Hi guys!

I just had the pleasure today of trying the game for the first time.

While it took me a bit to get used to it, I really liked it, it brought back good memories of the original WEG D6 Star Wars

That said, after playing it I do have one mayor concern, but maybe it's just cause I haven't played enough.

My impresion is that main characters (by this I mean the PCs) are a bit too squishy. Weapons do a fair bit of damage (which is fine by me) but there doesn't seem to be any options (besides armor) to give the character defence bonuses.

This seems… odd, it feels you have no decisions to make regarding the characters defence, besides pulling some stuns in the fight to get some black dice on the antagonists rolls. I imagined there would be talents and similar that would add defence dice to the character, but again, nothing in sight.

Has this changed? Because damage thresholds are fairly low and weapon damage high, it feels that it's one of those games where whomever goes first wins, as the other side cannot do anything to defend themselves.

Say what you will about the d20 game, it was not great (though SAGA was good) but it gave defence bonuses to all PCs so you could have scenes from the movies with Han being cornered by stormtroopers but holding his ground in spite of not wearing any heavy armor…

Thanks!

I know that there is a Dodge talent which makes a character more difficult to hit in exchange for suffering strain.

Other than that it seems to just be armor (Even Han would likely be considered to be wearing Heavy Clothes) and enviromental factors. (Seek cover, put distance between yourself and the person trying to kill you, keep moving so as to be a difficult target, etc.)

Hi

First thing, I'd just like to make sure that you're using the final BETA update (PDF) and not only the printed BETA rulebook. A lot of weapons had their damage reduced.

Some talents do help avoid damage by upgrading attack checks made against the PCs (Side Step / Defensive Stance come to mind). Again, the BETA update added some defensive talents to many specialization trees or moved defensive talents closer to the base of the tree.

It's a good thing to remind the PCs to seek cover in combat (adding setback dice(s) against incoming attacks)

If the PCs aren't combat oriented, you might try lowering the adversaries' comabt skills by a rank and see how it goes.

Hope this helps a little.

Talents-wise, we have Bodyguard, Defensive Stance, Dodge, Sidestep, Armor Master, Grit, Resilience, Sixth Sense, Superior Reflexes, and Toughened. I haven't played much so i don't know how well those mitigate the lethality, but they're there. I certainly see your point, though. Defense can be boosted by equipment and talents, while offense can be boosted by Attributes, Skills, Talents and Equipment. Perhaps the intention is that at higher ranks, you can spend a lot of extra Advantage buffing your side or debuffing your enemies.

Another thing to remember is the theme of the movies. While it is easy to get dropped in combat, it is pretty hard to actually be killed (a crit result of 151+). So, if the PC's get taken out, that's not the end, just the setup for another kind of challenge. Just think of all the times the main characters in the movies get taken prisoner, or held for a more elaborate execution. In Star Wars, like the pulpy serials it was based on, the bad guys never really try to kill the good guys. Or, if they do, they make an overly complex display of it that blows up in their face.

At least that's how I read it. The PC

s losing a fight is a chance for the GM to add another twist to the story, not to say, "The stormtroopers slit your throat, roll up new characters." It should be more Flash Gordon, less George R.R. Martin.

Has no one mentioned defensive maneuvers, like take cover and defensive stance/combat/whatever?

PCs that act foolishly or believe they are invincible will get the $#!t kicked out of them.

PCs that play smart, avoid combat when they're over matched, and believe in their own mortality will live much longer, healthier lives with more XP then their less careful counterparts.

There tends to be an adaptation period when players first meet this system. Many other contemporary game systems have buffed the PCs and nerfed the NPCs to the point where there is almost no threat to the players unless they act really really REALLY foolishly. In comparison, it seems that this game actually has consequences for reckless play.

-WJL

LethalDose said:

These only give a single setback die, which has a 1 in 3 chance of taking away a single success. Can one spend two maneuvers to add two setback dice? What I would really like to see is some sort of Full Defense Action for folks that are not geared for most of combat. If all I want to do is cower behind a wall, I'm going to be a heck of a lot harder to hit than my buddy leaning over it to shoot.

My contribution to the discussion is

Thumps up for a deadly Star Wars role play game!

I love Star Wars weg, but the game is just not lethal enough. I want blood! and players with sweety faces when a combat starts

I am still using the original weapon table from the Beta book, fear those Blaster rifles!!!

Cheers,

Yepes

To answer the OP's question…

In terms of how tough PCs could be in prior Star Wars RPGs, the answer is "yes," the PCs can be construed as "squishy."

Combat in this game is meant to be dangerous… which we generally see in the movies.

The Heroes of Yavin make frequent use of cover during their fights, with the exception of Luke in RotJ, who's got Jedi powers and a lightsaber to protect himself, making him the odd man out. Note that as soon as Han's gambit in ANH backfired and the stormtroopers he was chasing and yelling at realized it was only one man, his war cry quickly turned to a panicked yelp and he turned tail and ran. EotE reflects that sort of mentality.

As others have noted, there are defensive talents, especially once the Weekly Beta Updates are taken into account, which provides many of the specs with defensive talents they didn't have before.

But even still, combat can be a dangerous thing. Note I said "dangerous" and not "lethal." One thing to bear in mind is that once a PC has taken damage in excess of their Wound Threshold, they're simply unconscious with a critical injury that more often than not won't result in an insta-kill. And most hand-held weapons require at least two shots (barring an exceptionally good roll) to deal enough damage to exceed a PC's Wound Threshold. Nastier weapons exist, such as repeating blasters and lightsabers, that could do the job in one hit, but those weapons are also rather uncommon if not outright illegal for most people to own.

This means the PCs need to fight smart and make use of their environment. Against low-tier threats, even a lone setback die provided by cover or fighting defensively can make the difference an attack being a hit or a miss. Also, don't forget that Advantage and Threat can be spent to modify the combat circumstances. While I don't recall if it's a listed option on the chart, as a GM I'd have no problem with letting a PC spend a couple of their Advantage to apply a setback die to that group of stormtroopers that's about to open fire on them as the PC spends their manuever to dive for cover.

Donovan Morningfire said:

Exactly. Taking cover allows for adding a setback die to your opponents, two if it is a lot of cover. Guarded stance gives one against melee attacks and dropping prone one against ranged attacks. And yes you can spend Advantage to either give a setback die to an opponent (for two advantage) or give yourself a +1 defense against either ranged or melee attacks (for three advantage). Putting distance between you and your opponent also increases their difficulty of hitting you. All this before taking into account either armor or the various talents that can affect your defense. And then there is soak. A good soak characteristic can reduce the effect of many hits.

Plenty of options out there for those that want to use them.

This is not a D&D hack and slash

All of my players have learned to take cover in a firefight, aim, and have someone try to flank.

Donovan Morningfire said:

Combat with consequences is also good from another angle, getting all of your players to actually role-play. If combat is easy, there is no fear of entering into it, and players become eager to engage regardless of circumstances. Fear of losing in combat can get players to use skills or create situations where they either set things up for themselves favorably, or avoid combat entirely. When that kind of creativity is enaged, everyone enjoys the game much more.

The Grand Falloon said:

Considering that at the core of this game there is a narrative dice mechanic, I dont see any reason why a GM wouldnt or shouldnt apply two set back die instead of one if in your narrative description of your characters movement you advise of the above.

One thing that I keep in mind (thank you order 66 podcast) is that this is a "Yes but…" gaming system. Your traditional DnD and myriad of D20 based systems are built on the "No but.." mechanic. This system aims to envelop the story telling (contributed by all at the table) and the 'hack and slash' elements that we long time role playing gamers are accustomed to, under one single umbrella. I have only run a couple of sessions and my early impression is that they are onto a winner. Though it also requires a sense of maturity as the security of a rule heavy system isnt there though if you stick to the "yes but…" principal, it will be hard to go wrong.

DVeight said:

I think you'll find that both systems encourage the "Yes, and" or "Yes, but" philosophy of improvisation for interactions between DMs and players. It's a classic improvisation tool to help move the story along that's also extremely useful because it inheritly incorporates your player's ideas.