Hi, I couldn't find anything that specifically covers this, apologies if this has been covered before (or I'm just being stoopid).

In regards to activating a Force Power (Bind for example, and reason I'm asking) which the Magnitude aspect can be triggered with. How do people handle the Opposed (Discipline) side of things with Force Sensitive / PCs that are able to resist? RAW indicates that it is the acting character that make's the check along with the Force Dice when an Opposed check is asked for.

Does that mean that they have to make an Opposed check for each person targeted who is able to resist (which seems a bit against the general one dice check per action and a lot of extra dice rolling), would you instead rule that for this instance it is those resisting that makes the check (as an incidental)? Or would you just go with the quicker option of using the highest Discipline of those targeted by the power for the difficulty of the check?

I would just take the higher as the opposing Discipline. If you decide to grab some minions and a nemesis, failing against the nemesis is going to compromise your efforts with the others.

I would just take the higher as the opposing Discipline. If you decide to grab some minions and a nemesis, failing against the nemesis is going to compromise your efforts with the others.

But what about an NPC Force user targeting multiple PC Force users? Would you still just take the highest Discipline of the PCs targeted?

I make the victims make the roll. Also I am not a fan of the take the highiest discipline and done. Yes it quicker but a little unfair. Everyone is unique. Everyone should have the same chance resisting a force power.

I make the victims make the roll. Also I am not a fan of the take the highiest discipline and done. Yes it quicker but a little unfair. Everyone is unique. Everyone should have the same chance resisting a force power.

This is the direction I'm leaning toward. Going with the highest is quicker and I would certainly do this with NPC Minions/Rivals, for example, but I can almost hear the (justifiable) whinging of unfairness from Players, plus I wouldn't want to take away the (important PC) individual's opportunity to resist.

When it's PCs vs NPCs, the most difficult is the usual option (see Auto-fire). When NPC vs PCs, each PC should roll to resist separately.

When it's PCs vs NPCs, the most difficult is the usual option (see Auto-fire). When NPC vs PCs, each PC should roll to resist separately.

Interesting... Is that actually written somewhere in the CRB, or is that your personal guideline as GM?

When it's PCs vs NPCs, the most difficult is the usual option (see Auto-fire). When NPC vs PCs, each PC should roll to resist separately.

Interesting... Is that actually written somewhere in the CRB, or is that your personal guideline as GM?

This is the way I do it but as far as I know it's not in any CRB.

In my opinion this type of instance is going to be common in higher EXP games and is something that should have been in a sidebar as an example/advice.

When it's PCs vs NPCs, the most difficult is the usual option (see Auto-fire). When NPC vs PCs, each PC should roll to resist separately.

Interesting... Is that actually written somewhere in the CRB, or is that your personal guideline as GM?

It's my extrapolation.

First, the RAW only recommends an opposed Force check against NPCs when necessary (or the ability calls for it specifically), and that is frequently going to be against nemeses. As with Auto-fire, picking the most difficult option when hitting multiple foes seems in line with the rules, and spares the need to roll the same check four or five times for a single action. Keeps bookkeeping down, speeds things along.

Next, the rules do say that any power used on a PC should always be opposed. It just seems natural that each PC would be tested individually.

Assisted checks might also be an option...

I make the victims make the roll. Also I am not a fan of the take the highiest discipline and done. Yes it quicker but a little unfair. Everyone is unique. Everyone should have the same chance resisting a force power.

This is the direction I'm leaning toward. Going with the highest is quicker and I would certainly do this with NPC Minions/Rivals, for example, but I can almost hear the (justifiable) whinging of unfairness from Players, plus I wouldn't want to take away the (important PC) individual's opportunity to resist.

If you're going to do that against multiple NPCs, I wouldn't make the PC roll against each target. Instead I'd have the PC roll once, then each target rolls their opposing dice against that one PC roll. If the PC has to roll against, say, 4 targets, statistically they will fail one or more of those, which means all the XP spent to boost their capabilities is for naught.

I do allow PCs to resist individually (...because they are PCs...), but I do it in the same way. I recently had an Inquisitor use Move/Force Push on them, triggering Magnitude to get them all. He rolled his positive dice, and each player rolled their Discipline as negative dice. Lucky for me they all failed (or rather, didn't generate enough failures) and all went down like bowling pins.

I always go with the highest skill of the targets that you want to affect. So a character could target another character in the group that has a lower Discipline total than the best one, but then the power cannot include the one(s) with better Discipline dice.

When it's PCs vs NPCs, the most difficult is the usual option (see Auto-fire). When NPC vs PCs, each PC should roll to resist separately.

Agreed.

I wouldn't worry about assisted checks for the NPCs beyond maybe adding a setback die to the difficulty if the PC is trying to affect a large number of NPCs, such as tagging a major Rival and three minion groups of 4 baddies each in one go.

In the case of an NPC targeting the PCs with such an effect, I'd go with having the PCs make their own roll to resist. Yes, it does skew things in the PCs' favor, but it's a fair trade off for not bogging the game down while the GM makes multiple rolls while also circumventing any accusations of a player's character being unfairly affected simply because of a single lucky roll (and sadly there are players that would raise this objection, feeling rightly or otherwise that their character would have had a better chance of resisting if not lumped in with the rest of the group, even if they had the worst die pool of all the PCs).

Blackbird888, on 16 May 2016 - 09:43 AM, said:Blackbird888, on 16 May 2016 - 09:43 AM, said:

When it's PCs vs NPCs, the most difficult is the usual option (see Auto-fire). When NPC vs PCs, each PC should roll to resist separately.

your PCs vs NPCs rule doesnt make sense. Let imagine I have two mercenary Némésis. One is super brawny, the other is a ninja style nemesis with low brawn. The force user decide to use Move on both. The brawny one resist easely because his resilience is way over the discipline of the force user. So by your ruling, the ninja will get an automatic success on something he would have no chance of succeeding if he was alone because his Buddy succeed? No sorry. Not at my table.

If multiple PCs get to resist separatly, Némésis or even rivals should also.

When tossing multiple objects at a group of NPCs or Pcs I use the auto fire or linked rules.

So in example 1

Player picks up 3 sil 1 rocks and hurls them at the big bad and his two unattached minion squads.

The player rolls discipline ranged attack with an upgrade and for every 2 advantages the player can hit an additional target

with one of his 3 rocks limited of course to 3 total hits.

So in example 2

Player picks up 3 sil 1 rocks and hurls them all at the big bad,

The player rolls discipline ranged attack and for every 2 advantage he can link in an additional rock.

Now if the player is using people as ammo then he first has to make a

Discipline vrs Athletics, Resil, or Discipline which ever is higher to use them as ammo for his ranged check.

Thank you for all your replies. It appears many are in agreement to have PCs individually resist, which I agree also.

Cheers