There's a sidebar in the Force section of the book that describes allowing powerful NPCs and players to resist Force powers. Some examples are rolling Discipline vs. Athletics when trying to pull the blaster out of someone's hand with Move as your opponent tries to retain their grip, while another is of using Resilience to resist being tossed around bodily by the Move power, and another describes using Deception or Charm along with Influence in a social setting (personally, I don't see the need for this one, since we already have Influence adding dice to your social skill checks, which are themselves already opposed, as well as mind trick being Discipline vs. Discipline, but maybe this is referring to the 'cause strain' usage of the power), or Vigilance vs. something when using Seek.

The panel suggests that this be reserved for PCs and nemeses, and occasionally the "plot-important, named rival."

Personally, I really like this addition, as it didn't sit well with me that many Force powers were unopposed, because it makes some things much too easy, can result in some silly situations (I use Move to disarm you, then you use Move to disarm me, back and forth), and because I disliked that Force powers largely worked outside of the narrative dice idea at the center of FFG Star Wars.

What do all of you think?

I like it. Did this a little anyway because duels get pretty boring if both sides are just disarming each other until someone slips up.

I like the addition, as it's cleaner than having a dedicated Rebuke-style power (the path I took for Ways of the Force), but there's still the issue of "need GM's okay to do it."

Personally, I'd prefer a slightly more concrete mechanic to determine who can and can't resist a Force power, or when the resistance can take place. The current method leaves the door open for players to try and get a resistance check any time they are affected by a Force power, and to GM abuse if their pet NPC would get demolished or removed from the fight through the single use of a Force power (like Move to disarm).

I'm a fan of the notion of "flip a Destiny Point and you get to make a resistance check if one's not allowed already." This way, there's a defined trigger for when you can resist a Force power, cuts out the "can you or can't you" debates from happening at the table, and cuts down on the number of times a PC is going to try and stonewall a Force effect.

I dunno if I'd restrict this to targets that have a Force Rating of 1 or better, or still allow anyone to do it. After all, Han was very easily disarmed by Vader in ESB, though could just be that Vader's Discipline simply squashed Han's Athletics.

I like the addition, as it's cleaner than having a dedicated Rebuke-style power (the path I took for Ways of the Force), but there's still the issue of "need GM's okay to do it."

Personally, I'd prefer a slightly more concrete mechanic to determine who can and can't resist a Force power, or when the resistance can take place. The current method leaves the door open for players to try and get a resistance check any time they are affected by a Force power, and to GM abuse if their pet NPC would get demolished or removed from the fight through the single use of a Force power (like Move to disarm).

I'm a fan of the notion of "flip a Destiny Point and you get to make a resistance check if one's not allowed already." This way, there's a defined trigger for when you can resist a Force power, cuts out the "can you or can't you" debates from happening at the table, and cuts down on the number of times a PC is going to try and stonewall a Force effect.

I dunno if I'd restrict this to targets that have a Force Rating of 1 or better, or still allow anyone to do it. After all, Han was very easily disarmed by Vader in ESB, though could just be that Vader's Discipline simply squashed Han's Athletics.

I like requiring the Destiny point usage, but I'm not sure whether I think that might be too restrictive. If I decided that it was, I'd maybe change it to everyone being able to suffer some number of strain to resist a power.

As for Han, it could have just been that he was out of Destiny points, or was too surprised (and also not at all accustomed to that technique).

They seemed to address this issue with the later Force powers, in particular the lower Mastery and/or Control upgrades that are real game-changers. Given that the list of early powers is finite, maybe one of our forum members can suggest a (mostly) complete list for them to include in the sidebar as official unofficial updates wrt resisting certain powers? Maybe suggest vs. checks for new F&D powers that seem like they need them?

For the most part, I'm really happy with it. It's very Fate-like where it's a simple roll against nameless NPCs, but important NPCs and PCs get the equivalent of a resisted roll. I agree with Dono, though, that it shouldn't be "if GM allows it." Important NPCs and all PCs should get to resist Force powers. Period. It's part of their "plot armour". They are the exception to the rule, so they should be…better…than the nameless masses.

-EF

Battle Meditation: Mastery (Dark Side) should probably be an opposed Discipline check, rather than a Discipline check vs. an Easy difficulty, although it might be too strong at that point (right now I think it's too weak, even with the reduction to the targets' Willpower).

Bind should be opposed by Resilience for the basic power, and Resilience or Discipline for the Mastery (defender's choice). Possibly allow Knowledge (Xenology) or Medicine to be used in place of Discipline for the attacker.

Harm should probably work the same way.

Influence probably doesn't need an opposed check to be added to it, since we already have Discipline vs. Discipline for mind trick, and are simply rolling a modified skill check for the other Control Upgrade, but including an opposed roll for the Strain damage portion might make sense. I wouldn't use a social skill for that, though.

Misdirect could be Discipline vs. Discipline, or Deception/Stealth vs. Perception/Vigilance.

Move would be Athletics to oppose being disarmed, and one of Resilience, Discipline, Athletics, or Coordination to resist being moved directly.

Unleash is already an attack roll, basically, and is subject to the rules for ranged attacks, so Defense and things like Sense should work on the check. It also means that a target should be able to use Reflect to reduce the damage (we have plenty of examples of Jedi catching Force Lightning on their lightsabers after all).

Seek could probably be opposed by Deception or Stealth in place of Discipline at the target's discretion.

Sense basic should probably allow opposition via Discipline, but only by someone with a Force rating. The sense thoughts upgrade should probably allow for opposition via Discipline or Deception. Possibly include those for sense emotions as well.

What is amusing to me is, this loose and easy rules for resisting force powers is kind of what we had already been house ruling since the Edge Beta.

I have to say that I'm of mixed mind about the sidebar.

While I haven't gotten to even play EotE or AoR, in my experience having something up to the GM's discretion stands about a 50/50 chance of being "Rules Lawyered" to death (even when the GM makes it clear he's using the optional rules).

I feel it might work better to have the resistance ability written directly into the rules, especially as BrashFink says a lot of the stated mechanics have already been in use as house rules.

I'm a fan of the notion of "flip a Destiny Point and you get to make a resistance check if one's not allowed already."

I like requiring the Destiny point usage, but I'm not sure whether I think that might be too restrictive. If I decided that it was, I'd maybe change it to everyone being able to suffer some number of strain to resist a power.

Yeah, I'd prefer a strain version as well. That way minions can't voluntarily suffer strain at all, so will never resist, henchmen will suffer wounds (if they can voluntarily suffer strain - not 100% sure on that) and nemesis and PCs will be able to resist any power, at a cost (and with well defined rules around it).

I'm also all for something that makes strain more of a currency in the game, because it's usually used fairly minimally compared to wounds in my experience.

I'm a fan of the notion of "flip a Destiny Point and you get to make a resistance check if one's not allowed already."

I like requiring the Destiny point usage, but I'm not sure whether I think that might be too restrictive. If I decided that it was, I'd maybe change it to everyone being able to suffer some number of strain to resist a power.

Yeah, I'd prefer a strain version as well. That way minions can't voluntarily suffer strain at all, so will never resist, henchmen will suffer wounds (if they can voluntarily suffer strain - not 100% sure on that) and nemesis and PCs will be able to resist any power, at a cost (and with well defined rules around it).

I'm also all for something that makes strain more of a currency in the game, because it's usually used fairly minimally compared to wounds in my experience.

I have a couple ideas on this front:

1. It costs some fixed amount of strain (1 seems too low; 3 seems about right when comparing it to Parry/Reflect)
2. It costs a variable amount of strain equal to the difference between the attacker's and defender's Force ratings (minimum 1). This emphasizes both the difference between a Force user and a non-Force-sensitive being, as well as the increased power that comes with a higher FR. Now, it may not be necessary, since higher FR already comes into play when making Force power checks, but for several of the powers there is no way to leverage your FR into how difficult your powers are to resist, just the effects they have.
3. PCs and nemeses could either spend strain (as per one of the above) or spend either:

3a. 1 Destiny point, or

3b. 1 Destiny point per point of strain you would have had to spend, or

3c. Same as 3b, except you can mix Destiny points and strain

What do all of you think of these ideas? Would you use any of them? Which would be your preference? How much strain would be appropriate?

I'm happy with it as it is. Minions are there to die in numbers, anyway.

I'm okay with letting PCs and Nemesis-level foes have a save if I feel it's appropriate. I like the narrative style and don't really want hard and fast rules for every eventuality like 3.5 tried to do. I just go with what feels cinematic.

I agree with you Maelora, but since this is a Beta test, I'm also trying to see where the potential cracks and pitfalls are in the system. Sadly, not every group is blessed with a sensible GM and equally sensible players; I've seen and heard of groups that are so antagonistic towards each other at the table that I can't help but wonder why they even bother to game together in the first place.

To be clear, I think the sidebar is a good idea, it just needs a bit of fine-tuning to make into a great idea.

Yeti - Since suffering strain like this seems to occur between the 3-5 range (esp things like Deflect/Parry) I don't think Destiny Points is the best mechanic for multiples. I can see either voluntarily suffering 2+(difference in force ratings between target and user) OR flipping a destiny point to allow for the resist save.

I actually did like your option 2 the best - it was the closest to the general ideas I had on that front. However, my only FS player has only picked up the Sense tree so I haven't gotten to see a lot of this in action.

I agree with you Maelora, but since this is a Beta test, I'm also trying to see where the potential cracks and pitfalls are in the system. Sadly, not every group is blessed with a sensible GM and equally sensible players; I've seen and heard of groups that are so antagonistic towards each other at the table that I can't help but wonder why they even bother to game together in the first place.

To be clear, I think the sidebar is a good idea, it just needs a bit of fine-tuning to make into a great idea.

Perhaps allow an NPC with a rank in Adversary to make the resistance check. And any PC who has a rank in the skill that is used to resist said power?

In fact, this might be how I judge who gets to resist or not, even if FFG does not provide me with any hard and fast rules.

Edit: Or alternatively, forget the Adversary rank and just stick with any character with ranks in the skill used to resist.

I agree with you Maelora, but since this is a Beta test, I'm also trying to see where the potential cracks and pitfalls are in the system. Sadly, not every group is blessed with a sensible GM and equally sensible players; I've seen and heard of groups that are so antagonistic towards each other at the table that I can't help but wonder why they even bother to game together in the first place.

To be clear, I think the sidebar is a good idea, it just needs a bit of fine-tuning to make into a great idea.

Care to weigh in on the ideas I had, Donovan?

I agree that not everything needs to be spelled out, but it can be helpful, and, really, it's much easier to pull back from rules than it is to impose more--if you have something overly defined that you'd prefer to be more narrative/nebulous, it's easy enough to discard something you have, but it can be more challenging to come up with rules for something you feel is lacking.

As for antagonistic groups...well, the group I play with isn't that bad, but we have our moments, and there is definitely some me vs. them going on with our Star Wars GM, so stuff like this is helpful. Problems occasionally come up through misunderstanding or knee-jerk reaction to something that seems too strong, especially in the realm of uncontested abilities.

Imposing some opposed check was already being discussed at my table...we just hadn't gotten into it much because I'm the only one playing a Force sensitive character, only had FR 2, and was frequently failing important rolls (and was unwilling to tap into the Dark Side), so it wasn't getting overwhelming.

Yeti1069,

I can't honestly say that I care for any of them. Strain is a resource that's far to easy to recover, either through Advantages or talents like Second Wind, Also, being able to counter an enemy's Force abilities isn't supposed to be a trivial thing, and the only three individuals we see doing such countering are Jedi Masters, with Obi-Wan and Mace Windu needing to use their lightsabers to counter Force lightning. It's up to personal opinion as to whether Anakin or Obi-Wan initiated that Force push in RotS that ultimately sent them both flying across the room.

Part of the reason I suggested having to spend a Destiny Point was to make it so that it's not always going to be a default option for the PCs to use during an encounter, particularly if they've only got one or two Light Side Destiny Points left in the pool.

That being said, one potential option to correspond with the Destiny Point idea is that a character with a Force Rating gets one free resistance attempt equal to their Force Rating, either per session or per encounter. So a PC with Force Rating 2 would get to resist two different Force powers before they had to start flipping Destiny Points. By using Force Rating as a measuring stick of sorts for a game that's based around Force users, it provides them the chance to resist an enemy's powers, but it's still a decision as to when to resist given it's a limited resource.

I just felt like Destiny points, while limited, and not as easily renewable, don't carry the same risks with them as spending strain does. Strain is renewable in combat, but if my group is any indication, it can still be a difficult resource to manage. I know that my character runs through strain fairly rapidly, and is frequently just a few points from threshold, while the Wookie in the group was in a similar predicament several times with his ranks of Dodge and other talents.

We see some other countering occasionally, with some Jedi (even non-Masters) digging their lightsabers into the ground to halt their momentum from a Force Push (though why their lightsabers are causing that much friction, I don't know), and while it was explained that Hutts and Toydarians are immune to Mind Trick, it's possible they may have also just had a solid way to resist the power.

And, Donovan, when I asked for your input it wasn't necessarily to validate one of my ideas, it was because I value your input and skill in game rule design, so getting your opinion, positive or negative, is helpful.

One of the other big problems with using Strain for this is that it's an almost trivial resource in contrast to a Destiny Point, as most PCs, particularly those focused on being Force users, are going to have a decent Willpower (at least a 2, if not a 3 or 4) and a Strain Threshold in the 13 to 16 range at character creation.

So unless the GM is hammering their PCs with enemy Force users, suffering a few points of strain for a chance to negate an enemy Force power is pretty much a "no brainer" option, particularly against things like Harm (wound damage you pretty much can't stop) or Bind (forget moving at all, to say nothing of being disoriented or possibly not even being able to act at all on top of taking strain damage anyway).

I imagine that with an entire party of Force users, that destiny pool is going to see A LOT of use.

I imagine that with an entire party of Force users, that destiny pool is going to see A LOT of use.

Well, the GM doesn't have to require his NPCs to be able to resist a Force power, and in most instances they shouldn't, as they're one-scene wonders.

A major league recurring named bad guy, like an Inquisitor, most definitely should be flipping Destiny Points to avoid being dogpiled by a party of Force users. Of course, a smart Inquisitor is probably going to bring substantial reinforcements, such as a few squads of stormtroopers (likely at 4 strong each) to give them as much of an advantage as possible in the fight.

One of the other big problems with using Strain for this is that it's an almost trivial resource in contrast to a Destiny Point, as most PCs, particularly those focused on being Force users, are going to have a decent Willpower (at least a 2, if not a 3 or 4) and a Strain Threshold in the 13 to 16 range at character creation.

So unless the GM is hammering their PCs with enemy Force users, suffering a few points of strain for a chance to negate an enemy Force power is pretty much a "no brainer" option, particularly against things like Harm (wound damage you pretty much can't stop) or Bind (forget moving at all, to say nothing of being disoriented or possibly not even being able to act at all on top of taking strain damage anyway).

Keep in mind that characters may also be spending 3 strain somewhat regularly to activate Parry and Reflect, 1-x strain for Dodge, Defensive Stance, or Body Guard, or for several other talents, not to mention possibly being hit with stun damage.

In the Bane Trilogy, one of the first things Bane was taught when he was being trained was to create a Force Shield around himself to prevent someone from simply ripping his lightsaber from his grasp and cutting him down. In my game I ruled a FU was able to resist with a Discipline v Discipline check, With Force dice adding Success or fails for the pips generated. With the Pull power, non-FU opposed a Discipline check with Brawn. With the new rules, I will reevaluate my ruling.