So I was listening to a gaming podcast today, and a point caught my attention, that I felt needed addressing, and since it's something of a "learn as you go" kind of situation, I figured I'd make a thread, where we can post various "quality of life" tips for GMs, to make your gaming session easier, and more fun.

These aren't unique to Star Wars, though if you do have tips for this system specifically, go for it, but just general tips when trying to wrangle a table of people.

The one that caught my attention today:

Not having enough different clues/leads for your PCs to follow.

So, the podcast, basically had a group of players trying to uncover a secret to bad things that happened recently, and based on what the GM had told them, between various scenes and situations, it seemed that there might be a tie into the nearby lake, as to the cause of the bad stuff going on. This was a pretty logical conclusion for the players, based on what was presented, but when they started trying to follow up the leads, they kept getting shut down by the GM. And you could hear the mounting frustration in the players as they didn't know what else to do. Now this might be that the players just fixated on a random, inconsequential thing the GM said, and assumed that was the plot thread, that's certainly possible, and a long standing tradition in gaming, but, a good GM should be able to adjust to this derailing tangent. Because it's guaranteed to happen.

SO! Have multiple leads that you can tie into any random location that your players scurry off to. It doesn't have to be a direct tie, it can be something as simple as "A friend of mine's cousin's former roommate said something that sounds like what you're talking about, maybe go see him." Actually, this just came to me. Law and Order it! If you've ever seen the Law and Order tv show, this is a great way of how you can steer your players back onto your plot. The first half of that show, where the detectives are tracking down the criminal to put on trial, had a great design. They would go to the scene, wander around and try and see if anyone saw anything. Their first lead would almost always be Random Person 27, who just saw a minor little thing, that had to do with Random Person 83. So then they would go talk to 83, who would then give them a lead to point them to RP 102, and so on. And after about 6-7 links like this, they would find who they were looking for.

SO! If your PCs go off on a wild goose chase that has nothing to do with your actual plot, stick SOMEBODY there, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who can then lead them BACK to where you were actually trying to point them, but they just totally missed the clue. Either due to you being too subtle in your delivery, or them being too obtuse and goofing off to notice. So specifically sit down and ask yourself before each session. "Ok, how can my players Eff this up royally and not go the way I need them to? And how can I redirect them?" And then make contingency plans for it.

As to the "not enough clues" thing, one option is have a endgame that's a long way out. (spoilers incase Split sees this)

22 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:

SO! If your PCs go off on a wild goose chase that has nothing to do with your actual plot, stick SOMEBODY there, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a guy, who can then lead them BACK to where you were actually trying to point them, but they just totally missed the clue. Either due to you being too subtle in your delivery, or them being too obtuse and goofing off to notice. So specifically sit down and ask yourself before each session. "Ok, how can my players Eff this up royally and not go the way I need them to? And how can I redirect them?" And then make contingency plans for it.

That's something I need to get a lot better at. I'm running them through Long Arm Of The Hutt at the moment and it's been a bit of a struggle trying to get them to the information they need. They were just drifting through the Geonosian cocktail party not learning anything, because they wouldn't ask questions in case they gave something away.

2 minutes ago, Dafydd said:

That's something I need to get a lot better at. I'm running them through Long Arm Of The Hutt at the moment and it's been a bit of a struggle trying to get them to the information they need. They were just drifting through the Geonosian cocktail party not learning anything, because they wouldn't ask questions in case they gave something away.

Yeah it can be tricky, especially if your players are fairly paranoid. The best thing I can say, is to try and remember that NPC's don't live in a vacuum, and have their own lives with their own contacts. And those contacts can be differently skilled, and thus in a different location. So while they maybe avoided the cocktail party, perhaps someone else at the party knew who they were, and approached them. If that's not an option, perhaps a contact of a contact, who works in a different field, like, an Infochant, has a "hot job for someone willing to take some risks!", and then points them to the information they were supposed to get at the party. I'm not familiar with the module you are talking about, so I can't speak on specifics, but try and think logically about how each NPC would have a web of people connected to them, and find someone that is more likely to be able to get the party to open up. Like 6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon.

On 9/5/2019 at 2:26 PM, Dafydd said:

That's something I need to get a lot better at. I'm running them through Long Arm Of The Hutt at the moment and it's been a bit of a struggle trying to get them to the information they need. They were just drifting through the Geonosian cocktail party not learning anything, because they wouldn't ask questions in case they gave something away.

I find, especially in the case of information is to be upfront with the idea that there is no such thing as a “zero consequence action”. Every action, even turning up for a party and not interacting with anything is an action of some effect. I find the quicker people take to taking charge of their own actions, the quicker they can take control of the most probable consequence.

ive had entire sessions where I’ve responded and predicted npcs based on the measure of their observed characteristics. So learning to dive into things, ask questions and throw out some probable red herrings makes for a lively session.

Here's something I've seen done wrong more than once on AP Podcasts, not sure if they are doing it that way on purpose and have altered the rules at their table or if they misread it. Still, it's good to point out for those that are new to playing/GMing and their view of the system is informed by such podcasts:

When your character uses Force Points that are opposite of their alignment (Lightsider using Dark Points or vice versa), you need to take strain equal to the opposite alignment points you spend (spend 2 dark points, take 2 strain), however, you only need to spend a single Destiny Point.

Another thing is each side (Players, GM) can only spend a single Destiny Point per action, meaning you cannot spend 3 Destiny to upgrade one check. Another example: you cannot upgrade your dice pool with Destiny and then after rolling, use another Destiny to activate Force Points of the opposite alignment on the same check.

3 hours ago, GroggyGolem said:

Here's something I've seen done wrong more than once on AP Podcasts, not sure if they are doing it that way on purpose and have altered the rules at their table or if they misread it. Still, it's good to point out for those that are new to playing/GMing and their view of the system is informed by such podcasts:

When your character uses Force Points that are opposite of their alignment (Lightsider using Dark Points or vice versa), you need to take strain equal to the opposite alignment points you spend (spend 2 dark points, take 2 strain), however, you only need to spend a single Destiny Point.

Another thing is each side (Players, GM) can only spend a single Destiny Point per action, meaning you cannot spend 3 Destiny to upgrade one check. Another example: you cannot upgrade your dice pool with Destiny and then after rolling, use another Destiny to activate Force Points of the opposite alignment on the same check.

I personally dislike the "use a Destiny Point to use Dark Side Pips" rule, as it limits the temptation of the Dark Side for a player. I actually ran into this in play with some friends of mine, during a big scene. It was a dramatic, climactic situation, and innocent lives were on the line, and one of the PC's, a Jedi (old republic era), tried to use the Force to do something, but couldn't because there were no Light side Destiny Points up at that time. The other player had flipped their last one the turn before, and I had already made things pretty bad for them, and didn't feel like immediately flipping one back at them and making things worse. So he had to not use the power, not because of any narrative reason, but because of a silly game mechanic limitation, that is partially out of the players control (if the GM doesn't flip them back, they are stuck). And it seriously changed the flow of the scene, and after that session, I decided to do away with the Destiny Point limitation. Partly because I had players flat out saying they were hesitant to use the Dark pips, because they didn't want to "waste a DP on it", in case someone else wanted/needed to use it that turn.

And to me, this felt like being contrary to the seductive nature of the dark side. It's supposed to be quicker, easier, and more seductive. And to me, removing the destiny point requirement, accomplishes all 3 of those in one stroke.

This is definitely a house rule, but it had immediate positive results at our table. It made "dipping their toe in the Dark" a LOT more appealing, and manageable for the players, since they didn't have to consume a very limited and valuable group resource to do so. Which meant they were taking more risks with their Morality, which in turn made for more enjoyable roleplaying of their Conflict going forward.

39 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

It was a dramatic, climactic situation, and innocent lives were on the line, and one of the PC's, a Jedi (old republic era), tried to use the Force to do something, but couldn't because there were no Light side Destiny Points up at that time. The other player had flipped their last one the turn before, and I had already made things pretty bad for them, and didn't feel like immediately flipping one back at them and making things worse. So he had to not use the power, not because of any narrative reason, but because of a silly game mechanic limitation, that is partially out of the players control (if the GM doesn't flip them back, they are stuck).

...

This is definitely a house rule, but it had immediate positive results at our table. It made "dipping their toe in the Dark" a LOT more appealing, and manageable for the players, since they didn't have to consume a very limited and valuable group resource to do so. Which meant they were taking more risks with their Morality, which in turn made for more enjoyable roleplaying of their Conflict going forward.

I've had this happen, more than once, and there's a lot going on here.

Yes, that situation sucks, but:

First, DP are a meta resource that the Players need to manage. Mine have learned to always keep one in their pocket, for a rainy situation. They rarely use them on dice pool manipulation anymore - which I LOVE - instead saving them for narrative uses and Force Powers. Which usually frees them up for me to use, basically as needed.

Second, if spending a Destiny, when there is Destiny to spend, is perceived as too big of a cost, you can absolutely remedy that by making the use of Force Powers well worth it. Let that Power be a shortcut around a challenging situation. Let the known presence of a Jedi have greater positive narrative consequences (NPCS: "Crap, a Jedi! Ruuun!!" Actually that's neutral, cuz then what? They let these guys who know they're Jedi go and possibly tell the Inquisitors?).

Third, if you're gonna houserule something just to overcome "the Destiny problem", don't get rid of the rule, instead you frickin' just let them use the Darkside with the usual costs, and then something else besides a DP . If you've done your job as GM, in making Force Powers worth the costs, they'll use it. Every one of those situations at my table where the PCs didn't have the DP to "technically" use the Darkside - I just offered them another cost, and they accepted. Every. Time. I've done Wounds (the PC uses the Force to literally feed on their own body, causing themselves pain - Bane does this), I've done double the Conflict, I've done what we did before we had the Force & Destiny book, and that is: using the Darkside causes some sort of undesirable collateral damage or narrative consequence.

No need to eliminate the Destiny cost, at all, in my experience.

I actually really like the idea of removing the DP expenditure for use of dark side pips.

I think that it still makes sense to have to spend a DP for a dark sider to use light side pips, because it is supposed to be very difficult to get back to the light.

12 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

I actually really like the idea of removing the DP expenditure for use of dark side pips.

I think that it still makes sense to have to spend a DP for a dark sider to use light side pips, because it is supposed to be very difficult to get back to the light.

That's my thoughts as well. Makes sliding just that tiny bit easier, but climbing your way back out of darkness, is more difficult. Which is basically how it's presented narratively in the franchise

8 hours ago, emsquared said:

Third, if you're gonna houserule something just to overcome "the Destiny problem", don't get rid of the rule, instead you frickin' just let them use the Darkside with the usual costs, and then something else besides a DP . If you've done your job as GM, in making Force Powers worth the costs, they'll use it. Every one of those situations at my table where the PCs didn't have the DP to "technically" use the Darkside - I just offered them another cost, and they accepted. Every. Time. I've done Wounds (the PC uses the Force to literally feed on their own body, causing themselves pain - Bane does this), I've done double the Conflict, I've done what we did before we had the Force & Destiny book, and that is: using the Darkside causes some sort of undesirable collateral damage or narrative consequence.

Highly recommend this. When my Force users are against the wall and the DPs are running dark, I always offer double Conflict to bypass the flip. 99% of the time, they go for it. It makes dramatic sense. When things are looking dark, that quick power is even more tempting.

On 9/30/2019 at 11:33 AM, KungFuFerret said:

I personally dislike the "use a Destiny Point to use Dark Side Pips" rule, as it limits the temptation of the Dark Side for a player. I actually ran into this in play with some friends of mine, during a big scene. It was a dramatic, climactic situation, and innocent lives were on the line, and one of the PC's, a Jedi (old republic era), tried to use the Force to do something, but couldn't because there were no Light side Destiny Points up at that time. The other player had flipped their last one the turn before, and I had already made things pretty bad for them, and didn't feel like immediately flipping one back at them and making things worse. So he had to not use the power, not because of any narrative reason, but because of a silly game mechanic limitation, that is partially out of the players control (if the GM doesn't flip them back, they are stuck). And it seriously changed the flow of the scene, and after that session, I decided to do away with the Destiny Point limitation. Partly because I had players flat out saying they were hesitant to use the Dark pips, because they didn't want to "waste a DP on it", in case someone else wanted/needed to use it that turn.

And to me, this felt like being contrary to the seductive nature of the dark side. It's supposed to be quicker, easier, and more seductive. And to me, removing the destiny point requirement, accomplishes all 3 of those in one stroke.

This is definitely a house rule, but it had immediate positive results at our table. It made "dipping their toe in the Dark" a LOT more appealing, and manageable for the players, since they didn't have to consume a very limited and valuable group resource to do so. Which meant they were taking more risks with their Morality, which in turn made for more enjoyable roleplaying of their Conflict going forward.

Interesting. I went a different path as I found Conflict to be what held my players back from using the Darkside. So we go by feel as in, you know a Darksider when you see one. It allows for about as much lenience as the Clone Wars Jedi had (going to war, plotting assassinations, etc...) while still letting us go ok that was an action that would send you down the dark path. I kept the moments of alignment shift to more dramatic, story and character-driven moments.

Destiny Points have never been a major issue, I always make sure there's one around for the players. In the case there were none left, I'd just flip one and make the situation that much worse: sure you can use the Darkside but now you have to choose between defeating the villain and rescuing your ally who's falling off the ledge into a bottomless pit.

28 minutes ago, GroggyGolem said:

Interesting. I went a different path as I found Conflict to be what held my players back from using the Darkside. So we go by feel as in, you know a Darksider when you see one. It allows for about as much lenience as the Clone Wars Jedi had (going to war, plotting assassinations, etc...) while still letting us go ok that was an action that would send you down the dark path. I kept the moments of alignment shift to more dramatic, story and character-driven moments.

Destiny Points have never been a major issue, I always make sure there's one around for the players. In the case there were none left, I'd just flip one and make the situation that much worse: sure you can use the Darkside but now you have to choose between defeating the villain and rescuing your ally who's falling off the ledge into a bottomless pit.

I only had 2 players, so the DP pool was often very small. I would usually just add 1 more point to give it a bit more bulk. Also, my players are very gunshy about gaming, too much D20. They are almost biologically predisposed to assume I'm trying to Eff them over, and are always acting hesitantly, looking for the way things could go terribly. Despite YEARS of me telling them flat out that I'm not trying to kill their PC's, as then the game is over and the fun stops. Plus they are just....too analytical for their own good. They are always trying to "math their way out of things", so things like juggling a limited resource (a resource that is only replenished when the GM does something that makes their situation worse) will cause uncounted delays as they try and just think through stuff.

Maybe what you should consider doing for your game is instead of having the normal give-and-take of the Destiny pool having a set number of pips for each side to spend, plus the result of the players' (and the GM's) force dice rolls.

Base of X (2-4, probably 3). The PCs roll 1 Force Die each, adding ONLY the light side pips to the pool, the GM rolls 1 Force Die, adding ONLY the dark side pips to the pool. They then spend them like normal, but instead of flipping them, you just discard them. I don't know if that would help at all, but it might solve some of your problems. It also gives you a better way to allow your players to spend DPs without having to " screw them over " (air quotes) by spending them yourself.

Then I'd also discard the DP expenditure for dark side because aside from the other reasons for it, it will almost never happen if Destiny becomes a finite resource.

Well we haven't played the FFG systems in quite some time, though I have been cooking up a Genesys campaign that I'll probably do in the near future, once my schedule settles down.

So it's not really something I'm worried about anymore, at least not as an immediate issue.

2 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:

Well we haven't played the FFG systems in quite some time, though I have been cooking up a Genesys campaign that I'll probably do in the near future, once my schedule settles down.

So it's not really something I'm worried about anymore, at least not as an immediate issue.

Genesys is pretty nice to the players with Story Points. 1 per player per session, but just 1 for the GM. If any player in your group is a Natural, they can just start the session off by using their Archetype ability to steal that Story Point from you.

Running a group with 2 Naturals, I have to get pretty creative on how to tempt the players into using Story Points. It's pretty fun, cuz they know what I'm trying to do but sometimes the temptation is too much and they go for it.