Ghost, that's an interesting take on the use of Dpoint. It certainly forces you out of your comfort zone.

How often do yo uthink Dpoints are supposed to be used? should they be used sparingly and carefully or just flipped as needed?

However your rule n°2 can't be applied if you need to convert black pips and don't have any Dpoints available. What then?

Ghost, that's an interesting take on the use of Dpoint. It certainly forces you out of your comfort zone.

How often do yo uthink Dpoints are supposed to be used? should they be used sparingly and carefully or just flipped as needed?

I'm of the opinion that they should be used somewhat carefully, but also that no one should be afraid of using them. They go back and forth, so it's not like you'll never see it again. Really the only time the player should be super careful is when you are on your last Dpoint, just because they do so much it's hard to pick what the best use might be.

The GM by comparison should be more picky usually late-session when the Players are already probably beat up. More to avoid dropping the players into a metaphorical pit then anything else.

Like I said, kinda like the Dogme 95 shooting rules the idea is to help promote the collaborative narrative process. I don't think that you should do this every session anymore than I think that every film should be a Dogme 95 film. But I do think that maybe using it for a full adventure or two might not be a bad idea.

I may need to give this some serious thought... I see the potential for working in other ignored mechanics like Obligation/Duty/Conflict as well...

Funny, in school Dogme 95 never really got me excited...

However your rule n°2 can't be applied if you need to convert black pips and don't have any Dpoints available. What then?

Thanks, corrected, with a number 3 added to also assist. Use of words "may", and "appropriate" was very intentional. Typically though I'd expect that No1 will usually ensure that there's always at least one point in the pool at any given time.

However your rule n°2 can't be applied if you need to convert black pips and don't have any Dpoints available. What then?

My players and I actually started using something quite like #2 - the player announces their intention to use the force, and if they roll enough pips they have to execute the action, regardless of whether the pips are light or dark (and suffer strain and conflict as appropriate). If they don't roll enough pips, the power fizzles normally and the action is wasted. In answer to your question about the DP, we just have the GM immediately spend one (which he gets back right away) and we double the strain and conflict acquired. If there is no way for the GM to spend the destiny point (or even if there is), he is encouraged to 'spend' it on something happening behind the scenes in the larger campaign which will come back to haunt the players later...

I actually really like the 'must perform the action' because it places the temptation with executing the power and the risk of trying to use too much power rather than with spending the destiny point and gaining the conflict.

gonna break this off into a fresh thread.

Back to the original topic, I also agree that the name Knight Level needs to die under the hottest sums of the driest desert planet in the Outer Rim. Not only does 150 XP not make you a Jedi Knight, but the phrase is extremely and negatively loaded. Players are going to be coming to this came expecting to play a Jedi and expecting that they have to use Knight Level in order to do it. Normal starting play is likely to be overlooked in favor of Knight Level, especially with the handout lightsaber. The whole thing is just too dangerous.

I would even go so far as to recommend that the whole option be removed, since I really don't think GMs need a rule to tell them how the give players more XP. All this does is set an expectation for the players and force the GMs hand to use it. If GMs want to start their group with more XP and gear, fine. But it shouldn't be some special, game-unique thing that you can only do here (as opposed to EoE and AoR) and need some special rule in order to do.

As someone who's been playing around with +100-ish XP in many of my games, I really appreciated the Knight Level optional rule because it gives us at least a baseline idea of how to go about creating characters at that level of experience. It's not really a "special rule" as much as it is a helpful, optional rule. A suggestion, as of course all other rules in the book are.

As soon as I saw the rules for it, I thought, "THANK you, at last! This is awesome!"

What I didn't think, as soon as I saw the rule, was, "oh this is how I can play a Jedi Knight." Maybe I just understand the setting better than some, or maybe I don't put as much stock in names as others might, but I saw it and translated "knight" in my mind to be a flavorful, setting-appropriate way of saying "advanced."

Misleading? To me, no. Negatively loaded? I would think not. Dangerous? Furthest thing from it.

They could have call it Padawan level. I am of the opinion that the wording Jedi Knight level is a bit misleading.

Wait! Actually, what is a Jedi Knight? In the movie Phantom menace, Obi-Wan is the Padawan of Qui-Gon, but is he already a Knight? In the next movie he teaches Anakin (who is a Padawan) is he then a Master or a just a Knight?

It's only semantics, but it was silly of them to use such a loaded term. It creates unrealistic expectations, in a game where most players will already have unrealistic expectations of their Jedi characters after the last 20 years of bad fan-fiction.

They should have just had a sidebar saying:

'if you want to have a higher-level game, start them with more money and XP. Say, 10k credits and 150 XP?'

It's only semantics, but it was silly of them to use such a loaded term. It creates unrealistic expectations, in a game where most players will already have unrealistic expectations of their Jedi characters after the last 20 years of bad fan-fiction.

They should have just had a sidebar saying:

'if you want to have a higher-level game, start them with more money and XP. Say, 10k credits and 150 XP?'

Agreed

Master House: A-hole Jedi

I'm so doing that now. Maxing Heal and making everyone deal with the personality. Can I get a lightsaber-cane?

Yep.

I was reading my Tales of the Jedi collections and most of the characters who are still in training are refered to simply as Jedi Knights. They are mostly what we would think of as Padawans in terms of development, but are expected to perform missions without their master's help. Most of them have very limited force skill. Its hard to pin down the expectations for these very loaded terms.

Normal starting play is likely to be overlooked in favor of Knight Level, especially with the handout lightsaber. The whole thing is just too dangerous.

I would even go so far as to recommend that the whole option be removed, since I really don't think GMs need a rule to tell them how the give players more XP. All this does is set an expectation for the players and force the GMs hand to use it. If GMs want to start their group with more XP and gear, fine. But it shouldn't be some special, game-unique thing that you can only do here (as opposed to EoE and AoR) and need some special rule in order to do.

Talking about extremely and negatively loaded words why define Knight level play dangerous? I see no danger in wanting to play with more experienced characters so you can actually create more complex charcters than the "farm boy/girl who wants to escape his farm and see the stars" or "runaway guy from Nar Shaddaa who picks up a blaster and starts hunting criminals". You're talking like making anything higher than starting charcter is game breaking and wrong.

How would you run an Old Republic F&D game? Not everybody will find playing Zayne Carrick appealing.

As for the special unique thing that you can only do here, i haven't read anywayere that you can't do it in EoE and AoR, i take it for granted you can do it and you actually should do it if you have a mixed group who wants to start as knight-level.

In these games there is nothing you can't do.

I was reading my Tales of the Jedi collections and most of the characters who are still in training are refered to simply as Jedi Knights. They are mostly what we would think of as Padawans in terms of development, but are expected to perform missions without their master's help. Most of them have very limited force skill. Its hard to pin down the expectations for these very loaded terms.

That's an interesting observation but who is referring to them as Jedi Knights? the other members of the Order or the common people of the galaxy? i assume that the laymen don't know and don't care about the padawan/knight/master division and for them anyone who dresses in robes and uses a lightsaber is a Jedi.

I was reading my Tales of the Jedi collections and most of the characters who are still in training are refered to simply as Jedi Knights. They are mostly what we would think of as Padawans in terms of development, but are expected to perform missions without their master's help. Most of them have very limited force skill. Its hard to pin down the expectations for these very loaded terms.

That may be more because Padawans as a more defined term wasn't really introduced until Phantom Menace.

Although, as far as I'm aware, padawans aren't expected to operate on their own so I think the points stands, such as it is.

Knight as a word means Jedi Knight to many people even though F&D is not the Jedi Knight book. Can you play Jedi Knights with it? Absolutely. But it is the Force-user book, not the Jedi book. If people are going to be stuck on a word to such an extent then maybe it needs to be changed.

They could have call it Padawan level. I am of the opinion that the wording Jedi Knight level is a bit misleading.

I agree that "Jedi Knight" would be a bit misleading; however, the term "Jedi Knight" doesn't appear anywhere in that section. If one were to read the rules for Knight level play, I believe the intent of the option would be instantly clear. Throughout the rulebook, it is clear that the Jedi are dead and gone, and it puts their mystical powers and reputation in a mythical state. Only the very uninformed (or misinformed) would think differently. But the misinformation pervading many areas of the web ("I heard in this game everyone starts out as a Jedi!") is not the fault of the game system or the developers, nor is the lack of information the fault of any but the one who remains uninformed. *

Wait! Actually, what is a Jedi Knight? In the movie Phantom menace, Obi-Wan is the Padawan of Qui-Gon, but is he already a Knight? In the next movie he teaches Anakin (who is a Padawan) is he then a Master or a just a Knight?

Excellent question, and one that I think has been answered pretty well here. In-universe perceptions and opinions are just as varied as their real-world counterparts, it would seem Anakin is hardly normative, since he was "the chosen one." Obi-Wan is a central character and highly skilled in the Force. Do we spec him out (as I did earlier) at 300 XP, with all the bells and whistles that he could possibly have? Maybe. Or we could just be more conservative with our expectations and treat much of what he's doing as narrative, such as his Ataru technique and his Moving of battle droids (who were of course minions and could, of course, have been easily dispatched with a single solid "Hurl" check).

*The variegated mods of understanding of what a Jedi actually is in our real-world culture could possibly also be at fault for the misinformation about this product. Example: "Charlie" has seen Star Wars/A New Hope & Empire Strikes back once each in his entire life. He enjoyed them. He hears about the Force being in a Star Wars game, makes the connection between Star Wars, the Force, and Jedi, and thinks, "Oh okay that's a Jedi game." He then goes to the interwebz saying, "This is the game where people are Jedi. The other two are where you're a Rebel, and where you're a Smuggler." And then people take this Tweetable info to the four corners of the world, saying things like, "You can only be a Jedi? That's stupid." or "Where's the Imperial game!!?? I wanna play as the Empire!" Or, "EotE is a scum and villainy game so I have to be a jerk and kill everyone who gets in my way, because that's what people who are scum & villainy do."

I agree that "Jedi Knight" would be a bit misleading; however, the term "Jedi Knight" doesn't appear anywhere in that section. If one were to read the rules for Knight level play, I believe the intent of the option would be instantly clear.

As the only reference "Knight" in canon is also a reference to Jedi, I think it's the sole implication.

As the only reference "Knight" in canon is also a reference to Jedi, I think it's the sole implication.

This is good point.

Obi-Wan is a central character and highly skilled in the Force. Do we spec him out (as I did earlier) at 300 XP, with all the bells and whistles that he could possibly have? Maybe. Or we could just be more conservative with our expectations and treat much of what he's doing as narrative, such as his Ataru technique and his Moving of battle droids (who were of course minions and could, of course, have been easily dispatched with a single solid "Hurl" check).

I actually ran the numbers on this and found that at +150XP you can make a character with all the same attributes and abilities Obi demonstrates in EP I.

I totally ignored what EU and other fiction sources "said" he had and just went on what he actually did though. So yeah, if you're worried about if he's actaully using the Form MCXXI SpondleFondle TREE or Form Q ² Poodleplap TREE, then you'll need waaaaaay more XP, but that's generally true with trying to translate any major character from the source mats. The more EUey sources you factor in, the more the characters gonna be embellished, and the more XP you'll need to factor in "that one time when Obi turned into a dragon and defeated Darth Vader by breathing fire on him and then having a bowl of Trix with Jaxon."

For crying out loud, if it weren't for the equipment issue Boba Fett in V and VI could probably be stated as a starter level character based solely on what he actually does in the movies...

But that's one of the critical issues with the whole "Knight" level name. Expectations are so high that even when you can pull of a Movie Knight with an FR of only 1, our inner Erik is still gonna come out and demand more.

And just as a personal note,

So I think I see why the 0=7 FR system was dropped because it served no purpose for multiple reasons. First reason was that as previously pointed out my character could have a FR 7 but took no Force Powers other than those within the talent tree of my specializations. Second reason is that of specializations and unless you took 6 or more specializations there is no way to get to FR 7. Now you could do this the long way mid way or the short way. However, the long way is moot as this system was introduced with Edge and by the time F&D Beta hit the methodology could of changed for the development for F&D. Long way is taking a career/specialization from either Age or Edge and then both Force specializations in those two books then taking 2 careers from F&D and four of the specializations within those careers. You would also have to dive down into the final tier of each specialization talent tree(with the exception of the first one) and that is at least 75 xp per tree (not including the xp for if it isn't a direct route or the multi classing) and you are looking at 525 xp at least to get there. The middle way isn't that much shorter and only requires you take 6 careers out of F&D though you will have to be specific as at a quick glance not every specialization within a career gives you a boost to FR. Finally the short way is to take 4 specializations specifically Consular: Sage and Mystic: Seer as two and then two additional specialization from each career that give a FR. So I think that these points make the FR as a benchmark invalid. Also I could point out that if you chose to become a lightsaber master and take all the specializations related to those you will only end up with a FR 3. Though i think that if someone does this and masters them all they are just as dangerous as someone who has FR 7. Please note this is just a IMHO observations and not meant to offend.

I still think that chart is a handy base line to judge relative strength of average characters. Sure there are some characters that have low FR for their skills (zayne, tallisibeth) and those that have high FR for their skills (skywalkers, star killer, kyp and the Jedi battle master I can not remember the name of...corran horn?).

But I'd say 1 standard deviation on both sides probably is represented by the chart. It's a nice referent, not gospel.

For crying out loud, if it weren't for the equipment issue Boba Fett in V and VI could probably be stated as a starter level character based solely on what he actually does in the movies...

I am fairly certain the starting Bounty Hunters would fare better against a blind smuggler

That scene is just more evidence that Han wins with Advantages, not Successes.

Anyhoo, this just makes me glad I avoided so much of the EU. History seems to be vindicating my choice.

Edit:

And despite the excellent insight of your master swordsman, I had a similar conversation with fencer (not a master, but pretty good) who invoked the swashbuckler notion and pointed out that with all the fantastic "rule of cool" buzzing around "Star Wars", why draw the line at the fictional disciplines of laser swords?

I still think that chart is a handy base line to judge relative strength of average characters.

But the problem is, it's not.

The Force Rating is only 1/3 of the equation. Without the Power Tree and Force Talent Purchases (ones that actually use the force dice) and the willingness to flip pips, your force rating is just a number.

Wait! Actually, what is a Jedi Knight? In the movie Phantom menace, Obi-Wan is the Padawan of Qui-Gon, but is he already a Knight? In the next movie he teaches Anakin (who is a Padawan) is he then a Master or a just a Knight?

In PTM, Obi-Wan was still considered a Padawan, as towards the end during his one-on-one conversation with Yoda after the whole Battle of Naboo, Yoda says that the Council has conferred upon Obi-Wan the rank of Knight, with his battle with and defeat of Maul constituting as his Trials.

In AotC, he's still a Knight, but is referred to as "master" as more a term of respect from others rather than him being a Jedi Master. In RotS, he's a Jedi Master as Anakin is considered to have completed his training and become a Knight, which (in the EU at least) was the most common way a Jedi got promoted from Knight to Master (taking an Initiate as your Padawan and successfully training them to the rank of Knight).