And since Yoda really doesn't have official stats, who's to honestly say that he can't pull of those kinds of crazy stunts if he really wanted to?

Yoda was able to move Luke’s X-Wing without too much difficulty, but it was clearly still an effort on his part. In an emergency, could he move something the size of an AT-AT or the Millennium Falcon? Maybe, but I think that would really be pushing it.

But that’s just Sil 4. You can do that at FR1, with two pips, if you’ve spent 45 additional XP it takes to get all the Strength upgrades. The only other Force users I recall being able to move larger objects are Count Dooku and Darth Sidious himself, and neither of them seem to have gone beyond Sil 2. Even Anakin and Obi-wan struggled to use their powers to move a Sil 1 object that they really wanted to save.

Use the multiple upgrades option, and someone that is FR2 and spends three pips could move an object that is Sil 8 — on the scale of a Capital Ship, like a Victory-class Star Destroyer.

I’m sorry, there’s just way too OP, and completely destroys any willing sense of disbelief that I might have been able to conjure.

It should take extra pips to move larger objects, regardless of how you skin it.

The easy way to fix this problem is to remove all the additional Strength upgrades, past the first one. Then you could leave the rest of the current system alone — as modified by the published updates.

Another way to fix the problem is to build the extra pip cost into each of the existing Strength upgrades, but in that case I’d make the cost increase by one for every additional activation of the same Strength upgrade. So, if you had all four Strength upgrades, then to go from Sil 4 to Sil 5 would cost two additional pips and not just one.

And if you’ve gotten every single FR+1 talent there is, and you’re like FR12 or something, then maybe it shouldn’t be particularly difficult for you to toss Star Destroyers around.

But that shouldn’t be within the realm of possibility for someone who is just FR2.

And since Yoda really doesn't have official stats, who's to honestly say that he can't pull of those kinds of crazy stunts if he really wanted to?

Yoda was able to move Luke’s X-Wing without too much difficulty, but it was clearly still an effort on his part. In an emergency, could he move something the size of an AT-AT or the Millennium Falcon? Maybe, but I think that would really be pushing it.

But that’s just Sil 4. You can do that at FR1, with two pips, if you’ve spent 45 additional XP it takes to get all the Strength upgrades. The only other Force users I recall being able to move larger objects are Count Dooku and Darth Sidious himself, and neither of them seem to have gone beyond Sil 2. Even Anakin and Obi-wan struggled to use their powers to move a Sil 1 object that they really wanted to save.

Use the multiple upgrades option, and someone that is FR2 and spends three pips could move an object that is Sil 8 — on the scale of a Capital Ship, like a Victory-class Star Destroyer.

I’m sorry, there’s just way too OP, and completely destroys any willing sense of disbelief that I might have been able to conjure.

It should take extra pips to move larger objects, regardless of how you skin it.

The easy way to fix this problem is to remove all the additional Strength upgrades, past the first one. Then you could leave the rest of the current system alone — as modified by the published updates.

Another way to fix the problem is to build the extra pip cost into each of the existing Strength upgrades, but in that case I’d make the cost increase by one for every additional activation of the same Strength upgrade. So, if you had all four Strength upgrades, then to go from Sil 4 to Sil 5 would cost two additional pips and not just one.

And if you’ve gotten every single FR+1 talent there is, and you’re like FR12 or something, then maybe it shouldn’t be particularly difficult for you to toss Star Destroyers around.

But that shouldn’t be within the realm of possibility for someone who is just FR2.

Which would lead to complaints from people who do want to do things from books and video games. But frankly I don't see much need to worry about it since being able to move silhouette 4 objects is of minimal utility. So I don't see much call to worry about it or limit a players fun. I have yet to see anyone hurl even silhouette 3 objects let alone silhouette 4. as it is just not all that practical of a use of XP. People act like it is the end of the world. I just don't see it. there are better ways to do things than hurling starships that are more sure fire.

I mean really.... how often are you putting silhouette 8 objects in range....and how often is the best solution hurling that object at something?? Why is it even a worry?

Considering the range limitations the scale of how close to a sil 8 object you would need to be to move it it's kind of hard to even visualise, so while a PC could potentially do it finding a scenario where a silhouette 8 object is within range and, moving it no more than a couple of km (when it itself may be quite a bit bigger than a couple of km long!) will have a positive effect, is going to be rare.

As others have said its a costly ability xp wise

I always took Yoda's "sign of exhaustion" that people used to validate the OCR/RCR Star Wars RPGs having using the Force cost health as not a sign of the Jedi Master being tired from using the Force to move the X-Wing, but rather to instead be a sign of frustration that it took such a blatant example to finally get Luke to understand what he was trying to teach the boy. Given that for hundreds of years, Yoda had students and adults pretty much hanging on his every word, having Luke be so mired in the mundane was probably very frustrating to him.

Which would lead to complaints from people who do want to do things from books and video games.

I can assure you, nobody in my group has read a SW book or played a SW video game. And I'm pretty sure you don't need to act as the Paladin of PC Rights in other people's games...

Which would lead to complaints from people who do want to do things from books and video games.

Here’s the crux of the problem, as I see it. A power or other ability, once given by the game, cannot be taken back or reeled in by the GM.

Since some people will want to run with much higher power Force users, and some people will want to run with much more balanced Force users, it is better for the game system as a whole if they target the more balanced Force users, and then give you ideas for optional rules that you could use to allow for more powerful Force users.

You don’t want to be forced to run a game that you feel is imbalanced or doesn’t match with your worldview on how things should be done, anymore than anyone else wants to run a game that they feel is imbalanced or doesn’t match their worldview.

So, why would you insist on your — more powerful — interpretation as being the only one that is allowed? Why shouldn’t the baseline for the game be a more balanced approach and then give you an option for higher power?

In other words, kind of like the optional “Knight Level Play” rules?

As others have said its a costly ability xp wise

Paying 45xp to get all the available Strength Upgrades is not a high cost, IMO. Especially not if you’d need to do that any way, just to get the Mastery for that power.

I don’t recall seeing any Mastery listed for that power in the beta, but you never know what might change between the beta and the official published version.

Given that for hundreds of years, Yoda had students and adults pretty much hanging on his every word, having Luke be so mired in the mundane was probably very frustrating to him.

That explanation does seem plausible to me, so sure — Yoda could well have been able to easily toss around Sil 4 ships.

But that doesn’t change the previous discussion regarding every single other powerful Force user in Canon who never moved anything above Sil 3 (Dooku) or Sil 2 (Palpatine) or Sil 1 (Anakin and Obi-wan), and who most definitely would have had very strong incentive to do so.

And that says nothing to the possibility of an FR2 character being potentially able to toss around Sil 8 or even Sil 12 ships.

If they could have moved Sil4, they would have. Watching the Clone Wars initial movie, those giant crab droids (Sil4) would have made perfect artillery, never mind all the droidekas they could have bowled down the street...but instead they jump around blocking shots and doing almost everything with their lightsaber.

Even Yoda, in Season 1 E1, only juggles a B2. He takes on a division without once moving or tossing a Sil3 tank, something that by these rules even a fresh character could do.

Basically, if you want a canon flavour, those Strength upgrades have to come down.

If they could have moved Sil4, they would have. Watching the Clone Wars initial movie, those giant crab droids (Sil4) would have made perfect artillery, never mind all the droidekas they could have bowled down the street...but instead they jump around blocking shots and doing almost everything with their lightsaber.

Even Yoda, in Season 1 E1, only juggles a B2. He takes on a division without once moving or tossing a Sil3 tank, something that by these rules even a fresh character could do.

Basically, if you want a canon flavour, those Strength upgrades have to come down.

Not necessarily. As move is not necessarily the best way to dispose of bad guys. No matter how many times you make that claim. And as we keep telling you nothing indicates Anakin or Obi-wan focused on move. everything indicates they were broadly capable. Tossing a tank wont do much damage to it. 30 personal scale damage will not do much to the tank if anything.

For example an AT-AT has an armor of 6 and a silhouette of 4. meaning a Jedi could toss it around all day and do no damage to it. An AT-ST is silhouette 3 and has 3 armor. again tossing it around won't do much to it. Move is not the most efficient way to deal with armored vehicles.

Move works great on man sized targets. As personal scale damage is quite effective on people.

Tossing a tank wont do much damage to it. 30 personal scale damage will not do much to the tank if anything.

Flip the tank over, and it’s done.

And using a tank as a large size missile against ground troops, that’s really effective — it’s like Silhouette * 10 damage as an area effect attack. So, every single individual in that area of effect will each take 30-40 damage, or whatever.

You could wipe out a whole regiment just by dropping an AT-AT on them.

For example an AT-AT has an armor of 6 and a silhouette of 4. meaning a Jedi could toss it around all day and do no damage to it. An AT-ST is silhouette 3 and has 3 armor. again tossing it around won't do much to it. Move is not the most efficient way to deal with armored vehicles.

If they’re ground vehicles, then flipping it on its side or on its back is likely to be as good of an attack against it as most anything else. That’s basically all that Luke was doing to them with their snowspeeders and their tow cables.

If it’s an air vehicle, then bringing it to the ground and flipping it on its back is likely to be just about as effective against it as flipping a ground vehicle on its back.

These things just weren’t made to flip over easily.

Move works great on man sized targets. As personal scale damage is quite effective on people.

Vehicle-scale damage against personal scale targets is the single most powerful weapon in the game system.

I’m not a fan of giving Force users a way to easily abuse that mechanic, just by spending a few extra XP and needing only FR2 to make it happen.

except it takes more than a force rating of 2 to pull it off with any reliability.
You need one force pip to activate the power and one to activate strength and one to activate hurl... Oh and you probably have commited 2 of your force dice on sense. One for defense and one for attack... that leaves you with one force die to hope to roll 3 force pips...oh wait you don't have enough to toss around that tank. you could give up that attack bonus but then you still won't reliably be able to get 3 pips. and if you don't want the conflict...well 1 to 2 pips is what you can get reliably.

except it takes more than a force rating of 2 to pull it off with any reliability.

Not if you’re willing to spend dark side pips. In that case, FR2 is plenty to toss around Sil 4 ships, if you’ve spent the XP correctly.

You need one force pip to activate the power and one to activate strength and one to activate hurl…

Where does it say that you have to activate “hurl” anywhere?

Oh and you probably have commited 2 of your force dice on sense. One for defense and one for attack... that leaves you with one force die to hope to roll 3 force pips...oh wait you don't have enough to toss around that tank. you could give up that attack bonus but then you still won't reliably be able to get 3 pips. and if you don't want the conflict...well 1 to 2 pips is what you can get reliably.

You can’t argue whether something is OP or not on the basis of all the other points or dice that you might be spending on something else.

So, why are you continuing to argue? I’d venture to guess it’s because the lower-powered variant of Force Move that fits my world view is excessively weak in your opinion, and doesn’t let you build the literally world-shaking characters that you feel should be possible.

I’ve put a proposal on the table that would leave the base system at the lower level of strength, while allowing you the possibility of using optional rules that could build another Starkiller/Galen Marek in your game, while not forcing other GMs to try to live with a game mechanic that they consider to be very OP.

So, why are you continuing to argue?

Why can’t we both be right, about our own game systems that we choose to run, and the tools that are provided to us by FFG in that regard?

My point is that JUST because you do not see a force user in the movies focus on move does not mean move can't do something. The game is trying to allow you do what you see from all the sources including the novels. People act like it is super breaky to be able to throw around large starships. I do not see a problem with this. As I have yet to be in a situation where the best most reliable solution is to smash things with a starship being used as a club. Usually a lightsaber or using a lower strength move on more people etc.

My point is that JUST because you do not see a force user in the movies focus on move does not mean move can't do something. The game is trying to allow you do what you see from all the sources including the novels.

Yes, but clearly we don't care about the novels. And saying "just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist" is irrelevant. It's like insisting unicorns could exist because they appear in stories, even though nobody's ever seen one.

You need to respect the point of reference. If you want to include EU stuff in your game, go for it, nobody is arguing you can't, and the rules-as-written will suit your needs just fine. You might consider extending the same courtesy and stop insisting on what we have to include in our games.

My point is that JUST because you do not see a force user in the movies focus on move does not mean move can't do something. The game is trying to allow you do what you see from all the sources including the novels.

Yes, but clearly we don't care about the novels. And saying "just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist" is irrelevant. It's like insisting unicorns could exist because they appear in stories, even though nobody's ever seen one.

You need to respect the point of reference. If you want to include EU stuff in your game, go for it, nobody is arguing you can't, and the rules-as-written will suit your needs just fine. You might consider extending the same courtesy and stop insisting on what we have to include in our games.

You need to respect that the game has to handle more than your narrow view of the star wars universe. And the fact that doing so is not breaky. No matter how much you insist it is. Not when you compare to other things you don't complain about. The ability to toss around starships may be a threat to your game. But I have not seen it be a issue in any of the games I have played. Mostly because the one trick pony you are afraid of is not necessarily the best way to spend points. So in my experience it is not an issue as people don't focus that narrowly. and When they do you can easily hit them in the dump stats.

My point is that JUST because you do not see a force user in the movies focus on move does not mean move can't do something. The game is trying to allow you do what you see from all the sources including the novels.

Yes, but clearly we don't care about the novels. And saying "just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist" is irrelevant. It's like insisting unicorns could exist because they appear in stories, even though nobody's ever seen one.

You need to respect the point of reference. If you want to include EU stuff in your game, go for it, nobody is arguing you can't, and the rules-as-written will suit your needs just fine. You might consider extending the same courtesy and stop insisting on what we have to include in our games.

And you need to do the same for folks that don't see this as being a huge problem.

If you don't want to have Move work the way it does in the rules for your table, then so be it. It's your table, you're the GM, you have the final say on the rules... at your table.

What you are NOT is any sort of "final authority" on how the rules should be applied for other people's games. So Daeglan's points are just as valid, and if anything are even more valid, than your own, because he's at least keeping an open mind about how different folks might want different things from their games.

Yes, we all thought ErikB was off his rocker in terms of his wanting Jedi to be so uber that they make the Secret Apprentice from Force Unleashed look like a two-bit chump, but there are folks that enjoy that style of "high power" gaming. Force and Destiny even has rules to somewhat accommodate those types of groups with Knight Level play, letting them start with more XP and either a lightsaber or loads of gear. But under your logic, if one GM says that such an option is "too powerful" for the style of game they want to run, then it's "badwrongfun" for any other group that might want to use it.

You and bradknowles obviously prefer to have a much more limited view of what a Force user PC should be capable of than what the current rules allow. And your players are on board with that, then enjoy. Folks such as Daeglan and myself generally don't have an issue with how Move overall is written, and haven't found that it instantly destroys the game.

At this point, probably best to agree to disagree before this turns into an all-out flame war.

My point is that JUST because you do not see a force user in the movies focus on move does not mean move can't do something. The game is trying to allow you do what you see from all the sources including the novels.

Yes, but clearly we don't care about the novels. And saying "just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist" is irrelevant. It's like insisting unicorns could exist because they appear in stories, even though nobody's ever seen one.

You need to respect the point of reference. If you want to include EU stuff in your game, go for it, nobody is arguing you can't, and the rules-as-written will suit your needs just fine. You might consider extending the same courtesy and stop insisting on what we have to include in our games.

And you need to do the same for folks that don't see this as being a huge problem.

If you don't want to have Move work the way it does in the rules for your table, then so be it. It's your table, you're the GM, you have the final say on the rules... at your table.

What you are NOT is any sort of "final authority" on how the rules should be applied for other people's games.

(Snip)

But under your logic, if one GM says that such an option is "too powerful" for the style of game they want to run, then it's "badwrongfun" for any other group that might want to use it.

Oh, this is really rich! You and Daeglan must have a serious reading comprehension problem because this is *exactly* what we've been saying through this thread, and you two have been doing *exactly* what you just accused us of doing. What hypocrisy.

Face it: you don't want anybody to talk about the issue at all, no matter the context. There's nothing wrong with people discussing in a public forum how best to tweak things for their game when they're approaching it from a similar point of view, but when that point of view conflicts with your own you can't help but troll around.

My point is that JUST because you do not see a force user in the movies focus on move does not mean move can't do something. The game is trying to allow you do what you see from all the sources including the novels.

Yes, but clearly we don't care about the novels. And saying "just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist" is irrelevant. It's like insisting unicorns could exist because they appear in stories, even though nobody's ever seen one.

You need to respect the point of reference. If you want to include EU stuff in your game, go for it, nobody is arguing you can't, and the rules-as-written will suit your needs just fine. You might consider extending the same courtesy and stop insisting on what we have to include in our games.

And you need to do the same for folks that don't see this as being a huge problem.

If you don't want to have Move work the way it does in the rules for your table, then so be it. It's your table, you're the GM, you have the final say on the rules... at your table.

What you are NOT is any sort of "final authority" on how the rules should be applied for other people's games.

(Snip)

But under your logic, if one GM says that such an option is "too powerful" for the style of game they want to run, then it's "badwrongfun" for any other group that might want to use it.

Oh, this is really rich! You and Daeglan must have a serious reading comprehension problem because this is *exactly* what we've been saying through this thread, and you two have been doing *exactly* what you just accused us of doing. What hypocrisy.

Face it: you don't want anybody to talk about the issue at all, no matter the context. There's nothing wrong with people discussing in a public forum how best to tweak things for their game when they're approaching it from a similar point of view, but when that point of view conflicts with your own you can't help but troll around.

I have discussed the issue. and in the context of what one can do with autofire weapons, starship weapons, disruptors, lightsabers, thermodetonators, etc. Move is the least offending item. I have yet to see move be abused. I am in several games and I have never seen anyone eve go beyond the first strength upgrade. as beyond 2 and maybe 3 strength upgrades really have minimal utility. As there are other weapons that do a better job than trying to club things with vehicles.

Have you guys actually had anyong try and do these things? or are you so afraid it MIGHT happen that you said no before anyone even thought of using it? Because you guys act like it is some sort of boogeyman.

Daeglan,

I think you've made your points quite well. Not much you can do if the other side can't be bothered to actually look past their own bias. Again, probably best to just drop the whole discussion it in terms of "who's right and who's wrong" about how Move is supposed to work or how it works in relation to the movies or other media.

You need to respect that the game has to handle more than your narrow view of the star wars universe.

No problem there.

And the fact that doing so is not breaky. No matter how much you insist it is.

Ahh, there’s the rub. Once something is broken, sometimes it can’t be fixed. If the game starts off as “broken”, it is likely to be very difficult to virtually impossible for the GM to “fix it”.

So, why do you continue to insist that something MUST be present in the Rules As Written, to support your world view, when you KNOW that there are those of us who consider the presence of that very same thing to cause the game to be BROKEN?!?

Just because you don’t see Humpty Dumpty as being broken, doesn’t mean that everyone else in the Universe necessarily agrees with you. And you shouldn’t be trying to force them to do so.

And you need to do the same for folks that don't see this as being a huge problem.

If you don't want to have Move work the way it does in the rules for your table, then so be it. It's your table, you're the GM, you have the final say on the rules... at your table.

Ahh, there’s the rub. Once something is broken, sometimes it can’t be fixed. If the game starts off as “broken”, it is likely to be very difficult to virtually impossible for the GM to “fix it”.

So, why do you continue to insist that something MUST be present in the Rules As Written, to support your world view, when you KNOW that there are those of us who consider the presence of that very same thing to cause the game to be BROKEN?!?

Just because you don’t see Humpty Dumpty as being broken, doesn’t mean that everyone else in the Universe necessarily agrees with you. And you shouldn’t be trying to force them to do so.

I have discussed the issue. and in the context of what one can do with autofire weapons, starship weapons, disruptors, lightsabers, thermodetonators, etc. Move is the least offending item. I have yet to see move be abused.

I have yet to see nuclear weapons being abused.

That doesn’t mean that I should have to be forced to support their inclusion and availability everywhere.

Yes, we all thought ErikB was off his rocker in terms of his wanting Jedi to be so uber that they make the Secret Apprentice from Force Unleashed look like a two-bit chump, but there are folks that enjoy that style of "high power" gaming. Force and Destiny even has rules to somewhat accommodate those types of groups with Knight Level play, letting them start with more XP and either a lightsaber or loads of gear. But under your logic, if one GM says that such an option is "too powerful" for the style of game they want to run, then it's "badwrongfun" for any other group that might want to use it.

You are welcome to run things however you want at your table.

However, that doesn’t give you the right to try to force everyone else to live by the same rules.

All I’m asking for is the right to have the basic rules be more balanced. I am perfectly happy to accept optional additional rules that are much more powerful — and I and all the players I know can choose not to use them.

But of the much more powerful rules are baked into the baseline, then we can’t do that.

So, again I ask — why are you continuing to try to force your particular world view on the entire rest of the community?

You need to respect that the game has to handle more than your narrow view of the star wars universe.

No problem there.

And the fact that doing so is not breaky. No matter how much you insist it is.

Ahh, there’s the rub. Once something is broken, sometimes it can’t be fixed. If the game starts off as “broken”, it is likely to be very difficult to virtually impossible for the GM to “fix it”.

So, why do you continue to insist that something MUST be present in the Rules As Written, to support your world view, when you KNOW that there are those of us who consider the presence of that very same thing to cause the game to be BROKEN?!?

Just because you don’t see Humpty Dumpty as being broken, doesn’t mean that everyone else in the Universe necessarily agrees with you. And you shouldn’t be trying to force them to do so.

But that is the Rub it is not broken in any way shape or form. You insist that it is. But compared to other things you can do that you yourself admit are fine and also do FAR more damage are far more common and far more likely. How is it broken? Because it can do more than you think it should? Why is that broken?