Just now, StarkJunior said:

It's Yoda. YODA.

He's probably got so much experience that it's insane, and it's even more likely he's a Nemesis NPC like Vader who doesn't even have the same rules as player characters.

It doesn't matter who does the Force push. IF you are using the Move Hurl upgrade, it only does ten times the silhouette of the object thrown in wound damage. For a silhouette one object, (such as a human), that is only ten wounds of damage. That's it. No more. Subract five for the guards' Soak, and that leaves only five wounds out of sixteen. That is not nearly enough to incapacitate them. Heck it's not even half of their wound threshold. Therefore, it could not have been Move's Hurl upgrade Yoda was using. It had to be Bind's movement upgrade combined with its Mastery upgrade.

Again, he's probably a Nemesis NPC who doesn't even have the same rules as player characters.

9 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Are you sure? We really don't see them much once the battle between Yoda and the Emperor really get going. And, as I said, with a Wound threshold of 16 and a Soak of 5, the Move hurl upgrade doesn't do nearly enough damage to incapacitate a Nemesis level NPC, which is what Royal Guards are, according to F&D page 407. Therfore, Yoda could not have knocked them unconciuos just from pushing them into the wall if he was using Hurl. The only way he could put them out of the fight using a "Force Push", even for a short time, would be to use Bind to push them away and simultaneously immobilize and stagger them.

If he was just going to immobilize and stagger them, he wouldn't have needed to slam them into a wall to do that.

He also would have either needed to redo the power check every turn (not possible, give how he and Palpatine attack each other) or commit three Force die to keep them immobilized and staggered. Which would have severely curtailed his ability to do everything else, like tossing the Senate around and Protecting against Palpatine-level lighting. Then you have to keep in mind that he had to have yet MORE Force Die committed for things like Enhancing his Agility (when 900 years old you reach, be as fast, you will not! eheeeheehee) and Sense upgrades.

The mental gymnastics Tramp and Stan will go through to avoid admitting that Yoda took a little Conflict on the chin like the books encourage is incredible.

2 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

It doesn't matter who does the Force push. IF you are using the Move Hurl upgrade, it only does ten times the silhouette of the object thrown in wound damage. For a silhouette one object, (such as a human), that is only ten wounds of damage. That's it. No more. Subract five for the guards' Soak, and that leaves only five wounds out of sixteen. That is not nearly enough to incapacitate them. Heck it's not even half of their wound threshold. Therefore, it could not have been Move's Hurl upgrade Yoda was using. It had to be Bind's movement upgrade combined with its Mastery upgrade.

Oh look, Tramp forgot about ANOTHER rule: Hurl is a ranged combat check like any other. The 10 damage is a base, you add successes to the total. Yoda has to have a TREMENDOUS Disicpline and Willpower; the amount of successes he can rack up could easily be in the 10+ range. And that's not accounting for Triumphs and Advantages being used to do a +50 or more Critical.

But since you read the book cover to cover, you would know that already....right?

2 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Again, he's probably a Nemesis NPC who doesn't even have the same rules as player characters.

Actually, there isn't much difference between how a Nemesis NPC and a PC are run. And, given that Yoda is a major hero of the movie, I would certainly place him as a high XP PC, not an NPC. And the scene that was playing out would support that.

Or he initiated a duel (a la signature power) and they use the narrative that the guards are knocked unconscious until it is complete.

Or they are statted as minions for this encounter to reflect their place as mooks to display the level of power being thrown around.

Or Yoda rolled amazingly well and since he is using Niman asked to just say he force slammed rather than do the quick draw stab-stab he might have.

In this system there are many ways to describe anything (Hawk-Bat Swoop and high level enhance having the same end result for example). I may have lost the point as to why what precisely happened in this scene matters to the discussion, but it is probably unanswerable as a definite instead of a series of options.

1 minute ago, Benjan Meruna said:

If he was just going to immobilize and stagger them, he wouldn't have needed to slam them into a wall to do that.

He also would have either needed to redo the power check every turn (not possible, give how he and Palpatine attack each other) or commit three Force die to keep them immobilized and staggered. Which would have severely curtailed his ability to do everything else, like tossing the Senate around and Protecting against Palpatine-level lighting. Then you have to keep in mind that he had to have yet MORE Force Die committed for things like Enhancing his Agility (when 900 years old you reach, be as fast, you will not! eheeeheehee) and Sense upgrades.

The mental gymnastics Tramp and Stan will go through to avoid admitting that Yoda took a little Conflict on the chin like the books encourage is incredible.

Benjamin, a round lasts for about a minute or so. Once the guards went down we only see them on screen for not even that long. Thus we don't really know how long they were down, and that can easily be covered by being immobilized and staggered. And, as I said, even if Yoda had used Hurl, they could not have suffered nearly enough wound damage to incapacitate them. They didn't even suffer half of their wound threshold. We're not talking Minion class Storm troopers here. We;'re talking Nemesis class Royal Guards with a wound threshold of 16 and a Soak of 5. Hurl is not going to cut it.

What's with the strict use of wound points but the loose use of range bands? Could you at least be consistent?

5 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Actually, there isn't much difference between how a Nemesis NPC and a PC are run. And, given that Yoda is a major hero of the movie, I would certainly place him as a high XP PC, not an NPC. And the scene that was playing out would support that.

There is specifically a section stating a GM is free to bend the rules a little to create interesting NPCs - Inquisitorius characters, but Yoda would follow those rules, likely.

And Yoda would have so much XP for being 900 years old - I doubt there's even enough published material to emulate him yet.

Just now, Kael said:

What's with the strict use of wound points but the loose use of range bands? Could you at least be consistent?

IT's not being "loose" with range bands but "strict" with wound points. I'm using the RAW definitions of range bands and the RAW rules on the Move Hurl upgrade.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

IT's not being "loose" with range bands but "strict" with wound points. I'm using the RAW definitions of range bands and the RAW rules on the Move Hurl upgrade.

No, you are not.

1 minute ago, StarkJunior said:

There is specifically a section stating a GM is free to bend the rules a little to create interesting NPCs - Inquisitorius characters, but Yoda would follow those rules, likely.

And Yoda would have so much XP for being 900 years old - I doubt there's even enough published material to emulate him yet.

Actually, the developers once ran a campaign where they each played one of the members of the Jedi Council. Whoever stated out Yoda, made him a 2100 XP or so character. Personally, I think that's kind of low. I'd put him at about 3000 XP, but that's just me.

Just now, Kael said:

No, you are not.

Yes, I am. I've quoted you directly from the book on both what Engaged range and Short range represent. And I have repeatedly quoted what the Hurl upgrade does specifically. If you want I can quote it again.

Yeah, that's fine - but he'd be ruled a Nemesis NPC in any game I ran, and would bend the rules a lot - per the section for Inquisitorius - in order to emulate how he acts in the films. Even then, it still would be a lot of narrative fiat that disregards mechanics some, because Yoda is... freaking Yoda.

5 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Benjamin, a round lasts for about a minute or so.

BUZZER SOUND

Sorry, that answer is INcorrect!

Quote

Rounds can last for roughly a minute or so in time, although the elapsed time is deliberately not specified.

It seems you're able to read the books about as well as my forum name. Rounds are not set in stone, and can last any length of time, as deliberately noted by the game developers. Meanwhile in the movies, we see Palpatine attack with Unleash, Yoda with Move, then he and Yoda begin dueling with lightsabers. This is not a single round.

Edit: this is indicative of your understanding of the books, actually. You read the words, but you fail to grasp their meaning. You read the text I quoted and instead of coming to the conclusion that rounds can last any length of time but tend to last about a minute, you say that they ALWAYS last about a minute, despite the very next line noting that the time is unspecified! You read the words, but you don't grasp their intent or meaning. Whats more, you actively refuse to understand people people explain how you are wrong and where you contradict yourself.

To be fair, it could be.

There are talents and upgrades that reduce the action for powers, or as my point above, it could be narrative fluff even if only a power or lightsaber check was made.

2 minutes ago, Rossbert said:

To be fair, it could be.

There are talents and upgrades that reduce the action for powers, or as my point above, it could be narrative fluff even if only a power or lightsaber check was made.

Palpatine goes, Yoda goes, then Palpatine goes. That's not taking power uses as maneuvers.

Also Tramp, you never addressed the fact that Move is a Hurl check, and can rack up enough results to either overcome their wound threshhold or crit them severely.

Yes, and when Palpatine goes that second time, we haven't seen the guards since they first went down. Once the fight gets going for real, the guards are never seen again. To me that means they probably "woke up" relatively quickly and hightailed it out of there post haste. No matter what, the guards could not have been completely incapacitated. They simply could not have suffered nearly enough wound damage to put them out. Not from a simple Force Push.

Yes, sometimes used as an old RPG trick that while turns are sequential, the combat is very hectic and basically simultaneous.

The only thing the dice say are the outcome. In Swashbuckling games, and now this one we often retcon what happened in the turn after all dice are rolled to make a good story.

A common one at a table I sat at was switching the order of shots narratively so a killed character did something cool with his final breath rather than do the thing then take the hit.

That said, still probably multiple turns, but that doesn't rule out other options for what happened before.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

Yes, I am. I've quoted you directly from the book on both what Engaged range and Short range represent. And I have repeatedly quoted what the Hurl upgrade does specifically. If you want I can quote it again.

No, you quote the books just fine. You don't comprehend the rules though. You use of NPC types and wounds is strict. Meanwhile, your use of range bands is extremely loose. Even when presented with visual evidence you insist on being wrong.

So yes, you quoted directly from the books. However, your quotes don't back the arguments you make.

3 minutes ago, Kael said:

No, you quote the books just fine. You don't comprehend the rules though. You use of NPC types and wounds is strict. Meanwhile, your use of range bands is extremely loose. Even when presented with visual evidence you insist on being wrong.

So yes, you quoted directly from the books. However, your quotes don't back the arguments you make.

YEs, they do. The visual "evidence" you put forth has the guards blocking Yoda, potentially about to attack. Now, from their perspective, they could engage Yoda and Yoda could engage them. That puts them at engaged range from him, close enough for melee combat to begin for both Yoda and both guards. That is Engaged range. When he pushes them back, however, Yoda can no longer reach them. At Silhouette 0, he is too small, even with his Lightsaber, which is a Shoto. He would need to move at least a few feet to attack either of them with his lightsaber. That places them out of engaged range to him. Thus, they are now in Short Range to Yoda. Now, he could still be in engaged range to them because they have a longer reach. But, because of his size, the Guards are now in Short range to Yoda. Thus, by RAW, they have moved one range band away from him. Engaged range is not a set distance. It is a very small amount, that really only covers the distance combatants can engage in hand-to-hand combat. Once Yoda pushes them away, they are out of hand to hand combat range from Yoda. Thus they are no longer in engaged range.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

Thus, by RAW, they have moved one range band away from him.

You are wrong.

In his defense, in a crunchier system, D&D for example he is right.

In the narrative system such concepts as variable engagement ranges aren't a thing. The essence of this argument is the disconnect between people who want a higher crunch to fluff ratio (every thing portrayed literally) vs a more descriptive reading, and this system is definitely more narrative than many others, as evidenced by TK being split into several powers and talents.

56 minutes ago, Kael said:

What's with the strict use of wound points but the loose use of range bands? Could you at least be consistent?

That would require him to actually admit that he could be wrong, or even just be misinterpreting things. Neither one is something that he's shown to be capable of doing, even when presented with evidence that his interpretations are not as correct as he thinks they are.

Just now, Rossbert said:

In his defense, in a crunchier system, D&D for example he is right.

In the narrative system such concepts as variable engagement ranges aren't a thing. The essence of this argument is the disconnect between people who want a higher crunch to fluff ratio (every thing portrayed literally) vs a more descriptive reading, and this system is definitely more narrative than many others, as evidenced by TK being split into several powers and talents.

This isn't D&D, thus he isn't right. Using D&D as a defense for him actually makes my comment about him not getting the rules of this game even more valid. How crunchy another game is has no bearing on what these rules say.

There are few groups that don't house rule a little.

I was just pointing out that he clearly aims for a harder simulationist approach to combat with a bold, more four-color approach to morality.

This will never be resolved to anyone's satisfaction because various people are playing with different approaches and themes.

The arguments have been made on both sides, with the starting assumptions differing.