Star Wars: Insurgency

ixokai

If FCs are no different, even stats-wise from OCs, then why differentiate between the two? Why apply for FCs? Why do FCs typically get handed off to friends of staff and favored players?

I don't know what is 'typical', I only know what we're doing. If people want to get into a general discussion of FCs in theory, then I'd happily ignore the thread, but if people keep posting in this thread with comments that are not about us, its awfully confusing.

On SW:I, the only difference between FCs and OCs is (once I have the system in play), FCs have a certain minimal activity requirement, and that there's some people who really want to play their favorite people. That's all.

If there is no difference, stats-wise, between FCs and OCs, then what is the point?

The answer:
FCs come prepackaged with guaranteed roleplay opportunities and "main character" time in plots. FCs are automatically roped into game metaplot, whereas OCs need to find their own roleplay and means to being roped into (and more importantly, relevance in) metaplot

This is not correct. FC's are not given special access to plot: no one is going to start an event and reserve a slot for Luke. They are not positioned as 'main characters' in plots.

That said, our hooks system is specifically designed as a conduit of communication between players and Plot Staff for the express purpose of getting characters involved with plot and finding ways to connect people, so its incorrect to say that FCs are "automatically roped into game metaplot" and OCs "need to find their own roleplay and means".

Some FC's have positions of authority, but this is bought and is no different then OC's with positions of authority. We already have a few OC's with authority

In the canon SW Universe, Luke is a special snowflake who solves the metaplot. In SW:I universe, he does not have this destiny. He might play a significent role, but it is not written to be so: it will be on Luke's player to make it happen.

Ganymede

@ixokai said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

He might play a significent role, but it is not written to be so: it will be on Luke's player to make it happen.

Maybe he'll finally pick up those power converters at Tosche Station.

ixokai

@Faceless said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

@Akurel pretty much.

Do I think the game can work? Sure. In fact, my biggest issue is with the one planet aspect. The FC presence is a thing, one which I've saw fail time and time again in the past. In nearly two decades of various Star Wars games, I can say I've not saw it work out with 100% success. Moderate? Sure. Full? No. In fact, a recent conversation about another Star Wars game had mention of how some staffer's special snowflake character got hitched to Jabba the Hutt(the FC) so she could become "Empress" of a terraformed Tatooine. So, yeah.

Hey, stupid people can want to do stupid things if someone is an OC or a FC. I see that as Staff is there to try to minimize the stupidity. I don't see FCs as being inherantly more prone to stupidity.

No, my biggest qualm is with the whole rebel cell on Corellia thing. There's a reason that the Rebel Alliance kept largely on the backwater planets; safety. Yavin, Hoth, Dantooine(in mention), Sullust(used as a rally point), and all the EU mentions. The Rebellion runs, that's what they do. On a planet like Corellia, I imagine they'd be discovered within a few days. Star Wars Rebels provides evidence that a planet-based insurgency on a world with a moderate to heavy Imperial presence would quickly be put on it's heels and would have to flee; and that's on a relatively minor planet, by all appearances. The Rebellion runs, it's their thing. That too, of course, can be overcome. It only requires a level of disbelief suspension that I can't thoroughly wrap my head around. So that means the game is not for me, which does not mean it's not for others, and that's okay.

There is some validity to this point, but this is exactly why we chose Corellia over, say, Coruscant. In the EU, Corellia does have some rebel activity, and despite being a Core World, it is not the average Core World. Corellians are rebellious and independent and not wholly under the Empire's thumb. We're nudging things a little bit farther so out beyond Coronet City there is a rebel installation. The rebels will still hit and run: they'll just retreat to safe houses instead of across the galaxy.

Does it stretch the imagination some? I'll admit it does, a bit, but I only think a little bit.

But plots will take people throughout the Corellian Sector and beyond, so its not like the Rebels are going to be bringing heat home all the time and the Imperials come off as incompetent bumpkins for not finding them.

That's the intent, at least. We'll see how it works out.

Ghost

One thing I think this game has going for it is the FATE system. You're right, @ixokai , in FATE these things need to be BOUGHT, which presents an interesting concept that doesn't exist in some other systems. To have that kind of authority, or riches, or benefit, it needs to be bought, which balances out the character sheets in a way most systems aren't used to.

The major question, though, is are the character sheets of FCs such as Darth Vader going to have additional purchases so that the character FITS the FC version?

During FATE character creation, there's a # of skills that can be selected via character generation. There's also alternate ways to make veteran characters, etc.

So using Darth Vader in mind:

Sith Lord
Former Jedi
Master Force User
Commands the Super Star Destroyer
Pilot
Parent to 2 major FCs. Ahsoka?
Has his own legion of Stormtroopers
Fought in the Clone Wars (Skills, Aspects)
Fame. Rank. Infamy. Fear?
Throneworld: Vjun. He has his own throneworld.

I think the challenge that your game may face is in asking themselves "How do we make this FC what the FC really is without writing prepackaged player benefits into the character sheet? Do these FCs get extra benefits that OCs don't in an effort to make them truly the FCs they are?"

EDIT: There's plenty of skills and aspects that would be needed to make Vader. So as a constructive suggestion, this will be where your decision to use FCs may break, and where your players will be watching.

ixokai

@Ghost said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

One thing I think this game has going for it is the FATE system. You're right, @ixokai , in FATE these things need to be BOUGHT, which presents an interesting concept that doesn't exist in some other systems. To have that kind of authority, or riches, or benefit, it needs to be bought, which balances out the character sheets in a way most systems aren't used to.

The major question, though, is are the character sheets of FCs such as Darth Vader going to have additional purchases so that the character FITS the FC version?

In short, no.

In long, we've chosen to put everyone on an "even" playing field in Fate point terms, even if that means that certain characters (like, Darth Vader) are, if they are PCs, are not able to quite live up to what they were in canon. This is a purposeful decision that was thought about.

Our tier system is how we address stronger-then-average, but even then 'FC' does not mean 'Tier 1' -- FC's can be apped at any tier and Staff explicitly does not judge a character to see if its 'worthy' of the Tier choice of the player. We do look at how much refresh is left over and try to get it into a number we're more comfortable with, but we do so by encouraging the player to either lower the Tier (and since players can have only one Tier 1, and only one Tier 2 character, saving the higher tier for a concept that needs it to make sense), or by buying additional stunts or extras to have more abilities.

We have only two characters on our banned list right not: the Emperor and Yoda. For different reasons we don't think either should be in play or fit into the system except as quest givers. Maybe Vader should be on the list too, but I don't know for sure. Alpha.

During FATE character creation, there's a # of skills that can be selected via character generation. There's also alternate ways to make veteran characters, etc.

So using Darth Vader in mind:

Sith Lord

Former Jedi

Master Force User

Commands the Super Star Destroyer

Pilot

Parent to 2 major FCs. Ahsoka?

Has his own legion of Stormtroopers

Fought in the Clone Wars (Skills, Aspects)

Fame. Rank. Infamy. Fear?

Throneworld: Vjun. He has his own throneworld.

Do note that although we are based on Fate Core, our power level is significantly bumped up from the baseline. Our skill pyramid tops out at +5, we allow five free stunts and seven aspects (we don't require them all to be set at chargen. Fate takes some getting used to and aspects sometimes take time).

I think Vader actually fits into our power level quite well. What he doesn't do is fit into the game as better then every other person of the same tier. But that's intentional.

I think the challenge that your game may face is in asking themselves "How do we make this FC what the FC really is without writing prepackaged player benefits into the character sheet? Do these FCs get extra benefits that OCs don't in an effort to make them truly the FCs they are?"

Our answer to that last question is a resounding no. If someone wants to play a FC they have to accept that. Does this potentially make FC's less attractive? Perhaps. It might disappoint a Vader player that he is not the best lightsaber combatant to be found: but he can still have Superb Fight and get Legendary hits from time to time. Of course, my OC Tier 1 guy can too so he might be a match to Vader.

Given the possible outcomes of A) Be True to the FC and B) The OC's must have an equal footing, we choose B. This may diminish some FC's and we're aware. Perhaps those that can not fit onto this scale shouldn't be PC's (Maybe Vader), but I don't see any problem with the likes of Dash Rendar and Leia -- they fit just fine.

Seraphim73

@ixokai said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

FCs come prepackaged with guaranteed roleplay opportunities and "main character" time in plots. FCs are automatically roped into game metaplot, whereas OCs need to find their own roleplay and means to being roped into (and more importantly, relevance in) metaplot

This is not correct. FC's are not given special access to plot: no one is going to start an event and reserve a slot for Luke. They are not positioned as 'main characters' in plots.
...
In the canon SW Universe, Luke is a special snowflake who solves the metaplot. In SW:I universe, he does not have this destiny. He might play a significent role, but it is not written to be so: it will be on Luke's player to make it happen.

I think that you're ignoring the mentality of players here, and it's something you're very much going to have to look out for. In general, if players check a Where list looking for RP and see that Luke Skywalker is in one room, and Abist Trass is in another, unless they've RPed with Abist before, they're going to be heading for the room Luke is in. I honestly don't know what the solution to this is (besides no FCs except as quest-givers, but I understand why you don't want to go that route), if I did, I would happily suggest it. It's definitely something you're going to have to be aware of, however, as FCs will generally get more RP, more weight behind their RP, and thus more position in the metaplot simply due to the OOC weight behind their names.

Arkandel

@Seraphim73 said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

I think that you're ignoring the mentality of players here, and it's something you're very much going to have to look out for. In general, if players check a Where list looking for RP and see that Luke Skywalker is in one room, and Abist Trass is in another, unless they've RPed with Abist before, they're going to be heading for the room Luke is in.

The trick is for Luke to never be in a room unless there's a damn good reason for him to be there. Unless he's serving the plot, currently pushing the story forward, Luke shouldn't be online.

FCs like that don't belong in bar RP. If they are then it's a problem. l generally get more RP, more weight behind their RP, and thus more position in the metaplot simply due to the OOC weight behind their names.

Misadventure

Set Luke idle 2 hours on +who.

Set Luke Dark.

Steal an idea from one of the Star Trek MU*s, and have scenes of interest with major FCs of interest be broadcast to some sort of special OOC viewing mechanism. I would say an OOC room, so if folks want to watch, they can.

That's if the PCs are doing anything interesting.

Thenomain

@Misadventure said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

Set Luke idle 2 hours on +who.
Set Luke Dark.

Login BB-8.
@tel BB-8=Tatooine.
Login Rey.
[...]

faraday

@Arkandel said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

FCs like that don't belong in bar RP. If they are then it's a problem.

Kind of an ironic thing to say given that some of the most iconic scenes in Star Wars movies take place in cantinas.

But seriously - for those who think it's a bad idea for FCs to be PCs, or to be in everyday scenes, or to be less awesome than their movie counterparts, maybe just... don't play there? Constructive criticism is one thing, but I don't get the need to rain hostile critiques down on a game just because it isn't to your tastes. Especially on their own advertisement thread.

Constructive: "Looks neat, but I won't be playing here because FCs as PCs is a dealbreaker. I think history has proved that it rarely works out well for (these reasons)."

Not so constructive: "Having FCs as PCs is a horrible idea. They don't belong in everyday scenes. They should only ever be questgivers, period, end of discussion. This game is doooomed. But hey, good luck trying the same thing that 72 other games have tried and failed at. I'll just get the popcorn and wait for the Luke TS logs."

gasket

@faraday said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

But seriously - for those who think it's a bad idea for FCs to be PCs, or to be in everyday scenes, or to be less awesome than their movie counterparts, maybe just... don't play there? Constructive criticism is one thing, but I don't get the need to rain hostile critiques down on a game just because it isn't to your tastes. Especially on their own advertisement thread.

Not so constructive: "Having FCs as PCs is a horrible idea. They don't belong in everyday scenes. They should only ever be questgivers, period, end of discussion. This game is doooomed. But hey, good luck trying the same thing that 72 other games have tried and failed at. I'll just get the popcorn and wait for the Luke TS logs."

'Hostile critiques' and 'this is not constructive' is subjective, unless someone invented a meanness metric while I wasn't looking and gave the Meanness Police the ability to hand out tickets.

Maybe they want a good Star Wars game, have seen this exact same road travelled many, many times before, and are pointing out, "Hey, this has been tried fifty times and never worked," in hopes of avoiding example number fifty-one.

In my opinion, things don't tend to improve unless people speak up when they think they see a problem, and aren't told to pipe down because it might be a little mean. I suppose your mileage varies from mine.

Edit: "A little mean" isn't what I'm trying to get at. "Not perfectly worded" is closer.

faraday

@gasket said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

In my opinion, things don't tend to improve unless people speak up when they think they see a problem, and aren't told to pipe down because it might be a little mean. I suppose your mileage varies from mine.

There's a difference between saying "pipe down" and saying: "hey, how about conveying your points with more empathy and less hostility". But apparently our mileage does vary.

ixokai

@Seraphim73 said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

I think that you're ignoring the mentality of players here, and it's something you're very much going to have to look out for. In general, if players check a Where list looking for RP and see that Luke Skywalker is in one room, and Abist Trass is in another, unless they've RPed with Abist before, they're going to be heading for the room Luke is in. I honestly don't know what the solution to this is (besides no FCs except as quest-givers, but I understand why you don't want to go that route), if I did, I would happily suggest it. It's definitely something you're going to have to be aware of, however, as FCs will generally get more RP, more weight behind their RP, and thus more position in the metaplot simply due to the OOC weight behind their names.

I'm aware that this can happen, but I don't think its at all as prevalent or guaranteed to happen as you suggest it is. But we'll see.

Seraphim73

@ixokai I very much hope that you're right. It would, based on my experience, be a great step forward for players as a whole. Best of luck finding those players and encouraging them.

tangent

@Seraphim73 I think we're pretty confident that this will work, at least according to our own vision of success. Folks were skeptical of Marvel 1963 and we have been able to outdo our wildest expectations. If we fail, we fail, but among our Comic Book Nerd Games there seemed to be a big market (for me, a big market is 30-50 log ins), so it'll be what it'll be. But I guarantee we're all going to have fun while we figure out whatever it becomes.

bored

It wasn't my intent to 'bash' the game, but to offer vigorous and honest criticism. While an open alpha may not be an invitation for a popularity contest on MSB to determine policy, it is a moment in time where the game creators can probably make more use of criticism than at any other time. That they choose not to is fine, but I'm not going to sugar coat how bad an idea I think FCs are (the same way I won't really sit and equivocate on the typical nepotistic tier/feature character stuff in other genres; it's always a shitshow, and you're bad for doing it, and no your explanation as to why you're not bad isn't an exception).

The bukkake thing was just a callback to a prior joke. I thought it was a humorous summary of one (of many) issues with FCs, how they tend to get into very non-canon relationships that are often cringeworthy and theme-damaging.

ixokai

@bored said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

It wasn't my intent to 'bash' the game, but to offer vigorous and honest criticism. While an open alpha may not be an invitation for a popularity contest on MSB to determine policy, it is a moment in time where the game creators can probably make more use of criticism than at any other time. That they choose not to is fine, but I'm not going to sugar coat how bad an idea I think FCs are (the same way I won't really sit and equivocate on the typical nepotistic tier/feature character stuff in other genres; it's always a shitshow, and you're bad for doing it, and no your explanation as to why you're not bad isn't an exception).

The bukkake thing was just a callback to a prior joke. I thought it was a humorous summary of one (of many) issues with FCs, how they tend to get into very non-canon relationships that are often cringeworthy and theme-damaging.

Please note that no one affiliated with this game said you bashed the game nor have any of us taken the criticism as bashing: nor did we turn aside criticism. We welcome it, especially in Alpha -- we're designing core systems still and player input is incredibly valuable. I had an intensely useful conversation on the nature of advancement today and although I'm not yet ready to put a purposal forward, we're moving that way.

That said, I want to note two things: 1) The level of... criticism that is not about US, but about general STUFF, I don't find useful. This conversation has occasionally diverted to a point where they aren't even talking about is. I don't mind that talk, I'd just wish it happened not here.

And thanks to Faraday for defending us though she isn't one of our staff, but is acting as a challenge against the criticism that isn't really based around what we're doing. I don't feel comfortable doing that because I know very well there's this line with defending your game on boards like this and if you get too defensive its not useful. She was more defensive then I was, and I thank her for the effort.

That said, onto topic. We welcome feedback, BUT. Some things simply are.

We are a Fate game.
We are a Star Wars game that is diverging from canon after New Hope.
We allow FCs.

FCs and OCs are by system equal: its a true fact that simply being a FC might mean people want to RP with them more. We know this. It is a true fact that being a FC means you get a level expectation of awesome that is over other people that you simply will not have here. We know this.
On SW:I, we are entirely aware of these facts and we know some people are not into them but this is the game we are doing. This will not change.

We welcome everyone, I go out of my way to help and encourage people, but this is the game we are doing.

Our decisions are not out of ignorance. Its not even unanimous: of our five staff, only two have an interest in playing a FC. But those two are also some of the most amazing and inclusive and interesting plot staffers we've worked with. Without them, the game doesn't exist.

Its not even a question.

Now, all that said. Please try us out. We're in alpha and are open to changing at LOT. Many things are in flux. Our focus is not on stats and details but on story. We love Star Wars and want to play an alternative universe Star Wars universe. Some of us want to interpret FC's, some of us don't. Either way, everyone is on an equal footing.

We are entirely aware that having a certain name, ie, 'Luke Skywalker', might draw people. But we fully believe that embracing the wider potential of people making interesting characters they enjoy will be what drives RP.

I got nothin' else to say.

Arkandel

@faraday said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

@Arkandel said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

FCs like that don't belong in bar RP. If they are then it's a problem.

Kind of an ironic thing to say given that some of the most iconic scenes in Star Wars movies take place in cantinas.

... Okay, you have a point.

WTFE

@bored said in Star Wars: Insurgency:

It wasn't my intent to 'bash' the game, but to offer vigorous and honest criticism.

This is one of those tricky declensions, isn't it?

I merely offered vigorous and honest criticism.
You allowed your emotions to get the better of you.
He is a bashing asshole.

TiredEwok

@bored

I don't have issue with you voicing your opinion. What I take issue with is the fact that you're so willing to write the game off as a failure before it has even had a chance to really get off of the ground. Such levels of cynicism makes me sad and for many reasons, especially considering you're not even willing to give the game a try.

And is it just me or does anyone else want to tag on #AltFacts onto the end of the '72 games have tried and failed' line of logic?