My thing is that its approaching that point and it's approaching it without any particular gain.
Shields aren't mechanically interesting they're just math enhancers enhancing math I don't want to see enhanced.
There's barely even an opportunity cost on this given that The Ring exists and that prosthetic arms eventually exist and gives a big old boost to Kasatha and Skitters
Perhaps its my exposure to higher tier content lately but it's started getting to the point where I am practically EXPECTING level+2 armor on anyone who plans to melee. Its not quite "20 or nothing" but it's really close. One of the key things I like about GMing Starfinder is that generally the monsters that are supposed to be good at hitting things hit them quite well and for that to go away would be a true body blow to the system.
Think of how 'whatever' Dhurus would have been if when he opened up for a full attack he missed 4 times.
I simply dread going back to the old PF1 "ah yes you have a 38 AC and my to hit is +17" days - especially when Enhanced Resistance exists and is standard issue for anyone in melee.
As someone with a technomancer who is a Kasathan though, I will say that when you want something you can make it happen. Whether its GOOD is an entirely different discussion.
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
This has really been at the core of many of the AR team discussions.
There is a lot of stuff here that IS power creep. Shields for instance are UNDENIABLY power creep and I do fully expect that once writers get a feel for where shields push ACs that there is going to be a concomitant increase in to hit modifiers - this is what it is and there's not anything AR can do about it - this was a deliberate design decision made by the design team.
There being options for +4 Dex races is undeniably more powerful than there not being such an option but is it really ban worthy?
Bans are really just for options that are truly a little bonkers and/or throw the game balance out of whack in ways that probably weren't intended. Or for stuff that simply isn't well suited to org play specific issues.
Sorry, I got PMed and got what I wanted - thanks though!
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
There is a perfect example of this in Book 2 of Signal of Screams.
There is a part where you get jumped by street toughs on your way from point a to point b only to get....jumped by identical street toughs when you arrive at point b.
So yeah...I cut one of the redundant jumpings!
My feeling is that Calder would be the most boring - we already have a steady diet of going to new planets thanks to the Wayfinders faction and the history of the Society itself is an angle that - seeing in action in season 10 of PFS1 and season 1 of PFS2 - I don't think is very interesting.
I like Avor Stelek but I don't see a vision for the future there - his is a sort of staying the course vision.
So my top two are pretty strongly some order of Tara and Ehu.
I've been trying to stay out of this since I don't organize or play much PF2 but since it occured to me that these pants on head sort of sanctioning tactics might make their way to Starfinder Society I figured I would weigh in.
I do think it needs pointed out that this does effectively kill modules or 'Adventures' or whatever the nomenclature is this week as options for us to run at conventions.
This has been a staple for nearly every small to mid size con I've ever been to or run, including my own crit con which got a lot of mileage out of Ire of the Storm and Daughters of Fury and they've been fun and rewarding experiences. More importantly they've proven time and again to be draws for these sorts of events.
Maybe it was too much credit for too short an adventure but it seemed to me like this was a functional system and that the new system lacks a lot of answers for what it's broken here. Its also disturbing to me how many people are trying to quash dissent on a post that was openly about soliciting feedback and criticism.
Steven Lau wrote:
I would echo that - Mike.
It may be repeatable, but its not written like one at all.
I would have liked it a lot more if the Avor mission weren't basically predetermined to end in combat as players basically try and try and try to get there with skills and without the SUPER SPECIFIC ones called for by the scenario they dont have a good in.
The Library fight is a whole lot of fun if you can get it to last long enough for the math terrain to matter. Not challenging, but fun .
I feel the counterargument is important to make -
Generifying the boons in such a way that they can be earned by anyone, anywhere, yes even by players who never ever get behind the GM screen or do anything to help make the campaign what it is, means that many cons, most especially the small to mid-size con that is the bread and butter of many the Venture Officer will really cease to have its last meager draw for local volunteer support and that's a problem.
Running a con is hard. Running a con with almost nothing but good will to offer volunteers is even harder. Something abstract like "extra check boxes" doesn't move the needle the same way "GM here and get something sort of special" does. Gen Con supremacy is of course always going to be a source of jealousy. But going to Gen Con and giving them that sort of commitment to GMing when you could be enjoying the premier gaming show in the world instead IS worthy of special recognition. I remember one year the T1 race boon for GenCon - awarded for spending almost your entire con working for Paizo was then awarded as the REGULAR GM Boon not 6 months later and I was livid for months. Why should a GM who ran one game at a con get the same reward I got for indenturing myself to paizo?
Starfinder already does an excellent job of feeding players the ability to play a number of non-standard races through play and that's wonderful but if you don't hold something back to be given as a reward then its really hard to reward people who provide the services that make this campaign function.
I understand that people love their specific beloved race and feel its unfair that there is an extra hoop to jump through for Dragonkin that doesn't exist for say Morlamaw but if the rewards being offered weren't things people wanted then they wouldn't serve as proper incentives.
We really don't owe paizo anything.
I am definitely in the same boat as Nefreet. I was initially pretty skeptical of Starfinder but once I had the same experience with the playtest you had I gave Starfinder a second look and have fully committed to it.
But if I hadn't done that and I didn't enjoy PF2 (as I don't), I would see no shame in walking away from a hobby I no longer enjoyed. That's life.
Tommi Ketonen wrote:
Yeah, hence what Bob said - either unable or unwilling to make AR something that gets regular attention vs. something that gets addressed irregularly. I know the website is some kind of mystical beast and editing it is a bear for reasons beyond my comprehension, but the blog gets updated like clockwork so it must be possible - just not something they're willing or able to make a priority.
alright, consider me sufficiently shouted down. keep doing things exactly the same, don’t entertain the thought of changing anything, enjoy your echo chamber, I’m out. No further comments to be made
A good many of your suggestions have already been implemented.
I will say that very often the volunteer pass on things is done well well ahead of those decisions being published on the website, which all told seems to be the big holdup for most things.
Anyone who tells you there isn't optimization in Pathfinder 2 is lying to your face and probably trying to sell you on something that isn't true.
As more optimal options become available the balance of the game will shift and that's that. Because Paizo's business model dictates the need to release roughly 5 bazillion player options to sell to people, there will become increasingly optimal ways to build yourself over time. There just will.
Putting together an AR is not even really about curbing optimization, so much as its about curbing rules conflicts, weeding out thematically blah options that shouldn't be player legal for various reasons, and eliminating things that are egregiously imbalanced for either economic or other reasons. But the AR team is not the design team and if the design team wants to shift the game's power level around, that's on them, all the AR team is trying to do is make sure that its on purpose and that its appropriate for the campaign. Living optimization curves are a leading reason to play anyone's newest games systems, otherwise I am sure everyone has their favorite older RPG system that they'd rather be messing around with (for me its Warhammer Fantasy Role Play, 2nd edition).
We can only hope that that optimization is interesting (as it was in PF1) and not boring (as it was in 4th ed D&D).
I mean the retired scenarios are available for purchase and able to be run for funsies. I just bought The Asmodeus Mirage and am gonna run it for my normal PFS crew with the understanding that its for no credit - not that we are in an arena where official credit means all that much after give or take December once the regional cons have run through 10-98.
Should be fun.
I have seen a number of people with the agenda to 'prove goblins arent disruptive' which is more or less what I expected, a thousand tiny green drizzts.
That said, I suspect over time once this particular 'controversy' has died down some we will see more and more people wanting to play as Not-Reta Bigbad because that's what goblins are to most folks and is the cost of having them as PC options.
Pathfinder Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
I've been toying with the backstory for a new Kasathan who is either an outlaw or pirate or something of that nature and I am considering what sorts of lore reasons someone might be pushed out of their place on the Idari.
I am also toying with some naming ideas for an exiled Kasathan what I've come up with is something inspired by the bastard names in A Song of Ice and Fire. Only instead of geography it would be based on sin
So the name might be something like Altronus Blood for a murderer.
Blake's Tiger wrote:
The level to which they habd out goodies in SFS is also literally half of what we see here.
Plus I would say that hireling usage is probably the hugest scenario difficulty swinger I see and is like THE hallmark that separates casual and non casual tables and that that hireling is fairly liable to swing the secondary success conditions of a scenario fairly frequently.
Xathos of Varisia wrote:
On point one, it surprised me at first but out in the wild I have observed that quite a bit. Players will in fact turn down help if that means one less thing they have to manage. That's fine while all of the boons and extra resources are considered optional - a nice bonus for the meticulously prepared. My main worry with this whole system is that those bonuses will begin to become part of the power curve assumption of the game and make it much harder for a more casual player to survive.
And on that second point I agree. I don't really like 2nd edition at all. But I'm still learning the rules and will run it if thats what the con/community requires it simply won't be my preference when I have Starfinder available to run.
Honestly, Treasure subtraction feels pretty archaic anyway, I had expected to go to a more uniform treasure system to get a smooth APL without punishing players for not looking under every crevice for treasure - it's basically what we were already doing anyway in practice that we simply couldn't phase out.
That said that part really isn't any more or less complicated, it's basically the same but it could have been made simpler by its removal.
My first character is a worshipper of Thulvix who will at least try to get you to believe he is a worshipper a Chaldira Zuzaristan, but since I'm not a cleric it doesn't matter that neither is in the core rulebook (though I am almost surprised Chaldira isn't at least in the guild guide given 10-99...)
That said, I totally feel your pain. The one big downside of the rules changing but the world not is that many many of your ideas will undoubtedly be better served later.
I mean this has been my refrain regarding Org Play bloat for a while. It is simply far too much for newer players and I have observed many older players simply roll their eyes and ignore much of it in favor of having a more simplified play experience. Things like factions and boon slotting and Colleges and the veritable spreadsheet's worth of information you need to have accurate for your characters is a step deeper into the mire than PF1 which was already a fair amount heavier than the competition*.
With SFS I feel compelled to have a printed version of the guide with me and if I decide to take the plunge with PF2** as a serious GM, rather than as an occasional one, I am going to feel compelled to the same to an even greater extent. There is simply a very large number of fiddly little moving parts here that seem like a real pain to administer, especially since knowing the character of many of my GMs that a lot of that administrative responsibility is going to fall on me as VO regardless of the level of PF2 I choose to run. And the extra level of administration and preparation required needed may drive potential GMs to refrain from GMing which is again going to make life more difficult for me as an organizer, so while the comments are negative I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for some reprieve here.
* I am aware AL has been having its issues on this front as well, so I am not pretending theirs is a model we could simply copy, simply pointing out that it is in fact a lot simpler.
** Currently I am choosing the focus my efforts on keeping my community in tact and that means focusing on SFS and finishing out PFS1 for the time being, while leaving 2 to other, newer faces.