2 hours ago, Desslok said:

Instagib?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Instagib

One-hit-kill.

2 hours ago, Desslok said:

Instagib?

To kill or destroy something quickly and with negligible effort.

1 hour ago, RickAllison said:

The 160 points actually does include the cost for the two extra specs (assuming they were the second and third specs)! IIRC, three of the Technical Aptitudes are 5-XP talents while the fourth is locked behind two 20s, two 15s, a 10 and a 5 and is a 10-XP talent. 25 for the four ranks, 50 for the two specs, and 85 to get to the fourth rank.

Okay, like I said, I was away from book.

Still, if a player is willing to dedicate 160 points to buy three trees that have nothing to do with each other, generally have no synergy, to the exclusion of all else - then yeah, give him his moment in the sun. Let him be a god amongst men (assuming him and his 2 starting ranks in computer programming is sufficient to do anything more complex that installing Viewports 10) when hacking on an Imperial server while being shot at. And then punch the one trick pony where he ain't.

That or slap him and tell him to build a concept, not maximize a set of stats to win the game. Either way, problem solved.

(Also, if I was trying to break the game, I could do come up with combos that do a lot more damage that just installing droid software and hacking servers in one round )

Having had a little more time to mull it over, I'm a little conflicted on the whole 100% reduction.

The reason I bring in time constraints is not to keep the player character from being awesome. It's the exact opposite actually. I'm all about the PC's being awesome at the expense of realism (up to a point). The problem I have with 100% reduction is that it kind of removes one of the ways in which the slicer PC can be awesome. With everything reduced to an action, time is reduced to a binary. You either have the action you need or you don't. There's no wiggle room for the hacker's skills to reduce or increase the time via rolling, thus producing tension. It's (assuming you do it RAW) always 1 action so long as they are actually capable of making the attempt.

RAW vs RAI is another subject on this one (just like everything else), and one I'm happy avoiding.

Then people bring up the multiple attempts bit, which is a good question/subject. If something takes multiple steps, or is likely to require multiple attempts to succeed, then you've re-introduced time constraints as a narrative tool. So in that way it would work.

Personally I'd still cap it, rather than allowing “all time reduced to 1 action regardless of what it might be.” If the player really really wanted to take all 4 ranks in technical aptitude, I'd probably just say “OK, but the reduction is 90% not 100%.” You're still working 2.5 times faster than even the guy with 3 ranks in Technical aptitude, and 10x as fast as joe on the stree

11 hours ago, Spatula Of Doom said:

Personally I'd still cap it, rather than allowing “all time reduced to 1 action regardless of what it might be.” If the player really really wanted to take all 4 ranks in technical aptitude, I'd probably just say “OK, but the reduction is 90% not 100%.” You're still working 2.5 times faster than even the guy with 3 ranks in Technical aptitude, and 10x as fast as joe on the stree

Why not allow 100%, but still require multiple checks? I've heard of GMs treating non-combat checks similarly to combat, and this might be an instance where it would make sense in your game to allow for the kind of suspense you're advocating for. For instance, the slicer PC is trying to hack into an Imperial star destroyer's main computer. You decide that the system has 10 "resistance algorithms" (or something), each requiring one uncanceled success to take down. In other words, the computer has "wounds" the slicer has to overcome, and each slicing attempt takes a certain amount of time that Technical Aptitude can reduce.

Submitted the rules question.

Quote

Hello 2P51,

Nothing can take 0 time, so once you have four ranks, you can get things done very quickly, maybe within a turn of structured time. It may allow you to perform Computers checks as actions that normally the GM wouldn’t allow you to do, or otherwise just move very quickly through Computers checks.

Hope this helps!

Sam Stewart

RPG Manager

Fantasy Flight Games

Waiting on the follow up of his thoughts on things like programming droids and the numbers.

I've got a feeling this is just a case of the GM needs to be GM and do what worx for their table.

Anndddd the follow up...

Quote

That would be up to the GM; the time would be reduced substantially, but the GM can always rule that there’s a “minimum” time things can take.

Sam Stewart

RPG Manager

Fantasy Flight Games

So GMs, make a decision. Players, let your GMs make a decision. Carry on.

2 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

So GMs, make a decision. Players, let your GMs make a decision. Carry on.

This. This is the right answer to all problems.

38 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

So GMs, make a decision. Players, let your GMs make a decision. Carry on.

So once again we use the Signature Ability: Common Sense. Sounds good to me.

1 hour ago, Desslok said:

So once again we use the Signature Ability: Common Sense. Sounds good to me.

What career do I attach that to?

Wait wait wait, now hold on. I think the REAL question here is: how does Mr. Pirate get answers to his rules questions in less than an hour, when the most of us have to wait days or weeks ?

1 hour ago, kaosoe said:

What career do I attach that to?

All of them...

19 minutes ago, Absol197 said:

Wait wait wait, now hold on. I think the REAL question here is: how does Mr. Pirate get answers to his rules questions in less than an hour, when the most of us have to wait days or weeks ?

Ancient Chinese secret....

11 hours ago, SavageBob said:

Why not allow 100%, but still require multiple checks? I've heard of GMs treating non-combat checks similarly to combat, and this might be an instance where it would make sense in your game to allow for the kind of suspense you're advocating for. For instance, the slicer PC is trying to hack into an Imperial star destroyer's main computer. You decide that the system has 10 "resistance algorithms" (or something), each requiring one uncanceled success to take down. In other words, the computer has "wounds" the slicer has to overcome, and each slicing attempt takes a certain amount of time that Technical Aptitude can reduce.

My main concern is that you're going from fractions to "everything becomes 1." It's an inconsistency both in "the rules" and as a story telling device.

EG: hacking the local patchwork network of Mos Shuta control normally takes, say, five minutes for the average hacker, while the hack of the century on Coruscant Central bank's maximum security accounts and records takes, oh let's say a solid five days worth of 16 hour shifts to do the whole thing. The GM might decide that the first one only needs one check, while the second should be quite a few checks, and likely the core of an entire adventure (but we're talking about the hacking side of things).

I forget off the top of my head what a round of structured time is about, but let's say 30 seconds (I seem to remember that number being tossed around). Let's also say that CC bank adventure needs about 30 checks total from the hacker.

In Mos Shutta the player with Tech aptitude 4 is knocking 5 minutes down to 30 seconds, which is 1/10th of the original time. In the CC bank adventure, you're turning 80 hours into 15 minutes, or 1/320th of the original time. That's a pretty drastic difference.

It also makes the GM put in arbitrary artificial roadblocks like adding checks required in order to circumvent the character's abilities and maintain time limitations as a storytelling device.

"The rules" should be there to reduce arbitrariness not introduce them. We don't need rules to be arbitrary.

See your example solution is actually pretty cool, and I might use it in game, but not because someone might have 4 ranks in Technical aptitude.

3 minutes ago, Spatula Of Doom said:

"The rules" should be there to reduce arbitrariness not introduce them. We don't need rules to be arbitrary.

See your example solution is actually pretty cool, and I might use it in game, but not because someone might have 4 ranks in Technical aptitude.

It would, of course, depend on the GM and the players. If you're running a slicing-heavy scenario, it makes sense to not allow for a one-check hack of a system. But if you're running a mixed group, and you have a player who wants to be Fonzie, then let him just kick the computer and get it to do what he wants.

I haven't tried the non-combat-hit-points thing yet, but it sounds like a fun way to split the difference. I read about it on The Angry GM blog, or it may have been The Alexandrian. Their example was for picking a lock or breaking down a door, but it seems a natural fit for hacking, as well.

On 7/18/2017 at 9:03 PM, RickAllison said:

The Technical Aptitude talent has the unique honor of being the only time-reduction talent that actually stacks, reduces by 25% rather than 50%, and lacks a secondary benefit which normally is the aspect that stacks with multiple ranks. Where this becomes a problem is when all specializations of the game are available. The Slicer from the Edge CRB tree has two ranks of the talent which would take 100 XP to get both, Desperate Allies's Analyst has one as a 5 XP talent, and the Artisan from Endless Vigil has a 5 XP talent as well. If we start from Artisan, that means 160 XP will get four ranks which by the normal stacking rules for time would result in the duration reduced to 0, or basically an action.

Is there something I'm missing, or is a dedicated speed-programmer really able to do things like programming Elimination protocols per Special Modifications in a few seconds? If I am right, then that is truly awesome! I suppose dedicating a build to more rapidly performing Computer checks has earned its ability, and I might look to this as a potential build in a future game!

The one thing that I havent seen mentioned is that it should take a fairly odd sort of career path to to be a Slicer/Rebel Analyst/Jedi Artisan. If the player's motivation is 'I wanna be able to hack in zero time!' then the GM should mess with him as hard as possible. Play the adventure, not the rules set. On the other hand, if the player actually takes the effort to move the game in the direction of Slicer/Rebel Analyst/Jedi Artisan, and plays the character in character, honest to his motivations and stated goals, then more power to him. Let it be 'We need to hack the Emperor's Email,' 'Done!', 'the Coruscant Central Bank,' 'Done!', ' and WOULD YOU PLEASE WAIT TILL I TELL EVERYONE THE PLAN BEFORE YOU FINISH IT'

When you get to hundreds of XP, let the players be badass.

As this is Star Wars (and not Shadowrun) maybe just accept that whilst their big hack can be fast, it can't all be done from one terminal, so it is the getting the hacker to the right terminals that is the focus of the game in a major hack. And maybe they can hack quickly, but the download still takes as long as it takes.

Hi guys!

Hate to drudge this up, but it is kind of a follow up regarding the use of the Technical Aptitude talent in structured time slicing encounters with the system found in Special Modifications.

We are playing mission-based sessions where things will move quick narratively. I haven't found anything in my research for slicing that gives an indication to how long any one process might take aside from droid programming. Does this mean that GMs just need to make it up beforehand/on-the-fly? For example, does gaining access to a system need to take multiple rounds? The book seems to indicate that every process should be an action (or a maneuver with the Skilled Slicer talent).

GM's call.

Quote

the GM can determine that certain activities may require more than one action to perform,

AoR p. 216

I'm looking forward to FFG releasing a fifth rank, opening up for the possibility of time travel by coding really hard.

On 7/21/2017 at 11:03 AM, kaosoe said:

What career do I attach that to?

They haven't released that career yet. Why do you think Common Sense is so rare?