For the OP ill reiterate the notion that the Player should not think their PC's Intellect is a universal Peg that fits round, square hexagonal and 5 dimensional holes. yes they can do amazing stuff, but while their highs will be high, their lows should be as equally low. Hopefully the other Players will get in on it and start saying things like "your letting the team down" or "if only you where a little stronger..."

its not about ridiculing or bullying, its gentle reminders that the player made these sub-optimal choices.

Just look at that vid and then explain to me how climbing near a pit of lava is exactly like climbing near a trampoline.

Counterpoint:

(subtitle: Anakin and Obiwan jumping around in Lava like they were on trampolines)

(subtitle: Anakin and Obiwan jumping around in Lava like they were on trampolines)

I... don't think you know what a trampoline is.

So we started a new campaign using the Force and Destiny book (our group has played other games before) and we initially liked the concept because it seemed a little tough to be completely munchkin. Well, one of our players found a way to pull it off - and then complained that the rules were arbitrary when it didn't exactly go his way. So I wanted to get some thoughts and opinion from you guys.

First of all, he picked a class that gave him an INT of 4 and then he used creation points to bump INT to 5. He then chose the Consular: Sage path, built his way to "One with the Universe", and picked the Heal/Harm power. Aside from default skills, that was his entire character.

At first level, every single intelligence based skill he is completely dominating at. Even with characters that have actual skill training. He argues, "Well my character is just a genius", and believes that a genius could perform brain surgery without training (in his actual words he said 'I think we have very different definitions of genius'). He has no ranks in Medicine, but was able to manage insane medicinal tasks. He had no ranks in mechanic (we had someone else with mechanic who was worse than him) and easily pulled off a mechanic check.

That's about right. Check out the stats here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/249874023/Star-Wars-Edge-of-the-Empire-Dice-Roll-Probability#scribd

Speaking purely from a binary "Do you succeed or not" point of view, more dice is better than upgraded dice as it gives you increased chance of generating success. Upgrading dice also increases this chance, but not by the same amount.

The tradeoff is twofold:

1. The character, being untrained, doesn't know what they need to know to be *really* good at something. This is represented by their inability to score a Triumph.

2. The character will generally not know which tools are right tools for the job, resulting in mistakes and deficiencies. Represent this with Setback dice as appropriate. Don't let the player tell you that you can't do this; aside from the fact that as the GM you can do whatever the hell you want, Setback dice are there specifically to model situations like this; offsetting someone's sheer natural genius with the fact that they're often dealing with unknown unknowns, and no amount of genius can eliminate that penalty.

So, for the people advocating throwing setback dice/upgrades at the high Intellect character making "untrained" checks, do you do this on any untrained check? I mean, it's a way to push characters to diversify, but I can't imagine trying to roll 2 greens against a pool of reds and blacks being anything but tiresome. At that point, you either have to have a high characteristic or be a dilettante putting one skill rank in every single skill in order to be anything but a walking despair factory.

So, for the people advocating throwing setback dice/upgrades at the high Intellect character making "untrained" checks, do you do this on any untrained check? I mean, it's a way to push characters to diversify, but I can't imagine trying to roll 2 greens against a pool of reds and blacks being anything but tiresome. At that point, you either have to have a high characteristic or be a dilettante putting one skill rank in every single skill in order to be anything but a walking despair factory.

Not on EVERY untrained skill check, but sometimes it does make a difference. To use the example of the mechanics check, did the genius have the proper tools at hand? How did they know which tools they needed? How did they know the proper use and care of said tools? These are all things that could generate setbacks, and can't be offset simply be being smart, they're offset specifically with knowledge that has been refined over centuries/millennia of best practices and tool development. You simply can't recreate it from first principles perfectly in five minutes.

On the other hand, someone who has a large presence is still going to be pretty good at leading people or charming them even if they're never really focused on training these skills.

The useage and quantity of black dice are purely your discretion. It doesn't have to be applied across the board, only when you feel it is necessary. As for upgrading to red dice, that's something I have less experience with.

Not on EVERY untrained skill check, but sometimes it does make a difference. To use the example of the mechanics check, did the genius have the proper tools at hand? How did they know which tools they needed? How did they know the proper use and care of said tools? These are all things that could generate setbacks, and can't be offset simply be being smart, they're offset specifically with knowledge that has been refined over centuries/millennia of best practices and tool development. You simply can't recreate it from first principles perfectly in five minutes.

Right, but if you do this for the genius, you also have to do it for the average guy, which doubly punishes them for trying something outside their usual focus. What's the point of the 2 Intellect guy even trying that mechanics check?

Not on EVERY untrained skill check, but sometimes it does make a difference. To use the example of the mechanics check, did the genius have the proper tools at hand? How did they know which tools they needed? How did they know the proper use and care of said tools? These are all things that could generate setbacks, and can't be offset simply be being smart, they're offset specifically with knowledge that has been refined over centuries/millennia of best practices and tool development. You simply can't recreate it from first principles perfectly in five minutes.

Right, but if you do this for the genius, you also have to do it for the average guy, which doubly punishes them for trying something outside their usual focus. What's the point of the 2 Intellect guy even trying that mechanics check?

Well, that's what setbacks are for. That's in the core rules. So maybe Average tasks are pretty difficult for the average Intellect character making an untrained mechanics check with no tools in the dark, but ... so be it.

My own use of upgrades is reserved for situations where the results have potentially greater negative consequences.

Punishing someone for dumping all their points into a single characteristic and being hyper specialized should not be punished. They will feel the burn when they get hit in their dump stat.

We have all argued about droids being worthwhile or not enough to have determined this by now.

The player should be punished because he sounds like an asshat who is arguing the letter *and* the spirit of the rules to their benefit and to hell with everyone else. But do not punish them for mixing out a single statistic, rather hit them where it hurts because of their justifications and actions.

Well, that's what setbacks are for. That's in the core rules. So maybe Average tasks are pretty difficult for the average Intellect character making an untrained mechanics check with no tools in the dark, but ... so be it.

My own use of upgrades is reserved for situations where the results have potentially greater negative consequences.

See, I understand that setback dice are there to be a way for GM to adjust difficulty on the fly, but I'm not sure this is an appropriate use of them, because the game already has a way of representing the difference between someone with training and someone operating solely on talent and broad competency: proficiency dice. The relatively small impact on chances of success from upgrading from ability to proficiency, combined with the lack of "trained only" skills speaks to a design that encourages players to act outside their area of expertise/specialization, and throwing setback dice at someone for doing the equivalent of trying to change a tire without being a trained mechanic runs counter to that. I think there's better ways to address this situation than subtly pushing players deeper into their respective niches.

Edit: Not to mention it's a temporary fix at best. All the player has to do is spend a handful of XP buying rank 1 in a few skills and then say "See? I'm trained."

See, I understand that setback dice are there to be a way for GM to adjust difficulty on the fly, but I'm not sure this is an appropriate use of them, because the game already has a way of representing the difference between someone with training and someone operating solely on talent and broad competency: proficiency dice.

I agree with you 19 times out of 20. The problem with my stance apparently is that stating it at all is over-stating it. It gives it more weight in words than it is actually used.

There is a significant difference between changing a tire and performing brain surgery. One has very easy instructions to follow the other at best kills a dude if you screw up slightly. Even basic first aid without training can be worse then no aid at all.

I'm also going to point out that skilled assist is a much better option as the player with the 5 intellect can be used by the player with the skill to get a better dice pool.

Punishing someone for dumping all their points into a single characteristic and being hyper specialized should not be punished. They will feel the burn when they get hit in their dump stat.

We have all argued about droids being worthwhile or not enough to have determined this by now.

The player should be punished because he sounds like an asshat who is arguing the letter *and* the spirit of the rules to their benefit and to hell with everyone else. But do not punish them for mixing out a single statistic, rather hit them where it hurts because of their justifications and actions.

As for the conversation about upgrading checks I'm also in the RAW camp as this feels unnecessary. Increase difficulty for hard checks sure, throw in some setback for other negatives but upgrading without opposition or without DSP points feels again unnecessary. I get the risk might be higher but that's what the DSP are for. I point to some of the premades for an example of how risk can be achieved without generating despair. Often the "really bad" outcome is something more like if they generate 3-4 threat of a despair, insinuating in many situations that enough threat can replicate most of these bad outcomes especially if genetated in tangent with a failure.

If one must upgrade a check like say scaling a wall and you really don't want to spend a DSP to do so then consider throwing in some opposition, maybe there are small feral Asians that are awoken by people scaling the wall and start pecking at them while they climb, the check is upgraded by their melee skill, etc.

There is a significant difference between changing a tire and performing brain surgery. One has very easy instructions to follow the other at best kills a dude if you screw up slightly. Even basic first aid without training can be worse then no aid at all.

I'm also going to point out that skilled assist is a much better option as the player with the 5 intellect can be used by the player with the skill to get a better dice pool.

See, I understand that setback dice are there to be a way for GM to adjust difficulty on the fly, but I'm not sure this is an appropriate use of them, because the game already has a way of representing the difference between someone with training and someone operating solely on talent and broad competency: proficiency dice.

I agree with you 19 times out of 20. The problem with my stance apparently is that stating it at all is over-stating it. It gives it more weight in words than it is actually used.

Fair enough. I guess my concern is that offering this up as advice specifically for controlling an over-specialized character runs the risk of appearing to be passive-aggressively targeting one player by arbitrarily raising the difficulty of their tests in order to invalidate their character-building decisions. If incorporating more checks outside of their area of expertise isn't doing the trick, I think a direct conversation is a better option.

Thanks guys! And thanks for not criticizing my first post on the forum. I didn't want to be whiny, but I didn't think that there was anywhere to turn.

The idea that he has to roll to attack with his Heal/Harm power is something we missed. Pg. 283 has a section of rules regarding using powers against stronger NPC's and Nemesis, where you have to roll to hit. This changes everything in regards to that power. We weren't doing that.

And it's good to know that most people feel that the skills should be adjusted to reflect his lack of skill and/or character concept.

Thanks!

Mechanics-wise, I really don't think this guy has done anything wrong, and I wouldn't go out of my way to punish him. Those green dice can give you some very good rolls, but they can also be pretty swingy, leaving you with very few successes. Skills will make him awesome at his few tricks, but he really has gone kinda one-trick pony here.

Heal/Harm is a good power, but I wouldn't hit him with a combat check, even against a Nemesis in most cases. The reason for combat checks or opposed Discipline checks is that your big bad guys need a way to defend themselves from big damage dumps or control effects. Being Immobilized by Bind, being thrown out a window by Move, and so on. Harm never mentions having to touch your enemy, it doesn't do much damage, and it doesn't really have much in the way of control effects. Also, where it does have an opposed roll, it's Medicine vs. Resilience, and if you're making the power have an attack roll, every success should deal another point of damage. That's just going to make Harm nastier.

So, in combat, really all he has is Harm, which will always give him Conflict, often require him to spend strain and flip a destiny point, and only does 5 damage. He can improve that damage, but it's going to cost a lot of XP. I'm assuming he's a Drall, which means he has 1 in Agility and Brawn, so he really has no other combat options. Heck, even after he finishes out Sage and says, "What next?" his options ain't so great. Is he going to learn to use a lightsaber? Soresu Defender is his only decent option, because he hasn't picked up Dedication. So he'll have decent dice for his Lightsaber skill, and will be able to defend himself, but I gotta say, 1 Brawn does not a stalwart Guardian make.

In every arena other than "The Smart Guy," he's kinda screwed himself over. It's possible he's being obnoxious, but really, as long as he's not stepping too hard on any other characters' toes, I'd let him roll with it. He can team up with the team Mechanic for some amazing rolls, he understands astrophysics, medicine and so forth better than he should, but so what? Sounds like he's kind of a savant. And with the Heal power, it's easy enough to say that the Force guides him through human and alien physiology. Let him have his schtick. I'm sure "The Gun Guy" and "The Sword Guy" don't mind having someone who can patch them up after a fight.

Increase difficulty for hard checks sure, throw in some setback for other negatives but upgrading without opposition or without DSP points feels again unnecessary.

Why can't the "environment" be an opposition in the same way as a skilled NPC?

I see your point, whafrog, but personally, that's why I use DSPs to get upgrades.

Before any check, if I have DSP available (and I almost always do!) I ask myself if this is a check that might result in an 'oh s***' moment in the grand pulp tradition. If so, I upgrade.

For us, it's a mechanic that the players recognise and they get their LSP back to compensate. Feels less arbitrary that way.

But hey, whatever works for you and your table. I'm the last one to tell someone else how to play!

So, in combat, really all he has is Harm, which will always give him Conflict, often require him to spend strain and flip a destiny point, and only does 5 damage.

And with the Heal power, it's easy enough to say that the Force guides him through human and alien physiology.

Let me just ask, TGF, do you let the Lightsaber Hamster have both at the same time?

As I understood, by RAW only light-siders get Heal and only dark-siders get Harm.

(Let me also stress I use a vastly-simplified Morality rule that does allow this, but only one power at a time... basically like 'Stance' in the WH FRP game... I just wanted to know how other people played it...)

Increase difficulty for hard checks sure, throw in some setback for other negatives but upgrading without opposition or without DSP points feels again unnecessary.

Why can't the "environment" be an opposition in the same way as a skilled NPC?

Not on EVERY untrained skill check, but sometimes it does make a difference. To use the example of the mechanics check, did the genius have the proper tools at hand? How did they know which tools they needed? How did they know the proper use and care of said tools? These are all things that could generate setbacks, and can't be offset simply be being smart, they're offset specifically with knowledge that has been refined over centuries/millennia of best practices and tool development. You simply can't recreate it from first principles perfectly in five minutes.

Right, but if you do this for the genius, you also have to do it for the average guy, which doubly punishes them for trying something outside their usual focus. What's the point of the 2 Intellect guy even trying that mechanics check?

If he's the one doing it, at that point you're probably so desperate that some chance is better than none at all.

But yeah, overall someone who is untrained and working without proper tools should fail at a task most of the time. That's not punishing them, that's just applying consistency to the universe.

True and that's why changing a tire would be difficulty - or simple whilst brain surgery would be daunting.

Except that failing brain surgery could have a lot worse complications. It's not just harder, it's more dangerous.

But hey, whatever works for you and your table. I'm the last one to tell someone else how to play!

Agreed, it probably sounds like I'm being pushy about it, but I'm just trying to explain my rationale. I get why people use RAW for this.

It is kind of funny, the character I made is in many ways quite simiar to his. I am a Drall sage with a focus on heal force power, built using knight level rules. I expect the OP character was also knight level.

I have only a 4 int, with a 4 discipline to go with it, and I picked up bind and battle meditation, but not one with the universe. But in a lot of ways similar. I dont really use the harm power (or I havent been put in a dire enough circumstance to need to use it yet anyhow), I mostly spend my combat actions using battle meditation or bind, because really, harm is crappy damage compared to an average character with a blaster.

I am good at int skills, and in general am the smart guy, but with 4 dice I dont overshadow the mechanic, but then, if at knight level play, the mechanic should have around a 4 stat and a 3 skill anyhow, or they arent a very good mechanic, ours has more than me because he has a dedication. I dont see one more int really making me wildly better. I might get a bit more success, but no chance of a triumph makes it about a wash. Drall have an ability to be better at aiding others anyhow, so I generally tend to go that route.

That said, those are the things I do well. I have a soak of 3, and 7 wounds, any attacks at me are scary. I am miserable at any physical challenges, and play up being a meter tall chipmunk because of it. I dont need more penalties, I already feel moderately underpowered compared to other knight level characters that have good combat skills.

The OP character is far from broken, and forcing added difficulty to his int-based checks because someone 'claimed' the mechanic position is silly. If the guy with 5 int and no talents in it can do better on mechanics checks, your mechanic should probably re-examine why they come up short, if the sage got one with the universe, the mechanic should have a dedication, and really not be behind. But there is purposefully no system in this game that penalizes someone for being untrained. We see almost every character help out with fixing things through the movies, because that really is just a skill that the average person does. Think of it like using a computer in modern society, the average person knows the basics, what tools to use, how to apply them in general.

If you give him a penalty to using mechanics because he is untrained, you need to give the same type of penalties to all untrained uses. Rolling vigilance on your mechanic and he didn't put points there? toss a few setback dice because he hasn't read how to properly watch a room. the pilot didn't take ranks in resilience? Better give him an upgrade on that exhaustion check because he didn't know how to wear his protective gear right. The soldier doesnt have points in coersion? Guess he gets a few setback for not practicing the right ways to project his voice. This is not the sort of game anyone wants to play.

True and that's why changing a tire would be difficulty - or simple whilst brain surgery would be daunting.

Except that failing brain surgery could have a lot worse complications. It's not just harder, it's more dangerous.