Destiny Points aren't meant to be used in an adversarial relationship between the GMs and the Players a la upgrading checks. They are meant to be powerful narrative tools that introduce elements that didn't already exist previously into the scene, so long as the new elements aren't completely outrageous.

For Example:
The GM finds that his preplanned Minion groups of Army Troopers in a forest outside an Imperial base being mowed down with ease by the PCs. This particular scene is meant to be battle that the PCs could not win. Flip a Destiny Point, the PCs are ambushed by deadly Stormtrooper Minion Groups from all sides with a Stormtrooper Sergeant leading them. Vice versa, the PCs could use a Destiny Point themselves to introduce a fallen tree trunk that they could use for cover.

The constant back and forth of upgrading checks doesn't add to the quality of the story that is being told. It shows a lack of willingness to be creative in a game that practically requires both Players and GMs to be creative in order to play the game in the spirit it was intended to be played. GMs, Players: if you find yourselves in a session where the constant back and forth is a bore, then pause the campaign (not necessarily the current session) to brainstorm various ways the Destiny Pool can be spent other than upgrading checks. Communication is key. Don't let the back and forth upgrading bring your game to boring grind.

Re: Player order and flipping destiny

Page 28 (eote) second paragraph under "The Limits of Luck" - "The active player...always has the first chance to use a Destiny Point. Once he has decided whether or not he will use a Destiny Point, the other party involved in the check...has the opportunity to respond and spend a Destiny Point as well."

I read the rulebook cover to cover, played in two games for two years, ran a couple one offs teaching new people, and still only caught this detail a couple months ago when prepping for my first long term campaign. So, IMO, don't feel bad even a little if you missed it!

Extra Credit: The cite for activating talents and upgrading a roll being mutually exclusive is in the paragraph above.

Re: Ebb & flow

Anytime I think of a good use for a despair I'll flip one, but otherwise I leave the pool alone. I try to "give back" to the players with a group check, flipping a DP for each PC's Fear/Resilience/Coordination/whatever check, and also by upgrading all checks involving the main baddie (both incoming and outgoing). So my PCs usually get DPs back in waves instead of being stagnant/as a trickle.

Although, I am definitely going to try to encourage more of what Oden said in the future.

I completely forgot the other MASSIVE use of Destiny Points... The Dark Side (or Light side for those more adventurous PC's). If your making a combined Skill & Force Power check (eg Enhance Athletics) then flipping a Destiny Point to upgrade the check prevents you from flipping one after rolling to draw on the other side of The Force. I know many players under use the Force and refuse to use the Dark Side thus the "sleep walk to Paragon" problem, a discussion for another day. But for players and GM's who get their head around the intended way of using the Force thus can be one of the biggest ways to use DP's.

Essentially I'm trying to say that a dice Upgrade is the Vanilla boring least effective use of a Destiny Point, find the other ways. When you do you will discover that a big pool of DP's is much much more important.

Re: Player order and flipping destiny

Page 28 (eote) second paragraph under "The Limits of Luck" - "The active player...always has the first chance to use a Destiny Point. Once he has decided whether or not he will use a Destiny Point, the other party involved in the check...has the opportunity to respond and spend a Destiny Point as well."

I read the rulebook cover to cover, played in two games for two years, ran a couple one offs teaching new people, and still only caught this detail a couple months ago when prepping for my first long term campaign. So, IMO, don't feel bad even a little if you missed it!

Extra Credit: The cite for activating talents and upgrading a roll being mutually exclusive is in the paragraph above.

I admit that I had missed those passages, but the former doesn't really prevent the back-and-forth issue, as it doesn't state the active player can't still choose to spend a destiny point after the other party has spent one, i.e. just because they get the first chance, doesn't mean they lose that chance after the other player has chosen. Though the spirit of the rule seems pretty clear, that's been a very poor indicator of 'designer intent' in the past.

Having only played EotE, with no Force characters, I missed a whole aspect of the destiny pool. Thanks for nudging me in the right direction. And, I just got a first taste of F&D, at my FLGS's game day where a great GM ran us through the Beginner Box adventure. I must say, it was a lot of fun.

Re: Player order and flipping destiny

Page 28 (eote) second paragraph under "The Limits of Luck" - "The active player...always has the first chance to use a Destiny Point. Once he has decided whether or not he will use a Destiny Point, the other party involved in the check...has the opportunity to respond and spend a Destiny Point as well."

I read the rulebook cover to cover, played in two games for two years, ran a couple one offs teaching new people, and still only caught this detail a couple months ago when prepping for my first long term campaign. So, IMO, don't feel bad even a little if you missed it!

Extra Credit: The cite for activating talents and upgrading a roll being mutually exclusive is in the paragraph above.

I admit that I had missed those passages, but the former doesn't really prevent the back-and-forth issue, as it doesn't state the active player can't still choose to spend a destiny point after the other party has spent one, i.e. just because they get the first chance, doesn't mean they lose that chance after the other player has chosen. Though the spirit of the rule seems pretty clear, that's been a very poor indicator of 'designer intent' in the past.

I disagree, it does prevent the back-and-forth issue. Example:

PC: Flips Pip

GM: Flips Pip

PC: Flips Pip, but GM stops him because according to the Core book only each side can flip a pip once during a roll. (Flip Flop prevented.)

Also, you can choose to flip a pip, but the actual flip doesn't occur till after the roll. So if the party was looking a 3 Dark pips and 0 Light pips, the GM can choose to use a Dark pip which would still leave 0 Light pips until after the roll, which will then become 2 Dark / 1 Light. This scenario would also prevent flip flops.

Re: Player order and flipping destiny

Page 28 (eote) second paragraph under "The Limits of Luck" - "The active player...always has the first chance to use a Destiny Point. Once he has decided whether or not he will use a Destiny Point, the other party involved in the check...has the opportunity to respond and spend a Destiny Point as well."

I read the rulebook cover to cover, played in two games for two years, ran a couple one offs teaching new people, and still only caught this detail a couple months ago when prepping for my first long term campaign. So, IMO, don't feel bad even a little if you missed it!

Extra Credit: The cite for activating talents and upgrading a roll being mutually exclusive is in the paragraph above.

I admit that I had missed those passages, but the former doesn't really prevent the back-and-forth issue, as it doesn't state the active player can't still choose to spend a destiny point after the other party has spent one, i.e. just because they get the first chance, doesn't mean they lose that chance after the other player has chosen. Though the spirit of the rule seems pretty clear, that's been a very poor indicator of 'designer intent' in the past.

I disagree, it does prevent the back-and-forth issue. Example:

PC: Flips Pip

GM: Flips Pip

PC: Flips Pip, but GM stops him because according to the Core book only each side can flip a pip once during a roll. (Flip Flop prevented.)

Also, you can choose to flip a pip, but the actual flip doesn't occur till after the roll. So if the party was looking a 3 Dark pips and 0 Light pips, the GM can choose to use a Dark pip which would still leave 0 Light pips until after the roll, which will then become 2 Dark / 1 Light. This scenario would also prevent flip flops.

No, what you've described isn't the problem I've been talking about, and never has been and this would have been clear if you had bothered to read the previous posts, but I guess some people just can't be bothered. The problematic scenario is:

PC: I'm not flipping a pip

GM: I'm flipping a pip

PC: Okay, then I'm flipping a pip after all.

The passage states the active player gets the first chance, but not that it's the ONLY chance they get.

And this is viable so long as the choose to players leave one light side destiny point in the pool, and the pool is static because they flip a pip in response every time the GM flips one. This is exactly what some groups will do, and exactly what the rule discussed above is intended to avoid. This degenerate situation gets old fast.

And for the record, this:

The constant back and forth of upgrading checks doesn't add to the quality of the story that is being told. It shows a lack of willingness to be creative in a game that practically requires both Players and GMs to be creative in order to play the game in the spirit it was intended to be played. GMs, Players: if you find yourselves in a session where the constant back and forth is a bore, then pause the campaign (not necessarily the current session) to brainstorm various ways the Destiny Pool can be spent other than upgrading checks. Communication is key. Don't let the back and forth upgrading bring your game to boring grind.

... is what I did in the first campaign when the problem became evident: pause the campaign and discuss the situation. The house rule I described above is what we came up with.

Apologies there, my brain completely shut off while typing. Anatomy Lessons is absolutely the talent I had intended to type in as my example. If a player upgraded the dice pool with a Destiny Point they are no longer able to use Anatomy Lessons (and others like it) when resolving the action.

That restriction should only take effect if the talent influences the check. For example, if you can add or subtract a boost or setback die, or change the difficulty, or increase your ability, you can't spend a DP if you've already influenced the roll by spending a DP to upgrade the dice.

Talents like Heroic Fortitude, Mental Fortress, and Steely Nerves allow you to spend a DP to ignore the effects of wounds on particular skill checks. In those situations you can't activate the talent and also spend another DP to further influence the roll, which is what that section references when it says the character "cannot also invest a Destiny Point to trigger one of his character's talents".

This is further supported by text later on in the section that states, "For example, if the GM declares that he will be spending a Destiny Point to upgrade an enemy's Ability die into a Proficiency die for an attack against a PC, that PC's player has the opportunity to then use a Destiny Point, either to upgrade one of the Difficulty dice in the attack pool into a Challenge die, or perhaps to trigger one of the PC's talents." A talent like Anatomy Lessons would never be used as a response to anything an opponent did, again it can only be used after a successful attack is made.

I can see where an argument could be made that such a talent influences the results of a check after the fact, in the sense that by adding additional damage to a hit that it replicates the effect of the roll having extra successes. But it seems more straightforward and closer to RAW to assume that only talents that take effect as the skill check is occurring fall under this restriction.

*shrug* To me it seems pretty well spelled out that "the first chance" isn't meant to imply mutiple chances, just to specify they do it first. If the players say they should get another opportunity to flip, then you can just say that's not how it works. If they still insist between sessions, and you feel like indulging them, then ask them to show you where it says they do get another opportunity (which, ofc, they can't). Hopefully they accept the GM ruling and life moves on, if not then there's other issues. Besides, the deciding factor for flipping a destiny is an extra chance at triumph or an extra green die, not to try to offset a 4-ish% greater chance of failure.

That being said, if your rule works for you then obv I can't stop you. I'm just pointing out there's language in the rulebook for those who may not remember it.

Re: Atama

Sounds like this one should get passed up the chain. If what you say is true about Anatomy lessons, then what you say about Heroic Fortitude, etc. cannot also be true. Since both are Active (Incidental) talents, one could simply take the Heroic Fortitude Incidental as the first thing a character does on their turn, then aim, then attack and be able to upgrade their check with a destiny.

I don't see how the "further supported by" paragraph adds anything. When a PC is targeted they can flip to upgrade the opponent's difficulty or use a talent. I can't really recall any talents which read, "When targeted, spend a Destiny Point to...." but they could be out there.

Re: Atama

Sounds like this one should get passed up the chain. If what you say is true about Anatomy lessons, then what you say about Heroic Fortitude, etc. cannot also be true. Since both are Active (Incidental) talents, one could simply take the Heroic Fortitude Incidental as the first thing a character does on their turn, then aim, then attack and be able to upgrade their check with a destiny.

I don't see how the "further supported by" paragraph adds anything. When a PC is targeted they can flip to upgrade the opponent's difficulty or use a talent. I can't really recall any talents which read, "When targeted, spend a Destiny Point to...." but they could be out there.

You're 100% correct. I missed where those talents (Heroic Fortitude, etc.) last for the entire ENCOUNTER. Which means they are terrible examples and irrelevant.

I haven't gone through all the splat books or the 2nd and 3rd core books to check, but in EotE I see no active incidental talents that cost DP aside from the ones that add damage to a successful attack. So it's safe to assume that those talents are what the writers had in mind when saying you can't spend DP to activate a talent when spending a DP to upgrade a die.

On the other hand, I also can't find any talents anywhere that make sense to spend DP to activate as a response to the GM spending a DP. Which means that the text applies to hypothetical future talents rather than anything actually present in that book.

I think what I was getting hung up on is what a "check" is. I was assuming that the dice roll was the check. But looking on page 10 of the EotE core book, I see that the check is more than that. It encompasses the dice pool assembly, the roll itself, and the narrative and mechanical applications of that roll. Therefore, a talent like Anatomy Lessons which is adding damage to the results is taking place during the check, and it should most definitely count towards the restriction.

I've changed my opinion about how to interpret the rules, thank you for your assistance and correction.