Not really countering the point I was making... I agree that monsters do play a part and are indeed the focal point of the scenes they are in, but in general these scenes play second fiddle to the others where interaction with intelligent races is the main score. Heck, half of the encounters with monsters come from the earlier interactions with inteligentia... The Rancor? Jabba's pet. The Sarlac? Jabba's execution toy. The Nexus? Entertainment on Geonosis. Etc. Etc. They aren't a big focal point of the movies in my opinion and I cannot make a list long enough to fill even half a book if we would stick to the 6 movies we have (even if we included mounts and beasts of burden.)

Sure they play second fiddle to the main story - it's called Star Wars and not Beast Riders of Tatooine, after all - but I'd say that they're still pretty important given that most of the Monster Encounters add nothing to their respective stories, other than go "Look! It's a monster!". Big fishes on Naboo? Could have been easily cut. Wampa? Really just an excuse to cover up Mark's car crash scars. Snake Thing that Eats R2 on Dagobah? Nothing but a bit of slapstick for our droid. All they do, is demonstrate "Hey, this is a pretty diverse universe" and reinforce the Flash Gordon-y nature of the setting.

As for filling the book, sure we'd only get a couple of pages out of the movies. No reason why there couldn't be more FFG generated material around that same theme.

It's not like I disagree with you...

They could do a book like the Essential Guide to Alien Species that has new races and creatures in it. Maybe include some racial specs like the Gand Findsman. Something which is considered a universal spec for that race.

The E-11s description mentions a limited ammo capacity, but the stat block doesn't list this. I sent a message to the powers that be.

The E-11s description mentions a limited ammo capacity, but the stat block doesn't list this. I sent a message to the powers that be.

I'd imagine that the "limited ammo capacity" is more a fluff-text thing than anything that would have game mechanics attached. After all, the book includes rules for custom ammo for two of the slugthrower weapons, but no special rules for only having so many shots before running out.

'Enter the Unknown' is out in the UK next week; Esdevium Games already has it!

So I'm sending this message in for an official answer:

The Loronar E-9 Explorer-class Long-Range Scout Vessel (Edge of the Unknown, pages 61-62) describes itself as having a pair of turrets each mounting a single medium laser cannon. This appears in both the fluff text and in the rules listing its armament. This also matches previous versions of the vessel according to Wookieepedia. However, the game stats then give these weapons the Linked 1 Quality which would suggest that either Linked 1 should be dropped or that these are actually Twin Medium Laser Cannon. Which is correct?

Weighing in late on the Signature Ability issue people have been discussing (largely because I just got the book)...

I like them. I like them a lot. Those of you who think they are bad game design to keep them Career-based really need to tell us what game design chops you have, in order to make a call like that. Why are they not bad design? Well... first, as several members have suggested, it gives some kind of meaning to a character's Career choice, rather than just starting skills and an experience point discount when taking new Specializations. Moreover, they seem stylistically tied to the Explorer Career. After all, who should have Sudden Discovery and Unmatched Mobility abilities more than an Explorer? Who else is really in it for the discovery? Who else would be able to guide you to an ancient temple or ruin better? (And if your character is in it for those reasons, why aren't you playing an Explorer?)

I think the biggest mistake was not creating the Signature Abilities for all the Careers and releasing them on PDF long before the individual Career books were released. If every Career had their own abilities at the same time, people might be less upset about one Career getting theirs.

Unless the turrets are linked to each other? I could maybe see one laser in each turret counting as a linked pair. But that is a stretch of the rules as I understand them.

Why? Could it not just refer to the fact that they can be fired together in the same firing arc?

I think the biggest mistake was not creating the Signature Abilities for all the Careers and releasing them on PDF long before the individual Career books were released. If every Career had their own abilities at the same time, people might be less upset about one Career getting theirs.

I don't expect to see free major game mechanics released any time soon. I would think when the hired gun book comes out and there are some more SAs in that, people will see and understand all careers will be getting lovin and there is less reason to have any tantrums.

Don't have my book yet...is the stats for the LBR-9 Stun Rifle the same as the blaster rifle except for, I presume, stun at long-range?

Why? Could it not just refer to the fact that they can be fired together in the same firing arc?

I'm inclined to go with this in lieu of a typo.

After all, there are multiple starfighters (X-Wing and TIE Interceptor) that have weapons that are not directly mounted in the same place yet can be fired simultaneously in the same firing arc, so it's not entirely impossible.

Then again, given the high prevalence of "twin laser cannons" throughout the book, it could be the editor decided that the Loronar-9 not having them was an oversight and added it in. Then again, the A-24 Sleuth and A-36 Pathfinder both have laser cannon entries that make no mention of "twin" or "double" yet have the Linked quality. So maybe it's deliberate that those weapons have the Linked quality even though they're not listed as being "twin" or "double" weapons.

I don't see it as a huge deal either way, but I seem to be in the general minority when it comes to the matter of "did FFG make a mistake in Stat Block X?" of not really getting worked up about it.

Why? Could it not just refer to the fact that they can be fired together in the same firing arc?

I'm inclined to go with this in lieu of a typo.

After all, there are multiple starfighters (X-Wing and TIE Interceptor) that have weapons that are not directly mounted in the same place yet can be fired simultaneously in the same firing arc, so it's not entirely impossible.

Then again, given the high prevalence of "twin laser cannons" throughout the book, it could be the editor decided that the Loronar-9 not having them was an oversight and added it in. Then again, the A-24 Sleuth and A-36 Pathfinder both have laser cannon entries that make no mention of "twin" or "double" yet have the Linked quality. So maybe it's deliberate that those weapons have the Linked quality even though they're not listed as being "twin" or "double" weapons.

I don't see it as a huge deal either way, but I seem to be in the general minority when it comes to the matter of "did FFG make a mistake in Stat Block X?" of not really getting worked up about it.

It's unlikely in my eyes that the two different turrets are one linked weapon system. For one thing, they don't actually share firing arcs as one is dorsal and the other is ventral. Cases of non-Twin weapons that are Linked - such as the A-24, the A-36, and many starfighters - are non-turret mounts where the weapons face the same direction (and share the same firing arc).

I don't get "worked up about it" so much as I prefer clarity. The E-9 ship looks very attractive as a starting PC ship, so I just want to be clear on what I consider to be a probable error* in the stat block.

* My guess is that it should not have Linked 1.

I'm unclear. Is there some reason that turreted weapons, one dorsal and the other ventral, can not fire in the same arcs? Such as both firing forward or aft, or port or starboard? Linked is an active quality that must activated. No one says you have to activate it. The ship has both a pilot and a co-pilot. The two turrets may be used seperately or they may be used together. When used together they have the linked quality. Is there something I missed that says the weapons must be attached? Any reason a computer and circuitry couldn't link them top to bottom?

The reason they can't be linked is because there ARE certain targets they wouldn't be able to fire simultaneously at. Think of Episode IV when Han and Luke are manning the Millennium Falcon's turrets; when one of the TIE Fighters dives at the top of the ship the bottom turret can't target it, and visa versa.

Also, keep in mind that linking weapons together does NOT cost additional hard points. The only limits are the logical limits determined by the GM and player; there's only so much space on anything, after all.

The reason they can't be linked is because there ARE certain targets they wouldn't be able to fire simultaneously at. Think of Episode IV when Han and Luke are manning the Millennium Falcon's turrets; when one of the TIE Fighters dives at the top of the ship the bottom turret can't target it, and visa versa.

Yes? So? Linked does not mean they always need to be used together. I said that they can be used independantly. The linked quality just means they can be used together in the arcs where they can be used together. Common sense says they couldn't be used in arcs they don't share.

Even if you were to rule that they can be linked -- which there's really no problem with considering that, unlike regular linked weapons, a dorsal/ventral turrets use up their own Hard Points so its more than balanced -- I'd still rule that in certain situations they simply can't link up.

In any case, I'd personally allow it with a special targeting computer, otherwise you could easily end up with two quad cannon linking together for a grand total of Linked 7. Granted it would require an absurd number of Advantage results to actually Link all of those lasers together, but with a modded out targeting computer, Force powers, talents like True Aim and signature abilities like Unmatched Mobility (allowing for up to three aim actions) its entirely possible.

I must be speaking a different language.

The picture of the ship shows a dorsal-mounted turret with two canons, so I doubt it's supposed to be linked with the ventral turret as well. Again, there's no reason why they can't somehow be linked, it just seems a bit out of the norm and thus requiring some sort of special tool.

Didn't refresh my computer, my bad.

The reason they can't be linked is because there ARE certain targets they wouldn't be able to fire simultaneously at. Think of Episode IV when Han and Luke are manning the Millennium Falcon's turrets; when one of the TIE Fighters dives at the top of the ship the bottom turret can't target it, and visa versa.

Yes? So? Linked does not mean they always need to be used together. I said that they can be used independantly. The linked quality just means they can be used together in the arcs where they can be used together. Common sense says they couldn't be used in arcs they don't share.

As for dorsal/ventral, there is a section on it where it talks about firing arcs.

Hence why I said a specialized firing computer might be able to sync them up. Linked 7 is nothing to scoff at; that's definitely a special thing most ships aren't/shouldn't be capable of.

Hence why I said a specialized firing computer might be able to sync them up. Linked 7 is nothing to scoff at; that's definitely a special thing most ships aren't/shouldn't be capable of.

Linked 7 isn't really all that effective. The chances of rolling enough Advantages and/or Triumphs to get full value out of that setup are really low.