ANDREW, BREN, CIAN, RAY and RONAN! Don't you dare read this!! Giant rocks will falll!

So my players have been hoarding looted weapons. They have had plenty of opportunity to sell them on to some two-bit weapons dealers but have declined (they're offer was 20% market value; due to the limited selection and operation he ran he couldn't afford to pay more). They are stuck on a civilised highly populated Outer Rim world and currently don't have access to a ship to escape off world.

After progressing a while through the story and keeping this stockpile, they have no encountered another weapons dealer who is far more successful and should give them a better deal on their used blasters. There is one issue. The PCs don't realise that most of the jobs they have been hired for have been working against the Hutt who funds this arms dealer's operation, in fact the last encounter they had they killed a number of his elite soldiers, and obviously looted the blaster carbines from their bodies. They now want to set up a deal to sell all they have looted in bulk to this arms dealer.

There is no reason I can think of that the arms dealer shouldn't recognise his own wares and come to the conclusion that these are the guys who have been ripping off his boss.

I have in mind a scenario where they set up the arms deal and the arms dealer ambushes them with overwhelming force, leaving them no choice but to surrender or escape (losing all their looted blasters in the process).

It has been niggling at me though; is it fair to steal a couple of thousand credits worth of weapons from the PCs in their first attempt to sell them? I have warned them since the beginning that there are different factions vying for control and that their actions will have consequences and yada yada yada. I feel like this could cause some bitter and salty players.

Does anyone have suggestions on handling this?

Don't automatically win, just challenge them and get them to realize they need to finesse their approach to the 'gun runner' world and be smarter. If you just auto win then they're going to feel like there is no point playing their group the way they are since they'll just lose. If you scare em maybe you'll get them to sharpen their act.

Also, smart players (those that use Underworld or Streetwise) to find information out about the buyer could conceivably find out this fact. This could prepare them better for the negotiation (well since you sold them originally, you know the high quality of the arms).

Also, it might be worth it to find other ways, besides murder hoboing, for you players to make some cash.

Sounds to me like a perfect opportunity to tack on some more obligation. And that's something they should be allowed to resolve. Maybe the Hutt discovers it and they talk themselves into workibg for him further. Maybe when the Hutt discovers it they attempt to flee his anger and leave some or all of the weapons behind. Regardless the Hutt places a bounty on their heads that they can either continue to run from or attempt to negotiate with the Hutt to form a truce after some restitution.

Upsetting a Hutt isn't a light offense. Even if they escape unharmed with the goods and avoid bounty hunter after bounty hunter, their reputation may close a lot of doors. They may find that nobody wants to work with them or buy/sell with them.

As a GM I would have no problem stacking the odds against them to put pressure on them, but I feel you still need to allow them several ways to deal with it. Actions should have consequences, but limiting their ability or options to resolve it can suck the fun out of the game.

At least that's my opinion.

Don't automatically win, just challenge them and get them to realize they need to finesse their approach to the 'gun runner' world and be smarter. If you just auto win then they're going to feel like there is no point playing their group the way they are since they'll just lose. If you scare em maybe you'll get them to sharpen their act.

Oh it won't be an auto-win situation. Just very difficult. Difficult to the point that surrender or escape might be the better options. The arms dealer has much more by way of resources and men than the party so story wise it is only logical that he would bring this to bear against the PCs. Mechanically, it would just be a really hard fight and this would be apparent straight off the bat so hopefully they will be looking for ways out other than killing everyone

Also, smart players (those that use Underworld or Streetwise) to find information out about the buyer could conceivably find out this fact. This could prepare them better for the negotiation (well since you sold them originally, you know the high quality of the arms).

Also, it might be worth it to find other ways, besides murder hoboing, for you players to make some cash.

They do dodgy jobs for a shady organisation and are paid well. They are just greedy Although, you have a point; this could make them more cautious and a little less greedy

Sounds to me like a perfect opportunity to tack on some more obligation. And that's something they should be allowed to resolve. Maybe the Hutt discovers it and they talk themselves into workibg for him further. Maybe when the Hutt discovers it they attempt to flee his anger and leave some or all of the weapons behind. Regardless the Hutt places a bounty on their heads that they can either continue to run from or attempt to negotiate with the Hutt to form a truce after some restitution.

Upsetting a Hutt isn't a light offense. Even if they escape unharmed with the goods and avoid bounty hunter after bounty hunter, their reputation may close a lot of doors. They may find that nobody wants to work with them or buy/sell with them.

As a GM I would have no problem stacking the odds against them to put pressure on them, but I feel you still need to allow them several ways to deal with it. Actions should have consequences, but limiting their ability or options to resolve it can suck the fun out of the game.

At least that's my opinion.

The Hutt in question is someone who is far up the chain and kind of untouchable at the moment. He presents himself as a legitimate business slug. He also publicly attempts to fight against the Hutt stereotype of gangsters and crime lords, while he secretly runs the underworld of this part of the galaxy

This issue arises from the fact that the PCs, as their group obligation, have all been coerced into working together for a mysterious shady rival crime organisation. They are given very little details on the nature of their jobs in their briefings but through researching and through playing through the scenarios lots of hints have been given about the nature of what they are doing and who it might be that they are working against, yet the PCs are still very gung-ho, and have ignored/didn't pick up on most of these hints.

Considering the path they have followed, I think the only way is to have the gun runner ambush them but to make it more social; the gun runner and his goons use stun settings to capture them and interrogate them about who they are working for. The party don't fully know who they are working for but have been told nonetheless not to tell anyone under penalty of death. The interrogation itself could make for an interesting encounter, I may even try pull the old "prisoner's dilemma" scenario

Perhaps I shouldn't be so hung up on taking away the PCs loot. They have had plenty of opportunity to get rid of it already

If the party is ignoring your clues then interrogation can be an excellent way of spoon feeding plot to the party.

Attach the electrodes and have the bad guy tell the party what they should already know. "I know you work for a secret society, now tell me why you've been targeting Conan the hutt!!!"

A cache of weapons isn't just a piggy bank it's also a plot hook, starting a fight with an arms dealer is fair game. So is falling foul of imperial customs.

I prefer to get players to hand over the guns, hire them for a "simple" job of defending a mining town from a pirate attack. When the 10 pirates they expect turns out to be 100 (someone with fat fingers typed the job advert) they have to distribute the cache of guns to the miners.

Does anyone have suggestions on handling this?

Sounds to me like a perfect opportunity to use despair and/or triumphs in the deal. Dont plan to pull the rug out from under them. If the negotiation roll(s) comes up fine, let the deal go down. If you get one of the Extra Special Fun symbols, then yes - the deal goes sour, absolutely.

If the party is ignoring your clues then interrogation can be an excellent way of spoon feeding plot to the party.

Attach the electrodes and have the bad guy tell the party what they should already know. "I know you work for a secret society, now tell me why you've been targeting Conan the hutt!!!"

A cache of weapons isn't just a piggy bank it's also a plot hook, starting a fight with an arms dealer is fair game. So is falling foul of imperial customs.

I prefer to get players to hand over the guns, hire them for a "simple" job of defending a mining town from a pirate attack. When the 10 pirates they expect turns out to be 100 (someone with fat fingers typed the job advert) they have to distribute the cache of guns to the miners.

That is a **** fine idea; exposition through torture I can do them each separately, taking them out of the room so no one knows if anyone else gave up their employers and I can hit them in the face with the plot points as a "big reveal" and hope that when they think back towards all the previous hints I dropped and think "Oh crap! No way?!"

You are right though. By stockpiling the weapons into this large cache they have turned it into a McGuffin for me to play with

That is a **** fine idea; exposition through torture

Ha I did not think dam would be censored

First off how many times did they loot the Hutt's employees?

Maybe a few were tagged so the Hutt could track them down and in the process recover their stolen weapons?

I imagine a scene where they return to where they've stored their weapons only to find its been emptied.

Searching for the perpetrators they learn one of the local factions has suddenly received a influx of extra weapons drawing the empire's attention resulting in them paying a visit to the world specifically hunting them...

Why?

Well the Hutt got those weapons from someone who stole theirs from an Imperial depot, in the process of tracking down their missing weapons the empire asked the Hutt and the Hutt realising the trouble they were in conveniently allowed the empire to find the recovered weapons and the PCs details as the culprits...

Well at least they got a head start!

Taking your players loot away might be the quick and easy path... even if I like the copperbell's idea.

So they made a deal with an arms dealer to sell their stash of guns... unfortunately, that arms dealer works for the Hutt Lord they robbed them from... Oups!
The Arms dealer sets up the meeting and rigs the place. With a good Perception Roll, some players could spot the hyperconductive foil wirred to a stun-pulse generator they are standing on... Now the Arms dealer, with a convincing voice and smooth tone tells the players that the guns they are selling belong to Bimbo the Hutt, whom he works for. They do have a problem there... but before they do anything foolish, the Arms Dealer says he won't sell them off to the Hutt if they do some work for him... He's been looking for a few "hard hitting dudes that can get the job done" and he could use them... they would get credits for their work also... Now that's a Win-Win scenario for the players... Then the Arms dealer does offer less money for the guns that was agreed upon since they are his guns afterall... maybe 20% market value...

If all goes according to plan, the players don't get to shoot at the Arms Dealer and take the job... they also sell the guns at 20% market value like you offered before... the players will not feel cheated but might think twice now before getting greedy... Unfortunately for them... the fun is just beginning for the GM... Unbeknown to them, the job the Arms Dealer has is to attack the hideout of a contact they had with the other Patron that they worked before (the one which had them attack the Hutt)... They should quickly understand that they are standing in the middle of somekind of turf war and that they have to choose a side... Either way, they loose because a powerfull faction is gonna be hot on their back... Or they could try to just run away and hope it all goes away.... probably not

The goal here is to have your players realise that they have to be smarter or they'll get chewed and swallowed by the bigger dogs

Does anyone have suggestions on handling this?

Sounds to me like a perfect opportunity to use despair and/or triumphs in the deal. Dont plan to pull the rug out from under them. If the negotiation roll(s) comes up fine, let the deal go down. If you get one of the Extra Special Fun symbols, then yes - the deal goes sour, absolutely.

But make sure to give the roll vs Arms Dealer at least an upgrade or two, probably some black dice to represent the danger of selling him his own gear.

This reminds me of my own game. The party (a group of rebels), ended up shooting up a chop shop of a local crime boss, then pinning the attack on the Imperials. Now they are uber-paranoid, because they are dealing with that crime boss, trying to get on his good side.

I've robbed my players on numerous occasions. Sometimes cos they had it coming and other times just to instil the fear of god in them. I say if it makes sense he would recognise his own gear then it's more than acceptable. I mean how else are they gonna learn if they don't make mistakes?

@Edgookin; problem is that they don't know they are selling the gun runners' owm gear back to him I'm going to play it loose and see how they react nut I feel this will end with the party bound gagged and tortured

@Metsys509; too right dude. Us Gms should be robbing our PCs more often. They have it way too easy. Cash doesn't need to be the measure of success in EoTE. Xp and the chance to lower Obligation is.

Though now I'm stuck with another mechanical dilemma; how do I interrogate droids? Slicing them doesn't give them the same kind of chance as a RP interrogation

Droids get scared like everybody else. C3PO, R2 and BB-8 all displayed fear.

Droids get scared like everybody else. C3PO, R2 and BB-8 all displayed fear.

I get that but I just can't think of why they wouldn't just fit the droids with restraining bolts and slice the information from their memory rather than actually questioning them. I mean if Vadar had cuaght 3P0 and R2 I doubt he would have asked them did they have the Death Star plans. He would have gotten a technician to slice their memory core.

I get that but I just can't think of why they wouldn't just fit the droids with restraining bolts and slice the information from their memory rather than actually questioning them. I mean if Vadar had cuaght 3P0 and R2 I doubt he would have asked them did they have the Death Star plans. He would have gotten a technician to slice their memory core.

PC droids can resist the restraining bolt, as well as being able to resist being sliced. The same should be true for important NPC droids.

Thus, interrogation and torture methods can actually come into play, even for droids. Those methods have to be adapted to fit the sorts of things that droids would/could be afraid of, but the basic concepts would remain the same.

And frankly, good interrogation technique involves getting the target to tell you things because they are knee-jerk responding to your questions and not having time to think about the answer they should give, or they think of you as a friendly type who can help. No torture is required for those kinds of interrogations.

In the first case, maybe they accidentally respond with a plural answer instead of singular. Now they’ve just told the interrogator that there’s more than one target, which may be a fact he didn’t know. There’s all sorts of psychology involved in phrasing questions just the right way and interpreting the answer in ways that were not necessarily intended, but which are still helpful to the interrogator.

All researches on the subject of torture show that the method is ineffective for interrogation. Despite the popularity within hollywood as plot device and based on current research on US interrogation methods there is no sign that torture will result in reliable information. People will talk under torture, no matter if droid or meatbag, but the information they will give you are simply not reliable. So I see actually little value in using torture as effective method for interrogation in a RPG setting. If you do not want to waste time and go to much into detail for effective methods then you can always handle the interrogation by a single role.

But I guess we are getting ot with that, right?

I get that but I just can't think of why they wouldn't just fit the droids with restraining bolts and slice the information from their memory rather than actually questioning them. I mean if Vadar had cuaght 3P0 and R2 I doubt he would have asked them did they have the Death Star plans. He would have gotten a technician to slice their memory core.

PC droids can resist the restraining bolt, as well as being able to resist being sliced. The same should be true for important NPC droids.

Thus, interrogation and torture methods can actually come into play, even for droids. Those methods have to be adapted to fit the sorts of things that droids would/could be afraid of, but the basic concepts would remain the same.

And frankly, good interrogation technique involves getting the target to tell you things because they are knee-jerk responding to your questions and not having time to think about the answer they should give, or they think of you as a friendly type who can help. No torture is required for those kinds of interrogations.

In the first case, maybe they accidentally respond with a plural answer instead of singular. Now they’ve just told the interrogator that there’s more than one target, which may be a fact he didn’t know. There’s all sorts of psychology involved in phrasing questions just the right way and interpreting the answer in ways that were not necessarily intended, but which are still helpful to the interrogator.

I agree with you there about interrogation requiring nuance and subtly, but my problem is I prefer not to use too many opposed social checks on PCs. For example, I prefer not to roll an enemies Coercion skill at them and tell them they are scared. I prefer to have an enemy be scary and have the player feel like he shouldn't mess about when it comes to this NPC. Which is why I am reluctant to use an NPC's Computer skill to slice info out of Droid PCs. Restraining bolts are basically binders for doids (to put it in the simplest terms); rolling to resist is the same as rolling to escape cuffs. I am totally ok with that. I just don't like letting dice results coerce PCs into acting a certain way. It is fine for negotiation, but when it comes to Coercion or Charm I prefer to have NPCs be charming or intimidating through RP over dice rolls.

That's my own personal GMing style though

All researches on the subject of torture show that the method is ineffective for interrogation. Despite the popularity within hollywood as plot device and based on current research on US interrogation methods there is no sign that torture will result in reliable information. People will talk under torture, no matter if droid or meatbag, but the information they will give you are simply not reliable. So I see actually little value in using torture as effective method for interrogation in a RPG setting. If you do not want to waste time and go to much into detail for effective methods then you can always handle the interrogation by a single role.

But I guess we are getting ot with that, right?

I am not too sure if criminal gangs pay attention to reports on the efficacy of enhanced interrogation techniques Still, the torture is thematic; the bad guys beat and threaten the PCs, while asking them questions, most of which don't make sense. When the PCs wound threshold start getting lower and they start to get worried over they're ability to resist suddenly my questions will become more subtle and nuanced; geared to pluck info out of them Torture is very "Dark Side", I mean in Episode IV it is heavily implied that Vadar tortures Leia on the Death Star with the floating interrogation droid. Bad guys in Star Wars should be capable of sadism and malice.

I actually came up with a really good way to handle interrogating my droid PCs last night. The entire interrogation can happen inside their head. I can make them think that the bad guys have taken NPCs, that the players are fond of, hostage. The bad guys can threaten, hurt or even kill these NPCs in front of the droids in an attempt to get them to reveal the truth. However, all of it will be fake All inside the droid's head. If they give up the info, suddenly the world changes; they aren't in a cell, they never were, they are on a workshop table with cables attached to their central CPU while a slicer extracts info from their memory core. My players are invested enough in some of these NPCs to want to protect them and it would be totally plausible that the bad guys would be able to pick these guys up off the street. Hopefully creating a scenario where they think that harm might come to these NPCs might be enough to make them feel a proper dilemma; to give the info to save the NPC or stay quiet to protect themselves.

This way players get enough of a chance to resist with the risk of bad things happening and there is not a single opposed roll necessary

It's not a question of resisting torture, it becomes easy to LIE under torture. You delete all tells of a lie if you pressure someone with torture and you players should do exactly that. LIE. Just like Leia did on the death star. Even a jedi with his heightened senses will have issues to read someone under torture.

Now Fear at the other hand, fear can be used quite effectively to get informations, fear and hope and greed to be more exact.

And I was not trying to make the claim that there is no torture in star wars, there is plenty of idiocy, sadism and malice in a galaxy, far far away. But it actually proves even in star wars to be ineffective. Though being ineffective is something that does only bother Thrawn and very few other imperial officers.

It's not a question of resisting torture, it becomes easy to LIE under torture. You delete all tells of a lie if you pressure someone with torture and you players should do exactly that. LIE. Just like Leia did on the death star. Even a jedi with his heightened senses will have issues to read someone under torture.

Now Fear at the other hand, fear can be used quite effectively to get informations, fear and hope and greed to be more exact.

And I was not trying to make the claim that there is no torture in star wars, there is plenty of idiocy, sadism and malice in a galaxy, far far away. But it actually proves even in star wars to be ineffective. Though being ineffective is something that does only bother Thrawn and very few other imperial officers.

Hence why the plan is to make the players fear for the safety of their character I will be relying on my own ability to bluff and intimidate my players through roleplay and then use the mechanics of wound threshold and critical injuries in order to apply pressure to lend weight to those bluffs. Trick is setting limits; don't want a TPK by interrogation

I agree with you there about interrogation requiring nuance and subtly, but my problem is I prefer not to use too many opposed social checks on PCs.

IMO, there are two parts to the solution here.

The first part is to have the players do an opposed roll for the PCs. Then they have some influence over the dice being rolled, and they are much more likely to be invested in whatever the results are.

The second part of the solution is that if the players lose the roll, then only in-game mechanical effects happen to them. From a role-play perspective, the dice tell them that they are afraid or whatever, and in-game they lose some Strain. But it’s entirely up to the player as to how they role-play their response.

And if the roll was to resist giving up information and they lose the roll, then it becomes a discussion between the player and the GM as to what information might accidentally been divulged, and whether or not the PC realizes what they’ve given away.

But it all hinges on player agency, and their willingness to role-play the results of their own dice rolls.

Of course, as GM, you have the final say on what the results might be, and ultimate veto power.

But if they’re good role-players, then they’re likely to come up with something better than you could have hoped for, and then you and your group get to go off on a wild chase down that newly discovered path.

Droids get scared like everybody else. C3PO, R2 and BB-8 all displayed fear.

I get that but I just can't think of why they wouldn't just fit the droids with restraining bolts and slice the information from their memory rather than actually questioning them. I mean if Vadar had cuaght 3P0 and R2 I doubt he would have asked them did they have the Death Star plans. He would have gotten a technician to slice their memory core.

Dude interrogating droids is just as easy as interrogating organics. I mean you see a gonk droid getting tortured in ROTJ and it even screams in pain and begs them to stop.

I agree with you there about interrogation requiring nuance and subtly, but my problem is I prefer not to use too many opposed social checks on PCs.

IMO, there are two parts to the solution here.

The first part is to have the players do an opposed roll for the PCs. Then they have some influence over the dice being rolled, and they are much more likely to be invested in whatever the results are.

The second part of the solution is that if the players lose the roll, then only in-game mechanical effects happen to them. From a role-play perspective, the dice tell them that they are afraid or whatever, and in-game they lose some Strain. But it’s entirely up to the player as to how they role-play their response.

And if the roll was to resist giving up information and they lose the roll, then it becomes a discussion between the player and the GM as to what information might accidentally been divulged, and whether or not the PC realizes what they’ve given away.

But it all hinges on player agency, and their willingness to role-play the results of their own dice rolls.

Of course, as GM, you have the final say on what the results might be, and ultimate veto power.

But if they’re good role-players, then they’re likely to come up with something better than you could have hoped for, and then you and your group get to go off on a wild chase down that newly discovered path.

That's one of the age-old GM dilemmas; roll play vs role play It can be hard to decide when to let the roll sort out social encounters and when to let the role play do it. With my own style of GMing I usually go for the Role Play first and fall back on the rolling, but I have played plenty of games going the other way. All a matter of GM style.

I am looking forward to this interrogation now. Looking into my players backgrounds so I can have more ammunition for messing with their minds