Ehhhhhhhhhh

Dungeon World is better. Just refluff magic to DA FORCE and you're good to go.

OP here, 'bout 100 pages in the pdf for this. I'm rock hard

Explain D&D mindset and how it effects this game.

>overbalancing on one type of scenario

This shouldn't be understated. In D&D (and many games like it) a character's primary mechanical function is described in combat terms. You can be a Rogue but you're stilling faced with features like "Sneak Attack" and your ability to hide during combat.

Edge of the Empire will let someone legitimately be good at a lot of things which aren't combat. When a player makes a character, they are telling the DM what kind of game they want to play-- listen to them. Diversify adventures according to the diversity of the PC abilities; also challenge them with situations they are specifically not equipped for. But don't ignore them.

The dice system is the height of stupidity, the game is full of nonsensical exceptions and inconsistencies, and the dice system is fucking stupid. And the dice system is stupid. And JESUS CHRIST is its dice system stupid.

After youve rolled the dice, you have:

(1) Success vs. Failure (these cancel, multiples successes accumulate but failures dont)

(2) Advantage vs. Threat (these cancel, multiples of both accumulate)

(3) Triumph vs. Despair (these dont cancel)

Ignoring quantitative differences, these give you 18 qualitative results:

Success
Failure
Success-Advantage
Success-Advantage-Triumph
Success-Advantage-Despair
Success-Advantage-Triumph-Despair
Success-Threat
Success-Threat-Triumph
Success-Threat-Despair
Success-Threat-Triumph-Despair
Failure-Advantage
Failure-Advantage-Triumph
Failure-Advantage-Despair
Failure-Advantage-Triumph-Despair
Failure-Threat
Failure-Threat-Triumph
Failure-Threat-Despair
Failure-Threat-Triumph-Despair

Im a huge fan of systems that characterize the quality of success or failure (instead of just treating those as binary qualities). But why do we need to count each tier of dice symbols in a slightly different way? And why do we need three separate tiers of symbols? This system literally generates outcomes like, Moderate success with something vaguely good, but also something vaguely better than vaguely good, but also something seriously bad in a vague way.

Okay. So you flip over to the skill guidelines hoping for a little guidance and thats when you discover that even the designers have no idea how to use their convoluted dice system.

For example, advantage cant turn failure into success unless its a Knowledge skill, because then advantage can grant you minor but possibly relevant information about the subject even on a failure. (Except if youre gaining access to relevant information, that sounds like a success, right?)
If youre making a Computer check, then additional successes reduce the time required to make the check. BUT if its a Stealth check, then youre going to use advantage to reduce the time required. With Skullduggery you use advantage to gain additional items, BUT if youre making a Survival check youll use successes to gain those items.

It goes on and on like that.

So you have a system thats supposedly feeding you useful information, but the designers cant even figure out how to interpret the results consistently despite multiple years of development and nine different products featuring the core mechanics. Why should we believe that this system is going to do anything useful at the table?

But maybe I was still missing something. So I talked to people who were playing the game. And what I discovered is that people who were enjoying the system were almost universally not playing it according to the rules.

Many of them werent even aware they were doing it. (Subconsciously house ruling away the inconsistencies in how symbols of different tiers are tallied is apparently very common, for example.) Its as if we were talking about a car, I mentioned the gas pedal, and multiple people talking about how great the car is to drive said, Whats a gas pedal?

Even among those who were aware they were changing the game, it would lead to some really weird conversations where I would criticize the dice system; someone would reply to say that they loved it; I would ask what they loved about it; and then they would reply by basically saying, I love the fact that we changed it!

Which is, I suppose, the ultimate condemnation of the system.

The system is frankly riddled with inconsistencies.

For example, combat initiative works in all ways exactly like a competitive check except for how ties are broken. Why?! Why would you do that?

Another example: The difficulty of a check to heal someone is dependent on how injured they are. Similarly, the difficulty of repairing your ship is dependent on how damaged it is. If you take those rules and you put them on a table, you end up with pic.

Oh! Thats nice! Theyve unified the difficulties so that you can easily memorize and use Wait a minute.

What the hell?!

I honestly cant tell if thats just incredibly sloppy design or if its actually a revelation of Machiavellian evil. (I literally keep looking back at the rulebooks because my brain refuses to accept that this is true. But it is.)

The whole game is like this. (Weve already talked about how the skill guidelines seem to take an almost perverse glee in never doing something the same way twice.) Its almost as if the designers said, This system is pretty slick and elegant lets go ahead and randomly change half the mechanics for no reason.

Oops, forgot the pic. For those of you who are not eagle-eyed or easily miss things, the complaint is about the first two lines for each check:

- Medicine/Mechanics: Difficulty 1 if Wounds are less than or equal to 1/2 wound threshold; Difficulty 2 if wounds are greater than 1/2 wound threshold

- Damage Control: Difficulty 1 if System Strain is less than 1/2 strain threshold; Difficulty 2 if System Strain is greater than or equal to 1/2 strain threshold

In any sensible RPG, these two tables would be identical.

>snowflake dice that accomplish nothing but shekels for the devs
>60 dollars book
>retarded mish mash of effects stacked onto rolls for the GM to determine the results of
>apparently this is a "narrative" game
>huge ass rulebook
>people who shill go it have literally never given a specific example of why the mechanics are good.
It's crap. It's played by normalfags who are in to star wars (which is a pleb tier setting), and Redddit hipsters who want to brag on their blog about how they are playing a (((progressive))) narrative game, instead of being a problematic d&d player. Also, it's the most visible Star wars RPG currently available.

EotE fags are yet to provide a concise pitch for their gay ass system and specific examples of how it's mechanics enhance the experience. Until then, I'm not spending money on the shitty snowflake dice, until it is explained to me what they do that normal dice cant. (Protip: it's nothing but a cash grab for FFG).

You forgot the fact that the claim by the game designers that the core experience of the Star Wars universe is for Han Solo (Edge of Empire), Princess Leia (Age of Rebellion), and Luke Skywalker (Force and Destiny) to all adventure separately from each other. In order to run Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi, for example, you'd need to buy ALL THREE books.

I absolutely love it. Been playing a consistent Force and Destiny game as a Jedi for just over a year. Before that did Edge of the Empire as a Jawa Mechanic. Some people are bringing up some good points against it but it's easily the best written RPG I've ever played. It feels intuitive and clean and the rules don't weigh the game down. Sure buying new dice sucks but you can download a free app.

>Princess Leia is the AoR core experience
>not Based Wedge Antilles

Also all these brainlets shitting themselves in rage over having to get creative because the dice don't just go "you succeed" or "you fail"

Let's compare to DnD shall we? To run any campaign you need
>ALL THREE BOOKS!

You can run tons of Star Wars campaign only ever needing one core rulebook.

it's good, it plays fast and light which lends itself well to the star wars style high action.

Id rather play this

>D&D with lightsabers
>magic-u- I mean, Force-users are still fucking broken horseshit
lel nah

>rage over having to get creative because the dice don't just go "you succeed" or "you fail"
Except I have both played and ran apocalypse world games, which have the same effect. The thing is, apocalypse world does it in a way that actually makes things interesting and forces players to choose. And it's 2d6 based, too, not some shitty set of special snowflake d8s. So, nice straw man, but wrong.

>letting your players start as Jedi

>special snowflake d8s
>when there are d8s, d12s and d6s in there

Also advantage and triumph results are something the players choose to spend in interesting or advantageous ways, exactly like Apocalypse World. Don't talk shit about a game you don't understand.

>mixed parties were ever a good idea
Despite what the movies show, force users and nonforce users in the same group is usually a result of what the players want to play, followed by the narrative automatically conforming to that. Rather than creating a campaign concept and then fitting characters to that. Jedi are the focus of star wars storyline and are more powerful than the average person. No one questions what happens when Han solo goes against Darth Vader. Han loses. The game reflects this, and the developers are smart enough to see this, rather than pandering to your triggered-ass obsessive need for "balance."

That is not what the complaint is. There are plenty of games that give results that aren't just grouped into binary success/failure mechanics. But most of them don't feed you useless information like Edge of the Empire does, where you can literally get a result of "moderate success with something vaguely good, but also something vaguely better than vaguely good, but also something seriously bad in a vague way."

Though, I like how you just glossed entirely over how inconsistently the game applies its dice results:

- Advantage can't turn failure into success, except Knowledge
- Additional success reduced the time required for Computers; but Advantage reduces the time required for Stealth
- Skullduggery uses Advantage to get additional items; Survival uses Successes to get additional items.
- And then there is the utter fail that is Medicine/Mechanics verses Damage Control.

It's nonintuitive throughout the entire game (these are only a few examples), and learning how one skill functions gives no guarantee that you'll know how another skill functions. Indeed, it's likely to be misleading.

Say what you will about the d20 System, at least everything functions in the same intuitive way no matter what you're trying to do ("Roll a d20, add modifiers, higher results are better").

>EotE fags are yet to provide a concise pitch for their gay ass system and specific examples of how it's mechanics enhance the experience.
inb4 "I-I-It's more cinematic, like the m-m-movies!"

>Also advantage and triumph results are something the players choose to spend in interesting or advantageous ways,
Cool. And why does that require special snowflake dice? And If the game is exactly like apocalypse world, why would I play it?

>- Advantage can't turn failure into success, except Knowledge
>- Additional success reduced the time required for Computers; but Advantage reduces the time required for Stealth
>- Skullduggery uses Advantage to get additional items; Survival uses Successes to get additional items.
Is this actual shit from the rules?

Now let's compare that to SWSE.

To play Empire or RotJ, you need a grand total of....one fucking book. Your argument is trash.

>having to close off an iconic part of the setting because they run roughshod over the game balance

Because when Luke finally became a Jedi he didn't need Leia and Han at all, did he? Face it, the movies have the archetypal example of a mixed party and denying that makes you a fuckwit.

Because of greater granularity. There's a world of difference between hitting someone and knocking them to the floor and hitting them and severing their weapon arm. But I wouldn't expect a PBTA brainlet to understand

I actually like PBTA, I just hate some of its fuckwitted fanbase

This user gets it.

Got my party started out working as smugglers in the outer rim. No force users. Eventually I'll give them the chance to multiclass into a force user if they find a teacher.

Hard no's before I started were no starting jedi scum and no skill focus feat (lvl 1 jedi plus skill focus feat = throwing star destroyers force unleashed style)

I've literally never had a problem running Jedi and nonJedi in SWSE. It's only got the potential to be a problem when:
>Above 13th lvl
>nonJedi are incompetent character designers
>Jedi are hypercompetent character designers
>you're using OP splatbook powercreep shit

Anyone asserting otherwise hasn't spent enough time with SWSE to comment on it and it shows.

Neat pasta, friendo.

The issue here is in part conceptual. You "take damage", you dont "lose health". It's maddening at times when things dont match.

I will say that I've had fun, but there seriously has to be a better way to make advantage/disadvantage work.

Read Eventually if they become Jedi and overpowered to shit thats fine too. They're the heroes of this story, they should feel cool and powerful. Just starting off theyre gonna be plebs.

Unless you're one of those insufferable KOTOR era fanboys. Best part of legends to be wiped out by the mouse.

Yeah. But saga edition is shit

Ive been running it over a year now.

First, i own AoR, which is understandably better written due to extra debug and editing time. Things are more concise and have better explanation.

HOWEVER there are a few things.

1- I have mixed feelings about the dice. Yes, i like advantage/disadvantage in combat. It adds nice flavor beyond "succeed/fail". But as another user added, it sometimes seems to forget skill checks are a thing. You can sorta succeed yet fail, or reverse, and there isnt much that makes it feel organic.

2- no way to gauge difficulty, and thats awful. The pre-written adventure gives a clue, but there really isnt a way to help deal with the critical difficulty issue. At low level, I threw a party of 2 jedi, a droid tinkerer, and a body guard against an Imperial Royal Guard in a 1 vs. 4 arena match. And the Guard creamed them. I spontaneously dropped a whole dice from his attack and removed 3 HP because it was so lopsided, and I had 0 way of knowing that would be the case. They won by DM fiat. In another case, i did a repeat of 1 vs 5, this time a down-scaled Inquisitor, and the Inquisitor got rekt hard despite being a critical antagonist. It is a brutal trial and error process that is incredibly frustrating for the DM and players, since my options are "introduce 1-time bad guys to test the players" or "unnecessarily risk plot-vital NPCs who have developed relations with the PCs" (inb4 railroading- star wars has ALWAYS been about how bad guys and good guys interact; a recurring well written NPC is worth more than "boss #314").

> To run any campaign you need

Nnno, that's intellectually dishonest of you and you know it. The Player's Handbook contains details for all twelve core classes and all nine races. You can use these in combination to build pretty much any fantasy character you could desire, with only minor niches cases left out. While D&D needs three books (two, really - the MM isn't strictly needed since the DMG has rules on monster creation), it at least does not split up the core, expected D&D experience across multiple books.

FFG's Star Wars system by comparison splits up the basic idea of Star Wars into three systems.

Translated into D&D, it would be like if instead of a Player's Handbook, we had:

- Sword & Fist (Fighter, Monk, Human, Half-elf)
- Tome & Blood (Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard, Elf, Tiefling)
- Song & Silence (Bard, Rogue, Halfling)
- Defenders of the Faith (Cleric, Paladin, Dwarf, Dragonborn)
- Masters of the Wild (Barbarian, Druid, Ranger, Gnome, Half-orc)

It particularly stands out because previous Star Wars games (both the WEG and WotC versions) had no trouble integrating Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia into a single release.

Yes, it is actually in the rules.

The idea behind the dice system is good. The execution is wonky. To be honest, this seems like it would work better as a computer game.

>Just starting off theyre gonna be plebs.
>Unless you're one of those insufferable KOTOR era
You mean that vidyagaem where you started off as not a jedi? Neat shitpost, kiddo.

It is very mischaracterized from the rules.

>Advantage can't turn failure into success, except Knowledge
From the rulebook; "Additional [Success] represent the character recalling information or completing research with remarkable haste, while [Advantage] may be spent to learn extra trivial information about the subject."

The poster of the original copypasta wanted to suggest that "if you're gaining access to relevant information, that sounds like a success" by ignoring the word 'trivial'.

The underlying criticism is absolutely valid-- FFG doesn't present the system in an intuitive way, nor possibly even a consistent way.

But to argue against the efficacy of its foundation conceit--that the dice can tell you both whether you Did The Thing and What Was It Like in a single result--seems far reaching.

Success/Failure tell you if you Did The Thing.
Advantage/Threat tell you if circumstances were Good or Bad.
Triumph/Despair are pay-attention-special-thing-incoming.

'Tis. Also it's completely right.

I don't need KotOR. Attack of the Clones shows Jedi dying by the dozens to simple B1 Battle Droids, and Jango Fett kills at least one himself as well. Revenge of the Sith likewise has all Jedi across the Galaxy except for Obi-wan and Yoda killed by clone troopers.

Jedi are strong in some circumstances, but they are not insurmountable. Saying "Han Solo could't beat Darth Vader" is a fucking terrible example, because Han Solo is ultimately just some guy, while Darth Vader is the Kwisatz Haderach, one of the most talented and potent Force users in history (for that matter, Obi-wan- Yoda, and Palpatine are hardly representative either).

Using Darth Vader as your measuring stick would be roughly like using Usaine Bolt as your measuring stick for how fast the "average" human is.

Kotor1 was nice at the time. However the fanbase and sequels are cancer.

If you arent all about the Galactic Civil War and pledging yourself to the empire than you're better off drinking a bleach martini.

>pledging yourself to the empire
>your fighters are rusty shitboxes that are literally all crumple zones and barely armed past a couple of laser cannons
>retarded human male focus means you will never fuck your hot zeltron wingmate between sorties
>Imperial Army are shit, stormies aren't much better
>they could be better but Palpy is squandering the budget on retarded superweapon #253

>Because when Luke finally became a Jedi he didn't need Leia and Han at all, did he?
He only needed them because of plot reasons. Also Luke is much underpowered in OT compared to Jedi in PT. And either way, as I said, the movies are an exception. They are written for plot, not practical considerations. Most adventuring groups in star wars would not contain a Jedi at all. Why? Because the galaxy has billions of beings and there are like 10,000 Jedi tops if I recall. The only reason they'd show up in an RPG is of the campaign premise specifically involved them. Or (more commonly) a player wanted to play one, so the GM asspulls a reason for them to show up.

>#MAGA, but in spess
Yeah sounds like a blast, Jethro.

Who gives a shit about Wedge?

But user, Apocolypse World's dice mechanics are absolute dogshit.
>I rolled an 8 talking to the king, seems I convinced him to let me know up the kingdom
>I rolled a six trying to open a door, seems I broke my wrist
And I know these are :^) examples, but there's no granularity for level of competency or difficulty of skill. It's a major, concept breaking flaw that really ruins the whole franchise.
That said, I think there's tons of good ideas in it, especially how characters are generated. I'm not going to fault someone for trying something new. I just hate how it's treated as incredibly revolutionary for making rpgs ultra pleb in their design mechanics ethos.
But, like i said, I think there's a lot of gold to squeeze from the bronze. Truth be known I'm working The Sprawl into a SW dice hack because I think it's such a great book (just suffered from 2d6 clunk).

>10,000 Jedi to protect an entire galaxy
lel no, fuck that

People with taste, for a start.

>muh pretend demographics dictate play
Playing with you sounds like the opposite of fun.

>pbta and apocalypse world are the same thing.
That's like saying portal fans and people who enjoyed portal are the same thing, respectively. But whatever.

>greater granularity
You can still do this in other systems. If anything it's more interesting when the GM gets to choose, rather than having your arm cut off by a vibroknife or whatever the fuck. "Granularity" is not an excuse for why I need to spend 15 bucks on a set of dice. Why couldn't this be accomplished with a normal dice mechanic? Plenty of games have nonbinary success, by the way. Adding "consequence dice" and other shit like that just muddles the game.

I always liked the VP system from Fading Suns.

>consequence dice
stop user pleace, your retardation is ruining my sides

Also, the GM gets to choose how threat and despair are spent.
>muh fifteen bux
oh no. Just get some fucking blank/spare dice and stick conversion stickers on them, you cheap faggot

>you cheap faggot
~t. man-babby whose mommy and daddy wipe his nose and give him allowance

>no way to gauge difficulty, and thats awful.
Thats par for the course in a narrative game. FATE is the same way, with it's "ladder" of meaningless adjectives. Narrative games seem to have this obsession with preserving vestiges of simulationist RPGs. Whereas Apocalypse World ditches that whole idea because it makes the core mechanic about story nodes rather than task resolution. Goes back more to pre-thief/rogue OSR games wherecharacters were assumed to be competent at most things. 20 years later we have bloated skill lists, (((bounded accuracy))) so a level 1 fighter can barely tie his shoes, and "lol you got a nat1 that means you fucking killed yourself." RPGs have become a travesty. A literal parody of themselves. Say "not my group" all you want, you're one of the lucky ones. Wake up and smell the ashes and you will see how far we have fallen.

Christ.

>being able to spare $15 on dice makes you a spoiled manchild
Nigga that's like less than three hours work here

Mate you're getting super grave and imperious about your game of fucking pretend. Chill your tits.

More like less than an hour but if I'm gonna dump fifteen bucks on dice they better give me a handy when I crit.

You don't roll to open a door, you fucking retard nigger. Maybe you're thinking of Dungeon World, which IS dogshit. Apocalypse World is just fine. The mechanic isn't generic you stupid fuck it's applied to specific "moves" in the game, which have specific effects. Ally of which the GM has some control over, but with some requirements so he can't just sick over the players cause he feels like it (i.e. the gamemaster CAN cheat) and be a railroading twat. Your system sounds like "lol I got a complication die and now my pebis exploded while I'm trying to seduce some one CAUsE THAT's INTErEsTiNg RIGhT GuYS?"

No. It's stupid.

Yeah, I was going off minimum wage. Which is really your only excuse for being this much of a penny-pincher.

virt is that you?

>And I know these are :^) examples, but there's no granularity for level of competency or difficulty of skill
There are no skill checks in apocalypse world. There are no skills. There is no task resolution. It's a completely different kind of game. You don't have to like it. I didn't like it at all the first time I read it. It wasn't until the fifth time I looked into the senpai cause I was bored, that I actually wanted to run it. But its retarded to complain about something in a game being bad when the game specifically doesn't have that thing it all. It's like complaining the D&Ds combat rules are terrible at handling modern gun combat, when they were not designed with that in mind.

>everyone in our group is a special snowflake and if you don't let me play a Jedi on this random planet where no Jedi has any reason to be, you are an oppressive shitlord.
Fuck off. So sick of having a party of well made characters, then the last faggot has to play a drow monk despite being advised what type of setting this was.

You're get to explain why I should put in any effort at all, when your game doesn't seem to offer anything unique or revolutionary that I can't get from other systems. Do you just hand out money to everyone who asks for it?

>look mommy I'm projecting harder, I used BUZZWORDS this time

This retardation is exactly why FFG Star Wars was split into three books, so faggots like this wouldn't shit their britches with autistic asspain whenever someone wanted to play a Jedi.

So all you people bitching about "B-but muh three corebooks!"? This fucking brainlet and his inability to say yes is to blame.

No.

>easy to build characters that are a nice mix of class-based and classless (you get XP breaks for skills within your chosen career specialisations)
>equipment actually matters unlike Apocalypse World/PbtA
the destiny point pool makes gameplay pretty fun since at any time either the GM or the players can up the stakes for a check in their favour by spending one
>it's not an abortion of d20 mechanics married to a setting that doesn't suit them

Explain why it makes sense for even 50% of campaigns to have Jedi in them, when Jedi are 0.00001% of the population. "Because muh story focuses on jedi"....well why? Are you saying jedi are present for most if not all of the galaxy's interesting occurrences? Okay then why? Cause you choose to have Jedi? Okay then that's your choice to focus on them and you suffer the consequences. There are no full power Jedi in the OT. And I'm the prequels, what for padme the noble do? Get pregnant? That's about it. Oh and shoot some droids. She's useless. Stop whining when the game mechanics for the setting, instead of trying to be some sterile MMO obsessed with balance. At best you can argue that the force is a bullshit plot device in prequels alot of times, and should be more restricted in RPGs. But the fact remains that Jedi havi n Jedi powers AND combat skill, is going to make them better than martials. If you mix those types of characters, prepare to suffer the consequences.

>why yes, my system of skills and talents plus autismo-dice is MUCH better suited for setting X than your system of skills and feats but no autismo-dice.

It was split into three books so that shekelstein could make three times as much money off of you poor fools. If it was a balance concern they should have just said "don't mix parties you stupid shits" and left it at that.

Never had a problem mixing because my players play for fun instead of trying to """cleverly""" shatter the system and one-up each other.

What's hilarious to me is that the people who are most anal about hard demographics as a limiting factor to character creation think that stat reqs in 2E were dumb.

>Explain why it makes sense for even 50% of campaigns to have Jedi in them, when Jedi are 0.00001% of the population.
Because they're fun. Also, player characters are meant by their very nature to be exceptional, a cut above the rest and not just the scrubs of the galaxy that die in droves.

That's because in FFG's system it isn't a balance concern anymore. A decent rifleman can rape the shit out of some idiot who thinks he's hot shit because he has Force Rating 1. The Force is no longer a substitute for having actual skills, and I like that.

>meta currency bullshit
>getting punished for cross class choices
>literal trap option
>vague "raising the stakes lmao" bullshit the devs read on some blog and put in thr game cause they thought it sounded cool.
Sounds like a fucking dumpster fire.
Also, your gear matters a lot in Apocalypse World. You are thinking of Dungeon World, which has class based damage. Once again you are a fucking retard.

>getting punished for cross class choices
Nothing but a minor XP cost hike is stopping you from buying into extra specialisations and diversifying that way, shortbus.
Also it might be hard for d20 faggots like you to understand, but there aren't any "trap options" except for Entertainer, but nobody cares about those anyway

>Explain why it makes sense for even 50% of campaigns to have Jedi in them, when Jedi are 0.00001% of the population.

"Because it's fun."

>pledging yourself to a bunch of warmongering "peacekeepers" or space mexican alliance
>not prefering sleek imperial asthetics over rusty shitty alliance vessels
>not wanting to be surrounded by well dressed officers and sleek white armor
>prefering some green slut to Sheevs hot load

Shiggy diggy famiry

Not him but I just want to know, in simple terms, "is this encounter going to rape-train my players". FFG does a god awful job of that other than "minions die in droves and are basically buffers".

It'd be nice if they had 0XP, 50 XP, 150 XP, and 300 XP encounters just so I'd have a rough gauge for a party in "150 XP knight play" level.

I just dont want to gank them all on accident by giving a smuggler a Disruptor and a wee too high Ranged skill.

Woah buddy. Try decaf. I even said they were :^) exaggerated examples. I do stand by my statement over lack of skill/challenge differentiation.
But oh boy, thanks for the chuckle user

>muh sleek armour and vehicles
That die to trench run disease or a good shot from anything that isn't a piece of shit
>sheev's hot load
No thanks, I'd rather fuck a Hutt
also Zeltrons are pink but sheltered Imperialfags wouldn't know that since they've never even seen a nonhuman

Then you'd be fine with a mixed party. So are my players. It does depend on group. But pandering to the lowest common denominator (players who froth at the mouth because "wahhh X is OP") are retarded.

>Because they're fun.
This is not an argument.
>pcs are exceptional
Yep. And? Why does that mean that now of them are Jedi? Jedi are the only exceptional people?

Boy hutt or girl hutt?

>there aren't any "trap options"
Sounds like there are if you have to pay extra XP to do something outside your class. Sounds a lot like cross class skills in D&D 3e.

Hutts are hermaphroditic, friend.

Oggdude's character builder has a GM suite with estimated XP totals for NPCs so you can kinda eyeball encounter difficulties.
Of course, weapons play a big part of this. An enemy that survives long enough to let loose with a heavy repeater or missile tube is going to be bad news for PCs.

Either, they're hermaphrodites

Cannot stand its dice system. Felt like they had to use it just for the sake of parity with other systems pumped out from FFG

and yeah, Rich, if you're reading this it's still fucking retarded you contrarion faggot

Oh... oh my

>I do stand by my statement over lack of skill/challenge differentiation.
Except your statement is retarded because there are no skills. There are no skill checks. There is no task resolution. Stop being autistic and "standing by your statement" that is objectively wrong.

>not an argument
It's the only argument you need for including them in a game.
>not understanding that it's entirely possible for an exceptional character i.e. a PC to be a Jedi since both the kind of person that an average PC is and a Jedi are both equally rare and talented
what a brainlet

It's only 5xp extra. And taking another specialisation (read:sub-class) grants you skills under its umbrella as having the career discount.

That's not even getting into the fact some specialisations can grant you extra career skills, like Recruit.

Oh nice, never heard of Oggdude. Thanks