Level 20 would still work in TSL. Even though there are new force powers in the game you should get plenty to work with for several reasons.

 

1. You start as a jedi. More levels giving you force powers.

2. The prestige classes have a chance to give you even more force powers. Like maybe a Jedi master getting to pick 2 force powers every level instead of one.

3. In the latest GI magazine it is said that some force powers are learned not from leveling up but after you learn them by doing a something (force crush was the example)

 

So I think with the 20 level cap you should still get plenty of force powers to play with. Plus I don't like the fact of my characters having 1000 hit points if they are like level 40. What is this a final fantasy game?

Since I do not know at all the D20 sytem. It may be possible that your character starts with a Jedi class, then reaches level 20 and then becomes master and can reach another 20 levels. Would that be possible?

No. In Star Wars d20 there are no epic levels. max level is 20th, but you can start as a Jedi if the GM allows it. It all depends on what era he plans on playing through. If he decides to go through EMpire/Rebellian era he might limit the Jedi classes since it takes place after the Jedi purge, but Jedi Adept might still be allowed. At the beginning of Episode 4, Luke would have been considered a level 1 Force Adept.

University of Iowa right?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Iowa State University, English/Religious Studies Departments specifically.

I still don't understand the problem with someone (this time Bioware) taking an existing ruleset as a baseline, then altering it to fit their needs, especially when there's no need to a)use the ruleset 100% as it is, or b)make an entirely new ruleset when there is one available that is very similar to what you want to achieve.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You dont see the problem.. because there is none HAdes jsut wants to find somehting to Gripe about.. hes what theodore Roosevelt woudl call a "muckraker" Always sifting through the dirt and mud looking for what is bad about life instead of seeing the good in things

The prolem is that the game doesn't adhere to the rules system. It is a weakness in the game, and I for one will not be blind to a game's weakness.

Did the original d20 rules make the battles more interesting?

That implies that the d20 rules are the best implementation. Obviously Bioware didn't think so, so they didn't use them.

That implies that the d20 rules are the best implementation.  Obviously Bioware didn't think so, so they didn't use them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Or that they would be too hard to implement...

 

I actually partially agree with Hades... I think they've made a mistake (though not a big one). As long as they pull it off I guess I'm happy.

Personally, I don't really care what they do to the rules system, so long as they create a good game. *shrugs*. Maybe it would 'ruin the game', but I'll wait until the game is actually -out- before I press judgement on it, thanks.

Some people just can't be happy witha good game,while other are just ignorant, either way your still going to get post like these

That implies that the d20 rules are the best implementation.  Obviously Bioware didn't think so, so they didn't use them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Or that they would be too hard to implement...

 

I actually partially agree with Hades... I think they've made a mistake (though not a big one). As long as they pull it off I guess I'm happy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

When I say "best" implementation, I was also considering the difficulty of implementation.

 

If the d20 rules are too hard to implement, then they aren't the best implementation. I wasn't judging the quality of d20, since I've never actually sat down and played with them (I have only PnP gamed once, and it sucked).

Or maybe they didnt use them because teh D20 rules arnt fun in what they wanted to create a median between D20 and a fast paced action game... i think i forgot what we are arguing about...

Oh yes, a well balanced game is not fun. Must have uber munchkinized powerlamer characters that can kill anything in their path without giving one challenge to the player. Oh, what fun.

 

I like a good old fashion fun game myself and while KotOR was a good cinematic game and had fun bits, overall it had its share of weaknesses and drawbacks that hampered the overall enjoyment of the title.

 

As I said before, if they didn't want to use the d20 SYstem in full, then they shouldn't have used it at all. Bioware used a partial d20 rules set, but left out the important rules that allowed game balance. They left all the rules that would have allowed greaer strategic combat. They left all the rules that would allowed the player gerater options.

 

Balance, strategy (and the need to use it), and character creation and developpment options are all important in creating a fun and good CRPG. KotOR lacked these elements big time.

well if i had to rate KOTOR i woudl give it a 9.5 out of 10

It is simply the BEST Xbox RPG... Provides at least 30 hours of REPLAY.

Has a good plot twist

Has decent fighitng scenese, OSmewhat repetitive and has soem pause in between rounds, but not TOO bad. Kotor 2 will hopefully fix this error.

 

I jsut think with a modified 20 level system that does not use D20 as rules but rather GUIDELINES, i would THoroughly enjoy KOTOR and if it has all this stuff then ill probably end up givng it a 9.7

As far as I know there are only 2 RPGs on the X-Box and the other is Morrowind. Not much competition on that console.

Bioware used a partial d20 rules set, but left out the important rules that allowed game balance.  They left all the rules that would have allowed greaer strategic combat.  They left all the rules that would allowed the player gerater options.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Which rules did they leave out that screwed up the balance and strategic combat aspects?

 

This is an honest question, since I'm not too familiar with the PnP d20 ruleset.

well if i had to rate KOTOR i woudl give it a 9.5 out of 10

It is simply the BEST Xbox RPG... Provides at least 30 hours of REPLAY.

Has a good plot twist

Has decent fighitng scenese, OSmewhat repetitive and has soem pause in between rounds, but not TOO bad. Kotor 2 will hopefully fix this error.

 

I jsut think with a modified 20 level system that does not use D20 as rules but rather GUIDELINES, i would THoroughly enjoy KOTOR and if it has all this stuff then ill probably end up givng it a 9.7

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

It's the best x-box RPG.... Would someone remind me how many x-box rpgs there are? Now would someone remind me how many good x-box rpgs there are?

 

The combat is going to have to be kind of repetitive...unless you do a completely different style of combat each time... I have the feeling that there's sort of a rift here between rpgers and (what's the term?)...other video game players.

 

The other players are wanting this more as an adventure or maybe even fps style game and finding it failing in some of those aspects. The rpgers are wanting it to be more rpgish... KOTOR is a hybrid so it has two sides fighting over it... If one wants to keep KOTOR good, there's really not much (major stuff) to be changed. Those who just say Hades is whining need to really evaluate the issues...he has some good points, even if they are nitpicky sometimes.

Bioware used a partial d20 rules set, but left out the important rules that allowed game balance.  They left all the rules that would have allowed greaer strategic combat.  They left all the rules that would allowed the player gerater options.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Which rules did they leave out that screwed up the balance and strategic combat aspects?

 

This is an honest question, since I'm not too familiar with the PnP d20 ruleset.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The first is that the pen and paper has both vitality points and wound points, with wound points being equal to your constitution. Predictably, if you lose all your wound points you die.

 

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, is that force powers drain your vitality when used. This helps balance them out a bit and make rampant force abuse harder.

 

Finally, the weapons like blasters do MUCH more damage (a basic blaster is 3d8 compared to KotoR where they do a pathetic 1d8). This makes them actually useful, considering their generally poor critical hit values and lack of damage bonuses (unlike melee weapons).

 

Just a few examples.

The first is that the pen and paper has both vitality points and wound points, with wound points being equal to your constitution. Predictably, if you lose all your wound points you die.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing this one.

 

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, is that force powers drain your vitality when used. This helps balance them out a bit and make rampant force abuse harder.

 

I'm not sure this is a good method. I know the idea is to balance it so that Jedi or other Force users can't "dominate", but from a strictly Star Wars perspective, Force users are supposed to be able to dominate all other classes. For instance, "penalizing" the Emperor each time he used the Force wouldn't make much sense, since at his level, he should be able to pretty much kick any none Force user's butt without much trouble.

 

It seems the PnP rules, in this regard, are the one that is flawed compared to how the Force and Force users should actually be represented. Maybe Bioware (and now Obsidian) are trying to adhere to a system where they follow more closely to the actual Star Wars universe (ie. movies, books, comics, etc.) rather than the seeming balance done in PnP.

 

Finally, the weapons like blasters do MUCH more damage (a basic blaster is 3d8 compared to KotoR where they do a pathetic 1d8). This makes them actually useful, considering their generally poor critical hit values and lack of damage bonuses (unlike melee weapons).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll agree with this part that the blasters seemed rather weak. Not necessarily in relation to lightsabers, but compared to the other melee weapons, blasters seemed vastly inferior. I'm pretty sure Obsidian said they'd improve this, and hopefully they will.

I would like to see blasters do more damage, albeit for a different reason.

 

I think it would be cool to be able to play a Jedi that defeats his enemies primarily by deflecting all their shots back at them

That would be fun. You would go against an army of soldiers and killed them without even moving from your position. (although there must be a limit to the bolts you can avoid/send back at the shooter).

(although there must be a limit to the bolts you can avoid/send back at the shooter).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sadly, no.

sabres own because of the user jedi's are more powerful d'oh

there should be more then 20 levels