View Full Version : Anyone Play Starwars RPG Saga edition? A rules query.

2011-02-20, 02:01 AM
I am starting to play again soon.
One of my friends who I also play D&D with has in the past played a 3.5 ninja and is interested in continuing that legacy by playing a Jedi with the power cloak (from the clone wars campaign setting) and sentinels strike talent(Kotor campaign setting) as a basis.
So my question is:
Does this work how invisibility and sudden strike did?
does total concealment still allow for sneak attacks and the like?
I have been reading the rules but I still am not 100% sure.

2011-02-20, 03:17 AM
Without having those books I can only give general advice.

When I picked up 4e D&D rules it was easy to assume things work the same as they did previously if they seem similar. For instance you could assume that opportunity attacks (4e) and Attacks of opportunity (3e) operate the same. But they do not as 4e is once a turn and 3e is once a round.

You could be doing a similar thing here. Look at the rules fully with no assumptions from previous games such as D&D 3e. If it does not give any of the restrictions like D&D did they do not exist.

The only problem is when you do not see it you then wonder if you missed it or it is not there. I can understand how that would be a problem.

2011-02-20, 05:27 AM
Well its kind of like, sentinels strike basically says it works when the opponent is not expecting the attack or is denied dex to AC. like sudden strike basically.
But cloak provides total concealment. The rules for total concealment never state that they deny the opponent dex to AC like invisibility does, but in all other ways cloak seems to function like invisibility. Also from a logical perspective, you aren't expecting an attack from an opponent you can't see. But i can't seem to find satisfactory confirmation within the rules.
I am torn between following that advice and not giving sentinel strike because the rules you do, and going with my gut.

2011-02-20, 05:56 AM
Well, Saga is it's own game. If it doesn't state that Concealment denies a defender his Dex to AC, then it doesn't.