5th edition D&D is a fantastic rules set, simplified and streamlined from the box.

My group simply won't touch it because of WotC's absolute refusal to support it.

We don't want something like Pathfinder, with monthly power creep and a deluge of books, but having NO official crunch material (beyond the weaksauce and thin Realms book) isn't acceptable either.

We find we actually like FFG's steady, slow release schedule for the SW game. Gives us new options without swamping us in new stats.

Well, maybe because Colonists are actually tough people from somewhere else on the Rim and not from the Core Worlds?

Ah, but they're not. The Core Book makes it clear that 'Colonists' are 'non-Scum&Villainy guys on the run in the fringe', pretty much.

Yes, the word 'colonist' evokes the conception of a scrappy, fringe-world settler, but that's not who these guys are. A lack of skills like Survival or weapon skills speaks to that.

We've pretty much renamed them as 'Civilian/Professional'. And no doubt I'll rename 'Figurehead' to something more dynamic. Just semantics, really.

Well, maybe because Colonists are actually tough people from somewhere else on the Rim and not from the Core Worlds?

Ah, but they're not. The Core Book makes it clear that 'Colonists' are 'non-Scum&Villainy guys on the run in the fringe', pretty much.

Yes, the word 'colonist' evokes the conception of a scrappy, fringe-world settler, but that's not who these guys are. A lack of skills like Survival or weapon skills speaks to that.

We've pretty much renamed them as 'Civilian/Professional'. And no doubt I'll rename 'Figurehead' to something more dynamic. Just semantics, really.

I've been watching Hell on Wheels. Colonists are surveyors, and rail tycoons, prostitutes, and preachers. Every now and again they hire a Gunslinger to deal with the unsavory stuff. Politico and Scholar give you Well Rounded for that occasional Colonist who is more than they appear.

I think you should give 5th a trie. It is actually very good and rules light.

Come to the Dark side Luke...

I don't know. I am not a fan of level up characters, neither the huge amount of hit points characters end up having in D&D, I like combats short and deadly, with long lasting wounds if possible.

And all this balancing talk that is always in any D&D community...

but if you insist I will look around on the web and may be give it a read

Trust me, in 5E characters stay plenty squishy. I'd recommend taking a peek at the free basic rules to get a feel for it. Or check out the recently released SRD for a bit more robust look at the rules.

Many D&D players I know dislike the Realms. The first edition grey box was good, but since then, it's become awash with Mary Sue GMPC characters like Elminster, Drizzt and the Seven Sisters. It has a few hundred gods too many, far more than a cohesive pantheon needs. It suffers from endless retcons, reboots and revisions and world-shattering events that never involve the PCs. The huge and frequently contradictory history often feels daunting to new players (bit like the EU really).

I wouldn't ever want to run anything in it without a huge amount of reworking the material. I steal a few things from it for homebrews, but that's about it.

I've read a number of articles on how to 'fix' the Realms, and they pretty much all boil down to 'go back to Year Zero and the grey box set, and ignore everything that's happened since'.

Trust me, in 5E characters stay plenty squishy. I'd recommend taking a peek at the free basic rules to get a feel for it. Or check out the recently released SRD for a bit more robust look at the rules.

I don't know. Maybe we were doing it wrong. My players were around 7th level when we went on hiatus with that campaign, and they were plenty resilient, unless I really taxed them. The 3-4 levels, they were quite fragile.

Well, maybe because Colonists are actually tough people from somewhere else on the Rim and not from the Core Worlds?

Ah, but they're not. The Core Book makes it clear that 'Colonists' are 'non-Scum&Villainy guys on the run in the fringe', pretty much.

Yes, the word 'colonist' evokes the conception of a scrappy, fringe-world settler, but that's not who these guys are. A lack of skills like Survival or weapon skills speaks to that.

We've pretty much renamed them as 'Civilian/Professional'. And no doubt I'll rename 'Figurehead' to something more dynamic. Just semantics, really.

I've been watching Hell on Wheels. Colonists are surveyors, and rail tycoons, prostitutes, and preachers. Every now and again they hire a Gunslinger to deal with the unsavory stuff. Politico and Scholar give you Well Rounded for that occasional Colonist who is more than they appear.

Agreed. I view Colonists as "adventurers by necessity" as opposed to almost all the other careers.

I could see a town-based game where everyone plays Colonists who rise up against Imperial occupation. That might be interesting.

(no Bothans were harmed in the retrieval, fortunately...)

Now I just want to believe that there is a network of hair salons catering to Bothans as a cover for their spy activities.

"Many Bothans were dyed to get this information..."

One of the reasons I migrated over to FFG's Star Wars was because 5e didn't successfully transition enough away from the "role playing combat system" that, in a sense, it has always been. I loved 3e and 3.5e for the rich explosions of the lore and the universe; I enjoyed 4e for the action but the love would not last, because the RP element was just too thin; and 5e for me has proved to be a rules-light combat system with little appreciable support for non-combat and skills-based roleplay. That's not to knock D&D for the direction it's taken in 5e -- which I think is positive -- but rather that I don't think it's what I'm looking for. I came to a realization while planning my last 5e campaign that nothing would ever take me away from the reality that D&D had origins in wargames, and would always retain that spirit. I wish it well, and hope to come back to it again some day.

People have described FFG's Star Wars as a "cinematic" RPG, but for me, it's more a "narrative" one. The mechanics facilitate stories and storytelling, and that for me is infinitely preferable. I don't need my tabletops to be wargames with minmaxed positioning -- I spent too many years playing 40K for that.

I'm finding very few faults with FFG's mechanics. I say this as someone who loves theorycrafting and finding holes in game systems. It's not seamless, but it's incredibly graceful.

I don't care for maps or minis in RPGs as a way "minmaxing" positioning, but with some players I find it necessary to make the situation completely clear by putting the information in at least a rough visual form.

When it comes to the overlap of roleplaying, story, and mechanics, I understand the desire to systemize narrative and roleplaying... but on the other hand, my experience tells me that RP and focus on story are largely independent of system, and that systemizing things like morality or honor, and giving it mechanical game effects, will lead some players to feel straight-jacketed, and be seen by some other players as just another set of numbers to game and manipulate.

I don't care for maps or minis in RPGs as a way "minmaxing" positioning, but with some players I find it necessary to make the situation completely clear by putting the information in at least a rough visual form.

When it comes to the overlap of roleplaying, story, and mechanics, I understand the desire to systemize narrative and roleplaying... but on the other hand, my experience tells me that RP and focus on story are largely independent of system, and that systemizing things like morality or honor, and giving it mechanical game effects, will lead some players to feel straight-jacketed, and be seen by some other players as just another set of numbers to game and manipulate.

I know what you mean, but I'm thinking in particular of non-combat skill systems, which (in my experience) feed directly into RP. And in 5e, these were nothing more than gestures. All the highly developed pieces in that system were around combat/movement/highly "action"-based things. This is just not enough for me.

I hear you about the morality/honour issues and the problems that might arise with systematizing them, but because morality is such a fundamental piece of the Star Wars universe, I completely get that they wanted to make it something a bit toothier than pure narrative.

As for visualizing and positioning: the fact that there is so much latitude in this system -- allowing GMs to use it or not depending on their needs -- speaks to its success. It's no fault of the GM or the party if they want to use it, but when the system works without it entirely with nothing being lost -- that's a good system.

I don't care for maps or minis in RPGs as a way "minmaxing" positioning, but with some players I find it necessary to make the situation completely clear by putting the information in at least a rough visual form.

When it comes to the overlap of roleplaying, story, and mechanics, I understand the desire to systemize narrative and roleplaying... but on the other hand, my experience tells me that RP and focus on story are largely independent of system, and that systemizing things like morality or honor, and giving it mechanical game effects, will lead some players to feel straight-jacketed, and be seen by some other players as just another set of numbers to game and manipulate.

I know what you mean, but I'm thinking in particular of non-combat skill systems, which (in my experience) feed directly into RP. And in 5e, these were nothing more than gestures. All the highly developed pieces in that system were around combat/movement/highly "action"-based things. This is just not enough for me.

I hear you about the morality/honour issues and the problems that might arise with systematizing them, but because morality is such a fundamental piece of the Star Wars universe, I completely get that they wanted to make it something a bit toothier than pure narrative.

As for visualizing and positioning: the fact that there is so much latitude in this system -- allowing GMs to use it or not depending on their needs -- speaks to its success. It's no fault of the GM or the party if they want to use it, but when the system works without it entirely with nothing being lost -- that's a good system.

OK, yes, in terms of having non-combat skills (and the systems in which they work) actually robust and functional and done so that they matter... absolutely, that needs to be there.

Way way back in the day, one of the things I tried to do for AD&D was homebrew non-combat skills, etc.

Not to derail the derailment of this topic, but now that this book is "On the Boat" when can we expect it? Roughly.

Amazon says the end of May, beginning of June. June!

That doesn't seem right to me. Does that seem a bit overly long to anyone else?

I apologize if this has been answered already, but I didn't read through all 14 pages when I saw the D&D arguments.

Not to derail the derailment of this topic, but now that this book is "On the Boat" when can we expect it? Roughly.

Sometime after when it was put on the ship.

It depends entirely whether the 'Boat' is seaworthy, or the Epic Failboat that (eventually) brought Strongholds of Rebellion into our hands...

It's generally 6-8 weeks On The Boat

It's generally 1.5 weeks Shipping to Stores

Mind you, this time line is all thrown off now with FFG's new and annoying Street Date policy. The TL;DNR answer? who the hell knows anymore.

Just got back from my local store (in Toronto).

Sounds like it's probably going to be end of April before it arrives.

And I love me some Forgotten Realms...

I've got a sizable collection of Realms stuff. I had players that added to the world by discovering a lost vale of Dwarven ruins in the mountains west of the Dalelands. They founded a new colony of "Silverdale".

But, Greyhawk was always my first love when it came to old D&D campaign worlds.

I think you should give 5th a trie. It is actually very good and rules light.

5e is the best edition of DnD made so far.

I've run two mini campaigns in 5e, and the rules are instantly recognizable as DnD. Classes have been opened up, with archetypes blurring the lines between roles. Bounded accuracy means that levels are less impactful, and the d20 stays relevant for longer. Skills have been reworked, with some being combined or removed. A number of clever mechanics encourage swift action and rules resolution, all in order to keep the game flowing.

But it is still DnD, and it is still ultimately owned by a company that uses Magic the Gathering as its metric for success in a "niche" hobby.

It still has levels, classes, and other D&Disms that I lost patience for years ago.

I think you should give 5th a trie. It is actually very good and rules light.

5e is the best edition of DnD made so far.

I've run two mini campaigns in 5e, and the rules are instantly recognizable as DnD. Classes have been opened up, with archetypes blurring the lines between roles. Bounded accuracy means that levels are less impactful, and the d20 stays relevant for longer. Skills have been reworked, with some being combined or removed. A number of clever mechanics encourage swift action and rules resolution, all in order to keep the game flowing.

But it is still DnD, and it is still ultimately owned by a company that uses Magic the Gathering as its metric for success in a "niche" hobby.

Oh, yes! WAAAY better than 4e! It's much more like 2e, which I really like, and has a bit of the AGE system feel to it. The only issue I have with it is that any class can eventually get hold of various magiks, which I think should be restricted to certain classes only.

yup.. i agree.. i googled the d6 and d20 product listings.. WEG were PROLIFIC with their d6 stuff.. wish i had a time machine. I'd go back in time and tell my younger self to buy EVERYTHING d6 star wars

You could still do that now, and then work on the conversions.

I’m sure there are a few people around here who might be willing to help.

Okay... I'll sell a kidney and Ebay, buy the books, then I'll delegate who does what...

Seriously though, with the time lag between splat and adventures that's not a bad idea... even if it's a simple thing like the Cantina Owner and the Barman

From what we see in the movies, isnt a Jawa just a Squib in a concealing robe?

Okay... I'll sell a kidney and Ebay, buy the books, then I'll delegate who does what...

There are those of us who already have at least a few of the books.

IMO, the bigger problem is coordinating who is doing what when on what module, and then to stay on top of that in case someone falls through, so that work can get reassigned to someone else.

Devaronians will be in : Nexus of Power

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2015/11/2/nexus-of-power/

Devaronians in a F&D book?!?!?!? Sheesh.

Again, that species - more than any other - needs a place in one of these EotE books. And time and space are running out...

Who say's time and space is running out for Devaronians? They don't need to be in a career book, they could be in a sector book, or a shadowport book. Hell, if they wanted to they could do what Chronicles of the Gatekeeper did and introduce them in an adventure book.

Depending on how long FFG keeps the license, it wouldn't surprise me if theyou did another 3 specs per career. I mean if FFG star wars continues to be the goose that lays the golden eggs why not keep milking the cash cow for all it's worth. And yes I realized that I am mixing farm metaphors.

I kept telling myself I wouldn't bother with career books. Plenty of material in core, sector, and adventure books for me and I would keep my shelf from being too weighed down.

I did not anticipate just how much I would want this supplement. Sigh...

You know that there are multiple solutions to the weighed down problem... I bought a coffee table that one of my players commented "that's not a coffee table, it's a dinner table for hobbits" about and moved the game from the FLGS to my apartment. You could also get a rolling case to carry your books