I sympathize with you DeepEyes.

However... And this is just for myself and accounts of people I have spoken with personally... As I see the myriad of emotions that the stronger (as opposed to casual) defenders of the EU-Now-Legends seem to be experiencing (ranging from bummed through disappointment all the way to to rage) I am relieved that I never took it all that seriously as "Star Wars" canon (such as any fictional canon can be taken seriously).

When it came to it, Lucasfilm didn't defend the EU-Now-Legends and at least accepted letting it all be brushed aside.

Now, that said, I absolutely will always encourage people to love the stories they love and tell the stories they want to tell in RPGs. However, in a forum such as this, we all sort of have to agree upon a shared definition of the subject matter so we can effectively communicate our ideas on the topic.

And (for want of a less crass way to phrase it) the EU-Now-Legends "lost". It's impact is now "in question", at best, and thus... fairly or unfairly... it has become somewhat marginalized in many cases.

In response, perhaps I and those with similar views (I have been referring to the whole of the EU as "high-end fan fiction" for many years) could be more gracious about the whole affair. Things we dismissed previously could very well still become canon, some day.

Although a very general rule for using unfamiliar Force Powers without any prior training might have some merit. Does F&D have such a thing**?

* But my curiosity may spark an experimental playtest.

** Waiting to be embarrassed by someone citing a rule for that in EotE that I missed

No official rule, there's a thread talking about how it might be handled:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/125432-overextending-force-use/

It is an rpg inspired by movies and other media, not a direct simulation. You will not get the Jedi as seen on the screen out of thecgate without some investment. The ability that some people ascribe to Jedi makes them far above other characters. So unless you plan to not be equitable then you must build your Jedi as other characters. I'm not sure how people think they can give Jedi all this ability without unbalancing things.

I certainly cannot possibly be the first person to have noticed this... But outside the RPGs it seems that all Jedi (and, possibly, all Force Users) have access to all of what FFG has defined as Force Powers simply by being Force Sensitive.

The big difference is training, practice, talent and such.

In RPG terms it would be akin to paying for only the upgrades and not the initial power... Which is not something I am advocating, by any means*.

Although a very general rule for using unfamiliar Force Powers without any prior training might have some merit. Does F&D have such a thing**?

* But my curiosity may spark an experimental playtest.

** Waiting to be embarrassed by someone citing a rule for that in EotE that I missed

Are you referring to things like certain force users calling upon abilities they wouldn't otherwise know without some training? **Star Wars Rebels Spoiler in case you haven't seen it, then ignore**

For Instance, like Ezra in Rebels basically using Enhance or Move to hurl someone on accident?

I think a lot of that can be covered by GM fiat. There was a discussion on that actually in the Game Mechanics forum. I would simple let it be done only in a rare and dramatic scene that makes sense, using a Discipline Check, and requiring a Destiny Point.

But no, I don't think there are any real hard and fast rules on how to properly emulate that in F&D or any of the other books.

That and similar, yes.

And "GM fiat" seems an excellent game solution.

I sympathize with you DeepEyes.

However... And this is just for myself and accounts of people I have spoken with personally... As I see the myriad of emotions that the stronger (as opposed to casual) defenders of the EU-Now-Legends seem to be experiencing (ranging from bummed through disappointment all the way to to rage) I am relieved that I never took it all that seriously as "Star Wars" canon (such as any fictional canon can be taken seriously).

When it came to it, Lucasfilm didn't defend the EU-Now-Legends and at least accepted letting it all be brushed aside.

Now, that said, I absolutely will always encourage people to love the stories they love and tell the stories they want to tell in RPGs. However, in a forum such as this, we all sort of have to agree upon a shared definition of the subject matter so we can effectively communicate our ideas on the topic.

And (for want of a less crass way to phrase it) the EU-Now-Legends "lost". It's impact is now "in question", at best, and thus... fairly or unfairly... it has become somewhat marginalized in many cases.

In response, perhaps I and those with similar views (I have been referring to the whole of the EU as "high-end fan fiction" for many years) could be more gracious about the whole affair. Things we dismissed previously could very well still become canon, some day.

Don't get me wrong. I agree with a lot of this and with Maelora on the fact that A LOT of the EU was absurd.

Trust me, I think the best decision Disney made was axing the whole thing and starting fresh. Honestly? I was hoping Clone Wars would have been thrown out as well.

I'm only frustrated when it comes to having discussion and debates on mechanical stuff, that should have a basis in lore, be constantly flip flopped from agreeing with Lore, to totally dismissing it on the whim and only when it serves peoples purposes.

No one reasonably intelligent is asking for overpowered Jedi. But anyone who has a little bit of knowledge of the game mechanics thus far can see that there is something amiss with F&D. And I very well could be wrong. But when I play with my group, and build a bunch of characters on my free time, I find myself frustrated more often than not when it comes to making Force Users. It's an anxiety I don't have with almost any other concept.

It is an rpg inspired by movies and other media, not a direct simulation. You will not get the Jedi as seen on the screen out of thecgate without some investment. The ability that some people ascribe to Jedi makes them far above other characters. So unless you plan to not be equitable then you must build your Jedi as other characters. I'm not sure how people think they can give Jedi all this ability without unbalancing things.

What abilities? People keep cursing these apparent strawmen Jedi like they're the bogymen waiting to ruin everything.

Are we talking about stuff like thought bombs, devouring the life essence of entire planets, removal of force sensitivity, destroying planets, dropping star destroyers from the sky, and other ridiculous stuff--which I agree is ridiculous--we've seen in games and other media?

Or are we talking about the basic stuff we see Jedi do in the films and now in Star Wars Rebels? Reflecting blaster shots, using basic force powers, having saber duels, and all that?

I've stated out Kanan, and I've stated a bunch of other force users. It takes A LOT to get them to feel like Jedi. And you know wha? That's totally fine. But the problem becomes when I can make characters similiar to say, Sabine, Zeb, and Hera, from Rebels, without having to spend a heck of a lot of XP, there is a problem somewhere. I agree, Force Users should be a lot, and require an investment. But requiring almost an additional 400 xp (not counting Knight Level) after creation to get there? I don't know, it just seems like a lot considering what little you get in the way of talents and force powers. Reflect and Parry arguably aren't anymore good than Side Step, Dodge, or other talents that give defensive bonuses. It essentially adds to soak, yes, but you need a lot of them just to be able to keep standing in the fast paced, heavy hitting combat this system relies on.

Jedi are essentially Melee characters, and if you're running them in a Dark Times setting, the second someone uses their saber, the combatants are going to basically be "focus fire on the Jedi". You're going to get hit a lot. Even DonovanMF suggested slightly altered rules for parry and reflect to help, and a better version of Improved Reflect/Parry. Also, Reflect and Parry don't block breach. So with lightsaber duels, especially with any powerful lightsaber, you're gonna have a bad time if you get hit.

Again, I'm fine with Jedi costing a lot of xp. In fact, a friend of mine I'm running the game for was saying how in 2E DnD, Wizards were almost similar. How they sucked at start but once they got to a certain amount of XP/Level, they were really good.

Problem is that what you're getting talent wise and sometimes force power wise don't reflect all that XP investment.

I'm still running one shots with my group to test it out. Again, perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm still not totally convinced.

And as to players wanting to make characters emulating/simulating the movies?

"Your player character takes part in an adventure, analogous to episodes ofa television show, or individual movies wherein you play the part of the recurring cast."

And

"These Player Characters are cut from the same cloth as other memorable characters found in the Star Wars Universe--tough, savy, resourceful, and powerful people who who are destined to make an impact on the galaxy."

Found in the "I'm a Player! What do I do?" intro section of EoTE, and Page 8 "The Player Characters (The PCs)" in the same book. I believe the same stuff is found in AoR as well.

Well you obviously have a much higher expectation of what it means to be a Jedi then. I haven't experienced the same issues. The simple fact that you seem intent on mirroring Jedi from media in tells me that. Aways version of Kanan was perfectly serviceable and representative of the character. But you want to brush it aside like you are some higher authority on the subject. Jedi (and other Force characters) gain the benefit of fairly utilitarian powers and (sometimes) a melee weapon which far outstrips any other melee weapon on top of talents. Their balance comes from the fact that they must spread out their xp a little more.

Please... I don't think myself a higher authority on anything. Keep the baseless accusations to a minimum. I'm just someone who enjoys star wars, role playing games, and good story telling.

Fact of the matter is, with what this iteration of Kanan can do, and has, he wouldn't last long in the situations he's been in so far on the show. And they're not some outrageous plot elements. Fighting packs of minions, and the occasional rival and nemesis should be par for the course. He would be floored during the inquisitor fight if you used the basic rules to make an inquisitor.

I'm of a mind that maybe I should run this Kanan in a session emulating the things he does, and see the results. Maybe I'll post them. Perhaps I'll do it this week. If anyone has other changes to Kanan they would like to see, post them here. Maybe when I have time, I'll try them out.

Edit: let me not speak with certainty on this. I could very well be wrong. Hence why I think a test would be appropriate. I'd very much like to see.

But you want to brush it aside like you are some higher authority on the subject.

Not as much as you and others insist on it like you are some higher authority on the subject. I've been told I have a "warped view of the Jedi" among other such things...if that's not a pretence of authority I'm not sure what is.

So maybe we shouldn't go there, and instead simply acknowledge that we're at an impasse.

Anyway, the OP was about the terminology, and since Kanan wasn't a Knight, I think it's clear the Knight level term is misleading, especially to people new to the game. As I noted in an earlier post, you can stat up Ahsoka pretty well at Knight level, but that's about it.

But you want to brush it aside like you are some higher authority on the subject.

Not as much as you and others insist on it like you are some higher authority on the subject. I've been told I have a "warped view of the Jedi" among other such things...if that's not a pretence of authority I'm not sure what is.

So maybe we shouldn't go there, and instead simply acknowledge that we're at an impasse.

Anyway, the OP was about the terminology, and since Kanan wasn't a Knight, I think it's clear the Knight level term is misleading, especially to people new to the game. As I noted in an earlier post, you can stat up Ahsoka pretty well at Knight level, but that's about it.

You do have a warped view of Jedi. You want a starting level Jedi to be comparable to the world shaking characters in the movies out the gate. Even though Luke in Episode 4 can barely do anything with the force. You keep going on about not being able to do the movie stuff even though everyone has told you multiple times those characters have a bunch of XP and if you want to do that just give the PCs a bunch XP. Problem solved.

Fact of the matter is, with what this iteration of Kanan can do, and has, he wouldn't last long in the situations he's been in so far on the show. And they're not some outrageous plot elements. Fighting packs of minions, and the occasional rival and nemesis should be par for the course. He would be floored during the inquisitor fight if you used the basic rules to make an inquisitor.

Yeah, the thing is, IMO it was obvious that the Inquisitor was toying with him. He was totally playing a game of cat-and-mouse, and then got a little too cocky and let Kanan get the better of him long enough to escape. Or maybe that was his goal, just planting seeds of doubt in Ezra's mind so as to turn him to the dark side in the long run.

Either way, it seemed apparent to me that Kanan was no real match for the Inquisitor, and the fight was merely a pretense on the latter's part. I have no doubt that, had the Inquisitor been trying, he could have mopped the floor with Kanan.

I'm of a mind that maybe I should run this Kanan in a session emulating the things he does, and see the results. Maybe I'll post them. Perhaps I'll do it this week. If anyone has other changes to Kanan they would like to see, post them here. Maybe when I have time, I'll try them out.

Edit: let me not speak with certainty on this. I could very well be wrong. Hence why I think a test would be appropriate. I'd very much like to see.

I would be more than intrigued to find out what you discover! I have no changes in mind. I already did enough work on Kanan

Also, how would you build the Inquisitor?

Fact of the matter is, with what this iteration of Kanan can do, and has, he wouldn't last long in the situations he's been in so far on the show. And they're not some outrageous plot elements. Fighting packs of minions, and the occasional rival and nemesis should be par for the course. He would be floored during the inquisitor fight if you used the basic rules to make an inquisitor.

Yeah, the thing is, IMO it was obvious that the Inquisitor was toying with him. He was totally playing a game of cat-and-mouse, and then got a little too cocky and let Kanan get the better of him long enough to escape. Or maybe that was his goal, just planting seeds of doubt in Ezra's mind so as to turn him to the dark side in the long run.

Either way, it seemed apparent to me that Kanan was no real match for the Inquisitor, and the fight was merely a pretense on the latter's part. I have no doubt that, had the Inquisitor been trying, he could have mopped the floor with Kanan.

I'm of a mind that maybe I should run this Kanan in a session emulating the things he does, and see the results. Maybe I'll post them. Perhaps I'll do it this week. If anyone has other changes to Kanan they would like to see, post them here. Maybe when I have time, I'll try them out.

Edit: let me not speak with certainty on this. I could very well be wrong. Hence why I think a test would be appropriate. I'd very much like to see.

I would be more than intrigued to find out what you discover! I have no changes in mind. I already did enough work on Kanan

Also, how would you build the Inquisitor?

I also think that the inquisitor underestimated Ezra. That bomb completely caught him off guard.

Anyway, the OP was about the terminology, and since Kanan wasn't a Knight, I think it's clear the Knight level term is misleading, especially to people new to the game. As I noted in an earlier post, you can stat up Ahsoka pretty well at Knight level, but that's about it.

Still, I disagree that it's misleading. It's intriguing, sure, but then when you take the time to read the first several words in the Knight-Level Play section ("In Fᴏʀᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ Dᴇsᴛɪɴʏ , advanced characters and adventures are called Knight level."), it becomes instantly evident what its purpose is: a Star Wars-flavored term for advanced characters.

Oh, no doubt the Inquisitor was toying with Kanan. In fact, I would say the Inquisitor was probably using Terrify and/or Fearsome during the duel to try and cause conflict in Kanan and Ezra. Though, I don't agree the Inquisitor got an automatic conflict for knowing Terrify, but you already know my feelings on that!

I think it makes sense that Kanan and co ran. The Inquisitor was a tough foe, and I think the whole incursion was taxing for all of them.

I know Whafog mentioned that Kanan might need to know Bind. I think he's referencing that particular scene in the hallway. I think Kanan instead used dark side pips to fuel his Move Power to hold the Inquisitor at bay. Let me explain:

Here's the thing, and tell me if you agree or not, because I think it makes sense in this instance; Ghostofman mentioned earlier how people are so afraid of using Dark Side Pips, and DonovanMF was saying how in the latest Order 66 podcast (which I haven't listened to yet, but I will later), Sam Stuart said that mechanically it's there so people can use the Dark Side to power their abilities, and to not always using it is somewhat curtailing their power. I don't know if I fully agree with this sentiment, mainly because if you're a FR 1 it's going to be a source of frustration more often than not. You're not always going to want to suffer conflict to make your powers go off, but it does introduce an interesting source of storytelling tension. Particularly, I feel, when you're at FR 2-4.

At those rating levels, you're going to generate enough pips to get your powers going off more readily, and with enough to fuel your upgrades. But you're still not always guaranteed. And at those levels, I feel like people are going to be more loose with accepting conflict to ensure their powers go off. It adds a nice little story tension to what is going on.

My feeling, is in that fight with the Inquisitor in the hallway, Kanan sees Ezra about to possibly die, he then rolls Move--maybe even out of turn, which is apparently Kosher per RAW in the Force Powers and Narrative side bar, in being a bit more flexible with power interpretation--and rolls Dark Side Pips. Knowing he can't let Ezra die, he spends the destiny point and accepts the conflict just to make sure he stops the Inquisitor. I loved that scene in particular. Freddi Prince Jr.'s voice acting is pretty good, and his desperate yell "No!" was heart wrenching. It so seemed to me that he called on the dark side, even if a little, to ensure he saved someone.

As for how I would stat the Inquisitor, I haven't thought of that yet. I'll look into it tomorrow possibly, and put something up.

As for the potential play test. I'm musing over using roll 20, which is what I use with my group to play online. It has a dice roller that is compatible with FFG's Star Wars, and that's what I've been using while playing with friends. I'm considering seeing if I could get some volunteers from this forum to help me run similar scenarios/scenes with the Kanan I built and see what comes of it. It has a chat log system, so I could post it here. I think it would be valuable. Only thing is getting time during the week to do it.

Can we add a Force Level 8 option give them 2,000 xp and call it Unleashed level?

It would satisfy the players looking to pull Star Destroyers out of the sky.

This talk of giving players anything just hurts the evil core of my cold game master heart.

Can we add a Force Level 8 option give them 2,000 xp and call it Unleashed level?

It would satisfy the players looking to pull Star Destroyers out of the sky.

This talk of giving players anything just hurts the evil core of my cold game master heart.

Only if I can get a power to devour the life of an entire star system. I want to be Star Wars' Galactus.

Cause pulling Star Destroyers from the sky ala Unleashed is so 2008.

Are they set on the word "Knight" because they want to distance themselves from the word "Advanced"? Are they worried about people yelling:

"I won Star Wars RPG...and it was ADVANCED!"

I think dump the word "Knight Level" and replaced with the term "Advanced Play" and this conversation ends.

Are they set on the word "Knight" because they want to distance themselves from the word "Advanced"? Are they worried about people yelling:

"I won Star Wars RPG...and it was ADVANCED!"

I think dump the word "Knight Level" and replaced with the term "Advanced Play" and this conversation ends.

Maybe so. But I still think there are more systemic issues.

Are they set on the word "Knight" because they want to distance themselves from the word "Advanced"? Are they worried about people yelling:

"I won Star Wars RPG...and it was ADVANCED!"

I think dump the word "Knight Level" and replaced with the term "Advanced Play" and this conversation ends.

Knight was probably more of just chosen because it's a word that brings certain iconic images to mind when related to Star Wars. And while it does bring FaD players the ability to be a low-end Knight as one would imagine one being in a time when there's no option for formal training over a couple decades; it does just inherently tie itself to the Prequel Trilogy's meaning as well as the only showing of it in the Original Trilogy of Luke - who is meant to be a bit above and beyond as well.

So I'm sure they've been aware of the problem for a while, and it's more of just a matter of finding something as iconic as Knight, that doesn't undersell the considerable boost the option gives. For instance with the choice of Padawan in particular being something that sounds a little on the wimpy side even though it's also fairly accurate.

Are they set on the word "Knight" because they want to distance themselves from the word "Advanced"? Are they worried about people yelling:

"I won Star Wars RPG...and it was ADVANCED!"

As in, are they worried about this guy?

Probably not.

I think dump the word "Knight Level" and replaced with the term "Advanced Play" and this conversation ends.

Yeah, this conversation would end, but then you'd have a lot of people (me included) who would be disappointed and probably start a new conversation about how they liked "Knight Level Play" way more. "Advanced Play" is too darn sterile, "Padawan-Level Play" is too anticlimactic, and "Adept-Level Play" is like, "...what?"

However, I do grow weary of this conversation, because all it really amounts to is whether people like the Knight-Level Play rules as they are. I like them, and I wouldn't change them. And if I wanted my games to have more or less power, I would use the Knight-Level Play rules as a guideline. They are balanced, flavorful, and give you just enough power to start fleshing out a solid character concept but leave you wanting more, so that the journey of character development is still exciting.

Hooly won the thread... AND IT WAS ADVANCED!

For the record, I was trying to be funny regarding the "Advanced" comment. Your milage may vary

Awayputurwpn, after what you showed the other day in one of your posts, I agree whole-heartedly that Knight Level play is perfect for what I am thinking for my campaign (I just wasn't looking hard enough) and using that method can provide enough XP to make things not too over powered and yet fun for people who have been playing the game (if not role playing) for some time. I'm also one of those who would like FFG to suggest "other" levels of play (but I'm probably in the minority). I'm also one of the ones who would love to see the stats of Major Villains and Heroes of the Star Wars Saga so you can compare and see what a player might be looking for. And to those who say, "You can't do that because that means they could be killed off by players." You know what? Its an RPG and its your game. The suits at Lucasfilm/Disney are NOT going to come knocking on your door and say, "I'm sorry, but your game isn't canon. You'll have to stop that." I say give us the iconic character stats - it would be cool. And who cares if its wrong. It would give us a glimpse at what FFG see.

I digress.

As this OP's topic says, "It ain't Knight-Level", and I just think a better word would be more appropriate to prevent:

A) Generating a preconceived or stereo-type thought process for new comers to the game

B) Evoking an expectation to those of us who were born and bred Star-Warsian, only to feel a little sold short.

I don't say don't stat them. They just make a poor measuring stick for PCs as they do not need to follow the same creation rules.

Sure, but it would be nice to see anyway to give a less vague idea than what we have now

i agree with not statting them. I would rather they not do it unless it is for an adventure it makes sense for. Like Jewel of Yavin.

All Statting them out will do is lead to more arguments about how they are statted wrong.