I see now where Maelora said it, but I don't see where splad said it. So that's one person. But it doesn't matter. You decided that everyone suggesting optimizing attributes was a roll-player. Seems unfair...

So yes, I don't like roll-playing. I'm tired of seeing it as the majority where I am and it bothers me. So I will and have made characters with high attributes, but i've made characters that have sub par decisikns because story wise it felt right on both cases.

Which is completely valid IMHO, and probably everybody else's HO as well. I get where you're coming from about roll-playing, and past experiences with players who have Jedi getting "phat loot". I wouldn't want to play with that kind of group myself. But that's a world apart from what's being suggested here. Most people like character story arcs that have a "you're special, now run with it" tone, rather than a "you're average, can you make it?" tone. It doesn't mean they're all automatically the type of people you detest.

For myself, it's probably safe to say I will *never* get to be a player in a SW campaign because nobody I know wants to GM one…yeah, cry me a river …but if I ever get a chance, I'll want the former, not the latter.

If the GM wants the group to succeed, and the story has tasks that must be succeeded at, then he's going to have to dumb it down and make a lot of tasks "easy".

That sounds awful. There is much opportunity in failure and if the story truly comes down to requiring that the PCs overcome skill checks or else, then you no longer have a narrative—you've got a casino craps table.

If the GM wants the group to progress and have fun, and the story has tasks that can be passed or failed, then he or she will have both circumstances planned out so that if they succeed everyone feels great but if they fail something awesome still happens in the end. The GM has to do this because even pools that are fat with positive dice can sometimes come up lacking—optimized or not.

You fail your Deception check to convince the guy on the comm that the "reactor leak" should be locked down. Your original escape route is cut off but there might be another way out of this detention block.

If the GM has a part of the story that is written as "failure is not an option", if not succeeding causes the story to come to a screeching halt, then it shouldn't even be rolled in the first place.

***

With that said, to the OP, spend your initial XP wherever and however you want. The book's guideline of spending most of your points on characteristics is a good bit of advice. You'll likely want at least a 3 in whatever your most important characteristic is for your starting career. You'll probably want decent Agility since it's useful for ranged combat and piloting.

I'll admit that I haven't played much so far (our group has only had one solid session of play) but I specced my human mechanic with 3s in Agility, Intellect, and Willpower and threw the rest of my points into various skills to improve my well-roundedness and a couple talents because I want the Bad Motivator action so badly. I'm "only" throwing YGG for ranged combat compared to the optimized gadgeteer's YYGG. In our first combat, I failed to hit a monster we were engaged with but I rolled enough advantage to give a Boost die to the bounty hunter which allowed him to land a huge crit on his turn. Ultimately, I feel confident that I can contribute positively to the group even if my character generation choices are not "optimal."

As i've said, i've seen that most people care more about stats and bonuses and less about the emotional aspect of a character.

Not just in this thread, countless others and across dozens of forums. How to create a perfect Character.

It is something that really bothers me. Pulling out my gorgnard in public, but roleplaying games have changed. More about perfect numbers, loot and such. Not true in every case but most it seems. There was a time that some games you rolled attributes in order and took what you got. Sometimes you didn't get what you wanted but you had to make do, and play your character. I found these are the most enjoyable characters. I love traveller's character generation. You rolk to see what major events happen. Skmetimes good, sometimes bad. All random. You get characters that have depth. Not that you can't write that, but with that control taken from you it is a cathartic experience.

I'm unlucky when it comes to playing a character. Dice gods, if they be, hate me. I have made optimized d20 characters and rolled 14 different dice getting no higher than 4. I get the not being able to hit. I started doing other things. I found that I contributed more when I had a character that wasn't maximised and enjoyed myself more

My experiences shape who I am as a player. Min/maxing, optimization and building the perfect character has improved the game to me. It's done the opposite.

I do say the only correct way to make a character is to go with what works for the concept. Experience spent on attributes if need be, or talents or a mix. But if your at my table and your sole purpose is to make the perfect optimized character then that doesn't jive with me. I see attributes and such as the crude matter that Yoda spoke to Luke about. Luminous beings are we. A character without a soul is just a set of numbers.

I've said my piece here. I'm not going to become the next forum troll that spouts the same thing over and over. Let's drop it. I prefer building a characters persknality before stats (or a random system where I don't know what I'll get and just go with it, rather than letting the numbers come first. I will concedw that the true correct path is whatever works for you and yours.

As I said I'm done in this thread..pissed some people off and derailed it enough. Good gaming all!

People who start with mechanics can have deep backstories and develop their character narratively regardless of their optimization level.

People who start with story can totally half-assedly twink their story to make themselves a Mary Sue snowflake or be super disruptive at the table because "it's what my character would do." So can people who start with mechanics for that matter.

Bad players are just bad players, no matter which part they start with. Ditto for good players.

As I said I'm done in this thread..pissed some people off and derailed it enough. Good gaming all!

All you've done is rationalize your insult. We've acknowledged your points. Can't you just wookiee-up and admit you slagged everyone in the thread for no good reason?

Bad players are just bad players, no matter which part they start with. Ditto for good players.

Agreed. For this reason, it is often for the best to just take a person at face value and simply answer a question when posed instead of trying to instill a value judgement and tell them they're BadWrongNoFun. If they have no ill-intent, you're merely being pedantic for one's own sake.

If they're a min-max munchkin, just trust that their GM and group wise up and either instill a more integrative method of game play or, failing that, they get kicked out quickly. Things always work out for the best in the end.

If they're a min-max munchkin, just trust that their GM and group wise up and either instill a more integrative method of game play or, failing that, they get kicked out quickly. Things always work out for the best in the end.

Like...even this. *shrug* Some groups play games at a certain level of optimization (and, as said, that never precludes a good story; the very-optimized Shadowrun group I play with is also made up of really fantastic guys who have great character backstories and who talk in-voice the whole night). And I (and I'm sure some others) find a group of clearly-skilled pros more fun to play than up-and-coming newbies. As always, YMMV.

Samophlange, the points you make are good ones, but calling people 'roll-players' for doing what the Core rulebook says is where people will get upset. I do want to say the observation that you made, detailing that you get an beginning XP pool rather than attribute points, therefore, you shouldn't just go all out characteristics is sound, HOWEVER, race choices with less starting character points (humans/droids) get MORE starting XP. This basically says, these races are versatile and allows you to specialize them in a certain area, while still maintaining the balance of a race. On a further note, if you're choosing a different race, that has a large beginning dice pool in a specific stat, such as a 4 Brawn or 4 Agility, or something in the 3's than upgrading skills that reflect that dice pool DOES make great sense! But I do want to put forth reasoning behind raising the dice pool at character creation.

Realistically, we take a look at base stats as the average characteristics for a given race. Let's say, a 160lb, 100-120 IQ person - Characteristics let you make a character that's suited for something... Just because a human has an Int rating of 3, I don't find odd. Everyone is good at something and characteristics are a basis for that. Warren Buffet may have an Int of 4 or 5, but his physical attributes will be standard at 2 across the board, where-as Adrian Peterson may have a Brawn of 3 and Agility of 4 with 2's across the board. Everyone is naturally more adept than others at at least something, whether its that naturally faster than others, naturally smarter than others, a natural speaker, attractive... Something... And if they aren't, well I'd say that their the outlier. These are how you're supposed to see Characteristics, and that's how the book describes them... That's why the majority of people are recommending that you put at least some of your experience in raising attributes, because it defines what your character is naturally gifted at. Its not 'roll-playing' or doing something purely mechanical, its saying, "I have a character that's more agile than the average human," or "my Wookiee has a higher intellect than most other Wookiees." Its aptitude, not min-maxing!

The book also goes on the speak about characteristic levels and how a particular character would act with them; a 5 dice pool would mean a character that is naturally good at something, let's say a Wookiee with 5 in Brawn, then he puts his Career training point in Melee and specialization point in Melee - he's a Wookie that's been in battle his whole life, and trained in Axe Combat. The book mentions a 4 Ability, 4 Skill as an 'Expert' in his field, one who has honed training their entire life. A PC with a 5 Ability score and a 5 Skill level in something is considered a Master, their skill is likely known around the galaxy, individuals may seek them out for training, they are specialized in their craft and to behold their skill is awesome. You can't even get to that level without playing the game for a while, but I don't see how this is necessarily 'roll-playing'.

In fact, I'd like to point out that this game doesn't warrant much 'roll-playing' because the dice system doesn't call for it. It's a success/failure system and if your party is overly succeeding, the GM perhaps should challenge them a bit more. I've failed average piloting checks with my agility 3, skill level 3 Pilot - especially if the GM throws in, 'the Tie Interceptor squadron has routed your vessel toward intermittent space debris, add a setback die to each piloting check during combat'. Just because you have a 5 Brawn/Melee 5 Wookiee Marauder doesn't mean that every single scenario needs to be about combat. AND that character will be a spectator during any Space Combat, unless he deviates from that path and takes some skills from Bodyguard or Pilot, in which case his 5/5 won't exist. Yes, he'll be brutal in combat, but make them go to interesting worlds, where they fight on heavy gravity planets, with poring rain. He's an axe master, he's legend is renowned and no ordinary combatants will even dare try to fight that beast, so you may even send in a CHALLENGING nemesis. Think Obi-Wan v. Jango on Kamino, if that was a normal fight Obi-Wan should've schooled Jango, but the fact of the matter was it was raining and the Jedi was surprised. Look how easily Jango was dropped by Mace Windu without any type of setbacks...

With that being said, you don't HAVE to make a character like this - character's that have skill training, but have a lower ceiling shouldn't be steered away from, but I do think that the GM should remind those players of the repercussions of not using at least some XP to raise characteristics (it says specifically in the book to let your players know this if they choose otherwise). If you choose to be a more 'trained' PC, that's your prerogative, but basically, from an RP standpoint, you're saying, "my character isn't really naturally adept at anything, BUT rather he's trained very hard to make up for that lack of natural aptitude. He'll never be as good at something as his counterparts (because after a couple of rounds of experience, the lack of dice pools limiting the amount of training he can receive and having to purchase non-career skills since you get 6 a chargen), but he'll sure as hell try."

IF you choose to go all out skills and no additional characteristics, you're basically saying, "My guy is average, he's tried to learn of couple of things, but fact of the matter is he's just not really good at anything he does. Every once in a while, he gets lucky and achieves beyond his means, but he really is a buffoon and should basically be the little rat-creature on Jabba. Hopefully, he doesn't become dead weight and my party doesn't get fed up with him not being good at anything." But I guess you can incorporate this in to a Star Wars story somehow, but playing with your group or your GM getting frustrated on how to incorporate you PC's lack of aptitude at anything is something you'd probably like to discuss with them prior to starting an adventure.

WOW. Some exciting discussion! Sorry about some "heated" debate. I appreciate various points of view. And we certainly covered that. While this discussion was going on, I broke out the EotE and Rebellion pre gen chars and looked how they were created. I didn't run exact numbers, mind you, but in general it looks like most spent most of the XPs on stats, some on talents, and maybe a little on bumping/buying skills. So not outside the general consensus of this thread's responders.

Thanks a ton. Keep the opinions coming!!

Our group made our PCs in September (unfortunately, it'll probably be December before events fall right to allow us to actually play them ).

Of the four, we all maxed out our Obligation for the +10 XP. Three of us spent everything on starting characteristics, while the fourth spent all but 15 XP (which went to a talent and 2 skills).

As we haven't played yet, we won't know how this will actually work out!

On a related note, I noticed somewhere "upthread" that it was mentioned that only humans (with +10XP) can get characteristics of: 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2.

Actually they're one of five species in the EotE Core Rulebook that can. However, they are the only one that can arrange them any way they want.

Bothans can do it, but they have to have a Cunning of 3.

Gands can do it (and don't even need the extra Obligation if they go ammonia breather), but must have a 3 Willpower.

Rodians = 3 Agility.

Twi'leks = 3 Presence.

Droids aren't in the running, as they have quite a few species traits that take up their XP.

Neither the Trandoshans nor the Wookiees can pull it off, either (again due to exceptional species traits).

My Duros Smuggler/Pilot (yes, my GM let me use the AoR Beta stats) has Brawn 2, Agility 3, Intellect 3, Cunning 3, Willpower 2, Presence 3. He's the pilot, and the "face" of the group.

Cheers!

EDIT: Urk! Sorry, the fourth player spent all but 20 XP on characteristics (the 15 XP was just skills, as she also took the Indistinguishable Talent, which was key to her concept of a human thief that could blend into any crowd).

My two cents is to start by looking at the first two steps in chargen: motivation and obligation. I don't see a lot of posts mentioning that. Give a thought to the who/what/where/when/why/how of your PCs world. This system is a balanced system, and if you stick to RAW/RAI, then you can't overpower your PC, and that is half of the fun.

The first time I tried to build a PC in EotE, my mind was blown by the experience. You HAVE to make hard choices in your XP spending, and you really have to think about your character concept a LOT. That's when I really understood why the first two steps in the book are totally concept based.

The short answer is that characteristics are the best mechanical place to spend XP, for the simple reason that those things will not change for a very long time, and as a fresh PC new to the world, you have to rely so much on your natural abilities to get by.

Training and practical experience are forthcoming. And as you raise those ranks, you will see how the broad stroke boon of your natural abilities is slowly replaced by the focused investment into your characters' specific areas of expertise. What I'm saying is to keep in mind that when you build pools you take the highest number of ranks between the two categories for your green dice, and the smaller number for your yellows. As your PC progresses and continues skill advancement, the balance shifts, and becomes far more specific. It's brilliant, really.

Always remember that it comes down to your concept; motivation, obligation, origin story. And have fun!

My two cents is to start by looking at the first two steps in chargen: motivation and obligation. I don't see a lot of posts mentioning that. Give a thought to the who/what/where/when/why/how of your PCs world. This system is a balanced system, and if you stick to RAW/RAI, then you can't overpower your PC, and that is half of the fun.

The first time I tried to build a PC in EotE, my mind was blown by the experience. You HAVE to make hard choices in your XP spending, and you really have to think about your character concept a LOT. That's when I really understood why the first two steps in the book are totally concept based.

The short answer is that characteristics are the best mechanical place to spend XP, for the simple reason that those things will not change for a very long time, and as a fresh PC new to the world, you have to rely so much on your natural abilities to get by.

Training and practical experience are forthcoming. And as you raise those ranks, you will see how the broad stroke boon of your natural abilities is slowly replaced by the focused investment into your characters' specific areas of expertise. What I'm saying is to keep in mind that when you build pools you take the highest number of ranks between the two categories for your green dice, and the smaller number for your yellows. As your PC progresses and continues skill advancement, the balance shifts, and becomes far more specific. It's brilliant, really.

Always remember that it comes down to your concept; motivation, obligation, origin story. And have fun!

^ This is why characteristics are typically where you'll want to spend your XP at chargen. If you choose to put more XP in Skill or Talents, you vastly limit the growth of your Dice Pool and will quickly fall behind your counterparts in the RP group. You don't need to spend ALL your XP in Characteristics, but if your planning a character that fits in a role in your group, you should decide, at least, to put some XP in the characteristic where most of your skills are tied, ex. Pilot - Agility, Face - Presence and/or Cunning (Depending on the 'type' of face), Tank - Brawn, etc., etc. If you choose otherwise, you won't end up being anything but Average to slightly above Average at your best. This could be okay, you don't necessarily have to be a 'Master' at something, but there's nothing wrong with being a good pilot, instead of an average one, or a good thief instead of an average one. The fact of the matter is the game gives you enough XP and balances itself with Characteristic purchases at the beginning that it's extremely difficult to 'break' the game, or not find a 'role' for your character within the group; and if you choose not to put XP in to characteristics at chargen, you simply need to understand you are SEVERELY limiting your characters growth. This is still a skill-check game, while not using the d20 system, many things require skill checking, things that wouldn't necessarily require skill checking in other systems. Simple dialogue (there's 4 types of dialogue based skills), manipulating systems (4 types of system manipulations, from mechanics to computers), thought processes (4 types of Knowledge)... Everything in this game requires some semblance of rolls and it's up to the players to interpret the rolls. Without any natural ability, you really are making the game hard on yourself, but as I've constantly said that's the player's prerogative, but it makes it more difficult for a GM and the other players in the party to keep the game fun, challenging and narrative when a PC decides to limit their growth. If its the case where you've got a PC that does want to take this route, as a GM, they need to be reminded that if the campaign get's extended, there will come a time when their specific PC won't be able to keep up with the others from a skill basis due smaller dice pools.

Like I've said before, for example if your a Duros or Bothan and you want to be a Pilot, 3 to start the game as a base stat is fine and putting points in to skills or talents isn't necessarily gimping, but if you're a human and want to be a Pilot, then you probably should put a point into Agility at chargen. Two dice pools are simply too small for sustained specialization in a specific group role.

But is that really the case? Let's find out by throwing some simulated dice versus three difficulty dice and a challenge die:

YGGGG vs RPPP = 61.2% >=1 success, 25.1% >=3 success, 27.2% >=2 advantage, 8.3% >=1 triumph

YYGGG vs RPPP = 65.0% >=1 success, 28.4% >=3 success, 28.1% >=2 advantage, 16.0% >=1 triumph

YYYGG vs RPPP = 68.7% >=1 success, 32.0% >=3 success, 28.9% >=2 advantage, 23.0% >=1 triumph

YYYYG vs RPPP = 72.1% >=1 success, 35.8% >=3 success, 29.7% >=2 advantage, 29.4% >=1 triumph

YYYYY vs RPPP = 75.4% >=1 success, 39.7% >=3 success, 30.5% >=2 advantage, 35.3% >=1 triumph

The first row would be a "dump" characteristic. They're not going to be scoring many triumphs but they can be just as successful as their counterparts in the group.

EotE has a remarkably flat power curve so you really don't have to optimize at all to remain viable in dire circumstances late in the game.

Deve

Interesting numbers there. I get the general idea, and recognize your flat power curve comment (particularly in regards to the 1+ success rate). But I don't get what each row represents. Does "dump characteristics" mean bad, or someone who dumped all their xp in attributes?

Deve, you are only comparing rolls made on a characteristic of 5? And using it to proof that limiting the growth of your dice pool will not fall behind?

I may be very, very bad at math (and believe me I am) but I believe your basic premise is somewhat flawed....

The dice rolls assume 5 skill points and then different characteristic scores from 1 to 5.

First thing is first, the flat curve is static and dice pools are dynamic. Second, saying that a player will have 5/6 levels of a skill trained and not a characteristic is flawed logic, it does weaken dice pool substantially. One characteristic at level 5 gives multiple skills a 5 dice starting pool, whereas one skill trained to level 5 sees only one skill with 5 dice starting pool. I just think try to make a flat curve state without those two considerations is flawed logic.

A character with 5 agility automatically gains a 5 dice pool in coordination, gunnery, piloting-planetary, piloting-space, ranged-heavy, ranged-light and stealth. A character with a 5 skill level in piloting-space has a 5 dice pool in one skill, but not in the other 6... This is indeed limiting your dice pool. If you put training in any of the agility based skills, your character is much better as now it has a 5 dice pool in 6 skills, rather than throwing a massive amount of skill points around in single skill at chargen, without having levels in a given characteristic.

The dice rolls assume 5 skill points and then different characteristic scores from 1 to 5.

Yeah... That seems a completely unreasonable basis for a comparison then.

I think "we" are starting to veer from the OP. Math is awesome, but this game is not about the math. For the most part. "Never give me the odds, kid."

A "dump" stat is commonly viewed as the characteristic/ability of any given PC concept that has the least relevance to said PC. A general example would be a diplomat. Their dump stat would be Brawn, as they have little to do with anything remotely physical. Through all stages of play, that will be their least applicable/invested stat, and therefore least relevant characteristic. It gets "dumped," and forgotten about.

I look at it this way: you start with 4 Agility as your primary Characteristic. As you play, you invest in the ranks of skills applicable to Agility over time, gradually investing in the skills your PC makes the best use of, as applies to the character concept. These specific skills change thusly: GGGG, GGGY, GGYY, GYYY, YYYY dice. Then the balance shifts. GYYYY. And now no matter what, you are capped out on skill ranks, and the only way to raise that pool any higher is the determination talent, adding plus one to Agility: GGYYYY. That is awesome. That is an epic pool that will get you whatever you need in spades. Specifically for that one skill which you have spent so much XP on. Note worthy is the fact that whatever you do, ANY skill check involving Agility will always start you with a pool of GGGG. That is a safe place to be.

So you decide not to invest in your characteristics and go with skills. Agility 2. GG. GY. YY. Shift. GYY, GGYY, GGGYY. This dice pool is nothing to sneeze at. It's a strong pool for a specific skill. Both of them are. But these results are for ONE skill, super invested and focused. As you look at the rest of your Agility-based skills however, you will always see GG to start with.

A strong visual example of this is Sasha, the downloadable pre-gen from the beginner game. She has three stats at 3. When you scan down her skill list, it is a wide swath of green dice. A thick band. Compare this to some of the other pre-gens and you'll see they are more skill focused. Their columns are more like a sound wave; essentially a thin line with blips of raw talent. If you fast forward to Sasha after a few months of XP investment, her column of green would start to be augmented by blips of yellow, but would still be a thick band. Conversely, the others will still be thin sound waves with wider blips appearing in interesting places.

Keep in mind, skills don't live in a bubble, and you also have talents to contend with, but that is for now, a separate issue.

I apologize for the long-winded post, but I hope this illustrates my approach, andf that you find something useful within. I stand by my first reply insofar as looking at the PC and who it is as a person (step 1 and 2), and think about where you want them to start. Also, think about their future and where you see them after a hundred points of XP. Then two hundred.

Make something fun, don't be afraid to be limited. Sometimes working within limitations is more fun than being assured of success.

I have to disagree with your dump stat example. Physical Characteristics are very relevant to everyone. A Politico with low Brawn takes more damage from each hit. A Politico with low Agility is going to have trouble hitting with their holdout blaster (example used for iconic value).

A problem, as I see it, is that Brawn and Willpower, and to a lesser extent Agility, are wanted by everyone. Brawn for soak and initial WT. Willpower for ST. Agi just because it's keyed to both shooting and several support skills handy for noncombat types as well as combat types.

Presence is good for a certain Politico build. Certainly Cool is more readily accessible for strain recovery than Vigilance, given that Doctor has Cool in-Career and that'd be a cheap way to branch out. Presence is great if you want to be able to be charming, negotiate, and lead. If you're more interested in lying and swindling, you might not get much out of investing in it.

Now, Intellect. If you see your Politico as a fast-talker who isn't classically educated, there's not much *mechanical* reason to raise it. Int 2 should be able to puzzle out easier Knowledge rolls, and it's not likely you're the slicer or the mechanic. Mechanically it's a good idea to raise it if you're going to branch into Doctor.

Cunning is great for a specific build, that being based around Deception and Streetwise. If your Politico chooses to play it straight and just charm everyone, he won't get much use out of Cunning except trying to spot things with Perception.

And then Willpower. Willpower is good, as was said, for ST. Willpower is good if your build involves Discipline, which social Force-users probably will want to do for the upgrade to Influence that is an opposed Disicipline check. If you want to intimidate people, it's also good, and it's the more common way to generate initiative and recover Strain. So, a couple good skills, an important thing if you want to use Influence to its utmost potential, and combat stuff as well.

This kinda frustrates me. No build doesn't *mechanically* benefit from higher Brawn or Willpower. Starting WT and ST is one thing; the other effects, especially soak, are hard to ignore. It's hard to bypass Agility unless your character has something to do in combat that doesn't involve a traditional combat skill, or they just always Assist someone or use support effects, etc. The other Characteristics are really build-specific. I wouldn't necessarily bat an eye at building a nerdy Mechanic with 1-2 Presence (based on race) or a charming street rat Scoundrel who has no formal education and Intelligence 1, but it's really, really hard to be ok with staying at low inherent Soak with Brawn 1, or risking 1 die on initiative and post-combat Strain recovery. IMO.

I have to disagree with your dump stat example. Physical Characteristics are very relevant to everyone. A Politico with low Brawn takes more damage from each hit. A Politico with low Agility is going to have trouble hitting with their holdout blaster (example used for iconic value).

A Politico with low-ish (unless you're a droid, one of the two stats will be at least a 2) Brawn and Agility is a Politico who doesn't intend on getting into a blaster fight and is probably more likely to distract, sweet talk, lie, or otherwise talk their and their party out of a fight so that it never happens in the first place. If that is the narrative that the player intends, then they can do that. If the rest of the party plays along, then you can have a lot of fun.

That Politico is the guy that boldly strides up to the guards with Kate Moss confidence, engages them in conversation, diverts their attention while the rest of the party sneaks past the open hallway into their target's office, and then maybe even makes the guards think twice before opening fire if push eventually comes to shove before diving into cover.

***

The point of all this, and again getting back to the OP's original question, is that you'll want to spend some points on characteristics. How much will depend on the narrative that you intend to tell with your PC. Are you a trigger happy marauder that can end a fight before your enemy even draws? Are you a sabacc-obsessed card shark that can double your party's credits in an evening? Are you a jaded field medic from the Clone Wars who also knows a thing or two about slicing droids? Pick your story, pick your role, then buy up your stats and skills. Don't fret about the difference between a 1 vs a 2 or a 2 vs a 3 in a characteristic—later in the game it's not going to amount to much. There is a marked difference between a 1 vs a 3 or a 2 vs a 4 and so on, but those differences are what define the greatness and uniqueness of your character and the stories that you and your friends will tell around the table.

One PS. to my dump stat example:

I was only pulling stuff out of thin air. There wasn't a heck of a lot of thought involved. However, my intent stands up. Almost every system is balanced so that in character creation you can only raise abilities to within a certain limitation. In this particular case, you have an XP budget to work from which prevents you from jacking all stats up evenly. You choose a primary stat, then a secondary, etc. Until you get to the ones you can't change, and finally the one that you won't. IMO, A dump stat is merely the characteristic of the lowest priority to that unique PC, not a stat that bears no importance at all.

And on a side note, I like soup. Mmmmm...

Don't fret about the difference between a 1 vs a 2 or a 2 vs a 3 in a characteristic—later in the game it's not going to amount to much.

Not true. Dedication isn't an easy Talent to get: it's expensive just to get there, and expensive on its own as well, on top of the scaling buy-in cost to specializations just to move toward the next instance of it. The difference between a 2 and a 3 is how many dice you're upgrading when you buy your most-relevant skills up AKA the likelihood of hitting a Triumph or more Advantages. Better to have your most-relevant stats higher to start, so you can spread the initial Dedications around to either cap the stat or shore up a different weakness, IMO.

Also...if you're a Politico, I agree your role is going to be trying to talk people out of a fight. However you'll be in a fight at some point. You should be prepared for it. There are plenty of ways to stack gear/cover/Advantages-turned-enemy-Setbacks so you don't need Soak, but it's always a nice/smart investment. And if your politicking turns people against you, guess what the stat is to resist poison or the blaster of that assassin...

Also, if the Politico is always trying to talk his way out of fights, I guarantee your Hired Guns and Bounty Hunters are gonna start to get antsy (and rightfully so). I think a good balance there is necessary so everyone has fun with their character.

Also, if the Politico is always trying to talk his way out of fights, I guarantee your Hired Guns and Bounty Hunters are gonna start to get antsy (and rightfully so). I think a good balance there is necessary so everyone has fun with their character.

I believe I covered that point in my post.

Addition: Also, it's the GM's duty to make sure that each PC gets the spotlight and that no one PC prevents the other players from having fun. The GM makes sure that the Politico gets to distract the guards just long enough until they catch wise, then the Hired Gun puts down the opposition and holds them off for just long enough for the Slicer to crack the safe as the Pilot holds the speeder steady outside the building's in the middle of the storm as everyone helps each other through the open window to their quick getaway.

You don't need 4s or 5s in your characteristics to be able to pump both fists in the air and hi-five your buddies around the table after the end of a successful heist where everyone plays their part.