Gaming - Savaging Star Wars, Part IV - Edges, Hindrances, and the Problem of Generic vs. Specific in Gaming

Ever since the mid-90s or so, the trend in gaming has been to include systems about what sets your character apart - whether that was AD&D2 kits, or D&D3+ Feats, or Advantages/Disadvantages in GURPS and Merits/Flaws in Storyteller games, it was a fairly sharp deviation from the early D&D way of handling those either as one-offs with GM-arbitrated mechanical effects, or as nonexistent.  WEG's d6 Star Wars didn't really get into this - with a couple of notable, species-based exceptions like Noghri martial arts - but probably would have with a couple more years' development, as the use of Feats by the same writing team working for WOTC on d20 Star Wars demonstrates.

Savage Worlds uses the terms Edge and Hindrance for these; I discussed these very briefly in the Chiss conversion.  To be honest, the Savage Worlds philosophy of "just adjust one that already exists to fit circumstances" works really well, so that very little additional material needs to be written most of the time - I can wholesale lift the cybernetic rules from the Sci-Fi Companion, and can adjust things from Savage Rifts or Freedom Squadron, or any other Savage-compliant line, without a whole lot of extra writing on my part.  Even something like "Noghri Martial Arts," mentioned earlier, is just the character starting off with the Martial Artist Edge and some natural weapons, no need for special adjudication.  There are, however, areas where the existing rules don't quite line up with how Star Wars is typically portrayed (or, for that matter, my own personal experience).  This brings me to lightsabers.

In the extensive fictional backstory of Star Wars, there are seven "official" lightsaber forms, with their own unique advantages and disadvantages.  Most of the time, characters can simply reflect this through narration and roleplay - "my character favors the Ataru form," for instance, is just written up as having the Free-Running Edge, a high Athletics skill, and an aggressive combat mindset.  However, from experience, there are people who just fight better under certain circumstances, with certain weapon sets, and in certain styles.  I refer in this case not simply to training to be a better fighter, but to training with a specific combination of equipment or style.  Historical examples include the difference between Spanish, Italian, and French rapier combat, or the secrets laid down in any set of Japanese scrolls of transmission.

The Destreza Circle, Crazypants Version, or "Why Some Styles Are Just... Different."

So - how do I handle this problem that I know exists because real life says it exists, and I am kind-of a simulationist? My solution to the problem was to create an Edge, "Trademark Style," again based on the idea of tweaking an existing Edge.  In this case, it is Trademark Weapon.  Trademark Weapon says that the character has a specific weapon - think Han Solo's DL-44, or Zoe's hogleg gun from Firefly - that they get a +1 to all relevant rolls with.  Keep in mind, even at the extreme edge of mastery, say, Carlos Hathcock or Miyamoto Musashi, the highest a human's skill can ever go is d12+2, plus a d6 wild die, and the default to-hit is 4.  In other words, a +1 is still a significant bonus even at the top edge of what a human being is capable of doing.  That's Trademark Weapon, though; Han isn't quite as good with an off-the-rack DL-18 blaster.  Trademark Style does the same thing, with the mechanical change that the player has to know enough to define the style, when it works, and when it doesn't.  To use French rapier or modern fencing as an example, it requires that the character be facing a single opponent, using a melee weapon in one hand.  I could go as far as to say it requires only straight backwards and forwards movements, but that feels overly restrictive, especially given that the system and setting are both meant to be cinematic.

The statblock for that came out as:

Type - Combat

Requirements - Fighting 1d8

This Edge is meant to replicate specific combat schools such as the lightsaber forms, without requiring the character to have a specific weapon in hand (that is Trademark Weapon).  The player should be able to describe their style in brief terms - “a striking-based style which relies on mobility for its primary defense” or “a style based on absorbing and redirecting an opponent’s attacks back at them” for instance - and identify circumstances under which this style does not work - “cannot be wearing armor” or “must have one hand free at all times” for instance.  The character gains +1 to all Fighting rolls with that style.  This Edge can be taken multiple times, for different styles.

The other new Edge I wound up creating for this was a professional Edge, "Astrogator," based off the infamous Han Solo line about making the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs.  Travel times, which I'll discuss elsewhere, are generally plot-driven with vague guidelines on how long a journey takes based on distance; a skilled astrogator can cut those times down considerably.  This is why the Death Star was still in-system when the Millennium Falcon arrived - it hadn't had an opportunity to jump yet, because Han cut various corners on hyperspace routes and the Falcon already had a souped-up hyperdrive.

This one was based more on observation of the series, and feel for Savage Worlds rules, than on any existing material.  A professional Edge that provided a reduced time cost for performing an action, and a reroll on bad rolls without spending a Benny, feels about right, so that's what I did.

Statblock:

Type - Professional

Requirements - Academics 1d6, Piloting 1d8

An astrogator is an expert at moving between the stars.  An astrogator may reroll failed Piloting rolls for astrogation without spending a Benny, though they must abide by the second roll result even if it produces a critical failure.  In addition, an astrogator reduces all interstellar travel times by 25% on a Piloting Raise, in addition to the standard effects of a Raise.

 

Those are Edges; those are things that make the characters' lives easier. What about the opposite case, Hindrances? Well, sad to say, most of what I have there is Force-based, which means that it is going to have to wait for an in-depth discussion of the Force, but it does bring up a point regarding Savage Worlds that does bother me about the system. Savage Worlds tends to have Edges that give a mechanical advantage, but Hindrances that do not give mechanical penalties. For instance, "Arrogant" is a great character descriptor, but there is no mechanical effect to it; the idea is that the GM is supposed to administer roleplay awards for playing it, and the separation of experience and Bennies in Savage Worlds encourages those awards. I am torn on this - on the one hand, if it has no mechanical effect, why does it have a mechanic? On the other, if it encourages roleplay, so much the better; one of the greatest criticisms I have of the 3.x mentality from D&D is the growth of theory-crafted characters that have the same relation to organically grown characters that statues have to golems - the essential spark of life is missing from them.

 

Part of my way around this is to adjust not the statblock, but the write-up for things like "Obligation" or "Code of Honor." I expect that anyone who is able to tell me they have a code of honor will be able to tell me what that code entails; examples specifically from Star Wars include the Sith Code, the Jedi Code, and the Mandalorian Six Actions, but could just as easily include "gentleman pirate," "an officer and a gentleman," or the US Army's Ranger Creed. Similarly, obligations should be fairly specific, either in discussion with me as GM, or in shorthand form on the character sheet - starting Force-users are generally going to have an Obligation to their master, for instance - and Obligations should always come with some sort of expected reciprocity; one-way obligations are known as slavery, and that's a separate Hindrance (specifically Outsider, Major version). This doesn't fix the mechanical problem I mentioned earlier, but my experience is that this sort of specificity encourages the roleplay behavior which Savage Worlds Hindrances originally meant to reward, and it gives me as GM something against which to evaluate the player for those same roleplay awards.

 

This is part of what I mean in the title of this post about the problem of Generic vs. Specific - the Savage Worlds base rules, of necessity and philosophy, are written to cover the broadest possible combination of circumstances. Thus, the Code of Honor Hindrance says the character has a Code of Honor, it doesn't really say much more than that, much less what happens if the character violates it. In return, the book is about $20 and, professionally printed, comes in a size that'll fit comfortably in a side pocket of a laptop bag. Compare this to, say, Pathfinder, where the first-edition base book was several hundred pages long and contained a section just on character creation that was easily as long as the entirety of the Savage Worlds base book. However, a Pathfinder paladin knew everything they needed to know about their code of behavior and what would happen if they violated it - in addition to knowing precisely how many times they can cast Spoon-Bending and Heat Breakfast every day at each level. My personal experience and preference is that the looser approach, giving me wider room for interpretation, is a better fit for me; however, there's an entire philosophical tangent I could go on here about the reduction of GM role to arbiter instead of the godlike stature that earlier RPGs assigned and, to some (GREATLY lesser) extent, is still required to make Savage Worlds work.

The result of this is that you could totally run a Star Wars game straight out of the Savage Worlds base book; there are stats for laser pistols and laser swords, after all, you just use them and call it a day.  But it requires more depth than simply this to make it the specific world of Star Wars.  Savage Worlds magic is completely capable of handling the Force, but it wouldn't be The Force - that mystical energy field that surrounds us and penetrates us and binds the Galaxy together.  That requires greater specificity.  At the same time... do you really need stats for the BlasTech E-11 blaster rifle and the BlasTech DH-17 blaster rifle, if what they do to a body on the receiving end is basically the same? Do you really need stats for stormtrooper armor and environmentally sealed bounty hunter armor if the protection provided is basically the same? The '90s and 2000s answer to this was, blatantly and ridiculously, "YES PLEASE PROVIDE ME MORE BOOKS OF IDENTICAL GUNS!" but, as a guy who owned a lot of those books, that's an expensive habit to sustain.

My solution to the problem is basically to adapt the Savage Worlds trapping system used by magic powers - and, again, we aren't yet talking about the Force; that's a post all its own.  But once you figure out the basics of what a piece of equipment should do, you take the base model, and apply a number of customizations to it.  This is, again, not a particularly revolutionary game mechanic, it's just a way of simplifying the amount of paperwork I have to do, or for that matter players have to do.  I don't really care whether they write "BlasTech DL-44 heavy blaster pistol" or "blaster pistol, high-yield design, stun setting."  They're mechanically the same, and unless the equipment matters to the character, a pistol is a pistol is a pistol.  If it's a Trademark Weapon, I expect more, but that's again a matter of specificity to encourage roleplay.

How does this relate back to the original theme?

Kylo Ren.

Kylo Ren is a German longsword fighter; he specifically constructed that lightsaber to behave like a historical European longsword rather than the katana-like behavior we have usually seen, with more use of the point than the edge, theoretical quillions, and a body of strikes at the opponent's weapon instead of a "soft" parry, and he uses positions such as the "long point" that make it clear that they drew on European longsword work.  This is another case of Trademark Weapon (Kylo Ren's Lightsaber) and Trademark Style (Meyer or Talhoffer).  An opponent familiar with the style can neutralize its advantages fairly easily, and he keeps getting into situations where he fails to capitalize on either his style or his weapon (he seems to like fighting corps-a-corps, then failing to capitalize on it), denying him the use of that bonus.

So - to wrap it all up, if a character is going to have something special on them, it should be conveyed.  How is it their Trademark? How are they Obligated? If on the other hand it's not special, it's just gear or whatever, general terms are just fine.  That threshold is more philosophical than statistical, but given that my view of RPGs is as collaborative storytelling, philosophical matters to me.