I've noticed in the game I'm playing in, and the few that I've watched on YouTube, GM's don't seem to give out setbacks. There's a tendency to just add more difficulty dice, or upgrade to a red. It makes talents that remove setbacks useless.
Is this a common thing? Has anyone come up with a good solution?
It's common when you're new to the game, and it lasts until the GM makes a deliberate effort to start using Setback (and Boost) dice.
Unfortunately, in my experience, it is kind of common.
As a GM, I frequently forget to give them out.
What you have to do is realize the purple dice are there to determine how difficult the actual task by itself is. The red dice should be if something goes wrong, then something really bad might happen. Black are additional factors that crop up.
So piloting some uneven terrain at high speed might be "average" difficulty (2 purple). Piloting a windy path on some uneven terrain at high speed might be "hard" (three purple). Piloting on a windy path on some uneven terrain alongside a cliff at high speed would probably be two purples and a red (you fail, you could fall). Piloting on a windy path on some uneven terrain alongside a cliff at high speed at night would be the two purples, one red and one or two blacks (depending on how dark).
As for GMs not adding them often enough, it's just something you have to get used to. My first game GM'ing, I think I threw one black in. My second game, I think I used it half the time. The game I had earlier this week, I set in a dark cave and nearly every roll had black dice involved. It just takes practice to remember they're there and use them as needed.
As a GM I feel weird about giving a roll that doesn't have a setback die attached to it. Even if the roll is so outlandish (or opposed) I still tend to pour them on. Besides giving talents something to do (which is a big part of it) they also give context to the situation. Especially when the Setback dice roll a Threat or Failure, you can weave that into the narration.
But since most action isn't taking place in an open field on a pleasant day with cool, but not cold temp, no glare, no wind, and no time pressure, where the setback dice comes from almost seems a given.
For players that would like to see more of them in the game, just suggest to the GM 'Hey, would the fact we're in a rush give a set back die' or 'the interface is dated and using Seperatist codes' (which could be argued as a boost or a setback die depending). Most GM's just get caught up in the moment and forget thigns like that so suggesting them can be a big help...even if it is kinda like suggesting things to make your life harder. Ultimately, it's more rewarding.
GMs are used to systems with only one dial (difficulty), so it makes sense why this happens. Some of the adventures handle things this way too, which does not help.
If GM's haven't read up on how difficulty and setback are supposed to work, I see this happening a lot.
I've always added Setback (after paying attention to that section in the Core).
The mistake I made at first was assuming that Average difficulty was what should be given for most tasks. In fact (as the Core book says) Average is only a little higher than a 50% chance of success for an average skilled individual. Now I give Easy difficulty for more mundane things.
The arbitrary upgrades to difficulty given in some of the adventures is annoying, as the Core says that only NPC's and Destiny usually upgrade a difficulty.
I'm just starting to get the hang of adding setbacks, but I still forget them often. Plus, it's just impossible to account for every setback, without making even easy checks too hard.
I would have prefered that FFG had made the talents more simple to use: by adding a boost die to the checks, instead of removing a setback. I guess they did it this way to get the GM's creative juices flowing, but it does take getting used to.
I would have prefered that FFG had made the talents more simple to use: by adding a boost die to the checks, instead of removing a setback. I guess they did it this way to get the GM's creative juices flowing, but it does take getting used to.
I'm glad they didn't. This came up in another thread, and the reason for Talents that reduce setbacks is to put a cap on negative results. Yes, on average adding boost die gives a similar result, but without being able to reduce setbacks the potential for a worse negative result is higher. Plus IMHO it's a nice character development/flavour, that the character is confident and capable enough to ignore some adverse conditions.
I can only echo what others have said: GMs need to get used to how this system works, which is different that pretty much any other system I've played. I've made a deliberate effort to include setback dice in my adventures since day one, and after a few sessions it began to feel very natural. Now I'm doing it all the time, both when I'm writing an adventure and setting difficulties and when something just comes up during play. It's just a matter of getting into the habit, nothing more.
I think the problem is that in most other RPGs we are trained that when there are negative circumstances you increase the difficulty, target number, or whatever that system uses. So we are preconditioned to think "Oh the player wants to do X so that will be a DC 15 but then Y condition adds +5 to the difficulty". Then when we play EotE we bring that same mindset and throw on another difficulty die when we should just add a setback die or two. In EotE the intent is that the difficulty is supposed to be how hard something is to accomplish under normal conditions and then boost and setback dice are supposed to be added to reflect benefitial or adverse circumstances.
Also as Prost said above there are almost no rolls that I don't add a setback die to. Very few situations come up in the game that don't have some form of complication. If every roll is under normal conditions where is the excitement and drama in the game? Life for the PCs is very rarely ever normal.
GMs are used to systems with only one dial (difficulty), so it makes sense why this happens. Some of the adventures handle things this way too, which does not help.
Which adventures do this? Examples?
GMs are used to systems with only one dial (difficulty), so it makes sense why this happens. Some of the adventures handle things this way too, which does not help.
Which adventures do this? Examples?
You need look no further than the CRB itself for examples of how the rules work to train us "wrong". Or, at least, muddy the waters.
Lets take Astrogation. Not once, in all of Interstellar Travel rules (pages 246-247), is setback even hinted at. Neither is it ever discussed in the skill section entry itself on page 104. All the example modifiers listed on Table 7-13 increase Difficulty.
Yet the Galaxy Mapper talent removes setback dice. What setback dice? And what exactly is Galaxy Mapper supposed to represent, narratively speaking?
Our GM loves setback die. We love them too in that it makes certain characters shine more under the right conditions. We never have less than one setback die a roll it seems, and it is not uncommon to see three or four.
Cold, dark, rainy and while moving in difficult terrain comes to mind.
Our GM really loves the system and seems to have a pretty good grasp of things.
Edited by Dex VulenI think the problem is that in most other RPGs we are trained that when there are negative circumstances you increase the difficulty, target number, or whatever that system uses. So we are preconditioned to think "Oh the player wants to do X so that will be a DC 15 but then Y condition adds +5 to the difficulty".
Yeah, this exactly. It's pretty much the only system I know with multiple "result" axes, instead of the normal "success or fail? and if success, by how much?"
It takes some time to get into the mindset of having 2 axes that mean radically different things regardless of whether the good or bad sides of the dice come up. And yeah I think the knee-jerk reaction is to increase or upgrade Difficulty, rather than considering "is the task inherently easy hard (Difficulty increase) or are there outside factors that complicate pretty much everything that could happen in this area or with this character (Setbacks added) and do I want to be a real jerk about this roll (flip Destiny to upgrade)." 
I've noticed in the game I'm playing in, and the few that I've watched on YouTube, GM's don't seem to give out setbacks. There's a tendency to just add more difficulty dice, or upgrade to a red. It makes talents that remove setbacks useless.
Is this a common thing? Has anyone come up with a good solution?
Not with mine, he adds both as the situation and his mood suits him, as do I when I GM.
In the game that I play, I suggested to the GM and the other players that we all make suggestions for Boosts or Setbacks on rolls for each other and the NPCs to help the GM a bit by taking some pressure off of him to come up with reasons to add one, the other, or both. I also think it's been helping him, and the rest of us, adapt to the new system by seeing more examples given for adding the extra dice from different corners.
It's definitely tough getting used to, and, I think, made more difficult by the rulebook being fairly nebulous on actual difficulties and reasons to increase or upgrade or add setback to the various skills. I know that the system is intentionally open-ended, but I still think we would have been better served by some specific examples being given for each skill as a place to start working from.
Is running (Athletics) down an empty, tiled hallway a Simple, Easy, or Hard check? Is it the terrain that determines the difficulty, or the speed you're trying to achieve? Does the tiled floor, being a little slippery, add difficulty (it's harder than it would be on, say, asphalt), upgrade difficulty (a Despair might mean you fall and get hurt spectacularly--when I was a kid, I split open my chin doing this in socks, and still have a scar under my beard), or a Setback? Do you get a Boost for the terrain being even and flat? We have no baseline for this, really.
Lets take Astrogation. Not once, in all of Interstellar Travel rules (pages 246-247), is setback even hinted at. Neither is it ever discussed in the skill section entry itself on page 104. All the example modifiers listed on Table 7-13 increase Difficulty.
Yet the Galaxy Mapper talent removes setback dice. What setback dice? And what exactly is Galaxy Mapper supposed to represent, narratively speaking?
I would give Setbacks for situations like...trying to calculate a hyper jump while in space combat, or while winding in and out of an asteroid field where your point-of-origin vector is rapidly changing. Or while too close to any body of gravity, since it might skew the calculations. Or trying to make a long, direct route instead of a route made up or shorter, multiple jumps.
What does the Talent mean narratively? Not a clue. Good example of a very imperfect simulation.
Is running (Athletics) down an empty, tiled hallway a Simple, Easy, or Hard check?
I wouldn't call for a check as that's too mundane or routine of a task to even warrant one. "You run down the empty hallway, your footsteps echoing against the tiled walls and floors in staccatic rhythm."
Is it the terrain that determines the difficulty, or the speed you're trying to achieve?
It would probably depend on the circumstances. Whenever I think about Athletics checks for running, I imagine trying to out-pace someone else in which case it's an opposed Athletics check. I guess the other thing it would be used for is to measure endurance after running for an extended amount of time so I'd probably start with Average and ramp up the difficulty depending on what was actually occurring.
Does the tiled floor, being a little slippery, add difficulty (it's harder than it would be on, say, asphalt), upgrade difficulty (a Despair might mean you fall and get hurt spectacularly--when I was a kid, I split open my chin doing this in socks, and still have a scar under my beard), or a Setback?
Once you make the floor slippery then it is no longer an Athletics check—it's now a Coordination check to keep from falling. Difficulty is based on what's making the floor slippery.
Something that might make things easier for you would be to think of things in reverse. First, decide what outcome you are expecting and then reason backwards to the difficulty that will most likely cause that outcome. For example:
Do you get a Boost for the terrain being even and flat?
No. Let the players be responsible for generating their own Boost dice since it makes them feel awesome.
We have no baseline for this, really.
Check pages 17–18 of the CRB.
A lot of this is going to depend on your encounter design, really, as well as the challenge you're trying to pit your players against. If you need more examples past what's provided in the CRB (check the skill descriptions, as well) then try reading some of the published adventures or some of the fan-produced adventures available in the Compiled Resources List thread.
Just out of curiosity, I would imagine that as a GM, you could literally go nuts with the amount of SB Dice you put on any particular roll. I mean, think about it. Just a simple question to an NPC could be like:
+ 1 SB Die becase:
it's been a bad day
it's raining outside and your socks are soaked, and no one likes squishy socks
you're thinking about the fact that you're hungry
and thirsty
and you're broke
the rest of your party members forgot it was your birthday and you're pissed about it
it's windy out and hair keeps flying into your face
etc.
etc.
You see my point? At what point in time do you say, "Okay - this is plenty."? Also, at what point in time do you start to neglect thinking of a justification for applying a SB Die, and you just do it, because there's bound to be some reason for it?
I really like this system, but there are a lot of open-ended rules that are too abstract, I think. Maybe the designers did this one purpose just so that you felt like you had plenty of room for house-rules?
I had a lot of trouble with forgetting to add setback dice before I settled on a little mental cheat sheet:
-Difficulty dice represent inherent difficulty of a skill check.
-Challenge dice represent if the skill check is dangerous.
-Setback dice represent environmental factors that effect the check.
First two sessions I didn't use them often enough... Then when I did in session 3 it clicked. They wrk because they actually add a narrative element to the roll.
If your GM doesn't use them then tell him to do so outright or think up ways to have a boost yourself more often, that should get him/her thinking abot using sb more often too!
Just out of curiosity, I would imagine that as a GM, you could literally go nuts with the amount of SB Dice you put on any particular roll. I mean, think about it. Just a simple question to an NPC could be like:
+ 1 SB Die becase:
it's been a bad day
it's raining outside and your socks are soaked, and no one likes squishy socks
you're thinking about the fact that you're hungry
and thirsty
and you're broke
the rest of your party members forgot it was your birthday and you're pissed about it
it's windy out and hair keeps flying into your face
etc.
etc.
You see my point? At what point in time do you say, "Okay - this is plenty."?
You could go nuts, but it's best if you don't. One or two setback dice is usually plenty. Three would occur because of extenuating circumstances. If I were to take your example scenario above:
First of all, why is it a Bad, Hungry, Thirsty, Broke Day? If it's a result of Obligation triggering, then everybody's Strain Threshold is reduced, some more than others, and that's the extent of that. Those are some pretty major, story shaping circumstances so I would think there is a bigger play at hand than just "The GM feels like it today."
Rainy and windy? Severe weather? Ok... "You have to shout to make yourself heard and some nuance in your intonation is lost so you suffer one Setback die."
People forgot your birthday? Well.. It doesn't come up often (once a standard year) so my players might have buy-in to that. I don't know about yours. Is this a Setback on all checks for the day? Seems pretty harsh and borderline arbitrary unless the player stated ahead of time that such a thing was important to their PC. If it were, then you've got player buy-in and all is good. One additional Setback to all checks or to all social checks for the day.
Also, at what point in time do you start to neglect thinking of a justification for applying a SB Die, and you just do it, because there's bound to be some reason for it?
Probably never. Nothing makes players scream "BS" faster than capricious GMing.
I really like this system, but there are a lot of open-ended rules that are too abstract, I think. Maybe the designers did this one purpose just so that you felt like you had plenty of room for house-rules?
The fewer Rules As Written there are in a system, the more flexibility the GM and the players have in propelling the narrative however they see fit. Instead of narrowly defined situations you have widely and loosely defined buckets that let you come up with additional narrative solutions to novel situations.
PC: "I want to punch the guy with my shock gloves in the dark before he notices me."
Instead of hunting through the rules for that obscure numeric penalty...
GM: "Uh... What's the penalty on attack again when you can't see the target? It's in the section on the blind condition? Hold on, there's also a 50% miss chance, too..."
...You can just pull something out that seems right...
GM: (Thinks for a second on how to make this work... "Aha, let's make the guy noisy!") "The Black Sun thug is moving around clumsily in the dark as he fumbles around for the lighting controls so you've made out his position in the room by sound. Roll your Brawn check versus two purple dice. Add two Setback dice for pitch-dark conditions and let's see what happens."
Now, just let the narrative dice tell the story...
PC: "Uh.. Failure with... four threat..."
GM: "You swing but not before catching a table with your shin..."
GM: (continued) "You fall prone and suffer 1 Strain. You suddenly hear, 'Hey boss! You were right. We're not alone in here after all!' It would appear you have company. Roll Vigilance for initiative."
Yeah, that's something that I've also said to my players. It's a team effort to create the best story possible, not just the GM's responsibility. If they feel that a check could use a boost or setback die, they are all welcome to say so. And funny enough, my players can't seem to get enough of suggesting to add setback dice to OTHER PLAYERS' checks. (Which then comes around to bite them in their lower backs, of course.)
But like DanteRotterdam said, it really needs to click first, before you start getting the most out of the system.