Ratfolk

Nohwear's page

FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 3,509 posts (4,411 including aliases). 1 review. No lists. No wishlists. 27 Organized Play characters. 25 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,509 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

From my understanding, the book is a series of adventures that is designed to put the system through it's paces. If that does not suit you, there is nothing stopping you from creating a homebrew adventure and using that to give feedback. That is what I am doing.


Here are my thoughts. Most people have faith in one or more gods, but it is more a faith of convince. They hope that the gods will either protect them from the dangers of the world, or not do something to hurt them. There may even be small shrines to the local creatures that are powerful enough. The world of Golarion is a lot more dangerous then our own. Further, humans and demihumans are still a part of the food chain, to some degree at least. I also feel that one must consider the fact that magic, has very flashy and provable effects.


I have not yet had the chance to play or run yet, but I am positive overall. There is once area of concern though. I am concerned that resonance points make low level characters even squishier. That a GM can not throw in some heal pots or wands to help a group that has gotten too low on HP and other resources. I would like to hear other people's thoughts on this, especially if you have experience with the new edition.


Very happy, thank you.


That does make me wonder how viable it would be to either add material, or rework what is available to add more variety to the classes. Although I hope that there are plans to offer new options that add both breadth and depth.


DFAnton wrote:
Klart McCather wrote:

I think they did a really good job but this community is just one ofthe most closed minded ones out there. It was formed on not wanting to move on so this was to be expected. People will adapt.

I've read through 80% of the book now and have not really noticed any glaring issues and they have to leave room for splat books later. Dont worry choices will be huge after a year or so. Enjoy having only a few books right now.

Speaking of closed-mindedness...

It would be extremely dishonest to imply that the majority of complaints here stem from fear of change. I also see posts around that discount people's opinions because they think people are upset they won't have access to a decade of content. I see that claim more often than the actual complaint.

And, even if some people are upset because of change...so what? "You can't judge this system on the merits of the old system" is basically saying "using an external reference point for what works and what doesn't is invalid."

true, but I have seen a large number of people that when pushed for an answer do admit that they have not read the book/pdf before launching what sounds an awful lot like the same complaint(s). Still, you do have a point.


Greetings, Mr. Wertz. I was wondering where would be the best place to post an ongoing thread about my experiences running the homebrew campaign that I should be starting soon?


There is a Facebook group dedicated to the playtest. Maybe check there?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alright, that is a grumble though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Nohwear wrote:
It just feels like alignment offers to much of a guide. I just really do not like the alignment matrix. I feel that it make morality too simple.
How so? It lay the framework for Good and Evil and lets you fill in the gray.

That is part of the problem for me. I want to wallow in the gray area. I want villains that are the heroes in their own stories. People who are not good or evil, and are capable of being both. I am cautious about going too far, lest I open up the can of worms that comes with any alignment discussion.


It just feels like alignment offers to much of a guide. I just really do not like the alignment matrix. I feel that it make morality too simple.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want to help with the Playtest, but I also prefer morally ambiguous campaigns. Would it hurt the usefulness of my data if I were to throw out alignment for my campaign? I will still keep vows, anathema, and such, but not the alignment matrix.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

1. Do you currently like pathfinder 1e? Yes

2. Did you once like pathfinder 1e but now find it troublesome? I still like it.

3. Do you like 4th or 5th edition D&D? I actually liked 4e. 5e is not bad, but I prefer the extra options of Pathfinder.

4. Which are you looking for class balance, smoother high level play, more options, or even all of those things? I guess more options.

5. How do you feel about making the game more accessible in general? I would prefer Pathfinder to be more of a generally popular game, then more of a niche one.

6. Are you willing to give up on accessibility if you can still gain all of the benefits listed in question 4? To a certain degree. I feel that a balance needs to be reached there.

7. Would you be willing to play an alternative rules system then what we have been presented? I guess. I would need to see the system.

To answer the over all question, I feel that Pathfinder 2e as is, is a blend of Starfinder and 13th Age. To me, this is a good thing. I see the need more for fine tuning then a complete overhall. Although to be fair, my opion i based on a first impression right now. I want to run a homebrew campaign to test it out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To me, it feels more like 13th Age then 4e. Which is a very good thing. I would argue that 13th Age is what 4e should have been.


Is there going to be a section for giving feedback for those of use who choose to run homebrew? I would love to help the best I can.


I will be playing a Perfect Scholar Unchained Monk. Because the build is incredibly MAD, I will be dumping Charisma. The main thing that I am looking for is interesting ways to rp my low Charisma, although I would appreciate other advise as well.


Thank you.


Since the Craft skill seems to be used a lot in Skulls and Shackles, but not really elsewhere, is there some official ruling on adding it to Class Deck characters?

*

There is a good sized group that meets twice a month, but they have been struggling to get through those adventures. They keep running out of time. I have heard terms such as slog being used to describe their experience.

*

Hello, there I am brand new to the organized play side of PACG. Since my local group is stuck on the sixth adventure of the latest season, I am trying to see what other ways I might participate until the group finishes, or gives up out of frustration. Does PSCAG have the equivalent of "campaign mode," or some other way of getting credit for running through the main box?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Shepherd Book is definitely an operative with the Priest theme.


I have not done a full build scheme, but I am creating my Stealth Drone to be used more for recon than combat. I am starting off by taking Perception for the other skill unit, Skill Focus Stealth for the feat, and Camera for the upgrade.


I think that they are an interesting idea. It is better to compare them to prestige classes then Pathfinder archetypes. There needs to be more of them before I can give a better analysis.


Have characters that for the Starfinder Society who are exploring unkown space. From there just make the mood of the game Pulp. The important thing is to talk with the players to make sure that their characters have the right attitude and feel.


Pathfinder Austin wrote:
Also, there's no mention of being able to run the AP in "Campaign Mode" like you can with other Pathfinder APs, otherwise that would be a workable solution for SFS play.

Actually, there is, but it is somewhat buried.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dead Phoenix wrote:
Munchkins can be useful. After reading the book the first time I had a worry the envoy class might be fairly weak, and there was some talk on here that supported that fear, but after people had a bit more time people did a bit more math, taking into account stuff people were missing at first and it became obvious that envoy is a very solid support class, in SF. Now I can't wait to play my envoy later this month... going android might end up being a mistake, but ehh, I'm just missing out on +1 attack bonus I would otherwise have, I'm sure I'll live(well... I hope i do anyways).

To me, what you describe is not being a Munchkin. To be a Munchkin, you need to put your fun ahead of everyone else's.

*

I presume that a computer's level is equal to it's tier.

*

@BigNorseWolf, Starfinder is starting at Hero's Emporium in Indiana. That is not currently on the map.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.

One concern is that you get the situation where no one has the right other skills, and now can not make the higher face skill DCs.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The GM exclaims that they have not read Starfinder, but they are basically the same, right?


I am working on a campaign where the PCs have to keep a low profile because a corp, probably Apsis, has trashed train rep and launched an attack campaign to paint them as monsters. I am torn on if there should be some sort of mechanic to monitor how well they are doing at staying under the radar. While it would be easier to largely leave this to plot, I also want to them to weigh the risk and reward of certain actions. Do you think that there should be some sort of background game mechanic, if so do you know of any good examples?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

While salvaging/exploring a derelict station the PCs come across some sort of obelisk. After the obelisk bathes them in some sort of energy, a corporate team barges in and opens fire. The obelisk is now featureless and inert. When the party gets back to civilization, they find that the corp has trashed their rep and painted them as monsters. What is this obelisk? What did that light do? And Why is the corp out to ruin the PCs now?


I would like your thoughts on an idea. What if Con was needed to hit with heavy weapons and sniper rifles while sniping? With heavy weapons, I would argue that you use your body steady the weapon and absorb the strain. While sniping can easily be as much about endurance as hand eye coordination. Right now I am just playing around with ideas.


Space McMan wrote:

While there have been some good points made about the value of buying some strength, I still contend it is the weakest primary stat, aka the stat you spend the most points on in your build.

If you are giving first priority to your strength stat, you are getting less value, less options and versatility, than any other potential primary stat save possibly cha. All the while, the other physical combat stat, dex, is actually doing what a primary stat should and give bonuses far beyond hitting things better.

This was a problem in pathfinder, and it went unchanged in Starfinder. I expected more from the devs when it came to updated old Pathfinder mechanics. Being disappointed they did literally nothing to update strength into a sci-fi setting is not unreasonable.

However, I'm off to bed, so you all can keep on telling me how I'm wrong for expecting positive evolution of classic Pathfinder systems without rebuttal until I get up tomorrow.

I am not sure if it was ever explicitly spelled out, but clearly backwards compatibility was a development goal. This seems to be the main reason the stats are the way they are. If you disagree with that goal fine, but that is the reason, as far as I can tell.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, again you seem to be disappointed that that they tried to make the two systems compatible instead of building something new. At this point it feel like you might as well be complaining that it is still a d20 system.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Space McMan wrote:
avr wrote:
You'd probably need to use different basic stats to avoid the problem. D&D's 6 aren't carved in stone for every RPG, and I'd argue that for a SF RPG you could probably leave out strength entirely and probably break up dexterity into a couple of stats.

Exactly. But instead of work out a better attribute system, they just copy/pasta'ed from pathfinder and here we are again, with a stat which was already weak in a fantasy setting full of magic is even worse in a setting full of super advanced technology.

It was entirely in their power to avoid this obvious issue. This isn't supposed to be a Pathfinder setting, it's supposed to be it's own RPG.

And yet here we are. It's disappointing.

So then you are disappointed that that they made a compatible system instead of building something new from the ground up?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I can not help but feel that you want Strength to be more important, other then to make Strength more important. To change game mechanics for their own sake. I can see ways to make Strength more important, but it feels ham-handed and not organic.


Really though, Strength does not seem to be less important in Starfinder then in most sci-fi rpgs. I would argue that it is just the nature of the beast, much as Luke Spencer has pointed out.


Yes, Strength is less important now, then in Pathfinder because more people will be using ranged weapons. However, there are still melee builds or other builds that benefit from a high Strength score. There is also the fact that thrown weapons, especially grenades use Strength to hit. While it is easy to sat that Dexterity is now king, I would not say that it is now the go to bump stat for most builds.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

For Armor mod, I can picture something resembling a scanner from DBZ, plus retractable micro tools.

*

I always offer to show the GM my noncore stuff as soon as I sit down.

*

nosig wrote:
Nohwear wrote:
nosig wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
And I saw no problem with the Speedruns. Who cares if people want to start at level 2 and not level 1? Doesn't bother me in the least.
Would it bother you if people just filled out the chronicles for the characters then, rather than spend time running the module?

When someone shows up at a table with me - I really don't check to see if her CRs are filled out. I don't quiz her on how she played her last few games, or anything like that. What's she bringing to the table to play with me? What's she going to play like? Is she there to have fun? How is she going to fit in... not did she "play right" in her former games.

If - during the game with me - something is really "off" with the way she's playing? or something's weird with her PC? I might ask something then... but mostly to see if she's messed something up (made a mistake) or if she knows something I might learn (some "cute gimmick"), I tend to assume she's honest and fun to have at the table - at least until proven otherwise.

Let's look at it this way. What if a bunch of people from different lodges not only skipped straight to the sheets, but started to brag about it. Would it be their fault or the leadership's if there was a new layer of paper work and scrutiny added?

like the ITS? or the procedure for filling in the CR (hand it to the player blank, retrieve it, fill in the fields, return it to the correct player who updates the figures, retrieve it again to check everything such as in game purchases, Insure everything is filled in in Ink, now return it to the correct player again... and do this for all players at the table). Yeah. Great stuff, paperwork... just what we need...

" a new layer of paper work and scrutiny added?"? I think we have had people pushing for Mandatory Character Audits sense Season 1. I don't hear it so much any more... but maybe we're due for another round of those posts any month now...

What I had in mind, was something like an official witness or some such silliness. However, I was starting to go down an unhelpful path when I wrote this, so please fill free to ignore.

*

To connect the original topic to the direction that the thread is going, I do not think that saying, "stuff changes, deal with it," is very helpful. On the other hand, it may be that the reason for the changes is because of people openly flaunting that they are breaking the spirit of the rules. Maybe if we can find a good way to deal with those people, the Brass will be more lenient with rules changes and what is allowed? I may have started to go overboard, but I feel there is a problem that we can hopefully talk about how to reasonably handle.

*

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nosig wrote:
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
And I saw no problem with the Speedruns. Who cares if people want to start at level 2 and not level 1? Doesn't bother me in the least.
Would it bother you if people just filled out the chronicles for the characters then, rather than spend time running the module?

When someone shows up at a table with me - I really don't check to see if her CRs are filled out. I don't quiz her on how she played her last few games, or anything like that. What's she bringing to the table to play with me? What's she going to play like? Is she there to have fun? How is she going to fit in... not did she "play right" in her former games.

If - during the game with me - something is really "off" with the way she's playing? or something's weird with her PC? I might ask something then... but mostly to see if she's messed something up (made a mistake) or if she knows something I might learn (some "cute gimmick"), I tend to assume she's honest and fun to have at the table - at least until proven otherwise.

Let's look at it this way. What if a bunch of people from different lodges not only skipped straight to the sheets, but started to brag about it. Would it be their fault or the leadership's if there was a new layer of paper work and scrutiny added?

*

Infamous Scenario:
#08-05: Ungrounded but Unbroken heavily penalized you for not having Profession: Soldier and Knowledge: History.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Human Diversion wrote:

This isn't a something Paizo is likely to deliver, but I'd like a list you can sort that details all the changes between Pathfinder and Starfinder. After playing our first few adventures, we noticed that we were looking up rules we were 100% sure about in Pathfinder but may or may not have changed in Starfinder, thus bogging combat down tremendously.

Maybe I'll start it as an online sheet ...

I will see if I can find it, but there is a cheat sheet for this in one of the blogs.

EDIT: Cheat Sheet


Eclipse Phase is a good sci-fi game, although you can not play as aliens although you can play as a human is a weird body. If you like solving mysteries, there is a good one for the Gumshoe system, but I can not remember the name right now. Savage Worlds and Cypher system can be used for such games easily, although they may be lighter then you want.


I would like for there to be a Soldier fighting style based around Blast and Line weapons.

*

I am reminded of a certain infamous scenario that required some unusual trained only skills.

*

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that the reason some people wince against this is because we are a group primarily made of outsiders. Thus we have experienced unfair snubbings for being different.

1 to 50 of 3,509 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>