Oh! That was 100% intentional. As soon as Owen decided that the Iconic Ranger was going to be channeling "foxy Han Solo" in his look, I decided we needed to pay homage to that scene. ;-)
|
Hey everyone!
Errors in need of an errata are sort of inevitable when you are working with a brand new game system with the level of speed we needed to get the book together for you, and we are fully committed to making sure that this book is as error free as humanly possible. Thanks for your patience, patronage, and support!
I have not gone through the class and race options very thoroughly (they are the elements of least interest to me) but the Computer stuff in the Equipment section was great. This will be quite useful.
More like this please. A lot more. :)
Hey everyone!
Errors in need of an errata are sort of inevitable when you are working with a brand new game system with the level of speed we needed to get the book together for you, and we are fully committed to making sure that this book is as error free as humanly possible. Thanks for your patience, patronage, and support!
I have not gone through the class and race options very thoroughly (they are the elements of least interest to me) but the Computer stuff in the Equipment section was great. This will be quite useful.
More like this please. A lot more. :)
Matt will be thrilled to hear you say that. New computers and starships can be tough to design. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Errors in need of an errata are sort of inevitable when you are working with a brand new game system with the level of speed we needed to get the book together for you
I feel like this attitude is part of the problem. You didn't need to get it out this quickly, and instead of being something that made us want to buy your upcoming supplements I'm turned off from them.
That said, for better or worse I already went out on a limb and bought it, so I'm going to point out issues where I see them even for the ones I'm sure won't be fixed.
For example, there are way too many per day abilities in this book. So much more could have been done with Paladin by making smite a Resolve spender instead of filling out levels with an extra use per day. Wizard is another one with per day abilities that I'm not sure really needs them.
Cleric gets an additional spell prepared per day and the ability to prepare domain spells as if they were on the character's spell list; however, since they only have one domain cast spells as an arcanist the latter ability is useless since they already have their domain spells prepared at all times. I get the feeling they're only supposed to be able to cast their domain spell once, but I don't see anything providing that limitation.
I would highly recommend explicitly not allowing Icon's Megacelebrity and Priest of the Faith to stack.
Magus is alright, I guess, although I personally really dislike ability score replacers. I also see no way for the Magus to avoid provoking AoOs, which with the way guarded steps (read: 5-foot steps) work and how reliant on 5-foot steps the class was in PF, may pose a problem for class's ability to function in melee.
I'm also not sure why "Arcane Weapon" was moved up from a Swift to a move action, though that's just a quibble.
Still looking through it.
Oh! That was 100% intentional. As soon as Owen decided that the Iconic Ranger was going to be channeling "foxy Han Solo" in his look, I decided we needed to pay homage to that scene. ;-)
I never thought of Han Solo as a ranger.
Another selection of things I've noticed. First, stuff I like: Bard. Despite my more systemic issues with your book (MORE PER DAY ABILITIES!), you added more flexibility and flavor to what was already one of my favorite pathfinder classes. There are issues, but as a whole I really like it.
Thank you so much for giving Rangers (where appropriate) and Paladins access to cantrips and full CL.
The picture on 196. Heh.
Onto the issues.
In Bard's Muse ability, it says the Muses you can select from are on page 51 (they're actually on the next page, 52). Additionally, it says you gain a free rank in the muse's associated skill at each level; considering Versatile Performance still exists, I assume you mean key skill.
Back in Cleric, several Channel Divinity options are based on Wisdom, when (in my opinion) they should be based on Charisma since the ability is otherwise Charisma-based. Specifically, I saw the Luck and Plant options. The Luck one is weird because of the sheer number of individual bonuses allowed; does anyone really need 13 separate +1's over the course of a minute or so? Combat almost never lasts that long. Personally, I would recommend rebalancing it so it was a shorter duration with a somewhat higher set of bonuses.
I notice there are no litanies (or otherwise reaction-timed spells) in the Cleric (and, by extension, the paladin) list. These might have been a hidden aspect of the Paladin class, but they were an incredibly important one, and losing them is major. One of the major parts of the paladin class was having this suite of abilities they could use as an immediate action by using a spell slot, and not having anything in that part of their niche leaves the whole class feeling a bit anemic.
In Paladin's Divine Bond, the last paragraph says "the mount gains a +2 divine bonus against spells and abilities created by evil creatures." I assume you meant it to apply to saving throws?
In Ranger Methodologies, the Animal Companion one mentions level-2, and then later says level-3.
In Wizard, please state what page the Familiar rules are on (p.126), because they're not "at the end of this section".
In the Spellslinger Tradition, does Spellsling get the Focused Power bonus to attack rolls?
Was there any reason why you added in the Bonus Spells section to every single class? They all look the same, surely you could have just posted one 9-level table and let people extrapolate from there.
Although I'm reasonably sure it doesn't, Storied Background should call out specifically if you get the bonus to ability scores or not. I would recommend not.
Storied Continuation feels like it will be problematic, if for no other reason than the ability to have two separate resolve recovery methods.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey everyone!
Errors in need of an errata are sort of inevitable when you are working with a brand new game system with the level of speed we needed to get the book together for you, and we are fully committed to making sure that this book is as error free as humanly possible. Thanks for your patience, patronage, and support!
I have not gone through the class and race options very thoroughly (they are the elements of least interest to me) but the Computer stuff in the Equipment section was great. This will be quite useful.
More like this please. A lot more. :)
Alex is right: I am so pleased to hear that!
Hey All, I am meeting with my group tomorrow and I want to play a tiefling. But I am thinking they might have too many abilities. I am just checking to see if everyone thinks they are balanced. +2 to 3 skills while other races only get it to 2 skills?
I am looking at the Aasimar and it seems they aren't as powerful as the tiefling and I always saw them as a ying and yang.
I wanted Pathfinder in space, not Star Wars Revised Core Unchained. Very unhappy.Should you want that (to be very clear, I do not) then the book for you is Starfarer's Companion by RGG. That adds the "Pathfinder....in SPaaaaace" elements that you are (probably) looking for.
Can I ask people who have this. Is this a summary of the whole book? Or just a segment of it?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can I ask people who have this. Is this a summary of the whole book? Or just a segment of it?I wanted Pathfinder in space, not Star Wars Revised Core Unchained. Very unhappy.Should you want that (to be very clear, I do not) then the book for you is Starfarer's Companion by RGG. That adds the "Pathfinder....in SPaaaaace" elements that you are (probably) looking for.
Yes, I have the PDF.
Here is a view of the Table of Contents to the book. I think "Pathfinder in Spaaaace" is a fair description. PF Races, classes and a lot of PF's spells (or variations thereof).
The equipment section, which isn't "Pathfinder in Spaaaace", is my favorite part of the book, by the way. I would have preferred more of the new equipment material as it was very good and less of how to turn up the Pathfinder Fantasy feel to my new Sci Fantasy RPG. Oh well; can't please everybody.
Thanks very much. It certainly looks that way, I just wasn't clear whether you were speaking about a part of the book or the whole thing. (I didn't mean to imply you hadn't read it, by the way - I was just asking for opinions from anyone who had).
Cheers.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks very much. It certainly looks that way, I just wasn't clear whether you were speaking about a part of the book or the whole thing. (I didn't mean to imply you hadn't read it, by the way - I was just asking for opinions from anyone who had).
Cheers.
Didn't mean to imply? Dude - you wouldn't have to imply it - it's true! I freely admit I have barely come close to reading any of it! I've had it for like... 8 hours. It's 235 pages!
But I have skimmed it and also have read the part dealing with equipment reasonably closely.
I think most players of Starfinder will be better off running the game without the Starfarer's Companionfor now. It serves to re-up the element of the game that the Starfinder Core Rulebook is deliberately trying to turn down in order to make the game feel markedly different from Pathfinder.
But that's just not everybody's cup of tea. For some people, Starfarer's Companion is exactly what they want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be honest, I was hyped at first, but seeing the preview I was immediately turned off.
The classes seem overly-laden with features compared to Starfinder classes, including having many per day abilities instead of using Resolve.
The bard is so good at basically everything it does that it completely overshadows and invalidates the envoy, not only being a better buffer and a good skill monkey, but also having spellcasting on top.
And Tieflings are virtually immune to all low level energy weapons, it would've been much better to just give them an EAC buff instead.
I'll be honest, I was hyped at first, but seeing the preview I was immediately turned off.
The classes seem overly-laden with features compared to Starfinder classes, including having many per day abilities instead of using Resolve.
The bard is so good at basically everything it does that it completely overshadows and invalidates the envoy, not only being a better buffer and a good skill monkey, but also having spellcasting on top.
And Tieflings are virtually immune to all low level energy weapons, it would've been much better to just give them an EAC buff instead.
We might be better off not getting it?
I'll be honest, I was hyped at first, but seeing the preview I was immediately turned off.
The classes seem overly-laden with features compared to Starfinder classes, including having many per day abilities instead of using Resolve.
The bard is so good at basically everything it does that it completely overshadows and invalidates the envoy, not only being a better buffer and a good skill monkey, but also having spellcasting on top.
And Tieflings are virtually immune to all low level energy weapons, it would've been much better to just give them an EAC buff instead.
I kind of feel the same way. Looking at the Ranger they get ranger methodology every 2 lvls and spells starting lvl1 on top of that? Why the 6+ Int Skills when the other classes similar have 4 + skills? I have seen this happen in the past where you typically look at just the class and try to model it for an idea of the class and you don't compare to the other classes to make sure it's balanced.
I really wanted to support and have an expansion but it's not worth the $20 I spent if my DM won't let me play the classes in the book. I'm probably missing something since I gave it a quick read.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The bard is so good at basically everything it does that it completely overshadows and invalidates the envoy, not only being a better buffer and a good skill monkey, but also having spellcasting on top.
To be fair, this says more about the Envoy than the Bard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What Ilorin said. I want to like the envoy, and I defintely like reading what others have said about how they made the class work for them, but the envoy could have used a bit more.
Heck, even a handful of cantrips might have given the class a few more options at lower levels while not overshadowing improvisation at higher levels.
Edit: How do people feel about the setting in the book? The bits that got teased in this thread seemed interesting.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Irrespective of the merits or otherwise of the Envoy (or Solarion, for that matter). I'm wary of using 3PP products which provide classes in similar roles which are stronger.
I'd much rather see options for boosting the weaker core classes than similar classes which are just better.
Whew, sorry for the radio silence everyone! Gen Con was BUSY. (I ran both multi-table PFS Specials this year.)
I'm just about done my first pass on the book regarding some of the errors that were mentioned here, and I've got responses to most of the questions. Give me a few minutes; I'm going to try to ensure that my posts aren't impossible to quote.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
*Comments about Starfarer Classes' use/day abilities; comments about Starfarer Class's Resolve Points usage.
Disagree on your assessment.
While it’s true that the Starfarer classes have a number of use/day abilities, nearly all of them have ways that allow you to spend Resolve Points to use those abilities again. In the case of racial abilities, there are Resolute feats that allow it starting at 3rd level. For class features, some are build-upon abilities that unlock when you take new class options, others are built right into the chassis.
Cleric is 100% built on Resolve Point spenders; the idea is that you have to take a "leap of faith" in your god by spending a lot of Resolve Points to use your divine powers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
I never thought of Han Solo as a ranger.
Over half of the ranger specializations lack magic or overt wilderness ties. IMO both the skirmisher and the slayer styles have real Han Solo feels to them.
Important to remember that SF Ranger isn't a "I'm wilderness martial druid guy" class, it's a "I'm super good at tracking, studying, and bringing down things I don't like" guy.
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
Back in Cleric, several Channel Divinity options are based on Wisdom, when (in my opinion) they should be based on Charisma since the ability is otherwise Charisma-based. Specifically, I saw the Luck and Plant options. The Luck one is weird because of the sheer number of individual bonuses allowed; does anyone really need 13 separate +1's over the course of a minute or so? Combat almost never lasts that long. Personally, I would recommend rebalancing it so it was a shorter duration with a somewhat higher set of bonuses.
I’ll check those, but chances are they need to work off of your key ability score for balance reasons. Also, as someone who’s played the playtest and at Gen Con, combats can be pretty long in SF because of changes to the math. Don't assume they're always over quickly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
I notice there are no litanies (or otherwise reaction-timed spells) in the Cleric (and, by extension, the paladin) list. These might have been a hidden aspect of the Paladin class, but they were an incredibly important one, and losing them is major. One of the major parts of the paladin class was having this suite of abilities they could use as an immediate action by using a spell slot, and not having anything in that part of their niche leaves the whole class feeling a bit anemic.
This book has over 200 spells; we couldn’t fit everything, and litanies were easy to cut because Starfinder doesn’t have any spells that can be cast as a reaction to the best of my knowledge. (If I remember right, fly 1 is still a standard to cast.) This doesn’t put litanies out of the question for future products, but when you’re already adding 7th, 8th, and 9th level spells, you don’t want to rock the boat on a new game TOO much.
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
Was there any reason why you added in the Bonus Spells section to every single class? They all look the same, surely you could have just posted one 9-level table and let people extrapolate from there.
Because that’s how the SF Core Rulebook presents them. Since SF is pulling in a lot of new people who aren't 3.5 / PF fans, we wanted to make sure that the book looked familiar to those people. Spatial logic be darned!
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
Storied Continuation feels like it will be problematic, if for no other reason than the ability to have two separate resolve recovery methods.
In my playtests, it wasn’t. For most choices it amounts to one or two additional Resolve Points per day over your friends, compared to the fact that you invested three feats and 18 levels into the game to get them. The fact that you can’t be themeless and qualify for the feats is a big balancing point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
I am looking at the Aasimar and it seems they aren't as powerful as the tiefling and I always saw them as a ying and yang.
Aasimars in PF are traditionally more powerful than tieflings mechanically, and I toned them down a bit to make them work as a player appropriate SF race. A big balancing consideration between aasimars and tieflings was the fact that in 90% of games, the aasimar’s spell resistance vs. evil spells is more useful than the tiefling’s spell resistance vs. good spells.
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
I'll be honest, I was hyped at first, but seeing the preview I was immediately turned off.
The classes seem overly-laden with features compared to Starfinder classes, including having many per day abilities instead of using Resolve.The bard is so good at basically everything it does that it completely overshadows and invalidates the envoy, not only being a better buffer and a good skill monkey, but also having spellcasting on top.
And Tieflings are virtually immune to all low level energy weapons, it would've been much better to just give them an EAC buff instead.
Obviously it’s impossible to make classes that are absolutely the same as Core, but most of the classes don’t have abilities that neglect Resolve Points. Instead, most allow you to spend Resolve Points to use them again once you’ve used your initial use; this even applies to the races; if a Race in this book has a 1/day racial trait, there is a feat that you can take at 3rd level to get the ability to use it more often by spending Resolve Points.
As someone with lots of envoy experience, the bard doesn’t invalidate the envoy in the slightest unless you highly value spell casting as a player. The envoy is stronger at skills, and their abilities tend to just be fire-and-forgets while many of the bard’s debuffs allow saving throws to reduce or negate their effects, or target a limited number of creatures. (For example, a 6th-level bard can give two allies a +1 to attack and a +2 to damage all enemies while an envoy can give all allies a +1 bonus on attack rolls against one specific target. The bard also needs to keep spending actions to maintain his buffs or he risks losing the ability to bolster a given ally again, and things like paralysis and stunning can lock the bard out of their songs for a given ally. The envoy doesn’t have that problem.) Finally, the bard’s buffing spells are scaled to SF levels, which means they aren’t as powerful as they are in PF.
As for tieflings, if you’re only carrying around EAC weapons then that’s your problem. Nothing is stopping you from picking up a gun and shooting the Blood Mad bloke in the face. ;-) An iLevel 1 pistol is only 350-ish credits!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if these answers are curt; trying to make sure I answer everyone while also looking over the SFC.
Questions about rangers.
Rangers only get spells if they pick a specific style, and they get methodologies at the same levels a soldier gets bonus feats. Their powers tend to be similar in scale to feats, but usually interacting with their more bounty hunter-style theme. Rangers have 6 + Int skills because they lack heavy weapons and heavy armor like a soldier.
Irrespective of the merits or otherwise of the Envoy (or Solarion, for that matter). I'm wary of using 3PP products which provide classes in similar roles which are stronger.
I'd much rather see options for boosting the weaker core classes than similar classes which are just better.
And we'll absolutely get there.
If the higher fantasy nature of Blood Space isn't for you (or anyone else), that's fine. But it's important to remember that just like Aethera was created to bring Sci-Fi people into Pathfinder, a big goal of the Starfarer's Companion is to help ease high fantasy players into Starfinder using things that are fun and familiar to them.
If you don't like that, there's absolutely no issue with that. This book still has TONS of stuff for you; that preview on DriveThruRPG has like 1/3 of the races and a mere 1/3 of the classes. You didn't get to see the sick new tech-based Equipment Trick system I wrote, or the feat that let's you slice through an enemy robot's armor toss a grenade inside, and leave before it blows up in your face. You probably didn't see the 30-ish spells we have for technomancers or the 30-ish spells we have for mystics.
This book has a LOT of Starfinder stuff, and neither Owen nor Matt nor I are done writing them yet. In fact, I just came out with Everyman Gaming's first SF compatible product on Thursday, which is focused on mechanics. Give us time; you keep telling us what you want and we'll satisfy you.
Irrespective of the merits or otherwise of the Envoy (or Solarion, for that matter). I'm wary of using 3PP products which provide classes in similar roles which are stronger.
I'd much rather see options for boosting the weaker core classes than similar classes which are just better.
And we'll absolutely get there.
If the higher fantasy nature of Blood Space isn't for you (or anyone else), that's fine. But it's important to remember that just like Aethera was created to bring Sci-Fi people into Pathfinder, a big goal of the Starfarer's Companion is to help ease high fantasy players into Starfinder using things that are fun and familiar to them.
If you don't like that, there's absolutely no issue with that. This book still has TONS of stuff for you; that preview on DriveThruRPG has like 1/3 of the races and a mere 1/3 of the classes. You didn't get to see the sick new tech-based Equipment Trick system I wrote, or the feat that let's you slice through an enemy robot's armor toss a grenade inside, and leave before it blows up in your face. You probably didn't see the 30-ish spells we have for technomancers or the 30-ish spells we have for mystics.
This book has a LOT of Starfinder stuff, and neither Owen nor Matt nor I are done writing them yet. In fact, I just came out with Everyman Gaming's first SF compatible product on Thursday, which is focused on mechanics. Give us time; you keep telling us what you want and we'll satisfy you.
My concern has nothing to do with being too fantasyish. It's a reflection of the comment that the Starfarer Companion Bard is strictly better than the Envoy. If that's the case (I wouldn't know) then it's very unlikely I'd go for this book. That's due to a leeriness of power-creep, not any thematic discord.
In terms of what I like - big, chunky books that I can buy print versions of. DM options are waaaay more important than player options to me at the moment. My guys have no idea whether they like Soldiers, Mechanics, Envoys, Ysoki, etcetera etcetera... They're very unlikely to try any player option until we've played around with the core races and classes for a good year or more.
However, there's so little 'science fantasy' around on the DM side of the screen, I could definitely use some help. The more monsters, adventures, starships, worlds, etcetera that I can get as DM (so they can play around with their Kasathan Technomancer and so forth) the better.
EDIT: Also - I'm definitely going to use Paizo's default setting. So worlds which are plug-and-play are far more useful to me than an alternate campaign setting. I'm just not ready to branch out yet until I've found my feet.
This might have been asked elsewhere, but is there a plan for a print version?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This might have been asked elsewhere, but is there a plan for a print version?
In July they indicated a print-on-demand version would eventually see light of day, however they weren't sure when it would be ready. I haven't heard anything to suggest that's changed
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This might have been asked elsewhere, but is there a plan for a print version?In July they indicated a print-on-demand version would eventually see light of day, however they weren't sure when it would be ready. I haven't heard anything to suggest that's changed
It has not. I'm hoping we'll have one in two or three weeks, but the timetable is too hazy right now to be certain.
My concern has nothing to do with being too fantasyish. It's a reflection of the comment that the Starfarer Companion Bard is strictly better than the Envoy. If that's the case (I wouldn't know) then it's very unlikely I'd go for this book. That's due to a leeriness of power-creep, not any thematic discord.
You can see my thoughts above on the envoy / bard question.
[quoteIn terms of what I like - big, chunky books that I can buy print versions of. DM options are waaaay more important than player options to me at the moment. My guys have no idea whether they like Soldiers, Mechanics, Envoys, Ysoki, etcetera etcetera... They're very unlikely to try any player option until we've played around with the core races and classes for a good year or more.
However, there's so little 'science fantasy' around on the DM side of the screen, I could definitely use some help. The more monsters, adventures, starships, worlds, etcetera that I can get as DM (so they can play around with their Kasathan Technomancer and so forth) the better.
You'd probably want this books for the multitude of new computers and starships in it; M Morris quickly learned that those are REALLY hard to design, and we have special Plantoid-class ships. Owen also designed this really cool system for using shields in Starfinder (in the Core book, shields don't exist).
EDIT: Also - I'm definitely going to use Paizo's default setting. So worlds which are plug-and-play are far more useful to me than an alternate campaign setting. I'm just not ready to branch out yet until I've found my feet.
Our philosophy with this book is that it can be used alone or as part of a larger "galaxy of adventure." If your players are anything like mine, they are going to want to call everything inter galactic or interstellar; those words mean more when you have a good idea of what sort of worlds and people live outside of your setting.
|
|
A few answers from me as well:
Magus is alright, I guess, although I personally really dislike ability score replacers. I also see no way for the Magus to avoid provoking AoOs, which with the way guarded steps (read: 5-foot steps) work and how reliant on 5-foot steps the class was in PF, may pose a problem for class's ability to function in melee.
I'm also not sure why "Arcane Weapon" was moved up from a Swift to a move action, though that's just a quibble.
There are touch-range spells that explicitly don't provoke attacks of opportunity when cast.
As far as the action economy goes, most swift actions in Pathfinder became move actions in Starfinder, and we tried to follow that guideline as much as possible to keep these classes appropriately balanced with the core Starfinder classes.
I had missed the AoO clauses on specific spells, so you have my apology there.
As far as the action economy change goes, was this playtested?
I hesitate to let that one go by, since the original magus had its Arcane Pool mechanic as a swift action so they could activate it, close the gap, and attack in the same round. The way it's setup now that won't be possible; the Magus will either need to have a ranged weapon ready (quite possible) or not attack at all in the first round.
Edit: I cut out a section that was here because I'm at work and combined Arcane Weapon and Spellstrike in my head. My concern still applies.
Edit 2:
Paladin reactions / litanies
Flight 1 is weird because it stops you from using standards, though it is still just a reaction. Aside from that your statement is true, but my point of how Paladins having access to immediate action spells was a major selling point of the class remains. The closest things they have in that niche are a critical strike punishment and a very expensive way to quicken a 1/day ability. If each oath had something similar to Retributive strike my concern would be void.
per day abilities
I wasn't even really concerned about the Cleric in that situation; every single Paladin oath has a one/day ability that can't be used with Resolve points instead (although one can be enhanced with it). Smite Evil is the biggest offender, with up to 7 uses per day and no method of resolve use. The only consistent Resolve use that I see Paladin as having is with Lay on Hands and Channel Divinity, and some Oaths don't have any resolve spender other than them.
|
|
I had missed the AoO clauses on specific spells, so you have my apology there.
As far as the action economy change goes, was this playtested?
I hesitate to let that one go by, since the original magus had its Arcane Pool mechanic as a swift action so they could activate it, close the gap, and attack in the same round. The way it's setup now that won't be possible; the Magus will either need to have a ranged weapon ready (quite possible) or not attack at all in the first round.
This is a very understandable concern, coming from Pathfinder. The pace of combat is more measured in Starfinder, so enhancing your weapon and casting a buff is a good opening gambit in SF. (As opposed to PF, where having one round where you aren't doing damage might mean that you are hardly participating in combat.)
Paladin reactions / litaniesFlight 1 is weird because it stops you from using standards, though it is still just a reaction. Aside from that your statement is true, but my point of how Paladins having access to immediate action spells was a major selling point of the class remains. The closest things they have in that niche are a critical strike punishment and a very expensive way to quicken a 1/day ability. If each oath had something similar to Retributive strike my concern would be void.
We actually have a few spells that work in a similar way. Litanies would be a less-optimal choice in Starfinder than in Pathfinder, as they would be cast as reactions, locking you out of using your attack of opportunity for the round, or anything else that requires a reaction.
per day abilitiesI wasn't even really concerned about the Cleric in that situation; every single Paladin oath has a one/day ability that can't be used with Resolve points instead (although one can be enhanced with it). Smite Evil is the biggest offender, with up to 7 uses per day and no method of resolve use. The only consistent Resolve use that I see Paladin as having is with Lay on Hands and Channel Divinity, and some Oaths don't have any resolve spender other than them.
We did change many per-day abilities to use Resolve instead, but in order for the classes to have a functional adventuring day, you have to be careful not to integrate too many Resolve-dependent abilities. If the balance isn't right, you don't have enough Resolve points to regain your Stamina or stabilize when you fall to 0 HP.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yyyyup. In general, I'd definitely recommend being careful when adding new powers that trigger from the same daily resource pool. When in doubt, it's probably better to give something its own, separate pool of uses that reflects how much a character is intended to be able to use it each day.
That's the complete opposite of the design philosophy of Starfinder, though.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yyyyup. In general, I'd definitely recommend being careful when adding new powers that trigger from the same daily resource pool. When in doubt, it's probably better to give something its own, separate pool of uses that reflects how much a character is intended to be able to use it each day.That's the complete opposite of the design philosophy of Starfinder, though.
Starfinder doesn't make separate pools of resources, but it is also careful about giving Resolve-based abilities at low levels.
(Not disagreeing with you, just clarifying.)
Actually, what's the math on Paladin with Smite Evil look like? I'm too tired to look into the measurement, but looking at the basics it feels like they'd be beneath a baseline (read: no Gear Boosts or Specializations) Soldier at level 20, even after using their Smite, simply from the Soldier's extra attack and the improved action economy.
Even considering the paladin's spells and support abilities, I'm still worried about the class looking at that. Soldier, after all, can have a suite of support abilities all on its own through Guard and Gear Boost, not to mention the extra combat feats giving them much easier access to all their feats, including what non-combat support ones exist, because of how much easier it is for them to fill out their combat feats.
Is Aura of Justice meant to offset this? I can certainly see that being the case, especially if, as you say, combats last longer. It's always been hard to use though.
I had missed the AoO clauses on specific spells, so you have my apology there.
As far as the action economy change goes, was this playtested?
I hesitate to let that one go by, since the original magus had its Arcane Pool mechanic as a swift action so they could activate it, close the gap, and attack in the same round. The way it's setup now that won't be possible; the Magus will either need to have a ranged weapon ready (quite possible) or not attack at all in the first round.
In my playtests, the melee magus usually used arcane bond as a move and cast a spell of some kind as a standard (usually a buff spell but sometimes a spell to try and either bolster their movement or hamper an enemy), then closed in on the second turn. The ranged magus usually buffed their weapon and fired in the same round. It worked fine at our table, but if we see feedback that move action arcane bond is too taxing to the magus, we can look into adding a feat or a magus arcana that allows you to use it faster for Resolve Points or something.
Aside from that your statement is true, but my point of how Paladins having access to immediate action spells was a major selling point of the class remains.
Counterpoint: Litanies weren't part of the paladin class until Ultimate Combat, which came out four years after the Core Rulebook.
We might get around to litanies eventually, but I'm pretty pleased with how Matt handled the base paladin class. "Has room for more expansion" is not a flaw, after all.
I wasn't even really concerned about the Cleric in that situation; every single Paladin oath has a one/day ability that can't be used with Resolve points instead (although one can be enhanced with it). Smite Evil is the biggest offender, with up to 7 uses per day and no method of resolve use. The only consistent Resolve use that I see Paladin as having is with Lay on Hands and Channel Divinity, and some Oaths don't have any resolve spender other than them.
Ah, so you were talking directly about the paladin then? I had gotten confused when you said that "all the SF classes had too many day/use abilities," since as far as I recalled that was a paladin gimmick.
We designed the paladin to be more resource intensive for the other classes for several reasons. First and foremost, it's sort of the heritage of the class, and we like the idea of having a class that has more things to keep track of because some players like that. Second, there was no way we could make smite evil a Resolve Point based ability without severely limiting what you got when you smote a foe. In the end, we ended up keeping it like PF's model so we could keep the benefit mostly unchanged.
(Plus, having a class that "unleashes its true power" a limited number of times per day is made even cooler by the fact that you don't have tons of other SF classes that use the smite mechanic.)
Basically, the paladin is a case of, "This is how we wanted it to be and its meant to be in contrast to basically every other class in the game." You don't have to like it, you don't have to play it (I famously don't like playing prepared spellcasters or mesmerists), but that doesn't make it a bad option. :)
Yyyyup. In general, I'd definitely recommend being careful when adding new powers that trigger from the same daily resource pool. When in doubt, it's probably better to give something its own, separate pool of uses that reflects how much a character is intended to be able to use it each day.That's the complete opposite of the design philosophy of Starfinder, though.
Except it's not.
Take a look at ALL of the classes in the Core Rulebook. Notice how there are virtually NO abilities that spend Resolve Points before 3rd level. (If I remember right, the mystic is the only exception in the game.)
The reason is simple—if too many things tax your Resolve Point pool, you have to make a nearly impossible (and unfun) choice between using your coolest class features and potentially dying, or hoarding Resolve Points on the off chance that you are knocked unconscious and die. This is quite literally how the Resolve Point system works, and so we couldn't give paladins smite evil at 1st level if it was Resolve Point based. (And as I said before, even if we DID make it Resolve Point based, we'd have to severely weaken it to account for the fact that you'd be able to use it ten times per day at high levels.)
Granted, we might end up doing a feat or something that allows paladins to "mini smite" in exchange for Resolve Points or something, but the core mechanic is better off as a 1/day ability.
Actually, what's the math on Paladin with Smite Evil look like? I'm too tired to look into the measurement, but looking at the basics it feels like they'd be beneath a baseline (read: no Gear Boosts or Specializations) Soldier at level 20, even after using their Smite, simply from the Soldier's extra attack and the improved action economy.
Even considering the paladin's spells and support abilities, I'm still worried about the class looking at that. Soldier, after all, can have a suite of support abilities all on its own through Guard and Gear Boost, not to mention the extra combat feats giving them much easier access to all their feats, including what non-combat support ones exist, because of how much easier it is for them to fill out their combat feats.
Is Aura of Justice meant to offset this? I can certainly see that being the case, especially if, as you say, combats last longer. It's always been hard to use though.
Don't bother comparing the paladin or the ranger to the soldier; compare them to the solarian. As you probably know, one of the key tenants of Starfinder is an increased reliance on math, and one of the cardinal rules of Starfinder's math is that no other class should be able to beat the soldier at its game (combat). Operatives can mathematically keep toe-to-toe with the soldier when they successfully trick attack (which is far from guaranteed), and the solarian either lacks the soldier's stronger weapon choice (armor), its better armor choice (crystal), or has flat-out more combat feats that give them a better edge in a fight (assuming you dumped feats into your weapons / armor to offset the soldier's inherent advantage).
The paladin and the ranger have to abide by these rules too. Here's a brief look:
— The Ranger has better skills than the soldier, but they don't get heavy weapons or heavy armor.
— The Ranger has a better damage bonus against their studied targets, but they don't get additional attacks during a full attack.
— The Paladin can smite, but they have far fewer uses and don't get additional attacks. They also get spells, and their spell list is MUCH better in SF. (They use the cleric spell list instead of having their own spell list.)
— The Paladin is one of three classes in the entire game with healing (four if you count a ranger with the spellcasting style), but they don't get combat feats.
In our tests, the paladin did great against evil critters and was less damaging against nonevil ones. They can frontline as well as a soldier, though. We found this acceptable and intended, but if anyone plays it and finds it lacking, more field notes are always appreciated. :D
Counterpoint: Litanies weren't part of the paladin class until Ultimate Combat, which came out four years after the Core Rulebook.
Ultimate Combat (2011) was 2 years, not 4. It's been part of the class identity for much longer than it hasn't, to the point where I posit that it doesn't matter that it was ever not part of the class. This is a point we'll never agree on though, so I'll drop it and move on to other things.
Ah, so you were talking directly about the paladin then? I had gotten confused when you said that "all the SF classes had too many day/use abilities," since as far as I recalled that was a paladin gimmick.
I don't remember saying that; I pointed out that there were too many in the book, which is to say I saw them in Paladin, Bard (which is less of a problem with a closer look, as its per day also has a resolve extension), Magus (Counterstrike and a number of Arcana, though many of them also have resolve extensions), Wizard (for low level abilities, granted). If I led you into the assumption that I felt like every class was built around them, I apologize.
Paladin is the biggest offender, and the one that I felt (and still do feel) was the most anemic of them, so it's been the focus of my poking and prodding. Limiting it in so many ways with per day abilities concerns me just as much as lacking reaction abilities does, even if as you say that's the legacy of the class.
Comparisons.
All noted; you have obviously put a lot of thought into this. I'll be sure to take notes when I hand it off to my players early next month when I start my campaign, if any of them take Paladin.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Errors in need of an errata are sort of inevitable when you are working with a brand new game system with the level of speed we needed to get the book together for youI feel like this attitude is part of the problem. You didn't need to get it out this quickly, and instead of being something that made us want to buy your upcoming supplements I'm turned off from them.I really wish Paizo has an extra "development pass" as well. Not just SF but many PF books have content that either need(ed) an errata or could've been balanced differently if the development cycle had allowed extra time for another pass.
To me, Starfarer's Companion looks very interesting! I LOVE all the extra options. :) But I'll wait until it's erratad before I'll buy the (physical) book.
Last I heard, we're actually waiting until the errata is implemented to flip the okay switch for the print version of the book, so our goals line up there! ;-)
Any word on availability for the pdf on Paizo?
Hopefully today. Their Gen Con team just arrived back in Seattle late last night, so I imagine it might take them some time to process it. (They also haven't put up my new Everyman Mini or Star Log.EM products yet.)