Awhile ago my players were complaining that they were being hit a bit too hard since most of them didn't have high Brawn and the only armor they had was either padded armor or heavy clothes. Since the soak was maybe 2-3 they were getting hurt a lot easier than the last campaign we played (EotE).

I ruled that if they had a basic armor (padded, heavy clothes, etc.) they could combine that with a concealing robe (soak +1) in addition to their Brawn, which brought their soak up to 3-4.

Now that they are a bit further in the story and are getting more powers, and becoming more well rounded I have a character that just bumped his Brawn stat from his skill tree up and now has a soak of 5...soon to maybe he 6 if he continues the path he is on.

Have you ever made a ruling that worked for awhile but you decided to remove later? Any good ways to go about doing it?

IMHO the easiest is to simply say "I made a mistake, and we're removing that house rule." Presumably NPCs were able to use this house rule, so you can explain you won't be doing that anymore either (even if you never did ).

But Soak 5 and 6 aren't much of a problem, any weapon with Pierce can counteract your house rule. A minion group or two of thugs with vibro-knives can make short work of Soak 6 PCs.

IMHO the easiest is to simply say "I made a mistake, and we're removing that house rule." Presumably NPCs were able to use this house rule, so you can explain you won't be doing that anymore either (even if you never did ).

But Soak 5 and 6 aren't much of a problem, any weapon with Pierce can counteract your house rule. A minion group or two of thugs with vibro-knives can make short work of Soak 6 PCs.

I thought about making the NPC's use knives and such, but since they all have lightsabers as soon as anyone gets up close they can be cut down in a single combat check. So far shooting at them is the best bet because they don't have much skill in ranged weapons and most of them don't have deflect.

I thought about making the NPC's use knives and such, but since they all have lightsabers as soon as anyone gets up close they can be cut down in a single combat check. So far shooting at them is the best bet because they don't have much skill in ranged weapons and most of them don't have deflect.

How small are your minion groups? They must be pretty small (or low WT) if one round of lightsaber can take them all down. (Also note, by RAW, you can't multi-crit minions.) And they can't take down two or more groups, can they? Double or triple-team each lightsaber wielder...

Anyway, plenty of blasters with Pierce as well. There are a few weapons in Forged In Battle that even have Breach.

I've seen them do about 12ish damage in a single check, when you have a minion group of 3-4 with a wound threshold of 4 each it goes through them like butter. I have used most of the weapons from the CRB so I didn't see any blasters with pierce...

I used to hit them with ranged weapons from a stormtrooper group of 4 and I was able to knock them out in 1-2 rolls myself so I changed it up so they wouldn't wipe so easily. (That was back when I was getting used to them having a lightsaber and we were just starting FaD)

I gave them the extra soak so they wouldn't go down quite as easily for situations like that, but now with their ranks in grit and higher wound thresholds, in addition to better armor and lightsaber skills, even if they get hit they don't have as much damage done to them as they used to. I know it's just one extra soak, but I know at least 2 of my players will probably try to munchkin their way into a min-max build utilizing that rule, so I figured I would nullify it right now back to RAW.

Decrease dependency on brazen lightsaber use. Add Inquisitors, bounty hunters, or diplomatic pressure to leave and not jeopardize further negotiations. PCs still HAVE lightsabers, but must realize its delicate balance of use.

Failing these things, explosives and environmental conditions ignore lightsabers. Swing away with your Jawa Jedi in the desert and see how well they do...

Decrease dependency on brazen lightsaber use. Add Inquisitors, bounty hunters, or diplomatic pressure to leave and not jeopardize further negotiations. PCs still HAVE lightsabers, but must realize its delicate balance of use.

Failing these things, explosives and environmental conditions ignore lightsabers. Swing away with your Jawa Jedi in the desert and see how well they do...

This is very true...however even though I have warned the players of lightsaber usage outside of their hidden base, I recently had a player say "...well the only thing I am good at is using my lightsaber so I am going to start using it for everything regardless of issues."

The next session I am running involves the group trying to find one of the PC's who took off at the end of the last session because he fell to the Dark side and wanted more power. I ran a one on one session with him (you commented on the post I put up on here for that) and it went well, he did things he regretted and realized he was on a dangerous path of death and destruction when utilizing the Dark side...however he still has the Sith artifact which he thinks is his father and the new gem that he is going to make into his lightsaber crystal (the something ingot that sets things on fire).

So since he used his lightsaber on a planet under Imperial control, I was thinking that he was seen on some holocam and have some bounty Gank bounty hunters show up to try to take them in. I was going to give them cortosis armor so breach wouldn't work against them and make them very skilled in martial arts so they can keep up with the group.

I'd be extremely careful with cortosis because if you start putting them on the table your players are gonna loot them every chance they get and you'll end up with a prtay that's impervious to the Inquisitors lightsabers. But of course if words gets out they have armor that shrugs off lightsabers maybe every bounty hunter in the galaxy will come looking for them to "acquire" it.

Don't overlook poisons too. My favorite is a Dendriton toxin in a poison reservoir attached to a neuronic whip (all from Lords of Nal Hutta). Attack with the whip and hope to ensnare, then daunting save vs poison. Attack the next round with a high damage stun setting weapon and almost any PC should fall unconscious in the 3rd round. This will probably happen faster if they're a force user and are using reflect/parry.

On topic: Whafrog has it. Just be straight up and make it clear that it was one way, but now it's another. If they're any kind of thoughtful, they'll thank you for the boost for the time they had it.

Thanks for all of those ideas guys! I guess I need to invest in more source books...I do have the Lords of Nal Hutta though!

Thanks for all of those ideas guys! I guess I need to invest in more source books...I do have the Lords of Nal Hutta though!

If you're thinking about this because of equipment, you can easily tweak any existing weapon. If you need a cost, add +100-200cr per rank of Pierce and increase the rarity.

Just focus on the fact that the rule has now outlived its usefulness. You don't really even have to call it a mistake...just call it an experiment. "It served us well in earlier sessions, but it's just not working well now that we're a bit more well rounded. So we're gonna give the rules-as-written a try now."

If the players are complaining about "only being able to use light sabers", then they have made their characters wrong and are now starting to really pay for it; it is the player's obligation to make a balanced character that is flexible in a number of ways and quite frankly people who didn't adapt with the dark times simply died. Sorry for not exactly sounding sympathetic, but it's really a problem they can easily solve (investing in skills outside a tree) but are simply choosing not to. It's a single minded behaviour that is highly detrimental to themselves.

I find the best way to represent this is to use the obligation system from edge of the empire with the morality system if you are not already. During particular set pieces or public places (I wouldn't use this all the time) where Lightsaber use could be avoided, I would consider increasing bounty obilgation. Don't use it as a punishment mind you, just allow it to push the narrative that times get more difficult over time.

My character actually ended up with a huge bounty placed on his head after using his lightsaber as a weapon of terror during imperial raids as a signature trademark, which combined with his generally emity with Kaltho the Hutt (he stole the jewel of Yavin on Bespin, then raided his personal vault to steal two ships, which lead to him gaining 10 obligation over time; he eventually got rid of it by staging his death on the Smugglers Moon after the empire tried to seize it, apparently he died on the attack on a star destroyer that day after a gigantic explosion. Being a wanted outlaw was kinda his nature. XD

I would definitely be saying to them that the rule has outlived its usefulness.

On the topic of Sabers I would definitely be making life very hard for PC's who flash theirs around on an Imp controlled world. If they complain tell them an Ancient Sword would draw much less attention! You kill 2 birds with one stone doing that, they no longer regularly use a Breach weapon and they no longer have Bounty Hunters and Inquisitors around every corner.

And through a couple of 15 strong minion groups at them, they can cut them down for days and the minions still keep on hitting.

I challenge any notion that blames players for how they make their characters. The selection and subsequent use of skills, talents, and other career/species options is up to the player to fully engage in a fictional setting. This is a game for collaborate, narrative enjoyment, not competition between players.

THESE CHOICES, OPTIONS, ETC. ARE A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF SESSION ZERO PREPARATION. Complaining about a surplus of cooks in the kitchen with no wait staff is crying over spilled (blue) milk and reflect less imagination or shirked responsibility by the GM to adapt, improvise, and overcome the waiter shortage. Asking for help is a good idea, to spark imagination and because sometimes we're too close to the players or situation to think objectively about a GM's #1 Job:

SUSTAIN THE CAMPAIGN. Making players feel like their characters are worthless will cause drop out or less than motivated RPGing.

A way to fix this has been identified, and more responses may be forthcoming. Blaming the players for joining a game with the intention of having fun gets nobody anywhere, except a feeling of somehow feeling self-righteous or inflexibly incorrect assumptions about a player's participation and value in any RPG.

I challenge any notion that blames players for how they make their characters. The selection and subsequent use of skills, talents, and other career/species options is up to the player to fully engage in a fictional setting. This is a game for collaborate, narrative enjoyment, not competition between players.

THESE CHOICES, OPTIONS, ETC. ARE A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF SESSION ZERO PREPARATION. Complaining about a surplus of cooks in the kitchen with no wait staff is crying over spilled (blue) milk and reflect less imagination or shirked responsibility by the GM to adapt, improvise, and overcome the waiter shortage. Asking for help is a good idea, to spark imagination and because sometimes we're too close to the players or situation to think objectively about a GM's #1 Job:

SUSTAIN THE CAMPAIGN. Making players feel like their characters are worthless will cause drop out or less than motivated RPGing.

A way to fix this has been identified, and more responses may be forthcoming. Blaming the players for joining a game with the intention of having fun gets nobody anywhere, except a feeling of somehow feeling self-righteous or inflexibly incorrect assumptions about a player's participation and value in any RPG.

This.

Imperial Assault is a GMvsPC game, this SWRPG system on the other hand is a story telling device. It allows us to step into the SW universe we all love so much. Find ways to let the Players play the PC's they want to since its what they want to do. But throw roadblocks in their path to overcome, preferably with multiple ways to be overcome.

If you would like some specific advice about how to challenge your specific PC's then let know, this system is well balanced where there is always a counter to something a PC can do. But let those PC's eat their cake sometimes, having high highs in a game help balance out any low lows you introduce.

I challenge any notion that blames players for how they make their characters. The selection and subsequent use of skills, talents, and other career/species options is up to the player to fully engage in a fictional setting. This is a game for collaborate, narrative enjoyment, not competition between players.

THESE CHOICES, OPTIONS, ETC. ARE A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF SESSION ZERO PREPARATION. Complaining about a surplus of cooks in the kitchen with no wait staff is crying over spilled (blue) milk and reflect less imagination or shirked responsibility by the GM to adapt, improvise, and overcome the waiter shortage. Asking for help is a good idea, to spark imagination and because sometimes we're too close to the players or situation to think objectively about a GM's #1 Job:

SUSTAIN THE CAMPAIGN. Making players feel like their characters are worthless will cause drop out or less than motivated RPGing.

A way to fix this has been identified, and more responses may be forthcoming. Blaming the players for joining a game with the intention of having fun gets nobody anywhere, except a feeling of somehow feeling self-righteous or inflexibly incorrect assumptions about a player's participation and value in any RPG.

This.

Imperial Assault is a GMvsPC game, this SWRPG system on the other hand is a story telling device. It allows us to step into the SW universe we all love so much. Find ways to let the Players play the PC's they want to since its what they want to do. But throw roadblocks in their path to overcome, preferably with multiple ways to be overcome.

If you would like some specific advice about how to challenge your specific PC's then let know, this system is well balanced where there is always a counter to something a PC can do. But let those PC's eat their cake sometimes, having high highs in a game help balance out any low lows you introduce.

I am a firm believer of collaboration which is partly why I raised the advice. I also believe the reverse is also correct; the player is also responsible for bringing a good game to the table. If it is a dark times campaign where open Jedi use results in inquisitors, then wielding it openly will generate the appropriate, in universe consequences. If they are willing to accept those consquences as a collective, that is fine, but otherwise developing an alternative skillset isn't exactly a time consuming endeavour.

Definitely. But it should be outlined at the beginning of the campaign, not changing tack half way through.

Definitely. But it should be outlined at the beginning of the campaign, not changing tack half way through.

Oh that I can agree with. Campaigns can change over time, but usually there should be enough time to adjust. For me (our campaign is mainly AOR themed with frequent edge and FND dips) the switch to AOR took place over two weeks; mainly because the party tried to black mail the empire with deathstar footage, needless to say we lost any hope of being legitimate civilians and ended up spending a couple of sessions being recruited; essentially seeking out contacts. Force and Destiny was easier because my character had managed to obtain and get a lightsaber to work about 6 months into the campaign, thus we worked at it the other way around; no one started out with saber trees hence being overspecialised into lightsabers was never a issue; people were generally aware that they had to at least consider alternative means or if they didn't, they generally got used to hanging back until it was their time to be epic!

I must apologise for slightly addressing something off the OP's question, just figured it would be helpful. Help your players discover alternative means if the general aim of the campaign is the dark times or work with the campaign so they can more often.

Definitely. But it should be outlined at the beginning of the campaign, not changing tack half way through.

Hm, but what if things change a few sessions in? I'd advocate for throwing out any rules that don't work for a group's campaign, house-ruled or RAW even. However, I feel like the GM is the final arbiter of what is working and what is not.

Just focus on the fact that the rule has now outlived its usefulness. You don't really even have to call it a mistake...just call it an experiment. "It served us well in earlier sessions, but it's just not working well now that we're a bit more well rounded. So we're gonna give the rules-as-written a try now."

So just a quick update, I went back over our house rules before our last session and we got rid of some of them that we either weren't utilizing or were not working as well now. I used the wording above and it went over well, so thanks for the help everyone!

I'm glad it worked out. I haven't really had any issues with changing or removing house rules. So far, the assumption seems to be that house rules are temporary any way. After running an adventure at GenCon, I realized that I could insert "session rules", which is like when video games come up to a mini-game section and the controls change. An example might be extending a dramatic social encounter by having each side make multiple rolls to try to win an argument or get another side to back down. (in fact, that's even an encounter house rule)

The example from my GenCon session involved fear checks. It was a Halloween themed adventure, and I made frequent use of fear. In cases where the check was coming from a sentient being, as opposed to a creature, I allowed the Marauder to make a Coercion check against the Fear difficulty (or the adversary's opposed Coerce.). If he was more intimidating than the opponent, the PCs did not have to make individual checks, and the result could even impose penalties on the opponent.

I have a Halloween session coming up in my campaign, so I just might use that as a session rule again.