Oh of course. It is a learning curve to find the sweet spot of "Sure you can do that" and "lets roll the bones on it". However they do give a good baseline in the alternative rules section of the Edge of the Empire book for Passive checks. It isn't perfect, but it can give a good baseline of "this isn't super important, can we skip it?" and "The fate of the galaxy rests on you hitting that target no bigger than a wamp rat". As well as the various stages in between.

That said, there is a large amount of confirmation bias in dice games as a whole (not just limited to RPGs, listen to a craps player descibe the "real" odds sometime). And failures can be hilarious, and frequent. Just listen to all the times Bacta (the medic) on "The Campaign" podcast fails his medicine checks, even though he is pretty darned good at them, while Tristan seems to beat the odds no matter his roll lol.

If the ace pilot is consistently crashing, I am thinking he either thinks he is better than he actually is, or perhaps the GM is making the difficulty... Too difficult for the roll.

2 hours ago, Hurske said:

If the ace pilot is consistently crashing, I am thinking he either thinks he is better than he actually is, or perhaps the GM is making the difficulty... Too difficult for the roll.

What if the scenario is established in a well-known AoR adventure published by FFG themselves? What if the Ace Pilot really had 4 Challenge and at least 1 Boost per piloting roll and still managed to biff it on even simple rolls? Sometimes the odds are just stacked against you.

There is a reason that second editions are made. The complaints here are why.

FFGs Star Wars system is a pretty new system. As a result, some things work and some things dont. The explanations arent all that good either, which is another problem of a first edition. When the book was written there are effectively zero feedback.

So, they should make a second edition. Fix the problems and use the explanations refined over several years of playing.

Make a better game.

2 hours ago, themensch said:

What if the scenario is established in a well-known AoR adventure published by FFG themselves? What if the Ace Pilot really had 4 Challenge and at least 1 Boost per piloting roll and still managed to biff it on even simple rolls? Sometimes the odds are just stacked against you.

Doesn't mean the GM is using difficulties/situations as assigned by the adventure. Also, Challenge Dice work against you. Are you thinking of Proficiency Dice?

If the odds are stacked against you, why do you expect to succeed? To fail more of then than not in such situations is exactly what should happen.

10 hours ago, GroggyGolem said:

That's my point though, their responses are inconsistent with the rules they wrote & are often too vague of an answer to really seem based on logic or congruent with the rest of the written rules. It's as if they are just saying yes/no based on the rule of cool and not at all considering what they've already established in the books I paid money for that are supposed to be the game rules, the last time I checked.

That is because the editing is terrible and the rules are about as easy to understand as a my forum posts after a 36 hour day. ;-)

BTW, the rules are not as you seem to think about when to use piloting(space) and when to use piloting(planetary). You can read most parts as well as the skill to use depending on the environment. Saying that your X-Wing is operated by Piloting(Planetary) when flying around on planet is not totally out of question with rules as written. Before people started complaining about the jetpack ruling, I did not even thought for a second that the skill would be vehicle specific, I only found it odd that there is no Driving and Walker skill, but just assumed that they did not wanted not to shoo away the DnD players with too many skills. ;-)

3 hours ago, themensch said:

What if the scenario is established in a well-known AoR adventure published by FFG themselves? What if the Ace Pilot really had 4 Challenge and at least 1 Boost per piloting roll and still managed to biff it on even simple rolls? Sometimes the odds are just stacked against you.

4 Challange dice are certainly not a simple roll, so I assume you mean 4 Providence dice and a overall dice pool of ppppb
The chance to fail this is ~ 0.8%. The chance to fail this twice in a row is less than one in ten thousand. Less than 1 in 10,000.

And ironically a failed check is not a crash, the chance for a crash aka despair is ZERO in this dice pool. If you keep rolling despairs and triumphs over and over then welcome to my world, welcome to the twilight dice zone. Rolling 1 in 10,000 chances since 1993, watching the Balrog of Moria going down per accident, teleporting under the sea and into tree, and hitting control towers all day. But I don't think my special dice luck is related to this.

12 hours ago, Garran said:

Since a jetpack is typically strapped on (over the armor), the armor being vacuum-sealed wouldn't affect its performance, and given that a jetpack is just a high-powered maneuvering thruster I'd expect it to work better in space since you don't have to overcome planetary gravity or atmospheric resistance to get around. Maintaining your orientation under thrust might be more of a challenge since you won't have the stabilizing effect of the atmosphere and gravity, but that's probably why they suggested using the Piloting/Space skill.

Incidentally, it isn't: "[It] uses an air breathing jet turbine [...]" (EotE CRB, p. 181).

7 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

Doesn't mean the GM is using difficulties/situations as assigned by the adventure. Also, Challenge Dice work against you. Are you thinking of Proficiency Dice?

If the odds are stacked against you, why do you expect to succeed? To fail more of then than not in such situations is exactly what should happen.

You're right, 4 Proficiency dice! Ooops!

What I'm getting at is that I almost always failed, as a result of the luck of the dice. It was maddening. Others at the table with the same difficulty succeeded. To your point, I know a hard roll implies failure, but a large pool implies success sometimes and that wasn't happening.

6 hours ago, SEApocalypse said:

4 Challange dice are certainly not a simple roll, so I assume you mean 4 Providence dice and a overall dice pool of ppppb
The chance to fail this is ~ 0.8%. The chance to fail this twice in a row is less than one in ten thousand. Less than 1 in 10,000.

And ironically a failed check is not a crash, the chance for a crash aka despair is ZERO in this dice pool. If you keep rolling despairs and triumphs over and over then welcome to my world, welcome to the twilight dice zone. Rolling 1 in 10,000 chances since 1993, watching the Balrog of Moria going down per accident, teleporting under the sea and into tree, and hitting control towers all day. But I don't think my special dice luck is related to this.

Yeah, it wasn't a single roll that led to a crash, it was the constant failed rolls that led to exceeded Hull Trauma that caused it. The issue at hand wasn't the skills I brought to bear or the difficulty of the pool, it was the astounding regularity with which I failed rolls others at the table were making, even though I was considerably more skilled. I think the GM was doing it right, I just had horrible luck, consistently. It's a legendary joke at our table.

And yeah, I meant Proficiency dice. Ooops!

I really hope that for the second edition they only come out with ONE core rulebook with some Professions from the original 3 books and the rest as settings book, that way the rules would be consistent between settings.

The we can avoid confusing situations where Cool is used instead of Vigilance for initiative depending on the setting book...

2 minutes ago, GandofGand said:

The we can avoid confusing situations where Cool is used instead of Vigilance for initiative depending on the setting book...

I thought the rules were consistent and it was all based on situation: Cool if you knew it was coming, Vigilance if not.

I sit corrected...just rechecked all 3 books and its the same so nevermind...

In any case One Core Rulebook is way easier to deal with than 3...especially given the sizes of the books involved...8P

2 hours ago, GandofGand said:

I sit corrected...just rechecked all 3 books and its the same so nevermind...

In any case One Core Rulebook is way easier to deal with than 3...especially given the sizes of the books involved...8P

No argument there, although the case has been made many times and the conclusion is that a book such as this would be larger than a set of encyclopedias to have it all bound in a single cover. This forum and many others are rife with that discussion, so I'm reluctant to repeat it here.

No need to...we can move on...what really frustrates me about the rules is the complexity and sheer layout...I've gotten to the point where I can PLAY competently, but in no way do I feel comfortable actually RUNNING a game, much less an extended Campaign...I'd be truncating the crap out of the rules in favor of faster gameplay and more RP...which is pretty much the way every single RPG I've ever run anyway goes...but there's a limit to how much work I want to put into modifying a game...8P

2 hours ago, GandofGand said:

In any case One Core Rulebook is way easier to deal with than 3...especially given the sizes of the books involved...8P

But you only need one core book. It's 3 game lines. It's more akin to asking for the Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, and Eberron books to be in one volume. They are all DnD.

The larger difference is that the core rule system is included with the specific setting information. Would you rather they had 1 Core Rule book, then 3 additional Setting books?

I can understand where the perception comes from, and a difference of opinion. After all you are entitled to yours as much as i am entitled to mine. I just respectfully disagree.

As for truncating rules. I've been role-playing for about 20 years, and honestly i've never found a system that doesn't require alteration to fit a group. It's just a fact in the hobby as much as painting minis is in most table top wargames. And, it's not really a bad thing. The rules are there to facilitate fun. It doesn't matter if that fun is tactical combat, making the perfect plan, or telling an epic (or mundane) story. Don't follow the rules because they are the rules. They are just a tool. Just use the that tool to facilitate the most fun for the whole group as possible. If a house rule is more fun then the RAW, chuck the RAW and make/use a houserule. Beg, borrow and steal houserules that work to improve that tool for the group. Just never forget that it is a tool, and the purpose of that tool.

Thats kind of my Point, it should be one product line, Star Wars, and everything else should just be expansions and splatbooks with additional rules / mechanics.

I intensely dislike the idea of having to buy three different $60 books that are at least 60% the same set of text and rules. I'd rather buy one Core book with the core mechanics, some sample characters and maybe a mix of six different Professions to build and play characters with. Then one smaller book with Edge-type characters and additional rules, 1 for Rebels and 1 for Force-Users....the way most other game companies have ever done it for the last 25-30 years.

That way an updated edition only needs to update the ONE Core book instead of re-releasing 2nd or 3rd eds for all 3 lines...otherwise it's inefficient both financially and time-wise for the company and the customers.

With all of the other financial doubts and uncertainty these days Money is kind of a big deal for folks, especially the average gamer. I understand the company needs to make money but ****

...sadly its not just FFG but gaming in generally has become abhorrently expensive...and I'm not even going into the cots of Minis games these days...8P

Sorry I'll get off my rant-horse now...just some pet peeves that I am unfortunately going to have to deal with if I want to continue playing Star Wars with my local friends.

Hasn't gaming - whether it's RPG, minis, console, or computer - always been something of a middle class luxury hobby? You need a lot of leisure time, you need to have friends with leisure time if you don't play alone, and you need to buy the books and play utensils. Not defending it in any way, but I don't think it's ever been different.

The advantage to having the core books set up like that is focus and clarity of theme. A general Star Wars game is something vague and diffuse. Edge of the Empire is specific in what it offers you and how you should play.

I can understand that point of view. However imagine getting into the game as your first RPG. Instead of buying one book and one set of dice, you need to buy one rule book and one setting book plus one set of dice. Either way someone is going to have some bad feels. Though just my opinion, i would rather have the 3 core books as now, than 1 core book plus 3 setting books. That isn't even counting the extra cost for FFG in printing 4 books instead of 3, as well as the associated costs with such, which would all need to be accounted for somewhere. In the end i think it works out better (both for the company and the consumers as a whole). However i respect that others may not share that opinion, and that is not only perfectly fine, but also refreshing. If there were no differing opinions it would just be a unhealthy echo chamber after all

I think there's a breakdown between need and want personally. You only need a CRB and the dice app is cheap. The Talent sheets are freely available from fan made stuff. That's all you need to play. Sorry, but if one CRB and a dice app are financially crippling for an able bodied adult their problems run deeper than the cost of gaming supplies.

I was thinking that 3 smaller settings books would be cheaper than 3 whole books...but that's pretty much just picking at nits...it is what it is....

Hopefully once I get moved into my new Digs I can really sit down and look at converting D6 to use the Profession/Specialization Trees, be a LOT of work and I'm not even sure I'd have enough players here interested in trying...but its about the only way I'll run a Star Wars game....and I LOVE running Star Wars as a setting...so many good memories of Star Wars games past...8)

I personally feel that it's on the players to buy their own career splatbooks so that the DM doesn't pick up anything that is unnecessary. Not that I've got that problem, my DM buys all the books, even when no one actually wants it. XD

3 Core books? Well, it depends what the party is actually playing. Admittedly I find it sloppy design that Force Sensitivity is largely a entirely separate rulebook (don't point me toward exile and emergent. There is no way you can really emulate what you see on the big screen with those add on classes alone and inevitably you will need to buy the F&D core if even one person gets interested in a roleplaying a learning Jedi. That is an inherent flaw in the system.) but generally theres no need to buy all free unless you want to handle the most exotic glowsticks in the galaxy (which is every campaign ever. Probably.). I feel it would have been better practice to publish Force and Destiny as an extended spatbook, since it really should slot into either the other two systems, unless your entire group is playing as a band of force sensitives.

6 hours ago, themensch said:

Yeah, it wasn't a single roll that led to a crash, it was the constant failed rolls that led to exceeded Hull Trauma that caused it. The issue at hand wasn't the skills I brought to bear or the difficulty of the pool, it was the astounding regularity with which I failed rolls others at the table were making, even though I was considerably more skilled. I think the GM was doing it right, I just had horrible luck, consistently. It's a legendary joke at our table.

And yeah, I meant Proficiency dice. Ooops!

Why is someone even handing out hull trauma for failed checks? Threats can deal system strain, sure, but that is easily dealt with a mechanic check to compensate. Do you deal get wounds too each time you miss a shot? Meanwhile collisions deal criticals not hull trauma either.

Btw, I think you get fine around with a force emergent without having the FaD core rulebook, what you rather want are interesting specs and force powers and if you combine edge and AoR you actually get a solid set of force powers and just lack saber specs, which ain't a problem for an emerging jedi, but becomes a problem when you get into a full fledged jedi campaign with actual lightsaber opponents … because that is the moment when you want the lightsaber specs from the corebook. Well, I guess the warrior career book will come with Vaapad, so you might get away without the core book and a splat book instead. ;-)

On principle, I still agree that you want to have all 3 core books, but you don't necessary want that one guy owns all three, it fine if each player contributes one of them, so all players combined have access to all three, and each player has the rules for reference at home. Not that this would stop the collectors in the group to still own every book. ;-)

57 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

Why is someone even handing out hull trauma for failed checks?

Okay, I should have chosen a better example, I haven't fully explained the entire situation and I didn't feel it was necessary because I was trying to point out that despite a large dice pool and reasonable difficulties I still failed nearly every roll , and every other detail around that story is cruft. Needless to say, we don't need to debate the finer points of GMing here, that's not the issue at hand.

49 minutes ago, themensch said:

despite a large dice pool and reasonable difficulties I still failed nearly every roll

But how is that now how it should be? If there was no chance of failure, you wouldn't have rolled. By rolling, you accept that you could fail. And even a large dice pool doesn't imply success. It implies a high chance of success. Big difference.