When we played an old campaign using SW d20 rules, our jedi was stronger than the rest of the group; but is 6 months, he only got to use the lightsaber three times, for duels only. Any other time, it was simply too risky.

When you have a lot of xp invested into something you cannot use as freely as a blaster, i want that thing to be powerful when it comes into play.

See this would annoy me just as much. Unless a player specifically plays his character to wield his lightsaber infrequently, I would think the fact that he made a character with one means he wants to swing it whenever he gets the chance. I wouldn't deny someone that chance to do so. Certainly there could be consequeces, but I would in no way discourage it.

I also don't want to relegate the rest of the party to be sidekicks. Just their challenges will be different.

While the jedis are dueling inquisitors, the rest of the party will be busy preventing a swarm of troopers or tanks from entering the hangar, while the pilot will be in the air shooting down enemy fighters.

Which sounds good for a script, but I have yet to meet any group that follows a script. And in my experience trying to force such matters can cause more problems than letting things play out how the group wants. If you try to drive the narrative then it just becomes more you telling a story. Maybe your group is fine with that, but most groups I've dealt with like for themselves the players to drive the story (or at least have the illusion they are; bwhahaha!).

Edit: also i think i read a thread where the entire board was basically against one single user (cant remember the argument) i suppose that would be Erik?

Erik does have the ability to polarize people, most usually against him.

Everybody can of course play it how they wish.

But if you're posting on an open forum, you can expect disagreement.

FFG seemed to make a deliberate effort to balance Force-users with other characters this time around. Many past SW games have suffered from 'Jedi' being far too powerful, making other characters intrinsically inferior options. Many fans of the FFG SW game are happy with this more equitable balance.

You however, seem to want to operate a two-tier game where 'Jedi' have their own combats, can't be affected by non-Jedi beings, where lightsabers have to do more damage than any other weapon and basically make you immune to blaster fire.

Maybe if you're playing F&D alone where all PCs are overpowered SpaceNinjaWizards, that might work. But I certainly wouldn't want to be an AoR or EoE character in that group, marked out as inferior from the start.

Well I guess we know Mael's opinion on the matter.

I'm gonna say what I usually say:

Play it by the rules, and ask for help before you try to change things. The game is actually really well made, and all the stuff you're concerned about has been addressed. You just have to go through the trouble of utilizing the tools you've been given. If after that it still doesn't work, then start tweaking.

An inquisitor built using the guide on page 235 with 5 ranks of parry and reflect, terrify, move, armored robes, and a Lightsaber or two will be a very tough opponent that should be able to survive at least a few rounds even against the entire party.

I read the thread and it appears im going in a completely different direction than other people want.

I WANT Jedi to be better than mundane people. Not in everything of course. But i'd like that if an enemy has a lightsaber, then the best effective counter is another lightsaber, not more blasters or melee fighters.

I want saber duels in the game not be interrupted by other characters, non force users, throwing grenades and being more effective than the jedis.

In my game, being a jedi/force user is a serious thing. You don't get to play one if you haven't read half of wikipedia and you havent proved that you know what you are playing. Im nerdy like that.

Plus, you dont get to use the lightsaber that much, cause imperials are going to orbit bomb the planet you are on. So when you DO use it, you should be powerful enough, at least against other lightsaber wielders.

How can i achieve that? How about allowing easier modding of lightsabers? That would however result in more effective "mundane" performance for lightsaber users. I dont want that. I want lightsabers and jedis slightly more effective than other weapons/characters against mundane threats, but essential against other lightsaber wielders.

My group would be very much against this sort of play, but I understand how you feel and why you're asking. I'd recommend only doing this with the full consent of your group, and even then, it might not be the best idea.

Try making "reflect" cost 0 strain. The bigger hits will go through, but it will give a big defense to the Jedi. You could also make it so other melee weapons, unless they're cortosis, are sundered when they attack the lightsaber wielders or perhaps go from undamaged to minor with each attack.

Parry should still cost strain to keep the lightsaber combat intact. This isn't balanced, but just a thought.

Again, I don't really recommend it, since Force powers are still amazing and help distinguish force-users, but there you go. Use it if you'd like or ignore me entirely.

I have no problem with the Jedi being the primary fighting force of a party. at least in melee. but I think a blaster rifle with extreme range would have it on the distance in extreme range, lol. however, the rest of the party should still have a purpose. they did in the movies. if the Jedi is the uber pilot can insta heal every everyone, is the God of talking, and can out sneak the dark, then mature or not, the rest of the party will nap while the Jedi does everything. they're along for the ride of his XP. that was the problem withearlier games, and the balance that this one has struck.

I have no problem with the Jedi being the primary fighting force of a party. at least in melee. but I think a blaster rifle with extreme range would have it on the distance in extreme range, lol. however, the rest of the party should still have a purpose. they did in the movies. if the Jedi is the uber pilot can insta heal every everyone, is the God of talking, and can out sneak the dark, then mature or not, the rest of the party will nap while the Jedi does everything. they're along for the ride of his XP. that was the problem withearlier games, and the balance that this one has struck.

I think lightsabers shouldn't be any more amazing than any other weapon. I mean, Clone Troopers with blaster rifles were the ones that took out most of the Jedi with surprise on their side. I think people confuse what is actually the true strength of Ob-wan Kenobi or Darth Revan. No one looks at Conan and says "I gotta get that sword" or sees Legolas and thinks all Elves are combat monsters, but they see Jedi with lightsabers and think they are innately better than other characters.

It's the same reason why 4th Edition of D&D included "minions": creatures with 1 hp so heroes can kill swathes of them so they can feel like Aragorn in Lord of the Rings killing 30 to 40 dudes.

I honestly don't think Jedi or Lightsabers are innately more amazing than people who rely on blasters. A mercenary with the right tools or a smuggler with the right contacts should be just as scary. What we see in the movies and games isn't anything other than a character with a 1000+ XP killing minions or dudes with 200 or less xp. The PCs are already a cut above the rest of most with their access to Destiny Points to help their odds.

Just my opinion on the matter. If people want to accept the narrative with Jedi being superior to other characters, that's their choice, but at my table, we have a big mix of players and all of them prefer balance between the characters. We have a bounty hunter actually thinking on becoming an Inquisitor hunter since she has had luck taking one down but if my players wanted Jedi to be overpowered, I'd probably try and change things up as well. While I don't agree with it, the wants of the majority at my table shape the game.

Sorry, didn't mean to ramble, but the balance of the game is definitely a huge feature for me. I played WEG, D20 (revised version and not revised), and Saga edition. While I had fun with them all, I've had enough of Jedi being unstoppable forces (ha, pun).

I have no problem with the Jedi being the primary fighting force of a party. at least in melee. but I think a blaster rifle with extreme range would have it on the distance in extreme range, lol. however, the rest of the party should still have a purpose. they did in the movies. if the Jedi is the uber pilot can insta heal every everyone, is the God of talking, and can out sneak the dark, then mature or not, the rest of the party will nap while the Jedi does everything. they're along for the ride of his XP. that was the problem withearlier games, and the balance that this one has struck.

I think lightsabers shouldn't be any more amazing than any other weapon. I mean, Clone Troopers with blaster rifles were the ones that took out most of the Jedi with surprise on their side. I think people confuse what is actually the true strength of Ob-wan Kenobi or Darth Revan. No one looks at Conan and says "I gotta get that sword" or sees Legolas and thinks all Elves are combat monsters, but they see Jedi with lightsabers and think they are innately better than other characters.

It's the same reason why 4th Edition of D&D included "minions": creatures with 1 hp so heroes can kill swathes of them so they can feel like Aragorn in Lord of the Rings killing 30 to 40 dudes.

I honestly don't think Jedi or Lightsabers are innately more amazing than people who rely on blasters. A mercenary with the right tools or a smuggler with the right contacts should be just as scary. What we see in the movies and games isn't anything other than a character with a 1000+ XP killing minions or dudes with 200 or less xp. The PCs are already a cut above the rest of most with their access to Destiny Points to help their odds.

Just my opinion on the matter. If people want to accept the narrative with Jedi being superior to other characters, that's their choice, but at my table, we have a big mix of players and all of them prefer balance between the characters. We have a bounty hunter actually thinking on becoming an Inquisitor hunter since she has had luck taking one down but if my players wanted Jedi to be overpowered, I'd probably try and change things up as well. While I don't agree with it, the wants of the majority at my table shape the game.

Sorry, didn't mean to ramble, but the balance of the game is definitely a huge feature for me. I played WEG, D20 (revised version and not revised), and Saga edition. While I had fun with them all, I've had enough of Jedi being unstoppable forces (ha, pun).

Here comes some blatant opinion. I'd argue that lightsabers ARE a bit better than most weapons, by combining the benefits of energy damage from blasters with the added benefit of constant effect, blah, blah, blah. Conan, and even Legolas, are mortal beings, while we often see Jedi as magic fighters, able to glimpse the future, and act accordingly, while even Legolas had to see something, and then Tolkien-elf his way through, or around it. The clones succeeded because they frequently were a dozen guys mass-firing on a Jedi, who often didn't know what was going to happen (one of those later moments of sans-prescience). I can see where most people want Jedi to be the best, and better than the others, since they have magic powers, and such (and it's their story). They are the ones the galaxy turns to for protection, the ones who cause most of the need for protection. I can also see, and more so, where these images, while true of the movies and books, don't fit well in a game several people, some of which WON'T have lightsabers and witchery, will play. In a story, I want the wizard to literally crush the fighter, hands-down; the fighter has no business even hitting the wizard, if he didn't have surprise, considerable help, a lot more "XP", or what have you, and the wizard can do so much more damage than a sword swing, or three. In a game, though, I want them on par, so both players enjoy it, with one covering the other's lackluster points. This has caused numerous arguments over the years, with the wizard usually losing out, so he can be more balanced with the sword-swinger, but while I hated 4th ed for it, and MANY other things, I never questioned the need for it, from a game, and fun-for-everyone standpoint.

I think one thing we don't always take into account is that, in movies, one shot can kill. Armored storm troopers go down from lone blaster wounds, making them look like punks for years. Ki Adi Mundi can dodge and deflect numerous shots, but only two or three need to connect, and he's finished, while his foes are auto-firing. RPG Jedi, like everyone else, though, can't be one-shotted; hit points, or their equivalent, prevent this, unless you got critted in d20 Revised, and even then, death wasn't a certainty. Jedi in movies may feel "superior", and more amazing, because they avoid many more hits, with evasion, foresight, and a weapon that can deflect energy blasts, so that "one fatal hit" never gets in, while they carve through all comers, who don't have a chance. It doesn't work as well in a game, though, since players won't want to fight AGAINST that, nor watch their mary sue friend be cheese, while they wonder why they made characters. Getting the movie feel in a game can be tough, and maybe not as appreciated as one might think, upon initially trying for it.

I think lightsabers shouldn't be any more amazing than any other weapon. I mean, Clone Troopers with blaster rifles were the ones that took out most of the Jedi with surprise on their side. I think people confuse what is actually the true strength of Ob-wan Kenobi or Darth Revan. No one looks at Conan and says "I gotta get that sword" or sees Legolas and thinks all Elves are combat monsters, but they see Jedi with lightsabers and think they are innately better than other characters.

Steel isn't strong, boy. Flesh is stronger. That is strength, boy. That is power: the strength and power of flesh. What is steel compared to the hand that wields it?

Contemplate this on the Tree of Woe. . . . .

Here comes some blatant opinion. I'd argue that lightsabers ARE a bit better than most weapons, by combining the benefits of energy damage from blasters with the added benefit of constant effect, blah, blah, blah. Conan, and even Legolas, are mortal beings, while we often see Jedi as magic fighters, able to glimpse the future, and act accordingly, while even Legolas had to see something, and then Tolkien-elf his way through, or around it. The clones succeeded because they frequently were a dozen guys mass-firing on a Jedi, who often didn't know what was going to happen (one of those later moments of sans-prescience). I can see where most people want Jedi to be the best, and better than the others, since they have magic powers, and such (and it's their story). They are the ones the galaxy turns to for protection, the ones who cause most of the need for protection. I can also see, and more so, where these images, while true of the movies and books, don't fit well in a game several people, some of which WON'T have lightsabers and witchery, will play. In a story, I want the wizard to literally crush the fighter, hands-down; the fighter has no business even hitting the wizard, if he didn't have surprise, considerable help, a lot more "XP", or what have you, and the wizard can do so much more damage than a sword swing, or three. In a game, though, I want them on par, so both players enjoy it, with one covering the other's lackluster points. This has caused numerous arguments over the years, with the wizard usually losing out, so he can be more balanced with the sword-swinger, but while I hated 4th ed for it, and MANY other things, I never questioned the need for it, from a game, and fun-for-everyone standpoint.

I think one thing we don't always take into account is that, in movies, one shot can kill. Armored storm troopers go down from lone blaster wounds, making them look like punks for years. Ki Adi Mundi can dodge and deflect numerous shots, but only two or three need to connect, and he's finished, while his foes are auto-firing. RPG Jedi, like everyone else, though, can't be one-shotted; hit points, or their equivalent, prevent this, unless you got critted in d20 Revised, and even then, death wasn't a certainty. Jedi in movies may feel "superior", and more amazing, because they avoid many more hits, with evasion, foresight, and a weapon that can deflect energy blasts, so that "one fatal hit" never gets in, while they carve through all comers, who don't have a chance. It doesn't work as well in a game, though, since players won't want to fight AGAINST that, nor watch their mary sue friend be cheese, while they wonder why they made characters. Getting the movie feel in a game can be tough, and maybe not as appreciated as one might think, upon initially trying for it.

EDIT: I misread your post and mine offered nothing of value other than "No, I disagree". I also may have been rude (had a long day), so I apologize and let me try again to be a bit more constructive with my thoughts:

I can agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I stand by characters like Han Solo and Jango Fett. In fiction, I prefer to see the hero challenged by the evil wizards and rise above them. I love pulp fantasy and sci-fi, but that's just me. I'd prefer to be in a Star Wars galaxy where smugglers can outdraw Sith and Bounty Hunters that hunt Jedi.

I don't mind Jedi being viewed as powerful due to their training. I view them less as wizards and more as monks or paladins (In exception to Yoda and Palpatine), but I don't think them having access to the Force and giving them a cool weapon makes them better than other characters with different origins and experience (a mandalorian bounty hunter or a fringe smuggler that was trained as an Imperial Officer). I think it has to do with the training and the experience, rather than mere access to the Force (or magic). Obi-wan Kenobi, Anakin Skywalker, Mace Windu, Yoda, Luke Skywalker; these aren't just Jedi, but heroes (a lot of them more focused as warriors with lightsabers than mastery of the force). Star Wars is definitely Jedi-focused in the movies(Jedi being the main characters), but I think there were plenty of Jedi no-names that could be killed by Han Solo or Chewbacca.

I mean, Jango Fett killed one with just a blaster in the movie, so it can be done.

Yeah, it's obvious to me that only the Jedi "heroes" are the indestructible ones—the ones with all that plot armor. Obi-Wan, Anakin, Luke. Qui-Gon died fairly easily, as did thousands of Jedi at the beginning, and especially the end, of the Clone Wars.

Other heroes with "plot armor" are C-3PO, R2-D2, Han, Chewie, Leia. None of them are Jedi, but all of them are cool and have moments of sheer heroism.

I think FFG's Force users are perfectly balanced. Want a Jedi like Obi-Wan? Just give him a crap ton of experience, and the game system will deliver you an uber-character. No mystery, no muss & fuss, no house rules needed!

Personally, I wouldn't be entirely shocked if a "Clone Wars" book of some nature is coming down the pipeline, either as a sourcebook, or something else. I hope personally it will be something like a "gestalt sourcebook" that is not tied to any of the three lines, but useable with any. I realize this is technically true, for the most part, already. But not branding it as any of the three lines. I mean "requires one or more of the three" sort of thing. So no repeats of past rules. Thus giving more room for more info. More careers and talents. Higher level play advice. New powers and artifacts. Talents. Or whatever. Just era specific stuff.

Likely we'd want some dedicated Clone Trooper rules, for running a squad of Clones as your PCs. How "jedi" should be, even if just saying use F&D.

In an even more ideal world it has advice for running a Master-Padawan game and letting people at both powerlevels have fun AND have mechanical agency. (cfa: Doctor Who, Buffy, or Ghosts of Albion RPGs for examples of how this has happened in the past). If this is the case, then it's essentially just as possible for it to be Master + Padawan + Clone Squad and still work despite the Master being at a higher XP level.

With luck this could lead to other eras too. Though that seems less likely unless KOTOR gets a magic official canon stamp or something. Because right now the only official canon goes no further back than Phantom Menace, aside from random snippets tied to other stuff in Clone Wars.

*screams and hides* sorry. the idea of.going back to the dark times of the prequels scared me

Heh. The films - I agree. But TCW had a lot of background material and - oddly for a cartoon - had significantly more depth and nuance than the films.

Pretty much why I think a Clone Wars era book would work so well. With the TV show being so in depth, and so popular, it's a great possibility for a game.

Can we fudge it now? Oh, sure. But fudging it is never as good as a full on treatment in my opinion.

Would Like Do Hear Your Thoughts On This. In Other Games, If You Have A Jedi Character, There Really Was No Reason For Other Characters. They Were An Uber class And The Rest Of The Party OS Kinda AlonG For The Ride. With The Exception Of A Mechanic They Can Heal, They Can Fight, They Can Talk And For The Most Part, Due To The Force, Better Than The Rest Of The Party. How Do You Guys Feel Ffg Has Done In This?

Secondly Is if You Are Not Playing A Jedi.Revised D20 Had One class For All Other Non Jedi Force Traditions. Saga, None! This One, With Exile And Emergent, And Now All The New SpecializationS I Don't penalized For Wanting To Play A fallAnissi. But Again, Id Like To Hear Your Thoughts On How WelL This System Does On That.

This was probably mentioned at some point, but I have to ask... why do you have capital letters for every word in your post? I have noticed this in several threads and I keep getting headaches as I try to read them.

I really don't mean to be rude, are you using a phone browser or something else that automatically does that?

This was probably mentioned at some point, but I have to ask... why do you have capital letters for every word in your post? I have noticed this in several threads and I keep getting headaches as I try to read them.

I really don't mean to be rude, are you using a phone browser or something else that automatically does that?

Her phone was having problems with the website. It's been fixed since that post was submitted.

This was probably mentioned at some point, but I have to ask... why do you have capital letters for every word in your post? I have noticed this in several threads and I keep getting headaches as I try to read them.

I really don't mean to be rude, are you using a phone browser or something else that automatically does that?

Her phone was having problems with the website. It's been fixed since that post was submitted.

Thank you, that makes sense.

Heh. The films - I agree. But TCW had a lot of background material and - oddly for a cartoon - had significantly more depth and nuance than the films.

Not necessarily unexpected, tho. George had - what 7.5 hours to tell a story, world build and whatnot. The Clone Wars had 5 seasons at 26 episodes each (plus the 6 or so that were lost) - so 130-ish hours to work with?

Honestly even in the movies especially the first 3 the difference between Han and Luke was very little in terms of ability. Han and Vader was much more telling. Luke didn't beat Vader because he was stronger or better, but more because Vader didn't want to kill his son.

Honestly it still comes down to what HK-47 said.

If I see another idiot attacking a Jedi with a Blaster I'm going to kill them myself.

Jedi and Sith by the very nature of thier abilities are not exceptionally long ranged fighters.

When a Force user runs around the corner right into a flame thrower his lightsaber isn't really going to help him win.

People who actively hunt Jedi down are not going to be carrying blasters. They will be carrying weapons that render a lightsaber useless in a confrontation.