Ok so, why is it that more AGI doesn't make someone harder to hit in combat?

More Brawn adds soak, that makes sense.

But wouldn't a character who's quicker, be harder to shoot at?

I guess the game designers thought Agility was good enough as it was? It didn't need yet another thing to make it a must have characteristic.

I guess it also opens the door for Talents too

To expand a little further I guess the idea is that a Brawny person can naturally take a beating with no specific training or experience, that's what Enduring is.

But a naturally Agile character still can't dodge bullets, or a melee attack, that takes experience, equipment and the Force. Ie Dodge, Sidestep, Defensive Stance, Sixth Sense, Superior Reflexes, Sense, Armour etc etc.

But wouldn't a character who's quicker, be harder to shoot at?

Maybe in theory, but given the range of the dice pools, I don't think it's significant enough to make an impact without adding pointless complexity. But there's also the issue of game design and flavour: the game is designed to favour offence. This keeps things moving in a more Star Wars style, and makes it more difficult to play in a "tank until I win" D&D style.

Besides, if you're going to reward the quick, you'd have to penalize the clumsy, and suddenly all those species with Agility 1 would become unplayable, or would all be super agile examples of their kind. Agility is already a necessary attribute for key aspects of the SW experience, no need to make it even more important.

Agility has already some major skills listed under it. Having it affect defense too would be rather "overpowered" to be fair.

As others have said, Agility already has a lot going for it, being tied to two of the most prominent combat skills (Ranged:Light and Ranged:Heavy) as well as a fair number of non-combat skills (Piloting:Planetary, Piloting:Space, and Stealth). It doesn't need to play any further role in combat.

Brawn adding to Soak isn't that big a deal since the damage rating of most attacks is high enough that most PCs are only going to be able to withstand two or three hits before they get pushed over their wound threshold. PCs are encouraged to make use of cover, or to do what they can to end a fight as quickly as they can rather than let things drag out.

In this system, the name of the game is "getting into combat is dangerous!" If you find yourself in a protracted skirmish, then you're doing something very wrong. In a way, it's not unlike the older editions of Warhammer Fantasy Role Play, where the PCS were generally nobodies with very little combat training and not much in the way of weapons/armor, and you were generally better off avoiding the various orcs, goblins, and other nasties as opposed to the general D&D approach of kick in the door and start butchering the beasties.

It's mostly not about Agility, as much as it is about the fact that a quicker fellow IS harder to hit than a slow one.

Of course this comes from the difficult player, again, who keeps changing careers every time he finds something like this (now he wants to pick something that doesn't rely on agility).

So I told him that Agility is still plenty important because many skills/Force powers are based on it, etc.

BUT, when I was gamemastering my first session last week (this dude wasn't playing then), I did often question if I was doing combat right, it felt weird throwing the same X purple dice for ANY enemy no matter what, just based on range.

Thats the mechanic and as others have said there are a few Talents that describe the effects you want. In any case ranged combat isn't anything like a video game you don't run-n-gun and bounce about like a dropped football. You get behind cover and hope the F you don't get shot. So your ability to move fast isn't going to make much of a difference most of the time, the time that it can are covered by Talents.
As for Melee and HTH again as others have pointed out that it's really Skill that gives one the real advantage, and Talents make up for any difference.

Discounting the Imperial Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy's stunning track record, assuming the main characters, how often do you see them in the OT (or the films overall) dodging and jumping out of the way of enemy attacks? Most of the time they park behind cover.

The fact of the matter is, unlike other systems, actively dodging incoming attacks is an exceptional action that a character doesn't normally have access to.

BUT, when I was gamemastering my first session last week (this dude wasn't playing then), I did often question if I was doing combat right, it felt weird throwing the same X purple dice for ANY enemy no matter what, just based on range.

Some enemies will have Adversary, an automatic upgrade of those purple dice. And the PCs will have access to other means of defense, including talents like Dodge, or the Sense power.

But step back and take a bird's eye view of what the game is trying to accomplish. It's a game simulating the feel of the Star Wars universe, not a simulation of every nuance of reality. Games that simulate reality tend to be a grind, and this game is designed to generally avoid that. There are only 5 (maybe 6) increments to work with, so if you're going to make even the slightest change you're going to notice huge ripple effects in the whole game. Is Agility better than "cover"? Is it better than an armour's "defense"? Those two already don't stack, a game-design decision that seems arbitrary until you realize that allowing such stacking creates a static (and terrifically boring) combat experience. So if you allowed Agility to, say, add setback just like "cover", the game rules probably wouldn't allow it to stack anyway.

Have you ever been shot at? No? You'll have to trust me then, when I tell you you can't dodge bullets(/lasers - unless you're Neo). They're faster than you. Don't care how agile you are. The onus is on the skill of the shooter. Not the target.

If you are moving when someone shoots at you, that makes you harder to hit, absolutely. And it would be completely appropriate for the GM to increase the difficulty for the attackers pool if someone is moving while being shot at (this is able to be captured by Talents as others have very patiently laid out for you, or could just be a GM judgement call if all the target is doing is moving - just as cover is captured or laying prone could be, etc.). But it is not appropriate to assume people can actively try to dodge bullets, especially while conducting other activities (like trying to shoot someone else, etc.).

So; what you are conceptualizing is nonsense, and what you think you're conceptualizing is actually properly captured and represented in the system.

Thats the mechanic and as others have said there are a few Talents that describe the effects you want. In any case ranged combat isn't anything like a video game you don't run-n-gun and bounce about like a dropped football. You get behind cover and hope the F you don't get shot. So your ability to move fast isn't going to make much of a difference most of the time, the time that it can are covered by Talents.

As for Melee and HTH again as others have pointed out that it's really Skill that gives one the real advantage, and Talents make up for any difference.

THIS is the real argument. Thank you!

Have you ever been shot at? No? You'll have to trust me then, when I tell you you can't dodge bullets(/lasers - unless you're Neo). They're faster than you. Don't care how agile you are. The onus is on the skill of the shooter. Not the target.

If you are moving when someone shoots at you, that makes you harder to hit, absolutely. And it would be completely appropriate for the GM to increase the difficulty for the attackers pool if someone is moving while being shot at (this is able to be captured by Talents as others have very patiently laid out for you, or could just be a GM judgement call if all the target is doing is moving - just as cover is captured or laying prone could be, etc.). But it is not appropriate to assume people can actively try to dodge bullets, especially while conducting other activities (like trying to shoot someone else, etc.).

So; what you are conceptualizing is nonsense, and what you think you're conceptualizing is actually properly captured and represented in the system.

This too. Thanks

But... in this universe, Jedi -are- "Neos". Are they not?

But yeah, if we think that way, then it's not agility as a characteristic, it'd be the Force usage pulling that off. So... yeah makes sense.

But... in this universe, Jedi -are- "Neos". Are they not?

But yeah, if we think that way, then it's not agility as a characteristic, it'd be the Force usage pulling that off. So... yeah makes sense.

Kind of, but generally, only with lightsabers. Most of the saber combat trees have reflect, parry, or a defense talent to help them avoid incoming damage.

Otherwise, you need to rely on Adversary, Bodyguard, Dodge, Sidestep, or block to get bonus defense.

As has been said many times on this board. Forget what you have learned in other RPGs, Dex/ AGI adding to defense is a construct of D&D/ Pathfinder and other games that are derivative of them.

But... in this universe, Jedi -are- "Neos". Are they not?

Hence why powers like Sense can affect combat. Not the "Jedi's" Agility.

The Force Powers Sence and Protect are the Neo powers, along with the Talent Reflect. Anyone can Parry just ask middle age foot soldiers, hence why Parry doesn't require a connection to the Force to use.

Mythbusters tested this. They measured how fast blaster bolts appear to be traveling, and shot foam darts at the same speed. They never were able to get out of the way fast enough.

So even though blasters are slower than a bullet, they aren't slow enough to dodge. Not unless you're a Jedi with the power to see it coming ahead of time.

Mythbusters tested this. They measured how fast blaster bolts appear to be traveling, and shot foam darts at the same speed. They never were able to get out of the way fast enough.

So even though blasters are slower than a bullet, they aren't slow enough to dodge. Not unless you're a Jedi with the power to see it coming ahead of time.

It's mostly not about Agility, as much as it is about the fact that a quicker fellow IS harder to hit than a slow one.

Of course this comes from the difficult player, again, who keeps changing careers every time he finds something like this (now he wants to pick something that doesn't rely on agility).

So I told him that Agility is still plenty important because many skills/Force powers are based on it, etc.

BUT, when I was gamemastering my first session last week (this dude wasn't playing then), I did often question if I was doing combat right, it felt weird throwing the same X purple dice for ANY enemy no matter what, just based on range.

Maybe you should sit down and give a frank discussion with the player about what he is looking to get out of the game; is he looking to play edge or DnD style murderhoboism? Being difficult for the sake of trying to game the system isn't much fun for anyone, let him know that edge is more about how you treat the abstract then super focusing. If he's powergaming a new DM then frankly he's being a bit of a richard, I don't like richards.

The game is purposely streamlined so that the character actively has to invest in talents in order to become good at dodging. Dodge, Sense, Sidestep and the like generally improves your chances. Being quick doesn't nessarily make a character a agile dodger; agility despite it's name is more about coordination then actual speed and brawn actually governs all physical attributes, including physical stamina and running pace. It's precisely because brawn raises soak that generally races that start off brawny have a lower exp allotment.

Agility meanwhile already plays off a lot of abilities to warrant it not having a mechanical effect. Piloting, all armed checks and coordination are all part of the package, thus like brawn it covers a wide range of physical activities that makes agility somewhat more valuable. Upgrading ranged or melee checks would make it much more expensive; to the extent where a character granting natural agility bonus would have very little leftover exp to invest in stats.

A character doesn't necessarily need agility though; a character can buy/invest ranks to become good at something as a part of training. We have at least one reporter character who only has 2 in agility, but has brought ranks in pilot and packs an accurate sidearm thus is fairly likely to hit a minon group at short range despite being a face. I also have a trandosian called Travok who is really unwieldy (agility 1) but has invested in being a face with a swordcane; basically he buys ranks in social skills through sheer flattery.

I don't like richards.

whats wrong with richards, hey, hey?

I don't like richards.

whats wrong with richards, hey, hey?

They're Dicks.