I haven't found anything definitive in the book, so I can only assume answers based on omission.

The question I've been trying to answer is: If a person's roll nets them 1 triumph and 1 threat after all cancellations... what happens? I know Triumphs count as one success. And they can be used for things that normally cost Advantage. But it doesn't appear that Triumph cancels out threat.

I've been playing that Triumph doesn't touch threat, but Triumphs always resolve regardless. And any remaining threat then also resolves.

So in my example of 1 triumph and 1 threat, I would rule that as "While you crit with your weapon, you exerted yourself to make the shot and suffer 1 strain." Or the equivalent.

Does that sound right to you guys?

In your example, did the dice show enough Failures to cancel out the success from the Triumph?

In your example, did the dice show enough Failures to cancel out the success from the Triumph?

No. The roll is a success. But there are remaining threat.

Edit: And when I said "Triumphs always resolve" I meant in the form of their advantage, and not their success (since a failure can absolutely cancel triumph's success).

Assuming 1 Success, 1 Triumph and 1 Threat your answer would be correct. Having said that... spice it up!

Blasting the Stormtrooper squarely in the chest and rendering him lifeless (crits kill minions) getting in position for the shot took a little effort. (1 Strain)

Yeah, rolls can get exciting. You could potentially have a successful roll that nets Triumph AND Despair AND Threat. They might do something awesome, but they also might run out of ammo and leave themselves open to attack.

You don't specify what sort of roll it is, but as an example:

Your character was picking the lock on a door. He succeeded, which opened the door (success) and in a stroke of good luck also managed to completely disable the alarm (Triumph). However, as he slips inside he can hear footsteps approaching from around a corner (Threat).

Yes. A net result of 1 Triumph, 1 Success and 1 Threat means all three resolve. It is quite possible to end with a net result of 1 Triumph and 1 Threat, if there are enough Failures rolled. In that case the test is failed, something really good happens, and something kind of bad happens.

If shooting at a Stormtrooper with 1 Triumph/Success and 1 Threat, maybe your shot nails the trooper and blasts through his armour sending him to the ground in a lifeless heap, but the sound of the shot alerts his companions nearby.

With a net Failure, but still a Triumph and a Threat, your shot goes astray missing the trooper, but hitting a control box and bringing down the blast doors, however you can hear a fresh squad of troopers now trying to break through. On a Deapair instead of a Treat maybe you brought down the blast door behind the squad instead of in front of them..

Best advice I can give for funky results. Resolve the positive results first (or if you are a kind GM, resolve the players side of the deal first, e.g. advantage/triumph on PC rolls, threat/despair on NPC rolls) as that establishes a boundary to work on the rest of the dice results.

The actions should result in more complex events but shouldn't undo each other. So if a PC rolls 3 advantage and wants to make an NPC fall over, they shouldn't then on the despair have the NPC bounce right back up.

Sorry if I was unclear about what the dice were showing. What I meant was that after all cancellations, only 1 triumph and 1 threat were reamaining. So, for example, a roll similar to: 3 successes, 3 failures, 1 triumph, 1 advantage, 2 threat.

That would net 1 triumph and 1 threat. It would count as a success, since triumphs count as 1 success. But there would also be threat. My question was more along the lines of does the triumph help cancel the remaining threat? I haven't read anything that says it does, so my guess is that it does not.

Sorry if I was unclear about what the dice were showing. What I meant was that after all cancellations, only 1 triumph and 1 threat were reamaining. So, for example, a roll similar to: 3 successes, 3 failures, 1 triumph, 1 advantage, 2 threat.

That would net 1 triumph and 1 threat.

No, it would net 1 Triumph, 1 Success, and 1 Threat. The three other successes were cancelled by three failures, but the Triumph is also a success. The Triumph does not cancel the Threat though.

No, it would net 1 Triumph, 1 Success, and 1 Threat. The three other successes were cancelled by three failures, but the Triumph is also a success. The Triumph does not cancel the Threat though.

That's what I said in the sentence right after your cutoff. When I said "net" I meant symbols on the die. I am fully aware triumphs count as both 1 success as well as an additional bonus (that cannot be cancelled).

But I do appreciate the reply.

Sorry, I didn't cut off to be a jerk or something, I just thought expressing it fully rather than qualifying it after would be more clear.

No worries! I wasn't upset. Was just making sure we were on the same page.

Best advice I can give for funky results. Resolve the positive results first (or if you are a kind GM, resolve the players side of the deal first, e.g. advantage/triumph on PC rolls, threat/despair on NPC rolls) as that establishes a boundary to work on the rest of the dice results.

The actions should result in more complex events but shouldn't undo each other. So if a PC rolls 3 advantage and wants to make an NPC fall over, they shouldn't then on the despair have the NPC bounce right back up.

Personally, as a forgiving GM, I'd be more inclined to fill in the negatives first, so that the players have the option of using their Triumph or Advantages to help mitigate some of the threat they just rolled if they so desire.

Using the 'slice the door' scenario above for example:

If he players net 1 triumph, and 1 threat, but no successes (the triumph's success was canceled by a failure).

Not only do they fail to get the door open (no successes), but they hear the marching footsteps of a squad of troopers turn down the corridor on the other side of the door (threat).

They then have the option to spend their Triumph to:

• Buy some more time by having the squad's normal patrol be interrupted by some minor officer ordering them to do *something* that will take them away from that door for the time being.
• Or they could spend that Triumph to get in position to ambush the squad when it comes through the door, giving them a way through *if* they can handle what's coming from the other side.
• Or they can spend it to find a hiding spot so the patrol passes without noticing them.
• Or they manage to tell from the computer (somehow) that the approaching squad is a group of technical staff who have been working extra shifts, and now (with some decent checks) they can pretend to be a relief crew, and progress further without drawing suspicion.

Best advice I can give for funky results. Resolve the positive results first (or if you are a kind GM, resolve the players side of the deal first, e.g. advantage/triumph on PC rolls, threat/despair on NPC rolls) as that establishes a boundary to work on the rest of the dice results.

The actions should result in more complex events but shouldn't undo each other. So if a PC rolls 3 advantage and wants to make an NPC fall over, they shouldn't then on the despair have the NPC bounce right back up.

Personally, as a forgiving GM, I'd be more inclined to fill in the negatives first, so that the players have the option of using their Triumph or Advantages to help mitigate some of the threat they just rolled if they so desire.

Using the 'slice the door' scenario above for example:

If he players net 1 triumph, and 1 threat, but no successes (the triumph's success was canceled by a failure).

Not only do they fail to get the door open (no successes), but they hear the marching footsteps of a squad of troopers turn down the corridor on the other side of the door (threat).

They then have the option to spend their Triumph to:

• Buy some more time by having the squad's normal patrol be interrupted by some minor officer ordering them to do *something* that will take them away from that door for the time being.
• Or they could spend that Triumph to get in position to ambush the squad when it comes through the door, giving them a way through *if* they can handle what's coming from the other side.
• Or they can spend it to find a hiding spot so the patrol passes without noticing them.
• Or they manage to tell from the computer (somehow) that the approaching squad is a group of technical staff who have been working extra shifts, and now (with some decent checks) they can pretend to be a relief crew, and progress further without drawing suspicion.

The bullets you listed though are exactly what I'm talking about. They are different, complex things that don't contradict the positive. What I meant (and have seen) is GMs doing things like "You open the door but because of the threat it closes again"

How you get to those ideas is of course down to group/GM style. For me I find it easier if I allow my players the blank canvas and then I paint in around them.

Best advice I can give for funky results. Resolve the positive results first (or if you are a kind GM, resolve the players side of the deal first, e.g. advantage/triumph on PC rolls, threat/despair on NPC rolls) as that establishes a boundary to work on the rest of the dice results.

The actions should result in more complex events but shouldn't undo each other. So if a PC rolls 3 advantage and wants to make an NPC fall over, they shouldn't then on the despair have the NPC bounce right back up.

Personally, as a forgiving GM, I'd be more inclined to fill in the negatives first, so that the players have the option of using their Triumph or Advantages to help mitigate some of the threat they just rolled if they so desire.

Using the 'slice the door' scenario above for example:

If he players net 1 triumph, and 1 threat, but no successes (the triumph's success was canceled by a failure).

Not only do they fail to get the door open (no successes), but they hear the marching footsteps of a squad of troopers turn down the corridor on the other side of the door (threat).

They then have the option to spend their Triumph to:

• Buy some more time by having the squad's normal patrol be interrupted by some minor officer ordering them to do *something* that will take them away from that door for the time being.
• Or they could spend that Triumph to get in position to ambush the squad when it comes through the door, giving them a way through *if* they can handle what's coming from the other side.
• Or they can spend it to find a hiding spot so the patrol passes without noticing them.
• Or they manage to tell from the computer (somehow) that the approaching squad is a group of technical staff who have been working extra shifts, and now (with some decent checks) they can pretend to be a relief crew, and progress further without drawing suspicion.

The bullets you listed though are exactly what I'm talking about. They are different, complex things that don't contradict the positive. What I meant (and have seen) is GMs doing things like "You open the door but because of the threat it closes again"

How you get to those ideas is of course down to group/GM style. For me I find it easier if I allow my players the blank canvas and then I paint in around them.

No argument, I was just mentioning the difference in order that I'd use. I'd hate to have players use a triumph and end up feeling like they got shafted because I filled in after them, and they couldn't take that into account when they were deciding how to spend the triumph.

With small advantage vs. Despair, I might be more inclined to have part of the Despair simply be that they didn't notice what was going on until it was too late to do anything about it. But Triumph? I just feel like the players should have as much information as possible about what's going on so they can make a good decision there.

Of course, there's the caveat that if the players *want* to fill in the details first, I won't stop them, and I'll do my best to avoid directly cancelling out their good with my bad. (I agree, that's pretty cheesy.)

I'd never have a successful door open and then re-shut on them due to threat. I see threat as something unrelated, but parallel, to the specific task at hand. That task can either succeed or fail. Some might argue that "well, they *did* open the door" but just closing it on their face again works against the spirit threat is supposed to represent to the dice rolls.

*resurrect*

Hello.

Sometimes searching forums is really helpful, because today I played the game the first time and we had the very same discussion about how to resolve "Triumph" in the face of a "Threat". But in fact: your discussion does not provide full support on the questions we had.

The netto dice-role we had during gameplay was like this:

1 Success

1 Triumph

1 Threat

which actually means or translates into:

2 Successes

1 Triumph

1 Threat

That's the surface of things.

In our playgroup we got into a serious and long discussion, because neither ther game-material for starters (the new beginners box or whatever it is called) nor the core rulebook for Star Wars: Edge of the Empire really prove to be reliable sources to get a clear picture about how to solve "Triumh" vs. "Threat".

All the prepared and ready-to-play characters show a brief summary of all six different dice-results. And there you find this wording für "Advantage" and "Triumph":

"Advantage * symbols indicate a positive side effect or consequence,..."

"Triumph" * symbols count as Success * symbols and may also be spent to trigger a powerful positive consequence."

(page 2 of each character sheet)

And when you look into the core rulebook (I don't have it at my place now, but I recall this:), you will find a description for "Triumph" telling you that "Triumph" is basically a more powerful version of "Advantage" with a stronger narrative outcome.

But what does this mean in relation to "Threats"?

a) You could argue that "Advantages" and "Threats" are a completely different category of dice-results, which require you to treat those dice-results seperately from the other catgory of dice, which would be "Triumph" and "Despair". You could support this position with the concept that "Advantages" and "Threats" nullify each other, while "Triumphs" and "Despairs" stand alone and keep existing, no matter what.

b) On the contrary you could say: Since "Advantages" and "Triumphs" are described as being or triggering "positive consequences", there is no need to give them different understandings. Actually there is no solid reason why "triggering a positive consequence" with a "Triumph" should not be able to nullify a single "Threat", because this would make the "Triumph" inferior to an "Advantage" although it is meant to be more powerful than an "Advantage". Only a weak, but still supportive additional argument would be that the whole dice-mechanics of SW - EtoE aim at simplification, which would render a hard distinction between "Advantage" and "Triumph" unreasonable.

In other words: There are two very different readings or possible understandings how to relate "Triumphs" to "Threats" (and thus "Despairs" to "Advantages") and thus solve the above-mentioned dice-result - and both in my opinion would be equally valid. In order to get back into playing again we decided to rule it as described in b). We did not feel very comfortable with this solution, but we had the same amount of doubts about solution a) and just decided a "gamers friendly" outcome.

So I humbly ask you to consider these two differing thoughts and to offer aid in order to find the "right" solution; I especially address the game-designers with this question for clarification on this one.

In short: Does a single "Triumph" nullify a single "Threat" like a single "Advantage" nullifies a single "Threat"?

Thank you very much in advance.

Best wishes!

The Triumph part of a Triumph doesn't cancel out anything nor can anything cancel it. A Triumph also counts as a success. The success part can be canceled.

You could roll a 1 Triumph, 1 Success, 2 Failure, 2 Threat. Your final results would be no successes, 1 Triumph, and 2 Threat.

You can also roll a Triumph and a Despair on the same roll. They don't cancel each other out.

In short: Does a single "Triumph" nullify a single "Threat" like a single "Advantage" nullifies a single "Threat"?

No, you're overthinking it. As laid out in the book: Advantages and Threats cancel each other, but have no impact on Success/Failure/Triumph/Despair; Successes and Failures cancel each other, but have no impact on Advantage/Threat/Triumph/Despair; Triumphs and Despairs aren't cancelled by anything, however, the successes and failures they stand for can be cancelled by other failures and successes respectively.

This means there is a maximum 4 possible dice result to be interpreted for each roll: 1) Success or Failure; 2) Advantage or Threat; 3) Triumph; 4) Despair.

And that's all there is to it.

Hello.

Thank you Bronski and whalfrog for taking your time.

I am still not certain, but I think I will follow your lead.

Why do my doubts remain?

For once, although I understand the basic concept of the three different dice-result-pairs "Success/Failure", "Advantage/Threat", "Triumph/Despair", I do not take it that these are strictly resolved seperate. Why is that so? a) The "Triumph/Despair" influences the number of successes/failures and thus disrupts this idea; b) "Triumph/Despair" are similarly described like "Advantage/Failure" and both pairs even share a few comparable effects (example: critical injuries), which is why I wonder why "Triumph/Despair" would not affect the number of "Advantages/Threats" although they have an impact on "Successes/Threats" - in other words: why would pair 3 disrupt the seperation in relation to pair 1, but not to pair 2?

Secondly, just recollect my example:

The dice show this outcome face-value: 1 Success, 1 Triumph, 1 Threat, which translates into: 2 Successes, 1 Threat, 1 Triumph. Since the incredible and undoubting majority here and in other forums don't see a relation between "Threats" and "Triumphs", this actually means that although the player has an incredible success, there is also a threat; if he had rolled an "Advantage" instead of the Triumph" he would only have a Success while there would be no Threat at all. Yeah, doesn't feel right to me, when I consider how rare Triumphs are rolled, how much power you have to put into getting the D12 either in character-generation/development or by deploying a marker for the Light Side of the Power giving the game-master a Dark Side point in return, and most importantly given what the rule-book(s) say about all of this.

Maybe I overthink it; but I am just not certain. You have my reasons in my two postings. No offence intended: I don't see any of my arguments invalidated (yet), but I will stick with what seems to be the major understanding; and I really look forward to some guy at FFG to answer my rules-questions-mail I sent last night to them.

Anyway: case closed; I will tell my friends about the poor decision we made, and in future times we will consider what you have said as the no 1 reading of the rules. I appreciate your time and thoughts you spent on my question.

Best wishes!

Mad

I think interpreting the dice is an art, not a science.

Just remember this is supposed to be a narrative game - keep the game moving at a good rate rather than get bogged down with a bad call.

You don't really need a rules-call from FFG, just to interpret the dice to suit your table. It's not easy - most of us long-time role-players have to get our heads out of the success/fail paradigm we have. But it does start to make sense after a few games.

Be fair to the players, and don't sweat the small stuff.

Hello.

Thank you, Maelora. This is a very good advice. As a seasoned roleplaying-gamer I see your point and admit that it is kind of troublesome to resolve the dice in a narrative way.

A side-issue to my question is that at various spots in which I have raised or resurrected this topic people keep telling that I should take the "rules as written" (or something like that); and they argue there would be only one crystall clear way of looking at it without adding a lot of their own arguments and also without at least considering (if not falsifying) my arguments. And this, too, is what I challenge. The official game-material is ambigous about the question at hand, because the "rules as written" are kind of vague to say the least; therefore it is not "simple" or "easy" to provide the "one intended understanding" of this particular rule.

And so I have no trouble getting into a serious, but fair argument about it. And I, too, have no trouble following the majority's opinion, although I have trouble accepting the logic behind it.

Best wishes!

Mad

Yep, a lot of EoE is 'rules light', which is the flavour these days for games, after the rules-heavy era of things like D&D 3 and 4.

Remember that the rules and the dice and everything else is just there to make your game better. Interpret it in a way that makes the game better, and if it's not making your game better... change it.

It's good to get advice and see what other gamers are doing, but you can play EoE many ways and the bottom line should be what's fun for you and your players.

A side-issue to my question is that at various spots in which I have raised or resurrected this topic people keep telling that I should take the "rules as written" (or something like that); and they argue there would be only one crystall clear way of looking at it without adding a lot of their own arguments and also without at least considering (if not falsifying) my arguments. And this, too, is what I challenge. The official game-material is ambigous about the question at hand, because the "rules as written" are kind of vague to say the least; therefore it is not "simple" or "easy" to provide the "one intended understanding" of this particular rule.

Have to disagree with you here. There are plenty of places where RAW is vague, but this isn't one of them. It's the core mechanic for the game, and the only ambiguity is one of your own insertion. I think Maelora is right, you're still viewing the results through a "success/fail" paradigm, but the mechanic here is "3D" and is meant to have multiple results.

For once, although I understand the basic concept of the three different dice-result-pairs "Success/Failure", "Advantage/Threat", "Triumph/Despair", I do not take it that these are strictly resolved seperate. Why is that so? a) The "Triumph/Despair" influences the number of successes/failures and thus disrupts this idea;

Except that this is specifically explained in the book on page 12-13. Triumph and Despair are special cases, p12 says "Each Triumph symbol provides two effects..." and goes on to explain that one effect counts as a simple success, and the second effect is an uncancellable positive result.

From a different post:

b) On the contrary you could say: Since "Advantages" and "Triumphs" are described as being or triggering "positive consequences", there is no need to give them different understandings. Actually there is no solid reason why "triggering a positive consequence" with a "Triumph" should not be able to nullify a single "Threat",

I think the point of misunderstanding might be your interpretation of the *descriptions* (from the character sheet...?) of the dice results as if they have a bearing on the mechanical outcome. Just because Triumphs, Successes, and Advantages are all positive doesn't mean they are interchangeable. Using your logic you could argue that Successes could cancel Threats too, but that's clearly not the case.

The dice show this outcome face-value: 1 Success, 1 Triumph, 1 Threat, which translates into: 2 Successes, 1 Threat, 1 Triumph. Since the incredible and undoubting majority here and in other forums don't see a relation between "Threats" and "Triumphs", this actually means that although the player has an incredible success, there is also a threat; if he had rolled an "Advantage" instead of the Triumph" he would only have a Success while there would be no Threat at all. Yeah, doesn't feel right to me, when I consider how rare Triumphs are rolled...

First, Triumphs aren't that rare. If the character has any skill at all they will come up more often than a critical in D20, and once you get to 3 yellow dice it's almost 1/4.

Second, your result example was not an "incredible success". I believe this is an example of trying to collapse everything to a binary result. The result was this: a success, the two meaning possibly doing the task faster; a Triumph, indicating a possible boon related to the roll; and a Threat, meaning it cost some extra effort. If that was a Charm roll, the interpretation could be: success, the NPC believes you're a likeable person and they're willing to do you a favour; triumph, you actually know this person from your youth, maybe she had a crush on you in high school; threat, all this charm work is stressful, suffer one Strain.