So I have the book and read a really good portion of it. (Very excited by the way) But I just ran into a really big snag for me. Defense ratings.

Heres what I've seen:

You can gain defense in only 3 ways.

1. Put on armor/shields

2. Take an active maneuver like, but not limited to guarded defense or Side step (smuggler talent tree) to add basically defense (black dice)

3. The Force talent tree, 5th level that just gives you +1 defense.

Am I missing something? Whats the difference between Halo Solo and John Doe? Characters will keep leveling up there skill ranks in ranged attack but theres no way (exp those mentioned above) to advance your defense. Here my example/problem:

Halo Solo Runs down a hallway, turns the corner and theres 5 storm troopers right there. They open fire at him. Han doesn't/isn't waring armor, hes not taking a defense stance, and hes not a force user. They are at close Range.

So by my account the storm troops only have a easy difficulty (1 purple dice) to hit him. Well whats the difference between Han and a red shirt fresh out of the box character. Hell flash forward 500 EXP and take every smuggler trait out there. If hans not actively using his maneuvers, or wait even if he is your looking at only a Easy diffculty + 1 MAYBE 2 set back dice to hit a high level character, hes as easy to hit as any one else.

Is this how it's supposed to work?

Except by activly taking actions to gain defense (mind you thats still only a set back dice bonus) theres no way to increase defense based on skill?

Well,

I don't own the Beta, but I DO own and have played WFRP. Let's just say that there has been some lengthy discussion and house-ruling done amongst the WFRP 3E community down there at the bottom of the world's RPG pile :-)

Here is a link to one of the discussions from Jan '11. Hopefully one or two of FFG's designers will take a gander and help Star Wars fans avoid house-ruling the crap out of the system before it's even launched. Engaging with the fans would probably violate their company policy, but there's always a hope :-)

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=166&efcid=3&efidt=438024&efpag=0

I don't have my rulebook yet, but does your taking a defensive manoeuvre rely on a specific talent, skill or dice pool? I could imagine that being a means of factoring in experience, but from the sounds of it, taking a defensive manoeuvre is merely you telling your opponent's player that you're bobbing and weaving, and him adding black (difficulty?) dice?

Well, that's not good. It was kind of a pain in WFRP3 and one of the more obvious problems I experienced. I would've thought this is something they changed first when designing SWRPG. If it works like you say, I hope they fix it soon.

This game differs from the old Star Wars versions that you need armor. Dodging, or diving behind cover etcetera only makes it a little harder to defeat you. Though, actually killing you is real hard since that requires a fatal critical hit.

In our games, I brought this up that almost nobody in the movies wore armor and those who did, died in hordes. But the heavy clothes armor has a lot of leeway. One could say that Lukes uniform, Han Solo's leather jacket and Bens brown robe is heavy clothing. Yes, i was not convinced either but we used that rule of thumb. Happy to say that my Twilek smugler became a little more sturdier.

But, the emphasis on armor is imo the wrong move for a Star Wars game.

Another way to look at the ease of hitting targets is from an action management angle. If you run out of active defenses (dodge/parry/block) you had better be lucky on the incoming damage.

That being said you'll have to check out the henchman-mook-minion rules to see if they work the same as in WFRP (each cluster of henchmen get one attack in a round). That helps build a situation where Han Solo slides around a corner and doesn't get blasted out of his booties, and characters can stand around in the midst of a full scale battle against a droid army and not be gunned down.

In lieu of modifying the defense mechanics it might be worth while to test out a few combat situations to see how likely Han is to survive being at close range against a group of mooks in terms of incoming damage and Solo's available active defenses.

Hello,

I don't think I've ever written something on the FFG forums before, but I've been lurking for a while, and after I heard the news about Edge of the Empire, I jumped on the chance to get into the Beta. I really dislike d20 (and the Saga edition), so a new rules set for Star Wars is great news to me. I'm also very happy with the way FFG is handling this rpg (thought I'd mention it since everyone seems to have a comment on it )

I haven't recieved my book yet, since I live in Norway. As for the example with Han Solo running around the corner, the way I see that encounter is that Solo and the troopers suprise each other, resulting in much flailing, screaming and confusion, before Solo wins the initiative and flees back the way he came.

I'm not familiar with the rules yet, but I'm sure some initiative system is in place?

Also, in Star Wars, the ability to avoid getting hit, I think, comes from smart tactics, running around and taking cover, along with the odd bit of hero factor.

I would love it if someone gave me the basics on how combat works in the game.

-Eirik

Also bear in mind there is the Soak stat which I would think would cover not only natural defenses but passive ones in the sense that you are always trying to avoid being hit by something so you may duck or flinch here or there whether you are aware of it or not. Defense to me would be more of an active thing like I'm wearing a blaster vest, I am spending a manuver on actively dodging. So those things wouldn't necessarily go up as you advanced.

Just some thoughts…

Yancy

I'm not sure that I understand the problem. Most of my RP experience is with various flavors of D&D and especially 3.5. I have never played WHFRP 3E. In D&D 3.5, a character's ability to make more accurate physical attacks steadily increases with level. No similar increase occurs regarding the primary physical defensive trait, Armor Class. At the same time, characters do gain more HP. So while they are not necessarily harder to hit, they are harder to kill as they level. I never thought of this as a problem. Can someone explain to me what about EotE (or WHFRP 3E) makes this especially problematic?

Also, why would Han need to be different from an average smuggler? He's not a demigod, just another fringer trying to make it in a Hutt's world. He's as likely to be shot dead as anyone running into a squad of Stormtroopers. Him not getting shot in that scene could just be a matter of luck. After all, even the roll described ITT isn't a sure thing as far as I can tell.

As far as I can tell, there's very little in the way of actual HP increases as well (although I still have a lot of the book to read through first). So for a D20 system, the higher hit chance of a fighter is balanced by the higher health of the target (to an extent, at least), but there's not much for a EoE character to get more survivability.

That being said, I'm not sure that this is a problem quite yet, since it looks like the chance to hit doesn't seem to go up by a huge amount as you gain exp, and the damage seems mostly static as well. Of course, more playtesting is probably required.

I thought this game didn't use HP at all but some kind of condition track type mechanic?

Generally, I don't see any necessary connection between getting better at attacking and getting better at defending. Higher level humanoid opponents presumably are also limited by these restrictions regarding defense. Therefore, as the antagonists become better shots and the protagonists become better shots, the fights will get deadlier. That seems okay to me.

Manchu said:

I agree with you wholeheartedly. It's not a problem in WFRP3e, I think it's just a vocal minority that think so.

I haven't looked at the Star wars beta, but in WFRP3e the scaling up of defense (apart from armor/shield) comes from purchasing actions that add to defense (things like dodge and parry are actions, and then there are advanced versions of these) and from some talents. As the PC becomes more and more experienced he/she can buy more and more of these types of actions/talents and they all stack. But all in all, the offensive power builds up faster than defense which means that combat at higher power levels is more dangerous (as it should be).

But I guess it might be a problem in Star wars. I like how the armor questions was handled in SW:SE (armor was good, but only if you invested heavily in talents/feats). Those rules meant that most people would run around without any armor.

Ha ha ha! I think this is the other reason FFG has us starting in the Outer Rim! It's the grittiest, darkest, most comparable environment to the Old World in WFRP! The Warhammer rulebook says to those who seek out a lot of combat "get ready to create a lot of new characters." One shot won't always kill you, but it might! Especially if you were already wounded, because there are no healing surges and no resurrections. Like our Norwegian friend says, the best way to not get killed by blaster shots is to not be in front of them when they're fired!

I like it. There's another thread discussing how Jedi aught to be more powerful than other characters. Maybe this will be how: they'll be the only characters who can get shot at a lot and not get killed outright!

D20 characters are really powerful, and their kneecaps never get smashed in combat. Maybe I'd be more into Pathfinder or D&D 4e if I ever played in a campaign continuous enough to do all the levelling up that make those games interesting, but this narrativist stuff is more fun, and with higher stakes. Playing a Doctor will be a lot more interesting when your allies have describable injuries to treat and not just HP to regain. This first installment stands a chance of having a real Firefly feel to it…

Again, I have to stress my wariness regarding OP's example. The scene in question shows that Han's bravado and/or courage outstrips his combat capacity and tactical judgement. Charging around on the Death Star is a foolish rather than wise decision. IMO, a system that allows unarmored (or even armored!) PCs to confront armed enemies at close range and at overwhelming odds does not convey a compelling sense of adventure in the Star Wars setting. Such an action would probably result in death even in D&D 4E. There are games that allow you to do that, however. I'd recommend Exalted from White Wolf to anyone who want that sort of power level.

Gallandro said:

With the exeption of two or three talents in all of the talent trees there are no maneuvers to increase your defense against ranged attacks. You can't spend actions to just dodge to increase your defense.

Also Star Wars is not a system where characters are hit all the time and their pure toughness soaks up the damage. How many time in the original trilogy did you EVER see any hero get hit? Liea's arm, Luke's arm cut off, Lukes fake hand, Vader's arm. what is that 4 times? A large soak system doesn't cinematically portray a star wars fight.

Manchu said:

In D&D you have magic items that increase your defense and HP and all kinds of stuff that make your harder to kill. Also in D&D you have, as you say more hit points that you gain every level (every 3-5 sessions). We don't have any of those in this system. The problem is that as you get better at attacking you deal more damage due to rolling more hits, and rolling more advantages. But we don't get more hit points (maybe +1 here or +1 there on the talent tree but not enough to make a difference from a blaster rifle). Try rolling out a fight between two heroic characters from star wars using this system…they are dead in two turns. (Or knocked out)

Manchu said:

When did Han ever get shot with a blaster? or get shot dead by stormtroops? Never. At least not in the movies. See above for my point on characters not being hit often.

gruntl in regards to combat at higher levels should be more dangerous…that just doesn't feel like Star Wars to me. I understand what you point is and I just don't feel like it matchs the movies.

QUOTE efidm=700879]
Ha ha ha! I think this is the other reason FFG has us starting in the Outer Rim! It's the grittiest, darkest, most comparable environment to the Old World in WFRP! The Warhammer rulebook says to those who seek out a lot of combat "get ready to create a lot of new characters." One shot won't always kill you, but it might! Especially if you were already wounded, because there are no healing surges and no resurrections. Like our Norwegian friend says, the best way to not get killed by blaster shots is to not be in front of them when they're fired!

Again just doesn't feel like star wars to me. If thats how they want to run the Outer Rim style star wars campaign so be it but its doesn't match he feel of star wars. Very few characters die due to harsh combat in all 6 movies. I want to have risks for sure but I also want to see my wet behind the ears colonist turn in to a hard noised force sensitive information broker who deals in secrets.

Manchu said:

The turning a corner and running into storm troops was just one example. Heres some more: Han on the deck of a skiff off of jabbas sail barge. No cover, no armor. Han in the woods fighting stormtroops, some cover no armor. Han blasting at storm troops in docking bay 94, or in the deathstar docking bay. No Cover, no armor. Shall I go on?

All of these examples have Han fighting basically in the open toe to toe with 3-5 storm troopers, not getting hit and taking down 1 or 2 of them.

Look everyone maybe its not as big as a problem as I'm making it out to be but…Low hit points, Low defense, with easily increased attack values (just buying them with EXP) and few talents to increase defense (not to mention expensive as they are far down the tree) = dead characters. Star wars characters don't die from random fire fights with storm troops. They make heroic epic sacrafices and meaning displays of heroism. This system may work great for Warhammer, and very brutal world, but I think it's going to need some help in the world of the force.

Well I tried to post a response with embedded quotations but it seemingly failed. So bear with me as I attempt to address your points without the benefit of your structure.

(1) "D&D has magical items that improve defense." So does EotE, in a manner of speaking. Instead of a +1 Breastplate, you get a flak jacket. Instead of an Amulet of Natural Armor +2, you get a force field generator.

(2) "When did Han get shot in the movies?" In Return of the Jedi. He also got captured, tortured, and frozen in carbonite in Empire Strike Back. Han Solo benefits from armor -- it's call "plot armor." Basically, he doesn't get hurt when it's inconvenient to the narrative. He does get hurt when it's convenient to the narrative. RPGs work differently than movie scripts or novels. The outcomes are not predetermined according to a plot arc. The plot arc is determined by spontaneous characterization created by multiple participants and resolved through various mechanics centered on randomization.

(3) "It doesn't feel like Star Wars to me." I can't argue with that. Only you can speak to what Star Wars "feels like" to you. And for that reason, it's not an especially relevant standard by which to judge the game.

Don't get me wrong, I understand your sentiment. In the Star Wars movies, characters often recklessly engage in combat for the sake of the genre. Your fear seems to be that the mechanics will discourage players from doing this because combat is so lethal. Without the benefit of the rules, I can't really speak to how lethal combat actually is in this game. But even taking your fear for granted, I don't think this will make the gameplay unrecognizable to Star Wars fans. There are a lot of incarnations of Star Wars and some of them are decidedly more grim than the OT. It's very possible that this game is not what you're looking for in a Star Wars RPG because those incarnations are not to your taste. But that is, after all, simply a matter of taste rather than faulty mechanics.

Again, I'm posting without the benefit of rules. I can't say whether or not EotE has such broken rules that it is impossible to play.

Keep in mind, Han was blind on that skiff…

BUT I gotta say, rolling to attack and missing… it's really effing boring. I hope that an extra success here or there isn't the difference between "merely a flesh wound" to "tell my kids I'm proud." There might be a tad more leeway than that.

He said without a set of rules in front of him.

Greedo is Good said:

However I don't know if they have changed that in this.

jordiver2 said:

Thank you for making my morning. lol.

Manchu said:

1. Force Field Generator? Yeah because leia and Chewie were running around with those.

2./3. You haven't seen the book yet but in many places the rule book talks about how THIS star wars game wants to promote a much more cinimatic feel then other games. They forgo a lot of detailed actions in favor of just do it and roll, so we can keep playing. They want the players to feel like its the movies. I disagree with you the rpg's are much different then movies (Yes I understand ones predetermined and the others not) but the rules system should support having epic battles like the movie its from. You said your self that "Characters often recklessly engage in combat for the sake of the genre." Well if thats a theme of star wars then that should be a theme in the RPG game. PERIOD.

That all being said, I haven't play tested it yet, so I could be total wrong. I like the not dying easy thing and just passing out, just affraid thats going to happen a lot and with out a cool fight to go with it.

(Prescript: I have a copy of the game and have playtested twice. My first time was at GenCon - Thank you Jay, it was unforgettable!)

In my games, we treat HP/Wounds, etc, as luck and a bit of physical strain. Your clothes may get singed, you'll get a bruise or a little burned, but nothing some salve or a kiss from a princess can't cure. Critical hits are the bad boys - a scar to make a story for the grandkids.

Because getting shot by a blaster is deadly - most of the time (in the movies), it killed or incapacitated a fully armored stormtrooper. In EoE, stormtroopers are minions, which can't suffer strain, and die from a critical hit. There's no way a direct hit on a "heavily clothed" character wouldn't burn a hole in his gut - AKA a critical hit. The PCs (and "Nemesis" NPCs) have more HP ("Wounds") because they're the main characters, and are really "lucky." Inject some stimpacks or apply a medpack and you're back at it. In the movies, the scenes of applying minor healing are on the cutting room floor.

You can also gain a defense bonus when your attacker rolls a Tragedy symbol, or by taking cover, or being creative in some other fashion.

Yeah, I'd definitely have to say that soaking damage in SW is essentially getting lucky. You take a hit, that just means you're one dodge closer to actually getting shot. And when you look at it like that, it makes sense. Han runs around the corner, gets shot at, maybe gets "hit"--this turns into Han having a blaster shot graze by his head, and causes him to turn tail and run.

No physical damage to his character, but the damage system still works just fine. And then the critical strike would be when Luke loses his hand.

Sorry, "Tragedy" should read "Despair." I don't have the book in front of me.

BradPlogsted said:

Major problem with that…the better at attacking they are, the less despairs you get. Also the less defenses you have the less despairs you get…my point remains on that one.

Inksplat said:

I am all for what you two are talking about, sounds like a great reasoning…exp for one thing. Why is it then based of brawn? Why should a wookie be able to dodge and story wise miss blaster bolts better then a human? or a skilled bothan? Once again the mechanics don't support the story.

I'm not a hater of this system by the way. Just think defense needs work.