Yes but the problem you cite is a problem you are intentionally creating with those CHARGEN examples. In real life who's going to be a great pilot and not be a great pilot? I understand the rules mechanically allow it in the game, but intentionally building a character to not make sense isn't the rules fault. A PC is in charge of how their xp is allocated and there is no RPG that prevents someone from making a character that sucks, or is a walking oxymoron.

The examples I cited are extreme, certainly, but deliberately so. The problem exists even when a character has been deliberately created as a pilot - their skill is still hardly relevant, only their talents. With the same talent build, shouldn't a pilot with Agility 4, Piloting 4 have the edge over one with Agility 3, Piloting 2? I don't see how they will in the rules as written.

I am not sure what you are reading in the rules to suggest that the stronger pilot has no edge over the weaker pilot in this example. The stronger pilot will succeed more often on piloting and gunnery skill checks than the weaker pilot (presuming of course the same logic is followed in your example with regards to ranks in Gunnery).

This does not mean the stronger pilot will win **every** encounter with the weaker pilot, and that is how it should be.

I'm not saying that the "stronger" pilot has no edge, I'm saying that "stronger" means talents, not skill. There aren't many Piloting rolls required unless you run all your space combats in tight terrain, so unless you've got one of the chosen few specialisations that give you the right talents then you're largely helpless.

Yes but the problem you cite is a problem you are intentionally creating with those CHARGEN examples. In real life who's going to be a great pilot and not be a great pilot? I understand the rules mechanically allow it in the game, but intentionally building a character to not make sense isn't the rules fault. A PC is in charge of how their xp is allocated and there is no RPG that prevents someone from making a character that sucks, or is a walking oxymoron.

The examples I cited are extreme, certainly, but deliberately so. The problem exists even when a character has been deliberately created as a pilot - their skill is still hardly relevant, only their talents. With the same talent build, shouldn't a pilot with Agility 4, Piloting 4 have the edge over one with Agility 3, Piloting 2? I don't see how they will in the rules as written.

I am not sure what you are reading in the rules to suggest that the stronger pilot has no edge over the weaker pilot in this example. The stronger pilot will succeed more often on piloting and gunnery skill checks than the weaker pilot (presuming of course the same logic is followed in your example with regards to ranks in Gunnery).

This does not mean the stronger pilot will win **every** encounter with the weaker pilot, and that is how it should be.

I'm not saying that the "stronger" pilot has no edge, I'm saying that "stronger" means talents, not skill. There aren't many Piloting rolls required unless you run all your space combats in tight terrain, so unless you've got one of the chosen few specialisations that give you the right talents then you're largely helpless.

Well, the strength of a pilot is in lining up a shot and accurately delivering it first. Fancy flying doesn't really do as much for you in a starship battle as having the ability to rain laser-y death onto your opponent.

Yes but the problem you cite is a problem you are intentionally creating with those CHARGEN examples. In real life who's going to be a great pilot and not be a great pilot? I understand the rules mechanically allow it in the game, but intentionally building a character to not make sense isn't the rules fault. A PC is in charge of how their xp is allocated and there is no RPG that prevents someone from making a character that sucks, or is a walking oxymoron.

The examples I cited are extreme, certainly, but deliberately so. The problem exists even when a character has been deliberately created as a pilot - their skill is still hardly relevant, only their talents. With the same talent build, shouldn't a pilot with Agility 4, Piloting 4 have the edge over one with Agility 3, Piloting 2? I don't see how they will in the rules as written.

I am not sure what you are reading in the rules to suggest that the stronger pilot has no edge over the weaker pilot in this example. The stronger pilot will succeed more often on piloting and gunnery skill checks than the weaker pilot (presuming of course the same logic is followed in your example with regards to ranks in Gunnery).

This does not mean the stronger pilot will win **every** encounter with the weaker pilot, and that is how it should be.

I'm not saying that the "stronger" pilot has no edge, I'm saying that "stronger" means talents, not skill. There aren't many Piloting rolls required unless you run all your space combats in tight terrain, so unless you've got one of the chosen few specialisations that give you the right talents then you're largely helpless.

You're wanting divest Skills and Talents from one another, you can't in this system. You want crunch based solely around Skills, this system doesn't have it.

Yes but the problem you cite is a problem you are intentionally creating with those CHARGEN examples. In real life who's going to be a great pilot and not be a great pilot? I understand the rules mechanically allow it in the game, but intentionally building a character to not make sense isn't the rules fault. A PC is in charge of how their xp is allocated and there is no RPG that prevents someone from making a character that sucks, or is a walking oxymoron.

The examples I cited are extreme, certainly, but deliberately so. The problem exists even when a character has been deliberately created as a pilot - their skill is still hardly relevant, only their talents. With the same talent build, shouldn't a pilot with Agility 4, Piloting 4 have the edge over one with Agility 3, Piloting 2? I don't see how they will in the rules as written.

I am not sure what you are reading in the rules to suggest that the stronger pilot has no edge over the weaker pilot in this example. The stronger pilot will succeed more often on piloting and gunnery skill checks than the weaker pilot (presuming of course the same logic is followed in your example with regards to ranks in Gunnery).

This does not mean the stronger pilot will win **every** encounter with the weaker pilot, and that is how it should be.

I'm not saying that the "stronger" pilot has no edge, I'm saying that "stronger" means talents, not skill. There aren't many Piloting rolls required unless you run all your space combats in tight terrain, so unless you've got one of the chosen few specialisations that give you the right talents then you're largely helpless.

Replace piloting with athletics in a personal scale fight. ;-)

Interestingly enough you can go completely without athletics, but are a dead man without the talents AND the pilot skill in fighter based space combat. ^-^

And still, a soldier does not function on the ground with just his ranged heavy skill either.

Yes but the problem you cite is a problem you are intentionally creating with those CHARGEN examples. In real life who's going to be a great pilot and not be a great pilot? I understand the rules mechanically allow it in the game, but intentionally building a character to not make sense isn't the rules fault. A PC is in charge of how their xp is allocated and there is no RPG that prevents someone from making a character that sucks, or is a walking oxymoron.

The examples I cited are extreme, certainly, but deliberately so. The problem exists even when a character has been deliberately created as a pilot - their skill is still hardly relevant, only their talents. With the same talent build, shouldn't a pilot with Agility 4, Piloting 4 have the edge over one with Agility 3, Piloting 2? I don't see how they will in the rules as written.

I am not sure what you are reading in the rules to suggest that the stronger pilot has no edge over the weaker pilot in this example. The stronger pilot will succeed more often on piloting and gunnery skill checks than the weaker pilot (presuming of course the same logic is followed in your example with regards to ranks in Gunnery).

This does not mean the stronger pilot will win **every** encounter with the weaker pilot, and that is how it should be.

I'm not saying that the "stronger" pilot has no edge, I'm saying that "stronger" means talents, not skill. There aren't many Piloting rolls required unless you run all your space combats in tight terrain, so unless you've got one of the chosen few specialisations that give you the right talents then you're largely helpless.

Not helpless, just (potentially) at a disadvantage.

But I'm not clear on what you perceive as the problem. If you boil it all down it's a question of character construction/XP expenditure and knowing the system. Why does it matter if Pilot A thought dumping all his XP into Ability and Skill and relying on generated Success, Advantage, and Triumph was the way to go and Pilot B instead goes for more Talents to reduce difficulty and allow for the occasional special move or two?

But I'm not clear on what you perceive as the problem. If you boil it all down it's a question of character construction/XP expenditure and knowing the system. Why does it matter if Pilot A thought dumping all his XP into Ability and Skill and relying on generated Success, Advantage, and Triumph was the way to go and Pilot B instead goes for more Talents to reduce difficulty and allow for the occasional special move or two?

My Besalisk Hired Gun:Heavy/Ace:Gunner with four Agility could spend 100xp to get five ranks of Piloting skill (out-of-career, 10+15+20+25+30=100), but then he’d only be rolling ⬣ ⬣ ⬣ ⬣ ◆ and not be able to remove any setback or do any of the other cool things. And he couldn ’ t spend any more XP on anything that would get him to be any better at piloting. This would be the limit of his ability in piloting.

He could also spend 40xp to buy a third out-of-career specialty for piloting, and spend another 75xp to get five ranks of Piloting skill (5+10+15+20+25=75), and he ’ d have access to all the new specialty talents.

Someone who starts off with four Agility and one of the Pilot specializations would be able to spend 75xp to get the five ranks of skill, and he ’ d have access to all the talents. Now, 25 additional XP spent on those talents wouldn ’ t be all that greatly useful beyond what would have already been spent on skill, but there ’ s a lot of depth there for all those talents. And in the end, this pilot would be light years ahead of my Besalisk.