Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Shizuya

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I can't seem to find a good page in my books right now to back it up but I'm pretty sure that setting up traps should be skulduggery, maybe mechanics or even survival. But not deception which is a skill for social interactions (I may stand corrected if I'm wrong here). Other obvious contenders for the list would be perception, maybe resilience in hostile hunting grounds, discipline for fear or suffering from hunger/thirst if things dont go well. coordination/athletics for a chase in difficult terrain.
  2. I did let my player do such a thing with an opposed brawl check, which he has to do every turn in order to keep the enemy grappled. just make sure to add setbacks or boosts depending on how weakened the enemy is and I probably wouldnt let that happen to a nemesis enemy without good reason. it may sound too strong but I had a 4 brawn 2 brawl marauder PC try to grapple an enemy like that and he failed to do so 3 rounds in a row, which eventually just wasted a lot of time. with enough advantages/triumph any NPC will still be able to hit the PC holding the meatshield ofc.
  3. I've been handing out full XP for every character for the first 9 sessions. I didnt want the balance to be screwed early game but the XP have been rather generous so I dont think missing one or the other session is doing much now in that regard. Then I talked about missing sessions with my players and we agreed that they should get half the xp, rounded up. Their characters usually have smaller roles when they dont participate in a quest, for example being ready to pick up the rest of the group with she ship or other minor tasks. I personally don't think it is punishing. Every character in our game has something unique to him/her that no other character is very good at. For example if my slicer is missing 3 sessions in a row because of a business trip, he is still the slicer of the group once he comes back. If you had multiple characters in competition that try to do similar things, e.g. multiple force users then yes, it may cause someone to feel less significant in the long run. It really comes down to preference but also how much XP is actually earned in a session. We play every sunday for something like 6-8 hours and I've been giving 5xp per hour. So one player missing 3 sessions can later come back with over a hundred XP for not playing and that just doesnt sit right with me.
  4. I have several thoughts as to why this game will probably fail. Even though I'd love to have a decent star wars video game once again. first off the CEO of EA is said to have very little interest in the star wars IP which was leased by his predecessor in 2013. instead andrew wilson has made it very clear that he wants to push EA's own IPs. so the star wars license is more or less a (probably costly) liability for EA and disney is also not very happy with the deal, considering EA has only made two AAA star wars games (battlefront 1&2) since 2013 and both of the titles havent been huge successes in the long run. there were rumors for some time now that the exlusivity deal with EA and disney is going to end prematurely, maybe as early as 2020. so now this game trailer has come completely out of nowhere and the game is going to launch in only 7 months, which should raise an eyebrow on its own. look at games by quality game studios like cyberpunk 2077, which has been announced as early as 2012 and doesnt even have a release date today. my apprehension is that EA knows that they are going to drop the star wars license soon and they are pushing very hard to release another game which will probably sell through its name alone. so I'd say wait and see ofc but dont get your hopes up too high and mentally prepare for another launch desaster
  5. they way I'd understand it is that it should only work on driver actions which are listed on page 233+ in the EotE core rulebook. my understanding is that while piloting a jetpack, you're not making an action with the vehicle when attacking.
  6. In my group I handle money that way: every day the group spends idle on a planet, shopping, healing etc costs them a varying amount of money. the group has established a crew pot where 50% of the earned credits go to and is used to repair and refuel the ship etc. so for example a day on nar shadaa costs 1000 credits from the crew pot which includes the hangar bay, refueling etc. and about 100 credits for every player character (sometimes more if they go to a bar etc). this can be much cheaper on planets like tatooine, the downside is that there is much less trade and fewer rare items etc. I also houseruled buying items quite heavily. for example an item costs the base price plus the rarity x10 in credits. 50% extra if it is restricted. then the character that wants to buy it has the chance to negotiate to reduce the price by 10% per success and can use a triumph to negotiate even further. a despair can mean the trader makes an ultimatum on the price or loses interesting in selling altogether. every item has a minimum selling price of the base cost plus a percentage depending on the rarity. rarity 10 items cannot be cheaper than item price plus 30%, rarity nine is base price plus 25% etc. I never let them buy below the listed price in the books. oh, and buying rare and exciting items is always a real encounter against an experienced and cunning trader! I also use despairs to damage items sometimes, the PCs then have to spend the money on replacement parts. for crafted weapons I houseruled the base value as material value (e.g. energy pistol 200) plus 100 for every triumph and advantage spent when crafted. Last mission I let the PCs buy infos they needed for the quest and they 3/6 players also got robbed by a gang of streetchildren when they walked through a crowd of people (100 credits for every failure in a perception check plus 500 for a despair). that being said the players usually earn good money in their missions
  7. Well I think in many cases, coercion isnt really about trusting a guy. and hutts are indeed rather intimidating to most people. My player argued that he is an upstart hutt who isnt as obese and physically lazy as most other hutts and thinks the way of the modern hutts makes them weak (his second specialisation is marauder). I also told him that while that might be even more intimidating to everyday joes, people who are very knowledgable of the underworld will know that he is basically a meaningless hutt just from looking at his physique, so that is a huge potential for setback die. (As hutts portray their power by letting others do their dirty work, becoming absurdly obese is a sign of influence and power in the hutt society) I am aware of how downgrading works etc. the issue with intimidating is that I basically cannot but any challenge die in the pool. I would need to add 5 challenge die to actually have one left after intimidating and I dont think I can justify that with most NPCs (as I need 2 more to gain a challenge dice first and then upgrade it). Now that I am writing this, would that 4th challenge dice that was made by upgrading and already RRR pool be impossible to decrease again? Anyway, I can sure put lots of setbacks to the check but intimidating really is an issue there. even if I give the NPC only nobody's fool 1, the talent intimidating doesnt say the PC must take one strain per rank, it just says you suffer a number of strain of your choice, which cannot exceed your ranks in intimidating. And I honestly have no clue how to effectively use strain in out-of-combat scenarios yet, so there is no real way around intimidating. but as I said that is totally fine with me, I will just go different ways to make the talent non-cheesable which was my intention to begin with (and not make it useless or take away from its fun potential)
  8. I really dig the idea you portrayed here! the talent is indeed a double edged sword, thanks for making that clear. well the player just bought the talent on sunday so he hasn't even used it yet but knowing him I was just wondering how I could limit the potential cheesiness of the talent. he's also not a bad roleplayer (it's rather me being GM for the first time) but he is playing a rather arrogant hutt agitator and he does put his foot in his mouth from time to time thanks for all your answers, I feel a lot better about the talent now 😜
  9. well that's one way to handle it. I just looked up the description again and it doesn't state that the talent makes these NPCs friendly to the PCs, just that they "become unhappy or try to take action against an authority with power over them" 😏 this could actually lead to some very interesting (and unwanted!) situations... well the problem with that is my player has intimidating three times and he could buy it a 4th time with the agitator spec alone. and he is also using it on every occasion he can. but if he tried it on imperials for example I can see myself give setbacks for their loyalty to the imperial cause, them outnumbering the PCs, the PCs being wanted criminals, their officer being nearby and so on.
  10. oh you're actually right it is a hard check. well this player has intimidating 3, coercion 3 and willpower 3 so far, so I'm rather unlikely to be able to add a challenge dice but setbacks should be fine. I totally agree with the individual minions. I dont want to nerf this talent too much, that's why I'm here asking for thoughts I actually recommended this tree to the player since he was the last to join our group and it fits pretty well tbh. I think it will be a fun ability but like I said, I think I will need to give certain NPCs some plot armor once he starts using it 😂 on the other hand I can put lots of pressure on my group to make him use it and make it feel really useful on top. thanks for replying!
  11. Hello fellow GMs! So, one of my players is playing a hutt agitator and he has now bought the "incite rebellion" talent, which can make up to three NPCs oppose their faction when the PC succeeds on an average coercion check, once per session. While I really like what this talent can do (although I dont know if this needs to be a talent tbh), I know my players well enough (we've been friends for years) to know that he will use this talent whenever he gets the chance. While I already stated that this wont work or at least not be that easy when targeting a group of stormtroopers or very loyal NPCs, I already see the player protesting that it should always be average difficulty because the talent says so (and ofc he invested quite a lot xp for it). I personally would handle the ability in a way, that he can indeed make NPCs mutiny when poisining their thoughts etc. but that would be in a non combat scenario. In combat I would make this talent much more difficult depending on - are the PCs outnumbered heavily? - are the NPCs a group of loyalists or just mere mercenaries working for the highest bidder? - how convincing is the player actually when using the talent? what are your thoughts on this? should I just handle this player free cake once per session or up the difficulty? I think I would let the player try making a really hard check if he wants to try against the odds and only session-lock the ability once he has finally been successful. Very interested in other opinions here since I dont want to be unfair but I know this player will cheese the heck out of the talent if I let him.
  12. No. You cannot normally have any skills above rank 5 except with cybernetics, as stated on page 173 in the Core Rulebook.
  13. well my adventures led the group to nar shaddaa, the smuggler moon a.k.a. little coruscant because I love the planet thematically. stuff isn't hard to find there. Finding any item is also quite luck based. I've had a player with 1 green die roll a success on a hard negotiation check to find an item lol it was rather expensive due to disadvantages but still
  14. Contrary to everyone else's opinion on this here, I personally wouldnt mind giving this player a better bargain for his starting gear. I dont think this would "penalize" characters who didnt invest in negotiation. Or you could argue just as well that this player would be "penalized" for not performing as good in combat as someone who has invested in combat skills. That is kind of the point. No one in my group has invested even a single XP into negotiation 4 sessions in now, so I personally would try to encourage my players by allowing this.
  • Create New...