So which do you enjoy more? Obviously I know "Well it depends on the concept", but overall, which do you prefer? Do you like to have 2 specs that synergize with each other, making you scary good at 1-2 things? Or do you like having 2 divergent specs, that allow you to be vastly more broad in your scope as a character? For example, being a Doctor, while also a Beast Rider. Or an Enforcer + Agitator?

Personally, I like finding two specs, that thematically work well together, without actually being similar in purpose. Like Infiltrator + Spy Slicer. You get good with Computer checks, but also a healthy dose of combat/stealth. But I'm a little biased to the "jack of all trades" kind of character concept.

So what do you like? To have 2 specs that prop each other up with talents? Or two vastly different specs that give you a much broader range of possibilities in a campaign?

I like 2 different specs that utilise the core characteristics of the character in different ways, but theme is important too, I like giving the entire character a reason for having multiple disciplines. There are a few exceptions, mostly when it comes to particular talents that specifically work together; Pathfinder & Hermit, Modder & Rigger.

In a daringly similar manner to "depends on the concept" without being that, I'll have to say "depends on the party". And, obviously, the concept, but that's not what you wanted to hear.

At heart, I really enjoy synergy. There's something just right feeling about wrapping a concise concept with highly effective crunch - which is why I really like the Warden, but that's a different rant that I've already placed elsewhere. In that regard, though, it's really fun for me to look at the character as conceived and then find synergizing specs to make the concept more powerful than originally allowed. It can also be fun to play off that new spec to incite character growth; for example, a Warden that picks up Agitator has room to explain why they chose to focus more on diffusing fights with intimidation rather than carrying them through.

Of course, specializing only really works if you are, well, a specialist. If you find parts of your character are often overshadowed by other members of your party, then I think it's more fun to find something that still fits the concept but gives you more breathing room. Even if it is still an area covered by another party member, at least you're not doing one job worse than someone else... now you're a jack of all trades, able to support any situation. Take, for instance, by Commander Tactician. I wrote him to be a folksy sort of "face", mostly focused on Leadership but well rounded in social aspects and, in combat, focused around decent Ranged Heavy and the use of Body Guard. With the information I had about the party at the time, it seemed totally fine. Our analyst, however, has turned out to generally be a better face than the good Sergeant, partially for roleplay reasons and partially because stats. We actually got a whole Bodyguard - the spec, not the talent. Our party has a Hunter, who are extremely dangerous ranged combatants. I picked up a rank in Medicine and an emergency medpac to represent his desire to ensure soldiers around him don't die, but we got a Medic. The only thing that belongs to just him is Leadership related stuff. It's fine, of course; his folksy charm and quiet intensity work better than flowery diplomacy some days, more skilled rifles are never a bad thing, and we have enough squishy people that there's enough Body Guard to go around.

Still, I found myself wanting more, to be able to pull away from the "face" aspect and be able to lend my weight better in combat, where overlap is more easy to handle. I considered having him take a promotion to the Urban Guerrillas and becoming a Commando. To play devil's advocate, though, I can double down on the leadership aspect to get either Instructor or Warleader. (I'd have to ignore the Force talents, which would be painful but, honestly, why does no Commander spec have access to Prime Positions and Suppressing Fire?) I could also do Figurehead for the Leadership-based social powers, but I feel it would be hard to justify the theme.

For me it's ultimately a case of synergy, especially in the very early going (first 150 XP) where you're better off being really good at a couple of things as opposed to spreading yourself too thin and trying to cover too many bases at once.

While I've yet to really have a character get past that point, once a PC has earned 500 XP they can probably afford to start diversifying, as they've more than likely mastered the couple of things they initially were really good at.

Lets see, playing for years now and I'm still trying to find a balance of concept vs mechanics. My previous character - a princess from a planet of Jedi haters who had the force started politico, added entrepreneur because the direction the game was taking, added Force Exile and the Move tree because of her concept and a saber tree because I thought it would be cool. This was, when the game wrapped, WAAAAAY too many directions for her to go. If I had it to do over again, I'd stay the hell away from the Saber Fightin' tree.

My current character is an tech engineer, and since she's suppose to be a god amongst tinkerers, I picked up Outlaw Tech to compliment it. (Oh, and we gave everyone the Recruit Universal for free because we're moving into an Rebel vs Empire game). But until I get at least half way down both Technician and Outlaw Tech, I'm not even thinking about picking up anything else.

So my TL;DNR answer is - I'll probably stay focused until the core of the character is constructed, and then I'll think about diversifying. But probably not until the group hits 200-250 points.

Why not both? I tend to try to move to something that synergizes with what I'm already doing while also diversifying my options. My Droid Technician/Mechanic picked up Cyber Tech partly because it helps me build up my personal capabilities and craft better, but also because it adds Medicine as a career skill and a couple of ranks of Surgeon, allowing me to fill the role of the party medic more effectively. Before the F&D game I was playing in trailed off, my Consular Sage focused on force power usage was going to go into Niman Disciple as opposed to Seer, because ND would let me continue to improve my force rating while boosting my defenses, improving my combat capabilities, and giving me other ways to use my force rating. And then when I picked up a Wookiee Bodyguard from another player in an AoR game, I added Mercenary Soldier, partly because I wanted to get a social skill into my career skills list, but also because Second Wind helps with my low strain threshold and Sniper Shot creates the possibility that I'll actually be able to use Barrage with my bowcaster.

Basically, I want to diversify my options (and I'll usually pick up a second spec relatively early to do so), but I always want there to be some synergy between the two specs so that I'm not building in two completely different directions.

Watching my group develop, I would have to say it depends on them. If any of them start specializing, they probably all will, because they all want to shine as much as the next person. On the other hand, as a GM, I prefer the characters to be well rounded, because when they hyperspecialize, I have to counter with a threat, and invariably, my players put themselves out of position, and the NPC high damage dealer (to counter my party's tank) finds himself against the soft squishy PC's, the party sniper finds himself mobbed by minions (which he doesn't do well with because of slow firing).

As I don't allow multiclassing or non-career specs, that pretty much forces my players to diversify. So there's no cheese like 'Doctor/Enforcer' and they can't just choose all the best shooty specs, for example.

Some have picked up Specs they may not have otherwise, and found them useful (Gunner and Beast Rider for example).

There are still good synergies to be had, but they have to think about them a bit harder.

As I don't allow multiclassing or non-career specs, that pretty much forces my players to diversify. So there's no cheese like 'Doctor/Enforcer' and they can't just choose all the best shooty specs, for example.

Some have picked up Specs they may not have otherwise, and found them useful (Gunner and Beast Rider for example).

There are still good synergies to be had, but they have to think about them a bit harder.

Do you allow the universal specializations?

Because, otherwise, it seems like this would mostly just penalize the players who didn't choose an initial career that FFG has since published a career book for. Over a long campaign I can see players getting themselves into a position where they completely run out of specs to branch out into simply because they lost the splatbook lottery.

Also, kudos to any of the seekers in your group, because a combination of hunter/executioner/ataru striker would be absurdly good at slaughtering things without being completely one-dimensional because they'd also likely be good at a number of wilderness survival tasks, perception & vigilance, and stealth. Great for reconnaissance or just being a burglar if nothing else.