Per this argument by Aki:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/124347-beta-update-5/?p=1299162

...it seems to me that putting a price on these crystals just causes meta-game problems, especially if starting at "Knight" level play. 10K is pretty arbitrary anyway, especially considering that these items are usually considered "priceless" and are usually the focus of quests or other great effort.

Besides, you could walk into a ship dealer and you'd need 10 or more just to buy a YT-1300 ... which seems kind of cheesy considering what a personal item it is. No price at all would be better.

I concur.

Per this argument by Aki:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/124347-beta-update-5/?p=1299162

...it seems to me that putting a price on these crystals just causes meta-game problems, especially if starting at "Knight" level play. 10K is pretty arbitrary anyway, especially considering that these items are usually considered "priceless" and are usually the focus of quests or other great effort.

Besides, you could walk into a ship dealer and you'd need 10 or more just to buy a YT-1300 ... which seems kind of cheesy considering what a personal item it is. No price at all would be better.

The problem is if a Jedi in a knight level game gets a lightsaber what does a non Jedi get? The answer is the equivilant of 10K of gear. Which would be things like modded armor and blasters etc.

And the number now is 9300. It got tuned down.

The problem is if a Jedi in a knight level game gets a lightsaber what does a non Jedi get? The answer is the equivilant of 10K of gear. Which would be things like modded armor and blasters etc.

Why? Maybe they wouldn't need "10K" of gear, that part could be changed because its no longer tied to an arbitrary value for the lightsaber.

In the Jedi's case giving them a lightsaber is a way of filling in a backstory, but you could use it the same way with non-Jedi...give them one sweet piece of fully-modded gear, maybe that tricked out carbine they always wanted. Maybe it should be a "hard points and number of mods" scale, instead of credits. It seems to me that taking the value off the lightsaber and focussing on "backstory equipment" is a better way to approach Knight level than offering 10K of gear just because that's what a lightsaber costs.

I think this brings up a bigger conversation on the role Stuff should play in F&D so I opened another thread on that very question.

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/124856-should-creditsstuff-be-at-all-a-focus-for-a-fd-campaign/

I like what your original post is about Whafrog. I think it would be nice to have a general note about prices (say like if the GM wanted to set up a macguffin heist and wanted to say "this priceless gem is being sold at auction for 25,000 credits" or what have you).

But having prices for something like this... just feels wrong. Because in this era, these are basically artifacts of a sort.

Restricting access beyond the book value is what the Rarity/Restricted mechanic is for.

Every piece of gear needs some book value because it's totally unrealistic for a component to have no price, even under any circumstances.

The problem is if a Jedi in a knight level game gets a lightsaber what does a non Jedi get? The answer is the equivilant of 10K of gear. Which would be things like modded armor and blasters etc.

Why? Maybe they wouldn't need "10K" of gear, that part could be changed because its no longer tied to an arbitrary value for the lightsaber.

In the Jedi's case giving them a lightsaber is a way of filling in a backstory, but you could use it the same way with non-Jedi...give them one sweet piece of fully-modded gear, maybe that tricked out carbine they always wanted. Maybe it should be a "hard points and number of mods" scale, instead of credits. It seems to me that taking the value off the lightsaber and focussing on "backstory equipment" is a better way to approach Knight level than offering 10K of gear just because that's what a lightsaber costs.

So Jedi get a free very powerful weapon and everyone else gets nothing... How is that fair?

The problem is if a Jedi in a knight level game gets a lightsaber what does a non Jedi get? The answer is the equivilant of 10K of gear. Which would be things like modded armor and blasters etc.

Why? Maybe they wouldn't need "10K" of gear, that part could be changed because its no longer tied to an arbitrary value for the lightsaber.

In the Jedi's case giving them a lightsaber is a way of filling in a backstory, but you could use it the same way with non-Jedi...give them one sweet piece of fully-modded gear, maybe that tricked out carbine they always wanted. Maybe it should be a "hard points and number of mods" scale, instead of credits. It seems to me that taking the value off the lightsaber and focussing on "backstory equipment" is a better way to approach Knight level than offering 10K of gear just because that's what a lightsaber costs.

So Jedi get a free very powerful weapon and everyone else gets nothing... How is that fair?

I normally don't quote whole previous posts, it's a waste of space and adds clutter. But ... did you actually read what you quoted? I said "give them one sweet piece of fully-modded gear" and that maybe the "knight bonus" should be based on mods and hard points instead of cash. How is that "nothing"?

The problem is from what I can tell the intent is to give Jedi an unmodified lightsaber while giving everyone else more options. It is basically saying a lightsaber represents this much in other gear. Which really is what money is about. It is about having a method of showing equivalency. A lightsaber is worth this amount of stuff. And a Non Jedi can take this amount of stuff. And the intent is for it to be gear not cash. A cash value is the best way to handle that. Your way would require much more work to arrive at the same outcome.

Basically rules wise having a cash value is the best way to measure the value of things. Not necessarily to be able to go to Watto's and buy a lightsaber for 10,000 credits.

The problem is from what I can tell the intent is to give Jedi an unmodified lightsaber while giving everyone else more options. It is basically saying a lightsaber represents this much in other gear. Which really is what money is about. It is about having a method of showing equivalency. A lightsaber is worth this amount of stuff. And a Non Jedi can take this amount of stuff. And the intent is for it to be gear not cash. A cash value is the best way to handle that. Your way would require much more work to arrive at the same outcome.

Basically rules wise having a cash value is the best way to measure the value of things. Not necessarily to be able to go to Watto's and buy a lightsaber for 10,000 credits.

As pointed out in another thread being able to buy a small vehicle is a problem. Forcing characters to spend it on armor, guns, mods, and stim packs helps a great deal.

By that credit equivalency logic, if a smuggler in the group owns a ship: the jedi should get 8 lightsabers, the driver a tank, and so on and so forth. I think FuriousGreg is right to call for a broader discussion about gear/credit equivalencies and the economy of stuff as a meta-game element.

To me characters that are only defined by their gear are rather dull. That goes for a jedi as well. A character should start with enough doodads to match their character concept. <waves two fingers> There is no gear balance. This may not be the game universe you are looking for.

By that credit equivalency logic, if a smuggler in the group owns a ship: the jedi should get 8 lightsabers, the driver a tank, and so on and so forth. I think FuriousGreg is right to call for a broader discussion about gear/credit equivalencies and the economy of stuff as a meta-game element.

To me characters that are only defined by their gear are rather dull. That goes for a jedi as well. A character should start with enough doodads to match their character concept. <waves two fingers> There is no gear balance. This may not be the game universe you are looking for.

I ultimately agree with this. As long as it's in equivalent gear, it is fine.

What does "equivalent in gear" mean? You're assuming 10K is the right amount, but FFG only pulled that number out of their dark zone. It's completely arbitrary. They took an arbitrary value, and then found they had to scale everything else to it to handle "knight level play". It's a "cart before the horse" way of doing things.

I ultimately agree with this. As long as it's in equivalent gear, it is fine.

What does "equivalent in gear" mean? You're assuming 10K is the right amount, but FFG only pulled that number out of their dark zone. It's completely arbitrary. They took an arbitrary value, and then found they had to scale everything else to it to handle "knight level play". It's a "cart before the horse" way of doing things.

Looking at the only other weapon in FaD with Breach is the missile tube(7500), the lightsaber at 10k isn't limited by things like limited ammo, doesn't need to be prepared, isn't cumbersome and doesn't have several careers worth of abilities meant to augment its usage. Of course, out of the box a Saber doesn't have the range of a middle tube, nor the 20 damage, but I think that Breach is considered a very costly ability(justly so imo). I think that it is accordingly scaling given what I can see within the system, and isn't a number drawn out of the air.

I ultimately agree with this. As long as it's in equivalent gear, it is fine.

What does "equivalent in gear" mean? You're assuming 10K is the right amount, but FFG only pulled that number out of their dark zone. It's completely arbitrary. They took an arbitrary value, and then found they had to scale everything else to it to handle "knight level play". It's a "cart before the horse" way of doing things.

I ultimately agree with this. As long as it's in equivalent gear, it is fine.

What does "equivalent in gear" mean? You're assuming 10K is the right amount, but FFG only pulled that number out of their dark zone. It's completely arbitrary. They took an arbitrary value, and then found they had to scale everything else to it to handle "knight level play". It's a "cart before the horse" way of doing things.

Idk about the other books, but within FaD I think it is scaled appropriately.

Looking at the only other weapon in FaD with Breach is the missile tube(7500), the lightsaber at 10k isn't limited by things like limited ammo, doesn't need to be prepared, isn't cumbersome and doesn't have several careers worth of abilities meant to augment its usage. Of course, out of the box a Saber doesn't have the range of a middle tube, nor the 20 damage, but I think that Breach is considered a very costly ability(justly so imo). I think that it is accordingly scaling given what I can see within the system, and isn't a number drawn out of the air.

It means equivalent In Utility. Take a look at what a bounty hunter can do with 9.3k to spend on armor, upgrades for the armor and guns and upgrades for those guns. Think of it in terms of comparing Cad Bane with his gear allowing him to be on the same power level as Obi Wan with a lightsaber. The 2 were very evenly matched. But Cad Bane needed the gear to make up for no lightsaber.

In the hands of an experienced character a lightsaber is very potent. But then with the equivalent experience and value in gear any other character is going to be equally potent.

And most likely FFG did not just pull those numbers out of their ass and it is rather insulting for you to say so given the amount of thought they have put into every aspect of the game and for you to assume they did not put a lot of thought into pricing lightsabers.

Atomisk also makes a very good point about the missile tube. Which is also good evidence that no FFG is not just pulling numbers out of the air.

And most likely FFG did not just pull those numbers out of their ass and it is rather insulting for you to say so given the amount of thought they have put into every aspect of the game and for you to assume they did not put a lot of thought into pricing lightsabers.

Heh, I'm pretty sure they're beyond being insulted by "some guy on the internet". Especially when I've been clear I totally love this game, and these are just quibbles...strongly stated quibbles perhaps, but quibbles nonetheless. I have no illusions about my feedback being taken seriously.

But yeah, fixing a cost of 10K for a crystal that is effectively priceless is exactly like pulling a number from a dark zone. Even if you're right about mechanical equivalency--which I don't agree, but whatever--they've only sacrificed a story opportunity for a mechanical one, and painted themselves into a corner.

No they did not. They made a way for a GM to be able to measure gear prices so that a jedi character and a smuggler character will start with the same value of gear in a knight level or greater game even if if one has just a lightsaber and the other has tricked out heavy blaster pistol, armored clothing and a bunch of other gear. Which is good as Jedi tend to just have their lightsaber and few pieces of gear while smugglers have a wider variety. and as i said it is very clear that the intent is not for Jedi to just buy their crystal. But to be able to measure the value of the jedi gear versus other gear does require a price tag. .

Why is fairness or unity of value a bother?

What if I as the GM said to you what gear would your character have gained while he was playing for the time it would have taken to earn 150xp? Get your player to explain how they came upon the gear, you get free adversaries and adventure hooks.

If the Jedi gets some nice armour, his lightsaber and a R2 droid why is this a missery for the rest of the group? Don't they benefit for the jedi being good at what he does, or would you rather the jedi knight had a training saber because it wouldn't be fair if the smuggler got a ship.

I wonder too if you could add some extra obligation (if you were using EotE) and get a bigger cash fund.

The problem is if a Jedi in a knight level game gets a lightsaber what does a non Jedi get? The answer is the equivilant of 10K of gear. Which would be things like modded armor and blasters etc.

Why? Maybe they wouldn't need "10K" of gear, that part could be changed because its no longer tied to an arbitrary value for the lightsaber.

In the Jedi's case giving them a lightsaber is a way of filling in a backstory, but you could use it the same way with non-Jedi...give them one sweet piece of fully-modded gear, maybe that tricked out carbine they always wanted. Maybe it should be a "hard points and number of mods" scale, instead of credits. It seems to me that taking the value off the lightsaber and focussing on "backstory equipment" is a better way to approach Knight level than offering 10K of gear just because that's what a lightsaber costs.

But that 10k of gear is supposed to represent backstory equipment.

That's fine. Really, it comes down to this: pick whatever value of backstory equipment for non-Jedi, and give Jedi a lightsaber. But just take the price off the crystal, they aren't currency they are artifacts.

But that 10k of gear is supposed to represent backstory equipment.

That's fine. Really, it comes down to this: pick whatever value of backstory equipment for non-Jedi, and give Jedi a lightsaber. But just take the price off the crystal, they aren't currency they are artifacts.

Are you trying to say that those crystals can't be sold?

People buy and sell artifacts all the time. Especially when they have no idea what they've got. "Restricted" is accurate enough. Nothing is stopping the GM from waving the credit cost and making it the result of an adventure.

Are you trying to say that those crystals can't be sold?

No.

I'm saying the value is too nebulous to be pinned at 10K (which is also ridiculously low).

Then I'm just trying to understand why you have an issue with them having some kind of cost as far as comparison between other gear. As a GM I can make those crystals cost whatever I want or literally cover a cave floor. You are just it seems complaining about something saying it should be a certain way when it literally does not have to be that way because (here's the kicker) it's your choice how the rules are represented in your game or talk to your GM if you have that issue.

The cost is there so we can compare it to other gear within the game. I really can't comprehend how you are continuing to argue against that.