Driftbourne's page

Looks like Starfinder Society Infinite will be getting its first scenario soon, courtesy of Michael Beck (once he finishes playtesting and editing). Excited to see how it turns out:

https://www.starfinderinfinite.com/en/product/589600/lingering-mark

I don't think it's going to sell at $75.00. The description explains that it's temporary and not to buy it at that price, but it was shocking at first... Looks like it's a way to distribute to editors and playtesters before changing the price.

Wondering how other players are handling getting copies to editors and playtesters?

Pathfinder and Starfinder Society Infinite Scenario Guidelines

Building and Balancing Encounters wrote:

You can include creatures a maximum of 2 levels higher than the lowest level in your scenario’s level range. For example, in a level 1–2 scenario, you can include creatures of up to Creature 3. Using creatures of a higher level than this is very likely to result in the death of all lower-level PCs.

Adjusting Difficulty wrote:

Harder: The harder entry provides GMs directions for quick changes they can make to the encounter to increase the difficulty of the encounter to suit a group of 6 PCs of the highest level in the scenario’s level range. This usually includes adding creatures to the encounter (of the same type already present in the encounter), applying the elite adjustments to creatures in the encounter, increasing the DCs of hazards and skill checks, increasing the number of successes required to disable a complex hazard, or increasing the number of Victory Points required to overcome an obstacle or Victory Point threshold.

In this example, should I limit the maximum creature level to 3 even when adjusting “Harder”?

Using the harder adjustment doesn't chage the encounter budget; it either adds more of the same type of creature already in the encounter. I feel this is the easiest for GMs to adjust the encounter quickly, or you apply the elite adjustments to creatures in the encounter; this changes the math of the creatures but not their level. The harder adjustment is completely separate from the encounter budget.

Tech Core, the book that would be the perfect place to release a slew of new Serums,

The perfect book for more Serums is whatever book has the Biohacker in it. The Pharmacologist has a little of the Biohacker flavor, but doesn't have as many feats as the Nanocyte, so I don't think the Pharmacologist is a Biohacker replacement.

Player Core pg. 176

Vitality Network feat under the Mystic Archetype:

The network starts with a 10 HP pool that can be transferred at 10 per round.

The pool size increases by 10 at levels 10, 15, and 20.

The transfer rate increases by 5 at 5, 10, 15, and 20.

This means at level 5 you are able to transfer 15 of 10 HP?

What is it meant to be? If it's correct as written, could someone explain the reason? Either way, I feel like this needs to be sorted out.

(I have an idea of what it should be, but would rather not interject my own opinion into a request for an official ruling)

You're missing the part from Vitality Network: Your vitality network has a maximum capacity equal to 6 + 4 Hit Points per level. The part you're quoting is from the Transfer Vitality action; that's the amount you can use each round. So at 5th level, your pool is 26 points, and you can transfer up to 20 points. How much you regain each round starts at 4 and goes to 6 or 8, depending on your proficiency level.

It's the weekend, hopefully Maya will see this Monday.

Another good use for a sub-forum devoted to Pathfinder & Starfinder Infinite Scenarios.

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

Michael Beck beat me to it and managed to get the first one published...

Wish the website included the running time, so that we didn't have to zoom in on the image of the cover.

Maybe a good practice would be to include it in the description?

Do you know when the first batch of Path/Starfinder Society Infinite adventures will be available? And how to find them on Pathfinder Infinite?

There is no timeline for when Infinite adventures will be available, since they are all independent projects outside of Paizo's control. I think about 4 or 5 people have mentioned working on them. I think at least 2 are regular freelance writers. Unlike writing for Paizo, people making Infinite Scenarios also have to do their own layout and artwork. So, even for the freelance writers, it might take longer than just writing them.

I got my outline done and have started filling in the details. I'm at around 3000 words now, but I just started a job today with lots of overtime, so it could be a few months for me to finish mine.

One is pungent, and the other has a foul stench? What's missing is four degrees of stench in a fortitude save.

Driftbourne wrote:

The real problem is trying to find a length of scenario that fits everyone's needs. Groups running at game stores on weekdays that start at 6 pm and run to 9 pm because the stores are closing need 3-hour scenarios.

Do they? Or do they need three one hour scenarios, or two one and a half hour scenarios, or a one and a two?

I was too tired last night to reply or take this seriously. Several relevant parts of my original comments were not quoted. But your idea of several shorter scenarios actually has been done before and done really well, even, but not as several scenarios but as a repeatable scenario; the best example I know is Starfinder Society Scenario #1-32: Acts of Association.

Acts of Association is a pick-4-of-6 encounters type repeatable, plus it has a 7th optional encounter that can be added if you need something to add more time to the session. This could very easily be turned into a variable-length scenario to fill any time slot. Just run as many encounters as you need to fill your time slot, be it 2 hours or 6 hours. It even allows the GM to create a new NPC species and their home world, so you can go into as much depth as you like. Something like this would be great for Gen Con.

The only downside is that it's a 37-page scenario; it would have to cost more than the current 2-3-hour scenarios.

If Paizo is cutting back on how many scenarios they write each month, my suggestion is that Paizo should concentrate on variable-length scenarios used at conventions. And Infinite can fill in for everyday organized play. And/or make variable-length guidelines for Infinite.

I haven't done much of this mixing, apart from my GM for one of the playtest adventures allowing some PF2 equipment (like PF-only aeon stones). But I did have a silly character idea last night that would probably work best as a PF2 class: a novian ranger named Finder Star the Starfinder.

I have a PF2e I have mirror implement Thaumaturge, whose mirror is made from meteorite iron, named Iron Starfinder. The GM looked surprised when I said I was going to play a Starfinder character in a Pathfinder Society game. Astronomy is the oldest science, so it seems appropriate to have starfinder characters in Pathfinder.

I was thinking it would be fun to start the Starfinder Guild in Pathfinder, then I just remembered, hey, we can write Pathfinder Infinite scenarios now!

Novian named Finder Star the Starfinder is pretty funny. My mirror implement, Thaumaturge, upon meeting your Novan, would have to say If you are looking for stars, have you looked in a mirror?

Driftbourne wrote:

The real problem is trying to find a length of scenario that fits everyone's needs. Groups running at game stores on weekdays that start at 6 pm and run to 9 pm because the stores are closing need 3-hour scenarios.

Do they? Or do they need three one hour scenarios, or two one and a half hour scenarios, or a one and a two?

Really just don't know what to say...

For items, the guidelines on what can be included as found treasure useable during the scenario seem pretty straightforward (any rarity, but must be from an ORC Paizo book in the appropriate setting and must not be limited or restricted in organized play), but I'm a little unsure how those items should be handled on the chronicle sheet.

I can see some reasoning behind potentially allowing for appropriate PFS-legal uncommon or rare items on the chronicle based on the scenario, but it does seem to open the door to give easy access to items that have previously been locked behind boons or mechanical character choices like feats. If an item is rare or uncommon, should it be excluded from the final chronicle sheet even if it appears as treasure in the scenario? Or is the intent not to worry about that, so long as the item is appropriate for the scenario it's used in and it's of standard legality in PFS?

I know the guidelines have slightly different rules for Starfinder for this, but I think Starfinder makes a good example; some of the special items you get on Starfinder Chronicles, you had to visit an unexplored planet for the first time. Unless the scenario is about being the 2nd party to explore the planet, it makes sense to exclude the boon item from that planet. Or another example: either you were at the Strabeary Machine Cake anniversary concert and got a signed T-shirt, or you were not, and did not; if it did show up on another chronicle, I would assume it's a scalper selling it at outrageous prices.

This might question might answer your question: has any published scenario given out an item that was created for another scenarios chronical? Although the guidelines do list scenarios as a source earlier in the guide, for this specific case I do wonder what the intended use is.

medtec28 wrote:

They also sold 30% more tickets with their shorter slots.

10+ blocks (40+ hours): Eligible for a shared hotel room (typically arranged with 3–4 volunteers per room). That averages out to 10 hours per day; the shorter blocks give GMs more breaks. GM breaks include setting up for their next game and time to see other things at the convention.

I forgot the GMs also have to use that time to eat.

I love GMing, but honestly I don't have the endurance to volunteer for Gen Con. But 80 ACP in 4 days- that is a lot of ACP, and table credits; maybe I need to work on my endurance...

They also sold 30% more tickets with their shorter slots.

10+ blocks (40+ hours): Eligible for a shared hotel room (typically arranged with 3–4 volunteers per room). That averages out to 10 hours per day; the shorter blocks give GMs more breaks. GM breaks include setting up for their next game and time to see other things at the convention.

And I’m sure they don’t like players like me complaining about being screwed by their excessively short and overpriced tables.

There is no way Paizo is not aware of your complaint. There is also nothing any of us on the forums can do about it; even if Paizo fixes it for next Gen Con, that won't be until next Gen Con.

I also was not the only one complaining.

Everyone is aware of the problem; none of us on the forums can do anything about it.

The standard cost for Gencon seems to be fixed around &5 per seat per hour. at $22 for 90 minutes Paizo is charging me thrice that.

It wasn't just you; everyone got charged the same price for the time slot. I know GMs that ran the same scenario multiple times at Gen Con; they said some sessions they ran out of time and didn't finish the scenario, while other times it ran short. The big variable at his table was the players and Lucky die rolls. From table to table, add who the GM is as a variable, and how many times that GM has run the same scenario.

Paizo is already letting people write longer scenarios. One because Paizo knows people want longer scenarios, and two because Paizo had to lay off 15% of its workforce because of the Diamond bankruptcy 2 months before Gen Con. I'm not sure what other solution you are looking for from random people posting on the internet. But overall, I do think more sessions ran short.

If you want a response from Paizo, send customer service an email.

Or be the solution and write a longer scenario for Pathfinder Infinite. I'm having a lot of fun writing my first scenario, although it is for Starfinder.

Even if a single-handed weapon got the equivalent of a primary attack + reflex save vs. the same target, it would be an interesting ability or upgrade.

medtec28 wrote:

One thing is for sure to me, if they want to shorten things this much, those Gencon Seat prices need to drop significantly.

Please bear in mind that I have NO INSIDE INFORMATION about this, and this is JUST SPECULATION.

But, I would imagine that the ballroom that Paizo use each year at GenCon is exceptionally expensive to hire for the period, and that the games tickets sold have never covered that cost. Let alone all the others accrued in running such an event for four days.

In "normal" times Paizo would PROBABLY absorb the difference as a marketing(?) cost; but this year was FAR from normal times, and it may well have been price-hike or no ballroom.

^^ Bold to emphasize point ^^ Definitely not normal times; Paizo even cancled Paizo Con for this year.

Haven't read the weapons yet, but loving the names

More of a Creature Companion, but SF1e has Kilkharps, a common Creature Companion for shirren. Awakened Kilkharps might work.

Looks like
Tracking +1 on a grenade launcher applies to the saving throw DC.

Frost module adds its damage and effect if any to the grenade's damage because it affects the ammunition, which in this case is the grenade.

Soldier synchronization works with the primary target; you're basically hitting someone with the grenade before it explodes. The feat explains the damage better than I can. Not sure how it works with a frost module.

Frost module deals an additional 1d6 cold damage; that doesn't change the damage type from the grenade, and the damage type of the grenade doesn't change the frost module damage type; apply them separately when dealing with immunities or resistance.

Weekends can be slow here because people are off playing in games.

Driftbourne wrote:

It's really easy to add to short scenarios; it's really hard or more time-consuming to add to small scenarios.

After drilling into PFS GMs for over a decade that they shouldn't be significantly modifying the scenario, it feels like a pretty dramatic reversal to now want them to add onto the scenario to fill in a reasonable length time slot.

The real problem is trying to find a length of scenario that fits everyone's needs. Groups running at game stores on weekdays that start at 6 pm and run to 9 pm because the stores are closing need 3-hour scenarios. I think one of the reasons Paizo went with all short scenarios besides cost is that everyone has time for short scenarios, but not everyone has time for a long scenario. I don't play on VTTs, but for the VTTs that automate some of the work, I imagine short scenarios are run even shorter?

The way I see it, either Paizo makes the short scenarios longer, and GMs use the old ways, and time-manage scenarios to prevent them from running over the time slot.

Or GMs get creative and make short scenarios longer to fill in the time slot. But even then, the scenarios should be closer to 3 hours than they are now, there a big difference between making a scenario run longer and having to make up completely new parts for it.

Or Paizo makes both short and long scenarios, which Infinite scenarios might take that role if enough people write scenarios. The problem here is if you make equal numbers of both, you end up selling half as many of each for the same workload.

Or make variable-length scenarios that can fit more than one time slot. This also works great for making repeatable scenarios more repeatable too. Downside: more expensive to make. There are a few ways that are easy to do and don't take up a lot of space. I think variable-length chases are one, and if a party wipes out an encounter on the first round, apply the harder adjustment (when the harder adjustment is add more creatures). If needed, add the harder adjustment more than once.

I mean, "this entire scenario is one room and you don't really need to gather any info" sounds more like a quest than a scenario. Those weren't all that popular around here because just don't feel very meaty.

It does feel like the short PF2e season 8 scenarios feel more like quests instead of 2-3-hour scenarios. And what you describe as not feeling very meaty is what I'm saying in my last comment about feeling small. I think the goal for 2-3 hour scenarios should be 3 +or a little bit. Fitting a scenario to a tight time limit can't be easy.

I don't know if Starfinder is just better suited to this or if Pathfinder players have different expectations or what, but "well thats what Starfinder does" doesn't really seem like it's translating super well.

Most of the Starfinder scenarios seem to be 1000 to 1300 words longer than PF2e Season 8 scenarios. That alone is a big difference. Either that, or the grass is just greener in Starfinder; I'm assuming it's the word count.

I bought 8-03 For the Love of Vanity last night; it's a quick read. I checked the word count; it's only 4236 words. Love the idea, but beside short, I think some scenarios have a problem with feeling small. Both 8-01 and 8-03 use a single map. 8-01 is even just in a single room, and the 80+% map for 8-03 is one area. There is no getting-there exploration or info gathering outside of the mission briefing.

Yesterday I ran SF2e 1-02 Mystery of the Frozen Moon for the 3rd time. Yesterday the session lasted almost exactly 3 hours, but half an hour of that was things I added. The word count is 5507 and, as written, would have been short of 3 hours, but it had an NPC interaction in the Drift, some exploration on the planet, 2 encounters on different maps, and some NPC interaction at multiple steps of the scenario before and after encounters. So at least it doesn't feel small.

It's really easy to add to short scenarios; it's really hard or more time-consuming to add to small scenarios.

1-04 The Great Absalom Relay (5337 words) runs really short, 1:45 to 2:30, only has one map, but doesn't feel small; the events move all over Absalon Station. Even for running that short, it still has a higher word count than the PF2e scenarios listed in this comment, and The Great Absalom Relay has nothing but great reviews.

That's my 2 cents, adjusted for inflation and tariffs, is probably worth nothing...

I certainly hope so. Not sure they will get a third opportunity to disappoint. But I’m not sure I buy your reasoning. Most of the scenarios are written by freelancers instead of staffers, I think. Honestly, if ever there were a year to skip Paizo’s gencon experience, 2027 is probably the one.

What the writer turns in is not the final version that gets printed; there are multiple categories of things the Paizo developers check and rewrite, like balance, lore continuity, length, style, copyfitting, and for PF2e scenarios those are the people that got laid off.

Since there is a year's worth of scenarios between one year's Gen Con and another, it should be pretty easy to tell if Paizo has made any changes. If Paizo sticks with the changes they are making, there won't ever be PF2e scenarios at Gen Con 2027; it will be Paizo Printable adventures. If Paizo allows Infinite scenarios at Gen Con 2027, there could be 4-5 hour long scenarios again.

Sorry you had a bad time at Gen Con; I got a game to GM in 4 hours.

I think the most practical way is if a scenario calls for vehicles, the scenario provides them; if so, a player with a vehicle can use their vehicle instead of the provided one. Same for mechs, and maybe even power armor. SF1e power armor was good for dealing with high gravity planets. I can see scenarios where you want to provide anyone in the party power armor.

The exception might be for small personal vehicles like hoverboards. Because we can now write Infinite Scenarios, making a scenario with hoverboards might be a good way to playtest if they are balanced for everyday use in other scenarios. Test the flipside too; I've never had a hoverboard used against the party.

If a PC takes damage with both a force field up and a shield raised, the force field takes damage first. Shield Block only triggers if there is damage remaining afterwards, at which point the shield would potentially be damaged.

Level 19 force field has 42 Hit Points and replenishes 8 Hit Points on your turn; that more than makes up for shield hardness capping at 10 or 13. Just the force field's replenishment rate covers the difference.

Driftbourne wrote:

medtec28 wrote:

My only experience with the scenario length was a Gencon, and I truly hope they can figure this out before next year. Most of my tables finished around the 90 minute mark, which I felt wasn’t the experience I had paid for.

Which scenario?

The only PF2e scenario I own is 8-01 Intro to the Year of Clockwork Mystery. By my word count, it's shorter than all the SF2e 2-3 hour scenarios. I'm courious what the word count is on the other PF2e session 8 scenarios 8-01 is only 4207 words by my count. Some of the SF2e 2-3 hour scenarios are over 5500 words. I'm counting from Adventure Background to end of the end of adventure part of the scenario including stat blocks if at the end , but not handouts. If Include handouts the longest SF2e short scenario I've found so far is 6318 words, that's a huge difference compaitred to 4207 words.

I'm wondering if the problem isen't all 2-3 hour scenarios but just the PF2e season 8 scenarios are all on the short side of the 2-3 hours scenarios. Of all the SF2e season 1 theres only 3 that stand out as on the short side of the 2-3

Multiple Scenarios, I don’t think there was a single scenario that lasted for the full slot. 08-03 was the biggest culprit. I think we finished in less than 90 minutes. And those were $22 a seat tables. And there is no “Just run another scenario” option like everyone seems to say.

I agree scenarios that short at Gen Con is a bad combination. Cost and expectations are high, and a lot of the options to run longer are not available.

I looked up the timeline of events, and it looks like the Gen Con scenarios would have been in development around the same time as the layoffs happened. Pathfinder organized play was hit harder by that than Starfinder was. That might be why some scenarios feel incomplete. I wonder if that, plus the complaints of scenarios being too short, is also why season 8 was ended early and was replaced with Paizo printables. Perhaps Paizo printables had a different development team that wasn't affected as much by the layoffs? It looks like the newer Paizo printables are supposed to be around 5000 words, which is longer than the really short 2-3 scenarios. I'm hoping that the Paizo printables err on the long side of 5000, and not the short side. Doesn't make this year's Gen Con any better. I'm sure Paizo is aware of the complaints about too-short scenarios, and without dealing wiht layoffs in the middle of production, I'd imagine next year should be better.

We've got several different species that have really drastically different biology between their adult and immature forms (like, skittermanders aren't even sapient when immature!), so I'm wondering about a new ancestry based on, like, mayflies, botflies, or silk moths, where the adult stage has no digestive system or mouthparts, and lives only for a short while on nutrients obtained as a larva. What if we had a playable option that was only sapient as a larva?

Imagine a species that lives their whole personhood in their larval stage, and regards metamorphosis and their adult stage as the first point of the afterlife. Decorating cocoons with flowers and garlands, and then farewelling their elders again when their animal-selves (and animal-souls?) depart after laying eggs. It'd be really cool and different, I think.

Speaking of insects and metamorphosis, it might be interesting to have an ancestry where, as you level up, you go through metamorphosis and change form.

At least it can be done through feats, but it sucks that several features were cut. While it's nearly impossible to cram an entire class into an archetype, the fact that you can cherry-pick class features makes it slightly more appealing when it comes to customization.

I started to compare the Nanocyte archetype to other archetypes, and it's so far the most supported archetype, including the dedication it has 16 feats. All the other archetypes, even class archetypes I've countered, have 6 to 9 feats.

I think Magitech Nanites adds a lot of versatility, giving you access to 33 cantrips that can be flavored as Nanocyte abilities.

I've only done a quick read of the Nanocyte feats, but it seems to give you the choice of adding to your defence or offence, which should make it easy to add to most classes. I still hope that someday we get ways to add to it outside of the archetype. For now, I think the best thing is to figure out what classes it works best with, It might be a good way to add some spell-like abilities to a non-caster class? Or extra spell-like abilities to a caster class?

Driftbourne wrote:

Starfinder disagrees. Starfinder Society Scenario #1-04: The Great Absalom Relay is the 3rd shortest scenario I've found in SF2e season 1. The shortest reported run time is 1:45. And the longest is 2:25. Out of the 14 reviews, 13 are 5 stars, and there is one 4-star review. You don't get those kinds of reviews for a poorly written scenario.

It's one of the 2 year 1 adventures I haven't played, so I can't know.

Anyway, the reviews of a single adventure can't really tell us anything about the interest of a 2-3 hour format compared to a 4-5 hour format.

I may have jumped to the conclusion too quickly, but there's certainly a thing around the 4-5 hour format that pushes everyone to adopt this one. I have my own point of view, but that's obviously just an opinion.

I think it's great that the Infinite Scenarios can be either 2-3 or 4-5 so people have a choice. I'm in a weird spot trying to write an Infinite Scenario because if I write the way I run a 2-3, it will end up with a 4-5. I like running the 2-3 in a 5-hour slot because, as a newer GM, I have no concept of running to an exact time. That's something I need to learn, along with many other things.

Then explain to me why it stops at Level 12, instead of having 2 feats for 14, 16, 18 and 20.

I can't, but you definitely can't stuff a full class into an archetype that only goes to 12th level. So, hope at least some of my guesses/suggestions are right. Meanwhile looks like we can add at least a little nanite to our characters.

Speaking of playtesting, I expect I could get my local PFS group to playtest if I could grant them chronicles.

Is there anything keeping me from running a draft scenario with a group, getting feedback and editing, then issuing chronicles for the playtest after the finished scenario is put on Infinite?

I was thinking along these lines too. Even just a generic chronicle for APC. I need to see if anyone else in my area is looking to write Infinite scenarios; then there would be a group of people who have a mutual interest in helping each other out with playtesting.

I was thinking play-by-post testing might be a good way since the scenario would be recorded, although that wouldn't help test how long it runs in a live, in-person game.

___________________-

On another subject. I know we are waiting for the FAQ to be released; I'm wondering where it will be released?

I'm all for a Bugbear Brutaris team, unless I'm playing against them...

You can't replace a whole class with just an archetype. I haven't had a chance to look at Tech Core equipment, but I was thinking that augmentations would be a way to add more nanites or nanite-related abilities. A Tecnomaneer nanite programming language would be another way. Or a nanite Ecocortex for mechanics. Or some nanite-related feats outside of the archetype. I'm hoping the archetype is just the first piece of the puzzle, even if the pieces are in other books.

With the pharmacologist archetype, I'm wondering what the future for the Biohackers is. The Evoluitist could be a class that fills in the other pieces for both Biohackers and Nanites

My plan is to use Star Wars X-wing victory tokens to mark opponents' ships. The tokens are 5/8 of an inch wide. One side has 1 triangle; the flip side has 3 triangles in a pyramid formation to represent 3 ships. In a 2-inch square, I can place them 3 wide to show center, port, and starboard for narrative reasons. I can add further granularity to port and starboard by placing a token centered on the edge of the square, and farther by placing them just outside the square. Not sure that will be needed, but it gives me 7-degree positioning with one 2-inch square.

I don't have to look through it all, but the release calendar goes to April 2027

https://store.paizo.com/release-calendar/

Driftbourne wrote:

Short doesn't mean poorly written; it just means short.

It has an impact on how it is written, by setting time constraints.

I've played living campaigns for long enough to see that the 4-5 hour length is used on all of them. There's a reason to that. If they could make it shorter and keep a similar experience, they'd have done it. But 2-3 hours is just not long enough to tell an interesting story.

Starfinder disagrees. Starfinder Society Scenario #1-04: The Great Absalom Relay is the 3rd shortest scenario I've found in SF2e season 1. The shortest reported run time is 1:45. And the longest is 2:25. Out of the 14 reviews, 13 are 5 stars, and there is one 4-star review. You don't get those kinds of reviews for a poorly written scenario.

I do think the short scenarios might be a bad idea for expensive Gen Con tables. And there's nothing wrong with preferring longer scenarios if you have the time slot for them; not everyone does. I do think short scenarios are better when they run on the long side of 2-3 hours.

My only experience with the scenario length was a Gencon, and I truly hope they can figure this out before next year. Most of my tables finished around the 90 minute mark, which I felt wasn’t the experience I had paid for.

Which scenario?

I'm wondering if the problem isen't all 2-3 hour scenarios but just the PF2e season 8 scenarios are all on the short side of the 2-3 hours scenarios. Of all the SF2e season 1 theres only 3 that stand out as on the short side of the 2-3

I have run about 3 scenarios in succession to justify a game day, but even running and scheduling them online... they are unsatisfying and struggle to justify the effort to set things up.

I hope they move away from just offering the shorter content.

The way I run short scenarios long is easy in an in-person game; I don't use VTTS that might make a huge difference in how hard it is to run long?

Driftbourne wrote:

"Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue."

So who's getting married?

You! To Tech Core! Unless Quig and Navasi are getting back together...

It's a good day for a wedding

Short doesn't mean poorly written; it just means short.
If you run a short scenario as written, expecting it to run longer without any modifications, that's a choice with predictable results.

I'm running a short 2-3 hour scenario this weekend for the 3rd time; to me, it feels like a familiar friend.

Choices.

Daimalko...

Give me back my mechs already!

Until we get full mech rules, you can use the Cinematic Mech Scenes rules in the GM Core. Because Cinematic Starship Scenes define all the player actions and the opponents for each encounter, CSS could be used for almost anything.

ApesAmongUs wrote:

In all published books so far, the only substance I have been able to find that someone could use in these weapons is in Starfinder Society Scenario #1-07: Seize and Destroy. That's it. Are there really multiple injection weapons that have no usage in the books where they appear.

The BBEG in Rescue on Raxil has some choices, go grab the pdf for free! That BBEG looks like a preview of a biohacker too.

Is even wearing a lab coat to look the part.

Driftbourne wrote:

"Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue."

So who's getting married?

Could Raia and Danese be tieing the knot? They're the only long-term relationship among the 2e iconics that I know of.

Or maybe Keskodai and his partners are renewing their vows, and Chk Chk is going to bring Dae as his plus one?

I got bad news about Dae; we got Dae killed in game Saturday... Sadly, someone else was playing Chk Chk in that game, a true tragedy.

Keskodai and his partners are an interesting option. There are several species with 3 sexes; culturally, that's not something that has been explored a lot. I'd love to see Shirren's wedding.

The way I see the difference between Alchemical Crafting and Chemical Crafting is a college degree in chemistry. So I think Alchemical Crafting works just fine in Starfinder. An alchemist just doesn't know how it works; they just know this mix works. Goblins can be a bit reckless, so I think Fumbus works great as a pregen for Starfinder.

It's kind of the same difference between Inventor and Mechanic.

My guess is we don't see full support for injection weapons until the Biohacker comes out.

"Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue."
So who's getting married?

Driftbourne wrote:

This is exactly the kind of thing I look for when looking to make a short scenario run longer. If I don't have time to fill in the NPC's details myself, I just use the Deck of Endless NPCs. How the NPC is supposed to help is something I would need more context to figure out, since I haven't read The Elsewhere Feast.

That's exactly what I feel I have to do, as I'd be ashamed to run it as written. But that would lead to a few issues:

- The adventure would last easily 4-5 hours, sometimes even more. That's not expected by the players.
- The amount of work would be enormous; I don't take an already written adventure to put that much work into it. I can just write my own if I want.

Making a 2-3 hour scenario last over 5 hours would indeed be a lot of effort; adding an hour or an hour and a half to the average 2-3 hour scenario is not.

Adding to something as short as the Season 8 intro would also be a lot of work. The biggest problem with the Season 8 intro is that it's all in one room, and it's the shortest word count I've found so far. Despite I still had fun playing in it. Even for someone who mods almost every scenario they run, I would put it in the run 2 scenarios back-to-back category, although I have posted my ideas to run it longer in the GM discussion section; it is the first time I've considered writing a completely new encounter to add to a scenario.

Since shorter scenarios take less prep time, the time saved can be used to pick a map, find a pawn, and draw 4 cards from the deck of many NPCs and you're done; sometimes I do that 3 or 4 times. When I don't use the deck of many NPCs, I just use index cards and write a line or 2 about an NPC. I don't consider that an enormous effort; I find it easier than prepping the rest of the scenario. Since it's a creative process, I don't consider it work; I find it fun. For Starfinder, I post my mods so other GMs can copy my work if they don't have time, or can get ideas on how to do their own mods.

Something else I started to think about is: what do you do if you have a TPK in the first combat? Doesn't matter how long the scenario is if everyone dies half an hour into the session. The best suggestion I've found is to give the players pregens to recover the bodies and finish the mission. The point is, however short a scenario runs for whatever reason, be prepared to fill out the session.

SuperBidi wrote:

I can't speak for others, but from my point of view the new adventures are the worst I've ever seen in PFS by a significant margin. I'm puzzled people are not reacting more negatively towards them but to each their own.

It's possible they just haven't had a ton of play yet. The changes were announced a while and people that wanted the more fleshed out scenarios are probably just going to self-filter by avoiding these until they run out of other stuff to play.

I'm starting to notice a trend; often the worst reviews are written before or right after the release of a scenario, so I'm guessing it's people who played them early at conventions or within a few days of release. That's a time period when GM's have the least or no advice from other GMs who have already played the scenario. I don't go to conventions, but I'm imagining conventions don't allow playing 2 short scenarios back to back in the same time slot?

One way Starfinder 2e season 1 handled short plots was that most of the non-meta plot scenarios had sequels. I think Starfinder might have an advantage because of how easy it is to get from one star system to another; it's easy to mix unrelated scenarios. Short Starfinder scenarios also tend to have a longer word count than some of the Pathfinder sceason 8 scenarios.

So I think there can be good short scenarios from what I've seen in Starfinder; for stores that close early, they are a necessity, but also, if you've got the time, some people will always prefer longer scenarios, so having both as options is best.

Feels stylistically strange to have laser guns and still be using giant centipede poison.

I worked in pharmaceutical manufacturing for 10 years; here are some of the sources for ingredients we used.

(Lac Resin): Harvested from the secretions of lac insects (Kerria lacca),
Cantharidin: Extracted from blister beetles (family Meloidae)
Carmine / Carminic Acid: Derived from crushed cochineal scale insects (Dactylopius coccus),
Melittin & Bee Venom Components: Collected from honeybees (Apis mellifera)
Alloferon: An antiviral and antitumor peptide originally isolated from blow fly larvae (Calliphora vicina).
Chitin and Chitosan: Extracted from the exoskeletons of insects and crustaceans
Solanesol: An organic intermediate compound used in cardiovascular medicine, which can be chemically sourced from silkworm feces.
Silk Fibroin and Sericin: Proteins derived from silkworm cocoons

In sci-fi, from Dune, the Spice is made from fungal excretions of sandtrout (the larval form of sandworms)

The difference between using giant centipede poison in Pathfinder and Starfinder is that, in Starfinder, you know its chemical composition and why it works; in Pathfinder, you just think it works but don't know why.

I remember very specifically the "Diplomacy check to convince an NPC to help", with no information on what help the NPC was supposed to provide and a single line of description of said NPC, focusing on physical features.

This is exactly the kind of thing I look for when looking to make a short scenario run longer. If I don't have time to fill in the NPC's details myself, I just use the Deck of Endless NPCs. How the NPC is supposed to help is something I would need more context to figure out, since I haven't read The Elsewhere Feast.

______________________________________________
Some general thoughts to other comments:

Starfinder has had over a year of shorter scenarios. I started looking into word count now that we have the rules for making Infinite scenarios. The typical word count for a 2-3 hour scenario is 4000 to 5000. The shortest SDSF2e scenario I've found so far, and I think it only has one contender I haven't checked yet, is 4702 words. The scenarios that I've been able to run up to 4:30 hours are around 5500 words. PF2e 8-1 Intro Year of Clockwork Mystery is only 4207 words. When I played in 8-01; our session lasted 3:15 to #:30 hours. The GM didn't try to run it longer; it was largely the party that made the game run long.

We had fun with it, but 8-1 did feel a little short; I think its becuse it's only one map, and the point of focus on the map is one object that didn't move, instead of exploring the map and having encounters in different locations.

I wouldn't judge all 2-3 hour scenarios by 8-1, since there are 800 to 1300 words left that could go into a short scenario. I've played in 8-04: A Theft in Riddleport; I don't remember offhand if it felt short or not, but it could be because I'm used to SF2e scenarios.

The first PF2e organized play group I played with; we were always playing as fast as we could to be done before the store closed. Playing like that, PF2e felt like a tactical combat game, where the players never had time to talk OOC. The door opened: get your drink and be ready to play in 5 or 10 minutes. The current group I play with is not rushed; some of us show up an hour early to set up or just hang out and talk. Games typically are not rushed, unless there is a following event. People sometimes hang out after the games. The 2-3 hour scenarios give more
room for role-playing and table talk in and out of character.

I'm wondering if you're in a situation where you're used to running 4-5 hour-long scenarios and have to focus on the game to get done on time without a lot of table talk and role-playing, and run a 2-3 that same way as a 4-5, the 2-3 will run really short. The prep time for the 2-3 hour scenarios is shorter; that saved time is what I use to find ways to make them run longer.

I have nothing against 4-5 hour scenarios if you have time to not rush through them. I do think the shorter scenarios are great for new GMs

The magic rules for starship combat are very disappointing.

There are only four spells that can be used in starship combat, they're shared between classes, and the technomancer magic module works with none of them. You also need multiple upgrades on the magic module to support having multiple casters of different classes in the party, which you can't get until level five.

I really hope I'm missing something here.

For those of us without the book, what are the 4 spells?

I would hope Phantasmal Fleet works regardless of whether the magic station is used. Although not a spell, I would think Holo-Roger should work as well without a station?