I have a bunch of question that seem to pop up from time to time in our rookie group. Hopefully some of you can help provide "official" answers. Also thought it might be helpful to have a thread for noob level questions, compile them all in one place. Feel free to add any questions.

Noob Question: Some minion groups, say storm troopers, carry frag grenades. The number of grenades listed is 2, ammo 1 (pg 420)Does each member of the minion group carry 2 grenades? Or is it two grenades split among the group?

Thanks in adavnce!

Two per trooper/member.

3 hours ago, whisperingskull said:

Two per trooper/member.

But technically each time the squad "throws a grenade" they actually throw 1 each, from acting as a group. So the entire squad basically has 2 attacks worth of grenades. When they hit with that attack it still only does the damage of a single grenade, these guys are supposed to be the rank and file grunts. They should be fairly easy to overcome, and not be too damaging. For those reasons reality is slightly warped with them to simplify things and keep bookkeeping to the minimum.

If you want them to throw individually then you need to treat them as individuals, of course you get more chances that way, but their other attacks will suffer, and its a lot more work for you, IMHO not worth it for the amount of time they will survive.

The thing with minion groups to keep in mind is it's a trick. A way for the gm to represent a group of low level mooks but only doing the paperwork of a higher level single character.

So a minion group with 2 grenades essentially act like one with 2 grenades.

Thanks for the replies!

Noob Question 2A: Stun. "When the stun quality is activated, it inflicts strain equal to the weapons stun rating" (page 170 CRB). However, many NPC's don't have a strain rating, and typically any strain counts as wounds. How I would interpret stun for this scenario, is that if the NPC's wound threshold reaches zero by way of stun damage, even if some damage was traditional wounds, so long as the final blow was dealt by stun, the NPC is stunned and not killed. However, if there is a mix of stun and traditional damage, but the final blow is traditional damage, the NPC dies.

Noob Question 2B : Stun is also an active weapon ability, and thus typically requires two advantage to activate. If a PC is attempting to stun an enemy, and the attack succeeds but with only one advantage, what happens then? NO damage at all? Traditional damage only? My thought would be for no damage at all. Per 2C below, weapons would need to be set to stun ahead of time, and either the attacks succeeds in whole or not at all. Might encourage them to invoke destiny points for higher advantage results.

Noob Question 2C : Do you makes your PC's declare their intent to stun ahead of time, or allow them to activate it after the fact if they generate enough advantage? I would think they should need to declare it "Set weapons to stun".

(I also realize the rules are "suggestions" and flexible, but everyone in my group has the book and might interpret interpret things different. I find it helps if we are all on the same page, so to speak.)

For opponents that don't have a strain value the effects of damage are generally narrative to begin with - taking someone down via wounds doesn't necessarily kill them; taking someone down via strain could end up killing them. (Most likely by falling off of a precipice in true Star Wars style.)

I may be thinking about this wrong as well. If a weapon is set to stun, that makes it a passive ability, rather an an active ability, which negates all the advantage requirements.

Yeah, there are two versions of stun, active and passive. A weapon on stun setting is an example of passive and does all of its damage as strain without any further requirements. Shock gloves are an example of active stun - you spend advantages to trigger the effect, which causes stun damage above and beyond whatever else the weapon inflicts.

2A: Ultimately it's up to the gm but your interpretation is a pretty typical ruling.

2B: Stun setting and the Stun quality are two different things. Setting a weapon to stun does what the stun setting quality specifies. A weapon with the Stun quality does what the stun quality says. Important to get these seperated as they do VERY different things.

2C: the difference between Stun and Stun setting should make this clear, but if a player sets for stun they should say so before rolling.

There are three forms of "stun".

There's the Stun active quality, followed by a rating ("Stun 2" or some such). It requires Advantage to activate and represents something "extra" the weapon can do to cause strain to a person. The go-to example, as pointed out here, are Shock Gloves. The damage comes from punching someone, but you can also trigger a tazer-like pulse if you hit them right.

Then there's "Stun Damage" and "Stun Setting":

" Some weapons deal Stun damage instead of regular damage. In this case, the weapon deals damage as strain instead of wounds. This damage is still reduced by a target's soak.

A variant of this is a Stun setting. As an incidental, the wielder can choose to switch the setting of his weapon to "Stun." In this case, it does Stun damage as described above. When weapons with a Stun setting are used to deal Stun damage, their range changes to short and cannot be increased. "

Weapons that have "Stun Damage" are incapable of dealing "lethal" damage by way of weapon design. They might be low-grade blasters only able to shoot on stun or something like a tazer.

Weapons that have a "Stun Setting" can deal regular damage or be switched with an incidental to basically have "Stun Damage". In that case, yes , you're required to say before firing which mode you're using.

Thanks for the great explanations of stun.

Noob Question 3: As GM's do you designate if Duty has been met, or do you have your player's request that it be awarded?

I'm finding for each session as GM I put in between 4-8hrs in prep, and keeping track of duty obligations is rather onerous. Has anyone tried putting the responsibility of duty obligations on the players to keep track of? I feel like they should know their PC's best and be able to suggest when it has been met.

1 hour ago, Stethoscope Nunchucks said:

Thanks for the great explanations of stun.

Noob Question 3: As GM's do you designate if Duty has been met, or do you have your player's request that it be awarded?

I'm finding for each session as GM I put in between 4-8hrs in prep, and keeping track of duty obligations is rather onerous. Has anyone tried putting the responsibility of duty obligations on the players to keep track of? I feel like they should know their PC's best and be able to suggest when it has been met.

One of the hosts of the Order 66 podcast had a pretty good system for how he handles Duty. Each session, he has a certain amount of possible Duty that the players have the opportunity to achieve, and thus boost their score. You could think of them as side quests if you will. He likes to average the players hitting a new Duty rank every 4-5 sessions, so he roughly has 25-35 Duty available, to account for failing some of the available options. He then just ticks off if they actually accomplish any of them, and their Duty value, and then awards it at the end of the session, based on what the players accomplish.

Seems to be a pretty good system to me.

As to having the players do the actual tracking, sure, outsource those dice monkies to be your little helpers, and free up more brain space for you to run the game.

A different host of the same podcast, happily bribes his players with small bits of bonus XP if they help with the book keeping of things for him. +5 XP for whoever handles the initiative roster that session. +5 XP for someone who does up the map for the next encounter, etc etc.

31 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

A different host of the same podcast, happily bribes his players with small bits of bonus XP if they help with the book keeping of things for him. +5 XP for whoever handles the initiative roster that session. +5 XP for someone who does up the map for the next encounter, etc etc.

^This is getting implemented tonight. Thanks!

Noob Question 4: How exactly is duty score increased? I get that some action happens, a character fulfills their duty, their earn the rewards to wound threshold for the session etc. However, I don't see it spelled out how much their duty score increases? Or how it increased? I do see that once the duty score of the group reaches 100, it resets and the group earns a point of contribution rank.

@KungFuFerret in the podcast you mention (and your other posts on this), the GM is just averaging about 5 duty points per item of duty it seems?

1 hour ago, Stethoscope Nunchucks said:

^This is getting implemented tonight. Thanks!

Np, glad to be able to pass on someone else's good idea

47 minutes ago, Stethoscope Nunchucks said:

Noob Question 4: How exactly is duty score increased? I get that some action happens, a character fulfills their duty, their earn the rewards to wound threshold for the session etc. However, I don't see it spelled out how much their duty score increases? Or how it increased? I do see that once the duty score of the group reaches 100, it resets and the group earns a point of contribution rank.

@KungFuFerret in the podcast you mention (and your other posts on this), the GM is just averaging about 5 duty points per item of duty it seems?

Answer 4: It's basically just a metric you track outside of game. It's a numerical representation of the actions and deeds the party does, that helps the organization they are a part of. And when they add up to 100, they "level up", and get a boon from the organization. You track it by assigning a numerical value to various Duty goals you have in the session/campaign. How much is up to you, depending on how quickly you want them to progress up the Duty track. As the above podcast host I mentioned liked to say, he liked to give 1 way each player can gain Duty, based on their individual Duty choice on their sheet, and then maybe a bonus one that is slightly harder to pull off. So even if they don't get all of them, they are likely to at least get 2 objectives a session, maybe more. Depending on how dedicated the players are to accomplishing their Duty. So let's say, you have a social PC, who has a Duty of Counter-Intelligence. His duty that session is to spread a rumor among the Imperials about a known Rebel cell, that is either a decoy, or perhaps an ambush. He does this at some social gathering, using social skills. However, the player doesn't roll very well that session, and fails his attempts to plant the false information. That's ok though, because his buddies, who are secretly infiltrating the base underneath the party, have sliced the Imperial datacore, stolen tons of data (Thus boosting the Slicers Intelligence Duty), and the Ace Pilot has hot wired 3 of the prototype shuttles, allowing them to take them back to the Rebellion for reverse engineering (Space Superiority, or perhaps Acquisition).

This way, even if somebody has a bad night, the party (as a whole), can still progress up the Duty track. Because the Duty track is cumulative . If you have a 4 person party, and they each have a value of 25 in their respective Duties, then they have "leveled up". They've cumulatively reached 100, and thus roll over, and are due a boon. This way, you can have some players, who perhaps REALLY focus on Duty, while others don't really deal with it as much. They can still HELP the overall effort, but they're not the ones literally doing the Duty. For example, a team that supports a superior Slicer, who ends up slicing data from the Empire every session, spiking up his Intelligence Duty like crazy. But the other members, with other Duties, don't really do that much. They still all benefit, it's just not tracked based on their direct Duty.

Did that last bit make sense? I feel like I kind of rambled there for a bit.

As to your question about the value per Duty action, yeah, the host was assuming a standard 4-5 player group, and his goal was for them to have the potential to level up their Duty every 4-5 sessions. So that meant he made sure to provide 20-30 points of Duty opportunities per session, and then let the players decide what they would actually try for. Adjust the values, based on your party size, and how often you want them to potentially level up.

5-10 per incident is typical, depending on how significant it is and how it compares to the expectations for someone at that contribution rank. Some actions might be worth more if they're exceptional, and extreme cases might warrant an outright rank-up. (The raw recruits who somehow manage to commandeer and turn over a star destroyer are going to get noticed - by both sides!)

Yeah, what Garran said as well. Always be ready to improvise if they do something really nuts and pull off something above and beyond what you expected. Some huge action that seriously shifts the tables for the campaign, even in a background kind of way, should be recognized with a significant boost.

Thanks for the great explanations, really appreciate it.

I think its a massive oversight by FFG that they talk all about duty being integral to the players, but have nothing about how it is increased. You would have thought an errata or special published bit about duty (unless I have missed it) somewhere.

The GM chapter is quite good for ideas, it has details on how to hand it out. Then each career supplement has more information.

But it's a very complex concept and honestly an entire supplement could be written on best practices for each of Obligation Duty and Morality . If you have the time The Order 66 has done full episodes on each of the three different game mechanics. Those drop some decent ideas from people who have GMd a lot with this system.

Another Noob here- would it be possible to handle Duty in a more abstract way? If the aforementioned podcast host has his characters "level up" this way every couple of sessions, could this not be done on narrative alone? The roleplayer in me says that narrative links should be more important than abstract numbers, exactly how important is the exact duty track when certain elements of the rebellion take notice and provide support as the story gradually progresses?

On 6/17/2017 at 4:00 AM, FatPob said:

I think its a massive oversight by FFG that they talk all about duty being integral to the players, but have nothing about how it is increased. You would have thought an errata or special published bit about duty (unless I have missed it) somewhere.

Arda has it in several places (Friends too I think, haven't read friends as closely).

It gives several examples where there's a short little rp or 1-3 check "side mini-quest" that relates to individual Duties and kicks out a reward for accomplishing it.

On 6/26/2017 at 1:50 AM, DampfGecko said:

Another Noob here- would it be possible to handle Duty in a more abstract way? If the aforementioned podcast host has his characters "level up" this way every couple of sessions, could this not be done on narrative alone? The roleplayer in me says that narrative links should be more important than abstract numbers, exactly how important is the exact duty track when certain elements of the rebellion take notice and provide support as the story gradually progresses?

Yes and no. The idea is for Duty to provide a mechanical means of communication between the GM and player. A way for the player to say "here's what I want to do in this campaign."

So, by design, the core campaign should offer inherent methods of earning duty. Simple quest rewards being the most obvious since the Rebellion doesn't really do the cash payout thing (usually) and likewise if you were running an Imperial, or Old Republic campaign paying out big cash bonuses would be weird.

So it would be perfectly acceptable to have an adventure end with:

"Ok you destroyed the Prototype Starfighter, and escaped back to your base. You each get 5 Duty for overall mission success, additionally Steve, you get 5 for your performance in the space battle going with your Space Superiority duty good job with that stolen TIE, I didn't think that was going to end well, Suzy, you get 5 for counter-intellegence for figuring out that Kliner was the mole and disposing of him, and Phil you get 5 Support for that intricate plan that allowed you to run the mission without needing to resupply or spend any D-points on forgotten critical gear. So the entire party's duty goes up... By 40 points... That puts you over 100. Come back next week with ideas on what you want as a reward. I'll send you all a short mission brief teaser for next time to help give you ideas..."

In this case the core quest rewards duty payout would be your "narrative" application, where the other three are tagged rewards where a player did something specific to thier chosen duty that allowed them to stand out.

On 6/26/2017 at 2:50 AM, DampfGecko said:

Another Noob here- would it be possible to handle Duty in a more abstract way? If the aforementioned podcast host has his characters "level up" this way every couple of sessions, could this not be done on narrative alone? The roleplayer in me says that narrative links should be more important than abstract numbers, exactly how important is the exact duty track when certain elements of the rebellion take notice and provide support as the story gradually progresses?

It's mostly there as a metric for players and GMs to keep track of. Each time they "level up", it's mostly there to represent them making significant headway for their organization. The amount of things they had to accomplish, that furthered the goal of the organization would be significant by the time they reach 100. Multiple pieces of vital intel on Imperial troop movements (Intelligence Duty), obtaining multiple ships for the cause (Acquisitions). Destroying several wings of enemy ships, possibly even a cap ship or two (Naval Superiority), etc. Those are significant hurdles for the Rebellion. Just look at the episodes of Rebels, and how some entire story arcs hinge on simply getting fuel for their fighters....fighters that were only stolen a week ago. Those accomplishments were major stepping stones for the rebelling. "Hey! We've got a cap ship now!" "Hey! We've got a wing of bombers now!" "Hey! We've got FUEL to fly the bombers!" "Hey! We've got BOMBS to shoot from the bombers!" These were all separate plots for an entire episode, and they were treated as highly vital missions by the Rebellion command we see in the episodes.

So a group, having spent multiple sessions, accomplishing a few dozen objectives to add up to 100 Duty, would be considered an effective team, and they would see some benefit. Just like the crew of the Ghost started to see benefits. Access to Rebel services for repair and rearming. Support of their attack wings on dangerous missions. Assistance when they go off on a side quest for a personal objective, etc etc. These are the "Narrative" aspects of the Duty metric. The metric is just there to help the GM decide when to have the "Good show old chaps!" kind of speech, where the players/PCs get some accolades and props.

So don't really worry about the number itself, it's just there to help keep track of milestones.

In re NQ1 : keep in mind you can land a grenade each when the group throws... Minion groups are conceptually the same as linked weapons.

NQ2: Stun Setting and Stun Damage are passive. No cost to activate. Stun X is active, triggered after the roll, and renders the target staggered for X rounds.

RAW,

• Stun Damage is inherent, cannot be taken off.
• Stun Setting is declared before rolling
• Stun X is active, and so is only declared by spending advantage

NQ3 & NQ4: Duty...

I set a set of mission objectives. Each that gets accomplished is 1-2. A single session has 3-5 mission objectives, plus up to 5 optional ones. Each that is hit is 1 or 2 points, +1 if in your duty area. I let players justify unclear ones by wheedling.

Yes, DampfGecko , one can do it more abstractly. Just declare it hit... but that reduces the GM-Tool utility of the system. The extant system has several uses:

• It provides feedback to players in a tangible way that doesn't boost their capabilities significantly
• It provides a guide for the GM as to "who's up next?" for the spotlight and/or what kind of mission to prep next
• It provides punctuated rewards in an apparently fair manner *
• it allows for a schematic mapping of the value of various mission goals †

* the rewards are actually unfair, as all get the same reward but not all have earned the same rewards.
† IE, "Grabbing the cassette is 1 Duty. Broadcasting it to the overhead fleet is 5..."