I let armor defense and cover defense stack. Cover in my game range from 1-3.

I'm running as written mostly because I trust the devs and can see forward comparability coming into play. This is narrative play, not simulator based rocket science. If I do anything to assist with the "formiddable opponent" situation it will be to bump up the npc's soak. I'm out of this one, it's getting a bit wacky for my tastes. A lot of houserule bandwagoning and thesis construction over a single die. Your table. Do what you want. Whatever, internet.

While I totally agree the devs said armor and cover don't stack they said different sources of defense don't stack unless they state they do. OK that's fine, I am however confused. Here is why:

Armor: "The armors defense adds SB equal to the rating to the attackers pool. (168)

Sixth Sense and Superior Reflexes: The Character gains +1 Ranged/Melee Defenses, (142,144)

Cover: "cover...increases the character's ranged defense by one (213)

===================================

I get that armor is basically setting your defense. But the other two specifically talk about INCREASING your defense. Increasing from what? If these sources don't ever stack what is being increased? Maybe this is another case of rules based on material we don't have yet. But I'd make the argument that both cover and the FSE talents specifically state they stack by virtue of saying +1 and not 1.

I don't really see why cover wouldn't stack with armor. I also don't see why the FSE talents wouldn't stack with armor. I agree that too many dice can get a little wonky, but honestly ranged combat is fairly easy if you are good at it... I think these sources of defense should stack.

I think the cover rules fall under the multiple sources of defence. One of my other games is Warhammer 40,000, which uses a similar cover/armour mechanic. You simply use the best one available at the time, rather than letting them specifically stack. It streamlines things a bit, but as someone has eluded to earlier, the meta game idea is that an individual with armour that provides a defence value does not have to spend manoeuvres to get behind cover. Rather, they can spend their time aiming, without additional strain. Other environmental effects do add additional setback dice on top of defence values, but it is reasonable for defense values to effectively default to the most effective defense at a time.

Best available also applies to force powers as well... Although Sense upgrades the difficulty of an attack rather than adding a setback dice. Frankly, I think that is more effective than adding a setback dice as despair is now added to the mix. I don't think these things can remain in isolation from each other. Upgrading difficulty does stack with defense add setback dice.

I'm glad I'm not alone in that. I thought I was the only one that thought that way!

That's an excellent point, though. I never caught that wording, but the fact that combat checks ARE easy to do normally is a very good point as well. It is easier to get good dice than it is to get bad dice.

The example where they say multiple sources of defense doesn't stack relates to general defense not stacking with the two other types (ranged and melee).

But since cover increases your ranged defense and armor is general defense, then the two will not stack per RAW. If you have some other source of ranged defense increasing your rating it will stack.

It's just too wacky for me.

General defense applies to everything in my game and melee/ranged is added to that where relevant. It's not like defense is overpowered by a long shot, considering the chance to hit in this game.

so if a PC has armor that grants +1 defense, does that mean he never has to take cover? What about stormtrooper minions? Do they recieve bonus to cover even though they're wearing laminate armor?

so if a PC has armor that grants +1 defense, does that mean he never has to take cover? What about stormtrooper minions? Do they recieve bonus to cover even though they're wearing laminate armor?

Yep that's what it means, which is so incredibly silly when you consider different armor types with or without defense and then cover.

On top of that, if you calculate the chance to hit at medium range with a blaster for an average starting player who is ok at shooting, 2 in his skill and 3 in his stat and the enemy gets two dice for defense... he still has 61% chance to hit when spending one maneuver to aim and 67,2% when he spends two maneuvers to aim.

Once people start getting bigger dice pools, you'll need all the defense you can get to keep the game balanced :-)

so if a PC has armor that grants +1 defense, does that mean he never has to take cover? What about stormtrooper minions? Do they recieve bonus to cover even though they're wearing laminate armor?

The armored PC can still get 2 defense from superior cover.

The ST armor only adds soak and not defense so they can still benefit from cover.

so if a PC has armor that grants +1 defense, does that mean he never has to take cover? What about stormtrooper minions? Do they recieve bonus to cover even though they're wearing laminate armor?

The armored PC can still get 2 defense from superior cover.

The ST armor only adds soak and not defense so they can still benefit from cover.

My mistake on the laminate amor. Thanks for the clarification.

I like the rules to support the narrative. If a character acts in a way that is interesting and makes sense, and the system doesn't support that, we wind up houseruling.

I get the idea behind not stacking. And it makes some cool things happen! Less incentive to wear armor, so people run around in leather vests and call it good. Scary bounty hunters standing out in the open and gunning people down like a 90's action movie. Many will like this!

I happen to find it immersion-breaking, so I let defense bonuses stack. Haven't found it to bog things down; combat remains fluid, brisk, and enjoyable. Then again, my universes veer a bit from the films in style, so it's reasonable that others will enjoy the rules as written.

Edit: I should clarify. If someone is in the heat of the moment, and ducks behind a wall to take cover - and then finds out it doesn't do anything - it's usually taken them out of said moment. And the moment is cool! So I'd rather keep'm in. That's all

Ok, now I am officially confused. p202 says that cover allows a cover to gain ranged defense 1 but p213 says cover increases the characters ranged defense by 1 (this was what it was changed to in the beta phase).

So although Sam Stewart confirmed the pg 202 ruling it might have been an oversight as he didn't realise both rulings were in the book. Although I like to play mostly be RAW, or I guess RAI, I think the pg213 ruling does make more sense.

( and yes this means I have changed my mind, but this is good as it allows me to grow as a person.)

I've just sent a rules question off to FFG, lets see what they come back with.

Ok, I have had a very quick answer from Mr Sam Stewart himself, it was as stated on the order 66 podcast. Defense from cover absolutely does not stack.

Mr Stewart was really helpful and explained;

"The reason we changed defense slightly is we wanted to balance defense with, on the one hand, being useful to the players and allowing them to increase it, with, on the other hand, avoiding really bloated dice pools. We ret-conned the change in the Beta after we decided (post-Beta) to make Sixth Sense and Superior Reflexes not Force talents (leaving them potentially open to more characters in the future). Now armor and cover don't stack, but the "defensive" talents do."

What a totally nice guy!

(And this means i have changed my mind back, it doesn't mean that I haven't grown as a person just that I have realised, as a fan boy, that a Devs word is LAW!!!, Sam is to FFG what Dredd is to MegaCity One)

@ Lupex Lol. I also sent rules question in and got same result.

I had overlooked the page 202 cover, hopefully at some point they do an errata document to make the two agree.

As I now understand it, both cover and armor set your defense to a given value (and don't stack). The FSE talents add to your defense and so would stack.

I think this A) makes sense from a meta perspective, and B) fits within the Star Wars world (if not the real world) armor has always been fairly weak in SW RPG and certainly the movies don't depict it as awesome.

Also, it's been confirmed by the devs that Defense from armor and Defense from cover do not stack. So, if you've got armored clothing, you'll need to find improved cover that grants two setback dice to get any real benefit.

Yes, this is one rule that I find just stupid. My armor stops working if I hide behind a wall. Stupid

Also, it's been confirmed by the devs that Defense from armor and Defense from cover do not stack. So, if you've got armored clothing, you'll need to find improved cover that grants two setback dice to get any real benefit.

Yes, this is one rule that I find just stupid. My armor stops working if I hide behind a wall. Stupid

It's not that the armor stops working – the soak is still there. It's that all the cool plates that deflect damage (defense) rather than absorb it (soak) don't mean much when you cover them up with a wall.

Also, it's been confirmed by the devs that Defense from armor and Defense from cover do not stack. So, if you've got armored clothing, you'll need to find improved cover that grants two setback dice to get any real benefit.

Yes, this is one rule that I find just stupid. My armor stops working if I hide behind a wall. Stupid