Here is an interesting question this brings up with me. Just because you have a talent that applies to damage like in this case do you have to use it? I mean it is your talent you should have control whether it comes into play or not. That is just my two cents on the talent.

Here is the thing...There are some Talents that you can "Control" those are the Active Talents...You have to tell the GM that you are using said Talent...BUT if it is a Passive Talent, like Lethal Blows, you have No Control and it just activates when the conditions are met.

As to the OP question...If you are an Evil PC and do not give a shiznit about the Galaxy at large and just want to Shoot First, Shoot Often, Shoot Again, and NEVER ask questions...Use that Disintergrator!! Keep it and PWN the Hell out of everyone.

But since you sound like a PC with Morals (Ironic since we run around the Galaxy w/ Vibroaxes & Blasters that in RL would VAPE EVERYONE IT TOUCHES) then sure make some coin and sell that sucka.

But since you sound like a PC with Morals...[snip]...then sure make some coin and sell that sucka.

If a "PC with morals" is inclined to not to use a disruptor, how would they justify selling it? Making a prophet off of something so dangerous being secondary to keeping the thing in circulation (presumably in the hands of a new owner - someone with less moral character even more willing to use it).

Ok would conscience be a better word than morals??

Here is an interesting question this brings up with me. Just because you have a talent that applies to damage like in this case do you have to use it? I mean it is your talent you should have control whether it comes into play or not. That is just my two cents on the talent.

Here is the thing...There are some Talents that you can "Control" those are the Active Talents...You have to tell the GM that you are using said Talent...BUT if it is a Passive Talent, like Lethal Blows, you have No Control and it just activates when the conditions are met.

I would certainly allow a PC to turn off a talent like "Lethal Blows". They learnt how to do something, they ought to be able to not do it, too. If a talent was the result of something unremovable, like armour they wore or enhancements to their weapons, then perhaps not. But a talent that represents just learning or increased physical aptitude? I don't see what that should be compulsory.

Respectfully I disagree...If you have a Blaster and you choose not to activate the Crit feature on it then yeah, that could work, but if you do use the Crit say on a weapon, "LB" should kick in automatically Because you used the Crit on your weapon of choice. Of course if you weapon is on Stun that is a different story.

Just don't spend the Advantages or Triumph to roll a crit. A player is still in control how they are spent. There is nothing compulsory in the rules requiring a player to land a crit if they roll sufficient Advantages or Triumphs.

Respectfully I disagree...If you have a Blaster and you choose not to activate the Crit feature on it then yeah, that could work, but if you do use the Crit say on a weapon, "LB" should kick in automatically Because you used the Crit on your weapon of choice. Of course if you weapon is on Stun that is a different story.

As a GM, I wouldn't have a problem with a PC electing to not use Lethal Blows, provided it was declared in advance of making the percentile roll.

The bonus to the roll provided by the Vicious quality, however, is bound to the weapon, and not subject to the player leaving it off.

Respectfully I disagree...If you have a Blaster and you choose not to activate the Crit feature on it then yeah, that could work, but if you do use the Crit say on a weapon, "LB" should kick in automatically Because you used the Crit on your weapon of choice. Of course if you weapon is on Stun that is a different story.

As a GM, I wouldn't have a problem with a PC electing to not use Lethal Blows, provided it was declared in advance of making the percentile roll.

The bonus to the roll provided by the Vicious quality, however, is bound to the weapon, and not subject to the player leaving it off.

Exactly this. Vicious is a quality of the weapon - can't see how you pull your punch on a disintegrator. But Lethal Blows is the result of skill and training. I don't see how I could justify to a player that they may not strike less hard or accurately then their maximum capability. It would be like someone learning how to punch in vulnerable areas and then being told this meant they could no-longer punch someone in the thigh. It fails the Silliness Test.

I can understand your argument for Hand 2 Hand combat, but we are talking about "Lethal" Weapons...A Blaster already has a "Stun" setting so shooting someone is either I am going to take you out, or knock you out. Why would you want the hassle to add more nuiance to the game which already has a lot of room for interpretation already??

This issue would be in the simple category of "Black & White" and keep things simple. Personally I like simple things. Something that in the CRB as passive to me means that it will happen whether you want it too or not, it is part of the Talent that you chose to use and add to your arsenal. If someone wanted the option of not being able to PWN more easily then do not take the talent LBs. IMO

Respectfully I disagree...If you have a Blaster and you choose not to activate the Crit feature on it then yeah, that could work, but if you do use the Crit say on a weapon, "LB" should kick in automatically Because you used the Crit on your weapon of choice. Of course if you weapon is on Stun that is a different story.

As a GM, I wouldn't have a problem with a PC electing to not use Lethal Blows, provided it was declared in advance of making the percentile roll.

The bonus to the roll provided by the Vicious quality, however, is bound to the weapon, and not subject to the player leaving it off.

Exactly this. Vicious is a quality of the weapon - can't see how you pull your punch on a disintegrator. But Lethal Blows is the result of skill and training. I don't see how I could justify to a player that they may not strike less hard or accurately then their maximum capability. It would be like someone learning how to punch in vulnerable areas and then being told this meant they could no-longer punch someone in the thigh. It fails the Silliness Test.

I think choosing to not inflict a critical hit is just that though, not hitting as hard.

I can understand your argument for Hand 2 Hand combat, but we are talking about "Lethal" Weapons...A Blaster already has a "Stun" setting so shooting someone is either I am going to take you out, or knock you out. Why would you want the hassle to add more nuiance to the game which already has a lot of room for interpretation already??

Well if you give the same blaster to a different person, it doesn't do the +10 critical (or whatever level of LB they have). Ergo, the +10 is coming from something the wielder is doing, not the gun. And I have a hard time imagining what that something could be that isn't voluntary on the wielder's part. If it reflects better knowledge of where to shoot someone, that shouldn't be compulsory to use, for example. If it's better ability to aim quickly, that should still be voluntary. As I wrote, it's the Silliness Test. What could the talent represent that wasn't voluntary? Do the character's blaster bolts magically auto-correct in mid air to go for the eyes?

This issue would be in the simple category of "Black & White" and keep things simple. Personally I like simple things. Something that in the CRB as passive to me means that it will happen whether you want it too or not, it is part of the Talent that you chose to use and add to your arsenal. If someone wanted the option of not being able to PWN more easily then do not take the talent LBs. IMO

Well it doesn't add complexity to say that a player can choose to forgo it if they ask. I can't imagine it comes up very often, but if a player does say they don't want to use a talent, I think I would be unable to justify to them why they should have to do something they didn't want to. So long as they announce it beforehand instead of post-fact, I'm good with that.

Thanks for all the replies.

I've been to busy to even browse the forms the last 4 days.

A little background on my character. My character is a "True" Mandalorian. The Empire came to my clan and threatened its destruction if it didn't supply the Empire with some elite soldiers. My character volunteered. He was an assassin for the Empire for roughly 8 years. During a mission the commercial transport ship he was on was attacked by pirates. My character saw this as an opportunity to break free of the Empire. While the pirates were attacking he stowed aboard the pirate vessel and when it landed on Tatooine to unload it's ill begotten gains he made his escape. He then became employed by the Hutt from the beginner adventure. When the Hutt failed to pay him for some "bounty" work he decided to take matters into his own hands and freed all the Hutt's slaves and blew up his palace.

From there the group has done every premade adventure and a few our GM has made up on his own. Our most recent adventure had the group go to the planet my clan was marooned on for the last 5 years or so. Seems the Empire didn't keep their word after all. Since my clan heard about my death (pirates left no survivors on the transport) they buried my mando armor and belongings in their version of a cave mausoleum. Up until this point my character had been using armored clothing, a vibro-knife and a blaster rifle. He has deadly accuracy in melee (4 skill ranks in melee). In a celebration of my characters return my clan had a brawling tournament in which the winner received a hopped up vibro-axe. Naturally my character won even with zero ranks in brawl. He wound up fighting against his wookie friend in the finals. The group then put the rebels in contact with the current leader of the clan and they got the mandos off world. The clan now works for the rebels.

After all this the party face who literally has no ranks in ranged light decided he wanted a disruptor pistol. After looking for 5 sessions he finally acquired one. Then decided he didn't like all the attention it was drawing so he gave it to me. I then incorporated into my wrist armor to disguise it's appearance. Like I originally said I never used it in "public" and I really didn't have to use it against the Ackleys. I was just like he I have this cool toy that I never use so meh why not. It's not like animals have "loot."

You guys have brought up some good points. I wasn't aware that you don't have to crit if you don't want to. I just assumed it happened. My character is very powerful even without the hopped up vibro axe and disruptor pistol. He has 3+ ranks in every class skill and 1-2 ranks in some useful non-class skills. My character is a blast to play since he's just not one dimensional. Being able to assume many different roles is awesome and something none of the other players in my group really grasp. Everyone seems to want to be hyper focused in one role and when you "max" that focus then branch out to other useful things.