Rather than the cynical view that it only exists to sell you the same rules every gencon (which is extra silly considering the Q1 release). I think the real advantage is to produce adventures with a basic set of assumptions. I can easily see a large published campaign in the EotE. Such a campaign would focus on flawed heroes and their struggle to thrive. Those themes are neither relevant nor important to Jedi seeking enlightenment or failing that peace.

And while the theory of RPG as toolkit is fine, it's hardly universal in its adoption. More modern design thoughts suggest that it's better to modify the system to emphasize the themes of a specific style. Fate is a primary example. While using the same core mechanics it significantly changes things like stress tracks between it's diffrent iterations (Dreaden Filea and Atomic Robo most recently). Simularly 40k's core mechanIcs stay fairly constant while differing systems use diffrent meathods of aquireing goods. A soldier after all buys his guns differently from an undercover agent frond a space lord. If you want a Generic Universal Role Playing System, well one exists but it isn't this product. And those of you thing FFG will change their course biased on your opinion expressed here are in for disapointment.

We're here to test their system not run their company.

Design decisions, based on the specific style of campaign that EotE is built for, are something for the designers to either justify or not.

However, although EotE is not about the last of the Jedi and or the Rebellions struggle to restore the ideals of the Old Republic, the rules as currently written do include most of the trappings for playing a jedi in this era and in this game as demonstrated fully by Donovan Morningfire a few pages back.

Donovan Morningfire said:

What you gentlemen are missing is the point that anyone making noise about this in numbers large enough is called a trend. Beta tests and marketing research like to know about such trends and THEN make their decisions. Let FFG ignore it if they wish, that's their call. And as i said, i dont play Jedi so likely ill run this system here and there. But why many of you seem to have an axe to grind for people even daring to ask these questions really confuses me.

Some theories as to the answers of the questions posed here are good and well thought out, but they're unsubstantiated by some real solid reasoning from FFG.I heard the podcast, I read the log lines on the site and I still have questions. So do others. Why not let us have our questions? Why is that threatening or disturbing to any of you? Or even annoying? What's your stake in it?

Me? I'm here because players in my group play Jedi but these individuals are not on the beta. I'm speaking up for them. I'm providing information to FFG by way of my honest reaction. I'm providing information based on their reaction. Providing information actually IS constructive. It's entirely up to FFG what they do with it. It will impact my life not at all considering I like a lot of what they've done thus far…

I am simply asking questions and stating that I'm confused by certain decisions, so are others. If it results in a couple more force rules thrown in, great! But it might not and I'm fine with it. Some won't be. It is what it is.

But the people really not being constructive? The people getting angry or annoyed at us for asking questions. They're just questions, people. They're not gonna make your girlfriend break up with you, fire you from your job, or steal money out of your pocket. Let's all be friends.

I have to agree with Ron on this.

FFG has told us the design intent behind the 3-book model. Ron (and others) are questioning that. That is their right - not only as beta testers (he's **** right, this kind of feedback is pure GOLD for any beta - and most publishers would could themselves lucky to have it - whether they "go with it" or not), but also as gamers and fans.

They're not "wrong". You're not "right".

I think a lot of backlash is coming because we had "naysayers" presenting these arguments early, but in an inflamatory, trollish manner. It's easy to "turn off" the argument all together, as a result of that! But I think these are great discussions that shed light on both sides of the argument.

Again, any developer worth their salt (which FFG is) would be pleased as punch to get this kind of feedback, on both sides of the issue.

Maybe I'm confused then… I thought the latest question was "why are their 3 books instead of 1?" Which was answered in a very robust manner in the podcast interview.

Is there a different question being asked?

I think all we can do is look at FFG's previous models…

• WFRP 3e was very tightly focused on an area of play and the time frame it was set, this allowed them to focus and laser in on a small part of a large world. It also meant that each supplement had section on rules and a scenario that could easily be tied into any groups ongoing game.
• A core book for each setting has been a very successful model from the 40K line, and like it or not FFG is in the business of making money.

Will FFG come and explain themselves, i don't know, but honestly I don't think things will change, they would have to scrap this version and go back to square one, Jedi's just don't belong in this game.

Forcing a very specific playstyle isn't a bold move, it's a terrible idea.

There's no reason I should be mechanically penalized for playing a force user. It's just silly. I shouldn't be behind in points in order to gain access to being force sensitive. All I'm suggesting is that they should make Force Exile cost the same as a new career specialization. I'd also like them to reverse their decision to increase the cost of new specs* and/or make the skills less career restricted.

*I don't see any reason in this system to penalize the equivalent of multiclassing.

As a has been stated repeatedly, the three book system was a conscious design choice blah blah blah. This is a GOOD DECISION and GOOD CHOICE AND IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN LIKE THIS.

Put simply, the game is not, cannot, and should not be designed to be all things to all people.

Petersen said at his presentation at Gen-Con (2012 the In-Flight report) that when you try to create a the "Classic Star Wars Experience", you immeadiately run into a bring wall, because what CSWE even means isn't the same thing for different people. In his (paraphrased) words, the CSWE can be:

• Smugglers dodging bounty hunters on the fringes of civilized space
• Rebels fighting a war for freedom against the Galactic Empire
• Jedi avoiding or fighting the Sith

Petersen (with Little backing him up in the audience) said they tried to make a single game that could capture all CSWE flavors, but it was clear early on that it would fail on all counts. This is a problem that plagued both the d20 and d6 editions of the SWRPG. WotC tried to cram them all together, simplifying things to the point where "use the force" was ONE force skill for all things force, and never did a good job of supporting mass combat (Galaxy at War was one of the last supplements released by Wizards, and I felt it was clear they were just cashing a paycheck). The d6 version of the game treated jedi the way you see here, and added VERY little in the way of supplements to support force users beyond the core book, and really never hit the feel of the battlefield either. Beyond the mechanical issues, defining the CSWE for all players simultaneously is a major problem I have had in practically every star wars game I have been in or run in the last 12 years.

So what is Fantasy Flight to do? Retread the same ground in the same way and make a **** product with the same mistakes of those that came before so that instead of bitching that they aren't including everything, you ***** about how they didn't pay enough attention to Jedi or force rules or capital ships or ground combat?

Or do they follow a model where they already have proof of concept (WH40K RPGS) and finally have a chance to solve the problem that has plagued every edition prior to theirs?

The styles of games that hit the flavors of the CSWE are substantially different enough that merit standalone products. I believe they are as different from each other as the different flavors of WH40K RP games are from each other (This is based on information from friends who have played them). And really, if you look at many of the non-RPG Star Wars products that have come before (books, board games, card games) they tend to focus on one of these main points, while incorporating some flavor from the others. Truly, there are even more flavors than just what we have here, a statement its supported by the rampant pissing and moaning on these forums about how somone's pet subgenre isn't supported by the first core book.

Looking at these flavors, it mechanically makes the most sense to start with the fringe campaign (smaller squads, almost no focus on force powers, etc), iron out the kinks in the most basic of the systems, and have a better foundation from which to build on the later 2 games, which will have new challenges to attend to. The game is not, cannot, and should not be designed to be all things to all people.

They saw a problem that's existed for 25 ******* years, and fixed it. Its making a better game for you. You can either help with the beta process and make the best **** game possible, or get out of their way and wait till the core product that interests you comes out.

-WJL

doctorbadwolf said:

I think part of FFG's rationale is that a lot of people early one saying how great it'd be to dip into a specialization, grab a rank or two in skills you normally wouldn't have access to, perhaps snag a few permanent talents like Grit or Toughened, and then drop the career for something else. Under the old costs, it could easily become very cost-efficient to do this. One of the problems with the 3.X iteration of D&D was the rampant multi-classing and "cherry picking" of prestige class abilities. So the increased cost is a means to tone that down, making it less cost-efficient to simply hop from one specialization to another, and increased costs fits with what Jay Little said about "letting players do what they want, but they're going to have to pay for it."

Personally I think would-be Force-users did get a bit shafted, and will be sticking with the 10 XP cost to become Force-Sensitive. Paying an entry fee I'm fine with, as it cuts down on the unfortunate tendency that you saw in the WEG days (or least I saw) of characters choosing to be Force-Sensitive, if only to avoid the hard cap on Force Points that SWD6 had. It's just that 20 XP for something that's not even useful with paying even more XP just rubs the wrong way; it almost has the feel of being too reactionary to tales of super-powerful Force-users in the d20 system (which half the time was caused by the GM simply not making his Jedi characters actually act like Jedi, but rather let them carry on like a bunch of Force-empowered thugs with a glowing longsword).

I think GM Chris hit the nail on the head, that this topic has become a very sour one because some of the earlier folks clamoring for Jedi did so in way that was, quite frankly, trollish and confrontational, ignoring some well-thought out responses about why this game wasn't all about the Jedi.

As lupex quoted, I did pretty good rundown of what constitutes a Jedi in terms of purely game mechanics, and they can be done… it's just not cheap in terms of XP, which again fits with FFG's current mindset of "Balance by Way of Increased XP Costs."

As for the fluff bits about being a Jedi, those can easily be tacked on, and even under the existing rules a Force-Sensitive Exile could be relabeled "Fugitive Jedi-in-Training," with the easy rational of why you don't have a lightsaber being that carrying one on your person gets you into Major League Trouble with Imperial Authorities. The EU shows there were quite a few Jedi-in-hiding that ditched their lightsabers so as to better go into hiding as per the last instructions they received from the Jedi Temple Beacon. Obi-Wan kept his, but then again he was living as a hermit out in the grimy butthole of space. Luke wore his simply because he figured that he was already a heavily wanted man for his actions in ANH (freeing an Imperial prisoner from a secure Imperial facility before coming back to blow up said facility), so carrying his dad's lightsaber wasn't really going to matter.

And unless the GM is handing out 50+ XP per session, it's going to take a while to cap-out both the Force Exile tree and the various Force Powers. Heck, I built a Jedi-type character using one of my homebrew talent trees, and even at 350 XP he's still got quite a few talents to pick up to flesh out his Jedi specialization (and trust me, this won't be making a Jedi Knight out of anybody) to say nothing of boosting up his Force Powers or even his skills.

Like I alluded to earlier, I think a large part of the issue comes from people used to playing Jedi in the various d20 games where you start out pretty awesome from 1st level, as opposed to D6 where a Force-user had to work their way up to awesome.

Personally, I think it would be really cool for FFG to publish at least a "Jedi-in-Training" specialization so that those folks that really wanted someone with a solid, tangible link to the Jedi Order would have it, but at the same time keeping with the general feel of EotE that the Jedi are "all but extinct." Between that and the Force Exile specialization, that'd be enough to get a would-be Jedi up to Force Rating 3, which is generally going to be high enough to activate most Force Powers, even with the added FP costs involved by using your Upgrades. And even then, we're likely talking about more than 200 XP spent to get your Force Rating that high, which doesn't include the costs of buying and upgrading your Force Powers; true you'd get a number of decent talents along the way, but most of those are superfluous to using Force Powers.

LethalDose said:

Well, I'd have said that two lessons learned from 40k are that making a low level system and hoping you can bolt superpowers on later can fail and fail hard, and that it sucks to have to wait three years for your favourite thing.

Why do people think this time will be any different?

AluminiumWolf said:

For me the answer to that question is two fold - first this is not the same system, but more importantly I've run and love WFRP 3e and the system has been improved leaps and bounds, it shows how much the design team have learned and how much they have listened to their critics.

As has been said many times FFG did not create Dark Heresy, they had to evolve the lines from what I feel was a weak core, I do not feel this is the case with EotE, even in beta form it feels pretty solid.

Why do you feel that the design team can't possibly learn from past mistakes and move forward?

I can feel for you,( I have to wait for MWP to get their arse in gear and get the rights to release Marvel heroic roleplay in the UK, and that may never happen), but I would rather there only be the first two books set in the original trilogy, then move onto the Clone Wars and have real Jedi running around in a playground built just for them.

I'd like to address Lethaldose.

Dude, honestly? Really good post and I feel like you did a good job of addressing things I've been wondering about. Well done on those counts.

But also? Lose the attitude. You could have kept the bile to a minimum and kept it friendly. Why NOT keep it friendly? What's to lose, man?

But hey, content of the post? Again, I dig, even if I disagree with some of it.

I really think FFG could do a lot to quiet down the dissent on this issue by giving just a little more… Say lightsaber rules. Deflection, reflection, lightsaber combat, as an example. Makes stuff too powerful? Then make it cost more xp. Hell, Luke carried around a blaster until the end of empire strikes back when presumably he had a lightsaber for years. Clearly the blaster has a lower entry floor than the lightsaber.

I dig the idea that a lightsaber is a damned difficult weapon to use, but rewarding for those who put in the time.

Maybe Force user is a kind of latent jedi, afterall Luke didn't know that he could use the force until Obi-Wan started to train him. and Luke was probably not the only one. so in the Rim there could easily exist other latent force users, that have the potential of becoming a Jedi….

And that is a great background story for a PC, and a great adventure hook, to have the latent jedi power (if such exist in the book), or even part of a obligation rules.

Child of Destiny (new Obligation [force user]

as a child you where hidden from inquisitive eyes, stowed away on a remote planet away from harmful minds. You are indebt to certain individuals that took great care in disguising your heritage. and now due to recent events they have revealed themselves [insert versions of patrons], and given you some puzzle pieces about your unknown past….

I certainly dig.

@RonRamron

The "attitude" in the post was caused by the antagonism running through most of this thread and the apparent refusal of those antagonistic participants to accept perfectly legitimate explanations provided by the designers and community. The themes of:

• It's a cash grab
• There's no legitimate reason for it
• I want my Jedi/sith/cookie now
• All the old ones sucked so will this one

drove me up the wall. The assumption that the design decisions about of any aspect of the game was for any reason other producing as high a quality product as possible is cynical, immature, and counter-productive. If a design decision is confusing on its surface, the knee jerk reaction anymore seems to be to complain about it as loudly as possible, and reject any attempt to clarify why and how the decision was made, instead of spending time understanding why the decision was made in the first place. Sorry if you didn't appreciate it, but hardly see how what I posted could seem threatening by internet standards.

The beta process is absolutely not the place to question fundamental design philosophy. That occurs long, long before beta. Further, FFG was absolutely right in waiting until they had a beta ready product before even announcing it, if for no other reason to avoid months to years of this kind of gripe pressuring a change in the design before it even got this far. I have seen projects forced to choose between making bad design decisions or being perceived as ignoring the fan base because of vocal, ignorant masses of potential consumers using the internet the slander the yet-unreleased product.

Bringing it back home, what's to lose by keeping it "friendly"?

• Catharsis
• Volume
• Increased chance to get this point of view spread

The way they're handling force users is wonderful. It calls back the WEG's relatively minimalist method that left lots of room for great story telling and really captured the "Classic Star Wars Experience" for force users in the rebellion era (which is a very lonely and scary experience, just look at Luke's journey, especially in ESB), instead other eras (See Anakin, a turbo-powered jackhole surrounded by other equally powerful beings). The official material is limited, but there's obviously a lot more going on than whats just in the book (otherwise, why would we ever need Force & Destiny). It's way easier for groups and GMs to work around whats not there, versus working around official material that just doesn't fit in this book and setting (fringe campaigns) at all.

The presented force mechanics are just a taste, just enough to support the setting they're designing. I'm sorry you don't like it cause you didn't get what you want when you wanted it. Think of it this way, though:would you rather…

• get a crap official product now, and have to wait for a "revised" edition in a few years that finally fixes it, and is a headache to work around until then?
• or have a the patience to wait a little longer to get a much better official version while working some houserules in the interim to make do?

-WJL

Again, another will thought out post… But if it bugs you this much, why not just avoid this topic. If this is catharsis for you, well, I … hell man, there are better ways. Seeking to share information is one thing and you do it well. Seeking to beat down the opposition is quite another and speaks to, dare I say, a dissatisfaction that goes beyond these forums.

And while I find this stuff informative, I wanted to ask you, do you work in the games industry? You speak as if you do, and if you do, I certainly wanna hear more from you perhaps in a less combative setting. If you do not, then I still find what you say interesting, but things like explaining what the beta is and is not for is supposition at best. The very asking of questions is useful in this kind of beta. It's feedback.

Now don't confuse that feedback as a license to import a directive that FFG must follow, but feedback is data. Data is good. Let people say what they're gonna say.

Myself? I do have experience in the games industry… Not pen and paper, mind you, but I've been in on beta tests.. Not on the player side but the dev side. I've also been privy to marketing details and hell, I'll just say it, I've done and do work for this very franchise. I'm not out of line when I state that these questions and comments, even the cynical ones, are filled with incredibly useful data.

I have little doubt that FFG will put out a successful product. The beta book points to this. They're very talented guys. I'm gonna play it. I'm gonna love it.

But let people talk. It may not be always "fun" for FFG to hear, but useful data never had to be fun to read to be useful.

The reason he and I won't abandon this thread is that it would rapidly devolve into a Jedi wannabe circle jerk. That creates the perception that you guys are somthing other than a tiny but vocal minority.

The an obligation of being awesome is completly counter to every other style of obligation. Furthermore it's not significantly diffrent from a bounty and would only waste text creating the impression that playing a force user is encouraged.

Good counter point on the obligation, but I'll say to you too, lose the attitude. Circle jerk? Come on, pal. Keep it friendly. As for FFG thinking its bigger than a vocal minority, we all have handles on here. It's not like they read my many posts and attribute each post to a discrete user. They can see exactly how many people care. However many or few. Again, useful data.

Attitude toward we who ask these questions? Actually entirely un-useful data. Nothing in my job experience indicates a space for subjects of, say, marketing research to take chunks out of each other.

I enjoy your counterpoints, but keep it civil. We're Star Wars fans. We're better than that.

RonRamron said:

Agree totally. It would be a shame if the thread got locked, as there's an interesting debate here (and as you say, lots of useful information for FFG).

I'm somewhat reassured about the power level, based off what I've read, that we won't be seeing Starkiller-level antics in EotE. For me, the Force Unleashed was more a tech demo than anything else but respect some fans love that portrayal of the Force. Something of that level of power doesn't belong in an RPG, I feel, unless all the other players are a similar level. If that happens, you're talking a superhero RPG or perhaps Jedi Squad Supreme rather than Star Wars.

As a slight aside (but there is a reason) I loved the character templates in WEG Star Wars. There were no true 'Jedi' characters. The Failed Jedi started off his training but fell by the wayside, the Minor Jedi received a little training from a former Jedi before he was killed/taken. The Alien Student of the Force espoused a wholly different force tradition and the Quixotic Jedi realised by themselves that there was something different about them.

Where am I going with the ramble? The answer is I think the final version of EotE needs to be able to handle these sort of character builds, and are all valid archetypes to play in the game set in the Outer Rim. I don't know whether we should get a Lightsaber skill or not (I think yes, but capped without proper training), or a full Force Exile career, but those are just my thoughts.

cetiken said:

I guess I don't think people who might want to play Jedi are a tiny minority.

AluminiumWolf said:

Because this time we're at least getting a sense for the scale of force usage.

Having the lightsaber and basic force powers listed in this book would be similar to DH having the stats for an Astartes Bolter and a listing of the basic Astartes Implants. Right now, sure, a player could get limited access to it, but we can see the scale and be ready for it.

Also, unlike the 40K RPG line, its quite reasonable to figure out how they're going to make Jedi "good." And it won't be as broken as Unnatural Strength/Toughness is/was in DW.

cetiken said:

Dude…

That's unfair. And rude. Ron has been nothing but civil - no personal insults or foul tone. I'm suprised, Cetiken… your posts aren't normally like that. It's like the first couple "jedi-lovers" who posted were pretty vile. But they've been beat down. Now we have honest, non-inflamatory, genuine questioning of the decision. Good debate, but started by folks who aren't being inflamatory or mean. So what gives???

Your statement is also an untrue one. I'm a huge fanboy of Edge of the Empire, at this point. I'll buy it, play it, and am creating a podcast DEDICATED to it.

But if I had my druthers, I'd still want to see Jedi rules in the first release. I've asked (I've been keeping track, at this point) 47 people if they'd like to see "jedi rules" in the first book. 40 said yes.

Rather than seeing a new batch of rules for player-character Jedi characters it might be nice to see a stack of NPC statblocks for Jedi, Dark Side Adepts, etc in the back of the book. That way it doesn't upset the mission statement of EotE. Players that desperately want to play a Jedi now, could look at the statblocks and brow-beat their GMs into letting them reverse engineer their own. At least then we'd see how the FFG design crew would stat up a Jedi in their own rules. And it would be a good platform for launching house-rules from. And Star Wars homebrew has almost always been mucho mejor than official canon anyway (Episode 1.11 I'm looking at you)

In the end, I'm one of the people that's cool with the design intent of EotE. However, I don't think that makes me the king of imaginary town, and I'd like it if we could all find a game we are stoked about (even the embers of one) in what FFG puts together.

GM Chris said:

So what do you call the Force Powers and lightsaber stats that are in the book?

On a purely mechanical level, I'd call those "rules for playing Jedi." True, there's no fluff about what it means to be a Jedi, but then there's not a lot of fluff in any of the book. A few pages back, I did what I'd like to think is a pretty solid breakdown of what "Jedi" means in terms of game mechanics.

You even said yourself within 24 hours of acquiring the book that folks should relax, there are rules for the Force and playing Force-users, as well as stats for lightsabers. And when you get down to the nuts and bolts of it, isn't that what a Jedi essentially is, a Force-user with a lightsaber? Last I checked, you can do that, so in that respect, there are rules for Jedi in the Beta. Or did I get a different copy of the Beta than those folks clamoring there's no way at all to play a Jedi-type character in this game?

As one of the folks that cited maybe this thread should be locked, most of that was due to the excessive negativity. I figured lock this thread, and perhaps start afresh without all the excess baggage that this thread has in the hopes of keeping the discussion far more civil than it generally has been.

And as I posited in that same post where I did a mechanical breakdown of what a Jedi is, perhaps that new thread should be asking FFG for rules for playing Force-users (Jedi included) who can get beyond "Padawan level" in their Force Rating.