Anyone else thought this was a really poor article?

I normally love the FFG previews, but this one really felt sketchy.

I was really looking forward to seeing the new Diplomat specs, because we play a lot of non-combat games. Also, titles like' Advocate', 'Analyst' and 'Propogandist' are not as obvious as say, 'Hotshot' or 'Beast Rider' as to what they are actually supposed to do.

So I was looking forward to some insight into this, but the article didn't really give me any. It speaks about the specs in very general terms, and never really says what makes them unique or different.

For instance, you can say 'Rigger' represents a pilot who spends all his time improving his vehicle, or a 'Hotshot' is a devil-may-care maverick who uses a 'high-risk, high-reward' strategy over the conventional expertise of a Pilot character.

But the article just goes on in woolly terms about what they do, without giving us any insights into Talents or even what Skills they use.

They actually spend more time telling us what other careers would suit them - they tell us that Advocate suits Soldiers and Spies, Analyst suits Engineers and Commanders, and Propogandist suits Pilots, but it doesn't tell us how they suit career Diplomats, or what they actually do. Reading this, I just get the impression that these are secondary Specs meant to pad out the resume of other careers, and that can't be right.

What makes an 'Advocate' different from an 'Ambassador', say? The article doesn't tell us. Sometimes I wonder if this design intention of 'all careers must have six specs' is pushing things a bit, creating specs when there's no real room for them.

We enjoy the non-combat elements, and in real-world situations, having people who can analyse data, use legal loopholes and sway large-scale public opinion are absolutely essential to a military operation. But how do they fit into a Spec, how do we transfer that to exciting sci-fi adventures?

I'm sure the book will be fine and give us lots of good ideas about non-combat games, but I can't quite work out what on earth this preview was actually meant to be telling us.

Patience, there was a thread talking about this same thing, and I have seen that members of this community that get this book will give us the low down on it, so you will be able to make an informed decision on whether or not you would like to buy the book.

Really? I thought the article explained the new specs pretty nicely. Including how they could dove-tail with other specs.

They don't usually go into a lot of mechanical details until the final update before release, if past write-ups are any guide. And since this was a designer diary written by the designer who worked on the different specializations I think it contained pretty much what it said on the tin.

There's a new one, or are we talking about the old one? If new link please.

Edit: sorry missed the link somehow.

edit 2: Interesting. I'm still more interested in what new hardware the book will include then the specs and such. However while I doubt that I'll ever make a Diplomat but I could see a lot of my characters using Analyst based on what the article says.

I didn't personally see anything wrong with the article and thought it went over the new specs just as well as similar articles for other career source books.

Plus, you have to be impressed with an article that uses a word like "sangfroid", as if everyone is supposed to know what that means without looking it up

Anyone else thought this was a really poor article?

I normally love the FFG previews, but this one really felt sketchy.

I was really looking forward to seeing the new Diplomat specs, because we play a lot of non-combat games. Also, titles like' Advocate', 'Analyst' and 'Propogandist' are not as obvious as say, 'Hotshot' or 'Beast Rider' as to what they are actually supposed to do.

So I was looking forward to some insight into this, but the article didn't really give me any. It speaks about the specs in very general terms, and never really says what makes them unique or different.

For instance, you can say 'Rigger' represents a pilot who spends all his time improving his vehicle, or a 'Hotshot' is a devil-may-care maverick who uses a 'high-risk, high-reward' strategy over the conventional expertise of a Pilot character.

But the article just goes on in woolly terms about what they do, without giving us any insights into Talents or even what Skills they use.

They actually spend more time telling us what other careers would suit them - they tell us that Advocate suits Soldiers and Spies, Analyst suits Engineers and Commanders, and Propogandist suits Pilots, but it doesn't tell us how they suit career Diplomats, or what they actually do. Reading this, I just get the impression that these are secondary Specs meant to pad out the resume of other careers, and that can't be right.

What makes an 'Advocate' different from an 'Ambassador', say? The article doesn't tell us. Sometimes I wonder if this design intention of 'all careers must have six specs' is pushing things a bit, creating specs when there's no real room for them.

We enjoy the non-combat elements, and in real-world situations, having people who can analyse data, use legal loopholes and sway large-scale public opinion are absolutely essential to a military operation. But how do they fit into a Spec, how do we transfer that to exciting sci-fi adventures?

I'm sure the book will be fine and give us lots of good ideas about non-combat games, but I can't quite work out what on earth this preview was actually meant to be telling us.

Normally when I see a rant like this I immediately dismiss it as lame, unfortunately this time I agree.

With getting zero SWRPG announcements at Celebration. Then zero announcements about the SWRPG on May the fourth or Revenge of the Fifth, you would think the first foray back into SWRPG announcements would have more to it.

The article felt to me like "oh BTW we are still working on this, here is a fluff piece that says nothing you haven't figured out on your own", rather than "here is more info that can show how you will utilize this book even if you have no Diplomats at all".

Plus, you have to be impressed with an article that uses a word like "sangfroid", as if everyone is supposed to know what that means without looking it up

Also I couldn't find a single 'moreover' in this preview, so I approve.