21 minutes ago, SladeWeston said:

You have a ship with a -1 handling and you need to make a difficulty 3 piloting check. In that stacked case,

See, I wouldn't call that stacked. One setback is almost standard.

6 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:

See, I wouldn't call that stacked. One setback is almost standard.

Sorry, I only meant stacked in the sense that I was constructing a hypothetical case where I knew the mathematical outcome. Not that the scenario was unlikely. I think the fact that the average ranged combat smuggler or bounty hunter is going to have the same odds as a 3 agl pilot with skilled jockey and 3 ranks demonstrates my point adequately.

6 hours ago, LordBritish said:

My group sometimes experiences 5 way splits between 6 people. We don't all engage in that period but considering how our sessions can run for up to 7 hours the short breaks are fairly welcome as it's difficult to maintain character for extended periods of time. Especially during heists when everyone "should" be setting up little things, some adventures, like the jewel of yavin, has so many little things to do that it's essential that the party delegates otherwise the party will never accomplish things quickly enough.

When your tabletop game is like a mid-season episode of 24...

On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 7:55 PM, arrivan said:

I actually preferred his games because he was the better story teller. He really wasn't adversarial in nature at all, but you could count on having to make a wide variety of checks in any given play session. A character with 5 brawn couldn't just bow out of the social checks or knowledge checks. You could be sure while the face was negotiating a destiny point would get flipped and the 5 brawn would be drawn into the conversation as well and asked to make a roll. It could be a mook in the corner mistakes him for someone else or maybe the mark just doesn't like his species, or hey just some drunkard crashes into him and causes a scene. It wasn't one sided either. Our face had to climb walls and make athletics checks and often would fail and hinder the party in some way due to being Falleen with a 1 in brawn.

I like games like this, it makes it seem more real to me. In real life you will get in situations that you don't necessarily have the skills for and talking about how you didn't train for it won't help. I think it adds another level of depth to the story if done correctly, and can make for some memorable moments.

Let's put it this way in a world where you don't know what you could be up against would you want 16 character points or 15 character points? Would you want to divide your points evenly or go all in. A 2 2 5 2 2 2 drall cyber tech can be interesting to play, a 4 3 3 2 2 2 pantorean is pretty optimal as it gets a 4 and still has 16 character points, or a 43222 non pantorean gobbling up a character point, or a balanced 3 3 3 3 2 2 human.

It's more what you do next. I think the pantorean are the power gaming race right now cause they get full points and get to start with a 4, but plenty of characters can benefit from the human spread or the specialist spread. In the long term the generalists have more raw power from the extra stat point.

You call a 3-3-3-3-2-2 human balanced. I call it boring. The nonhuman species are more interesting to roleplay. The "unbalanced" nature of their stats makes them even more interesting.

And in the "long term" a generalist's mix of stats only matters if they've been able to put those non-key stats to effective use, which requires a carefully crafted and run game. In the meantime they've been outperformed by their specialist peers in their party, who have succeeded at their skill checks more often because they had larger dice pools. But if a player doesn't mind being relegated to a beta personality and just assisting other, more capable characters, then no problem.

I said it earlier, ill say it again, 4,3,3,2,2,1 is to me the most interesting spread you can have, most non human species can get it and some don't even need extra xp. You get to choose a species with an interesting strength and weakness, you get to be great at some things, good at a few more and average at a couple, with one area that your character falls down in and need lots of practice to improve.

Anyway, its the flexibility of the system thats interesting, and droids are the true gem in the gold mine for anyone wanting a really fascinating RP experience.

For me, I prefer to come up with character concept first. One of my previous character's was an incredibly dodgey super hedonistic used starship salesman. Presence and Cunning out the wazoo but I avoided spending anything anywhere near Willpower or Discipline. In any RPG system, I tend to build my stats around concept and try to incorperate character weaknesses into the stats. It is harder to leave gaping weaknesses in this system (at least I find it is) but in other d20 systems, I played gullible characters who were statted to have agonisingly low Will save scores, lest the dice make me disbelieve something I played a Paladin whose "get around the Lawful Good interfering with party mischief" thing was sheer gullibility. The party could talk me into anything

Anyways, like I was saying, I think it is better to come up with a character concept rather than trying to come up with an "optimal character build". If you view your character as a stat block, then that is how they will be at the table. If you come up with a concept and stat that character around that, lower stats for where they are weak higher ones for where they excel, you can end up with a compelling and rounded character.

Definitely, I always choose a general direction first, a 'thing' I want to do (Sword an Pistol pirate! Tech wizard, Infochant), then come up with Motivation/Obligation/Duty/Morality. Next I choose a species I think is plausible within those guidelines and then onto Spec/XP etc. but its story first, crunch later.

16 minutes ago, Richardbuxton said:

Definitely, I always choose a general direction first, a 'thing' I want to do (Sword an Pistol pirate! Tech wizard, Infochant), then come up with Motivation/Obligation/Duty/Morality. Next I choose a species I think is plausible within those guidelines and then onto Spec/XP etc. but its story first, crunch later.

Exactly! I find it fun to work out mechanical weaknesses to reflect the character's flaws and weaknesses. Sometimes you can have some really great gaming moments with the way you deal with the things your character can't do as opposed to what they can easily do. A friend of mine plays a wizard in a D&D campaign. At the first level he only took practical utility spells as in his character's background he had never needed to fight before. In combat in that first session he hid in the back. When things got rough and the front line fighters were getting pounded, they started calling for magical backup. He just kept running away crying about how he doesn't know how. It then became the character's mission to find spells that would allow him to defend himself so that wouldn't happen again. It instantly created a dynamic at the table where everyone thought the wizard was incompetent and treated him as such, until he finally learned how to drop big a$$ AOE spells that nuked tough enemies. There was great development, not only of a character but of everyone else's relationship and perception of that character.

Same guy plays the face in my EoTE campaign. He took no ranks in any combat skills and in the first fight just pointed his crappy holdout blaster and fired wildly with his eyes closed screaming. That is how the player actually described it. I upgraded the difficulty to challenge purely for that description. He came very close to blasting his allies. They then took it upon themselves to sit him down and teach him firearm safety

8 hours ago, awayputurwpn said:

When your tabletop game is like a mid-season episode of 24...

HANG ON, WHEN DO THESE GUYS, EAT, PEE? ANYTHING?

Truly Representative of our sessions. XD

2 hours ago, LordBritish said:

HANG ON, WHEN DO THESE GUYS, EAT, PEE? ANYTHING?

Truly Representative of our sessions. XD

Lol, now I know where those scant unaired minutes went each episode, between commercial breaks

10 hours ago, ShadoWarrior said:

You call a 3-3-3-3-2-2 human balanced. I call it boring.

Maybe it's the way you play.

I much prefer the 333322 distribution, though a 433221 works well also. I do wish humans had the option to reduce a stat to 1...

2 minutes ago, whafrog said:

I do wish humans had the option to reduce a stat to 1...

On this we agree.

17 hours ago, whafrog said:

I do wish humans had the option to reduce a stat to 1...

Sam Stewart gave a recent answer to this idea, which was posted in the "Developer Q&A" thread in the EoTE forum. His take was that, as a house rule, you could just figure the XP cost and then give it to the player for the reduced stat (so 2 becomes 1, that's +20 XP for the player...3 becomes 2, that's +30 XP). But he warned that this could make species differentiation less meaningful if everyone could just rearrange their starting stats. I would point out that this is especially true when it comes to droids.

I have a house rule that has been utilized a couple times by my players, and that is if you want to monkey with the characteristics and give yourself a "dump stat" then you can recoup XP equal to 5x the characteristic rank that you reduced (instead of 10x). So dropping 2 to 1 gives you 10 XP. Dropping from 3 to 2 gives you 15 XP. That way it's not a "1 for 1" transfer; you lose some equity in exchange for a bit of flexibility.

I would also limit this to a single characteristic. If you want ultimate flexibility in your characteristics, play a droid.

Yes, if any player asked I would offer the 1 for 20XP, but it could only be used for one attribute, impose a max of 4 on any other attribute, and no more than one 4 in the whole pool. And I wouldn't offer it if somebody just wanted a "dump stat" for min/maxing. I had a Weequay PC I really liked, and left his Intellect at 1. My plan was to eventually build up his Knowledge Underworld and some other Intellect-based skills, because I liked the idea of this "dim" fellow actually knowing his stuff, earning it the hard way. It would be nice to have that option codified for humans, just to give some variety.

A question that might be worth asking before making the character is, "how long is the campaign likely to run?". In a campaign running for a long time with potentially high-XP characters down the line it might be better to go for a more generalist spread (333322-style) since you could later gain multiple ranks in Dedication and increase your favoured characteristic(s) that way. In a short-term campaign starting with a 4 in your primary characteristic would be better, since it gives you greater efficiency at your core tasks right out of the gate.

Just my opinion, anyway. YMMV.

6 hours ago, Krieger22 said:

A question that might be worth asking before making the character is, "how long is the campaign likely to run?".

Good point. I suggested my players start with a 333322 setup (after watching them fiddle and twiddle with a 432222 setup unable to decide where to put that 4). But I expected the campaign to be long, and once they hit Dedication (or 2 Dedications) they really differentiate...not that they weren't differentiated before--talents and skill choices make a big difference even if there is some overlap in basic capability--but that 4 (or second 4, or single 5) shows who is boss

On 4/28/2017 at 4:47 PM, awayputurwpn said:

Sam Stewart gave a recent answer to this idea, which was posted in the "Developer Q&A" thread in the EoTE forum. His take was that, as a house rule, you could just figure the XP cost and then give it to the player for the reduced stat (so 2 becomes 1, that's +20 XP for the player...3 becomes 2, that's +30 XP). But he warned that this could make species differentiation less meaningful if everyone could just rearrange their starting stats. I would point out that this is especially true when it comes to droids.

This is what I've always done, though I only allow it if the player has good justification for it (and "I don't think I'll use that stat that much" is not good justification).

I can see not starting with a 4 being a *short term* issue if you don't start with knight level xp (150 earned xp, 9000 credits) but i've found that having a 3 in brawn and willpower for the extra point of wound and strain threshold, and then using the remaining xp on whatever you want your character to be good at to be more advantageous both long and short term than *starting* with a 4. Willpower is incredibly useful because of strain and vigilance/initiative, brawn is crazy useful, because of wounds and soak and you only get the extra point of strain and wound if you put your starting xp into them. And having a 3 in agility to be halfway decent with a blaster is also very useful at the beginning of the game (so you have something to do during combat) and then using your remaining 30 xp or so on whatever you wanted to focus on. Now if you chose a species with a 3 in one of those 3 stats, and a 1 in int, cunning, or presence and your focus was agility brawn or willpower, or you built a melee character so you didn't need a 3 in agility then go ahead and start with a 4 (or even a 5)

Edit: I thought I should clarify "short term" as 2 sessions: under the assumptions of a 3,3,3,3,2,2, split for attributes with a 3 in the primary attribute for what they wanted to specialize in, that the player chose some combination os career, starting spec, and species that let them start with 2 skill ranks in their primary role, and that the pcs receive 20-25 xp per session, then they start with 2 yellows and a green in their primary skill, at the end of the first session that is 3 yellows (they put a rank in the primary skill) and at the end of the second session that's 3 yellows and a green (they put another rank in the primary skill) then the issue of not having 4 dice in the primary skill has been solved after 2 sessions, and you are more survivable, are not useless in combat, and as a bonus have a lot fewer weak areas than a similar character who started with a 4,3,2,2,2,2. Long term (order (hundred) to order (thousqnd) of xp later) you'll be better off too, because you could have more 4's than the other character.

Example from my own game, a Droid gadgeteer with a 4 in agility and 2 in brawn and intelligence vs. a duros Marshall sharpshooter with a 2 in brawn 3's in agility presence, int, and willpower I think. We started at knight level, the droid gadgeteer had bought down almost all the way to dedication and had 1 yellow and 3 green in ranged light while the duros had 3 yellows in ranged lightthroughout the campaign the two have competed about who was the best ranged light combatant with the duros being a gambler gunslinger (this was before the gunslinger spec was released) the Droid got more dice by dedication and a cybernetic arm that increased agility, the duros got more dice by increasing his skill ranks and the true aim talent and a blaster pistol that was "accurate", their dice pools were pretty similar the whole way through, both put a deadly accuracy into ranged light, when the Droid gadgeteer finished off his tree and started he picked up sharpshooter tree at which point the duros was getting his dedications in sharpshooter and Marshall so he was at 5 yellow plus 3 or 4 blue dice when the Droid gadgeteer was at 3 yellow, 3 green, and 2 blue. So there really wasn't a lot of difference in their ranged light dice pools. Their damage is pretty similar, and the duros is more survivable, well rounded and definitely wins at quick draws (quick fix from sharpshooter)

Forgot about the upgrade from true aim, so the duros is rolling 5 yellow and a green plus the blues

And the Droid is now at 7 agility

Lik e a lot of people have said, it depends a lot on how much the party gets split up.

It also depends on the size of the party. The larger the party, the more you need to specialise in something to contribute, and the more a generalist/jack of all trades risks being constantly overshadowed. So a 333322 is very viable in a 2-3 person party, but (usually) a really bad choice when you get up to 5+

A f ew specs seem designed to act as secondary characters, specifically the advocate and marshal. even in a larger group, a 333322 marshal, who uses good cop and bad cop to soften people up before the main social character handles them, while still being fairly effective in combat, might be a worthwhile party member

5 hours ago, Cheeech said:

Lik e a lot of people have said, it depends a lot on how much the party gets split up.

It also depends on the size of the party. The larger the party, the more you need to specialise in something to contribute, and the more a generalist/jack of all trades risks being constantly overshadowed. So a 333322 is very viable in a 2-3 person party, but (usually) a really bad choice when you get up to 5+

A f ew specs seem designed to act as secondary characters, specifically the advocate and marshal. even in a larger group, a 333322 marshal, who uses good cop and bad cop to soften people up before the main social character handles them, while still being fairly effective in combat, might be a worthwhile party member

Since you can easily start with 2 yellow and a green in your primary/focus skill, and have 3 yellow and a green by the end of the second session... you can still specialize in 1 thing just as well as someone who starts with a 4 in the attribute, the difference is that the 4 attribute character has also specialized in a handful of other skills (via the attribute) at the cost of proficiency in at least twice that many.

Now if your focus area is brawn, agility, or willpower based then it certainly makes sense to get a 4 in that attribute, as it's not taking away from general survivability/combat-adequacy

... And by the end of the 3rd session you can have 3 yellow and 2 green in the primary skill.

I will admit, though, that my experience with ffg star wars has entirely been with starting at knight level so playability with only the species "starting" xp is hypothetical for me, so I'm not sure how much that changes things.

My group is going to be starting at Knight level play, and I last count we had maaaaaybe 4 people, including the GM. We're usually small. I'll be going with the 333322 spread for my Shien Expert. It just feels like a Sentinel needs to have some diversity in their attributes that other specs don't have to worry about. Or maybe it's just habit of a small group needing to overlap with one another. Being a melee lightsaber spec, I completely agree that the extra wound and strain threshold is important, any time you can get a boost at the beginning is helpful just to see those later talents and skills.