Hi all,

Of all the mechanics in the game that I've found a little confusing, there inevitably is a very good explanation eventually available. Usually, it's through the helpful people here on the boards. However, I've been reading the FFG Developer Answered Questions thread. Every answer to the questions makes sense save one.

In the second post under the heading Combat.

Q: The rulebook states that different sources of defense don't stack. Is this referring to different sources of personal defense, such as multiple layers of armor, or to any sources of defense, such as armor and cover.

A: Unless a source of defense specifically states that it stacks with other sources of defense, then it does not stack. Armor and cover, for example, do not stack; a character can only benefit from one of these sources of defense at a time.

So, a person wearing armor that grants them a ranged defense of 1 can't gain an additional defense of 1 from seeking cover? This doesn't make any sense to me either narratively or mechanically. Obviously, a person wearing armor can still stand behind something to make them harder to hit. And, mechanically, it cost me a manuever to take the cover. Therefore, balance is restored to the combat, since I was unable to spend that manuever elsewhere(like aiming).

Am I totally off my rocker on this one?

I look at it both ways. Yes, it seems silly that an armored person doesn't get any benefit to ducking behind cover. On the other hand, that cover might be replacing the benefit of the armor (as in, if I can hit you in cover, your armor won't help any more than the cover did).

Defense isn't like Soak. I feel like armor that grants Defense requires a solid shot to hit, not a glancing blow. If I duck behind cover, that also takes a solid shot to hit, as "almost there" shots are going to be deflected by the cover. Thus, if I am armored and duck behind cover, it takes a solid shot to hit me, but no more so than usual, unless the cover is substantial (which is covered). In either case, any shot that is good enough to get through the cover will be good enough to get through the armor Defense (not necessarily Soak).

Defense is about how hard it is to make the shot, not how much protection against damage (which is Soak).

Admiral Terghon explains it well. The Devs have also mentioned that the rules was also to help limit the dice pool, which was a problem in WFRP 3rd edition.

This is one rule that I've never seen implemented in any of the groups with which I've played. It's already absurdly easy to hit for skilled combatants, anything that a non-combat player can do to reduce the chances of hitting is allowed in my groups... Including stacking armor defense and cover defense.

This is one rule that I've never seen implemented in any of the groups with which I've played. It's already absurdly easy to hit for skilled combatants, anything that a non-combat player can do to reduce the chances of hitting is allowed in my groups... Including stacking armor defense and cover defense.

I agree.

Admiral's answer is good, but the reasoning the devs gave is really just a recognition of the limits of the mechanics as the equipment scales up. And that's fine, it's a game after all, not a simulation.

However, I don't think I'd prevent my players from using both cover and armour. For one thing, they are equipment poor...I don't think any of them has armour that has a defense rating. But someday if they do and they become too hard to hit, I'll just up the opposition. I'm pretty sure the campaign will be retired long before I feel I don't have the flexibility to deal with an additional setback die from cover.

Also, it's consistent with the rest of the rules-set... which is a big deal in crafting a system. In EotE, multiple sources of anything don't stack - you just take the highest value added - unless specifically stated otherwise.

(Hence my answer about not granting Brawn bonuses from powered armor and cybernetics, btw. Now, if you wanted to take Brawn from your armor, and Agility from your cybernetics, that's altogether different...)

Yeah, the explained it as dice pool management, but considering the many sources of setback dice (like disorient weapons, or multiple sidestep talents) the 1 extra die from armor and cover doesn't seem like it does much to limit anything. We ignore that rule at our table.

Also, it's consistent with the rest of the rules-set... which is a big deal in crafting a system. In EotE, multiple sources of anything don't stack - you just take the highest value added - unless specifically stated otherwise.

(Hence my answer about not granting Brawn bonuses from powered armor and cybernetics, btw. Now, if you wanted to take Brawn from your armor, and Agility from your cybernetics, that's altogether different...)

You're ignoring the distinction between a set value like Defense 1, and an added value like Defense +1. That + is very important, as is the word "increase". For instance, a Personal Deflector Shield has a Defense 2, but having the talent Improved Armor Master increases defense by 1, or +1. The same goes for an increase in Brawn from two sources, as far as I know there is nothing that gives Brawn 1, that's not a value in the game as far as I'm aware. An increase in Brawn(or Brawn +1), however, increases Brawn by 1 point and does stack. More specifically, the Strength Enhancing System armor mod "Increases wearer's Brawn by one point..." while the The Mod V Cyberarm cybernetic implant "...provides a + 1 Brawn...", together giving the character a +2 Brawn.

My argument, and I probably should have made this clearer from the beginning, is that cover should be defense +1. It shouldn't give you a defense rating, since mechanically you pay for it every time.

I'm gonna need a page number about Defence not stacking.

I was about to roll up a new Marauder PC that used a Riot Shield and a Vibro Sword to stack the Defensive quality.

And a jetpack... chicks love jetpacks.

One thing you guys are missing. If you go to cover and you have 1 defense from armor. But you have 2 defense from cover because you got yourself good cover. Well you use the 2 defense from cover and not the 1 defense you have from armor. While defense does not stack yo can choose to use the better one in the situation you are in.

Core Rulebook p. 207

"Multiple sources of defense do not stack. However, the character always uses the best defense rating available to him."

Also, it's consistent with the rest of the rules-set... which is a big deal in crafting a system. In EotE, multiple sources of anything don't stack - you just take the highest value added - unless specifically stated otherwise.

(Hence my answer about not granting Brawn bonuses from powered armor and cybernetics, btw. Now, if you wanted to take Brawn from your armor, and Agility from your cybernetics, that's altogether different...)

You're ignoring the distinction between a set value like Defense 1, and an added value like Defense +1. That + is very important, as is the word "increase". For instance, a Personal Deflector Shield has a Defense 2, but having the talent Improved Armor Master increases defense by 1, or +1. The same goes for an increase in Brawn from two sources, as far as I know there is nothing that gives Brawn 1, that's not a value in the game as far as I'm aware. An increase in Brawn(or Brawn +1), however, increases Brawn by 1 point and does stack. More specifically, the Strength Enhancing System armor mod "Increases wearer's Brawn by one point..." while the The Mod V Cyberarm cybernetic implant "...provides a + 1 Brawn...", together giving the character a +2 Brawn.

My argument, and I probably should have made this clearer from the beginning, is that cover should be defense +1. It shouldn't give you a defense rating, since mechanically you pay for it every time.

Problem is that there is another factor you are not considering. You don't see people in the movies who are wearing good armor use cover. Stormtroopers walk in the open. Boba Fett walks in the Open. Cover seems to be used mostly by those who don't have high defense armor. So when you have good armor you don't worry much about cover other than full cover. When I run my jedi with a good defense. I mostly use the limiting the number of people shooting at me cover. IE full cover for as many as possible while not worrying about it for the couple guys I am dealing with.

Also, it's consistent with the rest of the rules-set... which is a big deal in crafting a system. In EotE, multiple sources of anything don't stack - you just take the highest value added - unless specifically stated otherwise.

(Hence my answer about not granting Brawn bonuses from powered armor and cybernetics, btw. Now, if you wanted to take Brawn from your armor, and Agility from your cybernetics, that's altogether different...)

You're ignoring the distinction between a set value like Defense 1, and an added value like Defense +1. That + is very important, as is the word "increase". For instance, a Personal Deflector Shield has a Defense 2, but having the talent Improved Armor Master increases defense by 1, or +1. The same goes for an increase in Brawn from two sources, as far as I know there is nothing that gives Brawn 1, that's not a value in the game as far as I'm aware. An increase in Brawn(or Brawn +1), however, increases Brawn by 1 point and does stack. More specifically, the Strength Enhancing System armor mod "Increases wearer's Brawn by one point..." while the The Mod V Cyberarm cybernetic implant "...provides a + 1 Brawn...", together giving the character a +2 Brawn.

My argument, and I probably should have made this clearer from the beginning, is that cover should be defense +1. It shouldn't give you a defense rating, since mechanically you pay for it every time.

Problem is that there is another factor you are not considering. You don't see people in the movies who are wearing good armor use cover. Stormtroopers walk in the open. Boba Fett walks in the Open. Cover seems to be used mostly by those who don't have high defense armor. So when you have good armor you don't worry much about cover other than full cover. When I run my jedi with a good defense. I mostly use the limiting the number of people shooting at me cover. IE full cover for as many as possible while not worrying about it for the couple guys I am dealing with.

Please, they had plot-armor. Nothing gets through that.

Oh look, it's this discussion again.

The short and simple version: Cover sets your ranged defence to 1. Note the specific phrase "sets ranged defence". This does not stack with the defence rating from various types of armour, which is already 1. Now, any source of defence that says "increases defence" or "+1 defence" adds to already existing defence.

Example: You're wearing heavy battle armour, which has defence 1. You take cover behind some crates, something that sets your ranged defence to 1. You already have defence 1 from your armour, therefore you still have defence 1. A couple of rounds later you pick up a vibrosword. It has the Defensive 1 quality, which adds +1 to melee defence. You now have ranged defence 1 (armour) and melee defence 2 (armour + Defensive 1).

And as for it being easy to hit opponents, did you ever think that maybe that is intentional? Combat in FFG Star Wars is very fast; few fights last more than 3-4 rounds or so and rounds are meant to be played through quickly, without stopping the action to analyze and measure distances and calculate statistical probabilities. Shooting and missing for six rounds in a row is just plain boring, better to drop the enemy and move on. Especially since exceeding your wound threshold doesn't mean you're dead, just out of the fight.

I'm gonna need a page number about Defence not stacking.

I was about to roll up a new Marauder PC that used a Riot Shield and a Vibro Sword to stack the Defensive quality.

And a jetpack... chicks love jetpacks.

Answer from Sam :

My point, which I hope I'm making clear, is that defense from cover should be an increase in defense. My argument for this is because you use a maneuver to do it, you're paying for it as you would when activating a talent. Essentially, a maneuver is the same thing as spending 2 Advantages. The only argument I can see for it not increasing your defense is that it lasts for as many rounds as you don't maneuver away from cover. Anyway, I've apparently brought up something that's been talked about to death and me talking about it isn't going to change things, so I'll drop it.

Edit: Also, I'm not arguing that defense from cover and armor stack, I'm arguing that it makes no sense that cover sets a defense rating instead of increasing in defense. I just hadn't noticed before until I read the answer from the developers thread.

My point, which I hope I'm making clear, is that defense from cover should be an increase in defense. My argument for this is because you use a maneuver to do it, your pain for it as you would when activating a talent. Essentially, a maneuver is the same thing as spending 2 Advantages. The only argument I can see for it not increasing your defense is that it lasts for as many rounds as you don't maneuver away from cover. Anyway, I've apparently brought up something that's been talked about to death and me talking about it isn't going to change things, so I'll drop it.

Edit: Also, I'm not arguing that defense from cover and armor stack, I'm arguing that it makes no sense that cover sets a defense rating instead of increasing in defense. I just hadn't noticed before until I read the answer from the developers thread.

Just realize this: We aren't the Devs. We're all just players using the system. So, if you want the Devs to hear you, you'll have to reach them yourself via the contact forms: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/more/contact/

Well, at first I was clarifying what I read. I doubt contacting the developers is gonna change much. But, thanks for the link anyway.

My point, which I hope I'm making clear, is that defense from cover should be an increase in defense. My argument for this is because you use a maneuver to do it, you're paying for it as you would when activating a talent. Essentially, a maneuver is the same thing as spending 2 Advantages. The only argument I can see for it not increasing your defense is that it lasts for as many rounds as you don't maneuver away from cover. Anyway, I've apparently brought up something that's been talked about to death and me talking about it isn't going to change things, so I'll drop it.

Edit: Also, I'm not arguing that defense from cover and armor stack, I'm arguing that it makes no sense that cover sets a defense rating instead of increasing in defense. I just hadn't noticed before until I read the answer from the developers thread.

You argument makes sense. Personally I run it RAW, but if a GM in a game I participated in ran it like you suggest I wouldn't protest at all. It's a minor change that makes armoured opponents harder to hit, me and NPCs alike. I'd quickly go for an armour the provides defence though

One thing to be aware of is the die mechanic breaks down at around 6 proficiency and ability dice. So I suspect the same holds true for the other dice. Which is likely why they keep a limit on the stacking of many things.

Boost and Setback dice are much less powerful than Proficiency or Challenge dice. Particularly setback which, IIRC, don't have any double facings. We routinely run with 4 in space combat (2 shields base, Angled, Boosted) and while it certainly helps us not get hit, we're still getting the occasional strike home by small group minions. (or even ungrouped minions). Even Ability and Difficult dice don't break down at six as much as start pushing average checks into highly likely successes. Its the Proficiency and Challenge dice that really break down, because of their less balanced odds and the existence of Triumph/despair.

I tend to look at it this way... if you are hiding behind cover then really the fact that your armor offers defense is of less consequence since the majority of that armor is already hidden behind something else. Sure, that shoulder that is sticking out has armor on it but it's not offering the full defensive capability, it's not the whole suit. So they kind of even out effectively.. and that is what you get.. 1 defense.

Like Jegergyte I can see it going either way and really wouldn't create a fuss over a GM saying they have it stack in their game, but at the same time I don't see the way it is done in RAW is perfectly reasonable. You argue that because you invest a maneuver it should stack. Personally, I say, you invest credits in your armor to make that maneuver available for other purposes.

Boost and Setback dice are much less powerful than Proficiency or Challenge dice. Particularly setback which, IIRC, don't have any double facings. We routinely run with 4 in space combat (2 shields base, Angled, Boosted) and while it certainly helps us not get hit, we're still getting the occasional strike home by small group minions. (or even ungrouped minions). Even Ability and Difficult dice don't break down at six as much as start pushing average checks into highly likely successes. Its the Proficiency and Challenge dice that really break down, because of their less balanced odds and the existence of Triumph/despair.

I know they are not. But I suspect they have the same problem. Ie too man of any die type does weird things when you have too many.