Starfinder Second Edition is Coming!

The games are going to be compatible, that doesn't mean they're going to borrow the medicine skill and associated skill feats over wholesale.

I take umbrage with the idea that people aren't liking this because of some idea of system loyalty or aversion to change. I welcome change! I was stoked when 2e was announced!

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

It really doesn't, speaking from extensive experience, they're about as strong as optimized base pf2e characters because action economy is hard bottleneck.

Also talking from experience, a very optimized party of characters from 14th+ levels will break the encounter balance if they are allowed any common archetype.

That sounds like a you issue, not an archetype/free archetype one. Or rather, your party of optimizers are “breaking” stuff, it doesn’t have anything to do with Free Archetype.

I hope they ultimately move away from the leveled weapons. Just give us Starfinder equivalent of Potency and Striking runes.

Better idea: have that sort of thing included in level progression. A high-level combat-focused character should be lethal because they're Just That Good, not because they have a green lasergun instead of a red lasergun.

Though I guess that's not going to happen with PF2 compatibility being an overriding concern.

Gone for two years, immediately jumps into a forum argument. Par for the course.

*sips tea and waits for the moderators*

On one hand the three-action economy is a drastic improvement over the system both games' first editions had going on. On the other, I'm a little upset the 120+ playable races in SF are being thanos snapped in the transition.

I take umbrage with the idea that people aren't liking this because of some idea of system loyalty or aversion to change. I welcome change! I was stoked when 2e was announced!

I agree with you here.

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The same couldn't be said about PF1 and SF1?

Kinda looks like Starfinder is becoming a PF2 campaign setting.

I take umbrage with the idea that people aren't liking this because of some idea of system loyalty or aversion to change. I welcome change! I was stoked when 2e was announced!

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

Speaking for myself, its that the areas where it's pf2e esque aren't changes that create specific feels, they're just kind of systemic improvements and mostly where SF was too close to PF1e in regards to trap options, the DND 3.5 action economy and such. That and when i looked into SF in the first place... the balance issues were to the extent that people were recommending to almost never use archetypes out of very specific plans. That sapped the joy out of things extremely quickly, I'm sure SF 1e is fun, but I'm very excited to see the core system moved to something so robust. The soldier class feels like a different ethos on that base system, so far, which is nice, and ditto for the gun setup, and the leveled guns.

Rhunny wrote:

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The same couldn't be said about PF1 and SF1?

nope.

For instance, most people don't consider 3.5 to be fully compatible with PF1. The differences between PF1 and SF are far more pronounced. Action economy is similar at a glance but any close look will show they are fairly different. Classes, species, equipment and combat are all different too

Interesting.

Is Starfinder also getting a new logo? The one on the blog front page looks so much better than the original…

Love Kent Hamiltons’s takes on Navasi and Chk Chk. Obo suffers from being super boring as ever, and the pahtra Solarian doesn’t give me any inspiration at all. Oh well, two out of four ain’t bad.

I like how Kent’s signature/sigil somehow is capable of incorporating *every* letter in both of his names. Clever, especially if he didn’t mean it!

This is amazing news!

I am running the Doomsday Dawn set of adventures (with a bunch of invented material in between) and I literally threatened that if the heroes fail to save Golarion, we will be playing Starfinder, because the planet the characters were on was destroyed. Now we can literally do that and not even change characters or port the player characters into Starfinder 1e.

This is hilarious, but it is of course awesome news on its own.

Does this mean that they are getting rid of SP and HP and just going with HP?

Reducing our dislike of the system change to 'don't like change' is just being dismissive to be convenient. The last time a mechanics changes increased my enjoyment of the game was Skills and Powers for 2E DND. Most setting materials published since then have been worse in quality though some of the 3.X settings were solid. So all the work and money to learn new systems has not produced additional happiness. The existing Starfinder setting is one of the exceptions where it has been a truly new and fun setting, but why would I be excited to pay money to get the same type of options I already have to build characters.

this is exciting but i hope the archaic trait is tweaked a bit, maybe if its a magical weapon it bypasses the resistance

also i am LOVING the new logo and the new pahtra iconic, their design is absolutely amazing and i get gender envy looking at them

I would expect the new logo to be a placeholder, like the PF2 playtest logo was

YuriP wrote:

Rhunny wrote:

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The same couldn't be said about PF1 and SF1?

nope.

For instance, most people don't consider 3.5 to be fully compatible with PF1. The differences between PF1 and SF are far more pronounced. Action economy is similar at a glance but any close look will show they are fairly different. Classes, species, equipment and combat are all different too

But in practice PF1 is an improved 3.5 that uses same main rules, BAB, AC, Thrown Saves an so on even the DCs, BABs and Saving Throws formulas and numbers are the same.

The difference between classes, species/races/ancestries, equipment are more thematically related to the scenario and self-contained to specifics of the classes and not a general rule.

In the end all 3.0, 3.5, PF1 and SF1 keeps the main basis and gameplay feeling. In the end all them are basically a 3.0 modified in many degrees.

SF2 will follow the same thing to PF2 but granting that they wont made anything that brakes the compatibility. This doesn't prevented they to create new conditions, new weapons mechanics, new exclusive class abilities. They are just preventing that new things becomes mechanically and numerically incompatible with PF2 while keep the both games independency.

And this make sense commercially, helps the both games maintenance, help players migration between both systems, allows 3rd party developers to do material to both games easily and helps a lot to make Pathfinder Compatible to get a status similar to that D20 System was during the 3.5 golden era. With this Paizo is the first pointing that "we created a robust rule system with an robust open license (orc) that works with many different scenarios from Medieval Fantasy to Sci-fi Interstellar Fantasy. So you 3rd party developer can benefit from this too! Make your campaign set using our rules and diminish your work, costs, book space and make easier to get a player base that won't had the resistance of have to learn a new system".

I gotta imagine it feels better to have all the Paizo developers on the same system, so one team doesn't feel like the "B" team pumping out content for the aging, crusty system.

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Or not having a dick GM who lets you rest and isn't trying to run the dungeon as some simulation since they understand that this is a game, not a chore.

Following the rules is being a dick GM? That's new information. Also, better stay away from Adventure Paths, since they are encounter after encounter after encounter.

The-Magic-Sword wrote:

It really doesn't, speaking from extensive experience, they're about as strong as optimized base pf2e characters because action economy is hard bottleneck.

Also talking from experience, a very optimized party of characters from 14th+ levels will break the encounter balance if they are allowed any common archetype.

Age of Ashes during and after book 5 got easy; Agents of Edgewatch after mid-book 4 started to be very easy; Abomination Vaults last chapter was quite easy; homebrewed game at level 14 were able to make a level 19 NPC retreat.
Fighter dedication, Medic dedication, Rogue dedication, Champion dedication etc. These became so common that it is boring to see them, definitely can tell they increase the party's power.

Strength of Thousands has you taking a Wizard or Druid free archetpye as part of the Player's Guide. I think they account for it more than you may assume.

I also hope that the "fully compatible" bit is more "simple conversion" rather than just 1:1 transplants of content from one system.to another. I'd love SF2e to keep some of the extra scifi flavor of KAC vs EAC.

In addition, I do hope the team doesn't try and avoid SF classes stepping on the toes of PF ones too much. I'd much rather have Soldier be "Fighter in Space" and have a good breadth of options than be a bit too focused and make adding PF options to SF feel necessary to round things out.

With the Soldier in particular, I do find the current focus on area weapons to be a bit too narrow. While it would make an excellent subclass, I'd rather it emphasize a more generalist approach to defensive combat. For instance, it could be a Readied Action specialist, defending allies through in a more diverse manner, such as by getting a discount on Readied actions or by being able to ready activities instead of just singular actions.

Only 6 classes is also concerning, since I'm not sure you could cut any of the original 7 without the game feeling like it's missing a particular role. Maybe Technomancer and Mechanic could be fused.

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

I am on running my third PF2 Adventure Path and unless time is sensitive for some reason, the party can heal up almost to full between encounters. Sorry if this is some new information you'll have to process now.

Without Continual Recovery, rolling one Treat Wounds per hour is going to take awhile, imagine when you have 150 HP, healing by 4d8 per hour? Or, as I previously stated, someone HAS to invest into Medicine to make healing work and roll against the high DC, and if you do, in case of a failure? Let's wait a whole hour since you are now immune to Treat Wounds.

And without Ward Medic, even worse, taking 10 minutes per creature, rolling individually for each creature, then if fail/don't heal enough, have to repeat the process.
Yep, certainly not "Medicine rules require feat tax and investment" and more "dick GM" am I right?

At 150 hp, that means your players are either Level 10 or Level 12, depending on if one of them is a barbarian or not. That means a medicine check will help you recover 2d8+30 or 4d8+30 since by level 7, you could have master proficency in medicine. If you don't want to roll your, assuming you have a 14 wisdom, +18 modifier against a DC 30, meaning a 12 or higher beats it, you can always use the lower DC. This means you roll against a DC 20, for 2d8+15 or 4d8+15 since you'll likely crit.

There's also health potions, which by that point are 50 GP for a 3d8+10 heal. There's also heal and various items that give you a free cast of healing, such as the Staff of Healing, which can do either 3 casts of 2d8+18 heals, or 2 casts of 3d8+26 heals. Gloves of heal which at appropriate item level will do 4d6+15 and give you a +2 skill bonus to medicine, or even someone aquiring Lay on Hands to heal someone 30 flat hp every time its used, or someone playing a full caster with heal who can restore 5d8+40 or if they are level 12, 6d8+48.

You have a lot of healing in PF 2e. The question is basically just "How much healing does your party want?" and that will just vary table to table. Even a party that doesn't want to invest in any spellcasters or use the medicine skill will have enough loot to buy potions and play slow enough to make it okay.

Which means one can look at how common healing is in PF 2e, and come to the conclusion that Starfinder is likely about to get a ton of easy to access heals to make up for the loss of Stamina. I like stamina, and I like resolve points. But if you can arrive to the same conclusion of "PC's do not die as easily as they did in PF 1e" and do so in an easy to understand way, Then I'm good with moving towards normal HP vs the STamina/HP split.

Rhunny wrote:

YuriP wrote:

Rhunny wrote:

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The same couldn't be said about PF1 and SF1?

nope.

For instance, most people don't consider 3.5 to be fully compatible with PF1. The differences between PF1 and SF are far more pronounced. Action economy is similar at a glance but any close look will show they are fairly different. Classes, species, equipment and combat are all different too

But in practice PF1 is an improved 3.5 that uses same main rules, BAB, AC, Thrown Saves an so on even the DCs, BABs and Saving Throws formulas and numbers are the same.

Same happens to SF1 with the notable exception of Stamina and have 2 ACs for different damage types, the core rules are basically the same including most of base numbers and formulas.

The difference between classes, species/races/ancestries, equipment are more thematically related to the scenario and self-contained to specifics of the classes and not a general rule.

In the end all 3.0, 3.5, PF1 and SF1 keeps the main basis and gameplay feeling. In the end all them are basically a 3.0 modified in many degrees.

I'm sorry but no. SF1 plays nothing like 3.x and PF1. The 3 action economy in the game works much more like a puzzle and that's just the tip of the iceberg. Readied actions don't work the same, reactions replace immediate actions and attacks of opportunity, spellcasting works completely differently, there's a bound accuracy system, damage now also comes from level, what and what doesn't provoke is streamlined to the extreme...

the games just do not operate similarly even at a glance.

SF2 will follow the same thing to PF2 but granting that they wont made anything that brakes the compatibility. This doesn't prevented they to create new conditions, new weapons mechanics, new exclusive class abilities. They are just preventing that new things becomes mechanically and numerically incompatible with PF2 while keep the both games independency.

I argue there's no such a thing as SF2, as there's no new game being announced.

In all honesty, the only thing they announced is a new Pathfinder 2 campaign setting based on Starfinder.

And this make sense commercially, helps the both games maintenance, help players migration between both systems, allows 3rd party developers to do material to both games...

I actually do agree with you there, this is the most economical solution to the need for a new edition, which I agree Starfinder needs.

"I argue there's no such a thing as SF2, as there's no new game being announced.

In all honesty, the only thing they announced is a new Pathfinder 2 campaign setting based on Starfinder."

That is absolute sophistry and flies in the face of not just what Paizo is doing but what the Starfinder developers themselves are saying.

Dislike the direction and levy your criticism, now is the time to do so. But don't pull this BS of "SF 2e is just PF 2e in a trench coat" gatekeeping, no-true-scottsman trite.

It's not exactly what I wanted - I had been hoping for just a refined, 2e-esque but still separate system - but that doesn't mean I'm still not excited for it! I love Starfinder's settings and a lto of ideas going on, but cannot stand a lot of the mechanics having played it a bit. I'm excited to be able to really dive more in to Starfinder like this! Totally understand people who are sad, but hey, don't smile because it's over, smile because it happened. (and the game you like is still around!)

Also, the new Solarian iconic is flawless.

"I argue there's no such a thing as SF2, as there's no new game being announced.

In all honesty, the only thing they announced is a new Pathfinder 2 campaign setting based on Starfinder."

That is absolute sophistry and flies in the face of not just what Paizo is doing but what the Starfinder developers themselves are saying.

Dislike the direction and levy your criticism, now is the time to do so. But don't pull this BS of "SF 2e is just PF 2e in a trench coat" gatekeeping, no-true-scottsman trite.

Nothing that I've read here or in the field test has made think this isn't a re-skinned PF2e. You can grab the Tashtari as is in the pdf and run it in any PF2 game, absolutely 0 conversion needed.

Are there going to allow for computers, mechs, starships, etc? They have said as much and I believe them. But it's not looking like they'll be anything you can't easily snap in and out to make the core system still be that of PF2.

If you enjoy that, all more power to you. But don't accuse me of no-true-scottmanship when we're literally not getting a new game.

In all honesty, the only thing they announced is a new Pathfinder 2 campaign setting based on Starfinder.

Great!

That was the original intent for Starfinder, but PF1’s engine had too many flaws to give the stories they want their due, especially since they knew (even if we did not) that they were gearing up for PF2.

With remaster giving PF2 a bit of polish (and again, they knew this was coming even if we did not, do you honestly think this effected nothing about the remastery?), it looks like PF2 mechanics are going to be close enough for their use this time around.

I just wish Starfinder Enhanced had been released this month. Would have given them opportunities to trial balloon some changes they had in mind, like the new start ship combat system.

/shrug.

I tried PF2, but honestly I didn't care for it nearly as much as I like Starfinder. That's why I'm still here.

I'm sure this will bring PF2 players into Starfinder, so I'm sure it's a good move for Paizo financially.

I'm also sure it'll push out the players like me who actually liked the product as is. I was way more excited for Enhanced and getting just some minor tweaks, instead of throwing it away and converting to PF2.

I'll give it a shot; that's what I always do. Sometimes they surprise me, like 3E and 3.5 D&D both being purely upgrades. But more often than not, when I'm playing a system I already like, the new edition ends up being less fun and I ditch it within 6 months. (4E D&D, 5E D&D, PF2, M&M3)

I gotta imagine it feels better to have all the Paizo developers on the same system, so one team doesn't feel like the "B" team pumping out content for the aging, crusty system.

Michael Bolton: “Why should I change? He’s the one that sucks.”

I look forward to Starfinder 2nd Ed. I will want to incorporate that in mind with regards to a project I am working on. It would be part of the plan.

I look forward to Starfinder 2nd Ed. I will want to incorporate that in mind with regards to a project I am working on. It would be part of the plan.

Paizo, I'll be happy to discuss story base of a project I am working on and will forward to the story context and details so that there is no problem in story canon. So the story of my project and the starfinder story can "play together". I have ideas but dialogue with Paizo will be great to have.

Not how that works

Sidenote, my observation on free archetype rule is that besides players with choice paralysis not liking it, it does kinda make sure that all builds are somewhat similar because you are guaranteed to take all feats from your main class rather than mix and matching your class with archetypes.

So I do think its valid that not everyone likes it

What they showed us is just taster document. The document couldn't have new mechanics or they would have to be included also. That sort of thing comes when the actual play test comes out.

ORC in space... Wow! Super excited for a Starfinder 2E, especially one compatible with Pathfinder 2E. Ever since 2E came out I have been hoping for this. Being able to easily interchange classes, items, creatures, spells, etc, between Pathfinder and Starfinder is a big win for me. It just gives me more options when I'm doing the whole home brew setting thing.

I've only had a quick skim over the Starfinder Field Test, but I already love how the glitching condition expands upon the existing conditions in Pathfinder.

I'm looking forward to the playtest next August. Seems so far away, but then again I will have plenty to do with the Pathfinder remaster coming out in November. Thank you Paizo for Starfinder 2E.

I consider this an absolute win, because I love the Starfinder setting, but heavily dislike the 1e system. Obviously this is heavily subjective, but having a go at it after playing PF2e for at that point over a year felt like staying at a motel after hogging the penthouse for a while.

At the end of the day, for me SF2e means that I will have vastly more options for either system to play the game I want.

While I can see some issue cropping up with limiting the design space for Starfinder because of existing Pathfinder content, what limited info I have seen from the fieldtest and announcements, it looks like they have that handled.

Heh, I wonder if the Grimmerspace dudes have even started writing their thing, or are they behind far enough to switch to SF2 ;)

This is great news. The best of both worlds.

I probably won't be porting anything between PF and SF but the tech/magic of Starfinder in a three action system may become my go to TTRPG system of choice.

quick skim of the Soldier Field Test reveals

* no mention of Stamina Points ... just 10+Con HP per level
* no mention of Resolve Points

two things I'd miss a lot moving away from SF1e

Pathfinder 2e has variant rules for Stamina and Resolve points: https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=1378. So you might not have to miss them.

Very excited for this; hoping that this new edition will be what my group needs to get into starfinder! They tried 1e but they weren’t huge fans…

This is great news, I have been hoping for SF2 for a while now, and starfinder enhanced made me think it was still going to be a long way off.

I love that it is going to be 100% compatible with PF2, and look forward to seeing how the SF classes stack up. The Soldier does feel a bit narrow at the moment with the focus on big weapons, but I'm sure it will expand as we move into playtest and beyond.

Looking forward to more updates!

Please don't... Dont ruin the greate game for sake of saving a buck... I stehre a way to stop it?

Heh, I wonder if the Grimmerspace dudes have even started writing their thing, or are they behind far enough to switch to SF2 ;)

I'd recommend a writing with two rule sets in mind for people working in SF original edition and 2nd edition. Just have to have flexibility for end customers.

I don't mind them making SF2 compatible with PF2, but I was hoping it would keep some of its own identity. Stuff like stamina & resolve being core rules. So long as you have a consistent way to do it, having to convert a LITTLE from one system to another can be a good thing.

Please don't... Dont ruin the greate game for sake of saving a buck... I stehre a way to stop it?

What does this even mean?

A few days ago I was saying to a friend: "dude, I would like to play Starfinder but with the PF 2e rules, that would be great!"

And now, you announce this! This!! I am super excited!

On one hand the three-action economy is a drastic improvement over the system both games' first editions had going on. On the other, I'm a little upset the 120+ playable races in SF are being thanos snapped in the transition.

There was already mentioned that several will be present in the new core rules and knowing the popularity of the "triple-digit number of playable species" Paizo will be quick to update most of them.

The challenge here is that SF species are rather simple to write and front-loaded, PF2 ancestries need far more writing as you need to map out all the ancestry feats and heritages.

VerBeeker wrote:

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Wintergreen wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Super excited for all of this! Also very intrigued by Zon-Shelyn, especially in the context of what we learned in the Pathfinder side of things.

I'm almost afraid to ask; what did we learn on the Pathfinder side of things, exactly?

I was wondering the same thing.

There's going to be a Drift Crisis syle event involving a divine war. One of the Core 20 is going to die.

WHAT?!

Excuse you?! The hell you mean?!

Where was this?!

GenCon Keynote presentation.

I think some lore from 1e is also worth mentioning... When Dou-Bral first returned to the system as Zon-Kuthon, despite his new horrifying condition and despite having already ripped their fathers skin off and turning him into a monster, Shelyn tried to hug Zon-Kuthon because she loved him and was just glad he was still alive. He attacked her and raked his claws across her face and then they fought a LONG brutal fight. Shelyn realized that the Glaive he held was emanating some evil corrupting power, so she wrestled it away from him, and then he just stopped fighting and left (to this day she has not put it down for fear that he will get it again and it will continue corrupting him - hence her favored weapon changing from dagger to glaive). After this there was that whole thing where Zon-Kuthon willingly agreed to be imprisoned in exchange for an item from Abadar's vault (choosing the First Shadow).

After he was freed, Shelyn frequently would go and sit with her brother and talk to him (never getting a word back)... but she was the only one he would allow to sit with him like that. She tried for a very long time to mend his mind, but no progress was ever made. Worth mentioning though, the Glaive that she never put down was always radiating an evil corrupting energy the made her feel sick...

with all this said, I think what happened was after holding it for SOOOOOOO long, it finally began to change her (or weaken her). and maybe she gave up, and gave back the Glaive to him, or maybe he was just biding his time and when she was weakened enough, he attacked... but once he had it back, it drove him to consume her.