Star Wars Saga

[ZER0]

Has anyone here played Star Wars Saga? I've given it a brief look-over at the behest of a friend, and it appears to be the bastard child of d20 Modern/Future, D&D 4E, and George Lucas.

[CatharzGodfoot]

Pretty much. It's got a lot of good points, but needs some tweaking to be truly great.

[ckafrica]

There were several threads about it when it came out. You can google them

[virgil]

The gist is that some feel that it's got 4e's problem of lots of tiny numbers that don't mean anything (especially talents) and that Jedi still rock everyone's socks off.

Personally, users of the Force are at their weakest ever, which is good (even if they're on the high end). Their Save-or-Die equivalents, while greater in number than others, are still available to other classes in various forms.

I do say that system mastery is still expected, like in 3e, which is disappointing; basically meaning the disparity between fresh faces to gaming, experienced gamers, and system masters are stark and painful if the player group doesn't play nice.

[PhoneLobster]

It's like they took all the bad bits of 4th edition, combined with all the bad bits of d20 modern with a few tastes of the bad bits of 3.x edition star wars to liven it up (and the 4th ed/modern dominance means the bad bits left from 3.x DO spice it up!)

It's irredeemable crap.

[Surgo]

I actually wrote a review of it on the boards somewhere...will edit this post in a minute with the link (Google search isn't indexing it).

Edit: found it. Here.

[virgil]

There's also a lot of discussion between PhoneLobster and I on the nature of Saga, especially HERE. Obviously, we never reached resolution in our opinions since I don't consider the system irredeemable crap.

[ubernoob]

It's got to be better than the edition of star wars d20 that came before it. A friend of mine has the big fat book of star wars d20. The full bab jedi class kicks the shit out of every single other class in combat. Oh, and there's a 'fighter' class which isn't even as good at using non-lightsaber weapons than the jedi class.

Other than that, it uses level based AC which is good. Dex is still way too fucking good in that game though (attack, AC, the only save that matters, init, damage if you've got too much to hit with power attack).

Seriously, we wanted a break from 3.5's complexity. I glanced at the book for ten minutes. I told my friend, "If you want this to be remotely fun and not killing off PCs I suggest you make everyone play the exact same class because the power levels are so widely divergent. The full bab Jedi is the top end, so everybody's probably gunna want that. Lightsabers are fun."

Edit: Either it's star wars d20 (2000) or star wars d6 (1992). Age of the book says it was probably in fact star wars d20 (and the fact that it used the d20 system).

[Psychic Robot]

It's the foundations of a great system. They went with too many 3e aspects for it to work really well, but the system is, overall, better. Ironically enough, that system is the chassis for 4e. And they managed to fuck up 4e much, much worse.

[PhoneLobster]

It is the foundations for nothing. What would you keep? The broken inconsistent bonuses/chances of success? The broken annoying force system? The Broken boring classes? The mind numbingly d20Modern style useless talent trees? The bjorked feats? The poorly implemented skills house rule?

There are a lot of ideas in Saga that MEANT well and lead some gamers to think there is something salvageable. But the reality is they are SO poorly implemented that even if you went with some sort of similar Skill system implementation you would be throwing out virtually all the numbers, rules and skills as they are currently written.

Indeed though some things like selectable talents as class abilities are quite cool Saga edition implements them SO poorly as to give them a bad name and forever make it less likely anyone will ever do anything good with such a thing again, and if they do they probably won't be calling them by the same name.

Now it's not to say the 3.x edition was better. It was horribly screwed up to. They took the not to balanced off the RNG issues of d20 core and just took out whole swathes of bonuses and threw in other not entirely the same bonuses pretty much at random like that wouldn't be a problem. They added droid and vehicle systems which weren't great. Dodgy equipment. And then ultimately the worst bit, some incredibly stupidly badly balance classes.

So they have a class which is basically the fighter. A Jedi fighter class that is basically a less interesting Cleric and a class that is basically the Smart hero from d20 modern.

Somewhere in the deepest bowels of this place I once or twice tear the crap out of the 3.x edition star wars, especially the techy class much like in that d20modern thread.

But I hate Saga edition more because it still has RNG and other brokenness issues while eliminating anything with any redeeming fun qualities.

I mean it has a prestige class that grants one of the most powerful abilities in the game, cutting peoples freaking limbs off. Only as I recall (because I'm not dumb enough to OWN these rules) the ability only works basically in circumstances where the target is removed from combat (KO, killed, etc) anyway. Yes. One of the coolest abilities in the game is to mutilate characters that are otherwise unconscious, dead and at your mercy.

[Psychic Robot]

Things I think that make Saga a foundations thing:

1. Skills. I like them. Too few of them, like in 4e, but the system is what I like.
2. Saves --> Defenses. My number one favorite change.
3. AC = Reflex Defense. Yay.
4. Encounter abilities.
5. Talents vs. feats. (The idea is good.)
6. Smaller bonuses that scale at the same rate.

I don't have the book, but I'm sure that there are a few more things that I would like.

[virgil]

Don't let PL's rant fool you. It's a salvageable system, and the review is pretty close in terms of effects. I'd disagree with him more, but it would all be a retread of the same damn stuff we blathered at each other before (link already given above).

[PhoneLobster]

Things I think that make Saga a foundations thing:

Like I said though you wouldn't actually want to use any of those as written. Because however much you might empathise with some aspect of the design motivation the fact is the actual implementation is massively flawed.

1. Skills. I like them. Too few of them, like in 4e, but the system is what I like.

The skill system sucks. The good bit is the whole thing where you no longer do complex skill ranks accounting.

However the skills themselves are wildly divergent in power, I mean one is potentially a god damn attack (possibly attack/defence) bonus.

The numbers involved in being non proficient, proficient and expert etc... are pretty badly arranged.

The whole thing with +1/2 level or whatever it was is STILL pointless annoying book keeping.

And the system really potentially gimps you on available skill slots with wild divergence between available skill lists and slots and still pretends "Skill monkey" is a viable role to exchange real power for.

So what do we "keep" from this good foundation? "Ranks accounting sucks!" and that is basically ALL you keep.

2. Saves --> Defenses. My number one favorite change.
3. AC = Reflex Defense. Yay.

And the defence system is screwed up. Some defences are just plain worse than others. Targeting will or fort is like the win, especially if you do it with force powers and get a whopping +5 or +10 or whatever it was extra to your attack bonuses vs defences typically weaker than the Reflex def.

Worse still if I recall some classes can run around using force skill checks against the most common attacks to target reflex to further make Reflex a bad defence to target.

4. Encounter abilities.

I'm not going to fall either side of the fence as to whether encounter abilities as an abstract concept is a good thing or not in its own right.

But the Saga edition implementation totally fucking sucked.

What sort of and how many encounter abilities you had was ENTIRELY UNPREDICTABLE. You might have one very sucky one (I think one or two talents gave out something along those lines) or you might have spent three feats and a high wisdom and gotten about A JILLION "Force fucks you up!" power uses.

Then you could recharge them in a variety of weird and random manners in combat based on lucky rolls and fucking yourself over in the long run with the darkside and junk.

5. Talents vs. feats. (The idea is good.)

There isn't a damn talent in the game which is hands down an example of well written well functioning gleaming golden redeeming goodness.

There ARE large piles of negligible often non stacking +1 bonus bullshit talents and a bunch of horrifically written utterly stupid talents like the "permission to hack up the dead" talent.

Feats which sucked too much in 3.x are also made to suck slightly more in order to fall closer into line with talents or some shit. Sure some feats were all like "Fuck this is like weapon focus only worse" but others were all like "and now my force check goes off the RNG/I get four more killer force powers per encounter or whatever period that was again"

If I wanted a big pile of cool selectable talents for star wars d20 classes I would START by not using even one single fucking talent as written from Saga, I'd probably also chuck or rewrite the majority of feats and rebuild from scratch the entire Force use system. That is not exactly what you call salvageable material.

6. Smaller bonuses that scale at the same rate.

They are smaller but they DON'T scale at the same rate and they are still big enough for major RNG issues to occur between attacks and defences in actual "you can die bitch!" combat.

Even if they were smaller and did scale the same that just puts you into "Why is it a level system" and "this piss weak accounting annoys me" territories that everyone hates about 4th edition.

I don't have the book, but I'm sure that there are a few more things that I would like.

I don't have one either. But someone once promised me the chance to play in a Saga game so I scoured the damn book trying to find something cool to do. I wanted some zany cool ice cold moves without being a bullshit RNG abusing stunner Jedi, and there just wasn't anything worth half an ass to be, certainly nothing remotely more creative than sitting on as many jedi-stabs-you levels and tiny cumulative light sabre bonuses I could catch. In the end the very most exciting thing I could manage to envisage was to play a droid character who abused the droid purchasing rules and some otherwise entirely fucking useless classes that gave out cash in hand money back guarantees as class talents to buy my own droid mafia.

Because an off the shelf cheap ass combat droid was basically as exciting as being a light sabre jedi. And having two of them would have been TWICE as exciting. Having about 10-20 would have been hilarious.

Sadly (or perhaps fortunately) that game never got off the ground.

[JonSetanta]

It looks decent.
Better than the original Star Wars RPG about a decade ago (anyone remember that?)

Don't have a chance or the time to play but I would. I enjoy Star Wars to a moderate degree and the mechanics fit the setting.

However, it does fall in to the same pattern that pushed d20 Modern to fail; speedy/init-gimped characters win combat.
You might be able to correct that with counter-attacks or better defenses, I don't know.

[Surgo]

Star Wars d6, second edition at least, works fine as long as you accept that jedi are strictly better than anyone else. Which is a lot like Saga if you think about it, but at least in Saga you can have droid characters being okay too.

[Psychic Robot]

PL: I said "foundation." As in, you take the underlying principles and make them work better.

[PhoneLobster]

You have an interesting definition of foundation.

As in a completely different to normal one that also happens to be basically the same as saying "That would be a great RPG to write another RPG that doesn't actually share any of the rules as written from!"

So just maybe you should stop using the word foundation, or indeed claiming you are going to find any use for anything actually in the Saga rules at all.

I mean unless you feel like its a good thing to keep declaring Saga a foundation for further development when the only thing you want to keep is good intentions.

Pretty much everything else shares those good intentions, including the "Path To Hell".

[Psychic Robot]

Your blind hatred of Saga amuses.

[Cynic]

Your blind hatred of Saga amuses.

Is he suffering yet?

[Draco_Argentum]

Your blind hatred of Saga amuses.

He is right though, you don't seem to be able to point to any of the saga rules as being any good, only basic concepts that you could find on a gaming message board.