I'm brainstorming a campaign and I've been thumbing through the various career books in my SWRPG library. When I come to the playable species sections, I find myself reading the entries and thinking, "These are great! Too bad none of my players will ever want to play any of these."
I'm probably revealing too much of the psychology of my play group but I've noticed that players often drift to either Human (or it's Corellian/Mandalorian alternatives) or one of the "sexier" aliens: Chiss, Twi'lek, or Falleen. Of the six campaigns I've run, I can't recall a single oddball alien like a Gand or Iktochi, let alone a stock Star Wars character like a Wookiee. The last time I was actually a player in a Star Wars game (Saga Edition, I think), I wanted to play an Ewok but my GM (who sucked) wanted to do a "hard space warriors being hard in space" campaign and wouldn't let me. 
I'm starting to pay more credence to the theory that most (not all, but most) players want to play themselves but smarter and better looking.

I'm brainstorming a campaign and I've been thumbing through the various career books in my SWRPG library. When I come to the playable species sections, I find myself reading the entries and thinking, "These are great! Too bad none of my players will ever want to play any of these."
I'm probably revealing too much of the psychology of my play group but I've noticed that players often drift to either Human (or it's Corellian/Mandalorian alternatives) or one of the "sexier" aliens: Chiss, Twi'lek, or Falleen. Of the six campaigns I've run, I can't recall a single oddball alien like a Gand or Iktochi, let alone a stock Star Wars character like a Wookiee. The last time I was actually a player in a Star Wars game (Saga Edition, I think), I wanted to play an Ewok but my GM (who sucked) wanted to do a "hard space warriors being hard in space" campaign and wouldn't let me. 
I'm starting to pay more credence to the theory that most (not all, but most) players want to play themselves but smarter and better looking.

What are your players' characters' Duties and Motivations? And their backstories? I'm running an AoR campaign right now and, other than the initial story arc, the adventures center around what the players came up with for their characters. I also had them each come up with 2 - 3 NPCs that *could potentially* show up in the campaign and that's helped me springboard new adventure ideas.

If you're stuck, try linking what you've already developed with whatever the players have brought to the table. 

I'm brainstorming a campaign and I've been thumbing through the various career books in my SWRPG library. When I come to the playable species sections, I find myself reading the entries and thinking, "These are great! Too bad none of my players will ever want to play any of these."
I'm probably revealing too much of the psychology of my play group but I've noticed that players often drift to either Human (or it's Corellian/Mandalorian alternatives) or one of the "sexier" aliens: Chiss, Twi'lek, or Falleen. Of the six campaigns I've run, I can't recall a single oddball alien like a Gand or Iktochi, let alone a stock Star Wars character like a Wookiee. The last time I was actually a player in a Star Wars game (Saga Edition, I think), I wanted to play an Ewok but my GM (who sucked) wanted to do a "hard space warriors being hard in space" campaign and wouldn't let me. 
I'm starting to pay more credence to the theory that most (not all, but most) players want to play themselves but smarter and better looking.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

Professional commercial artist/designer who has worked with businesses both big and small here: 
From a legal perspective, you're rolling the dice with fan art. American copyright law is grossly weighted to benefit the financial bottom line of corporate America. That said, 99.9% of businesses don't care if you make unlicensed art because they view it as free advertising. But if you want to sell it for money, you'll have to do it under the table or else a lawyer will probably bust you. My friends who have tried to sell Harry Potter handkerchiefs (or whatever) on Etsy always end up with C&D orders. Judges view these on a case-by-case basis. Just because one artist won a judgement doesn't mean another judge won't rule in the favor of a faceless corporation. Even a SCOTUS case precedent can be ignored by clever lawyers. Fine artists get away with using corporate IPs because they're commenting on what the intellectual property represents. Andy Warhol didn't paint soup cans because he was a big fan of Campbell's soup. If you wanted to sell a painting of a child's bedroom with Star Wars figures on the floor, that's totally fine, because the theme of the painting isn't Star Wars, it's childhood. As an example of how litigious this stuff can get, my current employer won't allow any of its design team to use free Internet resources, like music clips made in Garage Band, because it could open the company up to a usage lawsuit. Only licensed stock images/videos/audio from vendors are allowed. I personally feel that American IP laws are disgusting, stifle both creativity and culture, and should be changed as they only benefit people who don't need more money. Corporations like Disney keep pressuring Congress to extend copyright protections way past the original expiration dates. Walt Disney has been dead for decades and doesn't have a reasonable cause to continue collecting on his work. But that's the world we live in.
Is it scummy to steal fan art? Yes. But that's the risk you're taking as a fan artist. That's a big reason why I encourage people to push their creativity and make something new *OR* work to become a preferred hire for the IP holder.

If the fan artist has been hired on the strength of his fan work, he's profited from it.
It just rubs me the wrong way to complain about art theft when you're aping and using other people's art without permission, too. Vehicle designs, logos, creature designs, etc. don't just spring up from nothing.

Then again, the fan artist doesn't have permission to use Disney's IP in the first place.

My (probably unpopular) opinion is that I'm glad that Lucasfilm rebooted Star Wars canon. As someone who had been reading SW comics and novels since the late 1980s, the Expanded Universe was ridiculously bloated and a lot of material was poorly written. My "baseline" for canon is the movies, TV shows, and the current crop of published, third-party materials. 
That said, Legends material is a great source to dip for ideas without feeling like you're breaking holy sacrament if you change it up to better fit your style of play.
The Evocii of Nar Shaddaa play a big part in the first adventure in my upcoming EotE campaign. I'm planning to use Corellia as presented in Suns of Fortune, just with the caveat that the planet was cleaned up following the big shipbuilding boom of the Early Imperial years. I've used the Matukai and various other Force traditions that were introduced in Legends though I've tweaked them a bit. For example, if the Jedi are Akira Kurasawa samurai then the Matukai are 1970s grindhouse kung-fu monks.  The "Tales of the Jedi" comics are mostly canonical though they're considered a part of the "oral tradition" in the Star Wars universe so they're open to interpretation and not considered historical fact. It's fun to twist what players think they know about Ulic Qel-Droma and company. Pius Dea Crusades are absolutely in my head canon.  I'll reference pre-Republic cultures from Legends from time-to-time but I'll usually change them up if they don't fit what I want.

RPGs have always been brand loyalty products for larger hobby companies. At best, they break even in terms of sales vs. production costs. They don't take the resources to produce that a board game does but it's unusual for their sales to outpace something like a collectible card game, which is the industry's bread-and-butter. Pathfinder and D&D sell a lot of books but Magic: The Gathering smashes them both.
Before Disney, the line was tapping into sources from the various Expanded Universe/Legends materials. Post-Disney, everything we've seen is directly tied to what's in the movie theater or on television (not even with the new novels or comics) or a compilation of existing RPG material. It's been pretty clear that licencors are strictly dictating what can be produced which leaves very little wiggle room for developers. After a ships-and-vehicles book, what else could they realistically produce? An Ep. 7-9 + Resistance book? I'd love a book that covers the Aftermath novels up to The Force Awakens but that might mean negotiating with Del Rey who are outside the Disney umbrella.
We got three complete lines plus five general books. That's better than a lot of RPGs publishes do, especially with the traditional "splat book" model. I'm not following this license to another publisher, especially not WotC or someone similar. I sensed the line was winding down long ago but I've got two FFG SW campaigns coming up in the near future so I'm not done playing. Not by a long shot.

RPGs have always been brand loyalty products for larger hobby companies. At best, they break even in terms of sales vs. production costs. They don't take the resources to produce that a board game does but it's unusual for their sales to outpace something like a collectible card game, which is the industry's bread-and-butter. Pathfinder and D&D sell a lot of books but Magic: The Gathering smashes them both.
Before Disney, the line was tapping into sources from the various Expanded Universe/Legends materials. Post-Disney, everything we've seen is directly tied to what's in the movie theater or on television (not even with the new novels or comics) or a compilation of existing RPG material. It's been pretty clear that licencors are strictly dictating what can be produced which leaves very little wiggle room for developers. After a ships-and-vehicles book, what else could they realistically produce? An Ep. 7-9 + Resistance book? I'd love a book that covers the Aftermath novels up to The Force Awakens but that might mean negotiating with Del Rey who are outside the Disney umbrella.
We got three complete lines plus five general books. That's better than a lot of RPGs publishes do, especially with the traditional "splat book" model. I'm not following this license to another publisher, especially not WotC or someone similar. I sensed the line was winding down long ago but I've got two FFG SW campaigns coming up in the near future so I'm not done playing. Not by a long shot.

RPGs have always been brand loyalty products for larger hobby companies. At best, they break even in terms of sales vs. production costs. They don't take the resources to produce that a board game does but it's unusual for their sales to outpace something like a collectible card game, which is the industry's bread-and-butter. Pathfinder and D&D sell a lot of books but Magic: The Gathering smashes them both.
Before Disney, the line was tapping into sources from the various Expanded Universe/Legends materials. Post-Disney, everything we've seen is directly tied to what's in the movie theater or on television (not even with the new novels or comics) or a compilation of existing RPG material. It's been pretty clear that licencors are strictly dictating what can be produced which leaves very little wiggle room for developers. After a ships-and-vehicles book, what else could they realistically produce? An Ep. 7-9 + Resistance book? I'd love a book that covers the Aftermath novels up to The Force Awakens but that might mean negotiating with Del Rey who are outside the Disney umbrella.
We got three complete lines plus five general books. That's better than a lot of RPGs publishes do, especially with the traditional "splat book" model. I'm not following this license to another publisher, especially not WotC or someone similar. I sensed the line was winding down long ago but I've got two FFG SW campaigns coming up in the near future so I'm not done playing. Not by a long shot.

RPGs have always been brand loyalty products for larger hobby companies. At best, they break even in terms of sales vs. production costs. They don't take the resources to produce that a board game does but it's unusual for their sales to outpace something like a collectible card game, which is the industry's bread-and-butter. Pathfinder and D&D sell a lot of books but Magic: The Gathering smashes them both.
Before Disney, the line was tapping into sources from the various Expanded Universe/Legends materials. Post-Disney, everything we've seen is directly tied to what's in the movie theater or on television (not even with the new novels or comics) or a compilation of existing RPG material. It's been pretty clear that licencors are strictly dictating what can be produced which leaves very little wiggle room for developers. After a ships-and-vehicles book, what else could they realistically produce? An Ep. 7-9 + Resistance book? I'd love a book that covers the Aftermath novels up to The Force Awakens but that might mean negotiating with Del Rey who are outside the Disney umbrella.
We got three complete lines plus five general books. That's better than a lot of RPGs publishes do, especially with the traditional "splat book" model. I'm not following this license to another publisher, especially not WotC or someone similar. I sensed the line was winding down long ago but I've got two FFG SW campaigns coming up in the near future so I'm not done playing. Not by a long shot.

My (probably unpopular) opinion is that I'm glad that Lucasfilm rebooted Star Wars canon. As someone who had been reading SW comics and novels since the late 1980s, the Expanded Universe was ridiculously bloated and a lot of material was poorly written. My "baseline" for canon is the movies, TV shows, and the current crop of published, third-party materials. 
That said, Legends material is a great source to dip for ideas without feeling like you're breaking holy sacrament if you change it up to better fit your style of play.
The Evocii of Nar Shaddaa play a big part in the first adventure in my upcoming EotE campaign. I'm planning to use Corellia as presented in Suns of Fortune, just with the caveat that the planet was cleaned up following the big shipbuilding boom of the Early Imperial years. I've used the Matukai and various other Force traditions that were introduced in Legends though I've tweaked them a bit. For example, if the Jedi are Akira Kurasawa samurai then the Matukai are 1970s grindhouse kung-fu monks.  The "Tales of the Jedi" comics are mostly canonical though they're considered a part of the "oral tradition" in the Star Wars universe so they're open to interpretation and not considered historical fact. It's fun to twist what players think they know about Ulic Qel-Droma and company. Pius Dea Crusades are absolutely in my head canon.  I'll reference pre-Republic cultures from Legends from time-to-time but I'll usually change them up if they don't fit what I want.

My (probably unpopular) opinion is that I'm glad that Lucasfilm rebooted Star Wars canon. As someone who had been reading SW comics and novels since the late 1980s, the Expanded Universe was ridiculously bloated and a lot of material was poorly written. My "baseline" for canon is the movies, TV shows, and the current crop of published, third-party materials. 
That said, Legends material is a great source to dip for ideas without feeling like you're breaking holy sacrament if you change it up to better fit your style of play.
The Evocii of Nar Shaddaa play a big part in the first adventure in my upcoming EotE campaign. I'm planning to use Corellia as presented in Suns of Fortune, just with the caveat that the planet was cleaned up following the big shipbuilding boom of the Early Imperial years. I've used the Matukai and various other Force traditions that were introduced in Legends though I've tweaked them a bit. For example, if the Jedi are Akira Kurasawa samurai then the Matukai are 1970s grindhouse kung-fu monks.  The "Tales of the Jedi" comics are mostly canonical though they're considered a part of the "oral tradition" in the Star Wars universe so they're open to interpretation and not considered historical fact. It's fun to twist what players think they know about Ulic Qel-Droma and company. Pius Dea Crusades are absolutely in my head canon.  I'll reference pre-Republic cultures from Legends from time-to-time but I'll usually change them up if they don't fit what I want.

My (probably unpopular) opinion is that I'm glad that Lucasfilm rebooted Star Wars canon. As someone who had been reading SW comics and novels since the late 1980s, the Expanded Universe was ridiculously bloated and a lot of material was poorly written. My "baseline" for canon is the movies, TV shows, and the current crop of published, third-party materials. 
That said, Legends material is a great source to dip for ideas without feeling like you're breaking holy sacrament if you change it up to better fit your style of play.
The Evocii of Nar Shaddaa play a big part in the first adventure in my upcoming EotE campaign. I'm planning to use Corellia as presented in Suns of Fortune, just with the caveat that the planet was cleaned up following the big shipbuilding boom of the Early Imperial years. I've used the Matukai and various other Force traditions that were introduced in Legends though I've tweaked them a bit. For example, if the Jedi are Akira Kurasawa samurai then the Matukai are 1970s grindhouse kung-fu monks.  The "Tales of the Jedi" comics are mostly canonical though they're considered a part of the "oral tradition" in the Star Wars universe so they're open to interpretation and not considered historical fact. It's fun to twist what players think they know about Ulic Qel-Droma and company. Pius Dea Crusades are absolutely in my head canon.  I'll reference pre-Republic cultures from Legends from time-to-time but I'll usually change them up if they don't fit what I want.

My (probably unpopular) opinion is that I'm glad that Lucasfilm rebooted Star Wars canon. As someone who had been reading SW comics and novels since the late 1980s, the Expanded Universe was ridiculously bloated and a lot of material was poorly written. My "baseline" for canon is the movies, TV shows, and the current crop of published, third-party materials. 
That said, Legends material is a great source to dip for ideas without feeling like you're breaking holy sacrament if you change it up to better fit your style of play.
The Evocii of Nar Shaddaa play a big part in the first adventure in my upcoming EotE campaign. I'm planning to use Corellia as presented in Suns of Fortune, just with the caveat that the planet was cleaned up following the big shipbuilding boom of the Early Imperial years. I've used the Matukai and various other Force traditions that were introduced in Legends though I've tweaked them a bit. For example, if the Jedi are Akira Kurasawa samurai then the Matukai are 1970s grindhouse kung-fu monks.  The "Tales of the Jedi" comics are mostly canonical though they're considered a part of the "oral tradition" in the Star Wars universe so they're open to interpretation and not considered historical fact. It's fun to twist what players think they know about Ulic Qel-Droma and company. Pius Dea Crusades are absolutely in my head canon.  I'll reference pre-Republic cultures from Legends from time-to-time but I'll usually change them up if they don't fit what I want.

That's fair, let's look at a few ideas!
 
I would say that the mechanics of the interrogation would always be a skill from the initiator - in most cases the Interrogator, but not always. In general, an interrogator will always go in to talk to a prisoner, so a check from the prisoner isn't required. Opposed rolls in the system are meant to cover an interaction by two characters over time, with skills accomplishing their intended successful outcomes. While usually this would be a Coercion check from the interrogator opposed the Discipline of the prisoner to avoid revealing valuable information in a classic sense, I can see other possibilities.

For instance, if the interrogator wished to befriend the target, and honestly try and help them in their predicament, avoiding lying or false promising, and appealing to the prisoner's sense of right and wrong would use Charm. In cases where the interrogator was pulling a "bluff" (such as the TNG episode with the final interrogation of Picard) the interrogator might use Deception. Likewise, while Discipline might be the "quintessential resist interrogation" skill, if the prisoner were specifically trying to deliver false information, then they may use Deception in place of Discipline. Likewise, should the prisoner attempt to threaten their way out (such as in the case of a captured Inquisitor relating the doom that awaits both themselves and their captors when Vader comes to "clean up this mess") then you might find the prisoner being the one using Coercion.
 
In an opposed check situation, you could have each party tally their own advantages and threats, then for each advantage they have garner a boost for the next round of rolls (identifying tells or "buttons" to press in their opponent) and for each threat generated get to narrate a single "false narrative" their opponent believes, resulting in a Setback to their next round, with net successes for either side resulting in strain loss for their opponent, and failures resulting in strain loss for themselves. This would represent the prisoner being shaken and starting to crack, whereas in could also represent the interrogator losing their cool and "needing a break" from the interrogation. Remember, the end result of interrogation is merely playing for time - either for legal proceedings to free them or time to be rescued/escape.
 
I would say that a good judge of determining when an interrogation is "over" is to run it through Cool.
If the prisoner brings the interrogator to their strain threshold, then the interrogator needs to make a Cool check, the difficulty being how many times the prisoner has "won." Setbacks or Boosts can be added for factors like how secure the prisoner is, how time sensitive the interrogation is, and how valuable the information is. If the interrogator passes the check, then another round of interrogation can begin when they are ready for it, or another interrogator is sent in. Failure indicates that the interrogator is "beaten" and believes that no more information is available, the prisoner doesn't know what they are after, or they believe what the prisoner has told them (depending on how the prisoner chose to handle their end of things). This is accurate to how it really happens, as many rounds of interrogation happen, over a long period of time, often with multiple interrogators involved. The advantage here is that the strain recovered by the interrogator is always recovered faster than it is for the prisoner, whose conditions are designed to prevent the recovery of strain. This inherently gives the advantage further to the interrogator as time goes on.
If (when) the interrogator brings the prisoner to their strain threshold, the same Cool check is made, this time the difficulty being how many times the interrogator has "won." Again, Setbacks or Boosts can be added for the same factors as above, but as it is seen from the prisoner's perspective (how secure the prisoner is in this case is a Setback instead of a Boost, how time sensitive is a Boost instead of a Setback as they only need to hold out so long, etc). If the prisoner was Tortured, or if a "plea deal" or reward for information was made, then upgrade the difficulty of the check a number of times based off of the temptation of the deal or extremity of the torture. Failure indicates that the prisoner gives in, and spills the information they are looking for, a Despair on the roll can even indicate that they make false claims just to get out of the situation. This is where torture and deals come into play, upgrading the difficulty of this Cool check multiple times depending on the severity, and thus increasing the likelihood of a Despair resulting in false claims, but even normal interrogation in many cases result in false admissions. 

I'm brainstorming a campaign and I've been thumbing through the various career books in my SWRPG library. When I come to the playable species sections, I find myself reading the entries and thinking, "These are great! Too bad none of my players will ever want to play any of these."
I'm probably revealing too much of the psychology of my play group but I've noticed that players often drift to either Human (or it's Corellian/Mandalorian alternatives) or one of the "sexier" aliens: Chiss, Twi'lek, or Falleen. Of the six campaigns I've run, I can't recall a single oddball alien like a Gand or Iktochi, let alone a stock Star Wars character like a Wookiee. The last time I was actually a player in a Star Wars game (Saga Edition, I think), I wanted to play an Ewok but my GM (who sucked) wanted to do a "hard space warriors being hard in space" campaign and wouldn't let me. 
I'm starting to pay more credence to the theory that most (not all, but most) players want to play themselves but smarter and better looking.