I always thought coercion was about talking. If you look big and scary, sure, why not add a boost die or two? But what happens when he meets another tough guy or girl who is even bigger and stronger?

And in many situations it should or at least could just be roleplayed and acted out if that makes more sense. You don`t always have to rely on the mechanics in a rolplaying game, story and rp comes first and thrumps the mechanics.

I still say there is confusion between fear rules and coercion. Coercion can use fear, it can also use torture, it can be simply putting someone in an untenable situation with no way out. Coercion doesn't have to be applied in the same room, a target can be coerced via holo message. Coercion is the art of applying just enough pressure in whatever form to extract a desired behavior, information, or action from a victim.

Mongo the robot may make people wet their pants, but that doesn't mean he is sophisticated enough to know when to back off, or when to then attempt to change the target's mind. That's skill in coercion, and the intuitive attribute for knowing when to do so is Willpower.

My advice would be for Mongo to be allowed to force fear checks on targets occasionally using the rules on p.298 in EoE. Then if someone with actual coercion skill wants to step in, give them a boost to their attempt. I would not get in the habit of just letting people swap stats of min maxed PCs for a creative excuse. The rules are there to provide balance and challenge to the game.

One of my players is a droid Marauder. He's a seven-foot B2 battle droid who is covered in cortosis-lined powered armored. He has a vibro-sword embedded in each hand and a missile tube mounted on his shoulder. With his modded armor, his Brawn is 7. He is cold, unfeeling, and incredibly terrifying. Whenever he tries to intimidate someone, though, he rolls exactly one yellow die due to his 1 Willpower and 1 rank in Coercion.

I can't help but feel your friend hasn't built the character he's trying to describe. Will 1 sounds indecisive. Easily led. Unsure of themselves. Certainly not scary.

Personality traits are a hard thing to match up to game stats, but when there's a mechanical benefit to be reaped it's on him to buy that benefit.

If he didn't understand how to build a scary guy at the start, you could maybe let him rebuild from scratch?

My advice would be for Mongo to be allowed to force fear checks on targets occasionally using the rules on p.298 in EoE. Then if someone with actual coercion skill wants to step in, give them a boost to their attempt. I would not get in the habit of just letting people swap stats of min maxed PCs for a creative excuse. The rules are there to provide balance and challenge to the game.

That's kind of stepping on the Loom talent. I don't think any PC should get any advantage just for being brawny. Having poor Coercion simply means the target is not convinced. Maybe it's that they think the PC doesn't know what they're doing, or maybe they just think they're going to die anyway so they clam up.

Here's the point: Coercion is the art of getting something out of someone while still leaving them a reason to cooperate. It's a form of Negotiation, using Fear as a currency. The target still has to trust that you are going to live up to the out.

PC: "I can kill you easily. See my gleaming metal hand? Watch it go through this wall."

NPC: "I-i-i-f I t-t-tell you what I know, will you let me go?"

PC: "Sure I will." Rolls a single green die against difficulty and gets a failure.

NPC: "No you won't, you're going to kill me anyway. I'm not saying anything."

Besides, if Coercion is a career skill, it's a total of 30XP for somebody to turn their Willpower 1 G roll, into YGG for Coercion, which is pretty decent. This is minimal XP expenditure for somebody who wants Coercion as part of their toolkit. If they don't have to spend that XP because the GM has given them a freebie due to their Brawn, the GM has effectively cheated every other player.

I did say "occasionally", whereas Loom is all day, everyday.

As has been said, "fear", "intimidation" and "coercion" all overlap but don't equal each other.

My current favorite example of "big and armed" not even equaling "frightening" let alone "intimidating" or "coercive":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgaeh43VxZk

I did say "occasionally", whereas Loom is all day, everyday.

True, but that "occasionally" easily turns into "always" if the GM doesn't nip it in the bud...

I did say "occasionally", whereas Loom is all day, everyday.

True, but that "occasionally" easily turns into "always" if the GM doesn't nip it in the bud...

Nothing prevents the Loom guy from doing the same either.

It's often puzzled me that coercion is based on willpower (and not presence)

But these rules, as good as they are, aren't perfect for every situation

When you're coercing someone you're trying to impose your 'will' on them, so it seems ok to me.

Indeed, it's often described as a contest of wills.

Coercion is showmanship it is not being tall with guns . Your player's character is a fire hydrant with weapons, not an actor . If he wanted to be intimidating as well he should have invested points in willpower and coercion instead of just being a soak/gun monster. A main battle tank is big and huge with guns but isn't inherently intimidating . Your players character is essentially the same thing .

This is just a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too in my opinion . The solution is simple, it's called be patient and build character that can do both instead of trying to have everything all at once .

i agree with everything you say about the game, but i dare you to stand in front of a tank and not be intimidated. and now imagine that tank slowly moving towards you.

Coercion is showmanship it is not being tall with guns . Your player's character is a fire hydrant with weapons, not an actor . If he wanted to be intimidating as well he should have invested points in willpower and coercion instead of just being a soak/gun monster. A main battle tank is big and huge with guns but isn't inherently intimidating . Your players character is essentially the same thing .

This is just a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too in my opinion . The solution is simple, it's called be patient and build character that can do both instead of trying to have everything all at once .

i agree with everything you say about the game, but i dare you to stand in front of a tank and not be intimidated. and now imagine that tank slowly moving towards you.

Been there, done it. I did step aside, as I don't think getting run over by anything is particularly smart. Didn't feel intimidated, but of course, they were my tanks....

I find it interesting that, in these games, Fear and Coercion are entirely separate mechanics.

I find it interesting that, in these games, Fear and Coercion are entirely separate mechanics.

Fear is so 'meh' in this game also. It always was something to really avoid in my experiences, and it's just not a big deal as presented I think in EoE.

I find it interesting that, in these games, Fear and Coercion are entirely separate mechanics.

Fear is so 'meh' in this game also. It always was something to really avoid in my experiences, and it's just not a big deal as presented I think in EoE.

I agree, which is why I find the Enforcer and FaD's Aggressor somewhat disappointing.

what do you all think about this; Fear failure should be an upgrade for the encounter, and the despair result should be the Staggered condition?

I've never really given it much thought but a lousy Setback is pretty pathetic. It makes Fearsome a way overpriced talent.

yep totally agree, even if it is to every action for an encounter.

Despite the player or even the GM imagining that such a droid would be intimidating, without backup from skills or abilities or what-have-you, that just isn't the case.

Something about the droid's stance or posture makes it look silly with all that gear, maybe.

This came to mind, skip to the 6:00 mark for the part I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS75NtlH3gI

No matter how many weapons he picks up, he won't be intimidating.

I have an issue with the Coercion skill.

One of my players is a droid Marauder. He's a seven-foot B2 battle droid who is covered in cortosis-lined powered armored. He has a vibro-sword embedded in each hand and a missile tube mounted on his shoulder. With his modded armor, his Brawn is 7. He is cold, unfeeling, and incredibly terrifying. Whenever he tries to intimidate someone, though, he rolls exactly one yellow die due to his 1 Willpower and 1 rank in Coercion.

Both my player and I agree this is not representative of his character. Sure, he's weak-willed, and if someone were to try and trick him into believing something stupid he'd probably believe it. But this doesn't work when he unsheaths his murderblades and puts them against some organic's fleshy throat to try and bleed information out of them. Even in thise cases, RAW says he uses his Willpower to determine his pool. This doesn't feel right to us.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to manage this? A Boost die seems like too slight of a reward for such an initimidating character.

As others have said Fear and Coercion aren't the same so you shouldn't treat them as such. Being afraid may make you more susceptible to Coercion so your Combat Monster PC deserves a Boost die but other than that he'd need to pick up some ranks of the skill.

You can use another Attribute as the base for a Coercion if the occasion makes sense but you shouldn't give the same results, rather they should be tailored to the Attribute used and the situation. So if B2-Battle Munchkin wants to force some info out of a meat bag and used Brawn he may get some info (probably lies to save their hide) but should do some Physical Damage in the process.

The point being that you can use other Attributes and Skills to do things if it seems appropriate but if you use alternate dice pools they should give appropriate results.

Also, just as a side note, it's not really fair to the other players at the table to hand wave extra abilities to a PC that's been Min-Maxed. If they can't be bothered to spend their EXP on the ability you shouldn't give it to them for nothing.

^^ This..

I'd just say a boost and call it even