Saga Edition: Force Power vs Lightsabers at high levels (branch off)

[Pleh]

This got started back in another thread over in the 3.5 area:

Do guns hurt D&D? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?530062-Do-guns-hurt-a-D-amp-D-game)

I wanted to reply to Nifft, but I didn't want to keep running the thread off topic, so I'm making a thread here to continue the discussion.

A quick recap:


SW Saga had a neat emergent property whereby the optimal way to engage a level 20 Sith was to have a lightsaber battle.

I like when the rules are in harmony with my vision for cinematic fights and lots of opportunities for awesome character moments.


I've played that system a lot over the years. I admit I didn't often play far past level 13 or so, but it seems pretty obvious that the optimal solution to everything in that system is to Use the Force.


Due to the way defenses, attack bonuses, and skill checks scale, at higher levels UtF falls off extremely hard to the point where getting past anything's defenses with it becomes extremely difficult. Around levels 14-15, actually.


I'm talking about the way defenses scale exactly linearly (so you have +20 to each defense at level 20), while skills scale at half that linear rate.

So at level 20 (vs. a level 20 target), your Use the Force check will be at an effective -10 relative to a Use the Force check at level 1 (vs. level 1).

BAB scales linearly (if you're a Jedi), so your lightsaber attacks will be a relatively stronger option.

You can reliably Use the Force to throw stuff at your level 20 opponent, which also emulates the fights that we see in the movies.


Yeah, but Skill Training + Skill Focus gives +10 to the skill check (and what jedi in their right mind doesn't take Skill Focus for the Use the Force skill as soon as possible?)

So you get +20 to hit against an enemy with +20 to defenses. Using the Force (if you've taken the single feat that you can pick up early with a bonus feat) is also +20 against an enemy with +20 to defenses.

Exactly what am I missing here? I buy that lightsabers "catch up" to force powers at later levels, but being extremely difficult to use? I'm not seeing the numbers come together.

I mean, you could select Weapon Focus for +21 with the lightsaber, build your own lightsaber to be attuned to it for +22, but are we making any meaningful headway to making the Force actually obsolete? It's still only a +2 lead so far. We could argue Attribute Bonuses, but the duelist Jedi will just make STR maxed out and the Force User can max out CHA to match it.

Here's the most recent reply I want to respond to.


Yeah but at level one that gives you +10 over the target defenses, which gives you a significant margin for success.

At level 20, it does not.

Yes, but my point was that your BAB to hit bonus is not substantially better than the +20 to your Use the Force skill, so why insist that the lightsaber is the superior method for a lvl 20 vs lvl 20 duel with a sith over just Use the Force? Just because Use the Force has gone from OP to Equally Effective while the lightsaber has largely kept parity balance until it caught up to force powers doesn't make it better than using the force.


Instead, at level 20 you've got Force Powers like Battle Strike (+1 to attack, up to +3d6 when you hit) and Dark Rage (for up to +6 attack & damage).

You could try to Force Choke your opponent, but if your target knows Rebuke, there's a good chance that you're stuffed.

But if you're a dedicated Force User, you've got a high Wis and taken several Force Training iterations so you have enough Powers in your Suite to have a couple Rebukes handy to Counter Rebuke when necessary.

And if you're just optimizing Use the Force, there's good reason to suspect you are either better or equal with the sith in Use the Force, so the Counter Rebuke DC being set at their check result isn't much worse than a 50/50 risk. About the same as a lightsaber battle, I'd imagine.


There are also talents like:

Dark Side Scourge: Against creatures with a Dark Side Score of 1 or higher, you deal extra damage on melee attacks equal to your Charisma bonus (minimum +1).

Resist the Dark Side: You gain a +5 Force bonus to all Defense scores against Force powers with the [dark side} descriptor and Force powers originating from any dark Force-user (that is, any Force-user whose Dark Side Score equals his Wisdom score).


So the choice is:
- One action with 50% chance to do nothing (Use the Force), or worse odds if you're a Dark Sider; and if you roll well, you're going to get Rebuke'd and suffer whatever effect you were trying to apply; or
- 4 attacks with better-than-50% chance to hit, and extra damage.

Only *slightly* better than 50% chance to hit. Also remember that while you only MIGHT be a dark sider, so your enemy MIGHT have a talent that makes him stronger against you, your enemy is a dark sider by definition (we're talking about the optimal strategy for combating a straight 20 level sith lord) and so you can easily have the same defense against his abilities or even have the advantage of being more resistant to his powers than he is against yours.


As an aside: IMHO it'd be better to not allow Skill Focus: Use the Force, but maybe that's just me.

Why? To keep it from being OP at lower levels? That sounds like Oberoni fallacy: Use The Force is not OP because we can nerf it by excluding options that optimize it.

Of course lightsabers are more optimal than force powers if you ignore the rules that allow you to optimize force powers.

If you don't nerf it, the math you are using seems to suggest either Force Powers or lightsabers should be approximately equally effective (the lightsabers having a marginal +1 or +2 bonus over Force checks).

Let's recall that in a lightsaber duel, you will first be applying +20 To Hit against +20 Use The Force (to use the Block Talent) THEN against +20 Reflex Defense (which already has a static +10 tacked on).

The Force Power applies +20 To Trigger Force Effect against opposed Use the Force (which, given the starting conditions ought to optimally be Light Sider vs Dark Sider Opponent with class features for battling Dark Siders) IF they have Rebuke in their Suite (which is probably true, but Rebuke has limited uses per encounter while Block Talent only has a cumulative penalty for each use per round) THEN against +20 X Defense (which already has a static +10 tacked on).

Granted, there aren't a whole lot of Save or Suck Force Powers (that aren't Dark Side powers) and Rebuke makes Save or Suck less appealing, but even Rebuke lets you Counter Rebuke to make both characters take half effect or spend a Force Point.

I'm not saying I think you're wrong. I just don't understand why you think lightsabers are so much BETTER than Force powers, when they seem to be mostly neck and neck at the high levels.

After reviewing my list of Force Powers and their effects, it seems obvious the best strategy would be to Use the Force to buff your Lightsaber combat ability (since those powers have no chance to be Rebuked), which I guess may have been what you were trying to say?

Still no reason you can't just throw Force Powers at the Sith the same way you would just trade lightsaber parries otherwise. While Lightsaber may be more reliable, if even one Force Power gets through to the Sith, you just gained a pretty substantial advantage, either through damage or tactical positioning.


Does any Jedi PC actually NOT build his or her own lightsaber?

The 1.5k credits isn't exactly prohibitive.

The Level 7 Jedi thing is a little more prohibitive, but I agree past that level it's a no brainer. Kind of beside the point, though. It still only grants +1 to hit.

[CharonsHelper]

After reviewing my list of Force Powers and their effects, it seems obvious the best strategy would be to Use the Force to buff your Lightsaber combat ability (since those powers have no chance to be Rebuked), which I guess may have been what you were trying to say?

I'll +1 this.

From what I remember about the system, Use The Force was kinda OP for the first several levels if you grabbed Skill Focus, but running the math using it offensively became much more situational by 6-8ish.

One additional thing neither side of the argument seemed to have considered is the stat point costs.

Getting your Charisma & Wisdom high enough for Use the Force to be competitive with defenses at high levels means that your Dexterity is going to be mediocre at best, meaning that your defenses against physical attacks will be sub-par. (I doubt may Use The Force focused characters are going to burn 2 Talents & 3 feats to wear heavy armor effectively.)

In addition - there are ways to get a Jedi's attack roll to well over +22 at 20th level even without using force powers to boost it - most obviously Greater Weapon Focus.

[Zanos]

Attack rolls are much easier to increase than UtF checks, so as the level and skill focus/training bonuses begin to even out then the math shifts back into favor of melee combat, who's damage is also much easier to increase than most force powers. When Force Lightning can do 8d6 damage and drop someone 3 levels on the condition track at level 1 with a +14 to hit it's stupidly OP, but when you're level 20 and the damage hasn't gone up at all and people have talents to resist condition track damage it's much less impressive than triple attacking with your saber with stacks of attack/damage buffs.

[Chronos Flame]

From several years of playing the system our group has come to a solid opinion that indeed lightsaber outpaces force at late levels and the force is just jaw droppingly better early on. The sweet spot for balance is luckily the best levels to play at in my opinion anyway, around 12.

The thing is, as was pointed out, UtF has so very few ways to increase, and starts far too high. Melee though has weapon focus (improved), conditional modifiers like attacking a prone enemy or charging, and options to boost damage such as dual wielding or double attack that mean that not only does the bonus to hit outpace but the damage quickly does so as well. In fact, making multiple attacks is one of the best ways to boost not damage, but accuracy. Two 50% chances to hit are much better than one.

Also, while at casual optimization levels the difference may only be a few points it is worth noting that defenses also scale faster than 1/lvl in a way as characters take levels in prestige classes. Class bonus is something that doesn't have an equivalent bonus to counteract in attack rolls, much less skills. With the almost unreasonable power of armored specialists in the system as well as myriad other ways to boost defense high level gameplay really requires you to squeeze all you can out of accuracy from an optimization standpoint.

We also play with a whole lot of houserules to eliminate or smooth out these problems as of recently though. Let me know if you'd like to hear them. They are less than perfect but they certainly make the numbers work better across the levels.

[Zanos]

We also play with a whole lot of houserules to eliminate or smooth out these problems as of recently though. Let me know if you'd like to hear them. They are less than perfect but they certainly make the numbers work better across the levels.
I'd actually like to hear these, I'm considering some houserules myself to nerf force early and make it more competitive later.

I was honestly just considering removing UtF as a skill and saying all force activations are just a Charisma attack roll and you add your character level to damage normally and such.

[CharonsHelper]

I was honestly just considering removing UtF as a skill and saying all force activations are just a Charisma attack roll and you add your character level to damage normally and such.

I think my group just didn't allow Skill Focus: UtF and had force powers deal 1/2 damage until level 7ish. Admittedly - we didn't play Sage Edition a ton, but it seemed to work out. (And I don't think that we ever played really high levels.)

[Chronos Flame]

Okay, list of house rules. (I'll come back and correct myself if I misremember any, but as 1/2 of the brains behind their implementation hopefully I have them down after a couple months. :P)

The big one! Defenses no longer scale 1-1 with level, but instead as 3/4 BAB does (but based on character level, not individual classes)! This is a gradual loss of 5AC over a character's career. The main reason for this was the tendency we noticed through our last couple long running campaigns for defenses to outstrip attack rolls slowly, or in the case of defensive specialists, unreasonably quickly.

Armor is standardized. This is a bit more in depth than I should take the space of here, but to put it simply we were tired of there being pretty much 2 armors of each class that were ever used, even by our non optimized players. So (if I remember the numbers off the top of my head) light is 4ref 3dex 1fort, medium is 6ref 2dex 2fort, and Heavy is 8ref 1dex 3fort. They have 1, 2, and 3 upgrade slots respectively and exactly one of those slots can be filled with a non-book mod at "creation" (this can be a +2 ref, or +1 max dex, or the flame trooper armors fire resistance for example) decided by the GM to make the rules match the flavor of the armor found/bought.

Skills attack bonus. This is just a different number used when rolling a skill that targets a defense (or another attack or skill attack) rather than a DC. There are many formulas we found or thought of but we personally use Character level +Stat Mod +2 if skill focus -5 if untrained. At the end of the day this keeps up better but does not become overwhelming, especially since we have lowered defenses a little across the board.

We also tiered force powers to limit access to particularly rare or powerful abilities, and to make force users in the game seem more unique, but that is because we are currently playing an all force-user campaign.

Edit: With the skill attack bonus and force powers we no longer use the DCs in the power (so long as the power targets a defense.) Instead the base level of activation is achieved if the target's defense is met, and the next level is met per 2 you beat the target's defense.

[Zanos]

I think my group just didn't allow Skill Focus: UtF and had force powers deal 1/2 damage until level 7ish. Admittedly - we didn't play Sage Edition a ton, but it seemed to work out. (And I don't think that we ever played really high levels.)
Yeah, that probably works fine at low levels, it just becomes an issue at high levels when UtF starts to suck.

[emeraldstreak]

SAGA has some tendencies, but is also a highly synergetic system and clever builds can defy its tendencies.

[Nifft]

@Pleh, it sounds like the thread is in loud general agreement with my position.

Did you have an argument that you had wanted to present after reading through this, or have you come around?

[Pleh]

I think you misunderstood my intent.

I was never trying to convince you that you were wrong. I wanted to understand for myself how you were drawing your conclusions. I never doubted that your games produced the effect that lightsabers work best against sith. I didn't see why it was an emergent property of the system rather than your specific experience (especially when you admit to nerfing utf).

Just saying, "attack >>> utf b/c 20 > 10" doesn't add up (especially when the real math says utf should be +20).

But yes, these other arguments have been explaining things a lot better. While the base bonuses for attacks and utf are comparable, it's easier to push attacks past the base bonuses than it is for utf.

Utf has a quick entry to high power, but hits a rather hard ceiling by lacking substantial situational bonuses (like charging does for attacks).

[Nerd-o-rama]

For my part, I have considered a houserule that has Force power attacks run off a "Force Attack Roll" of 1d20+level+cha, putting them in line with a full BAB character's attacks, and adding in feats and talents and such to modify this. Re-aligning skill checks might be too much of a pain since you presumably want Block/Deflect/Vehicular Combat to keep their skill-check-replaces-defense concept, though...

[Sparx MacGyver]

I find the Skill Attack Modifier fixes much of these Skills vs Defense issues. It doesn't just affect UtFm but any skill that targets a defense.

If you play SAGA for any length of time you may quickly realize how powerful skill checks are when rolled against a target's Defense scores. This is because while defense scores start at 10 they often go up slowing and in small steps. On the other hand just getting trained in a skill give you a +5 modifier with that skill and then skill focus gives you another +5 modifier and these can be taken at first level. When a human Jedi 1 is rolling his UtF check with MOVE Object at a +12 bonus (assumes CHA 12) hitting a Defense score of 13 or lower is AUTOMATIC which is what causes problems. Now defense scores increase +1 per heroic level while skills only go up half that fast so at the highest levels these things are somewhat balanced but while getting there these skill checks vs defense scores can DOMINATE the game.

A common house rule to help fix the "skill check vs. defense score" problem is to introduce the Skill Attack Modifier (SAM) to the game.

The SAM for a trained skill = level + skill's ability modifier + other modifiers to the skill with some exceptions. The primary exception is Skill Focus where its +5 modifier to the skill check is reduced to a +2 modifier to the SAM; other fixed +5 skill bonuses may get the same treatment.

Example: Human Jedi 6; CHA 14; Trained in UtF; Has Skill Focus (UtF). Skills: UtF +15; SAM: UtF +10
Example: Human Jedi 1; CHA 14; Trained in UtF; Has Skill Focus (UtF). Skills: UtF +12; SAM: UtF +5
Example: Human Jedi 16; CHA 16; Trained in UtF; Has Skill Focus (UtF). Skills: UtF +21; SAM: UtF +21

When using a skill you will still roll a single d20 just like you normally would. If the result will be checked against a target's Defense Score you add the SAM to the roll to make the comparison; if the result will be checked against anything else (usually the tables to determine effect) you use the normal skill modifier. If you would normally check the roll against both a fixed DC and a target Defense score, such as using Move Object, you will use BOTH the SAM to check against the Defense and the normal skill modifier to check against the fixed DC.

SAM and Untrained skills: There are two trains of thought here and I will present both so a GM can choose which to use.
1. Use the SAM as calculated for a trained skill but apply a -5 penalty for have an untrained (non-proficient) skill.
2. Just use the skill modifier as you normally would.

Option 1 punishes an character for trying to use a skill untrained when it targets a DEFENSE score. This make skill training a lot more important for anything which may target a defense score.

Option 2 avoids the massive problems normally cause by stacking +5 from skill focus with the +5 bonus for having a skill trained. Here you are using the skill like the RAW describes and some skills are still useful untrained against some DEF scores. Using this means that a trained skill doesn't have much of an advantage over an untrained skill at the lower levels but it will grow as the levels start adding up.

Now I may be missing some things so if anyone has something to add just go for it.

[CharonsHelper]

When a human Jedi 1 is rolling his UtF check with MOVE Object at a +12 bonus (assumes CHA 12) hitting a Defense score of 13 or lower is AUTOMATIC which is what causes problems


Why is that an inherent problem? (And it's not automatic since the min DC for Move Object is 15.)

It's the damage which is the problem (likely 4d6 or 6d6 if there is a suitably sized object handy) which isn't even THAT bad as with Saga's boosted level 1 HP it's unlikely to one-shot a level 1 character. (though the damage is still probably too high for low levels - hence my houserule above)

[Zanos]

Why is that an inherent problem? (And it's not automatic since the min DC for Move Object is 15.)
Because a character with a weapon is probably rolling a maximum of +5 to hit at level 1 for less damage.

[CharonsHelper]

Because a character with a weapon is probably rolling a maximum of +5 to hit at level 1 for less damage.

Oh - I totally agree that UtF's power is a problem at low levels. I'm just disagreeing that the nearly auto-hit is inherently a problem on its own. It's the near auto-hit combined with the high damage.

Having a near auto-hit wouldn't be a problem if the damage is low enough, especially with the limited usage. Hence my houserule above.

Maybe I'm being a bit nitpicky.

But I do think that Sparks' houserule is too complex for what is a pretty simple problem. Doesn't follow KISS at all.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Honestly's Sparx's houserule isn't that complex. The actual change is the following:


The SAM for a trained skill = level + skill's ability modifier + other modifiers to the skill with some exceptions. The primary exception is Skill Focus where its +5 modifier to the skill check is reduced to a +2 modifier to the SAM; other fixed +5 skill bonuses may get the same treatment.

...

When using a skill you will still roll a single d20 just like you normally would. If the result will be checked against a target's Defense Score you add the SAM to the roll to make the comparison; if the result will be checked against anything else (usually the tables to determine effect) you use the normal skill modifier. If you would normally check the roll against both a fixed DC and a target Defense score, such as using Move Object, you will use BOTH the SAM to check against the Defense and the normal skill modifier to check against the fixed DC.

Honestly the only part I'd call complicated is the last clause, which requires you to get two totals from the same die roll, but I honestly don't see a fair way around that without reconfiguring how skills and DCs work entirely. Weapon attacks still end up "better" at higher character levels because of more opportunities to increase either your attack roll or your damage, but this way the curves are equivalent for longer.

[Sparx MacGyver]

I'll be honest, I didn't write the SAM. I simply use it in my games. StevenO from both the WOTC forums (before shut down) and over at The Saga Continues came up with it.

[emeraldstreak]

Because a character with a weapon is probably rolling a maximum of +5 to hit at level 1 for less damage.

Not necessarily.


Oh - I totally agree that UtF's power is a problem at low levels. I'm just disagreeing that the nearly auto-hit is inherently a problem on its own. It's the near auto-hit combined with the high damage.

Having a near auto-hit wouldn't be a problem if the damage is low enough, especially with the limited usage. Hence my houserule above.

Maybe I'm being a bit nitpicky.

There are strong non-Force builds even early on. Likewise, there are strong Force builds even in the late game. SAGA is a complex enough system that optimization greatly trumps its baseline mathematical trends.

[Waar]

There are ways to get quite high bonuses on attacks even at low levels, the easiest would be a wookiee with dreadfull rage, str 18 and charge for +12 to hit, and 2dX+13 damage.
But skill focus (especially use the force) can still be a major issue

[Sparx MacGyver]

That's why I showed the SAM. It solves lots of those issues. Is UtF still up there in damage early on? Yes. But, at least ti helps with targeting Defenses, and also does so for the other skills that target defenses as well.

If SF is banned for UtF, then it should be so for other skills at the same level. I'm not a fan of targeting only 1 class. Just my opinion.

[Waar]

That's why I showed the SAM. It solves lots of those issues. Is UtF still up there in damage early on? Yes. But, at least ti helps with targeting Defenses, and also does so for the other skills that target defenses as well.

If SF is banned for UtF, then it should be so for other skills at the same level. I'm not a fan of targeting only 1 class. Just my opinion.

I have heard good things about the SAM from way back, and I considered using it myself, though it does neccesitate using 2 separate modifiers for the affected skills (most don't target defences).

However the last time I was the GM I simply asked the PCs not to take Skill focus until after level 4 (iirc), and it worked fine.



Honestly the only part I'd call complicated is the last clause, which requires you to get two totals from the same die roll, but I honestly don't see a fair way around that without reconfiguring how skills and DCs work entirely. Weapon attacks still end up "better" at higher character levels because of more opportunities to increase either your attack roll or your damage, but this way the curves are equivalent for longer.

There is no way around it for most force powers, but it doesn't show up anywhere else. And the extra +2 from skill focus should help for the last 4 or so levels.

[CharonsHelper]

However the last time I was the GM I simply asked the PCs not to take Skill focus until after level 4 (iirc), and it worked fine.

So long as they don't take Dark Side powers I can certainly see that. (Ex: Force Lightning is crazily OP for the first few levels even without Skill Focus.)

[emeraldstreak]

So long as they don't take Dark Side powers I can certainly see that. (Ex: Force Lightning is crazily OP for the first few levels even without Skill Focus.)

It's very good but other Force users can Deflect/Rebuke it. As for non-Force characters, they optimize in different ways and have their own very destructive moves.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Enforcing Dark Side Points is a good counter to Force Lightning in most groups, as it takes a large amount of character investment (or a cheesy backstory and one talent) to make it a viable 1/encounter ability. On the other hand, if you're playing a Dark Side campaign, I say let 'em go nuts with it. If you're going that way, it's probably because someone wanted to play a cackling bipedal tesla coil.

I've actually had more trouble with Force Grip, but that mostly just necessitates making sure you never run a "solo" enemy and always give your bosses fire support to break the Jedi's concentration. Or as mentioned, Rebuke.

[CharonsHelper]

It's very good but other Force users can Deflect/Rebuke it. As for non-Force characters, they optimize in different ways and have their own very destructive moves.

Yes - but they can't deal 8d6 damage (plus -1 condition) in one round at level 1, with 4d6 damage on a miss.

I'm not saying that it should be banned at low levels - I was just pointing out that it's OP without changes. My own houserule (as seen above) was that such things just do 1/2 damage for the early levels. (It's been awhile, so I can't remember what level the cut-off was.)

[Waar]

So long as they don't take Dark Side powers I can certainly see that. (Ex: Force Lightning is crazily OP for the first few levels even without Skill Focus.)

Yeah, I don't know what they were thinking when they made force lightning have maximum power from the start. I think just restricting which force powers you can start (a little) with goes a long way.


Yes - but they can't deal 8d6 damage (plus -1 condition) in one round at level 1, with 4d6 damage on a miss.

I'm not saying that it should be banned at low levels - I was just pointing out that it's OP without changes. My own houserule (as seen above) was that such things just do 1/2 damage for the early levels. (It's been awhile, so I can't remember what level the cut-off was.)


That also works, but it might be easier to remake force lightning into something more gradual (for instance dc 15 4d6, dc 20 6d6, dc 25 8d6, maybe dc30 10d6?), since the other powers aren't quite as potent without skill focus.

[CharonsHelper]

Yeah, I don't know what they were thinking when they made force lightning have maximum power from the start.

My guess is that they were thinking about it from the perspective of it being a BBEG force power rather than a potential PC one.

Frankly - that's how a lot of the most OP stuff slips into systems. (That's what I blame most inherently OP spells in D&D on too.)

[Nerd-o-rama]

It's also the best rules demonstration of the way Obi-wan and Yoda describe the Dark Side, if that counts for anything. The quick and easy path to a lot of power, but at a cost the young and foolish won't be able to pay, and with little further benefit as you grow in wisdom besides that.

Also, Wizards doesn't understand the concept of game balance and never has.

[CharonsHelper]

Also, Wizards doesn't understand the concept of game balance and never has.

Actually - besides UtF issues (which really aren't THAT bad besides Skill Focus & a few specific force powers in the very early levels), Saga Edition's balance is pretty dang solid. I'd go so far as to say it's the best balanced d20 game, and definitely has the best Jedi/normal character balance of any Star Wars game.

[Zanos]

Folded Space Mastery.

But yeah, Saga isn't that bad as far as d20 systems go.

[Nerd-o-rama]

It's a bit like saying Grand Admiral Thrawn isn't overbearing and authoritarian for an Imperial leader. It's true, by a wide margin, but look at what you're comparing to.

[Nifft]

I think you misunderstood my intent.

I was never trying to convince you that you were wrong. I wanted to understand for myself how you were drawing your conclusions. I never doubted that your games produced the effect that lightsabers work best against sith. I didn't see why it was an emergent property of the system rather than your specific experience (especially when you admit to nerfing utf).

Just saying, "attack >>> utf b/c 20 > 10" doesn't add up (especially when the real math says utf should be +20). Well, first off, I didn't say something quite that simplistic. I said that lightsaber battles were more optimal at level 20, and yes that obviously includes UTF to buff your lightsaber battle ability. It also includes skill checks being high enough to do jumps & tumbles.

Secondly, I didn't "admit to nerfing" UTF, so kindly take that false accusation and stick it somewhere. I do think that removing Skill Focus: UTF might make the game play more like the movies -- but the key thing here is that I think this because I have played the rules as written.

Playing the rules-as-written has also informed my opinion on low-to-high level play differences, and that's what I've been expressing in the other thread and here. This shouldn't need to be said, and it's frustrating that you're making me explain this level of basic stuff by trying to put words in my mouth.


But yes, these other arguments have been explaining things a lot better. While the base bonuses for attacks and utf are comparable, it's easier to push attacks past the base bonuses than it is for utf.

Utf has a quick entry to high power, but hits a rather hard ceiling by lacking substantial situational bonuses (like charging does for attacks). It's more than that.

One example: iterative attacks multiply combat bonuses. That's an inherent difference between low levels vs. high levels, and it's part of the shifting balance from low-level (direct UTF) to high-level (buff & lightsaber).

Many different aspects of the system come together to reward lightsaber combat at high levels: talents, feats, Defense progression, the hard ceiling on UTF checks vs. Defenses (as pointed out), and so forth.

[Squared]

Actually - besides UtF issues (which really aren't THAT bad besides Skill Focus & a few specific force powers in the very early levels), Saga Edition's balance is pretty dang solid. I'd go so far as to say it's the best balanced d20 game, and definitely has the best Jedi/normal character balance of any Star Wars game.

Not counting the FFG Star Wars system I take it?

^2

[Zanos]

One example: iterative attacks multiply combat bonuses. That's an inherent difference between low levels vs. high levels, and it's part of the shifting balance from low-level (direct UTF) to high-level (buff & lightsaber)
That isn't technically true. You need feats to make "iterative" attacks, and the penalties apply to all attacks in that round. So if you have the triple attack feat you take a -10 penalty to all attacks to make three attacks that round.


Not counting the FFG Star Wars system I take it?

^2
I could go on a whole rant about FFG star wars, but with regards to the force in general it's only not a problem in FFG because all the force powers are borderline useless unless you have more XP than I've ever seen, and even then shooting it with a blaster rifle is usually a better option.

[CharonsHelper]

Not counting the FFG Star Wars system I take it?

^2

I believe that there is a reason that FFG keeps force users and normal in entirely separate games. (albeit compatible ones)

[Sparx MacGyver]

I believe that there is a reason that FFG keeps force users and normal in entirely separate games. (albeit compatible ones)

To sell more books?

Pet peeve of mine, sorry.

As for the subject at hand, well I think it's gonna boil down to: is the party a group of lightsaber wielding force users fighting other lightsaber wielding force users? Or is a group of (insert any other character type) and one lightsaber wielding force user fighting either a group of (insert character type) or (insert any other character type) and one lightsaber wielding force user (or more lightsaber wielding force users)?

Because if it's the former, then it shouldn't stand out much. If the later, then yeah they stick out like a sore thumb.

Multiple attacks are whatever, take a -10 to all attacks, but get 4 attacks (assuming dual weapon mastery and triple attack), but assuming jedi class, you should have a +20 attack at that point, plus all the benefits of talents and stuff.

I think it also boils down to, as written, other classes/character types don't have anything near the Force user's ability to put out damage, or get bonuses. Which I suppose is the point - Force users are like Magic users, if Magic is rare (relatively speaking), then the mage is wicked powerful. If there are more mages around, then his reign of fireball destruction is less of an impact.

[emeraldstreak]

I think it also boils down to, as written, other classes/character types don't have anything near the Force user's ability to put out damage, or get bonuses.

Other classes do fine.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Much like D&D, the main strength of Use the Force wizardry, compared to weapon users, is in crowd control and neutralizing other peoples' actions. Weapon users, whether lightsaber, blaster, other melee, or whatever, instead focus on hit point or condition track damage. They do two different things, really, especially as levels go up and Force damage tapers off relative to weapon damage as quickly as UtF modifiers do relative to weapon attack bonuses.

[CharonsHelper]

Multiple attacks are whatever, take a -10 to all attacks, but get 4 attacks (assuming dual weapon mastery and triple attack), but assuming jedi class, you should have a +20 attack at that point, plus all the benefits of talents and stuff.


Yes - but most foes will likely get +20 to defenses, so that -10 still hurts.

Sure - if you're still fighting basic stormtroopers a -10 to hit doesn't matter, but at level 20 they're not supposed to be much of a threat anyway.