So, if I have a light saber with burn and I have linked..or hawk bat swoop plus saber swarm do I get burn x 2 or burn just go off once. Single LS btw.

Anyone...Anyone....Bueller?

I would say the laws of common sense apply here. You can only set fire to someone once, the intensity is set by the damage, the duration is established by the duration. Triggering burn again would most likely reset the counter rather then trigger it twice.

Otherwise you enter very dangerous territory where you are effectively hitting a target 4 times; two of which tanked by soak and I feel that kinda runs counter to the vibe of the setting. If I was your GM, burn would only apply once.

Generally, when you impose a condition on a character that they are already suffering from in this setting, the condition doesn't stack with itself, but instead you increase the duration.

So if you had Burn 2 and Linked 3, you could theoretically spend 10 Advantage (if you can somehow roll it) to activate Burn three times and make them Burn for 6 rounds.

However, at that point, is there any benefit? You hit them three times; surely three hits and three crits is better? Or three hits, one Burn, and two crits? Or some other effect for those insane 10 Advantage?

6 minutes ago, Absol197 said:

Generally, when you impose a condition on a character that they are already suffering from in this setting, the condition doesn't stack with itself, but instead you increase the duration.

So if you had Burn 2 and Linked 3, you could theoretically spend 10 Advantage (if you can somehow roll it) to activate Burn three times and make them Burn for 6 rounds.

However, at that point, is there any benefit? You hit them three times; surely three hits and three crits is better? Or three hits, one Burn, and two crits? Or some other effect for those insane 10 Advantage?

Well if the GM's pet monster is Crit Immune, Burns can be a valid way of getting damage in.

If I remember correctly burn goes through soak, so it's good against high armor targets? Unless I'm mistaken.

10 minutes ago, Shlambate said:

Well if the GM's pet monster is Crit Immune, Burns can be a valid way of getting damage in.

If I remember correctly burn goes through soak, so it's good against high armor targets? Unless I'm mistaken.

No, by itself Burn does not ignore Soak. However, it may take on any Soak-bypassing qualities of the weapon that inflicted it, I can't recall. I don't think it does, though.

Yeah Burn doesn't ignore soak on its own. I don't know if it's just common sense or a good houserule regarding Burn ignoring Soak if the weapon that inflicted it does so. Pretty sure it still goes through Soak. It's one of the reasons the "Unleash" power seems a bit weak for "shooting lightning from your fingertips".

Seeing as how Blast (active weapon quality) can benefit if the weapon has Pierce or Breach (both passive weapon qualities), my take as a GM would be to say that Burn (also an active weapon quality) would also gain the perks of Pierce or Breach.

Burn would benefit from Pierce/Breach. I agree with a lightsaber stacking a bunch of effects when you could just whack someone over the head with a super owie crit doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense. Plus Burn can be nerfed pretty easily by a target with the loss of an Action. Sometimes, depending on location, most places are going to have fire/hazmat suppression systems already, and those systems won't care if it's a utility junction or your ***, they'll go to work imo.

It seems logical that burn would ignore pierce or breach. You've made a hole in the armor with the breach effect, now the fire can get in and cook the meaty filling.