Never GMed before, RPed alot across different mediums. PnP, Videogames and larp. How ever never as a GM. I doubt I'll have a problem with naratives and such. But I seem to be a bit slow on picking up the mechanics. So I'll use this thread to post my many questions. I have a f&d core rule book and if the answer is in there and obviouse a page number would be great.

1. If some one is trying to persuade or coerce an npc (or the other way around) how does the defender determine what to roll?

2. Since there is no levels whats the best way to scale an npc to be a match for players as they progress?

1) That is covered in the Opposed checks section of the Core rulebooks.

2) That is more tricky, you will have to "learn as you go" with stuff like that or have somebody who knows more about it give you the info. The problems I faced (As I have also just started Dm'ing) is that I'm still unsure with how powerful my Group is, as on paper they may be "X" powerful but seeing as they're still getting used to it they are not using everything as efficiently as they might do in a few months time.

As for second question start way low power ramp up for the difficulty you want.

For me, (and I know Many disagree with this and the book doesn't even suggest it, but since Oggdudes Character generator makes things simpler) I build all my Rivals and Nemesis using the PC rules, that way I have a Basis in Point value for comparing them to the PCs.

The only part that doesn't quite match up is gear. But I gear them with what Seems appropriate for what I am going with in the adventure and what I am willing to let fall into the PC's hands.

1. If some one is trying to persuade or coerce an npc (or the other way around) how does the defender determine what to roll?

It's an opposed check (unless the GM wants to use another difficulty, which he can). Short version, you use one characters positive dice, and then convert 1:1 the other characters positive dice score to a negative one to generate the difficulty. So if I were trying to Coerce a character with a Discipline of YGG, my difficulty would be RPP.

2. Since there is no levels whats the best way to scale an npc to be a match for players as they progress?

The one's a bit of a peek behind the curtain, so I'm hiding it.

Also one trick is to mirror the party...Basically run their characters stat blocks reskinned. Instead of a Human charmer its a Twileck charmer. The Wookiee marauder is a Trandoshan Marauder etc.

I know it sounds crazy, but think about it, how fun would a new TV show be if the hero dies 3 episodes in like a chump?

Unless it is Game of Thrones.. Then best not to make any assumptions on who the main character actually is, cause the main character may actually just be the story and No one is Safe from the Story.

As a loose rule of thumb on skill checks, the PC will have a reasonable chance of success when they have more ability/proficiency dice than there are difficulty/challenge dice and setback/boost are equal. This falls off with bigger die pools where two+ more are needed. Having more than that makes success very likely, while having an evenly matched die pool means that the PC is going to fail about or at least half the time.

When it comes to combat, lowball the difficulty. It's MUCH easier to add reinforcements for the opposition as the fight progresses or to simply let the PCs have an easy win than to deal with the "oops, that was too much" version, especially when you're getting used to a system.

I agree with others, bringing more enemies in is a great way to even out the destiny pool or spend lots of threat or even despair on PC dice rolls. Better to have too few enemies than too many.

In my experience however, there should be at least one enemy for every PC in the group, now this could be a rival, or minion group, and this won't always work due to some rivals and nemesis' being more powerful than the PC's, but it is a good rule of thumb.

When planning encounters, do a few rolls and see what kind of damage the enemies will be throwing out per attack and compare that to the players, if you get to a point where you are exceeding their wound thresholds multiple times, then there may be a problem, once or twice is okay (after all crits create tension), but unless you are actively trying to overwhelm them to kill them or create the drama of an escape, avoid that scenario.

Try and create alternative objectives to complete the encounter, especially if they are overwhelmed, maybe the slicer can lock off the corridor the Stormtroopers are down, or maybe they simply have to rescue a prisoner from an escort of guards, which case it's a grab and go situation where the drama becomes protecting the prisoner as they make their escape.

I know it sounds crazy, but think about it, how fun would a new TV show be if the hero dies 3 episodes in like a chump?

Unless it is Game of Thrones.. Then best not to make any assumptions on who the main character actually is, cause the main character may actually just be the story and No one is Safe from the Story.

GoT has sufficient interesting characters, so the loss of any one isn't an issue. If your game has dozens of playable PCs and the players don't mind moving form one to another you're fine.

Typical RPG campaign focus on a single Character per Player though...

I have never had a problem with or been afraid of my character dying. I, Infact Treasure those deaths both the Heroic and the spetacularly stupid ones.

Me and some of my friends Talk about how our Characters Died often over the years.

My wife treasures one where we completed and survived assaulting tower and it evil only to have her Fall to her death, trying to climb back down, from a failed series of Climbing checks.

A Character Death Means a New beginning and the opportunity to try/play something new.

2. Since there is no levels whats the best way to scale an npc to be a match for players as they progress?

Compare the dice pools, soak, wound/strain thresholds, etc. with that of the players, for a start. If you want the PCs to be able to drive off the enemy, then they'll need to exceed the enemy's numbers, usually by a decent margin depending on how many you want standing at the end. You can do the same with any challenges, like slicing or mechanics rolls...look at your PC's capability and adjust the challenge accordingly.

That said, Star Wars is often about running away from terrible odds. So don't be afraid to make your opposition overwhelming and turning the scene into a chase. In that case the challenges need to be adjusted to the PC's Athletics, Coordination, possible social skills if they look for refuge, etc.

Also, traditionaly the dm/gm has rolled the "oposing dice". In many of the videos it seems players do this and from the rules it sounds like they want pkayers to instead. How ever it seems odd to have players do it on certain checks. I planned on allowing players to roll their own negative dice on things like hacking or piloting. But when trying to influence something that normaly thinks for it self it seems odd to allow them to roll on behalf of the NPC.

Does any one else feel this way and use an alternative dice pool method?

Also, traditionaly the dm/gm has rolled the "oposing dice". In many of the videos it seems players do this and from the rules it sounds like they want pkayers to instead. How ever it seems odd to have players do it on certain checks. I planned on allowing players to roll their own negative dice on things like hacking or piloting. But when trying to influence something that normaly thinks for it self it seems odd to allow them to roll on behalf of the NPC.

Does any one else feel this way and use an alternative dice pool method?

I roll the Oppsing dice as a GM for 2 reasons..

#1 it brings a bit more of the "Gambler sense of funto the game where we are competing against one another.

#2 there are checks that I do not want the Players to know the actual results of (I.E. whether they were successful or not.

Sometimes I let them know whether they have Advantages left or not, but If there are threat, I don't always tell them that either and just apply it.

This is most often the case for me with Perception checks and opposed checks.

For me, the players always roll the dice in their pool, both positive and negative. Mostly this is because it allows me to narrate the situation as the pool is being built (e.g.: "the guy you've been talking to seems to be pretty 'with it', so you're rolling against RPP", or "this setback is for darkness, this setback is for the Fear effect you're still under"...).

I always roll my own pool as well, both positive and negative, completely in the open*. I've never had a problem with revealing the results of Perception or the like, and actually this:

#1 it brings a bit more of the "Gambler sense of funto the game where we are competing against one another.

...is one of the things I've been fighting to get rid of in my game, with a pretty good degree of success. I'm not competing against the players, and they aren't competing against me, it's entirely about the story.

----------------

* there are dice I roll behind a screen, but those are just for ad hoc situations when the players are off the rails, like "is there a laundromat nearby" or "is the barkeep friendly"

For me, the players always roll the dice in their pool, both positive and negative. Mostly this is because it allows me to narrate the situation as the pool is being built (e.g.: "the guy you've been talking to seems to be pretty 'with it', so you're rolling against RPP", or "this setback is for darkness, this setback is for the Fear effect you're still under"...).

I always roll my own pool as well, both positive and negative, completely in the open*. I've never had a problem with revealing the results of Perception or the like, and actually this:

#1 it brings a bit more of the "Gambler sense of funto the game where we are competing against one another.

...is one of the things I've been fighting to get rid of in my game, with a pretty good degree of success. I'm not competing against the players, and they aren't competing against me, it's entirely about the story.

----------------

* there are dice I roll behind a screen, but those are just for ad hoc situations when the players are off the rails, like "is there a laundromat nearby" or "is the barkeep friendly"

That is a matter of perception. It is a "Game". The Dice are a "game". games involve some sort of Competition. I and My players tend to enjoy the Gamblers aspect of the competition.

You as the GM are Running/Playing the Enemies. There is a Competition of sorts in Every game.. and to try and deny this is a Fact in a GAME, is simply a denial of truth and an aspect of elitism.

That does not mean you you go out of your way to Kill and defeat the players... it does not mean that you don't build a Story together.... You as the GM are there to provide the challenge and mediate the rules, but you are still the opposition to the players.

Until you remove Chance and Opposition for the equation, trying to deny that there is no Competition in the game is simple denial.

Now, that being said, That doesn't mean that rolling openly isn't a valid form of playing the game... I am not saying that at all.

But I have found in my years that keeping everything open, Regardless of How good the "Roleplayer" thinks they are, It changes how they act and react to situations. It also Ruins the "surprise" of hidden events.

Some of the greatest moments my players have recounted over the years is When something that was kept hidden was finally revealed. Or when something that was hidden was successfully discovered before the intent to reveal had come about.

But that is just me and My players over the years. Others have different tastes and that is just fine.

That is a matter of perception. It is a "Game". The Dice are a "game". games involve some sort of Competition. I and My players tend to enjoy the Gamblers aspect of the competition.

You as the GM are Running/Playing the Enemies.

I'm also running their allies...and everything else that is "not the PC". Your definition is far too narrow.

There is a Competition of sorts in Every game.. and to try and deny this is a Fact in a GAME, is simply a denial of truth and an aspect of elitism.

Again, a narrow definition. I'm not sure where the "elitist" part comes in, that makes no sense...unless you're just taking the shotgun approach at attempted insults.

But I have found in my years that keeping everything open, Regardless of How good the "Roleplayer" thinks they are, It changes how they act and react to situations. It also Ruins the "surprise" of hidden events.

That depends on how it's presented. I can't think of the last time I put the players in the position of having to act on PC knowledge vs player knowledge, and I haven't rolled hidden dice for a couple of years.

Or your Definition of what a Competition is is to narrow and extreme. As I said, it is a matter of perception and taste. Neither method is 'wrong'.

Moving onto some other issues I've come across.

In other RPG's you say "I want to attack like this" Then the dice are modified. In this game it seems you roll then narrate...Right?

So using auto firing as an example I can't say "I'm going to auto fire" then roll. Instead I have to roll my attack and then explain what happens based on the roll.( The F&D rules say "If the attack hits, the attacker may trigger auto fire by spending 2 advantage. Auto fire can be triggerd multiple times.") If this is the case I'm not a fan. In the case of Auto fire, it doesn't seem to fit into any form of realism. You don't pull the trigger of an automatic weapon then hope it decides to fire like an auto. Is there a way to alter it or reinterpret it so that players can auto fire and then deal with the dice?

As far as narration, is the entire game intended to be dice narration or is it like most RPG's where you make a plan and see if it happens?

You certainly can autofire before you make the roll. In fact, the decision to do so is part of determining the difficulty *of* the roll.

Activating the auto-fire trait with advantages isn't finding out that the gun 'wants' to auto-fire. It's *hitting* extra targets (or even the same target more than once) with the burst of fire from your weapon.

If you don't pull enough advantages to actually activate the auto-fire trait, your spray of shots just didn't have any additional effect. You couldn't hold your aim well enough, so the extra shots missed your hoped targets, etc.

Just like in any RPG, you declare your actions, which encapsulate your *intent*, and make the roll to find out how effective you were at actually doing what you intended to do.

Ahh makes sense thank you

The other thing to watch out for, as my latest group did early in, is that players will sometimes defeat a Nemeses in a way you didn't expect.

Our 50-ish XP characters couldn't put enough damage on the Inquisitor to beat him outright, the GM wanted us to run, but we are difficult. So I opted to sunder the Inquisitor's lightsaber instead, which the GM had to hand wave him into having a backup saber.

It was a cheesy thing to do, I think, but the GM felt that I put him into a position that he wasn't prepared for. My advice there would be to simply not put your players into a position where you're forcing them to stay on your rails, so to speak.

Also don't forget to lock up the "toys" that you give your players as exciting set pieces when you don't want them to affect your adventure. Otherwise they'll one-shot your cool Nemesis and his henchmen standing menacingly on the mountaintop with the Z-95 Headhunters you gave them in the last scene for a space battle. #anticlimactic

The other thing to watch out for, as my latest group did early in, is that players will sometimes defeat a Nemeses in a way you didn't expect.

Our 50-ish XP characters couldn't put enough damage on the Inquisitor to beat him outright, the GM wanted us to run, but we are difficult. So I opted to sunder the Inquisitor's lightsaber instead, which the GM had to hand wave him into having a backup saber.

It was a cheesy thing to do, I think, but the GM felt that I put him into a position that he wasn't prepared for. My advice there would be to simply not put your players into a position where you're forcing them to stay on your rails, so to speak.

Also don't forget to lock up the "toys" that you give your players as exciting set pieces when you don't want them to affect your adventure. Otherwise they'll one-shot your cool Nemesis and his henchmen standing menacingly on the mountaintop with the Z-95 Headhunters you gave them in the last scene for a space battle. #anticlimactic

I warn My players up front, If it loos like a Bad situation, and you try to stick it out to claim a victory over a foe you should have run from, I will not hold back, expect Character deaths.

Now had you sundered the saber? I would have had them obtain something as back up, Maybe not a Lightsaber, but some weapon. Or In this system, I may even Flip a Destiny Point to Save the Saber in some way. THat is Fair use, as Players have and Will do similar things with Destiny points to save their butts.