2 hours ago, Magnus Arcanus said:

I am not sure where you are finding this anywhere in the rules. You cannot spend three advantages to activate a 'temporary' critical hit, and effectively 'select' what that critical hit is. You can't even do this on an triumph.

"When dealing damage to a target, have the attack disable the opponent or one piece of gear rather than dealing wounds or strain. This could include hobbling him temporarily with a shot to the leg, or disabling his comlink. This should be agreed upon by the player and the GM, and the effects are up to the GM (although Table 6 - 10: Critical Injury Result is a good resource to consult for possible effects). The effects should be temporary and not too excessive."

From the table on spending Advantages and Triumphs in Force & Destiny.

So, yes. You can spend 3 Advantages to temporarily inflict something along the lines of a critical hit.

23 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

"When dealing damage to a target, have the attack disable the opponent or one piece of gear rather than dealing wounds or strain. This could include hobbling him temporarily with a shot to the leg, or disabling his comlink. This should be agreed upon by the player and the GM, and the effects are up to the GM (although Table 6 - 10: Critical Injury Result is a good resource to consult for possible effects). The effects should be temporary and not too excessive."

From the table on spending Advantages and Triumphs in Force & Destiny.

So, yes. You can spend 3 Advantages to temporarily inflict something along the lines of a critical hit.

Being knocked prone is a temporary and in the realm of hobbling someone. And it is something the devs suggest. I dont get why youh are against something the devs say you can do. 3 advantage to knock someone prone fits in the things described on the table. It is temporary and of the same caliber as hobbling them.

12 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Being knocked prone is a temporary and in the realm of hobbling someone. And it is something the devs suggest. I dont get why youh are against something the devs say you can do. 3 advantage to knock someone prone fits in the things described on the table. It is temporary and of the same caliber as hobbling them.

Did you mistake me for Whafrog? 'cause I posted the quote to agree with your view.

No just expanding on your post.

1 minute ago, Daeglan said:

No just expanding on your post.

Ah, okay. The "you" in the post, along with quoting me, had me confused.

2 hours ago, Daeglan said:

Being knocked prone is a temporary and in the realm of hobbling someone. And it is something the devs suggest. I dont get why youh are against something the devs say you can do. 3 advantage to knock someone prone fits in the things described on the table. It is temporary and of the same caliber as hobbling them.

I would not allow a player to use three advantages to knock a target prone. Otherwise what is the use of talents that let you spend a destiny point to do the same thing? Why even have the knockdown quality? So you can spend 2 advantages instead of 3? That doesn't sound right at all.

And yes I know the Dev's suggested it, but that doesn't mean it is a good suggestion.

2 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

"When dealing damage to a target, have the attack disable the opponent or one piece of gear rather than dealing wounds or strain. This could include hobbling him temporarily with a shot to the leg, or disabling his comlink. This should be agreed upon by the player and the GM, and the effects are up to the GM (although Table 6 - 10: Critical Injury Result is a good resource to consult for possible effects). The effects should be temporary and not too excessive."

From the table on spending Advantages and Triumphs in Force & Destiny.

So, yes. You can spend 3 Advantages to temporarily inflict something along the lines of a critical hit.

I would also not conflate this description in the rules for spending three advantages to be the equivalent of "I can spend three advantages and pick a critical hit." While I get the suggestion is to use the crit table for inspiration, it also specifically states it requires GM approval. So it would be a mis-paraphrasing of this quoted rule to suggest 3 advantage = Critical Hit of the activate character's choice.

8 minutes ago, Magnus Arcanus said:

I would also not conflate this description in the rules for spending three advantages to be the equivalent of "I can spend three advantages and pick a critical hit." While I get the suggestion is to use the crit table for inspiration, it also specifically states it requires GM approval. So it would be a mis-paraphrasing of this quoted rule to suggest 3 advantage = Critical Hit of the activate character's choice.

First, let's keep it to what I actually wrote: "temporarily inflict something along the lines of a critical". Of course it requires GM approval, I never said otherwise. That's true of all rules that need a measure of interpretation and negotiation between GM and player. It doesn't negate the existence of those rules.

Furthermore, "something along the lines" is a bit different from just picking a critical hit as is and applying it. I think it's clear from my wording that you couldn't just pick any crit effect and apply it unchanged.

And I also note that "(an easy crit is being stunned, an average crit is being knocked over and suffering 1 strain, so it's well within range for that)". So we're not talking about just killing someone outright or any of the other high-level crits, but examples from the two most basic groups of criticals.

Quote

Otherwise what is the use of talents that let you spend a destiny point to do the same thing?

You can always do it without having to negotiate or justify employing this move.

Quote

Why even have the knockdown quality? So you can spend 2 advantages instead of 3?

Well, yeah.

I've never allowed my players to knock someone down with 3 Advantage, mostly because it completely invalidates the Knockdown talent (which requires a Triumph for that exact same effect).

8 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

Yeah. You can use 3 Advantages to temporarily inflict something along the lines of a critical (an easy crit is being stunned, an average crit is being knocked over and suffering 1 strain, so it's well within range for that), or you can spend 3 Threats on the specific effect of knocking the target prone.

27 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

First, let's keep it to what I actually wrote: "temporarily inflict something along the lines of a critical". Of course it requires GM approval, I never said otherwise. That's true of all rules that need a measure of interpretation and negotiation between GM and player. It doesn't negate the existence of those rules.

First lets actually make sure we are not picking and choosing our quotes here. The first quote is what you actually said. The second one is where you excluded the bit about giving more meat to your argument that spending 3 advantages lets you do things such as stun an opponent, or knocking an opponent over and suffering 1 strain. So forgive me, but I would have to take your comment in its entirety to mean "3 advantages lets you do something you can do on a crit" which is mis-paraphrasing what you can do with 3 advantage.

People can debate this endlessly, it doesn't make them right or wrong. My opinion on the matter is you cannot spend advantage or triumph to knock a target prone anymore than you can spend it to stagger a target.

It always amazes me when people say no to something the devs say is reasonable. How is it unreasonable to slam someone into the ground and knock them prone. It only takes a manuever to get back up. Some can pop up as an incidental.

Are you ******* kidding me with this?

2 minutes ago, Magnus Arcanus said:

First lets actually make sure we are not picking and choosing our quotes here.

I'm not "picking and choosing". You had already mentioned the three advantages in the bit I quoted from your comment. There's no need to repeat things already agreed upon.

2 minutes ago, Magnus Arcanus said:

So forgive me, but I would have to take your comment in its entirety to mean "3 advantages lets you do something you can do on a crit" which is mis-paraphrasing what you can do with 3 advantage.

Try reading comments constructively instead of with a hostile attitude. Zeus Christ.

2 minutes ago, Magnus Arcanus said:

People can debate this endlessly, it doesn't make them right or wrong. My opinion on the matter is you cannot spend advantage or triumph to knock a target prone anymore than you can spend it to stagger a target.

What makes me right is that I can quote where the rules agree with what I'm saying.

And I'm done with you.

2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

How is it unreasonable to slam someone into the ground and knock them prone. It only takes a manuever to get back up. Some can pop up as an incidental.

As noted, you keep conveniently ignoring the Knockdown Talent. Clearly the devs didn't expect 3A or Triumphs to allow it, otherwise they wouldn't have created the Talent, nor bothered to specify it for Brawl weapons. Or, if you allow it, what is your house rule to prevent a player having to pay the cost for that now worthless Talent?

4 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

It always amazes me when people say no to something the devs say is reasonable.

The devs aren't gods. Occasionally they have contradicted themselves. If they meant for weapon Qualities to be used with Move, they should have said so, or allowed damage to be traded for a Quality.

2 minutes ago, whafrog said:

As noted, you keep conveniently ignoring the Knockdown Talent. Clearly the devs didn't expect 3A or Triumphs to allow it, otherwise they wouldn't have created the Talent, nor bothered to specify it for Brawl weapons. Or, if you allow it, what is your house rule to prevent a player having to pay the cost for that now worthless Talent?

The devs aren't gods. Occasionally they have contradicted themselves. If they meant for weapon Qualities to be used with Move, they should have said so, or allowed damage to be traded for a Quality.

Clearly the devs did because THEY have said MULTIPLE times it is reasonable. The talent means you can just do it. The narrative has to be reasonable to do it otherwise

14 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

It always amazes me when people say no to something the devs say is reasonable. How is it unreasonable to slam someone into the ground and knock them prone. It only takes a manuever to get back up. Some can pop up as an incidental.

Why, because the Devs are infallible? Considering I've gotten contradictory answers to the same question I've asked doesn't give me a lot of confidence in their answers, to say nothing of the quality of editing on some of the most recent books (don't get me started on the Charlie Foxtrot that is Ebb and Flow). All in all, I don't assume that just because a Dev answers a players question and says you "can do XYZ" that it is remotely balanced or playtested.

5 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Are you ******* kidding me with this?

I'm not "picking and choosing". You had already mentioned the three advantages in the bit I quoted from your comment. There's no need to repeat things already agreed upon.

Try reading comments constructively instead of with a hostile attitude. Zeus Christ.

What makes me right is that I can quote where the rules agree with what I'm saying.

And I'm done with you.

I never kid. Except when I do. Lighten up Francis.

1 minute ago, Daeglan said:

The talent means you can just don't.

Whuuut?

If you mean what I think you mean, you still haven't explained what the actual value of the Knockdown Talent is.

1 minute ago, whafrog said:

Whuuut?

If you mean what I think you mean, you still haven't explained what the actual value of the Knockdown Talent is.

The value is no negotiation. You just do it. If it fits the narrative spending more advantage to accomplish it is reasonable. Per the devs.

Just now, whafrog said:

Whuuut?

If you mean what I think you mean, you still haven't explained what the actual value of the Knockdown Talent is.

The talent allows you to bend the narrative.

Without it, a player has to justify and negotiate knocking someone over by referencing the agreed-upon fictional situation of the game. There's room for the GM to go "I don't see that happening, sorry".

With the talent, the knockdown effect just happens, and the GM has to accommodate the narrative layer so that it matches up with the mechanical layer of the game.

The talent tells everyone "this character can routinely knock people over, even when the situation wouldn't seem to allow it".

A prime example of something like this is utility belt. Without it it is reasonable to find a blaster at a guard station. With it it is reasonable to pull one out of your utility belt anywhere.

Sorry guys, that's a ridiculous rationalization. You're basically saying you can do this with any Talent that otherwise requires a narrative die result investment. Parry? Reflect? Any others you'd like to neuter while you're at it?

7 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Without it it is reasonable to find a blaster at a guard station. With it it is reasonable to pull one out of your utility belt anywhere.

I would never allow someone to just "find" a blaster in their utility belt. There's "cinematic", and there's "cartoon", and I'd rather not play a cartoon.

Just now, whafrog said:

Parry? Reflect? Any others you'd like to neuter while you're at it?

Where in the Advantage/Threat tables are effects very similar to Parry and Reflect?

6 hours ago, Magnus Arcanus said:

I am not sure where you are finding this anywhere in the rules. You cannot spend three advantages to activate a 'temporary' critical hit, and effectively 'select' what that critical hit is. You can't even do this on an triumph.

5 hours ago, whafrog said:

As noted, you are not correct about this. I checked both EotE and F&D. Besides, I f it were true they'd have to revise the melee talent.

There is another concern with just piling on ad hoc weapon Qualities to Move, which is that it makes it even more potent. It's already in the blaster rifle range at 2 pips with a single Strength upgrade, it's a missile and massive explosives beyond that, and gives Autofire if you use 3 pips. I toned it down and added Qualities as a way to replace the damage with tactical options, instead of just throwing everything into the kitchen sink.

On the GM screen the closest thing to this is "have the attack disable the target or one piece of gear *rather* than dealing wounds or strain." this is under result options which refers to page 212 in the F&D core book. It goes on to say "This could include hobbling him temporarily with a shot to the leg, or causing him to drop his blaster. This should be agreed upon by the player and the GM, and the effects are up to the GM (although table 6-10: Critical hit injury result is a good resource to consult for possible effects. The effects should be temporary and not too excessive." Knockdown seems to fall into 'temporary disability'. Whatever use the crit table is, it's temporary.

6 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Where in the Advantage/Threat tables are effects very similar to Parry and Reflect?

Where is Knockdown?

Sheesh. I'm going to bow out, we're simply not going to agree. All the OP wanted was a Force Push, he can either:

• use the existing Move power with narrative flair and use the dev's over-powered suggestion on an over-powered power,
• trade damage for some kind of weapon quality like Knockdown
• trade more damage for actual movement of the target to a new range band

5 minutes ago, ASCI Blue said:

Knockdown seems to fall into 'temporary disability'.

Like the others, you're not addressing the purpose or value of the Knockdown Talent. But I'm done, knock (down) yourselves out

Edit: one last thought: would you allow Knockdown with a blaster rifle? If not, why not?