I love the theme of the Protector, but I find it really odd that it has several talents that require a lightsaber (Reflect [along with the Reflect application of Circle of Shelter] and two Center of Being picks), yet it doesn't grant Lightsaber as a Career Skill. This makes it look like an add-on to a lightsaber spec rather than a stand alone spec.

Protector is great, I love Bodyguard it's awesome to use when your mounted on a Beast. Force Protection and Supreme Armor Master combine so well

I love the theme of the Protector, but I find it really odd that it has several talents that require a lightsaber (Reflect [along with the Reflect application of Circle of Shelter] and two Center of Being picks), yet it doesn't grant Lightsaber as a Career Skill. This makes it look like an add-on to a lightsaber spec rather than a stand alone spec.

Protector is great, I love Bodyguard it's awesome to use when your mounted on a Beast. Force Protection and Supreme Armor Master combine so well

I'm actually a fan of Force Protection (especially on characters that already have a good Soak) and Stimpack Specialization to boost healing even if Intellect and/or Medicine are crap. Body Guard isn't really my thing since it takes a Maneuver and costs Strain, and there are already so many things that compete for both of those resources.

Navigator is my new surprising favourite. Very few characters combine Agility and Intellect skills, its refreshing and interesting.

Healer/Doctor/Medic just don't interest me at all, I prefer other kinds of support character.

Recruit is cool, but you spend a lot of xp getting Skills to be Career skills, then more on getting ranks in those skills, in a lot of ways your better to choose a smaller group of skills and pick a Specialisation that focuses on that. But if your focusing on only one of the branches going down then there are a lot of talents that make for one tough character.

On a seperate note for Recruit, what do other GM's say when a character takes recruit but already as some of those 8 Skills that can be made Career Skills through purchasing the 4 Talents? As an example if a character already had Melee and Ranged (Heavy) as Career Skills would you give them "credit" for prior experience and not force them to purchase the Tactical Combat Training talent?

The spec I like most has got to be Marauder. You might not be the biggest DPS guy on the field, but you'll be the one knockin' skulls and takin' names.

The spec I like most has got to be Marauder. You might not be the biggest DPS guy on the field, but you'll be the one knockin' skulls and takin' names.

Maybe not highest DPS but almost assuredly the best crits using a modified vibro-weapons w/ viscous. So let the dude with autofire kill the minion groups. Your the guy killing Teemo the Hutt

Maybe not highest DPS but almost assuredly the best crits using a modified vibro-weapons w/ viscous. So let the dude with autofire kill the minion groups. Your the guy killing Teemo the Hutt

Unless there’s a crazy-ass Duros who thinks it’s a good idea to overload a droid power core and turn it into an explosive bigger and nastier than a Thermal Detonator, and he sets that up right behind Teemo then dives for cover in the pit just before it blows up.

I hated that **** Duros.

Well, on the other page and referenced in my post above your original, Maelora literally just stated she did that. I'm assuming she's not the only one, so my point still stands. Of course, that doesn't explain why FFG put the spec in, but it's also easy to imagine that, with the relatively hefty penalty for non-career specs , the publishers assumed players might impose such restrictions on themselves and put the Recruit Universal spec in for very similar reasons.

A penalty which doesn't apply to Recruit (or Exile/Emergent), because they are universal specializations.

And one which is absolutely irrelevant in context that the penalty for a non-career spec is super smalll compared to the penalty you get for just having one more spec. If they would change that universal specs would not count to your total spec number when aquiring new specs they suddently would become very popular, but as it is you pay over a whole career a lot of extra xp for them as they charge you 10xp each time you get another spec extra. Or well, a well-rounded talent in recruit would potentially fix this as well. A lot of specs lack essential career skills like squadron commander has no leadership. If the recruit spec could fill those gaps while making you more tough I would guess a lot of players would look more favorable at recruit.

You keep using the word penalty when you should be saying cost. There is no penalty.

You keep using the word penalty when you should be saying cost. There is no penalty.

begin it's just semantics tangent...

"cost" connotes "agreed upon"

"penalty" connotes "imposed by an outside party"

both denote the price paid for some action or benefit,

if you know the penalty that an outside party is going to impose on you for taking an action, then that penalty is also a cost

basically this is just a semantics issue and not worth debating in my opinion

I think that the reason he was using the word "penalty" instead of "cost" was to distinguish a "one time cost" (say 20 xp for the second spec (if in career or universal)) vs. an "ongoing cost" ... an extra 10 xp that you pay every time you add a new specialization, even though the benefit of that thing you already bought doesn't increase with the extra 10 xp you "keep getting charged"

I think saying penalty has a very negative connotation, making it sound like something that should be avoided. Cost is far more neutral in most uses.

I think saying penalty has a very negative connotation, making it sound like something that should be avoided. Cost is far more neutral in most uses.

you might view it as a cost, but from the rest of his post he views it as a penalty (e.g. he's recommending it not counting towards the total number of specs in terms of continuing costs to make it more palatable to players who in his view avoid it for the continuing xp cost/penalty). I believe that your respective word choices are both correct for your respective views on it. The word choices convey the meaning you both intend. I don't think either of you should insist on a particular word for "price you pay" that the other uses in this debate. The validity of a logical argument (argument meaning line of reasoning not disagreement) should not depend on word choice/semantics. I'd recommend letting him try to make his case with logical arguments rather than dispute his word choice (because really, where petty bickering over word choice leads to is a flame war, and the thread getting locked).

The question about whether SEApocalypse's word choice is appropriate should be determined by whether people actually avoid the recruit tree because of the 10 extra XP per spec, i.e. whether people actually need an incentive to take the tree, and I for one am interested in learning the answer to that, I kind of think that we may need a poll for that, but we also need to consider the effect on the FSX and FSE universal specs (no house rule should be made in a vacuum).

I think that the Universal Recruit has the potential to be a valuable tool for very specific characters. For example, you are playing a diplomat character, as I recall none of these have any weapon skills and minimal non-social/ knowledge skills. And the cost of taking UR and the Basic Training Talent does cost less XP then taking a specialization that has both brawl and ranged (light) as skills.

However, the downside of this tree is that say you are a Solider Commando, you already have the combat skills that are the majority of the 'low hanging fruit' 5 point talents and need to buy them to get the most out of the Second Wind Talent and the first Toughened Talent. As it currently stands, you still need to buy 2 5 point talents that you get no benefit from as you already have both of the associated skills for them. It should be noted that Hired Guns, Bounty Hunters, and some other arhectypes also have this problem to some extent or another.

I think that the tree would be much better if those talents (along with other similar talents that give 1 or 2 Skills) were modified to say that if you already have both of these skills, you do not need to buy this talent.

Maybe not highest DPS but almost assuredly the best crits using a modified vibro-weapons w/ viscous. So let the dude with autofire kill the minion groups. Your the guy killing Teemo the Hutt

Unless there’s a crazy-ass Duros who thinks it’s a good idea to overload a droid power core and turn it into an explosive bigger and nastier than a Thermal Detonator, and he sets that up right behind Teemo then dives for cover in the pit just before it blows up.

I hated that **** Duros.

That sounds like our Jawa Technician Mek-Mek

I'm happy to get embroiled in semantic arguments all day, and while I agree that the validity of a logical argument should depend more on its construction than word choice, I view word choice as an incredibly important element of communication. That said, this is going to turn out to be a totally inane semantic argument, so I won't give it much thought, other than this:

Cost and penalty are both appropriate words to describe mechanic. The extra XP required to engage in non-career specs and skills is an additional cost imposed entirely due to the desired boon lying outside the purview of your career or class. Calling it a penalty keeps the lingo in line with other roleplaying game lines that impose setbacks for attempting actions outside your expertise, such as older editions of DnD applying a "to-hit penalty" when wielding weapons outside your proficiency. The connotation is intentionally negative: it is an additional hurdle placed upon you for trying to stray from your chosen role, and inherently disincentivizes you from making the more expensive choice to buy non-career skills and specs when you could more efficiently fill the niche you chose during character creation. However , one could just as easily refer to it only as a cost, since there isn't anything intentionally malicious in the imposed cost (which is tantamount to a "+1" - "you buy skill rank 2 for the cost of skill rank 3, you buy your second spec as though it were your third"), only an attempt to represent the relative difficulty of picking up totally new skills and knowledge as compared to greater mastery in an area where you already possess expertise. This lingo fits with the idea of "the cost of hard work and effort" and is more representative of the "in-character" aspect of the system - ignoring, mind you, that the same cost/penalty applies to a Sentinel Artisan trying to pick up Modder as it does a Diplomat Propagandist trying to buy into Heavy. Ultimately, both words accurately portray the point, and which you choose is really more telling of the speakers outlook and, potentially, level of cynicism, nothing more. The extra XP remains the same regardless, and whether it is a penalty or a cost, it still incentivizes some players to pick Recruit over other specs that might be ultimately more useful.

Since I said I didn't want to get drawn away from the point with more or less useless semantic arguments, it would be hypocritical to descend onto the thread and leave it only with that. So, what specs do I not like, for various reasons? Well, I wish I had the new Savage Spirits, I might be able to pick that apart... But I will say that, while I've generally tried to pick specs that I don't like m echanically for this thread, I really wouldn't ever play a scout-type character regardless. I don't really see the appeal. Sure, I guess I could find a cool roleplay and backstory to make it appealing, but it's just not my cup of tea. Especially because I'm not totally sure I see a place for them in most games. You'd have to be pretty heavy on the "getting lost in the woods" aspects to make a lot of that archetype work. I just don't think it's for me. I probably wouldn't every play a Thief-type character, either.

Anyone else have roles they don't want to play just because they don't enjoy them?

I'm seriously considering taking Recruit on my Bodyguard, wasted combat skill talents be damned, because Bodyguard is an incredibly strain hungry specialization, and Recruit's two ranks of Grit and three ranks of Second Wind do more to extend your in-combat strain economy than any other tree. Recruit is much better than any in-career options for the Hired Gun for that purpose, and the only non-career specs that rival it are highly specialized ones like Advocate or Hotshot (and while Bodyguard/Advocate is an intriguing combination, it doesn't fit this particular character). Getting three ranks of Toughened and a rank of Enduring is a valuable added bonus, and Quick Draw is a nice bit of icing for a character that has to switch between melee and ranged weapons as the situation demands. If Recruit somehow granted a social skill as a career skill somewhere, it probably would have edged out Mercenary Soldier for my second spec.

I'm seriously considering taking Recruit on my Bodyguard, wasted combat skill talents be damned, because Bodyguard is an incredibly strain hungry specialization, and Recruit's two ranks of Grit and three ranks of Second Wind do more to extend your in-combat strain economy than any other tree. Recruit is much better than any in-career options for the Hired Gun for that purpose, and the only non-career specs that rival it are highly specialized ones like Advocate or Hotshot (and while Bodyguard/Advocate is an intriguing combination, it doesn't fit this particular character). Getting three ranks of Toughened and a rank of Enduring is a valuable added bonus, and Quick Draw is a nice bit of icing for a character that has to switch between melee and ranged weapons as the situation demands. If Recruit somehow granted a social skill as a career skill somewhere, it probably would have edged out Mercenary Soldier for my second spec.

Have you looked at Saboteur? Grit, Rapid Recovery, Resolve, and Second Wind make it a beast at Strain management. Add in four career skills that a HG/Bodyguard doesn't typically have, the option to grab another rank of Hard Headed, and the explosive-related talents are just cake.

I'm seriously considering taking Recruit on my Bodyguard, wasted combat skill talents be damned, because Bodyguard is an incredibly strain hungry specialization, and Recruit's two ranks of Grit and three ranks of Second Wind do more to extend your in-combat strain economy than any other tree. Recruit is much better than any in-career options for the Hired Gun for that purpose, and the only non-career specs that rival it are highly specialized ones like Advocate or Hotshot (and while Bodyguard/Advocate is an intriguing combination, it doesn't fit this particular character). Getting three ranks of Toughened and a rank of Enduring is a valuable added bonus, and Quick Draw is a nice bit of icing for a character that has to switch between melee and ranged weapons as the situation demands. If Recruit somehow granted a social skill as a career skill somewhere, it probably would have edged out Mercenary Soldier for my second spec.

Have you looked at Saboteur? Grit, Rapid Recovery, Resolve, and Second Wind make it a beast at Strain management. Add in four career skills that a HG/Bodyguard doesn't typically have, the option to grab another rank of Hard Headed, and the explosive-related talents are just cake.

Saboteur is definitely a strong option, but my concern is chiefly with improving my strain management within combat, so Rapid Recovery is ancillary to my goals, and while Resolve is potentially useful, the main source of involuntary strain I have to worry about is stun weapons, which are uncommon and defended against with soak. That said, it is definitely worth ruminating on, as while Saboteur is subject to the non-career tax, a lot of the strain management is concentrated in the upper levels of the tree. I just can't see my character using Blast weaponry that extensively, and a high enough Discipline skill does an adequate job of both recovering strain and triggering Hard-Headed.

"Tax", I like it.

And, as I know the character Kaigen is talking about, Recruit does seem like a really great option for strain management... and, since our GM requires in-RP justification for all XP expenditure, it would be really easy to justify during the next Intermission. And strain management is a concern for a number of different specs in-combat, now that I think about it, making Recruit an interesting choice from that angle. And, as Kaigen pointed out, the other talents like Enduring, Toughened and Quick Draw and just icing on the cake to make combat smoother and more survivable.

"Tax", I like it.

And, as I know the character Kaigen is talking about, Recruit does seem like a really great option for strain management... and, since our GM requires in-RP justification for all XP expenditure, it would be really easy to justify during the next Intermission. And strain management is a concern for a number of different specs in-combat, now that I think about it, making Recruit an interesting choice from that angle. And, as Kaigen pointed out, the other talents like Enduring, Toughened and Quick Draw and just icing on the cake to make combat smoother and more survivable.

All in all, though? I view it more as a Spec you throw your PCs for free to represent them joining the Alliance or something in a crossover game.

Exactly, that's the kind of thing I'd provide for free, based on the needs of the campaign.

That's exactly what I wound up doing with a game that eventually transitioned into a AoR game. Did a session at bootcamp and then instead of experiance at the end of the game, I hooked them up with a free recruit tree (that doesn't count against the total trees if they buy more in the future). Mind you they still have to buy into the tree's talents down the road, but giving just the tree itself doesn't seem to have broke the game so far .