Legend: Play Test Report #1

We had some fun with the Legend system over the weekend, and I wanted to share our experiences.

The combat system is fun to play and run, it has this 'medieval armor simulation' thing going on, and it also allows for way more player involvement than your standard D&D or Pathfinder combat. It does feel like combat is very old-school with hit locations and sectional hit points, but we were amazed at the constant choices the game gave you when it came to offensive and defensive special moves.

Players had choice in how they wanted a blow to land, or what special way they wanted to put an enemy at a disadvantage. Enemies had this choice as well, which makes the game very deadly and tactical. It all depends on skill and being able to get a roll good enough to start pushing the combat the way you wanted it to go, with the possibility out there of a lucky hit sending your entire plan into the garbage bin.

My players preferred it instantly to D&D and Pathfinder's combat system, and had a lot more fun with it the first couple fights.

I can see this system not surviving players used to D&D on the first night, it is shocking to see your "average Joe" go down in one hit. It is also very satisfying to dispatch an goblin with a bonk to the head with a club, knocking the monster out. It is a system that takes time to learn and get good at, and there is a point where you know how it works but not how to be great in it that could lead you down the path of frustration.

As a simulation-ist combat system, it is a blast and incredibly fun to play and learn. It also is an eye-opener for players used to the "hit it and forget it" style of D&D, where atomic rolls happen and have little lasting impact other than taking the enemy's hit points down by a couple points.

And then we hit a small snag.

We had an issue where a player reported he felt he needed armor to survive, and felt the game forced him down that path. This was a tough one to deal with, because of the simulation-ist nature of the game, of course you need armor. It was true then in combat, and it is true today. But it didn't fit his character concept of an Assassin's Creed style character to start dolling up in plate armor. But this character got taken down in a single blow because he wasn't wearing armor. But isn't that realistic? But is that fun? But that's how this game works, and to be honest, D&D forces you to wear the best armor as well. But I don't like feeling forced to wear plate armor for a game benefit. But soldiers need armor and helmets! But I feel something is wrong, and I am being forced into this. But your character is an average low-level guy. But it still feels wrong.

You can see where this went.

Stealthy lightly-armored assassins are possible in this game, but I got the feeling this type of character only opens up at higher levels of play. You are not going to start out a ninja in this game, and you will be lucky to survive your first encounter with rats. If you are fighting anything intelligent with weapons and smarts, be prepared for a 50-50 fight if you are matched in numbers. This is very much a "medieval weapon simulator" at low levels, and you need to don the ye olde armored vest and helm in order to survive. It feels a lot like Warhammer Fantasy in that regards.

Part of it feels like a collision between not knowing the combat options well enough to be able to survive, and having a lower-level character in play who frankly can't survive being hit with a wet rat on a stick. This is one of those common points when learning a roleplaying game where you understand the dicing and game systems, but not much about how the rules can help you survive. It is that 'deadly phase' where you do all sorts of stupid stuff later on you would laugh at (if you are still playing the game and didn't get discouraged), and this takes real effort to get over and achieve that golden chalice of 'system mastery'.

This is also the time where players flee back to other games and go with what they know and feels right. It is the danger of unfamiliarity, and wanting to play a game that gives that immediate gratification and supports notions of character concepts as seen in video games, TV, and movies. If a game supports the notion of the Assassin's Creed character better and easier (at low level) than this game does, then that game is a better game. Right?

There's a danger in fantasy that caters to fantasy, where the fantasy is so divorced from reality that some player's notion of what's real becomes the fantasy.

For a game that is more focused on delivering a semi-realistic experience such as Legend, it is a problem. Expectations are all out of whack, and players come into the game expecting what they see in video games and in the movies to be the 'game reality'. This applies to in-game choices, such as an expectation of all armor choices to be of equal value, even 'no armor' versus plate. Video games give us this option and put clear benefits behind wearing no armor, such as increased movement, dodge rates, and a package of other benefits making the 'no armor' choice equally attractive when compared to 'full armor'. If it is this way in Call of Duty then it should work the same way in tabletop games, right?

But you get on a real-life IRL battlefield a thousand years ago or today, and the notion of 'no armor' being a equal and valid choice to adequate protection starts to seem pretty silly. Yes, some soldiers are lighter armored than others on every battlefield, but the ones up on the front lines (in every age) typically wore good stuff. To be fair, Legend has some benefits for the 'no armor' choice, but still, armor is generally a good thing to have, and this comes from real life medieval warfare simulation and history.

But it is a fantasy game!

But this game is supposed to be realistic.

But games are supposed to be fun! Realism does not equal fun.

I like realistic combat simulators, in both RPGs and computer games. There is a tactical challenge you are trying to overcome, an impossible world you are trying to survive in, and a set of behaviors you are bleeding through in order to beat the system and come out on top. I am reminded of classic games like X-Com, Jagged Alliance, and others that gave you those tough and deadly choices to make, and many hard lessons to learn. Easier games may give you that 'feels good' easy-mode story and action focused experience with the same weapons and scenarios, but this doesn't 'feel right' to me.

I like story-based and action-based games for lighthearted fun and movie-like entertainment as well. But I like hard-core tactical realism also.

It is a problem I don't feel we are going to get past with this game. I hope we do, because I like the system a lot. I just see other games being easier for players to get their 'expected fantasy experience' from, and Legend becoming an interesting experiment.

Maybe it's me as a referee, maybe I am playing this too hard-core. Maybe I should be fudging dice rolls, or handing out tons of hero points to spend for cinematic action. A hero point can take the place of a helmet in this game, so maybe players should have that many to throw around.

And so it goes. I think the real issue here is my expectations as a referee versus my player's expectations as fantasy gamers.

Where Are Our Immersive Experiences?

George was playing Call of Duty 2 on the big screen TV, and I watched him climb up sheer walls of ice (often falling off), race snowmobiles, hang from cliffs, and do all sorts of other cool stuff that just blew my mind. In reality, a lot of the Battlefield and Call of Duty games go like this, they break up the monotonous shooting levels with in-your-face action, car chases, hang-on-for-your-life moments, and plenty of cinematic spills and chills.

Contrast this with tabletop games such as Descent and roleplaying games like D&D4 and Pathfinder. In tabletop strategy games such as Descent, they place varied sub-goals on the map to break things up, but often the same turn-denial tactics win the day, and you are left with just the math and random chance to provide the excitement. My four figures against your ten, with infinite monster replenishments providing the impetus to end the scenario quickly. You can't run across a flaming log bridge only moments from collapse, dodge falling pillars as the temple crumbles around you, or leap aross an ever widening crevasse to safety. Scenario design could alleviate some of these problems, but too often tabletop games seem mired in the thought of 'math is fun' and expect that combat alone will solve all problems.

Roleplaying games fare a bit better - but you need a spectacular referee and players willing to throw caution to the wind to have a great time. A party that turtles up and avoids running through the collapsing temple, looking for another way around is going to kill your seat-of-your-pants fun; and similarly an unimaginative referee who presents a dull and structurally sound temple full of the same old goblins will get you back to that same old boring experience.

Players could revolt at the entire idea, and shout 'railroading' at the collapsing temple scene and they would be partially right. You need to give and take though, and the cry of railroading can be a method of refusing to participate; you have total freedom in there to escape, and you need to give a little to see how the story comes out. You could call everything in roleplaying games beyond a generic sandbox as railroading, but where is the fun in that? The referee needs the freedom to setup cinematic deathtraps for the players to escape and beat, and these are the challenges in which heroes are made. If I am a player, I accept your railroad, and I shall beat this train in my own way - with style.

So back to the question, where are our cinematic and immersing experiences? The old game Paranoia had it right: if you are boring, you are dead. Take chances, and you shall be rewarded. Your character's survival, however, is not guaranteed. Smart play, daring risks, and decisive action are the path to victory - but even then, a bad dice roll could turn your brave plan into a fool's folly. The only certainty is failure through inaction or cautious play. This is the unwritten contract between players and referees that made that game work so well, and the groups that understood it had a blast. The groups that played the game like some 1984 psychological drama or post-apocalyptic game had less fun.

In itself, math is not fun. A new way of rolling dice does not make a game fun. Having plenty of character design options does not make a game fun. Putting twenty figures on the map for your team of heroes to fight does not make the game any more fun than placing ten. In fact, more figures and more stats means less fun and more work. Combat is dull if it is just a dry calculation of AC versus combat modifiers. We need those moments of excitement. We need for characters to fail and fall. Without failure, there is no risk, and thus, no fun. The definition of a game is an activity in which you can fail.

Where do we go from here? You need to look inside yourself, as a referee, and make that choice to take the game into your own hands - and provide those cinematic experiences to your players despite what the rules say. As a player, you need to rise to the challenge, and accept fate. If the bridge ahead of you is burning and falling to pieces, you should go for it. As a referee, they should have a chance to cross that bridge based on skill, luck, or ingenuity - it is not a 100% certain deathtrap. This is more changing ourselves than the rules or the game, to accept action-oriented cinematic experiences as our personal playstyle - no matter what the game.

Players: Take chances and accept fate. Inaction is failure.

Referees: Present cinematic experiences, and to hell what the rules say.

Player's Pit: Star Wars: Edge of the Empire Beginners Box, part 2

Part II: Playing the First Session

 

Dicey Dice

I hope the extra dice sets go in sale soon, you need at least two sets per player. As expected, I'm getting used to the set theory needed to compile dice rolls, actually it works pretty nice. I for one, can't wait for the full game and dice sets to hit the stores, we plan on ordering two more full sets of dice.

We got the Dice App on iTunes, but I like to roll the physical dice better, since setting up a pool isn't as fun or quick in the app. The app is cool for the sound effects, and the ability to setup any dice pool you want, but grabbing dice and making the rolls is a lot more fun to me.

Initiative Issues 

Initiative though is clunky because you have to roll a bunch of dice and count up you successes, unless the initiative dice get a benefit from rolling the star symbol it would be easier just to roll a d10 and add an appropriate ability score.

Combat "Pew Pew Pew" vs "PEW"

The game likes to group up bad guys for simplicity, they call it Minion Groups. A Minion Group shares a bulk amount of hits and attacks as one unit. This I like as it allows the game to move quickly instead of micro moving and handling each monster one at a time. Lets say you had six troopers with 5 hits each, you could cut them up into two sets of three troopers each with 15 hits per group. They move, roll initiative, and attack as one unit. So you would make one combined combat die roll for the group of three.

Something thing odd that happened is that our Twi'lek girl shot her bast carbine so well she cleared out a group of Stormtroopers in one shot. Now I have a question, is an attack in this game considered a flurry of attacks over the turn or just one shot?

This attack she did would make sense if one attack roll represented your random baster firings over the turn so a good roll mean you suppressed the whole group. Otherwise one bad guy stepping on a land mine taking 100 hits damage takes out his whole platoon of ten guys which is odd.

One other thing they do is have range bands for determining attack range. its a generalization of range instead of a different operating range for each weapon. They use point blank, short, medium, and long range bands. My pistol had a medium range and a group of troopers at long range was too far away to shoot. This wasn't too bad as it led to faster play, I dislike have to having to tape measure my shots so this is good.

Hak got miffed at me when I started to interpret the dice on him (*evil grin*), and decided when I received a boost dice to enhance my attacks. But it is fun to do as a player if you get into things, but I do see when the 'Ref' has to make the call.

Those Adorable Minions

One bad side about minion-izing groups of monsters is they tended to go down quick and their attacks were weaker. So a bunch of Storm Troopers billed as fearsome elites in the book went down faster than a group of single Gramorean Guards with clubs who got a bunch of nasty hits in on my party in the first encounter.

I think if the referee wants to keep challenge high he needs to split things up into smaller groups or singles, or use the minions for background combatants only. They do not work as well as the only opponent in the encounter, so I expect Hak to mix them up with strong singles and use them as the bulk troops in future sessions.

The Ruthless Smuggler and The Bounty Hunter

I stumbled through the beginner adventure, more because of my interrupting the referee text speeches when he was reading the intros to the section of the adventure. I dislike when those pre-canned sections advance the situation beyond the point of getting a chance to role play the situation differently. It's like when the referee reads:

"You enter the room and flip the switch the doors slam shut and the room fills with gas. The bad guy is on a video monitor telling you 'goodbye sucker see you in landing bay 12'. ...What do you do!"

ME(player): "Hold on cowpoke, how about I get a look around the room before I enter?"

Referee: "...but if you don't let me read this, how would you learn about landing bay 12?"

ME(player): "Umm..ya. Don't worry about it. I'll probably trip the trap out of curiosity."

So players like me have a tendency to have a low tolerance for being railroaded into making a decision. This lead to me missing a couple things. One was brow beating the bartender in the Catina, who I thought, justifiably so after the Gramoreans attacked us, was a Hutt allied baddie. I ended up missing the info where the ship he was talking about was located. So we had to guess between the two star ports in town. Hak the Ref thought it was an issue because I interrupted his spiel, but to me this was fine since we got involved with the Imperials because of the oversight.

This led to some referee migraine inducing activities. We could have split into two groups, we could have farmed guards for clubs, we could have bee-lined it to the correct star port and blew off the town altogether, missing out on the content in the beginner set.

What I would have done in the starter module is to get some simple fetch quests and mini adventures before advancing the bigger plot. Several smaller plot-safe mini missions, such as killing womp rats to rescue a robot, repairing stuff under the town, or taking a posted bounty on a group of bad guys would have been a good appetizer before ending my stay on Tatooine. even making us escape the slave pens and fighting to get to the starter town would be better; give us chance to play around a bit.

So far so good though, I managed to have a combat with a bunch of guards, got better guns, run off and heal in the slums, and then tackle the star port control and take a prisoner (the starport tech). Then I proceeded to do some cloak and dagger spying on the visiting imperials and get my ship destroyed on a revenge kick.

Plus side, we stole a bunch of trooper comlinks, scavenged some guns, and avoided patrols in the town. The games more RP-style dice rolling makes this fun. We would move around the city and avoid trooper groups searching for us, we make one skill roll and we can avoid them finding us and calling in the Calvary.

Mayhem? You got it.

Now my group is trapped on Tatooine and plotting some mayhem. Besides...I'd much rather get me a nice new Imperial ship than a Copper Falcon.

Revenge? Yup, just like the TV show, I plan on getting a little on the Hut before I leave the planet. Funny thing is I have been playing Dash like a ruthless smuggler, less a budding goodie-guy so its been fun. If the main game supports a journey to the dark side this guy would be an awesome candidate. Amanda Clark eat your heart out...

SPOILER ALERT: I let the Trandoshan take off with the ship and made a quick exit of the landing bay through the tunnel. So as the two Tie-Fighters made mince meat of his ship, thanks to my ruthless buffing of the Tie die rolls with my fate token-thingys, the pursuing Imperials now think I am dead.

*twirls evil mustache whilst plotting next evil deed*

Things I would have liked to see.

• In-box Twinkies! Us gamers need gamer fuel as this is at least 6 Twinkies worth of game (2 per session per player)...no...lol kidding.
• More enemy counters, at least double the amount, even as an add-on product.
• A add-on map set containing: a shop building map, a plot of desert map, a desert camp map, a desert cave map. A generic desert street map section for city encounters and a generic edge of city map with one of those rope bridges that connect the bluffs.
• A character plus counters add-on product.
• A dice pack add-on product!

Grand Theft Star Wars

This game is fun and light compared to the multi-class-heavy d20 version by a wide margin. The rules are fresh feeling and provide a clean, focused, and unique experience. I like the less Jedi-centricness and enjoy the open feeling of carving my own way through the universe. So I'll probably have Tatooine in ruin before I roll a new set of adventurers. Heck, I might even continue my smuggler and his band of not-so-merry men across the galaxy. So props to Fantasy Flight Games for hitting a home run on this one.

Bright Future

The hardest part is the waiting for the release, and I am very very interested in the expansions they will do. We will most likely do more reports on this game as we game on with it as well!

Players Pit: Star Wars Edge of the Empire Beginner Game

Part I: Un-Boxing and First Impressions

Who Am I?

This is my first official post here for the SBRPG blog! I am a dedicated player and have been for over 25 years, also I am a co-designer of our current project and also SBRPG. I decided to call this series the Players Pit, because I want to give a review of this neat new game from my perspective as a player of the game. This is a bit different from a more referee-centric point of view because what interests me more as a player is different from Hak's (the referee's) point of view. I tend to care more about simplicity/cleanliness of the core rules, support for creating and developing interesting characters, and the playing smoothness.

Star War's Golden Era!

Star Wars: Edge of the Empire Beginner Game is very intriguing to me because this is one of the few that has custom dice that incorporate the storytelling interpretations right in the die roll. Plus I am a fan of the Star Wars era the game takes place, about six weeks after the destruction of the first Death Star. I feel this period of the Star Wars universe is greatest time to be a player. It was pre-Jedi-centric time where playing a normal "Uncle Owen" or "Han Solo" character was a viable choice and the Rebellion provided clear good guys and bad guys.

I think this is pre/non-expanded universe as well so you can start playing with a fresh storyline leading into the greater war. The plus of this era is if you like military, mission-based gameplay you could have that or if you prefer more role-playing style spy missions, you could do that too all against the backdrop of a galaxy-wide political power play. Add to this Fantasy Flight Games has been putting out some very well-polished games recently, so in short, this game has me hooked.

I eventually plan, when we graduate onto the full game, to play a bad guy (I have an idea of a Sith or imperial officer type character) and a good guy (I am going to run with Pash and company for this one) campaign. I am hoping the game meshes with the X-Wing Miniatures game as well, but we'll see.

Baby Steps...

Our first gaming session was just an un-boxing of the game and reading through the rules. I managed to absorb the sample characters and read their intro stories. the dice were confusing at first but one you reread the dicing help section you could pick it up in short time. I found it interesting that characters gad "talent tree" style progression as well, which reminded me of the the last Star Wars games d20 based feat stacking. This one however sees much more organized and simpler.

The artwork and presentation is outstanding and the character samples are very nicely organized and pretty. Much in the way the Pazio Pathfinder Beginner Set. The sheets have the sample sheet down the middle with side bar descriptions for everything on them. This I liked immensely and I hope they publish more preset iconic characters and game maps of ships, terrain and such in the future.

Overall the game gets me excited to play. I like the more RP-centric storytelling approach, and simple game play so I cant wait to dive into the included starter adventure. I am playing two characters, the smuggler Pash and the Twi'lek bounty hunter.

Overall Grade So Far: A+ (Great first impressions and exciting universe!)

The game rules are the way I like it, very rules light and fast playing. The basic mechanic is roll a base set of dice plus some difficulty dice added in and interpret the results. They have some symbols on the dice to shift the outcome slightly good or bad depending on the roll.This allows the referee to interpret the results in a more soft-RP way and adds to the fun of the play.

When were were done we were set up to dive into the included sample adventure for next time.

Stay tuned!
~G