Never mind, clearly it's not something the community at large is interested in.

If I end up making it and think people would have interest, I'll post it, but it doesn't appear I'll gain anything from discussing it.

You realize FFG is going to hunt you down for making their property free on the web?

As stated above, I would not be including game rules, and all fluff would be newly-written. Spec pages are allowed to be reproduced and that's the closest it ever gets to official content. No official information would be included here that isn't obtainable from something like Oggdude's generator or BeggingForXPs trees.

Perhaps it was a mistake to share this idea, all the same. Oh well, thought it'd be fun, but I'll just keep it to myself.

Ah ok, you want to produce a doc about the fluff of your new setting set 1200 years after ANH? After the initial reading I thought you wanted to put all the information contained in the 3 core books in one place.

Are you just going to copy paste the specialization or also creating new one?

The three core books are clunky?

But while we were looking into this, the thought occured to me how vast and unwieldly the game is when you use all three systems together.

The only problem I ever had - and I say problem very loosely - is the obligation/duty/morality. It's a touch clunky to manage, but really only takes a few moments at the start of the game.

I mean, when all of the spec books are done, it'll be 18 Careers w/ 111 Specs (assuming no new Universal specs).

Not really seeing how a plethora of choice is a bad thing. Unless your table has one hundred players at it, you can safely ignore most of the skill trees. Even if every player has four trees and you have six players, that's still only 26% of the careers in use.

Plus it's not like you have to track them and manage them. That's - presumably - the player's job.

The three core books are clunky?

I have the other two, and I'll consult them for specific rules and abilities and whatnot, but for the day to day GMing, I find that just Edge is sufficient.

...Couldn't you just house rule out certain careers/specializations, if you think there are too many? I mean, the game is designed to be used together, so this seems... moot? Like, I'm not exactly sure what the point of this is?

You can only have the EotE Core Book and all the Careers/Specializations, plus the rules for Obligation/Duty/Morality in a Word document and you can run all three games just fine.

It just seems... redundant when you can literally combine them just fine already.

Using the character builder, integration isn't clunky at all. It's actually very simple. The only stumbling block (as Desslok mentioned above) is the Obligation/Duty/Morality mechanics, which isn't very large at all.

If you want to do all this work, more power to you, but I can't think of a need for it.

But while we were looking into this, the thought occured to me how vast and unwieldly the game is when you use all three systems together.

This is some real hyperbole, and I can't disagree more. I've had zero issues with cross-game play. I have AoR career players in my EotE game, and it works just fine. They may branch into F&D careers someday, and that won't be an issue either.

The careers are just archetypes you can slot into any setting. In fact, they're so open and flexible, if you converted it to a fantasy setting you just have to change a few names.

Obviously you can do whatever you want, but I just don't get the need.

Never mind, clearly it's not something the community at large is interested in.

If I end up making it and think people would have interest, I'll post it, but it doesn't appear I'll gain anything from discussing it.

Never mind, clearly it's not something the community at large is interested in.

If I end up making it and think people would have interest, I'll post it, but it doesn't appear I'll gain anything from discussing it.

An attempt to unify a system that is by it's nature already designed to be unified is likely to get this kind of response. It's redundant work since the majority of it has been done. Especially as your proposed project would not be providing any rules (since that would be a copyright issue) which means they still need to have their books on hand to reference rules, look up talents and skills, plan their spec tree advancement, etc.. I am not certain what the intended gain is here?

I think he is less "unifying" and more "compressing." For example he proposed making everyone force sensitive so you can apply more general purpose specs to everyone, instead of having civilian, military, and force powered specs that cover the same ground.

Never mind, clearly it's not something the community at large is interested in.

I think The Community At Large is just confused at the attempts to unify a system that is already pretty unified. You could easily have a Scoundrel, a Ace and a Warrior running together on the same team without batting an eye. Yes the Devs say there are three different product lines, but really when you get right down to it, the only difference between them is the color of the cover.

This seems to be a solution in search of a problem.

I think he is less "unifying" and more "compressing." For example he proposed making everyone force sensitive so you can apply more general purpose specs to everyone, instead of having civilian, military, and force powered specs that cover the same ground.

At its core this was the intent. I realize I may not have worded it all correctly. Likely the fault of me writing it at midnight before heading to sleep.

As I stated previously, I don't think there's anything wrong with the three books, not their integration or their ability to be used together. I think they are all very versatile, and I think FFG's system is very well made, and I love it, and me and my players have never had trouble using all three games togerther. So I definitely don't want their to be confusion there.

At the end of the day, it is three different experiences that can be integrated together, and the idea was to compress/merge everything into one experience. (For example by the Force Sensitive change; by reducing the number of careers, and doing some balancing work to make sure everything is still covered). The Careers would be mostly new (potentially with old names as generic names are better) in design, with the specs being mostly carried over with some exception.

Again, mostly I was just looking to create a more compressed system to be combined with newly written fluff to represent a new era and point in time. Sort of a house-rule system with pretty representation, I guess.

I was also planning on introducing new character creation rules to give characters a slightly more powerful start, and more stuff like that. Likely altering Obligation, Duty, and Morality. So yeah, basically super-house-rules. When I realized that, I realized that that might not be something the community was really interested in (at least until its finished).

No intent to sound sour or anything (as I realize I might have). Guess I just didn't expect this kind of reaction and thus I reacted negatively in response.

I run my games using all three books at this point. People can choose character options from all three. I'll use Obligation/Duty/Morality interchangably or together as needs be. Right now I'm looking at adapting the Dawn of Defiance series of adventures using all three books for a new group. If you want a more powerful start, just use "Kmight" level creation rules. It would be fairly simple to allow or disallow certain options if one felt his concept.

I think they are all very versatile, and I think FFG's system is very well made, and I love it, and me and my players have never had trouble using all three games togerther.

It's hard to reconcile that with a phrase like "vast and unwieldy".

At the end of the day, it is three different experiences that can be integrated together, and the idea was to compress/merge everything into one experience.

Not to harp, but I think this is more a matter of how you approach your own campaign rather than anything to do with the three core books. I'm entirely "setting agnostic", and play it all as "one experience" already. All you have to do is disregard the fluff and use everything interchangeably.

Besides, I think compressing the careers would do a disservice to players. As an example, if somebody wants to play a Soldier:Medic in an EotE campaign, that should be no big deal. All the career does is frame the character's background, and perhaps frame the character's outlook. A soldier might have been forced into the fringe through other circumstances, but at the end of the day prefers order, discipline, and duty (small-d) to a marauder's mayhem. The soldier doesn't have to join the rebels or the imperials to get that experience.

At the end of the day, it is three different experiences that can be integrated together, and the idea was to compress/merge everything into one experience.

Not to harp, but I think this is more a matter of how you approach your own campaign rather than anything to do with the three core books. I'm entirely "setting agnostic", and play it all as "one experience" already. All you have to do is disregard the fluff and use everything interchangeably.

Besides, I think compressing the careers would do a disservice to players. As an example, if somebody wants to play a Soldier:Medic in an EotE campaign, that should be no big deal. All the career does is frame the character's background, and perhaps frame the character's outlook. A soldier might have been forced into the fringe through other circumstances, but at the end of the day prefers order, discipline, and duty (small-d) to a marauder's mayhem. The soldier doesn't have to join the rebels or the imperials to get that experience.

I completely agree with Whafrog here. I'm running an EotE campaign that has a Soldier: Sharpshooter at the moment. He just tailored his background as a former Corellian Defense Force member. He ignored Duty and started with Obligation instead. I also have an Explorer: Scout who took Obligation Dutybound: Rebel Alliance. Anything is possible with a bit of tailoring on your background. The 3 different systems are highly interchangeable, and don't require any complex rules to interact with one another.