Search Posts
I wish we had gotten to this point without the drama but.. it happened, I hope we can be spared the next one. I think this was the best available solution considering the starting point. Paizo adding more to CUP and making it easier to find out what is in there is going to be very helpful, I am looking forward to see how that develops.
Nothing is stopping a GM from bringing a selection of prepared characters using only the free resources (I mean the books you do not need to own to use in PFS2) and to offer them to new players. Those would work sliiiithly different from normal pregens but it likely would not be a real issue. Just to stay in the SFS2 context, you could for example offer a more healing focused mystic "pregen" by essentially statting out the SFS1 mystic iconic and parent of the SFS2 iconic. Or bring back the former SF1 solarian iconic, after all the character already has plenty of art.
and no more cellular stimulants. Nobody wants the penalty. They get completely ignored. The spell is just straight up bad. Yeah whenever I see that item in a loot list, I know know that the players would prefer getting a rock
I am in several minds about the directions of org play and I guess since blog seems to indicate that a number of issus tested in SFS1 for the first year are no applied to PFS2 this feels like a good time to write down my feelings on the issue as a now former Venture Officer of 10+ years. I mostly mention the last big because my experience as an organizer give me a different perspective. -Slow Track: Adding the option is unreservedly a good idea, I wish that the option had been added earlier but I am also aware that not updating the rules of a campaign too often during the year has benefits.
-Pathfinder Provisions: I am actually in favor of this one, especially since from what I hear from PFS2 tables, it often resulted in people getting a scroll of heal (as that is often the most efficient way to heal someone) and handing them to a spellcaster that could use them.
-Replayability: I have and had my issues with replay and replayers but I prefer “everything is repeatable” to having to deal with the boon store and having people purchases replays that way. I have had players that had tremendous issues even logging into it and navigating that page so this is actually better.
-Applying pregen credit: I like the direction and new option, but frankly speaking I also do not see the need to prevent application to any character, or any newly created character of any level (though that is partially what the new change does). -Starting Leves: This one is a mixed bag, with the more narrow level bands “recently” introduced they feel almost necessary because otherwise players that miss a session or two can fall behind. The narrow level bands also cause scheduling issues for players that want to play their character, while other options could have been used since this option was used in SFS2 there is more benefit of just doing the same just to limit differences between campaigns. However this change is a big one for org play as you can now always create a new character and even playing something like a 7-8 adventure does not guarantee that the player has had experience of play at lower levels… It makes something like GM credit and AP credit worth significantly less (reducing the reasons for your home games to run a Paizo sanctioned AP) and reduces GM rewards and incentive. In essence the campaign removed a friction point that makes it easier to players to start playing but makes I suspect this type of setup creates less very invested players as consequences for their characters do not really matter any more. Who cares if Bob the Barbarian dies, of you can recreate Bob at a level lower/higher or the same level for next weeks game? -Return of Statblocks: This is a very welcome change and I wish it they had never been removed. For SFS2 I have used the excellent replacements for collected encounter statblocks (including the ability to apply templates - something Paizo had stopped providing finished monster templates with the statblocks some time ago) on Archives of Nethys, that absolute gem of a community resource. Players Guides are a good new resource and I liked the players guide for the last SFS2 season even though adventuring with several Shobhads is miserable on most maps. -Nebulas: Sounds reasonable, but I have to say, I am beyond happy that the team has decided to delay 5th Nebula GM announcements for an indeterminate amount of time, as the burnout created by the race in PFS2 was something that I am happy we can avoid. Playtest Classes: I am not a fan of the option to keep playing the least polished and most prone to cause issues and uncertainties at the table playtest classes beyond the playtest window, but as long as the GMs can still opt out of permitting them at their tables I am content to doing public games. One bit that I feel worth mentioning.. since all almost nothing in SFS2 is gated by ACP … the GM incentives could be better and I hope the boon store or some other way for GMs to feel rewarded with something special will be used. Personally I am currently prepping the SFS2 special for an online con and after seeing parts of the ending of SFS2 season 1 I hope the Blood Door season will be great (dry cleaning expenses be damned).
From what AoN said in their video I guess the situation was comparable to getting divorced and having a 6 month period to move out. I can totally understand why they did not want to keep working on the site with that change on the horizon (and I suspect that even if they had concluded to use the 6 months they would have announced the date when all the art gets ripped out in that innitial announcement). Furthermore I am not sure how the grace period was worded... if it was a to allow you enough time we are giving you 6 month to conlude the removal of all the artwork not covered under CUP... using the whole 6 months and doing nothing until the last day where you rip it out in an hour... I am not sure that was going to work out either. But without access to the various emails and texts kind of hard to say. I still understand their emotional reaction though frankly speaking I think the community outcry is partially based on them not reading the entire statement properly.
Sigh... the timing and negotiation really doesn't matter, so I'm not sure why the debate keeps returning to that. What matters is that such negotiation was even needed. The problem is the decision to not renew the agreement, not details of how a possible replacement were negotiated. I think it would have been fine (and likely not gotten into the public realm) has the two parties discussed the issues before the legal notice was send and looked at options, that worked for both parties. But that is not how things went down. As others have suggested the "people keep thinking all of the artwork from Nethys is free to use" that could have been solved with a watermark or a similar solution, but the fact that this was apparently not explored or really mentioned much seems to indicate to me that it might have been found helping to justify the action retroactively in the public.
I would be interested in your take on the Patreon video that seems to claim that AoN send a message regarding their upcomming statement hours before it became public.it is non-remarkable that this decision was made and no-one thought to get ahead of it. Thank you for your answer and insight on this matter
it is non-remarkable that this decision was made and no-one thought to get ahead of it. I would be interested in your take on the Patreon video that seems to claim that AoN send a message regarding their upcomming statement hours before it became public.
That one might be to blame on the US copyright law, if you do not defend your copyright by doing DMCAs etc. you are prone to loose it. It's not a good thing but they really do not have options here.
This makes no sense, and comes across as completely disingenuous. The post itself fails to lay out a convincing rationale. How does this differ from Demiplane making the same content available for free? Others might assume that because Demiplane can do it, they can do it, too... and yet, I notice there are no announcements around Demiplane's ability to do so. Demiplane has a lot more to sell to people, thus there is likely cashflow enough to justify having to pay for all the lawyers. Not loving this, wish there was a way for them to not have to husstle to get the pdf and do the rushed data entry (losing the artwork is .. fine but understandable if it has to be like this) that would have been nice
The class has a lot of strong flavor and interaction baked into the mechnics... that might not be everyone's cup of tea even before noticing some of the pain points... people that don't vibe with it might just not engage with the playtest. I have seen people really like the class particularly online, but they tend to be the more expressive extrovert kind and likely will be happy with it. For those that are more interested in some more baseline scify concepts the other classes might be a tiny bit easier to grasp. So ... yeah it's a matter of personal taste I suspect, that said, I agree the playtest forum is pretty dead.
I'll have a question, Jim, You mentioned that you will stop producing PFS/SFS foundry modules, to my understanding, it's not profitable enough hence constitue a financial Risk and I am sad to hear about it. Does this will apply as well on Foundry modules like adventures and adventures Paths ?I'm not Jim, but no. While we are placing future Foundry modules for Pathfinder Society and Starfinder Society on hold for the time being (note that the current ones will continue to receive regular content updates through the end of the season), our plans for future Adventure Path releases, standalone adventures, token packs, etc. have not changed. Is there a good way of giving feedback from the people that have bought other Foundry modules but not the org play ones, despite running org play?
While I am having the same response as most, and hope the best for Paizo and it's staff, my brain and eyes can't help but drift to this. Are they saying 3rd party individuals will be able to publish Society Scenarios with paizo? Like anyone can just, post a scenario and it will be good as long as it fits the guidelines?With the generic sanctioning document for Starfinder (and no reason a similar one can't exist for Pathfinder), the mechanics of sanctioning third party content should not be difficult. My question, as someone who also games in the video way, is what sort of quality control there might be. If Infinite is filled with Society-legal shovelware, that is going to discourage people from playing Society and maybe drive them to other systems. On the other hand, checking all these offerings takes resources which Paizo might not have to spare right now. Yeah I feel for Paizo as this was caused by bad actors outside of their control and layoffs are rough at the best of times, but the org play changes and how they could be dealt with.. occupy my thoughts. **EDITED BY MEC 6/9/2026 TO REMOVE AN UNPROVEN RUMOR**
My gut instinct is that this ability is there more as set dressing or those crude cutout backdrops in theatre productions with a lower budget. While I think the class could use some more power, I would rather see this power get expanded a fair bit with significantly more word count, or reduced to essentially the effects of a cantrip.
I try to dedicate somewhat equal time to all of my players, and while not every player is equally fast at doing their turns and making their choices, I personally thinks that combat in particular should run fast as in my experience players seem to zone out when it takes too much time between their turns. In that context I am not a fan of abilities or mechanics that take a lot of time to resolve, or disrupt the flow too much abd force me to spend a lot of focus, attention and time on a single player as there is a point where that become unfair to the others.
This is not even about finishing sessions or adventures faster, I just think there are more enjoyable things than waiting. It has been a while since I started my last set of APs but personally I have would need players to make an amazing case for me to want to have to deal with investigator, thaumaturge, commander, and I guess this new class.
I have played TTRPGs for decades, Paizo's org play for more then 10 years at this point... which is why these days I am more pro-active in limiting experinces that wear me down. Of course it is all very much a matter of personal taste, but at the end of the day so is someone's choice of hobby or even a particular TTRPG.
I struggled to write this post, but I feel like I have managed to communicate my concerns.
Initial reaction When I started reading the class I got excited by hardlight and hologram sidebar, because that is a rather cool sci fi element I am interested in. Unfortunately shortly after that element got me excited the class introduces itself as something that admittedly feels like a very specialized class/archetype, something that I would have expected to be released several years after the Player Core and not … while the system only has 8 classes. That does not mean that the final result is not going to be appealing just that I and I guess some others might have been looking forward to classes that serve in a different role, after all this is the 3rd Starfinder class that uses Charisma as a key ability score. Weirdly if you skip past most of the spotlight and role rules… There are some cool hardlight effects in there, and I would love if that was a legit way to play the class without really interacting with the roles and spotlight.
Complexity and interruptions My main issue as someone that GMs significantly more than he gets to play is the complexity of this class at the table and the mental load/chores this add to the GM’s workload.
The design of this class includes a lot of potential interruptions to the game as the Luminary needs to move the spotlight, and this can’t really be automated because it is a choice to move it. Once you have more than one spotlight to move things can get even more complex. A lot of the reactions in the game have a rather specific trigger, like getting hit, a champion’s reaction, counterspell and GMs will know to give the player a moment to react when they come up… the Luminary at level 3 gets a reaction to Set a Spotlight and that triggers at the start of every creature’s turn that does not currently have the spotlight. Since roles and spotlights matter and might affect how the GM or other players can resolve their turn.. so the start of most turns will have a tiny pause to see if the Luminary wants to use their reaction… and those delays add up and are a negative change to the game.
Offline, I could see a player mark their spotlight visa markers/token rings etc. and a substantial set of printed out cards to manage the buffs, and debuffs/roles, though it gets more complicated once players unlock the ability to adjust them. Online, at least in the VVT of my choice, a lot of those roles and (despite me trying otherwise) the spotlight a lot of this will need to be applied to the enemies by the GM…. long term macros etc. might help but that is not a level of work that I am personally interested in adding to my plate. Unless the workload changes I am not looking forward to having that class in my games, this is supposed to be fun and not a second job. I hope development finds a way to play the class in a fashion that is less complex and involves fewer interruptions. Theming and flavor: This never really bothered me that much before but I feel like the stylings and flavor that is injected into this class really is less agnostic than it has been for other classes like Operative and Soldier.
For the first time, though I would not be surprised if this is a trend, the class already tends to be a bit ridiculous, maybe we all got over the point that bards just start singing to inspire their allies in battle, but I have heard similar feedback from some locals. In a serious adventure, where players are essentially sent on special ops missions… bringing the fashionista certainly creates a level of narrative dissonance. The roles mechanic might also interact negatively with other peoples RP, and perception, people do tend to complain about other players messing with their presentation, but getting cast in the Romance role… feel different to that.
As is, it almost feels like a group needs to buy into having this class at the table (somewhat similar to the Commander class), which is not really something that applies to most classes. Feast like Comic Relief have a very real chance to really mess with the tone of an adventure or the GMs style of running the game. Feats like Blooper inject the same sort of comedic tone into the game and … … I have issues with the idea of the BBEG slipping on a banana peel, as that also has the potential for changing the tone. Right now I have listed a couple of reasons why I would be apprehensive at having the class at the table and if I have some input which players try to play it, but on the flipside… I am not seeing a lot of reasons to have the class present. Supporters like bards have historically always felt like a third wheel or a 5th player, but considering the classes and the demands of most adventuring parties … I think the luminary is not really adding a lot at this point, any only a single platform adds some much needed healing in a system without a lot of focus spell healing. I do not expect the tech core classes to add a lot of healing options either. I guess if you have access to everything that exists in PF2 to fill out the large gaps Starfinder currently has (seriously summoning spells just do not work without PF2 at this point, Alien Core just did not cover enough basics/level ranges) this is just yet another class to throw on the pile.
Break A Leg… I have gotten through all the witch and misfortune material in PFS1 and I think that effects like that are pretty miserable. Players certainly seem to curse every time an adventure includes a lesser death, and for the GM, it gets old really fast particularly if the effect is applied without a saving throw or the incapacitation trait. Conclusion Right now I would not be willing to let a player play this class in one of my non-org play games, and while I have the right to not allow the class at the table before it is actually printed and published properly - I am more than apprehensive for the final release. I really want to like the class, I even have a character concept but, the current state of things is not something I have the spoons to engage with any more, and I am optimistic that development changes that.
I am working on my own reaction to the playtest but yeah the class is very complicated, and has so many reactions and free actions... I honestly know players that would just be overwhelmed playing this class, and that would be a bad experience at the table. While I might arrange a shorter oneshot for someone to test the class, right now I would just ban it from my games and continue my life, it is too much work for the players and GM at this point.
I am really annoyed by this unpleansantly late announcement, I had already planned to run this adventure online, seems it will just take me more time to prep it. Similarly to how Paizo only released physical pawn packs for an AP when it was fully releases, I doubt that releasing the Foundry version later will have the same impact as making it availble on release. Having already run Murder in Metal City online and offline, having run all the SFS2 scenarios offline... I am not really in the market for Guilt of the Graveworld, it is just not what I am looking for right now. So my options are to do something more tedious and prep it myself or look for another game to play or run. I am dissapointed that this was not communicated earlier.
I just made 2 separate purchases, in one order, I bought the PF2E Tokens: Monster Core and Starfinder Token Pack: Alien Core (Foundry VTT). Everything worked out as far as I can tell, the codes were a gift for someone and I have sent them to the recipient. Then I bought Alien Core Foundry code for myself but the Library just.. replaced the already existing code there with a new one. Now I have forwarded the first gift codes already, and claimed the second one, but if I had not done it in this precise order, the first code would not be visible to me anymore, likely necessitating an email to customer service. That felt like a bug worth reporting.
The review system has lost many features. Could we please get back the following? - Ability to edit/update a review: mistakes happen.
I managed to download it again, and the 60+ MB package worked for me, while a slightly higher resolution for the various artworks included in the pdf is a bit low/more compressed, I know where to find them online, or equally likely, a staggering amount of cool fan art, the Warframe community is pretty creative. When it comes to the map, honestly, I like the choices here: you can buy the flip maps (slight variations like no ship on one), which is very convenient for those who want a physical map but struggle to print, or you can print them yourself or show them on a VTT/big screen on your table (the dream for many gamers). I am pretty happy with the package and will use this opportunity to showcase SF2 and Warframe to more people. (Need to write a review, but after looking over the protoframes, this is very much what I expected and hope for, and ... ... like many Warframe players, I am looking for versions for my own favorites ). I was busy GMing, but having snatched parts of the Warframe Twitch stream... pretty cool to have more people exposed to this game.
Thank you Maya having a precise time makes the waiting more bearable ^^You're very welcome! We're just glad you're so excited!! ^_^ Actually, having downloaded it, while I appreciated the alterations to the existing flip maps used, I really would like to use them for VTT use or print them but all the graphics in the pdfs are pretty rough-looking. Likely while the thing is under 3 MB. Can you maybe ask if we can get an updated version, this is looking rougher than I am used to from Paizo, and looks a bit ... unpolished for what I hope to be a good partnership.
Fair point. I just wouldn't expect something to change to 'unavailable' and not just still be listed as before. (I am assuming that the lack of ability to add to the cart is a time zone issue as they are Pacific US.) Thank you Maya having a precise time makes the waiting more bearable ^^
Why is it yesterday the PDF was listed as available today and physical pre-order as unavailable, but today the PDF is unavailable but you can now pre-order the physical book ... though there's no release date? And no way to add it to the cart.... It might be a time zone's issue, while it is afternoon on release day here, Paizo workers might still be drinking their first coffee. I would give it some time, even if the physical version is a surprise and maybe a mistake.
Interesting thread, I think a lot of very reasonable concerns and pain points were mentioned. One thing that has become apparent to me is that some of the newer Paizo pdfs have ballooned in size (particularly looking at SF2, but some AP volumes have also gotten to quite the size), which can be overwhelming to some older devices (like my old phone and tablet). Unfortunately, that is where not having everything in a single pdf can be an issue, pre-loading a single pdf with a certain number of pages can work even on older devices, but having to switch between different pdfs to access the stat blocks of different creatures... at that can really slow you down, even if your phone/tablet device is of a more recent make. Thus far, statblocks (but unfortunately not a copy of the elite/weak templates) were included in SFS2 scenarios (and they were using variants/custom enemies most of the time anyway), but I am expecting the issue of stat blocks to eventually become an issue once Alien Monster Core is released. I am not exactly looking forward to it, but it will be nice for people to actually be able to summon things.
I take it this is not canon to the Starfinder Universe, right?Nope! Also, to note, I heard that the product WON'T be released under the ORC license, so all content in it will use standard copyrights (and thus any stat blocks probably won't be in AoN or any other online SRDs). That will make it harder to run on Foundry, but not impossible, just more prep, still quite unfortunate.
Displaying "verified purchase" next to a review by someone who has actually purchased the product, potentially with a toggle a viewer has to press to actually see all the unverified reviews - sounds like a fair compromise here. Related to that, over the years, I often had to purchase products for players without a credit card, or for my GMs, I am assuming that a gifted purchase, or someone redeeming a Humble Bundle code, also qualifies them to give a review? Anything else would be pretty silly. At the end of the day, I fear that limiting the ability to give feedback via reviews is just going to cause people to voice that sentiment in other places, and thus far, "leave a review, they read those" was a good way to limit players from complaining while still at the table. Not entirely sure if players starting a thread or several complaining about something in the org play section is going to make the forums more pleasant, though that is usually the area where GMs have to run things as written, and feedback tends to be rather direct.
|
