Tryn's page

Related to

Pathfinder 2nd Edition actually does this, which sort of compensates for the drastic nerf in non-Cantrip spell slots. But here's the idea I had instead: Instead of Cantrips automatically scaling, you have to invest to scale them by putting them into higher level slots. They retain their recastability, but now they're occupying a >0 level spell slot, so you need to pick and choose each day (if you are a prepared caster), or pick and choose as you level up your spells known (if you are a spontaneous caster). As an extension of this concept, since Cantrips would no longer be all 0 level spells, some Cantrips could start out at levels >0 (although at least the great majority of 0 level spells would be Cantrips).

I like the idea, this reminds me of the "spell feats" in 3.5e.

I would say they are made from magical and technological modifies bones of ancient creatures from Eox, which make them as hard as [insert starship metal].
Simply to give them a more mystical feel. :)

Charm Person didn't remove the common sense of an enemy.

If the guard knows that letting in enemies results in a harsh punishment for him, he will not let them in, no matter if they are his best friends or not.

Simply Image your best friend is a guard at a high security military base. Will he let you into the base? Of course not.

On the other hand if he catches you inside the facility and no damage was done, you could argue that he could probably just throw you out and don't report you to his superior.

I think a baseline for what a charmed person would do is always to ask yourself "Would I do a similar thing in the real world for my best friend?"

Why bother giving them stats? They should not participate in any combat or other "stat-relevant" encounter.

And if the mother thinks it's a good idea to bring two babys along while going on an adventure, I would ask her if she is sure and if so, she will have to deal with the consequences (AE spells/traps etc).

I think it's not about the space on a single planet for one single AP (PF had multiple APs and they didn't used the complete planet^^).

I think it's more about the "spirit of the game" (which is different for everyone). For me (and I think most people) Science Fiction is about encountering/exploring new planet/cultures/aliens and Spaceships.

There is a reason DS9 got the Defiant. ;)

Only limit in my games:
- No 3PP content (aonsrd only!)
- No ultra-passive characters (you are the main character of the story act like one!)

First of all I would allow it as this is the campaign finale and the player earned the wish.

I would sit down with the player between sessions and talk this through with him/her.

What does she/he expect from becoming a dragon?
Does she/he understand the benefits/drawbacks of it?
Does she/he understands the impact for the group/other players?
How can you two balance it out with the rest of the group?

I would suggest something like a permanent form of the dragon /like zza ni suggested) but let the player choose the size.

Don't make it more complicate then it's needed. ;)
And talk to the player! :D

EDIT
After running space combat with the RAW rules (and each player with their own fighter ship (including an VI), my players got much more happy with the RAW rules.

So I think we will stick to them for the time. :)

I think instead of a weapon/armor advancement system (which always feels very "rough" and "artificial") I would add a weapon upgrade system which is capped by the characters level/ranks/BAB.

This way the armor/weapon also become "the characters iconic armoe/weapon" which could add to the flavor of it.

If you want to keep it simple, you can say that a character has to spent the credit difference between his current weapon and the "new weapon" and spent some days upgrading it.
This way you can still use the WBL and armor/weapon stats of the official books, but simply reflavored it to make it more cool. :)

If you feel creative you could also allow the players to add special effects to their weapons (similar to the ship weapon upgrades).

Hence SF has no aggro mechanic I don't think you can apply the concept of the classic MMORPG roles (Tank, DD, Healer) to it.

Instead I would go more with the party roles mentioned in this video Party Roles Dungeon Dudes

And I think every class can fill almost every of this role, it's just a matter of the build, euipment and how to roleplay your character.

I would tackle this from the roleplaying side:

What is the motivation of your character?
How does he learned his skills?
Is he a team player?
Is he soldier or commander?
etc.

Once you have figured out the character personality (and maybe played it for 1 or 2 levels), you will get a got idea of your role in the party and then you can adapt and evolve your character into this.
(I'm no friend of completely pre-determinate character (builds), as this removes one of the core principles of roleplaying for me: that a chaacter shoudl evolve from the actions and stories this character experienced)

There is a youtube channel called "How It's played" which has a good playlist of rules overviews for Starfinder (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEei3frVCXg&list=PLYCDCUfG0xJaiOsB99j8 H3wyI8gGbxPuP)

The other, more obvious thing would be to read the core rule book and run a intro scenario from the society (I head good things about "Starfinder Society Scenario #4-08: Precious Cargo").

Alternatively run your own level 1 game with your friends.

Interesting to see what people define as "content bloat".
For me it's mostly useless/extremly situational stuff which is only designed for one specific scene/case and which no player would ever use.

The x-trillion feats from all the PF Companion books are a good example for this.

I really like the small "what you think about other races and what other races think about you" boxes in the CRB - would love to have this back for newer races as it gives a good guideline on how to RP your character (or how to break the stereotype of your race).

I see what you're going at and I can also see what you mean by the math. HOWEVER it is also implied in these that there is plenty of open space in these vessels for either green space, traffic, or food, which skews that idea.

I'm looking at this from the perspective...

I totally understand your point of view.

I think the biggest issue with station/ship size is, that doubling it's size didn't mean doubling it's volume, but instead increase it by a factor of 8.
So if you take a aircraft carrier and double it in size (to 2000 ft x 2000 ft x 2000 ft), you don't have (cramped) space for 6000 people but instead for 48.000 people.
If do this again two times, you are at a station with roughly 2,5 km (8000 ft.) side length which has space for 3 Million people (and space for 43.520 fighter jets^^).

As said, scaling sizes (and especially volumens) are something which can be tricky.

Because of this I normally model my players ships in 3D (sometimes just as a rough blockout) and it always amazes me how many (or with small ships how less) space there is. :)

The problem with sizes, especially in space is, that humans are very bad in realizing sizes and especially volumes.

I always try to compare station sizes to real world cities.

Let's take a look at Absalom station (Population: 2 mio)
2 mio people are roughly the population of the Paris city area.
Paris urban area is given with 105 km^2 resulting in a density of 21,000 people/km2.

So if Absalom only had one deck it has to be a size of 10km x 10km.

Let say it has 20 decks (not much or?) => 100.000 people per deck => ~ 5km^2 per deck => 2,2 km x 2,2 km

Lets say one deck has a height of 50 meters (~a 12 story house), then we are at 2km x 2km x 1km. Adding 30% for life support, power generation etc. and we are still smaller then Absalom in the game (8 km diameter ~4 km height).

The Idari has a population of 40.000, lets double this to count for all the people who left the Idari since it's arrival and double this again to count for lifestock, plants etc. => 160.000 people => 7,6 km^2.
Now keep in mind that it's a hollow cylinder (Basically a O'Neil Cylinder).

The Idari is 4km long and has a radius of 0,4 km.
So 3km long, radius of 0,4km => cylinder surface (2 x pi x r x height) => 10 km^2
So more there is more then enough space for all people (and lifestock) on board. (Keep in mind that you also have most of the volume of the cylinder for life support etc.)

Tldr: Absalom Station has roughly enough space to fit 8x Paris in it and the Idari could hold ~200.000 peoples without problems.

The problem is the "bigger is better" trend in Scifi. Some IPs really go to ridiculous large sizes without thinking about what these numbers really mean. (Yes I'm looking at you Warhammer & Star Wars).

I wouldn't say that the party isn't playing as a team, but most times it's more "I shouldn't use it now, it will be more impactfull later" or simply the player forget about the item (happened to me and my group A LOT, especially with things like scrolls & poitions).

I tackeled it by simply making sure the enemies also use such items (and let the players know it). This way it reminds the players that they also have one-time items they can use.

Also never "punish" the players for using an item "too soon" and always make the item count.
Nothing is more drustrating then using your one-time-summon-large-elemental gem and then the combat is over after 1-2 rounds later...

...

I totally see your point here, but at the same time, I also understand the need for such a system from a game design perspective.

I think the best solution would be what Leon Aquilla suggested:
Simply "move" some of the adventures rewards to the cargo reward.

Example:
You have level 3 group which make a cargo run. You plan the "adventure" and decide to add 4 encounters.
One encounter at level 3 should give the players around 1100 credits, so this cargo run should give a total of ~4400 credits.

So you simply split the "credits-gained". The players will get 2200 credits from the encounters (loot, cred-sticks etc.) and the other 2200 credits will be the reward (additional to the BP) when they delivered the cargo.

The good thing is: The players will never know that you split the reward, as they don't know how many credits per level they can expect.
Also you can simply tell them straight "completing this Cargo run, will give you the normal BP and additional 2200 credits".

This way you have your credit reward, but at the same time stay within the game design ideas. ;)

Environmental obstacles and the like only matter to the pilot. If I'm stuck in engineering on my mischief of ysoki it doesn't matter if the pilot is flying through open space or asteroids, my turn is the same. Regen the shields, regen the shields, regen the shields, wait for something to break, duct tape it, regen the shields...

Why restrict the effect (or useability) to the pilot?

Or let the science officer scan the "strange glowing" asteroid, just to find out that he could detonate it with the right frequency (doing damage to all adjanced ships).

Or how about the Riker Maneuver? (combination of engineer, science officer and pilot action)

Just watch some Star Trek episodes, throw in some technobable and let your fantasy run wild (of course the players have to do the same and the DM have to embrace it).

If you run starship combat straight by the numbers it is boring, but you can spice it up with some creative thinking and technobable. ;)

I think Starfinder spaceship combat also suffers from the "arena-mode" of most pre-made ship combats.

Let me explain what I mean with "arena-mode":
Almost all ship combats in the books take place on a plain battlemap with no special effects or environmental obstacles. This removes all tactical depth from it and make it to a "dice roll competition".
From my experience with wargames (especially BattleTech) I can say that adding things like environmental obstacles, triggered effects or timers can add a lot to the fight.
And you can even empower the other crew roles with such ideas.
How about adding a nebula which can be ignited (and by this do damage for this round) by overpowering the engines (engineer action) or some micro-anomalis which deal constant damage each time the ship moves unless the science officer scans them? Or very basic: Nebulas/asteroids which block LOS/give mali to checks.

I think what SF spaceship combat really needs are three things:
1. Remove the turn order (allows for more tactical team play in combat)
2. Remove the round-by-round initiative and exchange it with the standard inititive system (maybe with a special action which allows/forces a initiative re-roll)
2. A Splat-Book with A LOT of environment/timer/trigger ideas to spice up the combat.

I have to admit I never get so much into detail with these rules (neither as a DM nor a player).
For my table we normally play it simple.

But let me try to answer your questions:
1) I would go with Aware of Presence as Billy didn't know where Jack moved once he left Billies field of view. (he can't observe him behind the wall, no LoS).

2) Billy does not know where Jack is, even if he is not trying to hide. In this situation I would let Billy roll a perception check (DC 10 "Hear the sound of a Small or Medium creature walking"). If he succeds he is "Aware of Billies Location.

3)see 2)

4) If Jack want to actively hide from Billy, he has to do a Stealth check (including the +20/40 bonus). Jack has to do the roll, once he declares he is hiding.

5) I would rule yes, because there is no rule which forbid a character to attack an empty space. Of course Billy still have the 50% miss chance if he tries to do a direct hit (I would also roll this, if Jack is not in the space and simply tell the player "seems you missed").

6) If Billies perception is high enough he could spot Jack. And yes, if Jack is still invisible after the attack, Billy will be "Aware of his Presence" but not "Aware of his Location".

Hope this helps a little bit.

As it has been mentioned, once you know the duration you can simply drop out of the drift and try again if it takes too long.

First: If you simply drop out of the drift, you do not know where you end up to, thanks to the "fluid" behaviour of the Drift. So even if you are only one second within the drift, you could remateralize thousands of light-years away, somewhere between the stars or even more problematic: within a star.

Second: everytime you do the switch you tear a part out of the material plane (which is afaik no secret)

Third: you have to recalculate the route again, which takes time and maybe even end up with a longer travel time.

Last but not least: Just something is possible according to RAW doesn't mean you should do it. ;)

Followed the post for a while now and really wonder why all the fuzz about an "unkown travel time".
I normally tell my players how long it should take once they decided to enter the drift.
I don't see a problem here.

And knowing exactly how long the travel takes breaks other parts of the system.

Which parts exactly? I can't know of anything which relies on players not knowing how long their travel time is.

We are still playing PF1E - currently running two AP (Jade Regent & RotRL) both are somewhere in book 3 (i think^^).
We tried finishing RotRL before, but the groups always split up (people moved away, different shifts etc.), but this time we are determinate to finish it (our DM runs the part we already did as a "story told by an old man in a tavern", so much quicker then usual, jumping from "event to event" - it is fun so far, as our characters are also sitting at the tavern table and are able to interrupt and "correct" the story teller. :)

RAW I say yes, if the target gets out of sight, you loose your tracking.

But at my table I would say the target has to be completly out of sight for a specific time (e.g. 2 rounds) to loose the tracking (the exocortex predicts he target movement to a degree etc.).

This way enemies who are retreating can "shake off" the tracking and at the same time, the mechanic doesn't loose the target lock, everytime an enemy duck behind cover.

For me there's two basic problems with Starfinder as-is:

- Low level to mid level personal combat is boring [...]
- Low level starship combat is boring[...]

Also, operatives are the just plain best class for most purposes (most damage, biggest numbers for everything, best class ability selections), but still manage to be really boring at low levels because you're just using the same trick attack every round.

I think all three can be easily fixed.

I also want to test for starship combat if it works if you switch back to normal initiative (and damage) order and skip the fixed role chain. Have to see if this breaks up the slow combat. (Also you can give your players things like drones/figthercrafts).
Also removing the level restrictions for the bonus "tricks" in starship combat could help (they already have a higher DC, so why "double gate" them?)

For the operative, a simple "band aid" would be to let Operatives Edge only work with your specilization skills and remove the free skill point there.
The high skill ranks will still keep him as the skill monkey who is extremly profienct in his signature skills, but will remove the issue that he simply outranks EVERYBODY regarding skills (at the same time).

My bigger issue is more with the item scaling and the economy system. I would love to see a alternate version where the weapon/armor list isn't that bloated and effectivness increases are more bound to class advancement (like with weapon spec.) and item mods.

But I think this wouldn't need a complete revamp of the system (aka 2E) but a "Starfinder unplugged" Book would do it (I like this term^^).

As far as I understand this:
You can buy items up to item level 4 (as per the charter/AP)
You can craft items based on your skill level (as per the crafting rules)

I don't see the problem here or did I miss something?

How about a near death experience with the black hole? Maybe she was on a travel to an outpost, when the ship had a malfunction and it drifted towards the event horizon.
Once the rescue crew arrived everyone on board was dead except Rokayla.

This event left her with a "scar" which allowed her to see the very basic building blocks of the universe and gives her the powers of a solarian.

In fact these are arabic numbers not latin. ;)

And I guess these are simply because of the Gallifreyan universal translation matrix which is imbedded in every book and pdf, so we, who can't ready common, can understand it. :D

I think one thing we all forget when it comes to "inter-planetary wars" is the scale.
When the allied invaded europe in WW2 they sent far more then 5 million soldiers and support personel (based on the numbers of Operation Magic Carpet). And this was to "conquer" a country which only count for 2% of earth surface.

Also if you want to blockade earth you have to cover a "orbital surface" of 525.935.442 sq km. If each of your starship could effectivly blockade a area of 50 x 50 km of "orbital surface" you would need 210.593 ships (compare this to the allied WW2 fleet which was less then 10.000 ships).

If we assume only cruiser size this would mean at least a crew of 21.059.300.
If you now go into logistics the numbers get even more ridicilous (food and fuel for the fleet (and the support fleet) etc.).

So I think the best way of conquering an interplanetary species would be to destroy their space forces and then attack specific targets until they surrender and become a vasall of yours (otherwise you have to leave a MASSIVE occupation force behind).

And as Vesks are not mindless brutes, I think this would be the way they went for during the war. Unfortunately the Pact Worlds were a equivalent enemy and so a a stalemate/cold war scenario would be more likely.

Hi,
while I really love the Starfinder setting and the books I have to say that I'm really disappointed by the amount of content/page count of the books.

Let us compare it to similar PF1 books:

Advance Players Guide (336 pages) vs Character Operation (160 pages)
Ultimate Equipment (320 pages) vs Armory (164 pages)
Gamemastery Guide (320 pages) vs Galaxy Exploration (160 pages)
Inner Sea Guide (320 pages) vs Pact Worlds (216 pages)
Bestiary (320 pages) vs Alien Archive (164 pages)
Ultimate books (~250 pages) vs Starship Manual (160 pages)

I have to say this really disappoints me, especially if you keep in mind that the price is similiar (+5$ for the PF books, same prive for pdf versions).

Also if you read the SF books, you can definetly "feel" that there could be more in them...

Even if your post is a little bit passive aggressive, I totally agree with you.
The Star/Pathfinder APs are really poorly written from a Game Design point of view.
I'm did AotS for a group of three players (Solarian, Mythic, Soldier) who aren't really into the more compley rules of SF, so we basically run a CRB only game) and they stompt almost every encounter if I dun then by the book. I basically tweak almost every encounter in the AP (most times by adding some "goons" or simply increase the combat area and make it a little more interessting then the "arena" style areas from the AP).

There are so many basic "DM Mistakes" in the APs; from 2x3 square room encounters with "the enemy try to stay at reach" (which even became a "expression for bad design in my group" to "Boss fights with only one BBEG vs. 4-5 players".

Don't get wrong, I really like the APs for their story, development etc. BUT the encounter design is really f**ked up!

Short and simple: NO!

Long explanation: a pacifist is someone who is aiming for peace and is opposed to a violent solutions.

The defining question of Gorums faith is:
"Will you fight?"
And a pacifist can't simply answer this question with: "YES!"

So it's a clear NO GO for me.

Not sure, but the maps from AotS were distorted. The grids had different sizes and so it was impossible to align a grid completely. So maybe that is also here the issue?

Would be nice if Paizo would add grid-free maps to their digital APs, so it would be possible to easily set up maps for VTT.

I think a book like this could also help setting/definining the power-level of the organisations and the setting as a whole.

What level is the typical stewards foot soldier? What equipment they have?

This also helps building a consistency and allows the player to make better decisions as well as prevent "auto-level npcs". ;)

Absolutly agree. In most of my games most of the enemies were NSC (and no monsters), so a NPC Codex would be awesome.

This treat is a very interessting read and I want to put in my two cents.

For me (I'm primary DMing), P&P RPGs are not PvP games.

First because the players have to play together to survive/achiev their goals, no matter how powerfull one player is, he will not be able to complete an adventure which is designed for a group on it's own (simply because of action economy and the different challenges to overcome).
Sure some classes are stronger in specific situations (or on the paper) then others, but as they players (normally) doesn't fight against each other, this doesn't matter.
Also as it's a roleplay (and no roll-play) the players ideas and character play are often more important (then the rolls/stats) in determinate the outcome of an encounter.

Second as a DM I'm not playing against my players. I simply "run the world" their adventure take part in. This means I play their allys and enemies, but neither of them will "meta-game" or act outside of character. This means they sometime will not take the most "effective" action and also flee/surrender if the situation demands it.

I always try to mimic the enemies personality in their fighting tactics/styles - Animals fight different then undead then guards.

As a DM I'm not there to "Win" instead my goal is to set the stage for the characters to shine and have a good time.

As a DM in this very specific case I would say:
You can either have the slam attack from the elemental or the claw attack, not both. Simply because if you get additional attacks this way, why can't a four-armed character not attack twice?

Or even better then the "show them before" would be:
Show them before, let them make plans to avoid it, then when the times come all of their high-level plans fail, death seems to be inevitable. But then something/someone from a very early adventure (even before you revealed their destiny) shows up and "pays his dept", not rescue them, but given them the opening/time they need to change destiny (maybe with the same actions as in the "prophecy", but with another outcome).

I think if it come out of the blue it's a bad idea as it removes the control from the players.
But if you really want to got this route maybe put a spin on it:
Somewhere around the mid of the campaign foreshadow that the characters will die (but succeed) when they finally face the BBEG (make it clear that this will be in the far future, not "if you face him now").
This way the players can plan for it, maybe find a way around it (Maybe only one of them have to sacrifice himself etc.)

Avengers Endgame comes into my mind here.
Why? Tony knows the hole time how the final battle will end for him thanks to Dr. Strange. But when this moment comes he did it by his own CHOICE not because it was inevitable, which gave it even more importance).

Or another "noble sacrifice": Warcraft - Bolvars sacrifice at Icecrown

Of course I would always talk to the players before that, maybe even in a one-by-one if you see one players character would make a perfect "noble sacrifice" (This could even be a perfect ending for a character and even more impactfull if the other players didn't know it)

I like the "Race book" idea, but maybe a "Deck of many races" would be even more amazing.
Similar ato the "Deck of many worlds" a system which allows you to create new races by drawing some cards (stats, rough background, Environment etc.)

Instead of NPC clases I would love to have a book with more "non-monster enemies" - like the "supporting cast" in the Pact Worlds book.

I would say that Null-Space items work normally in the drift.
My interpretation of the description Loreguard posted is more that Triune simply denies every sort of magical travel from/into the drift.

Null-Space technology is more a "plane-within-a-plane", so basically it didn't allow to bridge between two planes but only between a plane (The drift) and a semi-plane (this specific Null-Space) which has no access to other planes.
This would also mean that casting a plane shift spell (to switch to another plane) while within a Null-Space in the Drift will not work.

Also from a game-design point of view: Denying the use of Null-Space technology within the drift would create a LOT of other problems (e.g. if you using items like "Null-Space Grips" etc.)

Why not simply use the shuttle frame and add a light turret for 5 BP ?

Uploaded the pictures of the latest print (not yet painted or primed).

I also uploaded the .stl, .obj. file as well as the .ctb & .chitubox file on my google drive:

3D Files

Feel free to download it and use it. If you share it on social media it would be nice if you can link my artstation profile:

https://www.artstation.com/frerkguentzler

This was really a fun project and I hope you all like the result. If you have feedback feel free to poke me.

I totally understand the issue with the operative, but I think you don't really have to change a lot to fix it.

Basically I would only change the following:

- Operatives Edge: Bonus only to Initiative and his specializations skill
- Debilitating Trick: only half damage if you apply a condition or use a
special exploit
- Skill Points at each Level: 6 + Int

This way the "Operatives Edge" feature is more on the level off TechLore (Technomancer) or Bypass (Mechanic).

By reducing the skills/level you bring the operative on the same skill quality/quantity as the envoy, making them them both the "skill monkey".

The change in the Debilitating Trick ability has mor to do with choices and could help balance the combat ability of the operative.

Yeah, have to do it to support hang-overs etc.
After some research I found a possible issue which should be fixed by printing the model at an angle.

So only issue left far is the scaling of the .obj file. I used the correct scaling in my 3D modelling tool (3D Max) but once I export it to my printing program the model is shrunk by ~50%...

Will do another test-print this weekend and post the result here (and also making the .obj files available then)

Sure, share it. :)

My plan is to do a first test print this weekend and if everything is fine share the digital files with the Starfinder community, so everybody who likes can use it for is own campaign/games.

Of course some people like lightweight rule systems, but some like more complex ones (I would put SF in the middle).
Believe me once you wrote your cheat sheet (and used it a few times) you will not need it anymore. Simply because you read the rules, understood them because you thought about how to abstract them (to make them fit on the sheet).

And once you know the rules which affect your character, gameplay will become much faster, simply because you understand the principles and with them understand/wing other situations much easier.

This is unfortunately something I see more often in the current days, people don't take the time to read the rulebooks. When I started with TTRPG we played Shadowrung 2.01D and the core rulebook took turns, every week another player/DM of my group had it to read it, to read the rules and understand them. It was normal... these days you can be happy if a new player shows up at your table knowing which system you play...

I think the biggest problem for Starfinder is that people build their idea of it by using our society and technology and extrapolate it into the future (and use current time morals). But this is not how Starfinder is build.

Take a look at the awesome artwork, no micro-computer, people are running around in armor and with weapons, barely any police.
It's a fantasy world with lasers and spaceships, not The Expanse scifi world.
I think the best comparison would be Star Wars or 80s Cartoons (e.g. Marshal Bravestar or Galaxy Rangers (a good example of how the Stewards work)).

Once you understand this and lean into it, the world begins to shine.