We are going to have to agree to disagree between debate and discussion, as I see it a different way entirely. Debates by no means insinuate hostility (though some result in it, especially in gamer threads) but to debate requires supporting data, evidence, a goal, etc… In a discussion, participants could talk about anything, and often derail into various topics, with no actual goal in mind. Anyway, call it what you will.
As to the quote, I'm all about catching errors, however if FFG were to "correct" this specific error, or add the "small rule", they would be in the wrong. In my previous post I agreed about the backpack, but not so much the belt. Well, belt in the word itself, but not the limit. I have since posed this same topic to my group and some of them pointed out that backpack would also be incorrect to limit to 1. Again, in name, yes, but not in purpose.
A satchel, murse, and large purse are all essentially "backpacks" in regards to the space they allow. Walk onto any college campus and you will see girls wearing purses and backpacks in conjunction with each other, essentially wearing 2 backpacks. You will see the same with guys and murses/satchels. Wearing them, with both hands free. Heck if done correctly, they could use the straps of the backpack it ensure that the shoulder strap of the side hanging device doesn't slip, or move down on the shoulder, thus increasing its use. So while the "backpack" is essentially limited, one could easily come up with a backpack by another name with a different method of carrying it, and essentially get the same thing.
A harness is essentially a method of wearing 3 belts at once, actually more like 2 in regards to space on the lateral straps. Again, a name deal.
If one really wished to "split hairs", a trando or wookie player could argue the ability to wear 2 or 3 satchels, at the same time, because of their longer frames (7-9 ft tall), and varying lengths of the straps. Heck the 3 satchels wouldn't even impede access to each other if worn correctly.
See why I say it is kind of a common sense thing? I, personally, wouldn't stop any of the aforementioned methods (perhaps the wookie 3 ordeal). There is no reason to. If a player could draw me a picture, or physically show me how this is supposed to work, I really don't have a problem with it. It isn't like it is game altering or anything; they can't fit a back up sniper rifle in either of them.
More to the point, if they added said rule, then they would have to add these other items to the gear lists and I certainly don’t require that. I can make an educated guess as to prices and legality.
I think this is a topic that if it is important to the group, should be addressed prior to the campaign, when they first sit to start playing, or when it comes up in game. Address it, come to a consensus, and move on. Shouldn’t take more then a minute, or two, to get to an answer.
Each group is going to see things differently, and that is great, but what works for one may not work for another. I have a few D&D/pathfinder players in my group that tend to want a "in game printed rule" for everything under the sun. Personally, it’s that very mentality that drove me away from said games. This game, FFG star wars, has made it a mute point. Like I said, it hasn't even come up, as an issue, in our 4 month campaign. It might, now, that I brought it up.
Anyway, Good day to you, Sir.
I'm really not sure if you're saying you disagree with me on the matter of stacking backpacks or definition of the words discussion & debate. The only point was trying to make above was that I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything on this thread, just trying to explain a preference. I don't understand why it led to the "good day sir" hostility.
But since this part of the discussion has lost all meaning at this point and wasn't even the OP's question, I'm sorry I even brought it up and wasted space on his thread.
"All models are wrong, but some models are useful."
-George E.P. Box, Ph.D.
"It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simpleas few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience."
Albert Einstein, Ph.D.
I'm not sure the backpacks "bonus" to encumbrance threshold is solely due to extra space, but also because its ergonomically designed, straps on tight and doesn't move about when running and jumping and the like. Therefore utility belts and/or harnesses would have a similar function. A bag, sack or murse/satchel on the other hand does provide space, but not the same functionality to prevent them from hindering movement and decrease mobility - they do not so effectively provide extra space so that it lets you carry more effectively without "feeling the weight". I mean, I rule that most of my players have at least a satchel (or similar item) to keep stuff in, but this satchel doesn't offer increased encumbrance threshold as such. They need to keep their comms, extra reloads, grenades, id-papers, datapads, senors, etc somewhere, they cannot carry it all in their hands… If they want a backapck, sure, they can buy it and benefit from the increased encumbrance. I also rule that 2 backpacks does not increase the threshold twice, because a backpack in front, or another attached on the back, does affect mobility more than one backpack does. They can still carry more, but they also receive the penalties from carrying more than they should.
"What about the future…? We can only hope, we cannot however account for the minutiae of the quanta, as all accidents in an infinite space are inevitable."