Hi all! Just wanted to get some opinions from you guys. So I have a player who doesn't agree with me. Shocking....I know. LOL. So I thought I would post my question here to see what you guys thought, and see if I'm just being "that old guy" or if I'm actually running my some what right.

It boils down to this. Talents and the skills checks to use them, specifically Full Throttle.

It says make hard piloting check. Now, I like to thow in setback dice for being in a crowded space lane above Nar Shaddaa, with transports around, and other ships. I also throw in another setback for the sun beaming right into the window, and I'm heavy on the Dark Destiny Pool, so I upgrade once. So the pilot is looking at two black, two purple and a red, and he is a great pilot, so he can get rid of both black, and he is rolling like 3Y 1G vs 2P 1R.

Now, a day later the player has some issues with me modifying rolls that have to deal with talents...I don't know why, but he feels that if using a skill to activate a talent and the book says it is three purple or two purple or whatever, then that is all it should be.

I had never thought of it this way. To me a skill check is a skill is a skill check, and they all can be modified by setback and Destiny, even the ones to to activate Talents. Has anyone else ever not modified the difficulties for skill checks for talents before? Or am I the wierd here on this one and modify them? Thanks.

Full disclaimer, my player isn't being combative or argumentative, and brought this up after the game ended, and has already said that he will gladly play the game as I see fit, but is just trying to understand it better, he just genuinely understands it right now that talent skill checks shouldn't be modified. So we aren't having an argument over this or anything, which is nice!!!

All checks can be modified. Just remember that can apply to upgrades and boosts too.

You could call for a separate Stellar Phenomena check in regards to the issues you cite. I wouldn't technically say either one of you is incorrect, he is right in that environmental issues and such really don't impede your ability to just hammer a throttle. Self preservation might play a role, but there would need to be a fistfight in the cockpit for environmental issues to technically affect him.

You're right in that I never say never or always say always. It boils down to simplicity I think and making one or two Pilot checks. I think your way is cleaner, but he can't honestly expect there aren't consequences potentially to flooring it in heavy traffic.

Thanks. Like in my example, the heavy traffic, and sun blaring in, he was able to use another Talent to get rid of those setback dice, so they didn't even become part of the roll. I'm not even sure why he brought this up. But I figured I would ask around here. I also did call for a Steller Phenomena piloting check as he was blasting his way through through dense space traffic away from two cloakshape fighters. He was moving at 5, so it was was pretty tough, and loaded with a ton of setback. That was really what kept the cloakshape fighters away. that player had a co pilot who helped reduce the Setback dice on that check, his talents reduced the Setback further, and he is a good pilot. The cloakshape pilots were Aces, but couldn't remove the Setbacks, so couldn't make the checks and keep up.

But I don't understand why he is/was concerned when I narrated his Full Throttle and added in the two setback, then said his talents got rid of those, and the upgraded with a Destiny. I guess he didn't like...? I don't know....

I guess he is not used to GMs who use setback dice. I know when he joined the group, I told him I am the king of setback and I try to have a setback in about every check. He didn't seem to thrilled with that idea. Out of the difficulties I use mostly Average to Hard, with a few Setbacks, and most player can get rid of 1-2 of those. So they are making 90% 95% of thier checks. This has only been his second session with us. I think he will come around.

Well, thanks for the thoughts and feedback!!!

I've always considered "activation" checks to be flat checks that, barring spending a DP, are not modifiable. Setbacks and the like, as well as the effects of Adversary, shouldn't play into those checks as there are certain thresholds that are built into the system that need to be attained in order to activate a talent reliably. Changing those thresholds alters the value of those talents and, by extension, the value of the XP spent to facilitate their use.

In short, as a GM I would think very carefully about whether or not to modify a talent activation roll as it changes a players ability to do something cool for which they spent XP.

Upgrading is fine, as a few talents mention what happens when rolling a despair. Setback are fine, as the more characters progress, the more they can remove setback dice, so GM's should use setback with great frequency. Adversary would only need to apply to combat checks to attack the target with Adversary (there aren't many, but I think Saber Throw is listed as an average check). Not directly modifying the base difficulty is probably a good cutoff for modifying dice pools (although as players have free access to various talents that can lower the difficulty of checks, as far as I can tell).

A skill check is a skill check, as you said, and nothing in the book limits how a GM can modify talent usage. At least not to me, it doesn't.

I've always considered "activation" checks to be flat checks that, barring spending a DP, are not modifiable. Setbacks and the like, as well as the effects of Adversary, shouldn't play into those checks as there are certain thresholds that are built into the system that need to be attained in order to activate a talent reliably. Changing those thresholds alters the value of those talents and, by extension, the value of the XP spent to facilitate their use.

In short, as a GM I would think very carefully about whether or not to modify a talent activation roll as it changes a players ability to do something cool for which they spent XP.

Actually "activation checks" are specifically called out to be modifiable by setback dice. Just look at the Signature abilities; around half of them have an activation check against a stated difficulty consisting only of Difficulty dice (purples), while often having one or more additional upgrades that specifically removes setback dice without ever specifying that the activation check has setback dice added to it. The inference is pretty obvious.

Well, I don't seem to be in the minority here. The player I have has been confused on a few things now, and last week called me wrong on something. He is a good player, and I wouldn't say he is adversarial or anything negative, so I want to make sure that I don't come that way across to him, and that I actually listen to him and hear his inputs and concerns, hence coming here and asking you guys... So our relationship is not one I'm right you're wrong per se'. So I just wanted to make that clear, I'm not dealing with a problem player, I'm dealing with a player who had (sorry to sound arrogant) bad GMs in the past and taught him wrong. I play my games 99.9% by the RAW/RAI. Another player is still new to the rules, the third knows his tech modding inside and out,the the fourth is another long time GM, but doesn't interject too much on rules, and is a good player. So I have a really good group going. So far they have been neigh untouchable, but let's see how they do against some Dark Side acolytes on some primitive world out in the middle of no where with super big creatures and a temple of tragedy!!!

Well, again, thanks for the thoughts and feedback everyone!!! You've been great!! Remeber to tip your waitresses!!

IMO, a roll is a roll, and if the GM thinks that setback or upgrades are appropriate, then I’d be hard pressed to argue with that unless there is something that specifically says that the roll in question cannot be modified.

OTOH, as GM, when discussing the subject of setback and upgrades, I usually talk about that in the frame of “I think X is appropriate here”, or “It seems to me that there would be really nasty consequences here if you were to fail” or somesuch.

In other words, I generally try to frame it as a proposal or suggestion, and give the player(s) an opportunity to convince me otherwise. Sometimes they convince me, and sometimes they don’t. But I like to try to make sure that they are engaged and invested in the roll to be made, and so they need to have a certain amount of player agency in order to do that.

So long as the players understand that I’m not just there to rip them off at every possible opportunity, and that for this game to be fun for everyone involved takes a group commitment by everyone to be reasonable, I find that they’re usually okay with whatever I suggest.

If Initiative can have Upgrades and Setback added to them (which they can) then anything is fair game. I say you did the right thing keeping it to a single check with all the factors included in it. The handling of the Vehicle should be included in the Full Throttle check as well because Handling affects any Piloting Check made by the driver/pilot in that vehicle.

My rule for any check: Optimal conditions? Yes! > No Setback. All other situations? Well...

Also, I agree with Richard: Why should Handling be privileged before other Setback?

Ok, thanks everyone for your thoughts and opinions. I didn't feel I was doing anything wrong, but my player brought up a question, and I didn't want to be that old GM so stuck in their ways that couldn't see past their own nose. It seems only one person here says leave the difficulty set, which I don't feel reflects the spirit or intent of the game at all. But to each their own. Again, thanks everyone!!!