It's interesting how the specializations in this book, much more so than in the other CRBs, are so disjointed from each other. Possibly another small balancing factor for the Force using PC? If you want an optimized character (for example, a high-Intellect PC might benefit most from Soresu Defense + Artisan + Sage), you've gotta pay the extra XP for the cross-career specializations.

I wouldn't say it's that disjointed compared to the other books. Barring inherently intellect-focused careers (Technician in EotE, Engineer in AoR), everything follows a similar pattern across the books. Like EotE has Marauder, and if you just want to be about beating people up with high Brawn, Mercenary Soldier, Heavy, and Demolitionist aren't going to be your top picks, and even Bodyguard and Enforcer are barely helping for somebody who just wants to be a beast with Brawn with care for little else. A Sharpshooter/Soldier from AoR might like some of the defensive stuff in Commando, but if they wanted to maximize things that benefit their Agility, they're going to branch out into Gunner/Ace.

It's really just all about what the career itself does and subsequently a base character concept than min/maxing to a certain characteristic.

2) In the Core Game, we have 18 specializations, one of which has one talent that gives 1 per-session point of Conflict (among a few other talents of questionable moral use). But this does not make an Aggressor PC a dark side PC.

Absolutely agreed. Entering aggressor does not make a PC dark anymore than entering Pilot makes one a pilot.

Also, although the Aggressor is the most obviously dark-flavored, it is not by any means a "dark side" specialization, ...

there are no light side or dark side specializations; it's what you do with them that makes them light or dark. There are also several specializations that carry a distinct flavor to them (whether light or dark), but are not only suitable for that type of character.

Using Pilot as the analogy above, If i entered pilot with no intention of being a pilot, then I'm not really using that spec in the way it was intended. I could go down Row 3 and then grab dedication. I'd be a decent co pilot, or navigator, something supportive.

I think even beyond terrify and the recent change, look at prey on the weak. It's not a dark side talent, but it sure as shootin' sounds like one. Fearsome has no purpose besides generating fear, and Intimidate also has very little purpose beyond fear. taking the Aggressor as a whole, if you had no interest in using fear based talents which all at their core are conflict inspiring actions, it would be like playing a pilot with no intention of taking piloting related talents.

Couple that with that Force rating is blocked off by all those dark sounding talents (fearsome and prey on the weak).

Now, does entering aggressor mean you must be dark? no. But if you want to use even more than 40% of that spec, you need to embrace some dark sounding talents. Some piece that preys on the weak, instills fear, or enhances the intimidation you are capable of putting out. So beyond terrify, I think it is fair to say that aggressor is a dark spec. It is not "only" a dark spec, but it has little utility outside of those dark sounding talents. Besides getting zombied out with Against all odds.

I think aggressor, and the terrify change is a sign that dark side specs are in the future. Not a purely sith EVEEL spec, but specs that are as focused on the dark as Pilots are on piloting.

For those that think Mace Windu didn't have the Agressor specialization, I want to point out the illustration on page #62: when the art direction was given for that, it certainly looks like they said "Think Mace. Not Mace, but someone with his intensity."

Couple of thoughts on the talent generating conflict thing.

1) I have no problem.with the idea of a talent generating conflict. The way I see it, it is flavoring your morality, not changing it.

2) I am concerned about the fact that there is currently only a negative flavor, and none of the other talents have a positive flavor.

3) Without #2, and if enough of these dark leaning talents get put into the game, there is the potential for an unredeemable dark sider. I do not think this is in the spirit of the theme of Star Wars.

I think there are a couple possibilities to resolve 2 and 3.

A) The introduction of light leaning talents would help. Healer might be a good place to start for those. Defensive talents like Bodyguard might also be appropriate.

B) Changing these talents, as has been noted, to a per-use type.

C) Duplicating the mechanic used in Force Powers and design these types of talents with a dark and light side.

D) Introduce mechanics to remove dark leaning talents as part of redemption. I can't really think of a solid way to do this, so I think this might be the worst of the options.

It's still early in the game's life cycle. For all we know, in future career-based sourcebooks there may very well be talents with a strong light side bias that automatically reduce one's Conflict, just as it's possible that future career-based sourcebooks might have entirely new specializations that have a strong focus on either the light side or the dark side. But right now, nothing in the FaD Beta really fits the criteria of being "light side," with Healer and maybe Protector being the two closest possible candidates. Aggressor's been walking on the darker side of the road since the beginning, and everything else is fairly neutral.

Terrify has had a pretty negative flavor from Day One, and the Aggressor in general has as well. It's about drawing upon the Force (it is a Force talent after all) to use fear and terror to put your enemies at a disadvantage. That's pretty much a textbook example of the dark side, but I'd hate to see the degree of whining and complaining if the design team had made the change be "generate 1 Conflict each time you use this talent" given the whining and complaining about starting with 1 Conflict each session. Particularly since that 1 Conflict at the session's start is pretty much nothing in terms of adjusting your Morality at the end of the session.

If anything, the Conflict rules appear to have been written with the general idea that PCs are going to generate at least a few points of Conflict each session unless they actively take steps to avoid doing so. A Force and Destiny PC that operates under the same general code of self-serving conduct that most EotE PCs would is probably going to be generating at least 3 to 4 Conflict each session from their actions, if not more since violence is often the "go-to" solution for a number of EotE PCs.

For all we know, in future career-based sourcebooks there may very well be talents with a strong light side bias that automatically reduce one's Conflict...

I can only hope not. What I like about this Terrify change is that it represents a combination of "choices matter" and "dark side seduction". I don't think there should be a light side talent that does the opposite because the light side doesn't help you absolve yourself, you have to do it all on your own.

Very interesting debate everyone, i haven't had to deal with this yet since none of my players have taken this tree. I don't really have a problem with the terrify conflict since you don't have to take it in the tree if you don't want to, and it doesn't block you from getting anything else on the tree, on the other hand...

I've always held the opinion it's how you use the power/ability that makes it light or dark, why don't you get conflict for just having the ability to harm or unleash? What if a character uses terrify to stop violence, its perfectly ok to dismember someone with your lightsaber to protect others but fearing someone to stop, in order to save your enemy as well as the people he is trying to harm gives you conflict?

I certainly agree using terrify is flirting with the dark side and would rarely be used by anyone trying to stay to the light but earning conflict simply for having it seems ridiculous. Unless I'm missing something.

For all we know, in future career-based sourcebooks there may very well be talents with a strong light side bias that automatically reduce one's Conflict...

I can only hope not. What I like about this Terrify change is that it represents a combination of "choices matter" and "dark side seduction". I don't think there should be a light side talent that does the opposite because the light side doesn't help you absolve yourself, you have to do it all on your own.

Honestly, I kinda agree with Whafrog on this. I think adding light side talents would be the wrong way to go. I think it would be a better solution to take these planned dark talents and give them a second side the same way the dark force powers are. That way the EXP shouldn't feel wasted to a light sider, while the dark sider will still get the anchor around their neck if they heavily use dark side powers. Plus, there is even more temptation to the light sider when that situation comes up where the dark use would just be so perfect...

We had our first session today since the most recent beta update. The player that is playing the Aggressor completely agreed with the decision made by the developers and had no problems with gaining the one conflict.

He admitted that 1 point of conflict was nearly negligible and it fit well with the story he was trying to tell with playing an aggressor.

I've always held the opinion it's how you use the power/ability that makes it light or dark, why don't you get conflict for just having the ability to harm or unleash?

What if a character uses terrify to stop violence, its perfectly ok to dismember someone with your lightsaber to protect others but fearing someone to stop, in order to save your enemy as well as the people he is trying to harm gives you conflict?

I certainly agree using terrify is flirting with the dark side and would rarely be used by anyone trying to stay to the light but earning conflict simply for having it seems ridiculous. Unless I'm missing something.

a) Talents are "tightly linked to a character's identity, whereas Force powers are meant to show a character's "broad, overarching abilities."

b) It's a one-of-a-kind talent, so there are no other examples we can pull from, but I think it fits. It's something that is an intrinsic part of you, tempting you to use it. The dark side has got its hooks in you, constantly beckoning you to draw from its power.

2) Going on that, temptation is a perfect way to give Conflict to PCs. Remember Luke on Endor: "I feel the good in you, the conflict." And Vader's denial: "There is no conflict."

3) Google "things man was not meant to know TV tropes". If all this doesn't at least convince you of the legitimacy of the talent's effects & consequences, then I don't know what else to do

For all we know, in future career-based sourcebooks there may very well be talents with a strong light side bias that automatically reduce one's Conflict...

I can only hope not. What I like about this Terrify change is that it represents a combination of "choices matter" and "dark side seduction". I don't think there should be a light side talent that does the opposite because the light side doesn't help you absolve yourself, you have to do it all on your own.

Super agreed. Double plus even. Not only because IMO it would be poor game design (a license to be evil, which is not what a "light" talent should do) but for the many times Away has pointed out that the films don't actually talk about light, only dark.

We had our first session today since the most recent beta update. The player that is playing the Aggressor completely agreed with the decision made by the developers and had no problems with gaining the one conflict.

He admitted that 1 point of conflict was nearly negligible and it fit well with the story he was trying to tell with playing an aggressor.

I would really like to hear the response in six months, and how that talent has impacted the character arc as a whole. Genuinely curious, as my main concern is not a short term one but a long term one, which only long term play experience can really provide.

but I'd hate to see the degree of whining and complaining if the design team had made the change be "generate 1 Conflict each time you use this talent" given the whining and complaining about starting with 1 Conflict each session.

Must be nice having such a simplistic view of the many nuanced opinions expressed.

Is there a general ETA for when the beta will "end" and the actual book will come out?

I would expect that the Beta will end at some point in November (like the previous two did) and the CRB will be available sometime in Q2 2015. But there hasn't been any official communication to either end, AFAIK.

Thanks

For all we know, in future career-based sourcebooks there may very well be talents with a strong light side bias that automatically reduce one's Conflict...

I can only hope not. What I like about this Terrify change is that it represents a combination of "choices matter" and "dark side seduction". I don't think there should be a light side talent that does the opposite because the light side doesn't help you absolve yourself, you have to do it all on your own.

To be honest, I'd rather not see such talents myself. But given how many surprises FaD had for those of us trying to predict what it'd be or how certain things would be handled, I'm not going to write off the possibility of such a thing later down the road either.

For all we know, in future career-based sourcebooks there may very well be talents with a strong light side bias that automatically reduce one's Conflict...

I can only hope not. What I like about this Terrify change is that it represents a combination of "choices matter" and "dark side seduction". I don't think there should be a light side talent that does the opposite because the light side doesn't help you absolve yourself, you have to do it all on your own.

To be honest, I'd rather not see such talents myself. But given how many surprises FaD had for those of us trying to predict what it'd be or how certain things would be handled, I'm not going to write off the possibility of such a thing later down the road either.

Yeah...rather than "light-side, conflict-mitigating" talents, I'd rather just see rules (perhaps in a future splatbook with more Conflicty talents) for granting bonus Morality to a player, apart from the d10 roll.

Is there a general ETA for when the beta will "end" and the actual book will come out?

On that subject, is there going to be a boxed beginner set like they did with the last two?

Is there a general ETA for when the beta will "end" and the actual book will come out?

On that subject, is there going to be a boxed beginner set like they did with the last two?

They'd be fools not to, IMHO. I think those beginner sets have been a huge contributor to the adoption rate of the game.

But that's not really a knowledgable answer...

Is there a general ETA for when the beta will "end" and the actual book will come out?

On that subject, is there going to be a boxed beginner set like they did with the last two?

They'd be fools not to, IMHO. I think those beginner sets have been a huge contributor to the adoption rate of the game.

But that's not really a knowledgable answer...

I see absolutely no reason why they wouldn't. Force & Destiny has followed both of the other CRB development and product cycles.

I'd expect a Beginner's boxed set sometime around April-ish and probably the CRB by July.

I pray one comes much sooner than that.