[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

When the new Edge system was hinted at, several posters commented that gaining 1 Edge didn't seem all that significant.

They were told that it really was significant, and worth more than it seemed.

Now, we are being told that losing out on up to 2 points of Edge if your character has a 7 Edge attribute isn't that big of a deal.

Which one is it?  Can't have it both ways.

Either gaining 1 point of Edge is significant, and losing out on 1 point of Edge is significant.
OR
Losing out on a point of Edge isn't that big of a deal even if it does happen, and gaining a point of Edge doesn't really mean all that much.

It's not a question of whether 1 edge is important, it's a dispute about whether the edge is in fact "missed out".

7 Edge: can't earn any edge on his action, but can spend edge during his action then earn edge on the enemy's action.
5 Edge: can earn edge on his action, but then can't earn any more edge on the enemy's action regardless of whether he spent edge.

[easl]

A minor but relevant point: Edgy Edgelord spends 4 edge to get +7 dice on a roll (and makes the whole pool exploding), while Standardus Maximus spends 4 edge to get +5 dice on a roll (and makes the whole pool exploding). 
Maybe that doesn't make up for missing the opportunity to gain edge prior to your first action, but it ain't nuthin'.

[Marcus]

Thanks for putting this spin-off discussion aside

Ok, 2 things to consider about this:

There are Edge uses that can be performed before any potential Edge-generating Action is declared (and thus, new Edge is generated). In the QSR alone, there is

• 1 Edge for +3 Initiative
• 2 Edge to give more Edge to your Allies (at a loss, but hey...)
• 3-4 Edge for healing Stun or Physical Damage
• 5 Edge for something extra special. That one is a gamble on your GM´s goodwill, but with this price tag, you can expect it to be something worthwhile.

That´s not the full list, more Edge uses might follow in the Core rules and in supplements.

Second: You cannot safely assume that you will generate Edge on the first Action you take or that´s taken against you. Opposition will be less likely to target you first if you are an unvavourable target that will likely get Edge from the Attack (and no, your GM is not supposed to play the opposition out as if they magically know that Player X is already "full of luck" and wouldn´t get more Edge ). And if you go first, the juciest target for Edge gain purposes might often not be the first one you want to take out. 

Thank you Fin. That addresses my question. If you can expend edge during lead in, then the problem is workable.
 As to your previous point in the last thread Fin yes the edge limit change reads like fairly classic mistake, but who knows. You never really know what the gamer base will do or like with total certainty.

On your second point, we are looking at Potential/Opportunity costs, you build to your satisfaction, you employ tactics to the level is appropriate for your character. But in the end you get edge or you don't. The build works or it doesn't.  If your build a strategy including edge or not, and have taken the steps will hopeful lead to the build being effective, then follow the plan, and it doesn't work then you make a new plan and trying something else. Just as we have always built characters.

[sn0mm1s]

Not sure if going first is as critical in this edition but +6 init + 5 edge is much better than just 5 edge.

Though, I think I could do this with a fast character (2 major actions).

Pre combat spend 1 edge for +3 init
6 edge remaining
spend 4 edge to attack all enemies based on whatever the limit is (5e was skill/2 I think) with full dice pool.
2 edge remaining
spend my 1st major action on the attack
presumably gain back 2 edge from some of those enemies
4 edge remaining
spend 4 edge to full attack all enemies
0 edge remaining.

Assuming 6 in your combat skill of choice, +2 specialization and multi attack limits are the same. With 6 or 7 edge to start a round you are conceivably making 8 full attacks before the enemy even gets to react.

[Kiirnodel]

Aside from the fact that you can only spend edge once a round, that looks like a valid plan. I'd probably let you spend that first edge for initiative before combat starts, so you'd be able to pull off one set of attacks without the penalties, but not two.

[sn0mm1s]

Aside from the fact that you can only spend edge once a round, that looks like a valid plan. I'd probably let you spend that first edge for initiative before combat starts, so you'd be able to pull off one set of attacks without the penalties, but not two.

Really? That makes Edge seem like a pretty poorly thought out mechanic. It rewards slowly acting characters far more than fast acting characters and spending Edge becomes a game of chicken. If that is truly the case, Edge is a trap and, unless initiative is obscenely important, I don't think I would ever want more than 2 in my Edge attribute.

[Kiirnodel]

Aside from the fact that you can only spend edge once a round, that looks like a valid plan. I'd probably let you spend that first edge for initiative before combat starts, so you'd be able to pull off one set of attacks without the penalties, but not two.

Really? That makes Edge seem like a pretty poorly thought out mechanic. It rewards slowly acting characters far more than fast acting characters and spending Edge becomes a game of chicken. If that is truly the case, Edge is a trap and, unless initiative is obscenely important, I don't think I would ever want more than 2 in my Edge attribute.

Well, considering what you previously described has the distinct possibility of completely invalidating an entire combat for everyone except the one character, I don't see much of an issue with limiting people to one special edge bonus a round. If that makes you feel like you should never start with higher edge, that's your opinion.

[Typhus]

That makes Edge seem like a pretty poorly thought out mechanic.

I have to disagree there.  It seems like they thought out your exact scenario and said "no, we can't allow that".

[Michael Chandra]

QSR is once per Action, CRB in its current state (note that the errata team started working on it two months ago and we don't have access to the result yet) once per round. That makes it extra painful if a tactical player ends up losing on an opportunity to gain Edge. So I like the idea of the cap not immediately applying.

[sn0mm1s]

That makes Edge seem like a pretty poorly thought out mechanic.

I have to disagree there.  It seems like they thought out your exact scenario and said "no, we can't allow that".

You have far more faith in the designers than I do. If 2 attacks are why they limited Edge to once per round then they should've just limited the Edge pool to 5 and let it be spent per action. I am not saying it is a poorly thought out mechanic because I can't pull off two attacks against everyone - I am saying it is a poorly thought out mechanic because it can only be used once per round. That makes it something you horde (because you don't know if you will need it later) and the PCs/NPCs that act late can use their Edge in a much better way than ones that act early.

[Finstersang]

Wait, so in addition to the Limit of 2 Edge gained per round, there´s also a limit on how often you can use Edge in a single combat round in the Core rules?

ARGH! People! What are you doing? This could be such a cool mechanic! Why do you feel the need to limit and neuter it?

*Adding this to my list of stuff I´m just going to blissfully ignore at my table*

[Hibiki54]

I'm building for 8 Edge. 

[Michael Chandra]

But that's not possible.