Weapons in Star Wars: Age of Rebellion generally deal x damage on a hit + 1 damage per uncancelled success symbol rolled.

Since, from what I understand from the rules, you need to roll at least one uncancelled success symbol to score a hit, does that mean a weapon with a damage rating of 6 will always do at least 7 damage? (before soak is subtracted)

I only have the beginner game set, and maybe I've missed something in the rules, but it seems like a weapon always having to deal damage above its rating is sort of redundant.



You've read the rules correctly and a weapon does indeed always do at least 1 damage more than its written rating when it hits, before subtracting soak.


As with other game systems that use similar mechanics (Shadowrun's net hits are very similar to uncancelled successes) the game rewards a good attack roll with increased damage. This makes sense in simulationist terms as well: the good roll represents a particularly lucky shot hitting a vital spot or similar.

While this mean that a weapon does always do higher than its listed damage it's quicker and easier to calculate damage if you don't have to remember to subtract 1 each time.

  • \$\begingroup\$ And the designers aren't stupid, they probably shifted all weapon damages down by one. When designing a game, issues like this do tend to come to your attention. \$\endgroup\$ – gomad Sep 3 '14 at 10:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ @gomad It's hard to say whether weapon damage was shifted down, character damage tolerance shifted up, neither was changed or something else entirely was changed. However as both Shadowrun and SW seem to function just fine I assume that either this damage was consciously accounted for somewhere in the system's design or it was deemed negligible. \$\endgroup\$ – Aiken Sep 3 '14 at 10:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ am I remembering it wrong? I am pretty sure I read somewhere that every succes AFTER the First increases your damage. I do only own "Edge of the Empire" though, not Age of Rebellion. But those would not really be different, would they? \$\endgroup\$ – Patta Jul 10 '16 at 19:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Patta If you can provide a quote from the rules text to support your point feel free to post your own answer. Since I answered this nearly two years ago while playing a short-lived campaign (with a friend and rulebook owner DMing) I no longer have access to the rulebook myself but I'm fairly certain I double-checked it at the time. \$\endgroup\$ – Aiken Jul 22 '16 at 7:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Aiken whoa, I did not see that this answer was so old :D And I just double-checked my german version of the rules, and could not find any mention of this, so it seems you are right. I'm probably confusing it with shadowrun or something in my head. \$\endgroup\$ – Patta Jul 22 '16 at 8:06

My group has always interpreted your first uncancelled success as not increasing damage, so that the second uncancelled success (and all subsequent ones) improve damage.

It would be possible to say that if success and failure cancel exactly, the weapon hits at base damage and that if there are "extra" success (beyond those needed to to cancel failures) then those increase damage.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.