Having just got into the game before running an actual campaign, I decided to start listening to the Order 66 Podcast. During the second episode, Sam Witwer mentioned that he hoped FFG didn't have talents (similar to some D&D Feats) that ruled on certain actions which gave the impression that without such talent, you couldn't do.

Is this talent one such talent or there rules elsewhere for doing this sort of thing?

If there isn't, what are people's opinion?

I think there is a big difference between chucking your lightsaber at someones head and throwing it in the manner of the Saber Throw Talent. On the one hand you could make a ranged (light) attack at *short* range with a setback die (this isn't in the rules, it's just how I would rule it) and then spend your next action summoning your fallen lightsaber back to your hand with a Move check OR you could use the talent to make a ranged Lightsaber check and spend force pips to have it return to your hand right then!

The talent is worth it because it gives you a range of Medium, it lets you use the Lightsaber skill, and it can return to your hand in the same round you threw it without costing an action.

This is how I look at it.

The talent is worth it because it give you a range of Medium, it lets you use the Lightsaber skill, and it can return to your hand in the same round you threw it without costing an action.

Yeah, that doesn't strike me as something one does all that impressively the first time out...

I'd kind of look at Saber Throw in the same was as I do Overwhelm Emotions compared to the Control Upgrade on the left side of Influence--they both do the same thing, but one is clearly better than the other/offers an alternate route for getting there, and maybe costs less XP in the process. Ditto for the Enhanced Leadership (or whatever it's called) in Peacemaker.

I believe you could do the same thing with the Move power as you can with Saber Throw, more or less, except that you'd likely be using Discipline instead of Lightsaber for the attack, would probably take a Setback (at least), and would need to have invested all the way down the right side of Move to get to the Control Upgrade that lets you manipulate objects as though you were holding them. They both get you to more or less the same place; one just has a much better view.

OK, so there is no hard and fast rule, but the Talent IS the hard and fast rule. The rest of it is best guess. Cool.

Myself, I can see the sense in among the throw lightsaber as a talent. With the way this ability is depicted in the films, it seems that a stron connection to the force would be required, anything Jo Blow could throw a lightsaber, but to keep it moving the way it does in the films, and then return is definitely a learned and uniques skill that could only possibly be mastered by someone with a strong connection to the force.

Mind you I personally would have prefered throw saber as a force power. Since then they could have added in more felxability with how it works and such. As it is now it hits one target and MAYBE comes back, depending on rolls. Where as I would have liked to see the ability to hit more then one target, do some different effects and what have you.

Raven, I like the way you think, but I reckon if the ability was to follow that path, then it would become a little over powered. With that bonus I could easily see the Jedi almost make the rest of the party seem almost irrelevant when it comes to combat.

The reason why it's a talent is because if you use the Move power you're throwing your lightsaber as your action…then you need to use your next one to Move it back to your hand. the talent is 1 Force point to throw out to medium range, and 2 Force points to pull it back to you in the same action . It's a very specialized form of the Move power that is really good at one thing: turning your 'saber into a boomerang.

-EF

Mind you I personally would have prefered throw saber as a force power. Since then they could have added in more felxability with how it works and such. As it is now it hits one target and MAYBE comes back, depending on rolls. Where as I would have liked to see the ability to hit more then one target, do some different effects and what have you.

I haven't done any math on this, but I suspect the GM could allow you hit multiple targets with the same rules as auto-fire without breaking the game.

I haven't done any math on this, but I suspect the GM could allow you hit multiple targets with the same rules as auto-fire without breaking the game.

I think it's ok about where it is because mechanically you're looking at:

A ranged attack

Using Lightsaber (a skill most lightsaber users will have)

medium range

That at a minimum is D6 C2 Breach, and can easily go higher with nothing but credits and mechanics checks (or discipline if you swing that way, which is another skill a lot of lightsaber users will have)

In exchange it currently costs:

50 or 75XP plus the Spec cost, and that includes the fringe benefits of the other Spec skills and the talents needed to get to the right spot on the tree, which in most cases won't exactly be wasted XP (Aggressor especially using it's current tree).

While initially it's kinda a gimmick, when you start talking EotE/AoR sabers, or Saber upgrades it actually becomes a very potent ranged weapon, especially when you factor in things like size, concealibility and it's ability to do HT and Crits to vehicles... Heck if you are lucky enough to get a Sapith Gem you're looking at an achievable Breach 2....

Perhaps allow the creation of an Advanced Lightsaber Throw Talent (priced at 25) that would allow for Autofire to be used when the saber is thrown?

I don't think adding another XP requirement should be the go-to balancing choice for any house rule. If just allowing it outright is too good, perhaps requiring an additional force pip or two to be spent in order to activate "autofire" would work.

... Heck if you are lucky enough to get a Sapith Gem you're looking at an achievable Breach 2....

I'm not disagreeing with what you've said, but since you brought it up, what's the point of Breach 2? There aren't a lot of NPCs running around with enough soak to make that much/any different from Breach 1, and attacking vehicles isn't very good because the damage is divided by 10 (so probably 1 or 2 points against a speederbike or light fighter).

So while Breach 2 sounds awesome at first, I don't think it would be more useful than Breach 1 in practice. It seems you think differently, and I'd like to know what I'm missing.

I don't think adding another XP requirement should be the go-to balancing choice for any house rule. If just allowing it outright is too good, perhaps requiring an additional force pip or two to be spent in order to activate "autofire" would work.

Then actually, the more I noodle it, the less I like taking the most powerful melee weapon in the game and allowing it to also become an extremely powerful ranged weapon. I think for my games I'll just let this one stay RAW.

In my opinion, I tend to think of it more in the manner that is in Lorne's gif. Someone who wants to throw their Lightsaber can chuck it just like someone who wants to throw a gun and chuck it - you take a definitely non-aerodynamic object, put a lot of elbow grease behind it and launch it at something.

Someone using the Saber Throw talent can extend their ability to fight with a Lightsaber to a greater range as they have invested the effort and training to understand that distance is a fabrication of their mind.

It's the difference between a throwing a frisbee after seeing a Tron movie and being Captain America.

Someone using the Saber Throw talent can extend their ability to fight with a Lightsaber to a greater range as they have invested the effort and training to understand that distance is a fabrication of their mind.

In the absence of the talent, I'd probably go with just treating it as a medium improvised weapon. Sure, the rules don't really handle ranged improvised weapons, but it's pretty simple to just say that you can throw out to short range and otherwise use the rules as-is.

I agree that this should be explicitly covered somewhere in the book though, so as not to give the impression of "this is something you can only do if you have the talent".

Then actually, the more I noodle it, the less I like taking the most powerful melee weapon in the game and allowing it to also become an extremely powerful ranged weapon.

I certainly don't think Lightsabers are the most powerful weapon in the game. They weren't before, and they haven't changed much. I've seen a light blaster pistol with 9 damage, because the character had it on a cybernetic arm and decided it was worth the 6500 credits to max it out. I've had players go to town with vibroswords and produce better weapons than lightsabers. Sure they lack Breach, but Pierce 4 ain't bad.

You get an enemy with a heavily modified Disruptor Rifle and the guy with the lightsaber should just start running!

(Edit: Oh, you were talking about melee weapons. I've seen Vibroswords doing 10 damage, Pierce 4, Vicious 2, Accurate 2, which is easier than making a full-up lightsaber and not far off. And that's just because dual-wielding them is far better than a heavier 2-handed weapon! I still think Lightsabers aren't the best engaged-range weapon in the game. They compete, but aren't flat-out the best.)

It's the Breach that seals it for me.

And yeah, a Light Repeating Blaster or Disruptor can get sick pretty fast.

Yeah, there really isn't too much an extra Breach will land you. For the most part, land vehicles are lower Armor (0-1) or higher armor (3+). So Breach falls in usefulness when you won't be able to do damage to the higher armored vehicles, and you're better off with even slightly more damage to get a guaranteed 1 hull trauma for the lower armored vehicles.

I'd say the extra Breach could be useful if they chucked in specific rules, or at the very least, suggestions, for cutting into things. So cutting into a blast door, Breach 1 takes 4 minutes/turns, Breach 2 takes 2 minutes/turns. It would also allow for things like cutting into an AT-AT, less for doing direct damage to try and take it out that way, and more like Luke so that you can create vulnerabilities.

... Heck if you are lucky enough to get a Sapith Gem you're looking at an achievable Breach 2....

I'm not disagreeing with what you've said, but since you brought it up, what's the point of Breach 2? There aren't a lot of NPCs running around with enough soak to make that much/any different from Breach 1, and attacking vehicles isn't very good because the damage is divided by 10 (so probably 1 or 2 points against a speederbike or light fighter).

So while Breach 2 sounds awesome at first, I don't think it would be more useful than Breach 1 in practice. It seems you think differently, and I'd like to know what I'm missing.

It's a ranged attack that allows you to damage vehicles with an armor rating of 2.

Sounds like nothing, but when you look at it only two or three other weapons can even do this (and those are usually breach 1 weapons with 20 base damage.) And off the top of my head only the thermal detonator is small enough to hide on your person, and not exactly without it's own risks. Factor in that sweet low Crit rating and you're doing something that's really not that common in the system right now.

Today this is a little limited by the relative low number of Armor 2 vehicles, but remember this game is in beta and the larger game set is still relatively new. So there's room for a lot more armor 2 vehicles to appear.

I'm actually a little interested in trying it out at an experimental Breach 3 to see how it changes the dynamic with heavy vehicles. Armor 3 is apparently the level of "modern" combat vehicles, and there's no weapon currently in the inventory (save the Anti-tank mine) that can penetrate it easily...

The only time I have read or heard about a saberthrow hitting more than one target, the thrower is attacking minions, which through it's mechanics can be narrated that its attacking more than one target.