You guys are being silly.
This is a good idea. My rebel pilot has no reason to hang out with a smuggler, nor does my jedi-in-hiding. All those characters go on different sorts of adventures. It only makes sense to think of them as separate but mostly compatible games.

Its also incredibly hard to create material for some sort of omni-game that you guys are advocating. An adventure written for a group of fringers is radically different than for a squad of rebels than for a pack of jedi and friends. This way each player / GM can focus their spending on what meets the needs of their game. Personally I buy everything I can for Rogue Trader (and likely Only War) but take a pass on most of the other books in the 40k line. I don’t need a book of adventures for Space Marines so I don’t buy it. If you suffer from the pokemon disease (or OCD) and have to own them all then complaining is kinda without merit as you are going to buy whatever they make anyway. For the rest of us, this method empowers GMs and improves quality by focusing the vision.

Corradus said:

I don't think we're going to agree on this.

And that's fine. You can have your jedi power fantasies, I don't mind. The issue, however, is when it comes to game balance. You can have a game where every jedi is more powerful than everybody else, or you can have a game where all PC classes are relatively balanced against eachother. You can argue for either approach, but when presented with two options that are both supported by lore to some degree, why pick the one that makes for the worse game? There's plenty of evidence that the "non-magical" protagonists of the story can measure up to the jedi protagonists. Why not go with that option if it makes the game fun for the non-Jedi folks too?

I get it. Jedi can do stuff that nobody else can. Of course they can, that's the point of being a jedi. But hey, Han Solo can do stuff that nobody else can, too. So can Leia for that matter. And Padmé. Because they are all exceptional individuals (read: PC-types). Padmé can't do the same things that Anakin can. She can shoot you dead with a blaster instead of cutting you down with a lightsaber, but for the guy at the other end I'm sure the difference is academic. She can talk sense to people instead of jumping out of moving speeders. They do different things, sure, but I don't see why a game system should make sure that Padmé is "overshadowed and eclipsed" by every Jedi in existence.

And as much as George Lucas like his Mary Sues, I doubt even he think jedi should "overshadow and eclipse" every other protagonist of the setting.

But, I guess I can just thank my maker that you're not designing the next Star Wars RPG (and I can promise you that I won't, either).

cetiken said:

I see what you did there.

Personally, I don't mind that they are separate game lines (even if I might not entirely understand the reason for it), I just hope that the games will be more compatible than the various 40k lines were. It's fine if you want to only focus on a rebel campaign, you just need the rebel book, but if I want to combine all three, I hope that's possible.

I think "possible" is the wrong word here. It's possible to do a Dark Heresy / Deathwatch crossover. I hope it will both be realistically feasible and make sense.

Corradus said:

Well.. this is, in my mind, due to a very different portrayal in the original films to the new ones. In the original films, yes they had special abilities which would put them a step above the normal man, but they weren't the all destroying super-ninjas they became in the prequel stuff. Even in Episode VI I did not get the sense that Luke Skywalker could have held of a platoon of Stormtroopers blasting with autofire at him all by himself. He was a capable warrior, certainly, but not a superhero all by himself. He is also the only one to demonstrate the amazing leaping skills (and I don't remember him not bednind his legs).

Yoda, Obi-Wan, and even the Emperor suggested a more "warrior mystic" idea than "WTF PAWN!" Darth Vader deflected a single blaster bolt with his hand, and there is always the possibility his cybernetic body helped with this. He was also overpowered by Luke when Luke let go, yet he was meant to be one of the greatest force users ever.

Only the Emperor showed any ability to throw lightning about, and he was obviously otherwise fairly weak (he presents little opposition to Darth Vader picking him up and throwing him down the pit, except for loosing control over his own powers).

Luke Skywalker's search for "A Great Warrior" is shown to be a misguided one when Yoda turns up. He is instead a person who has great control over the force, a great scholar and teacher… no indication of the green pinball we get in the prequels.

Then the prequels came along and made Jedi "SUPA-SPACE NINJAS!" who devastated all in their path… and yet are killed by a bunch of dweebs they have been working with for years.

cetiken said:

You can make all of the main characters from the classic trilogy using only Edge of the Empire Beta.

cetiken said:

This part I disagree with.

GMs and designers have been doing this in every version of the Star Wars RPG so far, and all of those games also went to length of describing in their GM sections how Star Wars was always about an ecclectic mix of characers coming together (A princess, a smuggler and a jedi walk into a bar…) and doing great things. It's been happening in D&D for decades (fighter, thief, cleric, wizard), and it happened in The Lord of the Rings, and the list goes on. The Knights of the Old Republic video game series did it too, as does the various Star Wars comics, as do the expanded universe novels.

While there are certainly extremes, ie., you could always run an all politicians game, I personally feel that when you want to add a unique twist to the generally accepted setup, this is better done with supplements.

GoblynByte said:

Which I think is kind of the point …

If i can make all of the main characters, then why do I need another "CORE" rulebook to make them "better"?

Core rule books imply a lot of things: dedicated supplements, gm screens, bestiaries, not to mention new sub-systems and rules tweaks. I don't trust FFG to stay at three, they didn't with 40K, and I get that that is my own personal issue to come to grips with. As mentioned in other threads, Cublice 7 pulled their multple core idea recognizing the same issue I am, and the 40K line is starting to feel like it's teetering on the edge of 'just too much' now too.

Just asking philosophically, If I can already make a Jedi, why isn't a supplement good enough to make them better? What's the core book going to offer that a strong core rule set wouldn't? Setting? (Supplement). Advanced classes and options? (supplement) New vehicles and combat options? (supplement). Etc Etc.

VagrantWhisper said:

From listening to the Order 66 podcast, the gist is that the core rules aren't going to be as universal as most people think of core rules being. The Obligation mechanic, for example, is very specifically an EotE mechanic--it's based in the character being from the Fringes. Yet you pick it before your race or career. Even the initiative skills are named specifically to focus on outlaws.

A character built around Ageof Rebellion is not going to have an Obligation, but in EotE, it takes up pages, because it is a primary concept. If there are things like that in all of the books, then I can totally understand them being separates--it allows for differences in design that are greater than what you usually see between classes in other games, and I think that is pretty cool.

The other danger of multiple 'games' is that despite all the best intentions, there may end up being a desire to tweak things just enough that each version of the core rules becomes harder to seamlessly mesh with the other version. See the 40k games' evolution for a great example of this. Yes, sure, you CAN mix Dark Heresy with Only War, or Deathwatch… but it doesn't work flawlessly at all, and takes a lot of work to do right.

While the advantage of a single corebook is rules stay the same, we don't need 3 chapters of the same stuff repeated each year, but can instead use those 3 chapters to expand the info for the new ones. Whether that means more cool toys (Either equipment OR class/powers), more fluffy setting information, better examples, or even just flat out advice of how to better mesh it with the previous games. This is a GOOD thing. I'd far prefer it, I'm going to buy them all anyways, and I imagine the majority of us are. I'd rather more info in the later books than a repeat like all the 40k stuff.

The other option of course being the later ones could be a bit smaller and thus cheaper… which might not be bad either. Though I'd prefer the bigger 'fat splat' model over smaller and cheaper. And as I'm saying, either over a book with the same rules repeated.

Dulahan said:

Why do you assume that you'd get 3 extra chapters of fluff, and not just lose the 3 chapters all together? 3 Chapters isn't that much space, but you seem to be treating it as if it were half the book. It isn't. Its 3 chapters.

Beyond that, the system seems like it'd be pretty hard to make incompatible. The Career systems are all going to work the same way most likely, you'll still have talent trees, and you've already got the Force-Sensitive spec that allows you to make a Jedi equal to Luke.

I can't see how you'd be able to make that all incompatible, when everything is at the same power-level.

Slaunyeh said:

I think that you're looking at it the wrong way. It's actually not hard at all to play a Deathwatch character in Dark Herasy. Nor is it challenging to have a Dark Herasy character in Deathwatch. What gets wonky is combining both systems together. Was that clear?

IE if you want to have a smuggler or other scoundrel from EotE team up with a rebel x-wing squad that shouldn't be difficult. Simularly if a rebel comando gets marooned on the fringe and has to work his way back to command on a smuggler ship his obligation would be somthing like AWOL (+10). Obligation is what drives PCs in EotE. Future books will likely have other mechanics that are core to the concepts of their default mode.

Inksplat said:

I said it was ideal, I even gave the example of getting it different.

And why do I presume the space? Because the 'repeated' stuff is some of the meatiest stuff in the book: Core Mechanics, Equipment, and general setting info. Just like in the 40k books.

And the real reason is that book prices and size are based on number of 'packets' inside them. 3 chapters - especially the rules and generic setting stuff and equipment that would be repeated in each is going to be 48 pages easily (2 packets), and likely in the 72-96 range with all the art, that's enough to drop down 5-10 bucks on a hardcover. In 40k RPG terms it's the difference between the Core Books and a Rites of Battle style once yearly 'big book'. That's quite all right too. I'll take a cheaper version. Thoguh as I said, ideally we get a similar size with more NEW stuff.

And incompatible? 40k games ostensibly all work on the same mechanic. And the first three even use the talent trees and career rank thing, and based on the same XP… though at different costs depending on the game, yet there were enough changes that things were anything but seamless. Just compare Ascension level Dark Heresy characters with starting Deathwatch Marines. Same XP level, DRASTICALLY different power levels. Rough equivalents, but not seamless by any definition of the word. It takes work to make them work together.

cetiken said:

Playing a character, and playing a campaign are not synonymous, and it's past the one-offs and the short series of adventures where the break down occurs.

All of the 40K games have different acquisition models for gear.

All of the 40K games have different token mechanics. What happens when my Space Marine buddies enter squad mode?

All of the characters peak at different power levels.

Which Psychic power mechanics should I use?

The statistics for gear changes, and in some cases the overall power of the gear "slides", does my DH character use the DH Bolt Pistol, or the DW Bolt Pistol?

In theory they all have different XP progression 'rates', DH characters max out far faster than DW characters.

While I get what you're saying, the longer you play them together, the more integration points you have to take into account. Once you reach that point, the compatible nature of the games break down.

I think it's a safe assumption to be a bit leery about seeing a similar thing happen to the Star Wars line.

I'd like to think there has been a lesson learned, especially with such an important franchise. They blow Star Wars, and that's a pretty huge whoops. So, I actually trust them to manage it, especially after listening to the podcast with Jay.

VagrantWhisper said:

You don't need another Core Rulebook. Just get the one and you should be good to go.

VagrantWhisper said:

You're GM should be able to make all those calls baised on the specific exception that you are making. But personally I'd convert the oddball character to the rules used in the prime setting. It's not hard for example to say that a Space Marine who is acting as a member of a Rogue Trader crew uses profit factor to aquire a new gun, since he is far from the support network.

VagrantWhisper said:

Differing xp progressions is a thing, but I honestly don't worry about it. I maintain that they are essentially comparable especially since the bestiaries make a point of not repeating material and can be used in any of the lines with truely minimal work. I worry not.