WEG could have made it up. A lot of ear material was fabricated whole-cloth for the RPG line, and this could be one of those things.

-EF

I was simply trying to answer HappyDaze's question (quoted above) based on my knowledge of relatively old SWRPGs and the sources available to me. My main point was that there actually is some published material that supports this [house] rule, hence it is more than just a "Myth" as HappyDaze described.

I suspect it was included to dissuade non-force-using PCs from using lightsabers, which is perfectly fine reason for the mechanic as far as I'm concerned. Whether it was either invented (i.e. it is not based on canon) or adapted (i.e. it is based on canon) for that purpose is beyond me. I won't, since I certainly can't , deny that the rule could have been fabricated whole cloth by WEG, since I have no knowledge of such an event occurring any canon.

Follow-up on that, the WEG rule doesn't discriminate between force-users and non-force-users; Anyone missing the difficulty by 10 or more injures themself. This part is widely house-ruled in games so a bad attack roll doesn't totally ruin someone's day and character, and is frequently moot since most force-using 'saber wielders are using the Lightsaber Combat ability which gives a good boost the Lightsaber skill when used by most force sensitives.

However, I like the rule, and include it in my games. Basically, if you don't have a force rating, Despair rolled on a Lightsaber combat check can be used to deal the attack's damage to the wielder. It provides a simple, mechanical answer to the question "why everyone isn't using a lightsaber?"

If you don't like the rule, fine, don't use it. But it is based on LucasFilm approved material. I'm not going to get into another debate/discussion/argument/fight about "what makes sense" for lightsabers. SW is soft sci-fi, so the thing does whatever the thing needs to do.

It provides a simple, mechanical answer to the question "why everyone isn't using a lightsaber?"

My players have never asked that question. They see Rarity 10 and a high cost as the first barrier to making the lightsaber general issue, and the second barrier is that ranged weapons (especially those with auto-fire) have many advantages over the lightsaber.

If we want to keep to melee weapons, then the vibrorapier boasts Pierce 5, which with mods can hit pierce 7. For the vast majority of opponents Pierce 7 works as well as Breach 1. Sure, the damage is probably lower, but it's so much cheaper and more available that it makes up for it.

My players have never asked that question.

That's immaterial to why the house-rule exists. Plenty of other GMs have been asked this by players. I'm one of them. I can also tell you it was one of the first things I asked my GM when I made my first character in WEG's first edition.

Maybe that's why WEG included the rule, maybe it's not.

But really, who cares? The rule is published in an official LucasFilm product, so it's more than the imaginings of the fans.

As I stated above, if you don't like it, don't use it. And this is so off-topic that it really doesn't bear further discussion. If you want to discuss lightsabers hurting wielders, it's well past time a separate thread got created.

My question stands even more. By making a lightsaber require more criticals shows the need for more skill. However the increased required advantages still doesn't stop me or another gm using despairs or multiple threats to say the user injured themselves. I think the starting advantages to crit is too low and think the standard lightsaber should have at minimum one vicious quality on it eve. Without crystal mods.

Thinking of making changes for my game of either one of these.

Basic Lightsaber

Damage 6 Crit 3 Special: Breach 1, Sunder, Vicious 1

Or

Damage 6 Crit 4 Special: Breach 1,Sunder, Vicious 2

Again my players and I both like it taking more skill to activate, but more vicious when you are skilled.

Would also say 2 despairs and they could be used to harm themselves and roll on the crit chart as well as base damage.

I and my players aren't concerned about the weapon compared to other weapons just the weapon itself.

It's your table, you can do whatever you want. If you want 'sabers to crit less, then make your changes. You're gonna be pretty disappointed when you realize how little increasing skill increases the advantages produced by a roll, though.

I think the way you seem to be looking at the lightsaber's efficacy is extremely myopic. Every career has an entire specialization dedicated to lightsaber combat! That's 300 xp of nothing but lightsaber-based combat ability, per career! But you don't think the weapon is skill based enough?

There's way more to weapons in this game than damage and crit, but if that's all you want to judge it on after what's been presented in this thread... I don't think anything is really going to change your mind.

I just have to point out Episode 1 Qui gon gets stabbed through the heart and Darth Maul gets cut in half. Episode II Jango loses his head and Anakin loses an arm and Obi-wan gets knocked out of a fight with crits. Episode 3 Dooku loses both hands and Anakin loses 2 legs and his other arm. Episode 4 Obi-wan gets cut down. Episode 5 Luke loses a hand. Episode 6 Vader loses a hand....Are you getting the point that Lightsaber crits are...REALLY bad.

In Star Wars, all the cool kids lose a body part. Cause that's how GM Lucas rolls.

I just have to point out Episode 1 Qui gon gets stabbed through the heart and Darth Maul gets cut in half. Episode II Jango loses his head and Anakin loses an arm and Obi-wan gets knocked out of a fight with crits. Episode 3 Dooku loses both hands and Anakin loses 2 legs and his other arm. Episode 4 Obi-wan gets cut down. Episode 5 Luke loses a hand. Episode 6 Vader loses a hand....Are you getting the point that Lightsaber crits are...REALLY bad.

If this is targeted at me... Lightsaber critcals are bad!?

Thank you for taking the time to explain that.

But seriously, yes, I do understand that lightsaber criticals are "REALLY bad." I would prefer most 'sabers have at least Vicious 1, and I'm rather disappointed that only a few crystals have vicious mods:

• Mephite (1)
• Krayt Pearl (3)
• Ilum (2)
• Barab Ingot (2)

But, assuming the Ilum crystal is the "standard" crystal, you can add Vicious with mods. I'm satisfied with that, especially with the reduced difficulty to mod your own sabers. Also, with sufficent advantages, you can activate critical hits multiple times to add +10 to the crit roll for each additional activation (pg 165), which is probably a more effective way of nailing "REALLY bad" crits. I can do the math for you if you really want.

The problem with your examples, though, is that they're based on several assumptions, two in particular, that may not hold up to scrutiny.

First, there's the question of crit severity (crits are really bad) vs crit frequency (crits happen a lot). All the injuries you describe are at the end of a relative long fight. Its possible, and I would argue quite reasonable, that the crits you listed weren't the first crits in any of the fights. A lot of the crit effects are pretty minor (everything under 40) and even moving up the chart, a lot of them don't neccessarily visible effects (See Scattered Senses). Considering that the sabers may modded, and crit can be activated multiple times, and how frequently sabers can crit, I think the "REALLY bad" crits are as likely to be the cumulative product of several crits, not the product of a *single* massive crit.

And having just watched through the ROTS duel with Dooku, I easily counted 3-4 times dooku could have gotten a minor crit before losing his hands.

Second, there's the assumption that these characters had no criticals going into the fight. This is a much weaker assumption, but some of these guys had gotten knocked around in previous encounters and were set up for nasty crits, making the crit rolls from these attacks seems greater than they really should be.

tl;dr: I get 'saber crits are supposed to be really bad. But IMO, the bad crits seen in the examples provided are just as likely to be the product of multiple crits (due to low crit rating) as they are the product of big crits (due to a high vicious score).

Or more likely a combination of the 2. A couple minor crits combined with a decent vicious rating.

This is a bit of a thread resurrection, but whatever.

If you're going to start screwing around with rules, I'm of the opinion you should at least be doing it in an informed way. To this end, I tried to resurrect my old R code for a dice roll simulator (originally posted the link in the old EotE forums, but they seem to be long gone), and being unable to find it, built a new one. I can post the code if anyone is interested. I generated dice rolls for four ball-park power levels of jedi with the following attribute/skill combinations:

• Youngling (Attribute 2, Skill 1; dice: YG) - Barely qualified to handle a glowstick
• Padawan (Attribute 3, Skill 2; dice: YYG) - An average starting character (not power-gamed)
• Knight (Attribute 4, Skill 4; dice: YYYY) - A solid lightsaber combatant
• Weapon Master (Attribute 6, Skill 5; dice: YYYYYG) - Max stats, a veritable glow-in-the-dark death machine

Six different versions of the lightsaber were modeled:

• Basic Lightsaber described in EotE: Dmg 10, Crit 1, Vicious 2
• Basic Lightsaber described in F&D: Dmg 6, Crit 2
• Ilum Crystal + 1 crit mod: Dmg 6, Crit 1
• Ilum Crystal + 2 Vicious mod : Dmg 6, Crit 2, Vicious 1
• Kilcanon's houserule #1 : Dmg 6, Crit 3, Vicious 1
• Kilcanon's houserule #2 : Dmg 6, Crit 4, Vicious 2

All versions also had Breach 1 and Sunder, but these abilities are irrelevant to the current discussion.

For the simulations, difficulty was locked at 'Average' (dice: PP). The same dice pools were interpreted for each weapon to minimize variability between weapons. No abilities will used in the interpretation of the dice results, and it is assumed all Triumphs and Advantages possible were used to trigger crits. These are just simplifying assumptions made to compare possible ranges of crit severity.

The Younglings hit about 50.3% of the time, and had an average of -0.8 advantages on a success. The crit results look like this:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 22% of successful attacks, and averaged +21.3 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 11.9% of successful attacks, and averaged +0 to critical injury rolls (< 0.1)
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 22% of successful attacks, and averaged +1.3 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 11.9% of successful attacks, and averaged +10 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 9.8% of successful attacks, and averaged +10 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 9.7% of successful attacks, and averaged +20 to critical injury rolls

The Padawan level characters hit 69.8% of attacks, and basically broke even on advantages (just slightly over 0). The respective crit results were:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 49.6% of successful attacks, and averaged +24.6 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 30.4% of successful attacks, and averaged +0.7 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 49.6% of successful attacks, and averaged +4.6 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 30.4% of successful attacks, and averaged +10.7 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 20.7% of successful attacks, and averaged +10.5 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 17.7% of successful attacks, and averaged +20.5 to critical injury rolls

The Knight level characters hit on just over 86% of attacks, and averaged just under an advantage (~0.9). The respective crit results were:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 75% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +30 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 59% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +3 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 75% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +10 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 59% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +13 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 44% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +12 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 36% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +21 to critical injury rolls

The Weapons Master misses less than 5% of their attacks, and averaged about 2 1/3 advantages on successful hits. The respective crit results were:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 91% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +41 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 82% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +7 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 91% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +21 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 82% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +17 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 69% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +14 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 57% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +22 to critical injury rolls

I look at this, and to me it looks like the magnitude of crits is substantially more sensitive to 'saber's crit rating than it's vicious rating: With the more mild house rule described, the crit modifier goes from +10 to +14 over a huge range of skills (the second house rule is even less effected by skill, ranging from 20 to 22), but if you reduce the crit rating, it goes from ~ +1 to over +20 as skill increases.

I mean, you wanted crit size based on skill right?

And this data says nothing about the effectiveness of repeatedly hitting crits on a target, which increases the CI rolls by +10/previous injury. With the house-rules you're giving up about 10-15% of your crits on successful attacks (about 1/4 - 1/3 of your total crits in some cases!) for about +10 on crit rolls.

For me, I'd much rather be hitting crits 20%-40% more often and scoring ~ 10 less on crit rolls. To me, that looks like a *much* more dangerous weapon than what would be described by the proposed house rules. But people have different opinions, and, frankly, based on my experience in these forums I have very very little faith that actual numbers will have any affect on most readers. I've found people rather just stick their heads in the sand around when presented with data that conflicts with what they think reality is.

On the methods: The results were simulated using a simple Monte Carlo method, with each die in the pool being randomly generated based on the face number (pg 12 of the EotE beta, and pg18 of the F&D core, but I didn't check to see if they were identical. Regardless, the dice are the dice) and the results from the dice from each simulated pool were aggregated over the net number of success (failures = -successes), advantages (threat = -advantage), triumphs and despairs. Each dice pool was simulated 100,000 times, based on req'd processor time and observed convergence of mean values. All simulated results were stored in .csv format and are available on request. The raw code for R is aslo available, but I'd prefer to release any code as an R "Package" that includes a EULA.

Monte Carlo methods rely on the weak law of large numbers to use large numbers to allow a set of simulated observations converge on the underlying distribution of values in a relatively complicated process. Since the results of FFG's Star Wars dice are tracked in 4 dimensions (Success, Advantage, Triumph, Despair), the dimensions are highly correlated, and the explict sample space becomes very large with more than a few dice (even though the explicit space is much smaller due to multiple dice rolls having identical degenerate results), MC simulations are hugely useful to approximate a dice pool's distribution. More information about Monte Carlo methods are available on wikipedia .

What I see from this is as a lightsaber wielder goes up in xp they become more dangerous.... did you take into account that higher xp characters are more likely to go up against characters with the adversary talent? curious how those effect things..

What I see from this is as a lightsaber wielder goes up in xp they become more dangerous....

... Yes, it does appear that skilled Jedi are, in fact, more dangerous. Very astute.

did you take into account that higher xp characters are more likely to go up against characters with the adversary talent? curious how those effect things..

As I stated in the explanation, I didn't include other abilities for simplicity. That included enemy abilities, as well as player abilities. So, no, I did not account for adversary talent.

The problem with your request is how to quantify "higher xp characters are more likely to go up against characters with the adversary talent". Are they facing 10% of enemies with Adversary 1? 20% with Adversary 2? It's completely subjective, and I didn't feel like getting into an endless debate about whether I pulled the "right" values of thin air. Additionally, as soon as you start tossing those changes in, the results become exponentially difficult to compare results since it's not clear what role the increased difficulty plays vs the increase in skill.

This is why you only adjust one parameter at a time in science: so you can see the effect of one variable. The discussion here is about the impact of skill on lightsaber crits, from the OP:

Emphasis mine.

The discussion is not about the effect of the adversary talent on lightsaber crits. So I varied lightsaber skill rolls, not the difficulty.

And no, I'm not going to set up a multi-variate or multi-variable regression to tease out the what parts are what. It's not even remotely worth the effort.

If I get some time, I'll try to toss a few different difficulties in at a set skill level. A lot of that above had to be transcribed from output by hand, especially since I can't figure out how to publish tables in this forum software.

I just have to point out Episode 1 Qui gon gets stabbed through the heart and Darth Maul gets cut in half. Episode II Jango loses his head and Anakin loses an arm and Obi-wan gets knocked out of a fight with crits. Episode 3 Dooku loses both hands and Anakin loses 2 legs and his other arm. Episode 4 Obi-wan gets cut down. Episode 5 Luke loses a hand. Episode 6 Vader loses a hand....Are you getting the point that Lightsaber crits are...REALLY bad.

Ponda Baba loses an arm, and if you believe behind the scenes photos, his head. Cornelius Evazan also dies in one hit, though it's a blink and you'll miss it kill.

I just have to point out Episode 1 Qui gon gets stabbed through the heart and Darth Maul gets cut in half. Episode II Jango loses his head and Anakin loses an arm and Obi-wan gets knocked out of a fight with crits. Episode 3 Dooku loses both hands and Anakin loses 2 legs and his other arm. Episode 4 Obi-wan gets cut down. Episode 5 Luke loses a hand. Episode 6 Vader loses a hand....Are you getting the point that Lightsaber crits are...REALLY bad.

That's why I would be adding vicious as a standard quality to every lightsaber, but to pull off the crit costs more...but when you crit you really crit.

This is a bit of a thread resurrection, but whatever.

If you're going to start screwing around with rules, I'm of the opinion you should at least be doing it in an informed way. To this end, I tried to resurrect my old R code for a dice roll simulator (originally posted the link in the old EotE forums, but they seem to be long gone), and being unable to find it, built a new one. I can post the code if anyone is interested. I generated dice rolls for four ball-park power levels of jedi with the following attribute/skill combinations:

• Youngling (Attribute 2, Skill 1; dice: YG) - Barely qualified to handle a glowstick
• Padawan (Attribute 3, Skill 2; dice: YYG) - An average starting character (not power-gamed)
• Knight (Attribute 4, Skill 4; dice: YYYY) - A solid lightsaber combatant
• Weapon Master (Attribute 6, Skill 5; dice: YYYYYG) - Max stats, a veritable glow-in-the-dark death machine

Six different versions of the lightsaber were modeled:

• Basic Lightsaber described in EotE: Dmg 10, Crit 1, Vicious 2
• Basic Lightsaber described in F&D: Dmg 6, Crit 2
• Ilum Crystal + 1 crit mod: Dmg 6, Crit 1
• Ilum Crystal + 2 Vicious mod : Dmg 6, Crit 2, Vicious 1
• Kilcanon's houserule #1 : Dmg 6, Crit 3, Vicious 1
• Kilcanon's houserule #2 : Dmg 6, Crit 4, Vicious 2

All versions also had Breach 1 and Sunder, but these abilities are irrelevant to the current discussion.

For the simulations, difficulty was locked at 'Average' (dice: PP). The same dice pools were interpreted for each weapon to minimize variability between weapons. No abilities will used in the interpretation of the dice results, and it is assumed all Triumphs and Advantages possible were used to trigger crits. These are just simplifying assumptions made to compare possible ranges of crit severity.

The Younglings hit about 50.3% of the time, and had an average of -0.8 advantages on a success. The crit results look like this:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 22% of successful attacks, and averaged +21.3 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 11.9% of successful attacks, and averaged +0 to critical injury rolls (< 0.1)
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 22% of successful attacks, and averaged +1.3 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 11.9% of successful attacks, and averaged +10 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 9.8% of successful attacks, and averaged +10 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 9.7% of successful attacks, and averaged +20 to critical injury rolls

The Padawan level characters hit 69.8% of attacks, and basically broke even on advantages (just slightly over 0). The respective crit results were:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 49.6% of successful attacks, and averaged +24.6 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 30.4% of successful attacks, and averaged +0.7 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 49.6% of successful attacks, and averaged +4.6 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 30.4% of successful attacks, and averaged +10.7 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 20.7% of successful attacks, and averaged +10.5 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 17.7% of successful attacks, and averaged +20.5 to critical injury rolls

The Knight level characters hit on just over 86% of attacks, and averaged just under an advantage (~0.9). The respective crit results were:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 75% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +30 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 59% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +3 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 75% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +10 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 59% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +13 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 44% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +12 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 36% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +21 to critical injury rolls

The Weapons Master misses less than 5% of their attacks, and averaged about 2 1/3 advantages on successful hits. The respective crit results were:

• EotE "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 91% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +41 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Basic Lightsaber": Crit on 82% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +7 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + crit mod": Crit on 91% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +21 to critical injury rolls
• F&D "Ilum + vicious mod": Crit on 82% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +17 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #1: Crit on 69% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +14 to critical injury rolls
• Kilcanons Houserule #2: Crit on 57% of successful attacks, and averaged ~ +22 to critical injury rolls

I look at this, and to me it looks like the magnitude of crits is substantially more sensitive to 'saber's crit rating than it's vicious rating: With the more mild house rule described, the crit modifier goes from +10 to +14 over a huge range of skills (the second house rule is even less effected by skill, ranging from 20 to 22), but if you reduce the crit rating, it goes from ~ +1 to over +20 as skill increases.

I mean, you wanted crit size based on skill right?

And this data says nothing about the effectiveness of repeatedly hitting crits on a target, which increases the CI rolls by +10/previous injury. With the house-rules you're giving up about 10-15% of your crits on successful attacks (about 1/4 - 1/3 of your total crits in some cases!) for about +10 on crit rolls.

For me, I'd much rather be hitting crits 20%-40% more often and scoring ~ 10 less on crit rolls. To me, that looks like a *much* more dangerous weapon than what would be described by the proposed house rules. But people have different opinions, and, frankly, based on my experience in these forums I have very very little faith that actual numbers will have any affect on most readers. I've found people rather just stick their heads in the sand around when presented with data that conflicts with what they think reality is.

On the methods: The results were simulated using a simple Monte Carlo method, with each die in the pool being randomly generated based on the face number (pg 12 of the EotE beta, and pg18 of the F&D core, but I didn't check to see if they were identical. Regardless, the dice are the dice) and the results from the dice from each simulated pool were aggregated over the net number of success (failures = -successes), advantages (threat = -advantage), triumphs and despairs. Each dice pool was simulated 100,000 times, based on req'd processor time and observed convergence of mean values. All simulated results were stored in .csv format and are available on request. The raw code for R is aslo available, but I'd prefer to release any code as an R "Package" that includes a EULA.

Monte Carlo methods rely on the weak law of large numbers to use large numbers to allow a set of simulated observations converge on the underlying distribution of values in a relatively complicated process. Since the results of FFG's Star Wars dice are tracked in 4 dimensions (Success, Advantage, Triumph, Despair), the dimensions are highly correlated, and the explict sample space becomes very large with more than a few dice (even though the explicit space is much smaller due to multiple dice rolls having identical degenerate results), MC simulations are hugely useful to approximate a dice pool's distribution. More information about Monte Carlo methods are available on wikipedia .

Thanks for all the info. WI'll defineately give me thoughts on which way I like to go