Rhunny's page

Definitely keep EAC and KAC. Stamina and Resolve also need to be there though better implemented than how they work in PF2. Also good powered weapons that I can reload outside of combat and forget about needing to track. Capacity 5? miss me with that, 20 or gtfo

I really enjoyed Starship Chases they worked out a way to make Starship Roles matter equally and make skill challenges that don't go on forever.

Eh, if you buy material for games you kinda can't get mad when an edition changes. That was always going to happen. Paizo isn't cheating you out of any money because what you own still retains the same value.

Actually, Pathfinder 1e and 2e and Starfinder have always shared the same setting, just different timelines and core rules. Now it will still be the same setting different timelines but with the same core rules.

I'd argue the massive time lapse and the gap do serve as a setting barrier but that's a taxonomical arguement I don't need to have settled.

Everything I've heard from Paizo suggests, both games will be completely playable by themselves, and both games will be add-ons, supplements, or settings (what ever you want to call it) to the other game if you choose to add them.

I mostly agree with this, there's only a single set of mechanics and 2 official settings for them.

Yeah “this game need to have unique mechanics and system for the sake of being unique” isn’t really a compelling argument or pro.

I'd argue having unique mechanics and systems that can be easily distinguished is a very relevant thing in the market of games. Why, the first thing people think of when they hear PF2 is three action economy.

You'll look really silly if that Core Rulebook is, indeed, a core rulebook with all the rules in there, you realise that?

Like I said, I fully expect to see the reprinted rules from PF2e in the book to avoid having to flip between books.

Rhunny wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

The fact that it's using the same (excellent!) rules chassis as PF2 does not mean it can't be its own game. It just brings a whole slew of side benefits.

that's literally it not being its own game tho. It's a campaign setting for an already existing (excellent!) rules chassis.

also, yeah of course it's going to have its own core rulebook to include new classes, feats, heritages, etc. Maybe it will even reprint the core rules so you don't have to flip between books too!

that doesn't make its own game tho

If that's your definition of a campaign setting, then it is >extremely< outside the norm for campaign settings to the point that it stretches your own definition to meaninglessness. If I were told we were using a campaign setting and I had to buy three new core rule books and I wasn't allowed to use any content from the "base game" without explicit GM consent I would not hesitate to say "That's a new game, not a campaign setting."

I don't know what to tell you, if two games are fully compatible to the point where the only reason why I can't freely use options from one on the other is "not setting appropriate" then clearly it's not two mechanically different games, it's two settings sharing the same core rules.

Let me level with y'all. I'm saying something that is pretty much the truth as I understand it: Starfinder 2 will use the Pathfinder 2 core rules, to say something that sounds very negative (although equally not untrue) : Starfinder 2 isn't it's own game, it's a campaign setting that uses the Pathfinder 2 Core rules.

That said, I don't want to make anyone feel like I'm attacking 2e. It's a great game in its own right. I just happened to like SF1 better and I'm bummed about the fact they are not even going to try to come up with a new set of rules for it and instead just use another one they already have.

I understand the commercial and logistical reasons for that decision but that doesn't mean I have to like them or change the fact that we are effectively losing an entire, mechanically differentiable game.

The fact that it's using the same (excellent!) rules chassis as PF2 does not mean it can't be its own game. It just brings a whole slew of side benefits.

that's literally it not being its own game tho. It's a campaign setting for an already existing (excellent!) rules chassis.

also, yeah of course it's going to have its own core rulebook to include new classes, feats, heritages, etc. Maybe it will even reprint the core rules so you don't have to flip between books too!

that doesn't make its own game tho

Starfinder, as its own separate game is seemingly going to end in 2025.

Not trying to exagerate or be extremist about it. It's just fairly evident whatever SF2 will end up being, it's not a fully realised system but an add on for PF2.

"I argue there's no such a thing as SF2, as there's no new game being announced.

In all honesty, the only thing they announced is a new Pathfinder 2 campaign setting based on Starfinder."

That is absolute sophistry and flies in the face of not just what Paizo is doing but what the Starfinder developers themselves are saying.

Dislike the direction and levy your criticism, now is the time to do so. But don't pull this BS of "SF 2e is just PF 2e in a trench coat" gatekeeping, no-true-scottsman trite.

Nothing that I've read here or in the field test has made think this isn't a re-skinned PF2e. You can grab the Tashtari as is in the pdf and run it in any PF2 game, absolutely 0 conversion needed.

Are there going to allow for computers, mechs, starships, etc? They have said as much and I believe them. But it's not looking like they'll be anything you can't easily snap in and out to make the core system still be that of PF2.

If you enjoy that, all more power to you. But don't accuse me of no-true-scottmanship when we're literally not getting a new game.

Rhunny wrote:

YuriP wrote:

Rhunny wrote:

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The same couldn't be said about PF1 and SF1?

nope.

For instance, most people don't consider 3.5 to be fully compatible with PF1. The differences between PF1 and SF are far more pronounced. Action economy is similar at a glance but any close look will show they are fairly different. Classes, species, equipment and combat are all different too

But in practice PF1 is an improved 3.5 that uses same main rules, BAB, AC, Thrown Saves an so on even the DCs, BABs and Saving Throws formulas and numbers are the same.

Same happens to SF1 with the notable exception of Stamina and have 2 ACs for different damage types, the core rules are basically the same including most of base numbers and formulas.

The difference between classes, species/races/ancestries, equipment are more thematically related to the scenario and self-contained to specifics of the classes and not a general rule.

In the end all 3.0, 3.5, PF1 and SF1 keeps the main basis and gameplay feeling. In the end all them are basically a 3.0 modified in many degrees.

I'm sorry but no. SF1 plays nothing like 3.x and PF1. The 3 action economy in the game works much more like a puzzle and that's just the tip of the iceberg. Readied actions don't work the same, reactions replace immediate actions and attacks of opportunity, spellcasting works completely differently, there's a bound accuracy system, damage now also comes from level, what and what doesn't provoke is streamlined to the extreme...

the games just do not operate similarly even at a glance.

SF2 will follow the same thing to PF2 but granting that they wont made anything that brakes the compatibility. This doesn't prevented they to create new conditions, new weapons mechanics, new exclusive class abilities. They are just preventing that new things becomes mechanically and numerically incompatible with PF2 while keep the both games independency.

I argue there's no such a thing as SF2, as there's no new game being announced.

In all honesty, the only thing they announced is a new Pathfinder 2 campaign setting based on Starfinder.

And this make sense commercially, helps the both games maintenance, help players migration between both systems, allows 3rd party developers to do material to both games...

I actually do agree with you there, this is the most economical solution to the need for a new edition, which I agree Starfinder needs.

Rhunny wrote:

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

The same couldn't be said about PF1 and SF1?

nope.

For instance, most people don't consider 3.5 to be fully compatible with PF1. The differences between PF1 and SF are far more pronounced. Action economy is similar at a glance but any close look will show they are fairly different. Classes, species, equipment and combat are all different too

I take umbrage with the idea that people aren't liking this because of some idea of system loyalty or aversion to change. I welcome change! I was stoked when 2e was announced!

My personal issue is that we're not getting a new game, we're getting what looks like a paintjob on a game that already exists. SF1 wasn't PF1 in space, but SF2 sure looks like PF2 in space.

To those people coming from PF2 saying they are glad they can now try out Starfinder... I'm not sure what you mean, this is the same thing you were already playing except "but she's got a new hat"

Not a fan. I didn't want a SF2 but I understand the need for it, I just hoped it would be its own game and not being absorbed into 2e.

Congratulations now we have one fewer game.

This is GOLD. Thank you for going all out with this concept!

A clarfication would indeed be nice but they I interpreted it was that Biotech and cybernetic augments as necrografts don't get a discount. They just have a lower base value.

This is of course, my interpretation on it

Since
"you choose the spell’s targets, measure the spell’s range from
your space, and make any attack rolls for the spell as if you were the caster"

I interpret that you can apply personal spells onto the Evolutionist, since you are considered to be the caster when determining from where the range is measured and "personal" is a category under range.

Here's all the relevant text I could find on range and personal.

An effect’s range indicates how far from you it can reach. An effect’s range is the maximum distance from you that the effect can occur, as well as the maximum distance at which you can designate the effect’s point of origin. If any portion of the effect’s area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted. If a range is based on level, this means caster level for spells, class level for class features, and item level for weapons and equipment. Standard ranges include the following.

An effect with a range of personal is limited to and affects your person only.

Saddly, they don't really clarify the issue any further. Although I personally believe it is intended to work as I said above, I strongly believe there needs to be a clarification on this matter.

Alright, last stretch of Devastation Ark book 1. No fancy formating this time, not much to disect.

As a 15th level Evo not much changed from the two previous sessions except for the fact at this point I've stopped even trying to find a good use for the Packmaster, there's simply not going to be one until I hit 18th level and can do Fission on my allies.

I also spent resolve on every fight in the first round to get up to 4 EP in the first round,spend one EP to gain full BAB since now it's effectively a +3 to hit. In the second and consecutive rounds I kept my EP at 5+ to earn me a bonus to damage 1/round.

I didn't do Explosive strike once. There simply weren't enough clustered enemies to make it worth the damage diferential.

I took around 1/2 my Stamina in damage from a trap and didn't heal it for the entirety of the section. I only took some minor hits here and there but overall the adventure is simply too easy for me to bother spending RP on anything but EP.

I rolled 3 Will saves. 1 out of combat that I made easily, 1 in combat at a -2 penalty that I succeeded on and another one at the same penalty that I failed by 5. All in all, Vital is still fairly ok drawback.

I'll be back with this character at 16th level in two weeks. I'll finally have Controlled Transformation

Played Devastation Ark again, this time having leveled up my Evo to 14th level.

The good: I did get to use explosive strike and I have to say it's great that the DC for the save scales so well. I sort of wish it was something you could access earlier. Went through a starship combat that turned up well enough. I was tied for best piloting but took the gunner seat instead.

The Bad: Nothing I haven't talked about before. Packmaster has been of little to no use since the enemies keep on dealing kinetic damage and giving a fly speed at my companions at 14th level is simply redundant.

Short Veredict: I should have taken Controlled Transformation. I love explosion weapons but getting the extra damage online earlier is simply too good.

I'm not sure I agree with the premise that it's counter intuitive to the action economy of the game but other than that I think the appeal of a class that gets more powerful the more rounds you charge up is that you're learning and adapting.
You could waste the fruit of your learnings mindlessly attacking (getting full Bab) or you could play your cards closer to your chest while taking a risk for a greater reward

Now, the effectiveness of either tactic is not in question. I'm just talking about what it means philosophically

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply I'm the one excluding anyone's experiences. Just stating the fact of the matter that the playtest is focusing on actual play feedback.

"We’re looking for your feedback, comments, and criticisms regarding the evolutionist class but will focus our attention on feedback from actual play. "

That's from the pdf.

So, keep the critiques coming but remember they are unlikely to be addressed correctly if you can't back it up with experiential evidence

Balancing out the possible rewards of spending EP or hoarding them for even better passive effects is a fun mechanic. Not unlike when a solarian needs to decide whether to go supernova and lose all their attunement.

Of course some people might prefer a less dynamic approach but it takes all types.

As for it being difficult to remember, I'd
encourage testing the class through play before coming down with that judgement. Anyone who feels like they want aspects of the class changed really need to play it and come back with their findings because this playtest is going to focus on actual experience.

I had the night off and decided to play in a waltz through myriad worlds with a 4th level evo. I decided to try a more challenging build and went for kinetic melee (S) with the Eldritch niche just to test how bad it could get. I picked a xenometric dragonkin android for the race to get extra reach and some limited flight and the laborer stats for extra STR and CON. For adaptations I went with distant strike and dazzling outburst.

The good: Something I failed to mention the last time but that was also extremely relevant in this session. The first level ability to pick an extra class skill is incredibly useful when everyone else in the party is locked into their skills and they realise there’s a glaring hole in the party’s repertoire. The melee damage output was very good.Every time my turn came around, there was less of the enemy. With maxed out STR and weapon focus I only missed a single attack and purposefully NEVER spent the extra EP for full BAB. I didn’t take as much damage as I expected I would. I got hit twice for non magical damage on different turns but it was only for an extra 3 and 4 damage. Not quite life-threatening
The bad: Oh boy. I figured I was lucky to find a party with a mystic that would let me get some feedback out of Eldritch but no such luck. The mystic didn’t show up to the game and the ability only triggers for Spells only, not SLA. SR never came into play. I guess I shouldn’t complain since the negative aspect was virtually unnoticeable but having to rely on a party member to have a specific class feature or you don’t get to use your main subclass focus is bad. Dazzling Strikes is awful, I didn’t expect it to be great since… I can read… but I expect the reaction activation and the non-a-cost-but-actually-a-trigger-when-you-use-a-real-power activation to carry it somewhat but a range of adjacent, on reflex to negate dazzle effect is just lame. Distant strikes, can’t say I’m a fan of the swift action activation since it locks you out of full attacking. A problem which arose with how the playtest is being carried out is that I get a pointless 3rd level weapon but barely any money for other stuff I would want like augmentations, fusions and other magic items. This wasn’t an issue in the Devastation Arc game since in campaign mode we followed the normal rules for creating a character above 1st level.
Short verdict: Eldritch Niche was every bit as disappointing as you could expect. The upside of the damage not piling up so much that it becomes a concern is overshadowed by the fact that you’re simply not going to use this if there’s no spellcaster in the party. For SFS that means no one in their right mind is ever going to risk picking this. Heavy armor + some middling DEX is still the gold standard for melee. I never even reached HP damage. I didn’t include a “mistakes I caught myself making” entry because with one game under my belt, I had no trouble remembering what I got from each EP level. Something else not necesarily the Evo's fault is the lack of good magitech augmentations. I settled for a Gravitational harness mk1 which... didn't do much of anything but it was kinda nice to have.

Bonus round! There was another Evolutionist at the table! I can’t attest to their exact build aside from the fact they were using melee and cold adaptive strike and picked a robotic niche. They seemed to rely a lot on spending resolve to gain extra EP, swapping their elemental damage some times.

I played part 1 of Waking the Worldseed last night with a 13th level Evolutionist Entu Colony. The rest of the party was a mystic11/envoy2 and a soldier12/vanguard1 (party of 3). I picked vital niche and packmaster focus. My adaptations were focused on giving stuff to my allies: Resistant Form x 2, Enhanced Mobility, Enhanced Resistance, Extreme Mobility and Area Strike.

the good:I had fun building the character. Getting to spend so many credits on augmentations was definitely a change of pace. The damage was pretty good for the most part and I managed to hit fairly often even when not using full BAB. The options to use cone and line came in handy and were well worth the 2 points each round. Being DEX focused allowed me to increase all the “vital” ability scores and still be able to increase my INT, meaning I had a good number of skills I was actually good at. I rolled a single will save at a -2 and still crushed it since that’s basically the bonus I got from my mk2 ring of resistance.

The bad: despite having been built as a party buffer, the buffs simply didn’t do much. Enhanced mobility only lasts for 1 round on allies which would be pretty lackluster even if by this level everyone already had reliable flight methods. Burrowing simply isn’t an option in a large number of places such as starships. The buff I figured I’d get the most mileage out of “enhanced resistance” did not come into play once though I don’t know if it’s bad luck or simply how high level behaves.

The mistakes I caught myself making: 2 though I should point out I fixed them fairly easily. The first one was thinking my allies benefited from vital instinct healing bonus. The second one was forgetting that at 5 EP I could deal extra damage. This was also largely inconsequential since the damage I dealt killed the enemy.

Short verdict: I don’t think this class needs any fixes to how it handles in combat at his level. I could hit almost as often and almost as hard as a *melee* soldier and would in fact out damage him once I reached 5 EP as a ranged character. If I had one gripe it would be that the Packmaster needs some better buffs to drop on allies.
On the other hand, though the skill side was very competent, I was functionally a soldier outside of combat.
Lastly, I didn’t know where else to mention this but I didn’t use Evolution Drain at all. I was simply never strapped for EVs.

Next week I'll play the 14th level version and update my notes but considering how little I cared about the drawback I'm going to be taking Explosive Strike to have yet another AoE option.

Yes, this is a PLAY TEST. Do remember to actually TEST the class through actual PLAY before making any definitive claims ;)

Rhunny wrote:

For no cash investment that is pretty good. A solarian can get a soulfire infusion for pretty cheap, adding CHA mod to damage. Plasma sheathe would also add an extra 5 damage but it's all fire. With those things you get an average of 44.5 damage(assuming 18 charisma). Higher than the Evolunist but with a lot of caveats.
I don't think there's anything the Evo can get that would offset this difference but it has nothing to envy the solarian

That is putting the Solarian at 20 Str, 18 Con, leaving little else for other stats, but point taken.

Solarians can and do absolutely get away with laser focusing on STR and CHA to the detriment of all other stats. You might think it's not great strategy since it does mean your defenses are very low but the bounded math in the game never lets them drop too fat behind and the ability to anhilate enemies in 2 swings does keep you safe /end of my solarian tedtalk :P

(also I think you meant charisma, not constitution but I got your point)

I don't like that Evo's don't get full BAB but it's far from the worst thing ever, weapon focus can really pick up the slack even if you're targetting KAC

Given how I understand the flavour of this class, I would have loved to see some size alteration mechanics

Not particularly optimizing any of this.

Melee: (Str 20)
Lvl 11 Solarion: 5d6 + 5 + 11 + 2 (Cost 24,900) (Ave 35.5)
Lvl 11 Soldier: 4d8 + 5 + 11 + (?5?) (Cost 26,300) (Ave 39)
Lvl 11 Adaptive Weapon: 2d10 + 5+ 16 (Cost 0) (Ave 31)
Sepulchral with 5 EP
Lvl 11 Adaptive Weapon: 2d10 + 5 + 26 (Cost 0) (Ave 42)

So the question is how much combat advantage can you add at level 11 with 25K?

(Keep in mind that with Versatile Strike you can save on backup weapons by just switching your damage types.)

(Not asserting this is totally accurate, more an invitation for other people more familiar with Solarian or soldier to comment and improve the comparison.)

For no cash investment that is pretty good. A solarian can get a soulfire infusion for pretty cheap, adding CHA mod to damage. Plasma sheathe would also add an extra 5 damage but it's all fire. With those things you get an average of 44.5 damage(assuming 18 charisma). Higher than the Evolunist but with a lot of caveats.

I don't dislike the balancing between the benefits and the penalties but I do think not all penalties are balanced amongst each other. The Eldritch Drawback seems a tad over the edge while the Vital one might never even come into play for a lot of fights.

I think I'd like the penalties to be much on the lines of the Vital Drawback, where it could potentially be a problem but most of the time it's not

IsitNovemberalreadY??

Too bad they are taking away Dex casting. Having played it extensively I never found it to be OP

That dragonkin is a dead ringer for my SFS character. He's a corporate agent always trying to hire people off of the society for his own organisation

The book says you might also benefit from having Alien Archive 2, Character Operations Manual, Armory and Pact Worlds

however, that is simply for a more comprehensive look at all the rules employed. With what you have you don't really need much else. You can also check aonsrd.com which tends to be up to date on most rules.

I really liked this book, I'm planning on running it as soon as it gets sanctioned so until then I'm gonna hold off on any in-depth criticism

I really do hope we get a FAQ about this. Having to explain the whole situation to a GM every time I go into SFS is exhausting.

So I've been working on my SFS character and realised that even though nothing prevents an envoy from using Combat Expertise on weapons with the explode quality, there's no explanation on how those abilities interact.

Would it work similarly to how the errata says Stun & Strike to works on explode weapons?

I played this today, and it's poorly game designed. Dc was way too high for level 1 characters and filled with deadly trap that could kill off the level 1 out right. We played this with 3 of level 1 characters which one was pregen, and one level 2(total 4 pc characters). On the first event one of level 1 almost died and one other level 1 actually died, so gm had to stop the party to go further ,because he was afraid that it going to be TPK if we go on with 3pc

This scenario does not have 4 member party adjustment, the traps work like low level meat grinder.(after we failed scenario, we count oddes and rounds to figure out what went wrong and more and more we do math, it seems almost impossible to win the event as level1 characters that can not afford a jump jet)
If your party is mostly new level 1s and under six people party. I highly recommend to not to play this.
I am highly disappointed that this is start of the new season.

My experience pretty much mirrored your own

I guess they were better disguised I guess? I went through a two-hour long slog of rolls with no real discernable purpose aside from "don't be near those dino-creatures"

Sorry, this is very bitter post but it was just soooo boring as a player

Jesus Paizo, I love your proucts but who the heck was asking for *more* skill challenges after 4e bombed?

Those shorter adventure paths send me one message, which is that the developers have no confidence in the high level play of their new edition. I'd love to see them actually do a full six part adventure path which goes to level 17 or 18, because it is a system I want to try out. But my group and myself have no interest in just going to level 12 or 14, even if it is a full six part AP. Three part adventure paths don't even enter the equation for my guys.

Developers have said more than once the reason why they don't publish more higher level adventures is because people just prefer low to mid level adventures.

As for this product, I will say I very much enjoyed the first book. It is quite clear that they've learned a thing or two about balancing combats from Dead Suns as they feel challenging without being overwhelming. The Starship combats included here don't feel tacked on in the least and have a very important role in the narrative. The story is easy enough to follow for someone like me who doesn't really follow the lore very closely.

On the negative side, I would have liked to have a map for the Starship Combat with Nakondis on the background. The combat against the midbook boss is a bit undewhelming as a solo encounter and some of the fetch quests to "Gain Trust" seem a bit menial.

Overall I highly recomend this

This discussion arose in Discord a couple of days ago.

Even though the combo "Contingency + Raise Dead" is one that I have used in the past, I've noticed there's a line that would seemingly make that void.

*The spell to be brought into effect by the contingency must be one that affects your person and be of a spell level no higher than one-third your caster level (rounded down, maximum 6th level).*

Raise Dead is not a spell that affects your person when you are setting up Contingency (it's not even a spell that affects a person period)

Secondary (and here's where I get to read way too much into the spell), would Contingency even be able to trigger on death? I mean, the target of the spell was you, and the caster is now a corpse a.k.a. no longer a valid target for Contingency.

Since I'm fluent in English I never saw the need to purchase the Spanish version of Pathfinder... but a friend of mine did recently.

Dear Paizo, please know that Spanish-speaking players are getting a VASTLY INFERIOR product. Translations are too literal and confusing, often muddling concepts that are already hard to grasp.

This issue isn't even new. Devir was also in charge of the translations for 3.0 and 3.5 (and I think 4e too, though I've never been through those and thus have no insight on the matter) where these same issues were also commonplace.

I understand if you have no one on staff that can check for these things (you probably don't even sell that many books in Spanish) but, as is, Devir isn't giving your product a good name.