I mentioned in my previous post that rules shouldn't become subjective. Nickname used to talk about this a lot. He used to say that the rules have a logic all of their own, and there was a danger in subjectively changing them, no matter how 'illogical' parts of them seemed. Once we start doing that, where do we stop? The whole turn based system doesn't make sense in real life, where one person does something and then stands there while another person acts. Why can't Jedi cut through doors? Or walls? And when in the movies did you see a Jedi hack someone like 6 times before they died? How can Sith Rage make someone's blaster shot do more damage? Why can't you occupy the same space as a force spirit? There are endless illogical things that result when trying to convert what we've seen in movies and read in books into a miniatures game on a gridded map. Who gets to say "Change just these things, and then the game is fine."?

Actually, the Legacy version does. Bronson has set this whole thing up that if a character turns out to be too powerful, take him out of the rotation. If enough people playing don't like a rule change or want something else changed, you can do it. Bronson has said several times that the tournaments are playtests in themselves. I don't hear complaining coming from people playing the format, so that tells me that the concept is working. But there are others who don't want to play that format. They want the consistency of the WotC rules and the knowledge that those core rules won't be changed. Maybe they feel that subjectively changing the rules changes the game for them and they don't want to play the game the way someone else feels it should be.

I believe that having these choices makes the game more fun for everyone. The Legacy version doesn't hurt competitive play, and renews interest and excitement for those who participate. Those who play the traditional game can still measure themselves against anyone anywhere who plays the game using WotC's rules. That was something Nickname strongly believed in; that 2 people from anywhere, as long as they could communicate, could play because the rules were consistent.

Which is why you have lightsaber defense, lightsaber block, lightsaber deflects, parry, evade, riposte, djem so, makashi, soresu, force absorb, force cancel, force bubble, and every other off turn force power that deals with reacting to what the other person is doing
personally, i have no idea

I have seen arms and hands hacked off, I have seen Luke Skywalker hit Vader and it just pissed him off. I have seen Obi-Wan cut off three appendages of Anakin/Vader, Darth maul was literally cut in half, in the clone wars you see lots of injuries. Should it be 6 times? no, HP are going up for jedi and nonjedi alike.

it most definitely should not, there should be an addition (on melee attacks)

We ought to be able to.


At this point the community at large can make these changes. Since these changes make sense and are in fact logical they will not be that hard for people to accept.

it is clear that people are not wanting to make small changes to the game. I seriously have no idea why, but it helps to know that they understand that the rules are silly. It makes it hard to know that we have the power to do something about it and purposefully decide not to.

Rule changes are an easy thing to do. Standard mini's can still be standard mini's its not going to change it. For instance the NFL makes rule changes every 2 or 3 years. The NBA makes rule changes all the time. The MLB just made a massive rule change that will directly effect the game.
The best organizations adapt when needed or desired to create a better product.

Anyhow, the horse has been beaten enough ;)

Mando, I would love for you to host an event sometime in the future. Would lvoe to play some Dynamic Duo league or something

Jen'ari, you are participating in every aspect of Legacy. That format is gathering momentum and is everything you are wanting. Why are you insistent that everyone conform to that approach? Why don't you instead pour your enthusiasm into Legacy and leave the traditional format to those who enjoy playing it? I've tried explaining game logic the way Nickname did years ago, but I guess I am missing the mark. If you are interested in what he said on the subject, it was on an interview on Star Wars Miniverse at least 3 or 4 years ago.

The fact that a bishop in real life doesn't only move on white squares is precisely my point. Any rules system in a game is going to fall short somewhere in abstracting real life. It is more important not to allow subjectivity to creep in where tournament and competitive play comes in. That's the whole point...consistency. Does that consistency create silly situations? Sometimes...but it also allows for confidence that the literal translation of the rule will be correct. When you start allowing subjectivity to enter that process, then different interpretations of intent rise up and pretty soon you don't have a strong rules base.

I have been a judge for a number of regionals and events at GenCon and I will tell you that consistency in the rules makes it far easier to judge events. For playing the game...I am thankful for what is going on with Legacy and I am excited to see some of the new designs. In time, when I get Vassal up and running, I plan to participate and enjoy that format. For judging an event, however, give me the WotC rules. Even when I run Assassin at GenCon, a format that I created, the rules changes that I myself made give me headaches.

ehhhhhhhhhh, they are afraid of change simple as that. they didn't want to believe daala needed changed, they don't believe any crap wizards stuff, rules or pieces need changed, and they don't believe in truly changing the design team, or even changing how the game is presented to try and bring new players in. they are so stuck in that stupid, well we have done this for 10 years now, so lets just leave it alone that they don't want to see anything else happen.

instead of trying to make it more realistic and understandable, Example:

playing with someone for the first time and I attack them with mara jade jedi adjacent, he's like ok cool, a lightsaber attack, i'll block, well you can't, why not? because its not a melee attack. IT'S A FRICKING LIGHTSABER! WHAT THE HELL! this is stupid. another example, ok i'll double claw attack you, ok i'll parry/block, nope wait its not a melee attack, WHAT THE HELL, ITS HIS FREAKING CLAWS!!! HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

Realize that we don't want to change the rules because "that's the way they are", but because we don't see the need to change them. It's as the old adage goes: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Change just for change's sake is never desired and generally makes things worse (i.e. New Coke or Qwikster).

Also, we've yet to be given two definitive answers to major questions:

1) Once these changes are made, where will they stop? If Lightsaber is changed, would that change extend to Lightsaber Sweep and Assault? What about Double Claw Attack then? Would one attack be non-melee and the other melee? If the Mice are changed, would it apply to ewoks and jawas as well? Even the ones that are medium base instead of small? If these changes were to be made, we need to know exactly where the line is being drawn, and exactly why situation X needed to be changed, but not situation Y or Z.

2) Who would be deciding these changes? And don't say majority rule of the community, as that would just cause the game to degrade into a slog of minute changes of Calvinball proportions as well as being very inconsistent with decisions (Keep in mind that the masses believed that Boba Fett, Bounty Hunter and the Viper Droid broke the game far worse then GWOK ever did). Who would be propped up to represent the game and be trusted to make fair, balanced, and most importantly, consistent rule changes while avoiding all personal bias? And would they be willing? As without a clear central authority to issue these changes, all the attempts to change will have the effectiveness of pissing into the wind.

than it is just a difference in play style than. Personally, i would want the play style to reflect Star Wars as much as possible.
Also, this isn't about making a New Coke, its about making normal Coke better (which they have done many times over changing lots of things)

to answer some of your questions, at least how I think about it.

1) Lightsaber sweep and assault would already be changed because the lgihtsaber was changed, you can only use sweep and assault against adjacent enemies, lightsaber says when attacking adjacent enemies its a melee attack.

Double Claw Attack should also be a melee attack. any attack that is, in reality, a melee attack should be a melee attack.

Mice should be the only ones changed because there is literally no argument that they can provide cover, there is an argument that an ugnaught can provide cover. Perosnally, if it were up to me small pieces would only provide +2 defense when granting cover to someone else, but thats nit picky and too complex, so I would just leave it at mice droids for the sake of ease.

As of right now, the only two rules I see as changing are the melee attacks and mice. So, for now, that is where the line would be drawn. If other things present themselves, than so be it, the discussion is had again.

2) who would decide them? why a committee of course. A committee of trustworthy folk. Who designs the pieces you play with each v-set that comes out? just a group of people. The committee should be taking what the community thinks and discussing what should be done about it. You act like their would be rule changes every week. There is no need to be frantic. Legacy has about what 6 rule changes all total or something. They are not going to mess with large rules, just small things like discussed.


But in all reality do you think the game was meant to be played by using cheap tactics like 10 mouse droids brought in by Lobot so you can totally out activate your opponent and kill 1 or 2 pieces the entire skirmish and only have three rounds of play?
I bet you anything that is not how the game was supposed to be played, people find lame loopholes and abuse them. I know people are going to say, that is part of it, thinking about what is the best strategy and using it. Competitive play means you use whatever you can find.
Which is total bollux! Competitive play is about knowing the game, playing within the bounds of sportsmanship, and not trying to gain an advantage through dirty tactics under the guise of "legality".
NPE's are sometimes brought on by the lame tactics the rules allow people to abuse. If we can limit the abuse by changing a silly rule than we can limit NPE's. (thinking about the Kol with Mof 2 and Leia rerolls being killed by Mara Jade with a lightsaber)

I think everyone is in the same boat that playing against a 32 activation squad that has 10 mouse droids and San Hill is an NPE.

While I appreciate the desire for "reality" and agree with it in principle, it sounds like some people really want a roleplaying game.



Lightsaber Sweep is also on Aurra Sing (CS) and Luke Skywalker of Dagobah. They do not have Lightsaber. Would their adjacent attacks be considered melee when using Lightsaber Sweep? What about their regular adjacent attacks when not using Lightsaber Sweep?

In what sense would Double Claw Attack be melee?
* Whenever this character uses Double Claw Attack, it is melee
* All adjacent attacks by a character with Double Claw Attack are considered Melee
* A character with Double Claw Attack can choose if its attacks are melee or non-melee if it only makes one attack


I don't know why, but Wizards apparently just didn't think of how to appropriately distinguish the combination (melee/non-melee) attackers until later in the game. They went through multiple iterations:

* Ignore it - they're just nonmelee. Give them Lightsaber or Lightsaber Assault or whatever, but they're nonmelee attackers.
* SA to make adjacent attacks melee attacks (Poisoned Blade)
* SA to allow a special ranged attack (Blaster 20)

With Poisoned Blade, the rules in some sense got more complicated because "counts as a Melee attack" doesn't say it gives the Geno Melee Attack, but it does for all intents and purposes (such as the interaction with the Czerka Scientist). They never did get around to what I think is the cleanest way to do it: "This character gains Melee Attack when adjacent to an enemy."

whats your point in the bold? Because ya, Jedi own the verse, I saw Yoda single handily take down a squad of battle tanks and droids easily. Darth Vader just took on like 15 BH at once.
He blocked a shot from Han Solo with his bare hand.
The idea that Jedi should have an extreme edge over non-force users (for the most part) is a certainty. something standard really needs to start moving towards.

Not stinking Talon Karrde having a huge impact on the game. or a duo Lancer Droid defeating an army with 4 Jedi Masters.
Or Poggle bombs being devastating. Its hilarious to think that, consistently, the most powerful squads do not contain Jedi or Sith.

I, personally, do not see why every jedi does not have some form of lightsaber reaction that occurs for when other people attack (block, deflect, reflect, riposte, djem so, makashi, soresu, etc)

That would be nice, but "fixing" things is not nearly as simple as you make it out to be. You're now advocating changes to three abilities: Lightsaber, Lightsaber Sweep, and Lightsaber Assault They would all stipulate that they are melee attacks.



I don't have any preference. Just drawing out the nuances. In your first wording, the character must declare that they are using Double Claw Attack before the first attack (since they both would be melee if used). Currently, you don't have to declare the use of Double Claw Attack until after the first attack is over. (And if you want, you can move instead of using Double Claw Attack.)

In your second wording, the first attack is nonmelee, the second attack is melee. If the character has Twin, the Twin off the first attack would be nonmelee. The Twin off the second attack would be... not sure. It would need an FAQ answer, but presumably should be melee.

If one were to press for a change here, I think the best wording would be "This character gains Melee Attack while adjacent to an enemy."



As I said earlier, I don't really care either way. I like more "realism" but I've gotten used to the idiosynchrosies of the game so they don't really bother me anymore. If there were a groundswell of support for certain changes, I wouldn't object, but as the above illustrates, changes would need to be made carefully or things could get very confusing. I don't think there's going to be a groundswell in any case.



Getting people to agree on things is seldom an easy process.

You should have to declare dbl claw, just like (i dont know this ruling so I will use the word should) you should have to declare not moving for +10 damage on dedeye or +4 attack on careful shot.

Ya so the two seconds I put into it did not fully cover what needed to be said. But if changes occurred there would be more thought put into it of course to make sure you are getting exactly what is wanted.


I dont either, and since Legacy is out, it takes away the edge (haha). I am kind of in the same boat as Jen'ari in that regard. Present ideas (apparently these ideas have been thrown around before and no one wants to do anything about it) and if they are not hitting the right cord or whatever, just move on.

I am currently tied for second in the Legacy league and can hopefully continue to do well in the league and have a blast!

However, I still do not understand the idea of not changing something that really should and could be changed. even if its just one detail