You know what you can do? Mix things up. If some of the players want to be more of Edge of the Empire-type of characters, rather than Force users. Just let them do that!

We have 2 Edge of the Empire characters and 1 Force and Destiny character mixed together to fight for the their freedom, while being pursued by empire, gang leaders and inquisitors.

Why limit your options? Mix it all up into a nice bunch.

Am I wrong in this? Are there tables full of people that all wanted to play as force users banded together for various reasons?

Sure, but it depends how you approach it. Personally I'm not really a fan of their F&D setting either. It's very monolithic and focussed around "uncover lost knowledge", which can only take you so far. I still think it's a great book, but I view it as a collection of useful careers and specs applicable to any Force-heavy setting. Expect to grant a lot of XP if you want to run actual Jedi. Give experienced players 300XP each, and then maybe you can run a freshly-knighted Jedi-heavy campaign.

A campaign I'm running has everybody as a Force sensitive. But the PCs all have AoR or EotE careers. I didn't let anybody pick an F&D career to start with, but they're free to branch into one if they want.

This is really what I was looking for (I definitely could have worded my thoughts a little better). Pretty much I understand where FFG is coming from by making FaD a standalone, but does it work for you as that or is your table mixing the books? This answered that.

And to be honest, I can see where my post could be perceived as trolling. I'm late to this party, and the question seems like one these forums might have already experienced several times. Glad I am late, though, and most of you have figured ways to incorporate this book in a more feasible manner than how it initially presents itself at first glance.

Thanks for the help

Never wished there was a down-vote on this forum until now. Obvious troll post is obvious.

Yes, it would be nice to down-vote your post. Nothing wrong with the OP's question.

Never wished there was a down-vote on this forum until now. Obvious troll post is obvious.

Yes, it would be nice to down-vote your post. Nothing wrong with the OP's question.

Obvious troll is obvious for accusing OP of being obvious troll for obviously good question.

No. He clearly just couldn't think of a way to bring his group together when obviously thousands of other people could. But he didn't come on here and say "Hey, I need help with a reason to bring my group together."

He comes on and says, these other two things that are doing the exact same thing as "this one thing" make sense, what you guys do though with "this one thing" makes no sense, even though it is the exact same thing these other two things are doing. Not only that but he says, Do ppl really like what you guys obviously like?

Seemed disrespectful to me, purposefully provocative. Kudos to you guys for being more patient.

Never wished there was a down-vote on this forum until now. Obvious troll post is obvious.

Yes, it would be nice to down-vote your post. Nothing wrong with the OP's question.

Never wished there was a down-vote on this forum until now. Obvious troll post is obvious.

Yes, it would be nice to down-vote your post. Nothing wrong with the OP's question.

Obvious troll is obvious for accusing OP of being obvious troll for obviously good question.

Because coming onto the forum "about this one thing", and saying "this one thing" is crap. is a reasonable way to start a dialogue?

No. He clearly just couldn't think of a way to bring his group together when obviously thousands of other people could. But he didn't come on here and say "Hey, I need help with a reason to bring my group together."

He comes on and says, these other two things that are doing the exact same thing as "this one thing" make sense, what you guys do though with "this one thing" makes no sense, even though it is the exact same thing these other two things are doing. Not only that but he says, Do ppl really like what you guys obviously like?

Seemed disrespectful to me, purposefully provocative. Kudos to you guys for being more patient.

Bringing the characters together is simple. The book even gives you ways to do it. I wanted to know if they felt natural to gaming groups or forced. I also wanted to see if most groups used the material as a supplement for the other settings.

You can see into that however you want. I get the internet has trolls, but sometimes the crusaders looking under every bridge for them can be just as bad.

Each book has its own theme and how well that works for each group can be variable. Personally I use all three together. My group is a combination of careers and specs from all three lines. And only one person chose to be a Force user out of the gate. Others my choose that path later with the Force uni-specs, but only time will tell. I don't think it is difficult to bring the characters together and it is up to the group to continue that afterward.

My point was FaD did not feel like a strong theme to me as well as seeming too guiding in character creation for all players to be interested. I wanted to hear others' experiences with this book and how it was being utilized.

Bringing the characters together is simple. The book even gives you ways to do it. I wanted to know if they felt natural to gaming groups or forced. I also wanted to see if most groups used the material as a supplement for the other settings.

You can see into that however you want. I get the internet has trolls, but sometimes the crusaders looking under every bridge for them can be just as bad.

No one owes or needs to talk you down, either it's for you/your group or it's not. But it obviously is for some ppl. Just like any other RPG.

Anyway, I won't derail your thread any further, I'll try to lend toward your understanding:

My table was chomping at the bit to play a group of force-sensitives. Why? Because it made perfect sense to us that in the years following Order 66 that there would be a massive rift left in the galaxy where there would be hundreds if not thousands of force-sensitives falling into fear (of being hunted for what they were), and wonder (wanting to learn more about who they were), and anger (over having to hide who they are). Left by the absence of the Jedi order which would help these ppl in the past. It was the easiest thing to unite around those principles - survival, discovery, struggling to be "free" to be force sensitive. Our group cohered better than our band of rag-tag money-grubbing bandits from EotE. It was more desirable to us, after a year or more of playing "space pirates" that could have been from any scifi setting. It worked for us because, surprise, different ppl like different things.

[Edit; and sorry for calling you a troll, that was probably too strong of a classification, but your OP(s) was not as magnanimous as your later stated intent.]

I find that it's very easy to come up with a group premise for AoR. Doing so for both EotE and FaD is a little more involved, but necessarily hard. I will agree that most games I run wouldn't mesh well with the idea of an entire group of Force-Sensitives, but I understand that not everybody agrees with me.

My point was FaD did not feel like a strong theme to me as well as seeming too guiding in character creation for all players to be interested. I wanted to hear others' experiences with this book and how it was being utilized.

Bringing the characters together is simple. The book even gives you ways to do it. I wanted to know if they felt natural to gaming groups or forced. I also wanted to see if most groups used the material as a supplement for the other settings.

You can see into that however you want. I get the internet has trolls, but sometimes the crusaders looking under every bridge for them can be just as bad.

You know you didn't frame it like that, you apparently didn't even get to

Anyway, I won't derail your thread any further, I'll try to lend toward your understanding:

My table was chomping at the bit to play a group of force-sensitives. Why? Because it made perfect sense to us that in the years following Order 66 that there would be a massive rift left in the galaxy where there would be hundreds if not thousands of force-sensitives falling into fear (of being hunted for what they were), and wonder (wanting to learn more about who they were), and anger (over having to hide who they are). Left by the absence of the Jedi order which would help these ppl in the past. It was the easiest thing to unite around those principles - survival, discovery, struggling to be "free" to be force sensitive. Our group cohered better than our band of rag-tag money-grubbing bandits from EotE. It was more desirable to us, after a year or more of playing "space pirates" that could have been from any scifi setting. It worked for us because, surprise, different ppl like different things.

[Edit; and sorry for calling you a troll, that was probably too strong of a classification, but your OP(s) was not as magnanimous as your later stated intent.]

My point was FaD did not feel like a strong theme to me as well as seeming too guiding in character creation for all players to be interested. I wanted to hear others' experiences with this book and how it was being utilized.

Bringing the characters together is simple. The book even gives you ways to do it. I wanted to know if they felt natural to gaming groups or forced. I also wanted to see if most groups used the material as a supplement for the other settings.

You can see into that however you want. I get the internet has trolls, but sometimes the crusaders looking under every bridge for them can be just as bad.

You know you didn't frame it like that, you apparently didn't even get to asking what "you really want to know" until your 7th post in your own thread, so what were you doing for the first 6? Being contrarian for the sake of it, it seemed. Each thing you said was more eye-roll inducing than the last cuz you weren't actively seeking the understanding you now claim. Kael said basically exactly what I was thinking, he just took the time to deconstruct the foundation of your ridiculous initial premise for a post.

No one owes or needs to talk you down, either it's for you/your group or it's not. But it obviously is for some ppl. Just like any other RPG.

Anyway, I won't derail your thread any further, I'll try to lend toward your understanding:

My table was chomping at the bit to play a group of force-sensitives. Why? Because it made perfect sense to us that in the years following Order 66 that there would be a massive rift left in the galaxy where there would be hundreds if not thousands of force-sensitives falling into fear (of being hunted for what they were), and wonder (wanting to learn more about who they were), and anger (over having to hide who they are). Left by the absence of the Jedi order which would help these ppl in the past. It was the easiest thing to unite around those principles - survival, discovery, struggling to be "free" to be force sensitive. Our group cohered better than our band of rag-tag money-grubbing bandits from EotE. It was more desirable to us, after a year or more of playing "space pirates" that could have been from any scifi setting. It worked for us because, surprise, different ppl like different things.

[Edit; and sorry for calling you a troll, that was probably too strong of a classification, but your OP(s) was not as magnanimous as your later stated intent.]

How has your group found the various force skill trees? Do they feel different enough to make the characters feel individualized to the point it seems like each character brings something special to the table? Or, since it seems to take a lot of XP to get to the "jedi knight" level of force abilities, does it feel more like a heightened use, or different usage, of skills than the other themes?

I'm asking this because I'm usually a GM in the rpgs my group plays. There's a couple of guys I don't think I could sell the idea of everyone using the force to. Most folks don't realize there's different types of force users other than Jedi. While it's easy enough to give examples of the different traditions, even in detail it all seems to boil down to just "force abilities."

That kind of thinking stems from assumptions of the mechanics of it. As a GM, I know I can run stories that make each character feel like an individual, but these particular players can at times be "game mechanics hawks," and if the system doesn't feel supportive of defining differences when it's time to role dice they won't be terribly interested.

It's weird, right? They can look at Edge of Empire and see a pilot, mechanic, scoundrel, and a warrior as different despite overlap in skills, but when you bind those same types (or similar types) together with the force they're all claiming they're being forced to play a certain way.

Most likely what will happen is we'll end up using a combination of all three books. I just wanted to inquire how other groups, especially those who are playing in just FaD, have found the systems in regards to these things.

Also for future reference, if I wanted to troll I'd go over to the Armada subforum and start a thread celebrating the diversity in the builds used in the finals at Gen Con.

How has your group found the various force skill trees? Do they feel different enough to make the characters feel individualized to the point it seems like each character brings something special to the table? Or, since it seems to take a lot of XP to get to the "jedi knight" level of force abilities, does it feel more like a heightened use, or different usage, of skills than the other themes?

I think they are different enough. In some ways I think they are too different. If you look at the specs and then tried to map them of any the characters in the Clone Wars, it's a real hodgepodge. So if I were running a TCW game, I'd probably do something radical like make all the specs career specs, or simply lower the cost of adding specs. However, within the mould of the game structure (and, admittedly, from a marketing point of view to generate revenue to keep the game alive), it works fine.

I do admit if I were designing the game without thought of revenue, I'm not sure there would be any Force-using "careers". General Grevious called Kenobi "the Negotiator"...in my fictional game, that would be because Kenobi's main "career" is something out of the Ambassador tree (including Desperate Allies). Increasing Force Rating and learning lightsaber abilities and styles (beyond simple skill) would be handled with a separate mechanic.

I get it. It's easy to read everything online as though its an attack of some sort (usually it is).

How has your group found the various force skill trees? Do they feel different enough to make the characters feel individualized to the point it seems like each character brings something special to the table? Or, since it seems to take a lot of XP to get to the "jedi knight" level of force abilities, does it feel more like a heightened use, or different usage, of skills than the other themes?

I'm asking this because I'm usually a GM in the rpgs my group plays. There's a couple of guys I don't think I could sell the idea of everyone using the force to. Most folks don't realize there's different types of force users other than Jedi. While it's easy enough to give examples of the different traditions, even in detail it all seems to boil down to just "force abilities."

That kind of thinking stems from assumptions of the mechanics of it. As a GM, I know I can run stories that make each character feel like an individual, but these particular players can at times be "game mechanics hawks," and if the system doesn't feel supportive of defining differences when it's time to role dice they won't be terribly interested.

It's weird, right? They can look at Edge of Empire and see a pilot, mechanic, scoundrel, and a warrior as different despite overlap in skills, but when you bind those same types (or similar types) together with the force they're all claiming they're being forced to play a certain way.

Most likely what will happen is we'll end up using a combination of all three books. I just wanted to inquire how other groups, especially those who are playing in just FaD, have found the systems in regards to these things.

We had one guy that was "the Lightsaber guy", he really didn't do anything related to the force that wasn't related to battles/the Lightsaber, Talents and all. He was our melee muscle.

I was a "blaster force guy" I focused on using the Talents to augment my ranged attack combat and abilities, I used the Force (Move) to push ppl away from me, to pull targets out of cover, to create cover for myself or other allies, to grab McGuffins, and so on. Rarely used an LS.

We had a Consular who was our "knowledge guy" and Healer, he wasn't much of a fighter, but would use a blaster rifle or LS, whichever fit the situation best for him defensively, as he wasn't much of a combatant.

We had a Shadow that was our social infiltrator/"face", and used the "Jedi mind trick" (Influence) and move, blaster or LS.

We had a Starfighter pilot that used much of his force Talents for piloting, primarily used the blaster.

Honestly, we had more mechanical diversity in our F&D group than we did in our Edge group/campaign (in which most PCs had at least a 3 in Agility - everyone could fly, shoot or gunn passably). The only thing that might be able to construed as leading to "sameyness" in F&D would be the Force Powers themselves, as there are only so many you can start with, and they can be used to great effect in diverse kinds of situations, and so a single PC was able to do more things - fill more roles - than a single Edge PC might be able to.

All that said, we just started our 3rd FFG SW campaign (played one EotE only, one F&D only previously) and anyone could choose from any book (we have the 3 cores and a number of supplements), and perhaps not so interestingly I'm the only Force user. I do think that using all three cores is the optimal way to play, but an F&D only certainly has its place without any forcing (see what I did there) involved.

I was wondering when someone was going to make a force pun.

Thanks for the help everyone. Puts a lot of stuff in perspective for what F&D offers

It's also pretty easy to make a character who doesn't even believe in the Force, and doesn't think he has it. Nothing wrong with a Starfighter Ace who just thinks he's the slickest pilot around. Or an Advisor who is just "really good with people." Heck, even some of the Force Powers could be "luck" or "training." Enhance? Hey, sometimes I just get a huge adrenalin rush. Sense? I'm like, so empathic! Even Move. "Man, how lucky was that? I wasn't even looking and that blaster got kicked right over to me!"

It's also pretty easy to make a character who doesn't even believe in the Force, and doesn't think he has it. Nothing wrong with a Starfighter Ace who just thinks he's the slickest pilot around. Or an Advisor who is just "really good with people." Heck, even some of the Force Powers could be "luck" or "training." Enhance? Hey, sometimes I just get a huge adrenalin rush. Sense? I'm like, so empathic! Even Move. "Man, how lucky was that? I wasn't even looking and that blaster got kicked right over to me!"

We see this in canon with young Anakin. He was a natural at pod racing even though he was of a race that didn't have the ability to be a good pod racer. For game purposes I would interpret this as Anakin already being a Force Sensitive and using his abilities even though he doesn't know it.

Am I wrong in this? Are there tables full of people that all wanted to play as force users banded together for various reasons?

Sure, but it depends how you approach it. Personally I'm not really a fan of their F&D setting either. It's very monolithic and focussed around "uncover lost knowledge", which can only take you so far. I still think it's a great book, but I view it as a collection of useful careers and specs applicable to any Force-heavy setting. Expect to grant a lot of XP if you want to run actual Jedi. Give experienced players 300XP each, and then maybe you can run a freshly-knighted Jedi-heavy campaign.

A campaign I'm running has everybody as a Force sensitive. But the PCs all have AoR or EotE careers. I didn't let anybody pick an F&D career to start with, but they're free to branch into one if they want.

Except that by the RAW, you can't have two Careers. You can take non-career specializations, but not two actual careers. That means you're limiting the players to non-force-user careers, requiring them to then take one of the universal Specializations required to become Force Sensitive, to allow them to take Force user Specializations as non-career specializations, but not allowing actual Consulars, Guardians, Mystics, Seekers, Sentinels, or Warriors.

Am I wrong in this? Are there tables full of people that all wanted to play as force users banded together for various reasons?

Sure, but it depends how you approach it. Personally I'm not really a fan of their F&D setting either. It's very monolithic and focussed around "uncover lost knowledge", which can only take you so far. I still think it's a great book, but I view it as a collection of useful careers and specs applicable to any Force-heavy setting. Expect to grant a lot of XP if you want to run actual Jedi. Give experienced players 300XP each, and then maybe you can run a freshly-knighted Jedi-heavy campaign.

A campaign I'm running has everybody as a Force sensitive. But the PCs all have AoR or EotE careers. I didn't let anybody pick an F&D career to start with, but they're free to branch into one if they want.

Except that by the RAW, you can't have two Careers. You can take non-career specializations, but not two actual careers. That means you're limiting the players to non-force-user careers, requiring them to then take one of the universal Specializations required to become Force Sensitive, to allow them to take Force user Specializations as non-career specializations, but not allowing actual Consulars, Guardians, Mystics, Seekers, Sentinels, or Warriors.

Who said anything about two careers?

Anyway, yes...that is the nature of the campaign I'm running. I gave everybody the Exile spec for free.

Am I wrong in this? Are there tables full of people that all wanted to play as force users banded together for various reasons?

Sure, but it depends how you approach it. Personally I'm not really a fan of their F&D setting either. It's very monolithic and focussed around "uncover lost knowledge", which can only take you so far. I still think it's a great book, but I view it as a collection of useful careers and specs applicable to any Force-heavy setting. Expect to grant a lot of XP if you want to run actual Jedi. Give experienced players 300XP each, and then maybe you can run a freshly-knighted Jedi-heavy campaign.

A campaign I'm running has everybody as a Force sensitive. But the PCs all have AoR or EotE careers. I didn't let anybody pick an F&D career to start with, but they're free to branch into one if they want.

Except that by the RAW, you can't have two Careers. You can take non-career specializations, but not two actual careers. That means you're limiting the players to non-force-user careers, requiring them to then take one of the universal Specializations required to become Force Sensitive, to allow them to take Force user Specializations as non-career specializations, but not allowing actual Consulars, Guardians, Mystics, Seekers, Sentinels, or Warriors.

Who said anything about two careers?

Anyway, yes...that is the nature of the campaign I'm running. I gave everybody the Exile spec for free.

Actually, you did. To requote:

I didn't let anybody pick an F&D career to start with, but they're free to branch into one if they want.

Urg. "Branching into another career" is a phrase synonymous with "taking another spec".

If I'd meant taking two careers I'd have had to specify they'd get all the career skills for the career in addition to the spec skills...but I didn't.

Yeah it's fairly rare for someone to say two careers and not mean one career and another specialization from a separate career.

RPG mechanics are a pedants wet dream.

The Dice For Brains actual play podcast has a great example of three Force sensitives who band together to complete a mission. Listen on iTunes or the website, DiceForBrains.com. We have more than 36 episodes of this beautiful game being played with full editing and sound effects.

The 3 core book approach has it's trade-offs and I think you've hit on one of them.

One of the devs stated reasons for splitting it up is that they wanted each core book (and line) to focus on one particular aspect and feel of Star Wars. I think it works brilliantly if you combine them all but can fall flat if you don't.

There are certainly a lot of fans on this site who love Edge of the Empire and that's their focus. But for me it can easily stop feeling like Star Wars. Look at a lot of the fluff in many of the Edge career books and if you didn't know you were reading a star wars book you'd have a hard time figuring it out as it focuses on mercenary work, smuggling, etc. To me the Edge elements are like spice in cooking: essential but not the main part of the meal. Without the spice the meal won't taste right - it won't even taste good - but if it's most of what you're using then you don't really have a meal. Others feel differently and they love playing "Firefly in the Star Wars galaxy".

Age of Rebellion is the book I think which most captures Star Wars in a single core book because I think it - unlike Edge - includes more of the iconic and heroic themes of Star Wars. It's easy to run an Age game and capture the Star Wars feel.

But for me, as awesome as Age is, something is missing without Jedi and that's where F&D comes in. Jedi are a big reason - probably the main reason - I love Star Wars so much. And F&D is for me an essential piece because it allows for that option. It also brings in some of the iconic and mythical themes of Star Wars. I agree that a pure F&D campaign is not appealing to most groups (just like for me a pure Edge campaign would feel like something was missing).

FFG didn't use the standard core book approach and put a wide spectrum of options in a single book that would satisfy every group where you'd have a scoundrel, Jedi and social character. They split it up. So, to satisfy many (most?) groups you'll need all core books to bring all the elements together. What splitting it up did do is bring a lot of depth to each element. F&D offers an amazing array of specs for Jedi (6 lightsaber forms, force use based, sage and negotiator based, etc) and non-Jedi force users, an extensive list of force powers, rules on lightsabers and lightsaber crystals and attachments, and a core mechanic which highlights the moral/light/dark struggle of the character. This would be hard to fit into a non-core book.

The Dice For Brains actual play podcast has a great example of three Force sensitives who band together to complete a mission. Listen on iTunes or the website, DiceForBrains.com. We have more than 36 episodes of this beautiful game being played with full editing and sound effects.

^^^

I've listened to this podcast, though I'm not yet through season three. It's a wonderful example of a Force and Destiny game. The story is extremely engaging, with subplots threaded through (the most notable being Bher's subplot, which I won't spoil) and beautiful roleplaying from both the players and the GM. One of the players (the one who originally posted, in fact) was entirely new to RPGs at the beginning of the podcast, and getting to see someone new get into things has been amazing.

(No, I'm not at all related to the podcast. I just get really into the things I enjoy.)

This was kind of my point. I get why the first two releases were done as full core rulebooks, but I really feel that FaD should have been a simple supplement to expand on force powers in greater detail.

The problem is that even if it was a sourcebook, it would still be hella thick. We'd still need the careers and new talents, all the expanded force powers, the equipment, the species and the How To GM for Jedi sections. Pretty much the only section we'd lose is the planets/universe/setting sections.