Species with only 2 HP still get the same Stamina as other members of the same class, though.
So far we haven't seen any indication that monster have stamina points at all.
thats why we are in the blatantly wild speculation thread :P
Species with only 2 HP still get the same Stamina as other members of the same class, though.So far we haven't seen any indication that monster have stamina points at all.
In fact, we can take the monster entries in Starfinder: First Contact as an indication that no monsters have any stamina points.
but do they have resolve points?
Some do, some don't.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are one or two rp cost for the ones listed. The only two point cost is to double the duration of a one point cost, but there is plenty of design space for other creatures to have higher costs.
I will say that the necrovite has multiple spells known in addition to its resolve powered teleport that are user per day. It has 3 fifth level spells per day, 4 fourth level spells per day and at will third level spells per day.
Monster casters do not need to follow pcs rules.
They are one or two rp cost for the ones listed. The only two point cost is to double the duration of a one point cost, but there is plenty of design space for other creatures to have higher costs.
I will say that the necrovite has multiple spells known in addition to its resolve powered teleport that are user per day. It has 3 fifth level spells per day, 4 fourth level spells per day and at will third level spells per day.
Monster casters do not need to follow pcs rules.
It's a huge positive for the setting if they do, though. It's a little stupid if a 13th level PC mystic can cast remove disease 5 times per day, but a 13th level NPC can arbitrarily cast it an infinite number of times.
But, like, that's just your opinion, man.
Sure. But my opinion is pretty much that it's asinine to have it be a provable in universe fact that the PCs are special cases of their class that are objectively inferior as far as spells per day.
More relevantly, monsters work that way now. How often can a 3rd level wizard cast invisibility? How often can a quasit do so?
From what we've seen so far, monsters and NPCs are generated the same way. NPCs just use Class Grafts, same as the basic PFU monster generation system Starfinder modifies. Which had the exact same problem, where a 5th level NPC wizard can cast infinite magic missiles.
But, like, that's just your opinion, man.Sure. But my opinion is pretty much that it's asinine to have it be a provable in universe fact that the PCs are special cases of their class that are objectively inferior as far as spells per day.
Not every system has to be perfectly simulationist. I'd even argue sticking to hardline simulationism no matter what can be harmful for gameplay overall, as the gameplay of a game with a DM is inherently asymmetric, meaning that playing it with symmetric pieces is dubious in the first place.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Blatantly wild idea; I want to be able to get in a dogfight with a Dragon using my ship. I hope they give Dragons a secondary, starship style stat-block for when you wanna tell a dragon to pick on someone their size.
It seems fair to assume there will be some kind of interaction between scales. Without it, you'd be unable to tell basic stories involving stuff like mecha godzilla swatting fighters out of the air or space Cthulhu shooting down a ship with his laser eyes.
It's infeasible that the power scale is so wide that there are no monsters the PCs can face that are unable to deal with the smallest ship (and, by transitive property, no ships the PCs can deal with on foot). That would imply Solars losing dogfights to Tie Fighters.
I mean, it's possible Paizo just won't include rules for that. But it would be a really bizarre failure point for the system, and it's unlikely they didn't think of it.
Blatantly wild idea; I want to be able to get in a dogfight with a Dragon using my ship. I hope they give Dragons a secondary, starship style stat-block for when you wanna tell a dragon to pick on someone their size.Yes please. but havent they said that ship scale will not have a correlation to PC scale? (no 10x modifier for ship cannons used against personnel or anything.) too bad though, i would be very amused to take out a younger dragon by landing on it and then having to duke it out with the ancient dragon mother in the ship later.
That's what I was getting at. In the Monster Manual (or Alien Archives, I suppose Starfinder calls it) you'd have the stat blocks for dragons as we're used to seeing them, with all their huge amounts of AC, HP, and Damage to be a threat to a party of adventurers on foot, but then below that, you have a second stat block for the same dragon with stats you use when the PCs decide to chase after a dragon in their ship (or get chased by the dragon, as the case may be). Then you could have an aerial dog fight with a dragon.
It's a huge positive for the setting if they do, though. It's a little stupid if a 13th level PC mystic can cast remove disease 5 times per day, but a 13th level NPC can arbitrarily cast it an infinite number of times.They are one or two rp cost for the ones listed. The only two point cost is to double the duration of a one point cost, but there is plenty of design space for other creatures to have higher costs.
I will say that the necrovite has multiple spells known in addition to its resolve powered teleport that are user per day. It has 3 fifth level spells per day, 4 fourth level spells per day and at will third level spells per day.
Monster casters do not need to follow pcs rules.
I mean monster/npc creation simplification is based on the idea that the pcs are going to only be interacting with them in a combat setting for a short period of time (as in theyll be dead soon) so if you really need to have an npc or monster stick around your totally free to put player limitations on them (like limiting spells per day or dividing hp in half to seperate hp and sp or even just building an npc like a pc)
The GM being able to rewrite the game doesn't mean something isn't a problem. Not everyone is going to have the talent, means, or time to produce a hack to fix a game's problems, and it's unfair to assume that they should.
|
|
More relevantly, monsters work that way now. How often can a 3rd level wizard cast invisibility? How often can a quasit do so?From what we've seen so far, monsters and NPCs are generated the same way. NPCs just use Class Grafts, same as the basic PFU monster generation system Starfinder modifies. Which had the exact same problem, where a 5th level NPC wizard can cast infinite magic missiles.
Except a 5tl level npc really can't cast infinite magic missiles, because they won't have enough time to in an encounter. Action economy and the fact that four highly motivated pcs are trying to kill them means that it's not likely to be able to cast its limited use spells, much less at will.
At will just means it will never run out in this encounter. If it's a npc ally and they might actually have meaning to track the usage throughout the day, build the npc as an actual caster class and just remove stamina. Or not.
Dude, I'm not talking about a single encounter. I don't see how that's possibly unclear. A PC's character sheet doesn't just tell you what they're capable of in a scrap, right? It tells you what they can do to affect the world around them and generally solve or create problems.
NPC and monster stat blocks do the exact same thing. They tell you what they can do to affect the story. Knowing that NPC Mystics can cure a disease every round on the round, that a Technomancer can dispel any magical effect given a few rounds as often as necessary, and that Contemplative can use psychokinetic hand to move stuff around despite their shrunken body tells you how the world works, and establishes what those creatures and characters can do to affect the story. They don't exist just solely for fighting.
Dude, I'm not talking about a single encounter. I don't see how that's possibly unclear. A PC's character sheet doesn't just tell you what they're capable of in a scrap, right? It tells you what they can do to affect the world around them and generally solve or create problems.
NPC and monster stat blocks do the exact same thing. They tell you what they can do to affect the story. Knowing that NPC Mystics can cure a disease every round on the round, that a Technomancer can dispel any magical effect given a few rounds as often as necessary, and that Contemplative can use psychokinetic hand to move stuff around despite their shrunken body tells you how the world works, and establishes what those creatures and characters can do to affect the story. They don't exist just solely for fighting.
Again, there are both advantages and disadvantages to simulationism and not every system has to be hardline simulationist. RPG's can work well and be quite enjoyable with any degree of simulationism or lack thereof, as is displayed by many games all over the spectrum, so it's hardly a strike against the game if it's less simulationist than Pathfinder.
I'm not talking about simulationism. Simulationism has nothing to do with wanting non-player-characters to have world-consistent lists of options for interacting with that world. Seriously, even games like FATE do that and they're about as far from simulationism as you can get. Probably the only games I can think of that don't are 4th edition D&D and games where actors that aren't PCs aren't even defined. Cut it out.
I'm not talking about simulationism. Simulationism has nothing to do with wanting non-player-characters to have world-consistent lists of options for interacting with that world. Seriously, even games like FATE do that and they're about as far from simulationism as you can get. Probably the only games I can think of that don't are 4th edition D&D and games where actors that aren't PCs aren't even defined. Cut it out.
Statblocks have only minor relevance out of combat, though. As an easy example, you don't have or even need statblocks for gods to know what they do and what they can do. You don't really need statblocks for most things to have a good impression of how they behave or act in-universe, as that kind of thing can be inferred from lore instead of looking at statblocks.
Relying on statblocks for worldbuilding is generally what causes things such as tippyverse.
That is actually so insane and baffling I have no idea how to respond to it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NPC and monster stat blocks do the exact same thing.
Unless they don't.
You appear to be assuming facts not in evidence. No one has ever said that NPC stat blocks are meant to represent how the world works.
In fact, it appears from the evidence we do have, that NPC and monster stat blocks do nothing of the sort. The introduction for monster creation in Pathfinder Unchained specifically notes that the characters created with that system "bend[...] the rules" for the purposes of ease of creation, so they explicitly do not reflect how the world works.
You are being asked to accept that NPC statblocks for the sake of a combat encounter won't accurately reflect their broader reality, because a combat statblock serves a specific and limited purpose. That doesn't seem that difficult to me.
NPCs oppose you in ways other than by trying to attack you or defend against your attacks. Stat blocks give you that information. This isn't difficult to understand.
If an NPC or monster's stats say they can do something, they can do that thing. In D&D, Pathfinder, and virtually every actual game on the market that stats things that aren't players (presumably also Starfinder), that doesn't change just because combat music happens to be playing, and I don't want to play in a game where it does, because that's offensively dissociated and actively kicks attempts to tell consistent stories in the nuts.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NPCs oppose you in ways other than by trying to attack you or defend against your attacks. Stat blocks give you that information.
In some cases, yes. But, stat blocks aren't the only place that information can be. It makes many situations easier to separate the narrative and combat abilities.
That's technically true, at least in Pathfinder. What they can do is also in the rest of the system's engine (basic stuff like moving items and talking to people or otherwise interacting with the world like you'd expect any warm body to) and in the Skills chapter.
You could also conceive of a system where abilities that aren't useful in combat time, but do affect the narrative, are listed separately. That isn't Pathfinder or Starfinder, though.
that's offensively dissociated and actively kicks attempts to tell consistent stories in the nuts.
That's just your opinion, though. I enjoyed storytelling that I experienced in 4e, a very asymmetric system. It didn't feel dissociated or inconsistent at all, as all the NPC's acted in ways consistent with the lore both in and out of combat, even though they only had a combat-relevant statblock.
It's very nice that you had a good time with a GM that made up arbitrary results that were fun for you. Not everyone plays RPGs to do that though, and not everyone has a GM that can make doing that fun. Many people play RPGs because they want a system that can handle telling stories and improves that experience, and nobody here is advocating a system where literally everything that isn't a player has asspullium abilities when they're not trying to kill someone.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, it simplifies the statblocks for the ease of running a combat encounter for the purpose of describing what that character can do in the confines of that specific interaction with your pcs. It is not intended to be an accurate representation of what it can do outside the confines of that encounter. If that is important to you, then you need to spend the time to fully create them as a pc instead of using the simplified monster creation rules.
The first rule of running a game isn't building a world, it's making a quick encounter to keep the game running smoothly with little prep time. If your priorities are different you're free to make each npc and monster using pc creation rules. But these rules are great for making it easier to stat opponents for a combat encounter, which is a huge part of the game for many players.
It's very nice that you had a good time with a GM that made up arbitrary results that were fun for you. Not everyone plays RPGs to do that though, and not everyone has a GM that can make doing that fun. Many people play RPGs because they want a system that can handle telling stories for them, and nobody here is advocating a system where literally everything that isn't a player has asspullium abilities when they're not trying to kill someone.
I don't see how is that principally different from Pathfinder, where a DM can just as easily decide to give the bossman asspullium abilities out of nowhere.
A bad DM is a bad DM, no matter what system you give them.Heck, amusingly enough, I experienced that exact scenario more often in Pathfinder than in 4e, however much of an anecdote that is.
Personally stat blocks have never had much impact in my games other than combat. It's not hard to pull out an arbitrary number for a social check DC or create an appropriate modifier for NPC rolls if you know them moderately well. If anything constantly referring back to stat blocks to try and work out what one of your god knows how many NPCs adds to his roll is more work than just making up a number on the fly to keep things moving.
|
|
In D&D, Pathfinder, and virtually every actual game on the market that stats things that aren't players (presumably also Starfinder), that doesn't change just because combat music happens to be playing,
Exalted and Shadowrun, just to name two that are literally the top two games on my gaming shelf next to Pathfinder.
No, it simplifies the statblocks for the ease of running a combat encounter for the purpose of describing what that character can do in the confines of that specific interaction with your pcs. It is not intended to be an accurate representation of what it can do outside the confines of that encounter. If that is important to you, then you need to spend the time to fully create them as a pc instead of using the simplified monster creation rules.
Dude, what? Monsters in Pathfinder already do what I'm describing. This isn't new. It's something we've had since the new millenium. You've been playing with it for years. Starfinder even does it for the most part, from what we've seen, all I was b&*!$ing about was an apparent failure of the monster generation system to properly model classed characters with similar capabilities to their PC versions- which is a failure point that already existed in Unchained and apparently has not been mitigated here. That got sidetracked into a discussion about the value of even having rules for NPCs to do anything outside of a fight, for some reason.
The first rule of running a game isn't building a world, it's making a quick encounter to keep the game running smoothly with little prep time. If your priorities are different you're free to make each npc and monster using pc creation rules. But these rules are great for making it easier to stat opponents for a combat encounter, which is a huge part of the game for many players.
Based on what evidence are you calling them great? The only comparison we have for them right now is the Unchained system that it modifies, which doesn't do what you're describing as useful.
Exalted and Shadowrun, just to name two that are literally the top two games on my gaming shelf next to Pathfinder.
...both of those games detail what NPCs are capable of outside of combat. Monsters and other exalted in Exalted have skills and abilities similar to what PCs have (actually, most of them are off the same list of charms and other crap, even), and that includes being able to diplomance the PCs in conversation or fly over a mountain. Security guards in Shadowrun have pools of the same skills and stats as PCs, as do NPC adepts or vampires or whatever. I have no idea what your point is, unless you picked those names without knowing anything about those games.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we go back to the blatantly wild speculation about games and put the discussion if stat blocks are good or not in a new thread?
*thinks about something to speculate about*
I wonder of there are diseases in the vore book, I mean they probably work similar to pathfinder but since we got a whole galaxy to explore there are also a lot of possibilities for more or less disgusting sicknesses...which might even affect different species in different ways. Lets be honest a flu that is a nuisance for humanoids could be lethal for some reptile species and insectoid might not be able to contract it in the first place
Species with only 2 HP still get the same Stamina as other members of the same class, though.So far we haven't seen any indication that monster have stamina points at all.
I meant PCs. The whole discussion was about how PCs of species with only 2 HP such as goblins would be easily killable at level 1, and I was saying I disagree because Stamina.
|
|
Exalted and Shadowrun, just to name two that are literally the top two games on my gaming shelf next to Pathfinder....both of those games detail what NPCs are capable of outside of combat. Monsters and other exalted in Exalted have skills and abilities similar to what PCs have (actually, most of them are off the same list of charms and other crap, even), and that includes being able to diplomance the PCs in conversation or fly over a mountain. Security guards in Shadowrun have pools of the same skills and stats as PCs, as do NPC adepts or vampires or whatever. I have no idea what your point is, unless you picked those names without knowing anything about those games.
I picked them because both of those games change the statblocks of the bad guys when the combat music starts.
"But," you seem to say, "the whole rest of the book describes what they can do outside of combat too!" Well, yes. And the same is true of Starfinder. Because the game tells you how many 3rd level spells a 13th level mystic can cast, regardless of what the monster book says. Because the monster book is intended for when you get into a fight, and if you want to see what they look like when combat is not an issue, then you use the rest of the rules instead.
The same way you would do now, in Pathfinder, even if you were using the graft rules.
I know that's absolutely untrue for SR3-5, and I have serious doubts that it's true for SR1 or SR2, considering those games are ancient. I haven't read the super secret special edition from Onyx Path, but it's not true in White Wolf's Exalted.
So, what, your suggestion is now to make two stat blocks for each NPC, and have them digivolve into one version or the other depending on their circumstances?
It's very nice that you had a good time with a GM that made up arbitrary results that were fun for you. Not everyone plays RPGs to do that though, and not everyone has a GM that can make doing that fun. Many people play RPGs because they want a system that can handle telling stories and improves that experience, and nobody here is advocating a system where literally everything that isn't a player has asspullium abilities when they're not trying to kill someone.
Also, for posterity: I played under about 18-19 different DM's in 4e. Every single one of them had their own distinct style of DM'ing. Some ran simple combat flicks, some ran complex plot arcs with a lot of intrigue and social interactions, some ran zany craziness. However, not a single one of them made me feel like enemies have jarring asspullium inconsistent with their fluff.
Given that, out of a selection of almost 20 different DM's with very different styles, I haven't ever encountered the typical horror stories about how 4e-style of combat/non-combat separation is terribly awful, I can't help but feel that the rumours are a bit exaggerated.On the other hand, I greatly enjoyed the simplicity of 4e's monster design while I was on the DM side of the table myself.
As such, I'm very much looking forward to Starfinder embracing a similar approach.
|
|
I know that's absolutely untrue for SR3-5, and I have serious doubts that it's true for SR1 or SR2, considering those games are ancient. I haven't read the super secret special edition from Onyx Path, but it's not true in White Wolf's Exalted.
Both games have "mook" rules, which change the statblocks of the mooks from what an ordinary character created with those rules would function like. Ex3 goes a whole lot further, with Quick Characters, but that's a whole other discussion.
So, what, your suggestion is now to make two stat blocks for each NPC, and have them digivolve into one version or the other depending on their circumstances?
My suggestion is to make a statblock for an NPC based on what purpose they are serving in your narrative.
Oh. So you're just being disingenuous and talking about an entirely different system, more like Pathfinder's troops. Got it.
As such, I'm very much looking forward to Starfinder embracing a similar approach.
You're going to be waiting for Starfinder 2e, at best.
|
|
The first rule of running a game isn't building a world, it's making a quick encounter to keep the game running smoothly with little prep time. If your priorities are different you're free to make each npc and monster using pc creation rules. But these rules are great for making it easier to stat opponents for a combat encounter, which is a huge part of the game for many players.Based on what evidence are you calling them great? The only comparison we have for them right now is the Unchained system that it modifies, which doesn't do what you're describing as useful.
Not just "great", "great for making it easier to stat opponents for a combat encounter". By that metric, simpler stat blocks are self-evidently easier to use. The class templates in the Bestiaries are a similar data point, though not quite the same.