And while we're on the subject of Aim... I've been going through the forums, but there doesn't seem to be a clear answer (unless I'm missing it somewhere), can players take a 2nd Aim maneuver on their turn (in exchange for 2 strain), or does the strain cancel out the first aim? Has there been an official response about this?

This came up a while back. I don't know if anyone asked the overgods, but it seems most thought it okay.

More here .

Even if you've two ranks of it, is it worth bothering with? You could spend 2 strain to negate two Setback dice and shoot... or spend two strain to Aim twice and shoot.

In your example, the choices are spend 2 strain to negate two Setback dice and aim once , or spend two strain to aim twice.

I would rather take 2 setback dice away than add one boost.

Not exactly.

Assassin Bob (Ranged: Heavy YY G ) has both ranks of Precise Aim and is stalking one of two identical twins.

On his turn his manoeuvre is a Precise Aim manoeuvre (costing him 2 Strain). His action is an attack.

He's spent 2 Strain and 35 xp to negage 2 black dice (which won't always be present). [ YY G ]

Assassin Dave is as fast and accurate as Bob, but hasn't bought Precise Aim. Instead he's spent the points on upgrading his watercolouring skills as it's his sweetheart's birthday and the lady likes a nice landscape. But first he has to take out the other twin.

On his turn, Dave uses his manoeuvre to Aim. He then spends 2 Strain for a second manoeuvre, which is also an Aim. His action is an attack.

He's spent 2 Strain (same as Bob) and 0 xp to add 2 boost dice. [ YY G BB SS ]

Boosts > Setback, so Dave's pool is slightly better than Bob's, and it has cost him nothing. Bob could have also taken a second manoeuvre, but then he'd have spent 4 strain in one turn, which could be bad if the law or the bodyguards return fire with stun blasts.

But assassin Alice is going to have them both beat. She's as good a shot as the other two, and spent her 35 XP on Precise Aim. When time comes to pull the trigger she takes one manoeuvre to use Precise Aim for two strain, then spends another 2 strain to take a second manoeuvre and aim. For the cost of 4 strain and 35 XP she pulls the trigger with YYGB, beating out both her competitors. She then uses some of her Advantage to recover some strain as she blows the smoke from her blaster's barrel.

But assassin Alice is going to have them both beat. She's as good a shot as the other two, and spent her 35 XP on Precise Aim. When time comes to pull the trigger she takes one manoeuvre to use Precise Aim for two strain, then spends another 2 strain to take a second manoeuvre and aim. For the cost of 4 strain and 35 XP she pulls the trigger with YYGB, beating out both her competitors. She then uses some of her Advantage to recover some strain as she blows the smoke from her blaster's barrel.

Alice gambles.

(EDIT: And is crap at watercolouring.)

You have made me see the advantage, Krieger (Ta!). I don't think it comes even close to balancing my internal "cost vs. effectiveness" equation, though.

I see your point. Judging cost in XP vs. utility is always a mostly subjective thing. I don't have the assassin tree in front of me right now, but I'm guessing that at least one of those Precise Aim talents is located on the way to something else that's useful, so it's not a waste even if you don't like the talent. But sure, one's mileage may vary, and it's always possible to not buy the talent if you don't like it.

There are 2 failures and 2 threats on a set back die. There are 2 successes and 4 advantages on a boost die. Adding boost dice will add more positively to a given roll than removing setbacks will protect positive results. The greens and yellows are also both skewed slightly better than the purples and reds. This isn't a debate, it is a mathematical certainty that adding positive dice is better than removing negatives at insuring a positive outcome.

Sure, on average, but I don't think that's the point. Having more negative dice means the range of negative possibilities is higher. If you get blanks on your positives, and your negatives max out, you're in worse trouble.

If you want to put a cap on the negative possibilities, and assert a little more control over the outcome, then Precise Aim is very helpful.

It seems this whole argument is based on a faulty premise.

The "math" assumes the player can spend two maneuvers using Aim. If you've played through a few actual combats, you will quickly realize this isn't always the case. Sometimes you've got to spend your default maneuver to move, get up off the ground, switch weapons, or any number of other things.

If you have one maneuver available, negating two Setback die is more often a superior choice than gaining a single Boost die. Is it always a better choice?

No, but then again, I don't think doing any one thing should always be the best choice.

Well my perspective is that negative dice cancel positive dice, so setback dice negate boost dice - sure the boost dice have some better facings, but all in all the setback dice (potentially) remove successes and advantages. Also, less dice in the pool decreases range of potential results, in some cases to the player's advantage. Of course boost dice potentially increase the number of successes and advantages to be cancelled, but more dice in the pool - particularly difficulty, challenge and setback dice - means a less likely good outcome. Removing those is good a thing.

Also, adding setback dice should be common in my opinion, there are few circumstance where you perform a task in the absence of other factors that would or could affect the outcome, be it stress, light, weather, tools (or lack thereof), being wounded (strain, wound or a critical injury), not knowing important details that can or will affect the outcome... throwing in a setback dice should in my opinion be normal, two perhaps not so normal, but still not too infrequent.

There are 2 failures and 2 threats on a set back die. There are 2 successes and 4 advantages on a boost die. Adding boost dice will add more positively to a given roll than removing setbacks will protect positive results. The greens and yellows are also both skewed slightly better than the purples and reds. This isn't a debate, it is a mathematical certainty that adding positive dice is better than removing negatives at insuring a positive outcome.

I'm really honestly not looking to make anybody mad that is just the math.

Unless the calculations I'm seeing is wrong, your claim is only a half truth.

I ran a simulation with two ability dice, two difficulty dice and one setback die. In this case adding a boost die gave a somewhat better chance for success than removing the setback dice, but adding one proficiency die to the mix changed that. The numbers speak for themselves.

AA DD S = success 35,1%

AA DD S B = success 44.1%

AA DD = success 43,5%

AA P DD S = success 56,7%

AA P DD S B = success 63,8%

AA P DD = success 65,1%

I then added a challenge die to the mix:

AA P DD C S = 39,5%

AA P DD C S B = 46,8%

AA P DD C = 46,7%

From this, and the many other variations I tried it seems that if you have an equal amount of ability/proficiency and difficulty/challenge dice, plus a setback die, adding a boost die is better than removing a setback die, on the other hand if the odds are already in your favour, i.e. rolling more positive dice than negative dice (not counting setback dice), you get more out of removing the setback die than adding a boost die. We also see that adding 1 boost isn't such a big boost, even in cases of even pools, but it is of course better.

AA PP DD CC S = 42,4%

AA PP DD CC S B = 48,8%

AA PP DD CC = 48,8%

Here we see that in a fairly large pool the difference is non existent.

What about multiple setback and boost dice?

AA P DD SS = 48,6%

Aiming once:

AA P DD SS B = 56,1%

Aiming twice:

AA P DD SS B B = 62,8%

What about removing both setback dice? Well, we already know that (see above), removing both is better than adding one or two boost dice. In this case, where the ability and proficiency dice outnumber the difficulty dice.

To further drive the point home lets add more dice:

AA PP DD C S = 57,3%

AA PP DD C S B = 63,5%

AA PP DD C = 64,4%

AA PP DD C SS = 50,4%

AA PP DD C SS B = 56,9%

AA PP DD C SS BB = 62,8%

AA PP DD C = as above: 64,4%

So, in conclusion, whether adding boost or removing setback is the better choice, depends on how many difficulty/challenge dice you roll compared to your ability/proficiency dice. If the latter is larger, then removing setback gives you a better chance for success, if the former is larger then adding a boost die (or two) is better.

Disclaimer: I found this dice simulator thingy online, these forums actually, here . It simulates dice rolling as I understand it, not pure probability calculations, so numbers are slightly different, but I think the point still stands. Apparently it is a probability calculator.

EDIT: I haven't included advantages simply because when shooting, hitting the target is the primary goal - the increase of potential advantages is .. duh-duh-duuuh! advantageous of course, but not the same as hitting and wounding your target.

There are 2 failures and 2 threats on a set back die. There are 2 successes and 4 advantages on a boost die. Adding boost dice will add more positively to a given roll than removing setbacks will protect positive results. The greens and yellows are also both skewed slightly better than the purples and reds. This isn't a debate, it is a mathematical certainty that adding positive dice is better than removing negatives at insuring a positive outcome.

Sure, on average, but I don't think that's the point. Having more negative dice means the range of negative possibilities is higher. If you get blanks on your positives, and your negatives max out, you're in worse trouble.

If you want to put a cap on the negative possibilities, and assert a little more control over the outcome, then Precise Aim is very helpful.

And yes, that was sort of my thinking. Limiting the range of negative results is a good thing, and as I show above, particularly when the chances are already in your favour.

But assassin Alice is going to have them both beat. She's as good a shot as the other two, and spent her 35 XP on Precise Aim. When time comes to pull the trigger she takes one manoeuvre to use Precise Aim for two strain, then spends another 2 strain to take a second manoeuvre and aim. For the cost of 4 strain and 35 XP she pulls the trigger with YYGB, beating out both her competitors. She then uses some of her Advantage to recover some strain as she blows the smoke from her blaster's barrel.

I think the bummer is that assassin Dave is by far the best. He's spent 35 XP on adding a 3rd and 4th rank to Ranged (Heavy). When the time comes to pull the trigger, he takes two aim maneuvers for two strain. For the cost of 2 strain and 35 XP, he pulls the trigger with YYY G SS B , beating everybody previously discussed. He presumably then mocks the rest of them about how he nevers sees them down at the shooting range practicing.

The problem with those setback removal talents is that it's probably always better to have just spent those points on making your raw skill better. It's definitely better when there's no setbacks to remove, and it also seems like it's better even if there are setbacks to eliminate.

What about when your raw skill is maxed out? You've only got 5 skill ranks to purchase.

The problem with those setback removal talents is that it's probably always better to have just spent those points on making your raw skill better. It's definitely better when there's no setbacks to remove, and it also seems like it's better even if there are setbacks to eliminate.

Unless those Talents unlock other things... I understand this is kind of a min-max thread, but not all these character development decisions are based on that. I like the idea of Precise Aim as flavour. "This guy is so good, what's a little sandstorm between him and his target?"

Skill is even more useful than the Precise Aim when you factor in that the skill makes the character more versatile.

Combat skills can be used out of combat to do things like identify what kind of weapon the Trandoshan Slaver is carrying.

Precise Aim is most useful to a Player who's already maxed out his other shooting options.

Precise Aim has the advantage that it covers different skill checks, but most players aren't using all of these. Most will only use a single combat skill in a given session.

Defense isn't ubiquitous. A single die for cover is the most common occurrence and you don't need two ranks of Precise Aim to overcome this. There is lots of equipment that helps you overcome the environmental difficulties, making those options more appealing for many players than spending precious XP.

For the power gamer or even the merely rational one, Precise Aim is not a good investment. Donovan called it at the start of the thread.

@Energy80: That pool, YYYGSSB lacks difficulty dice. Let's say it's long range. Your chance for success with the following dice pool: PPP A DDD SS B = 65,8%, whereas Krieger22's dice pool of PP A DDD B = 64,5% - there's a difference, but not a huge difference. At medium range; Energy80: 75,5% compared to Krieger22: 75,9% it's tipped the other way, although by very, very little, however at short range: Energy80: 84,8% vs Krieger22: 86,9% it's even more in Krieger's favour.

However I see now that you wrote that Assassin Dave would aim twice, that changes the dice pool to: PPP A DDD SS B B , this changes your chances from long to short range to this: L: 71%, M: 79,9% and S: 88,1% - so aiming twice does grant you a better chance than Krieger's dice pool with one less positive die. Not a huge difference and advantage on short range I'd say, but enough to go that route for sure! And at longer ranges having higher skill and/or characteristic is definitely advantageous, but that has already been established.

@awayputurwpn: At rank 5 it depends on your characteristic I guess, but once you reach these levels of skill, where you roll more dice than difficulty die it seems that removing dice are better than adding boost dice.

I tested these dice pools:

AAAAA DDDDD SS = 41,2%

AAAAA DDDDD SS B = 46,9%

AAAAA DDDDD S B = 52,6%

AAAAA DDDDD SS BB = 52,5%

AAAAA DDDDD = 52,8%

AAAAA DDDDD B = 63,7%

Now that would be raw characteristic without any skill ranks.

I guess what you're really asking is, what do you do when there is no more ranks to buy, and perhaps the next Dedication is too far away or is already intended for some other characteristic? I'd say go for Precise Aim, but also True Aim - a boost die and an upgrade is pretty nice.

Let's see how it works out with this guy, Agility 4, 5 ranks range weapon.

He's firing at a target at medium range with a personal deflector shield, that's 2 setback dice.

Just firing without any talent or manoeuvre spent aiming:

PPPP A DD SS = 82,2% (strain cost = 0)

Firing with 2 ranks of True Aim, and double aiming for two boost dice, if that's allowed(?):

PPPPP A DD SS BB = 93,6% (strain cost = 2)

If double aiming during True Aim is not kosher, then it's this dice pool:

PPPPP A DD SS B = 91,9% (strain cost = 0)

Now if the same guy has 2 ranks Precise Aim instead:

PPPP A DD = 91% (strain cost = 2)

2 ranks Precise Aim and Aiming

PPPP A DD B = 93% (strain cost = 4)

2 ranks Precise Aim and 1 rank True Aim (if that's possible, I don't know)

PPPPP DD B = 94,4% (strain cost = 4)

2 ranks Precise Aim and 2 ranks True Aim (again if both of these can be used during the same round):

PPPPP A DD B = 96,5% (strain cost = 4)

One thing that argues against Precise Aim is that is specifically calls out Melee and Range defence, not setback dice , being reduced equal to rank/strain spent. Therefore it's not really useful in a sand storm, as that isn't cover as such, i.e. defence, but an environmental condition (of course you could argue that it's cover and therefore defence, but other conditions that could incur setback dice won't be affected, unless you consider those setback dice as defence - and remember defence doesn't stack ), where I think Brace is a more useful talent ... or am I mistaken...?

Therefore it's not really useful in a sand storm, as that isn't cover as such, i.e. defence, but an environmental condition (of course you could argue that it's cover and therefore defence, but other conditions that could incur setback dice won't be affected, unless you consider those setback dice as defence - and remember defence doesn't stack ), where I think Brace is a more useful talent ... or am I mistaken...?

Ah, I clued out about that somehow. Hmmm, that changes things, and not to Precise Aim's favour. And here I wanted to like it...

Yup. Me too. I still like it, for those "easy" or easier shots it's more useful than normal aiming - and if it could've been used with vehicle weaponry it would be really nice, as it stands it's slightly "meh", but I'd take it if for no other reason than to really shine on those easier shots, like a short range target with deflector shield. Although against a short range target in heavy battle armour I'd rather take True Aim - what I do find odd is that True Aim costs no strain and gives you both boost die and an upgrade, whereas Precise Aim removes setback dice for strain and provide no other benefit... although it is a cool, if not mechanically cool, talent.

Ultimately, for me it's just another tool in the belt of the consummate assassin, waiting to be properly utilized when the situation calls for it.

The problem with those setback removal talents is that it's probably always better to have just spent those points on making your raw skill better. It's definitely better when there's no setbacks to remove, and it also seems like it's better even if there are setbacks to eliminate.

Unless those Talents unlock other things... I understand this is kind of a min-max thread, but not all these character development decisions are based on that. I like the idea of Precise Aim as flavour. "This guy is so good, what's a little sandstorm between him and his target?"

Actually you since Stalker and Sniper Shot are connected, you could skip both Precise Aim nodes and still get every other node in the Assassin talent tree. :-)

More productively, I think I'd take the talent if it either was a maneuver that cost no strain or an incidental with a strain cost. It seems crazy that this costs strain and True Aim doesn't.

If it offered Pierce or something that might be more appropriate: finding the weak spot in armour, etc.

Or removed the defense AND downgraded the difficulty.

A downgrade or decrease of difficulty (to a minimum of easy) would definitely be worth a couple of strain

Downgrading is a very underutilized opportunity in this system.

Since downgrading only ever converts red dice back to purple, and doesn't actually remove dice from the pool, in this instance it would have been a great benefit for, say, shooting into a melee where your marauder is mixing it up with the bad guy(s). Then you are using Precise Aim not to hit your friend. Which is a perfectly cool application and worth the expense of a maneuver and strain, IMO.

Oh well. I may actually consider this for my shortlist of house rules...

That's a nice idea, but perhaps even more circumstantial than removing defence/setback dice.

Circumstantial? Sure. Beneficial? Definitely.

The ability to negate Challenge Dice when you need to would be a very cool ability. And when there are no Challenge Dice to negate? Simple. Don't spend the maneuver and strain.

Is the XP cost, maneuver and strain expenditure worth being able to negate a couple ranks of Adversary? Or remove the risk of accidentally shooting your melee friend in the back with your suped-up heavy blaster rifle? I think so.

Fair point(s).

There are 2 failures and 2 threats on a set back die. There are 2 successes and 4 advantages on a boost die. Adding boost dice will add more positively to a given roll than removing setbacks will protect positive results. The greens and yellows are also both skewed slightly better than the purples and reds. This isn't a debate, it is a mathematical certainty that adding positive dice is better than removing negatives at insuring a positive outcome.

Sure, on average, but I don't think that's the point. Having more negative dice means the range of negative possibilities is higher. If you get blanks on your positives, and your negatives max out, you're in worse trouble.

If you want to put a cap on the negative possibilities, and assert a little more control over the outcome, then Precise Aim is very helpful.

If you judge a talent by a single roll perhaps, but a snapshot of a single roll is hardly a fair way to assess the utility and cost effectiveness of a talent. You have to look at averages over time in regards to dice rolls. Using the averages of more positive results is the same as controlling the outcome on a consistent basis.

Some of these % options that have been posted don't tell the whole story of a combat check either. A combat roll isn't just about a successful result on the roll, which is all those probability models present. You have to generate a sufficient number of successes as well to overcome soak, and while that is a wash between comparing 2 setback and 2 boost dice, advantages also factor in to the story which is why I refer to it as a positive outcome. Advantages matter more mechanically in combat checks than any other. If you want to score a crit, you need the advantages, trigger a weapon effect as well, ie auto fire and dual wield. So they factor in directly in the options for putting down a target or targets. Including Boost dice is going to generate more advantages consistently than excluding setbacks.

Some mentioned strain recovery, no comparison, a boost die included is far and away the better option than removing a setback for generating additional advantages on a roll.

In addition where the talent is physically located in the tree it is not a must take talent. It can be bypassed. 35 xp is enough to buy into trees that provide options like True Aim which in turn only increases the effectiveness of Aim.