In not sure what I or anyone can tell you then. I thought my last post was extremely detailed on why it would be imbalanced. When you change the number of skills some has to spend experience points in to increase their skill you imbalance the overall flow of experience for any player that does not want to use that skill. In fact in most cases when you create a super skill you force all your players into having to get it even if they really didn't want to.

I didn't say it wasn't detailed. Your first post, however, was not especially clear, which is what prompted a response from me that subsequently had you suggest that I might be trolling. I addressed that portion of the post and not the rest, figuring that it might escalate the situation if I potentially disagreed with your findings, given the tone of post.

I wasn't sure if you were here to help, or here to express your frustration with me. I'm still not entirely sure, but I appreciate the effort none-the-less.

I wasn't sure if you were here to help, or here to express your frustration with me. I'm still not entirely sure, but I appreciate the effort none-the-less.

My only frustration comes from you seemingly asking for help and advice and generally blowing off everyone who disagreed with your rule and claiming they were not giving you enough information to satisfy your believe of why you shouldn't combine just one skill. Which really came across to me as this is what I want do so don't bother trying to convince me otherwise. It seems that nothing numerous people have said or explained did or was going to change your mind. So why bother asking for input, if you really didn't want it to begin with.

I noticed you made no comment of my very clear and mathematical explanation of why your rule creates an imbalance.

Because, as I mentioned, I still wasn't sure of your intention / tone. Now it's fairly clear that you've made up your mind about me - despite my politeness toward you - and are apparently feeling aggressive on the matter. If I'm misunderstanding, I apologize, but as I read it now, you seem to be trying to pick a fight. As a result, I'm just going to drop it.

Because, as I mentioned, I still wasn't sure of your intention / tone. Now it's fairly clear that you've made up your mind about me - despite my politeness toward you - and are apparently feeling aggressive on the matter. If I'm misunderstanding, I apologize, but as I read it now, you seem to be trying to pick a fight. As a result, I'm just going to drop it.

Not at all. I wouldn't spend my limited time coming up with detailed explanations and examples to help your understanding of mine and others point about your question based on your previous post about not getting clear information to pick a fight. I have much better things to do with my time.

I'm sure you have enough info to make your decision, that will be best for your group. Good luck.

Because, as I mentioned, I still wasn't sure of your intention / tone. Now it's fairly clear that you've made up your mind about me - despite my politeness toward you - and are apparently feeling aggressive on the matter. If I'm misunderstanding, I apologize, but as I read it now, you seem to be trying to pick a fight. As a result, I'm just going to drop it.

Not at all. I wouldn't spend my limited time coming up with detailed explanations and examples to help your understanding of mine and others point about your question based on your previous post about not getting clear information to pick a fight. I have much better things to do with my time.

I'm sure you have enough info to make your decision, that will be best for your group. Good luck.

Fair enough, thank you. FWIW, your expanded post with a mathematical explanation is what I was looking for.

To do you some credit for taking the time to type it out: I can certainly see what you're getting at. I'm actually mostly inclined to agree. My only concerns are, basically, that there doesn't really seem to be an even ratio of skills built in. Currently, there are 33 official skills, and even if you were to divide them by some method (say brawn+agility "physical", int+cunning "mental", and willpower+presence "social"), there isn't really an even distribution. At least there doesn't seem to be. Intellect has the most, followed by agility, then brawn, and everything else is tied, I believe. What's more, certain examples like brawl are not functionally similar to Ranged (Light). Brawl seems more like a tertiary combat skill of roughly equivalent value to both ranged and melee characters - essentially, it's a backup plan, while ranged light generally isn't.

At the end of the day though, while I disagree somewhat on the severity of the impact, I ultimately agree. The change is in effort of solving a small problem, but results in a loss at worst, or no net gain at best, and thus is probably not really worth doing.

Intellect has the most skills - some of which have the least potential applicability/chance of coming up in a given game (namely, Knowledges).

That's true, but it still suggests to me that there isn't necessarily an inherent ratio to the amount and organization of the skills, as exists in other games.

It makes no sense to me that my assassin player may get into a situation where he doesn't have his blaster rifle, and if a firefight breaks out, he wouldn't be able to pick up a blaster pistol and be just as deadly.

It's just absurd. Han Solo used a Blaster Rifle effectively, and I sincerely doubt he had any ranks in Ranged (Heavy). So why can't my players?

The only thing I can agree with is that RAW EOTE would be unbalanced to combine them, and so some tweaking of the rules would be required. Nothing as game breaking as any of you are alluding to, though.

If you read my post about combing skills you would see if you do make the change you should combine all of the other skills I listed. By your own comment logic.

It makes no sense that an assassin can use a vibrosword (melee) and then not have it and not be able to use his hands (brawl).

It makes no sense that a player can climb walls (Athletics) but can't walk over a beam between 2 buildings (coordination).

It makes no sense that a diplomatic can negotiate peace for an entire planet or system (Negotiation) but can't talk a girl into a date (Charm).

It makes no sense that my smuggler can lie to someone (Deceit) but can't get him to do something he doesn't want to do (Coercion).

It makes no sense that my pilot can't fly a sophisticated star ship (Pilot Space) but can't drive a car (Pilot Planetary).

It doesn't have to make sense, it's for game balance and if you change that balance you have to change it for all players not just what you want. Since you already said the ranged light/heavy doesn't define a character - talents do, all you are doing is freeing up extra experience they can use on talents to be that much better for all the other player that don't want to play a range blaster character. That's what really doesn't makes sense.

Great you want to combine those skills. No problem. However, don't **** over and force the rest of your party to play the style of game you want to play. Combine all the similar skills into a single skill and keep the experience balance even, that is all I have been saying from the beginning.

I feel like it would cheapen the emphasis that ranged combat characters place on their abilities. I run two separate groups, with three characters out of nine trained in Ranged (Heavy). When it comes to mid or long-ranged combat, these guys are incapacitating a minion a turn, or thereabouts, and really feel like kings of the world. On the other hand, in polite, refined society (anywhere they can't bring their "Vera"), they feel really exposed, which creates cool role-playing opportunities.

Last week I ran a session where the group was participating in a sabacc tournament on Cloud City and attempting to assassinate one of the competitors. The ex-Stormtrooper PC (Bounty Hunter: Survivalist) was a stiff board in his old uniform, while the Twi'lek assassin (Colonist: Doctor) got to turn on the charm. It all paid off at the end of the session, when he got to take a sniper shot from the main spire of the city. Except it didn't, because he missed. Twice.

The rest of the party members only have a Blaster Pistol of some kind (in one case, only a Slugthrower Pistol) for ranged weapons, but haven't complained at all. They have learned to recognize a losing fight when they see one, and try to alter the circumstances.