During combat: if a PC wants to gain a second maneuver (up to an absolute maximum of two - with very rare exceptions), the CRB states this is possible by:

1. Using an ability/talent that allows a free maneuver.

2. Spending two Advantage from a previous skillcheck.

3. Voluntarily suffering two strain.

4. Downgrading your action.

Without having the option to use 1 & 2, can I voluntarily suffer strain and still take an action? Or do I have to suffer strain AND forfeit my action to take a second maneuver?

In 1 turn you can take:

you can take 1 action and 1 maneuver for no strain cost

You can take 2 maneuvers for no cost of strain

Or you can 1 action and 2 maneuvers if you suffer 2 strain

Hope this helps

That was my understanding, though I've heard it interpreted as the latter.

The book doesn't explicitly say it's one or the other, but it also doesn't say it's both either.

It's the latter. You can either take two strain for a second manoeuvre or downgrade your action.

-EF

In 1 turn you can take:

you can take 1 action and 1 maneuver for no strain cost

You can take 2 maneuvers for no cost of strain

Or you can 1 action and 2 maneuvers if you suffer 2 strain

Hope this helps

Sorry but your 3rd one is incorrect, you have to state (yea its a little silly to have to do this) you are using your action as the second maneuver. You are not doing your 2 maneuvers and then paying strain to do you action. You are paying the 2 strain to do maneuvers.

EotE pg 200

"A character may perform one free maneuver on his

turn. He may also perform a second maneuver by voluntarily

suffering two points of strain. [Characters may

also perform a second maneuver through a particularly

successful skill check, or by other means listed elsewhere.)

However, regardless of the source, a single

character may not perform more than two maneuvers

during his turn."

The means listed elsewhere is Actions pg 203

"There are five major types of actions a character can

perform during his turn: exchanging an action for a

maneuver, spending the action to activate an ability

or talent, activating a Force power, performing a

skill check, and performing a combat check. The last,

performing a combat check, is actually a variation on

performing a skill check. However, enough unique circumstances

surround it that it requires its own entry."

"A character may exchange

his action for an additional

maneuver during his turn. He may then perform any

maneuver he would be able to perform normally, following

all the rules that govern maneuvers. However, he

still may not perform more than two maneuvers during

his turn, no matter how he gained access to them."

"A character may only perform one action in a tum

Some characters may have abilities allowing them to

perform an action as a maneuver. This does not violate

the limit of one action per turn, however, as the

action now counts as a maneuver."

In the case of the last paragraph I quoted, you do one maneuver, then I use the ability that reduces my action to a maneuver taking 2 strain, then I can do my action. No matter what, I do 2 maneuvers I take 2 strain unless I give up my action.

I'm confused by your explanation and I'll need to go over it a bit to understand, when I do I'll explain myself further

I am 100% glad that it isn't as cut and dry as people that have done it one way or another have thought. This means whatever side of the fence you are on you can't feel bad.

Cut and dry per the RAW a second maneuver costs 2 strain unless you give up your action for the maneuver.

"A character may perform one free maneuver on his
turn. He may also perform a second maneuver by voluntarily
suffering two points of strain."

Isn't that what I said? Three options:

1; 1 action and 1 maneuver

Or

2; substitute your Acton for a maneuver to have 2 maneuvers,

Or

3; take 2 strain to have 2 maneuvers and an action.

What the RAW prevents is substituting the action AND suffering 2 strain to use 3 maneuvers in a single turn.

You do not have to take strain for the second maneuver if your not using your action, sounds like a dev question could be needed to clarify if it hasn't already.

In 1 turn you can take:

you can take 1 action and 1 maneuver for no strain cost

You can take 2 maneuvers for no cost of strain

Or you can 1 action and 2 maneuvers if you suffer 2 strain

Hope this helps

You said, what you said on the 3rd sentence above.

You may have meant substitute your action for a maneuver to have 2 maneuvers, but in it wasn't clear originally. We both see it the same way it seems.

Sorry, writing on phone with baby in my arms can make grammar difficult

Thanks for clarifying all. I got a little paranoid when I started believing it may have been the latter! Seemed a little too penalising to me that way.

No matter what, 2 maneuvers requires 2 strain unless you down grade your 1 action, it seems penalizing bUT it keeps you from being to over powered later in the game

No matter what, 2 maneuvers requires 2 strain unless you down grade your 1 action, it seems penalizing bUT it keeps you from being to over powered later in the game

2 strain actually seems an appropriate setback. The concern of mine was whether or not you still got the action.

Yes, you still get the action as long as you didn't change it to a maneuver.

If you still get the action that seems a bit silly for me.

You are surprised, you don't know a combat is about to start. It comes to your turn, you draw your weapon aim and fire in 1 turn just for 2 strain?

It seems if the point of quick draw was just to remove the 2 strain penalty of the maneuver in the first turn, it would say "it removes the 2 strain penalty". Instead I feel the intent was NORMALLY you would have to draw and then fire, then next turn you could aim and fire. Or with quick draw you can draw and aim and fire"

The intent seems broken if you can do 1 action and 2 maneuvers without some sort of talent involved to give that extra maneuver. I have always read it that if you downgrade the action to a maneuver, you paid 2 strain to do this and lose that action. Not "only if you decide to give up your action do you ever pay the strain"

Again I am pretty sure it isn't as cut and dry as people think and the rule for "downgrade to a maneuver" and "getting a second maneuver equals 2 strain" are separated across 2 pages which is causing people to think they are 2 different things rather than part of the same idea.

I submitted this for clarification and an official ruling yesterday so probably Monday I will post the real answer.

It seems pretty cut-and-dried to me. You get one free maneuver on your turn, and a second maneuver costs 2 strain (MANEUVER LIMITATIONS, CRB200). You may, instead, exchange your action for an additional maneuver (CRB203).

To me, this says that you can do up to two maneuvers and one action in a turn that round for the cost of 2 strain. Remember that one round is roughly a minute (CRB198). A lot can happen in 60 seconds, including drawing a weapon, aiming for a few seconds, then pulling the trigger.

Also, there is nothing in the EXCHANGE AN ACTION FOR A MANEUVER section that says it costs strain.

-EF

1, Typing in caps does not make it more important or correct.

2, The fact that I have seen and played it a different way, means by definition it is not cut-and-dried.

3, I am not sure why it offends anyone that someone reads the same words differently when the wording can easily be interpreted both ways.

4, I like lists

5, What is the point of a xexto always having 2 free maneuvers as its racial then if you can already get 2 free maneuvers?

6, Balancing doesn't make sense against your interpretation

7, Numbers are fun.

8, I think everyone can agree, the wording in the rulebooks has left some issues (strain recovery, initiative, etc) that it is not in any way, shape, or form, unreasonable to ask FFG themselves for clarification.

I'll try and break all the options down in one go:

The "default setting" is that you do one action and one manoeuvre per round. In addition, you can choose one of the following:

1. Convert the action into a second manoeuvre. This costs nothing.

2. Pay 2 strain and perform an additional manoeuvre, bringing the total to one action and two manoeuvres that round.

3. Pay 2 Advantage from your action (that you must already have performed) to take an additional manoeuvre. Otherwise identical to point 2, above.

4. You can take the Unmatched Mobility signature ability from Enter the Unknown. This allows for a third manoeuvre per round, but you'll have to pay for it as stated above or through some evolutions of the signature ability.

The point of contention is you separate 1 and 2, I read that anytime you have 2 maneuvers it costs 2 strain. Just because the explanation for gaining 2 maneuvers is on the next page does not mean it is a totally different rule. They have shown on other rules they separate the explanations so it is perfectly reasonable to read this as the case here.

As I already said a few posts ago, I submitted the question for clarification.

1, Typing in caps does not make it more important or correct.

2, The fact that I have seen and played it a different way, means by definition it is not cut-and-dried.

3, I am not sure why it offends anyone that someone reads the same words differently when the wording can easily be interpreted both ways.

4, I like lists

5, What is the point of a xexto always having 2 free maneuvers as its racial then if you can already get 2 free maneuvers?

6, Balancing doesn't make sense against your interpretation

7, Numbers are fun.

8, I think everyone can agree, the wording in the rulebooks has left some issues (strain recovery, initiative, etc) that it is not in any way, shape, or form, unreasonable to ask FFG themselves for clarification.

Just to address a couple of these:

1. The caps are just to denote headings of the specific sections in the EotE core book.

and

5. Xexto always get the 2 maneuvers without having to pay 2 strain for the 2nd.

1, Typing in caps does not make it more important or correct.

You're right, it doesn't. I was just copying the book. Subsections are in all caps.

2, The fact that I have seen and played it a different way, means by definition it is not cut-and-dried.

I didn't say it was cut-and-dried, I said it seems cut-and-dried to me. I went on to explain why I felt the way I feel.

3, I am not sure why it offends anyone that someone reads the same words differently when the wording can easily be interpreted both ways.

I'm not sure either. I wasn't offended, but it seems you have been. I was just explaining why I think the way I do. Afterall, isn't that the point of this thread, to discuss the second maneuver?

4, I like lists

Me, too!

5, What is the point of a xexto always having 2 free maneuvers as its racial then if you can already get 2 free maneuvers?

You only get one free maneuver. The second maneuver costs either 2 strain or your action. The xexto don't suffer the strain cost of the second maneuver.

6, Balancing doesn't make sense against your interpretation

I don't understand what you mean here. Can you elaborate?

7, Numbers are fun.

Indeed!

8, I think everyone can agree, the wording in the rulebooks has left some issues (strain recovery, initiative, etc) that it is not in any way, shape, or form, unreasonable to ask FFG themselves for clarification.

Yep, there are some wonky words used in some places, and assumptions made in others. Being their first edition of this game system, wonkiness is to be expected.

-EF

You're arguing about something that's been established for a couple of years. If you listen to any of the podcasts with the designers or other live-play stuff you'd know there's no argument or points of contention here.

You can always downgrade your action to perform another maneuver, Osprey already quoted the text. If downgrading your action didn't save you the Strain, why would anyone ever do it, and why would it be mentioned as an option? It would serve no purpose at all.

Actually I am not arguing I am debating, there is a difference. I do forget this forum often forgets there is a difference and defaults to arguments.

I have stated how I see it serving a purpose, you have stated how you see serving a different purpose. That is both allowed.

My Players have accepted my interpretation and don't feel cheated.

I I find it confusing that is seems "Set in stone" that on page A it says "when flying you can do x y z" then on page b it says "when doing x you must to b" that is considered established that "doing x you must to b" doesn't actually mean that, it means "oh we didn't mention now you can do x y z and aa"

I read;

You can downgrade an action to a maneuver

later I read;

If you want 2 maneuvers the second one costs 2 strain

You guys read that as 2 separate and unrelated thoughts

I read them as the same thought.

Regardless of what ends up being the answer from Sam Stewart I will just house rule it (if I was wrong) to do it the way I have done it already as, to me, it seems to fit my understanding.

The point of contention is you separate 1 and 2, I read that anytime you have 2 maneuvers it costs 2 strain. Just because the explanation for gaining 2 maneuvers is on the next page does not mean it is a totally different rule. They have shown on other rules they separate the explanations so it is perfectly reasonable to read this as the case here.

As I already said a few posts ago, I submitted the question for clarification.

This is a completely meaningless interpretation. If it costs 2 strain every time you take a second manoeuvre, regardless of how you did so, why in the world would anyone ever pay 2 Advantage or convert an action? It would render a section of the rules superfluous.

Edit: Oh boy was I ninja'd.