Hi Guys,

We played our first session of EOTE yesterday using the beginner pack. Everyone really enjoyed it and had a great time, thank you FFG!

During the session there was one thing that confused us.

Regarding Destriny points.. the rules seem to explain that a player can flip one light point on their turn to trigger an effect (upgrade / downgrade dice etc).. but the GM can also do the same, flipping a dark point, on the same check? Or vice versa? That can't be right can it? If both the player and the GM can do it on the same check then it would just even out, though may introduce triumph and despear results. Or is it the case that if you flip a token, that specific token can't be used by the GM and vice versa? So, if there were only 4 light points and the players used one, the GM would to wait until the next check to use the flipped point.

Thanks for your help!

You can only flip an individual destiny point once per roll.

If all the chits were light and a player flipped one dark, the GM couldn't flip it back until the next player's turn.

EDIT: Only if some were dark and some were light before anyone started flipping anything can more than one "side*" flip DPs for a single roll.

* The PCs constitute one side here (well, usually... unless they're actively trying to sabotage each other) and the GM the other.

That part of the rules book that is confusing me reads as follows, "Each time a check is performed, the active player may choose to spend 1 Destiny to upgrade one of his Ability dice to a Proficiency dice. Then the other players may do the same, spending 1 Destiny to upgrade onc of the Difficulty dice to a Challenge dice"

I thought the 'other player' was refering to the GM. If that isn't the case, then why would another player want to increase the difficulty of a check the first player just upgraded?? Additionally, is this not saying that two points can be spend on the same roll?

That's poorly worded. The other player should be referring to the GM. The wording might be confusing because the opposite can happen.

for example: I am the GM and I have a squad of storm troopers fire on the smuggler. The player playing the smuggler can flip a destiny point to upgrade the difficulty of the Storm trooper's attack.

I see, so either the player or the GM can either upgrade their check or downgrade the other player's on a roll, but only one point can be spent. That makes sense, and I think I read that the GM has first opportunity to use a point, is that right?

In my groups, everyone is allowed to flip a Destiny Point per action. If there are five players and five light side Destiny Points, then all five can flip one of them, albeit in turn order. In general, a player looking to flip a point asks for permission from the rest of the group, though we've said it's not necessary unless it's the last one.

However, the GM is part of "everyone," and so yes, if a player upgrades his check by flipping a Destiny Point, then the GM can turn around and flip it right back to upgrade his own check. Why he wouldn't do that is if he doesn't want to spend the point on that, or if he's okay with the players doing well in the check. The points aren't there to create an adversarial relationship between the GM and the rest of his players.

To be honest, I'm not sure any of us have read the rules for flipping points in the book. We just sort of intuited the system and never thought to question it because it was fun.

We play it that either side can chose to flip a destiny point first, and the other side can chose to respond by flipping a different point. So in that case, each side can only flip one destiny point.

Technically the point isn't considered flipped until after the action is resolved.

This is becoming more and more confusing... it's still unclear whether a single check can be affected by more than one destiny point and whether the same destiny token can be used by both the players and GM. *shrug* I guess it's whatever the house rules are.

I rule that players can upgrade their skill checks, and the GM can upgrade difficulty. But it's a first come first served, ie only one destiny flip (from either side) per check. Otherwise it just becomes a game of tennis.

As long as you don't try to pull a gotcha and treat it fairly on both sides it works well.

This is becoming more and more confusing... it's still unclear whether a single check can be affected by more than one destiny point and whether the same destiny token can be used by both the players and GM. *shrug* I guess it's whatever the house rules are.

The answer is "Yes". A single check can be affected more than once. Once in the positive and once in the negative.

And "No". To quote the rules: " Conversion takes place at the end of the action during which the Destiny Point was used, preventing players or GMs from immediately spending a just-converted Destiny Point."

evileeyore has it right. It's not "tennis" MrDodger, because each side can only flip once per action provided there are DPs available.

Example, the Destiny Pool is DDLLL. Player wants to make a Computers check. GM flips a DP from D to L, upgrading the difficulty. Player flips from L to D, upgrading their skill check. Legal.

Example, the Destiny Pool is DDDDD. Player wants to make a Computers check. GM flips a DP from D to L, upgrading the difficulty. However, the player can not flip a DP from L to D, because there weren't any available at the beginning of the action.

• Each player (or the GM) can invest only one Destiny Point in any single check.
  
• The other party (usually the GM) may also choose to invest one Destiny Point per skill check.
  
• It is possible that both parties can use Destiny Points to "cancel each other out", resulting in no net difference to the roll.
  
• The active player (or GM in the case of NPCs) always has the first chance to use a Destiny Point.
  
• The other party involved may then choose to spend a Destiny Point.
  
• Conversion of a Destiny Point from dark to light, or light to dark, is considered to take place at the end of the action, so a Destiny Point flipped in this way is not available for use from the other side until the action is complete.
  

• It is possible that both parties can use Destiny Points to "cancel each other out", resulting in no net difference to the roll.

This is probably a house rule of mine then, because I would NOT allow a cancellation of what the other party did. I think I remember experiencing early on the tendency of players to wanting to undo a difficulty upgrade...there is no loss for doing so because the pool then remains static. It's especially a problem with players who seem to put a higher value on the negative potential of difficulty upgrades than they do on the positive potential of their own upgrades.

This is probably a house rule of mine then, because I would NOT allow a cancellation of what the other party did.

Each use of a Destiny Point increases the tension a bit more. They don't cancel each other out, because adding a yellow die and adding a red die don't in any way "cancel each other out". You've ramped up the tension by adding the possibility for both Triumph and Despair.

The "active player" is the player which is rolling the check. So if a PC is rolling a check, that PC is the "active player". The "other player" would be the GM in most cases. If the GM is rolling a check, the GM is the "active player", and the "other player" is a PC.

I just read through the rules in the FaD beta book. Here are the salient points:

• It is possible that both parties can use Destiny Points to "cancel each other out", resulting in no net difference to the roll.

I would not allow the cancellation, as upgrading to a Yellow or a Red opens up Triumph and Despair, which have different narrative effects. I would let BOTH occur, as this can lead to more interesting narrative choices.

Kevynn

I think Oggdude meant that it would cancel out the "flipping" of the destiny points, not the affects. Nowhere in RAW does a destiny point allows you to downgrade a check. No house ruling is needed there.

Edit: Cancelling out may have been a poor choice of words.

I think Oggdude meant that it would cancel out the "flipping" of the destiny points, not the affects. Nowhere in RAW does a destiny point allows you to downgrade a check. No house ruling is needed there.

Edit: Cancelling out may have been a poor choice of words.

Maybe the words "no net difference to the roll" should have been "no net difference to the pool"...?

• It is possible that both parties can use Destiny Points to "cancel each other out", resulting in no net difference to the roll.

This is probably a house rule of mine then, because I would NOT allow a cancellation of what the other party did. I think I remember experiencing early on the tendency of players to wanting to undo a difficulty upgrade...there is no loss for doing so because the pool then remains static. It's especially a problem with players who seem to put a higher value on the negative potential of difficulty upgrades than they do on the positive potential of their own upgrades.

Well, if it's their turn, they get first dibs on Destiny Point usage. If they decline to use a Destiny Point, then you can use one to upgrade the difficulty and they can't do anything about it because they already had their chance Also, eventually the pool becomes static. However, since a Destiny Point doesn't become "flipped" until after the action is performed, you both need to have an available Destiny Point in order for it to come out the same at the end of the check. You can't just re-flip the one he just flipped.

I think Oggdude meant that it would cancel out the "flipping" of the destiny points, not the affects. Nowhere in RAW does a destiny point allows you to downgrade a check. No house ruling is needed there.

Edit: Cancelling out may have been a poor choice of words.

Maybe the words "no net difference to the roll" should have been "no net difference to the pool"...?

Here's the actual quote from the book (and remember, I'm only the messenger here ):

I think Oggdude meant that it would cancel out the "flipping" of the destiny points, not the affects. Nowhere in RAW does a destiny point allows you to downgrade a check. No house ruling is needed there.

Edit: Cancelling out may have been a poor choice of words.

Maybe the words "no net difference to the roll" should have been "no net difference to the pool"...?

Here's the actual quote from the book (and remember, I'm only the messenger here ):

The GM may also choose to invest one Destiny Point per skill check. This does introduce the possibility that both the player and the GM invest Destiny in the same skill check, resulting in no net difference to the overall Destiny pool balance.

Right. I think others were saying that you would negate the effects of both sides flipping a destiny point

IE Player A upgrades his Gunnery check by way of Destiny Point and The GM downgrades it by way of a Destiny point.

It should be that Player A upgrades his gunnery check by way of Destiny Point and GM upgrades the difficulty using a Destiny Point. The Destiny pool has no net difference, but the effects still happen.

I think Oggdude meant that it would cancel out the "flipping" of the destiny points, not the affects. Nowhere in RAW does a destiny point allows you to downgrade a check. No house ruling is needed there.

Edit: Cancelling out may have been a poor choice of words.

Maybe the words "no net difference to the roll" should have been "no net difference to the pool"...?

Here's the actual quote from the book (and remember, I'm only the messenger here ):

The GM may also choose to invest one Destiny Point per skill check. This does introduce the possibility that both the player and the GM invest Destiny in the same skill check, resulting in no net difference to the overall Destiny pool balance.

Right. I think others were saying that you would negate the effects of both sides flipping a destiny point

IE Player A upgrades his Gunnery check by way of Destiny Point and The GM downgrades it by way of a Destiny point.

It should be that Player A upgrades his gunnery check by way of Destiny Point and GM upgrades the difficulty using a Destiny Point. The Destiny pool has no net difference, but the effects still happen.

Yeah, I had read it wrong originally. I edited my post

I rule that players can upgrade their skill checks, and the GM can upgrade difficulty. But it's a first come first served, ie only one destiny flip (from either side) per check. Otherwise it just becomes a game of tennis.

As long as you don't try to pull a gotcha and treat it fairly on both sides it works well.

Players use LSP to make themselves more awesome, and I feel using DSP to counter that is something I don't want in my games, likewise letting players counter DSP soon becomes an automatic response.

My players tend to manage Destiny well now, and when to spend them leads to some interesting decisions.

I find I have to be really on the ball with Destiny Point flipping, or I either forget to do it, or I end up with situations where the players are facing challenges that are so tough I'd feel like a jerk making them even tougher.

To that end, I definitely don't mind one side flipping a point in response to the other side having flipped one.

Just for the record (since I don't think anyone has made this explicit), the official rule when spending destiny points is this:

The acting party chooses first, the reacting party chooses second (see page 28, the second paragraph under "The Limits of Luck").

It clearly states that the acting party (usually a PC) first has the choice to spend a point to upgrade his Ability. Then, once that decision has been made, the reacting party (usually an NPC) has the choice to spend a point to upgrade the Difficulty.

So if you want to stick to the rules-as-written, an acting PC cannot spend a destiny point to upgrade his Ability in reaction to the GM spending one to upgrade the Difficulty. He's already missed his chance.

Note, though, that this technically correct approach is a little awkward in practice. It requires you to always pause and ask the acting party, "Before we continue, do you wish to spend a destiny point on this roll?" Then, only after the acting party has clearly stated his choice, the reacting party may declare whether he wishes to spend a point.