Starfinder: Early Impressions

[Mashallah]

Eric Collins - France wrote:

When you talk about Starfinder vs. Pathfinder, and compare SF character creation to a 12 Point Buy in Pathfinder, you have to remember these are different games, with different systems.

Seems to me that SFS starts out a little less powerful, and then amps up way faster (maybe even crazy faster?).
In SF you can add +2 to four ability scores every 5 levels (and at least +1 to those four) vs. +1 every 4 levels in PFS.
In SF a Mk I Personal Upgrade (+2 to ability score) costs 1,400 Cr. (compared to 1,000 starting Cr. that is nothing, and way cheaper than the magic enhancements in PFS.

And the balance will also be vs. the DCs and monsters etc..
I am preparing 1-1 to DM it, and, without spoiling (I hope) there are a lot of DC12 things. It seems to me like the SFS DC12 is like the PFS DC15? (at low level at least).

My feeling is that it is probably best to play the game a bit before house ruling things based on PFS.

I have obviously not had time to read all the combat rules etc., but I have already found a lot of changes (sometimes small), like Aid Another where you must roll to Aid before the person trying to accomplish the task rolls ; or reach weapons which (I am still looking around to confirm, but seems quite sure it is so) now threaten all squares (not just 2 squares away without the closest one...).

Anyhow, I'll play it as written for a while at least before seeing what could be changed etc..

Yeah but Pathfinder Magic Items ultimately let you get +6 to all ability scores (and, if you really shell out, eventually even +5 inherent to all ability scores), while Starfinder only offers +6 to one, +4 to another, and +2 to a third.

Overall, Pathfinder ends up with higher ability scores.

[Mark Seifter]

Illia- wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

rooneg wrote:

QuidEst wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

Porridge wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

This is the Rogue I always wanted, but never had. I dislike that Daredevil and Thief are screwed over with trick attacks for no apparent reason, though.

Wait, where does it say Daredevil and Thief are different with respect to trick attacks? I have the pdf, but can't find where it says that...

I think I'm missing something... :P

Every other Specialisation says you get +4 to the skill on Trick Attacks.

Thief and Daredevil don't have that clause.

Oh, I heard about that. It took a little bit to work out, but those two have Dex-based skills, and the class is Dex-based. The other specializations have +4 to make up for relying on a secondary (or even dump) ability score, that way they aren't pushed into having a really high charisma or wisdom just to succeed at their trick attacks.

Note that Ghost also uses a DEX based skill (Stealth), and they get the +4 bonus. Perhaps they're assuming that it's not always practical to use Stealth in combat?

Ghost was not supposed to get a +4. QuidEst is correct that the +4 is to make up for not using a Dex-based skill, so that Ghosts wouldn't be better than every other choice, but it looks like an extraneous +4 slipped into ghosts (this is something that I noticed at Paizocon because the pregen is a ghost).

Even if that is your intent, the numbers are wack. It seems pretty weird to assume that even the most specialized of Operatives won't have a 14 in their secondary (that's even on the Focused Stat Array). If the only goal is to bridge the game between an 18 and a 14, you should be granting a +2 bonus. And, even if we consider that stats may change with level, it's easier to boost a 14 than an 18, even if boosting the 18 will be a higher priority.

Here's some fun rules archaeology: The +4s were something that came about due to playtest feedback and were, crunching the options (and remembering they didn't add to ghost; ghost already gets Skill Focus in one of the core trick attack skills that is Dex-based, which is why it didn't need anything else: they way it was implemented was that if you didn't have a Skill Focus skill in core trick attack, you got one, and if your Skill Focus trick attack skills were all non-Dex, you got a +4 to it), solid additions at the time they were added, but that was also using a different ability score generation system where it was easier to get 14 or so in your low stats over time but harder to get your third and fourth up to 18. To be fair, before long you will probably start to auto-succeed at those checks anyway, so it matters most at low levels with initial stats; with the current ability buy system, the trade-off looks like that you won't be able to afford much or any Con if you want to start with a good secondary for a trick attack skill or will have lower Dex.

EDIT: QuidEst beat me to the punch on Con.

[Mashallah]

Meanwhile, another disappointment of the book: sniper rifles.
When Mark Seifter said Operatives specialising in sniper rifles would be able to deal a ton of damage, I expected... at least something. As is, Operatives have no real sniper rifle support whatsoever - there's even no way to add Trick Attack damage to them anywhere I can find.

[Mark Seifter]

Mashallah wrote:

Meanwhile, another disappointment of the book: sniper rifles.

When Mark Seifter said Operatives specialising in sniper rifles would be able to deal a ton of damage, I expected... at least something. As is, Operatives have no real sniper rifle support whatsoever - there's even no way to add Trick Attack damage to them anywhere I can find.

You can, however, add debilitations. I was confused by this post since I didn't remember saying sniper rifles did a ton of damage, so I searched my post history. I think you might have been remembering that from when I said "Only an operative with the exploits for it is at all likely to get an instant KO with a sniper rifle (against a threatening opponent, anyone could assassinate a soft target if they were good enough), though anyone with proficiency could use it to attack from the distance." I can see how that might have seemed like it was talking about damage. I was talking about the instant KO debilitation, not KO from obscene one-shot damage. The math of trick attack is such that your damage with something like a sniper rifle + trick attack would be out of the league of any other character, so I don't recommend houseruling to allow it.

[Illia-]

Everyone gets maxed d12 HD, effectively, except soldiers who get even more. And most classes have a self heal or buffer pool or both. Is Con still a must have? That'd seem really harsh on the classes whose primary stat isn't Dex.

[Mark Seifter]

Illia- wrote:

Everyone gets maxed d12 HD, effectively, except soldiers who get even more. And most classes have a self heal or buffer pool or both. Is Con still a must have? That'd seem really harsh on the classes whose primary stat isn't Dex.

I'd say it isn't, especially at lower levels when you're really pretty beefy. I built a number of 10 Con characters that Logan used as pregens in his Paizocon game and he said they did fine. But more hit points and Fort saves are always nice, even if less essential than when the difference between 10 and 18 Con for a wizard was eventually more than doubling your hp.

[sunderedhero]

QuidEst wrote:

That 14 could go to Con and be much more useful, though. Dex will get the best stat boost item, Con would normally get second-best, leaving the eventual leftover +2 for a skill stat. The +4 catches the other skills up for comparable investment, but you have the option to focus on a social stat and do better than the Dex-based option.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Here's some fun rules archaeology: The +4s were something that came about due to playtest feedback and were, crunching the options (and remembering they didn't add to ghost; ghost already gets Skill Focus in one of the core trick attack skills that is Dex-based, which is why it didn't need anything else: they way it was implemented was that if you didn't have a Skill Focus skill in core trick attack, you got one, and if your Skill Focus trick attack skills were all non-Dex, you got a +4 to it), solid additions at the time they were added, but that was also using a different ability score generation system where it was easier to get 14 or so in your low stats over time but harder to get your third and fourth up to 18. To be fair, before long you will probably start to auto-succeed at those checks anyway, so it matters most at low levels with initial stats; with the current ability buy system, the trade-off looks like that you won't be able to afford much or any Con if you want to start with a good secondary for a trick attack skill or will have lower Dex.

The thing is you get a ton of SP/HP and the ability to regain SP easily, I don't think CON is really useful for anything except Fort saves, a 10 or 12 should be sufficient for an operative.

EDIT: Guh, ninja'd by the person I was quoting

[Archmage Variel]

What happened to snipers being capable of one hit KOing things with a sniper rifle in certain operative builds? It seems pretty difficult to do with the current operative exploits.

[Mashallah]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Illia- wrote:

Everyone gets maxed d12 HD, effectively, except soldiers who get even more. And most classes have a self heal or buffer pool or both. Is Con still a must have? That'd seem really harsh on the classes whose primary stat isn't Dex.

I'd say it isn't, especially at lower levels when you're really pretty beefy. I built a number of 10 Con characters that Logan used as pregens in his Paizocon game and he said they did fine. But more hit points and Fort saves are always nice, even if less essential than when the difference between 10 and 18 Con for a wizard was eventually more than doubling your hp.

On another note, can you please confirm or deny whether the Overlord Mystic level 3 feature is supposed to allow a saving throw or not?

I can't make heads or tails of the ambiguous wording and it worries me that it might not allow a saving throw.

[sunderedhero]

Archmage Variel wrote:

What happened to snipers being capable of one hit KOing things with a sniper rifle in certain operative builds? It seems pretty difficult to do with the current operative exploits.

As Mark stated above it comes from the 14th level exploit "Knockout Shot"

[Archmage Variel]

sunderedhero wrote:

Archmage Variel wrote:

What happened to snipers being capable of one hit KOing things with a sniper rifle in certain operative builds? It seems pretty difficult to do with the current operative exploits.

As Mark stated above it comes from the 14th level exploit "Knockout Shot"

Oh I totally missed that post. Really cool!

[Mark Seifter]

Mashallah wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Illia- wrote:

Everyone gets maxed d12 HD, effectively, except soldiers who get even more. And most classes have a self heal or buffer pool or both. Is Con still a must have? That'd seem really harsh on the classes whose primary stat isn't Dex.

I'd say it isn't, especially at lower levels when you're really pretty beefy. I built a number of 10 Con characters that Logan used as pregens in his Paizocon game and he said they did fine. But more hit points and Fort saves are always nice, even if less essential than when the difference between 10 and 18 Con for a wizard was eventually more than doubling your hp.

On another note, can you please confirm or deny whether the Overlord Mystic level 3 feature is supposed to allow a saving throw or not?

I can't make heads or tails of the ambiguous wording and it worries me that it might not allow a saving throw.

It functions as charm person, which allows a saving throw. As you've seen with Skill Focus, I'm not the most official person to answer questions (was only on the project for certain stages, though heavily involved in those particular stages), but I do know about early design phases on the mystic and the operative a fair deal because those were the classes I wrote.

[Mashallah]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Illia- wrote:

Everyone gets maxed d12 HD, effectively, except soldiers who get even more. And most classes have a self heal or buffer pool or both. Is Con still a must have? That'd seem really harsh on the classes whose primary stat isn't Dex.

I'd say it isn't, especially at lower levels when you're really pretty beefy. I built a number of 10 Con characters that Logan used as pregens in his Paizocon game and he said they did fine. But more hit points and Fort saves are always nice, even if less essential than when the difference between 10 and 18 Con for a wizard was eventually more than doubling your hp.

On another note, can you please confirm or deny whether the Overlord Mystic level 3 feature is supposed to allow a saving throw or not?

I can't make heads or tails of the ambiguous wording and it worries me that it might not allow a saving throw.

It functions as charm person, which allows a saving throw.

Thank you.

[Archmage Variel]

How to you tell what races have a racial language? Do contemplatives get telepathy as their "racial language"?

[Varun Creed]

Does an Envoy's Improved Get 'Em also add it's bonus to damage rolls when using resolve? It refers to the Get 'Em improv, but doesn't say this specifically.

Also, I noticed that the Operative needs to choose to either Trick Attack, or Full Attack - as they are both full actions you can't get trick bonus damage on a full attack.

[sunderedhero]

Varun Creed wrote:

Does an Envoy's Improved Get 'Em also add it's bonus to damage rolls when using resolve? It refers to the Get 'Em improv, but doesn't say this specifically.

That's a good question.

Varun Creed wrote:

Also, I noticed that the Operative needs to choose to either Trick Attack, or Full Attack - as they are both full actions you can't get trick bonus damage on a full attack.

Yeah either you get your trick attack bonus damage(assuming you make the skill check) or can make a full attack. Keep in mind however that the Operative eventually gets to make 3 then 4 attacks as a full attack (with operative property melee weapons or small arms). Then you can add in the Multiattack Mastery exploit to cause a debilitating trick if you hit with 2+ attacks and the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat to reduce the full attack penalty to -3.

[Porridge]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Here's some fun rules archaeology: The +4s were something that came about due to playtest feedback and were, crunching...

Let me explicitly say how much I appreciate these comments and replies. It's really helpful for getting a feel for what things which might seem funny at first glance are actually errata, and which ones have some less-than-obvious reasons behind them. And your contributions here are definitely above and beyond the call of duty

So I'm behalf of all of us newly minted Starfinder fans: thanks!

[IonutRO]

Mashallah wrote:

Meanwhile, I just calculated: the average array you'll go for in Starfinder is equivalent to 12 Point Buy in Pathfinder.

If you instead give 15 Starfinder Points to spread around, the typical arrays get closer to 20PB in Pathfinder, while also letting you get rid of the odd ability score imposed by theme while odd ability scores are really bad in Starfinder and screw you over, making me want to get rid of them.
I think this is a fairly reasonable houserule.

If it's a score you plan on increasing at every ability score gain, then the odd score usually ends up even in my experiments.

[Mashallah]

IonutRO wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

Meanwhile, I just calculated: the average array you'll go for in Starfinder is equivalent to 12 Point Buy in Pathfinder.

If you instead give 15 Starfinder Points to spread around, the typical arrays get closer to 20PB in Pathfinder, while also letting you get rid of the odd ability score imposed by theme while odd ability scores are really bad in Starfinder and screw you over, making me want to get rid of them.
I think this is a fairly reasonable houserule.

If it's a score you plan on increasing at every ability score gain, then the odd score usually ends up even in my experiments.

17->18 is a waste of a jump.

I'd much rather go 16->18.
I loathe the arbitrary cutoff for stat bumps. It irritates me to an irrational degree because of how ugly it makes math. The game forcing at least one odd stat on you just rubs it in and makes it even more irritating because it forces you to go through the 17->18 stat bump, like it or not.

[JetSetRadio]

Mashallah wrote:

And themes:

Themes look really fun. They are all good at one specific thing and make that specific thing really fun to roleplay. For example, Icon makes your identity common knowledge so literally everyone in the galaxy recognises you by taking 10 on untrained Culture checks.
Overall, as far as I can tell, if a theme fits your concept - take it! They're great, fun, and exciting. Themeless seems to be mostly a last resort option if nothing really fits well.

I did not miss the irony on this one. For all the negativity you have put out about this game before its release, you get to read the game before people who are desperate to get their hands on it. Bravo Universe... Bravo.

[Alanya]

Mashallah wrote:

Found a typo in themes:

Every other theme: when attempting knowledge or culture checks about stuff relevant to your theme, reduce the DC by 5
Icon: when attempting a profession or culture check to recall knowledge about other icons of your profession or details about your profession's cultural aspects, INCREASE the DC by 5

Maybe they're all just extremely spoiled and self-centered? :)

[Lanitril]

I personally feel that while OP has been possibly outwardly pessimistic, that's due to real fears in a lot of places. While I personally disagree with her about Lashuntas, I can understand that it is a change that was made rather suddenly.

However, I'm also quite glad to see her views in most cases, and particularly glad to see this topic, as it has provided a wealth of Starfinder information.

Back on track, is it possible you might be able to tell me anything about the Mechanic that you did like? I have a friend who's been looking to play one.

Or anything about Themes that you liked as well. Less general, more specific. Any cool or standout abilities?

[JetSetRadio]

I appreciate the post. Just find it a little funny.

The Solarian being combo based sounds fun. Kind of like the tome of battle.

I feel a Lashunta Envoy would be awesome. Loving the change to Cha. Not enough Cha based races.

[TheGoofyGE3K]

So just checking, it seems we've found one rather unfortunate error in the game so far (the icon increase instead of a decrease) and another in the operative? or is the Ghost/Thief/Daredevil "issue" intentional?

[Natsu Rage]

JetSetRadio wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

And themes:

Themes look really fun. They are all good at one specific thing and make that specific thing really fun to roleplay. For example, Icon makes your identity common knowledge so literally everyone in the galaxy recognises you by taking 10 on untrained Culture checks.
Overall, as far as I can tell, if a theme fits your concept - take it! They're great, fun, and exciting. Themeless seems to be mostly a last resort option if nothing really fits well.

I did not miss the irony on this one. For all the negativity you have put out about this game before its release, you get to read the game before people who are desperate to get their hands on it. Bravo Universe... Bravo.

i too noticed this....

[sunderedhero]

Lanitril wrote:

Back on track, is it possible you might be able to tell me anything about the Mechanic that you did like? I have a friend who's been looking to play one.

Or anything about Themes that you liked as well. Less general, more specific. Any cool or standout abilities?

I really like the Mechanic, it's right behind Operative for me. It's got a bunch of class features built around hacking stuff and obviously the choice of the drone or exocortex. On even levels you get a "trick" ability to choose from a list of 30 options(some locked till higher levels). The drone itself get to choose "mods" picking from another 30 choices. The exocortex can do some remote hacking using your bonuses and can give you effectively full bab against 1-3 enemies at a time.

JetSetRadio wrote:

The Solarian being combo based sounds fun. Kind of like the tome of battle.

It's less ToB more Jedi, it's also seems somewhat complicated. It does however get some cool abilities.

TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

So just checking, it seems we've found one rather unfortunate error in the game so far (the icon increase instead of a decrease) and another in the operative? or is the Ghost/Thief/Daredevil "issue" intentional?

The Ghost/Thief/Daredevil thing, as Mark himself pointed out, will need to be decided officially.

I did find another error though. On page 26 under step 1 2nd paragraph last sentence, it says you get an ability score increase at 4th level but you don't get one till 5th level.

[Plausible Pseudonym]

Someone should probably start a potential errata thread to post things you think are errors and assist the staff to compile them for potential FAQ clarifications or eventual errata.

[TheGoofyGE3K]

Oy. Plenty of typos and errors in the core book so far. Never what you want to hear, though with hundreds of pages, kind of hard to avoid. Does make me wonder if I want to get that extra fancy book if the insides are funky though.

On another note, I'm hoping to play a former detective-turned-bounty hunter and the Operative class seemed the way I'd want to go, specifically Detective. Does that seem to be the right way to go for such a thing? :)

Plausible Pseudonym wrote:

Someone should probably start a potential errata thread to post things you think are errors and assist the staff to compile them for potential FAQ clarifications or eventual errata.

Huh. Might get right on that.

[Natsu Rage]

i feel as if the book was rushed now due to all the findings that are coming about. i know they had a small team on a new type of play and i comend them for their efferts and joy they are bringing us. I am just hoping we dont have a "what the..." moment when trying to read stuff i nthe book.

[JRutterbush]

TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

Never what you want to hear, though with hundreds of pages, kind of hard to avoid.

These mistakes have been found by a small handful of people reading the book in about a day. Sounds like they'd have been pretty easy to avoid to me.

[Brew Bird]

Natsu Rage wrote:

i feel as if the book was rushed now due to all the findings that are coming about. i know they had a small team on a new type of play and i comend them for their efferts and joy they are bringing us. I am just hoping we dont have a "what the..." moment when trying to read stuff i nthe book.

There are definitely some things that are going to need errata/clarification, but not too many that I've seen. It's no Advanced Class Guide.

How grenade arrows interact with the more advanced crossbolters that consume multiple arrows per shot is unclear, for one.

[Natsu Rage]

Brew Bird wrote:

Natsu Rage wrote:

i feel as if the book was rushed now due to all the findings that are coming about. i know they had a small team on a new type of play and i comend them for their efferts and joy they are bringing us. I am just hoping we dont have a "what the..." moment when trying to read stuff i nthe book.

There are definitely some things that are going to need errata/clarification, but not too many that I've seen.

How grenade arrows interact with the more advanced crossbolters that consume multiple arrows per shot is unclear, for one.

i would guess they would be a one per shot to keep from becoming OP. although i dont have the PDF yet so cant really say.

[CorvusMask]

It is definitely type of situation where our first impression will be colored by OP's pessimism :D

[Natsu Rage]

JRutterbush wrote:

TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

Never what you want to hear, though with hundreds of pages, kind of hard to avoid.

These mistakes have been found by a small handful of people reading the book in about a day. Sounds like they'd have been pretty easy to avoid to me.

maybe but most who are reding this are taking it in for the first time so they make sure to read carfully enough make sure they dont miss or misunderstand how something works. whiel the team would have seen alot of this before and might have done what alot of people are known for doing by R3ading it the right way, 3v3n though there are m1stak3s within. :)

[Brew Bird]

Skill Focus being an insight bonus definitely feels like an oversight. The Solarion's Sidereal influence is a variable (d6) insight bonus to a skill, so using it with a skill you also have skill focus in has a 50% chance of doing nothing.

The Operative getting bonus feats that stop doing anything at level 7 (thanks for bringing that to my attention Mashallah, would probably have missed it otherwise) can't possibly be intentional either. If there were a bunch of other feats that required skill-focus as a prerequisite I'd understand it, but Starfinder feats are all very prerequisite-light.

Hope this can get cleared up soon after the book hits the streets, issues like this are why I've never opted for physical copies of player companions, so I really hope that I can feel comfortable investing in Starfinder hardcovers.

[Natsu Rage]

Brew Bird wrote:

Skill Focus being an insight bonus definitely feels like an oversight. The Solarion's Sidereal influence is a variable (d6) insight bonus to a skill, so using it with a skill you also have skill focus in has a 50% chance of doing nothing.

The Operative getting bonus feats that stop doing anything at level 7 (thanks for bringing that to my attention Mashallah, would probably have missed it otherwise) can't possibly be intentional either. If there were a bunch of other feats that required skill-focus as a prerequisite I'd understand it, but Starfinder feats are all very prerequisite-light.

Hope this can get cleared up soon after the book hits the streets, issues like this are why I've never opted for physical copies of player companions, so I really hope that I can feel comfortable investing in Starfinder hardcovers.

I think Mark said that skill focus was to stack in early cuts of the game, but when he checked later in his own copy of the book it was indeed insight, i think that this could easly be over ruled to be able to stack since it seems (from what ive been reading on posts) to hurt some class features.

[TheGoofyGE3K]

Hoping they figure the skill focus issue before Gencon so those going can play with correct rules

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

At the same level the operative's edge hits +3 (the same bonus as Skill Focus), they get an ability (specialization skill mastery) that allows them to take 10 with any skill they have Skill Focus with, even if its not normally allowed.
It's not a dead feat. Its benefit just becomes something unique only operatives have.

[Michael7123]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

At the same level the operative's edge hits +3 (the same bonus as Skill Focus), they get an ability (specialization skill mastery) that allows them to take 10 with any skill they have Skill Focus with, even if its not normally allowed.

It's not a dead feat. Its benefit just becomes something unique only operatives have.

As someone with a chronic habit of rolling natural ones at crucial times, you have my deepest thanks and gratitude.

[mussary]

One of the things that caught my eye, and will be sure to trip me up is that charge no longer gives a bonus to hit now its -2 attack and ac.

[Michael7123]

mussary wrote:

One of the things that caught my eye, and will be sure to trip me up is that charge no longer gives a bonus to hit now its -2 attack and ac.

Wait... charging now gives... a penalty to your attack? Without any other benifit to it?

[TheGoofyGE3K]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

At the same level the operative's edge hits +3 (the same bonus as Skill Focus), they get an ability (specialization skill mastery) that allows them to take 10 with any skill they have Skill Focus with, even if its not normally allowed.

It's not a dead feat. Its benefit just becomes something unique only operatives have.

So Skill Focus is meant to be an insight bonus then?

Michael7123 wrote:

mussary wrote:

One of the things that caught my eye, and will be sure to trip me up is that charge no longer gives a bonus to hit now its -2 attack and ac.

Wait... charging now gives... a penalty to your attack? Without any other benifit to it?

You moved twice your movement and got an attack. Sounds like a benefit to me. But yeah, that's interesting, to say the least.

[Lanitril]

Honestly, it was weird that it ever did anything else. Running fast does not make you more accurate. You're basically doing 2 move actions, something that would normally already be a turn, and then you get a standard action attack anyways, and with a bonus for actually no reason? Like, there's more momentum, but you're probably swinging more wildly too. There's a lot of tell to you charging too. It should be reasonably easier to dodge a charge than a normal attack.

[TheGoofyGE3K]

Lanitril wrote:

Honestly, it was weird that it ever did anything else. Running fast does not make you more accurate. You're basically doing 2 move actions, something that would normally already be a turn, and then you get a standard action attack anyways, and with a bonus for actually no reason? Like, there's more momentum, but you're probably swinging more wildly too. There's a lot of tell to you charging too. It should be reasonably easier to dodge a charge than a normal attack.

True, though with Martial/Caster Disparity in Pathfinder, it makes some sense. No need to penalize them further. Or so I remember the point being made a while back by... someone.

[space master7]

TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

Lanitril wrote:

Honestly, it was weird that it ever did anything else. Running fast does not make you more accurate. You're basically doing 2 move actions, something that would normally already be a turn, and then you get a standard action attack anyways, and with a bonus for actually no reason? Like, there's more momentum, but you're probably swinging more wildly too. There's a lot of tell to you charging too. It should be reasonably easier to dodge a charge than a normal attack.

True, though with Martial/Caster Disparity in Pathfinder, it makes some sense. No need to penalize them further. Or so I remember the point being made a while back by... someone.

Not sure if star finder will have the same M/CD problems. at least i'm not. (I don't have book yet <<jealous jealous jealous>>.)

[UnArcaneElection]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

Meanwhile, another disappointment of the book: sniper rifles.

When Mark Seifter said Operatives specialising in sniper rifles would be able to deal a ton of damage, I expected... at least something. As is, Operatives have no real sniper rifle support whatsoever - there's even no way to add Trick Attack damage to them anywhere I can find.

You can, however, add debilitations. I was confused by this post since I didn't remember saying sniper rifles did a ton of damage, so I searched my post history. {. . .}

I wonder whether some people might be experiencing withdrawal symptoms due to the release version of the Core Rulebook not having the 1d810 sniper rifle . . . .

[Varun Creed]

Did pages from the Envoy get cut?

Their max tier improvisations is level 8. All other classes have more powerful "talent tiers" on higher levels.

The Envoy seems to be weaker then a PF Bard (waiting judgement until real play). Yes I know it's wrong to compare a PF class with a SF one.. I really like the improvs diversity, except that there is no damage buffing one without spending Resolve (like a Bard's Inspire). Furthermore the Envoy doesn't get spells, with not much in return? Maybe if a lot of the improvs would be a shorter action (stnd>move, move>swift)?

[Mashallah]

JetSetRadio wrote:

Mashallah wrote:

And themes:

Themes look really fun. They are all good at one specific thing and make that specific thing really fun to roleplay. For example, Icon makes your identity common knowledge so literally everyone in the galaxy recognises you by taking 10 on untrained Culture checks.
Overall, as far as I can tell, if a theme fits your concept - take it! They're great, fun, and exciting. Themeless seems to be mostly a last resort option if nothing really fits well.

I did not miss the irony on this one. For all the negativity you have put out about this game before its release, you get to read the game before people who are desperate to get their hands on it. Bravo Universe... Bravo.

I was fairly excited for the game.

My "negativity" as you call it were worries it might be worse than I'd like.

[Mashallah]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

At the same level the operative's edge hits +3 (the same bonus as Skill Focus), they get an ability (specialization skill mastery) that allows them to take 10 with any skill they have Skill Focus with, even if its not normally allowed.

It's not a dead feat. Its benefit just becomes something unique only operatives have.

That is still poor design.

Abilities within the same class not stacking is unfun for the players and feels bad.

[CorvusMask]

So what this something about torture related mystic ability associated with Zon-Kuthon and Devourer also being associated with Iomedae?

Like, is that a typo, or is Paizo seriously going with "LG and Torture goes together!"? :D