I have found that of the games I have played, I prefer games that are open in allowing for attempts to do something without the Feat, Talent, Class if the situation is right. Do you play this game as an open system where you can attempt things or things might happen outside of the specifically designated, or do you prefer to have characters without those abilities unable to somewhat experience the same effects if it's in context.

Example: Quick Draw

Question: Would you ever let a character draw an easily accessible weapon as an incidental if they did not have this Talent?

Or other Talent effects? If not, why? I'm very interested in how people do things in their games and I like to try new ways of doing things so please don't be offended by this I am just curious.

11 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Example: Quick Draw

Question: Would you ever let a character draw an easily accessible weapon as an incidental if they did not have this Talent?

In this case, I wouldn't. That's just devalues those, who paid for that talent. Otherwise, I love this system for the open skills, since you don't have to buy skills to use them, you can work from your characteristics, even if they aren't that impressive.

25 minutes ago, Rimsen said:

In this case, I wouldn't. That's just devalues those, who paid for that talent. Otherwise, I love this system for the open skills, since you don't have to buy skills to use them, you can work from your characteristics, even if they aren't that impressive.

I love that too, it was one of the things I liked about it immediately.

In most cases, I find that the framework of rules are comprehensive enough to allow player characters to attempt to do anything. The Talents, if they crossover, typically only adjust the rules around the action (to make it easier) or enhance the outcome. So I don't really have an issue and don't see them as conflicting.

The only time I have run up against Talents in this manner is if I have a knowledge gap and adjudicate something at the table using common sense and realised later that I have overlapped with a the effects of a Talent. But this is not a long term problem as I will usually look up a thing I didn't know after the session and try to remember it going forward.

In those instances, I value maintaining momentum over accuracy.

I generally discourage players from attempting something covered by a talent (like Quickdraw), but I do agree that attempting to do something shouldn't by necessity be restricted simply because a talent covers the same situation. An example is bribery: The Entrepreneur has a talent that lets you bribe, but bribery itself shouldn't be restricted to just people what the talent! In cases like these, I simply make using the non-talent version of an action harder somehow. I think that the bribery talent lets it auto-succeed, so I'd require someone without that talent to roll an influence skill instead, modified by the size of the bribe. I might even allow a player with a holstered blaster to try to quickdraw and shoot, but that's something that might require at least a few Advantage to pull off, the same amount you'd need to get an extra maneuver on your turn (since taking out a weapon is a maneuver).

One of my PCs is a Performer, with Jump-Up accessible with an expenditure of 10xp. At a thematically appropriate moment (3 Threat, fell prone), I requested to "commit" my next 10xp to the talent (GM approved).

In a situation like this where it can occur organically, borrowing against future XP, I don't think it is unbalancing.

1 hour ago, Edgehawk said:

In a situation like this where it can occur organically, borrowing against future XP, I don't think it is unbalancing.

In Keeping the Peace, the Guardian sourcebook, there's actually a set of rules for "learning as you go". I allow all my players to borrow against future xp for a single talent/skill rank/upgrade as long as they can pay for it at the end of the game session. I have one player who uses this religiously.

For me, typically if you want to do something that calls for a talent, you need the talent.

However...

Case-by-case I might allow a D-point flip to allow it. This is usually for pretty minor talents that just happen, nothing that requires special circumstances or resources. Occasionally I'd be OK with something that may also require a Despair or something provided you also have that, but don't expect that to happen more than once or twice in a campaign.

Narratively there's no restriction on what you can do, it's jus the details of what and how that may be colored by a talent, or lack thereof. So like if you don't have Improved Reflect, but I decide that a Rival/Minion's attack that generated threat will inflict a few points of Strain (which are converted to wounds in this case), I have typically no problems with you saying you reflected some of their shots back at them. Your doing so was more luck than skill, and the mechanical effects don't change, but yay for cool. Someone who has Improved Reflect on the other hand can do that move more effectively and it "works every time."

2 hours ago, Ghostofman said:

For me, typically if you want to do something that calls for a talent, you need the talent.

However...

Case-by-case I might allow a D-point flip to allow it. This is usually for pretty minor talents that just happen, nothing that requires special circumstances or resources. Occasionally I'd be OK with something that may also require a Despair or something provided you also have that, but don't expect that to happen more than once or twice in a campaign.

Narratively there's no restriction on what you can do, it's jus the details of what and how that may be colored by a talent, or lack thereof. So like if you don't have Improved Reflect, but I decide that a Rival/Minion's attack that generated threat will inflict a few points of Strain (which are converted to wounds in this case), I have typically no problems with you saying you reflected some of their shots back at them. Your doing so was more luck than skill, and the mechanical effects don't change, but yay for cool. Someone who has Improved Reflect on the other hand can do that move more effectively and it "works every time."

Yeah I left out Force Talents and Force Powers on purpose but for a Force Sensitive character with a lightsaber I would allow reflect without the talent under the right circumstances, but I wouldn't let a non-force sensitive reflect under almost any circumstances. I guess I have a hard line of exclusion when it comes to the Force. Didn't realize that before.

4 hours ago, GroggyGolem said:

In Keeping the Peace, the Guardian sourcebook, there's actually a set of rules for "learning as you go". I allow all my players to borrow against future xp for a single talent/skill rank/upgrade as long as they can pay for it at the end of the game session. I have one player who uses this religiously.

I need to check that out. Thanks Golem!

6 hours ago, SavageBob said:

I generally discourage players from attempting something covered by a talent (like Quickdraw), but I do agree that attempting to do something shouldn't by necessity be restricted simply because a talent covers the same situation. An example is bribery: The Entrepreneur has a talent that lets you bribe, but bribery itself shouldn't be restricted to just people what the talent! In cases like these, I simply make using the non-talent version of an action harder somehow. I think that the bribery talent lets it auto-succeed, so I'd require someone without that talent to roll an influence skill instead, modified by the size of the bribe. I might even allow a player with a holstered blaster to try to quickdraw and shoot, but that's something that might require at least a few Advantage to pull off, the same amount you'd need to get an extra maneuver on your turn (since taking out a weapon is a maneuver).

Yeah it seems to me that buying a Talent means that the character can do this thing with some facility, whereas other people don't have that experience or knowledge or whatever to do it all the time. But I don't like the idea that the regular talents are somehow magically forbidden to everyone else under all circumstances.

25 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

I need to check that out. Thanks Golem!

Np. I play more loosely with the learn as you go rules for my table.

As far as allowing things to be attempted if the player wants to try it, yeah. It'll just be more difficult than the talent or cost more strain than it normally would. I'd allow it for most circumstances but in some cases it wouldn't make sense.

51 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

I need to check that out. Thanks Golem!

You may also want to check out Forged in Battle. There's an option there where when you take a Crit you can opt to also get a "Battle Scar" and buy an appropriate talent that matches, even if it's not on your tree. XP cost is based on severity of the injury, and it suggests which injuries might match which talents.

So while not quite the same thing, I do think it's kinda cool how todays' "Bleeding out" might translate into tomorrow's "Dodge"

1 minute ago, Ghostofman said:

You may also want to check out Forged in Battle. There's an option there where when you take a Crit you can opt to also get a "Battle Scar" and buy an appropriate talent that matches, even if it's not on your tree. XP cost is based on severity of the injury, and it suggests which injuries might match which talents.

So while not quite the same thing, I do think it's kinda cool how todays' "Bleeding out" might translate into tomorrow's "Dodge"

I have that book! Ok cool I read through that once but it obviously hasn't stuck. Thanks Ghost

On 9/19/2018 at 1:01 AM, Archlyte said:

Example: Quick Draw

Question: Would you ever let a character draw an easily accessible weapon as an incidental if they did not have this Talent?

For this particular example, I would allow it. The easiest way is to spend advantage for a free maneuver (but, remember he can't do more than 2 maneuvers in on round).

Other ways could include a couple of setbacks, auto-threats or increase difficulty. You could also consider using Willpower or Presence instead of Agility for the combat check.

Depends really.

In the quickdraw situation; no. There are some weapon mods that grant quickdraw to particular item. As far as I understand that includes sawed off sights, integrated holsters and so fourth. So in regards to that particular talent that is a standard mechanic. No, if you care enough about a concept to want to be able to draw a gun quickly then the character has more then enough avenues to invest or have a mighty fine cool/vig score. Likewise I wouldn't allow jump up; if you don't have it, you can't do it in structured combat. When it comes to more narrative situations I would be less strict on those rules (I wouldn't allow someone being prone to be unable to escape, though an awkward position might put setback dice onto it.)

There are some more exotic talents that I might allow occasionally. For example, I might allow particular talents that aren't expected to see much mileage in the group. Talents that the player might have access to this session I would allow if the narrative fit the situation.

By the way, Greased palms allows a talker to invest 50 credits per skill rank to buy skill ranks for a check. So one can have 5 skill ranks in any social checks provided the character has a way of either interacting with information brokers or providing gift to the target. Pretty much is the talent that allows them to preform reasonably brilliant at any social check.

50 minutes ago, LordBritish said:

Depends really.

In the quickdraw situation; no. There are some weapon mods that grant quickdraw to particular item. As far as I understand that includes sawed off sights, integrated holsters and so fourth. So in regards to that particular talent that is a standard mechanic. No, if you care enough about a concept to want to be able to draw a gun quickly then the character has more then enough avenues to invest or have a mighty fine cool/vig score. Likewise I wouldn't allow jump up; if you don't have it, you can't do it in structured combat. When it comes to more narrative situations I would be less strict on those rules (I wouldn't allow someone being prone to be unable to escape, though an awkward position might put setback dice onto it.)

There are some more exotic talents that I might allow occasionally. For example, I might allow particular talents that aren't expected to see much mileage in the group. Talents that the player might have access to this session I would allow if the narrative fit the situation.

By the way, Greased palms allows a talker to invest 50 credits per skill rank to buy skill ranks for a check. So one can have 5 skill ranks in any social checks provided the character has a way of either interacting with information brokers or providing gift to the target. Pretty much is the talent that allows them to preform reasonably brilliant at any social check.

Thanks for the response. I too noted that some mods could give that ability. Imagine a character who is a Hired Gun Bodyguard and he is guarding an attractive senator from Corellia and is expecting trouble. The player is describing how he has his hand ready to unholster his blaster pistol should anything seem amiss. The group gets an amazing roll for an initiative slot when 3 robed men at the side of the room pull carbines from their voluminous robes.

Would that instance be a possible time when the Bodyguard gets to draw as an incidental?

Also did the character who doesn't have quick draw at creation but picks up a new specialty which has it never achieve that effect before in his life? Is it actually physically impossible for those who do not have the Talent box?

5 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Thanks for the response. I too noted that some mods could give that ability. Imagine a character who is a Hired Gun Bodyguard and he is guarding an attractive senator from Corellia and is expecting trouble. The player is describing how he has his hand ready to unholster his blaster pistol should anything seem amiss. The group gets an amazing roll for an initiative slot when 3 robed men at the side of the room pull carbines from their voluminous robes.

Would that instance be a possible time when the Bodyguard gets to draw as an incidental?

Also did the character who doesn't have quick draw at creation but picks up a new specialty which has it never achieve that effect before in his life? Is it actually physically impossible for those who do not have the Talent box?

It's assumed that the character is generally trying their best to do something throughout their actions. A body guard will be looking out for their senator and basically be in a higher state of alertness, but they still have to keep a low profile and might not be the fastest gun on the block; but a reliable piece. Quick draw here wouldn't allow him to do anything he usually wouldn't, aside from having a free range of movement thus I wouldn't allow him to use that talent under any circumstances. If he wants it, he must pay for it, either by modifying equipment or taking a talent to enable it. In short, I wouldn't reward a player for just doing their job description.

However, that does not mean he can't find other ways to get the blaster in his hand.

Lets visit the situation from two perspectives.

The party rolls initive. Because the bodyguard is standing next to the person he is protecting, he can act first.

"Alright, seeing the immediate danger I say "Senator, get down!" I draw my blaster using my first menvourer and open fire (rolls attack roll) "Success? Awesome, you gun the first shadow down, the other two scatter for position/The pistol snags in the belt as you draw it, you fire a second too late as they get a optimal firing position; your first shots go overhead" "Right, I take 2 strain and some to activate bodyguard, I put myself between the Senator and them to make shooting her more difficult."

That's the first and simple perspective. The only issue is the body guard is burning through strain like crazy. The other is that they would have to make a choice of either drawing the weapon or getting engaged with the charge, to employ their talent. It might lead to some hard decisions, but sometimes not everything goes in our favour.

The other is if the bodyguard is aware of the attackers before they strike though, you can engage in a bit of roleplay to raise the tension at the table, to give him what he wants but at greater risk.

"You see rifles under the table, they don't seem to be aware of you as they begin to prepare themselves, but you know from the occasional glance that they are staking you out."

"****. It would be bad if I got caught in a quickdrawing contest. Anything I can do to prepare? I am going to start drawing my blaster under the table so I am ready."

"Alrighty then. Make a skulduggery check to avoid notice, if you succeed you draw the blaster without tipping them off; if you are unsuccessful they are tipped off and act before you can complete the motion."

"Right *rolls* I'm successful! But with despair?"

"You draw it so you do not have to draw the blaster in the first round of combat., but that senator you are protecting puts a stern hand on your blaster, "What are you doing?!, you manage to successfully draw it but the gunmen know your intent and your charge is being difficult; upgrade your next check by 1."

Thing is, I wouldn't give them a flat reward for doing something that they could buy or easily source. Roleplaying should be all about prioritisation after all.

1 hour ago, Archlyte said:

Thanks for the response. I too noted that some mods could give that ability. Imagine a character who is a Hired Gun Bodyguard and he is guarding an attractive senator from Corellia and is expecting trouble. The player is describing how he has his hand ready to unholster his blaster pistol should anything seem amiss. The group gets an amazing roll for an initiative slot when 3 robed men at the side of the room pull carbines from their voluminous robes.

Would that instance be a possible time when the Bodyguard gets to draw as an incidental?

Also did the character who doesn't have quick draw at creation but picks up a new specialty which has it never achieve that effect before in his life? Is it actually physically impossible for those who do not have the Talent box?

We tend to allow a free manouver prior to the encounter start on a triumph on the initiative check. That could be to draw the weapon. Of course, with Quickdraw they could be doing something else instead.

On 9/18/2018 at 10:01 PM, Archlyte said:

Example: Quick Draw

Question: Would you ever let a character draw an easily accessible weapon as an incidental if they did not have this Talent?

No. There's a Talent. Goes to the heart of what Talents are which is the real world applications of Skills and tricks learned through application, also called "experience".

20 hours ago, LordBritish said:

It's assumed that the character is generally trying their best to do something throughout their actions. A body guard will be looking out for their senator and basically be in a higher state of alertness, but they still have to keep a low profile and might not be the fastest gun on the block; but a reliable piece. Quick draw here wouldn't allow him to do anything he usually wouldn't, aside from having a free range of movement thus I wouldn't allow him to use that talent under any circumstances. If he wants it, he must pay for it, either by modifying equipment or taking a talent to enable it. In short, I wouldn't reward a player for just doing their job description.

However, that does not mean he can't find other ways to get the blaster in his hand.

Lets visit the situation from two perspectives.

The party rolls initive. Because the bodyguard is standing next to the person he is protecting, he can act first.

"Alright, seeing the immediate danger I say "Senator, get down!" I draw my blaster using my first menvourer and open fire (rolls attack roll) "Success? Awesome, you gun the first shadow down, the other two scatter for position/The pistol snags in the belt as you draw it, you fire a second too late as they get a optimal firing position; your first shots go overhead" "Right, I take 2 strain and some to activate bodyguard, I put myself between the Senator and them to make shooting her more difficult."

That's the first and simple perspective. The only issue is the body guard is burning through strain like crazy. The other is that they would have to make a choice of either drawing the weapon or getting engaged with the charge, to employ their talent. It might lead to some hard decisions, but sometimes not everything goes in our favour.

The other is if the bodyguard is aware of the attackers before they strike though, you can engage in a bit of roleplay to raise the tension at the table, to give him what he wants but at greater risk.

"You see rifles under the table, they don't seem to be aware of you as they begin to prepare themselves, but you know from the occasional glance that they are staking you out."

"****. It would be bad if I got caught in a quickdrawing contest. Anything I can do to prepare? I am going to start drawing my blaster under the table so I am ready."

"Alrighty then. Make a skulduggery check to avoid notice, if you succeed you draw the blaster without tipping them off; if you are unsuccessful they are tipped off and act before you can complete the motion."

"Right *rolls* I'm successful! But with despair?"

"You draw it so you do not have to draw the blaster in the first round of combat., but that senator you are protecting puts a stern hand on your blaster, "What are you doing?!, you manage to successfully draw it but the gunmen know your intent and your charge is being difficult; upgrade your next check by 1."

Thing is, I wouldn't give them a flat reward for doing something that they could buy or easily source. Roleplaying should be all about prioritisation after all.

Thanks for the in-depth response I enjoyed reading it and I think you make great points.

Well you bring up the problem of Paying for the Power, which I would agree is necessary if the character is going to be able to do it with any regularity, and perhaps a Destiny Point would be enough pay for you, but maybe not. But then again, what is this idea of Paying all about? Most people seem to give XP in this game every session with something like 15-25 points being average. Many people feel that the XP in this game isn't even tied to the experience of the characters but is actually just a mechanism to be used to have a schedule of advancement. The characters are supposed to get more powers as the game goes on, so If a Player makes a Bounty Hunter Gadgeteer he will get Dedication at some point. This game is about career planning, like in a video game. Given the low lethality of the system it is likely that our BH will hit Dedication for sure, and I think that box is aptly named because what it represents more than anything is playing the character until that box is reached. So did the Player/Character really earn anything? My suggestion is that the only trade off is the direction you go, because the advancement nearly assured and not a very big achievement at all. Giving permanent 100% available Talents based on XP disconnected form anything done in play seems like a meta participation award used to guarantee power climb on the graph. In reality this means that the GM is basically saying "Yes you can get that box now," based on the convention of this game's guaranteed meta advancement schedule. It seems to me just as ok to say "Yes you can draw that gun as an incidental" maybe even for something they described or did that was situationally appropriate for that action.

I think it is definitely easy to make a case for exclusion, but I also think that you can just as easily narrate that bodyguard having a moment of lightning reflexes even if he normally does not demonstrate such ability. People can do extraordinary things under extraordinary circumstances, so narratively it can easily make sense for someone t demonstrate some weird ability in a fluke that they might never otherwise. I definitely see the point of such exclusions when it comes to The Force/Magic where the effort is extra-physical in nature. But for something that a person can do regularly if they have the talent I feel like it makes sense that someone else could attempt that under the right circumstances.

I think keeping these things only for the characters who actually have the ability is a brain-energy saver that uses the game conventions to keep order. But if you are able to provide objective oversight to the narrative, and with the help of the players, you can open up such possibilities without disaster. The idea that only a guy with Quick Draw can do this makes it some sort of hyper-tuned ability. I knew an actual trick shooter in real life and he was a pretty ordinary (and slightly overweight) older guy whom I saw act in other fighting situations (we both worked in a facility where you had to physically stop people from hurting us and them) and he wasn't Spiderman. But he could pull that revolver lightning fast. He was teaching me to do it and I couldn't do it regularly, but twice I got a draw that he said was quite fast, and more times than that the weapon ended up on the floor when I lost control of it lol.

Anyway, my point is that yes, there are things you won't be able to do, but the story might benefit if there is some flexibility to this.

19 hours ago, 2P51 said:

No. There's a Talent. Goes to the heart of what Talents are which is the real world applications of Skills and tricks learned through application, also called "experience".

Yeah but 2P in another thread we established that most people don't tie XP to experience in this game. Couldn't experience be also described as what the character has done throughout the lifespan of the character and in extraordinary moments?

Are you sure you don't just want to ditch the game part of this RPG? Because a lot of your peeves seem to come down to skills, talents, experience, players and dice results. So just getting rid of all of those parts in favour of your narrative might be helpful. That way you can make sure nothing gets in between your narrative and the Star Wars feeling you're after. In fact, just collaboratively (or not, after all sometimes they have other ideas) pre-write the dialogue and actions of the players as well, that way they can't deviate from the Star Wars feel. If you make the sessions last tops 2 hours then it will also feel more like the movies, since the important stuff can happen in that time frame and the nitty gritty parts of life won't interfere. You can also get rid of the players desires to improve their gear, since there isn't really a need because they're only as effective as the players descriptions of what they do. And the only times they can improve their skills, which isn't really important because they just succeed if they describe their actions well enough and it fits the story, is between sessions or with a training montage.

Hopefully this suggestion helps you grasp that nostalgic feeling of Star WarsTM that you have been chasing.

10 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Yeah but 2P in another thread we established that most people don't tie XP to experience in this game. Couldn't experience be also described as what the character has done throughout the lifespan of the character and in extraordinary moments?

I couldn't care less what was established in another thread. It's semantics and rationalization for cheating. Characters and what they can mechanically do begins at CHARGEN, not when a zygote is formed. The background is fluff and narrative, not mechanics.

4 hours ago, Darth Revenant said:

Are you sure you don't just want to ditch the game part of this RPG? Because a lot of your peeves seem to come down to skills, talents, experience, players and dice results. So just getting rid of all of those parts in favour of your narrative might be helpful. That way you can make sure nothing gets in between your narrative and the Star Wars feeling you're after. In fact, just collaboratively (or not, after all sometimes they have other ideas) pre-write the dialogue and actions of the players as well, that way they can't deviate from the Star Wars feel. If you make the sessions last tops 2 hours then it will also feel more like the movies, since the important stuff can happen in that time frame and the nitty gritty parts of life won't interfere. You can also get rid of the players desires to improve their gear, since there isn't really a need because they're only as effective as the players descriptions of what they do. And the only times they can improve their skills, which isn't really important because they just succeed if they describe their actions well enough and it fits the story, is between sessions or with a training montage.

Hopefully this suggestion helps you grasp that nostalgic feeling of Star WarsTM that you have been chasing.

I appreciate the effort but maybe if you could point out to me how you got the idea that I want to narrate everything and not use any of the rules in the game that would be great. Also if you can maybe explain why my thread was offensive that would also be helpful.