Isn't that kinda the point of Adversary? I mean a guy with Lightsaber 3:2 opposed, and a guy with Adversary 3 will generate the difficulty using either method. And if you're having a duel that guy better darn well have adversary...

Yeah, my issue is just that taking an opponent's skill pool and Adversary into account is basically doubling up. The Adversary talent is meant, in my mind, to represent "skilled opposition" or "elite training," and that is exactly what skill ranks are for So it'd be like giving Batman a Boost die to hide because his suit is black, and then another Boost die to hide because his suit is dark .

Well that makes perfect sense though, he'd also get an upgrade because he's Batman.

Seriously though, my point was more: If you want to use opposed checks, why not just give the target character sufficient ranks in adversary to get roughly the same result without the kludge?

Agreed. In fact I would suggest not using Opposed rolls unless the opponent had at least one level of Adversary. Any opponent not bada$$ enough to merit levels of Adversary wouldn't be worthy of a duel of the type being discussed.

Yes. That would just be a Simple (-) combat check to determine how many mooks you kill.

Seriously though, my point was more: If you want to use opposed checks, why not just give the target character sufficient ranks in adversary to get roughly the same result without the kludge?

Mostly because your difficulty is likely going to be higher than the standard Average melee combat check: it is determined by the higher of the NPC's characteristic and skill rank. I'm a fan of the higher difficulties in narrative play, especially if the scene is meant to be a protracted duel that ends in retreat rather than outright defeat (like the scene in The Empire Strikes Back ).

However, if the NPC in question had an Adversary rating that was higher than his relevant skill ranks, I might just apply it instead of the skill (so an Adversary 2 with a Melee skill of 1 would still upgrade the difficulty of that Hard Melee check twice, just because, as you say, he is "bad a$$").

Isn't that kinda the point of Adversary? I mean a guy with Lightsaber 3:2 opposed, and a guy with Adversary 3 will generate the difficulty using either method. And if you're having a duel that guy better darn well have adversary...

Yeah, my issue is just that taking an opponent's skill pool and Adversary into account is basically doubling up. The Adversary talent is meant, in my mind, to represent "skilled opposition" or "elite training," and that is exactly what skill ranks are for

I disagree with the part I have bolded. It's what skill ranks and Talents are for. Accounting for all sorts of talents and abilities for your NPC nemesis would make game book-keeping much more of a chore during action scenes, so they have Adversary. A nemesis' skill ranks are exactly what they say they are, their pile of talents that a PC would have, are their adversary score. Plus a level of plot significance as well. If you abstract away Adversary thinking it's covered by a high skill rating, you make the nemesis weaker.

Just fact checked my earlier post. By my quick math a basic hilt with a fully modded Ilum crystal will match the EotE "base lightsaber" stats: 10 damage (6 base + 4 dmg mods), Crit 1 (2 base - 1 crit mod), vicious 2 (0 base + 2 mods), breach 1 and sunder.

Cost is also identical: hilt (300) + crystal (9,000) + 7 mods (700) = 10,000

The new cost is slightly higher: hilt (300) + crystal (9,000) + 7 mods (2,800) = 11,800

Edit: forgot mods cost 100 + 100(mods already installed) instead of a flat 100/per.

Someone asked Sam Stewart that question. So your first calculation should be right...

Cost of Mods

Question asked by Dakkar98 :

The wording concerning mods changed slightly from EotE to AoR. In EotE page 187, Section Installing Mods, paragraph 3, it says ... cost an additional 100 credits beyond the base cost. In AoR, page 199, same Section, Same paragraph, it simply states ... cost an additional 100 credits. I am of the belief that if you install, say an augmented spin barrel, and successfully activate all 4 mods that the total cost would be 2,150 credits, the attachment cost of 1,750 plus 400 for the 4 mods (4 x 100). The odd wording in EotE has raised the question as to whether the cost scales with each additional mod. Some interpret it that the cost for that attachment with all 4 mods would be 2,750, the attachment cost of 1,750 plus 1,000 for the 4 mods (1st mod 100, 2nd mod 200, 3rd mod 300, 4th mod 400). Which interpretation is accurate?

Answered by Sam Stewart:

Every mod you install costs 100 credits to do so. I agree that it could be worded slightly clearer, and apologize for the confusion

Isn't that kinda the point of Adversary? I mean a guy with Lightsaber 3:2 opposed, and a guy with Adversary 3 will generate the difficulty using either method. And if you're having a duel that guy better darn well have adversary...

Yeah, my issue is just that taking an opponent's skill pool and Adversary into account is basically doubling up. The Adversary talent is meant, in my mind, to represent "skilled opposition" or "elite training," and that is exactly what skill ranks are for

I disagree with the part I have bolded. It's what skill ranks and Talents are for. Accounting for all sorts of talents and abilities for your NPC nemesis would make game book-keeping much more of a chore during action scenes, so they have Adversary. A nemesis' skill ranks are exactly what they say they are, their pile of talents that a PC would have, are their adversary score. Plus a level of plot significance as well. If you abstract away Adversary thinking it's covered by a high skill rating, you make the nemesis weaker.

Sure, I can see that and I agree that talents represent training, definitely. Note that I didn't say that skill ranks are the sum total of elite training; I was talking here specifically about Opposed Checks. Adversary does for combat checks what skill ranks do for Opposed social skill checks targeting the same NPC. Adversary does not apply to social checks, but only to incoming combat checks, which never take into account the NPC's skill ranks in structured play.

However, there are a few talents that upgrade the difficulty of Opposed Checks...the only ones I can think of are Nobody's Fool and Intimidating (the latter of which only applies to Coercion and costs strain, much like Dodge does for combat checks). If there are any others I would love to know what they are! So in that respect I can see how Adversary could reasonably be applied to any opposed combat checks.

Even though the RAW would totally allow for Adversary to be applied to Opposed Combat Checks in narrative play, I fear that combining Adversary with the normal Opposed skill difficulty would lead to a dice pool that is a bit too far towards the ridiculous. In this exceptionally rare occurrence where an Opposed Check seems to be the way to play a combat check in narrative mode, IMO it should be skill ranks that determine the difficulty (or Adversary can do the job in lieu of skill ranks). But that's just me!

Isn't that kinda the point of Adversary? I mean a guy with Lightsaber 3:2 opposed, and a guy with Adversary 3 will generate the difficulty using either method. And if you're having a duel that guy better darn well have adversary...

Yeah, my issue is just that taking an opponent's skill pool and Adversary into account is basically doubling up. The Adversary talent is meant, in my mind, to represent "skilled opposition" or "elite training," and that is exactly what skill ranks are for

I disagree with the part I have bolded. It's what skill ranks and Talents are for. Accounting for all sorts of talents and abilities for your NPC nemesis would make game book-keeping much more of a chore during action scenes, so they have Adversary. A nemesis' skill ranks are exactly what they say they are, their pile of talents that a PC would have, are their adversary score. Plus a level of plot significance as well. If you abstract away Adversary thinking it's covered by a high skill rating, you make the nemesis weaker.

Sure, I can see that and I agree that talents represent training, definitely. Note that I didn't say that skill ranks are the sum total of elite training; I was talking here specifically about Opposed Checks. Adversary does for combat checks what skill ranks do for Opposed social skill checks targeting the same NPC. Adversary does not apply to social checks, but only to incoming combat checks, which never take into account the NPC's skill ranks in structured play.

However, there are a few talents that upgrade the difficulty of Opposed Checks...the only ones I can think of are Nobody's Fool and Intimidating (the latter of which only applies to Coercion and costs strain, much like Dodge does for combat checks). If there are any others I would love to know what they are! So in that respect I can see how Adversary could reasonably be applied to any opposed combat checks.

Even though the RAW would totally allow for Adversary to be applied to Opposed Combat Checks in narrative play, I fear that combining Adversary with the normal Opposed skill difficulty would lead to a dice pool that is a bit too far towards the ridiculous. In this exceptionally rare occurrence where an Opposed Check seems to be the way to play a combat check in narrative mode, IMO it should be skill ranks that determine the difficulty (or Adversary can do the job in lieu of skill ranks). But that's just me!

It's not really about whether there are talents that upgrade the difficulty of Opposed checks. It's that if you are replacing combat with an opposed check, they lose the ability to use all those talents. A player that invested in lots of talents like Parry and others would suddenly become weaker. As does a Nemesis with Adversary. In contrast, a player that ploughed everything into their Melee skill and skipped the fun talents would gain. You could change combat to be an opposed roll, but I think there is a cost here. Also, are you talking about replacing the whole of combat with an opposed roll, or each round just being one? If the former, I think you would lose a lot of role-playing opportunities through everything passing so much more quickly.

I don't see a problem with opposed checks so long as it's used at the same scope as other non-combat skills checks: overcoming obstacles.

If a PC wants to go from point A to B and there's some minions at point C in between, it's totally cool to have an opposed check (e.g.: Lightsaber vs. Ranged/Melee), remembering that boost and setback dice can be added to represent any number of additional modifiers. "I got a lot of saber talents!" "Great, have a boost die." In this case, the question is "does the PC just dance-of-death his way through the enemies like a psychotic ballerina high on coke?" Maybe yes, maybe no, maybe yes with some damage.

That's as far as I'd go. If there are Rivals or Nemesis, anyone you'd consider worthy of the Adversary talent ffs, I'd go to rounds because then you're undercutting your own dramatic encounters.

Well, we do see what it's like when a couple maxed out guys go head to head (See: Yoda vs. Sidious.)

Figure that's two guys with 6 in their relevant ability, 5 proficiency dice, and every saber tree there is maxed out going head to head. And then they're throwing FR 7 at each other (in my point of view) backed up by 6 willpower and, again, 5 proficiency dice. These guys throw multiple triumphs at each other regularly.

..................... This also leaves 3 hard points for the lightsaber to be modded, where previously there were zero. Now, you still have to roll to mod the thing, but the errata drops the difficulty when you're doing it to your own weapon by two levels and lets you add your freaking force rating into the roll...

........

I think I miss something. What errata are we talking about?

Well, we do see what it's like when a couple maxed out guys go head to head (See: Yoda vs. Sidious.)

Figure that's two guys with 6 in their relevant ability, 5 proficiency dice, and every saber tree there is maxed out going head to head. And then they're throwing FR 7 at each other (in my point of view) backed up by 6 willpower and, again, 5 proficiency dice. These guys throw multiple triumphs at each other regularly.

You know, having just dissected that scene, I'd have to say that it's not all that force rampage-y. Oh sure, Palpatine throws 5 or 6 Floaty Pods at Yoda, but honestly that could be narrated as one attack with "A metric s-ton of pods raining down on your head!" - but aside from that, it's just a bunch of jumpy, sabery stuff with not a lot of triumphs or despairs.

Don't get me wrong, they're probably very very good - but every single saber tree in the book? I see no evidence of that in the movie.

..................... This also leaves 3 hard points for the lightsaber to be modded, where previously there were zero. Now, you still have to roll to mod the thing, but the errata drops the difficulty when you're doing it to your own weapon by two levels and lets you add your freaking force rating into the roll...

........

I think I miss something. What errata are we talking about?

This errata . The bottom of page 3, top of page 4:

" When a character modifies attachments on his own lightsaber, he decreases the difficulty of the Mechanics check by two, to a minimum of Simple (–). "

-EF

Well, it's less the movie and more the EU. Both of them are acclaimed masters of every form. Yoda prefers Ataru, but he has all of them (After all, he teaches them to everyone else. Who taught Dooku Makashi? Yoda did.). Sidious prefers...I think that was Juyo, but again, he has all of them.

That is, by EU standards, they could've been playing Tennis with the entire Senate Building if they felt like it.

That is, by EU standards, they could've been playing Tennis with the entire Senate Building if they felt like it.

And that's the reason that 90% of the expanded universe sucks.

****EDIT****

Okay, let me expand on that. The problem once you get outside the movies is feature creep. Everything has to be bigger, badder, more powerful, longer, stronger and more badass. "My superweapon can blow up a planet! Oh yeah, well MY superweapon can blow up a sun! Well MY superweapon is the size of a briefcase and can blow up a galaxy! Well MY superweapon can go back in time and kill you before you were even born!"

You're getting authors who keep trying to one-up each other in really poorly written fanfiction. That's a load of nonsense.

The expanded universe needs to be subservient to the movies, not the other way around. And in the movies, we see two very powerful badasses face off. We're not seeing Superman and Zod blowing up moons with their little pinkies.

That is, by EU standards, they could've been playing Tennis with the entire Senate Building if they felt like it.

And that's the reason that 90% of the expanded universe sucks.

The main problem is that the Expanded Universe adds no value to the conversation when used to justify oneself. It is not canon any longer, and so

1) it's not helpful to try to convince a bunch of people using Legends as your evidence, and

2) it's not wise to try and engage a bunch of people using Legends as your talking point.

Yes, we all love Star Wars, but an increasing number of fans are happy to declare (and are 100% justified in holding to the assertion) that "Legends ain't Star Wars anymore" (there are very small segments of fandom that either lament the loss of the EU-as-canon, or that simply choose to ignore LFL and treat all Star Wars material from all time as G-Level Canon). And the rest of the Star Wars fans are simply confused by such talk because they don't actually know anything about the EU. So either way, in my experience it adds no value to your intended audience. And when you don't add value to your audience, you lose them.

Try instead to engage people where they're coming from: use what they actually value, and use that as a starting point. You'll find that they might actually want to listen and respond, instead of constantly decrying your statements.

This is a public service announcement from your friendly neighborhood Star Wars fan, who has read a majority of the Expanded Universe, enjoyed a good deal more than 10% of it, and is overall 'doing okay' with the Legends switch.

RIP Jaina Solo, Kyle Katarn, and Cilghal. Pouring one for my homies.

There was some good Star Wars in legends. There was some very crappy stuff in legends. And if you pay attention the good stuff is being brought back. But the bad stuff is being left behind. For example. The inquisitor.

I could see Yoda having Niman and Ataru. Maybe enough Shien for improved reflect. i see more of his point being spent on Seer and Sage trees.

Yoda only became a badass lightsaber combatant as of AotC, when prior to that nobody knew if he even carried a lightsaber or how proficient he'd be.

Mechanically, I agree with Daeglan that Yoda would have the Ataru Striker and Niman Disciple spec to cover his lightsaber fighting style, which gives him plenty of ranks in Parry and Reflect. Narratively, he'd know the basics of Shii-Cho well enough to teach it to Initiates, but simply having ranks in the Lightsaber skill covers basic Shii-Cho proficiency, which ever Jedi has simply because Shii-Cho was the foundation of lightsaber combat in general, but he wouldn't have the Shii-Cho Knight spec since he never really went much past the basics of Shii-Cho.

Sidious being a true "master" of all the Lightsaber Forms is pure power-creep BS, and probably best left as a narrative element that he's well-versed in all seven of the classical Forms and uses a fighting style that's a blending of the various individual Forms, something that appears very close to the Juyo Form (which itself is draws a great deal from Sith fighting techniques). But since he's a dyed-in-the-wool NPC, he doesn't have to bother with specializations and the GM can just cherry pick the lightsaber-based talents that he wants the Sith Master to have.

Yoda only became a badass lightsaber combatant as of AotC, when prior to that nobody knew if he even carried a lightsaber or how proficient he'd be.

Minor counter-point, Luke knows of him as a "great Jedi warrior". But I don't know if that's something that is actually part of Yoda's reputation or if Luke just assumed that this is what Yoda was. I'm inclined to the latter view, personally. Watching Yoda duel Dooku was one of the silliest moments in all six films for me. It was like watching Christopher Lee (who was actually a good fencer in real life) beset by a green Ping-Pong ball and trying to defend himself with a striplight.

Luke's stating Yoda as a "great warrior" was (at the time) pure presumption on his part, something that Yoda lampshaded with his remark of "wars not make one great." Granted, he'd probably feel that way after reflecting for 20+ years on how his being a "great warrior" during the Clone Warriors didn't turn out so great for the galaxy.

As for Yoda's fight scenes, YMMV on those. It was quite the contrast when he squared off against Dooku after seeing him dominate Anakin and Obi-Wan in a more traditional duel, which might have lead to Dooku deciding to bail as his Makashi prowess simply wasn't capable of fending off Yoda's absolute mastery of Ataru in both technique and mindset, but I enjoyed that sequence and the audience in the theater I was in when I first saw the movie erupted in cheers, both as Yoda broke out the beatstick and afterwards.

Yoda only became a badass lightsaber combatant as of AotC, when prior to that nobody knew if he even carried a lightsaber or how proficient he'd be.

Mechanically, I agree with Daeglan that Yoda would have the Ataru Striker and Niman Disciple spec to cover his lightsaber fighting style, which gives him plenty of ranks in Parry and Reflect. Narratively, he'd know the basics of Shii-Cho well enough to teach it to Initiates, but simply having ranks in the Lightsaber skill covers basic Shii-Cho proficiency, which ever Jedi has simply because Shii-Cho was the foundation of lightsaber combat in general, but he wouldn't have the Shii-Cho Knight spec since he never really went much past the basics of Shii-Cho.

Sidious being a true "master" of all the Lightsaber Forms is pure power-creep BS, and probably best left as a narrative element that he's well-versed in all seven of the classical Forms and uses a fighting style that's a blending of the various individual Forms, something that appears very close to the Juyo Form (which itself is draws a great deal from Sith fighting techniques). But since he's a dyed-in-the-wool NPC, he doesn't have to bother with specializations and the GM can just cherry pick the lightsaber-based talents that he wants the Sith Master to have.

Just adding onto sidious, I probably would go as far to say that he's completely style less, using little more then his raw connection with the force and extensive mental training, absolutely humbling everyone but mace in the initial exchange and making an absolute sham of Jedi conditioning.

Kind of reminds me of a scene in the rots book where he actually invites a Jedi to look into his mind, only to crush his mind and kill him, the Jedi are mere playthings to him since he doesn't follow any of the norms they expect, he's just a very raw force.

I'm really curious about this, as well. Going to have to do some test combat with my brother to get the pacing down.

Definitely looking for more of a Luke vs. Vader feel than Kenobi vs. Anakin. I'm sure some of that can be achieved by having the lightsaber battle be a major plot point and thus broken up by verbal interaction, but I also don't want a couple good rolls to guarantee victory.

I'll have to spend some time building characters within the rules, see how that plays out.

I'm really curious about this, as well. Going to have to do some test combat with my brother to get the pacing down.

Definitely looking for more of a Luke vs. Vader feel than Kenobi vs. Anakin. I'm sure some of that can be achieved by having the lightsaber battle be a major plot point and thus broken up by verbal interaction, but I also don't want a couple good rolls to guarantee victory.

I'll have to spend some time building characters within the rules, see how that plays out.

You can get either result, it's just a matter of staging and how you leverage the mechanic. You have to spend Triumphs and Advantage (and the other two for that matter) to do things like move the action to a different part of the set, or kick your opponent down stairs, or leap onto a catwalk. If you just move boost dice around and activate crits you'll end up with a much flatter fight.

Just looking at the media, the Vader/Luke fight I can get a saber duel that is (roughly) 5 rounds long... totally doable mechanically. The hard part is coming up with that dialogue between rounds to get your emoting done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RFYoZ7H67A

Yeah, it seems the big challenge to staging a proper lightsaber duel is to get the PCs to do things other than swing their lightsaber each round, and the same for a GM running their opponent. And that's on top of spending Advantage/Threat/Triumph/Despair on non-combat effects to keep things interesting. I will admit that I've been guilty of falling into the classic gamer mindset of "must attack, must defeat the enemy" and not really employing other skills during what should have been a proper lightsaber duel, both in this system and in others. Hoping I can avoid those pitfalls in the new FaD campaign I'm starting this Friday, but we'll see. At the very least, I'm aware of the issue, which is a step in the right direction. Who knows, perhaps in the Guardian or Warrior sourcebook we'll get a section in Chapter 3 that discusses and gives tips on staging proper lightsaber duels in this system.

To go by the clip that Ghostofman linked to, the RotJ rematch between Luke and Vader probably didn't have that many actual Lightsaber combat checks, and instead had Vader rolling Coercion and Luke rolling Charm at various points to try and convert the other to their point of view. Vader wound up rolling a Despair when he tried his Coercion check while he and Luke were under the Emperor's throne, which in turn caused Luke to flip out and proceed to flatten the Sith Lord with his next Lightsaber combat check.

I'd think that Vader was using Influence on Luke to push some dark side emotions and up Luke's Strain. He wanted to capture him (mostly) intact, and that easier done by exceeding ST than it is with lightsaber blows.