Made a couple of decisions last night, and was wondering others' thoughts/opinions on them.

1) The Gand Maurader brawled it out against a stormtrooper. I gave a setback for punching someone wearing armor. No one comlpained, but I was wondering it it was a bit much.

2) The Human Assassin, as an afterthought, wanted to know if he was being recorded while trying to sneak in and put a tracking device on an Imperial ship. I told him that while he was sure there were no people, there were cameras. He was a little miffed, because he thought I understood that when he asked if anyone was watching that meant people and cameras, but he flipped a Destiny Point and asked if the cameras could be down for repair. I said okay, but after that I thought that it might be a little much...only from the standpoint that I don't know if I want him to flip a Destiny Point every time they go in somewhere stealthily and the cameras be magically offline. I'm a bit on the fence over this one.

Thoughts?

1. It's a bit much on the setback dice for punching an armored opponent. You see it happen all the time in Rebels with the Lestat knocking stormtrooper heads together or punching them in the face.

2. I wouldn't allow using a Destiny point to make the cameras offline. I would have made him find a computer terminal and try to slice the system to turn them off. He'd also have to slice to remove any recordings of the group, but that would leave a clue that someone was there as there will be footage missing.

1. I wouldn't have because Brawling does not mean punching exclusively. Wearing armor and having all kinds of doo dads and straps connected to you provides an opponent hand holds and could actually work against you in a brawl.

2. Once is fine, next time they need to remember and ask, or you could simply point out there's obvious surveilance equipment, or make them roll Perception.

There's already a mechanic for punching someone with armor. It's the defense score.

1) If the armor has a defense then there is already a setback. If armor doesn't have defense then it's not going to. A character with a skill in brawl is skilled at how to hit and I wouldn't add a mechanic that already has defense as a mechanic. Also brawl and melee characters already have less going for them unless spending a lot of xp on them why make it even more difficult. That being said a character not skilled in brawl maybe I would consider giving the setback or if a despair comes up just having the character break his hand to show the risk in hitting armor is there just not often.

2) GMs and players need to understand if you spend a destiny on something once it doesn't mean it will work everytime. We are not making every destiny flip a law for all future flips. That being said I would allow the character to flip and say they were in repair. Might even let him flip another time at some point for a reason they don't work. However there would be times I just say nope the security is on and you can try to avoid the cameras with Stealth or Skulduggery or slice the security to shut down. A good player next time will ask for clarification when they say is anyone or any security cameras watching. Destiny should never be a crutch. I like it for a creative here and there but never a crutch

Stormtrooper armour is made of cardboard, isn't it?

I might be inclined to give out blue dice, were I in a generous mood.

Stormtrooper armour is made of cardboard, isn't it?

I might be inclined to give out blue dice, were I in a generous mood.

1) As others have noted, the setback die wasn't necessary, since Brawl covers a wide variety of unarmed techniques besides just a straight-up punch to the head/gut. Jiu-Jitsu is a prime example of an unarmed combat technique that was devised primarily to be used against people in armor. If a set of armor provides protection from melee attacks, that's covered by it offering a bonus to defense, such as armored clothing or heavy battle armor.

2) Yeah, going forward I'd make sure that you and the player are on the same page as to what "is there anybody watching?" means. Allowing him to flip a Destiny Point was a good compromise for that particular instance, but next time he asks that sort of question, it wouldn't hurt for you to clarify if he means just physical people or is he also including surveillance systems if you're not certain. Given what you've typed, I'm going to assume that he meant both people physically present as well as surveillance systems, but never hurts to clarify if you as the GM are not 100% certain what the PC is asking for.

Stormtrooper armour is made of cardboard, isn't it?

I might be inclined to give out blue dice, were I in a generous mood.

I think Stormtrooper armor adds something like 4 successes to a hit roll on it and an auto crit.

I believe it adds Vicious 10 with all weapons hitting the armor have a Crit Rating on 1.

Typically if my players were to ask a question such as "Is anyone watching?" or "Am I being recorded?" I would consider this a prompt for a skill check. I might not have planned anything in particular but it's a good thought by the player and should be encouraged.

Also, even though it might not have previously occurred to me, the results of the roll may inspire me or my players to introduce an interesting element to the passage of play. Heck, even a straight fail can introduce an element of uncertainty that wasn't there before just by dint of having rolled.

1) We know this is game does not intend to cover this level of detail, we also know as Maelora said that Stormtrooper armour is the biggest scam the Empire has ever suffered. Said that, if you want to add some more "realism" to your games, a set back die is the minimum I would add to an attacker's dice pool who is trying to use bare hands to attack someone in full (hard)armour. Other options would be to double the soak provided by the armour, or doubling the amount of advantages needed for scoring a critical hit...

2) Rulings are rules called on the spot that cover a certain situation, they don't need to become permanent game rules. Next time a PC wants to flip a destiny point, you just can decide if it happens or not, as you see fit.

Made a couple of decisions last night, and was wondering others' thoughts/opinions on them.

1) I gave a setback for punching someone wearing armor. No one comlpained, but I was wondering it it was a bit much.

2) The Human Assassin, as an afterthought, wanted to know if he was being recorded while trying to sneak in and put a tracking device on an Imperial ship. I told him that while he was sure there were no people, there were cameras. He was a little miffed, because he thought I understood that when he asked if anyone was watching that meant people and cameras, but he flipped a Destiny Point and asked if the cameras could be down for repair. I said okay, but after that I thought that it might be a little much...only from the standpoint that I don't know if I want him to flip a Destiny Point every time they go in somewhere stealthily and the cameras be magically offline. I'm a bit on the fence over this one.

Thoughts?

Destiny points as narrative aids are not for "I've an undocumented force power" but for honest oversights ("We should have been able to plan around that") and adding new elements to the fiction ("That news crew happens to include an 'old friend'" or, "Anoat system. Lando!" - but in that case, the GM flipped a destiny to already have had vader beat them there.) It's explicitly NOT for cancelling out elements established already.

Thanks for the input, everyone.

Admittedly, I am a little surprised that Stormtrooper Armor doesn't have a defense of 1. Well, not that surprised. At least if it would've, I could've tripped into justifying that decision!

Yeah, I think there should have been better communication between the player and myself with the whole landing bay / camera scenario. I think Aramis brings up a good point about the "undocumented force power." I was willing to allow it, mainly because I felt I messed up not competely understanding his question and offered it up as a compromise. In the future I think I'll seek more clarification (as DM mentioned) and have him make a skill check. If he fails, he'll have to figure out how to get around the problem without the use of the "undocumented force power."

I'll chalk it up to me still being a bit rusty. We played quite a few sessions during beta, trasitioning to the Beginner Box, but then switched to the 5th Edition D&D playtest. This past month or so is the first I've been back to EotE since then.

I wouldn't add a setback die. It doesn't reflect the genre and what we see on screen, and most armor provides setback through defense.

I would not have allowed a destiny point to "undo" being caught on film. This is mostly a communication issue. I tend to hint things characters would know to players, but I also expect players to ask relevant questions. However, while we see shipboard cameras in TFA, they didn't appear to have them on the ultra - secure death star, or even on Starkiller base. At least, in the Imperial Era, we don't see much in the way of ubiquitous NSA style surveillance. I think a bit of 70's chic could make the player's lives easier.

I wouldn't add a setback die. It doesn't reflect the genre and what we see on screen, and most armor provides setback through defense.

I would not have allowed a destiny point to "undo" being caught on film. This is mostly a communication issue. I tend to hint things characters would know to players, but I also expect players to ask relevant questions. However, while we see shipboard cameras in TFA, they didn't appear to have them on the ultra - secure death star, or even on Starkiller base. At least, in the Imperial Era, we don't see much in the way of ubiquitous NSA style surveillance. I think a bit of 70's chic could make the player's lives easier.

1. Most people answered it but I'd like to add that, at least as I've learned it, you probably don't want your players to figure out that the only effective solution to every encounter is to shoot it. Making less lethal solutions so difficult to use would make them shoot rather than brawl and why would anyone brawl against shooting pc's? It makes it harder to justify non lethal battles in which, even if the pc's lose, the pc's can wake up with bruises rather than waking up submerged in bacta with days of recovery time ahead.

2. Probably a good time to use Advantages to fill in the gaps. 1 advantage notices an important detail, right. Well, while looking for people, you spot a camera. But I agree with the whole camera network being down is a bit much for a destiny point.

Yeah, leave the setback die off in the future, but don't feel too bad. It's just one. I would certainly be willing to spend Threat to give them Strain, then just say, "Dude, why would you punch a guy in laminate armor? Because that's what you just did. Take 2 Strain."