I ran into an interesting issue in our last session. My stalwart Jedi Sage / Niman Disciple was being attacked by several people shooting on stun. She has only the base reflect, which reduces three damage. In this case, three strain. It costs three strain to activate the ability.

No point in reflecting. Suck it up buttercup.

I ran into an interesting issue in our last session. My stalwart Jedi Sage / Niman Disciple was being attacked by several people shooting on stun. She has only the base reflect, which reduces three damage. In this case, three strain. It costs three strain to activate the ability.

No point in reflecting. Suck it up buttercup.

There is a point in reflecting if you would reduce the "stun damage" to zero. If the attack deals no damage, then you can't be dealt a Critical Injury as a result of the attack. There are also some other effects, IIRC, that trigger only if you deal damage exceeding a target's soak (although the only one I can find right now is Crippling Blow, and that specifies the target's Wound Threshold).

So while with Reflect 1 (or Parry 1 with a stun baton) you'd have the curious effect of no net change in actual strain suffered, there can be a difference between "voluntary strain suffered" and "stun damage."

Based on Clone Wars (canon), stun bolt can be stopped but not reflected (Ashoka's scape).

Yeah this is actually one problem I have with the way reflect works (requiring strain). Why don't we see all attacks against lightsaber wielders in the movies set for stun if in range?

Might be a good call to say stun can't crit but I brought that up in the EotE beta and the thinking is it can.

Because "pfew pfew" sound and red bolts are cooler than "frishiu" and blue circles.... XDD

As I said in another post, in SW (and movies in general), forget about coherence... hello coolness!

Because "pfew pfew" sound and red bolts are cooler than "frishiu" and blue circles.... XDD

As I said in another post, in SW (and movies in general), forget about coherence... hello coolness!

I totally agree with you. My post was a roundabout suggestion to make the game reflect the movies. Obviously attackers in the movies want to use red bolts becasue their lives are on the line and it's the best survival choice or best chance to take down the target. PC choices and motivations should mimic this, not be in spite of their actually being a better tactical choice. In the end I can't force my PCs to not set for stun but the rules could make it academic that the choice reflects the source.

Yep. Always remember that tha main goal of tabletop roleplaying isn't achieve "level 20" or earn 3.000 XP. Is (or should be) create an AWESOME story where everyone counts and, of course, have a great time.

I player of mine decided to, not evade an attack with a spear, getting a lethal critical hit on him, just because it fitted REALLY well on that scene. Was awesome

Enjoy your game mate

Yeah this is actually one problem I have with the way reflect works (requiring strain). Why don't we see all attacks against lightsaber wielders in the movies set for stun if in range?

1. Intent. Lethal damage has more "stopping power" (better impact) and better range than stun blasts. And sometimes they just want to see you dead.

2. Ignorance...your average mook might not think to shoot to incapacitate, or know that it's the "better option" in the given scenario.

3. Inherent limitations of stun mode (range, and some crits don't make any sense, like Maimed), or weapon lacking stun mode.

4. Other game mechanics translated into sensible, realistic scenarios. It's easier to shake off a stun blast (just roll some Advantage, or use one of many strain-recovering talents) than it is to ignore a blaster burn (use your limited stim packs for the pain, and once per encounter you can receive first aid).

5. As the lore in the book goes, Jedi are rumored to be able to ignore strain. So maybe while ignorance can be a factor, knowledge can also be a factor, where the blaster operator knows a well-prepared Jedi could possibly just absorb or negate stun energy.

Might be a good call to say stun can't crit but I brought that up in the EotE beta and the thinking is it can.

Indeed...it's a sidebar that made it into the Core Rulebook.

EDIT: Nevermind. Josep beat me to it.

It's actually the case that both can be true. You can play a role and have the role represented accurately by the rules too.

For example, what if they made a bowcaster do ridiculously low damage? Would it not be a fair comment to change the rule to reflect their power rather than just say, "Your character is a Wookiee, just use it and have fun."

I mean the game does have very specific rules, right?

Away, I know those limitations of stun. If fact I suggested both in the EotE beta. FWIW, they do not say stun weapons can't do crits.

It's actually the case that both can be true. You can play a role and have the role represented accurately by the rules too.

For example, what if they made a bowcaster do ridiculously low damage? Would it not be a fair comment to change the rule to reflect their power rather than just say, "Your character is a Wookiee, just use it and have fun."

I mean the game does have very specific rules, right?

Away, I know those limitations of stun. If fact I suggested both in the EotE beta. FWIW, they do not say stun weapons can't do crits.

I think the mantra of "this is a narrative game!" is pushed a bit too far sometimes at the expense of common sense mechanics. I mean, yes, as a narrative game you're going to fluff up everything as the dice fall because that's what this system is built upon. However, there is a need for mechanical rules to back up a lot of stuff you're going to encounter in game. As I've been playing with FaD, I've been noticing some of the rules become very iffy when you start really looking at what can and cannot be done. I was thinking of making a thread to sort of hash out some of the stuff I've encountered and unsure about.

I think the mantra of "this is a narrative game!" is pushed a bit too far sometimes at the expense of common sense mechanics. I mean, yes, as a narrative game you're going to fluff up everything as the dice fall because that's what this system is built upon. However, there is a need for mechanical rules to back up a lot of stuff you're going to encounter in game. As I've been playing with FaD, I've been noticing some of the rules become very iffy when you start really looking at what can and cannot be done. I was thinking of making a thread to sort of hash out some of the stuff I've encountered and unsure about.

I agree. I love, love the game for the narrative aspects and there is absolutely room for a discussion on that but, heck, at the same time I assume any hardcore on this beta board "gets" all that part of the game.

We've been playing for a long time so we've had a lot of ups and a few downs with the games. The downs usually have to do with having to make rulings about pretty important things and then having to review those to make sure they are good precedents.

I try not to get too caught up in trivial rules for like backpack encumbrance or x-wing armor but general rules for how often you can use talents and how you resist the Force are pretty essential and nice to have consistent from one GM to the next.

Still I really appreciate how the presentation of this game makes it clear there is room for the players and GM to make the story go where they think it should and where it makes sense. But there are all kinds of gamers at the table and the one who wants to understand how the rules work precisely is no less valid than the thespian.

Your Jedi (unless self taught) was probably instructed by someone who had more than the base rank, and would therefore have found it worthwhile to use Reflect. A good Jedi (or an obediant Sith) should follow their Masters teaching. Therefore it is in character for them to use Reflect, even when it will make no game mechanical difference.

It might also want to be considered that when it comes to the movies distance to be able to stun someone. For most of the General Audiences see it as limited range. A Tazer is a great example to what crosses their mind.

That aside I do not see why using reflect on a stun bolt would be an issue as you are reflecting it from its intended target. Now its rate of reflection (distance it reflects) is basically Zero, but it can be applied.

For the Narrative potion I would see it as slicing threw the Blue Circles.

Lol do you ca her buttercup at game? Lol!!!!