Character species and attribute dice RAW vs House Rules

[Mamatried]

While this is a house rule issue the question is in the gamemaster realm as to reason behind a ruling and in this case a house rule?

I am used to what is a houserule that all player characters have 18D attributes and 7D for skills.

however the RAW actually states that this is wrong, the RAW states that the correct is the listed species attribute dice plus the 6 Dice for player characters.

this gives a human with 12D attributes a total of 18d which is stated in the book to be the galactic average.
Average indicates that there are some with higher scores and some with lower score in this.

A Falleen would have a total of 19D (specis listed with 13 and adding 6D for player character)

a Twi'lek similarly would have a totla of 17D, (11D +6D character)

My question is why do we have this house rule and what is the reasoning behind this?

As I see it will either make for too weak or too strong alien characters...
My Twi'lek at 18D as a player character is actually much stronger in Dice than any Twi'lek alive becuse the it is give 18D to attibutes when the RAw actually states it should have 17D total.

The Falleen would likewise be 1D dice weaker in all with the RAW listed total of 19d but is given only 18D.

The species dice + 6D character is listed in the create new template and the alien sections, not under the general character creation.

So why does this seem to be a consesus ruling and what game issues will occur by allowing a range on attibutes of 16D total to 20D total with the 17D to 19D range being the largest selection.

[FVBonura]

Have you seen an exploitable abuse by Players to raise this concern?

As for Twi'leks, when I GM, I give them secret buffs and lower difficulties on some underworld-related rolls to balance them. I do ban some alien races from Player access based on abusive behaviors in playtesting experience.
_________________
Star Wars Deckplans Alliance
Star Wars Prequel Commentary

[pakman]

[Mamatried]

interesting perspectives here.

I have used both allowance of variation in species and attributes as much as I have used a house ruled standard of 18 to all.

I did however find that unless we have a super powerful species in dice, like the nohgri or the hutt then I have not encountered any issues with a 17-19D range the "normal" range i would say.

I think I have only seen a 20D starter and it worked, with the narrative restrictions on players and species...but in the 17D to 19D range I never enountered mn maxing more than on 18D and had no ballance issues.

to me the allowing of variations even more or less powerful characters and species IMO reflects the galaxy more so than not, I can no imagine why all in the galaxy are equal in all then why even have species outside the mere narrative?

On the question of Attributes and Secies we can also come into the species bonuses and penalties.

The hapan humans, while allowing a 19D in attibutes ( 13d by species) I would not rule this to be in the min max or the very powerful range as the total night blindness is so severe.

Now I can see that some species at 18d will have some advantages and disadvantages comapered to other 18d, like the duros and the Starship Affinity, or the lorrdian communication and the like...

How should or do we measure like a 4D penalty to all visoon based perception in all forms of "darkness" basically leaving a character blind on a cluded day as worth how much in "attributes"?

[garhkal]

[raithyn]

I'm with Pakman. 18D/7D for all PCs with species as flavor, ignoring almost all special abilities and drawing on narrative elements to integrate unique relationships or access as appropriate.

There are species with aquatic or flying traits but if that's important, the party will have access to rebreathers or rocket packs anyway.

Ultimately I treat species similarly to how I treat age or gender while GMing. It can shape the character's identity, cultural heritage, life experiences, social standing, etc. but at the end of the day there's a reason the player wanted to play this character and I want to work with them to pull that out at the table rather than rely on numerical bonuses or skill buttons to do so.

That's not to say I think RAW character creation is unbalanced. I mean, it is, but I think there's enough unbalance inherent to the game that it all comes out in the wash. Instead my stance represents a philosophical disagreement with a mechanical implementation of species in a cinematic game.

[Whill]

More than 18D species/templates by RAW

Mamatried, the last time you started this discussion in a thread (which was not the first time even then), it ended up getting locked. Proceed with caution. We have beat this dead bantha into the ground other threads.

There is no problem with you handling it anyway you want in your game. But it is pointless to argue with us about the way we should do it.