Nope, no bone. Han had a point about a good blaster being the key, and only dopes will voluntarily use melee weapons (except in folks with Force and lightsabers). Game balance doesn't require all options to be equal.

The whole concept of balance is a fairy tale. It's smacks of MMO where a company with paying customers doesn't want to have a whole class or classes of customers drop a game because it's clearly weighted to one or other classes. This is a RPG, if someone can't just role play the melee/hand to hand guy and enjoy it regardless of their success weighed against someone else at the table then, RPGs probably aren't' their thing.

So when someone goes diplomat or politico or trader do you two have the same attitude and just run combat heavy compaigns n tell them to suck it up cuse it was a dopey choice and that they don't need to have a meaningful contribution to the table to have a good experience?

I run campaigns that draw on multiple talent/skill sets and tell my PCs they are best served by cross specialization and a broad approach to CHARGEN. If they choose to focus a PC in one way or another that leaves them inept in some fashion, that's on them. I allow respecs and have recently started test/demo rolls to compare and contrast how given builds fare to give some tangible feedback to people before they commit to an idea. That and I don't buy the 'boo hoo' Melee and Brawl are so under powered sniveling, particularly when factoring in things like Pressure Point, Improved Stunning Blow, coupled with other Talents like Frenzied Attack and Deadly Accuracy there are plenty of options for PCs to be overwhelmingly effective with their bare hands.

Nope, no bone. Han had a point about a good blaster being the key, and only dopes will voluntarily use melee weapons (except in folks with Force and lightsabers). Game balance doesn't require all options to be equal.

The whole concept of balance is a fairy tale. It's smacks of MMO where a company with paying customers doesn't want to have a whole class or classes of customers drop a game because it's clearly weighted to one or other classes. This is a RPG, if someone can't just role play the melee/hand to hand guy and enjoy it regardless of their success weighed against someone else at the table then, RPGs probably aren't' their thing.

So when someone goes diplomat or politico or trader do you two have the same attitude and just run combat heavy compaigns n tell them to suck it up cuse it was a dopey choice and that they don't need to have a meaningful contribution to the table to have a good experience?

A more apt comparison would be if a social character focused solely on Coercion

They are secretly hoping to stumble across a lightsaber...

Yes, even if they are not force sensitive/Jedi, they still want a lightsaber.

Because deep down none of us want to be Luke, we all want to be Han Solo with a lightsaber.

Yup. The lightsaber isn't 'an elegant weapon from a more civilized age', it's the galaxy's ultimate utility knife.

I need to get one Combined with the Ultimate utility tool!

The Sonic Screw Driver!

Pffft. Screwdriver trumps saber every time:

(subtitle: the 11th Doctor owning Vader by turning off his saber with his sonic)

Vader needs no lightsaber.

or the force for that matter.

And so after playing someone who was in the pew=pew=pew blaster crowd (and even that was only intermittent, mostly scathing them into submission), my new character has a pretty solid Strength attribute and I'm working on putting a couple of dice into her melee skill.

Gotta say - that's pretty fun! Whacking someone with my Gaffi stick is strangely effective and satisfying.

I trained in karate when I was younger, 20 years ago my reflexes/training/mindset were fast enough that I could see a bicep flex know that a punch was coming and where it would land, lean back so that the punch passed 6 inches away from my head, and while I was leaning back twist my torso so that I could get a fairly weak gut punch in to the other guys stomach before he finished the forward motion on the punch that missed me. The point of the weak gut punch was to break the other guy's rythm before it started, Yes that actually happened in a sparing match with a friend of mine (who hadn't trained in martial arts), and it really surprised him, enough for him to stop the match and ask "how did you do that?" I 'll be 40 in a few days, slowed down and haven't practiced seriously in about 12 years, so I couldn't do that today, but the point I am intended to make is that a practiced "brawler" could see an opponent'so thighs contract/start to move and start to follow before the opponent took his first step to "disengage" so the opponent would never be more than a half step to a step away which is not out of "engaged" range. I think the loop hole could be closed with a house rule that it takes 2 maneuvers to disengage and call it a day.

Not sure, but...

Isn't 1 maneuver required to disengage, and another 1 to move to Short range? Seems like enough to me. Maybe I'm interpreting this incorrectly?

Not sure, but...

Isn't 1 maneuver required to disengage, and another 1 to move to Short range? Seems like enough to me. Maybe I'm interpreting this incorrectly?

Disengaging puts you at Short range.

The famous Jake LaMotta commented as to what it was that caused him to decide to retire when he did.

His response was that, for the first time in as long as he could remember, he saw the opening first, and then put his fist into it. This meant he was slowing down.

Before that, he had always seen the opening only after he had already put his fist into it.

Sure, a trained brawler/melee artist could respond to something after the opponent starts some action and before their action is finished. However, I would make the point that then you’re into the realm of MMA Picosecond Simulator 12.7, as opposed to anything remotely related to Star Wars.

This game is supposed to be cinematic, and narrative. And both of those goals conflict with the concept of extreme combat simulation accuracy.

Choose what it is that you want to do, and then choose a game that handles that mechanism well. For extreme simulation accuracy, Star Wars is definitely not that game.

The point I was making is it is not hard for a trained brawler to keep pace with a retreating opponent, not letting them out of range.

But me personally, back in the day in a fight it seemed like time slowed down, I had time to see what was coming, choose an action, and execute before it got there, about 7 years back, time still slowed down, I had time to choose but not to execute but maybe because I didn't make up my mind as fast as I used to. This past year I got married and I have been trying to teach my wife some basic self defense... the correct way to punch, stand and the 3 basic blocks... time hasn't been slowing down for me anymore, I can't always block her, but then again my adrenaline isn't pumping when I'm teaching her stuff and I try not to block to fast because initially my wife said that my blocks hurt her arms... but I don't even see where she's going to punch before her arm gets there... maybe because she's not moving in a decent approximation of something optimal in terms of body mechanics, maybe I am just old and slow... I turn 40 this week... I used to run 7 to 11 miles a day... now I can't run without hurting myself because of a surgery I needed to fix a repetitive stress injury that wasn't healing on it's own... it sucks to get old

The point I was making is it is not hard for a trained brawler to keep pace with a retreating opponent, not letting them out of range.

After I punch some chump in the face, I use my advantages to shove him backwards over a chair behind him, knocking him onto his butt. Then I vault over the table with one maneuver and run out the door with my second. Problem solved - I'm out of range.

Next?

The point I was making is it is not hard for a trained brawler to keep pace with a retreating opponent, not letting them out of range.

Depends on the exact circumstances.

If that was always the case, there would not be any need for a boxing ring or a fighting octagon, because once the two combatants got into range, neither of them could ever get out of range until one or the other fell over — stumbled, knocked down, knocked out, dead, whatever.

Often, one way of preventing targets from getting away is triggering knockdown. Advantages and trumphs are there for a reason and the machanics suggested by the system are simply guidelines. Every now and again, spending advantage to prevent them from disengaging idly is possible. Or at the very least it will cost stain, a resource that most NPC's don't have, and most cannot take more then one move action a turn.

Just as said it's assumed that combat occurs in an abstract length of time, thus it is possible to narratively disbalence a person enough to use their moves to break away,only for the other to be always able to catch up to them.

The point I was making is it is not hard for a trained brawler to keep pace with a retreating opponent, not letting them out of range.

After I punch some chump in the face, I use my advantages to shove him backwards over a chair behind him, knocking him onto his butt. Then I vault over the table with one maneuver and run out the door with my second. Problem solved - I'm out of range.

Next?

Thanks for making the point for me.

You explicitly said that you used advantages to knock the guy over, and then used 2 maneuvers to get out of range... that's not 1 maneuver to disengage and then fire without penalty.

The point I was making is it is not hard for a trained brawler to keep pace with a retreating opponent, not letting them out of range.

Depends on the exact circumstances.If that was always the case, there would not be any need for a boxing ring or a fighting octagon, because once the two combatants got into range, neither of them could ever get out of range until one or the other fell over — stumbled, knocked down, knocked out, dead, whatever.

I said that it was easy for a practiced brawler attacker to keep pace/stay in engaged range with a moving defender who was trying to disengage/get away; I did not say that the defender stayed in place so that's something of a strawman argument but one worth addressing anyway.

boxers are generally ALLOWED to leave the ring/forfeit the match, and MMA fighters in a cage match can generally tap out to achieve the same effect. The purpose of

a "boxing ring" is to keep the fighters away from spectators and to keep the fighters in a relatively small area so that the spectators can have a consistently good view of the fight. It is not there to keep the fighters together.

Often, one way of preventing targets from getting away is triggering knockdown. Advantages and trumphs are there for a reason and the machanics suggested by the system are simply guidelines. Every now and again, spending advantage to prevent them from disengaging idly is possible. Or at the very least it will cost stain, a resource that most NPC's don't have, and most cannot take more then one move action a turn.

Just as said it's assumed that combat occurs in an abstract length of time, thus it is possible to narratively disbalence a person enough to use their moves to break away,only for the other to be always able to catch up to them.

I'd favor a rule where it took 2 maneuvers to disengage from an engaged opponent. Then the fleeing character could spend 2 advantage or 2 strain or their action to disengage so a Mook NPC could still disengage

Looked like a brawl between Obi Wan and Jango to me on Kamino. Obi Wan whooped @$$ with Force Pike on Geonosis also. Luke about got his head caved in by a Gaffi Stick. Off the top of my head...

Yes, all very good examples, much like the few I gave.

Aside from possibly the sand person with the gaffi stick, none of those characters are built to melee or brawl. It's a last resort, a desperation move, or simply a tactic to employ when something goes wrong.

Aside from Zeb in Rebels (which is very recent, obviously), melee just hasn't been the focus for any character in Star Wars that I know of. Again, not counting lightsabers.

So, aside from the Sandpeople and their close combat weapons, Ewoks and their close combat weapons, Gammoreans and their close combat weapons, the Jedi and their hand-to-hand capabilities, Teräs Käsi and its practitioners, First Order Stormtroopers with riot batons, Imperial Royal Guard and their force pikes, the Lasat and their close combat weapons, wookiees and their famed melee abilities, and of course not counting any lightsabers (Jedi, Sith, or "other"), WHAT has melee combat ever done for Star Wars?!

Often, one way of preventing targets from getting away is triggering knockdown. Advantages and trumphs are there for a reason and the machanics suggested by the system are simply guidelines. Every now and again, spending advantage to prevent them from disengaging idly is possible. Or at the very least it will cost stain, a resource that most NPC's don't have, and most cannot take more then one move action a turn.

Just as said it's assumed that combat occurs in an abstract length of time, thus it is possible to narratively disbalence a person enough to use their moves to break away,only for the other to be always able to catch up to them.

I'd favor a rule where it took 2 maneuvers to disengage from an engaged opponent. Then the fleeing character could spend 2 advantage or 2 strain or their action to disengage so a Mook NPC could still disengage

Depends really. I think this whole engagement thing is really quite simple and is largely meant to be handled via threats/advantages. An excess of either can be used to stop the other from disengaging. So one could actually be losing an engagement, but doing so in such a manner that means that the other combatant can't ignore them.

The point I was making is it is not hard for a trained brawler to keep pace with a retreating opponent, not letting them out of range.

After I punch some chump in the face, I use my advantages to shove him backwards over a chair behind him, knocking him onto his butt. Then I vault over the table with one maneuver and run out the door with my second. Problem solved - I'm out of range.

Next?

Thanks for making the point for me.

You explicitly said that you used advantages to knock the guy over, and then used 2 maneuvers to get out of range... that's not 1 maneuver to disengage and then fire without penalty.

Fine. After I punch some chump in the face, I use my advantages to shove him backwards over a chair behind him, knocking him onto his butt. Then I vault over the table with one maneuver, putting me a short range. Problem solved - I'm out of range.

Besides who the hell cares? The game engine is suppose to be fast and loose. You're not suppose to get caught up in all the fiddly minutia. Does it look cool? Then do it, and leave the "you're 3/4th of a foot too far away" mechanics at home.

I think the devs intentionally have placed the ability of a trained hand to hand combatant in limiting someone's ability to escape them deeper in Talent trees. If you by default allow someone the ability to do that, you in essence create the 'you can't ever escape me' option for essentially no investment in any particular career or spec. It's the equivalent of giving Brawl/Melee one of the more powerful weapon effects for nothing.

I think the devs intentionally have placed the ability of a trained hand to hand combatant in limiting someone's ability to escape them deeper in Talent trees. If you by default allow someone the ability to do that, you in essence create the 'you can't ever escape me' option for essentially no investment in any particular career or spec. It's the equivalent of giving Brawl/Melee one of the more powerful weapon effects for nothing.

My suggestion of it costing 2 maneuvers to disengage does not prevent someone from disengaging and shooting in the same round, it only requires them to spend 2 advantage or 2 strain to do it. It also means that the fleeing opponent can't get to medium range in a single round so that the melee character can re-engage and attack them the next round but to do that they have to chase that 1 opponent ignoring others. That seems simple, like a reasonable approximation of reality, and balanced...

As opposed to the raw one maneuver to disengage allowing a ranged attack at lower difficulty is a easily abused loophole to the rule that is supposed to put melee on a "level playing field" (other than damage where the ranged attacker still has the advantage) with engaged ranged opponents

Sounds like a good Talent for a Melee tree, not something for the base Skill imo, and it just happens to be in the Guardian book. You describing your experiences only reinforces my opinion, and clearly the devs. This was a mechanic they wanted in a hand to hand specific tree in the form of a Talent and not available to everyone.

I may have been a competent fighter when I was younger (but I was never an elite bad ass, if i had to give myself game stats at my PRIME, at best (being slightly generous) it'd be brawn 2, vigilance 4, agility 3, 2 ranks of brawling, maybe 2 ranks of feral strength, and defensive 2, quick strike 1 or 2, rapid reaction 1 or 2, jump up, probably 2 ranks of toughness, 4 grit, 2 second wind. There was no way I got to the bottom of a melee combat tree (I never got a black belt). Grapple almost fits your explanation of it's intended purpose, to make that work it need to be a once per round incidental. It might be as intended but that doesn't mean it's not a design flaw.

It also doesn't mean it is. I think you're confusing 'I can't have it as fast or as readily as I want it' with flaw. What you're calling for exists in the game. Not liking how long it takes isn't a flaw. Giving someone an Ensnare is wildly OP as an incidental, particularly if allowed out of turn.

That would be a huge mechanical flaw. You're is essence handing the ability for a hand to hand combatant to lock up a target indefinitely with no chance to elude them and at no cost in xp spent, or maneuvers, or actions used. That is absurdly OP.