cetiken said:

So what happens when you're in a negotiation, and a couple of your PCs don't have social skills? Aren't they going to feel inept there? Systems with stats and specific skills don't tend to allow characters to be effective in every possible situation.

The know it all might be hiding out of sight feeding the lead information. The wookie might be looking intimidating. Those two wou both add an advantage to the face's roll. The sniper might be across the street keeping a close eye on things ready for things to go south to gain a bonus on init gave when negotiations turn hostile.

cetiken said:

I think the key point was made. Is rolling 3 dice instead of 4 really not participating? Its not like they are going to miss constantly. The system favors the players hitting in the first place. Proficiency isn't like many other systems where not being "proficient" carries with it a significant penalty. This system does the opposite. All characters are decent at shooting. A couple of careers are just a little bit better.

Sorry, but no. All that took about five minuites to establish and a couple minuites to resolve one way or the other. Even a fast combat with only three weak enemies can take upward of 40 minuites if dice get cold.

Thats a huge difference in playtime.

If the system had a simularly lengthy social combat (like Fate does) I'd expect most specializations to be active in it.

cetiken said:

That really doesn't make sense. If 3 dice are that much worse than 4 dice, then where does it end? Clearly then, now that your normal characters are rolling 4 dice, when your specialists start rolling 5, you're in the same exact trap. General characters are never going to be as good as specialists, so you are always going to have a discrepancy, and the normal characters are always going to be ineffective in comparison.

And i'm sorry, but if I've got my PCs in the middle of an intense social interaction, its going to take longer than a couple minutes.

Inksplat, I'm sorry that you and I aren't talking about the same game. This is the Enimies of the Empire beta board.

Skills don't increase the number of dice rolled. Social situations are resolved in a single die roll.

cetiken said:

Actually, its the Edge of the Empire beta board. If your want to be snarky, at least do it right.

Second, your dedicated shooters are going to have higher ability scores in relation to shooting. So, you are going to see your shooters constantly out-roll your non-shooters. And when your non-shooters get 1 Proficiency die, and your shooters are getting 2, you're in the same position. Or when your non-shooters are rolling 2 and your shooters are rolling 3. There is always going to be a discrepancy. And if you balance a combat encounter towards the specialist's rolls, then the non-specialists are always going to feel weaker. If you balance it for the weaker characters rolls, then the specialists are going to make it trivial.

And as for social interactions being a single roll..yeah.. never going to happen, for me at least. You don't turn an entire, tense situation into as single die roll, unless you're demoing at a con, your group only wants combat and action, or you're not a very creative GM. Because a social interaction can be just as involved as any combat.

Then shouldn't you make a thread suggesting a revision of social mechanics?

You'r attitude honestly confuses me. You argue vehemently against scoundrels, fringers, and others even having the potential to use weapons within their own specialization for no reason I can determine other than not liking combat. The rules for which are the majority of the book. Further you clearly do not care about the actual rules yet here you still are. I am truely baffled.

cetiken said:

Why would I need to make a thread? It's not an issue to say you can resolve them in one roll. I just think you're doing a disservice to your players if you do. I mean, I'd personally be bummed if I worked my way to a meeting with Jabba over the course of a whole session, and the big climax resolved its self in a single roll.

As for hating combat…where do you get that? I love combat. I am just of the mind that it's made better with proper buildup and surrounding challenges.

And how don't I care about the rules because I think you can break a social interaction into multiple challenges? Especially when it's not like my opinion on social rolls is at all applicable to the fact that missing a prof die is not, in fact, the end of the world. Especially with the Destiny Pool mechanic.

cetiken said:

Dude could you please dial back the needless sniping it just weakens any point you might be attempting to make. Inksplat isn't (and hasn't yet in the thread) saying that he doesn't want a Scoundrel to be able to pick up a weapon. A scoundrel or a doctor can use weapons just fine for blasting storm troopers out of their boots. Straight up combat characters are simply going to be better at killing things.

If you played any previous edition of Star Wars, how did the non soldier classes work any different? This game doesn't use d20 mechanics where you can't pick up a weapon that isn't on a feat list, or where you need to have a laundry list of feats in order to remain effective long-term. That being said have you actually seen the mechanics of Star Wars first-hand, and play tested a non-combat character? No one will need to sit back and watch the combat mercenary do all the killing. If you have a whole party of scoundrels they might have to make an extra damaging hit in order to drop the big-gnarly. But how is that different from previous games, or any game for that matter. Frontline combatants are frontline combatants. Skill characters can usually fight just fine but they aren't intended to be conan the barbarian in power armor.

The system for Star Wars upholds the mechanics necessary for Princess Vespa to pick up the blaster rifle and shoot all the spaceballs on the landing platform…wait…wrong movie

cetiken said:

The confusion, I believe, stems from the fact that no one is actually making this argument. You think they are. But they aren't. The simple fact is: Everyone have potential to use weapons. Everyone. It's not actually possible to make a character who is unable to pick up a blaster and use it (unless, I suppose, you play a character without hands or something).

What happens in this game system is that people who have spend time training with their weapons, are vaguely better at hitting than people who haven't clocked all those hours at the shooting range.

You keep insisting that anyone defending the rules above, are trying to say that some characters shouldn't be able to use weapons or take part in combat. To reiterate: No one is saying this .

No reason to be "truly baffled", this isn't D&D.

This might be a good time to actually quote the rulebook on Skills Ranks (p.70):

" Aside from the game terms, it may also be useful to consider what skill ranks represent in a more practical sense. Even a single rank in a skill represents a significant amount of time spent learning and practicing its use. It is generally reasonable to assume that other characters in the game world rely heavily upon their characteristics for actions outside their field of expertise. For example, almost everyone can pilot a speeder in routine traffic, but most people do not have a rank of Pilot (Planetary). Instead, they default to using their Agility characteristic for the routine tasks. "

The bolding and italicizing is mine.

So, having a single rank in Ranged (Heavy) does not represent basic proficiency, but rather significant proficiency. We're talking about someone skilled with a Blaster Rifle, and probably in combat, not someone who just practices on weekends or uses it to hunt food animals - unless they are an expert marksman or professional hunter, in which case they would have a rank in the skill.

That's my reading on why only the combat focused Careers have combat skills as career skills. Doesn't mean a Smuggler can't spend a lot more time on the firing range, or getting into a shooting sort of trouble and pick up a Rank or two - heck, the Scoundrel DOES have Blaster (Light) as a specialty skill. It just means the Thief and the Pilot are going to have to spend a little more time learning how to kill a sentient in a gunfight, than a Bounty Hunter or Mercenary. Which makes sense. The Bounty Hunter and Mercenary are ABOUT getting into gunfights, while Pilots and Thieves are about flying and stealing, and maybe getting into gunfights on the side.

Also lets point out what this means. If you have an Agility 3 and Ranged (Light) 1, then you're rolling 2 Ability dice and 1 Proficiency die when you squeeze of a shot with that blaster pistol. If instead, you have Agility 3 but NO ranks in Ranged (Light), then you're rolling 3 Ability dice. Still 3 dice, either way. And I'm pretty sure it's just a slight difference in chance to succeed. The main difference is that the Proficiency die gives you more Advantages, and a chance to roll a Triumph - so, better/flashier successes. 'Least that's how I understand it.

I admit, I was wary about this at first. And I can definitely see it being an issue for some players. But after giving it a bit of thought, I'm actually okay with it. 'Sides, if a PC wants the skill and doesn't have it, it's not exactly prohibitively expensive to pick it up. I'd say give the game a shot as is, and see how it feels in play. If after a session or two it just doesn't sit with you, then give everyone whichever skills combat skills you think should be universal, and give the PCs who already started with those skills and XP bonus or something. Easy fix, problem solved.

Cheers!

Doc, the Weasel said:

I completely agree !! - effectively Im sure the endresult will be that noone has more than max 1 lvl of brawl … it will become the non-skill … I would then much rather have a couple of brawl-specific talents available to the marauder and scoundrel (yeah bar-fight!! ), wooki etc ….

The difference between Brawl and Melee is the difference between knowing how to throw a punch and how to swing a sword. They're not that interchangeable.

DailyRich said:

+1 to this.

lupex said:

You can make arguments like this about ALL skills … - Isnt creating a flashy powerpoint and Hacking a server also not two very different skills?? or flying a helicopter and driving a truck?? Or hitting someone with a hammer and fencing with a rapier?? - Whether or not a skill should be split up or aggregated into a broader skill, should depend on balance and relavance rather than some mistaken notion of "realism" (otherwise skills should cost much less and we would have 100s of skils …beign an expert at making tea dosnt maek u an expert in roasting coffee …yet along cooking borsh or making fire in the woods (ei. survvival)

Boehm said:

Yes, creating a flashy powerpoint presentation is a different skill than hacking a server. Hacking a server? That's a classic use of the Computers skill if ever there was one. Creating a powerpoint presentation? It's not an example of the Computers skill at all. It's just the normal, day-to-day thing that anybody who has used a computer at all can pick up. You want a 'flashy' (aka: particularly effective) one? That's Charm, Deceit, or Negotiate, depending on the message you're trying to convey. If you want to match the proper skill to the action, you need to look at more than *just* the medium involved. Look at the goal. You wouldn't have someone roll a Computers check because they used the ship's communication system to try bluffing their way past an Imperial blockade, would you?

As for the pilot vs. pilot conundrum? I'd have drawn the line at surface/non-surface and called them Drive and Pilot. It flies? That's Pilot. It doesn't? That's Drive. They chose to draw the line at space-worthy or not. It's not a game-breaking difference, but it's not the choice *I* would have made. Perhaps in Star Wars, space-capable ships have similar enough, standardized basic controls, and non-space-capable vehicles have a different standardized layout. Who knows?

Regardless, the normal, day-to-day activities involved in driving to/from the office, or flying your YT-1300 to and from it's regular route among protected space lanes don't even require ranks in Pilot (space) to succeed. Skill ranks don't start at basic proficiency, that's all covered by the Characteristic scores. Skills start at significant training and climb from there.

BrashFink said:

Not the way I fence…

On a more serious side I would be tempted to make special allowances for Ranged (light) aka pistols and Brawling as core skills cost upgrade for all given the wild west feel of Edge. Especially as the Players are assumed to be the more adventerous types not the random masses.