Nice work on the update FFG.

Where do you see the change to the Ancient Sword? I think that's a good change but I don't see it in this update.

I am not too wild about the Morality change. Starting out fully dark or fully light kind of defeats the point of a narrative role-playing game. The obtainment of either should be a journey for the character giving purpose or further motivation for the player adventuring in the first place. Instead of being codified in the rule set, something like this should have been best left to house ruling, imho.

Where do you see the change to the Ancient Sword? I think that's a good change but I don't see it in this update.

Hiyas:

I believe it's nestled in the Lightsaber section's comments. Not spelled out specifically in the Ancient Sword entry itself.

L

MTFBWY

A

Starting out fully dark or fully light kind of defeats the point of a narrative role-playing game.

Agree completely, not fond of it myself, but glad they made the change because now it's a viable choice and it's there for the ppl who want it. Personally, I would forbid it as a starting option, but not everyone has to play it that way.

Where do you see the change to the Ancient Sword? I think that's a good change but I don't see it in this update.

hiyas:

I believe it's nestled in the Lightsaber section's comments. Not spelled out specifically in the Ancient Sword entry itself.

L

MTFBWY

A

I thought it said as long as the weapon uses the skill it is considered a Lightsaber for modding purposes.

I am not too wild about the Morality change. Starting out fully dark or fully light kind of defeats the point of a narrative role-playing game. The obtainment of either should be a journey for the character giving purpose or further motivation for the player adventuring in the first place. Instead of being codified in the rule set, something like this should have been best left to house ruling, imho.

While you might be right about starting fully light, the previus rule for starting "almost dark" was pointless, because of the way morality is biased towards falling to darkness.

Starting as a dark side adept, on the other hand, is a perfectly resonable character concept.. If you want to play a redemption arc, spending the first session slaughtering children to fall first is disruptive to your concept and to the game.

Where do you see the change to the Ancient Sword? I think that's a good change but I don't see it in this update.

hiyas:

I believe it's nestled in the Lightsaber section's comments. Not spelled out specifically in the Ancient Sword entry itself.

L

MTFBWY

A

I thought it said as long as the weapon uses the skill it is considered a Lightsaber for modding purposes.

It's now 'every weapon in the Lightsaber Section' of the Gear chapter and not 'every weapon that uses the Lightsaber skill', which seems explicitly intended to omit the Ancient Sword.

Where do you see the change to the Ancient Sword? I think that's a good change but I don't see it in this update.

hiyas:

I believe it's nestled in the Lightsaber section's comments. Not spelled out specifically in the Ancient Sword entry itself.

L MTFBWY A

I thought it said as long as the weapon uses the skill it is considered a Lightsaber for modding purposes.

It's now 'every weapon in the Lightsaber Section' of the Gear chapter and not 'every weapon that uses the Lightsaber skill', which seems explicitly intended to omit the Ancient Sword.

Ah I see.

No, it still uses the skill which is listed in the table, which is the lightsaber skill and the update hasn't changed that. It just no longer counts as a lightsaber for other rules purposes. This means it doesn't benefit from talents that benefit only lightsabers (no Reflecting blaster bolts with Ancient Swords) and doesn't benefit from the "lightsabers cannot be sundered" special rule.

Seems a perfectly good, sensible change to me. I don't think they ever intended the Ancient Sword to count as a lightsaber, just they wanted to retain some of the mystique of the lightsaber as a special weapon (so starting character generally don't have them), while not penalising future lightsaber wielders by forcing them to take another combat skill at the early stages of the campaign (and providing them a narrative excuse why they have built up some "lightsaber" skill before they aquire one). Now, I would have to take a careful look through all the talents but it might mean some of the talents might have to be re-written to allow their appropriate use with the Ancient Sword. However, being unsunderable and being lightsabers for the purposes of Reflect don't strike me as what was intended.

Ancient Sword is just a melee weapon that lets you use your lightsaber skill for the combat check.

I am not too wild about the Morality change. Starting out fully dark or fully light kind of defeats the point of a narrative role-playing game. The obtainment of either should be a journey for the character giving purpose or further motivation for the player adventuring in the first place. Instead of being codified in the rule set, something like this should have been best left to house ruling, imho.

While you might be right about starting fully light, the previus rule for starting "almost dark" was pointless, because of the way morality is biased towards falling to darkness.

Starting as a dark side adept, on the other hand, is a perfectly resonable character concept.. If you want to play a redemption arc, spending the first session slaughtering children to fall first is disruptive to your concept and to the game.

Yeah, maybe. It just seems to me that the SW movies support a rise, fall and redemption motif. I am not saying you could do otherwise in your personal games it just seems to me that the default 'setting' should encourage what the SW movies have themselves set up as a groundwork. In the end, play it how you want to. I am just disappointed that the core suggests that what I believe should be a standard approach (and what the designers seemed to agree with in its initial offering) is now an optional one, i.e. a house ruled option. There. That is all.

So Illum Crystals end up 3 purple 2 red versus your mechanics+force rating. which could easily be a 3 or 4. so 3 or 8 successes, depending on the die roll and force rating. Doesn't sound terribly hard.

Wouldn't that be 3 red and 2 purple using just the latest Errata (the Hard check becoming an Easy check, needing some other effect to further reduce it?)

Love the new lightsaber modification rules.

Now you don't need a Mechanics dedicated character to pull of some good mods.

Makes the item much more personal and gets around the issue of a Jedi handing over his lightsaber to the techie to improve it.

Love the new lightsaber modification rules.

Now you don't need a Mechanics dedicated character to pull of some good mods.

Makes the item much more personal and gets around the issue of a Jedi handing over his lightsaber to the techie to improve it.

I like the Force rating assist for modifying a crystal, however I have mixed opinions on the reduced difficulty if it's a "personal" lightsaber.

Although it addresses the milieu for Jedi, it raises the question of why don't other characters get the benefit when modifying their "personal" blaster? Why are Lightsabers so much easier to modify if you make it "personal"?

Although it addresses the milieu for Jedi, it raises the question of why don't other characters get the benefit when modifying their "personal" blaster? Why are Lightsabers so much easier to modify if you make it "personal"?

That's all, lots and lots of complaining that their Special Snowflake characters wouldn't be able to pack every last drop of awesome into their favorite weapon.

because they want to discourage loaning out the weapon for modding so, as characters that would not normally have a high mechanics skill, this compromise was created to better address that issue. Other weapons can be loaned out to another mechanics character/NPC for modification. Looks like FFG bowed to the various cannon arguments made earlier.

I understand the change, and the reasons for it.

However, as evileeyore has mentioned (as well as others), it seems like an arbitrary rule made just for those special "snowflakes".

If the change applies to all modifications for all weapons that are "personalized" I can see that too. A general rule change that supports all sorts of character concepts, not just a minority.

Or, they could have set the precedence for using your rank in the combat skill as ranks in Mechanics (however, upgrade the check by one)... or, something that could be applied for all characters, not just "snowflake" ones.

I like the Force rating assist for modifying a crystal, however I have mixed opinions on the reduced difficulty if it's a "personal" lightsaber.

Although it addresses the milieu for Jedi, it raises the question of why don't other characters get the benefit when modifying their "personal" blaster? Why are Lightsabers so much easier to modify if you make it "personal"?

Because a lightsaber is different than a blaster. Your Kyber crystal can have an actual "spiritual" connection to you, whereas a blaster is just a personal piece of gear.

That's all, lots and lots of complaining that their Special Snowflake characters wouldn't be able to pack every last drop of awesome into their favorite weapon.

Derision is wasted on this forum, eeyore.

I could just as easily decry people in the EotE forum for wanting to play their "Special Snowflake" Mandalorians, Chiss, assassin droids, Toydarian Merchant, etc.

If a player wants to make a unique character, why is that bad thing?

I like the Force rating assist for modifying a crystal, however I have mixed opinions on the reduced difficulty if it's a "personal" lightsaber.

Although it addresses the milieu for Jedi, it raises the question of why don't other characters get the benefit when modifying their "personal" blaster? Why are Lightsabers so much easier to modify if you make it "personal"?

Because a lightsaber is different than a blaster. Your Kyber crystal can have an actual "spiritual" connection to you, whereas a blaster is just a personal piece of gear.

Not that I support the derision, but this is a valid question: Why should modifying a lightsaber at all be easier for a jedi with no mechanical skills than modifying an aggressor w/ ancient sword, or enforcer w/brass knuckles, etc.

As for modifying the crystal, sure, your argument holds, but there is no deep spiritual connection with an extended hilt. Why should mods on that attachment be easier to perform than mods on a filed sight?

I don't think it's about a unique character, but why are force users granted an advantage on making mods to a weapon, which happens to be the most powerful melee weapon in the game, which also activates several of their unique talents (such as reflect) and there is no cost for this advantage? At least not mechancially.

On the flip side, using a lightsaber in the rebellion era is quite a dangerous thing. It draws attention from the most unsavory kind. So there is a narrative reason not to. But IMO, you can't balance mechanical advantages with Narrative disadvantages. At least not in a good system.

Mind you, I'm pretty much in favor of the change. like 90% behind it, but I still think this is an inequitable change that favors the idea that force users are simply better. So I would still question why are the force users getting a special treatemnt on making the best weapon in the game better, with no downside?

Love the new lightsaber modification rules.

Now you don't need a Mechanics dedicated character to pull of some good mods.

Makes the item much more personal and gets around the issue of a Jedi handing over his lightsaber to the techie to improve it.

I like the Force rating assist for modifying a crystal, however I have mixed opinions on the reduced difficulty if it's a "personal" lightsaber.

Although it addresses the milieu for Jedi, it raises the question of why don't other characters get the benefit when modifying their "personal" blaster? Why are Lightsabers so much easier to modify if you make it "personal"?

That's a fair criticism - ultimately it's up to the devs to decide if it's balanced.

First off, a GM could decide to make Mechanics checks easier for other characters if they think it's warranted (or revert the change make it Hard for lightsabers again).

However, there are several factors that (at least to me) justify this.

(Specialized use for a particular character type. Jedi typically only really care about one item enough to modify it. It's their iconic item. But isn't Han's blaster just as iconic? In some ways yes, but Han also modified the Falcon. Other character types interested in modifying equipment will make much more broad use of Mechanics - weapons, armor, vehicles, etc.

Also, the typical Jedi character is not going to use another weapon. If a fight breaks out they'll use their lightsaber (and/or the force). Other characters will naturally be more willing and prepared to use a wider variety of weapons and armor.

The basic lightsaber needs to be modded to catch up in a lot of respects to be on par with other powerful weapons. The most powerful aspect of the basic lightsaber is its unmodded Crit 2 rating (which can me modded to 1). That's certainly very nice but it's 3 less damage than a blaster rifles/carbines and 1 less than a heavy blaster pistol, t he vibro-ax starts with the same damage and Crit but also has Pierce 2 and Vicious 3 (though the basic lightsaber does have Breach 1) . For a character concept - especially if pursuing the lightsaber form specializations - that's combat oriented this is an important aspect and the basic lightsaber has a little catch-up to do in that regard.

The "personal" weapon distinction does exist in the talent Jury Rigged.

Generally, when trying to decide whether something is balanced, I try to look at it as if none of the milieu exists...

Imagine that there is no such thing as a Jedi character type at all... and then we add this rule for these laser-swords... and then when we notice that modifying these weapons is really, really hard to do... then we make a rule that changes the original rule for one character type -- and not even a paid for specialization or talent -- just a concept.

How do we justify it in that situation?

However, there are several factors that (at least to me) justify this.

(Specialized use for a particular character type. Jedi typically only really care about one item enough to modify it. It's their iconic item. But isn't Han's blaster just as iconic? In some ways yes, but Han also modified the Falcon. Other character types interested in modifying equipment will make much more broad use of Mechanics - weapons, armor, vehicles, etc.

...

The basic lightsaber needs to be modded to catch up in a lot of respects to be on par with other powerful weapons. The most powerful aspect of the basic lightsaber is its unmodded Crit 2 rating (which can me modded to 1). That's certainly very nice but it's 3 less damage than a blaster rifles/carbines and 1 less than a heavy blaster pistol, t he vibro-ax starts with the same damage and Crit but also has Pierce 2 and Vicious 3 (though the basic lightsaber does have Breach 1) . For a character concept - especially if pursuing the lightsaber form specializations - that's combat oriented this is an important aspect and the basic lightsaber has a little catch-up to do in that regard.

Two quibbles.

1. I think it was mostly Lando and Chewie that modified the falcon.

2. I think that a lightsaber, even the most basic non-training variety, is a lot more powerful than you are giving it credit for. any successful attack with a saber is going to deal 7 damage, minimum, not counting rare mitigating factors like cortosis or parry. That's a massive leap forward over any other melee weapon. It's also not reliant on a stat, which means that it has fewer barriers to entry.

take for example, character with a vibro sword, and another identical one with a saber, fighting a storm trooper Sgt.

Lets say these character both have brawn 3, and 4 ranks of saber/melee. Both will have an 80% chance to hit, with an average success of about 2 successes. The trooper Sgt. has soak 5 and 15 wounds. so the saber wielder does an average of 9 damage, while the vibro sword wielder deals 3brawn+2weapon+2 success-(5soak-2 pierce) = 4 damage. Same xp, same skill level, same characteristics. Sabers are very good on their own.

and with the falling avalance talent, they easily compete with the marauder's feral strength upgrades. Add in that the saber is easier to modify and that starts to look pretty imbalanced.

All that has existed for 2 years in some form, and that's the universe of starwars, sabers are better. But to claim that sabers aren't leaps and bounds better than normal melee weapons is a little ingregious, and I'm not sure how many systemic advantages people need to make sabers that much better.