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

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

A few weeks in. Munchkins yet?


Starfinder General Discussion

1 to 50 of 76 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Starfinder has been out for several weeks now.
Are the usual types of people already trying to find ways to break the game? Or are people finding it's generally just good fun so far?


20 people marked this as a favorite.

YOU MUST TAKE FIRST LEVEL AS SOLDIER (BLITZ) FOR EVERY BUILD. MUUUSSSTTTTT


So far, I haven't seen any breaking. Some optimization and some strong opinions (especially on Solarians), but nothing too drastic.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The main thing I have seen so far is people buying flashlights and trying to use their batteries as ammunition for powered weapons.


David knott 242 wrote:

The main thing I have seen so far is people buying flashlights and trying to use their batteries as ammunition for powered weapons.

I think one change I would probably like to see would be a specific class of device batteries for computers/flashlights and other small electronics that is not the same as what you use in weapons.

They kinda hint this is the case but it was kinda vague in my reading of the book. It would explain why a 7 credit flashlight probably does not use the same battery as a laser rifle.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
simplygnome wrote:
YOU MUST TAKE FIRST LEVEL AS SOLDIER (BLITZ) FOR EVERY BUILD. MUUUSSSTTTTT

You must. You must! YOU MUST! ;)


6 people marked this as a favorite.
The Mad Comrade wrote:
simplygnome wrote:
YOU MUST TAKE FIRST LEVEL AS SOLDIER (BLITZ) FOR EVERY BUILD. MUUUSSSTTTTT
You must. You must! YOU MUST! ;)

NUMERICALLY SUPERIOR. THE SWARM DEMANDS GROUP THINK.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

All will be assimilated.

Resistance is futile.


15 people marked this as a favorite.

Ysoki can put 19 pistols into their mouth and spit out a specific one as a swift action, and take no penalties while doing this...

The Exchange

Mechanically it's not going to break easily. The options provided so far aren't providing overly powerful combinations......yet.

Give it time and more splat books and we'll see what happens.

With Pathfinder, I found it was D20pfsrd that caused issues as much as anything else. They present crunch rules from campaign specific splat books. But they do it without any of the restrictions the setting applies. So folks go through looking for combinations and spells in that resource and mash together things that can never exist in the campaign material provided.

I did chuckle at the ysoki one above though. In my campaign I'd see that as a way for a rat man to blow its head off.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I actually cap it at ten, since that's one bulk, no need to get ridiculous with it after all.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
I actually cap it at ten, since that's one bulk, no need to get ridiculous with it after all.

19 is correct. You drop the fraction so 01-19 is one bulk. Pg 167 CRB. Of course the volume of 19 pistols may cause the GM to question the ability for said space rodent to store this arsenal in one cubic foot of cheek space.


No one can make simulacrums or summon the answer to every problem out of thin air.

So, no.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
baggageboy wrote:
Ysoki can put 19 pistols into their mouth and spit out a specific one as a swift action, and take no penalties while doing this...

Pistols? Pfeh...GRENADES!

Shadow Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

How many Ysoki die of mouth cancer from storing all these dangerous things in their mouths all the time?

The Exchange

bookrat wrote:
How many Ysoki die of mouth cancer from storing all these dangerous things in their mouths all the time?

How many chip their teeth!?

Lucky they're rodents and their front teeth keep growing to,replace damaged enamel.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How many Ysoki follow the teachings of a ysoki demigod of Flavorful Mouth Storage. "Nononono ... I'm not putting those in my mouth without the proper seasoning mix. Those things are disgusting!!"


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Time to design a Carrier called the Ysoki!


So far I've not seen anything break the game. A few builds which were superior to others at specific things, but even then the superior build rarely has more than a +1 to +2 higher bonus in its favor.

The small spell lists stop weird combos of spells that could cause issues as well.


Tervola wrote:

Time to design a Carrier called the Ysoki!

2 hangar bays and a shuttle bay, all auxiliary craft ftw. ;)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

when I get around to playing a Ysoki, he going keep offering his companions snacks he keeps in his Cheek Pouch.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Not so much concerned with whether the game gets broken, as much as people trying.
Seems like every group has one of "those" players in it.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ched Greyfell wrote:

Not so much concerned with whether the game gets broken, as much as people trying.

Seems like every group has one of "those" players in it.

There's been a fair amount of mathematical analysis, including by me. I'm not sure that's really 'trying to break the game' though. I'm super happy that it's all carefully balanced, actually.


Yeah I havent really "dug" into it yet. Only real thing I've noticed so far is that melee is still quite strong compared to range though the gap is much smaller now with little to no ways to get more reactions.


I decided I liked this thread after the first 4 posts XD

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TarkXT wrote:
Yeah I havent really "dug" into it yet. Only real thing I've noticed so far is that melee is still quite strong compared to range though the gap is much smaller now with little to no ways to get more reactions.

It's higher damage, but not usually by a lot, and much more likely to get you hurt. I think the balance point is a bout right.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

My group is very optimization focused... Within reason. (Never had a pun pun problem, as it were.) In any case, it does seem more balanced by far. All of our best tricks are so far small. Devil is in the detail, as they say. A +1 here, another there. Positioning is far more important, since every creature occupied square is soft cover. (+4 AC.) Going prone, +4 AC vs ranged. It's been making us focus more on creativity in combat, rather than perfection of build. Not to say we aren't making some great builds...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just never have a problem....


I don't really think doing math testing is being one of 'Those' players. Doubly so when most of this is on the forums, rather than 'I want to break the game so I can use it in a game'. Stress testing is part of any new system, to try and get a hang of it's oddities and foibles.

I mean, getting a group that all feel equally useful with their characters can often be tricky in many games unless you understand that.


Munchkins can be useful. After reading the book the first time I had a worry the envoy class might be fairly weak, and there was some talk on here that supported that fear, but after people had a bit more time people did a bit more math, taking into account stuff people were missing at first and it became obvious that envoy is a very solid support class, in SF. Now I can't wait to play my envoy later this month... going android might end up being a mistake, but ehh, I'm just missing out on +1 attack bonus I would otherwise have, I'm sure I'll live(well... I hope i do anyways).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dead Phoenix wrote:
Munchkins can be useful. After reading the book the first time I had a worry the envoy class might be fairly weak, and there was some talk on here that supported that fear, but after people had a bit more time people did a bit more math, taking into account stuff people were missing at first and it became obvious that envoy is a very solid support class, in SF. Now I can't wait to play my envoy later this month... going android might end up being a mistake, but ehh, I'm just missing out on +1 attack bonus I would otherwise have, I'm sure I'll live(well... I hope i do anyways).

To me, what you describe is not being a Munchkin. To be a Munchkin, you need to put your fun ahead of everyone else's.


Nohwear wrote:
To me, what you describe is not being a Munchkin. To be a Munchkin, you need to put your fun ahead of everyone else's.

Reading a lot of this thread it feels a lot like people are using it to describe anyone who is doing math/working out the details of the system rather than leaving it in the undiscovered fog.


The traditional munckin I would agree but I think in this case its what Ikiry0 said.

The Exchange

Slyme wrote:
baggageboy wrote:
Ysoki can put 19 pistols into their mouth and spit out a specific one as a swift action, and take no penalties while doing this...
Pistols? Pfeh...GRENADES!

With light-activated fuses. Great for when you are being chased. Fantastic if some bastard manages to kill you in melee.


Makes a cavity search mean something different for them.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tervola wrote:
Makes a cavity search mean something different for them.

Wait... Why?

Mouths have always been a part of cavity searches.


Most mouths can't be tongue-detonated. ;)


I was going for tooth cavity.


Ched Greyfell wrote:

Starfinder has been out for several weeks now.

Are the usual types of people already trying to find ways to break the game? Or are people finding it's generally just good fun so far?

I'm not finding it particularly broken in the direction you're thinking, I'm finding more problems the other way- how easy it is to put together a character that can't meaningfully contribute in most situations. Terrible damage is pretty easy to do (which is a problem, since everyone should be contributing to the damage volley), as are abilities that only function or interact with a specific subset of targets.

And there are long level gaps between the upgrades (both weapons and stats) so poor choices at the beginning make for a party burden for a very long time.

And in terms of contributing, not taking the feat tax for proficiency in real weapons and then specialization is pretty much a crime against the party. Most of the feats simply don't compare.

It's a big book with a lot of trap options, sadly, and I've known a lot of players who will trip over the first ask of basic rules familiarity (let alone reasonable system comprehension, let alone mastery).

The Exchange

Voss wrote:
Ched Greyfell wrote:

Starfinder has been out for several weeks now.

Are the usual types of people already trying to find ways to break the game? Or are people finding it's generally just good fun so far?

I'm not finding it particularly broken in the direction you're thinking, I'm finding more problems the other way- how easy it is to put together a character that can't meaningfully contribute in most situations. Terrible damage is pretty easy to do (which is a problem, since everyone should be contributing to the damage volley), as are abilities that only function or interact with a specific subset of targets.

And there are long level gaps between the upgrades (both weapons and stats) so poor choices at the beginning make for a party burden for a very long time.

It's a big book with a lot of trap options, sadly, and I've known a lot of players who will trip over the first ask of basic rules familiarity (let alone reasonable system comprehension, let alone mastery)

Switching weapons is easy though. After your first game you'll either loot something better or just buy something better. Remember all the weapon focus etc feats are for weapon categories now, not specific weapons.

Waiting six levels to get a better long sword when a better tactical Spear becomes available three levels earlier is just stupid. (Weapon names plucked from thin air, not necessarily better.)

And I haven't seen any trap options yet. Would you please elaborate? Maybe you're missing something (or I am). So far I've found it to be very well balanced.

It has a completely different design focus to Pathfinder in what combat means.


Wrath wrote:
Switching weapons is easy though. After your first game you'll either loot something better or just buy something better. Remember all the weapon focus etc feats are for weapon categories now, not specific weapons.

Sniper rifle.

Bow.

Shuriken.

Unarmed.


Most of the feat list, most of the weapons list (for the reasons you just mentioned), quite a few of the class abilities and several of the class specializations.

Feat list in particular is a paizo problem, with a lot of stuff that should just be basic tricks that anyone can do, and most of it being terrible in comparison to taking the weapon proficiency taxes or saving throw taxes. Or for the mystic alone, spell focus.

A lot of way too narrow tricks that feel like a repetition of the ranger 'favored enemy' problem: whenever you aren't in that specific circumstance, you might as well have written 'warrior npc class' on your character sheet.

Switching weapons is easy... but not particularly meaningful. By and large the first upgrade for everyone comes at ilevel 7, with the exception of pistols (Sonic jumps to 1d8 at 4th, which is sadly a major upgrade), and the laser rifles and cannons upgrade at ilevel 6 for no apparent reason.

Quote:
It has a completely different design focus to Pathfinder in what combat means.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Combat design is still 'focus fire, kill them dead, don't be stupid and try fancy crap.'

Unless you can stunlock people efficiently, (one action to deny multiple actions), which the solarion spectacularly fails at, since their action juggling costs the solar just as many actions as the supposed victim. Which denies full actions, so is terrible. So 'gravity whatever' and 'crush' would be very good examples of trap class abilities.

The Exchange

Omnius wrote:
Wrath wrote:
Switching weapons is easy though. After your first game you'll either loot something better or just buy something better. Remember all the weapon focus etc feats are for weapon categories now, not specific weapons.

Sniper rifle.

Bow.

Shuriken.

Unarmed.

weapon infusions.

Except unarmed.

The Exchange

Voss wrote:

Most of the feat list, most of the weapons list (for the reasons you just mentioned), quite a few of the class abilities and several of the class specializations.

Feat list in particular is a paizo problem, with a lot of stuff that should just be basic tricks that anyone can do, and most of it being terrible in comparison to taking the weapon proficiency taxes or saving throw taxes. Or for the mystic alone, spell focus.

A lot of way too narrow tricks that feel like a repetition of the ranger 'favored enemy' problem: whenever you aren't in that specific circumstance, you might as well have written 'warrior npc class' on your character sheet.

Switching weapons is easy... but not particularly meaningful. By and large the first upgrade for everyone comes at ilevel 7, with the exception of pistols (Sonic jumps to 1d8 at 4th, which is sadly a major upgrade), and the laser rifles and cannons upgrade at ilevel 6 for no apparent reason.

Quote:
It has a completely different design focus to Pathfinder in what combat means.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Combat design is still 'focus fire, kill them dead, don't be stupid and try fancy crap.'

Unless you can stunlock people efficiently, (one action to deny multiple actions), which the solarion spectacularly fails at, since their action juggling costs the solar just as many actions as the supposed victim. Which denies full actions, so is terrible. So 'gravity whatever' and 'crush' would be very good examples of trap class abilities.

And yet, I don't find any of the stuff you mentioned problematic at all.

As for Solarian. If he pulls his trick, it lets three other players (assuming standard party size from AP design)do more stufff more effectively to that enemy.

Any way, guess I'm just going to disagree with your take on this completely.

Liberty's Edge

Voss wrote:

I'm not finding it particularly broken in the direction you're thinking, I'm finding more problems the other way- how easy it is to put together a character that can't meaningfully contribute in most situations. Terrible damage is pretty easy to do (which is a problem, since everyone should be contributing to the damage volley), as are abilities that only function or interact with a specific subset of targets.

And there are long level gaps between the upgrades (both weapons and stats) so poor choices at the beginning make for a party burden for a very long time.

Eh. If you follow some very basic principles of optimization that everyone should really have down (high casting stats, attack stats, and stats that give Resolve are good, get Heavy Armor if you have low Dex), most characters will do fine.

They won't necessarily be optimal but they'll do fine.

Voss wrote:
And in terms of contributing, not taking the feat tax for proficiency in real weapons and then specialization is pretty much a crime against the party. Most of the feats simply don't compare.

This is only debatably a problem. Yes, an Optimal Envoy, Drone Merchanic, Mystic or Technomancer should grab some Proficiency in something nice...but not doing so isn't the end of the world and doesn't make them useless. They do perfectly serviceable jobs without one. Having one is optimal but not necessary to be effective.

I mean, two of those classes are casters, and can shine pretty readily via that just by maxing their casting stat. Would they be better in combat with the Proficiency? Yes. Does not having it make them useless? No. Ditto the Envoy. A combat focused Envoy should indeed be using a huge Unwieldy weapon for maximum damage, but she's still amazing at social skills and a solid party buffer even without that, her own damage is highly secondary.

That leaves Drone Mechanics. Who have a Drone to help out on the damage front. Which, in fact, matters quite a bit.

Everyone else has good weapon choices, even the Operative (who makes otherwise bad weapons good).

Voss wrote:
It's a big book with a lot of trap options, sadly, and I've known a lot of players who will trip over the first ask of basic rules familiarity (let alone reasonable system comprehension, let alone mastery).

Unless you make the kind of fundamental mistake of having your Resolve granting stat or your attack stat at 10, I think most characters will do fine. And no system can help people who make that kind of fundamental error.


David knott 242 wrote:

The main thing I have seen so far is people buying flashlights and trying to use their batteries as ammunition for powered weapons.

And why would this not work RAW?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It does work RAW and that's the problem. You could also take a 350cr battery out of a 7cr comm and sell it for 35cr by RAW creating infinite wealth...


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Everyone else has good weapon choices, even the Operative (who makes otherwise bad weapons good).

Honestly, I'd sorta dispute that. Mostly because the Operative doesn't really have much choice. His weapon variety is tiny (Can't even use all pistols/basic melee weapons) with no real ability to improve it. It's for very understandable reasons but Weapon Choice is not something I'd say the class does well.

Liberty's Edge

Ikiry0 wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Everyone else has good weapon choices, even the Operative (who makes otherwise bad weapons good).
Honestly, I'd sorta dispute that. Mostly because the Operative doesn't really have much choice. His weapon variety is tiny (Can't even use all pistols/basic melee weapons) with no real ability to improve it. It's for very understandable reasons but Weapon Choice is not something I'd say the class does well.

My point was that those weapons he has access to are good for him. That he starts with all the weapon Proficiencies he needs to be optimal. Which is entirely true.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ched Greyfell wrote:

Starfinder has been out for several weeks now.

Are the usual types of people already trying to find ways to break the game? Or are people finding it's generally just good fun so far?

Darling, the munchkins were already beginning to do their thing before the game even came out.

1 to 50 of 76 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Starfinder® / Starfinder General Discussion / A few weeks in. Munchkins yet? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

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

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