Qingtian said:

That struck me as a bit low as well. It seemed very odd that a character such as a bounty hunter could start out with only light blaster pistol. However, this does encourage he playing taking extra obligation with a reward in the form of cash. Not saying I wouldn't support an increase in starting cash, but I can see the benefits of the current amount: keep 'em hungry.

Shakespearian_Soldier said:

Very possible, but I think they need to state that a bit more clearly.

GoblynByte said:

Well… Greedo was a bounty hunter. All he had was a pistol. What could possibly go wrong… oh..never mind. Bad example.

I guess they really want to character to take additional obligation to increase the starting credit. I noticed that range weapon tend to cost a lot more than melee weapon. I guess it's a way to balance range's advantage over melee based equipment?

Qingtian said:

Could you not obtain another "Obligation" to get more funds for your starting character? I think being able to do so would add more flavor to the PC as well as justifying the extra amount to start with.

KommissarK said:

This is dealt with on p.88 under Talent Trees. The PC will immediately lose all talents not marked as "Permanent" (a red bar in the Talent tree).

nyriv1 said:

Oh, THAT'S what it means by permanent!!! That explains a LOT. Thank you.

With regards to starting credits: would it not be a simple matter for the GM to just allocate to each player a higher starting amount? If your group are supposed to be extremely poor then, sure, 500 credits seems reasonable; but if your group has its own ship, and is currently pursuing a moderate smuggling career, then something more substantial could easily be justified.

Shakespearian_Soldier said:

Thats why I thought adding another obligation to the character would be a cool idea to be able to justify the extra credits instead of just giving it to them

Shakespearian_Soldier said:

Yes, but now you're testing a version of the game other than what's published in the book, and you'll have to note that in any feedback you provide.

My suggestion would be to play the game exactly as written as least for one adventure, and then provide feedback based on that.

I allways like WEG version of starting equipment, the player writes a list of reasonable gear they want there character to have includeing any odd things they might want like com links, data pads, holo recorders exc, plus usualy atleast one weapon, mabye armor, and a small amount of extra credits for spending money and the GM decides if it fits with the character and allows or disallows what ever seems wrong.

Another option that would be worth considering is a Ship's Locker. I saw this in Mongoose Traveler. Its a box that holds any reasonable gear. Land on a planet with toxic atmosphere? Dig the rebreathers out of the ship's locker. Think an emergency medkit would be usefull? Yeah there's one in there.

It greatly simplifies the mundane gear shopping. Buy a weapon and/or armor and any rare / specialty gear you need and call it a day.

"On ranked talents; what about when the talent only comes from one specialization? (ref. command from mercenary soldier)"

Command is listed twice in Mercenary Soldier, so theoretically you could take it twice. The only Talent with ranks I've found with only one instance was Blooded in the Survivalist Talent Tree.

Since attributes can't be directly upgraded with experience after character creation, it seems to me that it's "better" to spend a lot of starting experience on attributes (maybe taking some talents) and none in skills. Yes you won't roll upgraded dice, but you will roll more dice (and during game you will be able to purchase skills).

I don't see why characters shoulden't be allowed to directly upgrade attributes during play…

Maybe it would be sufficient to limit the attribute increase with the Starting Specie Experience (so it wouldn't be possible to use Experience obtained by starting Obligations).

cetiken said:

This is specifically addressed under creative uses of Destiny Points. A PC can spend a Destiny Point to luckily find exactly what the party needs, although it was never specifically purchased earlier in the game. Actually, I think the example lists something like rebreathers!

LukeZZ said:

Excellent point. I expect a lot of players will do exactly this, for the reasons you state. However, it is also posible to buy Talents that upgrade Characteristics post-creation, so there is at least one way to do it.

But yeah,the canny player will likely spent a lot of initial XP on attributes and work on other stuff later.

Venthrac said:

To tell the truth, it seems very strange to me having a system for attribute improvement during character creation (with increasing cost, 20 + 30 + 40…) and a different one after character creation (with a linear cost, 25 + 25 + 25… when the right talent is available of course), while skills and talents have only one system.

I would prefer a single system (during creation and after creation) for attributes too.

It could be something with:

1) an increasing cost (using the existing values) and the Dedication talent could give a different bonus, something like "select 1 of the 4 specialization skills: you gain an additional Blue d6 per rank when rolling this skill",

2) a linear cost (maybe letting characters distribute 3 points to improve attributes, 7 for droids) and giving for skills and talents 40 XP to Droids, 30 XP to Gands, Humans, Rodians and Twi'leks, 20 XP to Trandoshans and Wookiees.

LukeZZ said:

After creation, you can only improve characteristics by purchasing the Dedication talent, which is at the bottom of every Talent Tree. In order to buy up two characteristics, you have to get down to the bottom of TWO talent trees -- that's a huge investment in XP already, especially if the Talents along the way aren't highly relevant to your PC.

You can, of course, add in some cybernetics to boost some of your characteristics, but those are expensive and have limits of their own.

The two system thing doesn't worry me -- characteristics should be easy to adjust at start and very difficult to improve as this system makes it (especially considering the narrow 1-6 value, a one point boos is significant). It's also nothing new. Plenty of systems control primary abilities in this way.

the one problem there is given the costs to raise an attribute after character creation (and given its a fixed cost) no one should ever waste that rare upgrade on a low stat, no point raiseing that 1 to 2 or that 2 to 3 when you can get a 4 to 5.

Librarian said:

True, if you have a 1 Brawn, you're better off upping your relevant skills for more dice than spending so much to get what would essentially be an upgrade point. That said, skills have a ceiling of 5 that could be hit quickly.

Dedication is definitely a good name for the talent. Few people are going to use it to improve a bad characteristic -- it's there to make your great stat heroic.

nyriv1 said:

Yes, this means that it's time consuming, but the cost to increase an attribute is still a flat 25 XP + 25 XP + 25 XP…

The talents you take before every Dedication give you various benefits, they aren't only "empty spaces" to be bought to get a +1 to an attribute.

My only concern is that keeping the 2 different systems "encourages" min-maxers to min-max.

LukeZZ said:

That's the beauty of a point-buy system: min-maxers can go ahead and do what they do… and suffer the pain of neglecting other aspects.

This is to contrast other RPGs (level- and class-based ones at any rate) that have flat, stackable traits that are fixed to packaged options. Min-maxers make this work in their favor by buying the most effective combinations. Point-buy systems generally don't work that way because in order to get the more effective stuff you're usually paying out the nose for it, thus other, cheaper aspects never get picked up.

The best way to keep PCs from getting too specialized is for the GM to occasionally poke at their squishy parts. If the player complains, simply point out that they had the freedom to spend their points any way they wanted.

GoblynByte said:

Starting players investing in high Attributes (and not in skills) will simply roll more dice (as opposed to roll less "more powerful" dice).

After few XP they will be able to improve they skills, while players who invested in skills at character creation won't be able to invest in attributes. So the latter will have more "squishy parts" than the former.

LukeZZ said:

Perhaps you're right. And nobody will ever have any better fix for you than to find more mature players who will make characters based on common sense and story lines and rather than attempts to game the system. Systems don't encourage players to min-max any more than chefs encourage people to get fat. And if you're a GM of a campaign in which only min-maxers survive, then you're the one that encourages it.

A little self control and an eye towards the storytelling experience will go a long way towards making the experience more fun for everyone. It is unrealistic to expect systems to be unbreakable when it comes to min-maxers, munchkins, combat wombats, or whatever such folks are called these days. Sure, we could tweak any given system until the thing is locked down like Fort Knox, but I'd rather have a little bit of freedom in the system and put more faith in my fellow players. People are gonna find a way to break the system eventually no matter what we or the designers do. There's no sense in chasing your tail in an attempt to stop them.