Just now, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

Well, I just conferred with a professional editor, and she backed me up. My interpretation of the grammatical structure is correct. "Other disruptive physical obstacles" means that the previous examples were "disruptive physical obstacles."

Once again: read what I wrote.

You said "that when it says inclement weather, it is referring to disruptive physical obstacles based on inclement weather. "

It's not. The talent says setbacks resulting from weather, or other physical obstacles.

That does not mean physical obstacles based on weather. It means weather, or other physical obstacles.

You're misunderstanding the talent's text. You should reread it.

1 minute ago, Sturn said:

With this amount of loose interpretation, Brace could conceivably be used to remove ANY type of Setback posed by ANY condition.

No. Asteroids, just like walls and ceilings, aren't what the talent is about. You're strawmanning. Your fake interpretation here is not based on what I've been writing.

4 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

No. Asteroids, just like walls and ceilings, aren't what the talent is about. You're strawmanning. Your fake interpretation here is not based on what I've been writing.

No. We're showing you how when you loosen the definition too much, it loses its meaning and becomes over broad.

7 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

You're misunderstanding the talent's text. You should reread it.

No I am not, and I did read it. As did a professional editor. She read the full text of the talent and backed me up. Then she sent me these definitions, further backing me up: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/other

Specifically 1.2: Denoting those remaining in a group or those not already mentioned.

Here is another: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/other

Specifically, A1: used at the end of a list to show that there are more things, without being exact about what they are.

This is the same issue that has come up multiple times, not just for Brace but more misunderstanding the name of a talent vs function of talent.
Look for the discussion on "It's not that bad" talent.

Ignore the name of the talent when looking at what it does. For the majority of the talents, they will work with no arguments but others, you have to read the game mechanics of the talent itself and look beyond the name

8 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

No. Asteroids, just like walls and ceilings, aren't what the talent is about. You're strawmanning. Your fake interpretation here is not based on what I've been writing.

"There is no textual foundation to disallow Brace on visibility-related setbacks caused by inclement weather. " Is there a textual foundation to disallow disruptive physical obstacles in a pilot's path to not be "disruptive physical objects"?

"And a physical obstacle can absolutely impair visibility". Asteroids can absolutely impair visibility along your flight path.

I'm in no way saying that Brace should be used to negate setback imposed by an asteroid field when Piloting. It was an example of how literal interpretation of the words (versus its actual intent) could allow Brace to be used for near endless situations that should be covered by other talents.

More examples of loose interpretation of the wording if you didn't like the asteroid avoiding comparison:

• It's been raining (a disruptive physical force) in the jungle and the GM has imposed Setback on the tracks I'm following since they are beginning to wash away. When I get down to look for tracks I'll use Brace by shielding the rain from my eyes and squinting to remove that Setback. Who needs Expert Tracker?
• That locked door is a disruptive physical obstacle in my way. I'll take a deep breath and brace myself for the difficult task at hand to remove any Setback while I attempt to use Skulduggery on its lock. Who needs Bypass Security?
• I'm trying to repair my jammed Blaster and the GM says I have a setback to my Mechanics check since it is full of sand from fighting in the desert. That sand is a disruptive environmental and physical obstacle, so I'm going brace my blaster between my legs really tightly while I clean it out to use Brace to remove that Setback. Who needs Gearhead?
• I'm trying to push through this heavy forest. The GM has imposed Setback. But, all of that vegetation is a disruptive physical obstacle so I'm going to remove it by charging forward and bracing myself against all of the twigs, leaves, etc. Who needs Outdoorsman?

9 minutes ago, Sturn said:

More examples

No, strawmen.

30 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

No I am not

you keep not addressing the error I'm pointing out to you, which I've explained multiple times now

27 minutes ago, Varlie said:

Ignore the name of the talent when looking at what it does. For the majority of the talents, they will work with no arguments but others, you have to read the game mechanics of the talent itself and look beyond the name

I completely agree. But, it's the personal interpretations of the Brace descriptions which has led to widely different uses.

6 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

No, strawmen.

You're not being fair and very dismissive of valid arguments. Titling them "strawmen" doesn't dismiss the argument.

One of my examples literally used your example from page 1 - " By squinting, or holding your hands up to cover against the weather." A nd yet you still called it a strawman argument when I used it.

1 minute ago, Sturn said:

You're not being fair and very dismissive of valid arguments. Titling them "strawmen" doesn't dismiss the argument.

No, what's unfair is meeting honest discussion with strawmen, as you've been doing.

1 minute ago, Sturn said:

One of my examples literally used your example from page 1 - " By squinting, or holding your hands up to cover against the weather."

Twisted into something it wasn't. In a different situation, for a different purpose. Talk about "fair" discourse 🙄

3 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Twisted into something it wasn't. In a different situation, for a different purpose. Talk about "fair" discourse 🙄

How is this twisting?:

28 minutes ago, Sturn said:

It's been raining (a disruptive physical force) in the jungle and the GM has imposed Setback on the tracks I'm following since they are beginning to wash away. When I get down to look for tracks I'll use Brace by shielding the rain from my eyes and squinting to remove that Setback.

So at your table, even with the arguments you've made above, you would not allow a player to remove Setbacks with Brace in this example of weather affecting tracks? You are against this example yet you argued an hour ago:

1 hour ago, Stan Fresh said:

By squinting, or holding your hands up to cover against the weather . Brace doesn't mean just planting your feet firmly.

1 hour ago, Stan Fresh said:

Both affected by bad weather , which is explicitly mentioned as part of what the talent allows you to ignore.

There is no textual foundation to disallow Brace on visibility-related setbacks caused by inclement weather .

3 hours ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

I've waffled on Brace and its applicability, but based on the full description, I believe it is intended largely for skills like Athletics or Coordination, but not exclusive to, as some of the effects would affect other skills, like an unsteady surface would affect your aim for firing a blaster rifle. It doesn't really affect sight. All of the obstacles mentioned* do not necessarily impair sight. Most of them have to do with motion or obstacles to motion, hence "disruptive physical obstacles." The book is fairly clear on that front.

I also cannot come up with any good narrative justifications for using it to negate things like camouflage, darkness, or other concealment.

*With the exception of "inclement weather" but that includes wind and slickness from rain and given context, I have no reason to believe that it would apply to optical impairment.

Squinting or shading your eyes to make it easier to see a target. Also Camouflage is not an environmental effect. So I am pretty sure you couldnt use brace for that.

14 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

Squinting or shading your eyes to make it easier to see a target. Also Camouflage is not an environmental effect. So I am pretty sure you couldnt use brace for that.

Ah, but it's camouflaged with the environment...

Squinting and shading eyes don't seem like things you'd need a talent for (everyone does them instinctively), they seem to me to be just ordinary parts of making a Perception check and thus not good justifications. To Brace against a shifting surface while running takes skill, so Brace makes narrative sense there. Squinting your eyes doesn't.

If you had three ranks of Brace, and you use a maneuver to Brace before making a Perception check in night darkness, you just removed the entire penalty for trying to see something at nighttime. Can you come up with a justification for how squinting allowed you to turn night into day?

2 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

Squinting and shading eyes don't seem like things you'd need a talent for (everyone does them instinctively), they seem to me to be just ordinary parts of making a Perception check and thus not good justifications. To Brace against a shifting surface while running takes skill, so Brace makes narrative sense there. Squinting your eyes doesn't.

While I agree with your reasoning and I think the player in the OP is maybe pushing it too far, this is exactly why I can't stand the Talent trees anymore. Anybody should be able to "Brace"...

Well, the fact that this topic has generated such a heated discussion makes me think that my player was not forcing the issue as I thought and maybe I should give him more freedom to apply Brace.

However Sturn's reasoning is very compelling and I will watch carefully that Brace does not overshadow other similar talents.

Thanks everyone for your comments and reasoning.

1 hour ago, whafrog said:

While I agree with your reasoning and I think the player in the OP is maybe pushing it too far, this is exactly why I can't stand the Talent trees anymore. Anybody should be able to "Brace"...

I've tweeked a few talents for this exact reason. Everyone should be able to brace, pin, etc, yet they can't without a talent.

From my house rules regarding Brace (which due to moving onto Genesys after making this I never got a chance to playtest it):

Quote

Brace

Problem : You must be trained in a specific Talent to brace yourself against environmental affects. This should be something anyone may attempt.

Brace is a standard Maneuver available to all. The Talent is a “Quick Brace” that only requires an Incidental.

This is an added reason why I limit bracing. This version makes it a general Maneuver that anyone may attempt without talent expenditure. The talent version requires only an Incidental to perform.

1 hour ago, whafrog said:

While I agree with your reasoning and I think the player in the OP is maybe pushing it too far, this is exactly why I can't stand the Talent trees anymore. Anybody should be able to "Brace"...

I agree somewhat with Brace, but disagree on the broader point about talent trees.

With that said...

I have not seen Genesys's system for talents and am only picking up on what others have said. My perspective from what I have picked up is that it is pretty free-form, which I think is a way of making the system more adaptive since it is intended to be a universal system. When it is for a particular universe like Star Wars, that is less necessary.

5 minutes ago, Sturn said:

I've tweeked a few talents for this exact reason. Everyone should be able to brace, pin, etc, yet they can't without a talent.

From my house rules regarding Brace (which due to moving onto Genesys after making this I never got a chance to playtest it):

This is an added reason why I limit bracing. This version makes it a general Maneuver that anyone may attempt without talent expenditure. The talent version requires only an Incidental to perform.

I would be interested to see expanded Brawl rules based off of talents. Perhaps I'll work on that soon.

Do additional ranks of the talent still increase the number of Setback you remove? If so, would it be 1 Setback with 1 rank, or 2 Setback with 2 ranks?

I would argue, however, that talents like Pin and Brace represent additional training and skill above what a normal person would be able to display. Techniques learned through practice or experience. An important thing to remember about Setback is that they can come up blank. This can be treated as the character performing an "amateur" Brace, in that even though they don't have the talent they were able to counter the effect in a similar manner.

1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

My perspective from what I have picked up is that it is pretty free-form, which I think is a way of making the system more adaptive since it is intended to be a universal system. When it is for a particular universe like Star Wars, that is less necessary.

That's not why Genesys is made that way. They have several "particular universe" books (at minimum a fantasy and cyberpunk, but I haven't kept track). You can still provide the SW talent trees as guidelines, you're just not locked into it nor the order access...

...but maybe that's another discussion.

5 hours ago, Sturn said:

How is this twisting?:

Nowhere have I suggested that Brace should replace other talents. Expert Tracker does more than just compensate for a setback, yet you pretend a reasonable reading of Brace makes it into Expert Tracker.

Neither is it what I've said, nor is it a honest portrayal of what each talent does.

30 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Nowhere have I suggested that Brace should replace other talents.

Nowhere have I accused you of saying that. It was ME that suggested if Brace is not properly limited (as it was intended imo) you might as well get Brace as a catchall instead of some of those other talents which remove setback. That's why it should be limited, or it becomes too powerful. For many of the careers that can pick it up it only costs 5xp.

30 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

Expert Tracker does more than just compensate for a setback, yet you pretend a reasonable reading of Brace makes it into Expert Tracker.

No I'm not pretending that a reasonable reading of Brace makes it into Expert Tracker. I'm saying an UNreasonable reading of Brace makes it nearly as good as Expert Tracker plus several other talents. It becomes a catchall if too widely interpreted.

6 hours ago, Sturn said:

So at your table, even with the arguments you've made above, you would not allow a player to remove Setbacks with Brace in this example of weather affecting tracks?

You didn't answer this.

9 hours ago, Sturn said:

Which of these do you use to explain getting rid of a setback to Perception caused by fog?

Thought that was obvious 🤷‍♂️
It’s the bullet below. But really, people are so dug in on their opinions here that I’m not sure how much this will help. I’m just answering because you asked 😉

• to prepare (someone or oneself) forsomething difficult or unpleasant.

9 hours ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

Then is a grumpy NPC a disruptive physical obstacle? You offended him, and that adds 2 Setback to all checks to interact with the organization he has influence over. He is physical, he is disruptive, and his is an obstacle.

He is a disruptive physical obstacle.

But is he? Words strung together are different than a cohesive phrase, and words can have different definitions. Twisting them by using alternate definitions to completely change the meaning of a phrase does not make it applicable.

There’s lots of accusations of “twisting” getting thrown around here. I’m not sure how helpful that is to discourse.

The talent clearly calls out environmental effects. So the ridiculous suggestion of applying the talent to the grumpiness of an NPC remains ridiculous, but it stands by itself.

24 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

The talent clearly calls out environmental effects. So the ridiculous suggestion of applying the talent to the grumpiness of an NPC remains ridiculous, but it stands by itself.

This is my point exactly. When you make it too over broad, it loses its meaning and can be used for ridiculous things. Because of certain grammatical facts, I believe he is incorrectly extending it to apply to things it does not apply to. He was suggesting that "other disruptive physical obstacles" either extended to sight-impairing effects or did not preclude sight-impairing effects from inclement weather, in spite of the grammatical makeup of the description and the inferences that can logically be drawn from that.

36 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

Thought that was obvious 🤷‍♂️
It’s the bullet below. But really, people are so dug in on their opinions here that I’m not sure how much this will help. I’m just answering because you asked 😉

• to prepare (someone or oneself) forsomething difficult or unpleasant.

I'm not sure if sarcasm or not? If so, good one.

If not, how do you prepare yourself to be able to more clearly see through fog? I don't think squinting or holding your hand above your eyes is going to help.

I completely agree that the odds of someone changing their mind on this topic is approximately 3,720 to 1.

I love this narrative system. However, I still like it to have some semblance to reality.

12 hours ago, blatamano said:

Well, the fact that this topic has generated such a heated discussion makes me think that my player was not forcing the issue as I thought and maybe I should give him more freedom to apply Brace.

However Sturn's reasoning is very compelling and I will watch carefully that Brace does not overshadow other similar talents.

Thanks everyone for your comments and reasoning.

Probably worth a question to the developers, maybe they answer how it should work.