Search Posts
Absolutely WatersLethe. Kobolds would have been perfect! I also wouldn't have as much issue with Goblins if they had a written reason to integrate. Space Goblins in starfinder make sense because they have had centuries to get their stuff together. But in Golarion, especially Doomsday Dawn, they timed it even before Rise of the Runelords. Right in the evil-goblin time line. For example, here is a blurb about Goblins right from the first couple of pages of the Jade Regent Adventure Path. "Goblins have lived along the Lost Coast for as long as anyone can remember, but that certainly doesn’t mean they’re welcome. Viewed as pests by most and monsters by all, goblins’ reliance on the garbage of greater societies has ensured their simpering, cavorting proximity to better civilizations since the start. Goblins are naturally craven, gleefully foolish, and ever eager to visit atrocity and pain upon those they encounter, a combination that one might think would have led to their eradication by their betters long ago. But goblins are fecund and stubborn if nothing else. Much to the distress of the rest of us, goblins are here to stay."
Sure! There will always be those folks who derail, but even gnomes don't have the written-in pyromaniac tendencies. I can put my foot down, but goblins have a canon, pre-written excuse to be obnoxious and there are players who have taken advantage. And because of that written excuse, if I push too hard, I am stifling RP. Sure that wasn't every case, and most calmed down after I asked them to, but they weren't wrong in saying that's how goblins act.
It's not JUST ability mods. It's not just their ability mods that make them powerful, but some of their racial stuff as well. I have seen goblins at higher level and the combinations are brutal. The most powerful combat due I saw were a Goblin Paladin and Goblin Rogue and oh boy... the carnage I witness compared to others was enough to make me cringe without the quirky "goblinness" on top of it. That just ended up making it worse. Another concern is that almost every single Goblin at the table so far have used their characters as an excuse to derail the table. And this is on society where as GMs are not allowed to exclude anything. Foreshadowing for the future? I sincerely hope not.
Only part of my post, and the BLOG is not good enough in my opinion. Not everyone is a blog person, myself included. My point being, which still stands, is they could have very easily made it clear on the playtest page that everyone was required to go to get the materials in the first place. Besides, that isn't my only or even biggest gripe. Nor is that limited to Doomsday dawn specifically, but playtesting in general that doesn't have to do with Society which is still going strong. I thank Mathmuse for offering some words in regards to the other parts of my post instead of just rushing to try and correct me.
That is only a part of my post.
It's Jason's post in the "Last day for surveys" thread. "This is your reminder that TODAY, December 31st is your last day to submit Pathfinder Playtest feedback to us via the surveys. The surveys will close at midnight PST. You can find links to all of the surveys on the Pathfinder Playtest Page. In addition, these boards will be archived soon as well."
Since this has been wrapped up for the most part I wanted to leave my final thoughts, both on the game and the process itself. I was part of the original Beta Playtest back in the day and so I was more than thrilled that this would share that legacy as the most playtested tabletop game available. However my excitement was mitigated by the fact that it seems there was only a brief window in which we could have our voices heard. Even these message boards are apparently getting shut down soon, despite the fact that there is still 6-7 months from the hopeful release. This wouldn't be so bad if they had been upfront about the actual time frame we had to work on it. Ending it on the 31st of December felt rushed to me. That could have been the plan all along I suppose, but then it should have been a fairly simple task of letting everyone know what that time frame looked like when it all started. My group wasn't able to get all the way through the Doomsday Dawn because we thought there was time to get it done. That wasn't the case unfortunately. Then we at least figured that the surveys/message boards would be left open as folks would continue to play it, but again that is also over and cut off. Overall it feels like we were given this thing to work on and try out and then it was yanked out of our hands partway through. Not a great feeling in general, and even worse for someone who is passionate about Pathfinder and Paizo who wants to make sure we get the best version of the game. As for the specifics of the game that I still have concerns on, there are only a few that merit this kind of post. There are certainly more but this is already more verbose than I would like. Goblin PCs- Not only are they the best Paladins since Aasimars, but stat for stat I would say they are some of the most powerful characters period. This in my mind is thematically wrong in two ways. First, goblins have never been this powerful, nor should they be when compared to other goblins in the world. Second, no matter how many society specials were released with not-hated goblins, you cannot wipe away a literal decade of literature that shows how goblins are these nasty little creatures with a penchant for fire and explosives and death. I get it that they are Paizo's mascot, but Kobolds or so many other monsters could have filled that spot both for the quirkiness AND the decade of story that doesn't need to be rewritten. Making it "easy"- Identify magic items, repairing a shield, "free hand" to cast, and others. In some cases the words "made it easier" were used exactly and I just have to wonder why. I've seen PC's spend several in game days working on the most inane stuff, yet an hour (10 minutes with feat) to identify an item is too much? Expecting someone to actually have a free hand when using magic is too much? Expecting someone to have to take time to repair something that had been literally beaten to pieces is too much? I feel like we are heading towards "easy mode" more and more, especially with hero points on top. Spellcasting- I'm going through a home game right now and I am hopeful that the increased damage dice will do it, but I still feel like there was too much push to close the gap. Though the word gap is quite an unfortunate one because it wasn't a gap as much as they were simply different ways of getting the same job done. Magic eventually ran out, sword swinging arm does not. Etc etc. I'm concerned that Golarion is heading towards the realm of low fantasy which is really bizarre coming from the past 10 years of play. All in all I hope that we aren't simply left with silence once these boards are archived. I would also love to see some more number crunchy data. Jason for example has mentioned that surveys are a lot different from the message boards or facebook groups or whatever the case may be. Is there a chance we could see some of that data? Even a graph or pie chart would suffice. I'm not saying that folks who say things like that are misleading, only that generalizations aren't really helpful and it would be nice to see where our fellow adventurers sit on the matter.
I added one of these myself to a campaign I am running. In this case, Treat Wounds. My brain just cannot accept mundane healing that works on 6 people at once, essentially giving the healer 1.5 minutes with each person. Over and over. So this one is more realistic time wise, mundane wise, and only needs a single roll. Unless you fail of course. TREAT WOUNDS
You attempt a Medicine check on a single creature using 1 charge from a healer's kit. The DC is the highest ability DC that caused damage to the creature. The check determines how many HP are healed per minute, and the healer may spend any number of minutes healing. A creature healed in this mundane way cannot go above 75% of total HP. Critical Success- Healer's Character Level+Wis Mod + Wounded Character's Con Mod Success- Healer's Wis Mod + Wounded Character's Con Mod Failure- No healing is done Critical Failure- 1d8 points of damage is dealt to Wounded Character and the healing kit charge is wasted.
Las Vegas Open 2019!!!! 3 days of gaming and fun in fabulous Las Vegas! February 8th through the 10th, 2019, Bally's Casino. Pathfinder will once again make a showing, this time with a dash of 2nd ed mixed in! Because Pathfinder 2nd Edition has made some exciting waves, there will be two tables dedicated to it! Starfinder is also going to make a good showing with some of the best scenarios to date. As before, any GM volunteers will have their passes taken care of for the days they are running. This year will also allow our team to show off our supreme nerdiness with a plethora of 3d printed miniatures! There will be plenty to choose from day of, but if you are interested in a custom one then simply private message me at least 2 weeks before the event and we can figure something out. We all look forward to seeing you adventurers on the field! Here is the list of tables and games. The format is as follows:
Starfinder Table A -
Starfinder Table B -
Pathfinder Table A -
Pathfinder Table B -
Pathfinder 2nd Edition Playtest Table A -
Pathfinder 2nd Edition Playtest Table B -
Las Vegas Open 2019!!!! 3 days of gaming and fun in fabulous Las Vegas! February 8th through the 10th, 2019, Bally's Casino. Pathfinder will once again make a showing, this time with a dash of 2nd ed mixed in! Because Pathfinder 2nd Edition has made some exciting waves, there will be two tables dedicated to it! Starfinder is also going to make a good showing with some of the best scenarios to date. As before, any GM volunteers will have their passes taken care of for the days they are running. This year will also allow our team to show off our supreme nerdiness with a plethora of 3d printed miniatures! There will be plenty to choose from day of, but if you are interested in a custom one then simply private message me at least 2 weeks before the event and we can figure something out. We all look forward to seeing you adventurers on the field! Here is the list of tables and games. The format is as follows:
Starfinder Table A -
Starfinder Table B -
Pathfinder Table A -
Pathfinder Table B -
Pathfinder 2nd Edition Playtest Table A -
Pathfinder 2nd Edition Playtest Table B -
I really appreciate the playthrough and the thorough review! Even down to the descriptive text. It makes my day. And yeah, the forums definitely have a Jaali flavor. And now that you mention it, I hadn't thought about the exact nuances of that to be fair. I looked it up before replying and I did find that the hardness does NOT go away. The AC does go down but the hardness will stay according to current RAW. I had thought that 7 hardness would be a bit much as well, but I didn't change it because that was what the books said was supposed to be that equivalent challenge. In this case an Animated Statue for a "Severe" threat solo-boss. No environmental hazards. I had thought about offering an adamantine weapon as a possible loot option, but the problem with that is it is a much, much higher level item and worth a fortune. It would be up to the players to stay in agreement with the institute getting all the artifacts, weapons included. How many players did you end up doing this with, may I ask?
I am all for all the options presented so far, as each of them has some very interesting ideas! ESPECIALLY number 4. Number 4 is dangerous if left unchecked, but Living Greyhawk was a perfect example of how that worked. For example retiring scenarios after a set period of time or even making certain adventures regional.
This is listed in the Playtest Bestiary. In fact I wrote an adventure using these adjustments to test the system. If you look on pages 22-23, it shows you how much XP an encounter has. Monsters give certain amount of XP for their level. You can find the adventure here and see where the adjustments are. I made it adjustable from 2-6 players in total on a table.
Greetings fellow testers/gms! I decided, since I have gone through almost all of the available content so far, that I would try my hand at some encounter building. An associate requested an adventure when I mentioned it to him, and I figured this would be as good a place to post it up for public consumption. I put together all of the encounters with the GM tools provided and adjusted each one for party size differences. If the math all works out then this should be runnable for a party size between 2 - 6, all level 1. Let me know what you think! If the work is acceptable I may continue on with a series focusing on each level. In either case it's a good test of the GM world creation side of things.
So, I just ran my first 6 hour long session in the AP that is provided, and I'm beat. But satisfied. I wish it had been released on a monday or something, but I was prepared enough to at least start with. However there is already a bit more to consider so far as a GM than with 1st ed. Just like track-keeping wise. Some points on what I mean: Each time a player drops they have their own DC they have to save against depending on what dropped them. There are now Hit Points, Spell Points, Hero Points, and resonance that the GM now has to be aware of. Combat is rough on the party so far. Like, really rough. And healing so far is as limited as I expected. No one has died but it's been a matter of saves. Speaking of saves, poisons. Poisons and the save process for them are interesting to say the least. But definitely seems more crunchy than 1st ed. Adjusting to the smaller numbers of everything is, hard but refreshing? I love how the economy was adjusted. It makes so much more sense. Also, highest skill we have right now is a 5 at level 1. Dealing with the DC table is interesting as well, but I wish there was an easier-to-reference document for it instead of having remember it's on page 337. That's all I have so far! I will add onto it as the games progress.
The tightening of the alignments is ABSOLUTELY story driven, and intended to curtail certain types of clerics who didn't make thematic sense with their deity. By abandoning general rules for allowed alignments and custom designing each deity's allowed alignments we have a lot more flexibility. "Flexibility?" That word you use, I don't think it means what you think it means. What I have read here, as many of my fellow players have already pointed it, is that the current alignments and restrictions put into place do the exact opposite of that. You say it is not to stifle creativity but I am afraid that is exactly what it does, despite claims to the contrary.
I don't see anywhere in fiction or real world that says more advanced and powerful systems wouldn't make it easier for a pilot to control the vehicle. In fact we have evidence to the contrary with things like power steering that allows drivers to turn without needing to be moving first. Granted it's not in space but these are all fictional anyways so we are a bit beyond that. Otherwise we are in complete agreement about everything else. I agree that it is a system that is trying to balance itself, and my whole point is that it fails to do so in a compelling way. Besides, the original issue is something we all seem to agree on which is also my original post. It shouldn't be your own ship. This offensive roll should go against a defensive stat/roll.
Damanta, again that is my exact point. This system encourages you to use lower tier ships because it is easier than using tier appropriate ships. All the math we throw at this just further proves my point that the system is not balanced the way it should be. You see bulk in a high tier ship, I see more powerful engines, more powerful thrusters, more efficient armor, more advanced control systems, and of course one huge upgrade to the CPU running everything. (Though anything regarding bulk is also almost entirely mitigated by the fact that in space it's pretty easy to get stuff moving about. Especially with the higher tier equipment that should blow some cheap fighter out of the water in every respect.) As for how it sits now, I found my first spaceship combat slow but the next few amazingly simple. Their system is just that, simple. Ish. At least compared to something like Pathfinder. Though if they REALLY wanted simplicity, they could have instead opted for a dice vs. dice method that a plethora of ship-oriented games already utilize. Instead of DCs, have different kinds of bonuses/negatives based on current modifiers. In fact this is a PERFECT opportunity to utilize all of those dice we all have. Lower end parts would only add a 1d2 or 1d3, but the better you go the higher the bonus. You could even break that down further into parts that have a static bonus of +1 or something similarly small that is both easy to use and fun to count. (Let's be honest, we love to count our die totals. Or at least I've never met a player who didn't.) Each part can grant a simple bonus/negative system. Your heavy missile might give a bonus of 1d10 on your offensive rolls but because of it's size, or perhaps placement or whatever justification that can be easily used, it is slightly unwieldy and so it also gives a single negative to piloting. As for the possibility of a lot of math going around, that is what a well documented ship sheet is for. There is no reason all of the applicable modifiers and bonuses shouldn't be decided upon and on paper for easy reference once a game has begun. And yes it might just be a little weird rolling 1d4+2d6+1d8+(character bonus) or what have you as opposed rolls. But I'd argue that is only because the d20 is currently king. That is just what I could come up with over the past 45 minutes. It's far from perfect but the more I think on this the more I am wondering if I am going to lose sleep fleshing out the idea just to see where it goes. Though I have no one to blame but myself if I do I suppose!
I also want to note that I agree with their new x1.5 numbers instead of x2. I agree that the DC's should go up in this manner. I agree that enough of a tier discrepancy means some fights are finished before they begin. What I don't agree with is basing the DC of an offensive move off of the attacking ship, as opposed to the defending ship. Especially when it was written to be against the defender like every other similar mechanic in the first place. Edit: Also, your numbers just kinda prove my point. A properly leveled and skilled pilot shouldn't need the help of their captain and computer just to get the same auto succeed for flyby on a tier 1 ship. In fact, your example works better than mine did at explaining my issue.
This was assuming the same bonuses and all available positions filled. Yes I used all available actions and resources, otherwise it wouldn't have been a fair test. I encourage you to do it yourselves. Don't take my word for it. And that was JUST an example. Obviously a larger class ship with something like DT 15 would have a better chance, but he PRINCIPLE of the issue remains. What I mean is, even if we aren't talking about tier 1 ships you are incentivized to use smaller ships. The best example of this is to simply list out the Flyby DC's in question. Tier 1: 16
This is the crux of my issue. At the extreme ends of this list, the same character with that +15 piloting has either a 100% chance of success or a 0% chance once you hit Tier 14. But not because of the level of the other ship that is the actual target, but because of one's own ship. Another simple way to look at it is the BP system. BP is used to represent all ship resources including how powerful/advanced some parts are. The current rules state that a smaller, less armored, less armed, less advanced engines, less advanced computer, less advanced power source, etc etc etc... is still more capable of flybies than the ship that has literally dozens of times the resources focused on a single vessel. Tier 1 BP: 55
A pilot in that Tier 20 would need a MINIMUM +25 with a NAT 20 to flyby that tier 1 ship. Again, this is the extreeeeeeme comparison, but that should only point out the issue all the more.
I searched the forums and found nothing related to this, so I figured I would bring it up directly. In the FAQ, the flyby stunt has the correct DC equation, but it changes the target. Instead of using the enemy's stats for the DC like the CRB states, the FAQ has it using your own ship. Was that intentional? I would hate to think so as that means basically any Tier 1 ship could fly through almost any other ship hex without fear of provoking.
A very merry Christmas to those who celebrate! For those who don't, I have other good tidings that everyone should appreciate! The final schedule for Society games at Las Vegas Open! https://warhorn.net/events/las-vegas-pfs/schedule/2018/01/26
Whaaaat? Las Vegas Open is back?! Yes it is! And it's looking to be quite the event. I have spoken with some of you already but this is the Official Notice, officially confirmed and officially ready to rock. This year we are looking at 4 and 1/2 tables! 2 of those will be Pathfinder Society games.
Anyone who wishes to GM will of course have all material provided, as well as badges for the convention. Speaking of badges, there is no additional cost for Society material within the Las Vegas Open itself. However, an event badge will still need to be purchased. I will also be getting some more badges personally so I can give them away at local games. Who will win them, I wonder? Otherwise if you are wishing to GM, please sign up on this handy schedule. All scenario material will be provided.
Greetings Starfinders! I have recently run a series of Starfinder games and the same thing has come up three times from three different players. Which in this case is the only reason I bring it up and it is regarding Dayjob checks with Sleight of Hand. Starfinder Society guide says: "You gain a number of credits equal to twice your Profession
Starfinder Core Rule Book says: "Entertain
My first thought on this is Sleight of Hand cannot be used per the "no other skills" but because of the numerous times it has been brought up I figure a clarification was needed.
Good morning my fellow Pathfinders! I hope this message finds you well. This February, you have the chance to visit the City of Neon Lights to perform, battle, and barter your way though some of the toughest challenges yet. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j81a8K8_wTX3cr7vnzLPnJqmxOV5WVIeTeQcbUM bEjY/edit?usp=sharing Here you will see a list of our games and the related requirements. It is a few months away so there is still some time, however once the seats are filled that is it! I look forward to seeing you there! -Ethan Cline
Good morning my fellow Pathfinders! I hope this message finds you well. This February, you have the chance to visit the City of Neon Lights to perform, battle, and barter your way though some of the toughest challenges yet. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j81a8K8_wTX3cr7vnzLPnJqmxOV5WVIeTeQcbUM bEjY/edit?usp=sharing Here you will see a list of our games and the related requirements. It is a few months away so there is still some time, however once the seats are filled that is it! I look forward to seeing you there! -Ethan Cline
The allegation that VOs are discussing rules in the VO boards, getting them wrong, and then using their status as VOs to spread these wrong interpretations is troubling. Such allegations are incorrect. My name is Ethan Cline and I am the VO/GM in question. The resources I cited was a conversation from 3 years ago because I couldn't find anything else that stated otherwise. Largely the topic hasn't been clarified in my eyes. Particularly from, as Chris as said, an Official. At this point I am unsure of the rulings in either case and would also appreciate a final ruling or a link to a faq that is considered legal and accurate.
|
Pathfinder Society GM. Starfinder Society GM. 54 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 16 Organized Play characters. 1 alias. 