Relatively new to the system and I have been looking forward to the Force and Destiny (as I'm sure many have).

Now one thing I've always found difficult in the game is combat. In Star Wars the heroes rarely wore armor, and Jedi even less. Now I haven't gotten to play test this system yet but hope to soon. Is combat still dangerous for those that don't wear armor? Damage is pretty high and makes not wearing heavy armor a bold move.

That being said, do parry and reflect help much?

Now for the big one. Are careers and specializations necessary? Has anyone taken a look at granting players more control of their characters. Determining their 12 career skills (10 if they want a force rating), and listing out talents as a block of talents the player can spend points on, eliminating the need for careers, specializations or specialization paths.

It's "dangerous" in that in most cases, two to four good hits will take down most characters. But it still plays well for characters that don't wear armour...that said, even "heavy clothing" provides some benefit. The average starting character is usually walking around with Soak of 3 or 4, and this can absorb roughly 1/2 to 2/3 a blaster pistol shot. Also, it encourages players to take advantage of terrain to get defence bonuses, or to purchase Talents to increase defence; and it encourages GMs to provide such terrain and make combat more dynamic.

It should be noted that this "danger" is not the same as lethality. It's actually pretty hard to kill a PC in this game, you need to get really high rolls on a critical hit, and even then you need boost from Talents or equipment. So it might be common for a PC to go down, but very uncommon for them to actually die.

As for careers and specs...before you go down the route of trying to figure out a way to not use them, keep in mind that there is a lot of cross-over and flexibility in this game. It's not at all like other class-based games, eg: compared to D&D it puts multi-classing to shame. You can easily have a mechanic who is also a sharp-shooter, or a hired gun who is a good medic. The careers just provide a basic framework, but you can use XP to purchase extra specs, gaining the spec skills as careers skills and gaining access to the Talents, at any time. Your nervous scholar can easily pick up an Enforcer spec, and become Jekyll and Hyde if you want, or like Bruce Banner and the Hulk.

The main problem with not just going with the careers and specs is that Talents don't have a fixed cost anywhere. Some specs might give Toughened at 5PX, others at 20XP, and others not at all. So scaling something "classless" is complicated, and I've never seen a viable solution. Basically it's not really worth the effort, and since the player isn't limited in any way in how they develop their character, there is no real point to it.

To answer your other question, parry and reflect help quite a bit as long as you have the strain to manage it. It's essentially extra soak at the cost of a few points of strain. Parry is essentially the answer to Lightsabers being able to bypass soak.

I also recommend checking out armored clothing or heavy clothing. The pictures in the book make them look like regular clothes. If you are interested in played a Force user in Force and Destiny, there are Armored Robes and Concealing robes which grant soak (and in the case of armored robes, defense), and they look like something from the movies or TCW.

So the consensus seems to be that combat isn't as deadly as I had expected. Though giving up 3 strain for the reduced damage seems a better choice after a few investments. I'm still always surprised just how easy it is to hit anyone in this new system.

As for a classless system I just find the pre arranged paths a little tedius, not to mention any Jedi that wants to redirect a blaster bolt now needs Shien Expert, and not just Shien Expert, but Shien Technique, making Cunning unexpectedly popular for force users.

Any Niman Disciple needs Improved Center of Being to get Force rating +1 (and Center of Being), Pathfinders that want Force Rating +1 need Animal Empathy? Doesn't it push most pathfinders to be too similar?

As for a classless system I just find the pre arranged paths a little tedius, not to mention any Jedi that wants to redirect a blaster bolt now needs Shien Expert, and not just Shien Expert, but Shien Technique, making Cunning unexpectedly popular for force users.

Any Niman Disciple needs Improved Center of Being to get Force rating +1 (and Center of Being), Pathfinders that want Force Rating +1 need Animal Empathy? Doesn't it push most pathfinders to be too similar?

Not if you only want to reflect blaster bots at B1 battle droids or Stormtroopers.

Because minions take strain as wounds, every threat the enemy rolls against you can be a reflected blaster bolt- 4 threat is a dead battle droid, 5 is a dead stormtrooper, without any talents at all.

Any particular specialization is going to be fairly similar, yes. That's a large part of why they're specializations. You're not actually required to take the Force Rating (or Dedication) talents within a tree and its not so much a classless system as its a level-less system with incredibly flexible multi-classing; which makes it act much like a classless system.

So the consensus seems to be that combat isn't as deadly as I had expected. Though giving up 3 strain for the reduced damage seems a better choice after a few investments. I'm still always surprised just how easy it is to hit anyone in this new system.

Well, players may find that if they are all rendered unconscious they may wake up being cooked over a fire and the droid in the party is now a god and can get them released or eaten on his whim or they wake up in a gladiator pit and have to fight off a Rankor. Even in space combat their ship won’t die unless the critical says so, though they may end up in a tractor beam being dragged towards a star destroyer or a small moon.

Death in a normal game is a big deal, here you have far more leeway. My next game will see the players in my game face three worked up Nexu, if they stand and fight they will have a terrible time. However, I will be able to recover the situation and hopefully they will have learned that they get no more XP at the end of the evening for standing and fighting or running away.

Personally, I don’t find the talent tree broken. So if it isn’t broke don’t fix it.

While it may seem there is a certain standardisation there, you are forgetting that players can buy new specialisations and skills that interject through the spending of XP. I could spend my first 10XP on a skill upgrade as easily as a talent. So packages reduces the flexibility and timing a player has in their spending of their XP.

As for a classless system I just find the pre arranged paths a little tedius...

You said you haven't been able to play this yet, so how could you know if it's tedious or not? The way the XP-earning is structured, a player can always spend their XP on something, and those "somethings" start adding up to a well rounded character that grows organically. Seems to me you're focused on how to quickly get to a specific end goal, and missing the rest of the ride.

I think the same at the beginning, but after reading posts and asking Sam, now I don't see so much that "mortality" problem.

Minion packs no greater than 3, Wounds are scratches (fear criticals) and other useful things.

For the "non-class/specs". We use a "NPC style" design, so, we pick what we need. We try to folow the essence of the "class" (common sense) but suits fine.

Try it unnaltered a few more times, and patch if you need it, but I really suggest that try it mate

You said you haven't been able to play this yet, so how could you know if it's tedious or not?

Years of playing true classless systems.

Armor in this game isn't as effective as it is in other games and since Armor and Cover don't stack (you take the best of the two) if your Player's keep their PCs using cover they should be okay with minimal armor. Which is basically what you see in the original three films. Also there are other ways of getting Defensive dice in the game through Talents and such. Armor is really for the PCs that want to move around the battlefield without having to worry about cover as much, the advantage being the extra mobility and not having to use a Maneuver to get into Cover.

So the consensus seems to be that combat isn't as deadly as I had expected. Though giving up 3 strain for the reduced damage seems a better choice after a few investments. I'm still always surprised just how easy it is to hit anyone in this new system.

As for a classless system I just find the pre arranged paths a little tedius, not to mention any Jedi that wants to redirect a blaster bolt now needs Shien Expert, and not just Shien Expert, but Shien Technique, making Cunning unexpectedly popular for force users.

Any Niman Disciple needs Improved Center of Being to get Force rating +1 (and Center of Being), Pathfinders that want Force Rating +1 need Animal Empathy? Doesn't it push most pathfinders to be too similar?

The only change I think you'd need to make is to lower the cost of picking up a new specialization. With that bar lowered, the system ends up being fairly "classless." You could drop that to 0, but you run the risk of having players min/maxing by picking up lots of 5 XP talents (like multiple Toughened and Grit talents, not to mention Parry and Reflect), as well as unlocking a lot of career skills.

Personally, I'd say 10 or 20 XP for an in-career specialization and 20 or 30 XP for an out-of-career specialization would be fine. I don't think that cost needs to be increased by 10 every time you pick up a new spec.

As for having to go into Shien to pick up Improved Reflect (and having a focus on Cunning), there's been a lot of discussion on the boards about giving Improved Reflect to at least one other specialization (Soresu is where most people want to see it), and you don't have to have any focus in Cunning just because you have Shien Technique. If you're a practitioner of another style, you could still use your chosen characteristic and call your dip into Shien an expansion on your core skillset.

The only change I think you'd need to make is to lower the cost of picking up a new specialization. With that bar lowered, the system ends up being fairly "classless." You could drop that to 0, but you run the risk of having players min/maxing by picking up lots of 5 XP talents (like multiple Toughened and Grit talents, not to mention Parry and Reflect), as well as unlocking a lot of career skills .

Personally, I'd say 10 or 20 XP for an in-career specialization and 20 or 30 XP for an out-of-career specialization would be fine. I don't think that cost needs to be increased by 10 every time you pick up a new spec.

Though I agree with the cherry-picking low hanging Talents, that's the only flaw with dropping the cost to pick up a new Spec.

Well, I can see two possible things that "bother" people. The first one, is why I have to pay extra costs because "I was born" as another carrier and the concept itself of extra cost (low but pretty high if you acumulate so many non-class things).

The second one... no, there isn't XD

I believe that isn't an excesive cost but I understand that the class concept can annoy someone. In Star Wars Galaxies a friend of mine was Pikeman and Entertainer... why he have to pay extra costs? I supose that an elite-trooper can also be the best chef in the world with proper specs like "Elite Trooper and Master Chef".

I first wanted a non-carrier/specs version, but actually I like the concept.

I've been toying with the idea of doing away with xp for specs as a whole and instead giving out bonus specs as characters gain xp. say every 75 or 100. Problem is that I don't know what to give players that don't want a new spec in exchange.

My original thought for specs (before I tossed them entirely) was to charge 20EXP per new spec. It's a small "gateway" cost, keeps the "pluck low hanging Talents" under control, etc.

Also by not allowing them to pick them up when they want to, your forcing the Players to build in a certain way.

For example, my first non-skill purchases with my last character were 2 new Trees, largely because I wanted two new Career skills.

Yeah, I've thought about that too. the problem is that more often than not, my players don't want to go for a new spec, as it kills their xp. they fall behind quickly compared to someone that just purchases skills.

I think (off topic) my only real gripe with this system is that skills are too cheap. Not that I have a solution, or know the magic formula, but I often see players, even my non-min maxers, investing most of their early experience in stats then skills. it is just the most useful... or efficient use... of xp until now. force users have alternatives for xp sinkage and actually make talents and powers viable alternatives (through a combination of FR, the reflect, and power options.

Back on topic. I think if I were to redesign the "multiclassing" I would have said 20 xp for a career spec and 30 for a non-career spec. each time you add a new spec, pick on career skill and one spec skill. they become career skills for the character. This makes spec'ing less of a cumulative cost, and reduces the accumulation of career skills, IMO.

But that's arm chair game design.

Yeah, I've thought about that too. the problem is that more often than not, my players don't want to go for a new spec, as it kills their xp. they fall behind quickly compared to someone that just purchases skills.

That depends. If they get a spec that has the skills they invest into, they might be ahead...plus they get a whole row of new low-hanging fruit.

In the end I just don't see the current framework of careers and specs as much of a big deal. I expect most GMs are going to be flexible with this anyway, I certainly have been. I had one player whose character concept was so broad he was really an Archeologist+BigGameHunter+Trader all rolled into one. His problem in the game was he was spread so thin, other PCs usually had better capabilities in their shared areas. He's not much of a rules guy, leaving it all to me, so I decided to give him all three specs, making him pay for one out of XP-earned and giving him one for free. Then I told the other players they could take a free non-career spec, or a career spec + 10XP (...and there was much rejoicing...). In short order he's going from "thinly spread" to "broadly capable", and is much happier as a result.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think the framework is a problem. If you want to be generous within the bounds of the framework, go for it, it's a LOT easier to handle it that way than trying to reinvent a truly classless system and re-reranking all the Talent costs.

This makes spec'ing less of a cumulative cost, and reduces the accumulation of career skills , IMO.

Can you explain this?

I built a knight level Assasin/Politico, and nabbed the Politico's "Well Rounded" talent to round out my skills (then kept building toward Scathing Tirade as my free maneuver when I roll 2 advantage- the Shisivastan howls at you!)

@whafrog: I have no problem with the specializations. Just want to make that clear.

It's the xp cost adn quantity of class skills when obtaining the specs that seemed... not bad... just a blunt hammer. Pay XP, get all the skills, and the xp cost becomes burdensome after say 2 specs. That burden is a noticable thing. (this is a ltittle off topic, but if you duck into a third, non-career spec, that's 40 xp. let's say you nab 2 low hanging 5 xp talents too. for that same xp cost, you can get 4 ranks in a career skill, and I don't know about you, but most min-maxers most of the time will take the 4 ranks in a career skil. even then it's 3 ranks in a non career skill, still a big improvement over none.)

Sorry for the derailment. I think in the end I would have liked to see a xp cost that was lees progressive/cumulative, and that the benefits of cross spec'ing were less to compensate. It's my own selfish desire, knowing how I and my group like to play, and my feelings on skill cost and effectiveness.

@eeyore: Well, career skills lose their specialness if you are constantly accumulating more of them. between the recruit and politico career, you can have almost ALL the skills as career skills, to which I say, What's the point?

But more so, I feel like skill costs in the game are too low for what they provide. When I work with my player, what I notice is that often they start out wanting talents (in EotE) but then for actual effectiveness in play, skills are the best investment.

This isn't as much of an issue in other skill based games IME like WoD, since the various supernatrual abilities provide something that can't actually be replicated through skills, or surpass their mundane limitations in some way. FFGSW does not allow that. Not in the same way. Not often.

FaD actually addresses this some, since there are reasons to take talents, from obvious options like parry/Reflect, to the hunter's animal bond, and FR and force powers. these are game effects that surpass the mundane effects of skill dice. So this is the first time my group has taken talents instead of skills, and we all like it quite a bit.

I think If I were to go back in time, I would suggest that the career skills you start with are it. if you gain additional specs, no skills are added. that would make talents that add career skills far better, and could also reduce the cost of gaining additional specs to something reasonable.

But that is hind sight, with 2 years of personal play experience, and obviously would not work with other people's ideas.

You don't have to agree of course, but that's been my experience and my thoughts.

@eeyore: Well, career skills lose their specialness if you are constantly accumulating more of them.

They certainly aren't more potent than Out of Career skills.

I get that they're cheaper to purchase, but then if "defines a Class/Career" is your definition of special... we'll have to agree to disagree.

I hate Classes and want nothing to do with them. Career skills are a form of "Class based character design".

I think If I were to go back in time, I would suggest that the career skills you start with are it. if you gain additional specs, no skills are added. that would make talents that add career skills far better, and could also reduce the cost of gaining additional specs to something reasonable.

But that is hind sight, with 2 years of personal play experience, and obviously would not work with other people's ideas.

They are special by the broadest sense of the word.

and defining in that they are mechanically different, and significant over 5 ranks (a 25% discount off of non-career skills)

adjective 1 .better, greater, or otherwise different from what is usual.

I certainly wouldn't want to chase anyone away from the game (or make dono too happy ) but continually adding special qualities to characters (in the way of career skills) reduces the impact of actually ahving to choose a startign path and remain tethered to that on some level.

I realize that doesn't jive with you, but even in a classless game, many systems have favored skills, or some other character defining feature that makes your signature abilities more advantageous in some way. Edge is less free form of course, as this bundles the skills into careers and sepcs, but it's not far off.

But like I said, my style, and my ideas aren't for everyone. So the cookie crumbles. (It would be helpful if I did ALWAYS have the majority support for every idea I had. Make solving disputes with my wife easier. )

They are special by the broadest sense of the word.

And so you get where I'm coming from: My weapon of choice is GURPS . There is no hint of classes in any form in that system.

And when I'm done working this system over with a crowbar, I'll have ripped the Classes from it completely as well.