Ok, so I'm kinda a stickler about some species and players acting according to demeanor. Not all, but most. So this said, I have a dude trying to make a Bothan hired gun. As bothans shun violence, I said no. I mean they would defend themselves, but that isn't the character this cat is after.

He said it, the avoidance to violence, was a cultural thing and easily addressed by making the Bothan come from elsewhere (not raised by bothans/or in a bothan society). So, basically an orphan from tattooine or something of that nature. I fully agree with him on this, it is a social behavior that is learned.

Here is where the interesting things come up. Mechanics for the species. The stats are fine, they are what makes a bothan, biologically a bothan.

When you get to the bothan bonus perks… the streetwise, and the convincing demeanor talent… there becomes a bit of an issue, those are both "learned" behaviors based off the bothan culture/society. I mean, streetwise isn't a skill you're born to do, the convincing demeanor isn't because of vocal tone, or any biologic factor. We, my player and I, both agree here as well. It isn't like trando claws where they have them.

So what do I do to recomp the dude for these Bothan perks that he isn't getting? Do I do anything since he is knowingly giving them up to make the character he wishes? At that rate, I would think he would gain the learned behaviors of the society he was raised in. If raised by rodians, he would place the same emphasis on hunting as they do. If he was raised with humans- he would have developed along the same mindset as them- thus the access to their perks would be in order (bad example as they are kinda set up to offset the perks given to others, but still). Again, I'm not talking about the physical perks- he wouldn't get trando claws if he were raised there, but he may develop the hatred of wookies. I feel that just giving him the xp back for the perks, is kinda a cop out of what could prove to be an excellent plot and background ordeal.

Anyone see any reason why the "learned" behaviors shouldn't transfer over? Any of you number crunchers out there see a "break" in the game. I may be looking at it wrong, but wouldn't the fact that he was a bothan (furry, upright dog) really just be fluff? We, he and I, both know that bothans are not specked perfectly for the role he wishes to play, but it is what he wishes to play and I don't see a problem with it as long as we keep it logical. Just curious what others thought.

$hamrock said:

Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. The word "NO" should not be in a GM's vocabulary. If a player wants to play a character let them. To say no because you don't think it could work, is just going to bring in a whole lot of contention. Especially, in a game like this that seems to call for a lot of player input on how things turn out. Much like improv theatre, you should never say no to a players idea, you should build on it. "No" should never be uttered by a GM, instead, be creative on how you interpret your players desire for something.

I mean, sure, bothans shun violence. So do Jedi. But, frankly, Sith happens (see what I did there) There could be thousands of reasons why this particular Bothan is a hired gun. There could be something wrong with them psychologically that they like violence, or they feel that the only person who should have to kill, is someone who doesn't like it. They could have an obligation where they are forced to do something bad to save someone they love, they could be a prodcut of their society, in that spies sometimes have to break rules (and heads) to get information. I could go on and on with reasons why this character works. But it all boils down to, this is what they player came up with and it is your job to work with it.

Once you start saying NO, the players will expect you to shut down everything they say. This will snowball to the point that the players will give up trying anything because you've already set the precedent of saying NO. "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny"

Now, I'm not advocating giving the players everything they want, that's ridiculous. Players are like children. They want everything all the time. The trick is to only give them what they need to be satisfied at the moment. What I'm trying to say is that you should be flexible, and try to work with the player and figure out how to make this work for them as well as for your campaign. Our hobby is that of an interactive story, and as the saying goes "it takes two to tango".

In the particular case of this Bothan, maybe he's a borderline psychopath?

After all, our own society generally abhors violence as the first response to a problem, much less against innocent and undeserving targets. And yet America has a long line of home-bred murderers, ranging from methodical serial killers to those that just snap one day and go on a shooting spree in a populated area.

Who's to say that any given Star Wars society is different? There's always going to be oddballs and misfits in any culture. Now I am in no way advocating that this player make their character a barely-coherent blood-crazed psycho, but neither do I think Bothan automatically equals pacifist. Rather, their avoidance of violence is more that they culturally deem it "uncivilized" and prefer more elaborate schemes and methods to get their revenge.

Both excellent points. I did bring up the "off kilter" idea when talking with him…. He didn't care for that. He even says that he knows it's "off", but its a concept he wants to run with, which again, I am fine with…. just trying to figure out a back story that makes it work.

I misspoke a bit, I did not say "no" to the character, I said no as presented without supporting back story. He was just looking for out of the gate - violent bothan. (This isn't one of my strongest role-players, so I am trying to help him along), I wanted a reason for the drastic outcome.

As I read the text on Bothans, many of the fine ideas that have been presented here, would see him banished from society, at best. Just because he is an exception to the bothan rules, doesn't mean that bothans will/or have to accept him. Maybe he was a spy that had to "whallop" some folks, but this guy is talking about being a merc. no talents in any direction aimed at spy. (Not an excuse, I understand that). Still the Bothans, as a whole, would see that as a weakness. I guess in this light, he would still receive the bothan starting perks, as he came up in said society.

Like I said, I am anal, so I tend to want darn good reasons for someone, even as exceptional as a player, to be the way they are. I guess its the psychologist in me saying that it needs explanation. I just think that if I over look something so blatant, then my players that are not as familiar with star wars species are going to take that as a representation of the species, as a whole. And some are, but I guess there isn't a way around that.

I will reevaluate this with him, see what we can come up with.

That said, it does beg the question of learned perks in cases where for whatever reasons a person is raised in a society/culture not his own. Any views on that?

Forget the psychopath idea.

Why should this Bothan be limited by "his species' predilictions"? He's not an NPC. Not "just another Bothan. He's a hero. That means (as a course of action) he breaks the rules and the molds. I call it: "The Drizzt Model".

In my long-running (and recently finished) Alternate Universe Campaign, had a player who wanted to make a Bothan who left Bothan society because it just wasn't "him". He didn't care for espionage and subterfuge. He like building things and shooting big guns. So - in his bio - he joined the Republic military at an early age.

There's nothing wrong with that.

He's a PC. He GETS to be the exception to the rule - that's what being the hero in your own story means. :-) The Drizzt Model.

Just because a species as a whole tends towards a certain median, there's always going to be outliers. And they're not necessarily psychotic - they're just individuals who are different. That is the DEFINITION of a Player Character. :-) The Star Wars police aren't going to take his birthday away because he made a bothan in the "I'm a special PC" roleplaying game that didn't follow "the Bothan mold". Species predilictions are there to guide a player, but the real fun comes from making a character that bucks those guides. That's what makes a character memorable and unique.

So… I guess what I'm saying is… what's the problem? ;-)

GM Chris said:

II think you're reading too far into things. For one the player and I are working together on this. All I asked him for, to make this character, was for some logic behind the choice. Nothing more. I said no to the violence driven merc bothan that was living in bothan society like there was nothing odd about that. Regardless of the players free will, the bothans, per game play, wouldn't accept this cat, they would remove him, promptly. PC or not. I am perfectly willing to work with the player to come up with a logical background to the character. I find it interesting, if nothing else.

He brought up the orphan on Rodia, idea. Again I had no problem with it. What I asked was…. as he was not raised a bothan - he wouldn't get the bothan perks of "Streetwise" bonus, nor the "talent" as both are learned behaviors driven by the culture and society of the bothans (to which he has had no exposure. Would it be game breaking if I were to give him the learned perks of the rodian's (survival and tracking) instead? Again, they are learned behaviors driven by culture and society, of which the Bothan has grown up in.

That said, there are limits to what the PCs should and should not be allowed to do. No matter how much an ass my PCs think me, I won't allow an ewok fusion mechanic from Endor (prior to the species being discovered). Drizzt Model or not. I had a player arguing this in SAGA, giving me the exact same logic path you are…. "But I'm a special PC" , etc…. Regardless of the fact that there wasn't an engine for him to "work on" "learn from" or anything else, sitting anywhere on Endor. I guess he found a halocron, that happened to come in Ewok, and the force just taught him how to fix star ships. It doesn't work! I'm willing to bend, and work with the players, but they gotta give me some logic behind it.

I think the more interesting question here is what it is about the Bothan's that he likes, then what it is about the career/spec choice that he likes, and why he likes that they don't marry up. As for a solution, I don't know, I'm pretty much a "yes but" GM, maybe maybe his Obligation/Motivation has forced him into a life of violence and crime.

$hamrock said:

Do I think it will break the game to give the Bothan player the Rodian species traits because he grew up on Rodia? No. And the FFG Secret Police aren't going to come kicking in your door if you do it.

Do I think you're being more than a little bit implacable in fighting the player on this point? Yes. The PCs *should* be special. That's why they're the PCs and not just people sitting in a cantina. They're going to be the big **** heroes of the game. Yes, there should be some limits. An Ewok fusion mechanic from Endor is one thing - that's why there's something like the primitive trait. But is the logic of the game universe going to fall apart because there might be a Bothan or two that buck the trend of what it's like to be a Bothan? Hell no.

Also, dude - you're the frakking GM! The game universe is what you make it! If I want Nar Shaadda to be a gleaming center of culture and civilization in my universe and Coruscant some small, backwater world - I can totally do that. There's nothing stopping me. George Lucas isn't going to send me a cease and desist letter or send a Defel Assassin after me. Just because something doesn't line up with "established canon" (and we've seen just how nebulous that term is with the recent seasons of The Clone Wars) doesn't mean that it has to be a case of "Do not pass 'Go.' Do not collect 200 credits."

Boy did this thread get derailed. Everyone got caught up in the back story, of how it came about, rather then the actual titled presentation.

My player and I are happy. That's all I really care about as far as the bothan merc is concerned. We were happy before this post, it was just back story. I do have a ticked off player because I wont let him play an offspring of Kit Fisto that is a full on Jedi Knight. I presented alternatives to the character, and ways we could work back story, but be is stubborn as a dwarf, so be it. But thats another story. We did however get some alternative variations of a back ground that we have been working on. So I guess it's a win, anyway.

The concept that most species perks that currently exist are cultural and societal driven perks is what the point was. I was asking the number crunchers (of which I am not one), if there were any that would break things. Very few of the perks deal with physical traits, claws, nightvison, bonus to track because of a super nose, etc… Unless I missed something only twileks (heat tolerance), wookies (rage), and trandos (claws, regen) are actually perks that are biological in nature. All the rest should be transferable with any member/species of a community. Not that this comes up all that often, out of 30ish characters this is the first I have had that is trying such, but I can't imagine it will be the last.

Anyway, Thanks for the replies - sorry I didn't explain it more thoroughly, to get to the heart of the matter.

$hamrock

you are making an assumption that the skills and traits are societal and learned. There is no real reason to believe that. Bothans may be hardwired to be more convincing on the average than a human is.

You are opening a big can of worms on game theory here tho. Where to the rules end and the GM begins. When should the rulebook rule or the GM decide. In any set of characters, you can come up with places where the rules dont make sense. Say I make a human who was raised as a pit fighter from the time they could walk, and you make a Rodian scholar (there probably is one, dont laugh at me ). Why do you have more skills than me and I have the survival skill and the expert tracker perk. You've never done anything but beat people for fun and profit, and I have never set foot in the wilderness.

So, what do we do? If the answer is that the skills and talents should be only dependent on the character theme and background, dosent that make the rules in the book irrelevant? If the answer is that the rulebook should always win dosent that handcuff player desires for their characters?

Now that I am thinking about it, I think it should only be nature, not nurture, given by the race pick. Gand lungs, Trandosian regeneration and Wookie rage are all nature, and it isnt possible not to have that part of the race, but not every human is going to be a skill monkey, not every Rodian a tracker, not every Bothan a corpse, I mean spy.

Maybe char gen should be pick race then pick background. Race give you characteristics and innate talents then the background gives you the skill bonus-type stuff.

Say I make a twi'lek dancing girl who got out of that biz to be a tech. The twi'lek gives the stats, the dancing girl gives the skill level of charm, and then tech/mechanic is the class.

Say I make a Ryloth raised rural twi'lek who fell in love with space first time he saw a ship. This guy has twi'lek stats, but a level of survival instead of charm, and then tech/mechanic class. The survival skill fits far better for this background than a level of charm.

It would be hard to implement tho. Maybe an expansion book could have expanded char gen rules.

The split of innate racial abilities vs cultural/adolescent skill/talents has been done in other rpgs, in simple and easy to handle ways.

Although for a game like Star Wars, there are tons of cultures and variations to account for, even in a Fringe-only setting. The different variations needs to be kept balanced, some species-culture combination will suddenly have big advantages over the others, with the right species/culture/career combination…

While I like the idea of being able to customise my characters in this way, I doubt its something they will implement. I would love it though.

I prefer to stick to the book, even a Bothan merc will be met at a Bothan by others, not everyone knows all that much about others species'. This makes it, perhaps, easier for him to convince and/or check the "word on the street", even if he is a Bothan in a big armour. He's met as a Bothan, even if he's a brutal sob. He is not only as defined by himself or where he grew up, but also those he meets, the generalised others so to speak. So he is continually re-socialised and his habitus keeps structuring the structured structures. He becomes more Bothan. Or less. But he is still met as a Bothan, because it is what he "is", ie looks like.

Jegergryte said:

To put this in a little bit of perspective, the Unofficial Species Guide that Dono and I have put together is largely focused only on species that were big players during the Rebellion Era (with a few other fan favorites thrown in).

We're at 30 species counting the ones in the book. There's decidedly more if you look at some of the other species we've written up that fall outside of the Rebellion Era.

I'd stick by the book myself, just because if I want to play a character like that, there's ways in the rules that I can already do it without having to mess around with my species abilities, and it could open a huge can of worms down the road when you have Minimus Maximus sitting at your table.That said, I think it's going to be pretty obvious if a player is trying to do something like this to "game the system" and you as a GM can put the kibosh on it. I don't think it's going to break your game in this case, but I'd look at it like Jegergryte put it. He's still going to be viewed as "a Bothan" by Joe Smuggler.

I mean think of it as prejudice or a mild form of speciesism (uh… racism?) … when people meet me abroad they see a white guy. When I point out that I'm norwegian, I'm suddenly also an elitist socialist bastard with way too much money, and certainly an oil well in my back yard… or perhaps something less bad, but its serves to underline the point I made above.

When your character (and therefore player) sees a Bothan, you (the player) will think he's an untrustworthy cleaning utensil. Likewise will your character, because unless you have in-depth knowledge there is only hearsay, which usually says that they are bastards … and even with the in-depth knowledge you know for certain they are bastards, except that they are real good at it too. Therefore the Bothan is categorised receiving the benefits because of suspicion or an inclination to perhaps gain a "favour" with the reputed Bothan spy-network. OR whatever other rationalisation you can conjure, it makes sense to me at least.

Changing the talents of a species could make sense, but I think of it like this: I'd rather play a cool race in a very unconventional career, for while my species talents and abilities might be best exploited otherwise, I could argue that my Bothan grew up on Rodia, and therefore pick the appropriate career, specialisation and talents with my starting xp. Additionally, even if my Bothan had never seen another Bothan before, the Rodians on Rodia would have seen or known about my species, so even at a young age I would've met that suspicion and those expectations from the social milieu I was socialised in. These expectations would most likely hone just those skills, and I would become the manipulating hunter, or big-gun crazed mercenary who usually got better paid than his fellow Rodians (added bonuses), precisely because of both prejudice (you just can't rid yourself of it anyway) and socialisation (i.e. nurture).

I know a lot of people out there hate the Ewoks and I will admit I don't. Since you are talking about species that were in the Rebellion era I was wondering you had them in there.

I know I may be a small voice here in a very large crowd (those who don't like the Ewoks) but when I was kid about 9 Return came out and I liked them. I liked the cartoon show, I had the Ewok village for god's sake. They helped bring down the Empire. I know people will always say Lucas sold out with them and that it should have been the Wookiees but I like the fact that the Ewoks were even smaller and more primitive then the Wookiees. Any yeah they were cute. As a child I had a Wicket poster up above my bed and a hang glider on my ceiling.

So I hope that Fantasy Flight will put them in somewhere. I got the Beta and I figure timeline this is earlier then Return so they wouldn't be out there. But I wonder was there never an Ewok who got off the Green Moon of Endor. Say a ship crash landed there and a curious fur ball stowed away on the ship. Yeah the crew could eat him, kill him, en slave him. But he could be a great help to. I know people may start hate me for saying all this. But I don't care, if they bring in the race at some point to be playable I will buy all these books and enjoy it but if they keep them out like others I don't not so much fun for me. I buy all the books for my gaming group so who knows. Sorry I'm so tired right now and all this may sound like a long ramble. I don't mean to say that if I buy this game it all rests on one race (guess I did say that) there are other species I like but when your playing an RPG where anything can happen, I say why not? Especially if there are others out there would like to play them too (and I know your out there even if your a closet Ewok lover) come on FFG I'll buy everything? What if they were a DLC? Anyhow just a thought and since this was a species thread I thought it would be ok to ponder these things here. Ok time for sleep sorry again about the ramble.

sillyxander said:

Assuming that people's theories are correct about FFG following the path of the three movies, I could see them popping up in a book covering the very end of the rebellion.

The stow-away idea, would have at least put endor (life-forms) in the directories and they wouldn't be the "discovery" they were in Jedi, so I don't know about all that!

Like you, I do like them, not so much for their intended purpose, but they are kinda cool. I too hope they pop up eventually, though I won't stop running the game because they are not there. I would like to see Gungans come up too, I mean, not Jar-Jar, but the people as a whole, were awesome.

Ever wish FFG used a better forum software. I do.

I miss reddit's code.

If a player wanted to play a violent Bothan that should not only be fine but normal. There are many reasons for this. The first being that violent Bothans clearly exist. Physically weak wookies also clearly exist. Do not "Planet of Hats" an entire species, that's absurd. If there are a million bothans then there is a bell curve of their violent tendencies, there will always MANDATORILY be a Bothan that is the most violent Bothan out of a million until there is less than a million Bothans. Saying there are not violent Bothans is like saying there aren't tall asians. On average people of asian heritage are shorter than caucasian people but Yao Ming is just one person and he is very tall. He is not AVERAGE but that's kind of the point of playing a PC isn't it.

Cyril said:

I blew up Coruscant once for a campaign idea… Lucas didn't show up and make me take it back.

…

Of course, I had one player refuse to play because it altered canon Star Wars too much… some people just have a problem using their imagination. tsk tsk tsk.

----------

Regarding Species and their bonuses… I have a problem with the Gand. I really think the Intellect should be 2 and Presence 1. Or I think they should be given an option to start with Mechanics 1 because they are tinkerers, but having an Intellect 2 would just make more sense.

deanruel said:

Dude! Wow! You're not going off on what I was saying. I have NO problem with a violent Bothan. Bothan society wouldn't accept it, and that is fine. The player of said Bothan, and myself, are in agreement on it.

One of the options that the player asked was about growing up an orphan on another planet. Again I had no problem with it.

So it led me to the question of species perks. Looking at them they come from being raised in a specific type of society. Bothans heavily favor verbal resolution, the society as a whole promotes debate in every feasible manner. That is where the skills (species bonuses) come from. They are learned, not something a race is born with, like claws, fangs, or a highly sensitive nose. A bonus for tracking, based of said sensitive nose, would be biologic.

So, given that, having the bothan grow-up in another culture, it stands to reason that he/she would adapt that cultures methods. So, if they grew-up on Rodia, they are all about the hunt.

I was just asking if that broke anything, as I am not a numbers cruncher. I got my answer, but it still leaves an interesting topic.

Nobody is arguing that deviances don't exist in a society. Chewie is a prime example, however his being a runt didn't isolate him from wookie society. Other things would, for example, if he were to use his climbing claws to kill people.

Gotcha, that gives me a good idea actually. I'm gonna hit the books tonight and cost out the races abilities and advantages.

I guess I simply would've sticked to the species abilities as stated, and used an appropriate obligation to cover the Bothan society side of things. After all, I believe that's one of the (many) uses of obligations.

That being said, I understand from the various posts that you're not really arguing that, but rather if some abilities are gained primarily socially or biologically and what would happen if raised primarily away from your culture.

While I could in many instances support simply switching some abilities around and be done with it, I'd like to toss in a few thoughts on why not to, as well. It's not to send the discussion spiraling or anything, but because I feel some of these points warrants a mention.

First, the issue that was brought up about prejudice and species/cultures is actually a good one. If the Bothan is met with the thought of him being a typical Bothan, then odds are he is actually likely to develop the skills he's "despised for" (whether or not he actually possesses them in the first place).

Second, and this is really only a continuation of the first, there's the issue of cultural identity. Cultural identity is primarily shaped when cultures meet. If the Bothan (who it seems was old enough to take a stand when he left home or was orphaned) spends his time growing up in a foreign society - with a foreign species, even - then it is also likely that this will trigger him being "more Bothan" and have him embrace some of that culture even if he doesn't normally associate himself with it.

Third, there's also the possibility that these "cultural" abilities actually are somewhat biologically rooted. Mind you, for instance, that Streetwise can be explained differently than simply "knowing what character to talk or not talk to" or "what street or alley to avoid". Streetwise is very much also an understanding of behavior . Having a keen sense for that might be something with deeper roots than simply culture (and the Convincing Demeanor would be an extension of that, albeit slightly more culturally rooted, I can admit).

Fourth, I actually don't agree that there aren't any so-called violent Bothans. Sure, they're political schemers, backstabbers, spies and assassins, but they still have standing armies and the need for brute protection, even among themselves. They also have this state of crisis approach to certain galactic events (it has a name that eludes me), which basically is a martial law that call all Bothans to arms to defend the species and its interests with any means necessary.

Then there's the obligation approach to it, as mentioned, which I believe holds the most merit in any case (perhaps especially so if you wanted this player to have a more story-approach to his character than he usually have).

But to sum it up: No, I don't think it will be a huge problem to simply switch some species' abilities around. It's easy to do, after all, and wouldn't hurt as long as the new abilities are on par with the old. However, I also don't think it's as easy as to say "these abilities are biological, while these are cultural". Some may be primarily one or the other, but in some (most?) instances (that aren't obvious, like claws) there might actually be a mix of the two: The streetwise example above, for instance, might be rooted in an innate sense of understanding, say, pack behavior (which would to a sapient species translate to being a little street wise).

However, if you and your player are both happy with your solution, then that's of course what's most important. I'm just tossing this in to muddle the view on abilities a little. Sure, a system for calculating point costs for species abilities would be nice, but if the idea is to shop some away while others not, then Wookiees and Trandoshans with their easily identifiable primarily physical features are in a bit of a tough spot if they want customization. To me, customization from "the norm" likely starts with obligations and ends with you career, talent and skill choices.

^ Well said, and you bring up some interesting points. I shall ponder some of these and make a more thought out reply/retort.

I think it's important to remember - the paragraph describing a race's general outlook you see in RP books isn't the end-all and be-all of every individual of the species. Just like not *every* Rodian is a bounty hunter, neither is *every* Bothan a spy.

Those 'species' descriptions are merely extremely broad generalizations. Simply contrast the general Rodian description with the character in the Clone Wars cartoon - he was the senator from Rodia, I think, and a friend of Amidala. He was intelligent, well spoken - and quite different from the 'every Rodian is a bounty hunting thug' generalization. When you have a species of billions, they aren't all the same.

You can easily imagine a trandoshian poet, an ewok musician, a wookie slave-trader, or a cerean burglar. Just like there are different kinds of humans, there are different kinds of everything else.