Traditionally, when I start a campaign, I assume that one of the pilot-type characters already has a ship. The way I handle this: they begin with Obligation (Debt), and they get to choose their ship within reason. Since my groups are usually three to four people, I don't mind letting them decide on a wide variety of freighters available.

However, the game that's starting next week will be six people, so I'll be doing it a little differently. First of all, I'm not sure who will have Piloting (Space); I know we'll be having an Ace in the crowd, but since he's with the Alliance, I already have a plan for him. If he's my only pilot, I have a backup plan.

The other aspect to consider is that, given a six person game starts characters off with only 5 Obligation, my inclination is to only let the pilot choose between really cheap, awful ships. So, I've come up with a system: for every additional 5 ranks of Obligation the pilot takes, he or she can move up one tier of ships. The tiers I've developed are:

At 5 Obligation: choose between a YT-1000 (from Enter the Unknown ) or a Firespray System Patrol Craft, both at base level.

At 10 Obligation: choose between a YT-1300 or a GHTROC 720 (EtU), both at base level, or between a YT-1000 or a Firespray System Patrol Craft, either with a one-hardpoint modification.

At 15 Obligation: choose between a YT-2400 or a Wayfarer-class medium transport, both at base level, or between a YT-1300 or a GHTROC 720, either with a one-hardpoint modification, or between a YT-1000 or a Firespray System Patrol Craft, either with a two-hardpoint modification.

My questions are thus:

1.) Is this fair?

2.) Do the modifications for higher Obligations make sense?

3.) Is this in line with the rules?

That last question is mostly due to the phrase "Player Characters cannot gain more additional Obligation than their original starting value," with regards to Table 2-3 in the core rulebook. Obviously I'm willing to flaunt the rules in favor of a better gaming experience, but if doing so will severely break the game, I'll not do it.

Of course, it might be moot anyway if nobody but the Ace is a pilot. In that case, the Hutt lord they'll be working for at first will loan them a ship, and the pool will be much more limited.

What you're doing sounds fine, but I don't necessarily agree with the levels you put each ship at. For the most part, the Wayfarer is inferior to a YT-2400 overall, and the Ghtroc 720 is largely superior to the YT-1300.

Well, I don't really see the need to require Debt, and particularly only Debt, as an Obligation related to the ship. Seems like a big limitation on the character, and requires "paying off the ship" to be a major plot point when the characters may not be interested in that being a part of every story.

I'm also not sure what the goal is of requiring additional Obligation to not have what you call a crappy ship. There's a reason the initial 3 ships are the initial 3: they provide for a range of game theme options and all are able to be upgraded (even if each of the starting 3 has some flaws I don't think the developers really considered enough). Do you feel like the initial choices are too unbalanced?

Some of this just seems like a way to control the background of the pilot(s), I'm just not seeing what is gained from it.

What you're doing sounds fine, but I don't necessarily agree with the levels you put each ship at. For the most part, the Wayfarer is inferior to a YT-2400 overall, and the Ghtroc 720 is largely superior to the YT-1300.

I did it by price, since the governing Obligation would be Debt. The Wayfarer is cheaper than the YT-2400, but it's more expensive than the YT-1300, so I put it in the same category. Same with the 720; similar in price to the 1300. Other than that, I didn't differentiate by any other stats.

But...

Well, I don't really see the need to require Debt, and particularly only Debt, as an Obligation related to the ship. Seems like a big limitation on the character, and requires "paying off the ship" to be a major plot point when the characters may not be interested in that being a part of every story.

I'm also not sure what the goal is of requiring additional Obligation to not have what you call a crappy ship. There's a reason the initial 3 ships are the initial 3: they provide for a range of game theme options and all are able to be upgraded (even if each of the starting 3 has some flaws I don't think the developers really considered enough). Do you feel like the initial choices are too unbalanced?

Some of this just seems like a way to control the background of the pilot(s), I'm just not seeing what is gained from it.

To the first point, I should have used different language in my original post: I don't require pilots to start with Debt to have the ship. But in every game I've run, whoever is the pilot tends to have difficulties coming up with an Obligation for their character, and I tend to suggest Debt since it explains their ship. But you're right, they don't necessarily need to begin with Debt.

As for the ships, I was just hoping to offer a few more options. In games I've played in, some of the other players have expressed dissatisfaction with the starting lineup, mostly as too typical. I don't have anything against them myself, and I did my best to include them all in the list, along with some alternatives.

And I certainly don't want to control their backgrounds. Like I said, I do this because I assume it's a common denominator for pilots, but it doesn't have to be the case. I'm not married to this idea, so I wouldn't mind just going the straight route of allowing the players to choose which of the starting three they want. (Or, more accurately, having the Hutt offer them one of his three ships to use.)

Just for what it's worth, I've been in situations where nobody wanted the starting 3. The consensus we came to was opening up options for different ships that came with particular flaws or quirks to balance their strengths. My favorite was a Citadel-class cruiser; we balanced the weapon payload with a quirky hyperdrive (GM fiat or spending threat for the hyperdrive to not work when we might need it most) and a delicate reactor (when using a maneuver or action that only works if you voluntarily cause system strain, suffer double the normal amount).

I understand the desire of the group to have a different ship. My group will want to upgrade at some point, and given their history in other game systems, will have a fleet at some point.

For starting level characters, I think the 3 options are fine. To me, the main reason for having these options is so that players are not stuck on one planet, or having to negotiate passage every time they need to go somewhere.

The group that I GM currently has about 8 players, with a typical session having about 4 or 5 present. I decided to let the group have a second ship, with the explanation that the group splits up from time to time, so there will usually only be one ship involved in a session.

In the game that I play in, which has about 6 or 7 players (all of whom typically show up), we have a Wayfarer as our mother ship and two Z95s in the cargo pod. That way we can split up when necessary -- we have a few space pilots in the roster. It also keeps the larger group together to act as either support or cavalry.

My questions are thus:

1.) Is this fair?

2.) Do the modifications for higher Obligations make sense?

3.) Is this in line with the rules?

That last question is mostly due to the phrase "Player Characters cannot gain more additional Obligation than their original starting value," with regards to Table 2-3 in the core rulebook. Obviously I'm willing to flaunt the rules in favor of a better gaming experience, but if doing so will severely break the game, I'll not do it.

2) no, more after 3

3) no

See, according to the rules the players each get starting XP, starting credits, and the group gets a ship in exchange for their starting base obligation. They can then take one additional choice from table 2-3 to get an additional leg up (but as you noticed, that's all they are supposed to get per raw). The GM can select the ship for them or gm permitting, the players may select any ship worth 120,000 or less.

If you want to add more obligation beyond the official starting options on table 2-3 its certainly you prerogative as a gm. You do run the risk of crippling the group from day one though, because in my experience players will almost always take all the obligation you're willing to give them, and they can get to 100 fast.

If you want to give them a different ship, its probably easier and safer to just give them that ship. The ship option restrictions aren't there for some kind of mechanical balance reason, they are there to keep the typical player group in line with official publications. Ifyou want to give the players their own nebulon b frigate, as the gm you can (and theres an older canned campaign that does). Just don't expect Long Arm of the Hutt to work properly anymore.