I think risk and reward should be at the table, not ingrained into the advancement system.

Also, there is a simple reason why career and non-career skills can still cost different besides the risk and reward of which you buy first:

1. It causes you to still gain the skill slower than you would otherwise until you gain the specialization.

2. It causes it to still cost more if you never take a specialization that has it on there.

Thank you though for your polite disagreement.

My group has a couple of "power gamers" and a couple of "role players" so I'll be interested to see what happens if this comes up in my campaign. If it becomes a hot button issue I can refer to this thread and try some of the solutions / arguments.

The NAMES have no meaning, only the capabilities.

I am only saying names do have a meaning, in so far as they help give players who have no idea of what or how to play inspiration. If you have a very clear image of what you want to play, that is great. But for others, especially new to rpg's it can be difficult for people to conceptualize a living, breathing character.

But I disagree who the statement that class names have no mean. In any event, lets agree to disagree, as I am not looking to drag this out.

So all pilots are smugglers?

No, some are Aces.

So all pilots are smugglers?

No, some are Aces.

And some are Explorers (Fringers) who also get piloting talents. And some are people who have put skill points into Piloting (space), whether it's a career skill or not.

So all pilots are smugglers?

No, some are Aces.

So I need to buy another book just to play a non-smuggler who has a heavy focus on piloting?

Can I ask this: What is the benefit of taking all the names literally? Like in all honesty. What do you gain? As long as the capabilities match the fiction of your character, what do you gain?

I agree with Norton here... If I start as a bounty hunter (Gadgeteer) but end up being my groups pilot... taking the specialization Pilot does not make me a smuggler... I will always be a Bounty Hunter, regardless of the specs I move into during my career.

When you take a new spec you do not get the class skills of that class... just the 4 spec skills for that spec... so you just pay your XP, get your new spec... and add it to your class description... so Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer/Pilot).

I agree with Norton here... If I start as a bounty hunter (Gadgeteer) but end up being my groups pilot... taking the specialization Pilot does not make me a smuggler... I will always be a Bounty Hunter, regardless of the specs I move into during my career.

When you take a new spec you do not get the class skills of that class... just the 4 spec skills for that spec... so you just pay your XP, get your new spec... and add it to your class description... so Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer/Pilot).

Actually, you are missing my point. I'm saying that a Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer) doesn't even have to be a Bounty Hunter. He could be a soldier who is a mechanical tinkerer. Just because the career he chose says "Bounty Hunter" on it, doesn't mean that is what he is, or ever has been.

So all pilots are smugglers?

No, not all Pilots are Smugglers, and not all Assassins are Bounty Hunters. But all Pilots are Pilots. If you take Pilot it should be because you want to be a pilot and fly a ship (or drive a speeder). Smugglers just have a more natural affinity for it. They have names because they are more than just the skills and talents. For example, a Paladin in DnD or Pathfinder isn’t just a warrior who is good at killing undead or demons, it’s a way of life; you hold up to a set of ideals and a system of belief. If you start as a smuggler pilot it should be because you want to be a smuggler, who is a pilot, and then if you pick up mechanic it is not because you want to be a technician now and nor should it be because you just want some skills and talents, it should be because you are a smuggler who is a pilot who wants to start being able to work on tech, you want to be able to repair your ship on your own or install new parts without paying out of the butt. If you see it as just a bunch of skills then why keep the careers at all? I’m not trying to claim that people who like to number crunch are wrong, or bad role-players, I’m just asking how you can claim that careers and specs are meaningless titles just tacked on? Your career and specs define who you are as a character. You were a Smuggler Pilot, why? Because you actually smuggle stuff and fly a ship? Or because you want access to some skills? The reason that I keep bring this up is because it’s a role-playing game, you’re supposed to play a role. Now some people roll play, it’s all about numbers and powers and gaming the system, I personally don’t play with people like that, and if all you care about is numbers and power gaming then we can play fantasy football, or Maddan, or Mass Effect multiplayer.

But y'all are missing a huge part of my point. Buying a non-career spec cost more, just like buying a non-career skill. I was asking what people think about that if buying non-careers skills costing more are a negative idea then is this? I know you didn’t claim that it is “cheating players," to have them pay more for skills, that was someone else, but I was posing the question to everyone. Is it fair to charge more for out of career specs when ultimately you don’t pay extra for out of career skills?

I agree with Norton here... If I start as a bounty hunter (Gadgeteer) but end up being my groups pilot... taking the specialization Pilot does not make me a smuggler... I will always be a Bounty Hunter, regardless of the specs I move into during my career.

When you take a new spec you do not get the class skills of that class... just the 4 spec skills for that spec... so you just pay your XP, get your new spec... and add it to your class description... so Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer/Pilot).

Actually, you are missing my point. I'm saying that a Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer) doesn't even have to be a Bounty Hunter. He could be a soldier who is a mechanical tinkerer. Just because the career he chose says "Bounty Hunter" on it, doesn't mean that is what he is, or ever has been.

But it does. Because if all you want to be is a soldier that works with tech then you should look at the careers and play a Hired Gun Mercenary Soldier/Mechanic (or Gadgeteer). If you've never been a bounty hunter then why would you call yourself one? If you're just a soldier, there is a career and spec called soldier.

I agree with Norton here... If I start as a bounty hunter (Gadgeteer) but end up being my groups pilot... taking the specialization Pilot does not make me a smuggler... I will always be a Bounty Hunter, regardless of the specs I move into during my career.

When you take a new spec you do not get the class skills of that class... just the 4 spec skills for that spec... so you just pay your XP, get your new spec... and add it to your class description... so Bounty Hunter (Gadgeteer/Pilot).

No, it doesn't make you a smuggler, but it does make you a pilot, you are now a Bounty Hunter Pilot, that's why you don't gain access to all the Smuggler skills, just the four under pilot. You aren't a sumggler, but you are a pilot now.

Edit: Just relized I missed you were saying the same thing I am, I miss read that; "taking the specialization Pilot does not make me a smuggler," didn't see the Not there, lol, my bad.

When AoR comes out instead of taking Smuggler to get Pilot you could take Ace. Will taking it from one or the other make a role playing difference (assuming that you only want the pilot skill). Seems like some are saying it will and others no, a pilot is a pilot

So, as written in the game right now, according to you, it is impossible to play a character who isn't either a: Bounty Hunter, Colonist, Technician, Smuggler, Hired Gun, or Explorer.

No other character can be made?

Even if the groupings of abilities would fit for another concept, because those names are attached, we aren't allowed to make any characters that aren't one of those?

Once again: If you play this way, WHAT DO YOU GAIN?

So, as written in the game right now, according to you, it is impossible to play a character who isn't either a: Bounty Hunter, Colonist, Technician, Smuggler, Hired Gun, or Explorer.No other character can be made?Even if the groupings of abilities would fit for another concept, because those names are attached, we aren't allowed to make any characters that aren't one of those?Once again: If you play this way, WHAT DO YOU GAIN?

Not arguing against you since there are obviously going to be a few exceptions, but those are some really broad categories of characters. If I look back at WEG's archetypes, most (primarily excepting the Jedi ones) will fit within one of those broad careers. Once you add in AoR's careers into the mix, the exceptions are reduced considerably (with the continuing exception of Jedi). The important part is to realize that Careers are pretty flexible. A bounty hunter and a sector ranger have a great deal in common.

What about a Pirate? What grouping do they fit under.

What about the character I saw someone else mention: A core world princess who escaped her family arranged marriage? That isn't a colonist.

And wait, I thought NAMES WERE IMPORTANT. A Sector Ranger wouldn't be a Bounty Hunter. Those are two different things. That is the point I'm making, TONS of things can be represented using the groups of abilities as presented. A Sector Ranger could be represented with the Bounty Hunter Career, but a Sector Ranger ISN'T a Bounty Hunter.

So, as written in the game right now, according to you, it is impossible to play a character who isn't either a: Bounty Hunter, Colonist, Technician, Smuggler, Hired Gun, or Explorer.

No other character can be made?

No, what I'm saying is that it is impossible to play a character who wasn't one of those at one time. Maybe you haven't hunted a bounty in years, but you still used to be a bounty hunter and it still impacts you in many ways, most notable you career skills and your career specs. And remember that if your player doesn't want o play one of those, you are free to come up with something new, maybe a Core Worlder who is like a colonist but with a few different skills. and the same specs, or even different specs. But with the rules as writen yes, every player must start as one of those, no matter how close you abide by the career now, that is who you were, and it still impacts you. Han will always be a smuggler, even though he hadn't smuggled since a New Hope, and goes on to beceome a leader of the New Republic. Him being a Smuggler, even when it stoped being his job, was always something that impacted him and his actions.

From the book. Page 53 under Step 4 and 5: Choosing a career and specialization, under What's the difference, paragraph two "For purpose of story and roleplaying, however, it is important to more deeply consider the distinction of these two character elements (career and spec). What a player chooses as a career for his character defines the overall and ongoing commitment to a way of life for that character. A career is more than just what a character does for a living-it is his way of life, encompassing his goals, his passions, his training, and his destiny. Areas of focus may change over time, and what he does to make ends meet may alter drastically over time, but a character will never truly stop being whatever it is he chose to be at his core. [next paragraph] In other words, no matter how much he gets caught up in politics, military campaigns, or rescue missions, Han Solo will always be a Smuggler."

It goes on to talk about specs as a area of interest or education, his current topic of intense focus or the job he is doing at this time.

You are free to forget the book, that's fine, but it is clear that career isn't just a name attached to some skills and talents.

And what do you gain by playing that way?

How does it enhance the game?

What about a Pirate? What grouping do they fit under.

What about the character I saw someone else mention: A core world princess who escaped her family arranged marriage? That isn't a colonist.

And wait, I thought NAMES WERE IMPORTANT. A Sector Ranger wouldn't be a Bounty Hunter. Those are two different things. That is the point I'm making, TONS of things can be represented using the groups of abilities as presented. A Sector Ranger could be represented with the Bounty Hunter Career, but a Sector Ranger ISN'T a Bounty Hunter.

This would be a case where you as the GM, or player with you GM, work to create a new career, picking skills that fit andmaking new specs wioth Talents or just putting specs that work under that career. For example, the AoR Ace has trhe Pilot spec, now I don't have the book yet, but I'd guess it is very much like the Smuggler Pilot. You have that freedom. You are right, a Sector Ranger isn't a Bounty Hunter, so you shouldn't just play a Bounty Hunter and call yourself a Sector Ranger, you should make a Sector Ranger career because it would have different base skills and may have different specs, though some may over lap.

What about a Pirate? What grouping do they fit under.What about the character I saw someone else mention: A core world princess who escaped her family arranged marriage? That isn't a colonist.And wait, I thought NAMES WERE IMPORTANT. A Sector Ranger wouldn't be a Bounty Hunter. Those are two different things. That is the point I'm making, TONS of things can be represented using the groups of abilities as presented. A Sector Ranger could be represented with the Bounty Hunter Career, but a Sector Ranger ISN'T a Bounty Hunter.

That said, I'd think that most pirates would fall under the hired gun career. As for the princess you mention, IMO it would depend on what she does, not where she comes from.

That said, I'd think that most pirates would fall under the hired gun career. As for the princess you mention, IMO it would depend on what she does, not where she comes from.

Pirates aren't hired guns, unless they can be hired to fight for people. And pirates generally fight for themselves.

And the character iirc was represented with Colonist: Politico. The reason I mentioned she was from the Core worlds is because she is very clearly NOT a Colonist, but Colonist: Politico is easily the closest thing.

This would be a case where you as the GM, or player with you GM, work to create a new career, picking skills that fit andmaking new specs wioth Talents or just putting specs that work under that career. For example, the AoR Ace has trhe Pilot spec, now I don't have the book yet, but I'd guess it is very much like the Smuggler Pilot. You have that freedom. You are right, a Sector Ranger isn't a Bounty Hunter, so you shouldn't just play a Bounty Hunter and call yourself a Sector Ranger, you should make a Sector Ranger career because it would have different base skills and may have different specs, though some may over lap.

So, instead of using something that already exists that represents what I want perfectly fine, I should reinvent the wheel every time I want something that doesn't strictly match into the little boxes set up by taking the names of careers and specializations literally?

And what do you gain by playing that way?

How does it enhance the game?

You're asking how role-palying helps enhance the game? I'm not trying to be arguminative just asking for clarification.

But to answer, following how it is in the book helps players know how they might react in a given event. For example, a Smuggler pilot and a Hired Gun bodyguard both walk into a bar and there is thug for a hutt shaking down the owner. What do you do? A smuggler may have a very differnt idea than a hirder. Now, the players can do anything, but who the character is should have a say, they may go against what the character's natural idea is, but it should still enter their mind, having something like this aids in role-playing.

This would be a case where you as the GM, or player with you GM, work to create a new career, picking skills that fit andmaking new specs wioth Talents or just putting specs that work under that career. For example, the AoR Ace has trhe Pilot spec, now I don't have the book yet, but I'd guess it is very much like the Smuggler Pilot. You have that freedom. You are right, a Sector Ranger isn't a Bounty Hunter, so you shouldn't just play a Bounty Hunter and call yourself a Sector Ranger, you should make a Sector Ranger career because it would have different base skills and may have different specs, though some may over lap.

So, instead of using something that already exists that represents what I want perfectly fine, I should reinvent the wheel every time I want something that doesn't strictly match into the little boxes set up by taking the names of careers and specializations literally?

If it already exists and represents what you want perfectly fine then just play that. And just saying that you are a Sector Ranger and so you have Ranged (light) and not Range (Heavy) as a career skill but other wise everything is like the bounty hunter isn't re-invinting the wheel but it can set you apart even just something that simple. You should feel free to house rule... thats the point, but as it stands in the book, these are the only options, AoR adds some 6 more at least I think and force and destiny will add even more. If you want to make one do it, its the discription and the name, not the Skills and Talents. Change the name and if you want the skills and talents and specs, but it is your career... that what we are talkign about. In this book, or in AoR or not, we are talking about using your career, you are saying career doens';t matter, I'm saying it does, I AM NOT saying that the only careers that a character can have are the ones in the book.

That said, I'd think that most pirates would fall under the hired gun career. As for the princess you mention, IMO it would depend on what she does, not where she comes from.

Pirates aren't hired guns, unless they can be hired to fight for people. And pirates generally fight for themselves.And the character iirc was represented with Colonist: Politico. The reason I mentioned she was from the Core worlds is because she is very clearly NOT a Colonist, but Colonist: Politico is easily the closest thing.

Pirates most certainly do fight for money. They belong to crews that fight for shares of plundered loot. That's pretty much spot on for Hired Gun, and they are hired by the vessel's captain.

You're asking how role-palying helps enhance the game? I'm not trying to be arguminative just asking for clarification.

But to answer, following how it is in the book helps players know how they might react in a given event.

I don't need a label on a character sheet to know how my character would react. The idea that writing "Sector Ranger" on my sheet instead of "Bounty Hunter" has one iota of effect on my roleplaying is idiotic.