I house rules WFRP3 to be playable at high ranks - there weak defense is a really bad issue (although they did patch a bit wit later expansions).

But when you have 4+ red dice, the jamming and reloading will become an issue even if defense works. I'd just make those once per encounter effects.

I was afraid of this when I saw the recommended xp per session allowance and I immediately thought that I do not want my PCs to advance that quickly. I think after this I will reward 5 xp per session with the rest being made up by bonus XP (nemesis boss, good rping, quick/creative thinking).

I was afraid of this when I saw the recommended xp per session allowance and I immediately thought that I do not want my PCs to advance that quickly. I think after this I will reward 5 xp per session with the rest being made up by bonus XP (nemesis boss, good rping, quick/creative thinking).

After what? All this thread has been so far is someone attempting to scale EotE the way you would scale D&D, which was never going to work.

EotE NPCs have such a huge symbiosis that you have to take them all into account together. Minions that only roll 3 dice, for instance, are still worth something in a fight against high-tier PCs in EotE, whereas that is absolutely not the case in D&D.

Also, the Despair things are just examples, and should definitely not be the only things that happen. Use them to blow open air locks, drastically alter the terrain, or just flat out end fights.

There's no reason that you have to have a fight drag on--its much better to end it with a bang.

The PCs roll a bunch of Despair in their attack against the last couple Stormtroopers left? Have it blow open an airlock and suck the Imperials out...and then threaten to do the same to the PCs.

PCs roll a bunch of Despair early on? Use it to summon another batch of low-level minions. Have the PC draw a ton of aggro. Something different.

Enemies roll a heap of Despair? Minions can break and run (to return a few rounds later, ala Han chasing the troopers in ANH). Adversaries can lash out, force-choking a Stormtrooper ally for a round.

There are plenty of options.

Another thing that really needs to be remembered when talking about Triumph and Despair is that you can explicitly use them for the stuff that 1-3 Advantage or Threat does as well. If the GM is feeling creative, you could also use them for upgraded versions of those things as well, like recovering or suffering multiple strain, or adding multiple boost or setback dice. So, Triumph and Despair do a lot more than just the things that are listed as exclusive to them.

And a fully decked pc upgrading an attack 10

Times and addig 7-10 black aren't going to get hit easily :-D

The FFG guy said on the order 66 podcast that he intended to take his proto-jedi from EotE in to the Rebellion game, and then on to become a full Jedi in F&D, which implies to me they are supposed to ramp up.

To me, it implied that the options that become available mean that the progression from Exile to Knight is a possibility, where it wasn't before. In EotE, you're limited to FR 2 as a ceiling mark - if Force & Destiny provides character careers that allow access to more talents that increase FR higher, then that alone allows the potential for a Padawan to become a Knight-level in terms of Force power.

Another easy idea for better defense at high level is to allow a new option for use of a despair symbol:

Despair: count as two failures ie a despair will count at three total failures. That will give a more sensible option than jamming guns.

On top of that my house rules will make higher ranked defense talents always cost one strain. Those two simple rulings alone will make defense fine.

Another easy idea for better defense at high level is to allow a new option for use of a despair symbol:

Despair: count as two failures ie a despair will count at three total failures. That will give a more sensible option than jamming guns.

On top of that my house rules will make higher ranked defense talents always cost one strain. Those two simple rulings alone will make defense fine.

I'd caution against making Despair usable as a source of Failure--it really weakens the flow of gameplay with its "Yes, but/Yes, and/No, but, No/and" results and returns it to a much more binary system. However, a similar effect could be achieved by having Despair decrease the damage of an attack or lower the effectiveness of any Critical Hits scored. It still causes the attack to be less of a concern to the target, but maintains the non-binary approach of the dice system.

Another easy idea for better defense at high level is to allow a new option for use of a despair symbol:

Despair: count as two failures ie a despair will count at three total failures. That will give a more sensible option than jamming guns.

On top of that my house rules will make higher ranked defense talents always cost one strain. Those two simple rulings alone will make defense fine.

I'd caution against making Despair usable as a source of Failure--it really weakens the flow of gameplay with its "Yes, but/Yes, and/No, but, No/and" results and returns it to a much more binary system. However, a similar effect could be achieved by having Despair decrease the damage of an attack or lower the effectiveness of any Critical Hits scored. It still causes the attack to be less of a concern to the target, but maintains the non-binary approach of the dice system.

I haven't been following this discussion closely, but I did want to point out that Despair has two functions, and one of them is indeed failure. That is to say, a Despair symbol counts as 1 Failure. Although of course the Failure aspect can be canceled by a Success symbol, and then of course you are left with just whatever other disastrous thing the Despair caused.

So I agree that Despair shouldn't just be a failure mechanism in that the rules dictate it is more than this, but certainly failure is one of it's functions.

Another easy idea for better defense at high level is to allow a new option for use of a despair symbol:

Despair: count as two failures ie a despair will count at three total failures. That will give a more sensible option than jamming guns.

On top of that my house rules will make higher ranked defense talents always cost one strain. Those two simple rulings alone will make defense fine.

I'd caution against making Despair usable as a source of Failure--it really weakens the flow of gameplay with its "Yes, but/Yes, and/No, but, No/and" results and returns it to a much more binary system. However, a similar effect could be achieved by having Despair decrease the damage of an attack or lower the effectiveness of any Critical Hits scored. It still causes the attack to be less of a concern to the target, but maintains the non-binary approach of the dice system.

I haven't been following this discussion closely, but I did want to point out that Despair has two functions, and one of them is indeed failure. That is to say, a Despair symbol counts as 1 Failure. Although of course the Failure aspect can be canceled by a Success symbol, and then of course you are left with just whatever other disastrous thing the Despair caused.

So I agree that Despair shouldn't just be a failure mechanism in that the rules dictate it is more than this, but certainly failure is one of it's functions.

Oh absolutely. However, Gallows looked to have already taken this into account and was suggesting that the narrative element of Despair be used on the success/failure axis of the die result. As for my own argument, I'm not intending to imply that Despair has no relevance to the success or failure of a role, but only that it should have a broader effect than only that.

Another easy idea for better defense at high level is to allow a new option for use of a despair symbol:

Despair: count as two failures ie a despair will count at three total failures. That will give a more sensible option than jamming guns.

On top of that my house rules will make higher ranked defense talents always cost one strain. Those two simple rulings alone will make defense fine.

I'd caution against making Despair usable as a source of Failure--it really weakens the flow of gameplay with its "Yes, but/Yes, and/No, but, No/and" results and returns it to a much more binary system. However, a similar effect could be achieved by having Despair decrease the damage of an attack or lower the effectiveness of any Critical Hits scored. It still causes the attack to be less of a concern to the target, but maintains the non-binary approach of the dice system.

I haven't been following this discussion closely, but I did want to point out that Despair has two functions, and one of them is indeed failure. That is to say, a Despair symbol counts as 1 Failure. Although of course the Failure aspect can be canceled by a Success symbol, and then of course you are left with just whatever other disastrous thing the Despair caused.

So I agree that Despair shouldn't just be a failure mechanism in that the rules dictate it is more than this, but certainly failure is one of it's functions.

Oh absolutely. However, Gallows looked to have already taken this into account and was suggesting that the narrative element of Despair be used on the success/failure axis of the die result. As for my own argument, I'm not intending to imply that Despair has no relevance to the success or failure of a role, but only that it should have a broader effect than only that.

I agree. It intended as just an option for spending a despair symbol. I'd rule the option could only be picked once for each check if multiple despair symbols were rolled.