Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Garran

  1. The main reason that you end up with offense > defense is that if you don't then combat becomes padded sumo. Which might be okay if you want to dedicate an entire session to whittling down 10% of the opponent's staying power, but not otherwise.

    As for the PCs vs Palpatine, I'll second what some others have said: if he's dumb enough to let a bunch of competent assassins corner him unprepared, he deserves to get splattered.

    He shouldn't be that stupid, though.

  2. I'm inclined to feel that holocrons as such are something that you mainly see among the Jedi/Sith because they're part of that tradition and both groups were reflexively traditionalist - holocrons might not have been the best option for storing a lot of that stuff anymore, but by golly, they were the way things had always been done!

    Other groups probably did make their own equivalents but they'd have no reason to specifically copy the Jedi/Sith models, or to stick to using the same thing if they came across better options (depending on how traditionalist they were).

  3. 14 hours ago, immortalfrieza said:

    Thus your players will seek to counter it by looking to make even more money


    The opposite may also happen: the players will become completely cynical toward offered rewards - why bother/care about them when the payoff is just going to get arbitrarily yanked away again?


    Either way, the effect on the game/group is toxic.

  4. None of the above.

    If someone wants their character to be fully light-side, the system is designed to allow that. Likewise if someone wants their character to be dark-side, or to bounce around in the middle, or have a rise-and-fall, or fall-and-redemption, or whatever other arc they feel like going for.

    And if no one is really all that engaged with the narrative angle, ditch morality in favor of something else - duty or obligation work just fine for force sensitives, and they may be more appropriate to the character/campaign.

  5. Obligation is a bit messy because it was meant to be a kind of alternative currency but ended up being treated as a pure penalty system in a lot of the material. Getting obligation from a crime boss because he did something for you and now you owe him a favor is fine. It's also fine to get a bounty obligation from that same crime boss because you engaged in an unauthorized requisition of his capital assets - but you shouldn't really be getting one just because he's in a bad mood that day.

  6. It's also worth bearing in mind that PCs in the setting are themed as action movie heroes and are thus generally presumed to be broadly competent, even if they only have specific expertise in one or two areas. In short, they're rarely 'untrained' in the d20 sense.

  7. He didn't spot the creature...

    ...but he now realizes that something is out there.
    ...but he inadvertently makes the ambush more difficult by where he goes or what he does.
    ...but something else ends up drawing the creature's attention away.
    ...but a random friendly happens by and the creature is now up against worse odds.


    Of course, the triumph could also do something unrelated to the hidden creature but still beneficial to the PC.

  8. A talent that adds a boost is always going to be useful, so there's no issue there.

    Setback-removal talents really depend on whether setbacks come up with any frequency. This is somewhat playstyle related and somewhat situational, but some option to provide a boost is feasible. I'd suggest requiring 2+ setback removals to get a boost since a single setback removal is much less valuable than a boost die.

  9. The other major issue is that, while FFG's implementation makes force-users pretty much on par with non-force users, it has not been the case generally, and the bad taste tends to carry over.

    It's also worth reiterating that 'force user' != 'Jedi'. The two were typically treated as synonymous in older material, and this still tends to confuse things. Someone who is force sensitive is in no way compelled to adhere to Jedi (or Sith) ideology, or even to know what those traditions are.

  10. Like a number of things, failing an astrogation check amounts to 'do it again until you get it', which is really only meaningful when there's an active hazard or hostile.

    When something like this happen I'm increasingly inclined to borrow 'succeed at a cost' from other systems - you succeed anyway (as if you had 1 success) but generate 3 extra threat.

  11. My feeling is that the breakdown is better used for session planning. Actual outcomes will vary because you can't really be sure what the PCs will end up doing, but if you're looking ahead to a session (or set of sessions) you can use it as a measuring stick for whether you have enough for the players to do generally and enough potential front-stage moments for each character specifically.

  12. Once you start talking to the person to try to get them to think about the things you want to know, you've entered into the realm of social skill checks. It could be Deception, Charm, or Coercion - Negotiation is unlikely, since even if you're framing it as a haggling session, that's not what you're actually trying to achieve - but it isn't just the use of Sense anymore. The upside here is that the check difficulty probably won't be anywhere near as high as if you were trying to get that information by purely social means.


    As for reading someone's thoughts and whether this is conflict worthy, I'd say that it isn't inherently so. Why you're doing it matters (intent), and so does what you do with that information. Scanning surface thoughts isn't necessarily conflict worthy, but whether you have the professionalism* to keep anything you learn appropriately confidential might be - and that's where the actual temptation (and potential conflict) comes in, since you *could* easily abuse that sort of knowledge.


    * I don't know offhand if there are other sources of telepathy in the SW setting (there probably are, considering how expansive Legends got), but they'd be dealing with the same ethical issues even without morality/conflict at work. Really, it's one of those things that most sci fi settings with telepaths don't bother to think about too much except to make the bad guys obviously abuse it.


  13. 3 hours ago, Mefyrx said:

    So if a PC makes a roll to see if he trust someone and he doesn't know the result nor the difficulty, a failure as a GM you will tell him that he is trustworthy and the PC will therefor tend to trust you more than he knew he failed the check.....same for a success ….you'll say that he succeed but he will still keep a little though that he may be wrong.... and I would tend to believe that this adds to the game instead of impairing it....enforcing that players play their characters properly...

    If you really think that this sounds like a great idea then there are systems designed around the Gygaxian Screwjob style of GMing. This isn't one of them.

  14. I'd be inclined to add this to Foresee by way of an additional branch down the right hand side. Something like...

    [ Control 1 ] You get a vision of the most significant event involving the object (if there has ever been one). You can only do this once. Cost of 1 force point.
    [ Control 2 ] You can make that vision be of any one event (it doesn't have to be the most significant) that it was involved in. You can still only do it once.
    [ Strength ] You can now get a vision of one extra event by spending 2 additional force points (can be used multiple times).
    [ Mastery ] This gives you a (nonstacking) Boost die to any rolls that involve understanding the object or relating to the events witnessed. Can be activated once per event witnessed at a cost of +1 force point each.

    Needless to say, this can only be attempted once per object, at least by a given person/group.

  15. You can be an intimidating leader who leads from the front but you don't lead from the front by intimidation unless your objective is to get stabbed in the back.

    The concept of a warlord is also far too specific to be a universal spec.

    The game already covers this sort of thing though. While the options offered by Donovan are all good, the Commander/Tactician specialization from the AoR core book is pretty much a warlord by another name.

  16. Bear in mind though that the PCs aren't obliged to intervene in everything they happen across, so unless there's a specific reason for them to intervene then you shouldn't expect them to sit around watching a vignette play out and working themselves up into an emotional froth over it.

    The cause of the mutiny and the people involved may also be a factor: if it's because Lt. McBackstab decided that they wanted to seize power that's one thing, and the PCs could go either way on involving themselves. If it's because Commander Cadaver thinks that Darth Sidious is way too soft a touch and his soldiers aren't willing to stand for it anymore, well, that's a completely different kind of mess, one that they'd be well justified in staying out of. On the other hand, if they're Alliance operatives and this particular officer is known for being one of the more sympathetic sorts (or at least less unsympathetic sorts) then there's a good reason to try to put a stop to it, since whoever replaces them will probably be worse.

  17. The trouble with that vis a vis the way conflict works in this system is that you don't need to do anything evil or even particularly unpleasant to end up dark side. As written, you can end up there just by fibbing too often or because you're one of those people who just can't resist taking the mini soap bars from your hotel room, and it's a little hard to see someone going full-on Darth Sudsius just from that.

  18. One of the uses of Vigilance is to see whether the character has something with them that they do possess, or at least are reasonably likely to possess, but might not have with them at any given moment. That includes all the incidental odds and ends that PCs accumulate.

    Destiny point flips are for conjuring things that they otherwise do not have.

    "Accountants & Audits" style play is something I grew fed up with a long time ago and won't touch in the present day though.

  19. The problem, in other words, isn't that a setback die is applied for being under direct threat. The problem is that the direct threat of someone shooting at you doesn't become two/three times greater because the patient has a more serious injury, so it should be adding a setback die, full stop, not one per crit category or the like.

  • Create New...