R7-UP: 7up R7-A7 - 7&7

Watch the movie Ice Pirates

"The main clarification i need is, if i have astrogation at rank 1 and the related characteristic at 1 too, does it make sense too spend xp in order too increase the rank to 2 or will this be a waste of XP?" Your total dice pool will only ever a 5 (6 with Cybernetics). So if you start with an Astrogation Skill of 1 and a Related Skill (Intellect ?) of 1, your starting Die Pool would be 1 Y When you raise your Skill it will progress as follows: Rank 2: YG Rank 3: YGG Rank 4: YGGG Rank 5: YGGGG You will be more likely to get successes at a Skill rank 2 then you would with just a Yellow alone. As you raise your Intellect, you would be upgrading 1 Green to a Yellow each time you did so.

Remember that carriers are not designed to go toe to toe against other capital ships in a battle (that is what their escort group is for), rather they are about force projection and amplification. Naval architects found this out during WW2 where several "unsinkable" battle ships were destroyed by fighters (The Bismark, Yamamato, the bulk of the 7th fleet in Pearl Harbor) and even the naval battles around Midway which saw a US and Japanese carrier group fighting each other with just their fighters.

"I understand everything that has been said in this thread, but I think in regards to the OP question as far as for the rules not allowing the option to use XP to increase a character base stats after character creation, where as some of the NPC entries plainly did so, just seems to be as I stated before broken in that is effectively stating that one entity within the SW universe can do something that another (one who is supposed to be the star of the story - the PC) cannot." So a D&D Dragon that can fly, breathe fire at will, has a Strength of 22+ and so on where PCs are typically capped at 18 to 20 stat wise, cannot fly or breath fire is not broken? The monsters obviously use a different set of rules for creation then PCs do and no one complains....

In any system you (as the GM) need to have at least a basic understanding of the underlying math. You need to at least have a general idea what an appropriate level of challenge is to make a "good story" for you and your players. For example, in D&D you would never even think about throwing the PCs against a monster that has an AC of 30, when the highest bonus to hit in the party is +12 and the average is +10 (having only 5 to 15% chance of success) unless you wanted the PCs captured, the mage to shine, or to reset the campaign with new PCs. The same applies is this system, you need to know how adding a red, purple, or black will alter the odds of the player succeeding, getting advantages, and so on.

Also, your argument is not internally consistent. In particular: "The effects of this that I have noticed so far are: - The dice are less predictable in their results, all four combinations of results turn up more often, not just success+threat and failure+advantage" Is directly opposed to: "- The predictability of the dice is based on the difficulty of the maneuver. If you are doing something very easy, you will likely get success+advantage. - Players uncomfortable with the degree or narrative randomness coming into the game appreciated the more foreseeable results" So on one hand you are stating that rolling twice is less predictable, yet the it is better because you can predict more easily what is happening...

Which brings up the point, that even in more rigid systems like D&D 3.0+ or Pathfinder, that having a "Balanced encounter" has little to do with, "My PCs are Power level X so the NPCs should be at the same power level." You need to have a firm understanding of the underlying math of the system and how the PCs will stack up to the NPCs and vice-versa. In D&D it is realtively easy, for an "Average Difficulty" encounter both the PCs and NPCs should be able to hit each other between 60% and 75% of the time. Also, average damage output should be considered as well. As noted previously, that unlike a Class/Level system where a level X player will be at a specific power level, in this system a Marauder, BH, Enforcer with, say 250 XP, will be built differently then a Politico or a Doctor with the same amount of XP. While the combat centric characters will have a less difficult time in a combat situation then the social characters will, the reverse will likely be true for the social characters in social encounters. Which means, that if your party is all social type characters at the 250 XP level, then throwing them into a situation where they need to face a combat situation that was tailored to a combat heavy party of the same level, will likely be a TPK or a massive failure for the party.

Do remember that story where there was a comfortable Hobbit "Living the good life" and a wizard shows up with a dozen dwarves to invite him on a journey to steal the treasure from a dragon and the Hobbit says "I don't do that" and stays home? Work with the player to bend their background to suit the story. If the player insists then he stays behind and needs to make a new toon

There is also the fact that, while the individuals droids were less competent then a clone trooper, they were able to be produced much more quickly and relied on mass wave attacks to overwhelm the line.

Are you doing damage correctly it is base+1 dmg per success NOT base +1 per EXTRA success. So a hit with even a regular blaster is doing a minimum of 7 dmg (6+1 for the success). Also, make sure that the player can say what they are doing with advantages. Causing strain to a minion is a free wound effectivly, so if a player got 1 (or even 0) success but like 3 or 4 advantages that is potentially 3 or 4 more damage to a minion, or setbacks that can be applied to the target. Also a minion group should fight exacly as that. So a if you have 6 minion guards, they should fight as either 1 group of 6 or 2 groups of 3. This will lessen the incoming shots at the party.

Better yet...have the local Imerial Garrison pick him/her up as a person of interest and bring her to the local Governor's office which the person that they signed the contract with is waiting to "remind" them of the terms of their deal but they need to keep watch on them while they build a case to take out his network. They then get released...weather they get a Imperial "Tune-up" or not is upto you and the PC

Commissioning a new ship design is going to cost a ton of creds. They need to pay for material, labor, design fees, testing of the design to make sure it is space worthy, and dry dock time at the very least it will also likely take 6 months or so at a minimum to design and test and then another 6 months or so to build. The reduction of consumer price with "stock" vehicles is to to mass production. Also, if you have a unique ship, then there is really no need to track you as the ship arriving would set off warnings.

I would handle it as vehicle to vehicle combat with setbacks added for cover (as typically about half of the target would be covered by the vehicle) ontop of those imposed by the driver for any manuvers that they have,

Evasive Maneuvers to try and lose pursuit or make it harder to hit you...

If you do not routinely add Setback dice, then all of those ignore 1 set back per rank of X talents are just an XP tax to get to something else in the tree. With upgrading dice pools, the DP economy should keep flowing one way or the other and used by the GM to add the possibility of a Despair result when dramatically appropriate.

I would be interested in the "The Oncoming Storm" camaign if there is still room.

Keep in mind that the X-Wing and Y-wing need the Astromech unit in them to make hyperspace jumps as the droid is the astro-navigation computer to make hyperspace jumps with. So removing the droid is not a long term solution.

Q:"How much do you charge for prosthetic limbs/cybernetic limbs?" A: An Arm and a Leg!

Near humans are easily made by taking the base line human and customizing the 2 skills that they start with, and adding physical description to match. In addition, you can pump 1 attribute to 3 and drop another to 1

There are at least 2 follow up adventures on the web site (Long arm of the Hutt and one other) for EoE, and 1 for AOR

I also would recommend the beginner box idea (remember that there are 2 more characters for each on on the FFG site). After they have played that and they making there own characters, I highly recommend using Character Development Worksheet from Simon Fix http://simonretold.c...opmentSheet.pdf This will allow the Players to knit their characters together by allowing them to have pre-existing backgrounds together (think Han, Chiew, and Lando or R2, Leia, C-3PO) and have a reason to work together besideds "You are all in the Hutt Cantina when..."

Watch pretty much any episode of Star Trek TNG or Voyager for ideas

Another option is to borrow from Age of Rebellion. The party either has a ship OR a base of operations. Just give them a number of obligations as dictated by the number of players and say that they are stuck on the station for the first part of the campaign. If you want to change scenery have the station have a beat up Lambda shuttle for short excursions for a change of scenery every so often.

I have never agreed with this approach as it penalizes players that are not able to quickly think on their feet and you are actually using the PLAYER'S Charm (or Negotiation et al) and not the CHARACTER'S Skills to make the judgement on. For example, you would not recommend that a player punch you (or hit you with an axe) to modify how well their brawl or melee attack would do. Gotta disagree with this. I think it's a great approach. "I attempt to charm the guard." roll dice - result....ugh, boring and unimaginative. "I make some flirty eyes at the guard and ask him when he gets off duty." Interesting, now I have an idea of what's happening. He's young, single, and gets off duty soon.. blue die! He's married, and extremely loyal to his spouse and his employer.. black die! As for stormtroopers, I think a lot would be based on location. Central worlds, likely unable to bribe or charm. Outer rim, more possible. Some distant posting in the middle of nowhere, or on a planet run by corrupt officers, there might be a possibility. As for combat. I'll do the same thing. If the player comes up with something creative to do during combat, I'll allow them and give them blue or black dice accordingly. Did you actually read any of the thread after this post? As I said, there is a difference between describing an action and giving a player a automatic success or failure on the roll because they, the PLAYER impressed you, THE GM with what they did. So Player X wishes to attempt a social action, say a seduction attempt on a young princess to get into the court and pulls out a Shakespeare Sonnett and delivers it with passion and impresses the GM. Bravo...however that is the PLAYER doing the action not the CHARACTER doing so. At best it should be a boost die and NEVER an automatic success, which is what I was objecting to.