Has anyone gone through the trouble of adding in the Silhouette sizes for creatures that FFG has forgotten to include? As Pathfinder/Hermit have this as an essential skill of their specs, it's an important piece that is often neglected. I hope they choose to at least include some errata with the sizes at some point. Maybe someone who knows someone at FFG can mention it. I'm sure they have a size that they intended, even if they are left off about half the entries.

17 hours ago, Khazadune said:

Has anyone gone through the trouble of adding in the Silhouette sizes for creatures that FFG has forgotten to include? As Pathfinder/Hermit have this as an essential skill of their specs, it's an important piece that is often neglected. I hope they choose to at least include some errata with the sizes at some point. Maybe someone who knows someone at FFG can mention it. I'm sure they have a size that they intended, even if they are left off about half the entries.

They didn't "forget" to put Silhouette size in those species stat blocks. If a creature or species does not have a silhouette listed, it's always silhouette 1.

3 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

They didn't "forget" to put Silhouette size in those species stat blocks. If a creature or species does not have a silhouette listed, it's always silhouette 1.

That's good to know, I hadn't seen that written anywhere, I might have missed it. Still seems odd though, Wampas, Gundarks, Nexu, Mynocks, Nerfs, and Mantellian Flutterplumes are all the same size category.... while something like a tauntaun is Sil 2 and appears smaller than the Wampa that attacks it. I guess there could be variations like the Krayts we have been presented with, but the lack of explicit cohesion and a clear strategy around how to define silhouettes appear to create confusion. (Like with the Ewok and Jawa comment)

41 minutes ago, Khazadune said:

That's good to know, I hadn't seen that written anywhere, I might have missed it. Still seems odd though, Wampas, Gundarks, Nexu, Mynocks, Nerfs, and Mantellian Flutterplumes are all the same size category.... while something like a tauntaun is Sil 2 and appears smaller than the Wampa that attacks it. I guess there could be variations like the Krayts we have been presented with, but the lack of explicit cohesion and a clear strategy around how to define silhouettes appear to create confusion. (Like with the Ewok and Jawa comment)

The Wampa may appear taller, but that's only because it Stans upright, rather than hunched over. the Tauntaun is definitely longer and heavier than the Wampa.

Look at Table 6-6 in any of the core rulebooks. The examples for Silhouette 0 are listed as Jawas, Ewoks, astromech droids, and any smaller creatures.

Then look through Allies & Adversaries for smaller characters. We have:

Silhouette 0: Toydarian Merchant, Ewok Hunter, Ewok Shaman, Ewok (species stats), Loth-cat, Mouse Droid, Ugnaught Mechanic

Silhouette 1 : R2-D2, Yoda, BT-1, Jawa Scavenger, Jawa (species stats), Astromech Droid, Mynock & Vynock

There's something amiss here, and it's missing attention to silhouette.

Is Sil for creatures supposed to be weird like Encumbrance is?

47 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Is Sil for creatures supposed to be weird like Encumbrance is?

What do you mean?

On 4/25/2019 at 6:41 PM, SavageBob said:

Look at Table 6-6 in any of the core rulebooks. The examples for Silhouette 0 are listed as Jawas, Ewoks, astromech droids, and any smaller creatures.

Then look through Allies & Adversaries for smaller characters. We have:

Silhouette 0: Toydarian Merchant, Ewok Hunter, Ewok Shaman, Ewok (species stats), Loth-cat, Mouse Droid, Ugnaught Mechanic

Silhouette 1 : R2-D2, Yoda, BT-1, Jawa Scavenger, Jawa (species stats), Astromech Droid, Mynock & Vynock

There's something amiss here, and it's missing attention to silhouette.

I wonder if it was changed to lessen abuse on pc races or to make some things more balanced?

55 minutes ago, Oldmike1 said:

I wonder if it was changed to lessen abuse on pc races or to make some things more balanced?

Doesn't seem that way, since Jawas were not given silhouette 0, but Ewoks were in the book that just came out. I'm not sure how a small silhouette could be abused, anyway. If it's somehow advantageous, there should be a starting XP cost for it. I don't think it does much for PCs. But it is needed for talents that let you take a pet.

6 hours ago, SavageBob said:

What do you mean?

Oh I guess I mean Narrative.

9 minutes ago, Archlyte said:

Oh I guess I mean Narrative.

Ah, I see. It is to some degree narrative. The best way I've seen it described on these boards is that if you have two creatures whose silhouette is different by 1, the larger thing can theoretically be the mount of the smaller thing. So, for instance and theoretically, Yoda (0) can ride Luke (1), who can ride a tauntaun (2), which could hop on the back of a rancor (3). Silhouette 0 ends up covering a lot of stuff, though, as Yoda's snake can ride Yoda around, but they both are silhouette 0 (or Yoda should be).

The first time FFG kind of bucked this trend was with Drall, whom they didn't make silhouette 0. I think the assumption people have made with that is that Drall tend to be fat little guys, so they end up having as much exposed surface area as a typical human. But it's gotten pretty inconsistent, as with the Jawa/Ewok/Ugnaught example (1/0/0 respectively).

If you look at the picture of of the jawas next to Owen and Luke there is a height difference but maybe the abstract nature of silhouette means the range starts from jawa and goes up to a wookie.

This is of course one of the failures of abstraction in a numbers based game.

Also note that the Jawas in ANH were played by a mix of both little people and children. The Ugnaughts and Ewoks were all little people (although Warwick Davis was, of course, both). Some of the taller Jawas were probably 8–10-year-olds.