Hi,

I have been playing Edge if the Empire for a couple of game sessions but I am having always the same problem over and over. I even gave my players 100 exp one shot so they could be better and have more tools at their disposition.

My problem is in battle. NPCs, even minions hit my players most of the time. With one purple dice at close range its pretty easy to hit. If it is a Stormtrooper, you get 9 base damage. That being said, my players have around 12-18 HP. 3-4 hits and its game over.

You have a skill system, with no active dodge. You could say Dnd 3 had no active dodge: only your base + dex + armor, but HP would increase over time. Now you are telling yourself that HP can be increase with talents in Edge of the Empire, but I think these are small increasement.

In the end, even if I would give my players 500 more EXP, they would still be easy to hit and to kill.

This being said, I am probably doing something wrong. Can you help me please

Thanks

How many opponents are they facing in any given combat? What are their weapons? What kind of careers/specs are they? Are they using Stimpacks? How many players?

How many opponents are they facing in any given combat? What are their weapons? What kind of careers/specs are they? Are they using Stimpacks? How many players?

I have between 3-4 players depending on the game. I have a slicer, gadgeteer, Pilot and Mechanix.

I have tried one to several minion or even group of minion, The gear is not that good so far, but it is getting better. I think this set rule is very gear oriented, but still, I am worried that even if you have a skilled character, you can still die quickly. I dont have that problem in space combat because ships have more HP.

No Stimpack

You're throwing a very non combat group at the toughest Minions there are if you are using Stormtroopers. Stormtroopers are very tough and very offensive. The players are poorly armed. They have no way to heal themselves. They are engaging from Short range. I would expect that group equipped that way engaging from that range to die quickly actually, so I'd say the rules are working fine.

At least one player should be combat oriented. They all should have Stimpacks if they are going to engage in combat. If you aren't a combat Career, you compensate via gear. They need to be packing bigger guns. This game is very much about the best defense is a strong offense.

No character generally is going to be able to stand and simply absorb several hits. Some characters focus on raising Soak, but even the Soak monsters take time to develop and tend to be very hyper specialized and good for little else typically beside hitting someone with a stick and being shot.

Give them someone that can fight. Give them Stimpacks. Give them better guns. They will do better.

I agree with 2Pirate51 - you may be expecting too much fightyness from them.

Keep in mind that EotE does have quite a few defensive talents and options.

You can't play this game like other RPGs. I blame DnD for fostering the idea that every encounter is supposed to be winnable so long as the players hang in long enough. As the GM you'll need to scale the encounters appropriately, and offer plenty of range, catwalks, cover, and ways for the players to leverage any advantages and triumphs they earn (shooting out controls, making energy sources arc, etc). The players have to learn to take cover, pass boost dice around, spend triumphs to change the game in their favour, and just plain run away when they have to. Most importantly though (IMHO), the combat should be a sidebar to the main mission. The PCs might have to engage in combat while they (hack the computer, blow up the communications array, toss a grenade down the experimental missile silo) and after that they should be prepared to scram.

Lastly, crossing the wound threshold isn't death, unless you want the PCs to die. If you scale a fight too tough unintentionally, you have to be prepared to capture the PCs and offer ways for them to escape later. If the players are coming from other games and refuse to embrace the idea of running away, capturing them (and taking some of their stuff) is a good way to instill that idea for future sessions.

It's a hit point system. Characters will be hit, the trick is in minimizing how bad the hit is and keeping it from generating critical hits. Toughened is a great talent, take a few ASAP and get your soak up too. Never play a Brawn 1 character if you can help it.

BTW, starship combat can be even more deadly than personal combat. Instead of each PC having their own WT, they usually only have one ship. If they engage anything with concussion missiles or proton torpedoes (especially a Linked 1 pair) they may get blown out of space very quickly.

In the end, even if I would give my players 500 more EXP, they would still be easy to hit and to kill.

One of the things I love about this game... The DnD concept of steadily becoming immune was one of my major frustrations with it.

In the end, even if I would give my players 500 more EXP, they would still be easy to hit and to kill.

One of the things I love about this game... The DnD concept of steadily becoming immune was one of my major frustrations with it.

With enough Enduring and some good armor (possibly with Armor Master), you can become effectively immune to most Brawl and Ranged (Light) weapons as well as really taking the sting out of some Melee and Ranged (Heavy). When soak hits 10+ and you have Cortosis armor, you're pretty well protected.

I have to agree with about everyone here so far, it is not a problem with the system, but how the system is being ran. You have a non- combat group, so perhaps their encounters should not be combat heavy. Look at it this way, if I am not a boxer, but I keep greeting stuck in a boxing ring, I am going to get my a$$ handed to me, but most importantly, why I am I getting in the ring in the first place.

Sometime it is fun to throw your characters into situations were they are not supposed to shine. Taking them out of their comfort zone. Making the stupid but tough soldier do some computer hacking. it brings to mind that scene from Zoolander!

This cannot be done often though, and it can never be for anything too important or you just ruin the game and experience.

It seems to me that by your group not making combat characters that they perhaps don't want a combat heavy game, but you are making a combat heavy game.

Now you say that you gave your dudes 100XP, and the tools they need.

Before I appear to be rude, I do want to say welcome to the forums, there are a bunch of smart, great guys on here, well except for Whafrog, HappyDaze, Col. Orange, and 2P51. we hope to see you around here a lot.

Perhaps you need to rethink your stance. By giving out free XP, the characters don't become better at combat. They become better at their jobs. You don't have combat types, therefore they won't get better at combat.

When you say that you give them tools, do you give ample cover, range, and other obstacles to help them? Do you give your slicer anything to hack into to help in the fight? Perhaps he can hack video feeds to give everyone a boost die, or hack the fire suppression system, cleaning droids...anything?

This game is about the players and what they want. It does not sound like they want heavy and hard combat.

Unlearn what you have learned from other systems. Start off very, very small with your encounters, and above all, let them be heroes more often than not. The universe is not made up of Heroes on every corner and in every bar, serving drinks and driving cabs. Let them have fun.

Hi again,

I would like to thanks everyone for the replies. I am happy to see that you have a real nice community.

Like I said, in my message, I was wondering if my game mastering style was the problem. Thanks to your feed back, I will reevaluate how I run my game and adapt my game mastering style to fit the Edge of the Empire system.

To answer R2Builder, I gave them more EXP so that they could be more different from one another. The 100 xp, was for the talents. Because, they only had put points in their skills.

For narrative Tools, such as cover, ranger and obstacle I let player take the initiative. I make them roll a Perception check and according to succes and advantages, they can place what ever they want on the map as long as it fits with the environment. This include anything a slicer or a pilot can use.

Thanks again

By the way, sorry for poor grammar. I am a french canadian and I am not use to write in English. Thanks for you patience

One of the things I love about this game... The DnD concept of steadily becoming immune was one of my major frustrations with it.

With enough Enduring and some good armor (possibly with Armor Master), you can become effectively immune to most Brawl and Ranged (Light) weapons as well as really taking the sting out of some Melee and Ranged (Heavy). When soak hits 10+ and you have Cortosis armor, you're pretty well protected.

True enough. Just speaking for my games, I doubt my players will ever get that much XP or equipment. I don't think any of them has even looked at the equipment list yet (they aren't really SW fans). We don't play often enough, and if a campaign gets close to that level I'll want to design an epic closure.

In any case, the power/immunity curve is far flatter than D&D.

By the way, sorry for poor grammar. I am a french canadian and I am not use to write in English. Thanks for you patience

Don't worry about it. I've been speaking English all my life and I still make mistakes.

Seriously, after I was born I turned to my mother and said, "Hey, you're not the only one in pain. I have a hole in the top of my skull from where you pushed too hard!"

Some other thoughts.

This Saturday I will be running a small game for about 6 people who have never played Edge. It is shocking, but we don't have a combat heavy group. Here is the break down for the group.

Bounty Hunter/Gadgeteer--Human/Mandalorian

Explorer/Driver/Force Exile--Human

Technician/Outlaw Tech--Human

Doctor or Tech--Droid, Slussi, Verpine or Selkath

Hired Gun

Smuggler/scoundrel

With this group, I can not go super combat heavy. So while I like combat in my games, I will have to make sure that I give this group good alternatives to blaster/ranged combat.

I know I need to introduce them to combat, so I will have to make it really simple for them. I am thinking of doing a simple rescue mission deal. I am planning on just a simple straight forward job where the have to go in and fight some thugs to get the man out before he ends up in the Nerf Grinder. I know it will go awry, but I have some stuff in mind to try to get everyone involved with the encounter doing stuff other than shooting guns at baddies. At the end of the scenario, they will get rushed by some tough reinforcements, and they will have to make a quick escape in the speeder, letting the Driver have his moment to shine. I am planning on having the speeder take some nasty hits, and the techie can repair it, and they can make their get away.

I am going to make all the minions pretty simple, and easy to take down.

Since everyone is created RAW, they won't have a lot. So I will let them find some stim packs/Medpacs and maybe a heavy gun for the hired gun. I don't like to run a kill and scrounge game, but I will let them get a little gear.

In the area will be some machines that the techie can maybe turn against the defenders. Some chemical vats that can be exploited on Advantages, and maybe even a repulsor forklift that the driver can use.

The main idea is to give them a dynamic environment, and some easy baddies to dispose of, and to teach them how the game operates.

Ok, enough of my ramblings. Good luck out there!

For narrative Tools, such as cover, ranger and obstacle I let player take the initiative. I make them roll a Perception check and according to succes and advantages, they can place what ever they want on the map as long as it fits with the environment. This include anything a slicer or a pilot can use.

This is an interesting idea. You might also want to plan ahead of time how a triumph or despair can be used in the situation.

On a different note, if you haven't tried it already: one surprising thing with this game is how effective and tense social situations can be. My players are old-school and were at first dismissive of the idea, but after couple of sessions trying to calm a crowd or charm an informer or negotiate a good deal, they were sold. Now combat is "just another thing", rather than other games where the dice only seem to come out when shots are fired.

As whafrog said in post #6, crossing wound threshold isn't death. It's hard to die in this system, but not hard to be taken out.

I'd say the players need to think through the fact that if they're not combat-heavy, they should run from a fight more often than not. If it's just a few thugs, fine, but if it's a squad of Stormtroopers, or several Rival-class NPCs, or a nemesis like the Master Bounty Hunter, they should be scared. Even the heroes in the movies ran or snuck around from fights at times. While others may be accurate in some tips to change your GM style, I think the players also have an onus to change how they play their characters.

I agree that the players may need to change how they play the game, but that is the key role of the Game Master. All too often people feel compelled to fight. In many games, running away is not really an option, or is seen as a sign of failure. I have seen groups who will not run, or surrender in a fight. To them that is just as bad as dying. I'm not exactly sure where this mentality came from, but it is prevalent across our hobby. Not just one game system, culture, or geographical area. This is change that need to be inspired from the GM.

I have also seen the mentality of GM Vs. player. If people want to play that way, that is on them, but I do not feel that what RPGs represent or should be about. I have known D(G)Ms in the past that actually took pleasure in the TPK. They saw it a sign of their greatness as a D(G)M. I feel nothing could be further from the mark. "Oh I made this scenario or campaign that my group will never be able to get through without dying!" To me that is the first sign of a poor or lazy story teller. It is as bad as everyone in the universe is a Hero, from the blacksmith to the barkeep to the stable boy!

Anyway, wanting a group change their ethos will have to be a collaborative effort. The players and the GM alike have to understand that leaving a fight is not bad thing, that it is the smart thing. Perhaps in older games the degree of success was measured by how much you killed, now the degree is how long can you live?

I think most importantly though, why is a group of non-combat characters always getting into tough combat? Is it something they are doing wrong, or is the wrong story being told. If I'm a hired gun, but I always have to use deceit, skulduggery, coercion, and computer skills, and never get to use my blasters to get through my encounters, perhaps I'm in the wrong line of work...

So while I agree with Cvtheoman to a point, I do believe that the onus starts with the Game Master.

Nice discussion we got there.

Looking back at the last game, I have noticed that my players are always cautious and want to evade combat. But, that is my bad, I always pushed them toward combat, to have at least one or two fights per games. it is something that I will change from now on. Every combat situation will be avoidable.

I wouldn't make every combat avoidable, sometimes you gotta shoot your way through to escape, but that doesn't mean you have to put everyone down.

Agree with 2P51, sometimes combat means a chase, which can be a lot more fun.

But, that is my bad, I always pushed them toward combat, to have at least one or two fights per games.

This sounds familiar, that's how I used to plan D&D sessions, because "combat and conquest" was how the characters progressed. In this game, what that has turned into now is just several "encounters", some of which (probably no more than 1 per session) have combat-related activities. The trick is learning how to use all those other skills in a compelling and tension-inducing way. There are no "dump stats" or "useless skills" in this game, they can all play a part.

You could also change up how you structure missions so that some of them are to do what they have to do without being detected. That means combat has to be avoided, or be extremely short and sweet (no death, only unconsciousness). That way it's easier to time other actions that aren't combat related. Eg: let's say their mission is to frame a politician by hacking into his computer and installing wookiee-porn (... ... ), it will ruin things if the break-in is discovered.

I have seen groups who will not run, or surrender in a fight. To them that is just as bad as dying. I'm not exactly sure where this mentality came from, but it is prevalent across our hobby. Not just one game system, culture, or geographical area. This is change that need to be inspired from the GM.

It's a very, very old idea actually.

Death before dishonor.

Come back with your shield or on it.

Only cowards run.

etc.

On a battlefield running was often the fastest way to get killed. Especially, if it was infantry versus cavalry. This instinct seems to have carried over to some extent into the modern psyche.

Many players feel that big **** heroes don't run when the chips are down. I see a lot of GMs display an astonishing lack of understanding with character motivations (not player). Players will not run if they have a reason to stay. They won't ditch high value items or people, for example.

If you want the players to run, you have to beet them over the head with it. Don't give them reason to hang around.

I have seen groups who will not run, or surrender in a fight. To them that is just as bad as dying. I'm not exactly sure where this mentality came from, but it is prevalent across our hobby. Not just one game system, culture, or geographical area. This is change that need to be inspired from the GM.

It's a very, very old idea actually.

Death before dishonor.

Come back with your shield or on it.

Only cowards run.

etc.

On a battlefield running was often the fastest way to get killed. Especially, if it was infantry versus cavalry. This instinct seems to have carried over to some extent into the modern psyche.

Many players feel that big **** heroes don't run when the chips are down. I see a lot of GMs display an astonishing lack of understanding with character motivations (not player). Players will not run if they have a reason to stay. They won't ditch high value items or people, for example.

If you want the players to run, you have to beet them over the head with it. Don't give them reason to hang around.

The old honor codes you referred to can be relevant, but they are generally warrior codes. If the PCs are largely non-combs, then they should know when to run.

But on a bigger note, this is where it's good to make sure that the whole party (including the GM) is on the same page. As Aservan said, understand your players and their characters. What kind of game do they want to play? Are they looking for lots of combat, or are they more likely to try to talk their way out of a situation and would prefer more intrigue in their plot? Setting aside some time to discuss expectations as a group, especially early on, can save a lot of headache later.

I will say this: at the end of the day you can run whatever game you want, and as everyone at the table is having fun, you're golden. However, this system is designed to make players wary of combat, to make you think and have more depth to your story (even in combat) than just "pew pew, they're dead." So if your players just want to stampede over mooks with barely a scratch, you might want to try something else, but first I'd say give this system a shot by playing on its terms.

I will say this: at the end of the day you can run whatever game you want, and as everyone at the table is having fun, you're golden. However, this system is designed to make players wary of combat, to make you think and have more depth to your story (even in combat) than just "pew pew, they're dead." So if your players just want to stampede over mooks with barely a scratch, you might want to try something else, but first I'd say give this system a shot by playing on its terms.

My experience has differed considerably. This game does nothing encourage players to be wary of combat. If anything, the 'easily downed, but usually back up in no time' makes combat about as attractive as in D&D. Stimpacks are healing potions, and a Doctor or Medic is a Cleric that can generally clear away critical hits in no time. Sure you get scratched, but it usually has no lasting effect. This may not appeal to the sensibilities of the players (including the GM), but that's the way the mechanics actually play out.

Is this a bad thing? It's an adventurous setting so the PCs are meant to take risks, yeah?

Is this a bad thing? It's an adventurous setting so the PCs are meant to take risks, yeah?

Oh, I quite agree. Combat is supposed to be fairly common in Star Wars. Just about every character from R2D2 and C3PO to Jar-Jar was occasionally engaged in combat in the movies, and most of the major characters were involved in action quite often.