Search Posts
Well there's a lot that a new edition of Starfinder could have to make it more appealing to me personally! I couldn't see a new edition coming out any time soon but if there's a thread it could be a fun exercise. -A complete overhaul of the Starship minigame rules. Decoupling them from the APL level and instead using standard in game currencies and make it a system where players are mostly individual fighters that both lessen the burden on the GM and don't leave players sitting at the table bored for long periods of time not playing. A player's ship being part of their equipment effectively ala something like Cowboy Bebop or Star Wars versus the current rules. Luke's X-Wing or The Swordfish II vs the Firefly or Eagle 5. Trade crew roles for class specific abilities, etc. -Rules for starships interacting with non-starships. Weapon damages for shooting at buildings/people/etc. Rules for hovering and tossing down climbing lines or balancing/fighting on top of them, etc. Likely treating other vehicles (like a truck) as starships that can't fly to keep them all mechanically in the same sphere. -A complete overhaul of the magic rules to make magic actually a powerful and interesting. Much more interaction between technology and magic in rules. I'd be happier with some kind of conflict between them rather than just both doing the same thing but one takes batteries and the other takes mana. -A drastic reduction in the legacy third edition SRD numbers in a similar manner to more recent editions of d20 pen and paper RPGs. -Retain the modular class systems of the legacy third SRD editions which I prefer over the dedicated path system of D&D4/PF2. I find it much more fun to make your own character piece by piece than to be completely tied down in one lane. I'll decide what my character is and how it acts as one of that thank you. :) -Complete overhaul of equipment. Removal of levels and drastic reduction of weapons/armor for players and starships and a drastic increase in more traditional gear/gadgets/magic. With a numbers reduction these changes would be mostly painless but the system should focus on the players being more skilled with the weapons than just using more powerful weapons. Bigger/badder weapons should come with drawbacks or be the realm of story devices. Also throw out the hand waving fix everything rice stuff component too. It throws out a lot of very classic space fantasy problems. -Drastic overhaul of the setting to make it a bit more interesting and less the random nation states of Golarian but now it's a whole planet. Places to go in the setting could feel more science fiction interesting versus the trope worlds that currently exist or like are in Star Wars. The scope shouldn't center around one solar system but a modest galaxy with habitable planets being rare. -The drift could be more interesting as a kind of system to explore rather than how things travel around. I don't hate it but I don't think I like it either. Perhaps if there were alternatives for FTL travel along with it and the drift areas made space combat more into a navel affair like a fight from Banner of the Stars or the climactic fight at the end of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. -The classes would of course need an overhaul from these changes. Certain older classes should still exist by the settings rules. Clerics/wizards/etc shouldn't be relegated to an optional appendix and instead explored fully in scope. What is a wizard like in the age of space? What does a cleric's god need with a starship? New classes are still good too of course but the idea seems to sell on the Pathfinder in Space idea so it'd be a cleaner fit to mix the classics and new together.
If your players aren't ever failing saving throws you might want to audit their characters. We're constantly failing saves when we're playing in Adventure Paths... People are having very different experiences playing this game. It's really frustrating to have to spend three sessions with your character nerfed into the ground or to watch the melee and ranged martial characters knocking down foes left and right with ease and then just waste turn after turn because of successful saves. The 2e things well... I don't want to get into that. I have opinions on 2e and if Paizo wants to hear them they can ask. Not going to go on their forums and rudely slag them off or anything for it.
I know no one cares about what I think about anything but this annoyed me 10 minutes ago when I cast Howling Agony and everything made their saving throws and my whole turn ended up being pointless. It really pushes you towards damage spells. Cast a fireball spell and you at least get to do half damage. I'm talking about spells mind you, not picking good or bad targets. All these save or nothing spells just feel bad. Spells should be like save or be affected for a round almost always past 1st level. We should invent a time machine and add this to the list of things to fix after doing all the important stuff you'd have to do with a time machine.
So since the only one that says anything like that is the Ancestry Feats when it has those headings you are completely locked to your current level except for Ancestry Feats which have an exception? I suppose that would explain that sentence in the skill feat section saying the level is just a guideline as another exception.
Hrm...I don't know. That might work. They're really having trouble since they're divided out by level. I was hoping for something more specific about it calling it out. They're seeing the giant headers that shout out, "2ND LEVEL" and are assuming that they can only pick from those options and I'm not finding anything that contradicts that idea. Plus it's entirely possible that given that it's a new game, that's actually how it's supposed to work and I don't think it should because of having played the older d20 games for years.
When you take a class feat, you can take any that you meet the requirements for... including the minimum level... which means the feats of lower levels are wide open (if you meet their other prereqs, of course). Yes, I'm looking for the particular sentence, paragraph, picture, diagram or whatever in the rulebook that says that's the case. Like what page is it on?
Here are some questions about feats which is almost everything in this game. Class Feats
Example for people who can't solve for X: Willy the Wizard gets to level 2. He wishes to take a level 1 Wizard feat. Is that allowed by the rules as written? Where in the rules does it say yay or nay? Can Willy gain a Familiar, or is he forced for pick from level 2 feats? Skills Feats
The level of a skill feat is typically the minimum level at which a character could meet its proficiency prerequisite. So that seems to imply that number on the skill feats isn't a prerequisite, but there's this other rule someplace that I'm pretty sure said that when you read all these feats that big number on the right is absolutely a level needed to have the feat. So is that wrong? The level isn't in the prerequisite field but it seems like it normally is a prerequisite, but then something contradicts that for skill feats which seems like specific beating general... Can a character just take any skill feat they meet the prerequisites for then by the rules and ignore the normal level restrictions?
That's actually a fun trick for the mystic theurge using their combined spells ability for that. Not going to hit everything but it's fun. I really like this feat for the ability to allow for a lot of these fun alchemical components and equipment tricks rules to actually come into play. Mallecks makes a really good point for how it can improve or make valid very underused options in the game. You're economy is punished less for your investment in taking feats like Toxic Spell or the various Equipment Tricks. Wall of Ice isn't a spell you'd normally spend a hundred gold on to deal just a 1d6 acid damage to a foe but with False Focus you've only got to spend it once. The d20 system drastically overpriced alchemical items and poisons in my eyes. Paizo made so many interesting rules and items that just get costed right out of being useful to my characters so this is a fun patch to that.
So I've been looking to play some PFS adventures to get more experience playing 2nd edition and I've noticed a lot of games listed on Warhorn that aren't linked to a convention. Does anyone play in these games and know the etiquette for joining them? Do you just sign up and go for it? Also if you do play PFS adventures online how do tracking of certs and like usually get handled online? Or character sheets? Do people tend to just act on trust or do they expect people to have character sheets loaded into roll20 or the like?
That sounds more like the kind of investment that should be rewarded then punished. If anything that's more a commentary that the cure spells are too lackluster. This gives alternative options for non-spell casters to actually use treat deadly wounds effectively which is beneficial for a living campaign where you can't assume the party has some source of healing spell caster.
Hey folks, I know it's a first edition society question but does anyone know why the Healer's Hands feat got banned? Conduit feats aren't blanked banned, others are allowed. It doesn't have any evil connotations, strange role-playing prerequisites or the like. So what the heck is the reasoning for it?
This is hands down the most tedious adventure I've ever had the displeasure of playing in the past 20 years of various living campaigns. If that's what encounter mode is supposed to play like I'm totally out for 2nd edition Pathfinder. It was so bad I felt compelled to come here and complain about it. Now that I've done that I feel better and can try to put this out of my memory.
Hey sorry if this got asked already or is somewhere else but are the cleric buff spells (or buff spells in general) going away? I'm looking a the spells in Starfinder and it seems to be a bit lacking in the kinds of magics where one makes their fellows perform better. I know this isn't Starfinder but I thought of that today and I'm kind of worried now.
I'm sure I can find something to spend some more gold on with that. No variant Multi-classing either, just asked. Too bad though, since I'd never read it before and it's actually pretty neat. We can take the Advanced Template, it doesn't cost levels though. Can't create our own races. Skills will likely be very useful a lot of the time.
Yeah, you start to see why I'm asking for help on this. Just so many ideas but then it's hits some odd roadblock. Not bad ideas though! Just can't do anything with it. No guns either. DeathlessOne, that is pretty impressive with all that. Bloodrager does keep coming up as ideas for it. I didn't know superstitious would work with the buffs from the Arcane Bloodrager but re-reading it seems to certainly look like it should be fine. I'm going to take a look at what you've got in YAPCG and see how it looks. I know I didn't list it but Adamantine and Mithral are apparently banned. I've been fiddling with halflings and so forth a lot too, so it sounds similar to some of my ideas.
Hey all. I'm having some issues coming up with anything I particularly want to play in a campaign my friend is trying to start up. The things that are allowed and disallowed and the goals in the game are kind of all over the place. It's a semi-pvp gladiator/challenge focused campaign that starts at 12th level in a world where fifth level and higher spells don't exist at all. No items with them as prerequisites (yet 200k to spend with a 50k max per item) and the higher level slots are mostly just for meta magic, though if a supernatural ability emulates something that's higher it's fine. Our allowed books are:
Everything related to summoning isn't allowed for us. All hit points are maxed. Immunities are just resist 30 or save +8. No guns, companions or familiars are replaced with a bonus feat. It uses the revised action economy. People can come back to life with in game items. We have access to several of the CR+1 templates that exist like advanced, celestial, etc but we're on a 15 point buy. Any race with an actual page of information in the race Guide is open game. So you can see it's kind of all over the place. I could make a merfolk dragon disciple bloodrager but I can't buy a broom of flying. The only traits are those from the APG. I'm just not having much luck coming up with ideas that are appealing. With everyone having maxed out hit points it feels like just dealing damage won't be that great. At the moment I'm leaning towards a hexcrafter magus since curses and other debuffs sound more effective, or maybe a mystic thurge randomly. I don't know what anyone else is making either. Anyone have any suggestions or ideas? Please, I could really use a hand.
Well alright, in no particular order: Promethean Alchemist for Alchemist
False Priest for Sorcerer
Cloistered Cleric for Cleric
Tactician for Fighter
Paladin for Cavalier
Well there are a few that could be tossed out pretty easily with very little mess. Monk can obviously be thrown out completely. No reason to have that at all. Maybe in some Tian Adventures book or something. I suppose you could replace it with some kind of brawler class but that'd make a good Fighter archetype too. Ranger could be an Archetype of Fighter.
A majority of the issues I want to see, other than like making Paladin an Archetype of Cavalier, fall around the names of things. Two-handed weapons could be called Heavy Weapons, Prestige Classes (if they're even kept around) could just be Secondary/Advanced/Expansion Classes. Things like that. But not modes...
I'd say it makes them pointless or trivial. It makes finding like interesting armor or something similar pointless because things just hit you anyway on 2's. You're not epic because numbers are high, especially when it's all the numbers. Divide everything by 10 and it's exactly the same game.
It sounded interesting. Are all those terms finalized? The useage of Mode seems like it isn't the best. Things like explorer (exploration?) mode doesn't feel right in a fantasy pen and paper RPG. At least my personal opinion. Feels more like something an SUV would have.
The thing I like most about D&D 5th edition is just the toning down of the huge numbers that rolled around in the 3rd edition era and lived on for over a decade. Running games where people and monsters were roaming about with over +20 to hits or saves or AC's in the 40's got to be just way too much. Now someone in full plate armor is reasonably well protected even at higher levels. Plus when you do get a bonus it feels much more rewarding. It's something I hope Pathfinder persues as well. Tone things freaking down a couple dozen notches. Just +1 per level is too much. Also lower the freaking skill check DC's while you're at it. It felt like everything was 15+ at the lowest in the first edition.
X-Wing and Armada. Thank you! I couldn't think of the name and I was in a rush. I agree with your points too. I'm totally up for the 5-15 minute resolution style. The roll to succeed at life isn't terribly gripping either, especially when it comes to space ships. Make a roll to take off, make a roll to leave the atmosphere. :/ Also important is the how of obtaining a spaceship too. Just a story reward? How does a party of 3 people get one, how about a party of 7? People who play the game as a miniatures battle game on a grid, people who play it with a focus on story and don't use miniatures at all, groups who do huge intricate 3D terrain and tape measures, etc.
Doesn't that lead to exactly the same problem, where one section of the game is for one person and everyone else must sit back and wait while they and the GM resolve it? Not really. It's more that it pushes the group away from having space battles which is the far more normal situation in a space RPG. Someone's driving this thing so now we don't need to worry about it unless the story decides it's important. It's to keep the game from turning into stopping and just becoming like that Star Wars miniatures space game that Fantasy Flight does. Spaceships are Adventuring RV's that carry people from adventure point A to adventure point B. It's like the USS Enterprise in Star Trek. Sure some times they get to put up the shields and shoot the lasers but a vast majority of the time it's just there to get them to the next M class planet so the adventure can continue. That function of them works. Huge space fleet battles are super fun, in games about space battles. In an RPG that will take a huge amount of thought and effort to make something most of the player base would actually use. The up until now RPG model of huge GM responsibility and then blundering about is horrible. I warn against it. BEWAAAAAREEEE!
Don't make this like other space games where you need 5+ PC's to run a ship properly and there are tons of useless huge ships needing hundreds/thousands of people taking up valuable page space. Space ships are cool and they're always handled very poorly in RPG's from the experience I've had with them. They're very often some combination of priced obscenely out of any reach, require the PC party to not only somehow work together as adventuring people but also work part time as communication officers and mechanics, or are just massive star ships that seem cool but are virtually useless during actual game play. Spaceship battles can be a lot of fun but you can’t have them be like
Think Firefly, think smaller ships in Star Wars. 1 pilot in a proper ship, not a tiny fighter ship, but a whole adventuring RV ship! Engineers and people to work guns optional. We need Wash or Han. Everyone else can just buckle in. Something like that. Adventurer RV in Space. Spaceballs - exactly what ships are in a large portion of games. So seriously think about that as a real problem. Cool customization of ship designs looks great on the back of the cover but the ship needs to be very involved with the regular game play and mechanics if you want to have them as any kind of real game focus. Otherwise your being dull or frustrating to the players. Also don't let it devolve into that tired old trope of "cool, we have a spaceship... let's spend the rest of the game focusing on how we are going to pay for maintaining it." Way too many games devolve into that and it is not fun. These are real issues and failings in space RPG's up to this point.
How much do we know of spaceships so far? I haven’t read every post on the forum. I’m just worried because they always seem to be either priced outside of any PC’s possible ability to buy, require some kind of extreme number of crew members that it removes some/all the ships out of most games or even without thousands of crew you need to have 4-6 PC’s specialized in just running it. It can really throw a wrench into things especially when players start to just steal them. I’m just hoping that people are thinking about and looking at that. It’s hard enough to rope 4-6 people together as a unit without them needing to know how to use sensors or things after all.
|
