That's all well and good if you're working with a GM who is willing to go through this kind of a character creation process.
If you're playing PFS, any kind of convention game, a game at a gaming shop, or a game with a DM who just doesn't care that much about character-driven stuff, you're SOL. However, when you walk in with a Paladin, all this stuff is canned and supported by the rules.
TL;DR Most GMs won't go for that.
Huh? I don't understand this at all. Warpriests are awesome, and allow for exactly what the Paladin purists want - Paladins as Paladins, and other types of divinely-powered warriors in their own category. They also happen to be very effective as a class. The Warpriest is the shining jewel of the Ultimate Class guide, whose classes were uneven in quality and power.
Chest Rockwell wrote:
My critique is of the seemingly complicated, large numbers, fiddly design (that Trinkets preview was not pleasing to read). Lots of moving parts, and the obvious new shiny thing of this edition being the 4-tiers of success system.
This is a total tangent, but I agree that my players will end up getting lost on the degress of success system. There was a time I thought something like this would be pretty cool, but now I can see it will probably be overly complex for your average roleplayer.
"When used against an object, the ray simply disintegrates as much as a 10-foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell disintegrates only part of any very large object or structure targeted. The ray affects even objects constructed entirely of force, such as forceful hand or a wall of force, but not magical effects such as a globe of invulnerability or an antimagic field."
Is the Assassin Prestige class worthwhile vs just making an assassin-y rogue? It seems like you lose a little BAB, and of course rogue talents. In return you get some minor bonuses and some neat stuff that doesn't kick in until higher levels. And death attack, of course. Many of these things don't seem super useful in the course of a regular game of D&D. In this case, however, we'll be playing a City campaign, so I might have the opportunity to use a lot of these abilities. Thanks for your opinions.
TL;DR: Earth and Golarion are different places.
On happy old Earth, morality can be deemed as subjective and relative - we can't say for sure that there are gods, so we can't say for sure what they think about our actions. Therefore there's no moral authority on Earth.
On Golarion, the gods are very very real. They have very static opinions on acceptable behaviors. The alignment system determines how you ALIGN with the different gods.
Without that system, the gods become much more gray, bland, and indistinct - or unimaginably complex to deal with, capricious even. Some people prefer that. And those players and GMs are free to chuck out the alignment system (as SF has mostly done), and play a morally gray game.
For the rest of us, the alignment system is an important tool to interact with the gods, to remind us that they are real, and our actions are being judged by them.
TLDR; stop hyperventilating and speaking for everyone.
Yeah. No. We live in a world where morality is relative because we don't know if there is a God or not.
Golarion is a world where gods are very real, and have very significant opinions on morality. In Golarion, morality is NOT subjective. Full stop. Therefore, alignment is important, as it defines what gods you are offending, where, and how. The alignment is critically important for understanding what gods you ALIGN with. So get off your high moral relativist horse and also calm down, because you are free to play without the alignment system. The rest of us would like it to stay as is.
PCs have an annoying level of unnecessary detail for a GM. My enemies usually have more flavor than fluff. My PCs never notice that my enemies consist of three stats and 1-3 special attacks, many of which I make up on the spot. They do, however, notice that my combats are wicked fun. I have exactly 0 problem with NPCs having simple or different stats than PCs.
I would definitely prefer they go with Arcanist style. Especially if we're only ever getting 3 spells per day of any given level. I think going another step into a magic point system is a bit too flexible.
I want to build Craftsmen. I think Item Creation has been the weakest part of D&D/PF since time immemorial.
I had a GM who was obsessed with rust monsters/demons/mephits/horses. Every couple of sessions he was trying to churn magic items. It was truly obnoxious.
My great hope for PF2E is the retirement of generic magic items such as +1 swords and +1 armor. These items are boring as hell and just create an arms race where you need to have a certain bonus level to keep up. I would prefer more interesting items, and remove the stacking of bonus abilities such as having a vorpal firey human bane sword. If you want multiple effects you have to carry multiple swords and change weapons to adapt to the situation. I think this would make the game much more dynamic and interesting. And don't get me wrong, I love having those things, but I think it's bad for the game. Magic items should feel rare, powerful, and unique, rather than a commodity. I'd still be fine with, say, a weaker version of weapon types, such as a Greater Firey sword and a Lesser Firey sword.
On the opposite side of this, I hope this get rid of all 'generic' magic items aka +1 sword, +1 armor, generic AC bonus items. Boring 'must have' items that simply add numbers. I know that a +1 sword is the most classic item in D&D, but I think it's time to lay the concept to rest in favor of more interesting items.
Does it take a full round action to make a Fortitude save after being petrified by a Gorgon? I believe a saving throw does not take an action. Also do you get a Fortitude save the first round when you are petrified by the breath weapon? Say the Gorgon goes before you, do you get a Fortitude save to shrug off petrification on your turn?
Multiclassing has not been good, in my opinion, since 2e D&D. I would love to see more options open up for multiclassing characters. Although Pathfinder has many options for reflavoring a character via archetypes, they often feel tacked on - and are mechanically so much worse than other classes, or give up too many essential class functions, that they are nonviable.
Please, let me play a rogue/wizard that is actually good! Thanks.
I think you'll find this is a solid compromise, OP. I think making people choose between HP/Stam is just going to slow down the game and bake in some unnecessary considerations.
Literally just hand-wave everything you don't like/understand and you'll have a blasty-blast.
For example, I am not enforcing at all detailed charge tracking. I tell my players to fudge it and arbitrarily tell them when they are probably running out of ammo. They think it's a fine compromise in lieu of tracking every shot. However on a roll of a 1, the current cartridge always explodes. It works out decently well. We are easing into ship combat. We will probably never use the full rules.
I'll also state that starting Starfinder characters are more interesting, more durable, and have more customization than base PF characters, or even Level 1 characters with 5 years of fluff tacked on. It is unreasonable to expect a game that is less than a year old to stand up to a game that has been out for 5+.
It's your choice, but I feel like you're not giving it a fair shake. Which, granted, you're only primarily hurting yourself, but griping on the boards like this might turn people off the game for no good reason. And that hurts Paizo.
That's kind of the point! How would it look if we did force interaction between PF and SF. It's obviously not balanced for every day play, but as a curiosity it shows the differences between the systems in an interesting way.
As for Winds of Vengeance, I wonder if energy weapons would count for that, as wind doesn't really affect lasers/light based weapons. Otherwise, yes.
And, as written, it would deflect ballistic starship weapons, missiles, and even nukes.
Robert Gooding wrote:
Yeah I don't think handing out too many grenades is going to throw your game balance out of whack. Give them 1-2 per 3-4 encounters and they should be just fine.
Seems to me like it would be good to limit it by availability and make the cost scale as a % of WBL equal to the WBL % of a Level 1 grenade.
Either way, I built a spreadsheet to look at costing for SF grenades. There's a weird spike mid-level.
With Starfinder, casters have been dramatically renovated. I'm wondering how they would stand up against the mighty Wizard or Cleric of Pathfinder?
Theory time! A duo duel:
20th level Technomancer and Mystic
20th level Wizard and Cleric
Preferably this would be a comparison of Core SF vs. Core PF. Any builds will be accepted if you wish to go that route - no third party materials please.
Who do you think would win and why?
Every planet except maybe Akitosh should have some kind of orbital defense matrix. Now if you're somehow teleporting the nuke directly into the BBEG's base...that's hard to defend. Also consider, however, that while a nuke vs modern materials is pretty much a done deal, Starfinder materials are much more resilient. So a nuke might only deal some damage.
Very good at some skills. If you want to be good at those skills you have the option. Otherwise you are free to ignore those bonuses.
As there are a number of different types of combat drones in the AA, what's to prevent a PC from creating one? Other than the entries in the AA not having equivalent entries & thus costs in the equipment section. It doesn't seem too far fetched that a Mechanic can just build additional drones. Obviously there's a game mechanic/balance issue, but honestly 0 fluff problems.
(question arose from https://www.reddit.com/r/starfinder_rpg/comments/7rinll/whats_your_opinion_ on_pcs_fixing_broken/)
Welp, seems to be that Starfinder has revitalized Multi-classing. There are lots of cross-class synergies, and losing most capstones doesn't seem like it's going to hurt as much as in PF. I've got a dozen multi-class builds roiling through my head, and I can't even figure out where to start!
So what's yours? Either mechanically or narratively, what is your favorite multi-class combination in SF and why? Tell me about it! Feel free to share a list!