Star Wars Saga Edition - Any opinions?

[raxies94]

So one of my friends is really interested in Star Wars Saga Edition. I have to say, at first, I was very excited too, because I thought it would be very similar to Knights of the Old Republic. But after looking at the rule book, I'm having some doubts. There's a lot of stuff that's similar to 4e (defenses, encounter powers), which I do not enjoy, and some of the concepts just seem weird to me. For example, once you get very high level, there's little benefit to wearing armor. Another example is the force points; they just seem weird to me in general.

We haven't actually tried playing it yet, so maybe a trial run will make me change my mind. But now I'm very wary about. Does anyone have any experience or opinions with/about it.

[Yora]

I know lots of people who share my oppinion that it's be far the best d20 game ever made. It's more simple and allows you to play more smothly without being stopped by complicated rules too often.

[Siegel]

I know lots of people who share my oppinion that it's be far the best d20 game ever made. It's more simple and allows you to play more smothly without being stopped by complicated rules too often.

I wouldn't go quite so far but it is a great system in term of char. building in diversity in character. I really like the talent system.

[TheCountAlucard]

There's a lot of stuff that's similar to 4e (defenses, encounter powers), which I do not enjoy, and some of the concepts just seem weird to me.

Fair enough; I was a bit reluctant at the start, but I found that I actually was having fun when I played it. The defenses puts most of the game's rolling in the hands of the players, for one.

For example, once you get very high level, there's little benefit to wearing armor.

That's more of a stylistic choice, I believe. Besides, there are some pretty decent talent trees for armor.

If I recall correctly, in a Star Wars game a friend ran for a while, one of the players emphasized his character's build around wearing armor, and he quite literally took damage only once in the whole game, thanks to a Sith holocron.

Another example is the force points; they just seem weird to me in general.

Why?

We haven't actually tried playing it yet, so maybe a trial run will make me change my mind. But now I'm very wary about. Does anyone have any experience or opinions with/about it.

For what it's worth, I had a lot of fun with this game.

[raxies94]

I think the force points seemed weird because I was expecting something similar to a psion's power points. But even getting past that, It just seems strange to me that they are basically action points that you can renew until you grow a level.

Also, how do the non-jedi classes compare? Can they hold their own? If we do end up playing, I know I'll want to play a bounty hunter-like character (I say "like" because I'm not sure if the bounty hunter class will really suit me).

[boj0]

I just finished playing in a 3 year SWSE campaign; with no exaggeration or sarcasm, I can easily say it is one of the best systems I have played with.

To address some of your concerns:

1) Armor is something the heroes in the movies did not wear, the mechanics reflect this by explaining that a higher level character is luckier, quicker, tougher or some other handwavium. If you want to wear armor (Mandalorians ftw) there is an entire talent tree for soldiers that lets you take advantage of armor bonuses and still use normal level bonuses. Also, armor can hold upgrades and other gadgets, plus not dying in vacuum is always nice.

2) Force points, are again, a way to show how much luckier, quicker, tougher, better, etc. a hero is. When it comes right down to it, the characters of Star Wars do some pretty incredible things, Force or not. Force points are simply a very handy mechanical way of getting out of a sticky situation. In addition, the number of talents and powers that let you use them for additional effects just makes them a more versatile resource.

3) The defenses, skills, and damage bonuses are very much based off 4e as SWSE is effectively 3.75. I feel that worked out great, as you were never truly left out on using a skill, or your defenses were always within a decent number for your level (there was very little min-maxing involved for having competent numbers). You become less gear dependent for high numbers, and it falls down to your race, class, and abilities; like it should IMHO.

All in all, I find that Saga is a great system, as it gives you that comfortable feel of 3.5 and yet streamlined and just the right amount of licensed atmosphere to give it a unique taste. Give it a shot, you won't regret it.

[Gnoman]

The only thing I dislike about Saga Edition (to the point where I'm writing a replacement for the entire section) is the extreme levels to which vehicle combat is abstracted.

[Dienekes]

Amazing system. Personally my favorite star wars system (though d6 is also fun). There are a few quirks here and there that you can pick up, such as Skill Focus Use the Force is OP if taken before level 3 or so, and the Soldiers Brawler Talents are in general horrendously lackluster. But on a whole I feel it is one of the most dynamic, fun, and customizable d20 systems out there and if DnD 5e basically pallet swapped it to a fantasy setting all would be well in the world.

Though if you're just starting I have a few houserule suggestions, take them or leave them.

Everyone gets the benefits for Improved Armored Defense (or whatever the one is called to use your armor or level for Ref Def) for armor they are proficient with because armor hindering you after level 4 is ridiculous. Admittedly there are ways to max out your armor so that you become a nigh-unkillable god at high levels, but you can optimize anything and this rule I think helps those who want to wear nice light armor all the way through.

Skill Focus grants +1 per level maxing out at 5, to avoid level 1 and 2 force users from acting like gods

When multiclassing you can choose to take a feat or a skill from the next classes starting set, because I think it adds more customizability and I hate being forced to pick up Linguist.

And that's about it.

[gkathellar]

It's a well-built, fun game and does a lot to capture the pulp sensibilities of the original films.

The crucial thing about Saga, mechanically, is to understand that everything in 4E that wasn't tested in ToB was tested in its borders — but like ToB, it arguably did a better (or at least more accessible) job of using those principles than 4E did.

There's a lot of stuff that's similar to 4e (defenses, encounter powers), which I do not enjoy, and some of the concepts just seem weird to me.

If you're just pulling away from it because it's 4E-esque, I'd suggest you give it another chance. The three defenses are really a solid mechanic, and I personally was actually really disappointed how they brought back AC for 4E.

For example, once you get very high level, there's little benefit to wearing armor.

This is a stylistic decision. Watch the movies: armor never helps anybody, it's mostly decorative.

And actually, I disagree. With two talents, armor can boost your Reflex significantly. And with some of the Mandalorian talents from the splatbooks, armor can become incredibly potent.

Another example is the force points; they just seem weird to me in general.

Just think of them as the bursts of luck and talent that pulp heroes manage occasionally.

One other thing: like most d20 games, the system works best at the the middle of the level range. In Saga's case, this is due to the math of the skill and defense systems — at early levels, skill bonuses can be way too high (especially for characters specialized in Force powers). At late levels, defenses get too high. Within the level 5-15 range, though, the game's math is golden.

[Kioku]

It'd be more accurate to say that 4e is based largely on Saga, since Saga came out first, and WotC essentially was just using it to test out some ideas. Thing is though, Saga has all of the good stuff, and 4e ended up with all of the bad. On the note of classes, I'd tend to say that the non-Jedi classes are in most ways *better* than the Jedi class. They certainly make better force users if you mix them around a little.
I use a very, very modified version of the space combat system, I think someone had something pretty similar to it on these forums. It makes maneuvering, facing, and tactics matter. I also (last I played, probably will resume this project if I feel like it again soon) was in the process of re-building every ship in the game using the custom starship creation system - it's my thinking that games should follow their own rules when those kinds of things come up.

[TheThan]

I agree with Yora. It's probably one of the best versions of the D20 systems available. Really give it a try and see if you like it. Since choosing an RPG is a personal thing, I realize no one system is perfect for everyone.

[raxies94]

Thanks for the replies guys. You're really making me want to try it. We'll probably give it a go soon, though there's no telling if it will evolve into anything serious. We seem to have a chronic problem of starting new games instead of continuing current ones.

[Optimator]

Saga Edition is excellent.

[Talakeal]

I never got a chance to play SAGA, but it looked excellent to me, a vast improvement over 3.5 I was very disappointed that 4th ed didn't follow in its footsteps, if it had I would probably still be playing D&D to this day.

I did have a few major complaints, like you can't spend a feat to train in a cross class skill and that a lot of force powers didn't take size into account, but it is my understanding that those have been fixed in later printings or in errata.

[Alejandro]

SWSE is an excellent game. I GM it for my group, and pretty much everyone enjoys it a lot. It's very flexible. Vehicle use can get a little tricky, but it's easy to figure out. Talents and the ease with which you can multiclass are large pluses.

And to the previous poster, you can train new skills. Take the Skill Training feat, right in the main book. It allows you to gain training in one untrained skill from your class(es) list.

[Talakeal]

SWSE is an excellent game. I GM it for my group, and pretty much everyone enjoys it a lot. It's very flexible. Vehicle use can get a little tricky, but it's easy to figure out. Talents and the ease with which you can multiclass are large pluses.

And to the previous poster, you can train new skills. Take the Skill Training feat, right in the main book. It allows you to gain training in one untrained skill from your class(es) list.

That feat was added in the errata (and incorporated into later printings of the book) when the game first came out there was no way to train cross class skills.

[Alejandro]

Huh, I had no idea. Guess I never saw the version without that.

[Battleship789]

That feat was added in the errata (and incorporated into later printings of the book) when the game first came out there was no way to train cross class skills.

You can't ever train "cross class" in Saga. The Skill Training feat merely allows you to select another of your class skills to be trained in. To expand your skill list you have to multiclass (which is encouraged.)

SAGA is a great d20 system, possibly one of the best. I'd highly recommend it.

[Talakeal]

You can't ever train "cross class" in Saga. The Skill Training feat merely allows you to select another of your class skills to be trained in. To expand your skill list you have to multiclass (which is encouraged.)

SAGA is a great d20 system, possibly one of the best. I'd highly recommend it.

That is what the book I purchased days after release said, and I thought it was the rule. Since then I have had numerous people say that the feat applies to any skill, and a few people, like you, insist it does not. I can't believe that so many people have poor reading comprehension, the only thing I can think of is that they corrected this oversight in later printings.

[raxies94]

Well, regardless, you guys are really making me think about trying it out.

[raxies94]

So, I'm looking at the core rulebook right now, and there doesn't really seem to be much reason to go with double/triple attack route rather than the dual weapon route. Anyone have any reasons to go double/triple attack rather than dual weapons?

[RandomLunatic]

You can use heavier weapons. Dual wielding, as the name implies, requires at least two weapons. Most beings have two hands, which works out to approximately one hand per weapon, which sharply limits your options-vibroswords, lighsabers, blaster pistols, and the like.

With Double/Triple Attack, you can tool up things like vibroaxes, missile launchers, and heavy repeating blasters to bring on some serious pain.

[Battleship789]

You can use heavier weapons. Dual wielding, as the name implies, requires at least two weapons. Most beings have two hands, which works out to approximately one hand per weapon, which sharply limits your options-vibroswords, lighsabers, blaster pistols, and the like.

With Double/Triple Attack, you can tool up things like vibroaxes, missile launchers, and heavy repeating blasters to bring on some serious pain.

Additionally, the Double/Triple attack feat line doesn't have as harsh of prerequisites: no stat requirements and less of a feat investment. The Multiattack talent can also reduce the penalties, though it is a rather Talent-heavy investment.

That is what the book I purchased days after release said, and I thought it was the rule. Since then I have had numerous people say that the feat applies to any skill, and a few people, like you, insist it does not. I can't believe that so many people have poor reading comprehension, the only thing I can think of is that they corrected this oversight in later printings.

Dunno. The edition I have states that the benefit is: "Choose one untrained sill from your list of class skills. You become trained in that skill." Seems pretty unambiguous to me.

[Ivellius]

Well, I'll chime in with my contrary opinion, just because no one else is seeming to. If you don't like 4e, I really don't know if you'd like it--barring you being a huge Star Wars nerd, in which case it's probably worth it for the setting. I, unfortunately, am not so much.

I'm currently playing in a game as a medic--a Bothan Noble by class, with a heavy concentration in Charisma-based skills, Knowledge (bureaucracy), Knowledge (life sciences), and Treat Injury checks. And...I don't really like the system. The Knowledge skills have seemed pretty useless. Skill Challenges should die in a fire because a) they're often quite dissociated* and b) my character wasn't useful in the only one we did (involved chasing a Vratix). Healing isn't very good (characters are limited to one medipac per day), but it's very, very difficult to actually kill characters because of Force points and second winds. I still don't like the second wind mechanic.

Use the Force is also totally borked at low levels (maybe pretty weak at really high levels, due to the way skills scale?), though from what I understand errata may have helped (not fixed). We weren't allowed any Jedi in our current campaign. And...I miss having more skill granularity. I like being able to allocate skill points instead of the trained/untrained binary and wish our team sniper could take ranks in Gourmet Cooking because something like that is awesome and flavorful and necessary when hobos complain about his cooking. Damage is high at low levels but doesn't seem to scale for characters as well as monsters (might be my perception, as I'm not really a combat character). Grappling, at least, if not other attack options, was watered down (I may be the only person in the world that has a handle on 3.5 grappling, though I'll readily admit it takes way too many rolls for success).

Lest you think it's all complaints, I do like the condition track, and the way they reworked the action economy is probably okay. Having encounter powers isn't too bad, although they come slowly and I'm not sure the ones I have are very good yet. Armor not helping characters much feels weird to me (no one in our group specializes in it) but is in-genre. I like static defenses, although I think I prefer having 4 to 3. Probably because I'm used to it, and armor affecting Reflex defense is weird. Actually, if they just did Ref/Fort/Will and played with what attacks affect what instead of everything hitting Reflex I'd probably be good with it. I suppose Reflex is in-genre, as most people dodge/stand still and let Stormtroopers miss rather than absorb blaster fire.

Having said that, a lot of people like it, and if you're a Star Wars person or liked some of the 4e changes I'd say go for it. You...said you didn't, though, in the original post, so I'm sorry.

*No, it doesn't really make sense to require the characters as a party to make X number of successes before Y number of failures on a variety of skill checks. If you're chasing down someone, whoever's chasing should be able to succeed/fail independently of whatever the doctor does. Same for the doctor. I get what they were trying to do. And there are ways to do them (convincing a noble where he has to be impressed with each and every one of you, maybe?), but they don't need a mechanic for that. I could do that in 3.5.

[IdleMuse]

I love SAGA edition, it's seriously one of my favourite games to both play and GM, along with L5R 4th. I heartily recommend you try it out if you have any attachment to the setting at all.

I agree largely with pretty much everything that's been said above about the system, including the negatives, including Ivellius' specific comments above (though I will say they do stem somewhat from a particular build, a healer, which is annoyingly bad in the system). The skill challenge system will put some people off, but then again, some play groups really click with it, so I'm still on the fence with it. Generally I won't use them.

I'm a SAGA GM with all the books, and I will say that is does get a lot better when you have more options to choose from; core-book-only games can get a bit samey; scoundrel, jedi with move object and mind trick, noble with inspire line, soldier with double attack, there's not too many options, you really need to get into some odd multiclasses to have other funstuff. Which, I might add, isn't difficult, unlike 4e, multiclassing is highly recommended and highly useful, an integral part of the system.

In order to avoid this becoming wall-of-text, i'll utilise some lists... again be aware these are coming from the play/GM experience of having all the books, ymmv with just the core.

Pros
- Balance. Saga edition is balanced in a way neither 3.5 not 4E D&D could ever be; there's no singular overpowered options that negate the usefulness of whole tiers of classes (3.5) nor is everthing EXACTLY THE SAME (4E). Exaggeration, I know, but the 5-base-class system is highly balanced and very well designed, not restrictive at all. Pretty much all types of characters can be built, and all can be effective.
- Flexibility. Talents are super-cool, really letting you play a different Scoundrel each time without having a plethora of different base classes murkying the water. They make character development fun, they make play fun. They make characters feel individual. Every book adds more feats, talents, force powers to really amp up the options.
- Simplicity. Now, this is a relative term; SAGA edition is still a d20 system, with all its attendant combat-rules-depth. However, compare it to 3.5, and you instantly see a major improvement, and nowhere is this more evident than in the Skill system, one of my favourite improvements (but see house-rules below).

Cons
- Redundancy. Some content, particularly prestige classes, are redundant. There's really very few character concepts that are improved by the Vanguard PrC, for instance, while many builds will want to use the Elite Trooper. Note, this isn't a power problem; more, a utility one. You aren't really going to be too much worse off taking some of these talents or PrCs, but I just find very few players do.
- Occasional rules complexity. If you've played any kind of D&D, you're probably fine, but if you come to this from FATE or something, you'll struggle to penetrate some of the more obscure subsystems, such as vehicle combat, which has been touched on by others in the thread.
- Everyone always wants to play a Jedi in their first game! This can lead to some oddly unbalanced parties, where half the party are generalist jedi (who end up being average to mediocre in most fields), rather than having specialists.

Very little houseruling is needed. My personal house-rules, for reference, are;
- Crits work like 4E (max damage not x2, more for triple crit)
- Skill Focus (UtF) can't be bought before a specific threshold (unless you want early-game force wizards to be fairly powerful, for example, in an all-Jedi game from 1st level)
- Remove the era-dependant Special Prereq from the Imperial Knight in the Legacy Era book. (Allows players to play armoured jedi in other eras than Legacy).

That's literally it. Compared to 3.5 or other systems with homebrew and hosuerules coming out of their ears, Saga ends up remarkably balanced, in my opinion.

So yeah, any more questions, feel free to ask, I've had some pretty fun SAGA times and know the system inside out and back to front, more or less.

Oh, and one last point, if you've played KoToR, which it sounds like, from your OP, you have, then I seriously suggest having a looksee at the KoToR era campaign guide book, it's crammed full of references to the video games (stalines for PCs and NPCs, items, feats, etc) that always make people I show it too very excited

[Delwugor]

It is the best d20 system that WotC has put out (M&M gets my vote for the very best).
It is worth playing but there are areas of caution.
Use the Force is obscene and because of it Jedi tend to trump all others. That can work since the setting is about Jedi of course.
Ship combat rules for small fighters is fine. But forget the bigger ships as it becomes an extremely boring episode of how many dice can you roll before your hands fall off from being tired.
Personally I'd throw out any use of minis or tactical combat. For me their use had that D&D in space feel. Without it combat is more spectacular and you get that cinematic Jedi leaps 30 feet up igniting his lightsabre feel.

[Binks]

Saga edition is probably either my favorite or second favorite RPG system I've ever used. I've played 3-4 games in it, and run 3 (plus 2 currently in progress) and I've found that the rules for it don't tend to get in the way of having fun anywhere near as much as most other games .

Also, I see lots of posts in here about Jedi breaking the game and UtF being overpowered, etc. The problem is not Jedi or UtF really, the problem is force wizards, builds solely designed to get a ton of super powerful force powers. Your average Jedi character isn't going to break the game, but Jedi can be pushed in that direction...as can the other classes in their own way. Jedi are closer to the edge, but not automatically broken, and I've had plenty of fun games where the Jedi character was on par with the rest of the party because they didn't intentionally focus on being a force wizard.

[Ivellius]

Also, I see lots of posts in here about Jedi breaking the game and UtF being overpowered, etc. The problem is not Jedi or UtF really, the problem is force wizards, builds solely designed to get a ton of super powerful force powers. Your average Jedi character isn't going to break the game, but Jedi can be pushed in that direction...as can the other classes in their own way. Jedi are closer to the edge, but not automatically broken, and I've had plenty of fun games where the Jedi character was on par with the rest of the party because they didn't intentionally focus on being a force wizard.

This is kinda like the idea that 3.5's "Tier" listings aren't a problem because classes of higher tiers can just not do stuff that breaks the game. Well, the main problem with Use the Force is that it's a combat system masquerading as a skill like the other skills. It's trivial to have a +10 bonus to Use the Force at 1st level (trained + Skill Focus), in a combat system in which having a +8 to-hit with a weapon would be about as high as you can go min-maxing (I think Wookiees have a +4 bonus to Strength, so put an 18 into it and take Weapon Focus and something with +1 BAB. Someone might correct me if I'm wrong). Sure, there are probably a few more bonuses for weapons, but a similar ability investment would get you another +4 or +5 on your check. So...don't allow people to use Force powers at low levels, but then you're losing a lot of the appeal of the setting. I mean, seriously, everyone wants to be a Jedi, right?

I'll add a disclaimer that I don't own the books and looked very little at the Force powers, but from what the others in that group have told me, Force users can completely shut down a single opponent in an encounter (Force Choke, I think?) and I'd assume have other problematic powers.

[Yora]

There's a huge difference between "If you do that, everyone will hate the game" and "just don't go overboard".

Aknowledging a fault does not mean it has to be a serious problem.

[Mystify]

I've played it, and its pretty good. Jedi's are kinda overpowered though, being
A. The most defensive(seriously, between their lightsaber and force powers, they can be ridiculously hard to harm. And if you really want to, you can stick them in armor.),
B. The "spellcasters" (they are the best force users, duh.)
C. The strongest melee class (lightsabers)

This probably doesn't bother most people, as its star wars and they are jedi. You can certainly have viable non-jedi builds, but there is a power gap.

Force powers can be relevant at all levels. I've been 1-shoted by them at low levels, and my brother specialized them and was amazing at high levels.