I was reviewing WOTC's GenCon reports and found some interesting stuff regarding D&D 4.0. They were saying that there is going to be direction for each class and each monster on what purpose they serve. They brought up how the Wizard is actually the primary character and that the other players play a support role. The fighters and paladins keep the badies busy and protect the Wizard while the Wizard preps and casts his spells. The thief, bard, go around taking out weaker, peripheral badies. And the cleric is there to make sure everybody is physically and spiritually healthy. This really helps put things in perspective.

However, I still recommend providing a better means for letting others share the limelight. But providing a perspective on individual PC and NPC roles helps a lot.

I uploaded the document that I was working on previously, if you guys have not noticed already.  Although I have a lot of ideas, the ideas are really raw and probably need a lot of work, commentary, and harsh critiques to iron out wrinkles.

Some areas that really need a lot of attention are:

• New rules for Armor and Armor Skills
• Additional Magic Skills, and Tweaks to the Magic skill concept.
• Craft Skills
• Any other areas one might feel like exploring.

I would recommend, first, renaming the places with the name "star" as their alternate names:

Dixon's Star is Lacos.

Madderly's Star is Kdikit.

Truane's Star is Pale.

By the way, you misspelled Theseus on the map.

Everything else on the map is great. 

The appeal that Star Frontiers has for many people is that it is a skills based system that doesn't rely on classes. The classes of Zeb's turned a lot of people off, and it is, by the way, one of the least popular games I've ever seen (though much to do with its whole presentation, but I think it was a big part of it).

I recommend the Ifshnit in the place of the dwarf.

Otherwise, It looks like you have a good start. 

I built that map for him... something for starters, ya know?  I forgot that I kept the "Star" names the same, and if I misspelled Theseus on that map then I fear I may have misspelled it on my Alpha Dawn map too :-P  I better go have a look-see!

I have no problem with "Classes" if they're used just as an organizer of skills, as in the PSAs.  Think about it... if you had a "Fighter" PSA then it's pretty much a "Military" PSA but has a fantasy feel.  I wouldn't key much else off the PSA though... for example: I wouldn't restrict weaponry based on PSA.  But if I can belong to a Rogue PSA and therefore pay less for roguish skill levels than my companions, I'll pick it. 

For races, I think the concept of using the classic Star Frontiers races is very novel.  I do also want to build in optional races that emulate the basic fantasy iconic races (Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, etc.) but these are only included as options for referees to build alternate campaigns with.

For the actual skills, until I see an alternate treatment of the skills that I like better, I plan to emulate the Alpha Dawn/Knight Hawks skill setup with only minor changes.  The changes have more to do with technology levels and the inclusion of 'magic'.

Armor, as written, seems to create a mathematical mess, but it is similar to the existing mechanics that have been developed for SF.  A simpler method is one of my design goals.

I don't really have any ideas for a "basic" Fantasy Frontiers game -- I have a hard time believing anybody is going to use the Basic Game at all, really, just a personal feeling -- but I have been thinking about Skills for a fantasy game based on the SF system for a while, and here's what I've come up with.

Instead of "classes", I would divide skills by related groups, more like classic Star Frontiers: martial skills, which include weapons, armor, tactics and unarmed combat; worker or peasant skills, which include crafts/trades such as making goods of various types, teamster (wagon driver), woodscraft and so on; and knowledge skills, which would cover learning of all sorts. This divides skills along the lines of the historical "three branches of society", which are "those who fight", "those who work" and "those who pray", where "those who pray" happen to keep knowledge alive.