So like everyone else I'm excited about F&D, but was wondering if anyone's got their hands on the new AOR book. Really curious about its guidelines for bringing edge characters into the rebellion. Also would love to know more about the mass combat guidelines and how the whole big battle is structured?

The guidelines for incorporating Edge of the Empire characters are pretty simple. Spoilers to follow.

The Mass Combat rules are very simple. Without going into excessive detail, (and re-typing the rules verbatim) the number of ability dice in the pool are based on the strength of the acting force. Difficulty dice are added based on the relative disparity in size between the active force and the force opposing it. Ability dice are upgraded to Proficiency dice based on the active force's commander's number of ranks in the Leadership skill. Difficulty dice are upgraded to Challenge dice based on the enemy force's commander's number of ranks in the Leadership skill.

Boost and setback dice are added based on positioning, battlefield conditions, et cetera.

Any ships or vehicles new to the AoR/EoE system in it?

Any ships or vehicles new to the AoR/EoE system in it?

I was hoping for some new Alliance capital ships but the goodies we got make up for that. IMO The Alliance needs some more Sil 7 warships badly and I would love for both sides to get some more Sil 6 warships as well. Oh well hopefully next time.

I like the mass combat rules much better than the Squad rules. Despite the author of the Squad rules showing us an example of those rules, I feel like there isn't enough trade off for forming a Squad. The Mass Combat rules on the other hand is very general and relies heavily on Leadership which I think is a good thing.

I do think that there could have been more detail on how PCs might participate in the middle of Mass Combat much like how they can participate in a space battle while they were passengers on a light freighter. But I have enough here to work that kind of thing out.

You can skip the rest of this unless you just like to hear me complain...

What I do not like is how these rules were hidden in the middle of an adventure instead of put in the GM kit or the core rule book. I have a feeling that the CRB was finished before we ever got access to the beta rules and pointed out that mass combat was something that would be useful. I really hope that Force and Destiny is developed better. Even if it was planned from the start to omit the rules and make GMs buy the adventure if they wanted Mass Combat I feel like it was the wrong decision. I would have bought the adventure anyway and now I have to either copy two pages from it to use those rules in other adventures or drag the book along to the table. And it's not even in an additional rules section. It's buried in the middle of the book!

Not to derail, but one thing I noticed on my last read-through of the squad rules that might make squads more useful: damage is handled differently. The squad rules say that the leader can shift damage to a squad member, and that damage may kill or take out that squad member at their election. It's not handled like minion group damage, where a single attack roll may take out multiple minions.

Not to derail, but one thing I noticed on my last read-through of the squad rules that might make squads more useful: damage is handled differently. The squad rules say that the leader can shift damage to a squad member, and that damage may kill or take out that squad member at their election. It's not handled like minion group damage, where a single attack roll may take out multiple minions.

It's great for absorbing damage but it does very little to increase the attack ability of the squad. Unlike Minion groups where the upgraded dice do make them more accurate, squads only get a single boost die. It's better to take 11 guys, make them into two minion groups and then use the rest to form a squad to protect the PC. I just feel like that defeats the purpose of reducing die rolls and dealing with larger units.

The way I look at the Squad rules is that it's designed as a way to protect a Squad Leader who's got a specific objective--scout a certain area, sneak up and hack a terminal, take out a sentry to open up an avenue of attack.

You can use the Comm Silence, Search and other formations to make the Squad Leader more effective at doing these things.

At least that's how I see it.

I tried to start a discussion about Arda I on the EotE GM forum, but no one has seemed to join in the conversation about how to run the darn thing. I'm going to be running my group through it starting next week.

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/114084-gming-onslaught-at-arda-i/

I tried to start a discussion about Arda I on the EotE GM forum, but no one has seemed to join in the conversation about how to run the darn thing. I'm going to be running my group through it starting next week.

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/114084-gming-onslaught-at-arda-i/

Posted there, but posting it here too.

I've only read through the first Episode of Arda, but I've got a couple pieces of advice.

First, scrap the map. You may as well just scribble it out of the book, as it is completely useless. I don't know if you've read Episode I yet, but the descriptions of the base don't match the map in 90% of the cases.

For instance, when you have to escort Hase from C&C to the YT-2400 waiting for her.. which is in the primary hangar for some reason (which is full of Sandtroopers). Now.. you're able to get her to the ship without any incident.. yet right afterwards, you have to go back to C&C, and suddenly there are a bunch of Imperials in your way? If you look at the map, the hangar is tiiiny. But in all the descriptions, its pretty large. The picture has it holding, like, a handful of fighters, when the book says there are 2 Squadrons.

Basically, what you need to do is read through the episode and sketch out a map based on how its described and what you'll actually need to interact with to run it. If you try and use the map in the book, you'll end up stumbling around trying to figure anything out.

Additionally, I'd highly recommend ignoring the parts where it says "If the PCs fail this, have them re-roll by add an additional (stacking) Threat for every new attempt!" This is terrible for a narrative game, and seems to be a holdover from D20. What I'd suggest you do is, in any situation where a PC has to succeed in order to advance the story, treat a Fail as a Despair or two and have them succeed. Unless, of course, you break it up.

For instance, when the PCs have to set the generator to blow. If they've locked the Sandtroopers outside, and they fail the roll? Have the troopers bust in before the PCs have finished the setup. They fight, the console got singed by some blaster fire, and you have them reroll with an additional threat. Then, if they fail again, just treat it as a Pass but with the early detonation in effect. There's no reason at all to keep the PCs there re-rolling in a situation where it adds nothing to the tension or the story. Like, in that same situation, if they killed or avoided all the Sandtroopers outside, and they fail the roll the first time out? Just jump straight to the early detonation and have them get the hell out. This happens in a couple places in the first ep, and is just really shoddy module writing.

And lastly, work the dogfight at the end out in your head. They describe it as a fight, but its actually set up more like a chase, with the Rebels trying to get the Imps to crash as they race through the canyons. But even then, it doesn't totally make sense, as the Imps should be going after the transports.. which exit from a different canyon? And when the canyon the fighters would have to launch from is filled with AT-ATs? I don't know. Its really confusing.

Now, as much as I'm complaining, I think a lot of it is really well done. Its got a cool story, and some really nice individual pieces--its just that how they're linked together is pretty bad. You just need to prepare it in such a way that you've already worked out how its going to play out before you get to that part at the table. If you try and go from the book, you're going to have a bad time.

A little off-top - Does anyone from Europe has Arda (and the new EotE book) already?

My book (arda) was shiped today, hasn't got it yet though but it's in the postal service hands now. (In Sweden btw)

Additionally, I'd highly recommend ignoring the parts where it says "If the PCs fail this, have them re-roll by add an additional (stacking) Threat for every new attempt!" This is terrible for a narrative game, and seems to be a holdover from D20. What I'd suggest you do is, in any situation where a PC has to succeed in order to advance the story, treat a Fail as a Despair or two and have them succeed. Unless, of course, you break it up.

For instance, when the PCs have to set the generator to blow. If they've locked the Sandtroopers outside, and they fail the roll? Have the troopers bust in before the PCs have finished the setup. They fight, the console got singed by some blaster fire, and you have them reroll with an additional threat. Then, if they fail again, just treat it as a Pass but with the early detonation in effect. There's no reason at all to keep the PCs there re-rolling in a situation where it adds nothing to the tension or the story. Like, in that same situation, if they killed or avoided all the Sandtroopers outside, and they fail the roll the first time out? Just jump straight to the early detonation and have them get the hell out. This happens in a couple places in the first ep, and is just really shoddy module writing.

My first RPG was Burning Wheel, and I learned this as "failing forward". In a narrative game like BW or EotE it's useful to think of intention, rather than skill checks. What are you trying to do? If the generator has to be blown up to move the story forward, then it'll get blown up--it's too detrimental to the story not to. The intent is really "blow it up before the Sandtroopers get in" or "rig it to blow after we've gotten away". With either of those intents it's very easy to see what a possible failure looks like.

Are there any notable new adversaries? As I see TIE Hunter listed, I hope Storm Commandos are present.

Are there any notable new adversaries? As I see TIE Hunter listed, I hope Storm Commandos are present.

The TIE Hunter is cool. You some cool alien monster things called Evarrians, which could totally make for an awesome horror adventure. But the only troopers are Sandtroopers and Stormtroopers.

Are there any notable new adversaries? As I see TIE Hunter listed, I hope Storm Commandos are present.

The TIE Hunter is cool. You some cool alien monster things called Evarrians, which could totally make for an awesome horror adventure. But the only troopers are Sandtroopers and Stormtroopers.

Oh, shame that they did not made the cut. What is weird with TIE Hunter being present and all. When they were cut between Beta and proper release, I hoped they were saved for just a such occasion in later supplements, weird.

Are there any notable new adversaries? As I see TIE Hunter listed, I hope Storm Commandos are present.

The TIE Hunter is cool. You some cool alien monster things called Evarrians, which could totally make for an awesome horror adventure. But the only troopers are Sandtroopers and Stormtroopers.

Oh, shame that they did not made the cut. What is weird with TIE Hunter being present and all. When they were cut between Beta and proper release, I hoped they were saved for just a such occasion in later supplements, weird.

I haven't gotten mine yet, I'll buy it next month but I wouldn't be shocked if FFG retroconned the TIE Hunter so it was no longer deployed only to Storm Commandos. They retroconned the Lancer class Frigate to be 19 or 20 years older then any other source has it after all.

Are there any notable new adversaries? As I see TIE Hunter listed, I hope Storm Commandos are present.

The TIE Hunter is cool. You some cool alien monster things called Evarrians, which could totally make for an awesome horror adventure. But the only troopers are Sandtroopers and Stormtroopers.

Oh, shame that they did not made the cut. What is weird with TIE Hunter being present and all. When they were cut between Beta and proper release, I hoped they were saved for just a such occasion in later supplements, weird.

I haven't gotten mine yet, I'll buy it next month but I wouldn't be shocked if FFG retroconned the TIE Hunter so it was no longer deployed only to Storm Commandos. They retroconned the Lancer class Frigate to be 19 or 20 years older then any other source has it after all.

The TIE Hunter didn't start as Commando-only. In the adventure the Hunter is leading a group of experimental Interceptors, which makes sense, as it was the Interceptor that ended up replacing it.

A little off-top - Does anyone from Europe has Arda (and the new EotE book) already?

Yep, I do. I got it yesterday, after ordering it on Thursday (This was unusually fast, but the shop is pretty good - Sphaerenmeister).

I thought I heard that mass combat and squad rules are in the book. It seemed weird, since I wouldn't think they would duplicate the squad rules, but is that true?

No.

Arda I contains "mass combat rules".

The AOR GM Kit contains "squad rules".

Just got my copy today in the mail. Might add my comments once i read it

(off topic rant) Sadly my postal carrier cannot bother himself to get out of his vehicle and while I was working on my yard not more then 30 feet from the mailbox I saw him forcefully shove the padded manilla envelope with the book into my mailbox. It just damaged the corners. But this is the second time the same carrier has done this to a SW RPG book. He seems to enjoy doing this. I have already sent a complaint (the second one) to the postmaster. Not to mention on my way home from work today driving my crappy POS 95' Buick after midnight, i was stopped by local cops who decided to follow me TWICE and stop me TWICE to remind me of how crappy my POS car is TWICE. It is only a 20 minute drive that turned into an hour drive. FML

I got mine two weeks ago and live in germany.

Do only I feel so or do only the rebels roll for the mass combat? Is it always so that only one side is rolling the mass combat pool?

Do only I feel so or do only the rebels roll for the mass combat? Is it always so that only one side is rolling the mass combat pool?

It would seem (from my reading of the Arda 1 "example") that the mass combat rules allow for a funky & enjoyable abstract narration of a (somewhat) predetermined story arc ... even if the rebels "win" every round on Arda 1, the best they do is get more time and more of their troops survive to fight another day. This is fine if you're playing against a well-crafted and pre-planned scenario (such as the thoroughly documented & fun-looking Arda 1 module)

but I wonder how one could create "contested" rolls - lets say two factions of PCs went to war against each other! (ie: neither side were 'NPCs' but EACH SIDE deserved a 'fair roll' at winning)

I imagine that (as in Arda 1's rules), the basic dice pool is based on the average quality (&/or firepower) of your troops - then modded by the leadership skill of the lead officer. One can imagine that the "other side" does the same. But then TWO QUESTIONS come to my inexperienced mind:

(1) how do you cope with relative force sizes? against the GM you select purple difficulty dice according to table 1-2 (and tweaked according to the "enemy" leadership skill) ... but if this is a CONTESTED fight between two PCs then how should we handle it? ... the book's Table 1-2 kinda stops making sense at that point (eg: add two skill (aka 'difficulty") dice to EACH side because numbers are 'even' sorta seems odd - if not meaningless - but then again, maybe it adds to the chaos! - i just dont know)

(1a) ... since the "bad" side should be more than an NPC paper-tiger (it has a Player after all) then, should we allow the 'purple' side to build their dice pool based on quality/firepower as well (seems fair) and then TWEAK according to relative army sizes *OR* should we build BOTH dice pools according to relative size (but how?) and then TWEAK according to relative 'quality/firepower' ?

(2) how do you cope with complication & advantage (blue & black dice)? - this seems to me to be somewhat less of a problem tho (but i dont know if I've grasped the concept correctly): ... if one Player controlled side is arbitrarily assigned "good" colours (yellow/green/blue) and the other Player controlled is arbitrarily assigned "bad" colours (purple, red, black) then I guess the GM can just add blues & blacks accordingly [i assume its much the same to add a blue to "good" if the "bad" side has a problem, or if the other side has an advantage &/or visa-versa?]

any thoughts anyone?

ALSO: (and forgive me if this has been dealt with elsewhere): is there a FLEET BATTLE equivalent? or are we supposed to use the new "STAR WARS Armada" tabletop miniatures game for that? - which is cool but given some RPGs are online/G+hangout/Roll20/PBeM which means that people may not be physically present or in temporal synch, then tabletop mechanisms for combat resolution can't always apply ...