The D6+ System: My Star Wars Adaptation

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Ben Adams said:
Will vehicle/starship combat basically scale the same?
Click to expand...
Yes, it will be similar to the way R&E handled it, but with some changes I’ll add. I want the complexity of this to be somewhere between 1E and 2E. That’s part of the reason why I changed some of the Force rules, but also to make them work more like we see them in all the films. I think WEG’s Force rules were too cumbersome.
 
This is really great. I personally will keep the original 6 attributes when I steal this from you, but otherwise... wow.
 
Endless Flight said:
I think I’ve worked out a condition track for characters. This is basically the third version I’ve come up with. When I post a short description of combat, I’ll be referring to this





My other question now is: do you prefer ranges in numbers or do you like range bands?
Click to expand...
How are you figuring wound ratings for characters (before armor)?

Also, I would say range bands (3-6m for close, 7-10m for medium or whatever) are easier to remember when you have a flat number for how far a target is.

Are you using the WEG difficulty?
 
Wound and Strain ratings are based on an average roll for Fortitude and Willpower. A 3D is either would be an 11 for a rating and so on.

Im still working on the range bands.

I am using the WEG difficulties.
 
Ben Adams said:
This is really great. I personally will keep the original 6 attributes when I steal this from you, but otherwise... wow.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s easy to just use six attributes. You can move the two skills under Strength and Presence and make any changes based on Fortitude and Willpower easily. I just had my reasons for adding the two attributes mostly balancing issues.
 
The last thing I’m going to work on are the starship combat rules. I plan on getting the other chapters completed first.
 
Some tips for tables so that they're easier to scan:
- left align text, right align numbers
- headers aligned the same way
- use tabular figures (font feature, makes the numbers the same width)
- zebra-stripes are a bit dated, but if they're used please do consistently

I'm also not quite sure whether "Force Point Chart"/"Scale Chart" isn't a bit superfluous.
 
Endless Flight said:
The last thing I’m going to work on are the starship combat rules. I plan on getting the other chapters completed first.
Click to expand...
What are you thinking about walker scale? Back in the day we moved AT-AT to starfighter scale and eventually renamed some of them:
Character, Speeder, Light Military, Heavy Military, Light Freighter, Heavy Freighter, Capital.
We got rid of Space Station because that was seen as more of a plot device that couldn't be destroyed unless a specific weakness was hit.

unnamed.jpg
 
Sosthenes said:
Some tips for tables so that they're easier to scan:
- left align text, right align numbers
- headers aligned the same way
- use tabular figures (font feature, makes the numbers the same width)
- zebra-stripes are a bit dated, but if they're used please do consistently

I'm also not quite sure whether "Force Point Chart"/"Scale Chart" isn't a bit superfluous.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I can get rid of the stripes.

I usually would not so many charts but I figured maybe they would be easy to use for people who might not spot things out so easily in text.
 
Ben Adams said:
What are you thinking about walker scale? Back in the day we moved AT-AT to starfighter scale and eventually renamed some of them:
Character, Speeder, Light Military, Heavy Military, Light Freighter, Heavy Freighter, Capital.
We got rid of Space Station because that was seen as more of a plot device that couldn't be destroyed unless a specific weakness was hit.

View attachment 43072
Click to expand...
Scale is just going to be a number. A human is Scale 3, an X-Wing is Scale 6, an AT-AT is scale 7, and so on.
 
Endless Flight said:
Thank you. I can get rid of the stripes.

I usually would not so many charts but I figured maybe they would be easy to use for people who might not spot things out so easily in text.
Click to expand...
I like stripes! They don't need to be every other but they make it much easier for me to read tables unless they are small and simple. For me the scale chart benefits from them, but wouldn't need on the force point chart.

I also love charts and tables in general and dislike rules embedded in text. Charts and tables are easier to use and reference for me.
 
xanther said:
I like stripes! They don't need to be every other but they make it much easier for me to read tables unless they are small and simple. For me the scale chart benefits from them, but wouldn't need on the force point chart.

I also love charts and tables in general and dislike rules embedded in text. Charts and tables are easier to use and reference for me.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the comments. I will lighten up the colors a bit.
 
I’m still cranking out stuff for this. I’ve been working on Advantages and Drawback, including some Lightsaber Form Mastery advantages which help make combat a little more interesting. The white areas are being hidden for now. I can’t give the whole cow away. There are some errata for this page alre

CB6BBC40-1970-48E6-9371-8B01B46875EB.jpeg
Some examples of character profiles. I’ve probably changed fonts about five times already in the process of creating this game.

4AEA890C-5D49-40DD-B3DB-099755CDC70F.jpeg
 
So, while looking at this, I wonder if you need to adjust the difficulty numbers a bit. You may need to take into account the static bonus.
For example a skill of 4D you have a range of 4 to 24 which can fail at a very easy task (5).
But if you have a 2D +6 skill you have a range of 8 - 18. Not as high on the range but can't fail a very easy task level.
If that's the case should very easy start at 10 and go up (or 8 and go up every 4)?
If you have a wild die added, could you have a rule that says if your wild die rolls a one and at least one other die or half the other dice come up one (unless 1D is all you have) then you fail/fumble/whatever no matter the total?
 
I might start at 6 and go in increments of six. A very easy task should really have a DC of 0 and only a Wild Die roll of 1 would cause a complication of some sort.
 
I like that. I agree that Very Easy shouldn't really be a challenge.
So your difficulties look something like:
6 - Easy
12 - Moderate
18 - Hard
24 - Very Hard
30 - Extreme
 
Ben Adams said:
I like that. I agree that Very Easy shouldn't really be a challenge.
So your difficulties look something like:
6 - Easy
12 - Moderate
18 - Hard
24 - Very Hard
30 - Extreme
Click to expand...
It goes along with the whole Six theme. I want to keep things a bit streamlined.
 
What's thr status on this? It's in my wheelhouse for several reasons.
 
Part of the reason I asked is that I have been working on something similar. I'm trying to revise the core of OpenD6 and make something a bit more generic.

Your project feels much more bespoke and closer to the classic game. Reminds me of a streamlined REUP. I really like your layout so far, and your skill list.
 
Malckuss said:
Part of the reason I asked is that I have been working on something similar. I'm trying to revise the core of OpenD6 and make something a bit more generic.

Your project feels much more bespoke and closer to the classic game. Reminds me of a streamlined REUP. I really like your layout so far, and your skill list.
Click to expand...
Why thank you. I always second guess myself along the way, wondering if I’m making it too complicated.
 
In the process of working on this game, I’ve made some fairly big changes to D6 why trying to stay true to the spirit of the original Star Wars game. I’ve been influenced by other games and it can be seen in the rules. Overall, some of the rules have been simplified and some are a little more complicated. Some of the biggest changes have been in combat.

I’ve changed how actions work in D6 and added Standard/Full Attacks and Defenses along with new tactics characters can employ. I’ve felt these have been needed in D6 for quite some time. Combat needed to be made a little more interesting and I think these changes will help.

I’m posting three pages from the combat chapter to get any feedback and will keep amending it until I get it the way I want it.
Thanks to all who have been keeping up with this project.

488F275D-B387-4C2B-8E39-D847801C2F40.jpeg
5FF8644D-6530-43A1-928F-ACCE33095816.jpeg
B25F7793-5D2D-43C2-AF71-3449A71D441D.jpeg
 
First, your prose is clean, direct, and clear. Second, your layout spectacularly emulates the 2e and 2e Revised & Expanded style. I'm very impressed.

Most of what I am noticing are very small gaffs in editing: under Full Actions, an extra space between 'Using certain' and skill, which is missing an s if modeling the language of the section above.

The most glaring thing I noticed was a disagreement in the rules and the example for Movement Types. The rules make it sound like the character should walk 6 meters when the example suggests the movement rules are wrong and should read 'agility die' or 'agility rating/die code' instead of 'agility die × 2'

Finally, as you may have noted, I think rating or die code may be more accurate and complete then simply saying agility die. It irks me, but I cannot state why explicitly.
 
Thank you for your comments Malckuss Malckuss. I noticed a couple of the editing mistakes as soon as I posted. I will definitely look at the movement rules and see if I can make those clearer. You are right about the “die” being confusing. I will probably make it “die code” instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top