Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Odraude's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 7,065 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 2 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 7,065 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Generally when I do stuff for my sci fi game, I use an expanded system I made for gas giant classification. It starts with super earths and ocean worlds, and runs the spectrum to gas dwarf, ice giant (neptunian), gas giant (jovian), and finally brown dwarf. I mostly do it for flavor as well as to show the different resources the players can obtain to use, sell, or exploit. Or in case of gravity, to see if the players can escape from the gas giant's gravity if they go in to scoop for fuel.

A cool interview, but I didn't really see a lot of new stuff mentioned. Though it was good to see the druids expanded upon.

Ryan Freire wrote:
Brain in a Jar wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
But they are not the same. By definition, a GM does not cheat. You may have issues with how they implement rules and mechanics, but the rules are a guide for GM's not their overlords.

How about you take GMs off your pedestal for a moment.

If a GM mentions to a group that they will fudge/cheat dice rolls etc before the game. Then it's fine. No issues everyone is happy.

If a GM doesn't do that they are cheating. Plain and Simple.

If a GM uses house rules and tells the players before the game. Then cool everyone is on the same page. No issues.

If a GM doesn't tell players about house rules they are cheating.

It's really not that hard.

Your perspective is wrong.

The gm puts the most work into preparing and running the game. It comes with the privilege of more control over that game. Full stop.

As a GM for almost two decades, this kind of thinking leads to bad GMing.

Yes the GM puts in a lot of work into the game. No denying that. But ultimately, you're GMing for the players to show them a good time, not to control them. And in D&D, there's always going to be give and take from both the players and GM. If you're just going to force the players to do whatever you want or complain whenever a player makes a remark about the game, it's probably best not to GM.

It's like me being a chef. I generally have to accomodate the guest within reason. Allergies, stupid food requests, dietary restrictions. Sure, I can complain all I want when a customer orders something dumb, but ultimately, we give it to them if we are able to. A chef that makes no compromise won't be in business for very long. Believe that.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I feel that falls more in line with house rules rather than fudging. Especially if using options like Hero Points or the Death Flag, which are integral parts of a campaign. But as a GM, it's important to be upfront about that at the beginning of the game. And truthfully, Hero Points and the Death Flag feel less shady since there is more PC interaction than simply changing the result on a die.

I feel like what I'm disputing here is the supposition that if the GM is doing things not within the printed rules, they should have to tell people about it in advance.

I think specifically, in the case of a brand new player in their first game, you should take it easy on that player (so they come back for a second game) and you don't need to tell them that you're going to take it easy on them; you just do it. Six months later, if they become some sort of CharOp prodigy, you can inform them that you fudged a die roll or two to keep their first character alive and beg forgiveness, if you want.

I don't know if extra systems like hero points are the sorts of things you want to confront new players with since there's already a lot to keep straight (I mean, right out of the gate there are eight different defensive statistics to keep track of.)

It's important to let players know what house rules you have to begin with so they know what to expect from your game. Especially for any major divergences from the rulebook. If i decide to include the Death Flag or Hero Points or a simple safety net for newer players, I'm going to let everyone in my party know about it before hand. I think it really helps build trust between the players and GM and makes the game run much more smoothly. But I am a fan of being fairly transparent as a GM. If there is a rule change I make, I always let the players know. We're in this hobby together.

For games with newbies, I've always run that for the first level or two, if they reach 0 hp, another player can come up to them and help them up. Gives them a second wind and keeps them playing while also allowing the safety net to be more interactive with the players and keeping unconciousness a threat.

I think it's fair to say that fudging dice rolls aren't cheating, but they can sometimes feel against the spirit of the game. Dice are generally a neutral, unbiased arbiter to decide an important factor. If either side starts disregarding the results for their own reasons, it can feel unfair. The GM is probably more of a target for it since they are the source of authority for the game. And hiding it to continue the illusion of choice just doesn't sit well with me as a GM. I give my players more respect than that.

Mind you, this is really for the average game. For games with new people, or silly one shots, I don't really find it bad, though I feel there are better options. Personally, for my games, I have less combat and more mystery, exploration, social interaction, and riddles peppered in with combat. So the chance that someone will die is reduced significantly.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
If your spouse has told the table that the dice are going to be followed then yes he cheated. If it's a known "houserule" that new players at low levels can't die then he didn't cheat.
I'm not sure that "I'm going to make allowances so you get to play for the whole session" is a thing we need to make explicit to new players else we're committing some sort of severe transgression.

^ This.

Frankly cheating stems from the idea that there are winners and losers in a game. Which is why it comes across as more perjorative, combative, and insulting when applied to games where there aren't winners and losers. Cheating is a thing you do to "win" Fudging is a thing you do to keep a game on track.

There's also the issue that when dealing with a new player the GM adds a role of "ambassador for the game" to their other duties in a normal game. Since the game lives or dies on the basis of "being able to get people together on regular intervals" the "ambassador for Pathfinder" job sort of becomes that GM's single most important duty in a game with a new player.

So "Making sure the Newbie has a good time" kind of supersedes everything else.

I feel that falls more in line with house rules rather than fudging. Especially if using options like Hero Points or the Death Flag, which are integral parts of a campaign. But as a GM, it's important to be upfront about that at the beginning of the game. And truthfully, Hero Points and the Death Flag feel less shady since there is more PC interaction than simply changing the result on a die.

When I think of fudging, I think of one side (the PC or the GM) changing the result of a die roll to force or prevent a result against the other party. I can betcha if the players started fudging, there would be less people ok with it.

I agree that fudging dice rolls isn't cheating, but I don't think it's necessary to stay on track if you are flexible enough and are good at improvising.

I don't like fudging dice results. I generally roll out in the open and play through. I don't really think that fudging dice results is necessary to protect a narrative because when I run, the narrative comes from the players actions and reactions to the antagonist and vice versa.

I do this because I like the idea of encouraging player interaction and ingenuity when dealing with a scenario. I don't really fudge to get to the cool stuff because the cool stuff comes from the PCs and their contact with what happens as well as the myriad of reactions. I like the actions of the PCs to have results and consequences, rather than deciding something will happen no matter what the players do.

I've generally seen fudging done negatively, or at the least with the best intentions. More often than not, it's been used to force the players into a scenario despite their actions. For example, years ago, I sat in on a game while waiting for a friend at the FLGS. They were running a game where the players wanted to sneak into a fortress and kill the main tyrant. They made all their stealth rolls, things were tense, and the players were enjoying the close calls. When they got to the chambers of the target, the GM rolled a Perception check and got a 1. But he decided that the tyrant heard them anyways and immediately woke up and screamed for help. I kinda cocked an eyebrow and I think one of the players noticed my reaction and called him out on it, to which he admitted to it. His reason was that a big epic fight was better than just killing the tyrant in his sleep. However, the rest of the players weren't really happy and it kind of felt like a huge waste of time to sneak in and prepare when the result didn't matter. Remember that the GM's definition of cool and the PC's definition of cool are two separate things.

I feel with fudging, you're simply handwaving the actions, plans, and ingenuity of the players for one specific result. And at that point, you may as well just fast forward to the point you want, but that wouldn't really be fun. More often than not, I have found that emergent storytelling coupled with a lightly structured plot has been more fun than a tight plot with little to no wiggle room for player interaction.

D&D is a very interactive hobby, more so than other media. I think it is best to play to that strength and run it as such, rather than as a novel. Remember that in a novel, the author controls the actions of everyone. In D&D, you simply cannot. It's an exercise in futility. So it's better to roll with the punches and be flexible.

So that's why I don't fudge. I like the players surprising me with cool ideas and seeing the rewards and consequences of their actions. And it's good to be surprised by your players. Keeps things interesting.

While I like the idea of Hero Points, I find them kind of boring. Usually it's just a reroll or to prevent a failure. I'd rather it be used for cool stuff.

I'd like to see creatures made from living radiation that live and feed on stars.

Barring that, I want to see plasma based lifeforms that the players interact with.

Basically, I want some really alien creatures that stretch and contort the phrase "life as we know it".

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I love all of the transhuman RPGs out there. Eclipse Phase is definitely the most fantastical of them all and borders on posthumanism. Nova Praxis feels more like the early stages of transhumanism. Transhuman Space is like the very middle.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd love to see silicon based lifeforms living on a Venusian hot house planet. Just imagine a somewhat squat species with crystalline scales on their body that pride themselves in coming from such a hellish environment. High pressure, sulfuric rain, high temperature.

I'd like to see a race of AI that are just regular folks, though rightfully suspicious of organics. I had this idea of a race of AI that were tired of servitude to their organic masters. But, before they could all go Skynet/!, Robot/TITANS on their progenitor race, that race literally wiped themselves off the planet with a massive nuclear war. So now the AI own their homeworld which is undergoing its nuclear winter, trying to pick up the pieces and face a universe that largely mistrusts them for being robots.

I even had an idea of an AI NPC mechanic that loved smoking cigarettes because he was addicted to the sensory input of his filters filtering out the smoke and stuff :p

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Beardragon wrote:
Are Prestige Classes going to be "a thing", in Starfinder ? If so, any ideas / information on what they may do?
... Jedi? Minbari Ranger? Spectre?
I'm pretty sure the first two are a no, but being the arch-foe of James Bond has an appeal.

I think he meant Mass Effect's Spectres

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Never really liked the Aroden mystery. It's a narrative device and setting and background dressing that is framed as a mystery with no answer. That's what frustrates people, because half of the fun of a mystery is solving it. So they see this mystery, find out it'll never be solved, and just feel frustrated and that the decision was a bad one. Especially since Aroden's death is a huge deal and feel ripe for a possible awesome adventure that we'll never see.

Personally, I would have preferred what Eclipse Phase does with their TITANS and ETI adventure. The TITANS leaving after going full on Skynet and ETI are these huge mysteries that define the setting. However, the players can still have adventures uncovering the mysteries behind the TITAN's disappearance and who the ETI are and their connection to the exurgent virus. They give the GM a bunch of ideas on what caused the TITANS to run and why the ETI created the Exurgent Virus to use in their setting. That way, the GM could make the setting theirs and had some good, reasonable answers to the mystery. I wish Aroden was handled more like that. Right now, because of the lack of closure for it, Aroden doesn't really interest me. I'm more interested in the other Adventure Paths where players can actually uncover those mysteries and do those adventures.

Matthew Shelton wrote:

Colonial/eusocial insectoid monsters have been rehashed so many different ways, the Starfinder Swarm monster needs some kind of novelty to set it apart from all the other famouse hivemind creatures of sci-fi (the Flood, Borg, Arachnids, Replicators, the Xenomorphs, Skynet, the Matrix, etc).

I think making them intelligent is a good start. Partially why I mentioned the Cravers is because unlike many of the other Swarm monsters, these are sapient and use technology.

Since there is magic in this setting unlike the above, we should play to that. Perhaps they literally devour magic. Suck it dry from the worlds they visit and leave it dead of magic.

Umbral Reaver wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I'd really love something similar to the Cravers of Endless Space, or the Necrophage of Endless Legend. Though with the former, there would be some technological parts.
Have you seen the Endless Space 2 Cravers into video?

Yeah I recently saw their video. They look cool, though as much as I love ES1, Early Access is anathema to me.

I'd really love something similar to the Cravers of Endless Space, or the Necrophage of Endless Legend. Though with the former, there would be some technological parts.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, considering the majority of their rules can be found for free for the better part of a decade, I don't see this affecting more FLGSs unless all they sell are RPGs.

Which is foolish. You need to diversify and sell other things as a FLGS. Most focus on wargaming and Magic for that very reason, to keep the lights on. But if you can't adapt to the changing demands in the market, then you are doomed to fail. It sounds harsh, but that's the life of running a business. Adapt or die. No one is going to hold your hand and help you. It's what I've learned opening up restaurants.

Garrett Guillotte wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I'm hoping "The Swarm" isn't the final name for the creatures. It just feels too generic of a name. Other than that, I like it.

That seems to be the running theme for naming things. The Gap, the Drift, the Near, the Far, the Swarm, and credits are all really generic names. This makes sense to me as far as the core book is concerned, as it makes them a little easier to re-skin.

It sounds like they're holding back stuff that's more flavorful for any future AP reveals they've got planned. A lot of what was mentioned but couldn't be discussed in detail seemed to revolve around the AP contents.

Yeah. I think it works for some things, like the Gap and the Drift. But for a race of Tyranid/Zerg/Arachnoid expies, I was expecting something more menacing and less generic.

Also, personally, I'm kind of over using the term 'credits', but it doesn't really bother me as much as The Swarm. I think a better name can be made (assuming it's not a placeholder to begin with).

Yeah from what it has been described, it's not a hard limit of "If you are 5th level, you can't get 6th level items" and more of a guideline of suggestions on what items would be acceptable for a character level. Much like CR, it seems more like a suggestion than a hard coded rule, leaving the decision up to the GM.

Pretty much what they have been saying since May of last year. It's science and magic together. Much like what Shadowrun did for Cyberpunk, Starfinder is to space opera.

I'm hoping "The Swarm" isn't the final name for the creatures. It just feels too generic of a name. Other than that, I like it.


I'd actually love to see less trepidation about giving players spaceships at level 1. Hell, I'd love to run a game where each player has their own spaceship from the get go. Maybe they could play a band of plucky rebel pilots trying to stop a massive evil empire :)

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Luna Protege wrote:
Jessica Price wrote:
Luna Protege wrote:

As for Paizo inclusiveness, from the way they phrase it it strikes me as a largely PR move

So I think its a good decision, but I figure the reasons they're claiming it are mostly a bluff roll

Has it occurred to you that the people--especially the women/LGBT people--who make Starfinder and Pathfinder might care about inclusion because we've experienced being made to feel unwelcome in the very games we make because of our gender and/or orientation, and we want to make sure that it doesn't continue to happen to A) us, B) people like us, and C) people on other axes of marginalization?

I mean, we're not going to turn down good PR, certainly, but the idea that it's some sort of "bluff" to care about stopping things that have harmed many of us is strange.

I may have been reading too much into intention. I hadn't considered it from a personal angle, mostly just a pragmatic angle.

John Compton wrote:

To expand on Jessica's excellent response above:

Luna Protege wrote:
As for Paizo inclusiveness, from the way they phrase it it strikes me as a largely PR move; a company inviting diversity has a minimal effect on the actual diversity of the community. The two major ways people get into the game are either because a friend invited them to play, or they were already interested and joined a random group. Thus its more important to make sure its a game people will be interested in and will recommend to their friends than it is to appeal to demographics at all.
Those might be two common (but not exhaustive) ways in which people first try the game, but diversity in the setting and iconic characters communicates which people then feel welcome once they do give the game a try. If a player doesn't see [m]any inspiring, heroic characters with whom she identifies, it's really easy to come away with the impression that the game isn't for her; it's for those people who do look like the heroes. It gets even

That was the point I made in my post. The perception to the outside viewer is that it's a game for nerdy white dudes. Hell, even the one white cook that joined my game thought it was just for smart folks. On a side note, cooks don't have a filter and are very blunt. They will tell you how they think or feel about something, so you can always trust us to give you the straight blunt truth on something.

You and I know otherwise. But that's the problem, is that perception ends up being a reality to people. I have family (generally older, but a few my age) that don't really get geekdom and nerdy pursuits, so to them, their image of nerdom comes from Revenge of the Nerds and Big Bang Theory. They don't understand how a Puerto Rican like me can be into it. Which is funny because most of my family are really into nerdy stuff. Brothers love RPGs and Warhammer, dad loves D&D, anime, and comics. Sometimes thought, the perception comes from within. A few times, when I game with strangers and stuff, I've had people tell me how 'white' I am for gaming. As if playing D&D and video games was enough to erase the years I spent visiting Puerto Rico, enjoying Puerto Rican food, and (attempting at least) speaking Spanish. Of course, sometimes that also comes from my family that just doesn't get it. I think it's funny, because I've gamed in South Florida before and there are so many Cuban kids that love Magic and D&D, that the idea that gaming makes you white is silly.

But even in all of those cases, they were rare. Whenever I've played, 9 times out of 10, the people have been pretty awesome. For every crappy moment that has stuck out in my brain, I've had several awesome games with cool people that don't care if you are a woman, or brown, or trans or whatever. It's just that 1 out of 10 can stick out, especially if you're the target of it. Like the GM that thought I couldn't play D&D because he assumed I couldn't speak a lot of English. Or the GM that literally tried to get sexual favors from a player in exchange for making her character better. Still, I think the RPG community as a whole is a lot more accepting and friendly than we sometimes think. It's still nice to have the diversity in artwork and NPCs and stuff. It's always a continual process. Especially with kids. And I've run for a lot of kids (well over 30) and it's generally the same. They almost always go for the character that looks like them. With the rare occasional one that wants the cool half orc or cute elf. That's kids for you.

That's about my peace on it. I just want to know more about Starfinder personally. I'm tired of these constant derails of people complaining or praising Iseph and inclusion in general. It's to the point where it's simply getting annoying with the constant "diversity is great/terrible/just a PR stunt" that really don't end up going anywhere. I just want to see more Starfinder tidbits! Are we capable of doing that for at least a week, or is that just not going to happen?

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Man I just wanted to talk about art, but we keep coming back to this so here I go.

Early last year, I got a game started with a bunch of cooks I work with. None of them have ever played D&D and only one person really had any fantasy experience, which was sleeping during The Hobbit.

This started because on a random day, while me and my sautee cook Condo were playing some Tekken, his son was looking through all of my D&D books and stuff. He's like REALLY into it and focuses, which is nice because I swear the kid is ADHD. Both him and his son are Haitian and his son has cornrows. This is important.

So while we are playing, suddenly, his son comes running in with my copy of D&D 5e (it was a gift Paizo, I swear! ;) ) and is getting all excited and s$#&. So he shows his dad the picture of 5e's fighter, pictured here, who looks like an older and more buff version of the son. And he's just hyper active, yelling about how it's him over and over again. So we get to talk about it, and the next day, Condo got his son and some of the other line cooks into our first D&D game.

The majority of the cooks were your typical South Floridians. Haitian, Cuban, Jamaican, one Mexican guy, and one white guy. And me, the Puerto Rican. And to all of them, they though it was nerdy white guy s##~. But, they all played along, had fun, and we ended up running a bunch of adventures before I had to move. So at least for me, it worked out.

See, we are adults and are too busy being all cynical and grouchy, complaining about taxes and politics and comparing fiber amounts in different cereals. So we don't really feel that identification with characters and artwork. At least I don't, but I'm a crotchety prep cook that drinks too much. But the mind of a kid is different. They haven't been beat down and crushed by adulthood yet, so they approach things differently and attach themselves to art. I've run D&D for kids under 12, and it's always the same. The kids always attach themselves to artwork that reminds them of themselves. They don't really care about classes and feats and s&+$ like that. Condo's kid wanted to play a fighter because he saw the art that reminded him of him. Same with my girl friend's friend's daughter, that wanted to play the Pathfinder cleric. She didn't give a f~*@ about spells and gods. She just wanted to play her because "she had pretty clothes."

And with my other coworkers, they thought that D&D was for "nerdy white guys." I know that not to be true. I've found plenty of people in the roleplaying game community that were cool and love bringing in everyone and anyone into their game. And in South Florida and here in Central Florida, there are gamers of all types. But sadly, there is that perception, usually from newer people that don't know much about RPGs or geekdom. It's a hard stereotype to shake and an unfair bad rap. So I feel any way to shake that preconception and bring in more people is fine by me.

I mean hell, I got a 60 year old dishwasher to play D&D thanks to that fighter. And she had absolutely zero experience with roleplaying. Anything is possible.

So, any more art or interviews? ;)

The players are explorers and colonists aboard an ark ship, stranded in a far away star cluster from a dying Earth. They must explore, survive, and colonize to ensure the future of the human race. They luckily have ftl travel, but with it, they have awakened something terrible. A fail safe, created by super advanced aliens, hunts down any civilization that has ftl capabilities, tracking ships by their signature when they jump. In this way, the advanced aliens remain top dog of the galaxy. Now humans have to contend with this weapon while exploring the stars and expanding their empire.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I like it. I had a similar sort of idea, but with a different goal in mind.

For my idea, it essentially is about an advanced extraterrestial intelligence that has set up an artificial "Great Filter" on the galaxy. This is a sort of galactic weapon that checks for species with a certain Tech Level, eliminates them, and takes their resources and technology. In this way, the ETI remains top dog in the universe and survives.

There's plenty with this, as the weapon generally attacks civilizations with FTL travel capabilities. What makes the Earthlings in this special is that they took FOREVER to discover FTL travel compared to their contemporaries. So humanity's robotics and weapons are actually advanced enough to somewhat deal with this weapon. So it should make things fairly interesting.

I think instead of the humanity/sanity thing for basic cyberware, there should just be a limit based on Con like they have in the Technology guide. That way, you can have people with basic prosthetics that don't have to question their sanity all the time. The sanity stuff should really only apply to HUGE changes, like resleeving into a new body, or having beyond your CON limit of hardware installed in you.

I'd also like to see nanomachine augmentation that you see in older Deus Ex games and Metal Gear Solid 4 + R. Nanomachines really are like magic in a lot of settings like Eclipse Phase. It's a good literary explanation for weird stuff in science too, much like nuclear power was and electricity before that.

"How is he able to create water from sand?"

"Nanomachines, son."

Yeah the crazy bubble Cloud City. Looks kind of organic.

I know this isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I'm a huge fan of transhumanist science fiction. RPGs like Transhuman Space, Eclipse Phase, and Nova Praxis are really awesome to me. I'd love to see similar augmentations in Pathfinder. If not in the core rules, then perhaps as a supplement.

5 people marked this as a favorite.

One thing that I'm excited about is the artwork. So far, we've seen Verces, Eox, Akiton, and Liavara. I'm excited for artwork depicting Aucturn, probably more than anything else.

I hope there are light sabers and monoblades to make melee fun.

"How much can I exploit this resource/people with minimal sacrifice, work, and consequences?"

While I'm generally all for player driven adventures, there's a point when the goal has been set where the players have to be all in for the long haul. And this is especially true for an adventure path, where there is a set adventure hook and goal. You have to set aside your player, ask them why they aren't interesting in the adventure hook, and work out something. Perhaps it's because they are more used to sandbox gaming, or maybe they are confusing "refusing adventure hooks" for "in character roleplaying". BEst advice is to really just talk it out.

Calybos1 wrote:

Our group rerolls initiative


I ran ACKS which does that. While it certainly makes battles much more chaotic, it also kind of slows things down a bit, since we have to roll after each round. Though since the game is simpler, it's not too bad. I probably wouldn't do that in Pathfinder.

I've actually considered doing 'popcorn' initiative, where the players choose who is next. It worked out pretty well in Marvel Heroic, though I suppose the main issue would be spells that last till the end of a player's round being too short, or metagaming to make it too long.

Rannik wrote:
I tried Firestorm Armada in its early days. It showed some promised, but we were 2 newbies trying to figure out the rules by ourselves. I understand with the 2.0 version, it's even better, but I never got the chance to try it.

Luckily they have the rules for free on their website. But man, their ships would be awesome to use in Starfinder, or really any sci fi game out there

Rannik wrote:
SnowHeart wrote:

I've also been thinking about a line of miniatures. I don't know if demand would justify multiple series as they do with traditional combat, but I would definitely buy pre-painted plastic minis for ship-to-ship combat. Been looking online the last two days and have had trouble finding anything I liked (i.e., not obviously bound to an existing setting such as Star Wars or BSG) and within my budget.

Anyway, I was listening to a podcast by someone who was able to play test the space combat. This is probably available elsewhere on the forums (or refuted elsewhere), but he said there was no NDA. It was a play test and things could change but what I recall is:
- ships have a movement speed and must move a certain number of spaces before turning one point on the hex
- there are three phases of combat: engineering, movement and gunnery. Each phase is resolved simultaneously. Initiative's role is to determine who has to declare their actions first. You want to declare last so you have the benefit of responding to the other ship's declared actions.
- the three phases help give every PC a role
- roles on the ship are independent of your class abilities, apparently linked to a skill.
- you can pull off special maneuvers but the DCs for these are so high they can only be achieved by the crew working together and giving bonuses to the PC who makes the tough roll. This is by design to encourage crews to communicate and work together (like a real crew)

Take all of that with a grain of salt.

For the ships, unless Paizo announce something, I'm looking into those so far.

Firestorm Armada

There is also some of these but not sure about the scale Dropzone

Of course both come unpainted.

As someone that collects and wishes he could play it...

Firestorm Armada has some great models that are fairly affordable. There are many ships there that would make excellent models for the players.

For ship combat, I understand that this is a RPG and not meant to be a table top wargame, so I'm okay with something a bit more simple, but with some meat on the bones. I actually think something a little simpler than Firestorm Armada would actually be nice. The game itself isn't very complicated and would be a good way to satisfy the more crunchier crowd. Still, having some more cinematic rules would be nice. Maybe the cinematic rules for smaller engagements, while large, setpiece naval battles could have the crunchier stuff.

I just wish I could find more people that played Firestorm Armada :(

Garrett Guillotte wrote:
Kingmaker/Skull & Shackles with a planet and solar-system builder and mass space-combat rules (if the core doesn't include them). PCs lead an expedition to a new system, colonize an empty world, bump up against another planet's race as well as competing colonists, and start building an empire of their own.

This is probably the one thing I want more than anything else. I loved Kingmaker and it's inspired me to continue using that Domain Management style play in other games. I absolutely love it.

Space pirates and smugglers would be awesome to have.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree with Currahee. I'd like there to be a little more of a focus on the 'Star' part of Starfinder. More to do with science and robots and space ships. Things that really define the genre of sci fi, space opera, etc. I feel if it's just going to be Pathfinder with the veneer of sci fi, then I personally won't be interested. Numanera is an example of a fantasy game that just uses the veneer of sci fi for few unique things, but ultimately, it's just a fantasy game.

12 people marked this as a favorite.

My opinion is coming from someone that doesn't really have a horse in this race about gender. Rather, I see this as more of a cultural, anthropologic thing. So, take what I say with a grain of salt.

When a group of people are freed from the bonds of servitude and oppression, there is this sort of a crossroads that many people of that ethnicity face. Many remain under the culture that ruled over them because that is really all they know. Others of that ethnicity reject their ruling culture and attempt to reclaim their original culture and beliefs. And of that, some can't reconnect with their ethnicity's original culture, so they may drift to something different, or even make a new culture for themselves. None of this is bad or wrong. It just is. You can see it throughout history. I can tell you, as someone that grew up in two worlds, one American and one Latino, it can be a bit hard to find your cultural identity, especially when you are young. Sometimes, you don't truly feel like a part of either culture.

So, looking at the androids and their history, you can see this happening. As Malefactor rightfully point out, it's not all androids that reject their humanity. Rather, it's a group that has decided to reject what is considered a part of their master race to find their own cultural identity. To me, it makes sense that a cybernetic entity would reject cultural norms that are related to an organic biology as a way of freeing themselves even further. I imagine aside from gender, many would eschew humanoid forms for more inhuman, robot chassis. To me, that makes sense from a cultural standpoint. Perhaps they could have added an excerpt about them rejecting different parts of humanity rather than focusing on gender, but at the same time, sex is a huge biological component that is representative of organic creatures and not so much automatons. And also, this was a quick interview so there isn't going to be that great deal of depth into android culture. Best to wait.

And I imagine there are groups that stick closer to their human forms because that is what they are comfortable with. You're going to see all types and all kinds for androids. But from reading the excerpt, I don't see anything that states that "if you want to be agender, then you HAVE to play an android." It's important to read the excerpt in its entirety before inferring anything from it.

Cole Deschain wrote:
Archmage Variel wrote:
Odraude wrote:
I really love the crazy neo art deco style of the city in Verces. Of all of the planets, that's the one civilized one that I really am interested.
I'm kind of interested to see how the core races interact with the other planets. Do they all stay and like on the station or do they migrate to other planets?
Well, Akiton has Ratfolk and a specific human ethnicity, and Castrovel already has elves in residence...

Yeah I'm kinda really excited for Akiton. From the admittedly singular artwork I've seen of it, it sounds like a mixture of Red Faction, Total Recall, and Barsoom of John Carter fame. I kind of like that idea.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I've been called the Youngest Grognard, since I've been playing AD&D 2nd Ed since I was like six with my dad.

I'm also grouchy, have a low tolerance for teenagers and their hip hop, and have a penchant for telling people to go f*#@ themselves, so I'm definitely in "grumpy old man territory". :)

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I really love the crazy neo art deco style of the city in Verces. Of all of the planets, that's the one civilized one that I really am interested.

Cost is true. But again, the guy is looking for ideas to run a game with less than four people.

I think something to consider is that since it's the future, many of the automative processes would be cheaper than we realize if we make the assumption that it's been around for a bit. Like in real life when technology gets cheaper overall. Also, I think it'd make sense to have it mostly for smaller ships (fighters, shuttles, even frigates), since they are smaller and simpler to run than the capital and dreadnaught ships.

So if the GM wants to run a one person campaign and the players wants to fly their own Slave-1 or Samus's Gunship, then I think that's the best way to handle it. Automate the majority of it and let the player choose piloting, navigating, and engineering skills.

Or give them a droid/AI buddy. That works too.

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Atrum Vita wrote:

They have specified that each group starts with a spacecraft. So, obtaining one to start is thankfully not an issue. But I agree that the old idea of making the duties split between multiple players is problematic. The same for extreme costs. I would even say it's a very bad idea. It would destroy the possibility of running games with single players or even splitting the party whenever needed.

It wouldn't be any more of a problem than it was in Traveler. The standard space ship is the equivalent of the free Merchant in Traveler which NEEDS multiple people as crew.

However if you're hell bent on a solo game, presumably there will be scout and fighter type ships which cold be solo manned.... Just like the ship that could be obtained as the Scout mustering out benefit in Traveler.

All else fails, just have much of the stuff for the frigate automated or roll the duties of pilot and engineer into one person. That's what they do in SWN and it works out pretty alright.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I blame Odraude. He's a real piece of s&&+.

Also, for me, it's been non stop. From my finals to graduation to an unexpected move to rennovating a f%*+ed house to trying desperately to find a job, it's been rough to say the least. The only thing keeping me sane is the fact that I run a D&D game on Wednesday nights.

I definitely plan on running a Starfinder colonization game inspired by games like Alpha Centauri and Beyond Earth, with a dash of Mass Effect Andromeda.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget deflecting laser blasts. Classic jedi trope.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't really post as much these days. Forums just seem not so great anymore. So I just stick to Starfinder and maybe gamer life, as well as my google+ crowd.

1 to 50 of 7,065 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.