Jediphile

Yes I'd have suggested three changes that would have made it a much better movie IMHO 1. Remove any and all gungans. Period! 2. Replace Naboo with Alderaan 3. Make Anakin about 5-6 years older

Well, all the movies have at leats one vote now. That can't be all bad. And best of all, ESB is winning

I think I may be one them. Not that I don't enjoy play or particularly like complex rules, but I love spending hours and hours building up a complex new character. Not so that he becomes powerful, but more so that he has a very rich background. For example, I don't like how sometimes an old friend conveniently jumps into the plot with never a word about his existence before. In one Trek RPG game I played, I actually wrote down all my character's old friends beforehand and gave the list to the GM. He still didn't use it, though... :"> Anyway, tweaking a character, giving him strengths and weaknesses is great fun. I like the absolutely *huge* sections of advantages and disadvantages in the GURPS 4th Ed. Characters book - I can get inspiration just from reading the very extensive rules. That's what good rules do - they should inspire as well as decide stuff. That's where I disagree. AD&D 2e fights can take awful amounts of time once the characters gain multiple attacks, and I prefer the game to be fast-paced. I will not be kind on systems that enforce a rigid class and/or level structure, as that is just not helpful to role-playing in my experience. Besides, that sort of thing just spawns the usual "how can Obi-Wan defeat Darth Maul as a padawan (=below lvl 7) when Obi-Wan couldn't as a master (lvl 13+) and was even killed"-types of silly arguments. Levels don't make sense, and classes are just restrictive. I will never support either.

Yes, Paranoia is great It does take the right people to play, though, since you just can't take it seriously. Never played Gamma World. I'd go for a Fallout PnP game, though. I've even considered one with GURPS rules, but then I've considered a lot of potential campaign stuff over the years...

We at least agree on something. I actually never hated Disciple. He's annoying at times and sometimes insufferably lecturing, but otherwise he was okay, especially if you play a male Exile... But I hate GOTO. Completely useless and good only for his revelation if you built influence with him. Oh, and a few measely credits. You don't need them, but it's what he's good for... I like the voice-acting, but hate the character. Used him even less in K2 than I did T3 in K1, which speaks volumes... "

I live in hope...

I'm not sure that's right, but even if it is, it has no impact on the story at all, since it's all the same dialogue and scenes. Sadly I don't have my taped Special Editions with me right now so that I can compare... I wouldn't be surprised if he did. Lucas will never be finished with Star Wars. Somehow I like that he is still passionate about his creation, even if I do disagree heavily with some of the choices he made to change stuff. The Greedo-change is particularly sore, but I don't see why the cut scenes from ANH, ESB, and RotJ couldn't at least have been included as extra material on the dvds as they were for the prequels.

Hutt. Or maybe gungan.

People base their choice on what they consider to be good storytelling, not as a "Star Wars universe of the day"-information advisory... The original movie was good because it was an adventure movie with all the classic archetypes represented well, but in a new setting - fantasy set in space. But ESB was brilliant because it stepped beyond that and evolved both the characters and the plot. None of the other films that followed managed to do that. Lots of people really hate TPM (I'm not really one of them, though I do hate JarJar). TPM cost Star Wars at least as many fans as it won, I think.

Yes, I agree completely. I cannot in good conscience vote for the KotOR, when so much of it is merely an unoriginal revision of many plots already seen in Star Wars. Even Revan isn't original, as he bears a lot of similarity to Ulic Qel-Droma in both choice and fall. And Malak is just boring next to Vader. If K2 had been a completed product, it would have been a tougher choice, since K2's story is far stronger and original, but it's unfinished and Nihilus never reaches the potential he had, so the movies will win for me as it is. Besides, there is no moment in any of the KotOR games that comes anywhere close to "No, Luke. *I* am your father!"

Ah, but there lies the problem. Emotions are not good or evil, only how people react because of them are. Take anger. You might say that's a bad emotion, but what if that anger is due to injustice in your society, and it makes you react and protest with the result that the injustice is exposed and fairness is restored. Then anger is not a bad thing is it? Or maybe you think love is good? It would not seem to be good in Anakin's case, and indeed many, many evil things have been done for love. Paris may have loved Helena, but when all of Troy is destroyed for his love, it cannot be called a good thing per se, can it? That's the problem with emotions. The jedi understand that, though I would agree with you (and Jolee) that they go rather too far in how they deal with this "problem".

I think a tach party member would be more welcomed than G0-T0. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or a gizka

Yeah, that'll put the fanboys in their place!

I have those as well... That was in first edition (from 1997) of movies too IMO they shouldn't do more adds than that VCR had. edit: Those VCR thinks were...umm...special extended edition? Something like that anyway <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes. There are three versions of the films, or rather three versions of ESB and RotJ. There are only two versions of ANH, since it was unchanged from the special edition to the dvd-version. ESB on dvd is changed from special edition only by: 1. Original Palpatine voiced by Clive Revill replaced by new shots with Ian McDiarmid instead. 2. Temuera Morrison replacing the voice of Jeremy Bullock as Boba Fett (Bullock obviously still embodies Boba, though). RotJ on dvd was changed only by: 1. Naboo appearing very briefly during the "pan across the galaxy" bit of the victory celebrations at the end. 2. Hayden Christensen replacing Sebastian Shaw as the force ghost of Anakin next to the force ghosts of Obi-Wan and Yoda as seen by Luke at the end. I know there was a rumor that the dvd would also have a brief shot of Padme in it, presumably when Luke asks Leia about it, but it seems to have stayed a rumor, which might be because Lucas decided to kill Padme in RotS... EDIT: I still wish that Lucas would have put the early "lost scenes" with Biggs back into ANH. Luke meets him just before the x-wing battle in the special edition, which makes little sense, since we don't know the character. Owners of the Star Wars: Behind the Magic interactice CD-ROM (like myself) can still see them, but it's not the same thing as having them in the movie itself...

Which should tell you something... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yup. Like I've said before, ROTJ is my personal favorite, even though there are ewoks and lil' bit weak beginning, so I vote it. But best movie is indeed ESB, I just like ROTJ more. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Heretic! The gungan-lovers are out in force... If Battlefront had any redeeming qualities, then it was "Meesa gonna die!" I disagree totally. The best lightsaber duel IMHO is definitely Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan vs. Maul in TPM or Obi-Wan vs. Anakin in RotS. After that comes the duel between Luke and Vader in ESB. I was actually disappointed by the lightsaber duel between Luke and Vader in RotJ when I first saw it in the cinema all those years ago... Now, the starfighter battles in RotJ on the other hand, those are excellent and not outdone in the prequels either But RotJ is boring plotwise, as very little happens that we haven't seen before - Luke fights Vader, another rebel attack on another Death Star, more Tatooine, etc... It was impressive that Lucas could do a continuous and evolving finale over 40+ minutes without losing the plot, but I still think that was the major achievement of the film.

Yes, but where do you draw the line? I mean, is it enough that you can hit the arm, or must you be able to specifically hit the hand as well? Or even the finger? How about the head? Must you be able to target the throat or the eye as well? Agreed. As I have said before on these boards, D&D's abstract AC rules just don't make any sort of logical sense. They are simple, yes, but they are also too simple. It makes no sense that it's easier to hit a man in leather armor than a man in full plate mail, since it's rather more difficult to dodge blows in the latter case. I'd go for GURPS' damage reduction any day of the week. It makes far more sense and isn't really a complication to work with. And I dare say most people who have played Fallout will likely have arrived at the same conclusion.

That's a bit more information than I wanted...

If you're having trouble thinking of something to do in your campaign, take a look at the Net Book of Plots. I find it to be a good source for inspiration, even if I do always change them beyond recognition before I use them... As for rulesets, I always advice that you know the rules well. However, that doesn't need to be a problem. You can make very simple rules and be just fine, since they're easy to keep in mind. Heck you could make up your own rules, for that matter. Call of Cthulhu (5th edition, not d20) has very simple rules, for example, but it's still a great RPG (but it's horror, which is not everybody's cup of tea). Even for Fantasy, there are alternatives to D&D, though that is by far the most popular. I've played White Wolf's Exalted, and it's excellent if you like manga/anime. The system also isn't so difficult, I think. The biggest problem with Exalted is that there is a huge (albeit interesting) backstory that the GM needs to be familiar with (but not the players so much), before play begins. If you're just looking for a rule system, then there is no need to pay for it. For example, Fudge is free, and you can get free versions of Fudge and GURPS (lite). GURPS is sometimes a good choice, because you can use it for any setting and can expand from the free version (lite) to the full version later, if you like it.

I like huge and complex game systems as well, but I've learned over the years that it becomes pointless to deal with them if the rules are not easily referenced. It's just no use that there precise and exact details for how that particular armor is affected when struck by this specific weapon under water, if you cannot find the rule and use it in a few seconds during a game. If the game complexity begins to interfere with the pace at which the game evolves, then the rules need to go. It's a shame, but it is true, I think. As for the GM having a character himself, I cannot agree with it. The danger of that character becoming omniscient and never doing something wrong because the GM doesn't want to lose "his" character is just far too great. I've used an old favorite PC of mine as an NPC in my own Mystara campaign, but I was very wary of the danger and think I managed to avoid it. Besides, I used him more as conduit to connect different things in the plot, as my players explored it. On the contrary, if the players think the GM will protect his own characters, then make sure to introduce a new NPC that goes with the PCs, and then promptly kill him off at the first opportunity Generally the rules you choose to use don't matter. It's nowhere nearly as important as the GM's own ability to maintain internal consistency in his campaign and how well he can get his plots to unfold at the right pace. The most important part of rules is that they are consistent. If you don't like the rules you have, then change them. But try to do it before play begins, and make sure the players know what has been changed and why. Nothing is worse than creating a new character on the basis of the game foundation that later turns out to have changed. If anything is worse, then it's the GM suddenly having changed his already established rulings, that you have come to rely on as a plyaer, only he forgot to inform you of it. That sort of thing can kill the game and make players leave in seconds, and rightly so. Of course, you could become aware that something needs to be changed only after the campaign has started. In my experience that will almost certainly happen at some point. Even then it's okay to change things, as long as you don't try to use your authority as a GM to impose it upon the players. I find that most players are reasonable people, if you explain to them why something is causing problems and needs to be changed. In most cases the players just don't like being bullied... And if you change the rules during the campaign, invite the players to suggest revisions to their own characters, if they feel like it. This doesn't mean giving them a card blanche to rewrite their characters, though. Whatever they wish to change should be consistent with the character's, well, character And don't outlaw min-maxing. It's not a bad thing per se, because naturally the players will speculate about how to make their characters most powerful. If they do not, then chances are that they're just not very interested in the game, and you really don't want that either. Sure, be aware that min-maxing doesn't go to far, but don't treat is as criminal behaviour either. Many GMs do, and I think they're wrong.

Have you looked at the progress recently? A lot of it is already 100% (=done!), and mostly it seems it's just Malachor that is unfinished, probably because it needs to reflect what has happened in the plot up to that point, and the team needs to know that first (i.e., after they've settled all the additions to the plot that come before Malachor chronologically). But yes, it is difficult to wait...

I hate JarJar, but given that Lucas, in his infinite wisdom, decided to make him part of Star Wars canon, the addition of the Naboo scene in RotJ is somehow fitting, and it's just a few seconds anyway. I'm just glad that was all he decided to add... Erm, you do realise that only ANH is from 1977, right? ESB is from 1980, and RotJ from 1983... Oh, come on. They're not *all* bad. The X-wing attack on the Death Star in Ep. IV is definitely nicer in the revised version. I do have the original versions of the films on video, and the x-wing attacks just look old. And although it probably sucks for Clive Revill (the original voice of Palpatine in ESB) and Jeremy Bullock (the original Boba Fett), it was relevant to have them replaced in the DVD by Ian McDiarmid and Temuera Morrison respectively, since it made for better consistency. It was also better to see a Wampa with a severed arm in ESB rather than just watch some ugly arm-like thing with white hair drop to the ground after Luke chopped it off. No, not all the changes were for the better, I'd agree, but I'm not going to slash them just for being new and "heresy and defilement of canon"...

I *LIKE* T3 best (in K2, he was totally useless and I never used him in K1). HK-47 is more fun and interesting, but I don't like him as a character, so since the question is which i like best, T3 will definitely win. It's quite telling that *nobody* has voted for GOTO, who seems to be universally hated by everyone...

Which should tell you something...

Jolee, then Bastila, I guess. HK-47 is fun for his comments. I sort of like him for the same reasons I like Garak on DS9. Both have some wonderful lines, but they are both murderous scum of the worst sort, and I don't like them as characters... Nah, on second thought, HK-47 is crap next to Garak...