Galaxy Far Away - Ultralite Review + New Tables & Rule Ideas

So I usually don't do this, but today I'd like to take a look at this ruleset made by Jim over at the d66 Classless Kobolds blog. Basically he made a super simple Star Wars roleplaying game that I ended up really liking, but it felt a little bare bones. I want to stress here I'm not taking ownership of this game (obviously), but I made some content for it and wanted to share. Also: this one got a lot longer then intended, so strap in.

But first; let me get a little mini review of the game itself. It's very basic, which I suppose is the point since its an ultralight. Some of the ideas here are fun. I like the 1 in 6 chance to be Force Sensitive for player characters, it's not a perk, just a whim of fate. I guess the other nice thing about an ultralike game for Star Wars is you can depict the force in any way you want.

But first; let's discuss the elephant in the room. Some of the only real meat and potatoes of this game is in your starting equipment, rolled on a random table. One of these is a weapon table; which lists "Frag Grenade" as a possible outcome.

Now I don't really like this because I don't really consider a grenade a "weapon", I mean it is but, it's a one-and-done kind of deal. Obviously you're given some starting credits which specifically says you can buy a cheap blaster, so that isn't a serious problem. But I feel like starting weapons should be a little more lasting then that. If it was a bandolier of grenades that would be fine- but I would rather put this in as a "tool", a more generic explosive that can be used to destroy barricades, damage large vehicles, or kill and damage things out of the character's weight class like a Rancor.

But the real problem with this ruleset? Look at the random equipment tables. Frag Grenade? Really? In Star Wars? Why isn't it a Thermal Detonator? Are you kidding me?

Now jokes aside; I get that it's an ultralight, but without any sort of real mechanics to go on I feel it fails a bit as a game. The idea of realistic damage based on where and how you attack is great fodder for good fight scenes and, in my opinion, works fine for tabletop games, but the way you actually go about making the attacks are 2d6 contested rolls. This means pretty much everything is a 50/50 toss up, with a smaller chance to tie then something like a d6 vs d6 roll since you have more possible outcomes. With this in mind, there's no reason player characters wouldn't be ending every NPC they are fighting in a single roll- and vice versa, if the NPCs are smart. Obviously you could argue that you can just adjudicate the low winning rolls of a 2d6 as being weaker successes, with say a roll of 12 over an enemy roll of 2 being a major success- but frankly at that point you're making things harder for yourself.

Art @ukitakumuki

Now obviously there's not a focus on combat in this game, but I like the idea of variable damage rolls; just a little bit of crunch to bring to the combat system, which tends to be the part of roleplaying games people want and need the most solid rules for. So here are some blaster tables. Whenever you hit an enemy with a blaster, roll a d6.

#	Pistol / Holdout	Blaster Rifle	Heavy Blaster
1	Miss / Ineffective	Environmental	Environmental
2	Environmental	Glance	Scorch
3	Glance	Scorch	Injury
4	Scorch	Injury	Debilitating
5	Injury	Debilitating	Lethal
6	Debilitating	Lethal	Vaporize

Explanations-

Getting an Environmental hit means that the enemy is not damage directly, but something around them is damage; if it be their personal combat droid, target they're trying to protect, destroys part of their cover, or hits a door access panel and forces it shut (or open). Whatever the effect, it should be beneficial to the shooter.

Getting a Glance or Scorch means the target was clipped but not seriously injured or brought out of the fight. Glance may just mean a small scorch mark or minor damage- their helmet could be hit on the visor, thus blackening it and making it useless until they take it off or maybe their weapon is damage somehow. Scorch is a more serious version of a glance, causing a small flesh wound and pain. If you want to get more crunchy, maybe getting scorched causes a -1 to future rolls made until it is healed.

Injuries are more serious. If hit on a limb it may stop use of that limb, or if hit in the body will cause you to fall over. If hit by this you can only barely move away to escape, and are not in fighting shape at all- you'd only be able to do a few missing shots as a fighting retreat. Debilitating is the same, except in this version you can't even move or fight back at all- if the debilitating shot hit a limb, that limb is blasted away or charred beyond repair and will need a cybornetic prosthetic. Unless if you have medical attention; Debilitating means you will die within a few hours. Finally, if the Debilitating hit was aimed from the head, the target will die in a few minutes instead, and be totally unconscious.

Any blast marked Lethal will kill if aimed for the head, neck, or chest. Even if the bolt itself didn't go through or vaporize it, it caused enough concussive force to kill. If you roll a Lethal hit but were aiming to capture or stun (and not using the stun setting?), then that happens instead.

Finally, the Vaporize is unique to the heavy blaster and essentially means the target is not only dead, but either vaporized into a smoking cadaver or turned to dust. You can get the same effect with a Blaster Rifle, but only with many repeating shots to an already defeated opponent- just what happened to Luke's aunt and uncle. Any damage this serious will probably cause other opponents to surrender or at least become fearful.

Once damage is rolled, a player may freely flip over a light-side token to a dark side token to go up one slot on the damage table. They could turn a lethal roll into an injury for an important NPC or themselves, but by doing so shift the destiny of the universe more towards the Dark side (DM).

Art @AraxussYexyr

Armor Rules

Armor is unique in this game (and in Star Wars) because it's not at all explained. So instead, we'll go with some guidelines. Basic and mass produced armor up to the Clone Troopers or Storm Trooper level turns a result of 5 or 6 on a table to a 4 on its corresponding table. This is also the level of armor I'd consider starting Player Characters who rolled the "Modular Armor" result on clothing to have.

Specialist armor like the Mandalorian armor / bounty hunter armor has the ability above but also counts any weapon as the table to its left. So a Heavy Blaster is treated like a Blaster Rifle and a Blaster Rifle as a Holdout Blaster, while also reducing rolls of 5 or 6 to a 4 on that table. Blaster Pistols aren't effective against this armor at all, only dealing Scorch damage on a roll of 5 or 6. If a character aims at a specific target on the armor (like the fuel tank or jetpack controls), then they can still hit it and damage it on a roll of 6.

Armor is also locational; so armor equal to those white helmets the rebels wear might save their life, but only if shot in the head.

Also: If you're playing as a really tough species (Wookie), have a bunch of damage-absorbing Force effects on at once, a bunch of implants, or anything else that would make you tougher then average just reduce whatever result you get by -1.

Also also; I like the idea of a "Glance" actually getting deflected totally and flying off, causing collateral damage, if you're wearing some kind of armor at all. But heavy blaster bolts are too heavy and powerful to be deflectd so easily (at least without a lightsabre) so that's why its just listed as a Scorch instead.

The Force & Destiny Tokens

So in Jim's game rules, he doesn't really give a list of force powers. I really like this, as it frees up the Jedi and the Sith to use the force in ways that are unique, interesting, and once again allows for the referee and players own interpretation of The Force.

So with no other real rules to go by; I kind of like the idea of the force being balanced by the Destiny mechanic; the light side and dark side tokens. Basically as the rules describe them, it's a set of 6 tokens that are either white or black, representing the light or dark side of the force. If the player flips a white token to the dark, then they can get an advantage, but each dark token can be flipped to the light so the referee can give the players a setback. That mechanic I think is interesting, as it basically provides infinite resources to both players and, in the context of the fiction, acts as an interesting idea.

See, with how vague The Force is sometimes, I like to think the tokens represent the balance of the force in the game world. So if all the tokens are on the light side, that means the players have a massive amount of potential in every action- it's like they have the momentum of the plot. In the same way, the referee having all the tokens set to black means the dark side is currently winning, has the most resources to throw at the players- it's like evil has the upper hand.

I like to think this is a literal thing, even a thing players can feel. Whenever the referee flips a token to the light side and gets an advantage, the force-sensitive characters can literally feel it in the world. "I sense a disturbance in the force." That's fun. Of course, this only really works if the players are also good guys for the most part; if the players are aligned with the evil empire or are Sith, then it doesn't really make sense- but you could just flip the tokens colors for players/GM if you're playing an evil campaign.

Now how does this work mechanically? Simple! The power of your force abilities is influenced by the tokens in play. If all the tokens are white, then the light side of the force is more powerful. If all the tokens are black, then dark side powers are more powerful. Perhaps something like a simple d6 roll over the color of the opposing side of the force to defeat an enemy force user in some kind of context- like perhaps only for actual force powers v force powers battles, with lightsabres and stuff having their own rolls. But if ALL force user fights came down to destiny (with the winning side forced to flip a token to the other color afterwards) you can create your own dramatic tension.

I kind of like this because it makes force sensitive characters more hooked into the game rules and, perhaps a bit cheesy, able to peer through the 4th wall a bit the way Jedi seem to do. It also discourages players from actually using their light side tokens for advantages, as they can weaken the dark side by not flipping them. I also think the idea of all the other player and referee actions kind of leading and flowing into this climatic Jedi finale where the outcome is determined by destiny is very Star Warsian. I just think that's mechanically a cool idea, but narratively and in the fiction? Ehh, maybe not. You could obviously see how this takes away any force-sensitive player importance and if anybody does get to be a Jedi they'd have to work for it since you can't start the game as one; so this would kind of squash that accomplishment.

Art @BossLogic

Lightsaber Rules

Now, I can see Lightsabers being a bit of an issue with this ultralite. You see, the idea is to make the rules go with the fiction, and that's easy enough to understand. The problem here is with lightsabers, and since at least one player is almost certainly going to be a Jedi, and you'll probably fight Sith at some point, then Lightsabers upset this balance. The problem here is that according to the fiction, Lightsabers just kill everything. If somebody slashes you with a lightsaber up close, even if they aren't a Jedi, you'd just die. Now that's not necessarily a bad thing, but when it comes to the idea of a game not having rules for things like this and being a conversation between players and a DM, then the issue of why you can or cannot just run down everything and cut them apart with a lightsaber (or how enemies won't just shoot you on the way over) could be a problem in a narrative game like this.

So instead, we use a little mechanic called Momentum. Momentum is a numerical counter of a Jedi or Sith's "battle trance", or otherwise how powerfully they are moving forward, deflecting blaster fire, and pushing towards their enemies as a dervish of flying energy sword swings. Momentum is both a force-users attack and defensive power in combat, though this never overrides the fiction. If a combat roll is called and it is failed, your momentum drops down one step. If a combat roll is called and is successful, then you move up one step. The force user can cut thru a swathe of opponents of their momentum or less, and a force user can deflect any attack made at their deflection level or less.

Everyone who picks up a lightsaber fights at their training level. If two lightsaber users meet at equal levels (the same momentum) they cannot overcome each other, unless one uses the force, a trick, or an ally to help distract their opponent, etc. Also, whatever "tier" of Momentum a character has gives them all defenses on both their tier and everything about it, whatever makes sense.

M	Ranking	Cuts Thru	Deflects
-1	Nonforce User	X	X
0	Force Sensitive	Womp Rats	Training Bolts
1	Padawan	Battle Droids	Blaster Pistol
2	Jedi / Sith	Storm / Clone Troopers	A few pistols / Blaster Rifle
3	Knight / Inquisitor	Droidakas	Many Blaster Rifles
4	Jedi Master / Sith Lord	Monsters / Bounty Hunters	Heavy Blaster
5	Heroic / Starkiller	Regular Jedi / Sith	Repeating Blaster

To stat up different fighting styles; simply change what rank each column has. For example, if you've got Obi Wan using Form III, you could say that whatever momentum level he is fighting on is moved one down on deflection, but moved one up on cut thru, since it's a defensive focused form.

Finally- if all of this game's destiny tokens are flipped to one side; then all force users of that alignment gain a momentum of +1 in combat while using lightsabers. If this is too powerful, just move up down a stage for cut thru for Sith if all dark side tokens are up, and move down a stage for deflect for Jedi if all the light side tokens are up to make the characters more thematically appropriate.

Critique of an Expansion of a Generator (Pantheon Generator Review)

So Dan over at Throne of Salt made an expansion to my Pantheon Generator. Firstly, I'd love to say thank you for your kind words about my generator, it's actually my most popular post on my entire blog. It seemed incredibly popular and I'm glad people are thinking about it. Now let's talk about the expansion that Dan made.

Firstly, I'd like to start by saying that this is not supposed to necessarily be a value judgment of which one of us “did it better”, nor am I trying to claim stole my idea or anything. This is just seem feedback. It seems his post was pretty popular too, so clearly this concept interests people.

The Changes

Let's start with Dan's new “Where did they come from?” table is good. I like the subtle changes to my first table- his table feels more appropriate from “ground up” worldbuilding- what the people of the world actually believe happened, as opposed to my table which is more objective. I think making information more pertinent to the players is a better use of time then creating objective facts about a setting anyway, so I do think his table is better in that regard.

Now the change to the prime God / head of the pantheon is an interesting one. The concept of having the Prime God being a trio of beings instead of just one, or a opposite pair, or something even more complex (like absent entirely, which I think is a good one) is kind of cool. But here's where we get to the unpleasant part. The thing is I don't like the Moiety thing. I'm somewhat confused why it's even being included at all, but I think I have both a reason and a counter to it. Let me explain.

I think what Dan was going for here was the concept of creating a sort of scheme for the God(s) in the pantheon. Something like a Pantheon being ruled over by squabbling sisters of the Sun and Moon is an interesting concept- this exact setup is how two important Gods from Path of Exile are portrayed- Solaris and Lunaris. Here's the problem though- imagine if you wanted to expand out the pantheon more. Would you then create multiple Gods that fit with this theme of Day versus Night? Well, you wouldn't. I mean you kind of could, but it wouldn't feel the same. You see, the struggle of Day and Night between Solaris and Lunaris is its own thing. It's setting specific, and it works because they're locked in eternal conflict.

When I went to create the Pantheon Generator, I did so because I wanted it to be a way for people to create their own Pantheons similar to Greek, Norse, and Egyptian mythology. Other mythologies, such as Hindu, Japanese, or Chinese I'd also like to emulate somehow, but I'm less familiar with those. The issue here is these pantheons don't really have this idea of Moeity. I mean you have good and evil and yin and yang, but they aren't necessarily evenly split down the middle. What's the point of arbitrarily putting Gods into categories of “passive” and “active”?

Now here's my rebuttal to this- Humans are very good at finding patterns even where they don't exist. It's the basis of superstition and, by any metric, religion and religious practice itself. Goblin Punch had a good post about this just recently too. Here's my reasoning- I would never need to use Moiety for my generator because I would naturally find connections without needing to. The strange love or friendship between the God of Storms and the God of Wines is something you can extrapolate- Oh, those two Gods are paired up? Well, that's a good in-setting myth to explain why the ocean tumbles and makes waves during a storm- the ocean God must be getting drunk off the gifts of the wine God! It's an easy, cheap, basic explanation and easy myth to remember.

Next complaint (feels like this is just me complaining about Dan's generator at this point) I dislike the change to the appearance table. The reason why the God appearances are aged and specific are to encapsulate the ideas of mythology. I used the term “Mature” here to mean adult, probably bearded if a man, to fit stuff like Zeus and Odin as being the old and prime members of their pantheons, hence why Prime Gods are the aged ones. But I didn't feel right calling them “old”. In my mind, the inclusion of apparent age and sex to a God says a lot about their character and helps build the mythology. By breaking it down into a basic gender table I think you lose that. And while you could just determine the ages after you make the God, I think it's interesting to roll a God of the Underworld who is young and a God of War who is old. It instantly creates a dynamic that you wouldn't get if you just ran off a list- male, female, female, androgynous, etc. However, I did like the concept of having them portrayed as multiple genders, though I don't know how many examples of that there actually were in old mythologies, it does add to the mystique a bit. I kind of implied that with the androgynous appearance roll- the idea of things like Mercury/Hermes having both male and females traits or forms. (I mean Gods change their sex all the time so I guess you can argue it doesn't really matter, but a primary depiction is still more fitting with classic mythology anyway).

Now let's address the elephant in the room- this bit.

“You can only have viable godly offspring between gods of different moieties (I mean, it's possible to get double hot and double cold, but that's where you get legendary monsters) - the god's typical physical representation has nothing to do with it.”

Here's the thing, if you're trying to emulate classic mythology like I am doing, a God's gender is supremely important to their pairing. Godly pantheons are incestuous families, at least in the sources from where I am pulling. While there are examples of exceptions of this, like Loki turning into a female horse, and he still had a wife who gave birth to several important Gods. I don't really want to turn this into some kind of discussion about sex and gender or whatever, but if you're creating a mythology that has godly parents and pairings, then the vast majority are going to be heterosexual. Doing otherwise just feels weird at best, and blatant pandering at worst.

I do like the changes to the relationship table, which gives it a bit more depth. Finally, picking domains off of tarot cards is interesting, though personally I think Gods are a bit more suited to embody physical phenomena then some of the abstract traits included there (for a more mythological pantheon anyway); but overall I think this is a very nice addition.

Conclusion

All in all, I feel a bit confused by what Dan's table is trying to accomplish, though I think you could easily use it to create a cool pantheon. Finally, the concept of the “Godhead” being something that isn't an original couple is a good idea that I didn't include in my own generator. I think I'd like to create a more complex, “fantasy religion generator” at some point that included things like Monotheism, Ancestor worship, and Lovecraftian outer-gods as potential symbols of worship along with a more traditional pantheon, maybe with each part as fully fleshed out as the Pantheon Generators we have made. Maybe one of YOU can work on this project- let me know! Thanks for reading, Dan. Bye.