So I'm not sure if we are missing rules, or missing abilities that someone can pick up, but the numbers for this seem wrong. What I wanted to do was lay out the issue I'm having in as much detail as I can, and see if there is anything that can be done.

So I'm playing a Twi'lek Politico/Makashi Duelist. First character I made in this system, definitely would build different if I was going to start again, but don't like doing that and I'm enjoying the narrative behind the character. Anyways, my group consists of a mix of ranged characters and melee characters, myself, obviously being in melee.

Just recently we were playing and a couple of members of the group made poor choices and we were forced into a combat against a Nemesis. We started combat while trying to figure out how to escape and I got shot in the head by my teammate. This had been a reoccurring issue with one of our members having poor luck and rolling despair while shooting at the target I was in melee with. I was brushing it off as just poor luck since it is a 1/12 in a red dice only, but this was very much highlighted in the Nemesis fight where there was 3 upgrades to attack them.

So I know the rules state that when attacking into group combat, if you roll a despair and the attack hits, it hits an ally instead of the target. In the above situation. Medium range with autofire It was 3 red dice. which is about a 25% chance of hitting your teammate. Even in an ideal situation of 1 weapon, short range with no difficulty increasing abilities it is 2 Red dice for about 16% chance.

Now I know there are talent skills I can take to reduce the damage that is dealt to me at the cost of strain, but outside of that is there anything else? To me this seems very punishing to a group that is a mix of melee and ranged characters, especially since not all our melee are force users to get reflect, and its the DM's choice who gets hit. I know Nemesis won't be around every corner, but even Rivals with the DM spending Destiny points can do this too.

Usually we have negated this problem but spreading out combat, don't shoot the guy that someone is in melee with, this stopped working when there is only 1 target who was the big bad to be dealt with. Also, yes I know "Just don't use autofire" but that is still an unreasonably high chance to hit your own team in my opinion.

....you are opening fire with a machine gun on a target that's probably mere feet, if not inches away from your ally... if anything I think the odds of hitting said ally being only 16-25% are pretty generous...

Besides, you can get more tactical... You move in and attack, gunner moves and aims, next round you attack and move away, gunner aims and fires...

Yes but even without Autofire, as I said in the original, the chance to hit a teammate seems high. I agree, it definitely should be higher if someone is using autofire.

Encourage the gunner to take some ranks in brawl or melee for these occasions. The job of the GM is to challenge their players. One way to challenge a PC is to put them in situations where their best skills aren't the most useful.

Give the range guys something else to shoot at. Star Wars does not typically do "raid bosses" very well. Meaning, you do not ever see a 5 vs 1 fight in any of the movies. The RPG models this very well. The melee beatsticks can duel the Sith Lord while the gunner takes out his horde of Storm Trooper underlings.

Barring Racial limitations or Critical Injuries, you can gain 2 Maneuvers and an Action each turn. 1st Maneuver to Engage, Action to Attack, 2nd Maneuver to Disengage.Yes, the Strain build up happens.

Barring Racial limitations or Critical Injuries, you can gain 2 Maneuvers and an Action each turn. 1st Maneuver to Engage, Action to Attack, 2nd Maneuver to Disengage.Yes, the Strain build up happens.

I was thinking about this, 2 Threat (I think its two, I don't have the book beside me) can be spent for a free maneuver. So even if you set up the initiative order in such a way to get the ranged characters before the target, and then all the melee after to ensure the 2 maneuver keeps everyone out of engaged. There is a fairly good chance that he will be able to stick to someone in melee anyway and completely negate the tactical attempt.

This seems more like poor tactical cohesion than any inherent problem in the rules. Don't forget that you can switch slots on the Initiative order at any time, which is there to help coordinating attacks like this. And like other posters before mentioned, the disengage maneuver is your friend.

This seems more like poor tactical cohesion than any inherent problem in the rules. Don't forget that you can switch slots on the Initiative order at any time, which is there to help coordinating attacks like this. And like other posters before mentioned, the disengage maneuver is your friend.

This really. Theres a pretty big reason not to shoot into melee; if you have the chance, let them fire first. Otherwise they shouldn't be shooting into a melee for that precise reason, at other times it might not be worth you engaging if the nemesis has rather foolishly engaged your entire party. Figure out how to alliterate that between you. Don't want to get shot? Don't melee and have someone auto fire into the melee, no offence but to me it makes perfect sense that one should damage damage for stepping in front of a machine gun. Can't have the cake and eat it afterall

It's also worth mentioning that a hit isn't nessarily a direct hit narratively. A little edge burn basically.

I didn't know you can continue to reorganize who is taking what slot in initiative after the first round. Being able to do that would be a big help. Also should be able to limit the strain of double maneuver every turn with alternating the order if its possible.

Thank you very much for that item. Without that, I didn't think it was feasible since it seemed to me that with the threat maneuver chances were fairly good the bad guy could get close to someone who wouldn't be able to move away.

It's also worth mentioning that a hit isn't nessarily a direct hit narratively. A little edge burn basically.

So does this mean suggesting to the DM that the hit wouldn't use full weapon damage + Successes? I understand that this is more a narrative game...just want to understand the meaning for this.

No no, I meant more when you take a hit, narratively speaking it is described as a minor blow; exceeding your wound theshold is a direct hit and a critical is often a glancing/direct hit that really delibhibates the player in some way.

I didn't know you can continue to reorganize who is taking what slot in initiative after the first round. Being able to do that would be a big help. Also should be able to limit the strain of double maneuver every turn with alternating the order if its possible.

Thank you very much for that item. Without that, I didn't think it was feasible since it seemed to me that with the threat maneuver chances were fairly good the bad guy could get close to someone who wouldn't be able to move away.

It is a very important part of the combat rules, as you actually experienced first hand. Each character creates a player initiative slot, but those are blanks. As long as players don't have more than one turn per round, they can play in whichever order they want. It favors a more co op feel to the combat than usual. I think this will help tremendously solving the problem you're having with mixed groups.

Definitely. Thank you and everyone else for taking the time to answer my questions.

It's also worth mentioning that a hit isn't nessarily a direct hit narratively. A little edge burn basically.

This is a good point, but the damage doesn't have to come from friendly fire. You could narrate that the damage comes from the enemy you're engaged with, and that the hail of blaster fire was distracting enough for your opponent to strike you.

I could also see a house rule that you could use a destiny point to make the GM pick a different result for the despair. Just remember that he gets to use the rule also.

Any trained individual would not open fire with an autofire weapon if allies are engaged unless they are evil or stupid. The player is either playing his pc Darkside, stupid, or the player himself is not good at roleplaying a trained soldier in combat.

The rule isn't the issue. As a GM I want my players playing as if they were their character. It's just bad roleplaying and great rules

Be nice to the other players, politely suggest not pointing a machine gun at your back!

But seriously the initiative rule your now aware of will probably make all the difference.