I can't help but feel like FFG does a very poor job at marketing their RPG books and thus they don't sell anywhere near what D&D, the inferior system, sells. This system has so much that people aren't really aware of. Maybe this new compendium will lower the barrier to entry some by giving people the tools to create stuff without having to own every single sourcebook.

I feel like this is the way it should have been in the first place. Era books. Sector/Region books. Gear book. Vehicle book. Species book. It makes way more sense than haphazardly scattering your main content across other books. If WotC does anything right it's their book scheme. I essentially see this compendium as a monster manual kind of book. Or like Volo's guide as it has some new playables. That's a very very good thing.

The Star Wars line has consistently been the #3 selling line behind D&D and Pathfinder (it slipped with the release of Starfinder),; that's certainly nothing to sneeze at, and the line sells well. The fact of the matter is the Star Wars line was ALWAYS going to be the number 3 selling line. ****, even during the height of the WEG days Star Wars was the #3 selling game behind AD&D and Vampire.

We're all here talking about it.......must be doing something right.....

Market position is a little different from share. I just wonder if they're claiming all the revenue the could be claiming if they maybe had a little more of that marketing money from Disney.

On 1/10/2019 at 4:38 PM, Yaccarus said:

*Wookieepedians

Now you’re just being Wookieepedantic.

Being available in shops would help, at least in the UK. In a large game shop I see 100's of D+D books, Pathfinder books, well under 10 Star Wars ones.

I can't even get Fully Operational in the UK, having pre-ordered last February.

I get that RPGs are niche, and that carrying stock is an investment, but the lack of product is a major issue for increased adoption.

On 1/12/2019 at 11:20 AM, Arbitrator said:

That The Clone Wars is a splat and not a core book tells me we're not going to see a second edition anytime soon. People have been going on about prequel-tier Jedi since before the EotE beta and they shunt them into a splat where they could otherwise go for the full-priced tome and 'justify' it based on the difference of the era and scale that AoR wasn't really designed for? Ehhh.

I will say that I didn't expect a 'Bestiary Book' considering the Adversary Decks exist.

Hasn’t there been quite a few complaints about the game “breaking down” when people try knight level play, especially with force users? The concept seems to pop up when I’ve searched around through play blogs and the like (I don’t know firsthand, my group hasn’t tried it yet).

If so, it would make sense to release Rise of the Seperatists, get a massive amount of feedback, then compile, revise, and release a new edition where the ideas do work.

32 minutes ago, Flavorabledeez said:

Hasn’t there been quite a few complaints about the game “breaking down” when people try knight level play, especially with force users? The concept seems to pop up when I’ve searched around through play blogs and the like (I don’t know firsthand, my group hasn’t tried it yet).

If so, it would make sense to release Rise of the Seperatists, get a massive amount of feedback, then compile, revise, and release a new edition where the ideas do work.

Quite the opposite. Force-wielding characters tend to last a lot longer before feeling over-powered, just because Force powers provide additional XP sinks, and Force Rating provides a power limiter. They tend to feel "in the sweet spot" longer than AOR or Edge characters. But a lot of this has to do with how you GM, and how much your players are trying to min-max, and how big you're willing to let your minion groups get, or how many ranks of adversary you're willing to give your rivals and nemesis characters.

I agree with Mr. Kappel. My own F&D group is hovering around 700 earned XP, and not a single one of those characters feels overpowered in the slightest.

If anything, Knight Level (i.e. 150XP) is when a lot of characters begin to hit their stride and can competently do the stuff they're supposed to be good at.

My only complaint with the rules for Knight Level PCs as they're written is that PCs not getting a lightsaber get a whole mess of credits that can be spent to buy all sorts of wonderful high-end toys that PCs that started out at the normal XP level would count themselves fortunate to ever see.

That said, I think were part of the problem with AoR and EotE characters is similar to an issue I saw with WEG D6 characters, in that after a while, the player can't seem to find things to spend their XP on because they've already bought all the things that apply to their original character concept that makes them super-effective at dealing with challenges that fall within their wheelhouse. To my view, that's more an issue with the player putting a self-imposed limit on their character's advancement simply because they can't or won't look outside the original concept for new things for the character to learn, and not an issue with the system in and of itself.

1 hour ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

T hat said, I think were part of the problem with AoR and EotE characters is similar to an issue I saw with WEG D6 characters, in that after a while, the player can't seem to find things to spend their XP on because they've already bought all the things that apply to their original character concept that makes them super-effective at dealing with challenges that fall within their wheelhouse.

It's not necessery a bad thing. Just retire the character, if you can't bring out more from the concept. The game is - afterall - about RPing. Of course this is up to the player, but you should at least consider it.

The combat potential in the game in my experience stands up far longer imo than in D&D. Depending on party size in D&D groups become collectively invulnerable, the larger the party the quicker it happens. Our last 5E campaign I played we had 5-6ish players typically, and level 8ish. We were pretty close to unstoppable without using absurd opponents and fiat. By 10th average it would've been silly. The DM played in another game and he intentionally played his guy borderline suicidally aggressive and he couldn't get himself killed.

In this system it's simple enough to just give stormtroopers different weapons and dial their lethality way up.

2 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

To my view, that's more an issue with the player putting a self-imposed limit on their character's advancement simply because they can't or won't look outside the original concept for new things for the character to learn, and not an issue with the system in and of itself.

Arguably that mindset is counter to the spirit of the movies. Between Star Wars and Return of the Jedi , we see Han go from being a smuggler to also being a special forces leader, Leia go from politician to special forces soldier, and Luke go from basically a pilot to a Jedi. Between Empire Strikes Back and Jedi Lando goes from businessman/politician to leader of a fighter squadron, and its told (though never shown) that he was a professional gambler before ALL THAT.

Between the prequels and the Clone Wars Series, I’m not sure HOW MANY jobs we see Anakin and Obi-Wan performing. Star Wars characters, or at least main charcaters, just don’t seem to hang out in vocational pigeon holes.

1 hour ago, 2P51 said:

The combat potential in the game in my experience stands up far longer imo than in D&D. Depending on party size in D&D groups become collectively invulnerable, the larger the party the quicker it happens. Our last 5E campaign I played we had 5-6ish players typically, and level 8ish. We were pretty close to unstoppable without using absurd opponents and fiat. By 10th average it would've been silly. The DM played in another game and he intentionally played his guy borderline suicidally aggressive and he couldn't get himself killed.

In this system it's simple enough to just give stormtroopers different weapons and dial their lethality way up.

In my D&D experience once some parties start to hit around 9th level their worst enemies are themselves.

Happy to hear this game holds up better in the long run. My group tends to do small storylines ranging from one to three sessions, so we stay pretty low in xp.

5 minutes ago, LStyer said:

Arguably that mindset is counter to the spirit of the movies. Between Star Wars and Return of the Jedi , we see Han go from being a smuggler to also being a special forces leader, Leia go from politician to special forces soldier, and Luke go from basically a pilot to a Jedi. Between Empire Strikes Back and Jedi Lando goes from businessman/politician to leader of a fighter squadron, and its told (though never shown) that he was a professional gambler before ALL THAT.

Between the prequels and the Clone Wars Series, I’m not sure HOW MANY jobs we see Anakin and Obi-Wan performing. Star Wars characters, or at least main charcaters, just don’t seem to hang out in vocational pigeon holes.

While I agree with you about this, player comfort is always more restricting than the limits of any intellectual property.

My experience has shown the player who can step out of their comfort zone and play a different style than what they usually run to be rare. Ones who can play a character who actually GROWS through personal experiences? Even rarer.

Hats off to those who have entire playgroups consisting of versatility in roleplaying.

13 minutes ago, Flavorabledeez said:

While I agree with you about this, player comfort is always more restricting than the limits of any intellectual property.

No doubt. But Star Wars , as a franchise, gives a perfect excuse for a PC to suddenly start exploring a completely unrelated skill set. Optimally, then, Edge may be a good system and “setting” in which to encourage players to broaden their horizons. A player can start a PC as the same old character concept he always plays, then keep playing the comfortable concept while slapping on another that barely makes any sense.

On 1/11/2019 at 10:42 AM, AbsatSolo said:

At least, it seems like you don't have have to wait for the translation, or you would have said "+2 years"

We switched to the english books right at the beginning as the German translations take so long. We just use the translated core books. All other books are the English version. The last batch of books was bought at US shops (thanks for all the sales to compensate the shipping) due to the nonavailability in Europe.

6 hours ago, Ghrik said:

We switched to the english books right at the beginning as the German translations take so long. We just use the translated core books. All other books are the English version. The last batch of books was bought at US shops (thanks for all the sales to compensate the shipping) due to the nonavailability in Europe.

Same problem with French translations, it takes a long time for the book to be translated. And worse because the market is a lot smaller than the US one, we are never sure to see all the books translated. If you can read English it is better to buy the books in this language than wait for a translation that could never come.

22 hours ago, Ghrik said:

The last batch of books was bought at US shops (thanks for all the sales to compensate the shipping) due to the nonavailability in Europe.

I usually buy the English books at philibertnet.com, or at one of the two FLGS in town ... (Vienna/Europe in my case). And I think there's a lot of German shops who carry the full range of English books too. Also, webstores in England have the books and you save on shipping here.

Sending stuff from the US to Europe is insanely expensive.

On 1/17/2019 at 4:51 PM, WolfRider said:

Same problem with French translations, it takes a long time for the book to be translated. And worse because the market is a lot smaller than the US one, we are never sure to see all the books translated. If you can read English it is better to buy the books in this language than wait for a translation that could never come.

But this slowness in localisation process is due to FFG "parent company" herself, that's not the fault of the translation step.

This delay is due to FFG's lack of trust in her collaborator for non-English versions, because of multiple and useless validations steps...

That's great news.... they are a year and an half late since I've started to make those cards....but if they can do that, would be much better....

1) Book with NPCs

2) Book with vehicles and planets

3) Book with gear, armors and weapons

(including the mods for them)

would of saved me lots of time and trouble...

Anyway, this book is for people new to the game (me) and to compete with DnD strategy which is way better...

I like better the concept of "range" rather than "tiles and figurines" but how the book were design, DnD have the upper hand ...having a GM handbook, a Player handbook and a Monster manual ... about 30$ each..... you don't end up buying 3 core rulebook for twice the price and having 3 time the same information....and then stuff scattered across all the books...

So I understand for people who played the game since the beginning, it isn't as anticipated as other book, but I think it is a step in the right direction.....that is if they can add a lot more generic adversaries.... ....the DnD Monster manual is about 400 entries after all....

I don't like the cover that we can see as preview...I would rather have a close range fight between characters (aggressive theme) or a list of characters standing next to each other (casual theme) (like the MTG planewalkers (all of them) artwork).... but the cover as is really doesn't feel like it is about "adversaries" (witch can range from rebels to empire to gangster to senator to just about anything)

Can be something as simple as that:

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/9/97/Rodian_War.jpg/revision/latest%3Fcb%3D20080926153317&imgrefurl=http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Rodia/Legends&h=612&w=858&tbnid=LbLucmFOebnaNM&tbnh=190&tbnw=266&usg=K_MLgj4R9uRp_YK4t0s0o0uJfxbb4=&hl=en-CA&docid=sZpZ1ZwjqIPd7M