| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
And this is a part of why monopolies suck: when they go down, EVERYONE suffers.
Search Posts
Just doing "Tiamat is associated with dragons in particular" was already too close to D&D for comfort- that was dropped part way through PF1, so it definitely doesn't pass the more rigorous standards of post-OGL. Tiamat was associated with dragons-as much as anything Mesopotamian can be called a dragon-in her original myths. Some of her offspring were dragons.
`Nine draconic deities` - I wonder if this is including Apsu and Dahak in the counts.I believe that the nine Draconic Deities will be Apsu and his mate, Sarshallatu. And their 7 children, Dahak and the 6 others. I still dont get why the decision was made to change it from Tiamat, they had a very mythologically-rooted take on her without any real influence from D&D's version. Feels weird to have Apsu without Tiamat, really.
I agree with all of that, but I'm not aware of any plans for folklorically-accurate golems in the game, which is why I'm disappointed. As it is the most prominent creature from Jewish sources in the game besides nephilim (which are reskinned wholecloth from tieflings and aasimar, and I don't have an issue with that but it doesn't represent our culture), are the Qlippoth, which aren't really connected to the actual folkloric creatures aside from being fiends, and Asmodeus who is also just the Christian Lucifer with a different name (and ironically opposed to the qlippoth).
Frankly I'm a little frustrated by that one. Why do other cultures get all sorts of creatures and stories represented in Golarion but not Jewish culture?* They could've just brought them more in line with the actual folklore rather than removing the name entirely. * Heck, it does feel weird to me that while there are parallels with all sorts of cultures and religions from real life there's no Jewish analogue at all on Golarion. Like we have religions loosely themed on Christianity and Islam, at least in aesthetics, so why not Judaism?
Honestly I hope there's some way the Ilee proper can make a comeback, now that the ancestry system is modular enough that it'd actually work to support them, similar to the Awakened Animal ancestry.
Reading through the Necromancer playtest really makes me think someone's recently mainlined the Locked Tomb series. Oh absolutely, especially the mention of growing skeleton thralls from bits of bone and calling one of the subclasses "flesh magician", which is the exact term used to describe Ianthe.
Exactly, especially since it's science fantasy and all the same stuff from PF still exists. In a setting where dragons rule a huge chunk of a whole planet, dragon bloodline sorcerers won't stop being born. Supernatural patrons won't stop making deals with witches. It all just feels much more natural and immersive than 1e in a way that has me really excited to run 2e so I think that's a feature that needs to be reckoned with and assessed at this stage.
The thing is, I fully intend to make most if not all PF classes and ancestries fully accessible in any future SF2e games I run as I think it makes the game much more open to different concepts and play styles plus making it feel much more like the same universe as PF2e. I suspect many GMs will do the same, potentially a majority of them. As such, playtesting with that scenario in mind is a smart thing to do.
Like, the 20th level ballistic missile in the 2e playtest is significantly less powerful than the 10th level tactical missile from 1e.
While I recognize the need for balance in general, I think that the most important thing is for the game to let people build the characters they want to build. As others have noted, when people see a four armed alien in a sci fi setting their immediate desire is gonna be "using tons of weapons at once". I think that if we're so scared of how someone might exploit anything that we take away stuff that will just be plain fun 95% of the time just to cut down on that 5% of times that someone's gonna do something broken with it, then we've kinda lost the plot. Maybe this is just me having been lucky with who I play with but basically all of the people I've encountered who try to make busted builds or otherwise exploit stuff to the point it gets unfun for everyone else have been literal children. I'm not convinced we should build the system around a hypothetical player who's never grown out of adolescence.
The Archaic property is listed for armor, shields, and weapons, but its description seems weirdly incomplete with no clarification later in the playtest document.
Nowhere are these bolded sections explained or given any rules significance. As far as I can tell, archaic weapons have no actual drawbacks. What's going on here?
Some weapons feel rather underwhelming for me in general, in large part because they ALL have a level 1 version that needs to scale from there. Missiles being a big one. I get wanting to balance them but why not just make them high level items? Are players really gonna be demanding access to missiles in low-level play? It feels to me like something that'd be very reasonable to lock to higher levels, rather than making the damage of their explosions so underwhelming. I mean a 20th level missile does FIVE damage to anyone who isn't the direct target, that feels really weird and if I gave my players a missile launcher I think they'd expect something much more destructive. Plasma swords are also pretty disappointing given the really cool crit stuff they had in 1e. That's another type of weapon I think most players would be fine with restricting to being "high level gear" if it meant they can be chopping off limbs instead of mildly shocking someone with what's basically a lightsaber.
The playtest PDF only has the first 15 pages, I feel like something's up
Are there any new dinosaurs that are based on real animals? Oh HELL YES
Are there any new dinosaurs that are based on real animals?
Hi,
Yeah ghouls have always been notorious low-level party-killers in my groups, so I'm not too sad to see that ability go.
Yeah I usually read Fascinated as something you want to do outside of combat in order to distract people.
The new hags RULE. I've never felt particularly inclined towards using hags before but now I NEED to include them in my campaign. The fairy tale/literary themes really make them fun.
Hm. No ghast in here. Looks like the ghoul soldier replaces it. Yes? No?All a ghast was was a level 2 ghoul. Only thing it had over a regular ghoul was stench, and now all ghouls get that. Yeah I bet ghasts will be reintroduced as the Lovecraft version at some point.
Have the algollthus been changed much?
Are there any animals? Dinosaurs/pterosaurs especially? (The pterosaurs from the Bestiary need a serious rework IMO)yes, no surprises. Pteranodon is essentially unchanged, 10 fewer hp. Still no swim speed and bad land speed? :/
Are there any animals? Dinosaurs/pterosaurs especially? (The pterosaurs from the Bestiary need a serious rework IMO)
Just got my PDF, willing to answer questions. What changes to the fiends and celestial lineups? Are there replacements for things like lillends, pit fiends, and solars?
Just got my PDF, willing to answer questions.Are there any changes to the giant lineup? I'm curious if they got hit by the OGL stuff like dragons and hags did. Do they have new art?
I wonder if they'll have to redo any of the Archfiends in this? Some Demon Lords are probably out the window as their probably exlusively WotC property but what about some Archdevils (aka Dispater, Geryon, and Mammon come to mind)? Would Charon be an issue?Mammon being a greed and money focused fiend is lifted straight from mythology. I don't know much about the rest, but since nothing is said about them, I presume they're safe. Yeah and Geryon's role and a lot of other aspects of Hell in D&D and prior PF products are lifted from the Divine Comedy. They might need to go with the mythical spelling of Dis Pater but I dont think anything else would need to be changed.
NGL I was kinda hoping for an antlered nature god of a dragon, but I am still very glad to see the classics return.
Why does the concept art mention fire breath?
I don't like this take, as I feel like it diminishes Shelyn as a character. Yes, it's easy to show her artwork with Sarenrae and Desna to a queer person and say "Poly Lesbians=Pathfinder Good" but if you presented me with the same characters with the same dynamic and told me nothing bad and permanent would ever happen to them under threat of being edgy or "burying the gays" I'd roll my eyes. If there are no stakes, there isn't really much of a conflict...Still worried about Shelyn, here.I’d be pretty pissed if they killed off Shelyn. She’s been used as a poster child of PF’s queer rep, and it’d be obnoxiously edgy to kill her off given her role in the pantheon. I'm not saying that queer characters should always be immune to death or other stakes. I'm saying that when a character is widely promoted as a queer character and embraced by queer fandom, it'd feel kinda gross if they were then killed off as what is, when it all comes down to it, a marketing gimmick. Because beyond what I'm sure are legitimate storytelling reasons for whatever death is coming, it is also very much being presented as a publicity stunt to hype up War of the Immortals. The concern about being overly edgy is not about queer rep either, it's a separate concern on my part that killing off a goddess whose role is basically to be kind to everyone and to promote the idea that anyone can be beautiful would feel like it's just trying too hard to be as dark and mean-spirited as possible.
Still worried about Shelyn, here. I’d be pretty pissed if they killed off Shelyn. She’s been used as a poster child of PF’s queer rep, and it’d be obnoxiously edgy to kill her off given her role in the pantheon. Plus it’d immediately make Zon Kuthon completely boring as a character. I’m against the move to kill off a deity in general, especially now that Asmodeus, the only one who felt like he’d contribute as much by his death as continuing to live, is marked as safe, but Shelyn would be the absolute worst choice for them to make imo.
Honestly, I find it confusing and a little frustrating that "nephilim" is used as a singular noun in this book when other 2e beings like the einherjar have been pretty good about fixing that error. -im is a plural suffix, and while religious texts always refer to the nephilim in plural it's easy to extrapolate "nephil" or something similar from it.
It should also be noted that while Arazni absolutely was a victim, she's now a GOD. That kinda shifts the power dynamic A LOT, and means that any actions she takes towards people who aren't at least demigods are not going to rationally be done for the sake of survival. While it's hard to say how a god's mind works, there's probably some level of trauma response there, but the actual danger has largely passed. It adds another layer of complexity to her situation. Obviously trauma doesn't make someone evil but if you are on a scale of power that massively outweighs 99% of beings in the multiverse, it can be trivially easy for that trauma to become something that is used as an excuse for abusing others. In some ways it could easily become a sort of supercharged version of real-world cycles of abuse if she doesn't acknowledge that power in her interactions with others.
Honestly killing off a core deity feels really lame to me and more like the gimmick of a comic book event than something I want to see in an RPG setting. It feels super limiting especially since Pathfinder's pantheon is one of its strong suits which draws me to the Lost Omens setting over many others. It also feels kinda mean to players who've built characters worshiping that deity or otherwise tied to them; while home games won't be directly affected and a GM can say that it didn't happen in their game it still doesn't feel great to people invested in that god and their faith as a part of the setting. Plus I assume for organized play it'll really mess up those whose characters are based on that god. I have a very hard time seeing how this could open up more opportunities for stories, characters, and adventures than it closes.
Really hoping that the changes to the starship combat will make it feel more integrated with the rest of the game. My biggest gripe was that it felt like it was an entirely different game that's only loosely connected to what characters are normally doing
All of my attempted purchases keep getting money put on hold and then rejected. I've tried multiple cards and it's still doing this. What can I do so I can actually buy the books I need?
Love having a disabled iconic for Starfinder, that's super rad
My players just finished up We're No Heroes, but they escaped from the rendezvous point without killing Deminda. The book says that Sinjin will kill her if she fails, but that feels like a waste given how much of an impression she made on my players. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to incorporate her into future adventures?
As an autistic person who owes much of his social life to this company's games, this means so much to me, thank you!
I for one would love to see more of the Ramiyel. Their origins fascinate me.
Wait... HOW THE HECK DIDN'T I NOTICE THAT THE TASHTARI ONLY HAVE THREE LEGS UNTIL NOW???
Very happy for Stheno, hopefully they adapt the Euryale from 1e in this so we can finally have monsters based on all three sisters!
Trying to put together a group to play this ASAP! I've read through the first two books and I really love the tone it sets for really making the players feel like a part of this universe! Honestly this is exactly the kind of thing I've wanted since the game was announced. That said, I do wish this AP was available for Roll20. I've noticed that Starfinder APs dont have much support in that regard, which is a shame.
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 I dont think that's a dragonKIN
I'm fighting between the conflicting urges of "this seems really cool" and "I'm already way behind on like three actual play TTRPG podcasts"
As someone whose homebrew setting relies on guns, this is very exciting for me. That said, I'm quite sad to lose Lirianne even if the new gunslinger looks really cool.Considering that Dwarves who live in the Mana Wastes were the ones who invented black powder weapon in the Inner Sea Region, I like the idea that the new gunslinger iconic is a Dwarf. Oh, yeah, she looks really cool and it's a good idea to have a dongun dwarf. But I'm still attached to the old character
I'm quite sad to lose Lirianne even if the new gunslinger looks really cool.Has Paizo said that if they appoint a new iconic for a class the old one is no longer available? I must have missed it. Although, come to think of it, I don't know how easily certain PF1 class iconics (gunslinger, alchemist, magus, summoner for starters) can be ported to PF2. I'm just referring to seeing her in artwork.
TBH I never found goblins particularly intimidating but seeing one in life-size would probably change that! This is spectacular, though I'm sure it's way out of my price range
As someone whose homebrew setting relies on guns, this is very exciting for me. That said, I'm quite sad to lose Lirianne even if the new gunslinger looks really cool.
I hope we get a book that similarly expands magic, it feels like the fantasy part of Starfinder is a little neglected, which can be disappointing since that's a big part of its appeal for me.
|