Rules wise, it's is their anything preventing you igniting only one side?

Not that I know of.

Nope there isn't anything forbidding you to do that. It's actually a nice trick, but I think you would lose the defensive 1 and linked 1 trait until you ignite the second blade.

I don't think the double-bladed has Defensive, but you would certainly lose Linked 1. If I were GMing, I would say doing so might eliminate a setback die due to cramped conditions, or be woth a boost die when you suddenly surprise your opponent by igniting the second side.

I agree with Grand Falloon, in that you can use a double-bladed lightsaber with only a single blade activated, especially since we saw Darth Maul do that in his first dust-up with Qui-Gon in Ep1 while on Tattooine. However, the trade-off is that you'd lose access to the Linked 1 quality since that relies upon both blades being ignited. It'd be up to the GM if only having a single blade active lets you not worry about the Unwieldy 3 quality, but I'd probably rule that having only one blade of a double-bladed lightsaber ignited means the weapon looses both the Linked 1 and Unwieldy 3 qualities.

There's no rules even for igniting a lightsaber blade. I'd say it's an incidental at most to do so, since it's a matter of moving your thumb minutely to one side. Therefore it depends on what your player in question is trying to do. Is he attempting to use tràkata? And is he trying to get a mechanical benefit out of it? Or, instead of a fancy lightsaber style, is he just trying to avoid the Unwieldy quality's drawbacks?

1. Normally, I wouldn't treat a double-bladed lightsaber any differently with one or two blades ignited. Keep it narrative as to when the blades ignite, and allow the player to benefit from the Linked 1 quality at will. It seems in keeping with everything we know about Star Wars to allow the player to narrate that his character was igniting the blades and deactivating them again, at will, in attempt to get past enemy defenses (or in order to be tricky, or whatever). No mechanical benefit, no mechanical drawbacks; just fluff.
2. If he's actually trying to milk a mechanical benefit from using tràkata, like bypassing an enemy's Parry talent, that's an entirely different story and would probably take some creative thinking on the GM's part. (or maybe he's trying for a Darth Maul/Duel of the Fates moment, trying to give himself a psychological edge against his opponents by later revealing his second blade. Again, some GM creativity there wouldn't go amiss)
3. Now, if there was an instance where a PC got hold of a double-bladed saber, and they only had an Agility rating of 2 or 1, and they didn't want to suffer the Unwieldy quality, then yeah I could make a deal with them where they only kept one blade ignited and therefore lost the Unwieldy 3 & Linked 1 qualities. But for me that's an outlier situation. Like, there aren't many reasons you'd go to all the trouble of obtaining a double-bladed lightsaber if you're not planning to use both of its blades because it's more "expensive" (even narratively, it requires two crystals instead of 1), it has less hardpoints, it's heavier, and otherwise its capabilities are in no way better than a standard lightsaber. Of course, if such a player was on their way to a Dedication talent, or perhaps the Enhance power's "Agility" control upgrade, that could be a reason.

1 hour ago, awayputurwpn said:

There's no rules even for igniting a lightsaber blade. I'd say it's an incidental at most to do so, since it's a matter of moving your thumb minutely to one side.

Refined Cortosis has rules for re-ignition of a blade. Cortosis makes you wait a turn to do it, but otherwise the guidelines it gives should be fine.

Activating a Lightsaber is still an Incidental. Like Away said, treat the double saber as normal. Let the narrative dictate the visuals. I'd expand on his Option #3 by removing Unwieldy and Linked and trade it for the base modifications of the Extended Hilt.

As always, keep it simple. Every little nuanced situation does not need a special rule.

5 hours ago, ApocalypseZero said:

Activating a Lightsaber is still an Incidental. Like Away said, treat the double saber as normal. Let the narrative dictate the visuals. I'd expand on his Option #3 by removing Unwieldy and Linked and trade it for the base modifications of the Extended Hilt.

As always, keep it simple. Every little nuanced situation does not need a special rule.

Given the cost of a saberstaff, I wouldn't have a problem just giving a player the Extended Hilt attachment for free. At that point in the game it'd basically be a "gimme." I'd still make it eat up a hard point, though

On 6/22/2017 at 6:02 PM, Donovan Morningfire said:

I agree with Grand Falloon, in that you can use a double-bladed lightsaber with only a single blade activated, especially since we saw Darth Maul do that in his first dust-up with Qui-Gon in Ep1 while on Tattooine. However, the trade-off is that you'd lose access to the Linked 1 quality since that relies upon both blades being ignited. It'd be up to the GM if only having a single blade active lets you not worry about the Unwieldy 3 quality, but I'd probably rule that having only one blade of a double-bladed lightsaber ignited means the weapon looses both the Linked 1 and Unwieldy 3 qualities.

I would also treat it as have a long hilt.

I'd treat it as just losing the Linked, plus half any defensive upgrades from mods. I would NOT get rid of the unwieldy 3, but it's not like it matters much most of the time.

On 6/24/2017 at 2:17 AM, Daeglan said:

I would also treat it as have a long hilt.

I presume you're referring to the build option from Endless Vigil's construction rules?

Personally, I'm not sure I'd go with that, as it feels like the PC is getting too good of a bonus seeing as how a double-bladed lightsaber is probably one of the most damaging weapons in the game pound-for-pound seeing as how the user can score two hits, both at Breach 1, with a single attack roll and no increase in difficulty. And the wielder has the option at any time to switch the second blade on and start doling out the damage like ice cream cones on a hot summer day.

After all, a standard double-bladed lightsaber can already be used one handed per the description of the weapon in the CRB, so unless you're going to hand out a similar benefit to any PC that opts to use a one-handed weapon with two-hands, it's given a boost to a weapon that frankly doesn't need any further boosts than what's already available to it.

Naw. I am thinking extended hilt +1 dam.

The Temple Guard pike allows for a single blade ignition. Double blade doesn't say you can't, but doesn't say you can either. I ran it if you want a long hilt dual blade saber that one side can ignite you use the pike. We can come up with a backstory of how it was acquired later. Depending on the PC may remove the stun ability.

4 hours ago, ASCI Blue said:

Double blade doesn't say you can't, but doesn't say you can either.

Sure, but does it need to?

In any case, I think your observation is further justification for keeping the rules of the weapon in play no matter whether the user specifies he's using one blade or two. It's all narrative, aesthetics.

There's already one that does the desired effect. There's nothing in the rules that states who can or can't have a pike, plus it has additional benefits vs a standard dual blade anyway. Sure the rarity is higher but anyone who's buying rather than building imo is doing something wrong.

2 hours ago, ASCI Blue said:

There's already one that does the desired effect. There's nothing in the rules that states who can or can't have a pike, plus it has additional benefits vs a standard dual blade anyway. Sure the rarity is higher but anyone who's buying rather than building imo is doing something wrong.

My point is that of course a double-bladed lightsaber can have either end ignited independent of the other. It's not really a game mechanical "effect." The sentence that you're saying has rules about fighting with one or both ends ignited is really just describing the Temple Guard themselves: "Traditionally, these guardians wielded special double-bladed lightsabers with a long handle and could fight with one or both ends ignited" (KtP 46). The fluff here is basically assuming that people already know that double-bladed lightsabers are capable of doing this—one only needs to have seen TPM to know it. The fact that the rules don't call out that you can do it is essentially the Star-Wars-lore equivalent of lacking rules for blinking.

• GM: "A dust storm whips up around you. Please make a Perception check."
• Player: "Can I blink?"
• GM: "Sure thing, go for it."
• Player: "Can I get a Boost die on Perception for blinking so that dust doesn't get in my eye?"
• GM: "No, we just assume that you blink when you need to, because that's just how your eyes work."

Similarly, "that's just the way that double-bladed lightsabers work." They don't need special rules for activating one blade vs. two blades. You can narrate doing so multiple times within a single action, should you have the inclination. Neither the temple guard saber nor the standard double-bladed saber need any special rules for this, but they would both certainly benefit from installing an Extended Hilt! It's only 3000 credits, and you can afford that, right?

I agree that buying a lightsaber is usually a bad idea, on a number of counts But on the topic of building, I would be far more reticent to allow a PC to construct a "Temple Guard Lightsaber" unless the character somehow had an intimate knowledge of the Temple Guards. These specific lightsaber pikes seem to be exceptionally rare, even among lightsabers, and were specifically only built by the Temple Guard. Sounds like a great adventure reward for your aspiring Jedi, after having delved into the forbidden Library archives on Coruscant, or having explored the ancient ruins of the Temple on Lothal.

In addition to above, the rules for the Double Saber (Linked specifically could still be applied even as one narrates attacking with only one end active. Activating Linked, the user quickly activates the second blade to strike the opponent off guard and then deactivates the blade to continue or keeps the second blade on to showcase that "all is not what it seems". Very good way to surprise the players with that bad guy.

13 hours ago, ApocalypseZero said:

In addition to above, the rules for the Double Saber (Linked specifically could still be applied even as one narrates attacking with only one end active. Activating Linked, the user quickly activates the second blade to strike the opponent off guard and then deactivates the blade to continue or keeps the second blade on to showcase that "all is not what it seems". Very good way to surprise the players with that bad guy.

I've thought a fun way to reinterpret the "dual-phase" saber would be to have what looks like a double-bladed saber, but it only has one crystal. With a flick of the switch, the blade retracts and then extends out the other side. Like the dual-phase, it's only practical for one attack, but would look pretty bizarre in combat if you kept switching it.

On 6/23/2017 at 1:50 PM, ApocalypseZero said:

Activating a Lightsaber is still an Incidental. Like Away said, treat the double saber as normal. Let the narrative dictate the visuals. I'd expand on his Option #3 by removing Unwieldy and Linked and trade it for the base modifications of the Extended Hilt.

As always, keep it simple. Every little nuanced situation does not need a special rule.

This is what i did for my group, only i reduced the cumbersome rating to 2.