RSS RSS Facebook Twitter Email
Starfinder / Adventures / Adventures / Dead Suns

Starfinder Adventure Path #1: Incident at Absalom Station (Dead Suns 1 of 6)

3.60/5 (based on 28 ratings)
Starfinder Adventure Path #1: Incident at Absalom Station (Dead Suns 1 of 6)
Show Description For:
Non-Mint

Print Edition Unavailable

Add PDF $19.99

Non-Mint Unavailable

Facebook Twitter Email

A Ship Without a Crew

When a brutal gang war breaks out on a docking bay in Absalom Station, the player characters are recruited by the Starfinder Society to investigate the unexpected bloodshed. Delving into the station’s seedy Spike neighborhoods, the heroes confront the gangs and discover that both were paid to start the riot and that the true conflict is between two rival mining companies battling over a new arrival in orbit around the station: a mysteriously deserted ship and the strange asteroid it recovered from the Drift. To head off further violence, the heroes are asked to investigate the ship and discover what happened to its crew, as well as the nature of the asteroid it tows. But what the players find there will set in motion events that could threaten the entirety of the Pact Worlds and change the face of the galaxy forever...

This volume of Starfinder Adventure Path launches the Dead Suns Adventure Path and includes:

  • "Incident at Absalom Station," a Starfinder adventure for 1st-level characters, by Robert G. McCreary.
  • A gazetteer of Absalom Station, by James L. Sutter.
  • Magical relics inspired by the lost planet Golarion, by Owen K.C. Stephens.
  • An archive of new alien creatures, by Jason Keeley and Robert G. McCreary.
  • Statistics and deck plans for a new starship designed just for the player characters, plus details on a new planet in the Codex of Worlds, by Robert G. McCreary.

ISBN-13: 978-1-60125-961-5

The Dead Suns Adventure Path is sanctioned for use in Starfinder Society Organized Play. The rules for running this Adventure Path and Chronicle sheet are available as a free download (1.7 MB PDF).

Other Resources: This product is also available on the following platforms:

Hero Lab Online
Fantasy Grounds Virtual Tabletop
SoundSet on Syrinscape
Archives of Nethys

Note: This product is part of the Starfinder Adventures Subscription.

Product Availability

Print Edition:

Unavailable

PDF:

Fulfilled immediately.

Non-Mint:

Unavailable

This product is non-mint. Refunds are not available for non-mint products. The standard version of this product can be found here.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at store@paizo.com.

PZO7201

See Also:

1 to 5 of 28 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

3.60/5 (based on 28 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

5/5 —

A serviceable start

3/5 —

There's been a lot of words written about the Dead Suns AP as a whole. I don't want to rehash what other people have written, but here are my thoughts:

1. Requires buy-in from the players, no players guide - As it starts out almost as abruptly as Abomination Vaults for PF2. You're here to meet a dwarf about joining the SF Society, he gets murked, you get drawn into a conspiracy. If the players are disinterested, then no amount of begging by the Shirren SF Society contact is going to make them care.

2. Red Herrings - There's several red herrings floating around involving corporate bureaucratic infighting between a mining guild and a corporation over who gets to claim the Drift Rock that's never really elaborated upon and is honestly just a time-waster as there's no payoff for the group at all. I think it's better to excise this part entirely.

3. Another Red Herring - There's a character that you meet who basically disappears and is never mentioned again, except that your choice to complete the job or not complete the job may affect whether you get somebody's away message in the third AP. Was kind of disappointed.

4. The Ship Is A Deathtrap - Part 2 takes place on a derelict. Really cool, really spooky, except the players are marooned on this ship with no choice but to go forward. Good to chase the players up a tree, bad in that they probably were not prepared for this. My suggestion? Have an unethical space goblin/Wytchwyrd merchant dock with the derelict and offer medical services or consumables to the group. They will need them, if most peoples accounts of playing this AP are to be believed.

Disappointing

2/5 —

NO SPOILERS

Ok, here we go! The first adventure path for Starfinder, Dead Suns. I got to play it in a campaign that took a couple of years of biweekly sessions. My starting PC was a hyper-caffienated energy drink loving barathu envoy, B'rll'blub. He was great fun to play, but proved startlingly ineffective in combat and died later in the campaign--but it was through his eyes I first experienced what I'm reviewing today, Chapter 1: Incident at Absalom Station. In the flagged section below, I discuss the adventure in detail. My general thoughts might be summed up as: it's okay, but nothing spectacular, and with some encounters that aren't really fair to the PCs. Here in the "No Spoilers" section, however, I'm going to discuss everything in volume one that's not part of the adventure--the front and back matter.

[Cut for space: my hatred of the cover, and my description of the inside front and back covers and the author's foreword.]

The first piece of proper back matter is a twelve-page gazetteer of Absalom Station, the center for humanity in the Pact Worlds solar system (the main campaign setting for Starfinder). An interesting history is provided for the station, and I like how it cleverly integrates some concepts from Pathfinder (like the Starstone, some neighborhood names) while making it its own thing. Absalom Station is perhaps the most important location in the setting, as it holds the headquarters for the Pact Worlds government, the Starfinder Society, the Stalwarts (intergalactic peacekeepers), and more. It also serves as a natural starting location for adventures, and a probable home for PCs since it's a pretty multicultural place--a bit like Babylon 5. Although much of this information is probably replicated in the Pact Worlds hardcover, the gazetteer does a good job describing the different areas of the station and leaves a lot of room for GMs to customise as necessary for the adventure they want to tell. There are some "feel and flavour" elements that I think are missing--how do people get around (elevators? trams? vehicles?); what's it like for newcomers when they arrive (visas? security inspections? customs taxes?); and what laws are in place regarding weapons (frowned upon? side-arms only? everyone's got a rocket launcher?). This last issue in particular has proven problematic for a lot of gamers as it goes to varying real-world conceptions of what's normal for urban communities. As a complete aside, I can't help but note that the artwork of the dude on page 43 is *clearly* an intentional likeness of Jon Bernthal from Netflix's The Punisher!

Next up is "Relics of Golarion", a four-page-long collection of new magical items that have historical links to the now-missing planet. The writer clearly knew their Pathfinder lore, as there's a rich evocation of setting elements in the backstory to each item. In terms of actual usefulness, many of the items are too expensive or too high-level to be useful for most PCs, but I liked the falcon boots (allowing a PC to make a sort of personal gravity field so they can walk on walls or ceilings, even in Zero-G) and the (perhaps overpowered) chained weapon fusion which gives any melee weapon the reach property! I liked the section, though as a timing matter I think it was probably too soon and the space should have been devoted to making Starfinder more its own thing instead of tying it so closely to Pathfinder. New readers can be turned off if they feel they can't get the full story without playing an entirely different game.

A bestiary-style "Alien Archives" introduces 7 new creatures, with each receiving a page. The line-up is: akatas, bone troopers, driftdead, garaggakal, rauzhant, vracinea, and void zombies. The artwork is really strong here, though I don't see much in the way of creative ideas here (and a couple of just updates of Pathfinder monsters). Five of the seven appear in the adventure proper, which is a nice way to save word count there.

Finally, there's the "Codex of Worlds", a one-page description of a planet ripe for adventure that's located somewhere outside of the Pact Worlds system. This issue's entry is "Heicoron IV", an ocean planet with rival civilizations. Although they share a common ancestry, one has adopted to living on floating cities while the other has made the depths their home. There's a "first/early contact" situation for explorers. A classic SF concept that could have appeared (budget-willing) on Star Trek. It's not easy to design a world in one-page, but I liked what I saw with Heicoron IV.

The pattern established in this first issue of the AP persists in subsequent issues, with each including a setting element, a bestiary section, some player-facing character options, and a one-page new world. It's worth noting these volumes are also much shorter (just 64 pages each) compared to first edition Pathfinder APs, making them less of a value for the budget-conscious.

SPOILERS! (for the whole AP):

On to the adventure! This starts with a two-page campaign outline that offers the GM a rough idea of what's in store for the entire AP. In short, Dead Suns is going to be a planet-hopping adventure. The PCs start on Absalom Station in Chapter 1, head to Castrovel in Chapter 2, on to the Diaspora in Chapter 3, a gas giant in the Vast in Chapter 4, an artificial moon in Chapter 5, and then a massive Corpse Fleet flagship in Chapter 6. This is an AP meant to show off themes of space travel and exploration, not one about laying down roots or deep involvement with NPCs and communities. The plot itself concerns the lurking danger of an epic superweapon called the Death St--I mean, the Stellar Degenerator--capable of destroying entire worlds. I'll get more into that in reviews of later chapters.

Part 1 of Incident at Absalom Station is "Absalom Gang War." All of the PCs are meant to be new (or returning) visitors to Absalom Station interested in joining the Starfinder Society (an organisation devoted to exploration, scholarship, and first contact). That's a reasonable premise, but I *really* wish Starfinder did AP Player's Guides like Pathfinder does--they make great advertising tools and help players better immerse themselves in a campaign's premise.

Anyway, I think starting a campaign off with some drama and action is a wise choice, and that's what we get here, because the moment the PCs step off their shuttle and into the docking bay, they're caught in a firefight between two rival gangs! The Starfinder agent meant to show the group around (a dwarf named Duravor Kreel) is killed in the crossfire. I joked with my GM for months after because this is done in a heavy-handed way. Instead of Kreel being killed in the opening descriptive text (before the PCs can do anything), he's required to be killed in the first round of Initiative (no matter what the PCs do, and with no attack or damage roll required). But my PC had a rescue plan! Oh well . . .

With Kreel dead and the gang members dispatched (or fled), the PCs will eventually come into contact with the shirren Chiskisk, a higher-ranking member of the Starfinder Society. Chiskisk is concerned that perhaps Kreel's death wasn't simply a "wrong place at the wrong time" situation, and asks the group to investigate his death as a sort of audition to become members of the group. The investigation aspect is handled pretty well, I think, with five different columns for Gather Information results on different topics and lots of room for creative GMs to flavour how (or from whom) the PCs are getting the info. The PCs will quickly understand that the two gangs fighting in the docking bay (the "Downside Kings" and the "Level 21 Crew") were essentially proxies hired by two rival mining companies (the "Hardscrabble Collective" and "Astral Extractions"). The mining companies are enmeshed in a legal dispute over who gets to claim ownership of an asteroid-sized chunk of rock found in the Drift that had been towed back to Absalom Station by a mining survey ship named the Acreon. As all of the crew of the ship were dead on arrival, Absalom Station's authorities have placed the ship and the Drift rock into quarantine some distance from the station.

That info reveals what the gangs (and their mining company employers) were fighting over, but it doesn't yet explain the nature of Duravor Kreel's death. To get more answers, the PCs need to visit each gang's headquarters and see their leader. The adventure handles this part well, with diplomatic and violent approaches accounted for, and some good characterisation of the NPCs. Busting up gang members isn't exactly intergalactic SF action, but every Starfinder has to start somewhere! Assuming their investigation goes well, the PCs should learn that, in fact, Kreel was an intended victim by one of the gangs--he was a board member of the Hardscrabble Collective and so a hit was put out on him by Astral Extractions out of fear he would also get the Starfinder Society involved in the legal dispute. It's a mystery that has a satisfying conclusion, and gives the PCs an early sense of accomplishment.

Part 2 is "Ghost Ship." The PCs have a few days of downtime to explore and establish themselves on Absalom Station--something that's good for role-playing, even if the GM knows they won't be staying there long. They're then invited to a meeting with Ambassador Gevalarsk Nor, the necrovite (a type of undead) ambassador from Eox! Friendly chatting with evil undead is something some players will have difficulty swallowing, but the premise of Starfinder is that Eox is a full member of the Pact Worlds and that although some people find them distasteful or suspicious, they're generally treated decently. It definitely makes for an interesting meeting, as the PCs learn that the ambassador has an offer for them: he wants them to investigate the Acreon and the Drift rock, and report what they find. It turns out that Ambassador Nor is the mediator between the ongoing dispute over who should get to claim the rock. He's willing to pay well, and he offers additional payment if the PCs bring back to him personally a particular container in the ship's hold--though he won't reveal what's in it! I can't argue with a "What's in the box? Don't open the box!" mystery.

Assuming the PCs agree, they'll get their first taste of the game's starship combat rules. The shuttle they've been loaned is attacked by a single-seat interceptor piloted by an android assassin (hired by whichever mining company the PCs seemed most adverse to). I'm on the record as loathing starship combat in Starfinder, but at least this one is quick and easy, and serves as a straightforward introduction of the rules to players new to the game. As is often the case, I am annoyed that whether the PCs win or lose this starship combat, there are no real consequences, as the adventure assumes that the PCs take lifeboats to get on to the Drift rock (I have no idea why this "professional assassin" wouldn't just shoot down their lifeboats, and the adventure provides no explanation either).

Exploring the Acreon plays up to the classic science fiction "ghost ship" trope. The crew are either dead or vanished, and the PCs need to figure out what happened to them. Their investigation is hampered by the fact that some space goblins from Absalom Station broke into the quarantined ship earlier; I like how they can be simple foes to neutralize or made short-term hirelings (my group chose the latter option, because we needed all the help we could get!). The answer to what befell the ship's crew comes pretty quickly: the movie Alien. Here, they're "akatas", but they look and act very similar to Ripley's foes, complete with the egg-laying-in-human-host bit. Frankly, I wouldn't have minded an answer that was more creative and original. On the other hand, the "what's in the box?!" mystery has a great reveal. When I played, our group didn't open it because the Ambassador said not to and we wanted to get paid. But if a group does, they see there's a dead body inside--and the body opens its eyes and speaks! In short, the container contains an undead "bone trooper" who was being smuggled into Absalom Station by Ambassador Nor. This can turn into a combat or a role-playing encounter, but either way I think it's a creepy-fun answer.

Part 3 is "Phantoms of the Drift" and sees the PCs exploring the Drift rock itself. A well-concealed cave leads to a hidden complex of chambers with technology far in advance of what the Pact Worlds has. The PCs won't know this now (and even as a player, I never realised it until preparing this review), but the Drift rock is actually a small sheared-off portion of the Stellar Degenerator itself! While exploring, the PCs have to survive the android assassin who comes after them in person, some zombies (crew members from the Acreon infected by the akatas), a security robot, and more. They'll also be attacked by a driftdead (a new creature from the back matter's bestiary) that was once a space explorer named Moriko Nash--who died 75 years ago! It turns out Nash was the captain of a starship called the Sunrise Maiden that encountered the Drift rock decades before the Acreon. In a touching bit, the PCs find Nash's last recording that details her fate and gives an ominous warning that something is hunting her.

The PCs probably won't have realised it, but once they landed on the Drift rock and started exploring, their shuttle is remotely activated and flies back to Absalom Station, leading them stranded. This is a contrived (and to my mind execrable) excuse to force the PCs to find another way home. Of course, they'll find the Sunrise Maiden in a hangar bay, the ship intended to be their real home for the rest of the campaign (and the subject of the inside front and back cover). But first, they have to deal with what killed the ship's former captain.

The big boss of Incident at Absalom Station is a new monster called a garaggakal. It's a CR5 monster with a bite attack that does 2d6+9 damage, a special "Leech Life" attack that it can use (a limited number of times per day) to instantly do 5d6 damage that it then gains as temporary hit points, and an EAC/KAC high enough that PCs will probably hit it only 25% of the time. Oh, and if PCs barricade themselves in a room somewhere to rest and heal, it can pass through walls to get them! In short, it's a TPK waiting to happen, as evidenced by several posts in the forum. My experience as a player was exactly the same, although the GM took pity on us and had it act in ways that allowed us to eventually beat it. Frankly, I'd rather suffer a TPK than get a pity win. But in any event, placing the garaggakal there was a terrible decision idea by the adventure writer. I guess I can chalk it up to the difficulties with appropriately scaling difficulty in a brand new game, but I feel like just eyeballing what it can do versus what four average Level 2 PCs can do shows it's likely to be a big problem that leaves a sour taste in the mouth moving forward. And that's where the adventure concludes--there's not an epilogue, because the action starts up immediately in the next volume of the AP, right when the PCs leave the Drift rock.

Overall, both as a player and a reader, I felt some disappointment with Incident at Absalom Station. There were some bits I really enjoyed (the investigation and dealing with the ambassador, for example), but the plot afterwards was pretty basic: a ghost ship followed by a space-dungeon crawl that I've seen a million times, in Starfinder Society scenarios and elsewhere. I was hoping that the first AP for the game would really hit things out of the park (like Rise of the Runelords) did for Pathfinder, but that just isn't the case. And the big boss encounter made it clear that the writers' expectations of what an average group can do is not realistic.

Good starting adventure, but not that good intro

3/5 —

So I'm having bit of problem with these reviews because I'm doing them while running the final book, so by now players' reactions and such isn't super fresh in my mind :p But at least my impressions have had time to age.

The adventures premise of "your contact got killed that ropes you into plot between two factions competing for same thing" and gags involved in it IS interesting.... But have no relevance to rest of the plot at all, so it all feels kind of... Irrelevant?

If Dead Suns is structured like a scifi action adventure movie, this book is essentially pre credit roll intro thing. Like Indiana Jones stea- err finding that golden idol and having it stolen by his evil counterpart. Except instead of lasting 5-10 minutes, it lasts for one sixth of the story.

(that said, actual adventure is fun, I like use of akata and stuff in the drift rock in itself, but its weak overall plotwise when you look at the ap as whole. It does have interesting stuff like potential enemy you can turn to friend and I do like idea of drift rock's discovery setting you up on grand journey. Though this book has several moments of straight up railroading that feels unnecessary or like if it could have been written around differently)

P.S. Gevalarsk Nor is the best npc of this ap. I do find it bit of mixed bag in how its kept secret for gm what his subplot is actually about, but I do like it you can reasonable figure it out by paying close attention through entire ap.

I expected so much more from Paizo then this...

2/5 —

While I generally do not play published adventures, Incident at Absalom Station is exactly WHY I don't play published adventures.

Without spoiling too much of the plot, IaAS is a railroady, contrived adventure that tries to be a murder-mystery but was written by someone who clearly had no idea how to write a murder-mystery.

The book kicks off with the players being newly recruited Starfinder Society members that arrive only to see their Society contact get gunned down in front of them. What follows is a paint-by-numbers story of corporate intrigue that drags on for much longer then it needs to be. Five minutes of dice rolling and roleplaying, and most intelligent players will have found both the main suspect and the motive. But because the writing is contrived, the party still has to trudge through largely pointless filler and no, you cannot call on the Starfinder Society to help speed things up (remind me why we joined these guys again?)

After the initial mystery resolves itself with an unsatisfying bit of Deus Ex Machina, we get to the second half of the adventure, a fairly standard dungeon crawl. Other then the fact that the encounters as written are not balanced for a standard party of four level two adventurers, this actually isn't all that bad. And yes, there is errata available that makes the dungeon encounters more manageable. That one was on us.

I will not elaborate on the ending other then it is fittingly unsatisfying for an adventure that had little player agency and was horribly contrived almost from the get-go. For a company that had been writing adventures for 14 years before Dead Suns dropped, Paizo's first outing into the Pact Worlds should have been better then this.

1 to 5 of 28 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Search Thread

Search this Thread:

251 to 300 of 546 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Sooooooooooo, ** spoiler omitted **

Sounds to me a Player's Guide would have been very handy with this AP...I am starting to think with a lot of people leaving....they lost sight on why the Player's Guides are really important.

Sovereign Court
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

I've been thinking of the Core Rulebook as a really big player's guide. It has all the relevant rules and the setting description you need.
Liberty's Edge
3 people marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:

You've summed up my feelings exactly. That's why I called it a failure point.

[Stuff Deleted]

You are being a little harsh here. Not entirely unfairly perhaps, but still, a little harsh.

Look, when it comes to the definition of "railroady" and its application in SciFi RPGs, you need to take a giant step back, sit on the stool and put your thumb in your mouth a moment and think abut this.

There's a problem with the common definition of "railroad" and its application to SF RPGs. It's this: there are TOO MANY OPTIONS for the PCs; WAY, WAY, WAY, TOO MANY.

This leads to more permissive railroading in the interests of actually playing a frikkin game.

Once you give the PCs a ship and a planet/system/galaxy to explore, there is no longer any horizon of reasonable anticipation that a GM has. If the PCs don't take the hook, the game breaks. Utterly. Into a kazillion pieces. Utterly irretrievably broken. So the game turns into Papers and Paycheques, Piracy in the space lanes, and then a session or three later "How about we just roll up a group of rogues instead?".

Like every other Space Opera game, ever.

This is, in fact, the Primary Rule of all SF Space Opera campaigns ever made since 1974:

THEY DO NOT LAST. EVER. **EVER**

They don't last because the PCs really DO have to take the hook. The social contract at the table over this is just too important in a SF campaign.

And of course it's even worse when there are very few published adventures written for any system. It's not like you have a trove of hundreds of adventures to re-purpose and throw 'em out there on the fly.

No, you've got FA to work with, basically.

So while some of this story-telling can be a little more elegantly managed and GM'd, give Rob McCreary a break. The PCs have to take this hook. There might be *another* hook presented that ends up leading to the same place -- but now we are talking colors of different lures all tied to the same fishing line. That's the hook and you just *got* to take it.

You need to go with it. Accept the premise and all else follows. If you don't? Go play your old Traveller game again.

How'd that work out for you, by the way? Lots of fun, everybody says they love it, yet nobody ever actually plays it? EXACTLY.
3 people marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
I've been thinking of the Core Rulebook as a really big player's guide. It has all the relevant rules and the setting description you need.

Except for the part Rysky stated...like do not play a

:
undead hunter who really hates undead.

The player's guide are not so much about the mechanics but also the Role-playing as well...
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Stratagemini wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:


That's actually ANOTHER failure point that I didn't even think of. ** spoiler omitted **
A competent GM will talk to their players about character creation during Session 0. You don't actually need a Player's guide. They're nice, but not necessary. Like Maps. I wish Starfinder's APs came with Maps like Pathfinder's do...

Sure, but what about incompetent (or, more likely, just new) GMs? Or one on a PbP board?

And yes, the core rulebook is essentially one big players guide for this AP, but it would have been handy to have something small and easily digestible to set expectations, an APs tones, and what kinds of player roles they should be looking to fill.
Dark Archive
Stratagemini wrote:
AnimatedPaper wrote:


That's actually ANOTHER failure point that I didn't even think of. ** spoiler omitted **
A competent GM will talk to their players about character creation during Session 0. You don't actually need a Player's guide. They're nice, but not necessary. Like Maps. I wish Starfinder's APs came with Maps like Pathfinder's do...

Perhaps the interactive maps will be sold separately at some point?

That or, if long term the market remains there for them, they'll consider making them. I totally get not wanting to wade into waters too deep right off the bat with a new line, but hopefully for next years AP they'll have more freedom.
Silver Crusade
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Sooooooooooo, ** spoiler omitted **
Sounds to me a Player's Guide would have been very handy with this AP...I am starting to think with a lot of people leaving....they lost sight on why the Player's Guides are really important.

No, because they just made one for Ruins of Azlant.

It's just that this AP doesn't need one. You want to play an undead-hating undead hunter? Well, nice RP challenge of how does he hate undead 24/7 with Eoxians being civilised (if creepy) pillars of Pact Worlds. You get that in the Core Rulebook, no need for a separate guide.

And I would argue that somebody wanting to play such a character in this setting is a contrarian of the "I want to play a Paladin in Skulls and Shackles" sort and you shouldn't game with him/her :)
Steel_Wind wrote:

Eoxian Ambassador?

** spoiler omitted **...

Uh, not really sure what you were disagreeing with with the first bit, but I don't have a problem with how little or heavily railroaded the AP is. My concerns are what Kretz pointed out,

Spoiler:
working with Eoxians. Which, even if your character doesn't have anything all that against Undead, Eoxians are full on f~!@ing monsters.

Like it be like in Pathfinder if you were operating under the assumption of playing Heros... and then you have to work with people from Okeno.
Sovereign Court
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
I've been thinking of the Core Rulebook as a really big player's guide. It has all the relevant rules and the setting description you need.

Except for the part Rysky stated...like do not play a ** spoiler omitted **

The player's guide are not so much about the mechanics but also the Role-playing as well...

Spoiler:
The Core Rulebook also says that Eox are full citizens and have representatives on Absalom Station. A character choosing to be a militant Pharasmin should be prepared for the possibility of encountering an undead they cannot kill, both legally and by CR.

Players should be prepared to play in the setting.

Liberty's Edge
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Steel_Wind wrote:

Eoxian Ambassador?

** spoiler omitted **...

Uh, not really sure what you were disagreeing with with the first bit, but I don't have a problem with how little or heavily railroaded the AP is. My concerns are what Kretz pointed out, ** spoiler omitted **

Like it be like in Pathfinder if you were operating under the assumption of playing Heros... and then you have to work with people from Okeno.

I'm more concerned with the plausibility of it. But, whatever the concerns, they end up in the same place if you go with my proposed alternate route:

Spoiler:

Your PCs end up on the Acreon, while your concern is avoided, too.

Win-win.
Gorbacz wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Sooooooooooo, ** spoiler omitted **
Sounds to me a Player's Guide would have been very handy with this AP...I am starting to think with a lot of people leaving....they lost sight on why the Player's Guides are really important.

No, because they just made one for Ruins of Azlant.

It's just that this AP doesn't need one. You want to play an undead-hating undead hunter? Well, nice RP challenge of how does he hate undead 24/7 with Eoxians being civilised (if creepy) pillars of Pact Worlds. You get that in the Core Rulebook, no need for a separate guide.

And I would argue that somebody wanting to play such a character in this setting is a contrarian of the "I want to play a Paladin in Skulls and Shackles" sort and you shouldn't game with him/her :)

Paladins aren't common in the Shackles though. Iomedae, Sarenrae, and Pharasma are core deities of the Pact worlds. That even discounting the Undead thing Eoxians are f&@#ing Evil. Like "broadcast horrific torture and snuff games throughout the Pact worlds" evil.

Sovereign Court
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

@Rysky, I think you're reading a little more Evil into Eox than is presented.

Eox:
"A small number of glory seekers
look to enter the deadly games in the Halls of the Living, a
subterranean city designed specifically for living inhabitants,
where cruel reality shows and competitions are arranged as
entertainment and broadcast through the Pact Worlds."

More like Nidal or Cheliax than Okeno.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Sooooooooooo, ** spoiler omitted **
Sounds to me a Player's Guide would have been very handy with this AP...I am starting to think with a lot of people leaving....they lost sight on why the Player's Guides are really important.

No, because they just made one for Ruins of Azlant.

It's just that this AP doesn't need one. You want to play an undead-hating undead hunter? Well, nice RP challenge of how does he hate undead 24/7 with Eoxians being civilised (if creepy) pillars of Pact Worlds. You get that in the Core Rulebook, no need for a separate guide.

And I would argue that somebody wanting to play such a character in this setting is a contrarian of the "I want to play a Paladin in Skulls and Shackles" sort and you shouldn't game with him/her :)

Yes...because they viewed The Ruins of Azlant player's guide as important because of the mechanics and not the Role-Playing. That is a change of view.

Apparently the Eoxians have game shows where innocent people are killed...I do not know about your definition of civilized is but it is not mine. What if the player is a survivor of Eoxians 'civilization'? That would be a great character concept...just not for this AP.

Sure if after reading the Player's Guide of Skull & Shackles and the player still wants to play a Paladin...boot him/her...but how is a player suppose to know?

There is also the fact that not all players( in the various groups I play with it is about 5%) not going to but the CRB...or any gaming book.
KingOfAnything wrote:

@Rysky, I think you're reading a little more Evil into Eox than is presented.

** spoiler omitted **

My reading of that was that there's a few thrill seekers that willingly go there, but the people living there don't get a choice.

Going back to your other post, does the Core book cover how to deal with them when playing a follower of one of the aforementioned Goddesses and encountering one? Feels like Lethal weapon 2...
2 people marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
I've been thinking of the Core Rulebook as a really big player's guide. It has all the relevant rules and the setting description you need.

Except for the part Rysky stated...like do not play a ** spoiler omitted **

The player's guide are not so much about the mechanics but also the Role-playing as well...

** spoiler omitted **

Sure...

:
Not killing them and helping them is two different things. I imagine the Undead Hunter would be like a Paladin....they do not go just killing every undead they see...but working with them? That is pushing it.

I mean it could work...but a Player's Guide would have been useful so a player could be at least a little prepared.
Sovereign Court
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:

Sure...

** spoiler omitted **

I mean it could work...but a Player's Guide would have been useful so a player could be at least a little prepared.

Spoiler:
Working for the appointed ambassador in a matter of diplomacy.

The matter of the small favor is... optional. Worst case, encourage the player to investigate what this shady ambassador is up to in order to discredit them and make the Worlds a less undead place.

From my reading, an undead hunter is a great choice for the rest of the AP, and the inciting incident could be a strong motivation.
3 people marked this as a favorite.
KingOfAnything wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:

Sure...

** spoiler omitted **

I mean it could work...but a Player's Guide would have been useful so a player could be at least a little prepared.

** spoiler omitted **

I do not disagree...I just think this...and probably other things are making me wish they just took the time to do a Player's Guide. I can not stress how those Player's Guides have saved me from a campaign of nothing but frustration as I played a concept that did not work.

Silver Crusade
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:


Sure if after reading the Player's Guide of Skull & Shackles and the player still wants to play a Paladin...boot him/her...but how is a player suppose to know?

Because it's a campaign about pirates. Law-breaking, unruly criminals. Who kill and torture because they can. Or don't, because they can, too. You cannot imagine a less welcoming non-Evil campaign for a Paladin than one where he is supposed to be part of a criminal gang, work with other criminals and tolerate an almost lawless society of criminals letting other criminals be criminals.

It's obvious. To try make a Paladin in such campaign is to be either utterly clueless as to how humans work or to try and sabotage the game. Neither is something I like at my table.
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


Sure if after reading the Player's Guide of Skull & Shackles and the player still wants to play a Paladin...boot him/her...but how is a player suppose to know?

Because it's a campaign about pirates. Law-breaking, unruly criminals. Who kill and torture because they can. Or don't, because they can, too. You cannot imagine a less welcoming non-Evil campaign for a Paladin than one where he is supposed to be part of a criminal gang, work with other criminals and tolerate an almost lawless society of criminals letting other criminals be criminals.

It's obvious. To try make a Paladin in such campaign is to be either utterly clueless as to how humans work or to try and sabotage the game. Neither is something I like at my table.

Okay that is a easy one ...and what about this AP that shouts that somebody who is anti-undead should not be playing? Or at least something to tell them it could cause issues?

Silver Crusade
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:

Sure...

** spoiler omitted **

I mean it could work...but a Player's Guide would have been useful so a player could be at least a little prepared.

** spoiler omitted **

I do not disagree...I just think this...and probably other things are making me wish they just took the time to do a Player's Guide. I can not stress how those Player's Guides have saved me from a campaign of nothing but frustration as I played a concept that did not work.

The fun thing about kitchen sink settings is that 90% of time you can play any character in any campaign. You can play a desert fire sorcerer in Reign of Winter. A technophobe Barbarian in Iron Gods. A comic character in Strange Aeons. You can play pretty much anything in, say, Shattered Star or Kingmaker.

I'd even argue that for some people, the suggested class/race/archetype advice in Player's Guides are BAD, because they straitjacket these people into playing ONLY the kind of characters that PERFECTLY fit the theme and these people end up FRUSTRATED since they aren't playing a Human Ranger in Ironfang Invasion because they want to, but because they are obsessed with playing a PC that fits the campaign theme, other considerations be damned. I had such people at my table.

If Dead Suns was a campaign where some kind of character was a bad fit, I'm sure that would be telegraphed way ahead and highlighted in the first adventure.
Dark Archive

The AP is obviously not playable as easily with some character concepts as with others.
I think EVERY SINGLE AP needs a players guide to clarify what players can expect and what they should avoid.

But to me personally, it is also clear that everybody working on Starfinder (AND Pathfinder) was under immense deadline pressure and considering that, it is unlucky but very understandable that we didn't get one for this first AP.
I'm hoping and expecting one for the next one though.
Sovereign Court Senior Developer, Starfinder Team
11 people marked this as a favorite.

Regarding Ambassador Nor:

Spoiler:
The primary purpose of the encounter with the Eoxian ambassador is to show that in the Pact Worlds (the assumed setting of Starfinder and therefore, this AP) there are undead creatures who are not automatically "monsters" just because they are undead. In Starfinder, not all undead are evil, and it's much harder to tell if someone, living or undead, is actually, definitively evil. Eoxian citizens, living or undead, have the same rights as any other citizen of the Pact Worlds (as stated in the AP), and if the PCs were able to somehow kill Ambassador Nor, they would be immediately arrested by the Stewards for assassinating a representative to the Pact Council.

If an undead hunter, Pharasmin, or another character has qualms about working with an undead creature, that's a roleplaying consideration that the GM and player will have toe work out. In my opinion, it's the difficult choices that make for the most interesting roleplaying.

Silver Crusade
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:


Sure if after reading the Player's Guide of Skull & Shackles and the player still wants to play a Paladin...boot him/her...but how is a player suppose to know?

Because it's a campaign about pirates. Law-breaking, unruly criminals. Who kill and torture because they can. Or don't, because they can, too. You cannot imagine a less welcoming non-Evil campaign for a Paladin than one where he is supposed to be part of a criminal gang, work with other criminals and tolerate an almost lawless society of criminals letting other criminals be criminals.

It's obvious. To try make a Paladin in such campaign is to be either utterly clueless as to how humans work or to try and sabotage the game. Neither is something I like at my table.

Okay that is a easy one ...and what about this AP that shouts that somebody who is anti-undead should not be playing? Or at least something to tell them it could cause issues?

Because there's a core assumption of the setting. Look, you don't need a player's guide to tell you that playing a tiefling-slayer character in a vanilla fantasy campaign that has tieflings as a civilised race is something that will be a challenge. Does any Paizo Player's Guide state that playing a tiefling-slayer PC is a risky idea? No. Is it going to be a problem? Well, depends how far are you taking that slaying, is that a professional thing or a personal thing for the PC and how you work out with your GM. If this PC will limit him/herself to snarling at tieflings, refusing to talk to them and gleefully engaging in every combat against tieflings - sure, fine, if she or he will go KILLMAIMBURN the moment they see a N tiefling barkeep - well, you won't go far.

Sovereign Court
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:

Okay that is a easy one ...and what about this AP that shouts that somebody who is anti-undead should not be playing?

I don't think that is necessarily true. In fact, the concept should work pretty well for anyone who is not literally a paladin.

Quote:

Or at least something to tell them it could cause issues?

Players that are inclined to murder sentient creatures on sight are going to cause issues no matter the concept they play.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Robert G. McCreary wrote:

Regarding Ambassador Nor:

** spoiler omitted **

That's rather disconcerting :(

Why was that decided? Or to phrase more accurately

Spoiler:
When did Undead suddenly have the ability to not be Evil?
2 people marked this as a favorite.

The thing about the Eoxians is that even though they're undead, they're still just people. It's like if all the people of Earth were turned into zombies, sure some are evil but most are just people, do they deserve to be killed just because they're undead? In Pathfinder there was a lot more black and white but as civilization progressed there are more and more grey areas opened up where it's not as straightforward. It probably also has to do with the fact that in PF undead were usually created by evil gods whereas here Eoxians became undead because they had no other choice, so there's an element of intent involved there.

EDIT: We also know that many planets sell their dead to be re-animated on Eox so by the Pathfinder logic any government involved with this should be considered evil, which just shows that the definitions of evil have changed somewhat.
Dark Archive

Good & evil alignments make a lot of sense in a fantasy setting.
In a Sci-Fi setting not so much.
In a Science-Fantasy setting like Starfinder they should probably still exist, but play a lesser role, as most people are neutral, doing some good things and some bad ones in their lives without becoming one or the other irrevocably.
Luke Spencer wrote:

The thing about the Eoxians is that even though they're undead, they're still just people. It's like if all the people of Earth were turned into zombies, sure some are evil but most are just people, do they deserve to be killed just because they're undead? In Pathfinder there was a lot more black and white but as civilization progressed there are more and more grey areas opened up where it's not as straightforward. It probably also has to do with the fact that in PF undead were usually created by evil gods whereas here Eoxians became undead because they had no other choice, so there's an element of intent involved there.

EDIT: We also know that many planets sell their dead to be re-animated on Eox so by the Pathfinder logic any government involved with this should be considered evil, which just shows that the definitions of evil have changed somewhat.

It's not entirely fair to say that they had no choice. I mean, if you gave most paladins a choice between becoming undead or dying, they would choose the latter option.

There's also this.

From Distant Worlds:
It is true that the bone sages of Eox did mostly choose to turn to necromancy for the sake of survival. But a small portion of Eox's inhabitants managed to survive the calamity that took place eons ago by taking shelter in a bunker with it's own atmosphere- the halls of the living (which the friendly bone sages then decided to use for horrible genetic experiments).

Besides, I think it's mentioned that a lot of the bone sages were the same people that made the weapon that destroyed two entire planets and Eox's atmosphere in the same blast. So other options did exist.

For the record, I do like the idea that undead can be non evil aligned. I just think that it really should be the exception rather than the norm, and that the magic of necromancy should still be evil.

Basically, if Pally Dan gets slain by a lich and then gets raised as a wight, I think it makes for an interesting story for someone trying to struggle against a whole slew of foul temptations and desires. Just because he became what he is because of evil doesn't mean that his future actions must be evil.
Silver Crusade
5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.
Robert G. McCreary wrote:

Regarding Ambassador Nor:

** spoiler omitted **

Sounds great. Reminds me of one of my favorite settings Eberron. And even in Pathfinder with a lot more black and white it was not always wise to attack any evil person that crossed the path of the group^^

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.

That's just the problem. In the past Undead were always Evil. And now they're suddenly not.

So either A) something happened on a cosmological scale that caused this to occur, something to do with the Gap?

Or B) Undead have always been able to not be Evil, which it a retcon that has an uncountable amount of implications and repercussions for the entirety of the Golarion universe and timelines.
Sara Marie wrote:
If you preordered AP #1 and are now (after July 27th) subscribing, ping customer service.

This describes me, unsure what 'ping' means!

1 person marked this as a favorite.
jack ferencz wrote:
Sara Marie wrote:
If you preordered AP #1 and are now (after July 27th) subscribing, ping customer service.
This describes me, unsure what 'ping' means!

Either e-mail customer service at the address at the bottom of the page, or make a new thread in the Customer Service forum asking them to mark your preorder copy as a subscription.

Grand Lodge
3 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

Undead are people, too.

-Skeld
3 people marked this as a favorite.
Skeld wrote:

Undead are people, too.

-Skeld

People are monsters, too.

Silver Crusade
4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Aboleths did it.
Joana wrote:
jack ferencz wrote:
Sara Marie wrote:
If you preordered AP #1 and are now (after July 27th) subscribing, ping customer service.
This describes me, unsure what 'ping' means!
Either e-mail customer service at the address at the bottom of the page, or make a new thread in the Customer Service forum asking them to mark your preorder copy as a subscription.

thanks :)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.

That's just the problem. In the past Undead were always Evil. And now they're suddenly not.

So either A) something happened on a cosmological scale that caused this to occur, something to do with the Gap?

Or B) Undead have always been able to not be Evil, which it a retcon that has an uncountable amount of implications and repercussions for the entirety of the Golarion universe and timelines.

I've checked the rules for the undead creature type in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary. Nothing in there says undead have to be evil. In fact non-evil undead have been explicitly featured in Paizo products, such as Ordelia Whilwren, a chaotic good ghost cleric of Desna (Undead Unleashed, p. 37).

Zaister wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.

That's just the problem. In the past Undead were always Evil. And now they're suddenly not.

So either A) something happened on a cosmological scale that caused this to occur, something to do with the Gap?

Or B) Undead have always been able to not be Evil, which it a retcon that has an uncountable amount of implications and repercussions for the entirety of the Golarion universe and timelines.

I've checked the rules for the undead creature type in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary. Nothing in there says undead have to be evil. In fact non-evil undead have been explicitly featured in Paizo products, such as Ordelia Whilwren, a chaotic good ghost cleric of Desna (Undead Unleashed, p. 37).

Ghosts are the exception, not the standard.

Also while Bestiary 1 is setting Neutral in the universe of Golarion Undead are Evil, out of all the Undead published compare how many that are Evil to how many are not.

I'm wanting to know how/why they are suddenly have more freedom in their alignment.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
[...] in the universe of Golarion Undead are Evil [...]

Can you cite a rules text that actually says that?

Sovereign Court
2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.

That's just the problem. In the past Undead were always Evil. And now they're suddenly not.

So either A) something happened on a cosmological scale that caused this to occur, something to do with the Gap?

Or B) Undead have always been able to not be Evil, which it a retcon that has an uncountable amount of implications and repercussions for the entirety of the Golarion universe and timelines.

My guess is that what we consider undead has expanded to include creatures that were previously impossible. A blend of technology and magic that can attract a soul into an otherwise lifeless body without damaging said soul? Some undead might be closer to a bio-magical construct than skeletons and zombies of yesteryear.

@Zaister, it is setting text, not rules text that affirms undead are evil on Golarion.
Dark Archive
Zaister wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.

That's just the problem. In the past Undead were always Evil. And now they're suddenly not.

So either A) something happened on a cosmological scale that caused this to occur, something to do with the Gap?

Or B) Undead have always been able to not be Evil, which it a retcon that has an uncountable amount of implications and repercussions for the entirety of the Golarion universe and timelines.

I've checked the rules for the undead creature type in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary. Nothing in there says undead have to be evil. In fact non-evil undead have been explicitly featured in Paizo products, such as Ordelia Whilwren, a chaotic good ghost cleric of Desna (Undead Unleashed, p. 37).

The fact that the only "creature type" in the Bestiary that has an Alignment entry is "animal" (always neutral), supports that all others (with the exception of mindless creatures) can be of any alignment.

On the other hand, all 15 sample creature undead (even ghost) are evil...
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
KingOfAnything wrote:
@Zaister, it is setting text, not rules text that affirms undead are evil on Golarion.

But where does it actually say that? Maybe we're just inferring that.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
@Zaister, it is setting text, not rules text that affirms undead are evil on Golarion.
But where does it actually say that? Maybe we're just inferring that.

I don't know a specific book of the top of my head, but James Jacobs, the creative director of the original setting, has repeatedly confirmed that Undead are always Evil in the universe of Golarion barring few exceptions.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is a quote from Owen from the Q&A currently happening on Reddit.

Quote:

Me: Is necromancy (specifically, creating zombies, skeletons, or other forms of undead) still an evil act in Starfinder?

Owen: Not automatically. It certainly can be, and lots and lots of undead are evil. But it's not universal, and there might well be gray-area cases where there's a non-evil justification for creating undead. It's just not the way to place your bets.

I have mixed thoughts on it, but in general it's something I can work with in my games.

Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I'm very happy that Starfinder puts the "undead = always evil" assumption in the past.

That's just the problem. In the past Undead were always Evil. And now they're suddenly not.

So either A) something happened on a cosmological scale that caused this to occur, something to do with the Gap?

Or B) Undead have always been able to not be Evil, which it a retcon that has an uncountable amount of implications and repercussions for the entirety of the Golarion universe and timelines.

While I do not like it necessary...there is also

C) This is not the same universe as PF Golarion...it is alternate universe with some changes to things...

That is what I am telling myself at any rate when in the past undead were Always Evil...and you could wear more the two magic items...etc.
Liberty's Edge
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
KingOfAnything wrote:
@Zaister, it is setting text, not rules text that affirms undead are evil on Golarion.
But where does it actually say that? Maybe we're just inferring that.

By the combination of these two effects:

Firstly

To cast the spell animate undead or create undead, the descriptor for the spell is always School necromancy [evil].

The rules of the game say that no matter the intent of the caster, the casting of the spell itself blights the aura of the caster, such that his or her alignment always shifts towards evil by casting it. It is an intrinsically evil act, no matter the intent.

You can find millions of pixels on EnWorld, the Paizo Message Boards and Facebook -- (not to mention rec.games.advocacy.frpg) discussing this or variants thereof, going back to the origins of the game and the Internet itself. It is not without controversy, but that's the basic effect. It's evil to do it, no matter the ends one is attempting to justify with those means. That's the orthodox, majority view. There has been (and is now) a spirited, more nuanced dissent from this gameist ruling.

Secondly,

Detect Evil operates differently on Undead and Outsiders. Undead are tied to the Negative Plane and they may be detected as intrinsically evil, no matter what they are thinking or contemplating:

Aura Power

An evil aura’s power depends on the type of evil creature or object that you’re detecting and its HD, caster level, or (in the case of a cleric) class level; see the table below. If an aura falls into more than one strength category, the spell indicates the stronger of the two.

Creature/Object Aura Power
None Faint Moderate Strong Overwhelming

Aligned Undead (HD) — 2 or lower 3-8 9-20 21 or higher

This suggests that undead are invariably evil. And in the Bestiary, they are.

Now, this may suit the purposes of a black/white FRPG rather well. It is perhaps of less utility in discussing the more sophisticated moral theories and ethical approaches of a future advanced society.

It is also possible that the future advanced society has re-evaluated its approach to defining "evil", whereas the spell might not have changed at all. So that the gods might have a different interpretation of this than humanity now does.

Moral relativism where humans have the last word? Perhaps.

But the Starfinder Core Rulebook goes further than this. And it allows us to escape from the Pathfinder world view with another method.

Detect Evil no longer is present within the Starfinder Core Rulebook as a spell. It's GONE. No ability for it either that I can see. It's GONE too.

Similarly, for example, animate dead no longer has the evil spell descriptor.

I suggest to you that this is not an accident and in it lies the heart of the concern - and how Starfinder resolves it. Yes, the game HAS been changed so that Undead are no longer necessarily evil.

Are the Undead still all evil? Maybe. But how would you know, for sure? There is no spell for it anymore. Just the ravings of some priest and the rantings of another. Who is right? Ask the philosophers, they each have different answers.

Nobody really knows any more. There is no objective answer.

That's why the spell has been removed from the game. Time to think about this with a bit more of a grown-up and nuanced world view. There is no objective answer to this anymore. That is a deliberate change.
Silver Crusade
1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So there's an easy way to explain as to why Undead are not always evil anymore.

You're the GM and you decide why.

All that is known, is that in the assumed setting of Starfinder undead are not always evil, and Eox and its citizens have the same rights as any other free people in the Pact Worlds.

So if your player has a prejudice against the undead, take a page from Terry Pratchett's book: "Undead yes! Un-people no!"

There's plenty of people that assume Androids are going to rise-up and overthrow their non-synthetic oppressors.

There's undead who believe that Pharasmins are zealots who would see all undead destroyed simply for existing. Even though said Eoxian is a humble asteroid miner, who's undead necrology allows him to mine asteroids without so much expensive life-support.

By moving alignment to a descriptor based on the individual attitude of any free-thinking being is good. Because Science Fantasy should allow for a wider scope of philosophical difference.

Hmm an interesting take on undead for sure and id be on board however they make exceptions in the form of planar beings. Pg 25 states so. Beings from Hell are indeed evil because they literally are manifestations of evil. So either the power of animate dead no longer pulls from the negative energy / shadow plane or they are indeed evil.. kind of a strange. Eox can still be a evil society and still be part of the pact world. Governments make exceptions all the time in the interest of peace. it would be interesting to hear if non evil undead was the actual intent or is it the case that they are simply tolerated because whatever pacts / treaties created in the interest of peace require that they are tolerated in most circumstances.
251 to 300 of 546 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Product Discussion / Starfinder Adventure Path #1: Incident at Absalom Station (Dead Suns 1 of 6) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.