I have a few NON-signature ability questions if that's okay with everyone?

How have the stats of the Ghtroc changed from beta?

How do the named/classed weapons compare to the generic catch-all of the core book? Would someone be outclassed if they have the Core rule book weapons, compared to new ones? A breakdown of cost comparison ideally. I know many a player that will unfortunately number crunch and do a cost to damage ratio. It's really frustrating. Not to mention, I don't want to see power creep work its way into the system.

Are there any new attachments for either weapons or ships? Is the weighted head attachment useful yet?

How have the stats of the Ghtroc changed from beta?

Handling changed to -2 and encumbrance capacity to 200.

How do the named/classed weapons compare to the generic catch-all of the core book? Would someone be outclassed if they have the Core rule book weapons, compared to new ones? A breakdown of cost comparison ideally. I know many a player that will unfortunately number crunch and do a cost to damage ratio. It's really frustrating. Not to mention, I don't want to see power creep work its way into the system.

The weapons cost more. The pistol does the same damage as light blaster pistol but is more accurate and has pierce. It costs over 3x the light blaster pistol and has no stun setting. The sniper rifle does the same damage as the heavy blaster rifle and is accuate and has pierce out to extreme range. It costs over 2x as much and is restricted, still is cumbersome, has no auto-fire, and is slow-firing. The stun rifle is a stun damage only rifle with a range of long. Even though it costs almost 3000, I'm sure it will stir up the stun vs wounds debate. And some other weapons along the same veins, modified with some advantages and disadvantages.

Are there any new attachments for either weapons or ships? Is the weighted head attachment useful yet?

No new attachments and no new bludgeoning weapons.

If the droid was going to dump that many points into a second specialization tree, why did they not pick it as his/her career?

There are lots of reasons, not the least of which would be someone who is playing a protocol droid and thought the most suitable career would be politico even if most of their experience after manufacture was being dragged around the galaxy by a wookie a smuggler and a kid and felt they were doing more exploring than diplomacy.

If most of their experience were in another field, it would make more sense to choose that field as a career instead. Just because you are "created" to do something doesn't mean that it has to be what you do in life. And in 3PO's case, it would make more sense if his signature ability were something related to a politico since that is "what he was created to be."

Dagnabit! Still no use for "Weighted Head"? I really question the thinking on even including it at this rate. I am house ruling that it can be used on gaffi sticks, just because it makes sense to me.

As for C-3P0 and his signature ability, I could see a case being made for him being a Scholar or a Politico as his primary specialization. I have difficulty seeing him as a member of the Explorer class, although he might squeak into Fringer. R2-D2 I could believe as an Explorer, although I think he is more likely a Technician.

I am hoping that the next couple of sourcebooks include more about Signature Abilities so we can get a better idea of how they fit into the overall framework of the game.

The Ghtroc is also cost/availability 112,000/8 (maybe 7, but I seem to recall 8).

There are lots of reasons, not the least of which would be someone who is playing a protocol droid and thought the most suitable career would be politico even if most of their experience after manufacture was being dragged around the galaxy by a wookie a smuggler and a kid and felt they were doing more exploring than diplomacy.

First, you do realize that there are more books on the way with more Signature Tier talents on the way right? That this isn't everything in that game mechanic that FFG is going to release. Yes, you cant get the Explorer stuff, but cool politico stuff is on the way. Just chill and wait to see what they come up with.

However, if patience is not your bag, you have two options:

One, ignore the rule and allow anyone from any archetype to be able to use any Signature ability. It's your table and nobody but your friends care about what happens behind closed doors. Personally I wouldn't - throwing out a mechanic we know nothing about seems idiotic to me since we have no idea what FFG has in store later down the road. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

Two: Respec the character. Take all the experience earned thus far and build the character from the ground up again.Turn your politician into an explorer. Boom, sorted, Easy-peasy.

What isn't going to be effective in any way is complaining about the rule to us. FFG is not going to change their game just to suit you. Adapt your way of thinking or playing, because FFG isn't going to change what they do for you (and besides, it's madness to think that the inmates should be running the asylum anyway.)

If anything the case of C3PO is actually a great advocate for the rule as written.

He has been dragged around the galaxy by a wookie, a princess, a smuggler and a kid but never really unbecame what he was in the first place.

I don't see how using him as an example would be used to convince us the path FFG has chosen would be the wrong one...

Since these are only the first of the signature abilities to be seen it is a bit early to be creating scenarios to "prove" a point that they are somehow bad game design. Who's to say that the same player that created the colonist/politico droid that then went on to sink his XP into explorer specs wouldn't want the colonist signature abilities once released. Once the other careers have their signature abiities it will be relevant tool in helping players decide their concept for their character. Just because you don't like it or don't agree with it doesn't make it bad game design. I like that the designers are making career choice more relevant.

I would be curious to see how attitudes change as more splats are released... As I said in the other forum, I was very glad to see FFGs approach to their supplement books. It seems like they are trying to offer something to everyone who is willing to look, as well as encouraging some outside the box thinking.

Funny enough though, their still seems to be this stone wall of power gaming that some folk can't get over. I have heard this referenced in a certain podcast I never listen to, as they discuss playing in this new system. There are those that are still trying to create mega PCs in a system that doesn't look at MEGA as a priority. There is cool, new gear, etc. Even the signature abilities that are up for such debate, are powerful, yet not EPIC. It's like a little top tier carrot that will add a touch of flare to someone's concept. And some people are still searching for the munchkin items and Epic Level Powers.

This just occurred to me: What happens when the three core books are out, and all of the splats are released? What happens when people have created and adventured with their favourite PCs that they have fallen in love with? Do you suppose that after all is said and done, and the "trilogy" is over, that FFG will just pack it in?

They are creating three separate, distinct yet fully compatible worlds (within the same world, even!) that have been forward planned AT LEAST two years from now. They have already admitted to including rules, talents and gear for EotE that seem to have no relevance or use RIGHT NOW. What about when AoR is fully released, what about FaD?

Never mind that, what about Sons of Fortune?! There is no way of knowing when these things will come to light, but we know they are going to at some point. Obviously not all of the mysteries were revealed with the first Supplement, but did you really expect them (sorry in advance) to blow their whole wad (i said sorry) in the first release?

All of this I brought up because I think we all as GMs and players need to do some forward thinking of our own. Adapt and change, think outside the box. This is a new system with a reasonably fresh take on table-topping. I'm not familiar with other similar systems like Numenara, but FFG and Monte Cook (among others) are fundamentally altering the way we table-top.

It's exciting! ... Well...I'm excited...

Don't try and rush around the curtain so fast. Don't focus on the numbers so much. Don't complain about the special effects or you'll miss the whole movie. To quote a personal hero, "Don't focus on your finger! Or you will miss all of that heavenly glory..."

Sorry if that got a little philosophical, but I started to explore an idea, and just went with it.

In my group, I have a player who is used to 4E. While playing that, he is an inspired and creative individual who uses his many powers in surprising and unusual ways.

He is enjoying EotE, but isn't nearly as creative with his choices. I asked him why, and he said that there is too much choice! We can literally do ANYTHING, so he can't think of a single thing to do. When he has a confined and controlled list of powers, he can reference them and be inspired, but he can't exercise that kind of energy as well with this system.

People are so used to the rules/combat heavy systems that some of us seem to be looking for the rules and mechanics to make our decisions for us. We have a hard time with FFGs freedom of narration.

Try not power-building, calculating numbers and planning every XP purchase.

Whenever anyone asks me what an RPG is, I always find this to be the best analogy: "Do you remember when you were a kid and you ran around the yard playing cowboys/indians, cops/robbers...STAR WARS!? Yeah, it's like that, only with some rules and a choose-your-own-adventure type story (I personally preferred Fighting Fantasy).

That's it from me for now. I'm all for healthy debate about the pro's and cons of new stuff, just a little nudge help us all "stay on target:" Have fun.

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

And completely missed the point. It is bad game design, it has nothing to do with power gaming.

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

And completely missed the point. It is bad game design, it has nothing to do with power gaming.

He simply has a different point of view. Why so negative?

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

And completely missed the point. It is bad game design, it has nothing to do with power gaming.

What's with the attitude?

How about you missing the point completely with your C3PO comparisson? Was anyone rude to you? Eventhough that was one of the worst most shortsightd posts I had the displeasure of reading here I tried to engage you in a civil manner. I guess adult conduct just isn't for everyone...

Thak you Polyhreadonman, I enjoyed reading your thoughtful post and didn't mind its length. Ar least it wasn't rude.

I still do not agree that it is bad game design.

As for the game design, my players have gotten a s far as playing the cool little dice game within a game. They really LOVE the dice system. Most of them are still playing the prehensile from the Beginner Game and using little more than those rules. I can't get them to tap in to all the awesomesauce of the full system.

Very ironic for me as I have always been an ultimate Narativist, ruleslite GM. I usually gleefully disregard about 80-90% of the rules and mechanics in any game I run. Now, here I am frustrated that my players aren't looking at the talent trees and coming up with K3wl Pow3rz stunts. I actually want to use the mechanics.

Certainly for my group Signature Abilities are not poor game design, they are irrelevant game design.

But, the best thing is that even the non-Star Wars fans at the table, including one girl who "doesn't like Star Wars", are having an absolute blast playing EotE. I call that extremely successful game design. When you can someone who doesn't even like the genre to enjoy the game you must be doing something right.

As for what FFG will do when all three core books and all their splat books and supplements are released, I think that mostly depends on how sales are doing. I think FFG will continue to publish Star Wars gaming material as long as it is profitable to do so. Unless they do what ICE did with Middle Earth Roleplaying and diverge enough from the source material that the License Holders pull the license.

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

And completely missed the point. It is bad game design, it has nothing to do with power gaming.

Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

And completely missed the point. It is bad game design, it has nothing to do with power gaming.

In the sense that it seems opposed to the design philosophies of the rest of the game, I can understand how it can be seen as "bad" design.

But taken outside of the context of SWR, put on a more objective level, I don't see how it's bad design. Are favored class bonuses in D&D and Pathfinder bad game design? What about racial attributes? Why can't my Vampire in WoD ever become a Hunter? All locked in at character creation. If you remove the significance of a character choice then why bother having that choice to begin with?

That said a mechanic to take on an additional career wouldn't be so bad. A hefty XP cost and/or a hard limit on careers could work. Signature Abilities would need a hard limit too.

That said a mechanic to take on an additional career wouldn't be so bad.

That exists already, or are we speaking of different things here?

That said a mechanic to take on an additional career wouldn't be so bad.

That exists already, or are we speaking of different things here?

You can't take additional careers, just specializations. You are limited to the career you select at creation (not the specialization, you can add an unlimited number of those).

Thanks for the support and comments, but I wasn't trying to re-invigorate an argument. I was just following a thought I had as I kept up with what has turned out to be a very heated discussion at times.

Simply put, whether it is good or bad, Union's opinion is his own. He is entitled to it. And everyone is entitled to argue for/against what they believe to be true. I felt a lot of the arguments made had to do with a desire to power game, and he disagrees. I'm OK with that. I feel we could get together and discuss it over a beer and have a good time, but I'm pretty easy to get along with.

I am not at your tables, and you are not at mine. We will all use/not use mechanics and rules that we feel don't fit our little world. A huge example from my own table is the fact that nobody in my group really likes starship combat. Go figure. So we do other stuff. Life goes on. We have fun.

We will house rule what we feel we need to change. I will withhold opinions on Signature Abilities until a) I see what they look like for other classes, and b) have had the opportunity to try it out at my table. So far, I think it's "neat."

Healthy debate is awesome, and as I previously stated in another post, does not have to fall under the normal conventions of internet forums, which tend towards the rude, and often devolve into the text equivalent of "yo momma" reponses. We can disagree, AND still be nice to each other.

Do what works. Have fun. I look forward to everyone's review of EtUnknown as they (finally) receive them into their sweaty palms.

PS. Has anyone read the section on creating rivals and nemeses in an explorers world? It's in the back. WELL past the section on abilities.

Thanks for the support and comments, but I wasn't trying to re-invigorate an argument. I was just following a thought I had as I kept up with what has turned out to be a very heated discussion at times.

Simply put, whether it is good or bad, Union's opinion is his own. He is entitled to it. And everyone is entitled to argue for/against what they believe to be true. I felt a lot of the arguments made had to do with a desire to power game, and he disagrees. I'm OK with that. I feel we could get together and discuss it over a beer and have a good time, but I'm pretty easy to get along with.

I am not at your tables, and you are not at mine. We will all use/not use mechanics and rules that we feel don't fit our little world. A huge example from my own table is the fact that nobody in my group really likes starship combat. Go figure. So we do other stuff. Life goes on. We have fun.

We will house rule what we feel we need to change. I will withhold opinions on Signature Abilities until a) I see what they look like for other classes, and b) have had the opportunity to try it out at my table. So far, I think it's "neat."

Healthy debate is awesome, and as I previously stated in another post, does not have to fall under the normal conventions of internet forums, which tend towards the rude, and often devolve into the text equivalent of "yo momma" reponses. We can disagree, AND still be nice to each other.

Do what works. Have fun. I look forward to everyone's review of EtUnknown as they (finally) receive them into their sweaty palms.

PS. Has anyone read the section on creating rivals and nemeses in an explorers world? It's in the back. WELL past the section on abilities.

Your mom read that section

And let's be honest. Nobody likes space combat.

Wow. That was longer than I thought... Too much time...

And yet you increased the Bruce Lee in the thread by 100%, so it's all good!

Simply put, whether it is good or bad, Union's opinion is his own. He is entitled to it. And everyone is entitled to argue for/against what they believe to be true. I felt a lot of the arguments made had to do with a desire to power game, and he disagrees.

As someone once said, You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. We don't have enough information on how the Signature stuff works yet. Dismissing it and calling it a bad mechanic when we've got two very tiny portions of the overall picture is foolish.

Continuing to complain when several very viable options in dealing with it have been presented crosses the line from complaining to whining. Either disallow the entire thing at your table, respec your character or disregard the rules and allow ALL characters to have it. Three very easy fixes - so I fail to see why this is a problem at all.

That said a mechanic to take on an additional career wouldn't be so bad.

That exists already, or are we speaking of different things here?

You can't take additional careers, just specializations. You are limited to the career you select at creation (not the specialization, you can add an unlimited number of those).

Yeah, I keep mixing up the names! My bad!

When your opinion amounts to "it's bad game design just because I don't like it" then its an opinion that holds no weight. Just because you don't like the fact that the designers are endeavering to make career choice more relevant does not denote bad game design. Or that someone in said career can beeline to the signature ability, yet someone who has spent 100s of XP on specs in that career can not take said signature abilities. You may not agree with the design, but it isn't automatically bad.

It's perfectly fine to not like the direction the system has taken. Union is well within his rights to think it "should" be something else.

When he takes that opinion and declares it "bad design" though – as if it is an objective fact – he's totally off base. The comments that amount to "you don't get it, it's just wrong" aren't adding anything to the discussion.

DBuntu, is that true? Do I need to start a new thread? Hmmm...

And my mom can read more threads than your mom.