Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Garran

  1. An occasional source of confusion IRL is the use of "doctor" as a title by someone with a PhD, leading to the incorrect assumption that they're a medical doctor. In the right (wrong) circumstances, this can have life-threatening consequences.

    However, you could certainly use this for RPG-worthy confusion and/or comedy; the character has a doctorate in something completely unrelated to medicine, thus the title.

    Or somewhat subvert it: they have a doctorate in something unrelated to medicine, but they're ALSO reasonably competent at medicine. Just not as much as people would assume the title "doctor" to mean.

  2. The power would end as soon as you no longer had the dice available to commit and keep it sustained, so single-check boosts to FR wouldn't be useful for sustaining anything.

    If the talent boosted FR for an entire scene then you could commit them and keep the power active until the scene ended, though.

  3. Do not use random die rolls to increase individual stats (whether skill ranks or anything else). Whatever is given should be given to everyone equally. Granting extra XP is usually the safest option because it can be spent in whatever way the player feels is appropriate to the character.

    What isn't clear to me is why the characters had different careers in the past. If the concern is that the player wants to use a career from a different core book, that's not a problem at all: you can use an EotE or FoD career in an AoR campaign without any changes.

    Obligation/Duty/Morality aren't required to make any of them function. In an AoR game you can have all of the characters use Duty regardless of which book their career came from, and that is generally the simplest thing to do, especially if you are new to the system.

  4. There's no need for Sense or to wait for a check in most of these cases. If someone has any ranks in any remote-relevant skill then you can simply say "The Den Mother's rage doesn't feel natural." (or whatever else fits) when describing the situation.

    Most of the time the players will pick up on that. Whether they decide to act on it is another matter, but if they do, that's when you move on to the resolution mechanic.

  5. A few individuals or small groups might also be convinced to defect if they're presented with solid evidence of the Empire's crimes against (whatever matters to them) - evidence that had clearly been concealed/covered up by the Empire while they were working in its service. Even better if they were involved in the event and can have a "Wait a minute, I thought they..." moment.

    Large-scale conversions are still unlikely, even so.

  6. I'll differ a bit here with P-47. While it's true that Negotiation should pretty much always involve the PC as the active characters, in the event than an NPC is doing the same thing and going around looking for a buyer they'd be getting the same outcome: they can find a buyer for it at X price and may or may not choose to sell at that price.

    Note, however, that this still doesn't mean that the PCs are the one and only potential buyer out there. The NPC has found SOMEONE out there who is willing to pay that price. The NPC might decide not to sell if they don't like that price, but if they do then player agency would be deciding whether they want to be that buyer (or at least match the buyer's price). If not - and it'll depend entirely on whether they think the item is worth it - then some other NPC ends up with it.

    This may or may not matter, although I would only ever consider doing this if the item was some sort of MacGuffin and the PCs merely being made aware of the sale could be significant later.

  7. And I'm in agreement with P-47: general use of Negotiation to see what price you can get just sees what price you can get. It doesn't mean that any sale has happened.

    Threat/despair doesn't mean you irrationally sold it for nothing; it does mean that the process was somehow more laborious and/or drew unwanted attention (from someone with a reason to be interested), etc.

    On the flip side, advantage/triumph might give them a lead on a better place to look for a deal and/or provide some other opportunity involving the (whatever) - in other words, incoming plot hook.

    Re the salesman, most people dealing with them have probably already decided that they're going to take whatever offer is made because they just want to get rid of the thing. I'm not in that much of a hurry, so I can wait for a better deal.

  8. Getting four failures, two threats, and two despairs would require a minimum of what, seven upgrades to the standard difficulty? And even then a 'perfect' result on all of those dice (and the GBY ones too).

    If they're trying to sell something with that much heat attached to it then no, they're not selling it for a bit less than they hoped with that sort of result. They're not selling it at all; they're probably fleeing the region with every major faction on their tail (and the Benny Hill theme playing over it).

  9. If there's no specific requirement to sell/buy the item RIGHT NOW then there's no reason that either (or both) parties can't walk away from the negotiation if they can't agree on something they're both happy with. It happens all the time IRL. (Even if I dicker with someone over the price of my used car, I'm not obliged to sell at whatever price they finally offer.)

    The Negotiation result tells you what the best possible deal is (and it might well involve talking to many potential buyers/sellers, not just one person in particular).

    If that's not good enough they you can wait and hope that the market improves, or move on to a different one. That takes (more) time and potentially travel, but it's valid as long as you have the patience for it.

    If the negotiation is over something that has to happen RIGHT NOW then you don't have time to play the market and may have to take a bad deal, or cope with whatever consequences arise from not getting (or getting rid of) whatever it was. (Which probably leads to a new encounter of some sort, for good or for ill.)

  10. If you want a very fast-and-loose hack, treat the character's emotional strength/weakness as a Duty per AoR, but rather than gaining it via goals, they gain it any time their emotional strength/weakness comes into play in a dramatic fashion, regardless of how it actually resolves. (Succumbing to the emotional weakness is just as valid as overcoming it!)

    You don't have any ranks or the like associated with it in this case, but some minor perk related to their strength/weakness can occur when it hits 100 and resets.

    And whether they're light or dark is entirely dependent on the narrative.

  11. The ideal situation for a group of undercover rebels might be to get a mission from the Moff that they can do without compromising the Rebellion... and use that for cover as they also carry out a mission for the Rebellion. As long as no one is able to put the two and two together they could play that relationship for a while.

    The Moff's individual attitude will matter too, of course. In particular, if they're one of the light-touch types then the rebels might want to quietly support (or at least not destabilize) their position since if they're seen as failing then their replacement would almost certainly be from among the worst of the iron-fist set. The social gatherings could actually be rather relaxed ones in this case but navigating the resulting political minefield will be another matter entirely.

  12. Depending on what the place was used for, there would be a lot of relatively mundane stuff that might still be of interest to historians/researchers/etc even if it doesn't have any direct relevance to force use or the Jedi's signature tools/technology/training. Nonperishable supplies, components, and so on could be taken and used or sold as-is. Records, artwork, and other curios would take some legwork but a buyer could probably be found (or trouble happen if a Despair comes up when trying to find one).

  13. It's down to what the campaign will focus on, rather than which book(s) the careers are taken from, and is something that the group should work out ahead of time.

    This goes for all three subsystems. Force-sensitive characters aren't *required* to use morality; it's there if the character/campaign arc is about internal emotional struggle, but if that's not a major theme then it should also be set aside.

    For that matter, you don't actually have to use any of them if none really suit your campaign structure. The system won't break.

  14. The mechanical solution to a light-side character that has normal emotions is the system exactly as it is. The Jedi were WRONG about a lot of stuff, especially by the time of the prequel movies when they'd become hidebound. In fact, I'd peg the fact that they kept trying to pretend that they could set all emotions aside as one of their biggest screw-ups. On one hand, it meant that they pretty much met the definition of 'Apathy' as an emotional weakness in the Consular book, and on the other, it meant that they didn't know how to cope when those emotions inevitably surfaced; it was really only a matter of time before they ended up pulling a collective Anakin that way.

    So-called negative emotions aren't necessarily a problem for a light side character either. Feeling them is fine. Letting them rule you is when you start going down the dark side drain.

  15. Most structures probably wouldn't have system strain since they aren't a boxed set of complex integrated systems that operate under extreme conditions. Short of cutting power to the building, it's not going to just stop working all of a sudden. (And even if you did cut the power, buildings will have far more non-powered features and functions than a starship will.)

    So you're generally only looking at hull trauma/structural integrity/etc, whether for the structure as a whole or for individual parts. (And once again you're less likely to be dealing with 'all the structure at once' effects than you are to be smashing up individual bits and pieces of it, unless you're dealing with a really small structure or a really big explosion.)

  16. Back up a step: why are the inquisitors repeatedly putting themselves in that position, especially if their targets are known for doing it?

    "I'll just have to send another, slightly stronger version of the same thing after them..." is Evil Overlord List behavior. By this point any inquisitors showing up ought to be using completely different tactics that don't leave them wearing a giant DISARM ME TO WIN sign.

  17. Does the character actually want to install it, or do they have in mind to get a slicer to mine the thing for data? The latter would actually be a reasonable (if somewhat distasteful) course of action considering that Garais turned out to be something much more than just an academic administrator.

  18. In a case like that, and especially since it doesn't really matter who does or does not detect the thing, only whether someone does, it would be more appropriate to have a single check (using the best available pool, or in the case of being on a ship, whoever is manning the sensor-related station) with a boost die added for every extra set of eyes. Having EVERYONE make a check means an unwarranted flood of advantage/threat (and starts making high Vigilance a de facto requirement so that high-difficulty 'spot' checks like this don't hammer the PC group with masses of the latter).

  19.   There's nothing keeping Duty to a squad level - a single person with Duty is still duty-bound to whatever it is. If it's the Rebellion then they can fulfill that duty as part of whatever operation they're involved in, even if the other PCs don't care about it.

      Smuggling? Resource Acquisition is definitely one Duty that fits neatly into that shtick; the Alliance brass might not want to know where that hard-to-acquire but conveniently plot-necessary thing came from, but they sure appreciate having it when it's needed...


  20. 2 hours ago, damnkid3 said:

    For the control ability I would still keep the light side points can only be spent on positive thing and dark side can only be spent on negative things.  So the person doesn't spend 3 light side points to boost his lie or coercion check.   

      That would really depend on what you're doing with the check, particularly in the case of lying. Lying for personal gain is (generally) conflict-worthy, but lying for other reasons isn't inherently so. Lying to protect an innocent person from harm is by no means conflict-worthy, and is also more respectful of free will than just Mind Tricking the person (aka "These are not the droids you're looking for.")


      As for Mind Trick, the one character that I've played that made use of it always did so in ways that seemed like a plausible suggestion in the context, so it didn't look odd to observers and the target wouldn't think anything odd about it either (either at the time or when reminded later). Subtlety really helps with a power like that - and subtlety isn't a strong point of the movie characters who tend to fool around with it, which leads to most of their later problems...

  • Create New...