We have a stronger in-house design guide for the separations than ever existed in PF's 1st days so it should be less common, and as always, everyone will do their best to avoid them, but I'm sure there will eventually be a theme (or other feature) that violates these guideline somewhere down the line; it's inevitable in a mature enough game system with enough options in enough books. If you see a new feature that's causing your group issues (say a theme that's diverting away player...
That seems good to me. As you said, with enough material, something is always going to slip through the cracks eventually. Knowing that there's a good guide for keeping the separation should help cut down on it, though. Is it something that will be available for 3rd party writers? I really like some of the things from people like Dreamscarred Press, for instance, but if they have to go just by feel it could take a lot longer to find those sweet spots.
What about the Ace Pilot who is also a Chick/Dude Magnet?
Rack up some levels in Ace Pilot Class, then multiclass and take Icon...
Chuck Yeager is a straight single-class Ace Pilot with a lot of levels.
Charles Lindbergh is an Ace Pilot who picked up and used some Icon sway.
What about the Ace Pilot who is also a Chick/Dude Magnet?Rack up some levels in Ace Pilot Class, then multiclass and take Icon...
Chuck Yeager is a straight single-class Ace Pilot with a lot of levels.
Charles Lindbergh is an Ace Pilot who picked up and used some Icon sway.
Archetypes are tied to a class. Themes are tied to a character, as far as I can tell.
Character idea: Bounty Hunter Mystic. Hunting down criminals and capturing them are acts of religious devotion.
Isn't that an Inquisitor?
I am not sure i follow what you mean, just how archetypes trade out class abilities while themes are not affected by them?
Mr. Lindbergh could very well be an Envoy with the Ace Pilot theme who has a normal level of renown for his level.
I think he means your character only gets 1 theme for the entire game, multiclassing doesn't give you another theme as themes are tied to the character as a whole not the individual classes.
Archetypes are tied to a class. Themes are tied to a character, as far as I can tell.What about the Ace Pilot who is also a Chick/Dude Magnet?Rack up some levels in Ace Pilot Class, then multiclass and take Icon...
Chuck Yeager is a straight single-class Ace Pilot with a lot of levels.
Charles Lindbergh is an Ace Pilot who picked up and used some Icon sway.I am not sure i follow what you mean, just how archetypes trade out class abilities while themes are not affected by them?
Mr. Lindbergh could very well be an Envoy with the Ace Pilot theme who has a normal level of renown for his level.
He means themes are applied to a character and key off character level while archetypes are applied to each class individually and key off class levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure i follow what you mean, just how archetypes trade out class abilities while themes are not affected by them?Mr. Lindbergh could very well be an Envoy with the Ace Pilot theme who has a normal level of renown for his level.
Pretty sure it means that you can't multiclass into Icon from Ace Pilot. Themes are one per character, archetypes are one per class.
In any case, a lot probably depends on WHEN your character became a famous and sexy babe magnet. If your character was a celebrity before start of play, they probably have the icon theme. If they became famous during play, they probably have some other theme. I would imagine that any mid- to high-level character should achieve some degree of fame -- especially in the Starfinder setting where apparently a lot of the high level NPCs were recently wiped out.
...
Crazy/Insane/Mad theme?
"Mary Sue"/"Gary Stu" theme?
Alternatively, Inspector Clouseau theme . . . .
"Mary Sue"/"Gary Stu" theme?I'd have to assume GMs will write that theme themselves, for use with their favorite GM-run PC-build character.
But it sounds like sooo much work...and I have to mache the character really really edgy tooooo
Just convert the Bladeling over to Starfinder, hard to get edgier than being made out of edges ;)But it sounds like sooo much work...and I have to mache the character really really edgy tooooo"Mary Sue"/"Gary Stu" theme?I'd have to assume GMs will write that theme themselves, for use with their favorite GM-run PC-build character.
Don't forget to back it up with the Edge Lord Harbinger archetype.
Well... I have an odd question in regards to that "Quick Pidgin" example, in the vein of "instructions not clear".
Namely, what does it mean by "specific creatures" exactly?
Does it mean the members present when you're trying this communication thing? Or does it mean all members of that species?
I get the feeling that it means basically the members present, but the rule is slightly ambiguous given the statement immediately after: It states afterward that the +2 bonus on doing it with others is with "similar creatures" rather than with "creatures of the same species".
In a full context interpretation, one player could argue that the latter statement implies that the former case of "specific creatures" refers to "that specific species" rather than specific members of that species. (With whether or not "similar creatures" being just that species or not being up for debate.)
In a word for word interpretation, another player could argue that its a case that the Pidgin only works for the members involved in that instance, and that the clause of "similar creatures" is merely a case of the bonus not applying exclusively to other members of that species, but also others.
I think the main fumble with the wording is just the ambiguity of what "creatures" refers to. "Creatures" as a word in itself could refer to species, or it could refer to members of a species, especially given its in plural rather than singular. (I.E. A group of Dragons are "specific creatures", as is an unusual race of Dragons also considered "specific creatures" in a purely linguistic sense.)
I ask this now so that we can get the rules lawyering out of the way so we don't have to deal with it mid session.
|
Namely, what does it mean by "specific creatures" exactly?
It means the creatures present.
The bonus for "similar creatures" could apply to other members of that species, yes. But, it could also apply to members of a different species that share the same home or occupation. Creatures can be similar along many different axes and shouldn't be limited to race.
I would say similar may also refer to language. If you can mime your way through talking to someone who only speaks akitonian, you should be able to do the same with another person who speaks the language, despite rave. I would think.
Could be similar disposition as well. Warlike vs peaceful. Probably up to the dm
Up to the GM, obviously, but it's clear to me that it refers creatures that speak the same language so that the same pidgin could convey information effectively to them.
You are transposing a pidgin of two languages to another similar context.
Up to the GM, obviously, but it's clear to me that it refers creatures that speak the same language so that the same pidgin could convey information effectively to them.
You are transposing a pidgin of two languages to another similar context.
Speaking the same language is not always a guarentee. Very often culture will have a large impact on things as well.
The UK and US both speak 'english' but their use of certain words and cultures can have a very large impact on how they communicate. Perhaps the US would be 'similar' to the UK for this ability?
Up to the GM, obviously, but it's clear to me that it refers creatures that speak the same language so that the same pidgin could convey information effectively to them.
You are transposing a pidgin of two languages to another similar context.
Speaking the same language is not always a guarentee. Very often culture will have a large impact on things as well.
The UK and US both speak 'english' but their use of certain words and cultures can have a very large impact on how they communicate. Perhaps the US would be 'similar' to the UK for this ability?
That's why you get a +2, not auto-success
The discussion seems kind've moot, since it comes in at a level where tongues has already been appropriate for a while, and Sci-fi translator technology exists. Unless both magic and technology have had their language abilities neutered specifically to give it a niche, Quick Pidgin is probably not going to be useful very often.
The discussion seems kind've moot, since it comes in at a level where tongues has already been appropriate for a while, and Sci-fi translator technology exists. Unless both magic and technology have had their language abilities neutered specifically to give it a niche, Quick Pidgin is probably not going to be useful very often.
Yeah, especially as a level 6 feature, when a lot of such spells and stuff should come online already.
Developer, Starfinder Team
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The discussion seems kind've moot, since it comes in at a level where tongues has already been appropriate for a while, and Sci-fi translator technology exists. Unless both magic and technology have had their language abilities neutered specifically to give it a niche, Quick Pidgin is probably not going to be useful very often.
That's assuming that by "tongues has already been appropriate for a while," you are assuming tongues comes into Starfinder when it does in Pathfinder for bards or sorcerer/wizards, rather than when it does for clerics (in which case it wouldn't come in until 7th, and then only if someone selects it as one of their two 3rd level spells known or spends money to have it as a consumable.
Also assuming that technology exists that can translate totally unknown languages (which is not something we have previewed as happening in the game). Even the racially-granted limited telepathy only works with creatures that share a language with you. (Translating to a known language is a different level of difficulty, obviously.)
And even if tongues is an option, if its duration is the same at the Pathfinder version it's only last an hour, which likely means you can talk to the scouting party you run into, or to their leader back at camp, but not to both in the same day.
|
I may have missed it since information is scattered here and there about the net but does anyone know how healing is going to work in starfinder? I'm very interested in playing a medic type of character.
I'd expect that to be detailed in one of the classes, or possibly one of the themes could be re-flavored to assume such a role.
Or you could homebrew it.
That's assuming that by "tongues has already been appropriate for a while," you are assuming tongues comes into Starfinder when it does in Pathfinder for bards or sorcerer/wizards, rather than when it does for clerics (in which case it wouldn't come in until 7th, and then only if someone selects it as one of their two 3rd level spells known or spends money to have it as a consumable.
Also assuming that technology exists that can translate totally unknown languages (which is not something we have previewed as happening in the game). Even the racially-granted limited telepathy only works with creatures that share a language with you. (Translating to a known language is a different level of difficulty, obviously.)
And even if tongues is an option, if its duration is the same at the Pathfinder version it's only last an hour, which likely means you can talk to the scouting party you run into, or to their leader back at camp, but not to both in the same day.
I'm comparing it to when tongues comes into play for most 6 level casters, since that's what we've got in Starfinder. Which is level 4- 2 levels before Quick Pidgin is an option.
Universal translators are a pretty common thing in sci-fi, more so in science fantasy. I would be extremely surprised if they didn't exist as a relatively common thing in a game that bills itself as kitchen sink science fantasy.
As far as duration, I mean, there's not really anything stopping you from casting the spell multiple times. Or carrying consumables that trigger it for when you need it. Both of those are pretty common activities in Pathfinder. Your specific example is a pretty unlikely one, though, since it also assumes whatever "scouting party" you're running into that has a totally unknown language both isn't a hostile encounter and has the patience and intelligence to spend 10 minutes trying to make up a pseudo-language with you.
From my perspective, Quick Pidgin looks like a ribbon ability that's impractical and unlikely to matter. Which is fine, lots of RPG abilities are mostly background and don't do anything immediately useful, and it's cool to be able to say your character can make up a temporary language in 10 minutes, just as long as it's not competing with other abilities that do important stuff.
|
Developer, Starfinder Team
|
Your specific example is a pretty unlikely one, though, since it also assumes whatever "scouting party" you're running into that has a totally unknown language both isn't a hostile encounter and has the patience and intelligence to spend 10 minutes trying to make up a pseudo-language with you.
It becomes much more likely when the campaign included the option of seeking out new worlds, new life forms and new civilizations, while boldly going where no one (from your civilization) has gone before.
There should be more totally unknown languages on previously-uncontacted worlds than known ones. (At least maybe -- one could assume that planar tongues are the same on every world, which might make them common trade tongues... )
|
Developer, Starfinder Team
|
Also, in Pathfinder tongues is gained as a 3rd level spell by just as many 6-level casters (alchemists and summoners) as get it as a 2nd level spell (bards and inquisitors).
Warpriests are 6-level casters who get it at 4th.
So *most* 6-level casters get it later than 6th level.
It also becomes way more likely that you can just prepare tongues and/or comprehend languages for they day when you're going somewhere or bring gear to deal with the problem. A permanent ability for then you unexpectedly run into a totally unknown language spoken by people willing to collaborate isn't really a large amount of play space. If it's a ribbon, that's great. If it's competing with a special ability appropriate to 6th level, it's probably not.
Starfinder (currently) has no preparation spell caster. Only spontaneous spellcasters.
What? Are you serious? Jeez. Leaving all the people out that like preparing spells is a way more serious problem than splitting hairs about pidgin languages. How the heck did that get through first drafts?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tbh prepared casting was the single thing I disliked the most about PF, so I'm fine with them being absent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah prepared casters always seemed like an extra level of redundancy, I don't think I've ever played a game where prepared casters have actually said what spells they prepared, they just cast whatever was appropriate at the time.
Starfinder (currently) has no preparation spell caster. Only spontaneous spellcasters.What? Are you serious? Jeez. Leaving all the people out that like preparing spells is a way more serious problem than splitting hairs about pidgin languages. How the heck did that get through first drafts?
We've known that pretty much from go. But yeah, of the 2 casting classes so far, they're both spontaneous. And when you think of Scifi or science fantasy, those few who do have magic abilities are, in essence, spontaneous casters. They can do a few things with their limited powers. They may change that at since point, but for right now, that's how it is.
There are plenty of 6 level casters that are prepared. Just refusing to handle prepared casting in the core book is baffling to me, since it's one of the more unique things about d20 compared to most RPGs.
Prepared casters don't fit the genre as well.
Oh come on. Space wizards aren't even remotely a rare concept in science fantasy, and the distinction between spontaneous casting and prepared casting is almost entirely player preference- they're both running on "shots" of spells that aren't modeled in any of the source material.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are plenty of 6 level casters that are prepared. Just refusing to handle prepared casting in the core book is baffling to me, since it's one of the more unique things about d20 compared to most RPGs.
Prepared casters don't fit the genre as well.Oh come on. Space wizards aren't even remotely a rare concept in science fantasy, and the distinction between spontaneous casting and prepared casting is almost entirely player preference- they're both running on "shots" of spells that aren't modeled in any of the source material.
Prepared casters are generally more prone to becoming god wizards than spontaneous due to vastly better access to their spell list. Removing them is a logical part of curbing C/MD.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Prepared casters don't fit the genre as well.Oh come on. Space wizards aren't even remotely a rare concept in science fantasy, and the distinction between spontaneous casting and prepared casting is almost entirely player preference- they're both running on "shots" of spells that aren't modeled in any of the source material.
I'm not saying casters don't fit the genre. Obviously they do. But every example I can think of fits the spontaneous, spells-known model far, far better than the awkwardness of spell-selection and one-and-done casting of prepared spellslingers. So yes, prepared casters don't fit the genre as well.
I'm not saying casters don't fit the genre. Obviously they do. But every example I can think of fits the spontaneous, spells-known model far, far better than the awkwardness of spell-selection and one-and-done casting of prepared spellslingers. So yes, prepared casters don't fit the genre as well.Prepared casters don't fit the genre as well.Oh come on. Space wizards aren't even remotely a rare concept in science fantasy, and the distinction between spontaneous casting and prepared casting is almost entirely player preference- they're both running on "shots" of spells that aren't modeled in any of the source material.
The spontaneous model doesn't fit at all either. Pretty much all of those stories' systems fall into fatigue (you get worn out by casting), pool (you expend nebulous 'magic juice' and can run out), or unlimited (you can cast all you want within the options you know). Darth Vader doesn't run out of 3rd level slots and resort to casting force choke instead of force lightning.
If we're only going to do Vancian style casting, the important distinction between spontaneous and prepared casting is seriously just player preference. "Do you want more spells known at a time, or do you want to be able to change up your strategies more frequently?" Only including spontaneous casting is pretty much just telling anyone that likes preparing spells to go pound sand, the benefits to theme outright don't exist.
Arguably, it just does harm to people's ability to do interesting things without hiring people outside of the party. If everyone's a spontaneous caster, they're probably not going to bother learning really niche or downtime-based spells along the lines of masterwork transformation or continual flame or determine next of kin, since they're not versatile enough to be worth limited spells known that have to be more focused on fulfilling broad task groups. I would have expected something more like what Arcanists do becoming more common, not a step back like this.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We need to stop derailing this thread. However...
The spontaneous model doesn't fit at all either. Pretty much all of those stories' systems fall into fatigue (you get worn out by casting), pool (you expend nebulous 'magic juice' and can run out), or unlimited (you can cast all you want within the options you know).
I completely agree that there are mechanical options that are much more like the genre examples than spontaneous casting. But spon-casting is far closer to those options than preparation would be. You can reasonably flavor running out of spell slots as fatigue, for example. Preparation doesn't fit the model at all.
Darth Vader doesn't run out of 3rd level slots and resort to casting force choke instead of force lightning.
To the extent that this is true, it's certainly far more true still that he doesn't switch to force choke because he only prepped force lightning once today.
If we're only going to do Vancian style casting, the important distinction between spontaneous and prepared casting is seriously just player preference. "Do you want more spells known at a time, or do you want to be able to change up your strategies more frequently?" Only including spontaneous casting is pretty much just telling anyone that likes preparing spells to go pound sand, the benefits to theme outright don't exist.
I disagree completely. I can fudge a Jedi or a biotic in the model of a spontaneous caster, but prepared caster just doesn't work in my head at all. But I'm not going to push this further unless we make a new thread for it.