I'd like to use some of the careers/talent trees in AoR (and eventually FnD) but I'm concerned that each setting 'scales up' the threat and power levels of the game much like each 40k game did so (Dark Heresy starts 'weaker' than Rogue Trader, which is weaker than Deathwatch, and so on). Even though those 40k games could work together and releases brought power levels up I haven't been a good judge of if the same is true for EoE and AoR.

Could someone create an AoR character, drop that character into a 'standard' EoE campaign, and find they're on a par with everyone else, or would they start out at an advantage?

I plan on using the force trees and gear/ships/droids freely across the game settings, just worried about the characters and possible NPCs themselves.

Thoughts?

From what I can see AoR and EoE are approximately the same power level. I can't say what FaD will be like, the fact that the characters are all force users will increase the power level I think but they shouldn't be too overpowered at starting level. From everything I have seen and read there won't be anywhere as much of a scale up as with 40K.

E

The coolest part of about the idea of compatible systems is it doesn't exactly scale up anything. You can mix and match from AoR and EoE and still have a balanced game. Nothing is "harder" or "easier" just more options or less options.

That appears to be intentional. While from what I've seen of F&D there is significant power creep compared EotE (force users that get their force rating without buying into it, for one thing, plus a lot of their powers are outstanding and they may get lightsabers, some of which they can use with a main skill that is not brawn), that matches the idea of F&D being a super epic legendary 9000 campaign. For instance, playing Luke from RotJ would not really be possible in EotE or AoR rules (which were fine for earlier Luke versions), the exiles just aren't flashy and powerful enough.

EotE and AoR mesh a lot better though - the reason AoR seems better is because the career skills are way more focused on the military side (with 4/6 of the trees starting with Ranged Light, if memory serves). Not all the trees in AoR are better than EotE, but they're certainly better if your campaign is definitely going to be a military one, which an AoR campaign is even more likely to be than EotE.

I guess I will add, AoR does focus its extra rules on "massive".

Squad(ron)s versus solo, Mass Combat, more info on Capital ship combat.

But that doesn't mean you are restricted to only do those types of things or use those items. It just gives you more in ways of options on how you can design your story.

F&D characters have far more ability to protect themselves and teammates, but don't hand out damage anymore so than Joe Gun with the skill and modded HBR would.

I have not seen power creep. just different focuses

FaD is going to have a bit of power creep because every character has the force. I don't think it should be too massively bad though. It will need testing before any real information is available.

I have not seen power creep. just different focuses

AoR combat class's (sharpshooter and gunner come to mind) are noticeably more powerful than anything in EoE

Since the F&D characters still have to spend XP to get their Force Powers, it shouldn't be too bad. They will have an early lead over Force-Sensitives in the other systems (who need a second specialization), but that lead will disappear once they get to the point when they acquire their own second specializaton.

Just remember that basic F&D characters don't start with lightsabers. You wouldn't give them extra XP over anyone else, so don't give them extra equipment over everyone else either! If everyone gets extra equipment, then it's probably fine, but first consider what "everyone gets extra equipment" would actually mean:

Jedi: Lightsaber.

is approximately the same credit-value as...

Bounty Hunter: Disruptor pistol, laminate armor, and jetpack.

Colonist: Shipboard bacta tank and hypercomm array.

Explorer: Military speeder bike and recon droids.

Hired Gun: Vibro-axe, heavy repeating blaster, and heavy battle armor.

Smuggler: Shipboard proton torpedo launcher and ammunition.

Technician: Advanced cybernetic arms and legs.

EDIT: Not that there is necessarily wrong with these characters starting out so well-equipped. But the desire to acquire better gear is a major drive for many players. I, personally, prefer to have my players not take anything for granted.

EDIT EDIT: And I plan on beginning a Knight-level side-campaign shortly, and incorporating at least one EotE or AoR character for comparison, so I've given some thought as to what the ramifications are.

I have not seen power creep. just different focuses

AoR combat class's (sharpshooter and gunner come to mind) are noticeably more powerful than anything in EoE

Apples to... Pears? I'm gonna go with Pears.

Those classes are only superior in their field, but not all around. The Sharpshooter is comparable to the BH:Assassin, and the Gunner doesn't even really exist in EotE. On the other hand though AoR is a military themed core book, and EotE is a civilian themed core book, so the differences are to be expected.

The Gunner will shoot vehicle weapons better then the Entrepreneur, but the Gunner won't be able to play his talent tree to get 500 credits at the beginning of every session just for showing up...

I want to get 500 credits just for showing up every session!

Then play an entrepreneur, I think they have a power that gives them 100 credits per rank in the talent at the start of each session. :-D

But yes, I actually meant that mechanically the ability to have your main attack skill match your main secondary-role skill could (key word there being COULD) lead to characters that are good at everything they attempt. In my findings one of the things I like about EotE's system is that no stat can be dumped without a real tangible downside. However, if you play a Face Jedi who gets their face powers and their main attack from Presence, well, you could sensibly roll a human, take +10xp, and 50+40+30 your chosen stat to roll 5 dice for everything both fight-y and social. This is not necessarily incorrect to the way Jedi work in-universe, and a good way to give them a mechanical advantage in some senses (because part of "you are a Jedi" is "you rock at lightsabers"), but it's still certainly powerful in a straightforward way that EotE characters can't usually achieve (ie being out of the park fantastic at both a combat skill and a non-combat skill.)

And yes, you may not start with lightsabers, but 10,000 credits will fall into your hands eventually, and a lightsaber is certainly better than, say +1 to a stat from a cybernetic, or most other weapons. Again, not a bad thing, you're epic amazing Jedi for fraks sake.

I think starting with a Force Rating of 1 will be a boon to anyone wanting to play a Jedi. That's 20XP you can immediately spend on a Power. An EotE or AoR character would have to buy FSE for 20XP, then the base power to match up.

I also am skeptical about the talents that allow you to use say Willpower as the base characteristic for Lightsaber. That seems to really encourage picking Niman specialization and dumping XP into Willpower since it will be the way you fuel both your Force Powers and your Lightsaber skill. Pair that with your free Force Rating and that Willpower boosts your Strain Threshold (to fuel Parry and Reflect) and I can see that being a powerful combination. A character with a decent Presence and a strong Willpower could handle just about any encounter; combat or social.

I think starting with a Force Rating of 1 will be a boon to anyone wanting to play a Jedi. That's 20XP you can immediately spend on a Power. An EotE or AoR character would have to buy FSE for 20XP, then the base power to match up.

True but I see that as slightly making life hard for yourself. You use the right tool for the job - want to make a Jedi? Use F&D. Want to make Indiana Jones in Space? Use EotE. That making a Jedi is slightly tougher in one than the other, doesn't mean that one book is the weaker. For analogy, that it's harder for a Politico to be a good shooter than an Assasin doesn't make the former worse, only if you're slightly trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer. The Force elements in EotE are side-garnish, the same way shooting is side-garnish to a politico. IMO, anyway. I think it will be a little while before we completely get a feel for power levels.

Starting PCs in each game are pretty equal to each other, though F&D characters have a slight advantage in that they can pick +5 XP and +1000 credits as a default option without having to alter a starting Obligation or Duty. This is set off a bit by the fact that F&D careers only offer six career skills each, of which a starting PC gets to take 3, so a PC from the other two games has two additional career skills and an extra skill rank.

AoR careers have more of a combat focus, where EotE tends to be "all walks of life," and F&D are naturally Force users.

Now I want teams from each rulebook to have a showdown anchorman style

Now I want teams from each rulebook to have a showdown anchorman style

The Rebels bring unsurvivable firepower. The Force users bring unbeatable defence. And whilst the two of them are working that out the Edge of Empire crew steal all their wallets and head for Mos Eisley.

True but I see that as slightly making life hard for yourself. You use the right tool for the job - want to make a Jedi? Use F&D. Want to make Indiana Jones in Space? Use EotE. That making a Jedi is slightly tougher in one than the other, doesn't mean that one book is the weaker. For analogy, that it's harder for a Politico to be a good shooter than an Assasin doesn't make the former worse, only if you're slightly trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer. The Force elements in EotE are side-garnish, the same way shooting is side-garnish to a politico. IMO, anyway. I think it will be a little while before we completely get a feel for power levels.

Sure, but comparing a Politico to a Bounty Hunter is apples and oranges. We are comparing Force users.

I'll preface this by stating that I don't think it's a huge deal either way and it's a beta.

However, I think a Force user from all three games should be roughly equal. This is something that was true for classes in AoR and EotE. An Assassin and a Sharpshooter would start on fairly equal footing. They might have different skill sets and talents that set them apart, but neither is at a particular disadvantage. The same is true for those same two characters should they become Force users. They have the exact same method and cost. FaD seems to really be a stand alone. I know they are all supposed to be their own games, but EotE and AoR fit pretty well. This just feels like an odd one out.

I don't have F&D in hand, but what I can say is the power level of the characters doesn't seem to offput too much, if at all. What changes are the motivations of the characters and how they plan to accomplish them.

For example, you could drop an EtoE toon, into AoR with little problem. If that character happened to be a Dr. you start to have a problem, because Dr.s in EtoE don't get any combat skills to speak of. In AoR, it seems like combat is expected, so they all get to at least be qualified with small-arms. EtoE, on the other hand, combat can easily be avoided, so said Dr. is able to have a long and successful career without ever touching a weapon. In that scale, they are drastically different.

F&D, can be expected to lend itself to obvious places, where both EtoE and AoR toons may find themselves "under qualified" for the tasks at hand.

Just what I've taken from it, thus far.

True but I see that as slightly making life hard for yourself. You use the right tool for the job - want to make a Jedi? Use F&D. Want to make Indiana Jones in Space? Use EotE. That making a Jedi is slightly tougher in one than the other, doesn't mean that one book is the weaker. For analogy, that it's harder for a Politico to be a good shooter than an Assasin doesn't make the former worse, only if you're slightly trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer. The Force elements in EotE are side-garnish, the same way shooting is side-garnish to a politico. IMO, anyway. I think it will be a little while before we completely get a feel for power levels.

Sure, but comparing a Politico to a Bounty Hunter is apples and oranges. We are comparing Force users.

I'll preface this by stating that I don't think it's a huge deal either way and it's a beta.

However, I think a Force user from all three games should be roughly equal. This is something that was true for classes in AoR and EotE. An Assassin and a Sharpshooter would start on fairly equal footing. They might have different skill sets and talents that set them apart, but neither is at a particular disadvantage. The same is true for those same two characters should they become Force users. They have the exact same method and cost. FaD seems to really be a stand alone. I know they are all supposed to be their own games, but EotE and AoR fit pretty well. This just feels like an odd one out.

There are no true Force Users in EotE or AoR though. Universal Specs do not compare to full specs. Exile and Emergent are the equivalent of Recruit from AoR, just released early, essentially.

... steal all their wallets and head for Mos Eisley.

True but I see that as slightly making life hard for yourself. You use the right tool for the job - want to make a Jedi? Use F&D. Want to make Indiana Jones in Space? Use EotE. That making a Jedi is slightly tougher in one than the other, doesn't mean that one book is the weaker. For analogy, that it's harder for a Politico to be a good shooter than an Assasin doesn't make the former worse, only if you're slightly trying to use a screwdriver as a hammer. The Force elements in EotE are side-garnish, the same way shooting is side-garnish to a politico. IMO, anyway. I think it will be a little while before we completely get a feel for power levels.

Sure, but comparing a Politico to a Bounty Hunter is apples and oranges. We are comparing Force users.

Then you and I are not comparing the same thing. I am comparing F&D to EotE, and you are comparing Force users in both. I agree the latter is not equal. My counterpoint is that the former are. And I guess also that I think the former is what matters. The Force elements in EotE are an extra you might use as a icing on another character type. The rules don't even let you pick Force Sensitive Exile as your starting specialization because it's not part of a career. It's similar to the way a Politico doesn't naturally start with close combat skills but you can add them - just not as easily as if you were a Marauder for example. Whereas a F&D character it is central to them, just as close combat is central to a Marauder. You can't compare them directly any more than you can compare close combat skills between a Politico and a Marauder.

The difference is that you are wanting equivalence and I am saying that different costs for the same thing for different characters is a respected approach to balance. I can make a wookie dancing girl character if I wish, but I'm going to have an easier time if I pick Twi'Lek.

I can see it as a problem introducing it into an on-going game where a character has been focusing on Force Sensitive Exile and the path from AoR and then suddenly you drop in F&D and someone makes a Peacekeeper. But that's a different nature of problem with other solutions.

Anyway, I respect that you're just making a point. Where I'm coming from is not that you're wrong factually, but in actual game context, this is actually a good thing.

I know they are all supposed to be their own games, but EotE and AoR fit pretty well. This just feels like an odd one out.

Personal opinion time, but I think given the movies and TCW make Jedi pretty amazing compared to non-Force users, FFG have done a really, really good job in making Jedi that still feel like Jedi but are not over-powered in a role-playing game with characters who are not. I think that is the thing that if they had got it wrong would have really made it difficult to integrate. As it looks at the moment, I think it can integrate very well.

For example, you could drop an EtoE toon, into AoR with little problem.

Toon?

I read this as "steal their weasels" and now I can't stop laughing.

If players were willing, I would run an entire Star Wars game where the galactic currency was weasels. No-one would ever raise the issue or question whether it was a good idea, we'd all just play it straight.

I would like that.

Yes what a cruel world we live in where weasels aren't accepted as legal tender. I can't weasel my way into a bank and steal all their weasels.

But i guess you could be weasel herders rather than nerf herders and be trading your weasels around the galaxy,

or the name of currency is "weasels" instead of "republic credits"