Don't have F&D yet, but I haven't seen anyone mention it. Is there a saber-lock mechanic?

It's such an iconic feature of lightsaber combat I'd be a bit disappointed if it weren't. In Saga there was, if I recall, but it was kind of lame and forgettable. Rewatching some of the movie and TCW scenes it's clearly part of the combat. Also, I was recently watching the TCW episode with Maul vs Palpatine, and Palpatine is the only one I've ever seen actually *bend* the lock to get a better position. It was a pretty cool scene.

So if there isn't, should there be one, and how should it work?

I'd say if you roll 3 Advantage/Threat (or Triumph/Despair), the PC/NPC can use it to lock sabers. Until the lock is broken, the engaged opponents make contested Discipline + up to as many Force dice as the participant wishes (so could keep other commitments going, or simply reserve some for a followup). Pips can be converted to successes or advantages as needed.

Whoever wins may break the lock. Any remaining uncommitted Force dice can be used to break the lock immediately and gain an upgrade on their next attack; or keep the lock and attempt a Force action, after which the lock is broken.

Eg: Dooku and Obiwan lock sabers. Both have committed a couple of Force die for Enhance, etc. Dooku has 4 Force dice left, Obiwan has 3. They roll contested Discipline (I won't speculate), with Dooku applying 2 of his 4 remaining Force dice, Obiwan all 3. Dooku wins, keeps the lock, rolls his two remaining Force dice to use Move to hit Obiwan with a chair. The lock is now broken.

Too complicated and crunchy?

When a round is a full minute of intence swordplay, a saber lock is just a discription of what happens when Talking Is A Free Action.

There's no rules for it, though it could be covered by spending Advantages or Threats (particularly if you've used the Parry talent to mitigate some of the damage) and saying that boost and setback dice generated are the results of a saber-lock either putting you or your opponent off-balance and either unable to fully commit to their next attack or being left wide open for a follow-up strike.

As Rakaydos noted, a combat round is generally the span of a minute, and a lot can happen in the course of a minute.

When a round is a full minute of intence swordplay, a saber lock is just a discription of what happens when Talking Is A Free Action.

I've been thinking about this, appreciating the main point of the combat timing, but wasn't completely sold.

My lingering doubt comes down to this: I think we're missing out on an iconic narrative opportunity.

The movies and TCW are replete with scenes of two combatants locked in a combative stalemate. Sometimes one attempts anger to overpower their opponent, and then loses (Obiwan vs Maul...twice). Sometimes one is only playing with the other (Anakin vs Dooku, who uncurls two fingers on his lightsaber grip to attack with a Move). Sometimes the lock can be used to draw a breath, or desperately prevent further damage.

All this might take "less than a minute", but that's sacrificing the narrative for the mechanic of a one-minute round. I don't think there would be any harm in at least giving it a sidebar mention in the full book. Without it I think it's missing a chance to inject some key flavour, something that only happens in SW.

I don't think the mechanics need to be complicated. At its simplest, no mechanics are required at all, just a mention that with, say, a Triumph you can initiate a sabre lock, unbalancing your opponent and upgrading your next attack (something you can do anyway, but reminding people of the narrative).

But for people like me who would a mechanic to recreate those tense face-to-face moments, this is simpler than the above: on 3 Advantage/Threat or Triumph/Despair a lock can be initiated. Eg: your character may be fighting a Dark Jedi, you hit for damage, but roll a Despair...the Dark Jedi initiates a lock to prevent more damage. While a lock is in place you can't take maneuvers, parry, reflect, or damage your opponent with your lightsaber. You can, however, use the Force, or make a Melee or Brawl attack at +1 difficulty. Breaking the lock could be as simple as a contested Discipline roll, in which the winner gets to apply Strain = successes to his opponent. If the opponent doesn't want to contest it, the lock may be broken as a maneuver.

Again, it's something that can already be handled under the existing rules for spending Advantage/Triumph and Threat/Despair with really needing entirely new rules or extra combat rolls for such a thing.

Again, it's something that can already be handled under the existing rules for spending Advantage/Triumph and Threat/Despair with really needing entirely new rules or extra combat rolls for such a thing.

There are no "extra" combat rolls, it's still one-per-action. And we have Parry and Reflect which involve a lot of strain-counting. What's wrong with a minor, less complicated, rule that touches on an iconic part of lightsaber combat?

In all the fight scenes that matter, the story doesn't happen in the hack and slash part of the fight...all the character development happens in the moments when there is a standstill, when it's more a battle of wills and control than lightsaber skill. Without a way to inject that into the narrative, it's back to hit points and damage counting.

I've been thinking about this, appreciating the main point of the combat timing, but wasn't completely sold.

My lingering doubt comes down to this: I think we're missing out on an iconic narrative opportunity.

I think it should be exactly that. Part of the narrative, not needing its own special game mechanic. It's simply a narrative component to when two lightsaber-wielding people fight each other.

You do not need specific game mechanics to insert moments of character development into fights. You can already do it during the fight as part of the narrative.

I guess nobody here has played Jedi Academy, where it's a critical part of the combat. I think it at least deserves calling out in the fluff text, if nothing else.

I guess nobody here has played Jedi Academy, where it's a critical part of the combat. I think it at least deserves calling out in the fluff text, if nothing else.

On the contrary, I bet almost all of us have played Jedi Academy. Still doesn't mean 'saber locking' needs a separate game mechanic. Nearly every lightsaber fight contains at least one 'saber lock'. It can easily be narrative/fluff.

Though I'm with Dono on this one*, in my home game I'm adding in a Discipline check occasionally (and most critically at the beginning of a "duel") to represent the "Battle of Wills" that saber fighters engage in, to size each other up, to psych each other out, etc.

It may or may not be a "saberlock" moment, it could also be a momentary break in the scuffle, a lull in the rush of combat.

* In that I don't think the base rules need it. A sidebar optional rule maybe? Or just here in houserule land is fine too.

You do not need specific game mechanics to insert moments of character development into fights. You can already do it during the fight as part of the narrative.

I will (I know my players far better than you do), which is why I'm adding my "occasional Discipline" check. The non-Saber waver will have a check to regain his breathe, maybe to outmaneuver the foes he's engage with as well (or be outmaneuvered by).

I agree with the others about the necessity of these rules, and feel that the standard uses for triumph, advantage, etc. can and should cover saber locks narratively. However, it sounds like you'll be using rules for it regardless, so let's talk about yours.

But for people like me who would a mechanic to recreate those tense face-to-face moments, this is simpler than the above: on 3 Advantage/Threat or Triumph/Despair a lock can be initiated. Eg: your character may be fighting a Dark Jedi, you hit for damage, but roll a Despair...the Dark Jedi initiates a lock to prevent more damage. While a lock is in place you can't take maneuvers, parry, reflect, or damage your opponent with your lightsaber. You can, however, use the Force, or make a Melee or Brawl attack at +1 difficulty. Breaking the lock could be as simple as a contested Discipline roll, in which the winner gets to apply Strain = successes to his opponent. If the opponent doesn't want to contest it, the lock may be broken as a maneuver.

First of all, I don't understand why it has to be so difficult to break the saber lock. Taking your time and defensively retreating should be an option. I'd suggest allowing an action to break the saber lock and disengage without having to roll or gaining any of the possible benefits for winning the lock. Next, I don't see why your lightsaber skill is completely locked out. In fact, making a lightsaber check with +1 difficulty to break free and damage your opponent sounds much more reasonable than a melee or brawl check.

And so far, the only benefit I see for initiating a saber lock on defense is mitigating an undecided amount of damage, and then your actions are (likely) locked up before your opponents. It doesn't sound very appealing to me unless you know you heavily out-weigh your opponent in discipline.

Though I'm with Dono on this one*, in my home game I'm adding in a Discipline check occasionally (and most critically at the beginning of a "duel") to represent the "Battle of Wills" that saber fighters engage in, to size each other up, to psych each other out, etc.

It may or may not be a "saberlock" moment, it could also be a momentary break in the scuffle, a lull in the rush of combat.

* In that I don't think the base rules need it. A sidebar optional rule maybe? Or just here in houserule land is fine too.

You do not need specific game mechanics to insert moments of character development into fights. You can already do it during the fight as part of the narrative.

Now, to be fair, he might.

I will (I know my players far better than you do), which is why I'm adding my "occasional Discipline" check. The non-Saber waver will have a check to regain his breathe, maybe to outmaneuver the foes he's engage with as well (or be outmaneuvered by).

You do not NEED specific game mechanics to insert moments of character development into fights. If you WANT to add a mechanical component and that makes you happy, that's great. Do what works for you.

For me, personally, I think that adding in these mechanics is inelegant and will only serve to slow down your combat. If you want to add "saber locks" and mental battles of will in the middle of combat, I think players should be encourage to add additional role-playing to enrich their narrative experience, instead of adding more "roll-play" by cramming in additional specific mechanics and slowing the flow of play. But as I said, do what works for you.

I will ( I know my players far better than you do )...

You do not NEED ...

Sigh.

I will ( I know my players far better than you do )...

You do not NEED ...

Sigh.

You appear to not understand the meaning of the word need or the meaning of the phrase character development. Character development is when characters dynamically change over the course of a narrative . You don't need mechanics for narrative. The game system is a narrative system by definition. It's built to handle narrative and role-playing at will without extra mechanics. If you want to add additional mechanics for narrative, that's your prerogative.

You appear to not understand the meaning of the word need or the meaning of the phrase character development. Character development is when characters dynamically change over the course of a narrative . You don't need mechanics for narrative. The game system is a narrative system by definition. It's built to handle narrative and role-playing at will without extra mechanics. If you want to add additional mechanics for narrative, that's your prerogative.

And you don't know my players. Without a mechanic that breaks up the combat pace (forces a lull) to allow for a moment or two of "catching your breath, reassessing your position, trying to position for advantage" they won't bother. It'll be "pew-pew" and "voom-voom" till all enemies are dead or they decide it's time to run.

Roleplaying with them occurs in two forms: Outside of combat it's roleplaying, inside of combat it's roll-playing. Now, don't get me wrong, their great gamers, but if the system doesn't have something that forces these breaks, it won't happen organically.

If I were to just pull a "The mysterious Sith Lord steps back from the deadly exchange and says, "Blah, blah, blah, I'm a Sith, we're awesome-sauce*!"." The player would respond with, "I roll to lasersword him".

If I start a combat round with, "It's a lull, give me Discipline checks" and then let them respond based on the results of those checks (regain Strain, take a Boost from better positioning, take a Setback from losing ground to the enemy, etc) and have the BBEG start monologuing, they'll engage him in chatter since for this round (and maybe the next couple) they know it's "disengage the pew-pew, engage in the blah-blah".

So, yeah. Before you start pontificating on what someone else may need ...

* Or, you know, something a bit less lame. Though know I'm totally thinking about having a lame Sith Lord. All the awesome power of the Dark Side but a total nerd/loser personality.

I was more pontificating on what the system needs. The system itself doesn't need it to function. If your players need it for the system to function to their specific house-ruled tastes, that's their situation and that's fine for them.

So for the sake of discussion, presuming that additional rules for a 'saber-lock are something the designers wish to add...

For the cost of 3 Advantage or a Triumph, simply have it so that the attacker must either spend a maneuver disengage the 'saber lock, or else they won't be able to attack on their next turn.

It's much simpler than having the target make any sort of Discipline check, and still has a cost involved to the target, primarily as they can't use their free maneuver for anything else (such as the Aim action but also such things as Defensive Stance).

I was more pontificating on what the system needs.

For the cost of 3 Advantage or a Triumph, simply have it so that the attacker must either spend a maneuver disengage the 'saber lock, or else they won't be able to attack on their next turn.

It's much simpler than having the target make any sort of Discipline check, and still has a cost involved to the target, primarily as they can't use their free maneuver for anything else (such as the Aim action but also such things as Defensive Stance).

I agree with the others about the necessity of these rules, and feel that the standard uses for triumph, advantage, etc. can and should cover saber locks narratively. However, it sounds like you'll be using rules for it regardless, so let's talk about yours.

But for people like me who would a mechanic to recreate those tense face-to-face moments, this is simpler than the above: on 3 Advantage/Threat or Triumph/Despair a lock can be initiated. Eg: your character may be fighting a Dark Jedi, you hit for damage, but roll a Despair...the Dark Jedi initiates a lock to prevent more damage. While a lock is in place you can't take maneuvers, parry, reflect, or damage your opponent with your lightsaber. You can, however, use the Force, or make a Melee or Brawl attack at +1 difficulty. Breaking the lock could be as simple as a contested Discipline roll, in which the winner gets to apply Strain = successes to his opponent. If the opponent doesn't want to contest it, the lock may be broken as a maneuver.

First of all, I don't understand why it has to be so difficult to break the saber lock. Taking your time and defensively retreating should be an option. I'd suggest allowing an action to break the saber lock and disengage without having to roll or gaining any of the possible benefits for winning the lock. Next, I don't see why your lightsaber skill is completely locked out. In fact, making a lightsaber check with +1 difficulty to break free and damage your opponent sounds much more reasonable than a melee or brawl check.

And so far, the only benefit I see for initiating a saber lock on defense is mitigating an undecided amount of damage, and then your actions are (likely) locked up before your opponents. It doesn't sound very appealing to me unless you know you heavily out-weigh your opponent in discipline.

A defensive action to retreat sounds reasonable.

Two reasons I left Lightsaber out of it. First (and main one) is that doesn't seem to be the driving determinant in the media. There are plenty of scenes where someone is outmatched in Lightsaber but still manages to pull through, get away, turn the tables, etc, and the actions they take to do it don't have much to do with their Lightsaber skill. It makes the narrative more interesting.

The second, more mechanical, reason is to provide an optional way to defeat your opponent, to hold them at bay, toy with them, or manipulate the situation in another way. Without that there is no real mechanical reason to do it even if you wanted the flavour. A character might not have the best Lightsaber skill, but has enough internal focus or drive that they can turn the tide...it makes the battle more varied rather than a statistical likelihood that the best Lightsaber dice pool will always win.

That internal focus/drive/stability is, to me, central to what a Jedi is, and I'd like to see a mechanic that allows that to be expressed.

What about something similar to "gain the advantage"?

You can take the "Saber Lock" action.

Spend an action to roll an Opposed Lightsaber check. If the check succeeds then you ignore all setback dice to lightsaber combat checks against that opponent until the end of the following round.

Once the advantage has been gained, on the following turn the opponent may attempt to cancel out the advantage by using Saber Lock as well. This works as described earlier, but his check is one step more difficult for each time he or his opponent has successfully locked lightsabers against the other.

Edit: see a few posts down for a more elegant version of this.

Epic dueling might also be something we see as some from of signature ability. Not sure how that would work, but it's a thought.

What about something similar to "gain the advantage"?

You can take the "Saber Lock" action.

Spend an action to roll an Opposed Lightsaber check. If the check succeeds then you ignore all setback dice to lightsaber combat checks until the end of the following round.

Once the advantage has been gained, on the following turn the opponent may attempt to cancel out the advantage by using Saber Lock as well. This works as described earlier, but his check is one step more difficult for each time he or his opponent has successfully locked lightsabers against the other.

The "gain the advantage" idea is good, but it means everything is still tied to the lightsaber skill.

I am of the opinion that these sort of "special movements" must be handled narratively during the fight.