If a book list a minion having 2 grenades, and you decide that there are 6 of that minion, does that mean each minion has 2 grenades (thus 12), or does the group still only have 2 grenades total?

How ever you like it.

But by RAW, the listed Weapons and gear is per person, so every minion would have 2 grenades (would look silly if 9 of 10 man would have emptygrenade holsters on them)

Technically each has 2 grenades.

It's just a simple matter of minions grouping better when they are uniform, and the fact that you can just as easily come across one minion as you can stumble upon 20, and the GM may decide they need grenades in either situation.

That said, the GM has total control over all established components of any encounter, including how many grenades are there at the start, and how many are left when the smoke clears. Like with missiles and torpedoes, just because something is able to carry a weapon, doesn't mean it always carries it.

Finally, remember that also from a technical perspective when a minion group makes an attack, it's narratively the entire group making that attack. So a group that's listed as individually having 2 grenades, can as a group make 2 grenade attacks before the entire group is "out of grenades."

But seriously, the biggest most important things are in bold. The listed stat blocks for adversaries are just examples and suggestions, not some carefully mathematically balanced constant. Feel free to restat, reequip, and outfit your adversaries in any way that makes sense within the encounter you're designing. If it doesn't make sense for the stormtroopers pulling rear guard duty to have grenades, they don't need to have grenades. If it makes more sense for them to have missile launchers, flamethrowers, and a long range comlink and a TIE fighter ready to scramble to support them, that's what they have.

Also, if your minions are using grenades, I would rule that when 1 throws a grenade, they all throw a grenade (at the same target of course), or else their check should not be upgraded.

I was going to say the same thing: if every Stormtrooper in that Minion group has 2 Frag grenades, and the group takes an action to make a Frag Grenade attack, you have three options:

Option 1) You give the Minion group the correct number of skill ranks for their number. In this case, each member of the group threw one of their grenades;

Option 2) You have only a single member of the group throw a grenade. In this case, the Minion group has no skill ranks, but only 1 grenade is used up, instead of 1*M grenades;

Option 3) My favorite, the Minion group dual-wields their blaster rifles and their grenades! Treat like a normal combined check, and then some of the group can attack with their rifles and some of the others can attack with their grenades. I might, depending on the circumstances, alter how the combined check works. For instance, if one member of the group is throwing a grenade while the rest shoot, the group will make a Ranged (Heavy) check normally except the grenadier's rank will be missing; then I'd increase the difficulty only once instead of twice for the different skills, and if the group scores enough advantage they can hit with the grenade (and maybe Blast with it, too!).

It's my opinion that dual-wielding is not used enough in this game. For instance, a Jedi can dual-wield their lightsaber and the Move power if they're skilled enough! Or how about dual-wielding Move and Unleash at the same time! There are lots of fun combinations (not all of which use the Force) if you think about it long enough.

I do like that Two Weapon Combat idea a lot, it's not exactly the "best" mechanical way to do it, but it's very thematic. Hmm TWC Move & Unleash... I gotta try that! Although your going to run out of pips quickly.

Oh absolutely, but it's just so awesome!

Ok so bare minimum you need 4 Force Pips to Move/Unleash a target, against a Hard Difficulty Discipline at short range, plus their Defence&Adversary ratings.

With that successful check you can trigger basic Unleash for Willpower + Success damage (probably WP 5 if your doing this for real), then for 2 advantage you hurl them within short range for 10 x strength upgrades in damage (assuming there is an object that size to throw, otherwise the target themselves)

I'm away from books, but I'm pretty sure you can't activated mor than one force power at a time, dual wielding is just stated for weapons (bare fists are also weapons).

The only way around is the talent that allows you to activate a forcepower as an maneuver.

It is one thing to hold too weapons and attack a target, but it is a whole different thing to conentrate on too different thoughts at the same time... wouldn't allow it

but that's only my 2 cent

I do agree Nightone, but I think the single pool of Force Pips limits its use significantly.

Using a Force Power is an action. So you can't Dual Wield Force Powers...that's just silly.

Making a combat check with a single weapon is an action, too. What makes combat checks with Force powers different, beside the Weapon being the Force and not a machine?

Making a combat check with a single weapon is an action, too. What makes combat checks with Force powers different, beside the Weapon being the Force and not a machine?

An attack requires a motion made with one hand and/or arm. Aiming a blaster and pulling the trigger, swinging a sword, punching someone. When wielding a weapon that only requires one hand, you can opt to attack twice if each hand is performing a different action with a different weapon simultaneously.

The Force does not require the motion of a single hand to use. Some abilities are accompanied by the motion of a hand, such as the wiggling of fingers when performing a Mind Trick, thrusting your hand out with a Force Push, or lifting/moving a hand when levitating or otherwise moving an object. However, it's pretty clear that such motions are not necessary for using the Force since similar effects are achieved without the accompanying hand motions. I believe that those motions just help the Force user to concentrate and focus their will into what they are doing. Using the Force is a matter of the mind, emotions, willpower, and your connection to the Force, and do not involve physical action most of the time. (The only exception I can think of is when the Force enhances a physical action like a Force Leap, but even then you can argue that the physical action and the use of Force are still independent, but merely happen simultaneously.)

So you can't "wield" multiple Force powers the way you wield weapons because nothing is being wielded. It's not a physical thing you hold in each hand. I suppose you could home brew some rules to do multiple Force powers simultaneously, showing that a skilled user can divide their concentration between multiple powers, and use the rules for two weapon attacks as a guide. But that would be a house rule only, and I can't think of any cases in canon where someone did two totally different Force powers simultaneously.

Two weapon fighting is specific about having weapons wielded in a single hand. Even if you rule force powers are wielded in a single hand, how do you adjudicate increasing the difficulty of a force power roll? Most only need white dice. I suppose you could roll the purples, have fails cancel force points and use threat (or despair if it gets upgraded) as usual. But that seems like a stretch.

First of all, as I say often, it's important to keep in mind that a single roll is NOT a single pull of the trigger or swing of the laser sword: it's a combat check, the sum result of all your attempts to inflict the hurtin' on your opponent throughout the round. And because a round can last up to a minute, even when wielding a single weapon that isn't Auto-Fire or even Linked, in the building narrative the character almost certainly performs at least half a dozen (if not more) trigger pulls and sword swings.

Now, while I agree that dual-wielding Force powers is not strictly spelled out, keep in mind that this isn't D&D - we don't need an explicit whitelist of every potential option for it to be rules-legal, taking concepts already enumerated (fighting with multiple weapons) and expanding them to similar concepts is possible, even recommended, in the rules. While we won't find anywhere where we could read it off that one can do this, we also won't find anywhere where it's explicitly denied. And, since it's hardly as potent an ability as a simple weapon with Auto-fire, I don't see the problem.

As for Atama's points, I feel that's unnecessarily splitting hairs. A "weapon" is anything that you use to inflict harm on another, being a physical object one can hold isn't a requirement. And if something physical is needed, well, a common use of Move is to fling heavy objects at a person - fairly physical there. I'm still not sure why the skill, concentration, determination, and will needed to aim a slugthrower and have the guts to pull the trigger in order to fling a mass towards an enemy is different than using those same qualities to fling a packing crate using telekinetic power. The accelerant is different, but there's a definite aspect of mental training and discipline involved in both. And the only other Force power that can make a combat check, Unleash, is similarly physical: a coruscating blast of electrical energy generated from your fingertips is just as physical as one generated from a Sakiyan Lightning Gun.

And to be clear here, I'm not talking about dual-wielding any two Force powers, I'm specifically talking about Move and/or Unleash, the only two (currently) that explicitly call for making combat checks. This gets to Edgookin's point in that I would adjudicate it like any other combat check made to dual wield: if the two weapons use the same skill (Discipline, in this case), it's +1 Difficulty, if they use a different skill (firing a blaster pistol with one hand and winging our ubiquitous packing crate at someone with the other), then it's +2 difficulty, and we use the lower Characteristic and lower skill rank to determine the positive dice. Success/Failure and Advantage/Threat are resolved as normal for a combat check.

There is no Dual Wielding of anything in the RAW there is only Two Weapon Combat. Two Weapon Combat only applies to holding two Ranged Light weapons, two one-handed Melee weapons, or one of each. This is clearly spelled out on pg210 EotE, pg224 AoR, and pg217 F&D. You do not have to agree but those are the rules. If you choose to ignore those limitations and allow your Players in your game to Activate more than one Force Power with a single Action that is your prerogative, but it's a House Rule not a different interpretation of the RAW.

There is no Duel Wielding of anything in the RAW there is only Two Weapon Combat. Two Weapon Combat only applies to holding two Ranged Light weapons, two one-handed Melee weapons, or one of each. This is clearly spelled out on pg210 EotE, pg224 AoR, and pg217 F&D. You do not have to agree but those are the rules. If you choose to ignore those limitations and allow your Players in your game to Activate more than one Force Power with a single Action that is your prerogative, but it's a House Rule not a different interpretation of the RAW.

Exactly. I'm not "splitting hairs" or treating the game like D&D. I'm going by what the game designers wrote. Feel free to make up whatever rules you want if it makes the game more fun, I even suggested you do so, but don't pretend you're following RAW.

FuriousGreg wins!

The next time I slice, I'm going to "dual wield" two computers since they are kinda "weapons" when performing cyber attacks and I can use one in each hand.

I wanna "dual wield" two speeder bikes since I can make attack rolls with them when using their laser cannons. I'm putting one foot on each bike, one hand on each handlebar, and yelling, "Jedi Knievel FTE!"

I agree with Furious Greg. Well, except for this: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i5FBBXM12AE/USFnf6X5Y4I/AAAAAAAAA6U/KUurELc50vQ/s1600/dual+duel+2+star+wars.jpg

There is no Duel Wielding of anything in the RAW there is only Two Weapon Combat. Two Weapon Combat only applies to holding two Ranged Light weapons, two one-handed Melee weapons, or one of each. This is clearly spelled out on pg210 EotE, pg224 AoR, and pg217 F&D. You do not have to agree but those are the rules. If you choose to ignore those limitations and allow your Players in your game to Activate more than one Force Power with a single Action that is your prerogative, but it's a House Rule not a different interpretation of the RAW.

The "Two-Weapon Combat" section in Force and Destiny says the following (emphasis mine):

"When attacking with two weapons, the character must be using weapons that can each be reasonably held and wielded in one hand. Generally, these weapons are Ranged (Light) weapons - such as pistols and grenades - and one-handed Melee, Brawl, or Lightsaber weapons. If it's unclear whether or not a weapon can be wielded one-handed, the GM makes the final determination."

Note that it says that such weapons will "generally" be of those categories, it does not say, as you claim, that it can only be weapons of those types. The GM may make the determination for weapons that don't obviously fit in the categories given, and while I agree (as I always have) that it is not specifically called out as being possible, nothing in that section that explicitly excludes it. And the rules for Move's "Hurl" control upgrade says it follows all the normal rules for ranged attacks - if it follows all the same rules as a ranged attack, and ranged attacks can potentially be used with Two-Weapon Combat, why can't Move be used with that rule? It'll be difficult, surely, but why couldn't it?

And the "one-handed" point is fairly useless here, because if you don't even have to touch something to use it as a weapon, it's surely not taking up more than one of your hands, is it?

Also, let's please not quibble about the definition of "weapon." The definition that is the most useful is "something that you make a combat check with," which includes both physical weapons and supernatural ones. If I pick up a rock and throw it at someone (with the intention of injuring them) using my hand, that's clearly a weapon. Why would it stop being a weapon if I do it with the Force?

Exactly. I'm not "splitting hairs" or treating the game like D&D. I'm going by what the game designers wrote. Feel free to make up whatever rules you want if it makes the game more fun, I even suggested you do so, but don't pretend you're following RAW.

I'm trying to point out that the rules as given allow for broader uses than expected. As given with the quote above, there is an explicit allowance that the types of weapons enumerated might not be all the weapons one could use that rule with. If I can combine a two Ranged (Light) combat checks, or a Ranged (Light) and a Brawl combat check, why can't I combine a Ranged (Light) and a Discipline combat check? There's no reason. The passage says that generally Two-Weapon Combat will be performed with one of the first two options, but if a character wants to attempt the third, the GM may determine if it's possible. If you're GM, your determination is that it isn't. If I'm GM, my determination is that it is. Both are RAW, because RAW is that the GM makes the determination.

The next time I slice, I'm going to "dual wield" two computers since they are kinda "weapons" when performing cyber attacks and I can use one in each hand.

I wanna "dual wield" two speeder bikes since I can make attack rolls with them when using their laser cannons. I'm putting one foot on each bike, one hand on each handlebar, and yelling, "Jedi Knievel FTE!"

I agree with Furious Greg. Well, except for this: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i5FBBXM12AE/USFnf6X5Y4I/AAAAAAAAA6U/KUurELc50vQ/s1600/dual+duel+2+star+wars.jpg

This is clearly not what I mean. A blaster pistol, lightsaber, or Move-propelled crate (or blast of pure telekinetic Force) are clearly weapons, intended to cause physical harm to a target, and are used by making combat checks, a specific type of check in the game terminology. That's all I mean; taking things that are already used as personal weapons in their regular usage and combining their use with other weapons.

EDIT: To hopefully settle this without too much back and forth (I have a feeling none of us are going to be changing our position), I've submitted the question to the devs.

i asked the devs anyway

The "Two-Weapon Combat" section in Force and Destiny says the following (emphasis mine):

"When attacking with two weapons, the character must be using weapons that can each be reasonably held and wielded in one hand. Generally, these weapons are Ranged (Light) weapons - such as pistols and grenades - and one-handed Melee, Brawl, or Lightsaber weapons. If it's unclear whether or not a weapon can be wielded one-handed, the GM makes the final determination."

Note that it says that such weapons will "generally" be of those categories, it does not say, as you claim, that it can only be weapons of those types. The GM may make the determination for weapons that don't obviously fit in the categories given, and while I agree (as I always have) that it is not specifically called out as being possible, nothing in that section that explicitly excludes it. And the rules for Move's "Hurl" control upgrade says it follows all the normal rules for ranged attacks - if it follows all the same rules as a ranged attack, and ranged attacks can potentially be used with Two-Weapon Combat, why can't Move be used with that rule? It'll be difficult, surely, but why couldn't it?

And the "one-handed" point is fairly useless here, because if you don't even have to touch something to use it as a weapon, it's surely not taking up more than one of your hands, is it?

Also, let's please not quibble about the definition of "weapon." The definition that is the most useful is "something that you make a combat check with," which includes both physical weapons and supernatural ones. If I pick up a rock and throw it at someone (with the intention of injuring them) using my hand, that's clearly a weapon. Why would it stop being a weapon if I do it with the Force?

You glossed over the most important part. The critical part that your argument completely contradicts is where it says, "When attacking with two weapons, the character must be using weapons that can each be reasonably held and wielded in one hand." We're all in agreement that Force powers can't be reasonably held and wielded in one hand (or two hands, or any number of hands, or even carried in a backpack) because it's not a thing at all. The wiggle room that you're appealing to is where the rules let the GM decide what can reasonably be held in one hand. For example, what a Wookiee can hold in one hand and what an Ewok can hold in one hand are going to differ.

Throwing a rock with the Force doesn't stop it from being a weapon. It stops it from being a weapon you held in your hand. You said the "one-handed" point is fairly useless. Then you're suggesting that the rules need to be ignored then, because they're pretty unambiguous on that point.

You can submit the question to the devs, but you're essentially asking them if there is a typo because the RAW is very assertive and not contradicted by anything else in the rules.

Hmrrmm... as a weapon, the force you see? A dark path you start to walk on there... be carefull, or your doom it will be!...hmrrmmm

(ok that one just had to come by someone! )

Well I´m curious about the devs answer

I'm not. I know what they'll say: one Force power activation action per turn.

This is like playing D&D or Pathfinder, where casting a Fireball (or any other spell) is a Standard Action, and then saying that you're "dual-wielding" spells so you can cast one Fireball with each hand. The rules simply don't work that way, and that is painfully obvious to anyone who isn't deliberately obtuse.

I'm not. I know what they'll say: one Force power activation action per turn.

The argument that it is an action to activate a Force power and therefore they cannot be used with Two Weapon Combat is irrelevant to this discussion. Please observe:

I make a combat check with a Heavy Blaster Pistol. This is an action.

I make a combat check with a Frag Grenade. This is an action.

I make a combined combat check with both a Heavy Blaster Pistol and a Frag Grenade using the Two Weapon Combat rules. This is still only one action.

I believe that there will be no debate about this. I’m positing that the following is equivalent:

I make a combat check with a Heavy Blaster Pistol. This is an action.

I make a combat check with a Move-thrown object. This is an action.

I make a combined combat check with both a Heavy Blaster Pistol and a Move-thrown object using the Two Weapon Combat rules. This is still only one action.

There are two possible outcomes to this discussion: A) The Two Weapon Combat rules do not apply to combat checks made with Force powers, in which case the distinction doesn’t matter because the weapon attacks and Force attacks are incompatible and must be used separately anyway; or B) The Two Weapon Combat rules DO apply to combat checks made with Force powers, in which case it still doesn’t matter because taking two combat checks that require actions and combining them into one action at a higher difficulty is the entire point of Two Weapon Combat.

Either way, the action requirement of a Force power is meaningless to coming to a constructive conclusion.

This is like playing D&D or Pathfinder, where casting a Fireball (or any other spell) is a Standard Action, and then saying that you're "dual-wielding" spells so you can cast one Fireball with each hand. The rules simply don't work that way, and that is painfully obvious to anyone who isn't deliberately obtuse.

Secondly, if that’s the example you chose, then I think you’re missing a very important distinction in my argument, which I will reiterate: I am NOT talking about using ANY Force power with the Two Weapon Combat rules. I am ONLY talking about those Force powers which act like weapons, and are used by making combat checks in order to attack a target.

These are the only Force powers my argument is applicable to:

Move (when used to throw objects at people for damage), Unleash.

These Force powers are NOT applicable:

Battle Meditation, Bind*, Enhance, Farsight, Foresee, Heal/Harm, Misdirect, Protect, Seek, Sense, Suppress, Warde’s Foresight.

If you are going to continue to engage is this discussion with me, please acknowledge your understanding of this point. We cannot continue in any meaningful way if we’re arguing about different things.

While I hesitate to use a comparison to D&D/Pathfinder because of the many inherent differences in both ruleset and game design style between the two, if one wanted to make a comparison, the spell flame blade would be the best analogy. Once cast, the flame blade is wielded “…as a scimitar, except as noted [in the description].” Meaning that, like a scimitar, if you had two flame blades active at once (or one flame blade and one manufactured weapon) then you could, with appropriate penalties, wield them using the Two-Weapon Fighting rules until the blades’ duration runs out. Like Move and Unleash, flame blade is part of a very small subset of spells that act like weapons, and is therefore able to be used with any weapon-specific subsystem. Dual-wielding fireballs is clearly ridiculous, as they act in no way like weapons (they require a standard action to use, not an attack action; they do not require an attack roll; they do not target an individual but an area; they do not target Armor Class as defense but instead target Reflex; they are unable to inflict critical hits; etc.). Flame blades act exactly like weapons, and once created (comparable to “drawing”) they can be wielded like them.

You glossed over the most important part. The critical part that your argument completely contradicts is where it says, "When attacking with two weapons, the character must be using weapons that can each be reasonably held and wielded in one hand." We're all in agreement that Force powers can't be reasonably held and wielded in one hand (or two hands, or any number of hands, or even carried in a backpack) because it's not a thing at all. The wiggle room that you're appealing to is where the rules let the GM decide what can reasonably be held in one hand. For example, what a Wookiee can hold in one hand and what an Ewok can hold in one hand are going to differ.

Throwing a rock with the Force doesn't stop it from being a weapon. It stops it from being a weapon you held in your hand. You said the "one-handed" point is fairly useless. Then you're suggesting that the rules need to be ignored then, because they're pretty unambiguous on that point.

You can submit the question to the devs, but you're essentially asking them if there is a typo because the RAW is very assertive and not contradicted by anything else in the rules.

I would also argue that the spirit of this game, contrary to that of your standard d20 system, is to be as permissive as possible to encourage narratively interesting results and avoid pointlessly legalistic pendantry which might restrict the same. This is likely why my interpretation is more permissive, but clearly one person’s concept of the game’s spirit will differ drastically from another’s, so that’s more of a philosophical point. Once again, I don’t think we’re going to change each others’ minds on this. Richardbuxton and I have submitted the question to the devs; let’s wait until they respond and we’ll see what their answer is.

* I would be open to convincing from a player to allow something similar with Bind, using the same rules. However, because Bind is not stated as utilizing the combat check rules, this would unambiguously be a house-rule.