Jump to content

Xcapobl

Members
  • Content Count

    308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Xcapobl

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

673 profile views
  1. Just eyeballing it depending on the location the scene is set should be enough, I think. How rare is a Twi'lek on an Imperial shipyard facility? In an Imperial prison camp? On Ryloth? The same for Chandra-Fan? How Human-centric is the Mos Eisley Cantina? A general guideline? Take the home planet of a species (Humans have several noted as specifically human planets). The species is very prevailent there, others being diplomats, rare tourists, traders. The systems surrounding that would probably have a couple of colonies and outposts, making the species sort of prevailent there. Other species there would have a bigger chance of being traders, travellers, etc. In other systems beyond colonies and outposts, that specific species fills the role of diplomats, traders, travellers. And then there are (primarily, but not always, Outer Rim) hives of scum and villainy.
  2. Xcapobl

    Move

    That's no excuse! 😉 No, seriously though. I am no native English speaker as well. However, anyone with a dictionary, both in print or online, can find the entry for "object" and notice that it rarely, if ever, directly refers to a person or animal (i.e a living creature). Other entries in many powers, talents and rules do refer to "creature", "person", or even "character" specifically. So the use of the word "object" over other words I mentioned, or their synonyms, does seem to imply the intent of only being able to use the Force Power Move on non-living objects (blasters, lightsabers, Imperial-Class Star Destroyers, etc.). The fact that we need developers to tell us the intent of the Force Power was to be able to use it on NPC characters as well (both droids and living creatures like Stormtroopers), made me wonder why they didn't change the write-up in Force and Destiny. They had all the time since Move appeared in earlier books, and received feedback, to change it. The complete text outside of the Force Power tree also didn't include characters with objects. Very harsh perhaps, but I simply look at the number of participants in a minion group, or their equipment, individually if necessary. The squad rules are a step up from simply saying any minion group is Silhouette 1 because each minion is Silhouette 1 (assuming human-sized minions, not Chandra-Fans, Toydarians, or Ewoks and the likes), but that doesn't take into account the number of participants. Do I interpret it correctly when I say a minion group of 2 Stormtroopers is Silhouette 2, but a (squad) minion group of 10 minion level Stormtroopers is Silhouette 2 as well? (Regardless of whether a minion group should ever be bigger than 6 participants for adding 5 skill ranks to their minion group skills.) As I mentioned before, squad rules may say say a minion group is Silhouette 2, but (for example) using Move to grab 5 blaster rifles from 5 Stormtrooper minions would, to me, constitute using Move on 5 Silhouette 0 targets. A character should have the appropriate upgrades (Magnitude, and Control) to do so. Likewise, using Move on the minion group itself would constitute using Move on 5 Silhouette 1 targets (assuming a group of 5, of course, good luck picking up a hypothetical minion group of 10 Stormtroopers). In my opinion, we have the minion rules. They can form a squad of sorts, called minion group in the rules. Then there were squad rules, probably to also include leadership fellows, like a rival level sergeant? There are also vehicle squadrons. What would one do if a character has all the relevant Force Rating, Move upgrades and range and magnitude and strength and control, so the player might say: "I pull the TIE-Fighter squadron consisting of 6 TIEs, all piloted by minion level TIE Fighter Pilots, down to crash it into the ground"? 1 Target (squadron), or 6 (number of TIEs)? Silhouette 1 (pilot), 3 (TIE Fighter Silhouette), 4 (TIE Fighter Silhouette, plus 1 more for the fact that there are more than one TIE in the squadron), 6 (6 TIE Pilots / TIE Fighters total)? And no, I am not as harsh as you might think, not at all. I will never say this to be Silhouette 24 (6 TIEs, 6 Pilots, 6 Blaster pistol side arms, and 6 utility belts) or even more (all manner of other objects they might carry). Bringing down 1 Star Destroyer by means of the Move Force Power isn't Silhouette 40.000.000 or something like that. I don't want to feel forced to listen to a podcast for one piece of information, read an online forum for the next piece of information, read a transscript from an interview with a developer for another piece of information, and so on. I do still think that Keeping It Simply Stu___ is the way to go. Give me a simple and official downloadable errata sheet, where it is clearly mentioned that Move can target "an object, droid or creature" instead of only "an object", and that groups/squads/squadrons count as a number of targets equal to the true amount of targets, looking at the Silhouette of individual members or vehicles within that group. Of course, that applies to any and all of the rules inconsistencies, oddities, and what not. One source on the relevant Product Page on this website is all we should need. Je parlez Français un petit peut. Maar ook ik heb Engels niet als mijn moedertaal.
  3. Going by RAW, your first option is invalid, as you must have more talents of the next lower TIER, not an equal amount. Nothing you couldn't house rule, but still. I think I would prefer your second option as well. It would keep the higher TIER slots open, and you can always take a TIER 1 talent to start a new row.
  4. Xcapobl

    Move

    Opposed to what @whafrog is saying, I will agree fully here... that the long text uses the word "object" and not "object or creature". And the problem here is, I'm affraid, the FaD Core Book itself. Page 287, the brown sidebar on Force Powers and Narrative. It specifically mentions Move or Bind to be used on another character to prevent that from falling off a balcony, or at least prevent the crash down below. Bind, or Move, on a colleague (assuming living, sentient being here). And that in turn led to many debates, and maybe even a clarification in a podcast that not everybody listens to.
  5. Framed you say? Part of this Obligation might be to find a lead to a piece of evidence. All the while being involved in another mission, the character would be very eager to find that evidence. Life threatened by a rival? Exile Obligation in this case might mean an encounter with a bounty hunter, or even an assassin, hired by that rival. You know, just to silence the character. Wanted dead or dead. (Yes, overlapping a Bounty Obligation, but narratively clearly related). Nasty stuff you mention? What if the character Obligation is triggered, and as a result some people related to that nasty stuff come looking for that character, believing the framed part to be true? How would the character handle a hunting civilian mob that believes him to be the killer of their loved ones?
  6. Xcapobl

    Move

    To which we both seem to agree. 😂
  7. I can see why whafrog is doing this. I have a sister thread, about swapping individual talents. The Smuggler Pilot is an old specialisation talent tree, from the first book ever published for this RPG. Each and every book thereafter, as long as it included a new talent tree, also seemed to include a couple of completely new talents. Barrel Roll for example, is a new talent that only Clone Pilots seem to have, while any pilot ought to know how to twist the control stick left or right and spin around his forward axis. Updates on old talent trees? Nah, don't invalidate printing. Rules to swap talents within talent trees? Nah, deal with it yourself. TIERs for those new talents, and balance within talent trees? I do wonder, if FFG were to ever release a second edition, if they would indeed insert a system like Genesys. A more freeform talent pyramid, and careers being nothing more than a narrative description with a few career skills attached. The Genesys talent pyramid does have its own quirks, however. For example, once you have bought a couple of Toughened talents, its TIER went up each and every time you took it in addition to the previous ones. So in the end it constantly returns as a TIER 5 talent, vying for that TIER 5 spot with many other talents, both up0TIERed talents like Grit and other ranked ones, and talents that are TIER 5 to start with. Assigning TIERs ourselves is a matter of eyeballing. If you say that a talent would have the minimum TIER that it does in Star Wars, thanks to the Padawan specialisation Force Rating would have a starting TIER 3 for anyone. The Nightsisters open up Witchcraft (and thus Force Rating 1) for anyone at TIER 1.
  8. Xcapobl

    Move

    And that depends on personal interpretation, in my opinion. Which is why I would agree with @whafrog again, and @GroggyGolem, about Move not being stellar in its wording. I would never call a character (being a minion, rival, nemesis or player character) an object (something lacking true sentience or true AI like most droids have, and yes, even B1 battle droids in the series seem to have a rudimentary form of intellect and a sense of self-preservation, suppressed by a droid control ship). All the different RAW prints, errata or clarifications (especially in podcasts that some people find annoying to listen to while they seem to contain vital information for the flow of many games) and all the house rules muddy the situation even further. Having a power target one object, and then adding characters to that definition of objects in supplemental rules source X... Several points to respond to here. Yes. A minion group could be a target. If I have a character that makes one combat check against a minion group, and I deal enough damage, multiple minions from that group drop. Some powers, talents and rules use different wording, and one mentions "one object", another targets "a target", the next affects "a character" specifically. All different terms with different meanings, and I do still believe the different wording is fully intentional. As is wording like "one or more..." as opposed to "one...". This opens up a lot of debate. If you see a droid as an object, could you then target an entire minion group when you may target "one" object? Is a group one object? Or is one minion group, for example, five B1 battle droids with five battle droid blaster rifles, and therefor a total of ten objects? Clear and consistent wording of rules text might have prevented many play groups to have had to make up things as they go. Obi-Wan, Bind, Dark Side Points. Yes. Why not? He had Qui-Gon as his mentor and example, and he cheated at Chance Cubes to get the boy and not his mother... In game terms, using a Dark Side Point to get the upper hand against a numerically superior foe might not be such a bad idea, it shows that a good character under stress might have to make bad choices, and one Dark Side Force Pip does not a Fallen Jedi make. Getting too hung up on wording is never good, but a little thought on speficically defined parts of the text might still be necessary. Talents and Force Powers especially are notorious for this. The talent tree and Force Power flow charts sometimes omit info that must be gleaned from the full text on ethe same page, or in a totally different chapter. Take Misdirect, for example. The green fllow chart mentions that "a target at up to short range..." will be unable to perceive something. I have had a simple misinterpretation when a player wanted to use Misdirect on a camera system. It is a target and it mentions just that on the flow chart. But then I pointed the player to the full text, which mentions a "living target", so technically (even if they weren't already immune for reasons) a droid couldn't be affected by Misdirect. Surprise, surprise. So aside from droids being immune to certain Force Powers just for being droids, they, and any other surveillance equipment, can't be fooled. Move and the mionion group as a single target. Sure, I could dig that, as you also target a minion group with a single combat check, and you can drop two, three, or even more if the total damage allows. But why Silhouette 2? Just so you have something affecting Move, and not the difficulty of combat checks? Why not Silhouette 3 if the group consists of 5 or more minions? Because that would affect combat check difficulties? What would I roll if I target a Silhouette 2 minion group, yet decide to (or only have enough Force Pips to) only affect one Silhouette 1 member? What if it is a minion swarm of 10 or more Silhouette 0 creatures? Would you target this as Silhouette 0 (for its component creatures), Silhouette 2 (for your idea of groups being larger than 1 member), Silhouette 10 perhaps for ten members, or Silhouette 5 for ten members, each being rather small? While I understand the drive to make house rules, and I know I made them for other systems in the past as well, they do remain just a highly individual patch up for errors or inconsistencies or simply less movable parts of the rules. Start opinion. Interestingly, and I must stress this to be an opinion here, I don't think Move as a power needs so many house rules. It targets one object. Not one character (including droids for being a character). Not one group of characters. It affects Silhouette 0. Both specifics about number and size defined can be altered by adding Magnitude and Strength upgrades. Everything else added to the RAW print in the core books, including allowing it to target characters and creatures in some form, only complicates matters further, and is itself open to interpretation and individual addition through house rules (often against abuse). I realise there are things like the sidebar on FaD page 287 about Force Powers and Narrative, where a GM might allow a character to use Move or Bind to stop friends from falling. But such permissions would have had to be in the relevant descriptions in my opinion. The free choice means one GM will allow it, and another one won't. Bind "restrains an enemy" and Move affects "one object". Both are short and clearly defined. A sidebar with a special permission, depending on free choice to use it or not, leaves a lot of room to wriggle. And a can of worms wriggles. 🤣 End opinion.
  9. Xcapobl

    Move

    I would say you can't target minions, @whafrog. The basic power of Move (referencing to FaD page 298 now) specifically targets "one object" of Silhouette 0. Not a creature, not a minion, not a group to be seen as a single entity. The book description of the Move Power (not the green flow chart) specifically mentions the basic power may not be activated multiple times. So true Force-noobs without Magnitude upgrades, and the Control upgrade that allows pulling stuff from secure mountings or opponent's grips @c__beck mentioned earlier, would still not pull even one blaster rifle from a single Stormtrooper within that minion group. Even with the aforementioned Control upgrade, it would still be only one object, so only one blaster rifle from a single minion level Stormtrooper. At least until a Magnitude comes into play for this power as well, requiring at least two Force points, one to activate the power itself, one to activate Magnitude. When somebody does have the Control upgrade, allowing them to use their action for a Force Power check to disarm a single minion doesn't feel like such an overpowered thing to do anyways. They spent 30 XP to get through the Move Force power tree to be able to do so. Another 5 on a Magnitude upgrade to pull more than one object away from their opponents. And then, when a Rival or Nemesis level opponent gets to resist, For free, no XP expenditure, on account of just being Rival or Nemesis level (or another Player Character). "But how did Obi-Wan and Qui Gonn Jinn move about all those battledroids which seemed like minions to me?" As far as the rules of this game are concerned, not through the Move Power. Look at the Bind Force power (FaD page 286). It targets "one target" and not simply "one object". It has a Control upgrade to move that target towards, or away, from you. For the right type of Force points spent, you damage or even critically injure the target(s), thus easily taking out those battledroid minions. It can be expanded upon to stagger or disorient the targets (narratively representing them falling over and getting up again... narratively... if they didn't 'die' through damage or crits). And yes, I am well aware of clever players, who then justify to use the Force power Move to 'target' the opponent's belt or something similar (any Silhouette 0 object, basically, that the target cannot simply let go of) and fling that into the wall behind the poor NPC. Been there, punished that. 😁😉
  10. Xcapobl

    Move

    Maybe not for minions, but I can see what you did there, @whafrog. FaD page 283 also mentions this specifically, in the top bar about Resisting Force Power checks.
  11. It all depends. When you look at the tables on page 104 of the Genesys Core book, you would see Triumph could be used for minor things in combat that only need one Advantage to trigger, less minor things that need 2 Advantages, or even more major things that need 3 Advantages. However, it doesn't seem to work the other way around. When you specifically need a Triumph, there is now way you could spend Advantages for that. Not 4, not 5, not 20. Only Triumph. That last example is true, again, when looking at certain Talents. Look at Counteroffer, page 75. It requires Triumph. No mention of Advantages. Same page, the Berserk talent adds Success and Advantages. It doesn't add "Triumph equal to X Advantages". As such, the ratio of Advantages to 1 Triumph is rather dependent on the specific table, talent, species ability, or other rule you invoke. As such, I rarely decide that ratio myself; it is there, in the books, per situation. I would say the same, with different examples and pages, for Threats and despairs.
  12. Hmmmm. Might have to reread some parts there then. Never really made heavy or even medium use of Stun (neither setting, quality nor damage) at all. Yep... Back at my books now, and somehow (probably by not using it much) I overlooked the fact there are 2 (3) Stun entries... Stun Quality, Stun Damage and Stun Setting causing one of the former... To keep things clear, I guess.
  13. Light Blaster Pistol comes with a Stun setting. Blaster Pistol comes with a Stun setting. Blaster Carbine comes with a Stun setting. Blaster Rifle comes with a Stun setting. The Stun part is an item quality that can be added to many weapons, in as far as they don't already have it. A lot of the more basic Blaster type weapons can fire a normal blast, or use the Stun setting. If it is omitted from the tables, just look up the full descriptions.
  14. In every game I played (KOTOR 1 and 2, for example) and every piece of (now Legends) story I read, Cortosis weave seems to be more common in times when Jedi (or at least lightsabers) seem to be more prevalent. Every description mentions its rarity, yet it pops up everywhere, it seems. As such, I wouldn't equip every single Minion level Mandoa-mook with one, but Rival level officers and higher might as well defend themselves with Cortosis vibroswords, cortosis lower arm bracers, etc. Short out a lightsaber, lay down a bit of firing solution onto a Jedi now relatively defenseless (Parry and Reflect depending on a Lightsaber or Melee weapon), see part of the problem disappear. Remember, most people would state, that reactivating a lightsaber is but an incidental. But it must be your own turn to use an incidental. Only a rare few things are out-of-turn incidentals, always specifically noted as such. It's hard to mitigate a soak 12 without resorting to the big guns. A lightsaber has its Breach quality, ignoring Armor (and thus Soak in the tens and twenties unless there's cortosis or some such). There is very little that can do so in kind. Perhaps a man-portable armour piercing laser cannon as a support weapon in (or more likely behind) a minion squad? The aforementioned Basilisk war droid claws? First break the means, then the men and women behind the means. What provides the tremendous Soak bonuses? Can that be targeted and then broken (if, for example, Jedi Battle Armor with mods)? How about Stun Quality weapons? Stun must be activated but causes strain, doesn't count as damage, and thus bypasses Soak. What good is Soak, if you drop 500 kilograms of netting onto a Jedi, thus immobilizing him or her? Granted, few things to be truly done in melee. But once you crack the shell, you might get to the meat inside a little easier.
  15. Four words: Mandalorian Basilisk War Droids. Or use jetpacks and flight freely, a lightsaber only has so and so much range, as do unaugmented Force powers. High soak does jack-excrements to a land slide caused as an ambush. In short, intelligent opponents could always play off an opponent's weaknesses instead of trying to batter through its strengths.
×
×
  • Create New...