Some issues with Starfinder

[CountArioch]

Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:

Just to point out,

A) Barricade lets you get cover anywhere, not just if a table is nearby.

B) Harrassing/Covering Fire are actions anyone can do. The Suppresive Fire Feat just makes you a lot better at them.

B) I'm a little confused as to how this makes you better. You seem very informed, could you explain?

[Shinigami02]

The feat for one gives you a +4 to attack rolls to use the abilities, an also lets you apply them to all enemies in a cone. Normally the abilities apply to either one creature you have line of effect to (for Harrying) or the first attack against your ally (for Covering).

[Milo v3]

Golurkcanfly wrote:

My biggest problem with the system is just the setting. I find the Pact Worlds are too condensed for my tastes

It is abit weird how they shoved basically everything into the same solar system, would makes drift 100% pointless if Vesk didn't exist.

[RyanH]

Milo v3 wrote:

Golurkcanfly wrote:

My biggest problem with the system is just the setting. I find the Pact Worlds are too condensed for my tastes

It is abit weird how they shoved basically everything into the same solar system, would makes drift 100% pointless if Vesk didn't exist.

It's the START of the land rush... there's so much to explore out their, it's all new territory!

[Jaçinto]

Are the small arms inherently worse than long arms? Nothing with blast and everything seems to have low damage compared to long arms. I guess paizo doesn't understand that there are handguns out there that have more punch than rifles. I had this same problem in PF where the smaller weapons like daggers were, generally, junk. Not really viable and you had to use them simply because it eats a feat to take better. You could stand there and stab a high level fighter all night long and said fighter would barely notice due to 1d4 damage. I am wondering if it is gonna be the same with small arms.

And now someone is gonna say that it is for balance. It doesn't have to make sense. Blah blah. Thing is, I am having a problem with junk options.

[KingOfAnything]

Operatives can use small arms to great effect.

[Rysky the Dark Solarion]

"I guess paizo doesn't understand"

Dood it's a fantasy game using fantasy weapons, it's getting really old seeing you constantly complain about fantasy weapons that aren't even unique tropes to Paizo but acting like they and they alone use "incorrect" depictions of fantasy equipment.

Bucklers are strapped to the arm in fantasy.

Shotguns fire in a short cone in fantasy.

Rifles are better than handguns in fantasy. Though a higher level handgun is better than a lower level rifle.

[Jaçinto]

Yes how dare I talk about what paizo does on the paizo forums. Get over it. If I want to complain about what FFG does, I go to FFG forums. If I want to talk about Shadowrun, I go to Catalyst. Just like how I criticize Payday 2 on the Overkill discord where the devs actually hang out. If it is getting old seeing me, then stop looking. It isn't stopping. If I have an issue, I am gonna raise it and you are just gonna blanket defend just because fantasy. I get it.

Bucklers are used incorrectly. Shotguns are used incorrectly. They messed up monks for a more cinematic feel that isn't cinematic. They made small arms piddly and weak. If talking about problems with the things that don't make sense is such a bad thing because "fantasy" then they would shut down every critical thread and only allow rules questions, praise, and LFG stuff.

[Rysky the Dark Solarion]

I don't have a problem with you not caring for those depictions.

I am annoyed however with how all of your posts frame Paizo as being the sole contributor of all those depictions and not, ya'know, going off how they've pretty much always been depicted in tabletop and video games.

Paizo didn't "mess up" bucklers, they've always been depicted that way.

Paizo didn't "mess up" shotguns, they've always been depicted that way.

Paizo didn't "mess up" monks... I'm not honestly not even sure what type of monk you'd be comparing it to for them to be using it incorrectly as you say.

Small Arms also aren't piddly and weak, they lag behind longarms, yes, but they're not useless or dismissible.

[Jaçinto]

You assume I am saying only Paizo does this. No, I am just talking about Paizo because this is a Paizo game.

Bucklers have always been depicted that way, except in reality so no it is not always.

Shotguns have always been depicted that way, except in reality so no not always. Wrong again.

So the thread where they took away monk unarmed weapons from adventurer's armory because they wanted a cinematic feel, so they made them simple weapons to prevent people from using monk abilities with them, since the best martial artists in movies is always unarmed never happened? You know, where someone replied to their posts with videos of Bruce Lee with Nunchaku.

Now can we stop getting hostile? We were keeping it about the topic rather than attacking each other and saying opinions about each other? Talk about Starfinder, not each other. I'm ignoring any further personal jabs and sticking to the topic of talking about issues people have with Starfinder.

[Rysky the Dark Solarion]

I did specify always been depicted in tabletop and video games, not how they function in real life.

And when you say ""I guess paizo doesn't understand" and "they messed up" yes, I am assuming you are talking about Paizo.

My apologies for coming off as hostile, I should have voiced my frustrations better in this case. As per your request I am letting it drop and leaving this thread.

[Ambrosia Slaad]

Jaçinto wrote:

Now can we stop getting hostile? We were keeping it about the topic rather than attacking each other and saying opinions about each other? Talk about Starfinder, not each other. I'm ignoring any further personal jabs and sticking to the topic of talking about issues people have with Starfinder.

I think the discussion will go better if all "personal jabs"/"hostility" is avoided, including that directed at Paizo developers. Maybe that isn't your intent, but that is certainly how your comments are coming across. If you have complaints and suggestions on how the game can be improved, great. Just remember the Paizo folks are humans too, and I'm sure they don't appreciate personally directed hostility any more than you do.

[Jaçinto]

Didn't ask you to leave. Just want to stick to the topic.

[Voss]

Jaçinto wrote:

Are the small arms inherently worse than long arms?

Yes. Yes, they are. (though not because they lack blast, as focus fire is strictly better than trying to area damage your way through an encounter- damage is lower and there are either saves or hit penalties depending on what you're using. Autofire takes the -4 to hit for full actions (and is awful on ammo economy, and thus action economy), and blast shots take a -2)

But yes- small arms are just straight up weaker and they get half the benefit from weapon specialization. Most characters are pretty obligated to burn at least a pair of feats on proficiency and specialization if they want to keep up when combat music plays.

Mostly this seems to be because small arms need to be weaker because operatives can do more attacks or trick attack with small arms and operatives need to trick attack or make more attacks because small arms are weaker. So because circular logic, envoys, mystics, technomancers and droid mechanics need to set feats on fire.

And nuts to genre emulation, where most space protagonists run around with pistols. Thhbbbt.

[crazy_duck_88]

Jaçinto wrote:

Sniper weapon proficiency. Ok this really hurts my head here. Do people at paizo know how rifles work at all? It's a rifle. If you can use an assault rifle, you can use a "sniper" rifle. I know my opinion on this one is gonna bother some people so go ahead.

I think they are referring to the fact that sniper rifles require a more in-depth comprehension of the mathematics of long range shooting and the awkwardness of firing at close range versus the awkwardness of shooting at long(sniper)range distances i.e. sniper weapon proficiency versus the mathematics of shooting an assault rifle i.e. longarm proficiency. Using your example the sniper rifle fired at close range on a planet would be awkward because of the sniper scope and would possibly take a penalty to hit. But at the same time at long(sniper) ranges if you fire it like you would an assault rifle you get penalties to hit from failing to take the mathematics required to hit a target at long(sniper) ranges i.e. not lifting the barrel to account for the bullet dropping which I believe has to do with curvature of the planet and gravity. that being said I am not a sniper nor do I have any experience at shooting over long ranges so I may be wrong also most of what limited knowledge I may have comes from reading Stephen Hunter's Bob Lee Swagger novels and other similar novels. I also respect your opinions and I am not trying to hurt your feeling. I am also sorry that head hurts.

p.s. sorry for any and all Grammatical errors English while my only language I read, write and speak. I have always had a hard time with the writing part

[Jaçinto]

You didn't hurt any feeling. You are speaking logically and I appreciate that. You make a good point. Lets see. The sniper weapons appear to have the sniper and unwieldly qualities. Meaning with spending a move to aim, your standard to fire goes to 250 feet. Unwieldy means only 1 attack per round, no full attack action and no attack of opportunities. So I suppose maybe I was hasty on the whole sniper thing. Thanks for what you said.

[Micheal Smith]

CupcakeNautilus wrote:

Micheal Smith wrote:

Jaçinto wrote:

Not everyone is aware of all the discussions going on, man.

Not going to lie, this is a poor excuse. There is a search feature. Simply type in the thing you are looking for, an OMG something may pop that is relevant to what you searched for. So you don't have to start duplicate threads.

I don't know about you, but search is straight busted for me lately. I tried searching for "exocortex" earlier, then sorting it by recent, and the most recent results it can find are from July 20th.

It's one thing if nothing pops up. But still do the research. If Jaçinto would have done a search I am sure the thread that was reference would have popped up.

[David knott 242]

The search function for recent stuff is definitely broken. I just did a search of "exocortex". I found no products at all and no messages newer than August 2nd.

But here is a product page that should have been found.

This product is also mentioned a couple of times in a very recent thread discussing the Starfarer's Companion by the same company.

[CupcakeNautilus]

Micheal Smith wrote:

CupcakeNautilus wrote:

Micheal Smith wrote:

Jaçinto wrote:

Not everyone is aware of all the discussions going on, man.

Not going to lie, this is a poor excuse. There is a search feature. Simply type in the thing you are looking for, an OMG something may pop that is relevant to what you searched for. So you don't have to start duplicate threads.

I don't know about you, but search is straight busted for me lately. I tried searching for "exocortex" earlier, then sorting it by recent, and the most recent results it can find are from July 20th.

It's one thing if nothing pops up. But still do the research. If Jaçinto would have done a search I am sure the thread that was reference would have popped up.

For real though, check search. Its currently not working correctly. It doesn't bring up anything thats been posted in roughly the last month no matter what you search for.

[Raynulf]

Voss wrote:

Jaçinto wrote:

Are the small arms inherently worse than long arms?

Yes. Yes, they are. (though not because they lack blast, as focus fire is strictly better than trying to area damage your way through an encounter- damage is lower and there are either saves or hit penalties depending on what you're using. Autofire takes the -4 to hit for full actions (and is awful on ammo economy, and thus action economy), and blast shots take a -2)

But yes- small arms are just straight up weaker and they get half the benefit from weapon specialization. Most characters are pretty obligated to burn at least a pair of feats on proficiency and specialization if they want to keep up when combat music plays.

Mostly this seems to be because small arms need to be weaker because operatives can do more attacks or trick attack with small arms and operatives need to trick attack or make more attacks because small arms are weaker. So because circular logic, envoys, mystics, technomancers and droid mechanics need to set feats on fire.

And nuts to genre emulation, where most space protagonists run around with pistols. Thhbbbt.

I'd noticed this as well. Which unfortunately results in very few effective combat styles:

1. Str build with a melee weapon (typically two-handed, unless you want a hand free for grenades).
2. Dex build with either a longarm or heavy weapon.
3. Operative

The Envoy, for example, probably wants the biggest, highest damage (and typically unwieldy) weapon they can grab - after they buy the proficiency feats. Reasoning? They generally can only make one attack a round in conjunction with their improvisations, and so to make the most of it they want a weapon designed to be balanced around only making one attack per round.

Personally I think the half-specialization on operative melee weapons and small arms is a mistake, and the solution to the operative's damage is in fact not to give them so many extra attacks. Longarms already have advantages on range, ammo capacity and raw damage - reason enough to use them.

[thunderbeard]

I'm kind of annoyed that the setting describes 10 planets in the Pact World system and 20 planets outside of it, and EVERY SINGLE ONE (IIRC) has ancient mysterious aliens on it somewhere. Like I get that this builds a rich world, but at this point it just feels ludicrous. Why are there so many powerful ancient aliens, and where did they all go?

[kadance]

Well, during the Gap.... I forget.

[Golurkcanfly]

The issue with ruins is also one of my problems with the setting, to the point that the setting I've been working on developing has only one planet known to have any ancient alien ruins, and even then it was only discovered like a few months ago in-universe. Prime adventure location right there.

[Voss]

thunderbeard wrote:

I'm kind of annoyed that the setting describes 10 planets in the Pact World system and 20 planets outside of it, and EVERY SINGLE ONE (IIRC) has ancient mysterious aliens on it somewhere. Like I get that this builds a rich world, but at this point it just feels ludicrous. Why are there so many powerful ancient aliens, and where did they all go?

It's sort of a carryover from PF and D&D in general. Rather than rich worlds, there is a tendency to kitchen sink the setting. Everything is in (and new monster books add more to get tossed in), so you get layers of old civilizations puppeted by even older civilizations and Elder Gods beyond that and then freaky folk trying to puppet newborn Elder Gods, and multiple things trying to eat or end everything for reasons.

[Wrath]

Setting wise this is really no different to any other sci fi involving exploration.

- Star Trek, discovers new stuff all the time, even ruins of old empires.
- Star Wars, even in the inner systems there are ruins of previous empires and Jedi temples
- battlestar Galactica , the entire human plenary system is destroyed in a nuclear war. Returning to the system showed ruins and carnage.
- Stargate - everything is ancient compared to the humans who are only just now out exploring it. Particularly true in Stargate Universe.
- The aliens franchise is based around this entire premise of discovering something older than us that's much more dangerous than we are.

The setting is based around a major catastrophe occurring a few hundred years ago that wiped everyone's memories. This is a system only just rediscovering Drift travel and exploring beyond the reaches of the known system after who knows how many Millenia of lost time. So for this system (the pact worlds) everything is new and mysterious. Nothings to say the ancient ruins in Planet X aren't actually just an old settlement from the pact worlds that just got forgotten in the Gap and just died out from isolation. Or maybe these mysterious aliens were actually once well known and trade partners but again the Gap has caused an isolation and rift to come between them.

Mystery is the key to great sci fi. Even in stuff where the world is full hi tech and overpopulated, there's mystery in Corperate espionage, emerging psychic power, alien contact etc etc. This allows the players to have maximum chance at impacting the game universe in all honesty. It also removes restricting Canon from a setting for DMs creating their own material to run in the established pact worlds setting.

Forgotten realms, for me, was the worst setting to ever try and run a game in, as it basically hamstrung any creative licence I wanted to use in my games. Bleh

[Voss]

Wrath wrote:

Setting wise this is really no different to any other sci fi involving exploration.

- Star Trek, discovers new stuff all the time, even ruins of old empires.
- Star Wars, even in the inner systems there are ruins of previous empires and Jedi temples
- battlestar Galactica , the entire human plenary system is destroyed in a nuclear war. Returning to the system showed ruins and carnage.
- Stargate - everything is ancient compared to the humans who are only just now out exploring it. Particularly true in Stargate Universe.
- The aliens franchise is based around this entire premise of discovering something older than us that's much more dangerous than we are.

It's quite different, actually.

Aliens- there are only a handful of species out there. That's full stop completely different from the kitchen sink approach.

Stargate- things occasionally get a bit silly with aliens (like the shapeshifters who show up, get blowed up and never show up again), but the number is very tightly controlled. With few exceptions, everything revolves around humans, go'auld, ancients, asgardians, and replicators (which are the fault of one or more of the previous). There are only a half-dozen or so others, and one never even shows up (Furlings).

BSG- uh, what?. Depending on which version, BSG is almost entirely self-contained. A few bits of weird stuff with angels and demons, but other than that, there's two factions and a lot of nothing else.

Star Wars- there are indeed ancient ruins and old empires. But they're largely the same empires (and crazy cults) over and over again. Yes, there are a lot of species but it presumes a lot of populated planets and independent evolution. For Starfinder, at least half are colonies and diaspora of the same species. And old empires of the same species. And older empires of different species that manipulated them.

Trek is similar with a bunch of species scattered all over the galaxy.

In Starfinder, a lot of this old stuff and many, many species are all packed into a single system. _Every_ planet is inexplicably habitable, and something ancient is buried within half of them, with cults and countercults and eviller cults that make the basic evil cults of elder gods look like great big heroes. Somehow.

It would be one thing if this stuff came about through exploration of unknown regions. But this is all at home. The vesk and shirren are actually rather weird for being from far away- even the kasatha have been squatting in-system for centuries.

[Wrath]

yeah, ill give you the one system has everything.

perhaps it is a hub system of old, and were only just working that out.

Fragged empire (an Australian Sci Fi game) has a similar thing. In that one, the races were genetically engineered by humans, who went extinct. The race the humans made then went and engineered a dozen new races themselves. One of these races fled because the creators were going to destroy them. They eventually came back and killed the creators but left the gene races behind. So a hodgepodge that makes sense.

Valerian is another example.

And star wars has more species and races living in single systems than you can poke a stick at.

Star Trek is the same. Once the Federation got rolling, there were all sorts of species living in the Sol system.

This is nothing new. The Pact Worlds are just what's left after a galaxy spanning empire that imported stuff from all over the place finally collapsed. Just like the Roman empire, for instance. I mean, it even has precedence from Earth History in terms of collapsed empires and forgotten civilisations. These ones just happen to be alien species.

If you've looked at the Iron Gods Adventure Path, you'll know that this system had ships travelling through it that brought creatures from all over the universe and beyond.

And of course, there's Golarion itself. The planet with so many sentient races on it that the mind boggles to understand how it could remain the way it did. The short answer is gods.

[Chaos Isaac]

Feats have always been the bane of making a good game in the D20 system. For some reason, feats always remove basic things that characters should kind of be able to do to make them... well, artificially necessary. Instead of making your character better at something, it made them competent at them, and maybe with five other feats you'd get real good at it.

Really if Paizo done more new things because they do their own imaginings really well, instead of regurgitating more 3.x with little changes. If you don't like how skills are kinda half useful and some of their better stuff is locked behind feats; all I can say is play a different system.

Although the setting is really bad. Far too condensed, and like a hand gun has a range of 30ft, this doesn't make sense in a setting where technology has come so far, but have the same distance of a nerf gun. Then again, Paizo aren't really setting guys, it's more crunch less fluff.

[TwilightKnight]

Jaçinto wrote:

Sniper weapon proficiency. Ok this really hurts my head here. Do people at paizo know how rifles work at all? It's a rifle. If you can use an assault rifle, you can use a "sniper" rifle. I know my opinion on this one is gonna bother some people so go ahead.

Yes, it will, particularly retired military. I can tell you from experience that there is a significantly different skill set required to being a sniper than using a "normal" assault rifle. The simple act of shooting either is certainly the same, but that's not what the game mechanics are simulating. Using a sniper rifle properly and effectively requires heightened eyesight, hand-eye coordination, ballistics knowledge, meteorological knowledge, hell how many things in life do you actually have to account for the curvature of the Earth and the effects of gravity? Firing a precision weapon at ranges up to an including a mile away or more is not the same as firing a "crude" in comparison assault rifle at targets up to only a few hundred yards and whose optimum killing range is much closer than that.

[Rysky the Dark Solarion]

Chaos Isaac wrote:

Feats have always been the bane of making a good game in the D20 system. For some reason, feats always remove basic things that characters should kind of be able to do to make them... well, artificially necessary. Instead of making your character better at something, it made them competent at them, and maybe with five other feats you'd get real good at it.

Really if Paizo done more new things because they do their own imaginings really well, instead of regurgitating more 3.x with little changes. If you don't like how skills are kinda half useful and some of their better stuff is locked behind feats; all I can say is play a different system.

Although the setting is really bad. Far too condensed, and like a hand gun has a range of 30ft, this doesn't make sense in a setting where technology has come so far, but have the same distance of a nerf gun. Then again, Paizo aren't really setting guys, it's more crunch less fluff.

The handgun is accurate to 30ft, which is just its first range increment, not its total range. It's full "range" is 300ft, and it's not like the projectile stops so much as it just isn't reliable enough to hit something that far.

[EC Gamer Guy]

It's 15 + (2 x tier) etc.

korinthmalar wrote:

why are the DC for Stunts and crew actions all

15 + 2 x tier
or
10 + 2 x tier
or
20 + 2 x tier
????
would that not just be 17,12,and 22 x tier??
or am i missing some information that alters the DC some how??

[Steve Geddes]

Chaos Isaac wrote:

Then again, Paizo aren't really setting guys

Heh. This is so far away from my position I can't begin to imagine how anyone can think this. That's not a challenge, it's just that I find your comment as incredible as if you'd suggested the moon landings were faked.

The world is a big place. Thank you internet. :)

[EC Gamer Guy]

You do realize the Pact Worlds are one set of planets in an entire galaxy, right? I think there is already a published adventure beyond that. I know for Starfinder Society there is the Scoured Stars Incident which is at least another star system, if not galaxy.

Give them more than a week to put out stuff and I'm sure you'll see something past Eox (or whatever the last planet is.)

Golurkcanfly wrote:

My biggest problem with the system is just the setting. I find the Pact Worlds are too condensed for my tastes, so I'm probably going to go with a custom setting that rationalizes some things (like Lashunta being an evolutionary offshoot of humans to explain their very human-like appearance).

[EC Gamer Guy]

I'm actually as fan of Barricade and might take it if I end up with a very ranged focus character. The main benefits to the feat are:
1) Move action, not a full round or more.
2) Can be done nearly anywhere that is not completely barren. Most rooms have furniture or crates and such.
3) +4 to AC with no penalties beyond you can't move out of cover.

[Chaos Isaac]

Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:

The handgun is accurate to 30ft, which is just its first range increment, not its total range. It's full "range" is 300ft, and it's not like the projectile stops so much as it just isn't reliable enough to hit something that far.

You know, that actually doesn't make it much better. So, you're right, it's maximum range is 300ft, but even then the penalty to that attack is a neat -18. So, they can shoot a bit further than a paintball gun. A contemporary 9mm can shoot far, far further than that, and we don't have FTL travel, power armor or plasma weaponry. It is entirely at odds with the setting itself, and while it is better than I thought it was, it's still pretty bad.

And in that case, there's some bad editing going on here that needs to be addressed, and the range note needs to be added into the 'reading weapon tables' as at first glance, many players aren't going to know this.

Steve Geddes wrote:

Chaos Isaac wrote:

Then again, Paizo aren't really setting guys

Heh. This is so far away from my position I can't begin to imagine how anyone can think this. That's not a challenge, it's just that I find your comment as incredible as if you'd suggested the moon landings were faked.

The world is a big place. Thank you internet. :)

The setting is a kind of not good and Pathfinder wasn't much better at this.

Still; i'll explain to you why I don't think the setting is good, but to start why they're not good fluff people, i'll read this quote. "To understand the significance of this particular solar system, one must first understand Starfinder's history... or rather, it's lack of one."

Now, you may have never played a game with a established setting that actually has it's own thing going on, and i'll list a few of my favorites. Shadowrun, where cyberpunk meets fantasy. Warhammer 40k, where in the grimdark future there is only War. Dragon Age, a modern one that should be familiar. All of these game systems have their setting firmly planted in the books, with lore and fluff running through the entirety of them. In Starfinder... not so much.

While Starfinder is doing better than Pathfinder and actually including a setting chapter it brings up a few curiosities. Triune, is apparently a fusion of three gods. Why can Gods fuse now? Is this a new ability? Are other gods gonna fuse and become super gods? Will a evil god dominate another god in combat and then fuse to become a super not-as-evil god?

Let's talk about another important part of the setting; the Vesk. So they've dominated other species, why? Because it's what they do. (Such bold and unique writing) But.. what about those subservient races? Are none of them here? Do any of them get to join the military? Did they get to keep their names or are they Vesk-Servant Species 1? It's a shame, as playing a Veskarian servitor race who escaped would be a fun concept, that's just not supported.

Why are all of the old races a foot-note at the back of the book except for humans? Why are half-elves still social outcasts, if all of these other races have decided to get along, humans still can't accept half-elves? It's just another coat of paint that has very little difference. The only real change i've noticed from the legacy races are the elves, who decided kicking ass and being xenophobic was better than what they used to be. They can now be used, easily, as a villain race and that's not even including the Drow.

Still, I can't find much mention of the legacy races before chapter 13. A lot of the other stuff is, well, a little generic and a nice summary but not much to sink your teeth into. They bring up some interesting things, like the Idari's brainbanks, but there isn't more than surface level details.

[Wrath]

Well, Chaos Isaac, if the sales model for Starfinder works anything like Pathfinder, the core book is just a taste of what's there.

They will release splat books based specifically on setting material you're discussing right now. Like they did with all those countries in Golarion, and many of the gods, and even a full setting book. That way, people can choose to follow the canon realeased by Paizo OR just fill the gaps in with their own ideas.

I'd like to point out 40k as something you've specifically used for good setting.
In 1988 I bought Rogue Trader, the first ever edition of what is now 40k. It was a table top game set in a distant future and it had a setting that was barely discussed but hinted at sooooo many things. The God Emperor was a minor footnote in the book. Elder were all pirates, Jokaero were Orangutan space men with the best technology in the galaxy, Tau didn't exist, Tyranids didn't exist (genestealers were just another space alien to be feared) most of the chaos stuff wasn't detailed. However, they had stats for a huge array of monsters and space vampires and other cool sci fi stuff to design adventure based skirmish games around.

It's taken 30 years for Warhammer 40 k to reach the setting detail it currently has. Much of that was written in the 90s and has just been rehashed over and over again since then. What's worse, they actually removed a huge amount of the cool species and setting material that existed in the original rogue trader book. Squats being the classic example that people still complain about (suddenly an entire race of space faring combatants are removed from the setting with no reason why.)

Paizo does great settings, which they detail over time but still manage to leave enough mystery that players can create their own spin on things without stepping on creative toes.

[bookrat]

TwilightKnight wrote:

Jaçinto wrote:

Sniper weapon proficiency. Ok this really hurts my head here. Do people at paizo know how rifles work at all? It's a rifle. If you can use an assault rifle, you can use a "sniper" rifle. I know my opinion on this one is gonna bother some people so go ahead.

Yes, it will, particularly retired military. I can tell you from experience that there is a significantly different skill set required to being a sniper than using a "normal" assault rifle. The simple act of shooting either is certainly the same, but that's not what the game mechanics are simulating. Using a sniper rifle properly and effectively requires heightened eyesight, hand-eye coordination, ballistics knowledge, meteorological knowledge, hell how many things in life do you actually have to account for the curvature of the Earth and the effects of gravity? Firing a precision weapon at ranges up to an including a mile away or more is not the same as firing a "crude" in comparison assault rifle at targets up to only a few hundred yards and whose optimum killing range is much closer than that.

I concur. I have quite a bit of experience with military assault rifles and machine guns (two very different skill sets on their own), and a very tiny bit of experience with sniper rifles. They are all entirely different ball games.

Never fired a handgun until about five years after I got out of the army. I was taking a forensic science course, and as part of the ballistics analysis section we went to the local police station and fired some rounds from various handguns, and even a tommygun!

[Chaos Isaac]

Wrath. You couldn't be more wrong or right. 40k canon, all is told by a unreliable narrator and everything is canon and nothing is true. But the god-emperor's corpse and the poor state of the galaxy is still at the forefront, and the mood of the setting is still kinda there.

I've played a lot of Pathfinder, over about a three year time it was pretty much the only thing I played, and that entire time... I couldn't tell you anything about the setting asides the iconic barbarian carried a over-sized sword. Because the setting never was important, and still not really important. It's all set-dressing for an adventure, not a place to roleplay a character.

Races have their generic cultures where nothing is different from other iterations, they don't have much iconic to themselves. And this makes me extra sad, as I love the Kasatha, but hah, there's not much on these dudes. I can give you a basic overview of how to act, but I have nothing for anything of depth.

Conversely, if I was going to play a Orc in Shadowrun, I could tell you racial insults they have, how they try to own the insult 'trog', their own orxplotation genre of music and other media, the honor they take in having their own language after not having one for a while. The rage they get when someone compares them to dogs because they birth litters, their bond with trolls for being similar. The affects of their shortened lives, living in ghettos and kids getting pregnant at 9-12 years old because that is when they're maturing and that's their teenage years. The underground societies they formed, how protective they are over their mothers where a mob of them will come kick your teeth in because of the rough conditions of their lives and what a ork mother means to their entire culture. Their almost pack nature to stick together and look out for one another.

Paizo has a lot of breadth, a lot of things thrown out there that are kind of cool, but really really lacking in the depth department when it comes to the cultures and lives of their individuals. "Quality over quantity", is how I like my races and settings. Paizo likes to throw around a lot of stuff but none of it really gets to excellent where it feels alive. Andoran is Pathfinder America, and that's cool, but I couldn't tell you who they were friends or enemies with, any real notes of their relations with other nations. I can tell you, however, 'If you want to be a freedom fighter knight, that's a cool place to be from'.

[The Cyber Mage]

EC Gamer Guy wrote:

I'm actually as fan of Barricade and might take it if I end up with a very ranged focus character. The main benefits to the feat are:

1) Move action, not a full round or more.
2) Can be done nearly anywhere that is not completely barren. Most rooms have furniture or crates and such.
3) +4 to AC with no penalties beyond you can't move out of cover.

Also being in cover stops Attacks of Opportunity now!

[Wrath]

Can I suggest you buy a few of the area specific settings materials then. Because it's all in there

Heck, the players guide for Second Darkness AP included a thieves tongue slang terminology.

Shadowrun was originally produced by FASA. They also did Earthdawn.
All of the racial stuff you're talking about originally came out in splat expansions (which I still own). The language and insults etc you talk about are exactly the same in Earthdawn as they are in shadow run. Because it's the same races written by the same company just rehashed for a future setting. While I agree that setting was rich in detail, it was restrictively rich. It basically told you how to play your character by race. My group ignored over half of it since we wanted to play our characters the way we envisioned, not the way the developers told us. We still kept much of the cultural stuff, but languages etc , meh.

You're having an issue with the way YOU played the setting, not the way Paizo developed it.

You are of course entitled to that opinion based on your experience.

As a side note, I still own all the old 40k books and most of the white dwarves from 88 through to early 2000. I watched them selectively butcher the rich setting they had in order to better focus on the products that sold. Good business model, dodgy setting exploration.

[Steve Geddes]

Chaos Isaac wrote:

Steve Geddes wrote:

Chaos Isaac wrote:

Then again, Paizo aren't really setting guys

Heh. This is so far away from my position I can't begin to imagine how anyone can think this. That's not a challenge, it's just that I find your comment as incredible as if you'd suggested the moon landings were faked.

The world is a big place. Thank you internet. :)

Now, you may have never played a game with a established setting that actually has it's own thing going on, and i'll list a few of my favorites. Shadowrun, where cyberpunk meets fantasy. Warhammer 40k, where in the grimdark future there is only War. Dragon Age, a modern one that should be familiar.

I know Shadowrun (a longtime personal favorite of mine) and Warhammer 40k (which I've always found quite dull - there's only so much bleak angst I can take before I just start taking the mickey).

The fact I'm only passingly familiar with Dragon Age is another indication of just how far apart you and I are experience-wise, I suspect.

With rare exception, if it wasn't released in the 80s I probably don't like it. :o

[Zabraxis]

Chaos Isaac wrote:

Andoran is Pathfinder America, and that's cool, but I couldn't tell you who they were friends or enemies with, any real notes of their relations with other nations.

Using your example, Andoren foreign relations has exactly the information you're complaining is missing. It's nicely footnoted so you can go read the information. Just because you or your DMs haven't done the homework doesn't mean Paizo hasn't given their setting some depth. It just wasn't all in the core book. It happened over time, just like Shadowrun and the other settings you like.

[Chaos Isaac]

Wrath wrote:

While I agree that setting was rich in detail, it was restrictively rich. It basically told you how to play your character by race. My group ignored over half of it since we wanted to play our characters the way we envisioned, not the way the developers told us. We still kept much of the cultural stuff, but languages etc , meh.

You're having an issue with the way YOU played the setting, not the way Paizo developed it.

So, it's not the way I played the setting. I never bothered with the Golarion setting because it didn't exist when I started playing Pathfinder as far as I know. (Picked it up in 2009) I made up my own stuff for adventures and did whatever. But I think with what Zabraxis said I found the core. The big problem I probably have here, is the way Paizo published it. I never knew what the inner sea primer was for a very very long time even though I saw it around. Unlike Shadowrun's "Run Faster", which I understood to be a race and setting expansion book, the Primer just... seemed like an adventure module book. Which I don't really use.

Hell, when Zabraxis mentioned foreign relations, I didn't even know Andoran had a Spirit of Liberty book. Which, actually I have as a PDF and didn't know it. Zabraxis, a lot of that stuff is still really a foot note. It's a shame even after i've learned this stuff and read through it, i'm still disappointed. I couldn't say what exactly is putting me off about it right now though.

Wrath wrote:

As a side note, I still own all the old 40k books and most of the white dwarves from 88 through to early 2000. I watched them selectively butcher the rich setting they had in order to better focus on the products that sold. Good business model, dodgy setting exploration.

Good business, but the fluff definitely suffered due to it, but also benefited, and as someone who only got into Warhammer (Fantasy and 40k) this year, I can't imagine some of annoyance people like you had to go through for so long.

Steve Geddes wrote:

I know Shadowrun (a longtime personal favorite of mine) and Warhammer 40k (which I've always found quite dull - there's only so much bleak angst I can take before I just start taking the mickey).

The fact I'm only passingly familiar with Dragon Age is another indication of just how far apart you and I are experience-wise, I suspect.

With rare exception, if it wasn't released in the 80s I probably don't like it. :o

Mn, Dragon Age originally came out as a video game in 2009, and the tabletop sometime after that. The tabletop oozes the feel of the setting, littered with good art and character creation backgrounds giving details on the world and a bit of a primer from where you're from. The later half of the book really gets into lore and religion and it's pretty cool. It's a dark fantasy, though, and i'm not sure how the game system lasts in higher levels. It's fairly simple, but the setting makes it for me.

Oh, and 40k's hilariously dumb grim-dark is dumb and probably shouldn't be taken that seriously. Between the 7 foot tall space vikings and orks who make guns out of lead pipes and duck tape, the over the top 80's grimness is dumb fun and super good for creating conflict for the heroes. Having someone make a nerd who just wants to learn actual history is pretty much heresy punishable under death, and so you can have a entire campaign just about trying to learn stuff and then like gaining crazy magic powers because you read the wrong book. It's great for shenanigans.

Warhammer Fantasy, to me, is a bit better, with many more 'hero' like characters who fight evil, and not everyone being a idiot. Also great crazy wood elves and like the occasional dwarf helicopter and elven flying fortress.

[Smite Makes Right]

Wrath wrote:

Shadowrun was originally produced by FASA. They also did Earthdawn.

All of the racial stuff you're talking about originally came out in splat expansions (which I still own). The language and insults etc you talk about are exactly the same in Earthdawn as they are in shadow run. Because it's the same races written by the same company just rehashed for a future setting.

Not to get too off onto a tangent, but you have that backwards. Earthdawn is Shadowrun rehashed for a fantasy setting. Shadowrun was going to be FASA's attempt at a cyberpunk game, but R. Talsorian released Cyberpunk 2020 first, so the fantasy elements were added to differentiate the game.

Back to Starfinder, given the blog comparisons to Shadowrun and Star Wars, I am underwhelmed so far. The setting feels a bit tacked on and superficial. The economics feel very contrived.

[Wrath]

Smite Makes Right wrote:

Wrath wrote:

Shadowrun was originally produced by FASA. They also did Earthdawn.

All of the racial stuff you're talking about originally came out in splat expansions (which I still own). The language and insults etc you talk about are exactly the same in Earthdawn as they are in shadow run. Because it's the same races written by the same company just rehashed for a future setting.

Not to get too off onto a tangent, but you have that backwards. Earthdawn is Shadowrun rehashed for a fantasy setting. Shadowrun was going to be FASA's attempt at a cyberpunk game, but R. Talsorian released Cyberpunk 2020 first, so the fantasy elements were added to differentiate the game.

Back to Starfinder, given the blog comparisons to Shadowrun and Star Wars, I am underwhelmed so far. The setting feels a bit tacked on and superficial. The economics feel very contrived.

Cool, didn't realise that part about FASA. They did good setting, but the mechanics were dreadful (especially as a DM).

I suspect Starfinder is going to be developed in a similar way to Pathfinder in all honesty. They have rules guys and they have setting guys. The rules are generally meant to be setting neutral and freely published on an SRD format style.

The setting will be developed separately and pretty much be Paizo only property.

Economics wise I suspect it's a balance thing. I'll need to play the system through a campaign before I can really make much judgement honestly.

[Steve Geddes]

Wrath wrote:

I suspect Starfinder is going to be developed in a similar way to Pathfinder in all honesty. They have rules guys and they have setting guys. The rules are generally meant to be setting neutral and freely published on an SRD format style.

The setting will be developed separately and pretty much be Paizo only property.

I'm sure the rules elements will nearly always be open content and the setting stuff will always be Product Identity.

However, recently there has been a shift in the PF rulebook philosophy and the distinction is not as stark as it was initially. I suspect the same will be true of Starfinder and that "setting neutral" will not be such an important goal as it initially was in Pathfinder Hardcovers.

[eddv]

The Solarion in general is proof positive of that.

Really the solarion is so bad.

I don't even mean mechanically, though its certainly that too.

Its so absurdly specific in theme and content that it cannot possibly hope to be setting neutral and it enforces a very particular kind of setting to boot.

Its the only class like it and it just seems so ill-considered.

[Rysky the Dark Solarion]

Uh, it's based a philosophy involving a cycle and exemplified by black holes and supernovas. Those are in lots of settings. Definitely in space based ones.

I'm not seeing anything setting specific about them at all.

[eddv]

*says the person with Solarion in their name*

Yes that philosophy, that's the one. That's not a real thing. Its fictional and specific to this setting!

[Rysky the Dark Solarion]

*blink*

*blink*

It's a philosophy about the cycle of the universe. Almost every setting has one of those. They're no more setting specific than Druids.