Ewoks

Brawn (2) Agility (2) Intellect (1) Cunning (2) Willpower (3) presence (2)

9 + Brawn

11 + Willpower

Starting Experience : 95 XP

Special Abilities: Ewoks Begin the game with 2 Ranks in Survival. They still may not Train Survival above rank 2 during Character Creation.

Guerrilla Warfare: Ewoks gain + 1 to boost die on all checks in a forest environment.

Size: Ewoks have a Silhouette of 0.

Show me your Ewok and What you think it should start out with..

Let me know What might need some fixing.

Too much racial stuff. You need to ditch True Survivalist and Guerrilla Warfare, way too much.

I'd tend to agree with our dear pirate.

Not only is it simply too much clutter and special rules, but all of this stuff on top of a 100XP is also WAY more than any other race gets.

I simplified it now. And lowered XP aswell.

Guerilla Warfare is way too good. Imo, 1 rank of Survival and 1 rank of Stalker or Outdoorsmen or something along those lines.

I think agility should be at 1. They are ungainly, nonagile creatures. They can't run, they can't jump, they suck at driving, they are not terribly good shots.

Let's see, real quick: Brawn 1, Agility 3, Intellect 1, Cunning 3, Willpower 2, Presence 2. WT= 9 + Brawn; ST = 11 + Willpower. Silhouette 0; Perception 1; Primitive; 100 XP.

Aren't these already in the Universal Species Compendium? Why reinvent the wheel?

They need the Primitive Racial trait

I see no reason to have Ewoks or Jawas as playable races. I doubt we will ever see them in the books.

26 minutes ago, Andreievitch said:

I see no reason to have Ewoks or Jawas as playable races. I doubt we will ever see them in the books.

People said the same about Hutts, we also got the completely pointless Human sub species of Corellians and Mandalorians . With so many fans of the species they are bound to show up somewhere, somehow, probably in an adventure if FFG cant justify their existence outside of specific areas.

8 minutes ago, Richardbuxton said:

People said the same about Hutts, we also got the completely pointless Human sub species of Corellians and Mandalorians . With so many fans of the species they are bound to show up somewhere, somehow, probably in an adventure if FFG cant justify their existence outside of specific areas.

But Hutts, and the others you mentioned, are space faring species. Ewoks and Jawa are not. That is my issue. I understand the need for stats for NPCs, but don't like the idea of them being playable species.

Again, I think the desire of some people to play them will trump the in universe limitation of being normally stuck on a planet. PC's are almost always exceptional examples of their kind, and many start off with the classic "I was a farmer until 2 droids showed up with the empire in tow" or "I was a street kid until i discovered i accidentally fell into adventuring"

Sure their writeup is going to be vaguely worded and dancing around your point, but there are quite a few species already where the gist is "this species generally stay at home, adventuring is shunned". There are lots of reasons a Jawa in particular would end up leaving their sand crawler, same for an Ewok, just because we haven't seen them do it on the big screen doesn't mean a PC cant. Obviously that departure is going to be a big part of the story of the PC, their remorse, their being homesick, the wanting to return... but also the wonder of discovery, the stories they can tell their brethren when they do get a chance to go home.

I want to make it clear, I agree with you that the species are definitely difficult to accomodate into "every" adventure, but if its what a player wants then its not hard to include in "an" adventure.

There is nothing in canon that suggests Jawa don't move to, or live on other planets. In fact FFG themselves have them working skiffs on Raxus Prime in Beyond the Rim.

Blizz feels offended about the comments that Jawas are unplayable.

Also those two brave Ewoks who served NR during the Battle of Coruscant.

There is a firm reason why Jawas won't be a playable race; their appearance without the hood hasn't been addressed by the new canon (in fact I don't think it was ever properly addressed int he old EU canon either ). Having Jawa PCs leads to a natural question about what they look like? I would say until we see a Jawa in a canon appearance with his hood down, you won't see an official playable Jawa species.

And on the subject of Ewoks; you won't see an official Ewok playable species because they suck. They are the worst thing about the original trilogy; an entire species of Jar Jars

Your stat block looks nothing like an Ewok; why would Ewoks have 3 Willpower? Why is an Ewok as strong as a hull grown Human? You should have a look at the Ewok in the unofficial species menegerie . Definitely looks a lot closer to the Ewoks in RoTJ (although I would strongly agree with those who say that they should have the Primitive racial trait, the same one Dressellians have seen as Ewoks are tree dwelling technophobes who eat people).

30 minutes ago, McHydesinyourpants said:

There is a firm reason why Jawas won't be a playable race; their appearance without the hood hasn't been addressed by the new canon (in fact I don't think it was ever properly addressed int he old EU canon either ). Having Jawa PCs leads to a natural question about what they look like? I would say until we see a Jawa in a canon appearance with his hood down, you won't see an official playable Jawa species.

Well, thing is, FFG is allowed to create new details on stuff , as shown with the Kyuzo and the upcoming Cosians, so lack of information isn't really a hinderance, and there's plenty of information on Jawas.

What do Ganks look like?

24 minutes ago, Blackbird888 said:

Well, thing is, FFG is allowed to create new details on stuff , as shown with the Kyuzo and the upcoming Cosians, so lack of information isn't really a hinderance, and there's plenty of information on Jawas.

They are allowed and they do create new stuff, but they are still ruled by Disney's vision for Star Wars. By the looks of things, I would say Disney likes to keep tight control over what FFG print, preferring them to stay with their canon. Disney won't let a game make decisions on something like Jawas seen as they are featured in the films and because they would make cute toys

8 minutes ago, Richardbuxton said:

What do Ganks look like?

Ganks were never featured in anything canon. Disney will probably never touch upon Ganks so FFG can do what they want. That said, a quick look on Wookieepedia revealed that;

"The typical member of the species had a face that was squared-off and yellow in color, the expression trapped in a perpetual snarl that non-Ganks found unattractive. Small, mean-looking eyes peered from above the maw, and ears facilitated the sense of hearing. The head sat atop a thick neck, which emerged from between broad, strong shoulders. These capped two thickset, powerful arms, which terminated in hands with five fingers each. In contrast, their legs were relatively short; over all, the average member of the species stood 1.6 meters tall. Their heavy build afforded Ganks great strength, yet they were also spry runners."

The more you know

On 3/14/2017 at 8:51 PM, Andreievitch said:

I see no reason to have Ewoks or Jawas as playable races. I doubt we will ever see them in the books.

Well thank you for speaking for the community.

54 minutes ago, Desslok said:

Well thank you for speaking for the community.

Yeee....said the guy with a stormtrooper avatar.....

Jawa Charmer:

4 hours ago, McHydesinyourpants said:

There is a firm reason why Jawas won't be a playable race; their appearance without the hood hasn't been addressed by the new canon (in fact I don't think it was ever properly addressed int he old EU canon either ). Having Jawa PCs leads to a natural question about what they look like? I would say until we see a Jawa in a canon appearance with his hood down, you won't see an official playable Jawa species.

Never stopped other RPG's from introducing them as a playable race nor did it stop players from picking them , so... No.

9 hours ago, DanteRotterdam said:

Never stopped other RPG's from introducing them as a playable race nor did it stop players from picking them , so... No.

Disney didn't own Star Wars when those systems were written and Lucas Arts were a little more liberal about people taking creative license with their material when it came to this sort of thing. Disney seem a little bit more rigid about these kind of things. Like, it has been pretty clear that some of the more recent books published are attempting to integrate some of the new Disney stuff like the Rebels TV Show.

Anyways, it was just a theory. Disney seem to be very protective about their intellectual property and I personally don't see them letting FFG take liberties with something that they could produce cuddly toys for. Doesn't mean I don't think players shouldn't have fun playing as Jawas, just means I don't think they will be a published race any time soon.

When in doubt: blame Disney.

Your spinning a tale that has no merit.

Why on Earth would Disney care of a licensed RPG had playable Jawas?! Do you really think that is something they are paying attention to?!

14 minutes ago, DanteRotterdam said:

When in doubt: blame Disney.

Your spinning a tale that has no merit.

Why on Earth would Disney care of a licensed RPG had playable Jawas?! Do you really think that is something they are paying attention to?!

Especially considering that it's the same Disney that allows for the waaaaay out of continuity Freemaker Adventures (and the other Lego specials). I don't think there's quite the stick planted...somewhere...as the, "Pfft...Evil Disney" crowd likes to think.