In Force and Destiny the crystals in lightsabers are treated as Attachments. Modifications are they done to those attachments. In the rules for modifying (modding) attachments states "If he fails and his check generated at least one [despair symbol], the attachment is also rendered useless by his tinkering."

Does this mean that if a player is trying to mod the crystal in their lightsaber and they generate a despair that the crystal itself is destroyed? *poof* 10K gone?

Does this mean that if a player is trying to mod the crystal in their lightsaber and they generate a despair that the crystal itself is destroyed? *poof* 10K gone?

BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

I wouldn't go as far as poof, house rule a little in that case, maybe it creates an unstable crystal. Or everytime the player uses their sabre that they roll on a table of effects to see what might become of the holder or the lightsaber itself, after all the crystal is the core components of a weapon made almost purely out of energy and plasma, two very dangerous components if something were to go wrong.

Yup. poof. I think it would be kind of a **** move on the part of the GM. I hope the next update deals with this. As this is one of the biggest longest running complaints about the system at the moment.

According to RAW the only way a despair can appear while moding is if the GM flips a destiny point... If I would be a player I would not understand this behaviour from my GM unless I would be trying to mod my equipment under very poor conditions (no gear, workbench etc.)

Or you are doing so many mods you are rolling over into upgrades to difficulty. IE ilum crystals with 7 mods.

Or you are doing so many mods you are rolling over into upgrades to difficulty. IE ilum crystals with 7 mods.

The mod rules state the dice pool Increases which is has a distinctly different mechanical definition than Upgrade.

So mod number 7 on that Ilum crystal is 9D, though the GM may require PCs to flip a Destiny for every roll past 5D, which means the PC can't upgrade their own dice pool.

Does this mean that if a player is trying to mod the crystal in their lightsaber and they generate a despair that the crystal itself is destroyed? *poof* 10K gone?

As things currently stand, that would be the case. And it's something worth bringing up since next week's Beta Update is going to focus on lightsaber customization. Aside from starship attachments, there really aren't any weapon or armor attachments that can be as heavily modified and have such a high price tag.

However, the only way to get a Challenge die on the check is if (according to an answer Sam gave on his last O66 podcast appearance) you're performing a 4th or more modification on the crystal, since by his answer the number of purple caps at 5 (Formidable) and that you'd proceed to upgrade the difficultly dice instead of adding more of them.

So if attempting a 5th modification on an Ilum Crystal, the difficultly would be 2 reds and a 3 purple. And if you roll a Despair, you've not only lost the prior modifications, but your lightsaber is just a fancy hilt until you can procure a replacement crystal, which is likely to be no small task.

Which is odd. I distinctly thought that the purple capped at 6. Wasn't there even a side bar about that in one of the core books or the Edge beta?

Which is odd. I distinctly thought that the purple capped at 6. Wasn't there even a side bar about that in one of the core books or the Edge beta?

I just checked the FaD Beta, the AoR core book, and EotE core book, and they all cap at Formidable (5 purple). There's a sidebar about "Impossible Tasks" that says the PC can try such a thing by first flipping a Destiny Point and then rolling against a Formidable difficulty.

I don't have my EotE Beta book handy, so it might have been in there initially but removed for the final version.

Go figure. Not that it's really even come up once in the last 2 years, but go figure.

Go figure. Not that it's really even come up once in the last 2 years, but go figure.

But there are no RAW provisions for going beyond that. So, personally, I'm going to keep upping the Difficulty dice and just requiring a Destiny flip to even attempt it.

Some quick rolls suggests 9D5P is roughly 50/50 on success/failure, so it's not totally undoable.

On our show, Sam Stewart suggested that once you reach Formidable, you can start upgrading the check. So to try and get that last mod on an Ilum crystal it would be vs 3 Challenge dice and 2 Difficulty dice.

On our show, Sam Stewart suggested that once you reach Formidable, you can start upgrading the check. So to try and get that last mod on an Ilum crystal it would be vs 3 Challenge dice and 2 Difficulty dice.

There's no way to generate a despair on the check if you do not upgrade the difficulty at some point.

And when it comes to gear, I don't see the GM flipping a Darkside Destiny Point. That'd just be mean. (Characters will more'n likely make sure the conditions are right for doing said modifications , so I can't see the GM claiming adverse conditions/increased risk.)

So all that's left is upgrading dice after five difficulty is reached.

+0.02¢

;-j

Yeah... then it needs to be errataed.

Otherwise I tend to ignore most devs until I really get to trusting their rules calls. I blame years of Andy Chambers as the D&D "Sage" for this attitude...

Andy Chambers as the D&D "Sage"

There is no Sage but Skip Williams. All hail to the Sage.

Andy Chambers as the D&D "Sage"

There is no Sage but Skip Williams. All hail to the Sage.

Thus far, Sam's been pretty **** knowledgeable where this system is concerned, and has been willing to admit that he's made a mistake based upon faulty information (which doesn't happen very often) and apologize.

Just because one guy at WotC couldn't tell his backside from a beehive when it came to D&D 3e rules (which were an overcomplicated mess by the end of that version's life cycle) doesn't mean that all game designers that are willing to answer questions should automatically be tarred with the same brush.

And whether one likes his answers or not, until there's an errata that contradicts what Sam's said, his explanations and answers to various rules questions are pretty much Word of God. Anyone is free to house rule differently for their personal games, but when it comes to official rules interpretations for stuff that's not clear in the book, Sam's word is pretty darn close to final.

And while I respect Sam, and FFG for not releasing copious amounts of errata, this (moding equipment, impossible checks, and increasing difficulty beyond 5 dice) is not an area that can just be a one off question answer on an unofficial podcast. No offense intended to order 66 (I loved the podcast back in the d20 days).

In prepping my feedback for this update (the first time I've really done so, more than a one off comment) I went back and looked at the Edge and AoR equipment mods to find parallels.

The issue I come up against is that each core has some attachments that exceed what should be possible. Sam's suggestion actually flies in the face of rules that are in the book (for instance that an impossible task is still difficulty 5). Something like the attached grenade launcher is a good example, which has 5 potential mods. 3 could be done RAW, 4 if you had the master mechanic talents, and then 5 would reach into impossible status.

Now, if he had intended it a different way, that should be updated in the errata. I shouldn't have to go to an unofficial source to hear rules clarifications (which thank god it's recorded, because then it would be, "well Sam said..."). My grind is that the rules present a clear (and granted uncommon) explanation for how the game should work, and Sam's comment is a little inconsistent with the words on the page.

Now, to put this in context, not a big deal, until now. Adding ammo capacity to an attached grenade launcher.... not really a huge or common issue in most games. A couple blaster mods could hit impossible territory, but that's well covered by the impossible check rules and the master mechanic talent.

FaD, and specifically Ilum crystals, present a problem, as there is a piece of equipment that makes the rules and Sam's response become an "in the know" thing AND they are in contrast. And this is a type of equipment and mod that many many players will want to get their force sensitive mits on. In light of all that, I don't think it's too much to ask that we get a more clear and specific game rule that covers this new, or previously rarely explored, game territory because I guarantee, it will come up in most any FaD game at least once after the core is released, and better to straighten it out now, than later.

At least, I think that would be good game design. as always, YMMV.

thebearisdriving,

Actually, I do agree that if Sam's suggestion of how to handle modifications that would push the difficulty past Formidable is how it's meant to be done in this game regardless of which book is being used, than it's something that needs to be added to the printed rules, either in the next Beta Update or in the Errata file for EotE and AoR.

As you said, it's not an issue unique to the Force and Destiny Beta, but it is highlighted due to the Ilum Crystal's extremely high number of potential modifications. Then again (and I'm speculating), maybe when EotE was being designed, stuff like the underbarrel grenade launcher was meant to have a few extra modifications with the idea that the PC would likely fail one or two of them, but still have a couple extra grabs at the apple, so that the chances of a PC having all four of the Limited Ammo +1 mods was somewhere between slim and none due to having failed at least one of the checks.

Alternatively (again, more speculation on my part), it could be that the initial intent was was that difficulty caps at Formidable in terms of how many difficulty dice, and any further modifications are simply treated as "impossible tasks" and require the PC to flip a Destiny Point. That may well have changed in the years since the game was initially designed (probably starting in 2010 or 2011, aka roughly about the time that FFG got the license) and where the game is now. Jay Little has left FFG for health reasons and gone freelance (and is currently teaching college courses on game design), with Sam stepping into Jay's old role as Lead Designer, and it could just be that Sam and Jay simply have different ideas on how parts of the system work.

In short, I do agree that it probably does need to be spelled out, but for those folks waiting for an official word to this particular issue, Sam's answer is currently what we've got, agree or disagree. Maybe that will change next week, maybe it won't. Time will tell.

Thus far, Sam's been pretty **** knowledgeable where this system is concerned, and has been willing to admit that he's made a mistake based upon faulty information (which doesn't happen very often) and apologize.

Now FFG has to work to reinstill that trust in their capabilities (with me at least).

And whether one likes his answers or not, until there's an errata that contradicts what Sam's said, his explanations and answers to various rules questions are pretty much Word of God.

His informal answers make for great house rules, but they aren't RAW.

So by RAW 5D is the maximum in any pool? Odd, isn't it? Which pool will a character who is trying to flee from a Rancor (Atheltics 0 but Brawn 6) roll on an opposed check?