So, reading over the rules, it seems a bit tough to attack vehicles with the Force. The go-to method would seemingly be to attack them by using the control upgrade of Move that lets you hurl objects, but when you factor in armor rating, most vehicles won't take any damage from that, unless you hurl a large vehicle into a smaller one.

My second best guess would be to use the Move upgrade that lets you rip things from secure mountings to try and tear a vehicle apart. The question then becomes, how would you factor in damage? Treat it as inflicting a critical damage? Or perhaps just dealing a single damage to the vehicle? Has anyone else experimented with this in a game?

I would approach it on a case-by-case basis. Combining the "rip objects" upgrade with strength and magnitude upgrades could work, but I would probably require a combined Mechanics check for it to be effective, and just handle it narratively. What happens when the Force user pulls the chin blaster off an AT-ST? Or rips the canopy off a hovercraft? Or pulls the astromech from it's socket on a starfighter

In general though, if the Force user just wanted to lift and slam the vehicle against the ground, I'd use the collision rules to simulate the vehicle getting beat up.

Perhaps instead of dealing damage when using the 'hurl objects' Control upgrade, the PC simply inflicts a major collision on the vehicle.

If you're looking to use the "pull secured objects loose" upgrade, then I'd say make it a Discipline check with a difficulty equal to the targeted vehicle's size, in addition to needing the requisite number of Strength Upgrades. Again, I probably wouldn't treat it as doing hull trauma to the vehicle, and perhaps instead treat it as a major collision.

Either way, they won't be taking vehicles out in one go, so what you may want to consider allowing is that for each Strength upgrade that gets activated beyond what's required, the player gets a +10 to the critical hit result. So for instance, if I've got a Force wizard with 3 Strength upgrades and I use Move against a starfighter (Silhouette 3) and managed to activate the Strength upgrade twice, then I'd get a +30 on the critical hit roll.

Truthfully, I think Move was deliberately designed to avoid some of the problems of Jedi vs. vehicles that prior Star Wars RPGs had, as it was quite possible to demolish starfighters and severely damage light freighters with telekinesis (d6) or move object (Saga Edition) if you were able to get a skill check result that was high enough. Thus, in this system Move won't allow you to quickly or easily cripple walkers or flatten transports through sheer damage.

You mean like...

3 hours ago, rogue_09 said:

You mean like...

...

There ya go, major collision

One major thing to keep in mind about Move interacting with vehicles is that vehicles do not move in personal range bands, and as a result using the move power on a vehicle has a negligible effect on their position.

All that said, in my opinion, the intersection between vehicle and personal scale is one of the weakest mechanical points in the SWRP system, and I'd highly recommend to any GM to turn fights against vehicles while the players are on foot into narrative sequences instead of just using the combat rules. Have them climb on the vehicle to sabotage systems, or play out an escape sequence where they take stealth, athletics, coordination and similar rolls to avoid a vehicle that's chasing them, have some kind of weak spot in the vehicle that can be attacked etc. It simply yields better sessions than having people roll against near impenetrable armor and rolling instant death weapons against them.

I would not allow Move's upgrade to allow you to forcefully disassemble a vehicle just as I wouldn't allow it to pluck mechanical limbs off of cyborgs (or even fleshy limbs off of anyone's body). There's a difference between pulling something out of a guy's hand and actually pulling a guys hand off. If it's integral to the vehicle's structure, it's a "hand" for the vehicle, not a piece of gear.

I do think that using the collisions rules would be best in these cases.

Yeah, the way personal weapons and vehicles are supposed to interact relies heavily on inflicting crits over doing hull trauma. Without a crit rating matters get dramatically more complicated.

Doing something with collisions isn't a bad idea, though applying a crit of 5 is probably acceptable as well...

13 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

I would not allow Move's upgrade to allow you to forcefully disassemble a vehicle just as I wouldn't allow it to pluck mechanical limbs off of cyborgs (or even fleshy limbs off of anyone's body). There's a difference between pulling something out of a guy's hand and actually pulling a guys hand off. If it's integral to the vehicle's structure, it's a "hand" for the vehicle, not a piece of gear.

I do think that using the collisions rules would be best in these cases.

Well, the Control upgrade that lets you disarm also says that it can pull objects free of secured mountings, much like Vader did in ESB when he ripped stuff off the walls to hurl at Luke during their fight, or Dooku did to rip pieces of ceiling loose to drop on Yoda during their fight in AotC, or Dooku even tearing loose a bit of platform to pin/crush an unconscious Kenobi in RotS.

So while doing the "yoink guns away from bad guys" is the most common usage of the upgrade, it's also not the only usage. So on a purely strict reading, a Force user could use Move to tear limbs off of cyborgs or components off of vehicles. It's certainly cheesy as all get out, and any sensible GM should be leery of allowing it, especially the limbs off cyborgs (which in and of itself should warrant several points of Conflict for causing unnecessary harm to a living being).

6 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

It's certainly cheesy as all get out, and any sensible GM should be leery of allowing it, especially the limbs off cyborgs (which in and of itself should warrant several points of Conflict for causing unnecessary harm to a living being).

I doubt it's any worse for Conflict than using lightsabers to brutally dismember targets, and Jedi seem to do that all of the time. A critical injury is a critical injury regardless of how you inflict it.

I don't remember - is falling damage specific to characters, or would the table cover vehicles? Pulling a land vehicle or stationary starship or speeder over a canyon and letting go would seem to do the trick nicely, at least outside combat when they're not being piloted.

4 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

I doubt it's any worse for Conflict than using lightsabers to brutally dismember targets, and Jedi seem to do that all of the time. A critical injury is a critical injury regardless of how you inflict it.

There's a world of difference of slicing off a limb (while cauterizing the wound) to end a combat, and the deliberate intent to maim a person in a way that the person knows is going to be excruciatingly painful.

Kenobi took Zam Wessel's arm, but she had a blaster pointed at his back and was probably quite ready to pull the trigger, and that was after efforts to capture her using less painful methods had failed, so it wasn't quite his "first resort." Next time Kenobi removed limbs was in RotS, and both instances (Grievous' hands and Anakin's remaining organic limbs) was against an armed foe looking to end his life. Last time was against two thugs in Mos Eisley, both of whom had drawn blasters with intent to shoot an old man after he'd tried to talk them down from bullying a farm boy.

And if PC were to attack someone with a lightsaber and the express intent of maiming the target because they could, then I would agree that would warrant Conflict just the same as using Move to tear a cyberlimb out of its mounting.

17 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

I don't remember - is falling damage specific to characters, or would the table cover vehicles? Pulling a land vehicle or stationary starship or speeder over a canyon and letting go would seem to do the trick nicely, at least outside combat when they're not being piloted.

There seem to be a good amount of examples of starships surviving pretty extreme crash landings with only superficial damage in the movies and shows though. The ubiquitous nature of artificial gravity and repulsors makes me think it's actually quite difficult to destroy a vehicle by just dropping it, especially since these systems seem to require next to no power and stay online even when main power is gone.

On 24.3.2017 at 11:54 AM, Donovan Morningfire said:

Well, the Control upgrade that lets you disarm also says that it can pull objects free of secured mountings, much like Vader did in ESB when he ripped stuff off the walls to hurl at Luke during their fight, or Dooku did to rip pieces of ceiling loose to drop on Yoda during their fight in AotC, or Dooku even tearing loose a bit of platform to pin/crush an unconscious Kenobi in RotS.

So while doing the "yoink guns away from bad guys" is the most common usage of the upgrade, it's also not the only usage. So on a purely strict reading, a Force user could use Move to tear limbs off of cyborgs or components off of vehicles. It's certainly cheesy as all get out, and any sensible GM should be leery of allowing it, especially the limbs off cyborgs (which in and of itself should warrant several points of Conflict for causing unnecessary harm to a living being).

Actually, pulling off limbs requires you to pull in both directions else the guy is just flying into the direction you pull. The issue is not strength alone, now if you chain that cyborg first to the wall with something which will hold him tighter than you pull … ;-)

6 hours ago, SEApocalypse said:

Actually, pulling off limbs requires you to pull in both directions else the guy is just flying into the direction you pull. The issue is not strength alone, now if you chain that cyborg first to the wall with something which will hold him tighter than you pull … ;-)

As I said in my post, going strictly by what's written in the book, there's no mention of needing to go through those extra steps. The mechanics are simply select the object you want to tear free from it's secured mounting, and simply generate sufficient Force points.

Now in the case of a cyberlimb, the GM is well within their rights to at the very least require an opposed check, with my suggestion being that the target uses Resilience vs. the Force user's Discipline. If the Force user succeeds, then it can be presumed they used the Force to hold the target in place and then ripped the limb off.

1 hour ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

As I said in my post, going strictly by what's written in the book, there's no mention of needing to go through those extra steps. The mechanics are simply select the object you want to tear free from it's secured mounting, and simply generate sufficient Force points.

Now in the case of a cyberlimb, the GM is well within their rights to at the very least require an opposed check, with my suggestion being that the target uses Resilience vs. the Force user's Discipline. If the Force user succeeds, then it can be presumed they used the Force to hold the target in place and then ripped the limb off.

Basically a limb has no secure mounting unless you chain the guy first to something significant heavy to create that secure mounting. Redefining what a secure mounting is can naturally lead to odd results when you apply the rules afterwards to it. ;-)

A gun in my hand can count as something in a secure mounting. It talks specifically from stuff in secure mountings, not from ripping something apart. And btw, if you want to play the force gory, just pull the blood out or squish the heart or invest force pips for multiple targets and at least pull the poor guy into two different directions at the same time or hold him in place while pulling.

6 hours ago, SEApocalypse said:

Basically a limb has no secure mounting unless you chain the guy first to something significant heavy to create that secure mounting. Redefining what a secure mounting is can naturally lead to odd results when you apply the rules afterwards to it. ;-)

A gun in my hand can count as something in a secure mounting. It talks specifically from stuff in secure mountings, not from ripping something apart. And btw, if you want to play the force gory, just pull the blood out or squish the heart or invest force pips for multiple targets and at least pull the poor guy into two different directions at the same time or hold him in place while pulling.

And now you are trying to weasel in the splitting of hairs much like TrampGraphics and Aetrion do when trying to debate rules. A cybernetic limb, which is what is ACTUALLY being discussed in this scenario, is an artificial prosthesis, and a case could be made by a player that Move could be able to tear it free from the meat stump that the tech has been secured to, especially if it's an obvious piece of cyber, such as Lobot's headpiece or Anakin's initial replacement limb.

Should a GM allow this? That's up to their individual interpretation of the rules, and though I personally would be leaning towards "no" in this particular instance, not every GM is going to view it that way. But if they do, there should be a heck of a lot of Conflict involved in ripping that cybernetic limb free from it's mounting.

But at no point should Move ever be allowed to literally rip an organic limb out from an organic being, as said limb is part of a unified whole. Where you got that delusion from that I was saying Move could be allowed to do that at all, I've no idea.

And no, a gun in your hand doesn't count as a secure mounting, as anyone can rather easily knock it loose with 3 Advantage on a skill check during a structured combat sequence, or if the GM permits a Brawl check exclusively to disarm you of that gun, but it can still be pulled loose from your hand via Move as the control upgrade specifically notes that it can be used pull objects "out of secure mountings or out of an opponent's grasp." Thus, an object secured to a wall is not the same as a blaster held in your hand.

In the novel for Attack of the Clones Dooku rips Annakin's arm off with the force as opposed to chopping off his hand with a lightsaber.

That being said I'd definitely award conflict for the whole tearing limbs off a person to deliberately maim them.

This does follow the rule of cool. So yes allowing a player to do it is fine...

9 minutes ago, Decorus said:

In the novel for Attack of the Clones Dooku rips Annakin's arm off with the force as opposed to chopping off his hand with a lightsaber.

That being said I'd definitely award conflict for the whole tearing limbs off a person to deliberately maim them.

This does follow the rule of cool. So yes allowing a player to do it is fine...

Bind is the way you'd accomplish this, I would think, since it allows you to cause Critical Injuries. And we all know Dooku loves his Bind power!

But I'm with Dono—I wouldn't allow a character to use Move to rip someone apart. It's not a case of "rule of cool," it's more a case of "rule abuse," where you treat two halves of the same character as "different objects" to move away from each other. Just like the rules don't allow for shenanigans like "I move his utility belt" as a way to move a Silhouette 1 character when you only have 1 Force point, they also shouldn't allow for a player to treat a target as a multi-part object that can be picked apart simply by moving the parts in different directions.

IMO, it is completely outside of the parameters of the power—in addition to the reasons above, you'd also be giving the benefit of causing critical injuries to a power that specifically doesn't allow for critical injuries.

In other words, using the Move power to literally pull someone apart is stinky, smelly cheese.

But weren't we talking about vehicles...?

Actually Move can crit, because ranged attacks can crit which incidently is how you use move to take out vehicles if they can get past the armor.

The rest is just you going oh noes Player character wants to rip the arm off my npc we can't possibly let that happen, because abuse blah blah blah.

See the better response would be:

Yes spend a destiny point and your roll is now a contested roll against his Athletics, Resil, or Discipline which ever is higher and you need to achieve enough advantage to crit which would be the same as punching.

Just be glad he doesn't pick up Martial Artist and use fine manipulation to brawl with the force at range...

11 hours ago, awayputurwpn said:

But I'm with Dono—I wouldn't allow a character to use Move to rip someone apart. It's not a case of "rule of cool," it's more a case of "rule abuse," where you treat two halves of the same character as "different objects" to move away from each other. Just like the rules don't allow for shenanigans like "I move his utility belt" as a way to move a Silhouette 1 character when you only have 1 Force point, they also shouldn't allow for a player to treat a target as a multi-part object that can be picked apart simply by moving the parts in different directions.

Why stop there? "I turn his heart 135 degrees to the left. Sure, I have the "pull out of secure mounting" upgrade for move. And while I am at it, I use multiple targets and pull out the blood out of this other guys nose and ears, that is a sil 0 object, right?" ;-)

15 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

And now you are trying to weasel in the splitting of hairs much like TrampGraphics and Aetrion do when trying to debate rules. A cybernetic limb, which is what is ACTUALLY being discussed in this scenario, is an artificial prosthesis, and a case could be made by a player that Move could be able to tear it free from the meat stump that the tech has been secured to, especially if it's an obvious piece of cyber, such as Lobot's headpiece or Anakin's initial replacement limb.

Should a GM allow this? That's up to their individual interpretation of the rules, and though I personally would be leaning towards "no" in this particular instance, not every GM is going to view it that way. But if they do, there should be a heck of a lot of Conflict involved in ripping that cybernetic limb free from it's mounting.

But at no point should Move ever be allowed to literally rip an organic limb out from an organic being, as said limb is part of a unified whole. Where you got that delusion from that I was saying Move could be allowed to do that at all, I've no idea.

And no, a gun in your hand doesn't count as a secure mounting, as anyone can rather easily knock it loose with 3 Advantage on a skill check during a structured combat sequence, or if the GM permits a Brawl check exclusively to disarm you of that gun, but it can still be pulled loose from your hand via Move as the control upgrade specifically notes that it can be used pull objects "out of secure mountings or out of an opponent's grasp." Thus, an object secured to a wall is not the same as a blaster held in your hand.

No, you are just trying to make the cybernetic limb something which it is not. A Cybernetic limb is literally better attached to the rest of the body than the limb it replaced is. Organic limb or cybernetic limb makes no freaking difference, if you allow to rip out cybernetic limbs out that way than organic limbs are even easier to rip out of their mountings.

And I have actually no intention to discuss this further with you, have an excellent day.

On 3/23/2017 at 11:40 AM, Donovan Morningfire said:

Perhaps instead of dealing damage when using the 'hurl objects' Control upgrade, the PC simply inflicts a major collision on the vehicle.

That is incredibly perfect, elegant, and in line with the rules. Thank you for this, I have a feeling it's going to come in handy.

As for using Move to literally rip someone apart...yuck. I'm with Dono, it's generally not something I'd allow. Mechanically, I'd probably take @awayputurwpn's solution and have Bind be used for that, but it would come with copious amounts of Conflict.

3 hours ago, SEApocalypse said:

Why stop there? "I turn his heart 135 degrees to the left. Sure, I have the "pull out of secure mounting" upgrade for move. And while I am at it, I use multiple targets and pull out the blood out of this other guys nose and ears, that is a sil 0 object, right?" ;-)

I'm a little confused, here. All of those bits of munchkinized powergaming are exactly why I wouldn't want to start down the path of using Move to rip limbs out of sockets, cybernetic or otherwise. Which is what I thought you were in favor of?

3 hours ago, Benjan Meruna said:

I'm a little confused, here. All of those bits of munchkinized powergaming are exactly why I wouldn't want to start down the path of using Move to rip limbs out of sockets, cybernetic or otherwise. Which is what I thought you were in favor of?

Based upon his prior posts, he's probably got no more of a clue than anyone else about what he's saying.

He seemed to be convinced that I was in favor of using Move for dismembering bodies with or without cybernetics, something it's pretty clear wasn't the case from the get-go.

20 hours ago, Decorus said:

Actually Move can crit, because ranged attacks can crit which incidently is how you use move to take out vehicles if they can get past the armor.

The rest is just you going oh noes Player character wants to rip the arm off my npc we can't possibly let that happen, because abuse blah blah blah.

Move has a null critical rating.

And "the rest" is a legitimate gaming and flavor concern. I'll second @Benjan Meruna's "yuck." And agree with the tongue-in-cheek example that @SEApocalypse gave us of taking this ridiculous notion to an extreme conclusion.

But you can do you!