Having a character start with an additional 190xp is an open invitation to finding hefty combo's and min/mxing in my experience.

that is why I usually don't give extra xp for new characters at all, or bonus xp at the end of a session they played in, in order to stop them from thinking so conceptually about their characters.

Don't forget that you can get a Hired Gun's ability LAST ONE STANDING easy in 190xp and that murders minions and rivals

(just had too )

With the 1 Crit Vibro weapons, sunder and ranged is the bane to these types of weapons. Just remember with the right equipment in the right hands can be deadly

Having a character start with an additional 190xp is an open invitation to finding hefty combo's and min/mxing in my experience.

that is why I usually don't give extra xp for new characters at all, or bonus xp at the end of a session they played in, in order to stop them from thinking so conceptually about their characters.

That's poor form as it gives the new characters substantially less opportunities to control the narrative. They can certainly still *try*, but they're going to be far less likely to have an effect than the characters with 3 extra ranks in whatever, which makes for an unsatisfying story. Look at ANH, the most powerful character is rapidly shuffled out of the narrative to allow the rest of the heroes to have a meaningful chance so it's not challenges geared for Obi-Wan that the others can't contribute meaningfully to. For another example, look at Gandalf in LOTR.

Having a character start with an additional 190xp is an open invitation to finding hefty combo's and min/mxing in my experience.

that is why I usually don't give extra xp for new characters at all, or bonus xp at the end of a session they played in, in order to stop them from thinking so conceptually about their characters.

That's poor form as it gives the new characters substantially less opportunities to control the narrative. They can certainly still *try*, but they're going to be far less likely to have an effect than the characters with 3 extra ranks in whatever, which makes for an unsatisfying story. Look at ANH, the most powerful character is rapidly shuffled out of the narrative to allow the rest of the heroes to have a meaningful chance so it's not challenges geared for Obi-Wan that the others can't contribute meaningfully to. For another example, look at Gandalf in LOTR.

I seriously disagree with this. A great game (especially in this system) does not hinge on being succesful in all you try.

I for one as a player would much rather lag behind a bit and experience the growth of my character than start off woth a power house that I set out to have an ultra hard attack. Different strokes and that.... Saying it is "poor form" now that is poor form.

That's poor form as it gives the new characters substantially less opportunities to control the narrative. They can certainly still *try*, but they're going to be far less likely to have an effect than the characters with 3 extra ranks in whatever, which makes for an unsatisfying story. Look at ANH, the most powerful character is rapidly shuffled out of the narrative to allow the rest of the heroes to have a meaningful chance so it's not challenges geared for Obi-Wan that the others can't contribute meaningfully to. For another example, look at Gandalf in LOTR.

I seriously disagree with this. A great game (especially in this system) does not hinge on being succesful in all you try.

I for one as a player would much rather lag behind a bit and experience the growth of my character than start off woth a power house that I set out to have an ultra hard attack. Different strokes and that.... Saying it is "poor form" now that is poor form.

No, but it does hinge on all characters being able to equally contribute to the narrative. If you have a character themed around stealth, but they have much lower success rates than another one in the same party themed around social skills, then the party will tend to solve problems with social skills (or guns, or whatever). Even if you're GMing in a 'fail forward' style, and failing that initial Skulduggery to pick the lock doesn't penalise the character, it still means they don't get spotlight time as they sneak through the place they broke into.

It is poor form. 'Earn your fun' character progression is a very stale hangover from the days of OD&D.

Maybe I am overreacting. I dont know, I dont have enough experience in the system to really know. It just feels like Vibroswords are insane.

I'd agree, you're probably overreacting.

This system gives just about every form of combat a way to shine and devastate. As others have mentioned, Ranged (Heavy) hits hard, and when you factor in Auto-fire it hits very hard (it gets worse when you factor in some Gadgeteer talents, among others). Ranged (Light) is frighteningly reliable using the Easy Difficulty of Short Range while allowing the character make full use of cover and other means of making themselves scarce. Melee, with relatively easy access to Critical Hits can cause minion groups to evaporate and cripple Rivals and Nemesis NPCs.

And this is missing a ton of nuance to the system. Ranged fighters can, and probably just as easily, become the same crit machines that a melee fighter can.

I have a PC, though not as far along as yours, who regularly takes out two minions at a time, or crits harder foes. Given how deadly short range fights can be (especially for a group of two who treats combat as secondary skills), it has been a blessing, getting the PCs though more than one tight spot. Its a relatively reliable tactic which makes it more measurable and thus easier for a GM to account for. Have fun with it, and let the PC shine when and where he can (note, the same should go for the rest of your PCs).

My other PC cannot fell pairs of minions or regularly crit, but he uses his other talents (mostly social and deceptive) to make just about every fight easier than any White-room test would indicate. Victory is almost always as much his doing as the first PCs, despite the lower body count.

I know your struggles. I have a droid Marauder in my party. He has Soak 10 (with Cortosis Armor), Brawn 7, and 5 ranks in Melee with two fully modded vibroswords. He's taken both the Unmatched Protection SA and the Last One Standing SA. There is no possible combat situation where he will not absolutely slaughter the opposition. A room full of Stormtroopers doesn't frighten him. He's taken out a rancor single-handedly with barely breaking a sweat.

That being said, I have had significant experience with this particular character (we've been playing this campaign for two years), and I know how to handle him. As others have said, in a delicate social situation he is entirely worthless. During space battles he is average at best. The main villain is an Inquisitor, and he can just Force move the non-living droid out a window whenever he gets too close. He trivializes combat, for sure, but luckily there is so much more to this game than just combat. We've gone entire sessions where no one has fired a single blaster shot.

That being said, it is also really comforting to the group that they have a nuclear bomb in their back pockets if negotiations go south.

That's poor form as it gives the new characters substantially less opportunities to control the narrative. They can certainly still *try*, but they're going to be far less likely to have an effect than the characters with 3 extra ranks in whatever, which makes for an unsatisfying story. Look at ANH, the most powerful character is rapidly shuffled out of the narrative to allow the rest of the heroes to have a meaningful chance so it's not challenges geared for Obi-Wan that the others can't contribute meaningfully to. For another example, look at Gandalf in LOTR.

I seriously disagree with this. A great game (especially in this system) does not hinge on being succesful in all you try.

I for one as a player would much rather lag behind a bit and experience the growth of my character than start off woth a power house that I set out to have an ultra hard attack. Different strokes and that.... Saying it is "poor form" now that is poor form.

No, but it does hinge on all characters being able to equally contribute to the narrative. If you have a character themed around stealth, but they have much lower success rates than another one in the same party themed around social skills, then the party will tend to solve problems with social skills (or guns, or whatever). Even if you're GMing in a 'fail forward' style, and failing that initial Skulduggery to pick the lock doesn't penalise the character, it still means they don't get spotlight time as they sneak through the place they broke into.

It is poor form. 'Earn your fun' character progression is a very stale hangover from the days of OD&D.

I wouldn't Disagree with you much, as well Danterotterdam.

I have been a GM for over 30 years for many a varried system, and The only time I have seen a Player feel His character Couldn't contribute was when the Player had his Mind set on what He Should be able to do and focused on what the Other players characters had and Could do.

I myself Have started level 1 Characters in games with players who had level 6-9 characters. I learned Quickly to focus on the strengths and abilities of My own character and what I could contribute. Looking for Opportunities where I could make a difference and grow.

Did I start out as more of a Support character to begin with? In a lot of situations, yes. But I also had Gms who looked to mae sure everyone had a good time and provided situations where My character who could be Key to success.

So IMO It is both the Players responsibility to not expect the GM to just give him hand outs and the player should be thinking for himself. But Also the GM should Be making sure their are opportunities for all players to participate.

Now If the group Runs Up against the Big Bad and The New guy Charges Forward to try and Toe to toe it with the Big bad... When then that is just Stupidity on the players part if he whines about getting his butt handed to him. IF the Player Plays Smart, He lets the experienced Characters Take Point and then moves in to Add what he can and support the experienced Characters until he has made a Name for himself.

So you don't disagree with me is what you wanted to say I guess.

@Talkie Toaster: please stop implying that our games, which are a lot of fun, are not good enough. Stop attaching your ideas of what a game should be like to how I chose to spend my time and effort. Stop saying things like "poor form". Stop making attacks just because your games are a different type of fun. Stop being judgemental and condescending. Stop bringing DnD into this. Just stop.

So you don't disagree with me is what you wanted to say I guess.

@Talkie Toaster: please stop implying that our games, which are a lot of fun, are not good enough. Stop attaching your ideas of what a game should be like to how I chose to spend my time and effort. Stop saying things like "poor form". Stop making attacks just because your games are a different type of fun. Stop being judgemental and condescending. Stop bringing DnD into this. Just stop.

Umm Yes lol.. I lost a few letters in there lol including the Y on you..... FIxed that

Massively overreacting. A character with an autofire weapon can kill at a minimum 2 minions for 2A- if they roll well (e.g. 3-4 successes) that can be 2*14 damage and 4 dead minions. That's also enough to oneshot a rival, whereas crits can only kill a rival with a meagre 50:50 chance if you get +100. They'll die of wounds long before they die of crits. Even nemisises aren't too badly affected by crits, they're only really devastating vs PCs.

This raises a good point: Due to their persistence, crits are way more dangerous to the players than NPCs. Players with low crit weapons are much less problematic than NPCs with low crit weapons.

Having a character start with an additional 190xp is an open invitation to finding hefty combo's and min/mxing in my experience.

that is why I usually don't give extra xp for new characters at all, or bonus xp at the end of a session they played in, in order to stop them from thinking so conceptually about their characters.

That's poor form as it gives the new characters substantially less opportunities to control the narrative. They can certainly still *try*, but they're going to be far less likely to have an effect than the characters with 3 extra ranks in whatever, which makes for an unsatisfying story. Look at ANH, the most powerful character is rapidly shuffled out of the narrative to allow the rest of the heroes to have a meaningful chance so it's not challenges geared for Obi-Wan that the others can't contribute meaningfully to. For another example, look at Gandalf in LOTR.

Again, I concur here. I see little need to nerf the characters joining a campaign already in progress. Besides, any player that would be putting together combos at creation + XP as described would more than likely be planning their character's progression to hit those combos at the same xp levels anyway.