Search Posts
> I think the solarian is the closest we're ever going to get to a Jedi-like class. Fair enough. Although I still think a monk, with say specializations in something like last airbender ... and then with air specialization and a monks natural reflex's plus "laser" sword equals Jedi. Not saying I need a Jedi class, but that feels like the general way to do it without having a Jedi class.
29? where did you get that number? The real point I'm wanting to hit home is this. If I look at the big medieval(ish) fantasy movies out there, of which there are unfortunately few, Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, Pirates of the Caribbean, Dungeons and Dragons and wanted to play a story or character from one of those, Pathfinder wood accommodate easily. If I'm looking at Star Wars, Star Trek, Dune, Aliens, or Starship Troopers I think I'd find that you wouldn't even get close. Whilst having a unique narrative is important, letting people play the popular thing that they like within the unique narrative is the thing that might allow this to become a popular narrative.
> Shirren were once part of the Swarm, so they're your core "sci-fi bug" ancestry. Sure, just having the right ancestry alone won't create the right feel since most abilities come from your class. I might like the Evolutionist class, but I can’t say for sure—especially since it's currently missing. I bring this up because I see the "sci-fi bug" concept as being mostly melee-focused, which ties into the same issue. I also kind of dislike how Games Workshop has portrayed Tyranids. The idea of a reptilian bug holding a gun seems ridiculous to me, or rather, it just looks absurd. But that's just my opinion. For some reason, *Pathfinder* has multiple classes that serve the same concept. While many of these are expansions, as I pointed out in another thread, there are 17 classes between the Core Rulebook and the Advanced Player's Guide (APG).
I've been looking at classes now to see if something really fits most science fiction bug races. Which sound a lot like the pathfinder "swarm" and yet they seem to have mostly decided to make the split offs from the swarm fluffy cute bugs. I've yet to figure out if there's something that Makes me think this independent bug came from Xenomorphs (Alien), Arachnids (starship troopers), Tyranids (40k), or Zerg (starcraft) (technically these last 2 are buggish looking reptiles). Feels like there's a missing Bioform class that's all claws and carapace, and more evolved bio plasma launchers. Maybe there was a class like this in 1e? I'm kind of digging to see what I might do with an Operative.
Also, battles in real life tend to happen in big open fields, or wide open streets. A non-trivial number of starfinder are likely to take place in cramped starship corridors or in mazes of crowded hive-like buildings (like the walled city), where an "Action Hero" soldier may inadvertently mow down a dozen civilians with their automatic fire. no offense but soldiers fighting in iraq and afganistan, etc, might disagree with you. I know in Iraq that one of the bigger problems was dealing with "civilian" snipers and then clearing dangerous buildings. The soldiers might have been on open streets some of the time, but their enemies weren't. This is from some very limited knowledge. Guerilla warfare is how most wars are fought now.
I haven't actually played yet, just working on building characters. Is it a potential issue that ranged weapons don’t deal enough damage? In the modern world, firearms can hit from a distance, and suppressive fire is often needed to close the gap for melee combat. If you're hit, you’re likely to go down quickly. Even today, melee weapons can be more effective in close quarters because ranged weapon damage is focused in a single line, while melee weapons can cause damage even when someone is struggling against them. From my training in disarming people, I’ve found that skilled opponents can neutralize firearms quickly at close range. At 20 feet, a melee attacker would struggle to close the gap if they’re running directly into the line of fire. However, at 10 feet, the person holding the gun is at a severe disadvantage if the attacker is skilled and charging effectively. Of course we shouldn't spend too much time modeling reality.
You did ask for an example of a dexterity-based magic class. I think you could make a strong case that Jedi from Star Wars are essentially magic monks. I’m not suggesting we should duplicate Pathfinder classes, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to aim for parity with Pathfinder. A lot of inspiration, including mechanics, could be drawn from it—just rewording a mechanic can make it feel fresh. In any case, I didn't find a class that truly matched the concept I was aiming for. It seems there was a class in the first edition that did fit. Given the number of Pathfinder classes, that amount doesn’t seem unattainable. Whether or not each attribute needs to be represented as magic or science, having a balanced approach feels appropriate.
The math isn't incorrect since there are already three intelligence-based classes. I figured out how I arrived at 14 instead of 13, but I’ve now forgotten the exact process. I think it was due to a misunderstanding about the non-intelligence class and how it related to the definition of magic or similar concepts. Regarding the second point, this seems more of a stretch than a reasonable fit. If Pathfinder can accommodate so many classes, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to have a slightly smaller number for Starfinder, especially since you could likely adapt many of the mechanics from those Pathfinder classes. I was considering suggesting something akin to the Pathfinder monk for a sci-fi magic class. It wouldn't be purely magical, but monks have some magical-like abilities that could be emphasized further—think along the lines of Iron Fist with glowing hands.
I’ve been contemplating creating a character inspired by Ash from *Alien*. Initially, I thought an Envoy would be a good fit since I wanted a character who didn't focus on magic or combat. However, I later realized that androids have significant penalties to Charisma and skills, which led me to reconsider. After exploring other options, I found that in *Starfinder* 1st Edition, both the Technomancer and Mechanic are core classes, similar to the Advanced Player’s Guide (APG) in Pathfinder. For *Starfinder*’s equivalent to the APG, there’s the Biohacker. In Pathfinder, there are 17 core classes spread between the Core Rulebook and the APG. Although it might be ambitious, I observed that the playtest features one class per attribute. Historically, there were three Intelligence-based classes, suggesting it could be useful to aim for 18 classes between the Core Rulebook and the new Character Operations Manual (COM), with three classes for each attribute. This may seem like a stretch, but having one magical and one non-magical option for each primary attribute—totaling 14 classes—seems reasonable. This would mean keeping the original 10 classes and adding 4 more. Perhaps the original 10 could even be included in the core book. I haven’t suggested specific classes for the additional 4 yet, as I'm not deeply familiar with the existing options at the time of this post. I might update this post once I identify other concept gaps.
> Trained in Computers represents a character with basic hacking and programming skills as well as probably a college level proficiency with computerized research yeah. I've seen this in other RPGs, they explicitly spelled out that no proficiency didn't mean you couldn't do it e.g. "drive (automobiles)". What it meant for something like a chase or another under stress situation it was going to be hard because you really aren't that good at it. You shouldn't be doing any kind of racing, even street racing. The number of people I know that can barely make things work... and I'm always astonished at how little they know about their own phone, or features of software they use daily. Your browser prompts you to log into it and save your passwords! why?!!!!
It feels like this should be fundamental to me! But that's just my take on it. I get why a technomancer might not be a core option. Is a mechanic a class? Seems like an odd specialization, maybe it could work better as a background... I do understand not throwing everything into the playtest. But, on the other hand, feedback is crucial. I'm just someone who wanted a sci-fi setting without having to convince my friends to pick up yet another new system.
Yeah, I kind of assume the same. Since it was omitted though I feel like maybe I should say something to make certain it's not completely overlooked accidentally.
While you could change the name of this Pathfinder 2 ancestry it seems like a weird exclusion. Maybe I want to play R2-D2 or IG-11 like characters. I imagine there will be many many new ancestories released over time but this one feels kind of core to a Sci-Fi experience.
I've just been skimming the play test book and have never played starfinder before. Looking at the backgrounds provided "bounty Hunter" seems like it's probably an obvious omission. It feels like it fits in the same vein as smuggler. |
