Reading the Obligation part of the rulebook has me seriously confused. They spend a lot of time explaining that this is a core mechanic and oh so important, but the rules regarding Obligation are really poorly written IMO.. It really needs some more examples.

I hope I can get some clarifications in here.

So, starting obligation, for a standard 4 man party is a 10 point obligation. What does that actually MEAN? If it's a debt obligation does the character owe 10000 credits? 10 million credits? What?. And what about other obligations like Oath or Addiction? Are you MORE addicted with a 15 point obligation?.

Then it says you can extend your obligation for xp or money, so you could get your obligation to 15 or 20. But it doesn't really explain what actually happens with your obligation besides it having a higher chance of triggering. Is that really all?

Also, I have yet to figure out if you can actually solve your obligation and what would happen then? Does your obligation score go to 0? Also it's not really clear how your obligation can rise, and what mechanically happens then. Some of them I can sort of figure out, like debt. But what about Oath or betrayal? If you pick the Oath one I simply can't see it move beyond your starting value.

It says group obligation can grow to more than 100, but it doesn't really say HOW it grows.

Someone please enlighten me

For obligations increasing: A few sessions ago my players decided they would try to kill their "benefactor" since he was obviously crazy, bent on domination and one of the players said he was "dark" (she's force senstivie but this was before people got to know that in-character). So they attempt to off him, which of course doesn't work... he escapes and triggers a self-destruct mechanism on the ship they're on. They barely escape.

Now their obligation to that guy is increased (doubled for all players basically - that was my decision, with them goading me to increase it even further)... the result? They have more than 100 obligation, so they cannot spend XP. Most people will know them as someone who tried to off their employer - which means blackmailing can happen every now and then from unrelated agents of other crime lords.

If they had managed to kill him, I could've ruled that they would have no obligation to him anymore - although someone might feel that the group is obligated to them through a bounty or betrayal of the organisation they were a part of. This depends.

Also, if they manage to lower the obligation in other ways, that means that perhaps he will change the type of obligation back to debt or something, rather than the current Bounty (I considered a new one: Nemesis ).

Other ideas for increasing obligations: betraying the oath you swore - depending on the oath when you have fulfilled it through revenge for instance it can decrease or be solved, no?

Other way to increase obligations is: failing negotiation rolls when negotiating obligations when they come into play in a fitting manner, having to act against the obligations in some manner - for instance not satisfying your addiction over a longer period? I guess it depends on the addiction.

When/if an obligation is solved there should be a new one soon enough. Remember obligations can be gained in-game to gain access to gear, equipment and resources they would not have access to or be able to afford in other ways. They could gain a whole new Debt obligation when acquiring some equipment for a mission trying to pay of Debt to another crime lord.

The obligation value is "relative" in that is does not equate a set amount of cash or value in goods. It could, if you want it to - but what about interest rates on loans? Should that then increase the obligation too? One of my players have a Debt to the IBC at 10 points I think, we agreed on something like 150,000 or thereabouts, just to put a number to it, not that it really matters - he'll never pay it back, and probably couldn't either even if he wanted to.

The higher the obligation value for a certain obligation the more important it is, the more impact it should have when activated - at least that is my take on it. For instance the addiction setback dice suggestions in the book: 1 setback die for 5 points, 2 for 10 points and 3 for 15... any higher you could find other effects too, not to say that a 15point obligation MUST incur 3 setback dice, it could incur less, but have other in-game (not necessarily mechanical) effects.

A 15 point Oath could be more important and central to the characters identity or goals, than a 5 point Oath - but it could also signify what: revenge against the Empire, or Darth Vader, or Jabba, or Czerka or some random smuggler or bounty hunter low-life that is unnamed. It could also be to uphold justice, free slaves whenever and wherever and so on. The larger the value the greater chance for activation - which includes stress (lowered strain threshold for everyone), and the player has a roleplaying incentive...

To put it like this: there is not set way to use all this, its open to interpretation and improvisation, so that it fits the group and the campaign.

Is it not written as well as it was in the beta book? The beta book was crystal clear on how to use it. If I remember correctly, in the beta book the example and detailed explaination on use was in a sidebar.

Agreed with above, it is an extremely open-ended mechanic.

I wouldn't say "crystal clear", but clearer than mud, stout, ale and perhaps even lager I haven't looked closely on the core book chapter on obligations, I was more interested in gear, attachments and starships (for obvious reasons), so I'm not sure how much it differs, although I remember wanting more clarity in that part of the book originally...

I wouldn't say "crystal clear", but clearer than mud, stout, ale and perhaps even lager I haven't looked closely on the core book chapter on obligations, I was more interested in gear, attachments and starships (for obvious reasons), so I'm not sure how much it differs, although I remember wanting more clarity in that part of the book originally...

HAHA Okay, fair enough. I suppose I should not have put "crystal" in there. I understood and got what they meant, but it is definately (like a lot of this game) open for inturpretation.

I think a lot of rules lawyer types are going to have some issues with a lot of things. Everytime I see someone starting a thread about movement asking for clairification and details, I think of this. I gave up on "Grid Gaming" a few years ago when playing Pathfinder. I started thinking about how we played in the 80s and we did not even use minatures. I got sick of people standing around in my games, thinking for 10 mins on where to move. I would rather just play a battle stype boardgame at that point.

Anyway, as for how it is written in the new book, mine is supposedly "out for delivery today" so I have not seen it yet.

Oh I agree with you on that! Grids ruined gaming for me for a long time, luckily I/it got better I only shudder slightly when the Lady has prepared the chess board for an afternoon game...

Yeah, the rules lawyers are going to have a field day with this vagueness and lack of deterministic world vie... erm perception of the game. That said, I can fully understand people's confusion and uncertainty when meeting this mechanic/concept. I just yell: DIVE!!! There's no reason to hold back, you're better off messing stuff up royally than you are by ignoring it or leaving it out. It can easily make the game, the conflicts and stories more personal and tied to the characters.

Then it says you can extend your obligation for xp or money, so you could get your obligation to 15 or 20. But it doesn't really explain what actually happens with your obligation besides it having a higher chance of triggering. Is that really all?

Triggering an obligation can be a very big part of the session. The GM can use the character's obligation to craft an event that will create an obstacle for all of the players.

This is not the only use of obligation, though. It also determines the group's standing in society. If the group has an obligation total that is too high, they will have a hard time working with legitimate business owners. This is because they are creating a name for themselves as unsavory types, and might have to resort to the more expensive black market dealers. Politicians might also be wary of meeting with a group with high obligation, as it brings into question the type of people they are associating with. On the other hand, it will be hard for them to get an audience with notorious criminals without having enough obligation. First, the characters would have to make a name for themselves in the crime world (by finding ways to take on more obligation.

Also, I have yet to figure out if you can actually solve your obligation and what would happen then? Does your obligation score go to 0? Also it's not really clear how your obligation can rise, and what mechanically happens then. Some of them I can sort of figure out, like debt. But what about Oath or betrayal? If you pick the Oath one I simply can't see it move beyond your starting value.

It says group obligation can grow to more than 100, but it doesn't really say HOW it grows.

Someone please enlighten me

Obligation growth is determined by the GM. As Jegergryte mentioned, it is a very abstract concept. The GM can use obligation to help the players obtain expensive equipment when they don't have enough credits, or as penalty when the players mistreat an NPC (it might come back to bite them later on).

Regarding your question about oath and betrayal, obligation increase does not have to apply to the starting type. The character can begin the game with 10 obligation in oath. Then, when he needs to obtain a expensive part for his ship, he might have to take on an additional 5 obligation in debt.

There are definite narrative ways to increase an obligation in oath or betrayal though, too. Say a character's oath is to free a group of slaves that includes close family members. Let's say the players make a decision to place a bounty on the slavers to help with the process. The slavers catch wind of it and turn it into a hostage situation, demanding a big payout or they will begin killing slaves (starting with some of the family members, of course). This puts a major strain in fulfilling the oath, and should significantly raise the obligation.

Is it not written as well as it was in the beta book? The beta book was crystal clear on how to use it. If I remember correctly, in the beta book the example and detailed explaination on use was in a sidebar.

Agreed with above, it is an extremely open-ended mechanic.

Judging by one of the recent articles on the main page (can't remember which one), it looked like they hashed out the obligation types even further. This would lead me to believe that the core book is even more thorough than the Beta.

I don't have my copy, yet, so I can't say for sure.

Good pointers from Farsox there on an example Oath.

Perhaps this thread could become an Obligation thread? Questions, suggestions and all for players and GMs alike?

_{Good pointers from Farsox there on an example Oath.}

_{Perhaps this thread could become an Obligation thread? Questions, suggestions and all for players and GMs alike?}

_{I agree that there needs to be a thread for this. Dealing with obligation can be a hefty job for the GM. The more resources, the merrier.}

I guess I've just been a little used to everything having a value from playing Pathfinder..

So if someone with the Oath obligation gets into a situation where he picks up 5 points worth of debt obligation, how does someone figure out which obligation of the two gets triggered during the start of session obligation check?

Up to the GM is my "guess", seeing as this really seems to be a very abstract concept and really without numbers to back it up.

Or would it be obligation roll 11-20 is Oath and 21-25 is Debt?

First: as far as I remember, the obligometer^tm starts with the highest number, so if all others are 10, then if you pick up another 5, you're 15, that means 1-15 is the one with the debt. Although this is not the important partin your question.

As for you question: you last suggestions is how I do it - I'm not sure there are any guidelines in the book about it, but most of my players have two obligations some even have three, for instance the one that covers 51-73 has three: addiction, favour and bounty. Now I don't have the exact values in front of me for these (although the player has on his character sheet), if I roll 51-65 I'm pretty sure that is Bounty, 66-70 is addiction and the remaining is favour - although I could be wrong, but that's besides the point. Doing it that way can make it easier for you, although just picking randomly can prevent player prediction

Include me as well saying they should have spent a little more time detailing obligations in play with at least an example of how each obligation type could manifest itself in game. FFG did the same thing in Rogue Trader with Endeavors and Profit Factor, other great concepts with lack of detailing of how to easily incorporate them in game.

Let me also say this as an 80's gamer that grid less games often lead to confusion and frustration around the table.

I guess it shows that I'm a gamer from the 2000s, because gridless gaming is my favourite (I hate using miniatures and maps, I'd play tabletop wargames if I wanted that), and things like this that are left open for me to flesh out as I want are things I love. I think too many rules for things that are essentially abstract features are a bad thing.

Don't want to detract too much from the issue at hand but i'm not sure distance and locations between PCs and NPCs should be thought as an abstract concept, which by way lead to most of the confusion and frustration when a GM pictures one thing in his mind and players interpret it another way. By the way, I have no issue with the way EotE deals with spacing just with the rose colored references to 80's gaming (which I did enjoy).

As far as the Obligations go I think they could have done a better job presenting them. They are a great concept but I can see new people to roleplay struggle with implementing them. I know as an experienced gamer (GM), Endeavors and Profit Factor in Rogue Trader still are fuzzy concepts when it comes to using them in adventure design and rewards.

Obligations should be flavor that is added from time to time, but I can see my players from the start wanting to know how to completely eliminate them from the start. ie How do they clear up their debt in whatever form it takes.

For a number of great examples of Obligation in play, watch FIREFLY.

Not only does the series have much of the tone of a good EotE campaign, but we see a variety of obligations in play, as well as the strife that they cause within "the group." I would just that Mal has both Debt (although it's really more "lack of money") and Dutybound ("I do the job; I get paid") and almost every episode is colored by one -- or both -- of those.

There are at least two episodes where Inara is so sidelined by her Oath (her job as a Companion) that she is removed from the action (or at least limited in what she can do). River's Bounty and Simon's Criminal and Family obligations are another major story engine, and although Zoe's Responsibility to Mal is usually an asset, there are definitely a few times we see it at play in a negative way.

Heck, there's actually an entire episode where it seems like the GM "rolled doubles" on Jayne's Criminal obligation and decided to have a little fun with it by turning an otherwise-simple job into a wacky side adventure on a crappy moon where there's a statue of Jayne.

As a GM and storyteller, I think there are some great lessons to be learned here about how to use Obligation. What to temporarily sideline a character (either because the PC is out for the session or maybe someone else needs the spotlight for a little while)? Look to their Obligation as a source. If your smuggler who was once Betrayed is player-less for the session, maybe there's a rumor about that old enemy that the shafted them is around and they must go investigate.

Have an idea for a simple adventure that you'd like to spice up? Use Obligations as inspiration. Most of FIREFLY is really centered around simple, simple jobs that are complicated by Mal's or River's issues. And that makes for an awesome EotE game.

Obligations should be flavor that is added from time to time, but I can see my players from the start wanting to know how to completely eliminate them from the start. ie How do they clear up their debt in whatever form it takes.

If I recall correctly from the beta, they can't. You can NEVER do away with all your Obligation in EotE. You can reduce it. You can change it. But at the end of the day, everybody owes somebody something. That's part of the tone of the game.

Obligations should be flavor that is added from time to time, but I can see my players from the start wanting to know how to completely eliminate them from the start. ie How do they clear up their debt in whatever form it takes.

If I recall correctly from the beta, they can't. You can NEVER do away with all your Obligation in EotE. You can reduce it. You can change it. But at the end of the day, everybody owes somebody something. That's part of the tone of the game.

To clarify, you can clear up all your specific Obligations and never take on new ones, circumstances allowing. However, even a player who does this has 5 "untyped" Obligation that can still trigger. If it does, it is suggested to draw on past adventures to explain what it means, as no one can completely avoid their past.

For myself, I don't think that I would ever want to fully remove my Obligation from an out-of-character perspective. I might settle specific ones, but there's so much possibility in gaining and losing various Debts, Favors and other Obligations in the course of play.