No. In a worst case scenario of all negative results getting something and all positives being blank removing setback is far better. you are minimizing your risks. You are still referring to averages. And why are you counting 2 boost to 2 setback? almost all setback reduction abilities take away two, but almost all boost add one, precisely for the reason you stated of boost dice being slightly stronger.

2 ranks of Precise Aim take away 2 Setbacks, a double aim adds 2 Boost, I don't really understand your point.

You're also judging this by a single snapshot of a single roll which is a completely incorrect way to determine the value of a talent that influences a dice roll. If you aren't considering averages over time you aren't examining it accurately.

I think EVERYONE understands the probability involved it's been repeated ad nauseum on this thread and is entirely correct. It's a very easy concept to get one's head around.

The "bad stuff cap" is something to simply take into consideration, and like most things in this game, is entirely situational. Like, would I rather have a 10% ( made-up number) chance of rolling 2 Threat with greater probability of big payout, or a 0% chance with a lower chance of big payout? It's simply risk/reward management. Eliminating setbacks is "playing it safe," while combating them with boost dice is a greater "risk" with a decent probability of reward.

Define playing it safe though. Beyond the probabilities if you are looking to trip a weapon effect (Autofire, DW, Ensnare, Stagger,etc) recover strain, pass on a downgrade to the enemy, pass on a Boost to an ally, or land a crit, you are better off leaving the Setbacks in the roll and adding the Boost dice. I consider playing it safe making sure the bad guy is dead.

Also, if you can gain 2 Boost, and eliminate 2 Setback (which you can with these Talents and extra maneuvers to Aim), then why wouldn't you do that?

As I said before, it fits a specific situation sure, but it's a great Talent to have in a sniper's arsenal.

(I also really hate min/max'ing. Ironically, the min/max'er in one of my groups rolls the blank on his good dice almost all the time.)

Could the talent be better for the player? Of course. It could give a free upgrade and add 10 damage per rank with no strain expenditure.

Are there sometimes better options than using it. Yes.

Are there better talents out there? Yes, indeed. True Aim is the gold standard of awesome shoot-em-up talents.

Does it provide functionality that other talents do? No. This one is important. Changing it to add boost dice just makes it another True Aim. We don't need another True Aim.

Most importantly, it doesn't (in general) limit other choices that could be better. You don't have to choose between aiming and Precise Aim; you can do both (situationally you may have to make that decision, but you also have to choose between aiming and taking cover too, and no one feels the need to balance those against each other).

In the end, we have a situationally useful talent. It could be better, but there are many that are worse. It also works best when playing in genre (i.e. sniping from a distance where you have time to double aim and the Precise Aim), which helps reinforce the specialization it is in.

I think what I'm getting out of this conversation is that one rank of Precise Aim is meh but two ranks can get you something decent. Worth doing to remove two Setback dice with a single maneuver when an aim can only get you a single Boost die. Too bad the talent is only found on the Assassin tree and the second one will cost you 25 XP. Which makes it handy to have in your tool belt but cost prohibitive to actually buy.

I think what I'm getting out of this conversation is that one rank of Precise Aim is meh but two ranks can get you something decent. Worth doing to remove two Setback dice with a single maneuver when an aim can only get you a single Boost die. Too bad the talent is only found on the Assassin tree and the second one will cost you 25 XP. Which makes it handy to have in your tool belt but cost prohibitive to actually buy.

You and I are drawing very different conclusions from the same information.

The talent is so situational as to be almost worthless. Unless your GM sets up situations where you get to aim for two rounds before the bad guys go, it doesn't do much.

This is not a common situation in most groups. At best a party has one snipper and 3 other people. The other people are getting minimized while the snipper sets up. The other players want to play too. A GM who constantly allows ambushes is messing with group dynamics. It's also not terribly heroic.

It's also not a "one shot, one hit, one kill" kind of game. You will rarely take out anyone (other than a minion) in a single shot. If you are aiming for multiple rounds at any point during the fight you are being less effective (and less fun). Why would you want to shoot every other round? It's not like you get to double down on damage and one bad roll is even more crippling.

Just accept that it's a crappy talent and that you'd be better off spending XP elsewhere. It's not like the game is hurting for good places to park XP.

Just accept that it's a crappy talent and that you'd be better off spending XP elsewhere. It's not like the game is hurting for good places to park XP.

I completly agree with you. Which is why I say it's good for in the tool belt but no one is going to pick up two ranks of it. One rank isn't good enough. You need two ranks and a GM who actually gives enemies good cover every once in a while. It would only be worth it if you could pick up both ranks for 5-10 XP each, even across two trees, but it's not worth 25 XP for that second rank. It's a talent that wouldn't get used much, but I would use it if I could get rid of 2 Setback dice for a single maneuver. But overall I agree, I'm never going to pick it up unless I wanted to get the whole tree or if the add on tree (Whatever they call those new specialization trees) required that I took a talent in that spot. I'd rather spend that 25 XP on picking up a different tree. I'm just saying that there is a time and place for the talent if you actually had it, no matter how bad it actually is. One of those "rainy day" talents.

If you were houseruling Precise Aim to make it less crappy, would you:

1) Make it part of a regular Aim manuever, so that you can get both a boost die and remove a setback (for strain)?

2) Make it so that it either downgrades or removes a setback die, chosen per strain suffered?

I'd go for multiple effects myself and have Precise Aim, Improved Precise Aim, and Supreme Precise Aim, and add things like reduce difficulty dice for targeting an item, add a Sunder effect to attacks, and add Pierce.

I'd go for multiple effects myself and have Precise Aim, Improved Precise Aim, and Supreme Precise Aim, and add things like reduce difficulty dice for targeting an item, add a Sunder effect to attacks, and add Pierce.

That does sound rather effective!

You should be adding setback die to most of the players rolls. That's how the system encourages narrative.

You should be adding setback die to most of the players rolls. That's how the system encourages narrative.

I think you're mixing up drawbacks with narrative. can you elaborate more on what you mean? Specifically as it pertains to Precise Aim removing defence dice? Are you arguing that Precise Aim is, by its nature, anti-narrative?

Oh gawd, I'm confused now.

In the end, it's one Talent in the assassin tree, that can easily be bypassed if you don't want it.

If you're not making a sniper, I wouldn't recommend it. If I was making a sniper Assassin, I would definitely buy it.

My sniper Assassin can take a perch on a nearby rooftop, take Aim at an unsuspecting target for 2 maneuvers, then spend 2 Strain and another maneuver and remove up to 2 Setback of Armor or Cover. This makes for a great opening shot, IMO, and if you're actually a good sniper and they don't see you after the first shot, you can start lining up another shot with Aim plus Precise Aim to remove the cover that they will certainly have taken by now. (Unless you're GM totally sucks and target always stand out in the open without armor.)

You should be adding setback die to most of the players rolls. That's how the system encourages narrative.

I think you're mixing up drawbacks with narrative. can you elaborate more on what you mean? Specifically as it pertains to Precise Aim removing defence dice? Are you arguing that Precise Aim is, by its nature, anti-narrative?

Oh gawd, I'm confused now.

Kager is suggesting the system was created with the assumption there'd be unique complications to almost every combat encounter (shooting through traffic, mist, foliage, bystanders, darkness or blinding light, etc.). Mechanically, these'd manifest as Setback dice. That's a good assumption.

It sounds like he's suggesting Precise Aim should help negate these concerns. It's a good idea, expanding the frequency with which the talent becomes useful (not everyone has armour with a Defence rating, after all).

How I'm resolving this talent in my mind is that, costly as it is, it still has two uses:

1. It won't help you be a better soldier, but it does make you a better assassin - the kind that starts and ends a fight with one shot. (A solid reason, but too pricey for me.)
2. Mid-battle, it's still good for players who don't trust the gods of probability - raising your worst possible roll, having less effect on your average roll, but lowers you best possible roll (all when compared to double aim).

(If it were to be improved, my favourite revamp of it would be Jegergryte and ccarlson101 's suggestion that it would ignore ranks of Adversary.)

I think it is a useful talent like every other. And since even Armored Clothing gives you/your opponent 1 RD it seems not that misplaced to have at least 1 rank in it.

2 ranks is only really viable if your opponent has superior armour and/or a shield generator.

The talent would IMO be much better (and costefficient) if it negated all kinds of setback die instead just armour.

As for situational uses: The group i GM consist of 1 Wookie Doctor, 1 Human Pilot, 1 Chiss Technician, 1 Human Assassin and 1 Bodyguard. And that Assassin loves to sneak around and search for good sniping spots. So while the Pilot and Doctor sweet-talk any customers/oppsition he takes his time to line up those shots. The only negative die are the purples.

Everything that removes risks is prefered in my group. We are a rather cynical bunch who does not trust the dice to roll average, we expect them to betray us.

Once a player was so frustrated after loosing a char in another group that he burned the sheet and the dice that resulted in his death as a warning to his other die.

Once a player was so frustrated after loosing a char in another group that he burned the sheet and the dice that resulted in his death as a warning to his other die.

I'm glad I game with adults.

He is 35 years old and plays for about 2 decades. Works as a private tutor for mathematics and physics etc ...

Define adult.

Maybe he would have better served his point by saying, " I'm glad I game with people who behave like adults "?

He is 35 years old and plays for about 2 decades. Works as a private tutor for mathematics and physics etc ... Define adult.

I'm sure* Dbuntu was just having some fun. Setting fire to the dice seems like a bit of an overreaction.

* well, I assume.