Lizard

Freedom Snake's page

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber. Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights 164 posts (216 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 18 Organized Play characters. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Follow up question. So that I can properly plan, what decks do I need to buy as a balanced minimum out of my own pocket as a VL to be able to kick off PACS in my stores and provide our players who want to try society play before making a financial commitment? I need to have a conversation with my wife and start budgeting.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Thanks for the responses. We have one player at our store that is starting who owns anything at all. I didn’t want him to have to hand out his decks every week until we can convince people to buy their own or until I can recover from the cost of 2e launch plus a Starfinder hardcover to hand out sets to everyone else. At the same time this is our weekly organized play gathering and I’m trying to support organized play with PACS. I suppose there just isn’t a way to support PACS at this time and can hopefully convince the store to start stocking them.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

So here comes the new guy questions.

In PFS and SFS you can go into a store, grab a pregen and experience something fun and new, which could potentially result in sales for Paizo. Why is the PACS policy that the GM or another player has to buy things out of their pocket or else tell the curious walk-up player there is a minimum $20+ store purchase required to even see if they like it?

It’s very off putting to force GMs to buy decks for walk-ups to use. It’s very off putting for a new player to be told to fess up $20 if they want a seat at the table.

Is there a reason for banning the characters already built in the rulebook in the box?

I have the core set and crimson throne, but have only played once so far. There is interest in my store but it’s not fair to keep asking one of my players to supply all their personal decks to random strangers every week and with my late July shipment already in excess of $450 between PF and SF, I can’t add catching up on class decks for public use to my budget anytime soon.

Does OP have a process to bring in first time players?

What does OP offer? There are restrictions to playing. Is there any added benefit beyond consistency if you play card game at conventions? Which btw, is also not really a thing as far as I can see. Were there class decks for walk-ups at Origins or was there no support for society? I honestly don’t know, even though I was there. How about GenCon?

With PF/SF you can play a pregen core character and see if this is the thing for you within the society context. How does PACS support this aspect?

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can't make GenCon, sadly, but I'll be at Origins if you will be around. I love meeting new people and talking shop :)

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would support a 5 nova evaluating for SF, as they have been qualitatively evaluated 3 times in that system.

The same for a 5 glyph in 2e

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just a quick update. A VC did reach out to me yesterday about sitting in with another VC to observe me due to their general inexperience with high level Starfinder. I did not see this message until recently, because I didn’t notice that I had a PM. While I still believe my concern has merit, this individual is willing to make an effort and I find that to be utterly fantastic!

I truly hope we see VCs who will be present at events people are looking for evaluations at step up like this. Wether we agree or disagree with the program implementation, that is no longer our choice. Being a community that still works to support each other through the process and its revisions is exactly what we need.

Thank you, kind VC for stepping up and helping others move forward in this process. Even if you don’t feel comfortable signing the evaluation without more SF experience, you can provide valuable feedback that players are often uncomfortable providing and that means something to me.

Thank you.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Richard Lowe wrote:
Jacob Rennels wrote:


If exactly zero VCs are even willing to open a dialogue at doing a Starfinder evaluation at Origins in some sort of act of protest, that’s a problem. That’s their right, but at what cost and to who? Refuse to entertain the idea to force change at the expense of your GM core? That seems to be a problem that needs to be addressed. “I don’t like it, so I will passively contribute...
I think you may be rather jumping to conclusions here, I'm not saying that you're wrong or that it doesn't mean it won't be difficult to get evaluations under the proposed system if your experience is borne out so please don't misunderstand me. But I do think that saying there is some massive, organised secret protest or boycott from VCs because no-one replied to one post you made is... stretching things.

Please don’t mistake me for thinking our VCs are united in a coordinated effort to stop this. I don’t believe that at all. I believe that one of them is. And another one is. And another one is. It appears that it is more an aggregation of individual refusal to participate.

Richard Lowe wrote:


Your target audience is VCs who regularly have time to read the forums, feel they are knowledgeable enough to run an evaluation, are going to the specific con you are at, have free time at that con or can cancel other obligations to help. That's a lot of hoops for someone to jump through (which is indeed part of the problem) and more likely the cause of your lack of offers, rather than a secret cabal of VCs protesting in silence, I'm pretty sure many of the VCs will (and some have) speak up about something like this they see problems or issues with.

I’m not concerned at a lack of offers or agreement to help me, personally. I would LOVE to have other people who don’t know me give me the feedback to improve or the kudos to congratulate me. I always strive to be better than I am in everything I do.

My concern is that I see a LOT of active VCs, many who have stated they will be at Origins. Not one has even said hey, let’s meet up and see if this is possible. That’s more than any have been willing to do so far.

No one said you need to be a Starfinder expert to evaluate. In fact the criteria doesn’t require the evaluator to be one. Excessive reference, excessive delays, things like that aren’t Starfinder specific. Good GMing isn’t Starfinder specific. If they don’t know the system, they can be an asset in ways others can’t. They get to see how you are with players new(ish) to the system.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I should also add context to my previous post. I originally asked if someone would be willing to work with me on this a month ago under the understanding that this was coming and I would like to be proactive rather than procrastinate. Any attempt to open a dialogue with the VC core has been completely ignored. I don’t say that out of contempt or frustration, but as a point of fact.

If requests for evaluations are to be met with silence by the VC core then then their inaction will halt all access for everyone who doesn’t have the geographical luxury that I have.

Wether they like it or not, the evaluation has moved from question to statement. The question now is how many people they deny progression through intentional inaction and refusal to support an official part of the Organized Play program. Wether or not you agree, this is now set forth by Paizo as the official way ahead.

It is not appropriate to refuse to even discuss the possibility of supporting the program at the expense of others because of your personal stance on what Paizo has officially set forth.

The evaluations are already taking place and even conducted at PaizoCon. Why attempt to penalize everyone else over your disagreement? You can disagree out loud without holding everyone back. Evaluate under protest in an effort to not penalize everyone else.

I’m sure that absolutely zero VCs will be willing to evaluate me at Origins anymore now than they were in the last 30 days, but again, I don’t need the VCs at large. I’m voicing my concern over the impact to everyone else who will have trouble finding a VC in the first place, much less three times, when requests are met with silence or completely ignored.

Is it really too much to even discuss the possibility of scheduling an evaluation table at “the Starfinder con”? It’s not like we don’t have precedent of evaluations before the guide update, because that’s already happening and the criteria has already been published.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Blake's Tiger wrote:
Quote:
If I can’t get a single VC to be willing to even open a dialogue about it for Origins where I will be running 8 tables, I can’t help but have concern for the ability to do this at major cons.

I can sympathize, but none of that is new, right?

The status quo: 150 tables, 50 unique, 10 specials and be evaluated by a VC who just goes with his gut.

The new mode: 150 tables, 50 unique, 10 specials, and be evaluated 3 times by a VC using the proposed rubric.

If you situation was such that you couldn't get 1 evaluation without overarching guidance for the evaluator, that situation hasn't changed for you and has nothing to do with using the rubric/guidance on how to measure adequacy.

With the exception of the number of evaluations, the process was objectively worse than the proposed process, unless you were friends with your VC. Now, at least, those of us not friends with our VCs can be confident that there's more guidance on pass/fail than a random stranger's gut feeling. We have benchmarks to aim toward.

I may have misrepresented my concern. I have frequent and regular access to at least 3 VCs, so the new system doesn’t pose a problem for me, personally. My concern is what appears to be a boycott by VCs to even discuss the possibility of doing a Starfinder evaluation at Origins. Of all the places someone should be able to have that discussion, especially for those with limited VC access, Origins should be that place. I am currently at 7 specials, 42 unique scenarios and 96 tables. I will have all but the 150 table count by January with no trouble using my local VCs.

If exactly zero VCs are even willing to open a dialogue at doing a Starfinder evaluation at Origins in some sort of act of protest, that’s a problem. That’s their right, but at what cost and to who? Refuse to entertain the idea to force change at the expense of your GM core? That seems to be a problem that needs to be addressed. “I don’t like it, so I will passively contribute to preventing anyone else from achieving this.” is a poor way to protest and isn’t victimless. That’s not the behavior that seems appropriate for a VC.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think getting VC support may be harder than people realize. I’ve asked for any VC willing to evaluate me at a table at Origins in the VO forums and not a single person has replied or contacted me. It’s gone completely ignored. I have 3 VCs within 2 hours of me, so I’m not worried about the ability to get my evaluations done. I’m at 96 tables with 4 scheduled before Origins, but I want to meet other VCs and hear feedback that isn’t from people who know and see me regularly. I want outside, unbiased feedback that I can use to improve because I enjoy trying to reach my highest potential in everything I do.

If I can’t get a single VC to be willing to even open a dialogue about it for Origins where I will be running 8 tables, I can’t help but have concern for the ability to do this at major cons.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Thanks for the prompt response! Everything works great now.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
John Mangrum wrote:
Level 21, right! Meant to say that, not 41.

Sir we've combed the entirety of level 41 and can't find any sign of the level 21 crew

Sneaky bastards.....

I literally just sprayed Mountain Dew laughing at this in a restaurant. Now people are looking at me like there’s something wrong with me. I’m also wearing a Starfinder shirt.

Thanks for the laugh and the story I can laugh about BNW!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Thanks for the point out. I rarely see the PFS forum since we have so many PFS1 experts in my area with far more knowledge than me and I almost never play because of lack of interest in 1e in my primary LGS.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I think my account might be bugged. I can’t update player or GM credit for myself for SFS 1-06. No one else seems to be able to report it for me either.

241400

And thank you for this fantastic product!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

4 people marked this as a favorite.

@Kishmo I print them on 36” x 48” with decent quality using GIMP (which is a free image software).

Using Adobe Acrobat, loaf the scenario PDF
Using the arrow tool, click the map in the back of the scenario (the unmarked one)
Copy

In GIMP, ctrl+shift+v to paste as a new image of the same size, DPI, etc.
Count your dimensions in squares (to determine how many inches each dimension should be)
Go to Image > Scale Image and change the unit of measurement in the image size section pixels to inches
Adjust only the width to the right number of inches (number of squares)
Remember to double the inches for 10’ squares.
Tab to the height dimension and it should automatically update, keeping the correct proportions. If the height is larger or just right, continue to the next step, otherwise adjust the height then tab out and your width should now be equal to or greater than you need. This is fine.
Once you are satisfied with the dimensions ctrl+shift+e
Name your file and at the bottom, click select file type and make it a pdf (because it is a vector graphic)
You can now print this pdf at places like OfficeMax or wherever.

If you’re lucky, you can convince them to print as a blueprint for a fraction of the cost. I pay $11for full color 36”x48” and $6 for a 24” x 36”. All but one of the employees at mine will do that for me.

I hope this is helpful and best of luck to you.

For those wondering why I don’t just do this in the future for an out of print map pack, it’s just the frustration of Paizo saying “Hey, we’ve got this great product you can use to show this on something much more portable than a roll of architectural paper, but just kidding. You can’t. Print it on photo paper and spend a fortune if you want it to be as nice as the product we’re referencing but not making available.

At least if it were called a custom map when it’s really a custom arrangement of map pack materials Paizo fully intends to eventually stop production of, it would feel less like an IDGAF to meas the customer. I try to give the highest quality physical experience, depicting the author’s descriptions as I can afford time and money for, as I can. My 8 year old is a better artist than I am. When I draw maps, crates that provide cover are confused for doors. Areas of varying terrain types get mistaken and it just tends to take away from the overall experience when the players have to spend time clarifying which part of my Jackson Pollack is which mechanical advantage or disadvantage to them.

Here’s a great thing you can go out and buy, but just kidding. We won’t sell it to you. Figure it out. I just don’t look forward to that day. At the end of the day, it’s still a business and the business needs to do what it deems in its best interest. Sometimes that might mean the author uses a material that may become forever unavailable 6 months after publishing, but best fits their writing. I can accept that, even if I disagree with it.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Subject says it. Pfstracker.net will not let me or anyone else report SFS 1-06 for me as GM or player. I have opened up my profile to allow others to report for me and so far no one can report that scenario for me. In fact, if anyone here thinks they might have some luck reporting it for me, my number is 241400.

In lieu of that, does anyone know who I should report the issue to? The website seems devoid of contact info.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I appreciate the response. I’m trying to figure out what map packs I might need to buy before they go out of stock to cover the future scenarios (I really dislike trying to draw maps of far inferior quality to the published art for my players). I’m trying to balance this against the possibility that as a customer, I can’t see which are out of print, only which (if any) are out of stock. This is part of my season 2 SFS budgeting for the year.

Thanks again for the response. I’m not sure it helps me anticipate anything more than seeing the map preview a couple of months out does, but I know what to expect, and that’s something.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I seem to recall that Paizo had decided to halt production of Map Packs in favor of the newer tiles system. As recently as 1-34 scenarios are still being designed to use them.

Is the intention to continue using them in scenarios to help clear inventory with the knowledge they will eventually become difficult to obtain then you have to print or draw on your own?

Is there a QC process in the works to avoid map packs and maybe use tiles instead, where applicable?

If the intention is to use map packs anyway, I would personally prefer to have them listed as custom maps (which would also save the frustration of maps with misaligned, stretched or gapped spaces).

If tiles become a thing, could we please make it a requirement that the tiles not have to be partially stacked and leaning on each other in a map design?

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

This is why I love these forums. I'm far from perfect, but I try to be as educated as I can be.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

That's a good catch! Thank you guys for pointing this out! I'm sure he's reading this forum too. We both read these regularly and meet weekly for lunch. Our conversations are generally around OPF and Paizo stuff in general.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

So rather than chastising, why not use this community forum to help the community learn and grow? I would invite you to respectfully rebut our errors, explaining why and provide a citation so that we may learn firsthand and fully understand exactly where your position is derived from within the source material.

I would further point out that your comment only makes sense if you disregard the part about hiding and remaining hidden. Your post and the context of this is about casting from concealment supported by the skill stealth.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I had a good discussion with one of my local VA's recently and we both thought it worthwhile to put on the boards based on some local player confusion that may not be isolated to our geographical area.

With the prevelance of replays currently available and upcoming between GM nova replays and SCS(Jadnura) replays, the replay for credit rules in the Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide have a seemingly lesser-referenced paragraph worth knowing, that I myself am guilty of violating through simple ignorance of what is written.

Replaying Adventures, Page 9 wrote:

You can receive up to two Chronicle sheets for a given adventure: one for playing an adventure and one for running the same adventure as a GM, regardless of how many times you play or run that specific adventure. A character may have no more than one copy of a Chronicle sheet applied to her. GMing adventures contributes to GM nova rewards even when it does not award additional Chronicle sheets (see page 17 for more information about GM novas).

In certain circumstances, you may need to replay an adventure you have already completed. The following rules determine when replaying Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild adventures is legal and what benefits you can gain from replaying. When using a replay credit, you may earn no more than one bonus Chronicle sheet per adventure.

You can only have 1 bonus copy of a chronicle from replays. In other words, if your -701 plays Live Exploration Extreme normally, you can only ever accumulate one additional bonus chronicle from a replay. So now your -702 happens to be SCS (Jadnura) and has tier one. They can then play Live Exploration Extreme, resulting in your first bonus chronicle for the same scenario. Now, you REALLY love Live Exploration Extreme, so you make a -703 and get them to tier 1 of SCS (Jadnura) so that you can play it again. You can't. You already have one bonus chronicle for playing that scenario. The only way you can play this again is only if you are the third and final player in order to make a table. In which case, you can play for no credit as outlined below.

Skipping down to relevant rewards section...

Replaying Adventures, Page 9 wrote:
Rewards: Replaying to make a legal table doesn’t earn any rewards. The Chronicle sheet for the adventure is a placeholder. It should note that the scenario has been replayed for no credit and awards no credits, Fame, Reputation, XP, boons, item access, or any other benefits or disadvantages. You must track consumables, purchases, and conditions acquired by playing the adventure. This is the only exception to not having two copies of the same Chronicle sheet assigned to one character.

So a valid no reward replay should not count against this. Keep in mind there are restrictions on when you can play for no credit. Keep in mind this can only be done if you are necessary to meet a minimum legal table. This would only apply to you being part of a 3 player table.

The SCS (Jadnura) boon even specifically references the replay rules on page 9 for using it.

I brought this up because this is exactly what I mistakenly did. To further complicate it, this brought one character to level 5, who then played a 5-8 scenario, meaning that if I were to undo shred the chronicle, then I have a tier 5-8 chronicle I wasn't eligible to play in. It's a mess to clean up my books for this in order to make myself legal.

All of this of course is separate from the GM chronicle, because that is not a bonus chronicle for a replay. Nor does this apply to the Repeatable scenario tag.

I welcome any feedback or corrections to my interpretation of the guide in this regard.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
Damanta wrote:

Page 330 of the Core Rulebook disagrees with you:

"A cast spell always has obvious effects that are noticeable by nearby creatures; it is not possible to clandestinely cast a spell."

No, you're just reading too much into that rule.

I'm going to respectfully disagree and suggest that you aren't reading enough into that rule. Stealth explicitly allows you to MOVE silently.

From the CRB page 147:

"You can stay hidden and move silently to avoid detection, allowing you to sneak past foes or strike from an unseen position."

This does not supercede clandestine spell casting. It goes on to elaborate on the two things it does. Hide/remain hidden and move silently. Just because you can move silently doesn't mean you can summon a demon from hell silently and unnoticed. In fact, as soon as you cast a spell from stealth the NPC gets an opposed perception check, even if you are concealed.

Quote:
That's like saying it's not possible to clandestinely fire a gun. Ok, but see the Stealth skill and sniping rules.

I agree it's exactly like that. So, use your standard action to attack an opponent who is flat-footed, then take a -20 to reattempt a stealth check as a part of that action. Concealment does not equal automatic, successful, subsequent stealth.

From the CRB page 148:

"If you have already successfully used Stealth to hide from a creature that is at least 10 feet away, you can briefly pop out of cover or concealment and make a single ranged attack against that creature. As long as you can reenter cover or concealment, you can attempt a Stealth check to hide again as part of that attack with a –20 penalty."

Quote:
Spells get called out because they have no components and the introduction of psychic magic in Pathfinder infamously required them to state that all spell casting was always visible regardless of direct spell effects or components being sensed.

Can you cite your source for this being the Starfinder logic or is this a personal opinion that you can't substantiate?

Quote:
They still haven't addressed in either system how and whether that interacts with invisibility, total concealment, and stealth rules. Until they do, I think the reasonable assumption, given the history of why this rule exists, is that spell visiblity is subject to the usual stealth/invsibility rules - it's only meant to stop you from casting openly but unnoticeably in social situations. If they want it to go further, they need to say so explicitly.

I feel like I've provided ample evidence of it being addressed in this system. Page 330 isn't caveated. It's definitively stated.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Dennis brings up a valid point. Would it be possible to specify that GMs may apply it once per tier regardless of the tier it was GMed in?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

The gunnery checks would not be impacted because no one suffers a crit until all shots have been fired. Think of it as both ships squeezing the triggers before the other shots finish traveling to the opposing starship.

From the CRB, page 320:
Attacks are made in the gunnery phase of combat, in the order determined during the helm phase, but the damage and critical effects (see page 321) are applied after all of the attacks have been made (meaning every starship gets to attack, even if it would be destroyed or crippled by an attack that happened during the same gunnery phase.)

Remember, a colossal ship (over 15,000 feet or 3 miles long) fits in one hex. There is a significant distance between ships, even in adjacent hexes.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

3 people marked this as a favorite.

A few points from a different lodge that what seems to be the vocal majority.

First, in Saint Louis, we run every new scenario twice every month. We also run 4 back-plays a month. We still need more to satisfy our player base. Because that doesn't seem like something that is going to happen anytime soon, we also run APs. This isn't some way to power game or manipulate the system, it's a way to continue to offer SFS in a community which regularly plays so much SFS that we simply run out of things to play.

Second, congruent to my first point, we sometimes have to offer repeatables in a way that affords more play opportunities without forcing people to make even more characters. Thus, we have characters that are level 5 on repeatable content alone. (Quest, 1-01, AP1, AP7, 1-12, 1-16, 1-25, 1-32). Putting a glass ceiling above these players just because others do not have the same option is not in the spirit of the society. Growing the pyramid by expanding both outward and upward ensures lots of content for everyone. The mentality of holding others back because you can't advance is frustrating. So is the mindset that content should only grow upward like a tower. I am grateful for the plan moving forward.

Third, I have to agree with Bob. Handing a level 12 soldier with 2 combat styles, 12 feats, 3 gear boosts, several conditional abilities, possibly powered armor to track the charge level of, weapons of multiple damage types, maybe DR and adaptive resistance, a jet pack to track charges of, etc. to a newer player just so they can play would be obnoxious. At that point, they aren't playing, you are playing for them. That's just what Obozaya could easily be. Now let's add Quig and have them run 2 characters of level 12.

You run the risk of potentially overwhelming a new or low level player. Or worse, you're going to turn them away and tell them they can't play, but they can sit and watch the grown ups. In my opinion it's better to pull out a repeatable and include everyone in a compatible tier and include the low level or prospective member of the Society than it is to exclude them or overwhelm and discourage them.

I understand there are also times when a level 8 character will want to play at the 9-12, and that would be perfectly reasonable and a much smaller jump. But for those of you using your low table frequency and preponderance of mostly low or mid level players, the addition of a level 12 pregen this early in the campaign seems contrary to your needs.

Fourth, I am completely in favor of level 12 pregens when there is so much content that a player is playing said pregen in that tier because they genuinely want to try a level 12 class. I know I said it in three, but I'm going to say it again. In my opinion, it is better to change the table to something everyone can play than it is to exclude people or split the tables and offer it again for the other half that graciously ensured no one was turned away.

No one should feel unable to play in an OPF game if you have 4 or more people present.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Freedom Snake wrote:


On a note regarding the personal boon, I totally took the first option for my GM credit for my Manifold Host Maraquois. Now when he hits Tier 3, he will be able to use it combined with the race boon. Let's be honest, a Daredevil (Versatile Movement) Operative Maraquois with that particular benefit is too much fun to pass up the opportunity to play!
Doesn't being a Maraquiois take up your personal boon slot? That seems to be the big deal with the wayfinder tier 4 race boon as compared to the others.

Way late, but just saw this. Tier 3 Manifold Host Boon. Manifold Host Exemplar. 8 Fame, allows you to slot a personal if you already have a permanent unique race boon.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.

IDK how many tier 11-12 tables of 2-00 will be offered at Origins, but I will be GMing tier 11-12. I'm looking forward to studying and prepping that. I'm looking forward to seeing a full table of characters that high wreck face (or have their face wrecked if I know Thursty). I hope to see some of you there!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

My suggestion is Foundation Points (for OPF). You could acronym them into PFP, SFP and CFP. This shows that you are active in one system and when explained to newer society players it’s a way to help expand the OPF’s visibility/ recognition level. This could be useful 5 or 10 years down the road if Paizo ever gains other third party content/system partners in OPF and chooses to support them in a similar fashion to what they are doing here.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I’m certain your assumption is correct. Your highly reputable Second Seeker now has a story worth telling. People have most likely heard of you by now, and are probably talking about you to those who haven’t.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn’t mind another flashback scenario like 1-00 offered as a quest pack to give 5 short backgrounds. There’s no reason Guidance, the Forum, faction leads or any VCs couldn’t have a small story segment that present day Starfinders could learn as an interactive memory or vividly related experience.

I personally would love to see 1-01 followed up with a quest pack or scenario to learn more back stories.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I second the question of maps. I would be appreciative of the opportunity to order the maps called for in time for my monthly subscription shipment. It’s always nice to have the map when the scenario drops.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I have played this once and GMed it three times. 75% “Above my pay grade” and 25% “Let it live.” I’ve only had two players vote to lobotomize and one to kill outright. Almost half of the players seem to vote to let nature take its course, but end up outvoted by the people saying “Who am I to decide the fate of an entire planet’s worth of life?”

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

+1 for promotional slot...

(which means no shirt reroll) for a one time use by that player at that game, but deck is subject to inspection and shuffle by GM at their discretion. May only be used by a PC, not an NPC, even one under the control of a PC.

My personal opinion.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe I'm blind, but I have been unable to find the pregens mentioned in the blog post. Are those available somewhere? I know of some players who want to try the new mechanics in play before they commit to building a character when we run at the LGS.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sasha Lindley Hall wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

No ranged attacks. Slam and trample would be otherwise unaffected.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I ran this 2x at Origins and saw some very creative solutions. In one party they [/spoiler]...they had two level 8 pregens who were unaffected by the medium radiation in their ilvl armor suits. We had a Ysoki (we'll call him Ysoki A) who happened to be high enough ilvl armor, but then we had the other Ysoki (we'll call him Ysoki B) in ilvl 5 armor.

Ysoki A grabbed the Mk2 Null Space Chamber they found and Ysoki B hopped inside to reduce his exposure time, at which point Ysoki A stuffed the chamber containing Ysoki B into his cheek pouch. When skill checks were needed or combat imminent, Ysoki A would spit out the chamber as a swift on one turn, then summon Ysoki B out of the pouch on the second turn, at which point Ysoki B then fell prone out of the pouch and began participating in combat for 30-42 seconds, then hopped back into the pouch.

As he was the only one initially affected by the radiation, he was the only one eligible for the boon.[/spoiler]

On a note regarding the personal boon, I totally took the first option for my GM credit for my Manifold Host Maraquois. Now when he hits Tier 3, he will be able to use it combined with the race boon. Let's be honest, a Daredevil (Versatile Movement) Operative Maraquois with that particular benefit is too much fun to pass up the opportunity to play!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Awesome! Thank you so much for the clarification on this. I had a lot of fun running it last night and the players had a blast. You might find it entertaining to know that a Technomancer used a spell grenade to target "something" in encounter D2 that had a confusion effect. I was not prepared for that, but had a great time working through it with the players at the table!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Second question: Since Ipsoth’s Balloon attack requires the foe to be adjacent and immediately lifts the opponent 30’ into the air, this would also provoke an AoO, but it’s currently his turn. If a second PC were to approach him, (he has reach) would they provoke since he hasn’t acted since his last turn, or would provoking on his turn count as “after” for those purposes?

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

On optional encounter C, it says to reduce the players credits is they defeat the Formians. Should this deduction be if they don’t defeat them or did I miss the point of the penalty in the deduction?

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Gabbers "Gab" McTalkington wrote:
Was everyone supposed to get this, or was it tied only with certain specific missions?

Spoiler:
Your GM was supposed to offer you a choice
Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Arc Riley wrote:

As I understand the entirety of Dead Suns is already sanctioned by page 1 which defines the level ranges and story content, just awaiting chronicle sheets.

So if I were you I'd keep it on the current schedule but collect everyone's email addresses. Send chronicle sheets out when they become available.

Arc, you are correct. All 6 books are sanctioned. The problem is player lockout. Until you have a chronicle for book 4, you cannot legally play that character in anything. At all. Period. Until the chronicle for 4 is received on that player. So while 5 and 6 are sanctioned for play (even though items/races are not) you cannot play 5 if your character is locked out on 4. Neither can you play any scenarios on that character. It's not so much about sanctioning as it is about "multi-session adventures and extended play" per the roleplaying guild guide.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mr. Bonkers wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
Star Knight gives you proficiency if you already have Heavy Armor proficiency.
Actually, it doesn't. It gives either light armor proficiency, heavy armor proficiency, or fortification if you are already proficient with both. I think he just wore it without proficiency. Yes, you do get lower EAC/KAC, but that wasn't the point of the build. The point was to have a lot of stamina, DR 5/- and just tank the hits whenever necessary. Which can be a good method, especially if you can also heal yourself when needed.

That was exactly the case. Half move speed, -EAC/KAC, etc. He was not proficient. He was just built to get in, administer treatment and get out. Mind thrust or magic missile when there's no healing to be done. Legit combat medic.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

So, to answer the question in your post title, without reading your post, an emphatic HELL YES, YOU CAN!!!”

Let me tell you about a mystic I GM’d for at Origins. Tier 5-6, 4 player. He was a level 6 Mystic doctor.

The doc wore powered armor with DR/5- and a force field. He also took Technomantic Dabbler and carried no weapons. When he would recall knowledge, the first thing he would tell me was that he was trying to remember wether or not Mind Thrust was effective against this type of creature. He literally acted as a front line fighter built primarily around Con, Wis and Dex with some Int iirc. He would run in to touch patty members, eat AoOs in the process and generally not care. If no one needed his medical services he would Mind Thrust or Magic Missile accordingly. He never needed a weapon.

This guy was a real treat to have at the table and built an outstanding combat medic. This goes to prove that if he can tank mobs and receive a proper front-line beating, you can absolutely make a melee Mystic!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

That would require the champion boon to exist in the first place. Unless I’m mistaken, the J one does not yet exist.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I would agree with you. Earning the boon does not count toward any check boxes, so you could conceivably earn the boon (through any means) then GM it for your first check box(es).

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I think the tiers should be ability based. In SFS, 4-level tiers make perfect sense for a few reasons.

Weapon proficiency in SF at level 3 is a complete game changer. Factor in additional feats at 3 and 5 (4 additional feats in the case of the soldier) and having even a single level 5 at a tier 1-2 table becomes completely broken and pointless. The 5 at a table with levels 5, 1, 1, 1 (APL 2), 5, 3, 2, 1, 1 (APL 2.4), 5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1 (APL 2.3) or a 5, 3, 3, 1, 1, 1 (APL 2.3) will hit everything on a 4 or 5, probably one-shot most NPCs, obliterate skill checks, and make the whole game no different for the low level players than it would be if they were to just watch someone else play and listen to the story. A level 5 in tier 1-2 would be obnoxious and ridiculous in terms of SF scaling.
If PF2 scales like SF does, then the tiers need to progress like SF does.

Second, if you care about new players and omission of unnecessary complication as a design aspect, adding a sandwich tier between the tiers doesn't seem to be value-added or help your case.

Frankly, limiting the sub-tiers to one increase per feat universally obtained is one of the best things Paizo did with SFS. Limiting the tiers to a maximum of 2 complete sub-tiers per tier that every player neatly fits into also makes great sense.

Anything larger than two sub-tiers should be reserved for multi-table specials.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I believe Thursty’s spoiler above implies 2 factions available to support in the future. Possible divisions and political malarkey, infighting, all kinds of fun. Stay tuned to Absalom Station’s Syndicated News for all the latest drama!

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

Thursty, we appreciate all you do for the SFS OP program. I would like to second the idea that we’ve got it pretty good compared to what PFS has. While we eagerly anticipate sanctioning, I think we also eagerly anticipate our monthly scenario drops. I imagine that having to choose which to delay would result in a nearly unanimous agreement that the scenario drops should have priority.

Thank you for keeping active and telling us where things are. No news is worse than bad news and I appreciate your keeping us out of the dark. Except for your evil menacing plots. I spend far more time than I should trying to hypothesize what nefarious plot twist will come from the dastardly duo of Thursty and John.

Thanks for all you do and stay thirsty, Thursty.

Liberty's Edge ⦵⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Lieutenant, Illinois—Fairview Heights aka Freedom Snake

I offered that up, but nobody here wants to have characters locked out from other scenarios while they wait on a chronicle.

Basically, if they were to play 4, they cannot play 5 or any other scenario for credit, until they receive the chronicle for 4. My players unanimously elected to wait for a chronicle rather than risk lock out or having to play 5 for no Society credit until the chronicle is released.

“Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide Version 1.0, pg. 11” wrote:
Roleplaying Guild characters can only played in one scenario or Adventure Path at a time. Characters are considered to be playing in a scenario or Adventure Path until they receive a Chronicle sheet for sanctioned content.

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>