A topic that's been rolling around in my head for a while.

The past two sets have had a pretty big influx of text on cards. Some of it is overly stacking a card with abilities, others are making some pretty complex abilities. In all honesty, I have been a bit slow with the V5 rules stuff, because having to write the 4 pages of V4 glossary sort of burnt me out. That and I really like having the cards when making the FAQ and catching Errata. I have seen some comments on this, and thought it was worth opening a topic on.

Now, I'm not innocent on this. Some of my early drafts were quite complex. I also had some very stacked designs as well. The longer I look at the set, the more some of the more simple stuff has stood out to me. Make no doubt, some of the more stacked characters do bring out older pieces, which is a very fun goal I have in designing pieces. But I look at the Muun Guard Colonel, and it's fairly retro design is really growing in appeal to me. One SA, one simple CE. The average amount of abilities a character will have has risen, even on the cheaper pieces.

Now, there are pieces that do deserve new abilties, and some more complex abilities. There are also characters that the fans pretty much demand to be stacked in terms of abilities. But is that necessarily right for the game? There are some abilities that were made that I think were overly complex for no reason.

So what are your thoughts. Should big name/big cost characters have barely legible text, if it means they can play like they feel they should. Is there no more room in this game fo simplicity, of making good figures with very few abilities? What are good guidelines to follow. I know, I look at the last few sets, and am thinking more and more about simplifying my designs.

Seems you have three questions here; First, should the community go with long, complex SA's/FP's that create something new and unique?

New abilities/powers are a necessity; you can only make so many combinations of WOTC SA's/FP's before you start making cookie cutter pieces. Some abilities can be simplified, sure. Some need a complex explanation. What "niche" are you aiming at? That answer will go a long way in design.

Second, who gets what? I've always tried to keep to a simple formula. Common pieces, 1-3 abilities, Uncommon, 2-4 abilities and nothing super unusual for either (otherwise they wouldn't be Commons.) Rare can get 1-2 unusual abilites and 1-4 "normal" abilities and Very Rare comes down to what is the real purpose of the piece; more on that later.

Third, should the community try to make uber pieces that are all things to all people?

I think WOTC made a million Vader's for a reason; each serves a slightly different purpose. When you catch yourself making a uber piece, just ask the question "What am I aiming for with this piece?" Yeah, Luke/Vader/ etc, are big pieces that could have 10 abilities, but you can't fit that many so what are you trying to create with this new piece and yet still keep the essence of the character.

Ultimately, I say keep it simple .....

Apologies for rambling .... its late.

This discussion is very timely for me. I've been reading the old Jedi Counselling articles and one of the Minis questions was on the Lightsaber SA not being a melee attack. The answer was that the minis game was meant to be reduced complexity and that level of detail was more suited to the RPG. WotC kinda backpedalled on that with Poison Blade and Blaster, but the point still stands: the minis game was designed to be a simplified, faster-paced game. I think that would get lost when a lot of time needs to dedicated to learning complicated new abilities.

I think there are still a few avenues to explore in combinations of existing abilities. One that always stands out to me is the Kashyyk Trooper: Double and Mobile so you can either stand and shoot or keep moving. It seems like those 2 options have been developed separately (the mobile one especially with GMA et al), but there aren't many pieces with that kind of flexibility or that require that kind of decision making to run effectively.

If it comes down to a choice between a 'definitive' version stacked with SAs or a series of versions reflecting different aspects, I would say it depends on the character. I'm happy with Malgus being that complex because the character doesn't interest me enough to want a second version. Other characters would be different, but it's all personal opinion on which ones, so consensus is virtually impossible.

First, I don't really like the overwhelming slap of abilities with a size 2 font. I didn't like it on Revan when we got him in Kotor, and that opinion hasn't changed much over the years. I find the font hard to read, but worse, i find it tedious to keep the whole card in my head and it tends to slow down the game and become overwhelming. The example that jumps to memory from the v-sets is Mara Jade Skywalker, Jedi Master: i see her card and just go cross eyed.

I do feel like EPIC pieces are an obvious exception here, as well as the 100+ point pieces. These pieces i feel deserve the ability to do all these things, and it makes sense on them. Not to mention, its significantly easier to use a weighted piece like that when they take up 1/2 or more of your squad. Some of these are used more for high point games (300+), but 200 is still the standard for SWM and in that format, i feel like they're manageable.

Being able to do everything the characters have done in the books, movies, and videogames is not really in the spirit of this game. While its cool to see those characters from time to time, SWM was built around picking a character, picking a scene or theme for that character, and building around that.

I can tell you, being a veteran from A&E, that i find some of these pieces overwhelming, and I think I have a pretty good head for stat memorization. My GF has only played post V-Sets, and its hard as hell to get her to play with me, because from a new player perspective, how the heck could she possibly feel like she knows what she's doing when she looks at piece like MJSJM and sees 18 different abilities that have various triggers? A piece like that sucks to play with or against for a newcomer. It's really turned her off to the game. I know at this point the v-sets are more about keeping established crowd interested, but it should be noted that it does make an already hard-to-sell-to-newb game even harder to sell.

As for new abilities. I like them, and its one of the things I look forward to in any new set (Wotc or V-set). I do think there is a balance to it though, and feel like maybe the v-sets have gotten excessive with it, but they've also made weak factions competitive, so, it has worked in the favor of the game i think once you weigh all the pros and cons. I suppose my advice is "all things in moderation".

I like simplicity, and your example of the Muun is a good one. I really like that piece, and he's solid in his build. Coleman also comes to mind as one of the best designed pieces in the new set, and he's pretty straight forward.

My concern is, can you go back at this point? I felt like the 40 piece sets that WOTC started releasing saw a lot of pieces that no one cared about... because they were "underpowered" by the then-current game's standards. Pieces like the last mace from MOTF or either of the WOTC's final versions of Kit Fisto didnt have a chance at competitive play, because the designers were working backwards. Less abilities, pay more for what you get. There was no room for that with the established pieces. I'd like to say, yes, the game would be better off with pieces that were simpler in design, but it is going to put a heavy burden on the designers. They will need to be able to make pieces that are simple, yet effective, and thats the real trick. otherwise, you'll make some really cool pieces that i'll love, bust most people will hate because they're only good for theme'd and casual play squads.

As for the complexity of new abilities? Well, i think that heavily depends on all the above factors. The more new abilities, and the more stacked abilities it has to interact with, the more complex that already complex SA/FP becomes.

Look at the too rated customs, I know I hav a couple up there but most are praised for their simplicity. For being just a "new for the faction" ability on an older piece. There are a handful of abilities that come to mind right now that I believe shouldn't have been even made because they are so close to what already exists.
I much prefer minor variations of old abilities. Instead I flame rounds for the Mandalorian what about flamethrower 10 and he just costs cheaper?
Acrobatic = wall climber
Covenant watch circle = tactician
Crushing blow = lightsaber precision
Second wind = heal
Cortosis armor = lightsaber duelist
Grenade launcher = missiles
Visions if doubt = stun
Score keepers blessing = absorb life energy

Were what I felt was a bit unecessary this set.

A bigger thing is what was mentioned about just not giving pieces lots of SAs, does someone really need rapport? Jolt? Sniper? Etc...

Most pieces should try to have less then 3 SAs with the exceptions of uniques that need a a couple more.

The nice thing about Epics is there you can dump out ons of powers and complex SAs. But in my opinion most of the old republic set could have stood to lose one to three abilities each.
Looking at the set by itself makes it seem no so bad but when you remember there are two sets a year plus mini sets it gets pretty complex pretty fast. That is why some of play group have even stopped building their teams and just ask me to since they can't figure out their complex interactions anymore.

It's not to late to implement simpler interesting pieces and I challenge the design group to give it a shot for one set and see how it's received?

I have to admit, when looking at some of the v-set cards I have flashbacks to playing Yugioh with my son and squinting hard to read the text. When we play the Epics, I just print them at full-sheet size, lol. (those are excused though ;)

Overfull cards are definitely an issue. Wording abilities to be work correctly and be understandable is often pretty hard to do. Sticking to slightly simpler mechanics for SAs could cut the text down a lot. Simplifying wordings is a good goal, but changing wording styles too much makes the relation of new abilities to existing ones less obvious, so that is a bit of a double-edged sword when it comes to remembering what does what.

I think more emphasis should be given to simpler designs. There are some shining examples in the v-sets, the Muun being one, OR Senator, Pellaeon, Spaarti, YV Worker, Sith Recruit to name just a handful. There are quite a few more that are overlooked with so many pieces to try out (and so little time).

There is still untapped potential, not just with WotC pieces but within the v-sets. Example: the Mando Blaster-For-Hire counts as a Mando Trooper. We now have the Flame Trooper, plus the original Mando Trooper. There isn't anything in faction that is specific to troopers. Should there be? I don't know, but there are SAs that were put on cards throughout the life of the game that never had much (or any) follow up to make them useful. So I'd like to see a lot more of these simply designed pieces that work to help connect those dots and fill in the gaps.

I like characters with big toolboxes too, but there could be less of that in future sets. Save it for the uber-beats and commando types, for the most part.

Thats kinda my take. I like a lot of the new pieces, but pieces like the muun commander, jann ors, Marn, the new yoda, and new lando are my favorite. I've always felt that i'd rather get more play from old WOTC pieces by improving them, rather than complete redos. Like the new BH Luke... i really was hoping for tweeks to Grand Master rather than a reboot. I know im not the only one around here who felt that way. I know there's only so much you can do sometime, but i feel like protecting what WOTC established and enhancing that it rather than just leaving it to history is also important.

Cortosis Armor was added by WOTC, btw, and is functionally different from Lightsaber Duelist.

Duelist gives you a bonus to your defense.
Cortosis Armor lets you prevent damage and mess up an opponent's attacking.

I don't think you are understanding what I'm saying. Because I'm not entirely sure I understand what you are saying. I think we agree. And I'm more than happy to talk to people and discuss this, if our opinions differed I wouldn't be unhappy to hear that. I really like Grievous, Hero of Hypori and Ki-Adi Mundi, JM. I'm not saying pieces shouldn't be remade, my point was sometimes the effort into making a support piece to fix ONE piece isn't worth it and a remake may be in order. Ki-Adi Mundi or Darth Revan are both very good examples of that. Having one piece fix many (like Yoda) is great! I'm all for that.

I greatly believe in simplicity, I think the problem is the left hand stats seem to stay unchanged(hp,de,at,da) I would rather see a tweaking of stats rather than giving abilities. Rather than giving a figure evade, why not give them higher Defense and more hitpoints? Or give a figure higher base damage and attack than, assassin, JEDI hunter, opportunist, and so on.

I would set guidelines like this:
Common = 1SA or FP
Uncommon = 2SA or FPs
Rare = 4 SA or FPs
Very Rare = 8 SA or FP
Epic = go to town.

Abilities like melee attack, double attack, force 2, force renewal 1 don't count towards this limit.

Tons of abilities and card text slow down an already dragging game plus discourage new players from learning.

I'm not sure if its because of printing issues, but 60 figures per set is to much IMO when almost every card is a novel:)