Hey folks, Ive been running my first campaign as a GM (and first with the narrative dice system). Mostly EotE characters with one from FaD. The PC have basically got to a point where they are likely to be hunting down the villainous mastermind (a junior imperial inquisitor who has gone rogue and started up their own brainwashing/kidnapping cult). The confrontation will likely be in the next 1-3 at most sessions of about 3 hours each.

Since this will be the culmination of the campaign so far, I'd quite like it to go well, so any advice on how to make it a memorable experience will certainly be appreciated!

What i am concerned about is the possibility of loot after the battle. I know the books say you should try to wean players off the "loot corpse" mentality, this has partially stuck, but when the dead bounty hunter has a cool (X) they find it hard to resist. Anyway, I am a little concerned that when our heroes defeat this villain, they are gonna want her lightsaber and whatever cool stuff she is equipped with.

The FaD character is a rather tanky knight who already has a lightsaber: I am a little concerned he will want two, which given his one lightaber is already the fanciest piece of kit in the party may not be good for team balance, and would certainly make it hard for me to balance encounters in future.

At the same time, no loot at all may feel that I am stiffing the players, especially if done in a contrived way.

I have considered that they are likely to seek rebel assistance in attacking the cult hideout; given its early days, they will probably want the war material to boost their own position in the area, and this could mean they are limited in what they take. Another possibility is that the local moff, who has been quietly gunning for this rogue inquisitor, turns up near the end of the battle, either to deal with the renegade himself or because he got wind of a rebel operation going on, forcing a scramble to escape: This again may feel a cop out, and may not help with a PC saying that they want to make a quick grab for a saber? I could spend a fate point, but if near the end of a session as its likely to be at that point with no consequences for me not using it, is that a cop out?

Should I just not worry about it too much? Whilst a lightsaber can be a big deal, If the party has one already is another really gonna break the game? That said, if only one character has the lightsaber skill, would that be an issue?

If you really don't want them to get the Big Bad's lightsaber, give it the gene lock attachment. If they manage to grab it, so be it...they still can't use it.

That sounds like an idea; can you tell me where it is so i can read up on it? can it be bypassed by an enterprising mechanic for example?

It's on page 51 of Dangerous Covenants . The primary mod says "Weapon functions only in the hands of its authorized user." It has a an optional self destruct mod, "Inflicts one critical hit if unauthorized user tries to use locked weapon. Weapon is destroyed."

The moment they touch the lightsaber the Gene Lock will destroy it and make it useless, the mod is perfect for restricting what items become loot and what items don't. As far as I know there isn't a way to spot the Gene lock mod but I could be wrong.

I wouldn't worry about it. It's easy to challenge PCs I think. I don't typically sweat gear anymore.

I also think genelocks are cheese **** personally. I think a hidden homing beacon that activates on death and places an automatic bounty for the assassination of the current owner is a much cooler idea.

16 minutes ago, TheJokerOfSocal said:

The moment they touch the lightsaber the Gene Lock will destroy it and make it useless, the mod is perfect for restricting what items become loot and what items don't. As far as I know there isn't a way to spot the Gene lock mod but I could be wrong.

Nah, the fluff specifically calls out that it only applies to technological aspects of a weapon. (Example given is that a vibroknife can be used as a regular knife.) So, they can pick up the lightsaber, but can't use it. And it's only destroyed if the optional mod is added in.

4 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Nah, the fluff specifically calls out that it only applies to technological aspects of a weapon. (Example given is that a vibroknife can be used as a regular knife.) So, they can pick up the lightsaber, but can't use it. And it's only destroyed if the optional mod is added in.

The only time I use the Gene lock is for restricting which weapons become loot for my players so I usually flick that optional mod on since it's an NPC weapon, but that's because I'll set some NPCs (major boss ones) in my campaign with 2 weapons, one that's a solid weapon, and one I design to be super scary but one time use to put the party on the edge of their seats.

There's also the personalized design option and customized grip mod. The first gives the designer (npc) an automatic success but everyone else an automatic threat. Customized grip removes a setback for the designer but adds 2 to everyone else.

I don't see a problem with the group having a lightsaber.

Give the inquisitor a standard lightsaber. ****, even put an un-moddable basic Illum crystal. You can even call it a synthetic inquisitor's crystal, and chalk the un-moddable part to Vader/Palps not wanting their inquisitors to get too big for their britches.

However, if it really is a concern for you, there is a better and less cheesy solution than gene lock (I really suggest avoiding the Genelock). Upon the inquisitors's near death (the players won't know how many wounds the NPC has), the inquisitor could enact a self-destruction protocol on the facility. Something like "If I'm to die here today, then I'm taking you with me" sort of thing. Something like that would force the characters to decide whether they should stick around and finish him/her off, or run for it.

You've all suggested some handy ideas, so thanks for those folks!

Given that I suspect they will be getting help from the rebels, and the local moff has already expressed an interest in seeing the rogue inquisitor dealt with, I can see the inquisitor taking the spiteful route if it looks like the facility is going to be captured, especially as she has tried to cover her tracks before.

kaosoe, I am a little concerned as the force user character already has a lightsaber and its easily one of the nastier things in the group; his character is already noticeably more tanky and lethal than the two smugglers of the party, and I don't want the power difference between players to get too out of hand, as i am concerned that in order to provide his character a challenge the smugglers might find the situation a it too lethal. At the same time, it would be nice to give some kind of decent reward for victory.

How big of an issue is power differences between PCs for folks by the way? As it stands, the less combat oriented members of the party are certainly able to contribute ATM, but I am a little concerned that if the FaD PC continues to focus on combat skills when the other PCs get both combat and non combat skills, that it may distort things a bit on both directions. There was one part of a session in which the players very much had to rely on non combat/social skills, and the FaD PC was only really able to contribute by taking on obligation.

You could have the final battle move to some kind of unstable or dangerous terrain... Like a series of hand rail-less walkways over a chasm full of lava, that way when the bad guy finally dies , he and his equipment go over the edge of the abyss. Cinematic and exciting environment for the end battle and it solves your loot problem, plus these locations are established as a canonical battlegrounds.

Also if you are worried about character skill and talent disparity put characters in non combat situations that require different skill sets, as well as combat, highlight that rounded characters require a mix of skills and talents to exist rather than being a 2 dimensional 1 trick pony.

1 hour ago, Elgis said:

kaosoe, I am a little concerned as the force user character already has a lightsaber and its easily one of the nastier things in the group; his character is already noticeably more tanky and lethal than the two smugglers of the party, and I don't want the power difference between players to get too out of hand, as i am concerned that in order to provide his character a challenge the smugglers might find the situation a it too lethal. At the same time, it would be nice to give some kind of decent reward for victory.

So are you concerned about the player using two lightsabers at once? There's a drawback to that as well.

More concerned that he is going to run away from the rest of the party in terms of combat power

57 minutes ago, Elgis said:

More concerned that he is going to run away from the rest of the party in terms of combat power

Don't worry about that, I have a mixed party of combat monsters and very weak combat tech/charm characters. Just add mixed mobs to tailor the power of the combats if need be, players know their roles well enough, after all they build them that way.

Don't forget there is more to combat than just swords and guns.

One of the players in my group picked up on the animosity between two Hutts lieutenants, his character charmed one of them, convincing him that the other lieutenant was skimming creds from the hutt and blaming him for it, Combat and hilarity ensued half of the things were killed by their compatriots without s single shot fired by the PCs. TBH I did NOT see that coming but its great when your players roleplay the h**l out of something and the situation grows organically ?

That hutt episode sounds interesting, and I may have to borrow that idea going forward!

I do try to add a mixture of very weak and strong enemies, as much because it would be weird if the low level storm troopers or thugs just mysteriously stopped turning up, but also because the minion group rule means they can still be somewhat relevant.

2 hours ago, Elgis said:

More concerned that he is going to run away from the rest of the party in terms of combat power

Jetpacks. Once the flying baddies show up the melee crowd gets a frowny sad face............ ☹️

11 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

Jetpacks. Once the flying baddies show up the melee crowd gets a frowny sad face............ ☹️

Thats what destiny points are used for, even those odds, fly PCs are a pain in the butt too ?

On 5/23/2018 at 3:37 AM, Nytwyng said:

If you really don't want them to get the Big Bad's lightsaber, give it the gene lock attachment. If they manage to grab it, so be it...they still can't use it.

Removing attachments is easy. Not during a fight, but afterwards.

7 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

Removing attachments is easy. Not during a fight, but afterwards.

It’s as hard or easy as the GM wants it to be. ?

26 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

It’s as hard or easy as the GM wants it to be. ?

It's called GM fiat for more than one reason imho. ?
Ones you start to make to many arbitrary decisions as GM players will stop thrusting you. And thrust is basically the currency in which GMs deal.

So the better the explanation as GM, the more stable your GM Fiat. ?

And as hard or easy as the GM wants ... even an impossible check can become basically a 70/30 for the players. Denying any check at the other hand usually leaves a sour taste. And begs the question why the villain secured his lightsaber that way. Downright destroying the thing instead seems to be a safer bet.

Gear doesn't make or break games. If they get a lightsaber, they get a lightsaber. If there's a narrative reason that you don't want them to get something, don't introduce it in the encounter. It's as simple as that.

Narratively speaking, lightsabers are big "please arrest me/kill me" messages to the Empire and the Inquisitorious.

8 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

It's called GM fiat for more than one reason imho. ?
Ones you start to make to many arbitrary decisions as GM players will stop thrusting you. And thrust is basically the currency in which GMs deal.

So the better the explanation as GM, the more stable your GM Fiat. ?

And as hard or easy as the GM wants ... even an impossible check can become basically a 70/30 for the players. Denying any check at the other hand usually leaves a sour taste. And begs the question why the villain t secured his lightsaber that way. Downright destroying the thing instead seems to be a safer bet.

All fair points.

In the case of removing an attachment like the gene lock - one specifically designed to prevent anyone else from using the weapon - I would certainly make it a pretty difficult check, including setback. After all, given the nature of the attachmment, trying to remove it might be considered an attempt to “use” the weapon. And if that self destruct mod is on there, too...that might mean kaboom.

If my players did think of trying to remove it and succeeded in doing so, then my reservations about them having the saber would have to be mine to work with as GM.

For what it’s worth, in my campaign that’s set 250 years after RotJ, I’ve got a player (character is a clone trooper who’s been in carbonite from the Clone Wars until the other players freed him in his first session) who’s wanting a lightsaber. He found one in an ancient Jedi ruin, but it didn’t work. He picked up another from a defeated dark sider last session, but it had the gene lock.

I won’t say much more since he reads the boards ? , but while I’m not opposed to him getting and learning to use a lightsaber, it’s not going to be easy for him. Repairs/rebuilding as he gathers parts are gonna be tough, since he’s not Force sensitive.

(And...I clearly use the word “Force” in a Star Wars context a lot. My phone just auto-capitalized the word. ? )

So, how I’d manage trying to remove the gene lock from the saber:

Formidible as base, so difficulty 5. One upgrade for the gene lock’s nature (even successfully removing it without the proper genetic code may cause damage to the saber). Another upgrade if the self destruct mod is installed (trying to remove it may result in self destruct). One setback if the character is not familiar with lightsaber construction. One setback if the character is not Force sensitive (since we saw on Clone Wars that much of the assembly is done using the Force).

So, potentially a pool of 2 red, 3 purple, and 2 black.

Seems pretty fair to me. Heir to the Jedi showed a (still inexperienced) Luke disassembling a lightsaber that he’d obtained to get an idea for how they work...and rendering it completely useless and unable to be reassembled once he did.