One of my Pathfinder groups is looking at trying a new system. We enjoy Pathfinder, but we occasionally get frustrated with the amount of dice rolls required during each turn, the emphasis on rules, and the need to specialize to be effective.

The two systems we're most likely to try are Savage Worlds, which three of the players own but have never played, and Edge of the Empire, which none of us own but one of us has played. I'm leaning toward Edge of the Empire, but I have a few questions the reviews I've read didn't answer. Specifically:
1. One of our concerns about Pathfinder is that many characters end up doing the same thing over and over during combat. Does Edge of the Empire encourage more improvisation? Can the players pull off stunts like disarming enemies by hitting their weapon or throwing dirt in their eyes without specializing in those areas?

2. In general, how powerful are specialized characters? Will a dedicated face make the other players feel like they should stay quiet during social encounters?
3. Since I'm likely to be the one of two people advocating the system and the other person who wants to try it has DMed for more than a year, I suspect I'll end up DMing. I have almost no familiarity with the Star Wars setting. Will I still be able to run the game well?

4. Some of our players have limited free time, so it's likely we'll only have one or two people that have read the rules. Are they simple enough the others can learn the essentials during play?
5. How does the system compare to Savage Worlds?

Thanks.

Honestly if you are not sure i would suggest getting the Beginners Box set. It gives a good representation of the rules and system. The adventure is on rails, but that is because it gives you a breakdown of different aspects of the rules. Overall, though, it is a good introduction to the Star Wars game.

One of my Pathfinder groups is looking at trying a new system. We enjoy Pathfinder, but we occasionally get frustrated with the amount of dice rolls required during each turn, the emphasis on rules, and the need to specialize to be effective.

The two systems we're most likely to try are Savage Worlds, which three of the players own but have never played, and Edge of the Empire, which none of us own but one of us has played. I'm leaning toward Edge of the Empire, but I have a few questions the reviews I've read didn't answer. Specifically:

1. One of our concerns about Pathfinder is that many characters end up doing the same thing over and over during combat. Does Edge of the Empire encourage more improvisation? Can the players pull off stunts like disarming enemies by hitting their weapon or throwing dirt in their eyes without specializing in those areas?

2. In general, how powerful are specialized characters? Will a dedicated face make the other players feel like they should stay quiet during social encounters?

3. Since I'm likely to be the one of two people advocating the system and the other person who wants to try it has DMed for more than a year, I suspect I'll end up DMing. I have almost no familiarity with the Star Wars setting. Will I still be able to run the game well?

4. Some of our players have limited free time, so it's likely we'll only have one or two people that have read the rules. Are they simple enough the others can learn the essentials during play?

5. How does the system compare to Savage Worlds?

Thanks.

1) Absolutely. One of the biggest perks of this system is that you can rationalize doing almost anything so long as you roll well enough. Even better, you decide what happens after you see what the roll is, which removes a lot of the "risky maneuver for no reward" effect.

2) Given the way the dice mechanics work, obviously specialized characters are going to do better than non-specialized ones, but a decent amount of dice in a given area still makes trying worthwhile. Social defenses aren't a binary thing, either, so if one PC is really good at being charming, the person who's good at being intimidating still has an area to shine in.

3) I would definitely rewatch the original trilogy again, to get yourself into the feel. Then read the chapter that describes the galaxy. Twice.

4) I've played this game with new players many times, and I've never seen it take more than a few minutes for a new person to pick up the dice mechanics.

5) Pretty different. The dice are all their own thing and the rules adjudication is very free-form.

Welcome to the forum, I'm presumptuous I know

1) Yes, definitely, perhaps not reliably, but advantages (one of the types of symbols on the dice) can have these, and numerous other effects. Arguably disarming can also be done intentionally with some tweaking of the aim rules - if that is desired.

2) Well... perhaps, perhaps not. The system rewards specialising of course, but my experience is that the specialist are most useful under stress, under dire circumstances and so on. I'm also blessed/cursed with players that sometimes don't care about who's the face, they just talk - at which point I make them roll, even if they didn't intend to

3) Certainly, having seen the films helps a lot, but beyond that the corebook has a wealth of information to get you started - even an adventure.

4) Certainly.

5) I don't know.

Most important thing is someone needs to buy 1-2 sets of the specialty dice. You CAN just use standard d6s, d8s, and d12s but IMO it's easier to interpret the results as the dice are rolled than to compare the number to a chart to see what the numerical result using the in-system die results would be.

4. Some of our players have limited free time, so it's likely we'll only have one or two people that have read the rules. Are they simple enough the others can learn the essentials during play?

Your worries may be put to rest by the other responses, but this one was particularly enjoyable for me. One of my groups are high school friends, all 50+. They only have a passing knowledge of the SW setting (tending to think of it as corny), and usually get bored or frustrated with new mechanics and overly tactical RPGs (D&D4e comes to mind). At first they were dubious about the dice, but after 20 minutes they were comfortable with it, and they took to the game like ducks to water. I've never had such a positive reaction.

What's compelling about it is that the player gets to determine the effects of positive dice results, and it allows them to be extremely creative above and beyond the limitations of their character's stats. This single difference affects your first three questions. If a player rolls well enough they can pass benefits to their allies, and if they choose to describe it as "I throw dirt in the Twi-lek's eyes, so my buddy can sneak up behind" then that's what happens. You can do similar things with social encounters, fixing stuff, etc.

If you're still not sure, follow mouthymerc's advice and get the beginner set. It comes with a set of dice, which you'll probably need or want anyway.

The beginners box comes with 1 set (edit, stickers are in beta book, not beginner game)

I would highly recommend you use the dice app though, as it can QUICKLY compute the net result so much faster and keeps the game going smooth. (not to mention its CHEAPER than dice)

My problem with all the rule based games is combat takes FOREVER.

I'll just throw this anecdote out there.

I was at my FLGS today to see if they happened to have a GM Kit in stock since it's impossible to find and I got talking with the manager there about the game. Her comments were that she was enjoying it much more than Pathfinder and the biggest bonus was that it only takes like 10 minutes to understand the mechanics. YMMV.

Thanks all for the quick and thorough answers. I had a reply written up addressing several comment, but the forums appear to have a limit on quotes, so I'll do this the old fashioned (and considerably more concise) way.

Mouthymerc, I realize it's probably best to play the Beginner Box before getting the rest of the game, but I'm enough of an optimizer that I like to build my own characters. If I get to play instead of GM, I might try doing that with the character builders on this site, then buy the book if the rest of the group commits to the game.

Regardless, we'll probably buy the Beginner Box if we decide to play the game. I'm told it has some nice tokens and maps, and the stickers Diggles mentioned might be a way to redeem an unreadable set of dice.

Kshatriya, thanks for letting me know you only need one or two sets of dice, not one set for each player. The cost of buying dice was one of the major concerns when we discussed trying the system. If we can get by with the ones from the Beginner Box until we decide if we want to stick with the game, we're more likely to try it.

Rikoshi and Jegergryte, thanks for the comments on the power of specialists. I'm fine with specialists being better than others, but I want to play a game where almost everyone has a fair chance of success at basic tasks. If the hyper specialists are only needed in dire circumstances, I'll be happy.

Rikoshi and Whafrog, I suspect the "roll dice, then explain what happens" approach will take some time for me to get used to. However, if it allows more creativity, I'll give it a shot.

Aahzmandius, Whafrog et al., I'm glad to hear the system is easy to learn.

Rikoshi, if I'm interpreting you correctly, Savage Worlds is more structured and rule-driven than Edge of the Empire. That can be a pro and a con. I like the reliability that comes with rules-driven systems and enjoy figuring out how to optimize within them, but I've had a lot of fun in the one rules-light game I've played (a superhero game where we ignore the rules for everything except character creation). It puts a lot of responsibility on the DM and requires us to trust him, but we've been able to pull off some crazy stunts that I doubt we'd even try in a more rules-driven system.

I have two more questions.

1. How quickly do characters accumulate experience and grow? Will someone who wants to build a hybrid character (e.g., a mercenary doctor that can shoot almost as well as he can patch people up or a bounty hunter with a politician's charm and knack for deception) be able to realize that concept fairly quickly?

2. Is it easy for GMs to improvise? If the players decide to go in a direction I don't expect, will I be able to throw together a reasonably balanced encounter on the fly?

1) Depends on the gm, But the official line is 10-20 xp per character per session, plus extra for good playing. In the case of your shooty doctor, or sly hunter, its totally doable through several different methods fairly quick.

2) Yes, while you'll be in trouble if they go totally off the rails, if they just go in a different direction you can usually roll with it pretty easily. Generating "balanced" emergency combat encounters will take a little getting used to, but its not too rough. A few independent minions and a rival or two will usually be good enough.

1) that's up to the GM. XP is awarded per session, not by killing/conquering things, so there's no set rule, but the guidelines given can round out a character nicely in a few sessions. There are a few key things to note: first, put most of your character's pre-game XP into their attributes (Brawn, Agility, etc). If you want a specialized character, select an attribute and bump it up to a 4, pick another to give a 3, and the rest will be 2s. If you want a more rounded character, opt for more 3s (you can get up to four if you take on some extra Obligation).

Second, getting at least 1 skill rank is an game-changer because it unleashes that all important Triumph potential. This is just my opinion, but if you want a "hybrid" character, take a non-career Specialization with the first in-game XP you earn. You gain the associated skills as career skills, which are cheaper to upgrade than non-career skills. The cost difference pays for itself very quickly. With the next XP you earn, you can easily bump those skills up a rank, and you're on your way to a very dynamic character.

2) I've found it very easy to improvise. Most of the games I run are "on the fly", but I have a few key characters or scenes waiting for their opportune moment. That said, it can take some finessing to get the balance right. A game like D&D4e was very easy to set up balanced encounters. This game doesn't have the same kind of mechanical plug-and-play, so err on the side of leniency until you get the hang of it...you can always call in reinforcements if it's too easy.

With the dice at the beginning you can get away with just one set. Once you get into it a bit having a second set will be good. For a few of the dice a third set would be nice but not necessary. Also, there is the dice roller app for android and apple phones and tablets that is 4.99 usd. In that case you wouldn't have to worry about all the dice.

4. The system is easy to learn. I have never read the rules but it has not stopped me from learning them as we went. I was A WHOLE LOT better off as a new player not knowing the rules in eote than I was in Pathfinder. If I could be taught, I am pretty sure experienced gamers will have no trouble at all.

This is not intended to be a slight against Savage Worlds, this is just my biased comparison for the benefit of the OP. I find Savage Worlds is still a fine system, just not a system I will see myself ever running as a GM.

I've only ever played Savage Worlds a few times, but I found the mechanics in that system more difficult to understand then EotE, oddly enough. No need to do math to calculate raises, and the character customization for EotE is more diverse. (It might just be my Deadlands experience talking here). Most of your rules are in the dice for EotE and once you master building dice pools and interpreting the dice, the rest will come.

It's also worth mentioning that this system expects a certain level of creativity not only on the part of your GM, but on the players as well. This has been a point of contention for my players so far with this system.

Not to be too far into the minority here, but my personal experience with the systems is as follows. i"ve GM'd and played the Savage Worlds system fro several years (in adition to D&D 3.5/4.0) and am currently running our EOTE game, of about 3 months..

1. Creativity in combat is a combination of a few factors: GM description, player creativity, and system flexibility. The first 2 options are dependant upon the individuals involved, and so outside of the perview of this posting. The last is however. EOTE and SW are two very different systems. EOTE favors cinematic, narrative task resolution, while SW is more of a quick, pulp, "binary" system. They are both great games, but play very differently. SW handles most of the "quirks" in combat via the Trick action, while EOTE favors a continuing cycle of narrative bonuses and penalties on just about every roll. there is nothing restricting an EOTE caracter form attempting creativie actions in combat, and frankly the system probably does a better job than most other systems I've seen, so I would favor EOTE in this regard.

2. Because of how the aid/assist mechanics work, and the variety of situations one finds themselves in, "specialized" characters benefit from the other PC's. As with any system focusing on any one skill/stat will make it more likely for you to succeed, but this isn't really a system concern per se. In SW, focusing your character development is almost a requirement. Not so in EOTE, but a highly skilled Bodyguard will probably be a better shot than his Fringer friend. this doesn't mean the Fringer can't shoot, just that the BG will be better at it.

3. as with any setting, you'll need to become familiar with some of the main points, but all of that is covered in the corebook. You will not be required to read tons of EU content, but some of it is very useful. The setting is a space opera and if you are familiar with the idea you should have few problems.

4. ... hummm the basics of the game are fairly easy to grasp and can be done in game. There is a level of detail in the system that may cause the players to want to become more familiar with the system, but that will be a personal choice. It mostly depends on how involved the PC wishes to be in character advancement/creation. which can take some time.

5. As above, EOTE is a narrative system while SW happens to be a "binary" (meaning pass/fail) system. They are both very fun games, and i believe that SW will have a cheaper buy in (the core rule book is $10 msrp) BUT after all of my gaming experience with Savage Worlds, I actually prefer EOTE, but that is a very personal preference. I'm also a GM who hates doing prep, so take that with a grain of salt.

1.1 Many have already replied to this, but I will give you my answer with some numbers. To fully purchase a talent tree, a PC needs to spend 300 xp. As I prefer to have a definate goal in mind for my games, I figured 2 full specs would be enough for this batch of characters, so 600. Our game meets just about every week (sans October, as we have other things on the plate) which gives me about 40 or so games in a year. some simple math later and viola 15 xp per session. it has gone higher and lower on occasion, but i figure about a year's worth of gaming later we'll be ready for some noew stories. I would vary this number by how long/short of a campagin you wish to run, and what your group want to play.

2.1 there is always a part of me that is kind of ammused by this question, but only because my games are either pre-published or entirely improved. I usually have an endgame set up, but i tend to use the characters back stories/actions dictate things. Adversaries chapter is fairly well stocked, if you really feel the need to drop in an encounter, but, as I constantly remind my players, NPC are "real" people and will respond accordingly.

I also do not believe in the concept of a "balanced encounter". Force allocation, wether from squads of goons or the Imperial Army, is not based around the concept of fairness or survivability. If at all possible, they tend to focus on being explicitly unfair, given the choice. If the PC's decide to strong arm a merchant in order to get a better deal or slam into the front door of a chemlab they were hired to hit, the cops are going to respond. gunning down Stoorm Troopers on a back water like Tatooine is survivable. Doing so on an Inner Coreworld is suicide unless approached very carefully.

Design your combats around "real world" needs. It isn't your (as the GM) responsibility to make sure your characters can live through the fights they get into, it's the PCs job to not take on more than they can chew.

I hope this helps.

The beginners box comes with 1 set + stickers to convert your existing dice into a second set, all you really need.

Minor correction here: the sticker sheet came with the Beta Book. The Beginner's Box just comes with the physical dice.

Rikoshi and Jegergryte, thanks for the comments on the power of specialists. I'm fine with specialists being better than others, but I want to play a game where almost everyone has a fair chance of success at basic tasks. If the hyper specialists are only needed in dire circumstances, I'll be happy.

Rikoshi and Whafrog, I suspect the "roll dice, then explain what happens" approach will take some time for me to get used to. However, if it allows more creativity, I'll give it a shot.

Rikoshi, if I'm interpreting you correctly, Savage Worlds is more structured and rule-driven than Edge of the Empire. That can be a pro and a con. I like the reliability that comes with rules-driven systems and enjoy figuring out how to optimize within them, but I've had a lot of fun in the one rules-light game I've played (a superhero game where we ignore the rules for everything except character creation). It puts a lot of responsibility on the DM and requires us to trust him, but we've been able to pull off some crazy stunts that I doubt we'd even try in a more rules-driven system.

If nothing else, I can at least say that this is a game where nobody should feel obligated to min-max. Even putting just a little bit of XP into an area makes a character "pretty good" at it.

And it's not so much that Edge is rules-light or anything; there are certainly codified rules, but the way to interpret the dice results is deliberately freeform. The book gives suggestions for certain results, but stresses that they're only suggestions, and that the GM and the players should come up with their own interpretations as befits the situation.

For example, a roll that in one situation knocks a stormtrooper off of a catwalk might, in another situation, disarm the bounty hunter with the huge blaster rifle. You just go with what makes sense, assuming you've rolled well enough!

short answer: yes.

It's honestly one of, if not the, best rpg systems I've played in my almost 3 decade long hobby. It's the dice, they literally provide contextual story with every dice roll. I've had complete newbies to all manner of rpgs join in and instantly understand and love the system.

You should like Story, you should like Improvisation and you should like Player Agency (they get to make up stuff too). For my group, its the perfect balance of rules crunch vs narrative and plot, where I'm continually engaged in cinematic hijinks without having to worry about miniature battles that take up the entire session.

And, its just the beginning... lots more to come. New rulebooks, new sourcebooks, new adventures... and if you like Star Wars, new movies and new animated tv series. It's a great time to jump in and enjoy all the tie ins over the next 4 years.

Edge of the Empire and Savage Worlds are my two favorite systems (I'm trying Numenera this weekend so will see how that goes). I experienced SW first and was just bowled over how much better it was than Pathfinder. Then I found Edge and so far it is as close the perfect system as you can get in my opinion. You will be able to pick up the game very quickly. Because of the narrative nature of the game your players will be doing lots of different things in combat especially when describing the effects of Advantages and Triumphs. You don't have to be super familiar with the Star Wars universe because Edge deals with only a part of that universe and provides you with all you need to know. Savage Worlds and Edge have completely different mechanics and both are solid. You would think that Edge using non-standard dice would make it a bit more difficult but I actually found that my players picked it up just as quickly as SW.

Ghostofman and whafrog, thanks for the comments on experience and advice on optimizing. From what I've gathered playing around with the character builder, 10-20 experience a session sounds reasonable. It looks like you'll usually get at least one improvement every two to four sessions, even if you're saving up for something big.

Bronski, I'm glad one set of dice will work at the beginning.

PrettyHaley, I'm glad the game is easy to learn. We have two people that seem new to roelpalying in the group, and I'm wondering if this sort of game will get them to contribute more. Pathfinder is a great game, but sometimes I feel like people who play it look at their character sheet for a list of options instead of thinking from their character's perspective. I know I've done that.

Tenrousei, thanks for the comments on Savage Worlds. I like to build versatile characters, so if Savage Worlds requires specialization, it is probably not ideal game for me. I've had fun with botches, partial successes and epic successes in a friend's homebrew game, so I suspect I'll enjoy the less binary nature of the game's conflict resolution.

I agree that challenges should fit the world, but I don't want to throw an impossible encounter at the party when I mean to give them an easy one, or an easy one when I want them to sweat.

Rikoshi, thanks for the clarifications. I like learning rules, so having some should be no problem as long as they aren't oobtuse or restrictive. If the players and GM can interpret the dice in a variety of ways, as you suggest, I should be fine.

torquemadaza, that's an enthusiastic endorsement. Player agency and improvisation are fine by me. While I occasionally get frustrated as a DM when the players come up with something I didn't expect, we all remember those days more than we remember the ones where everything went as expected.

PatientWolf (cool name, by the way), thanks for the comments. I don't know if I'd consider Edge of Empire a perfect system–I don't think that exists–but it definitely looks promiosing.

If you all can't tell, I've enjoyed reading the replies to this thread. From your comments and the Skill Monkey podcasts, I get the impression the game requires creativity from both the players and the GM, which I admit I find somewhat intimidating. However, it also looks like it leads to cinematic stunts and memorable stories while giving the players the freedom to build versatile characters. As long the rules are approachable, as your comments suggest, I think we'll have fun.

I bought the book and some dice today. Hopefully, I'll get the chance to try the game with my Pathfinder group. If not, I might be able to get some other friends to give it a shot.

I gave my group +70 EXP (which could NOT be used for attributes) at character creation to represent that they had some previous experience. It helps people flush out character a bit more and at least pick a few talents. Still limited max skill rank to 2 though.

Even with that +70 EXP head start the first two sessions were tough and close fights.

It's a great game and has been a welcome change for our group (who have been playing Pathfinder & 3.5 before that, as well as SAGA edition - and had grown weary of both)

I think it's fair to say - the biggest differences you'll see are lack of level grinding and a very flat power level. Comparing a level 1 Pathfinder PC to a level 5 PC is like comparing me to Hercules. By it's nature EotE characters have a much flatter progression. You'll never have 10 times the hit points like you do in d20 systems. I think this is a plus, as you don't get to that 'I'm an invincible deity' feeling you do in other systems. You may miss out on the feeling in Pathfinder where every time you level up you get 'some new power' - but my group has enjoyed letting the story be the reward - making contacts, accomplishing tasks, furthering the story is its own reward. EotE also doesn't bury you in books like PF does.

I think it compares favorably to Savage Worlds - Both systems are pretty 'light', rules wise (although Savage Worlds is classless where EotE is somewhat classed).

You can be a hybrid character without too much problem. Since you can buy specializations across careers it's easy to pick up whatever you want. (it's just a matter of spending the XP)

What's hard for some to wrap their head around is your career doesn't define you mechanically like a class does. In Pathfinder your class determines everything from attack bonus to saves to HP to allowed weapons. While a EotE gun for hire gets career skills in something like ranged (heavy) - there's no reason why any other career can't have it also. And there is no correlation between career and wound threshold (beyond talents) - a fighter in PF gets his D10.

I hope this helps and feel free to ask questions