Here's the thing.

While there's plenty of ways to play this game, most of them are going to be do flying around in a tramp freighter, doing the firefly/han solo/ red dwarf thing.

Agility, Presence and Willpower are good on almost every character. Even the "most efficient murder machine" you seem to love spouting on about, still is going to value initiative and strain.

I've seen players get annoyed at their underperforming fringers and scouts, so that's why i warn against them.

And again, I disagree, and I can't see what the issues with the Fringer and Scout are. Initiative and strain? Both have Cool as a career skill (very few Specs have both Vigilance and Cool as career skills). Both have multiple ranks of Grit and Rapid Recovery for strain. What are these metrics you're using to measure 'underperformance?'

I'm surprised someone said Brawn was a dump stat when the most re-occurring issue on these boards have been challenging high-soak character.

Int and Br may be crap in some games, but plenty others will find it useful as heck in theirs.

stop power-gaming for 5 minutes. Sit back and play a character you want to play; make that character...hand the sheet to your GM...if they are a good GM they will make NOTE of all the players and their abilities and make sure each scenario is POSSIBLE for your band of rag-tag-spacers. They will make sure each scenario and adventure plays suit to each in their own special way making sure everyone has fun. Fun...remember that? Remember when FUN trumped adding numbers to make sure your numbers beat the other numbers?

Ok-- you can go back to power-gaming now...

To better answer the OP question we need to know what it is you want your character to do (as Thanatos pointed out).

I think a better approach would be come up with a concept and then chase the stats, and not the other way around. Brainstorm for a bit and go "I think I'd like to play Magnum PI crossed with Liberace!" and figure out what classes fit versus picking something from the book and building to that.

I am pretty certain that is what I said.

Int and brawn are the two most dumpable unless your class resolves them.

I haven't seen this. I'd suggest your game experience has some voids. If you don't need Resilience to recover precious Strain, then Strain is too easy to come by. If you never need to climb anything, then your terrain is too flat. If you don't need non-scholars to make the occasional Knowledge check, then you're not making full use of those challenges or the means by which game information can be imparted. If you don't need a non-mechanic to make a desperate attempt to fix the steering on the speeder because the mechanic is too busy making the engines go, then the party is too comfortable in their monolithic core competencies.

Funny choice of word because optimization can mean max productivity with minimum waste. So really the typical jack of all trades, say 3 in all characteristics in game terms, also meets the definition of optimum since a PC will be solid at everything. In fact going power gamer and maxing a PC out at something means invariably that character will find themselves sucking hard at certain checks. Given the mathematical definition of optimization and the fact that in an adventure all variables can't be counted on, there is no way to max a PC out at anything and really be "optimum".

I find the concept interesting that someone would suggest that there is a class imbalance. Because my first reaction is to say "of course there is" why shouldn't there be? Each class has an array of strengths, often quite different to another.

Why is the archeologist written down? The Star Wars universe is full of lost civilisations with amazing technollogies. Heck, the main character in Guardians of the Galaxy is an Archeologist. The tech he finds has the potential to destroy the galaxy. Bounty Hunter: Gadgeteers will love this guy as a friend, what's not to love?

The good old Commodore gets a hiding, but I am interested, to me it pushes the buttons, I have enjoyed reading books such as Honor Harrington, Kris Longnife, Sorrano and Hornblower. Maybe once you get F&D you could create the "Dread Pirate Roberts" and have a fencing pirate type dude.

And with that I leave you with the following "Have fun storming the castle."

While there's plenty of ways to play this game, most of them are going to be do flying around in a tramp freighter, doing the firefly/han solo/ red dwarf thing.

Right - but are you The Leader, the Lancer, the Smart Guy, the Big Guy or The Chick ? Or are you the Sixth Ranger ? There are plenty of ways to do the flying around in the tramp freighter thing - and not all of them involve fighting or leaning heavy on the dexterity. Lando? Probably a pretty smart cookie (he did run a city after all), and you think Han didn't have at least a decent knowledge skill set? Core worlds, rim worlds, Mechanics, Astrogation, Underworld, computers, and probably a rank of education.

Call me crazy, but a solid brawn - you know, the stat that raises your Don't Die When Shot or Stabbed ability seems pretty important too. And Cunning, with it's perception and streetwise (at the bare minimum) is pretty worthwhile. That just leaves the Smarts - which we've already establish that it's not unless (or if it is, your GM is doing it wrong).

So, back to square one - every attribute is important to some build, and those all depend on what your concept is.

In full disclosure, my R3 astromech character began play with Brawn 1, Agility 2, Intellect 4, Cunning 3, Willpower 1, Presence 1. I would not consider any of those 1's dump stats though. I did this with the conscious decision to base him on an improved version of the adversary profile for the standard astromech (1/1/2/2/1/1). I just couldn't see raising them all to 2's, since droids are supposed to be highly specialized in my opinion.

Brawn 1: I am banking on the thought process of 'who shoots an astromech when there's a wookie marauder coming at you?' I have since offset this by getting some Toughened talents.

Willpower 1 and Presence 1: He's a droid with a natural lack of social aptitude, and I counter this with ranks in the social skills that matter most to a droid slicer/mechanic.

From my perspective, I'd never leave the gate without a 3 agility. It's just too useful a stat in actual gameplay. Whether you buy it off the bat or it comes from the race, always put that at least at 3.

After that, you have to ask what your role in the party is going to be. The primary stat for that ability should be 4 (3 from race, 4 from points).

After that, ask what you think your GM will expect your weakness to be and buy that up to a 2.

Take whatever XP bonus you can get for more obligation at character creation (more XP is always good).

30 + 40 + 20 xp = 90xp.

You should now be just about out of XP. Throw the rest into class skills or 5xp abilities.

Once you start playing, you have to decide whether or not you're going to push for more stat points (which means straight-lining for Dedication and cheap specs multiple times) or skill/ability saturation (which means your starting stats stay that way for an extended period of time).

This is just how I optimize and my priority system. YMMV.

On another note, as a stat, Intelligence is awesome. A high Int will allow your character to be very versatile with just base dice -- all Knowledge skills are Int based, Mechanics and Computers are Int based and so is Medicine. With a high Int, you'll be able to be competant in a lot of roles without having to spend XP.

THe The Best Thing I Can Recommend IS To Get The Non Excel Character Generator On THis Forum. Its A Great Program And Will Help Creation A Lot

On another note, as a stat, Intelligence is awesome. A high Int will allow your character to be very versatile with just base dice -- all Knowledge skills are Int based, Mechanics and Computers are Int based and so is Medicine. With a high Int, you'll be able to be competant in a lot of roles without having to spend XP.

High Intellect is a swiss army knife superpower. 10 of the 34(ish) skills use it. If you and your table are creative enough, it works wonders.

Agility only has 6 (admittedly half are combat offense skills).

The good old Commodore gets a hiding, but I am interested, to me it pushes the buttons, I have enjoyed reading books such as Honor Harrington, Kris Longnife, Sorrano and Hornblower.

EEEEEE! Somebody else reads Harrington!

Those series are all really good examples of how to mix vehicular scale gameplay with personal scale. They're naval officers, sure, but they're not always on the bridge. On Basilisk Station, Honor of the Queen, and Behind Enemy Lines would all be really good campaigns. I can't wait for the next Honorverse book to come out!

Optimization/specialization also depends on how big your party is. My gaming group is really big, so a couple of us (the droid players) are really good at one thing each. (Leadership/Negotiation & Intelligence/Knowledge respectively) While it's awesome to roll insane on our specializations occasionally, there is a lot of fun to be had in all the times we're in a position we really shouldn't be. Like combat. One of the few times my character actually made an attack (1G brawl) was while he was attempting to wrestle down our NPC medical droid (1G brawl) who was being controlled with a restraining bolt while the rest of the characters dealt with the actual enemy soldiers.

What I would say the truly suboptimal, not-to-fun character creation choice is, is too good but 2nd & third best at everything. If you don't get a chance to shine or flop, it gets harder to find ways to get into the game and you spend a lot of time assisting. I'd also suggest taking a look at the "other actions" that can be done in Space Combat and finding one or two your character can do. (Assuming you don't go for gunnery or pilot) Not having anything good to do in Space Combat can also get a little boring. (My niche is fire discipline/inspiring rhetoric)

As someone else noted above, our group also has the "one Rebuild" rule, where you can take your character and build them again with the same concept and xp, but otherwise completely from scratch. Most of the time this is used to swap a character to a better splat-book class, but occasionally it'll come because they shifted to a specialization that wasn't useful/fitting, or in one case to flip a 3 cunning to 3 willpower because of the way the character evolved.

On another note, as a stat, Intelligence is awesome. A high Int will allow your character to be very versatile with just base dice -- all Knowledge skills are Int based, Mechanics and Computers are Int based and so is Medicine. With a high Int, you'll be able to be competant in a lot of roles without having to spend XP.

High Intellect is a swiss army knife superpower. 10 of the 34(ish) skills use it. If you and your table are creative enough, it works wonders.

Agility only has 6 (admittedly half are combat offense skills).

This seems to be the same conclusion my players came to in making characters for the campaign they hope for me to start some day soon. One character is a droid with a high Int and lots of those Int skills covered. Additionally, as the dice analysis link points out, you don't necessarily need a given stat to be high. More dice tends to outweigh upgraded dice. 4 stat and 2 skill is no different than 2 stat/4 skill. If you only care about 1 skill tied to a stat, dump the stat and raise the skill... it'll be cheaper. My players' discussion seems to be revolving around what they feel they need to aim for as "good enough"... 3/1, 3/2, 4/2? Obviously anyone that feels a skill is "key" to them they may be shooting for an eventual 5.

Some of the scenarios described in this thread seem... odd. If a Presence 1/Negotiation 0 character is going to have to bargain at some point, is that going to annoy the 4 Pr/4 Negotiation player? Sure, he could be doing something else, but in smaller groups this feels more like punishment unless it happens very rarely. If it happens often enough to make the combat guy invest in people skills, you're affecting two players, not one, particularly if at the same time you're throwing melee or ranged duels at the face character. Smaller groups often can't afford this level of overlap in other games, but maybe that is't the case in this game.

We've now extensively played all the specs, and (as someone who doesn't allow cross-career specs) I've come to the conclusion that all of them can offer something... with the important caveat that some are very niche, and the Core book Explorer specs and the Scholar aren't much good at doing 'typical Star Wars stuff', for the want of a better description.

Characters good at combat or Stealth will usually find something to do on any given adventure - I found that Explorers really only shine when I go out of my way as GM to run explorer-type adventures, actively trying to showcase these unloved Talents like Familiar Suns or Respected Scholar. This was actually a lot of fun, as I broke that character off from the main group, added a plucky sidekick as a GMPC and ran several adventures that felt more like 'Mountains of Madness' or 'Da Vinci Code' than the standard SW fare of shooting stormtroopers. When your main obstacles are the environment, ancient traps and natural beasts, instead of Hutt/Imperial goons, it calls for a very different skillset and adventure flow.

In particular, lack of combat skills actually make the sessions feel more like a book or movie, because avoiding combat or just plain running away are now good options, whereas the optimized-for-killing characters almost always choose to fight it out and wipe out the opposition.

Of course, 'Enter the Unknown' really adds the core adventuring skills like Ranged Heavy and Stealth back in, and each of the three new specs caters to this style of play. By itself, Scout is an unsatisfying grab-bag of random skills and talents that don't match up, but it makes a superb second spec for a Big Game Hunter.

I like the concept in any case; pretty much everyone's Original Star Wars Character is some special-snowflake Jedi, and those who aren't are either smugglers or bounty hunters. We don't see enough explorers, traders or academics in SW, because most action/adventure stories don't focus on their skillset.

So instead of saying Intelligence is a dump stat, it's more accurate to say that some careers emphasize different skills than others.

Hate to break it to you, this isn't the most balanced game ever produced.

Not all stats are equal. Nor are the spec's.

As a player you have finite points so some are going get dumped.

Int and brawn are the two most dumpable unless your class resolves them.

Yes Archaeologist is a good class, it has both a niche, solid mechanics and versatility.

Trader is by far the most useful of the core explorer classes.

Scout and Fringer are underwhelming, i'd say jack of all trades but they are not even that. Esoteric talents with limited use is not good place to start new players.

Agree with most of that (except Brawn, that has to be the best stat, surely?), for reasons posted above. And I think you and Desslok are on the same page, actually.

Fringer feels like it was intended as a second spec, a way to add some piloting skills and general toughness to an existing character. It has odd things like Knockdown, but no Melee skill to get those Triumphs with. My GMPC started out here, and it was astonishingly underwhelming. When your main use in combat is standing in the open, screaming 'shoot me instead of my squishier companions!' , I knew I'd have to cut back the fight scenes in favour of something else.

And Scout, bizarrely, actually makes for a poor scouting character. Medicine isn't half as useful as Stealth would be:

"Okay Red Command, I've found the Imperial camp. Sending you my estimates of troop movements and vehicle numbers now. Oh, drat. They've seen me. Again. Okay, get the ransom money ready again, and tell my wife I'll see her when I get released in about six months."

I disagree again. This game is perfectly balanced based on the premise that players and GMs work together to create stories. Each Spec fills a role and appeals to different interests as well. How are the Fringer's piloting talents (Skilled Jockey and Defensive Driving), 2 ranks of Dodge, 2 ranks of Grit, 2 ranks of Toughened, and 3 ranks of Rapid Recovery esoteric with limited use? If Astrogation is not an important skill in your games, I can see how you could think Galaxy Mapper and Master Starhopper aren't useful, but as our group's Astromech player, I think they're invaluable. The Scout has Natural Hunter, Heightened Awareness, Disorient, Quick Strike and Stalker....all great.

Fringer feels like a backup class; the Talents work well to make a tougher character as a second spec. As your initial spec though, it feels very lacking, unless the GM puts a greater-than-normal emphasis on space travel. Astrogation in particular tends to get handwaved in many groups.

No, without the skills to make best use of these Talents - Vigilance, Stealth, Coordination, and any combat skill for Disorient/Quick Strike - they are considerably less than 'great'.

As a second spec, it can work very well, particularly to a BGH. As a first spec, it's a complete mess. (For an Explorer anyway; it's pretty good for Spy in AoR, as that career has vastly better base skills.)

Which is why I'm betting the Explorer book was the first one we saw.

For me, the thing about making combat characters do non-combat things (and vice-versa) is the comedy effect.

While your “Face” is off doing the really important negotiating stuff, how funny would it be if the totally un-anti-non-social Wookiee decides that he needs to use the refresher, and what kind of hijinks can ensue?

Some of our funniest moments have come when players had ideas of things to do, but those ideas weren’t really well suited to their characters, and so they went off and did some truly wacky things.

If you can use that “Hit them where they aren’t” philosophy but in a comedic fashion, I think that tends to go a very long ways to making a much more interesting game — and one where the players are comfortable knowing that you’re not just there to screw with them in any way you can, but instead you’re there to help them tell an amazing, and funny, story.

Last time my character and the other non-face fighter in the group tried to impersonate Imperials with perfect uniforms and perfect ID's and a decent story (and my character is a deserter former Imperial Lt.)... we still got found out. Which was annoying

Having 2 ability (green) dice in something is going to trip you up a significant fraction of the time, even on average difficulty tasks. (43.5% chance of success vs two purple. Probably forgot to ask for boosts )

(OK, it was funnier that way, but still painful. About 3 total scars worth.)

First, pick a character concept and a back story and goals for whatever character you want.

Pick a couple (2 history, 2 now, 2 future or so) or skills you want to focus on. Try to get your past and now skills to proficient, and then hint at the future skills. Personally, I figure "Proficient" is at a 1G2Y dice pool. This will let you succeed at MOST things (unless you roll like me) statically. Starting you are capped at 2 ranks in a skill, so you could bump a Characteristic to 3, and hit "Proficient" if the Characteristic feeds that Skill. If not, spending 15 XP for that 3rd skill rank happens pretty quickly.

Until your GM starts throwing Nemesis, or multiple rivals at you in a given encounter, I would not worry about bumping that dice pool again; instead focusing on the Talents in the talent tree you chose, and may buying another specialization.

While playing, remember to TRY everything you think might be fun (or funny). I had a smuggler with 4 Agi that never tried to shoot his blaster pistol because he thought he was bad at it. I had to coax him into it, not understanding that his 4G pool was probably better than the 2G1Y pool our blaster guy was sporting when it came to succeeding. As to the funny... We have a HK droid in the party who is a Galaxy renowned Twi'lek poet. He picked something silly and off beat for his Obsession. Well, his 1Y dice pool for composing poetry when his turn to be the Designated A-hole (the one whose Obligation triggered) was used extensively, and had LOTS of destiny points spent on it to get it to succeed. That little bit of craziness kept the table rolling for HOURS when it happened, and we revisit it every couple of games, just because it is so funny. Never underestimate the ability of poor skill pools to entertain the party.

In the end though, build the character without worrying about the mechanics, and then fill in the mechanics. Make sure the character can _do_ what they want (see "Proficiency" above) to do, and let the story tell the rest. Work toward your character's goals, and have a great time contributing to the telling of the story your group is telling.

Kevynn

when it comes to character building, i recommend you know what the other players are doing. if there are three characters who are combat focused, and you make a 4th, you will run into issues. i've had this happen to me once. i made a gunslinger, but there were two other members of the party who had blaster rifles. they could do damage from farther away so, when combat started, they would unload before i could. i went the entire campaign with only taking one shot. so, knowing what the other players are going to do, and working around it, will help you to be more of a part of the group and make it a more plesurable experience for you. if there's a gunslinger and a piot/mechanic, be the one who negotiates and speaks for them. a good gm will find ways of allowing everyone a time to shine if you give him a chance to.

as for building the character, i HIGHLY recommend you put your points into your primary stats, such as brawn and agaility. after character creation, the only way you can raise them is by expensive bionics/surgery, and investing 100+ points into a specilization to get the dedicated feat. and then you can only raise one by ONE before you need to invest into a new tree. you can always pick up skills later, and for pretty cheap. but not your primary attributes. from a story perspective, i feel this makes more sense as well. your primaries represent your raw potential, but skills are training and experience. i feel that should be done in game as well.

as for species, make sure you learn about them before you choose one. they are more then a representive of numbers. Dugs, for instance, have a lot of anger in them and a warrior history. if you don't want to be an angry character, don't choose one because they have an ablility you like. your character is more important then a stat which you can buy with starting xp.

lastly, get the character generator program on these forums, i think the title thread is another character generator. it will make character creation MUCH more easy. keeps track of your points, shows you your options with customizing your weapons, and MUCH, MUCH MORE. my group has used it since our first session, and it's one of the reaons i understand the game as well as i do.

lastly, have fun. what does gaming matter if you aren't having fun?

Last time my character and the other non-face fighter in the group tried to impersonate Imperials with perfect uniforms and perfect ID's and a decent story (and my character is a deserter former Imperial Lt.)... we still got found out. Which was annoying

Having 2 ability (green) dice in something is going to trip you up a significant fraction of the time, even on average difficulty tasks. (43.5% chance of success vs two purple. Probably forgot to ask for boosts )

(OK, it was funnier that way, but still painful. About 3 total scars worth.)

three scars. that hurts.

Optimization/specialization also depends on how big your party is.

This. Or more specifically: If you want to optimize your character in Star Wars, you have to do it as a group: Make sure you've covered all the bases. Not everyone needs to be great at Piloting (Space) but _someone_ in your group should be. This is true for (almost) all skills: It's usually sufficient if one (or two) characters in your group are good at a certain skill. A possible exception may be the combat skills: Make sure that your character is able to carry his (or her) weight in combat encounters. This doesn't automatically mean you have to be good in at least one of the combat skills, but it's the easiest way to make sure you can contribute.

This game is perfectly balanced based on the premise that players and GMs work together to create stories.

This is basically the Oberoni fallacy ('the rules aren't broken because the GM has final say!').

It depends on the system or the character whether I come up with mechanics or backstory first, but you always have to have a concept. Reading on Wookiepedia about different species, such as Gand, can give you some great ideas.

My personal recomendation is to spend all your starting xp on Characteristics. I also reccommend getting as many stats to Three as you can, even if it means taking additional obligation. If you are a human or lunged gand for instance, you can have a 3 3 3 3 2 2 starting array, which is pretty nice. I generally don't recommend spending xp to take stats to 4 at character creation, as it's less effecient. You can always raise attributes later through Dedication, which costs 25 xp. Generally speaking, edge is a game where anyone might be called on to make that charm or negotiation roll, not just the guy with +20 to diplomacy. I personally don't like to have any characteristics at 1 because you're at risk to fail even simple checks (no difficulty).

Generally speaking, characteristics should determine how many green dice you roll and skill ranks should determine how many of them are yellow. The reason for this is simple: it will take less xp to raise the relevant characteristic than to raise the skill ranks of all the skills in that characteristic, as a rule. More green dice are better than smaller numbers of yellow dice (until you get into large numbers of dice where the better results on the yellow dice can even it out).

Remember you don't have to pick your favorite specialization first. Sometimes it's worthwhile to pick one that will give you better starting skills and/or offers a straight path to Dedication. Also, some talents are somewhat dependent on equipment, and you may not have that equipment yet.

Lastly: figure out how you're going to contribute to combat and space combat.