completely wrong. In the 2nd Edition AD&D Player?s Handbook: pp. 50-64 is devoted entirely to skills, only here they are called non-weapon proficiencies.

But now we come to the crux of the matter. The D6 version of Star Wars was superior in the fact that is was skill based.

This is not a fact, this is an opinion. So in other words, all a game system needs to meet your approval is nothing but skills?

In addition, it was also very easy to learn to get new gamers in the hobby who will henceforth be refered to as " newbies". Nevertheless, this game anybody could play since virtually anybody owns six sided dice in one form or another.

This assumes that everyone wants to play Star Wars in the first place.

The rules are quite simple as well you simply add the number of dice together by looking at your attributes and skills and beating the difficulty set by the gamemaster.

As stated, Wizards? Star Wars works pretty much the same way.

Where as in the D20 system the system is far more complicated, which leaves me baffled as to why one of the people who posted on this board said that the WEG version was too hard and that the WOTC version is easier, which begs the question is that man entirely sane?

Again, someone posted an opinion. Also, what one person finds difficult is found easier by another, and ultimately, it?s a matter of taste.

But, I digress, also, WOTC as made Magic a very bad game it used to be quite well indeed now it is just crap.


What does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

It introduced the great evil itself Pokemon * shudder *, and even furhter crapified ( please excuse made up word) the D@) system with third edition D&D and Star Wars to make it appealing to newbies.

So, Wizards of the Coast are bad people because they wanted to cash in on the demented Pokemon craze?

Now, everywhere I go and people start discussing how superior the D6 version is people bring up the quality of the source

 

Sounds like you?re griping more about the fact that Wizards? Star Wars is based off AD&D than anything else. And West End Games is based off of Torg which is based off Ghostbusters which was based off Indiana Jones or some such combination.

In that most of this is opinion, and mine is well known, I wont address it - but I must correct the D6 lineage.

Ghostbusters was the first D6 product, long before the line was named such. Then came Star Wars, a year or so later, with the same dev team - more or less.

WEG put out the Masterbook system, with Indiana Jones as one of it's flagship titles (along with Bloodshadows and one other whos name escapes me now) - but NOT using the D6 system. They went with the new game engine because they believed that LFL owned the rights to D6, and they couldnt use it, or so my source in WEG told me. It was only later that someone connected the dots and realised that they owned the game engine, not LFL.

Thus they adapted D6 into their universal game system. After the great colapse, D6 evolved again slightly with the Metabarons rules. But Torg and Paranoia had nothing to do with the D6 system.

In the long run, it's not that D6 is a superior system to D20 - it's just that I think that D20 is a flawed engine. I didnt like it when I played Star Wars - but I really learned to loath it when my group decided to give D&D a try. I wouldnt use it to play Star Wars, Toon, Champions, or even Hackmaster. Given a choice between D20 and flipping a coin, I'd rather go the coin method.

 

Ghostbusters was the first D6 product, long before the line was named such. Then came Star Wars, a year or so later, with the same dev team - more or less.

Whatever. I wasn't going for accuracy, rather just stating what I knew to be true, that they share the same lineage.

In the long run, it's not that D6 is a superior system to D20 - it's just that I think that D20 is a flawed engine. I didnt like it when I played Star Wars - but I really learned to loath it when my group decided to give D&D a try. I wouldnt use it to play Star Wars, Toon, Champions, or even Hackmaster. Given a choice between D20 and flipping a coin, I'd rather go the coin method.

Opinions, BTW!

Personally, I think both game systems lack tremendously in certain areas, but given a choice between D6 or D20, I'll take D20.

What happened to West End Games, did they go bankrupt?

 

I'm all for D6. Thats what i grew up with. thats what i'm sticking with

 

I prefer D20, it is what I am currently growing up with (Just recently started) and I have looked at the D6 and I find the D20 system makes for a smoother game, in my case anyway.