I'm ok with it just being tied to a combat skill as well. My only deal is the range. That 20 feet thing caught my eye as soon as I bought this game and started reading. First rule I thought to myself I was ditching. 20 feet and you could just bean someone in the head and not pull the friggin pin.....

As your typical normal human w/ no superhuman feats or army training, I can tell you that throwing a baseball from 3rd to 1st is FRAKKING HARD!! I can't throw for shiznit so I think the 20' range thing is pretty accurate (Or inaccurate in my case )

As your typical normal human w/ no superhuman feats or army training, I can tell you that throwing a baseball from 3rd to 1st is FRAKKING HARD!! I can't throw for shiznit so I think the 20' range thing is pretty accurate (Or inaccurate in my case )

Did you do it? It's not a matter of hard, it's a matter of if your life depended on it, could you do it? It's also 127 feet from 3rd to 1st.

I was in the Army and would like you to make a fear check for throwing a grenade. It always scared me to pull that pin and in the back of my mind know this baby could take me out. Fired everything else without a problem, even fired perfect on the m-16 a few times. Grenades though man I hated those.

20 feet is silly for the throw range. It should be based on skill, brawn, and coordination.

I've heard stories of people throwing the pin rather than the grenade during basic training. I thought that only happened in cartoons or something. In that particular case, the sergeant grabbed the grenade and threw it himself then proceeded to boot stomp the trainee.

We had a goofball in my boot camp platoon that cooked one before he threw it. The range SGT was white as a snow drift when he came off the line....

I don't have any house rules I use in my Star Wars games, but I am taking some rules from SW to other systems.

I've just started a 5th edition D&D campaign, and I'm importing the flexible initiative system so that everyone rolls initiative, and you come up with slots for PCs and NPCs which can be used by whomever.

I'm also considering bringing in Destiny Points as well. Flip a destiny point to gain Advantage on an attack, or the DM could flip a Destiny Point to give you Disadvantage on an attack.

Another houserules that we are still testing.

Minions follow the same rules except that they don't upgrade skill. Instead of they can use those points that they would used to upgrade to add some Succes or Advantages in case of acomplish the task. For example:

- 6 Stormtroopers make an attack, instead of become 3Y 2G (5 Upgrades) they still 3 G but if they hit they can add to the effect 5 Succes or 5 Advantages (any combination possible).

In non combat cases would be the same, the old "upgraded stats" would be used to increase effects of a succesful roll with Success or Advantages.

There is maybe a CON with this. Is that with this system minions NEVER will get a Triumph.

I'm considering changing True Aim to cost strain per rank used.

RAW it is causing the "optimum play" syndrome where the player who has two ranks in it does nothing but "True Aim, Shoot" pretty much every single turn. It's incredibly boring gameplay, but you know I get that he wants the two free upgrades to his pool for the low low cost of an Aim maneuver he doesn't mind doing anyway. One of those cases where the Talent is so good that player feels it would be dumb not to use it almost constantly... which equates to poor design imho.

I'm considering changing True Aim to cost strain per rank used.

RAW it is causing the "optimum play" syndrome where the player who has two ranks in it does nothing but "True Aim, Shoot" pretty much every single turn. It's incredibly boring gameplay, but you know I get that he wants the two free upgrades to his pool for the low low cost of an Aim maneuver he doesn't mind doing anyway. One of those cases where the Talent is so good that player feels it would be dumb not to use it almost constantly... which equates to poor design imho.

Compare it to Precise Aim, where it's so bad that almost nobody wastes the Maneuver to use it.

We also said that Talents that remove setback will grant boost dice if there are no setbacks to remove.

This sounds like something I might consider in my group. I know there are 3 of my 4 players with some talents that remove setback dice that sometimes dont' make sense including with a check.

Another I was consider having was allowing grenades to be thrown from medium range, and the talent in the Merc tree would increase it to long. It just doesn't make sense that you can only throw grenades when you are about 10ft from enemies, most grenades would destroy you if you were that close from the shrapnel.

I do something along these lines except where not setback is applied the PCs can remove one negative setting. Challenge breaks down into 2 difficulty. Difficulty breaks into two setback. This method cannot remove the last setback however. I am toying the idea that this will only affect the lowest die of the combined negative dice pool.

Here goes a few more house rules!

- We made a change on Minon mechanics. They don't upgrade dices, instead of that they add Boost every 2 minions up to 3 (or 5) Boosts. EFFECT: Win heroic level, reduces mortality.

- Agility: Every 2 points you get an increase to hit difficulty when you are targeted. EFFECT: Reduces mortality.

- Space Combat: Speed difference adds difficulty if being targeted. EFFECT: Reduces mortality.

Other rules on

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/106434-house-rules/page-4#entry1128396

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/106434-house-rules/#entry1095254

Hope you enjoy them

Here goes a few more house rules!

- We made a change on Minon mechanics. They don't upgrade dices, instead of that they add Boost every 2 minions up to 3 (or 5) Boosts. EFFECT: Win heroic level, reduces mortality.

- Agility: Every 2 points you get an increase to hit difficulty when you are targeted. EFFECT: Reduces mortality.

- Space Combat: Speed difference adds difficulty if being targeted. EFFECT: Reduces mortality.

Other rules on

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/106434-house-rules/page-4#entry1128396

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/106434-house-rules/#entry1095254

Hope you enjoy them

I don't know about these ones. Does this game really need to be less dangerous? I think it's at a pretty good point where it is. Kind of half way between the invincible gods of d20 and the brittle leaves of BRP.

I'm considering changing True Aim to cost strain per rank used.

RAW it is causing the "optimum play" syndrome where the player who has two ranks in it does nothing but "True Aim, Shoot" pretty much every single turn. It's incredibly boring gameplay, but you know I get that he wants the two free upgrades to his pool for the low low cost of an Aim maneuver he doesn't mind doing anyway. One of those cases where the Talent is so good that player feels it would be dumb not to use it almost constantly... which equates to poor design imho.

Again only the Merc gets this Talent, (I am not 100% up to date on all the books! just going by ECRB).

If he wanted the two boost die and the two upgrades he would have to True aim once 1 boost, 2 upgrade and aim again costing the -2 Strain to gain the extra Boost Die.

What have you done to make your Merc do other things than aim? Blow his cover away, move the baddies from his line of sight, have him get melee attacked, have a shipping container about to fall on him? Have the baddies move out of his range? Have him get flanked, so he has no more cover? You say this "optimum play" aim shoot style is boring then it is up to the GM to fix it, and not by changing the rules of the game to hinder someone's build. If I were your player and had this character built, and all of a sudden you told me to start marking off strain, I would just ignore you. Putting a house rule like this into effect after the build is crappy at best, but really just a sign of vinDICtive GM, who has to cheat to make the game seem funner for him. Sorry, if I seem a little hostile, I am not, it just irks me when I see this stuff, and when it happens to me as a player.

So my advice is look at your encounters, and cause him to use his maneuvers in others ways than just "picking" on him and his ultra cool bottom tier talents, which almost all of them are.

Adding Strain to True Aim isn't all that bad, you have to burn a Strain for each rank of Frenzied Attack, Sidestep, Dodge, etc.

Hhmm, sorry I disagree. Adding strain to it is bad. Why are you adding strain, because you get the upgrade now? Then Aim should cost strain. I could maybe understand saying you could True Aim twice, and that could then cost the -2 strain.

My problem with the post is where he says aiming and shooting is boring, so I am going to change the rules to penalize the player with True Aim to limit him from doing it so much.

Sorry, this is just lazy GMing and IMHO poor GMing.

The real problem here is why is the battle field so static that everyone can just stand around and aim all the time. To me that is boring. Is it a mechanics problem? Nope. Then what is the problem? Liloki does say it is a poor design, but the way I see it it is in the encounter setup/execution not in the mechanics of the system.

Again, if the character is already built, and you change it now is really horrible.

If you have that much heart burn with it, and still let your players just stand in one spot for round after round of combat, then perhaps here is a modified house rule. True Aim, one boost, one upgrade. If you a have True Aim two times, then you can Double True aim, spending one maneuver to True Aim, and spending another Maneuver to True Aim again, for 2 boost, 2 upgrades at -2 strain.

I'm not really commenting on battle set ups or the use of Aim, I just don't see it as a big deal to add a Strain requirement to True Aim, when every other combat buff maneuver/incidental has it already. You can have 4 ranks of True Aim, only Aim once, and that gets you 4 upgrades and a Boost die for zero Strain. That is OP in all honesty.

What House Rules are you GMs using???

Would anyone use the rule that 4 uncancelled Triumphs = Insta-Death?

Unless it were a minion, or I had a ton of troops on the table and I'm looking to clear the field up a bit... no.

I actually use a number of house rules... Just on this subject, I stuck to the way the beta was of doing extra damage on an attack: the first hit was to actually hit, and didn't count for extra points of damage. Like if you rolled a net positive of 4 hits, I give +3 to the weapons damage. The first hit is to actually hit. It wasn't something I did on purpose, I just never realized it changed. We're so used to doing damage the way we have been doing it that when I brought it up, the players even wanted it to stay the way we were playing it. Also note, that this goes both ways, it applies to NPCs also.

If you are using mods, and you didn't buy them new or have them professionally installed, they automatically convert the first purple to a red. The despair representing the mod/weapon/ship breaking.

On that same note, if a player character is installing the mods and has the appropriate career/background/specialization and they roll a success with a triumph, it is considered professionally installed (no red upgrade).

I've just started a 5th edition D&D campaign, and I'm importing the flexible initiative system so that everyone rolls initiative, and you come up with slots for PCs and NPCs which can be used by whomever.

I also took some elements with me... particularly the advantage and threat. I use the fudge dice though + and -. I have the players toss the dice with their 20s and have successes with bad things happen, and failures with good things. I adore the way this mechanic brought out the role players in many of my roll players, as I make them tell me what is happening with their results. So far it's gone spectacularly, however, I can't get players to stop playing star wars to give more then a passing try to D&D, understandable. But these players all came from D&D and Mathfinder... and all have apparently given those systems up in coming to star wars. Out of 13 players, only one is a star wars nut, like myself.

I'm stuck on a fence: It turns out the wife doesn't like being jammed with all 5 kids all the time. so I'm on a stop watch as to how much "game time" I get a week, and currently that's wrapped up in two star wars campaigns.

Here goes a few more house rules!

- We made a change on Minon mechanics. They don't upgrade dices, instead of that they add Boost every 2 minions up to 3 (or 5) Boosts. EFFECT: Win heroic level, reduces mortality.

- Agility: Every 2 points you get an increase to hit difficulty when you are targeted. EFFECT: Reduces mortality.

- Space Combat: Speed difference adds difficulty if being targeted. EFFECT: Reduces mortality.

Other rules on

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/106434-house-rules/page-4#entry1128396

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/106434-house-rules/#entry1095254

Hope you enjoy them

I don't know about these ones. Does this game really need to be less dangerous? I think it's at a pretty good point where it is. Kind of half way between the invincible gods of d20 and the brittle leaves of BRP.

Hi Icosiel!

There is no need BUT its a pretty good option for people that doesn't want they powerful 1.800 XP + characters with more than 14 years of story, die by a pack of 6 stormtroopers minions and a rival officcer giving a Boost XD

Every house rules fits for a game. In our one he just hace reduced (a bit, not so much) hit probabilities. In general therms:

From 60% to 40%, from 30% to 20% and from 20% to 10% in the tests we did. A significative, but not awesome change

Hhmm, sorry I disagree. Adding strain to it is bad. Why are you adding strain, because you get the upgrade now? Then Aim should cost strain. I could maybe understand saying you could True Aim twice, and that could then cost the -2 strain.

My problem with the post is where he says aiming and shooting is boring, so I am going to change the rules to penalize the player with True Aim to limit him from doing it so much.

Sorry, this is just lazy GMing and IMHO poor GMing.

The real problem here is why is the battle field so static that everyone can just stand around and aim all the time. To me that is boring. Is it a mechanics problem? Nope. Then what is the problem? Liloki does say it is a poor design, but the way I see it it is in the encounter setup/execution not in the mechanics of the system.

Dude, first off, this thread is about House Rules people are using or considering in their own games. You don't have to agree with everything everyone says here. It isn't an official errata thread that will change your game.

Second, I said that was a change to True Aim that I was considering . Nice of you to fly off on a tirade about how I must be a bad GM to supposedly vindictively just insta-slam my player with this with zero discussion. Making a lot of assumptions just to insult someone b/c you don't agree with their opinion on a rule in a game table that you are not even a part of isn't rational.

If you think the Talent is fine, that is fair and your opinion. From experience and in contrast to other rules in the game, it has become my experience that the Talent is on the OP side. To insist someone is a crap GM b/c their optimiser player is abusing something that is arguably broken is totally off base.

The fact is that True Aim is the one combat Talent that does upgrading that doesn't cost strain. Not only that, it gives you the upgrades for doing a maneuver that already benefits you. You don't make any sort of meaningful sacrifice choice in game to suddenly get free upgrades. Other combat Talents force you to make a Strain choice for the upgrades and in many cases this is in addition to consuming your maneuver for which you get no other benefit. The contrast is rather significant.

The easy benefit of True Aim is so good that my optimiser player even has it written on his character sheet.

1. Point gun at enemy.
2. True Aim
3. Aim Again
4. Cackle like a madman as enemy is obliterated.
5. Repeat until you stand atop a pile of mangled bodies.
6. Add footage to Demo Reel.

Your only point of suggestion is that I am supposedly supposed to go even further than my usual shifting combats to intentionally do stuff geared to prevent him from getting to use his Talents? That is more of a jerk move than what you are assuming I would do by just insta-nerfing the Talent on him without discussion. Your proposal is that GMs should do arbitrary things to block player actions.

Honestly, I'd rather just stick with my plan to have a chat with my player and present the changes I am considering and the reasoning behind it. Just b/c you got burned by a bad GM doesn't mean you should jump on forums assuming GMs you don't even know are bad based on conclusions you've drawn from barely any information at all.

I'm not really commenting on battle set ups or the use of Aim, I just don't see it as a big deal to add a Strain requirement to True Aim, when every other combat buff maneuver/incidental has it already. You can have 4 ranks of True Aim, only Aim once, and that gets you 4 upgrades and a Boost die for zero Strain. That is OP in all honesty.

Exactly. It's now at the point where a determined player can grab 4 ranks of True Aim for their character fairly realistically (the two ranks on the Sharpshooter spec aren't even deep at the 10 & 15xp rows).

A truly determined player could even end up with 6 ranks of True Aim with the specs released so far, but that's some serious dedication to chasing a RAW abusable Talent.

1. Point gun at enemy.
2. True Aim
3. Aim Again
4. Cackle like a madman as enemy is obliterated.
5. Repeat until you stand atop a pile of mangled bodies.
6. Add footage to Demo Reel.

That is HILARIOUS!!!! ROFL!! LOL!!! I am going to use that. Ok, so the question...Since when can you aim 2ice??? I mean logically, you aim your gun and shoot. Maybe you take a minute but that isn't aiming 2ice??!!!

I think you are taking the idea of committing both maneuvers aiming too literally. I think the intent is to represent a higher degree of effort and time spent lining up a shot.

Concerning the True Aim house rule. I ran an AoR one-shot several months back. One of my players played a Gunner/Sharpshooter specifically because of True Aim. He grabbed all 4 ranks of True Aim. All of the usual combat-oriented players in my group, even the Gunner/Sharpshooter admitted that 4 ranks in True Aim was incredibly overpowered.

For a one shot, I had no problem (though I did burn some destiny points on that particular character, but it was all in good fun), but for a long-term game, I would definitely consider the strain penalty or something like that.

Keep in mind that this talent is an active talent, so he would not have to suffer the strain penalty (via house rule) if he does not wish to activate the talent. Thus regular aim is not affected and would not need to be.

TL;DR: When even my hard core power gamers admit a rule is broken and needs adjusting, something needs fixed.

1. Point gun at enemy.
2. True Aim
3. Aim Again
4. Cackle like a madman as enemy is obliterated.
5. Repeat until you stand atop a pile of mangled bodies.
6. Add footage to Demo Reel.

That is HILARIOUS!!!! ROFL!! LOL!!! I am going to use that. Ok, so the question...Since when can you aim 2ice??? I mean logically, you aim your gun and shoot. Maybe you take a minute but that isn't aiming 2ice??!!!

Yeah, outside of the stale combat macro aspect of it, it is rather amusing.

RAW you can do two consecutive Aim maneuvers for twice the effect. Narratively, it is taking extra effort/time to line up your shot. So if you True Aim once and regular Aim once you can choose to get the two Boost from consecutive Aim variants and upgrades from ranks of True Aim.

Honestly, I knew it was a little off but didn't think it would be a big deal till I noticed he started trying to do this combo as much as possible no matter what was going on around his character. So I had to look into possible root causes and my assessment was that it being non-consequential to choose to True Aim every time was making it an automatic constant choice for him. Then there was also mention of desire for the Sharpshooter spec for the two easy additional ranks of it... not b/c the rest of the spec made sense for his character to deep spec into but just b/c those two additional ranks of True Aim are early.

I checked in with another friend of mine who is running his own game of AoR Beta that transitioned to full on AoR and asked if he had similar thing going on with the Sharpshooter in his game. He confirmed that was also the case. So to me that reinforces the "non-consequence no-brainer choice" aspect of True Aim RAW.

Adding a Strain per Rank cost would put it back in line with all the other combat Talents that give upgrades. So that is going to be part of the conversation I have with this player. Even if I don't end up instituting it this campaign, more than likely going to institute it in other campaigns going forward.

edit: removed double quote

Second, I said that was a change to True Aim that I was considering. Nice of you to fly off on a tirade about how I must be a bad GM to supposedly vindictively just insta-slam my player with this with zero discussion. Making a lot of assumptions just to insult someone b/c you don't agree with their opinion on a rule in a game table that you are not even a part of isn't rational.

Hmm. I didn't realize I was flying off on anything. I was responding to you directly saying you were thinking about changing a rule because you thought it was "boring". I'm sorry if you think what I said was harsh. But that is exactly what I think. By the way, the quote you pulled from my was directed to 2P51, not you. I guess I should have quoted him, but I posted right after he did. Then I did refer to your post. I stand by what I said. In your first post about changing this the only reason you said you were thinking about changing it was because you found it to be a boring tactic. I'm sorry I upset you when I said I didn't agree.

I never said anything about intentionally keeping him from using his talents. I listed out some possible things that could happen in an encounter, I did not mean to make them all happen in row, right after another.

Thank you for pointing out why you don't like this talent so much. I do agree that if a player wanted to get all six of these, then that would be pretty crazy. But by then, how much XP does this guy have? What kind of enemies is he facing. They should have quite a few ranks of adversary!

Making a lot of assumptions just to insult someone b/c you don't agree with their opinion on a rule in a game table that you are not even a part of isn't rational."

I never did insult you. I did say

"My problem with the post is where he says aiming and shooting is, so I am going to change the rules to penalize the player with True Aim to limit it him from doing it so much. Sorry this is just lazy Gming and IMHO poor GMing."

I never said you were a bad GM or a bad person. I did say IF that is your reasoning THEN...

This is a playful forum, perhaps you are reading my writing with venom that was never intended or included.

I never said you can not do this proposed house rule. I actually gave you an alternative idea as well.

I have never had anyone use this talent in my games yet, so I am interested in seeing why people think it is broke. I did state that I am only going with the ECRB, as all my other books are crossing the Atlantic right now. I still don't see how Two True Aims is a problem. I am staring to see how 3-6 true Aims can be a problem.

Liloki, my intent was not to insult you and make you upset.

-R2builder