Speculation about the development of classes


General Discussion

101 to 126 of 126 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jack of Dust wrote:
I really hope they don't lock dogfighting behind a feat. Feat taxes are a huge issue in Pathfinder and one that hopefully will not be translated into Starfinder.

How would you feel about it if the Feat simply made you better/more effective at it than someone without?

For example, Someone without the feat could:

Make a Full Attack with Ships Weapons (Full Round Action)
Perform a Complex Maneuver (Double Move)
Make an Attack with a single Weapon (Standard Action)
Perform a Simple Maneuver (Move Action)

For example, someone with the Feat could:

Make a Full Attack with ships weapons (Standard Action)
Perform a Complex Maneuver (Move Action)
Make an Attack with a Single Weapon (Move Action)
Perform a Simple Maneuver (Swift Action)

Plus, there are other actions you might need to be taking, such as damage control, active defenses or sensors checks.

The guy who spends character resources on being a better space fighter is better at the dogfight, but the guy who didn't isn't locked out. Is the untrained guy at a disadvantage? Yes! Should he be? Yeah. Is it hopeless? Not really.

This also makes Multi-Pilot small craft a thing that actually makes sense game wise... A Heavy Fighter with a Pilot and Gunner (or a pilot and a droid, wink wink) starts to seem like a good idea.

I would much rather see something like this, than have everything locked behind something like a "Ace Pilot" prestige class.


I don't see untrained piloting, outside dire emergencies, but I don't see cross class skill being a show stopper either.


Sorry, I meant Untrained more along the lines of "Im a freighter pilot, not a naval officer". He knows how to fly (has ranks in the Pilot skill), but getting into Combat isn't in his job discription.


Dexion1619 wrote:
Sorry, I meant Untrained more along the lines of "Im a freighter pilot, not a naval officer". He knows how to fly (has ranks in the Pilot skill), but getting into Combat isn't in his job discription.

K, but I was responding to this. Maybe I should have quoted?


Perhaps ship piloting will function as weapon or armor proficiency, some classes will pick it up automatically and others can pick it up with a feat.

Dark Archive

Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:
They could just give us a pilot class for star/space ships and mechs.
As long as it avoid the "I can Pilot everything", yeah.
I cannot for the life of me figure out how "I can only pilot freighters" would make for a better gaming experience.
Now, that is going from one extreme to the other.

If you can have different proficiencies for short spear, spear and longspear (as well as a dozen polearms), then it shouldn't be too different to have different proficiencies (and 'weapon groups') for ship classes. Your 'pilot' class might have general proficiency with all ship types, and gain bonuses with specific chosen ship classes (just as Fighters gain bonuses with specific weapon groups) and then further develop that with 'Ship Focus' or 'Ship Specialization' feats that give them bonuses with one specific sort of ship, instead of all ships of that class/type/size.

The game already has that sort of levels of granularity/persnickety-ness built into the weapon charts, for better or worse, so it should be easy enough to file off short sword or halberd and write in snub fighter or troop transport.

As long as they can avoid the level of fiddliness that led to GURPS Vehicles (ironically coming from a game in which the seventy-two polearms of D&D are reduced to a 'polearm' skill and stats for a halberd, and axes and maces use the same skill), which made my eyes cross trying to read it, I think we're good. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ryric wrote:

7 classes..in that case I think there will be one pure caster class, with options to switch out the flavor to cleric, druid, wizard, what have you.

I also think they can fold "doctor" into the tech/mechanic class. That gives multiple paths to healing - technological or magical.

I think maybe the vigilante is a bit of a test for this sort of design space - a class chassis with multiple options that play quite differently.

A friend of mine was saying they really only need the Mass Effect 6 classes:

Fight
Magic
Tech
Fight/Tech
Fight/Magic
Magic/Tech

He was being a bit facetious but there seems to be some truth there.

Personally I'm pretty on board with that. Mass Effect's six classes cover a lot of bases for character archetypes.

The main thing I want is for them to consider the three pillars for EVERY class this time around. There are zero grandfather-clause classes in this game since they're not directly adapting core classes from a previous edition, so for once class design does not need to give two hoots about how they did it in Pathfinder CRB.

I just don't want to sit down to run this game to find that my friend who wants to play a super-hacker or whatever the closest equivalent to the wizard in this game is once more has an endless bounty of shenanagans at their fingertips while my friend that's trying to reproduce their sniping-focused badass space soldier from Mass Effect finds out they have basically nothing to do when there isn't a fight going on, and what little they CAN do the hacker and the space wizard can also do and often do better.

Some of the ideas like what they had for the Vigilante might be good. Not so much the dual identity thing, but the idea of giving the class talents for combat and noncombat purposes. In the case of the dedicated soldier class, I have to say the Vigilante's Feat+ talents are the way to go. Don't just pile on bonus feats and a few minor class features that won't be USEFUL until 15 years later and call it a day. If the soldier's the combat expert, it makes sense to me for them to have one "tree" of talents that not only give them feats but let them use them in ways less-trained classes can only envy while having another "tree" of things like talents that aid in survival/exploration or mechanics work, things like that.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Dexion1619 wrote:
Jack of Dust wrote:
I really hope they don't lock dogfighting behind a feat. Feat taxes are a huge issue in Pathfinder and one that hopefully will not be translated into Starfinder.

How would you feel about it if the Feat simply made you better/more effective at it than someone without?

For example, Someone without the feat could:

Make a Full Attack with Ships Weapons (Full Round Action)
Perform a Complex Maneuver (Double Move)
Make an Attack with a single Weapon (Standard Action)
Perform a Simple Maneuver (Move Action)

For example, someone with the Feat could:

Make a Full Attack with ships weapons (Standard Action)
Perform a Complex Maneuver (Move Action)
Make an Attack with a Single Weapon (Move Action)
Perform a Simple Maneuver (Swift Action)

Plus, there are other actions you might need to be taking, such as damage control, active defenses or sensors checks.

The guy who spends character resources on being a better space fighter is better at the dogfight, but the guy who didn't isn't locked out. Is the untrained guy at a disadvantage? Yes! Should he be? Yeah. Is it hopeless? Not really.

This also makes Multi-Pilot small craft a thing that actually makes sense game wise... A Heavy Fighter with a Pilot and Gunner (or a pilot and a droid, wink wink) starts to seem like a good idea.

I would much rather see something like this, than have everything locked behind something like a "Ace Pilot" prestige class.

I'm not sure it needs to follow that sort of system unless each player is piloting their own ship. If they were to go with that sort of system, I would hope they would also give ships a free move each turn. That way, characters without the feat wouldn't have to remain stationary in a dog fight if they want to do any notable amount of damage, while characters with the feat can still get more out of their actions such as taking an extra move and still full attacking. I would also hope that extra actions could be taken than what is shown above regardless of whether or not you have the feat. The specific actions you could take might depend on ship customization.

Honestly though, I would rather they didn't simply give characters with a feat better action economy. Creating feats that do things like allow you to perform new kinds of maneuvers would make a bit more sense I think and would leave some design space for new material in future books. It might also be a good idea for such feats to have some sort of effect when not in a dog fight to avoid having characters who are terrible at adventuring outside of the confines of their ship, although I'm not sure what exactly they could give them off the top of my head.

Whatever way they decide to do it, I hope they don't have it boil down to combat without class features.


Honestly, ships should never move like character, but rather keep moving at a particular pace and in a particular direction unless changed by a piloting action.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Dexion1619 wrote:
Sorry, I meant Untrained more along the lines of "Im a freighter pilot, not a naval officer". He knows how to fly (has ranks in the Pilot skill), but getting into Combat isn't in his job discription.
K, but I was responding to this. Maybe I should have quoted?

I see what you're getting at, but would you require a Drive skill to be trained only in a modern world setting?

The important thing to me is not to put a feat/skill tax on simple travel. If your character concept is "best pilot in the galaxy" that's great and should be supported, but if no one wants to play a dedicated pilot the party needs to be able to at least reach the adventure without one.


TheAlicornSage wrote:
Honestly, ships should never move like character, but rather keep moving at a particular pace and in a particular direction unless changed by a piloting action.

I know that is how ships would act based on how we build rockets but if a ship is moved by future super tech or magic then i could easily buy into funny tricks with disappearing inertia. Even Star Trek had anti-human salsa making inertial dampeners. Star Gate too but mostly as a joke about Star Trek i think.


TheAlicornSage wrote:
Honestly, ships should never move like character, but rather keep moving at a particular pace and in a particular direction unless changed by a piloting action.

I think a simple decelerate/accelerate mechanic would be enough for that. Really I think that Pathfinder's vehicle rules are okay enough if it was trimmed down


ryric wrote:
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Dexion1619 wrote:
Sorry, I meant Untrained more along the lines of "Im a freighter pilot, not a naval officer". He knows how to fly (has ranks in the Pilot skill), but getting into Combat isn't in his job discription.
K, but I was responding to this. Maybe I should have quoted?

I see what you're getting at, but would you require a Drive skill to be trained only in a modern world setting?

The important thing to me is not to put a feat/skill tax on simple travel. If your character concept is "best pilot in the galaxy" that's great and should be supported, but if no one wants to play a dedicated pilot the party needs to be able to at least reach the adventure without one.

(Legal) Driver Licence? Avoiding boatload of damages? Getting so many tickets your vihicle gets taken away? etc?

Now, I don't mean rank = level or need to be a class skill.


In the silent vastness of space, everyone is a ninja!!


Cthulhudrew wrote:
In the silent vastness of space, everyone is a ninja!!

How does silence prevent one from being seen?


Silence doesn't, but distance does. Play Homeworld 2 on a 16 million km map to see what I mean by how distance can be a defense and a stealth cloak (but be warned, ships get jittery the farther out you go from center.).


Insane KillMaster wrote:
Cthulhudrew wrote:
In the silent vastness of space, everyone is a ninja!!
How does silence prevent one from being seen?

If the perception rules are similar to pathfinder, that -1/10' is gonna add up fast...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Insane KillMaster wrote:
Cthulhudrew wrote:
In the silent vastness of space, everyone is a ninja!!
How does silence prevent one from being seen?

Star-ninjas have no reason to stop wearing black.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Nutcase Entertainment wrote:

(Legal) Driver Licence? Avoiding boatload of damages? Getting so many tickets your vihicle gets taken away? etc?

Now, I don't mean rank = level or need to be a class skill.

A trained only skill can't even be attempted if you don't have ranks. With 0 ranks in Drive you might crash if it can be rolled untrained, if it can't - you can't even back the car out of the driveway without hitting something every time. Someone with no driving experience at all can still sit in the driver's seat, turn on the car and push pedals to see what happens. They might actually succeed at operating the car. Thus it can be rolled untrained (the character will just stink at it).

Contrast with something like Disable Device, where I can hand a set of old-style "thieves tools" to most people and point them towards a lock. They could fiddle with it for hours without getting it open.

Very few skills should be trained only.


At least one class that can "MacGyver" items out of junk.

A psychic class that can make weapons/armor/tools out psychic energy/force/constructs.

A class that specializes in cybernetics.

A class that specializes in biotech.

A class that is a mech pilot/ironman wannabe.

A class that combines magic and tech.

A telepath class would be awesome as a spell power/supernatural focused class.


How about classes designed around Archetypes? As in the chassis class doesnt have any unique abilities, just proficiencies, BAB, HP, Skill points, save progressions and depending on chassis a spell casting progression. Archetypes all add in at set levels without replacing or altering other abilities though some grant abilities that scale off BAB instead of level or grant knowledge of spells that cant be used without a chassis that has spell progression. Then you just have a small number of chassis to pick from:

Full BAB + 2 Archetypes
3/4 BAB + 3 archetypes
3/4 BAB with spell progression + 2 Archetypes
1/2 BAB with high spell progression +2 Archetypes.

Archetypes can be smaller individually since PCs can have multiple and there are way more ways to mix and match abilities together.

For instance, instead of Full BAB with 4th level casting you can just throw in an archetype that lets you pick a few low level powers to use X times/day as SLAs. It can help prevent some classes from getting too MAD too i bet.

*sigh* but since they have said there will be seven classes at launch this boat has probably sailed already.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cthulhudrew wrote:
In the silent vastness of space, everyone is a ninja!!

Yeah, but according to the rule of Conservation of Ninjutsu*, that means everyone is really sucky at it.

* Make a Will save with +4 to DC. Failure means you've crossed the event horizon and are trapped in the TV Tropes hole for 1d4 hours.


Dr. Hans Reinhardt wrote:
Cthulhudrew wrote:
In the silent vastness of space, everyone is a ninja!!

Yeah, but according to the rule of Conservation of Ninjutsu*, that means everyone is really sucky at it.

* Make a Will save with +4 to DC. Failure means you've crossed the event horizon and are trapped in the TV Tropes hole for 1d4 hours.

Whew, passed my save!

:)

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32

Here's hoping that the tech/soldier hybrid class are like the "Two by two, hands of blue" folk from Firefly.

I'm also envisioning something akin to the ARG, but for species of alien, that have great specific focus on a type of class, like psychic assaulters for race X or lithe and limber class for race Y...but that would likely be a separate book like Advanced Species Guide or some such.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
theheadkase wrote:

Here's hoping that the tech/soldier hybrid class are like the "Two by two, hands of blue" folk from Firefly.

I'm also envisioning something akin to the ARG, but for species of alien, that have great specific focus on a type of class, like psychic assaulters for race X or lithe and limber class for race Y...but that would likely be a separate book like Advanced Species Guide or some such.

D20 Star Wars had a book that was just dozens upon dozens of aliens statted up as playable races - I think it was the Ultimate Alien Anthology or somesuch. That book was fantastic. It had nearly every race from any source, EU or movie. Were they all balanced? Heck no. But it was a great resource.

Now that I think about it, that book could probably convert over pretty easily as it was a d20 book.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I had a few ideas about classes, if anyone had any thoughts.

Marine (STR/DEX Class)

A martial adept, damage dealing tank. Can branch out into subclasses favoring ranged weaponry or close range combat (with energy swords!), a mix of both, or even magical training for a holy warrior archetype.

Ruffian (DEX/CHA Class)

Your smooth talking, jack of all trades, ace pilot and smuggler extraordinaire! Basically a space bard. Has extensive piloting skills and can take on a variety of roles, such as fighting with specially modified firearms, sneaking around, patching up companions, and talking their way out of bad situations.

Technomancer (INT/CHA Class)

The magic-using squishy class, dealing out crowd control. Subclasses could involve a support mage, spellhacking technician, fighting mage, and an honest-to-goodness space wizard.

Mechanic (INT/WIS Class)

Master technician, capable of hacking, building, repairing, and destroying anything machine-like with ease. Largely a support role, but possibly aided by a VI pet, carrying out orders and performing mundane tasks. Class could specialize in combat technology, building turrets and robots (which the VI could control), or dedicated support (teleporting companions, supercharging weapons), or be a junkrat, using gadgetry and taking advantage of situations by hacking machines or building tools from scraps lying around.

Agent (DEX/INT Class)

A trained spy and killer relying on technical expertise and physical dexterity to eliminate their foes and sneak past tight security undetected. Relies on the element of surprise, deals deadly critical hits, and employs a wide range of cloaking and surveillance technology. An excellent improviser, with subclasses delving into a preference for technology, magic, or even deadly drugs and narcotics.

Empath (WIS/CHA Class)

Magical monk, harmonizing with nature, deceiving the weak minded, and telepathically talking that deadly space worm out of eating your entire party. Employs a technology-free approach to battle (may even have trouble using technology), by creating mind-altering illusions, summoning nature's power, or even altering their physical form to suit the situation. Can use magic to manipulate other characters, the environment around them, or their own bodies.

Cyborg (STR/INT Class)

Characters of this class are neither fully organic or synthetic, but rely on the best traits of both worlds to make their way. Similar to the Marine regarding a martial role, but with an emphasis on modifying one's own body rather than one's weaponry. May even have their weaponry built-into their own bodies, and a computerized brain that's as liable to speak code as it is to type words at someone. Also pretty handy with Space-Wikipedia.

101 to 126 of 126 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Speculation about the development of classes All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.