And a PC with Quick Draw would be able to pull out and slap in a power pack as an incidental, since it's covered under the 'drawing an item' part of the talent's description.

The equipment listing cites the maneuver as the cost to both drat the extra reload and use it to remove the "out of ammo" condition from the PC's weapon. It's not two maneuvers for both, unless you're an overly literal prick of a bean-counting GM, of the sort that would make the PCs track their copper pieces and exact encumbrance in a D&D game (something most rationale DM's dispense with since it slows down the game and dampers the fun for the players).

But given your posts across these forums... yeah, I'd say your exactly that sort of GM.

This is a discussion DM, we have a different idea as to whether assembling a fictitious object is an Incidental or a full Maneuver thats all. I've read many of your posts and you're a thoughtful and intelligent gamer, take a short time out and back off on the ad homonyms okay.

I can see how both of these ideas make sense. Drawing and assembling a Light Saber would be more akin to drawing a pistol (Quick Draw) and then reloading it (maneuver), not just reloading it. However I can understand why Mr. Morningfire would consider the assembly an incidental. Why not Quick Draw incidental (both peices come out) maneuver, (assemble), two strain additional maneuver (jump up on the box), Action (Defend)? Each camp should probably just allow the item to work the way they want in thier game, and stop trying to force each other to thier point of view.

Slapping a power pack into a blaster is a maneuver. Why is this faster than slapping a power pack into a blaster? It is about the same.

So putting together two pieces of a such a weapon (one that is designed for a quick assembly), especially once already drawn and in-hand, is really right smack dab in the middle of the Incidental realm.

Each camp should probably just allow the item to work the way they want in thier game, and stop trying to force each other to thier point of view.

To offer a counterpoint:

BUT OTHER GMZ WILL RUIN THE GAME FOR EVERYONE!!1! THEY NEED TO NOT BE STUPID!!!!!1

Also, an appeal to human nature:

+1 for XKCD.

Slapping a power pack into a blaster is a maneuver. Why is this faster than slapping a power pack into a blaster? It is about the same.

Besides being a brand-new attachment (and can have its own rules governing its use), the main difference is in the design of the thing. It's designed to take next-to-zero effort to assemble. Let's take a look at other things you can do with incidentals: speaking to another character, dropping an item, releasing someone, shifting position, peeking around a corner, looking behind oneself. You can also switch to stun mode on a gun, and I'm sure there are other things I'm forgetting. Flipping a lightswitch when you enter a room, for example. There are also a number of talents that let you do significant stuff with incidentals.

So putting together two pieces of a such a weapon (one that is designed for a quick assembly), especially once already drawn and in-hand, is really right smack dab in the middle of the Incidental realm.

are you saying slapping a magazine does not have that design goal?

And here I thought the interwebz were only full of Pedantz.

This is a discussion DM, we have a different idea as to whether assembling a fictitious object is an Incidental or a full Maneuver thats all. I've read many of your posts and you're a thoughtful and intelligent gamer, take a short time out and back off on the ad homonyms okay.

And yet you and Daeglan seem hellbent on blathering on that a suggested homebrew attachment is breaking the game. You've stated you don't like for whatever reasons, I've stated that I disagree and provided the reasons why, and yet the two of continue to keep harping on and trying to prove that I'm wrong based upon an overly strict interpretation of the rules. Your's and his posts are bordering on hazing attacks, being antagonistic for the sake of being antagonistic. It's not quite to the point of reporting to the moderators as deliberate attacks, but it's not that far off.

I've moved past what you two have to say on the matter, as it makes as much sense as the internet outrage over a non-white stormtrooper in the teaser trailer for Force Awakens. You're certainly welcome to your opinions, and I'm just as welcome to treat them for exactly what they are.

Much like Desslok, I'm done with this conversation. Nothing constructive is being achieved at this point. Folks can take the suggested homebrew attachment based upon a TV series that was posted in a thread discussing suggestions on how to house rule the game to account for material from that same TV series, in or they can leave it as suits their personal tastes and games.

I think think of it like this: When in doubt if it involves one hand or no hands and can be accomplished without looking, or only a quick glance, unless otherwise specified it's probably an Incidental, it it takes two hands and more than a quick glance it's probably a Maneuver.

This is a discussion DM, we have a different idea as to whether assembling a fictitious object is an Incidental or a full Maneuver thats all. I've read many of your posts and you're a thoughtful and intelligent gamer, take a short time out and back off on the ad homonyms okay.

And yet you and Daeglan seem hellbent on blathering on that a suggested homebrew attachment is breaking the game. You've stated you don't like for whatever reasons, I've stated that I disagree and provided the reasons why, and yet the two of continue to keep harping on and trying to prove that I'm wrong based upon an overly strict interpretation of the rules. Your's and his posts are bordering on hazing attacks, being antagonistic for the sake of being antagonistic. It's not quite to the point of reporting to the moderators as deliberate attacks, but it's not that far off.

I've moved past what you two have to say on the matter, as it makes as much sense as the internet outrage over a non-white stormtrooper in the teaser trailer for Force Awakens. You're certainly welcome to your opinions, and I'm just as welcome to treat them for exactly what they are.

Much like Desslok, I'm done with this conversation. Nothing constructive is being achieved at this point. Folks can take the suggested homebrew attachment based upon a TV series that was posted in a thread discussing suggestions on how to house rule the game to account for material from that same TV series, in or they can leave it as suits their personal tastes and games.

Again with the denigrating remarks. If you don't want to see opposing views then don't post your ideas.

This is a discussion DM, we have a different idea as to whether assembling a fictitious object is an Incidental or a full Maneuver thats all. I've read many of your posts and you're a thoughtful and intelligent gamer, take a short time out and back off on the ad homonyms okay.

And yet you and Daeglan seem hellbent on blathering on that a suggested homebrew attachment is breaking the game. You've stated you don't like for whatever reasons, I've stated that I disagree and provided the reasons why, and yet the two of continue to keep harping on and trying to prove that I'm wrong based upon an overly strict interpretation of the rules. Your's and his posts are bordering on hazing attacks, being antagonistic for the sake of being antagonistic. It's not quite to the point of reporting to the moderators as deliberate attacks, but it's not that far off.

I've moved past what you two have to say on the matter, as it makes as much sense as the internet outrage over a non-white stormtrooper in the teaser trailer for Force Awakens. You're certainly welcome to your opinions, and I'm just as welcome to treat them for exactly what they are.

Much like Desslok, I'm done with this conversation. Nothing constructive is being achieved at this point. Folks can take the suggested homebrew attachment based upon a TV series that was posted in a thread discussing suggestions on how to house rule the game to account for material from that same TV series, in or they can leave it as suits their personal tastes and games.

Perhaps not being so defensive would be a good start. I think it should take longer to assemble something than it takes to just pull it off the belt fully assembled. Why this thought angers you so I don't know. Stop treating it like it is a personal attack.

It's about having to pay attention to what you are doing while in a high stress environment and game mechanics.

Which is why you can blind fold a soldier and they can dissassemble and reassemble their weapon. It is their livelyhood. You don't think the lightsaber is a Jedi's?

It's about having to pay attention to what you are doing while in a high stress environment and game mechanics.

Which is why you can blind fold a soldier and they can dissassemble and reassemble their weapon. It is their livelyhood. You don't think the lightsaber is a Jedi's?

Thank you AgentJ, this is a good example because it's very much what Quickdraw is all about; in mechanical terms it's learning a Maneuver (or in your example a set of them) to the point of it being an Incidental. A PC learning how to get their pistol out and ready to shoot to the point of it being automatic is another example in the game. So is, in my opinion, assembling a Lightsabre that has been modified as we see Kanan's is. You can learn/practice assembling it until it's counted as an Incidental which is represented in EotE mechanically as the Quickdraw Talent but it's not inherently that way.

It's important to understand that I'm not arguing that assembling a Lightsabre can't be Quickdrawn and that assembly Maneuver counted as an Incidental, I'm arguing that you can't both Draw and Assemble as a single Quickdraw Maneuver, this is the RAW as only one Quickdrawn Maneuver is allowed per turn.

The counter argument, as far as I can tell, is that the Assembly should not be considered a Maneuver at all but as only an Incidental. Essentially that anyone with this Mod should be able to assemble the two pieces of this potentially dangerous item while in a combat environment without having to spend the time to practice this action to the level of skill as in your example above. That this ability should be included in the Mod itself.

The problem is that the examples of Maneuvers, Incidentals and Mods we see in the CRB don't follow this pattern. Taking a pistol from your holster is a Maneuver, reloading a weapon is a Maneuver, opening a door is a Maneuver, all of these actions are on par with assembling two pieces of a weapon in the proper configuration. The Filed Front Sight Mod is also a separate Mod with a single ability, and it takes up a full Hardpoint as well. So it follows this assembly should be counted as a Maneuver and not as an Incidental and that Mods generally only provide a single ability.

Now let's also be clear about why I'm arguing about this at all. I'm enjoying it. It's a thought experiment to see how well my reasons work and how it holds up to counter argument. I'm not invested in the outcome and neither should anyone else. If someone comes up with a novel argument that I can't counter I'm happy to concede.

Edit: There is a possible solution to this that would be RAW. You could spend a Hardpoint to gain the disassembly and the resulting increased Concealment then spend an additional HP to gain a re-skinned "Filed Front Sight" Mod to gain an innate Incidental for the assembly. This can be explained as the weapon was not only designed to be taken apart and re-assembled to conceal it's function but has special super magnets or whatever, that speed assemble and remove any chance of miss-assembly. You are spending a HP for each attribute just as you would for any other weapon. You can also use Jury Rigging if you don't want to loose that extra HP (which is probably what Kanan did for himself).

The point is that if there is a way to do it without hand waving it away you should do it that way, unless you are willing to hand wave similar actions for every Player/PC for all similar Maneuvers that could be argued with the same logic. If you do this though you'll end up basically throwing out nearly all of the rules on activities a PC can preform during a turn.

FuriousGreg, I think that maybe you're missing the point of the attachment:

The one mechanical benefit is that it is "easier to hide."

The one mechanical drawback is that it takes up a hardpoint.

How it becomes easy to hide is rather superfluous, but Dono has chosen to craft the attachment in such a way that it "breaks apart into two pieces." These pieces are so easy to fit back together that you can do it in a a second-and-a-half with your eyes closed.

It is mechanically little different from the Shadowsheath or Shortened Barrel attachments (the only real difference is that it doesn't have any mod options, which actually makes it inferior to those two attachments, all things being equal). The mechanical effect is that you can hide your weapon easily. The flavor is that you've made your lightsaber into something that can be quickly disassembled, and even more quickly reassembled when the time comes.

FuriousGreg, I think that maybe you're missing the point of the attachment:

The one mechanical benefit is that it is "easier to hide."

The one mechanical drawback is that it takes up a hardpoint.

How it becomes easy to hide is rather superfluous, but Dono has chosen to craft the attachment in such a way that it "breaks apart into two pieces." These pieces are so easy to fit back together that you can do it in a a second-and-a-half with your eyes closed.

It is mechanically little different from the Shadowsheath or Shortened Barrel attachments (the only real difference is that it doesn't have any mod options, which actually makes it inferior to those two attachments, all things being equal). The mechanical effect is that you can hide your weapon easily. The flavor is that you've made your lightsaber into something that can be quickly disassembled, and even more quickly reassembled when the time comes.

Well thats not how he/she's chosen to present it.

By saying that the assembly is an Incidental and not a Maneuver, which I've tried to point out is counter to the examples of similar actions in the CRB, the Mod is giving two benefits not one: Added Concealment and an innate Quickdraw like ability.

I still have not seen a cogent argument as to why the Assembly should, mechanically, be an Innate action rather than a Maneuver when all of the similar examples provided in the RAW point to it being a Maneuver. This is the crux of the issue, you can't just say that this cherished Mod falls outside the precedent set by all the other Mods and Maneuvers, just because. (you can but as I mentioned above you now will have to justify to all of your Players as to why their cherished Mod doesn't work the same way).

Personally I would just take Shadowsheath and describe it as breaking the weapon down into two non-descript pieces and be done with it. Its just fluff.

FuriousGreg, I think that maybe you're missing the point of the attachment:

The one mechanical benefit is that it is "easier to hide."

The one mechanical drawback is that it takes up a hardpoint.

How it becomes easy to hide is rather superfluous, but Dono has chosen to craft the attachment in such a way that it "breaks apart into two pieces." These pieces are so easy to fit back together that you can do it in a a second-and-a-half with your eyes closed.

It is mechanically little different from the Shadowsheath or Shortened Barrel attachments (the only real difference is that it doesn't have any mod options, which actually makes it inferior to those two attachments, all things being equal). The mechanical effect is that you can hide your weapon easily. The flavor is that you've made your lightsaber into something that can be quickly disassembled, and even more quickly reassembled when the time comes.

Nice to see that at least one active participant in this thread understands how the attachment is supposed to work. Though AgentJ is also on the right track in how the hilt is designed to work, both in RPG terms and what we see on screen.

In short, it's a noted exception to the usual rules, though even the "usual rules" being referred to (extra reload and stimpack) are themselves a "draw and use in the same maneuver, something the critics are either unable to grasp or willingly opting to overlook.

For those who keep bringing up the example that reloading a blaster is a maneuver not an incidental, I have a question. Is it one maneuver to get the reload out of your pocket and another to put it in the blaster, or is grabbing the reload and slapping it into the blaster a single maneuver?

Personally I would just take Shadowsheath and describe it as breaking the weapon down into two non-descript pieces and be done with it. Its just fluff.

Which according to Daeglan's answer to my question about a PC storing a tool kit in multiple jumpsuit pockets, would still require additional maneuvers even with the Quick Draw talent since, under his unflinchingly literal interpretation of the rules, it's no longer considered a "single item" but is now multiple items.

And obviously the idea of "quick assembly" is a completely foreign concept to Daeglan. Apparently Star Wars tech is so back-asswards that items that can be put together by rote in seconds never occurred to them

FuriousGreg, I think that maybe you're missing the point of the attachment:

The one mechanical benefit is that it is "easier to hide."

The one mechanical drawback is that it takes up a hardpoint.

How it becomes easy to hide is rather superfluous, but Dono has chosen to craft the attachment in such a way that it "breaks apart into two pieces." These pieces are so easy to fit back together that you can do it in a a second-and-a-half with your eyes closed.

It is mechanically little different from the Shadowsheath or Shortened Barrel attachments (the only real difference is that it doesn't have any mod options, which actually makes it inferior to those two attachments, all things being equal). The mechanical effect is that you can hide your weapon easily. The flavor is that you've made your lightsaber into something that can be quickly disassembled, and even more quickly reassembled when the time comes.

Pulling items off your belt and then assembling them should take longer than just pulling them off your belt. Why this is such a difficult concept I don't know. And the using quick draw to reload is not really relevant because it involves ejecting and inserting a fresh power pack into something already in our hand. The turn being about a minute ignores that your character is only getting part of that minute. not the whole thing.

For those who keep bringing up the example that reloading a blaster is a maneuver not an incidental, I have a question. Is it one maneuver to get the reload out of your pocket and another to put it in the blaster, or is grabbing the reload and slapping it into the blaster a single maneuver?

I've always read that as being a single maneuver to draw and use the extra reload, same with using a stimpack. Having it require two separate maneuvers (1 to draw, 1 to use) rather than the one maneuver listed in the item description is nonsense.

Personally I would just take Shadowsheath and describe it as breaking the weapon down into two non-descript pieces and be done with it. Its just fluff.

Which according to Daeglan's answer to my question about a PC storing a tool kit in multiple jumpsuit pockets, would still require additional maneuvers even with the Quick Draw talent since, under his unflinchingly literal interpretation of the rules, it's no longer considered a "single item" but is now multiple items.

pulling out the tool kit that is spread across your person will take longer than pulling out a pack of tools all bundled together. Pulling out a roll of tools is fast. pulling out several tools spread across your person is not fast.

For those who keep bringing up the example that reloading a blaster is a maneuver not an incidental, I have a question. Is it one maneuver to get the reload out of your pocket and another to put it in the blaster, or is grabbing the reload and slapping it into the blaster a single maneuver?

I've always read that as being a single maneuver to draw and use the extra reload, same with using a stimpack. Having it require two separate maneuvers (1 to draw, 1 to use) rather than the one maneuver listed in the item description is nonsense.

yes but you are already holding the blaster in your hand. which is not the same as drawing a blaster and the blaster reload and putting the reload is. That is going to take longer than pulling your blaster and pulling a reload and putting them together.

Personally I would just take Shadowsheath and describe it as breaking the weapon down into two non-descript pieces and be done with it. Its just fluff.

I wish shadowsheath was usable for lightsabers by RAW. It would fit perfectly with a character concept I have been using for years.