Does the talent Bad Motivator of the mechanic have to be "engaged" with it? or is it merely a point and pick something?

Too bad r2-d2 wasn't on alderaan when it was targeted by the death star, he could have prevented the tremendous loss of life By using bad motivator on the super laser or main reactor.

There is no range. There wording implies that the character must have "line of sight" to the object, but no range is specified. But the result is the GM's discretion.

Too bad r2-d2 wasn't on alderaan when it was targeted by the death star, he could have prevented the tremendous loss of life By using bad motivator on the super laser or main reactor.

I am sure there was more than one mechanic on Alderaan if that was the case.

So then what, a mechanic can beat a jedi with bad motivator? I don't think so..

I am sure there was more than one mechanic on Alderaan if that was the case.

So then what, a mechanic can beat a jedi with bad motivator? I don't think so..

There's more to a Jedi than his glow sword. Any Force sensitive PC or NPC wanting to call himself a Jedi wouldn't sweat too much at a faulty power cell. Though once the the Heavy ally steps forward to blanket the Force sensitive, then we have another story

No, it doesn't have to be engaged. As a GM, I really don't like this talent. It puts the GM in the position of being arbiter and choosing between shutting down the player's new thing he's excited about, or allowing some potentially game unbalancing event to happen. Unfortunately, in my experience, players will want to be the star, so they want to do something like shut down the escaping imperial's engines. This enthusiasm is great, but it can derail an entire adventure.

Anyway, I just had an encounter with this talent in my last game session, so I'm all worked up about it. Sorry for the rant.

Also, this must be played everytime the talent is used.

No, it doesn't have to be engaged. As a GM, I really don't like this talent. It puts the GM in the position of being arbiter and choosing between shutting down the player's new thing he's excited about, or allowing some potentially game unbalancing event to happen.

There is a middle ground though right? I have come to find that I can go halfway at times as well.... I could say "No" or I could say "Yes, and..." basically making it happen in a way that is fitting with the game. That speeder bike doesn't break down but it veers left all of a sudden. That light saber switches off for 2 rounds instead of completely. That droid doesn't turn off but has a personality change and becomes aggresive.

Also, and this might be a great opportunity, I actually put things in my games where the mechanic is bound to use bad motivator just so he can shine and.... He can't use it anymore later on in the session. Last session I had a perimeter fence set up with the generator hidden in the fenced off area. I played it up as if the party would never reach the cache of goods within the perimeter but of course I knew what the mechanic would do. He loved it, I loved it and the rest of the game there were no surprises.

Does the talent Bad Motivator of the mechanic have to be "engaged" with it? or is it merely a point and pick something?

Had this happen in my game.

When a player wants to do something like this, I dont allow it unless the player can give me a narrative on how HIS mechanic check made a device fail....

Solves all this B.S. about unbalance when he physically cant reach said object or the failure of said object seems inplausable.

The excuse, "well my roll says i can" I say not so fast.. now tell me how ..

Im a hard ass when it comes to munchkin antics,,, i dont put up with that crap, neither should you!

Doesn't the wording for Bad Motivator indicate that it's possible for it to be a purely narrative event in which it's not the PC's actions which damage or affect the mechanism, but the PC just notices it or has reason to know it is happening?

In the canonical example, R2D2 didn't do anything to R5D4 to cause it to have a bad motivator, but he just happens to benefit from the malfunction.

(Of course, like everything in the game, its effects are within the GM's discretion though.)

Doesn't the wording for Bad Motivator indicate that it's possible for it to be a purely narrative event in which it's not the PC's actions which damage or affect the mechanism, but the PC just notices it or has reason to know it is happening?

Yes, the wording does specifically allow for the "happy coincidence" of device failure when Bad Motivator is activated. As other have mentioned, this can get abused very easily. Of course, one of the Imperials might have been constantly using this talent on the MF's hyperdrive during Episode V...

Does the talent Bad Motivator of the mechanic have to be "engaged" with it? or is it merely a point and pick something?

Had this happen in my game.

When a player wants to do something like this, I dont allow it unless the player can give me a narrative on how HIS mechanic check made a device fail....

Solves all this B.S. about unbalance when he physically cant reach said object or the failure of said object seems inplausable.

The excuse, "well my roll says i can" I say not so fast.. now tell me how ..

Im a hard ass when it comes to munchkin antics,,, i dont put up with that crap, neither should you!

Well you might be a hard ass, but you are not using the talent RAW.

Doesn't the wording for Bad Motivator indicate that it's possible for it to be a purely narrative event in which it's not the PC's actions which damage or affect the mechanism, but the PC just notices it or has reason to know it is happening?

Yes, the wording does specifically allow for the "happy coincidence" of device failure when Bad Motivator is activated. As other have mentioned, this can get abused very easily. Of course, one of the Imperials might have been constantly using this talent on the MF's hyperdrive during Episode V...

Doesn't the GM fiat work against abusing the talent. "I think that so-and-so has a bad motivato" "No, it is a brand new device and it seems to work fine." No abuse.

Even brand new devices can have defects that buyers/users haven't noticed yet.

And thus you could allow it if you wanted to.

This is why the GM is the final arbiter in this talent.

As a GM, I would definitely see a difference between busting an astromech droid so a PC can go where they need to go and disabling all the massive and redundant engine systems of an enormous space cruiser ...

As a GM, I would definitely see a difference between busting an astromech droid so a PC can go where they need to go and disabling all the massive and redundant engine systems of an enormous space cruiser ...

This. It is only "cheating", "an abuse" or "a short cut" if you allow it...

There is no range. There wording implies that the character must have "line of sight" to the object, but no range is specified. But the result is the GM's discretion.

I for one think it is incredibly poorly written for this reason and ignore it to save both me and my GM a headache or friction.

Well, if you are aware of this then it seems like you would be the perfect player to use it...

I can only speak from my experience as a GM but we have had many laughs and great moments at our table because of this (once a session) talent and my player never tried to use it on anything too game breaking.

There is a level of maturity involved and you seem to have that level, so give it a shot. It's a great talent.

My GM and I had a conversation about it a couple weeks back. His big concern is how it could neuter purpose-built enemies, like a couple months ago we fought a couple of dark side Adepts, one with a lightsaber - how Bad Motivator would have completely shut down the threat of that enemy and that seemed to be too strong to him.My counterpoint was that if it didn't short out the saber for a bit it'd be quite a bit less useful if one had to stick to like...blowing out door gears and the like.

Eh in the end I decided to retire that character for unrelated reasons (got kinda tired robbing pigeonholed as the repair/helper on top of feeling like my opinion mattered less as a droid) so it's a moot point...but the new character is also bought into Mechanic so it may just be a matter of time.

I've seen players want to use it on the sunlight drives of a ship pursuing them, the hyperdrive of a ship that was trying to escape, the spacesuit of a pirate, a demolition charge that was planted on the PCs' ship, a mine that the mechanic stepped on, and several other things. Bad Motivator seems like it has the scope of a narrative Signature Ability, but it is far easier to get.

Last session my duros marshal sharpshooter (Thad Bane) was having a quick draw showdown with an npc gunslinger, I knew the mechanic Droid would want to use badmotivator on the gunslinger's pistol so she had 2 guns a fancy equalizer (sun's of fortune) and a standard blaster pistol. As predicted the Droid took out the equalizer with bad motivator, giving him his moment of awesome, and the gunslinger outdrew Thad Bane shot him (but not enough damage to drop him) and Thad Bane took out the gunslinger on his turn (very narratively appropriate considering that Thad Bane's father out drew his uncle, Cad Bane, but Cad Bane's return shot was lethal). Design an encounter for the Mechanic to use bad motivator and have his moment of awesome, but have a second device. For example silver 5 ships and larger probably not only havery multiple engines but multiple power plants, so a successful use of bad motivator might drop a cap ship speed to 1

Lastros session my duros marshal sharpshooter (Thad Bane) was having a quick draw showdown with an npc gunslinger, I knew the mechanic Droid would want to use badmotivator on the gunslinger's pistol so she had 2 guns a fancy equalizer (sun's of fortune) and a standard blaster pistol. As predicted the Droid took out the equalizer with bad motivator, giving him his moment of awesome, and the gunslinger outdrew Thad Bane shot him (but not enough damage to drop him) and Thad Bane took out the gunslinger on his turn (very narratively appropriate considering that Thad Bane's father out drew his uncle, Cad Bane, but Cad Bane's return shot was lethal). Design an encounter for the Mechanic to use bad motivator and have his moment of awesome, but have a second device

If the players in your game are happy with this, then it's all good. However, it just seems to me that his talent was negated. If you always have a second device, the talent becomes meaningless. The gm could have just said no for the same effect and result.

But there was a better gun and an ordinary one, so he could take out the better one... this scene was intended to be the duros Marshall/sharpshooter's (Thad Bane's) scene to shine in, and if the gunslinger hit Thad twice it could have taken him down, so the mechanic's player could conclude that he saved Thad anyway, they both get their glory (if the mechanic hadn't used bad motivator the gunslinger would only have shot with the better gun). Now, more generally speaking previous session, starship combat party's ship verses 5 cloakshape fighters and a firespray, bad motivator takes out one cloakshape, rest of the party takes out the others, there was more than one cloakshape, and I don't see a problem with that (It would have been boring for the rest of the PCS if the mechanic took out the only opponent). How about another scenario, there are 3 bombs that all have to be difused at the same time and they can see but not get to the third one. Bad motivator on it to make it a dud, then difuse the other two at the same time. The point is to set up encounters where bad motivator in undeniably useful in HELPING the party to accomplish their objective, without making it an encounter ending I win button

And sometimes when it's the mechanics turn to take center stage I will set up an encounter in such a way that only bad motivator will save the day