I am pretty sure Dante was not calling you a jackass, derroehre. Far as I can see it, you two were engaging in a hypothetical discussion. It didn't look personal at all to me.

To be sure, there are any number of games and game mechanics that people could argue over. Hell, I got into an argument without even realizing it (my GM thought I was arguing, and I was just confused and trying to understand what he was saying) about regular, old maneuvers in-game. A GM could come down hard on players, players can buck against a GM's ruling, and the table can fall apart. People are fully capable of being jerks to each other for the silliest of reasons.

Nobody is perfect. We all have interpersonal issues that we have to work on. But blaming players leaving on a talent is like blaming a divorce on a scrubber sponge. It's not a game issue; it's a people issue.

It was not meant personal indeed. I didn't think I was addressing an actual occurrence but a hypothetical situation.

????

What truth? Who is ErikB? And what five pounds?

Dont try and deny it ErikB, I've found you out. Well played sir - laying low until everyone here forgot all about you - only to rise up again like some Internet Dracula! As for the 5 pounds, okay - that's a bit more obscure . Malora might be the only around here to get that (and that's still a maybe).

So how would a character defend against this?

There's flipping a destiny point and/or perhaps throwing a black at it. And while the rules don't say this is applicable, it's not unreasonable to apply the Nemesis upgrade.

'side from that? That's about it.

Using it in combat against a weapon being wielded even though it should be just you noticing an issue with the weapon? I think I'd skip Adversary and just have you roll it, probably a DP though. Just gotta have a Despair chance on these once a session things.

He's a Jedi gone bad, so he'll have the Force to use. Plus Ill love the look on the lightsaber fan's face when I say you broke it beyond repair......

????

What truth? Who is ErikB? And what five pounds?

Dont try and deny it ErikB, I've found you out. Well played sir - laying low until everyone here forgot all about you - only to rise up again like some Internet Dracula! As for the 5 pounds, okay - that's a bit more obscure . Malora might be the only around here to get that (and that's still a maybe).

*plonk*

The players shouldn’t stop the whole game just because of a single roll from a single talent.

So far it hasnt. Mind you, I'm speaking from my two (thusfar) examples, but in one usage - on the ancient door two weeks ago - it kept us from being overrun by reinforcements. This week it tipped the balance of power in a direction where we could hug instead of fight.

I’m all for letting the players direct the narrative, based on the rolls. But this has to be a cooperative story telling process, and any BBEG would have backup plans. It is the very height of silliness to suggest otherwise.

Well, Warde couldnt very well have minions, being a hermit on a long dead world. But that going to a sarcophagi to find a ancient sword Kaigen mentioned would have been an option, or using the force or other means other than a boring old "look, another saber in my pocket!"

To be honest, if you were put in that situation in the first place, where either the entire party dies or you have to use Bad Motivator to break Warde’s lightsaber, then I’d say that was really bad GMing and story-telling that got you to that point.

*shrugs* That's how the canned game was set up. And we probably could have dealt with it, but the talent made it easier and a more desirable (and cool) outcome.

As PCs, you should have been able to talk him down earlier. And if you failed, then it should have taken a lot more dice rolls and/or bad roleplaying to get you there.

Except the way the game was set up, it was all Old Hermit right up until it was "HAH! Had you fooled! I'm really Warde - now lets fight!" Talking him down before that big revelation (despite this player going "yeah, that's Warde" from the second he showed up) was impossible. Talking him down after the big reveal - well, we were fighting then - so yeah, it had to be done on the fly.

Except the way the game was set up, it was all Old Hermit right up until it was "HAH! Had you fooled! I'm really Warde - now lets fight!" Talking him down before that big revelation (despite this player going "yeah, that's Warde" from the second he showed up) was impossible. Talking him down after the big reveal - well, we were fighting then - so yeah, it had to be done on the fly.

I’m running the same adventure right now. The players have recently arrived on Cato Nemoidia, and they’ve already done some things to get the attention of … certain parties.

And I’ve read the scene you’re talking about. Just because a particular canned adventure is written a certain way doesn’t mean that it has to be run exactly according to book. IMO, if the way it’s written would be overpowering for a certain group, then it would be bad GM-ing to actually run it that way. And I think that the folks who actually wrote that adventure for FFG would be the first ones to agree with that statement.

In my game, assuming the party gets to the same scene, they’ll still be able to talk their way out of it. That will be a really hard path to follow, but I refuse to completely close that door.

And I’ve read the scene you’re talking about. Just because a particular canned adventure is written a certain way doesn’t mean that it has to be run exactly according to book. IMO, if the way it’s written would be overpowering for a certain group, then it would be bad GM-ing to actually run it that way. And I think that the folks who actually wrote that adventure for FFG would be the first ones to agree with that statement.

And we were adjusting numbers on the fly - half way into the fight with those smoke rat things, the GM realized "man, this is gonna kill everyone" and dialled the numbers waaaay back. Since we opted for talking instead of violence with Warde, I'm only assuming that the fight of new characters vs Jedi master would have gone poorly, because you know - Jedi Master and all. I've not actually compared his stats to our numbers.

I'm just glad that I had a huge equalizer in my back pocket because I wasn't looking forward to violence.

I am pretty sure Dante was not calling you a jackass, derroehre. Far as I can see it, you two were engaging in a hypothetical discussion. It didn't look personal at all to me.

...

It's not a game issue; it's a people issue.

It was not meant personal indeed. I didn't think I was addressing an actual occurrence but a hypothetical situation.

Yeah, I obviously took that the wrong way

As a Player as well as a GM, I had several groups splinter in the past because of minor disputes that grew over time - with mountains of prepared story going to storage, so nowadays I try to find potential hotspots waaaaaaay in advance.

Eh, that's okay - anyone with Detective Frank Drebin of Police Squad! as his avatar can't be all bad.

Eh, that's okay - anyone with Detective Frank Drebin of Police Squad! as his avatar can't be all bad.

That's the doctor from battlestar galactica.

Wait - the doctor from Battlestar Galactica was Detective Frank Drebin of Police Squad! - surely you can't be serious.

I am serious, and don't call me surley.

I am serious, and don't call me surley.

I don't think Donnelly Rhodes could have done that line any justice.

So this weeks Awesome Use of Bad Motivator? It did nothing to change the direction of the story, didn't scupper a bad guy's superweapon or anything like that. We ran into a chief engineer, a gruff and blustery verpine serving on a capital ship. We had to consult him for one reason or another and while we were down in his engine room, my tech and him started exchanging harsh words, eventually doubting each others engineering acumen.

I said something like "Hah! I'm a greenhorn? You can't even tell when your thermic oscillator is running too hard!"

"What! You don't know what you're talking about!"

I reach for my dice. Everyone at the table goes "Oh, you're not . . ." - and I just smile. One successful mechanics check later and I just turn and walk out, a smug "I told you so" hanging in the air.

So no, it did absolutely nothing to move the game forward at all, but it was a great personal victory on my part.

So this weeks Awesome Use of Bad Motivator? It did nothing to change the direction of the story, didn't scupper a bad guy's superweapon or anything like that. We ran into a chief engineer, a gruff and blustery verpine serving on a capital ship. We had to consult him for one reason or another and while we were down in his engine room, my tech and him started exchanging harsh words, eventually doubting each others engineering acumen.

I said something like "Hah! I'm a greenhorn? You can't even tell when your thermic oscillator is running too hard!"

"What! You don't know what you're talking about!"

I reach for my dice. Everyone at the table goes "Oh, you're not . . ." - and I just smile. One successful mechanics check later and I just turn and walk out, a smug "I told you so" hanging in the air.

So no, it did absolutely nothing to move the game forward at all, but it was a great personal victory on my part.

This has to be the best narrative use of bad motivator I have ever heard of... it's a shame that I can't like it 20 times

This weeks Bad Motivator story? Everyone was on a mesa top, one of the PCs was down and out and everyone else was in real bad shape after a scrap with a squad of stormtroopers and just a cook from the mess hall when imperial reinforcements appear thanks to six threat in one roll.

And in so the next NPC slot, there's this ominous sound of a repulsor platform rising behind the group, loaded down with another batch of stormtroopers, appearing over the lip of the mesa. And then there's a muffled pop as the poorly maintained repulsor drive gives out, plunging the reinforcements to their death 150 feet straight down. Whoops.

If you think Bad Motivator is contrived, Biggest Fan under the Performer tree is even worse.

I'll admit that I was a bit wary of these kinds of talents initially, but then I realized three things...

1) I've got an awesome group of players who aren't likely to abuse them.

2) Star Wars is the kind of setting where I can actually get behind the tone set by 'narrativist' mechanics.

3) If kept from getting out of hand, these kinds of talents have the potential to be a lot of fun.

Just found this thread...

So when is the GM justified in saying "no" to this Talent without the player feeling like they've been denied the use of their Talent?

And how far can the GM push things in terms of "reactivating" the item before the player feels like they wasted their Talent (and Action)?

I can see myself saying no to it shutting down the BBEG in an encounter. In the example above, there is the option of the Jedi Master just using powerful Force Powers instead or finding another weapon on hand in the environment (as it makes sense).

Or if I sensed that the players were just looking for an avenue of talking things through I'd be much more inclined to saying "yes".

Sometimes GMs have off-nights too and they can't think of anything off the top of their head that would be an interesting direction for the encounter after Bad Motivator shuts something down.

It seems like the "deux ex machina" potential of this Talent seems like it could be a source of making the narrative worse (I'm not saying it does, I'm saying it could) because major plot important "devices" spontaneously and "retroactively" failing can also be lame. If the PC has to interact with it before failure (and there's an opportunity for the NPCs to reactivate it) seems like a much more interesting approach. Seems like in these circumstances the GM is justified in requiring some sort of plausible interaction.

Well, the talent requires a check to succeed; so if it's a situation where you're disinclined to allow it, or an item (like perhaps a lightsaber) on which random malfunctions are unlikely, feel free to pile on the Setbacks. If the character still succeeds, then...they kinda earned it, right? But I would say that you could spend Threat and Despair from the check to limit how long the item is offline, if it's that important.

Me personally, if the character can't physically get access to the object to rig the failure, that's automatically one or two Setback on the attempt, unless it's already been established that the machine in question is in poor condition. Sure, a lot of mechanics will have talents to remove those Setbacks, but...isn't that the point of those talents, too?

Just found this thread...

So when is the GM justified in saying "no" to this Talent without the player feeling like they've been denied the use of their Talent?

And how far can the GM push things in terms of "reactivating" the item before the player feels like they wasted their Talent (and Action)?

Whenever they feel like allowing it detracts from the fun and the story.

If all this Talent was useful for was direct cause and effect acting on a Nemesis, then I would say the PC has a right to be @$$ed up if it's disallowed. However, given the myriad of ways this Talent could be used imaginatively in a fun way I don't feel they are entitled to get wound up if a GM doesn't want it to be the 'auto-win' button vs. a Nemesis.

In a recent session our ship was docked in Mos Eisley Bay 95 and was lifting off as the same time as a certain YT-1300 was departing from an adjoining bay. When he heard this, our mechanic got a wicked gleam in his eye and rolled for Bad Motivator. He got two triumphs and he now lays claim to being the reason why the Falcon's hyperdrive is all wonky.

Did it make any impact on the game? No, but it was a lot of fun.

I'm not sure how different this talent is from rolling a Triumph in combat that the PC uses to narrate that "something important" happens. Yes, you can choose when you can use the talent and rolling a Triumph isn't something you can plan or anticipate. But you still need to roll for Bad Motivator to succeed so it's not a guarantee either. In both cases you need to negotiate with your GM to determine what is allowed, and in both cases you're changing the narrative of the story for some kind of gain. Even the description of what a Triumph can do (trigger door controls to shut a door on reinforcements) can be replicated by use of the Bad Motivator talent.

So last weekend's Awesome Bad Motivator? We were in a mountain pass, waiting to ambush an imperial convoy for some spare parts. We were expecting 4 or 5 trucks, and not 5 trucks with a command vehicle equipped with a heavy baster turret. Fortunately, being an cold and icy environment and all, the Empire showed shoddy preparation - and the turret had iced over during their trip, tipping the firepower back into our favor.

(I then followed up with a Inventive Creation, putting together an anti-personel RPG from all the explosives I had left over from the mines I had built. Epic!)

Even the description of what a Triumph can do (trigger door controls to shut a door on reinforcements) can be replicated by use of the Bad Motivator talent.

Bad Motivator has a wider selection of devices to choose from (any device, period) and less room for the GM to say no. Plus a talent that someone laid 15 points out on is suppose to be more versatile and awesome than just flipping a point. Plus, what happens if you don't have a point to flip?