What is the outlook of a healer?

Healers are seekers of knowledge (particularly medical knowledge) and peace, seeking to heal the wounded, not hurt others, as defined by the real world Hippocratic Oath all Doctors must take.. This fits well into the Consular ethos very well.

Hey Tramp, ever consider trying your hand at creative writing? You have some very strong ideas/beliefs on how other peoples characters should be created and role played. This is fairly antithetical to role playing games in general. I'd suggest you'd be happier if you picked creative writing as your creative outlet and not focus as much on RPGs. You seem to be a fairly competent writer. I think it would suit you well.

If you don't want to carry the entire creative load you could always look into creating a short story collection, written by several people, that is bound together by an overarching narrative thread such as V-Wars by IDW. Writing and/or editing something along these lines might be something that may be a better fit for you than trying to force your beliefs about rpgs down other peoples throats. Calling people out for not playing their characters correctly isn't really in the spirit of role playing.

Edit: Just to add, while I doubt I'd enjoy playing in a session with Korath, as he seems like a prick, I'd love to read a story featuring him as either the protagonist or, better yet, the mentor to a younger protagonist. He's obviously been a labor of love for you, share him with the world.

That's not the doctor I described. At all. Additionally, he likes to get in brawls. He only picked up the profession of a "doctor" because he was intelligent and it payed well and he had the willpower to make it through the schooling. He's taken jobs with the Hutts to extract information out of people.

I do find it amusing that if we got Tramp to tell us what exact Talents, Skills, and Powers Yoda must have and we all created characters matching those exact mechanical specifications he'd still say it was wrong if it didn't start in Consular even if mechanically there was zero difference.

31 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Where was this? Please provide proof from canon sources. No Legends. No RPGs. A canon source - a book/comic after April 2014, CW/Rebels episode, or film.

I'll wait.

No comment on this, @Tramp Graphics?

35 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

By RAW, such a character isn't a Bounty Hunter, not as a Career. he may play at it, and have some of the specs, but, at his heart, that character is still an Explorer first and foremost.

Also, sorry, but no. The character is whatever the player creates for them. Mechanics =/= story.

Honestly Healer makes a fantastic Dark Dide Harm User. Healing trance and rapid Recovery is very selfish. Calming aura works against any Force User. Physician and Surgeon are great for getting your mooks back in the fight quickly.

Just now, Tramp Graphics said:

Healers are seekers of knowledge (particularly medical knowledge) and peace, seeking to heal the wounded, not hurt others, as defined by the real world Hippocratic Oath all Doctors must take.. This fits well into the Consular ethos very well.

Boy am I glad I'm not playing in your games as I have a Healer who focuses on death and the use of Harm.

Just now, Richardbuxton said:

Honestly Healer makes a fantastic Dark Dide Harm User. Healing trance and rapid Recovery is very selfish. Calming aura works against any Force User. Physician and Surgeon are great for getting your mooks back in the fight quickly.

I had this exact same thought, which is why I created this PC.

http://swsheets.com/c/juaxebr8x-lt--cmdr---nevi

I wasn't going to post, but now I really want to.

33 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Healers are seekers of knowledge (particularly medical knowledge) and peace, seeking to heal the wounded, not hurt others, as defined by the real world Hippocratic Oath all Doctors must take.. This fits well into the Consular ethos very well.

What about the specializations that contradict their careers? Such as Medic, who focuses on healing wounded allies, but it is part of the soldier career, which focuses on killing. The Saboteur spec is in the Engineer career but engineer means someone who builds, maintains or repairs, and a saboteur destroys.

1 hour ago, Tramp Graphics said:

By RAW, such a character isn't a Bounty Hunter, not as a Career. he may play at it, and have some of the specs, but, at his heart, that character is still an Explorer first and foremost.

Isn't it the player's choice what the character is at heart, both at creation and later along the character's developing story?

18 minutes ago, Imperial Stormtrooper said:

I wasn't going to post, but now I really want to.

What about the specializations that contradict their careers? Such as Medic, who focuses on healing wounded allies, but it is part of the soldier career, which focuses on killing. The Saboteur spec is in the Engineer career but engineer means someone who builds, maintains or repairs, and a saboteur destroys.

To be fair, engineering is the process of applied science. While most use that process constructively, the saboteur uses the same process destructively.

5 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

To be fair, engineering is the process of applied science. While most use that process constructively, the saboteur uses the same process destructively.

True, looking at the definitions again saboteur doesn't stand out as much, but the medic example still applies.

5 hours ago, Imperial Stormtrooper said:

I wasn't going to post, but now I really want to.

What about the specializations that contradict their careers? Such as Medic, who focuses on healing wounded allies, but it is part of the soldier career, which focuses on killing. The Saboteur spec is in the Engineer career but engineer means someone who builds, maintains or repairs, and a saboteur destroys.

Soldiers don't focus on killing, they focus on fighting. And medics are still fighters - they protect their allies' lives, with both their medical skills and their skill at arms.

5 hours ago, HappyDaze said:

Isn't it the player's choice what the character is at heart, both at creation and later along the character's developing story?

I think Tramp builds mechanics driven characters as opposed to RP driven characters. For most of us a career and it's specelizations are just a general idea of what the character is and does. For Tramp those mecahnics define what the character is as opposed to the rp defining what the character is. Hence a Healer for him is someone who values life as opposed to a character who picked that as a starting career because it offered up Xenobiology and it fit his death focused concept.

23 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:

Yesterday.

So, replying to an ongoing conversation is "bringing something up?" That's a new trick. I didn't know I could do that. I'ma start claiming credit for other people's ideas now, after having just participated in conversations about them. Sweet deal.

And anyway, that post you linked was me talking about something Mace Windu said. He talked about the senate "deciding" Palpatine's fate, and then later (after giving in to a bit of darkness there) decided that Palpatine had too much hold over senate and the courts. So there's two legal bodies that Windu mentions. We've seen the senate multiple times, and we see some function of the "courts" system, over which Palpatine did seem to exercise plenty of control, during Ahsoka's trial in Season 5 of TCW.

That was what I brought up: legal bodies that are established in canon. I didn't bring up the issue of laws, originally.

And anyway, before I "brought it up," you posted this:

And then, when challenged on this, you explained how you didn't actually have to back up your arguments because you were only "assuming" something:

Then later, after I pressed you about supposed "evidence" that Windu had that Palpatine was a Sith Lord, and asking you to define Windu's actions (since you disagreed it was an assassination attempt) you told me that 1) Palpatine had confessed to Anakin and 2) Mace Windu's actions were the execution of a traitor during wartime (which you seem to think makes it "legal" because of this "space-Roman-republic" thing you've got going on).

So to point 1, you still haven't brought any evidence that Palpatine confessed anything to Anakin.

And to point 2, dude, if you're gonna make an argument, you've gotta back it up. You've made an assertion now, not just assumptions. What's your evidence?

We have already seen the senate and courts in action, and we know, at least in part, what kind power they had.

What legal authority did the Jedi have to declare traitors and perform executions? I would love to talk about any sort of evidence that this authority existed; I just can't find it.

And since all we know is that the Chancellor was made the Chancellor via election by the senate, and we don't know about any sort of weird wartime provisions regarding abdications of office—nor do we know which oaths Palpatine undertook when he became Supreme Chancellor, or what the penalty for failing to uphold those oaths was, if any—the only reasonable thing is to assume that Windu was, legally-speaking, attempting an assassination. Because what he was attempting is the definition of assassination. In absence of any evidence to the contrary.

And if there's no evidence, I think our discussion of such things is done, because it's starting to make my head spin.

Not that I don't like a little head-spinning every now and then.

20 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

That was what I brought up: legal bodies that are established in canon. I didn't bring up the issue of laws, originally.

...there can't be legal bodies without, you know, laws. What do you think "legal" means?

And I'm not going to play by a rule you don't feel a need to follow. You make a bunch of assumptions but start nitpicking when I make one. No thanks.

21 hours ago, ghatt said:

Hey Tramp, ever consider trying your hand at creative writing? You have some very strong ideas/beliefs on how other peoples characters should be created and role played. This is fairly antithetical to role playing games in general. I'd suggest you'd be happier if you picked creative writing as your creative outlet and not focus as much on RPGs. You seem to be a fairly competent writer. I think it would suit you well.

If you don't want to carry the entire creative load you could always look into creating a short story collection, written by several people, that is bound together by an overarching narrative thread such as V-Wars by IDW. Writing and/or editing something along these lines might be something that may be a better fit for you than trying to force your beliefs about rpgs down other peoples throats. Calling people out for not playing their characters correctly isn't really in the spirit of role playing.

Edit: Just to add, while I doubt I'd enjoy playing in a session with Korath, as he seems like a prick, I'd love to read a story featuring him as either the protagonist or, better yet, the mentor to a younger protagonist. He's obviously been a labor of love for you, share him with the world.

I actually do write, to a point. I've been working on a script for a graphic novel series Cyberpunk war story for over twenty+ years though I haven't even gotten the first issue done. I'm good with plots, not so much dialog and fleshing it out. I have also been gaming for over thirty years. Korath is a character I love playing. I also cosplay as him. As for his personality, it's sort of a cross between Qui-Gon Jinn, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Chuck Norris and a dash of R. Lee Ermey.

1 hour ago, Stan Fresh said:

...there can't be legal bodies without, you know, laws. What do you think "legal" means?

And I'm not going to play by a rule you don't feel a need to follow. You make a bunch of assumptions but start nitpicking when I make one. No thanks.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I was not separating "laws" and "legality," but rather included the modifier "originally" to (obviously, in my mind) denote that someone else had, earlier in this thread, broached the topic of "laws." And you and I had already included ourselves in that part of the discussion, well before I brought up Mace Windu's quote about the senate & courts.

If you feel like there are any assumptions I need to account for, I'd be happy to discuss them. But here, I'm just calling for us to use the lexical meaning of "assassination" properly, simply by not assuming something for which we have no evidence.

I don't expect you to concede the point, and I can appreciate that, but it seems like you keep putting up smoke screens instead of just acknowledging that you have no evidence to back up your position.

BTW, Exar Kun was a consular.

On 2/26/2017 at 11:11 AM, Tramp Graphics said:

Well, given that Disciples of Harmony isn't even out yet, and over half of the Specializations needed to build Yoda properly are in that book, what do you think.

I think that is a bantha-fodder excuse But my challenge stands, should you ever choose to accept it.

On 2/26/2017 at 11:11 AM, Tramp Graphics said:

No, it wasn't. Not in OCRB and RCRB. The key difference is you didn't have separate specialization from core classes. There were Prestige Classes, which could be considered similar to Specializations, but the Classes themselves were the equivalent to the current Careers. However, unlike Careers in this system, you could add entire new full Classes to your character, not just Prestige Classes, thus actually change "careers" as your character advanced, gaining completely different options.

So...you're saying that in OCR, Yoda could have started as something else besides a Jedi Consular, because game-multiclass-mechanics? But in FFG's system, he can't start as anything but a Consular, because game-career-mechanics?

I just find the whole thing odd, because the idea of a Jedi Consular was created for another earlier game edition (granted, in an attempt to define Yoda and other Jedi like him), but it's evolved since then (and so has Yoda). Yet, @Tramp Graphics would have such a character, in this system, be locked in definitively to some weirdly selective, yet rigid, amalgamation of d20 game mechanics (from two systems ago—ignoring WEG and Saga) and some portions of Legends lore.

Or maybe it comes down to philosophy on this one. Could it be that @Tramp Graphics is like, "people don't change," and everyone else is like, "yeah, people totally change all the time," and that is the crux of the whole argument?

2 hours ago, awayputurwpn said:

Or maybe it comes down to philosophy on this one. Could it be that @Tramp Graphics is like, "people don't change," and everyone else is like, "yeah, people totally change all the time," and that is the crux of the whole argument?

I really do think that's his argument, that people don't change, but more deeply that people don't change from the core mechanics that the game sets out. So if the Healer says a person is X then all characters that result must also be X and can never be Y.

On 2/27/2017 at 6:58 PM, awayputurwpn said:

I think that is a bantha-fodder excuse But my challenge stands, should you ever choose to accept it.

So...you're saying that in OCR, Yoda could have started as something else besides a Jedi Consular, because game-multiclass-mechanics? But in FFG's system, he can't start as anything but a Consular, because game-career-mechanics?

I just find the whole thing odd, because the idea of a Jedi Consular was created for another earlier game edition (granted, in an attempt to define Yoda and other Jedi like him), but it's evolved since then (and so has Yoda). Yet, @Tramp Graphics would have such a character, in this system, be locked in definitively to some weirdly selective, yet rigid, amalgamation of d20 game mechanics (from two systems ago—ignoring WEG and Saga) and some portions of Legends lore.

Or maybe it comes down to philosophy on this one. Could it be that @Tramp Graphics is like, "people don't change," and everyone else is like, "yeah, people totally change all the time," and that is the crux of the whole argument?

Yoda in OCRB/RCRB, starts out as a Jedi Consular. His PotJSB stats then give him levels in Jedi Master and Jedi Instructor. So, no, Yoda did not start out as something else.

The FFG game mechanics do create an inherent limitation in that characters cannot change careers. So, if you want your character to have a specific career, you have to choose that career at the start. The evolution of characters comes from the selection of Specializations afterwards. Personally, I prefer Classless systems like R.Talsorian Games' Fuzion system, but we do have to work with what we have.

21 hours ago, Kael said:

I really do think that's his argument, that people don't change, but more deeply that people don't change from the core mechanics that the game sets out. So if the Healer says a person is X then all characters that result must also be X and can never be Y.

It's a bit of both actually. A person's core character and values are pretty well fixed by the time they reach adulthood. There has been actual studies on this. Given this, the game mechanics also assume that characters have a core character and overall outlook that does not really change, but can grow. It's who they are at heart; their Essence, so to speak. And this is what the Career is. Perhaps "Career" was not the best choice of terms they could have used to represent the concept.

Tramp, once more - Consular is not a canon concept, and if you're going to consider it as a whole in terms of sources like you do - you have to take into account Saga Edition. And there, Yoda was barely even a Consular. I think somebody said 1/11th some posts ago.

8 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Tramp, once more - Consular is not a canon concept, and if you're going to consider it as a whole in terms of sources like you do - you have to take into account Saga Edition. And there, Yoda was barely even a Consular. I think somebody said 1/11th some posts ago.

He was still a Consular though, however "barely" it was. As for whether or not it is a "canon" concept, yes, it is, certainly as far as this game goes. Regardless of whether or not the term has been used in the movies or not is irrelevant. It is a term still used in SW lore, not just material written pre-2014.

Think about this, if everything produced after 2014 is considered part of the new canon, that should logically mean that the newest updates to the SWTOR game from 2015 and 2016--Shadows of Revan (Dec 1014), Knights of the Fallen Empire (Oct 2015), and Knights of the Eternal Throne (Dec 2016)--are also a part of canon. If this is the case, then that is clear evidence of the Jedi Consular still being a part of the new canon. The same with Force and Destiny, which was also produced after 2014, and it too establishes Jedi Consulars.

12 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

He was still a Consular though, however "barely" it was. As for whether or not it is a "canon" concept, yes, it is, certainly as far as this game goes. Regardless of whether or not the term has been used in the movies or not is irrelevant. It is a term still used in SW lore, not just material written pre-2014.

Think about this, if everything produced after 2014 is considered part of the new canon, that should logically mean that the newest updates to the SWTOR game from 2015 and 2016--Shadows of Revan (Dec 1014), Knights of the Fallen Empire (Oct 2015), and Knights of the Eternal Throne (Dec 2016)--are also a part of canon. If this is the case, then that is clear evidence of the Jedi Consular still being a part of the new canon. The same with Force and Destiny, which was also produced after 2014, and it too establishes Jedi Consulars.

SWTOR is firmly set within the legends category. Only reason it didn't get the can when Disney bought Star Wars is because it still makes money and Lucas film probably had a contract with the developer prior to the ownership change. I wouldn't consider any of that game canon.