Field Test #3 Survey Extreme!

People have been imagining a tech supplement for SF2 to be one of the earliest releases; I imagine SROs will be in that.

ThatQuietOne wrote:

I'm a little disappointed, but not surprised, that android isn't a versatile heritage. It stands to reason that they're human-only on Golarion, but we know they come in all shapes and sizes elsewhere.

Have there ever been nonhuman androids in pathfinder or starfinder? I think all the ones we've ever seen have been human based, unless I'm missing something.

I think the SF1 Characters Operation Manual had rules for non-human looking android.

An android versatile heritage would be good.

ThatQuietOne wrote:

I'm a little disappointed, but not surprised, that android isn't a versatile heritage. It stands to reason that they're human-only on Golarion, but we know they come in all shapes and sizes elsewhere.

Have there ever been nonhuman androids in pathfinder or starfinder? I think all the ones we've ever seen have been human based, unless I'm missing something.

Xenometric Androids are in Character Operations Manual, offering a blend of android and base species traits for about a dozen species.

I could see androids getting a heritage that works similarly, perhaps operating somewhat like the Adopted Ancestry feat in that it lets you mix the two feat pools.

Or heck, with the new rules for mixing ancestries in Player Core, that might not even be necessary. Just use those same rules to make an android of whatever species you'd like.

I could see androids getting a heritage that works similarly, perhaps operating somewhat like the Adopted Ancestry feat in that it lets you mix the two feat pools.

Or heck, with the new rules for mixing ancestries in Player Core, that might not even be necessary. Just use those same rules to make an android of whatever species you'd like.

The precedent for that would be PF2 Skeleton ancestry and the Compact Skeleton heritage and the As in Life, So in Death feat.

Lojaan wrote:

Are ysoki even popular?

Yeah, they are. They show up in a sizable chunk of the live play casts, and most artist commission portfolios I've seen in Starfinder spaces feature at least one ysoki, if not more. I can't speak as to Starfinder Society numbers, so it's just some anecdotal evidence.

That said, I wouldn't expect them to rank highly in this particular poll since they're one of three options with an existing PF2 version.

We ysoki can be found in the Starfinder Society as well, expect us...

As much as I Love playing a ysoki I didn't pick them for the field test poll because I think other species could tell us more about the direction SF2e will take.

I'm a little disappointed, but not surprised, that android isn't a versatile heritage. It stands to reason that they're human-only on Golarion, but we know they come in all shapes and sizes elsewhere.

I'd also like to see Holograms being a versatile heritage. There is no reason all species could not have hologram forms.

Kasatha and lushunta were my picks so I could take a look at 4 arm and psionic mechanics in sf2e

I'd also like to see Holograms being a versatile heritage. There is no reason all species could not have hologram forms.

I actually prefer the approach from the current SF1 Hologram, from Enhanced. Your stats & ancestry details are determined by being a hologram (not what your hologram looks like, as a versatile heritage implies), but you can take 10 minutes to reprogram your appearance to be just about anything, presumably including your appearance not matching any ancestry. Want to be an ambulatory neon sign, or a mobile holographic art installation, or Miss Minutes? Go nuts.

Driftbourne wrote:

I'd also like to see Holograms being a versatile heritage. There is no reason all species could not have hologram forms.

I actually prefer the approach from the current SF1 Hologram, from Enhanced. Your stats & ancestry details are determined by being a hologram (not what your hologram looks like), but you can take 10 minutes to reprogram your appearance to be just about anything, presumably including your appearance not matching any ancestry. Want to be an ambulatory neon sign, or a mobile holographic art installation, or Miss Minutes? Go nuts.

Doing it the other way feels too prescriptive: i.e. if your ability score boosts are tied to what your hologram looks like, then changing your appearance feels way more complicated. ("Oh, we need to knock down the door? Hang on, let me reprogram to look like an orc and get +4 Str...")

Good point. I wasn't thinking about ability score boosts. I was thinking more along the lines of a species with multiple arms wouldn't program a hologram with fewer working arms, that would be like a species with two arms only making one work. I wouldn't mind of Holograms had a base species that determined it number of arms and movement types, and that those couldn't be changed when just changing appearance.

I was thinking too that it might be good if the size range covered all playable sizes, but there's nothing saying you can't play a medium-sized hologram of larger or bigger creature. Could be a good way to play a large species in a small ship.

Eh, the simulationist view of "why would a X-armed species build a hologram with only two arms?" just opens to door to "if you can just keep adding arms to a hologram ... why not make one with a thousand arms, who can wield as many items as its bulk limit allows?"
It's a good point (and a hologram with infinite arms, 18 Str, and Bulk Limit 9 wielding 99 L bulk items would be hilarious) but Game Balance™ gets in the way. IMO it's easier to just say that "holograms can appear to be nearly anything, but regardless of appearance they functionally have only two arms." Similar to how bantrids have dozens of hair-like cilia that, collectively function as two hands, or how astrazoans can change form to have any number of pseudopods, but again functionally only have two hands, and so on.

Large size would be pretty cool, though..! Again in the interest of balance, they'd probably have to be the "Bad Large" that doesn't have 10 ft reach, like Bears, but, /shrug can't all be winners.

CorvusMask wrote:

Skittermander don't feel like core rulebook option to me tbh

That’s because they won’t put Ysoki and Skittermander both in the Core Rulebook. That would doubling up on the cute, fun, small characters.

I think it was unexpected that the Skittermander would eclipse the Ysoki in popularity. Now they are in weird position.

You can’t have both in. The only other option is to replace the Ysoki with the Skittermander in the core.

I don’t think they are ready for that.

To me, Skittermander are to Starfinder what Goblins are to Pathfinder. I feel they deserve elevation to a core race.

I would like to see Space Goblins again.

We're missing Skittermanders as a vote option....This is not fun. Please Paizo make them a core like Goblins were in PF-2E, everyone I spoken to loved Skittermanders to a fault.

Meanwhile I consider goblins becoming core instead of kobolds in 2e kind of mistake because fun part of goblins IS them being chaotic evil personality wise, so chaotic neutral goblins don't have same sharpness :'D

(But yeah, please don't make skittermanders core x'D They are fun in small doses)

Given a skittermander is pretty much the mascot of the SF2e field tests, I think it's a fairly safe bet they will be in, they're also a VERY popular ancestry/species.

And given you have both Halflings and Gnomes, I don't see why we wouldn't have both Skittermander and Ysoki.

I also LOVE the suggestion of Android and Hologram being versatile heritages.

Given a skittermander is pretty much the mascot of the SF2e field tests, I think it's a fairly safe bet they will be in, they're also a VERY popular ancestry/species.

And given you have both Halflings and Gnomes, I don't see why we wouldn't have both Skittermander and Ysoki.

I also LOVE the suggestion of Android and Hologram being versatile heritages.

Having both halflings and gnomes has become the convention in both Pathfinder and D&D. An old convention that can’t be changed.

But I think if the editors at Paizo and Wizards really had a choice, they would drop one of them for a more unique ancestry.

Skittermanders will be in 2e, but I still think they shouldn't be in core book unless core book has absolute massive list of species :p

"Species X is super popular, so it should be core!" is absolutely the wrong thing to to tell Paizo if you want it to happen. What they hear is "Species X is so popular, it will guarantee extra sales on the non-CRB book we put it in."

Look at it this way... Ysoki can be Core, and Beginner Box for Starfinder. They can print Skittermander for free in the next FreeRPG adventure supplement if they time everything right. Meaning everyone could have access to it for free. But interest in it would draw people into getting people to try the new FreeRPG adventures every year, and hopefully get new players involved, by drawing attention to them there.

Example:
#1: Ohhh... cute dice bag, what is that supposed to be.
#2: That is cool, I think I saw someone with a red one too.
#3: Yeah, that is a Skittermander.
#2: What is that from?
#3: Oh, it is from Starfinder.
#2: I don't remember seeing them there.
#3: Oh, the rules are in the FreeRPG adventure Skitter Onward!
#1: Can Players choose them?
#3: Sure enough, they are a complete playable ancestry, go check it out. I'll send you the link. They even work with the New Beginner Box if you want!

"Species X is super popular, so it should be core!" is absolutely the wrong thing to to tell Paizo if you want it to happen. What they hear is "Species X is so popular, it will guarantee extra sales on the non-CRB book we put it in."

That'd be a real weird stance to take when all the rules, including ancestries, from said books will be online for free.

Skittermanders will be in 2e, but I still think they shouldn't be in core book unless core book has absolute massive list of species :p

How about having Skittermanders as the only species in the core rule book and before the core rule book is even out publish a massive book with all the other species?

I can't decide if I'm joking or not because I'd buy that species book for sure.

Skittermander PLEASE I MUST HAVE SKITTERMANDER!!!!!

I just wanna see how the Lashunta subtypes are handled under a PF2 framework, because they seem more substantial than your usual Heritages.

...also, I've wanted to play as one in PF2 for years now, but that bias is barely at play here.

CorvusMask wrote:

Skittermanders will be in 2e, but I still think they shouldn't be in core book unless core book has absolute massive list of species :p

How about having Skittermanders as the only species in the core rule book and before the core rule book is even out publish a massive book with all the other species?

I can't decide if I'm joking or not because I'd buy that species book for sure.

If "all other species" includes ALL species from 1e, then yeah sure :D

Soon (tm)

Soon (tm)

Fascinating.

Any idea what the normal turnaround time on a blog post is?

Karmagator wrote:

Soon (tm)

Fascinating.

Any idea what the normal turnaround time on a blog post is?

well, It was originally announced to come out in January 2024, so that still seems like the plan. The question is if the tweet means soon or some point latter this month.

No idea how long it actually takes, but the other Field Tests came out on the 4th and the 7th. So maybe don't start the F5 sect just yet ^^

What do you think, will ancestries be the main part of this field test? Or will it be the "extra" part like the weapons or spells for the first two tests and we will get the third class preview?

I'm guessing the first, just from how extensive even a cursory look at two ancestries would be, but I'm hoping for the latter. [Insert the Kylo Ren "more" meme here]

I’m hoping to get what was shown at PAX U as an extra, but I don’t think it’s time yet.
More Weapon and maybe some Armor are easier to get.

I’m hoping to get what was shown at PAX U as an extra, but I don’t think it’s time yet.

More Weapon and maybe some Armor are easier to get.

I also don't know how useful it would be. It would be nice, sure, and I would 100% take it. But unlike previous field tests we would also learn very little about the design behind everything.