![]()
![]()
![]() Personally I found the shifter to be pretty great when I played it... though to be fair, that was the adaptive shifter, which just from looking at the base vs adaptive archetype, is way better. Frankly if shifter came back I would want it to be that. Of course in a party with a bloodrager, it didn't always feel like it we were playing the same game, but other then that it was really cool. Sadly my attempts to get a decent build for that character in pf2 has failed(wild druid shapeshifting from the archetype just sucks), but maybe with the upcoming wild mimic plus the natural weapon archetypes I can piece something neat together? ![]()
![]() My experience with bard must be very different from most peoples because being a 'Anthem bot' is the least of my problems(in fact I don't really have any problems, it turned out better then I expected, especially compared to the envoy I've been playing in sf1, until it hit level 6+ recently). And its only gotten better with the remaster. Get 'em seems even more constraining since you have to take a second action just to get the damage bonus, and you can do multiple directives on one turn so you have less excuses to not do it even if you are opting for a different one in a turn. Not really a complaint though, having a really good 'third action' is only a good thing in my mind(and its SO much better then low level sf1 envoy). Also I find the idea that you will get the Saw It Coming bonus 'often' very unlikely unless the gm is setting it up for you regularly. ![]()
![]() I like the class overall, though 2 things kind of bug me. First, I feel like Size Up needs a little bit more of... something at its base function(the feats can make it way more interesting, but I don't think it should need that). I first idea is some way to combine it with directives and/or the leadership styles, but really it could be anything. And the second thing is the key attribute. Should envoy be key CHA? Probably, but then why doesn't it use it in a cool way in battle. As is, if you ignored cha, it doesn't feel like you would even be losing much more then most other martials(you even can get bonuses to make up for it). Even the leadership styles look like they were built to give you a extra choice for key abilities. ![]()
![]() Sanityfaerie wrote:
No thanks, pf2 got away from 3.x multiclassing for the better and even pf1 didn't have racial hit die iirc. the only solution(other then the one they already have) imo would be to give ancestry abilities with the same level of power, which is probably hard enough to do as is. ![]()
![]() i've played pfs session with wildly different character levels and its crazy how much a difference level makes. warpriest clerics are good in general, but give them 2 levels on the rest of the party and the fights become (even more of a) joke. the existence of the level bump mechanic make its even more clear to me its something they have to work around to make society play work then something that is a viable form of play. and personally, when i first started running pf1 way back i did the whole 'you dont gain xp if you arent in the session' but eventually realized that just makes the experience worse for everyone involved. so yeah, the way pf2 works(and really, most d20 games i've played) i dont think mixed level parties are a good idea unless you want to suck the fun out of the combat for people who are to low level to help in combat or makes the enemies so easy the higher level people are given a challenge(which i guess, tbf, some people would enjoy). ![]()
![]() you can already do that by readying an action. only reason people dont really do that as is, is because it takes 2 actions to do it(and if no one actives your trigger, its a complete waste of 2 actions) and under most circumstances you are better off just shooting twice(plus some other useful action). though some kind of class feature or feat that make it more effective(only costs 1 action, gives you multiple reactions, whatever) could be interesting. ![]()
![]() pf2 hasnt added any new traditions, in large part because the entire point of only having four traditions was to avoid all the problems of creating a new spell list for every class. sf2 could add a one, but the way the system works it would not be worth doing when the much easier option is just to create new spells that work in the four traditions as is. maybe also give access to spells from other traditions, which is already pretty common for spell casting classes. ![]()
![]() oh i forgot about four winds... haven't had a chance to play my air kineticist yet and that move is the a huge part of the reason i made one. that said i find hard to believe movement is less valued. unless you start battle in the perfect position you are probably going to want o move, and being able to saving an action on that is amazing. i've got a character that uses 'To Battle'(from marshal) and another with 'Loose times arrow'(the spell) that i've used to great effect. obviously great for melees, but if cover is gonna be a common thing, people are gonna want to get there with as few actions as possible. ![]()
![]() while the ability to give the entire party a free move on the envoy's turn is absolutely wild, i doubt they will give them a way to provide free attacks to the party(maybe at a much higher level, maybe). as is the -1 to ac is pretty damn good for most characters(even spell casters can opt to cast attack spells) and the bonus damage is gonna be useful for everyone. porting over to pf2, a shortbow envoy looks very good to me looking very good next to my pfs bard right now. melee envoy with marshal dedication has the potential to be an absolute beast. ![]()
![]() Quote: Lastly, the AC difference between a Mystic and Soldier is 1 for the vast majority of the game this is just not true. im gonna go out on a limb here and guess that soldier will have champion armor progression and mystic will have caster progression, which means by level 7 soldier will always has a +2 from proficiency until level 17, when it becomes a +4. even if they get bumped up to other martial armor progression for some reason, mystic will still be behind by 2 for more then half the levels. ![]()
![]() with the 3 action system you can cast a cantrip and make a martial attack(especially ranged) very easily. that's pretty much my go to strat for my bard after i get my lingering courage started, and its very effective if i dont think i need to spend a slot slot or something(and in that case i can still attack afterwards most of the time). but they will never get spell casting prof for weapons. at best they might get a way to use int for attack rolls... but one class has that and its pretty much their biggest mechanic, while technomancer will likely be much more focused on casting spells. ![]()
![]() oimandibloons wrote:
Of the three casters I'm playing in campaigns(well, when the scheduling actually lets them happen), I feel like it blows my primal sorc away, compares favorably to my life oracle, and only really the bard comes out ahead in my mind, though that is in large part because he's a buffer who heals on the side(and bard is really good at buffing). Time and playtesting will tell, but as is i think you could just make the mystic a 3 slot caster and it would still be really good. Of course this is just my thinking having not played it at all and the more important question is how it compares to other sf2 classes. Personally, I'd say it destroys soldier, but from the sounds of it its already a different class in their playtests. Might have a better idea after the live show next wednesday.![]()
![]() Karmagator wrote:
Could be some interesting space for combination weapons with soldier, that use explosions(or w/e aoe) instead of guns/bullets. Perhaps a feat that lets them quickly swap between modes, assuming that isn't something they decided to make easier in starfinder 2. ![]()
![]() Kishmo wrote:
at about 58 minutes they very explicitly say that the operative is not a skill monkey, the envoy is. even using the word skill monkey specifically. they also said the operatives skills are 'to kill you'. this doesn't mean operative will have the lowest number of skills in the game, in fact they might end up in a area like swashbuckler who get extra skill feats and the like without going full rogue with the double amount of skill increases(in fact, envoy might not even get that much). ![]()
![]() Hero points are very much a meta currency that doesn't really interact with the rest of the game. The way they currently work and are gain do not fit the role of resolve points without a serious overhaul... at which point they should just port over resolve point instead. Personally I could see them as a form of focus points that you can use as a martial with 0 magic(and being recovered on a 10 minute rest keeps it from being a daily resource which martial generally dont have in pf2). And personally I'm terrible at remembering to hand out hero points, which would be terrible if it was an expected resource to have for your class to fully function. The hero point deck is probably the best options if you want to get more out of it, not that I would know since my players don't even remember they have them... ![]()
![]() LandSwordBear wrote:
You ever had to teach a grand parent how to use a phone? Now, imagine that, but they dont even know what a radio is. Also the phone is built with technology thousands of years in our future and is being used by people who for generations, literally cant remember the time when they didn't have hand held phones and have probably never had to teach anyone how to use one. Even spending time in Numeria would not prepare the time traveler for all this honestly. ![]()
![]() Tcheekiin wrote:
well they had inspire courage going(i assume from the mystics song ability or w/e), so im going to guess they just used pf2e system and changed the name of a few things. and it looks like they might have even manually rolled damage(when needed). ![]()
![]() PossibleCabbage wrote:
doing make overs of pf2 classes would be great, and personally wouldn't mind doing a couple classes like that instead of a single new class. but if its just 'drag and drop' them over from pf2, i dont really think thats except-able, especially if that is used as a reason to make fewer classes. i assume in general the largest reason sf1 had less in the first place is the smaller team and fewer books in general and assuming that continues to be the case, swapping out a potential new class for 4 ancestries or whatever just does not seem worth it to me... or really any number of ancestries, since you can only really play 1 at a time anyways(well... 2 with Versatile Heritages, but still). really though, there's a lot of room to play with for SF classes that pf2 classes wont easily fit and i think they should do as much with it as they can. ![]()
![]() Driftbourne wrote:
this i couldn't disagree with more. having more ancestries is fine and all, but classes are a much more interesting thing to play around with since that is the number one thing that changes how you actually play the game. SF2 is likely due to have far less classes for several reason, but i hope one isnt just to fit in more ancestries. ![]()
![]() breithauptclan wrote:
there actually are a couple options to get large size permanently, and not to mention we have 2 up coming ancestries that are large starting at level 1(with an option to be medium). its very possible this will be more common in SF2 as well, once more ancestries get released. ![]()
![]() keftiu wrote: I wonder how tough it'll be to get decent armor on a 2e Envoy. As a child of the D&D 4e days, there's been a Warlord-shaped hole in my life ever since, but I don't know how much love there was for an Envoy who could take a beating in melee in SF1. not that hard in pf2. assuming they start with light armor(and who knows if that will be the case in sf2), you can pick up something like the sentinel dedication feat and get medium armor, then at 3 you should you can take a general feat to get for heavy armor, and thanks to sentinel, it will automatically scale up with your class. down side is unless you are playing versatile human to pick up the armor feat at level 1, you wont have heavy armor till level 3. though i could see some kind of battle envoy being an option for a 'subclass' that starts with better armor. Driftbourne wrote: It sounds like the SF2e Envoy will be more combat capable. But that could just mean, from the sound of it, more flexible to be able to use Envoy abilities and still fight at the same time. Perhaps since they will be expected to be more directly involved in combat might get some upgrades to their current armor or weapon use. i was just playing an envoy last night, and i would have killed to just be able to shot(or use inspiring boost), Get 'em and move on the same turn ![]()
![]() pf2 has plenty of crunch and synergies. its just not stacking up numbers with feats that combine in just the right way that rolling becomes an afterthought. you've probably heard it before, but in pf2 optimization happens at the table, not the character sheet. @wolf
![]()
![]() free archetype did a lot to make me more interested in pf2 because i thought it was lacking in customization, and while i generally prefer to have it, most of my time with pf2 has been organized play so I've not even used it half the time, and there's still plenty of customization. Hell I just almost completely retrained my champion, from sorc dedication to marshal(plus a couple other feats) and while i haven't played the remade version yet(scheduling is truly the greatest villain) i think he is going to be a very different beast. then there is the kineticist. what a monster of a class... like, imo they should be looking at it when coming up with future classes/editions. ![]()
![]() Very excited for this. Marshal is nice, but I want a full class for this. While there may be some issue with getting a gm to let me play it, especially since I mostly play society... if its even an option I imagine it would be very hard/costly to get the permission to use any SF2 class. Will be interesting to see how well it works with marshal as well, since I doubt with will have an aura stance or anything like that(based on SF1 envoy, which could very well change). ![]()
![]() eddv wrote:
The moment they mentioned 100% compatibly I felt like it was a huge missed opportunity. Could have been a chance to try and take pf2s systems to the next level... While that may still has happen in some ways, it's going to be extremely restricted, which I think is quite unfortunate. That said, it's a great idea for marketing, as it now means pf2 huge playerbase with 0 interest in SF might pick up books just for more options. ... Personally hoping they can be pushed to make stamina the core assumption, if only to expand the mechanic for both games. ![]()
![]() Xenocrat wrote: The chance to miss on the first Chain Blast and entirely waste two actions that you precommitted is not that low. I’m not sure it’s good enough for a feat investment given the frequency of situations you’d want it (4-5 enemies within your first range increment but not within a reasonable substitution overflow AOE). Yeah I've been wondering about this whenever i hear people talking about how amazing it is. Hitting 5 people with your full blast damage sounds great, but one miss and you feel like you wasted 1/2 extra actions. Off hand i don't think any 'make multiple attacks at full MAP' are dependent on the previous ones hitting, even if they lose some bonus effects. If you've got good luck and some hero points its godly, if your luck sucks its probably feels terrible to have 'wasted' your entire turn on it. I'm sure there is room for a 'high' risk/reward ability so idk about replacing it, but I don't feel its broken or anything(having not yet used it myself of course). ![]()
![]() Samantha DeWinter wrote: Foundry this, Roll20 that... isn't anyone else running Starfinder games in a cobbled-together macro framework in MapTool? A friend of mine built up a framework for both pc and startship combat, but after finishing the first book of dead suns, the gm had to put the game on hold and since then half the party has zero interest in playing more starfinder(including the person who made the framework) so we've just been playing pf1 since(the same two players dont want to play pf2 either, after doing the playtest anyways). Thankfully I recently found a SF game to join, though that one is played in roll20(im not a fan but good luck getting people to use something else, even as they complain about how much roll20 sucks themselves). ![]()
![]() Skedge wrote: Baldur's gate is turned based, it just does not auto pause between turns by default. It is a setting you can change in game :) Yeah, and it plays terribly like that since it is not built for it. Either go all the way with turned based or don't bother. My vote is for turned based.And yeah, I'm super excited for any potential 2e game. Apparently when they first started developing the king maker game they argued whether to go rtwp or turned based and I think the changes to 2e will go a long ways to then going turned based off they have that discussion again for a next game(here's going there is one!). ![]()
![]() Bagpuss wrote:
The problem with this idea, is that it makes it easier to crit on the check, which might actually make reducing the dc to reduce the damage healed... actually make you heal more damage(on average due to the increased odds of criting). This could be changed by removing or changing the crit success effect though. ![]()
![]() Shain Edge wrote:
Incorrect. Assurance at matter level gives you a flat 20 to your check. Your skill bonuses do not apply, which by the time you are high enough to have matter in a skill, the DC is probably too high for a 20 to pass. Maybe a few levels at best... ![]()
![]() Davor wrote: But here's the thing: You don't NEED that many feats to get back the agency. What if you only got 5 feats throughout your adventuring career, and one of them was: "Animal Companion: You get X benefits, and at X level, X level, X level, and X level you select from these improvements." That would be an amazing, build-defining feat, and you'd sit there in eager anticipation reaching for 5th level because you'd get ANOTHER build-defining feat. You could also have a "Natural Lore" feat that gets you things like Wild Empathy, Superior Tracking, Nature-based Spells for Spell Points, etc., all tied to a theme, all for one feat. Again, in a 1 feat/5 levels, that'd work, because every feat would be huge. All PF2 needs to do is strike a balance given their current... I was just thinking the same thing. Maybe not less feats, but having the feats scale more instead of taking feats just to keep your abilities relevant at higher levels would feel a lot better I think. I like where they are going with the class feats, but it feels like the chassis of most of the classes got striped so much that I would have to spend all my feats getting what I need to keep up instead of getting something that lets me do something new. In pf1 this wasn't so bad because often feats were something that was outside of your class, which had more then enough stuff going for it(well... maybe not all the classes), but even then, few people liked feat chains(my group's house rules largely involved reducing feat chains or at least reducing the restrictions on them), and yet now it feels like they are back and more important then ever, even if the actual prereq's are no longer as much a problem. ![]()
![]() I like stamina... but i don't like resolve(as it is in SF). In fact I'm not a fan of the whole, 'everything runs off of one pool of points' thing a lot off people seem to be really into, so to deal with stamina, they have to come up with something else. Though maybe resolve just being for stamina healing and not dying(instead of hero points)could work.. for me at least. ![]()
![]() The occult spell list has the spell Soothe, which heals the same as a 1 or 2 heal action spell, and gives +1 vs mind effects for a minute. and it cost 2 actions to use. outside of battle, its about as good as heal if you aren't group healing, though not as good as cleric's heal. which should do the main healer job just fine, if not as well as divine healers. EDIT: Double ninja'd... oh well. Oh wait, I missed soothing ballad. It does a couple things, but one of them is 7d6+modifer to up to 9 allies and scales up. its POWER 7 though, so... I assume you get it around level 14 making it a bit less useful. ![]()
![]() First World Bard wrote:
Probably not a typo. In the glass cannon podcast playtest they got persistent bleed from bats and it was 1 hit per round until they made a flat dc 20 check. But I believe you can spend all your actions in a round to make a roll to end it sooner. Or they could just get healed, though that likely only works for bleed. ![]()
![]() Shakro Who Came Back wrote:
Weapon dice have been changed. They are all one dice now, and I am pretty sure greatsword is 1d12 now(1d10 at worse), so a +5 would be 6d12 damage making it an average of 39 damage. ![]()
![]() Unicore wrote: I think that if inspire courage gives a +1 (and eventually higher) to attack to all allies, it is going to take an action every round to maintain. They've talked about bards using an instrument as the verbal component for spells, so I'm thinking maybe they have to use an action to maintain inspire courage, but that action can serve double duty as your verbal component for a spell. ![]()
![]() John John wrote:
Pathfinder already had(optional) rules for this, in relation to crafting and I absolutely love them. Its called dynamic magic item creation(its in the pathfinder unchained book) and it actually makes building items interesting(imo anyways), and better yet, it brings the other characters into the action occasionally. Its all skill checks, so if you had the right skills and they were really high, its all good, but some interesting stuff can happen on a couple bad rolls with instantly destroying an item or anything(though... this can happen if you are really unlucky). Sadly my hopes that this would be the core system for magic items have been dashed, so I hope it shows up in a later book(but not to late, please!). ![]()
![]() Vidmaster7 wrote:
I certainly won't complain about having spells, but we all know there are some people who avoid them like the plague, prepared spells even more so. I also think there is a lot of design room for the aspect system shifter had in Pf1 for them to mess with that maybe the druid wouldn't mess with so much... and maybe this time let people actually make their bearowl shifter. ![]()
![]() Vidmaster7 wrote: I like that pretty well my prediction that you wouldn't need the shifter class if the druid has a shape shifting specialization holds out and pretty well their we go! Sure, but isn't there a large group of people who want a spelless shape shifter? I assume that was the reason the class was made in pf1 more so then the full bab... getting it at level 1 was probably also pretty important, though the shifter class didn't get that, but no reason they shouldn't get it here if druid already can. ![]()
![]() Redblade8 wrote:
Power attack is two actions with no penally to attack, but only gives 1 extra weapon dice of damage, plus one more at higher levels iirc. ![]()
![]() Redblade8 wrote: This blog about deities mentions favored weapon, which reminds me, do we know anything about weapons in 2e? In 1e, one of the key distinguishing features of weapons is their crit behavior (range and/or multiple), buy crits work rather differently in 2e. Do we have any idea what, for instance, makes a 2e longsword different from a battleaxe? Yes we do! For the most part the crit ranges are going to be gone, but in there place every weapon has various abilities. Like a scimitar has an ability that deals extra damage when attacking a single character multiple times in a row and also has one that makes it so when they attack multiple opponents in a row, in a single round, the attack penalty decrease. Light weapons appear to have only -4 on additional attacks, and a rapier does an extra +1d10 damage on a crit. There are probably other examples out there, but I think you get the idea. Personally I think it sounds pretty rad, which is good because I'm not a fan of the lose of differing crit ranges(love a good crit fishing build myself) so this is at least makes up for it.
|