I'm contemplating building a melee focused Kyuzo character for my first Edge of the Empire Game and have a question regarding its Dense Musculature ability.
It allows me to move to any location within medium range. Does that mean I can engage any enemy within medium range or that first I should use the maneuver to get to short range and then use another normal move maneuver to engage the target.
Also, is there some specialization that allows me to move from long to medium distance with a single move maneuver?
Kyuzo's leap question.
The devs answered this question during an Order 66 podcast. They said that no, none of the movement abilities allow you to engage unless they specifically say otherwise. So in this case, No, I'm afraid not.
Engage? Unfortunately no.
Long to Medium in a single Manoeuvre? Unfortunately no. Although Jet packs and jump/rocket boots theoretically allow Extreme to Short in a single Manoeuvre, but that defeats the purpose of being Kyuzo.
Where can I find the Kyuzo information?
Yep, no engage/disengage outside of spending that separate maneuver or stuff like Draw Closer/Hawk Bat Swoop, according to the Developer ruling.
TBH I'm not a fan of that dev response. The printed text clearly says "any location within medium range". You could leap within an inch of an adversary at medium range since you can go to "any location " but according to the dev ruling, you are not "engaged" with said adversary. You're an inch away from them but you are not engaged. You could boop them on the nose but you aren't engaged. The rules text saying one can go to "any location within medium range ", according to the developers, is a lie.
It doesn't break the game to allow leaping as a Kyuzo/Force Leap to engage/disengage per the way the rules are written and I personally allow it at my table. There's already so much one has to do with maneuvers it gets kind of tedious in combat. "i want to grab my weapon." maneuver. "i need to hide behind those crates literally right next to me." maneuver. "i'm dropping prone." maneuver. "i'm aiming." maneuver. "i'm going to grab a stimpack from my bag." maneuver. "i want to use the stimpack i just grabbed." maneuver. etc...
The engage/disengage maneuver going by it's description isn't a change in location but the act of safely getting within or away from melee range of an opponent. So instead of thinking of it as movement it is just a narrative representation of approaching or backing off from someone safely. DND for example gets round this by allowing players to accept that they can do this if they want to accept that they will get attacks of opportunity against them , FFG have no AOO rules and instead force a player to engage / disengage instead of throwing all cuetion to the wind when approaching or backing off from an opponent.
Given how easy it is to drop characters when you allow additonal hits (see autofire thread) then let's face it if they allowed AoO like DND , where characters can soak these extra hits, instead then there would be little point in playing a melee character because those one or two extra hits you take at short range are really going to be detrimental. So FFG just say that to approach safely you HAVE to take that little extra time this makes sense when you consider the average person isn't wearing platemale , and even the most basic sword is designed to be able cut through steel like a hot knife through butter, so this makes sense in this world.
You could always try removing the engage / disengage maneuver and instead allow Attacks of Opportunity, although personally I would disallow any defense techniques outside of your armor since you are using your maneuver to move (so you would lose the benfits of side step) and ranged attacks could be made at short , rather than engaged, range (essentially allowing your opponent to line up an atack as you come in, whether it's melee or ranged). This would likely ruin melee characters.
Nah, I'll keep doing things my way. Force Leap and the Kyuzo leap are beyond normal movement and per the way they are written, should supercede the need to engage/disengage separately. As shown in the films and shows and comics etc... it's possible to leap engaged to someone from a ways away and it's possible to leap away from someone you're right engaged with, without getting cut to pieces (Anakin only got cut to pieces because he decided to jump right above Obi-Wan and attack downwards). Per the dev ruling, you cannot leap to engage/disengage someone, you'd have to leap to a point near them and then move in a couple feet or move away a couple feet and then leap further. TBH that kind of nitpicky ruling breaks the immersion and ignores the evidence shown otherwise in the IP and it isn't what I'm about when I run my games. So I houserule that the RAW takes precedence over the dev response in that case.
To each their own though. I know others would prefer to run things the way the devs explain it. I usually prefer sticking to RAW as interpreted by dev rulings and responses but sometimes their responses don't make any logical sense when you look at how the rules are written.
I agree with @GroggyGolem and I really hope my GM doesn't go with the Dev ruling.
The leap is the main reason I am playing a Kyuzo! Given there is strain cost to do the leap, I think that should be enough of a deterrent to do it too often. Adding in the complexity of engage/disengage nerfs the ability too much (i.e. in the wrong way).
I'm torn on this one. On one a jedi/sith leaping into a saberclash or a gamorrian charging someone with their vibroaxe is very Star Wars. It fits thematically and just "feels right" to me.
On the other hand we have what the core books and the dev interview said. Specifically this part in the core books. "
Thus, spending a maneuver to move to engage someone or something is
as much a matter of moving into combat cautiously enough to avoid receiving a blow unnecessarily as it is moving a physical distance."
At the end of the day i think the choice was made to respect action economy and balance within the system. If you give a free engage/disengage to the leap abilities it is essentially giving them 3 maneuvers on their turn, which the system takes great care to prevent happening.
Imagine a melee duel, one person can leap the other cannot. It's no longer a melee duel. It's a game of tag where the non-leaper is always IT. Start at engaged, as soon as the leaper can go they attack, leap, and *insert what ever they want maneuver" When the non-leaper goes they need to maneuver to short, maneuver to engaged, attack. Rinse and repeat. It creates as much of an imbalance as giving someone a 3rd maneuver that is not easily dealt with, without extensive additional rules.
But the Kyuzo leap costs strain or activating Dark Side pips costs strain? There are multiple talents in multiple trees that allow you to flip a DP to regain strain equal to a stat.
But that costs a DP? Then you are depriving them of spending DPs also, because any they use will only give you more to use.
But Leap costs XP investment? So do all talents, and leap (both force and kyuzo) bring the added benefit of being able to move vertically as well as horizontally.'
In the end, always do what is most fun for your group and your table, i'm just offering a counterpoint and another perspective on it. Though if you allow it to move to engage. you might want to prevent it from moving from disengaged, and/or maybe adding setback or upgrading their next check on the same turn to show the added difficulty of doing so. Just suggestions, you do you, i'll do me, hopefully we all get happy endings that way
I run a group that has a droid with "jumping legs", a cyber implant that I ruled functions identically to the Kyuzo leap. I let him move into engaged as his maneuver, especially with the strain cost. I treat it like a jumping charge, and sometimes throw in a coordination or athletics roll depending on circumstances. But I don't let him leap away from engaged. He still disengages, or else I give a free attack from his opponent. It seems to have worked well so far. Although, to be honest, he rarely ever tries to disengage from an opponent until it is dead. More often, they are running from him.
On 4/2/2017 at 11:44 PM, syrath said:The engage/disengage maneuver going by it's description isn't a change in location but the act of safely getting within or away from melee range of an opponent. So instead of thinking of it as movement it is just a narrative representation of approaching or backing off from someone safely. DND for example gets round this by allowing players to accept that they can do this if they want to accept that they will get attacks of opportunity against them , FFG have no AOO rules and instead force a player to engage / disengage instead of throwing all cuetion to the wind when approaching or backing off from an opponent.
Given how easy it is to drop characters when you allow additonal hits (see autofire thread) then let's face it if they allowed AoO like DND , where characters can soak these extra hits, instead then there would be little point in playing a melee character because those one or two extra hits you take at short range are really going to be detrimental. So FFG just say that to approach safely you HAVE to take that little extra time this makes sense when you consider the average person isn't wearing platemale , and even the most basic sword is designed to be able cut through steel like a hot knife through butter, so this makes sense in this world.
You could always try removing the engage / disengage maneuver and instead allow Attacks of Opportunity, although personally I would disallow any defense techniques outside of your armor since you are using your maneuver to move (so you would lose the benfits of side step) and ranged attacks could be made at short , rather than engaged, range (essentially allowing your opponent to line up an atack as you come in, whether it's melee or ranged). This would likely ruin melee characters.
This is how I've always interpreted it and I was considering the same AoO style house rule. I think the engaged rule needs to exist in some form so that melees have a chance against jumping ranged combatants. Kiting is fine in MMOs but makes for a lame tabletop experience. Similarly, without the rule, a ranged character couldn't ever escape a jumping melee character. An AoO rule would certainly be more balanced than not having that rule, but it would still make jumping/freerunning type abilities more powerful and honestly, I'm not sure if they need to me.
2 hours ago, Wisconsen said:I'm torn on this one. On one a jedi/sith leaping into a saberclash or a gamorrian charging someone with their vibroaxe is very Star Wars. It fits thematically and just "feels right" to me.
On the other hand we have what the core books and the dev interview said. Specifically this part in the core books. " Thus, spending a maneuver to move to engage someone or something is
as much a matter of moving into combat cautiously enough to avoid receiving a blow unnecessarily as it is moving a physical distance."At the end of the day i think the choice was made to respect action economy and balance within the system. If you give a free engage/disengage to the leap abilities it is essentially giving them 3 maneuvers on their turn, which the system takes great care to prevent happening.
Imagine a melee duel, one person can leap the other cannot. It's no longer a melee duel. It's a game of tag where the non-leaper is always IT. Start at engaged, as soon as the leaper can go they attack, leap, and *insert what ever they want maneuver" When the non-leaper goes they need to maneuver to short, maneuver to engaged, attack. Rinse and repeat. It creates as much of an imbalance as giving someone a 3rd maneuver that is not easily dealt with, without extensive additional rules.
The thing is, fighting melee against a leaping character, kyuzo or force user, you're already going to have that problem because they can leap to platforms unaccessible to other melee combatants or across chasms or over fires, etc...
*leaps across chasm, attacks melee enemy, leaps back, repeat*
It's a situation that comes up in a few places in the game rules, such as if you're fighting someone with a jet pack. They can exceed your reach easily, every round. You wouldn't expect to catch up with them without something similar in your arsenal, so you'd have to switch tactics and use some sort of ranged attack or use stealth.
The only difference running it RAW over dev ruling is that you would actually be able to do what the abilities say and leap to any location within medium range, rather than have to worry about arbitrarily spending maneuvers and taking strain you shouldn't have to take.
I understand the idea that there should be a cost. I don't necessarily agree that there needs to be a cost further than the RAW. I like that we've got differing opinions and we can discuss them without the conversation escalating to some ridiculous argument.
Leaping to engage makes more sense then being able to freely leap out of engage. Perhaps giving a setback on the attack.
That's not a bad idea for adding in another cost and is pretty simple to explain to players.
gm: "your opponent is glaring at you from around medium range."
player: "i want to leap at him and strike."
gm: "ok, you do and you take a setback die to the attack."
@GroggyGolem I certainly understand why you feel the way you do and in the right style of game I think your ruling would be fine. The issue is that the Dev have to design something that is balanced for most games and the changes you are suggesting would make Dense Musculature significantly more powerful than it was balanced for.
If you deconstruct the species, given it's 3/1 stat block, 90xp 11 ST and WT, it appears that they costed DM at around 10xp. Now that is a pretty good deal and puts it on par with the Leap portion of the Enhance FP. Personally, I think they were pushing the edge of balance even allowing it to do what it does given that Freerunning is very similar and costs 15xp. On the otherhand, what you are suggesting is that it function more like Hawkbat Swoop minus the need for of a free force dice. That would make Dense Musculature worth closer to 20-25xp which would be outrageously imbalanced when compared to other species.
Of course, in the grand scheme of things does 15-20xp really make that much of a difference? If you're answer is no, ask yourself this, would you have been as excited to play a Kyuzo if they had 75 starter xp?
I don't sweat this one way or another. Anyone can have jetpacks and rocket boots. I just leave the Maneuver to engage/dis in place. For the melee centric folk that aren't Kyuzo or Force users, buy the jetpack or rocket boots. Easy peezy.
14 minutes ago, SladeWeston said:@GroggyGolem I certainly understand why you feel the way you do and in the right style of game I think your ruling would be fine. The issue is that the Dev have to design something that is balanced for most games and the changes you are suggesting would make Dense Musculature significantly more powerful than it was balanced for.
If you deconstruct the species, given it's 3/1 stat block, 90xp 11 ST and WT, it appears that they costed DM at around 10xp. Now that is a pretty good deal and puts it on par with the Leap portion of the Enhance FP. Personally, I think they were pushing the edge of balance even allowing it to do what it does given that Freerunning is very similar and costs 15xp. On the otherhand, what you are suggesting is that it function more like Hawkbat Swoop minus the need for of a free force dice. That would make Dense Musculature worth closer to 20-25xp which would be outrageously imbalanced when compared to other species.
Of course, in the grand scheme of things does 15-20xp really make that much of a difference? If you're answer is no, ask yourself this, would you have been as excited to play a Kyuzo if they had 75 starter xp?
They need to change the way the rules are written then, because "...any location in medium range" on both Kyuzo and Force Leap is wrong according to their response.
Either they can move to "any location" or they cannot and it shouldn't be written that way.
Also, can't normal characters just use athletics to increase the distance traveled? If so, what's the difference then other than Kyuzo and Force Users can do so slightly in a slightly easier way?
23 minutes ago, GroggyGolem said:They need to change the way the rules are written then, because "...any location in medium range" on both Kyuzo and Force Leap is wrong according to their response.
Either they can move to "any location" or they cannot and it shouldn't be written that way.
Also, can't normal characters just use athletics to increase the distance traveled? If so, what's the difference then other than Kyuzo and Force Users can do so slightly in a slightly easier way?
I think you may be thinking about range bands the wrong way. First, in this game combat rounds are long, like a minute plus, and range bands are suppose to represent the general area your characters was in during that period of time. It is assumed that the combatants are ducking, diving, moving between cover, etc. I think of it the way they describe electron shells around an atom. This is very different from other games with more tactical miniatures combat. In D&D, Warhammer or whatever, your character is exactly where your figure is, that isn't what range bands were designed to represent.
The second thing to understand is that Engaged isn't a range band, it's more of a state, like grappled or staggered. When you are within the short range band of someone you may become Engaged with them. This is an important distinction that I think might be the core of your issue with this ability.
Maybe try thinking of it this way. During combat, if two people are within short range of each other they are both moving independent of each other. Neither is making an effort to, and may in fact be avoiding getting too close to the other person. When one of the players Engages the other, they in essence, are making an effort to sync their movement with the other person and stay near them. The other player may choose to disengage, thereby making an effort to stay away from that other person, but both take effort to do.
Note, that none of this interplay really has anything to do with distance. Two engaged player are still within short range of eachother, they are just in the Engaged state.
So you see, when the power says that you can move to anywhere within medium range, it's not a typo, you can. That movement however doesn't stop the person from actively trying to avoid you once you get there though. In order to get and stay within melee striking distance it takes a little more effort on your part.
Hopefully that clears it up a bit.
13 minutes ago, SladeWeston said:I think you may be thinking about range bands the wrong way. First, in this game combat rounds are long, like a minute plus, and range bands are suppose to represent the general area your characters was in during that period of time. It is assumed that the combatants are ducking, diving, moving between cover, etc. I think of it the way they describe electron shells around an atom. This is very different from other games with more tactical miniatures combat. In D&D, Warhammer or whatever, your character is exactly where your figure is, that isn't what range bands were designed to represent.
The second thing to understand is that Engaged isn't a range band, it's more of a state, like grappled or staggered. When you are within the short range band of someone you may become Engaged with them. This is an important distinction that I think might be the core of your issue with this ability.
Maybe try thinking of it this way. During combat, if two people are within short range of each other they are both moving independent of each other. Neither is making an effort to, and may in fact be avoiding getting too close to the other person. When one of the players Engages the other, they in essence, are making an effort to sync their movement with the other person and stay near them. The other player may choose to disengage, thereby making an effort to stay away from that other person, but both take effort to do.
Note, that none of this interplay really has anything to do with distance. Two engaged player are still within short range of eachother, they are just in the Engaged state.
So you see, when the power says that you can move to anywhere within medium range, it's not a typo, you can. That movement however doesn't stop the person from actively trying to avoid you once you get there though. In order to get and stay within melee striking distance it takes a little more effort on your part.
Hopefully that clears it up a bit.
Unfortunately for your explanation, Engaged is indeed a range band. It is in the range band section of all 3 core books and is named as one of the 5 range bands. While it does behave a little differently according to the normal rules as far as move maneuvers, both the Kyuzo species ability and Force Leap are not move maneuvers and should not be subject to those limitations, especially when the rules for each ability explicitly state that you can leap to any location in medium range. That's really the problem, the phrase "any location". It denotes covering all locations within the specified range, medium, which indeed covers engaged range.
There's another problem with your example as well, which is saying that the enemy is moving out of the way outside of their turn. That is because there is only one ability in the game that allows someone to move distance outside of their turn on their own, which is the Preemptive Avoidance talent.
To say that an enemy is moving outside their own turn narratively just to avoid your leap would mean they are being put in a different position relative to their own allies and to your party members for no cost at all. It's not in the rules of the game to do so.
Move is applied in a number of ways as a Maneuver and one of those ways is changing Range Bands, so the racial is a Maneuver. Force Leap is an Action until you buy it up, then it's a Maneuver.
Quote"To reflect two or more targets who are grappling or otherwise engaged in hand-to-hand combat, there is a special range status called engaged.
...The engaged status simply indicates that two things are close enough to each other to directly interact.
... Consider engaged as a subcategory of short range. Obviously, someone can be slightly farther away if they’re at short range, instead of being engaged with someone else. However, the difference in distance is relatively minor. Thus, spending a maneuver to move to engage someone or something is as much a matter of moving into combat cautiously enough to avoid receiving a blow unnecessarily as it is moving a physical distance." - Core Book
Here is the exact wording. I was trying to provide you a different way of thinking about a fairly abstract concept. It is also worth noting that even in the maneuver section there is a special maneuver for engaging that is different from the one for changing range bands.
17 minutes ago, GroggyGolem said:There's another problem with your example as well, which is saying that the enemy is moving out of the way outside of their turn. That is because there is only one ability in the game that allows someone to move distance outside of their turn on their own, which is the Preemptive Avoidance talent.
To say that an enemy is moving outside their own turn narratively just to avoid your leap would mean they are being put in a different position relative to their own allies and to your party members for no cost at all. It's not in the rules of the game to do so.
You are missing the point a bit on this one. Of course the enemy is moving out of turn. This isn't some game of red light green light were enemies freeze while it's your turn, turns are a minute long in this game. They aren't frozen for 50 seconds of it only to act when their portion comes around. Do they change range bands out of turn, No, I'm not saying that, but they aren't standing like some statue so you can walk up on them and hit them either.
Edited by SladeWeston3 minutes ago, SladeWeston said:Here is the exact wording. I was trying to provide you a different way of thinking about a fairly abstract concept. It is also worth noting that even in the maneuver section there is a special maneuver for engaging that is different from the one for changing range bands.
You are missing the point a bit on this one. Of course the enemy is moving out of turn. This isn't some game of red light green light were enemies freeze while it's your turn, turns are a minute long in this game. They aren't frozen for 50 seconds of it only to act when their portion comes around. Do they change range bands out of turn, No, I'm not saying that, but they aren't standing like a statue some you can walk up on them and hit them either.
You missed this part
"...distance... is divided up into five different range bands, from engaged to extreme."
Also the text on the "engage or disengage from an opponent" move maneuver specifically calls out engaged as a range.
There's also the part you keep ignoring when trying to tell me I'm wrong, which is that the Kyuzo species ability and Force Leap are specifically NOT move maneuvers and therefore should not be subject to the rules regarding move maneuvers.
35 minutes ago, 2P51 said:Move is applied in a number of ways as a Maneuver and one of those ways is changing Range Bands, so the racial is a Maneuver. Force Leap is an Action until you buy it up, then it's a Maneuver.
Doesn't have to be a maneuver with Leap when you have that upgrade
. Actually, it looks like once you have the upgrade for Force Leap that lets you use a maneuver, it's mandatory that it only be used as a maneuver (doesn't use the word may), so apparently you can't use it as an Action if you buy that upgrade.
In addition, the written rules for move maneuvers only allow you to move within short range or a single range increment per maneuver but both the Kyuzo and Force Leap allow you to move to anywhere within medium range, so already they aren't part of the rules that follow move maneuvers. They are just written too differently to be considered part of the move maneuver rules, are in different sections entirely and would need to be changed in order to reflect that they are part of the same set of limitations.
Sorry, somewhere along the line I let my tone shift and I apologize. Don't get me wrong, I still think you're wrong, but I should have been less jerky about it.
Believe it or not, I was trying to be helpful. I wanted to try and provide you some perspective on how you might interpret the rules so that they align with the Devs interpretation. I shouldn't have made this into an internet argument, because there really isn't one. Clearly the Devs don't see "any location" as the same as "any range band". They didn't balance the ability to work that way and have explained how engaged works together with Dense Musculature in the Forged in Battle Order 66 podcasts.
I understand you wanting the leap to be cooler than it is. Who doesn't want their character to be cooler? I understand that the wording is confusing. The Engaged range band section is a confusing mess. Engages is simultaneously a range band, a sub-range band, and a status. While the DM ability just says location but doesn't say much beyond that.
Sorry if I got carried away trying to convince you. Hopefully there are no hard feelings.