Another post brought up the fact that the table for suggested uses of Advantages and Triumphs allows an attacker to knock his opponent prone with 3 Advantages or a Triumph. I'm away from book at the moment (spending a few days in Barcelona while my books are back in Tacoma), butif this is the case, then what is the point of the Knockdown Talent (which allows you to knock down your foe with a Triumph on melee attacks)?

I'm pretty sure that's actually a standard Threat/Despair result, not Advantage/Triumph. I'll have to check my book when I get home.

EDIT: T-town? Dude, we should game sometime.

Another post brought up the fact that the table for suggested uses of Advantages and Triumphs allows an attacker to knock his opponent prone with 3 Advantages or a Triumph. I'm away from book at the moment (spending a few days in Barcelona while my books are back in Tacoma), butif this is the case, then what is the point of the Knockdown Talent (which allows you to knock down your foe with a Triumph on melee attacks)?

I thought the exact same thing when I read the Knockdown talent. Seems like a waste of a Triumph. And it just knocks them prone, so basically the have to spend a maneuver to get up? Oh scary!

"The character falls prone" is a possible outcome of generating 1 Despair or 3 Threat on a combat skill check. The Knockdown Talent allows a player to spend a Triumph in order to knock an enemy prone.

The distinction being who falls down when. Good catch!

"The character falls prone" is a possible outcome of generating 1 Despair or 3 Threat on a combat skill check. The Knockdown Talent allows a player to spend a Triumph in order to knock an enemy prone.

QFT

For melee characters, it is really not a "wasted talent". Yes you can knock a guy prone if he tosses 3 threats on an action. Yes you can do it on a Despair. But how often do the bad guys really toss that many?

Since most melee weapons can crit at stupidly low levels of advantages, it is a useful talent so you can use the advantages to crit, then the Triumph to Knockdown. Then the bad guy has a choice. Stay prone, give the melee character (which he's still engaged with) at blue bonus die to his next attack, or blow a maneuver to stand (still engaged) and either shoot while engaged or use his action to move out of engaged range. Either way the melee character wins.

Honestly there are very few "wasted talents" in this system. Situational, maybe. Wasted? No.

Honestly there are very few "wasted talents" in this system. Situational, maybe. Wasted? No.

I agree with this. Really, they're all situational if you look at them from far enough out, so to speak.

I think that might have been my thread where that was brought up. Oops, I hadn't verified that from the actual core rulebook. I use a consolidated and simplified table for reference that I printed up. My group's been running prone for 3 advantage since that's equivalent to the amount of threat that can trigger it. Which, given that the table is meant to be a guideline (and prone can fall under the umbrella of "narrative advantage"), isn't so unreasonable.

Even if that's potentially too generous, though, I wouldn't bat an eye at allowing a PC to knock an opponent prone with a Triumph, talent or no.

Talents like these are a slippery slope as far as I'm concerned, as it can potentially result in a problem that plagued 3.x D&D - there were so many super-specific feats, etc. that you couldn't really attempt much of anything because "you don't have that feat."

It's against the spirit of the system to say "you can't knock the target prone because you don't have that talent!" but at the same time why spend XP on a talent for an effect that most reasonable GMs would give you for a Triumph or 3-4 Advantage?

I remember reading this talent and thinking it was a total waste. For a triumph I'd thinking knocking somebody down might be a rather low end result. On a good triumph I'd say knock them down and have a barrel fall on them. If you get a second triumph on the attack a herd of Banthas is startled by the noise and stampedes actoss the target.

One knockdown for a triumphk, whoop-de-do.

I remember reading this talent and thinking it was a total waste. For a triumph I'd thinking knocking somebody down might be a rather low end result. On a good triumph I'd say knock them down and have a barrel fall on them. If you get a second triumph on the attack a herd of Banthas is startled by the noise and stampedes actoss the target.

One knockdown for a triumphk, whoop-de-do.

Yeah, that's my big problem with this talent, is that I feel knocking an opponent prone should already fall under the purview of a Triumph. I mean, I think disarming an opponent is worth more than knocking them down, and that only costs three Advantage...

Isn't there a Knockdown quality for weapons? IIRC, unarmed attacks (and thus Brawl weapons) already have it. What if the Knockdown Talent simply allowed the character to treat any Melee weapon he/she wields as though it possesses the Knockown quality? The key difference here is that knocking your opponent prone could then be activated with Advantage (two, I think, still away from book) or Triumph, making it a bit more appealing.

Isn't there a Knockdown quality for weapons? IIRC, unarmed attacks (and thus Brawl weapons) already have it. What if the Knockdown Talent simply allowed the character to treat any Melee weapon he/she wields as though it possesses the Knockown quality? The key difference here is that knocking your opponent prone could then be activated with Advantage (two, I think, still away from book) or Triumph, making it a bit more appealing.

There is, but it is for (drum roll please):

Bowcaster

Bola/Net

That's it.

Bola/Net is obvious because even an untrained combat character should be able to knock someone down with the bola or net. The Bowcaster gets it because the Quarrels hit you with such force you can't help but be knocked down. That's it. There is no mod attachment that allows knockdown. Even Weighted Head doesn't do it.

And the Knockdown trait on weapons allows for knockdown at the cost of 2 advantages, +1 advantage for each silhouette larger the target is.

I remember reading this talent and thinking it was a total waste. For a triumph I'd thinking knocking somebody down might be a rather low end result. On a good triumph I'd say knock them down and have a barrel fall on them. If you get a second triumph on the attack a herd of Banthas is startled by the noise and stampedes actoss the target.

One knockdown for a triumphk, whoop-de-do.

Yeah, that's my big problem with this talent, is that I feel knocking an opponent prone should already fall under the purview of a Triumph. I mean, I think disarming an opponent is worth more than knocking them down, and that only costs three Advantage...

But it's not a total waste.

The point is you don't knock people down. They fall, stumble, dive. If they do that, its on them. Your blaster isn't going to knock a person down anymore then if someone shoots you in real life with a gun. You might fall down after you get shot cause you're dying, but not as a result of the bullet hitting flesh.

By allowing characters to knockdown on advantage, you are MAKING the talent worthless . There is no reason for that. Mechanically it doesn't even make sense. So they got 3 advantages or a triumph. Make them come up with something more creative or use what the book lists for 3 advantage.

What's listed in the book is far better then knocking your opponent prone, especially if you are a ranged character. 3 advantages are:

negate targets defenses

ignore penalizing environment

disable the target in lieu of doing damage

gain +1 melee or ranged defense

disarm

Really, why would you pick prone over any of those options? Unless you are aforementioned melee character where it is a huge benefit to you to prone out the target as it keeps them close and gives you a bonus. That bonus doesn't fall under advantage or triumph for the obvious reasons of you don't knock them down, they fall down themselves.

By allowing characters to knockdown on advantage, you are MAKING the talent worthless . There is no reason for that. Mechanically it doesn't even make sense. So they got 3 advantages or a triumph. Make them come up with something more creative or use what the book lists for 3 advantage.

What's listed in the book is far better then knocking your opponent prone, especially if you are a ranged character. 3 advantages are:

negate targets defenses

ignore penalizing environment

disable the target in lieu of doing damage

gain +1 melee or ranged defense

disarm

Really, why would you pick prone over any of those options? Unless you are aforementioned melee character where it is a huge benefit to you to prone out the target as it keeps them close and gives you a bonus. That bonus doesn't fall under advantage or triumph for the obvious reasons of you don't knock them down, they fall down themselves.

Well, when you narrate the reason for knocking an opponent prone for 3 advantage, you'd say they sidestepped your shot and tripped over something, or your blaster knicked a pressurized pipe and the force of the blast knocked them down, etc. The same way you'd narrate a setback/boost die.

Your argument is also contradictory regarding whether or not the talent is worthwhile or not. You say a group is MAKING it worthless by allowing 3 advantage to trigger prone, but at the same time you're saying that the listed options for 3 advantage are already stronger than prone. If the talent added an underwhelming option (prone) to the list of things you can do with 3 advantage it still wouldn't be any good. But it says you have to spend a TRIUMPH to do that, which is laughable.

As for prone being useful for ranged characters, it's great if you have a melee ally that can run over to the guy and start pounding on him.

EDIT: I forgot that I also wanted to point out that Brawl attacks also intrinsically gain the Knockdown quality (as well as Disorient 1), as per the rules for Unarmed Combat on page 211 of the core rulebook. So for a Brawler you get a talent that says you can knock someone prone for a Triumph, when you can already do it for 2 Adv (+1 per sil larger). Ridiculous.

Well, when you narrate the reason for knocking an opponent prone for 3 advantage, you'd say they sidestepped your shot and tripped over something, or your blaster knicked a pressurized pipe and the force of the blast knocked them down, etc. The same way you'd narrate a setback/boost die.

Your argument is also contradictory regarding whether or not the talent is worthwhile or not. You say a group is MAKING it worthless by allowing 3 advantage to trigger prone, but at the same time you're saying that the listed options for 3 advantage are already stronger than prone. If the talent added an underwhelming option (prone) to the list of things you can do with 3 advantage it still wouldn't be any good. But it says you have to spend a TRIUMPH to do that, which is laughable.

As for prone being useful for ranged characters, it's great if you have a melee ally that can run over to the guy and start pounding on him.

EDIT: I forgot that I also wanted to point out that Brawl attacks also intrinsically gain the Knockdown quality (as well as Disorient 1), as per the rules for Unarmed Combat on page 211 of the core rulebook. So for a Brawler you get a talent that says you can knock someone prone for a Triumph, when you can already do it for 2 Adv (+1 per sil larger). Ridiculous.

And if you want to sidestep the rules by doing so narratively as you claim, feel free.

No matter how contradictory you think my argument is, you don't get to come in here and ***** about a talent being worthless when you MAKE it worthless. That is even more contradictory then anything I've come up with, all within the scope of the rules.

And it makes perfect sense Brawl gets the knockdown quality. Sweep the leg, Daniel-son. And look, you get to avoid having to take the Knockdown talent! Bonus!

That Knockdown talent is written for melee characters who use melee weapons that don't get any sort of native knockdown quality (although I'd argue that the force pike should probably have it). If you don't like it, and want to cheat the system by using triumph narratively, fine. It's your game. But don't complain a talent is worthless when you make it so.

I thought 2 advantages where enough, +1 per silhouette bigger than1.

I used that capacity to create the Stouker concussion riffle used by Trandoshans in the Darkforces videogame a long time ago... with blast capacity, making prone every character in the engagment. Nice and clear.

from http://gaming.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_Dark_Forces :

• "Stouker Concussion Rifle: The concussion rifle is a strong and accurate weapon that is useful for engaging multiple enemies. The concussion rifle fires invisible bullets of ionized air which explode on contact - the end result is a blue explosion at the location of a targeted enemy. If multiple enemies are in front of the player, the rifle can hit two of them with separate explosions. The explosions deal splash damage which is dangerous to the player. The concussion rifle uses four power cell units per shot."

So, as a house rule, how do you folks feel about the Knockdown talent simply adding the Knockdown quality to any Melee weapon the character is using?

So, as a house rule, how do you folks feel about the Knockdown talent simply adding the Knockdown quality to any Melee weapon the character is using?

Really?

I think melee characters are powerful enough in this system as it is right now. I would be open for them to change the Knockdown talent from requiring Triumph to requiring advantages. But again, melee characters are pretty beefy right now. To add that power level... I dunno.

So, as a house rule, how do you folks feel about the Knockdown talent simply adding the Knockdown quality to any Melee weapon the character is using?

Really?

I think melee characters are powerful enough in this system as it is right now. I would be open for them to change the Knockdown talent from requiring Triumph to requiring advantages. But again, melee characters are pretty beefy right now. To add that power level... I dunno.

How is that any different from allowing the knockdown on advantages? Knockdown isn't automatic, it still requires activation.

Good point, but it's different in that if FFG decides Knockdown is too weak of a talent and decides to change it to advantages, then it just makes the talent stronger to do the effect. Remember, Knockdown only applies to a melee attack. So characters using melee weapons get to use knockdown, which doesn't come natively on their weapons.

I'm not sure what you mean by knockdown isn't automatic and requires an activation. Instead of trying to guess what it means, could you elaborate on that point more?

I agree with alien, during Escape from Mos Shuuta and Long arm of the Hutt we allowed people to be knocked down by using a number of advantages (I think 3), later when we got the Core book we noticed the Knockdown Talent and we see no use for it. We might try to houserule it in a way to make it worthwhile.

Yeah, I've long considered a house rule that has this talent grant the Knockdown quality to melee weapons. Not sure if that's too overpowered. I think that there is the consideration.

If you see no problem in your games with granting a Knockdown for 3 Advantage, then a talent that reduces it by 1 is no big deal.

However, if Knockdown ends up being a very powerful effect in your games (e.g. if you have very tactical/battle-savvy players/PCs), a Triumph here might be the more appropriate cost. A talent that gives a Triumph an effect that's not really incumbent on the GM to give the OK is very valuable for some groups.

All the discussion aside. Why would you like to spend XPs on a talent, that all it does is to allow you to spend a triumph to knock people prone, when they may spend 1 manoeuvre to stand up? Specially when for a for a triumph you can activate any of your weapon's quality, or inflict a critical hit, or use any of the suggestions in table 6-2.

All the discussion aside. Why would you like to spend XPs on a talent, that all it does is to allow you to spend a triumph to knock people prone, when they may spend 1 manoeuvre to stand up? Specially when for a for a triumph you can activate any of your weapon's quality, or inflict a critical hit, or use any of the suggestions in table 6-2.

Maybe to support a story concept built around a tripping martial artist?

How is that any different from allowing the knockdown on advantages? Knockdown isn't automatic, it still requires activation.

Good point, but it's different in that if FFG decides Knockdown is too weak of a talent and decides to change it to advantages, then it just makes the talent stronger to do the effect. Remember, Knockdown only applies to a melee attack. So characters using melee weapons get to use knockdown, which doesn't come natively on their weapons.

I'm not sure what you mean by knockdown isn't automatic and requires an activation. Instead of trying to guess what it means, could you elaborate on that point more?

I meant that the Knockdown quality on a weapon only takes effect if the attacker elects to spend 2 Advantages or a Triumph. The Knockdown talent only takes effect if the attacker elects to spend a Triumph. You stated that you'd consider having the talent changed to being triggered from Advantages, so I asked how this would be any different from having the talent grant the Knockdown quality, and then I seem to have lost you...

All the discussion aside. Why would you like to spend XPs on a talent, that all it does is to allow you to spend a triumph to knock people prone, when they may spend 1 manoeuvre to stand up? Specially when for a for a triumph you can activate any of your weapon's quality, or inflict a critical hit, or use any of the suggestions in table 6-2.

I agree that it is a pitifully weak talent in my eyes. It's never going to see use outside of fighting a Nemesis, and there it's mostly going to be for the metagame effect of draining that Maneuver.