Recently my GM decided that Sunder was too powerful. He did this out of the blue, even though we'd never actually used it before.

Now, a successful Sunder expense no longer damages an opponent.

Another player is playing a Shi-Cho Knight and I'm playing a Niman Disciple. Since we both get access to Sum Djem, I whole heatedly expect the GM to eventually Nerf this as well.

I'd like some suggestions as to some talents to replace it with. Would Improved Reflect or Saber Throw be good replacements for the Niman? What would be good for the Shi-Cho?

Hm, aren't the lightsabers immune to the sunder ability?

He should put some lightsaber users against you if the's afraid of sunder.

Hm, aren't the lightsabers immune to the sunder ability?

He should put some lightsaber users against you if the's afraid of sunder.

So are weapons with the Cortosis quality, such as electrostaves.

You can destroy a Lightsaber with 2 Triumphs.

With two of those, you can do anything within reason.

I hate to be that guy but we're kind of off topic here. I've tried to convince my GM that his house rule is unreasonable but I can't change his mind on anything. I could really use the advice of some experienced players and GMs on what would be a reasonable replacement for Sum Djem on the talent tree.

That's just silly really. Sum Djem shouldn't be nerfed and nor should sunder. Because;

If the weapon is sunderable, then chances are it's either a minon or a PC is too close. It's why I hesitate to fully tool out any blaster. If your GM doesn't want said nemesis's to be disarmed this way, then he's too attached to his nemesis. Rivals and minons? Who cares? If they are being disarmed then they are being saved from an inevitable death or should have backup weapons anyways.

It's actually really easy to recover from a disarm. If it's in the same square; pick it up or draw another. If it's in a different square then it might be an amusing little diversion while your party beats tracks. Plus there is a certain talent that makes an NPC undisarmable. I suspect he will most likely give every nemesis that.

For Niman Saber throw would be pretty cool. For Shi-Cho Knight, I would actually recommend Hawk Bat-scoop, it allows you to use your action's really well and makes your attacks hit that little bit harder.

You're not being "That Guy". You have a valid and very frustrating problem. First off, I'd point out that Sum Djem, as I'm sure you know, is merely a "cheaper disarm". I can't see a good reason to disallow that talent unless they seek to remove certain Triumph results as well. If that's the case, it seems there are deeper issues to worry about.

To be completely honest, it's a silly move on your GM's part. As I'm sure "Not playing with him" isn't a viable option, I'd ask him to come up with a suitable replacement, if they decide to forbid Sum Djem. I'd also point out that not allowing Sunder takes away a powerful aspect of lightsabers, mechanically and thematically. If you can articulate this to your GM they might keep things as written. I don't know them, so in that, I can only speculate.

Finally, in respect to Sunder, it's not that powerful. Destroying a weapon requires four (thanks to whafrog for catching my mistake!) Advantage, which in the case of many lightsabers, could very well be a critical hit with a +20 modifier, at least.

I'll be honest, your GM's call is going to seem arbitrary and unnecessary to many here and, since it's a "house problem", going to be hard to help adjudicate. That's not to say people won't help, just that many will find it hard to give advice on fixing something that isn't broken in the first place.

Say what now?

Sundering weapons is a time honored Jedi Technique to neutralize an opponent without harming them. Same with disarming them except when they take the arm with the weapon.

Destroying a weapon requires three Advantage, which in the case of many lightsabers, could very well be a critical hit with a +20 modifier, at least.

Isn't it 4 advantages, not three?

1 for minor, +1 for moderate, +1 for major, +1 for destroyed.

I'm actually sympathetic to the GM a bit, even if his response is unimaginative. With a good dice pool (YYYG or higher), 4A isn't that hard to get, so maybe he's watching all his Nemeses lose their weapons in one round...I wouldn't mind that on occasion, but if it happens every encounter it would be boring. It would force me to make every opponent a Cortosis machine (an element that's supposed to be super rare and expensive), and to start Sundering the PC's equipment in turn. Then the game becomes an arms race focussed around weapons rather than a story.

So one solution might be to simply up the Advantage cost for Sunder, maybe 1/1/1/2, or 1/1/2/3, or even 2A for each step...this helps ensure it will require a couple rounds minimum to destroy the weapon, while still making it available.

I have the same thoughts about disarming in general, it's a boring tactic once it becomes common. Once you get 3 yellow dice, Triumphs come up about 30% of the time, and you are awash in Advantages, so it's going to happen a lot. So he could do the same with Sun Djem, just up the Advantage cost to 3 or 4.

Basically, I don't think a player should be denied the options, but some of the Advantage costs listed in RAW don't seem to take into account what happens at higher levels of play, or how they funnel player behaviour towards boring but undeniably useful tactics.

Yea, if you are getting annoyed at Sunder, give your Minions grenades and see how often the player wanted to Sunder.

I found Breach to be the one thing on lightsabers that made my head spin as a GM. Took me a while to figure out a way past that.

Since your GM seem to be that guy, it is probably best to ask him directly wich talent he will let you use instead of Sum Djem instead of asking us. We can give you suggestion but if he didn't like them, you will be back at the first square.

I was honestly hoping for a discussion about suggestions so I could point him to this thread.

Well, all I can say is Sun Djem and Sunder aren't really alike. One damages things, the other disarms -- not damages, not destroys. The target simply has his weapon knocked away; yeah, it requires a Lightsaber, but it doesn't say how you disarm somebody. If you can think of an explanation on how you knock away a weapon without dicing it, you shouldn't have a problem. Nothing else that I can think does that. Knockdown is the only other thing that adds a combat effect, but it's a different effect. Being able to non-lethally subdue an opponent by getting rid of their weapon seems like a thing any aspiring Jedi or imitator would want to do first anyway.

Okay. As a GM if I was to change Sum Djem because I was very protective over weapons, I would yield first to the fact that Sum Djem disarms but does not destroy a weapon, allowing it to be picked back up.

If I was still in mindset that that was too powerful for me, I would then change Sum Djem to either:

"Spend a (Triumph) or (Two Advantages) to apply cause the target to lose his free maneuver until the end of the ecounter"

"Spend a (Triumph) or (Two Advantages) to apply cause the target to go to the bottom of the initiative order"

"Spend a (Triumph) or (Two Advantages) to apply cause the target to get knocked prone and suffer 1 strain"

These all keep the weapon in the hand of the enemy you are attacking, which seems to be the issue, yet makes Sum Djem do what it was meant to in making the target have to waste a maneuver to respond to your attack. I see Sum Djem in line of hitting a Lightsaber so hard and unexpectedly that the opponent loses grip on it. So to keep in line with that either you hit them so hard they fall down, you cause them to now have to directly engage with you and focus on you so they can't so wild with the maneuvers or that you hit them so hard they lose their cool.

I was honestly hoping for a discussion about suggestions so I could point him to this thread.

Have you asked the GM point blank why he made the change? Also have you asked him what he intends to replace the talent with? To some extent there's no reason to toss out ideas at a GM who is going to ignore them all. And not knowing his logic it gets very hard to suggest things that he might even remotely consider.

The Force Power Move can be used (with upgrades) to pull weapons out of opponents hands, and within short range it only costs a single force pip to do that. This is probably the most viable way to disarm an opponent other than those 2 your taling about. and considering the XP investment to be able to do it (25xp without a mentor) you would have a good argument over your GM trying to Nerf that.

All three of these happen within the OT so i feel sorry for you having to put up with this kind of BS from your GM.

If these are major parts of the concept of your PC i would be asking to completely re-make your character.

Destroying a weapon requires three Advantage, which in the case of many lightsabers, could very well be a critical hit with a +20 modifier, at least.

Isn't it 4 advantages, not three?

1 for minor, +1 for moderate, +1 for major, +1 for destroyed.

I'm actually sympathetic to the GM a bit, even if his response is unimaginative. With a good dice pool (YYYG or higher), 4A isn't that hard to get, so maybe he's watching all his Nemeses lose their weapons in one round...I wouldn't mind that on occasion, but if it happens every encounter it would be boring. It would force me to make every opponent a Cortosis machine (an element that's supposed to be super rare and expensive), and to start Sundering the PC's equipment in turn. Then the game becomes an arms race focussed around weapons rather than a story.

So one solution might be to simply up the Advantage cost for Sunder, maybe 1/1/1/2, or 1/1/2/3, or even 2A for each step...this helps ensure it will require a couple rounds minimum to destroy the weapon, while still making it available.

I have the same thoughts about disarming in general, it's a boring tactic once it becomes common. Once you get 3 yellow dice, Triumphs come up about 30% of the time, and you are awash in Advantages, so it's going to happen a lot. So he could do the same with Sun Djem, just up the Advantage cost to 3 or 4.

Basically, I don't think a player should be denied the options, but some of the Advantage costs listed in RAW don't seem to take into account what happens at higher levels of play, or how they funnel player behaviour towards boring but undeniably useful tactics.

Yes, you are correct. That was a typo. Thank you for correcting my mistake!

It happened right as I was about to make my first attack with the lightsaber he'd given me. I asked how Sunder worked. Since he didn't know the answer I looked it up and read it aloud. He said, "That's way too powerful." and changed it on the spot because he believed lightsabers were clearly too powerful.

I've tried explaining to him that all of the other things I could do with four advantages. He also acknowledged how long it would take to accumulate all those successes with our level of skill and he wouldn't budge.

He just doesn't get it. I've long since given up on convincing him. If I press this any further he'll do something drastic like quiting or kicking me out of what is otherwise a very fun and largely successful game.

I'd much rather just focus on some thematic alternative talents for the various classes that have Sum Djem in their talent trees.

Destroying a weapon requires three Advantage, which in the case of many lightsabers, could very well be a critical hit with a +20 modifier, at least.

Isn't it 4 advantages, not three?

1 for minor, +1 for moderate, +1 for major, +1 for destroyed.

I'm actually sympathetic to the GM a bit, even if his response is unimaginative. With a good dice pool (YYYG or higher), 4A isn't that hard to get, so maybe he's watching all his Nemeses lose their weapons in one round...I wouldn't mind that on occasion, but if it happens every encounter it would be boring. It would force me to make every opponent a Cortosis machine (an element that's supposed to be super rare and expensive), and to start Sundering the PC's equipment in turn. Then the game becomes an arms race focussed around weapons rather than a story.

So one solution might be to simply up the Advantage cost for Sunder, maybe 1/1/1/2, or 1/1/2/3, or even 2A for each step...this helps ensure it will require a couple rounds minimum to destroy the weapon, while still making it available.

I have the same thoughts about disarming in general, it's a boring tactic once it becomes common. Once you get 3 yellow dice, Triumphs come up about 30% of the time, and you are awash in Advantages, so it's going to happen a lot. So he could do the same with Sun Djem, just up the Advantage cost to 3 or 4.

Basically, I don't think a player should be denied the options, but some of the Advantage costs listed in RAW don't seem to take into account what happens at higher levels of play, or how they funnel player behaviour towards boring but undeniably useful tactics.

Maybe I'm lucky or, at the risk of seeming arrogant, a good GM, at least in regards to this topic. My players don't always take the most mechanically efficient option if there's a cooler way to achieve their goal. As for myself, I roll a lot of Triumphs for my NPCs, but very rarely do I do something to a PC's beloved weapons or crit them to near-death. As a group, we focus on what will enhance the game, not what lets us win faster.

For you as a Niman Disciple combine the Force Assault Talent with the above mentioned Move Force Power, if he wont let you disarm the opponent just throw the opponent a long way away.

I hate to be that guy but we're kind of off topic here. I've tried to convince my GM that his house rule is unreasonable but I can't change his mind on anything. I could really use the advice of some experienced players and GMs on what would be a reasonable replacement for Sum Djem on the talent tree.

I have to be honest, I dislike the wording of Sun Djem, but only because it states that the disarm happens with GM Approval. Having mis-reffed this a couple of weeks ago I have decided that the better way of handling this is to use the expenditure of a Dark Destiny Point to deny the disarm (and will likely use this mechanic any time I need to prevent something. That said, I think it only makes sense to deny something like this if it is to stop a fight becoming a disappointing let down.

The power itself is fine, it is not massively over powered and would only be a minor delay for a Nemesis as he spends his free maneauvre and two strain to move to short range and pick the weapon back up. Alternatively, if the Nemesis is a Force user, they could theoretically use Force Move to pull it to their hand.

For your Shii-Cho buddy they have 2 things they could do:

1. Get the Sense Force Power with the entire left hand column of upgrades, then commit their 1 Force Dice to the Attack upgrade to help 'Sarlacc Sweep'. Basically kill them before they can do much to him. This idea needs the PC to use use as little strain as possible since the Advantage from rolls is not available for recovering Strain as much.

2. Otherwise get Sense Force Power with the first 3 Upgrades on the left side. Also focus on getting the 'Improved Parry' talent, then Commit his 1 force Dice to Defence to help trigger 'Improved Parry' as much as possible. Gaining more ranks in Parry will help survivability, and getting Grit talents as well as Second Wind are important, also using the PC's own advantage to recover Strain as much as possible.

Oh, I have a good player group and they don't abuse it at all, so it's not a current problem. They certainly roll enough advantages to do so though...and I know there are a couple of players associated with my normal group who might join who would jump at the chance to consistently be slicing up the opponent's gear. I guess all I'm saying is once the dice pool hits YYYG, Sunder and disarms with the right talents becomes extremely easy.

As my players got too powerful and wielded lightsabers, I hit them with Minion hoards. It's cool if you can breach all the soak and do nearly 10 damage a hit if there's nearly 10 guys coming for you. Also a major enemy or two with armour plating. I called it Trade Federation tactics.