Starfinder Society Scenarios - First Wave Clarifications & Errata


Starfinder Society

101 to 150 of 243 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks Thurston.

The downside of the NPCs not following the rules is that it is impossible for us to guess what the desired numbers are (as the posts above this make abundantly clear :-)). I know that errors creep into the process but they're going to be harder for us GMs to fix now :-(.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Paul Jackson wrote:

Thanks Thurston.

The downside of the NPCs not following the rules is that it is impossible for us to guess what the desired numbers are (as the posts above this make abundantly clear :-)). I know that errors creep into the process but they're going to be harder for us GMs to fix now :-(.

I suspect that problem will be less of an issue once the Alien Archive drops and GMs can just look at the NPC rules.

Paizo Employee Starfinder Society Developer

5 people marked this as a favorite.

No worries folks; this was entirely a flub on my end. Not sure where those numbers went in the printed scenario or how we missed getting them in.

Now, if you'll excuse me, methinks I'm going to do another neurotic review of the stats in #01-04. :)

Grand Lodge 2/5

I just assumed the mercs were using guns they weren't proficient with and was intended to be a +0. It made sense to me that they'd just throw down their inferior guns and run up to the PCs with their big ol' hammers.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/5

claudekennilol wrote:
I just assumed the mercs were using guns they weren't proficient with and was intended to be a +0. It made sense to me that they'd just throw down their inferior guns and run up to the PCs with their big ol' hammers.

I just assumed it was +3 bonus that got left off the stat block. Though, I think they do much better with the assault hammers. :)

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Thurston Hillman wrote:
Now, if you'll excuse me, methinks I'm going to do another neurotic review of the stats in #01-04. :)

Heck, Mark, Paul, or I would be willing to look at the stat blocks!

just kidding.. a little.. :)

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

claudekennilol wrote:
I just assumed the mercs were using guns they weren't proficient with and was intended to be a +0. It made sense to me that they'd just throw down their inferior guns and run up to the PCs with their big ol' hammers.

Even with no bonus, I still hit the PCs fairly often!

But yea, as soon as one of the PCs got close enough, out came came the melee weapon.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta aka The Masked Ferret

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thurston Hillman wrote:

No worries folks; this was entirely a flub on my end. Not sure where those numbers went in the printed scenario or how we missed getting them in.

Now, if you'll excuse me, methinks I'm going to do another neurotic review of the stats in #01-04. :)

Please also include the ranges on the weapons on both NPCs and Starships. Right now, you have to look them all up in the core rule book.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/5

The Masked Ferret wrote:
Thurston Hillman wrote:

No worries folks; this was entirely a flub on my end. Not sure where those numbers went in the printed scenario or how we missed getting them in.

Now, if you'll excuse me, methinks I'm going to do another neurotic review of the stats in #01-04. :)

Please also include the ranges on the weapons on both NPCs and Starships. Right now, you have to look them all up in the core rule book.

I don't know that they need to go in stat blocks. I just put the ranges on the starship sheet.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5

The Masked Ferret wrote:

[

Please also include the ranges on the weapons on both NPCs and Starships. Right now, you have to look them all up in the core rule book.

I'd second this request. There is a LOT to internalize in the game (NOT a complaint, an observation) and I'm already doing enough page flipping :-).

While I'm asking for stuff, would it be possible to change the Starship block so the NPC stats INCLUDE the ship stats? One less thing for me to have to do in combat (and the GM already has to do a fair bit in starship combat)

Grand Lodge 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paul Jackson wrote:
The Masked Ferret wrote:

[

Please also include the ranges on the weapons on both NPCs and Starships. Right now, you have to look them all up in the core rule book.

I'd second this request. There is a LOT to internalize in the game (NOT a complaint, an observation) and I'm already doing enough page flipping :-).

While I'm asking for stuff, would it be possible to change the Starship block so the NPC stats INCLUDE the ship stats? One less thing for me to have to do in combat (and the GM already has to do a fair bit in starship combat)

Definitely. Ranges are necessary.

Likewise, I had a heckuva lot of trouble finding the stats for the gun in the desert vs the worm. I couldn't find it on the starship weapons charts at all. Afterwards, it occurred to me that perhaps it was just a regular level four gun. But my PCs crit the worm with it after they'd brought it down to half health so I just told them they killed it.

I mean, if you prep a starship page, then sure, you can already have it in a good place. But that was the only piece of information missing from the stat block that kept me from just running it without having the rulebook in hand.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

claudekennilol wrote:
Likewise, I had a heckuva lot of trouble finding the stats for the gun in the desert vs the worm. I couldn't find it on the starship weapons charts at all. Afterwards, it occurred to me that perhaps it was just a regular level four gun. But my PCs crit the worm with it after they'd brought it down to half health so I just told them they killed it.

Yea, I had trouble finding it then I noted the "heavy weapon" description of it and bingo, found it there.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

And while we are on the X-gen gun, it is a projectile weapon but the description of it in the adventure indicates that it uses charges. Should it use bullets or rounds instead?

3/5 5/55/5 Venture-Agent, Ohio—Dayton aka Athos710

Thurston Hillman wrote:

No worries folks; this was entirely a flub on my end. Not sure where those numbers went in the printed scenario or how we missed getting them in.

Now, if you'll excuse me, methinks I'm going to do another neurotic review of the stats in #01-04. :)

I'm not terribly familiar with the release schedule, so apologies.

Do we know (approximately) when 1-04 and 1-05 will be released? We're looking at scheduling for a Con in November and want to be certain of availability.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/55/55/55/5 Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

Quick question about the Endless Threnody I just caught as I was helping another GM prep Into the Unknown - the enemy gunners have an attack of +7, which we're having a hard time calculating (even with a BAB of 2, they would need an 18 Dex just to get to +6). Thanks in advance for any thoughts!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

You mean you have a hard time calculating the bonus of an npc of which we do not yet have the full rules for?

NPC stats are not based on their ability scores, but on their CR.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/55/5 Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

The Masked Ferret wrote:
Thurston Hillman wrote:

No worries folks; this was entirely a flub on my end. Not sure where those numbers went in the printed scenario or how we missed getting them in.

Now, if you'll excuse me, methinks I'm going to do another neurotic review of the stats in #01-04. :)

Please also include the ranges on the weapons on both NPCs and Starships. Right now, you have to look them all up in the core rule book.

Also a fan of this suggestion, at least when it comes to the starships.

Dark Archive 5/5 5/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

SFS 1-02:

For the final fight, there appears to be some issues with the attack bonuses for the miners.

With their clubs, at both tiers, they have a +8 to hit (really, clubs, which do -5hp to anyone with armor), and in neither do they have a bonus for their ranged attacks.

I question the +8 at tier 1-2, as their STR bonus is less...

What do we use for the lasers?


Mr. Hillman! We need a clarification please!

Paizo Employee Starfinder Society Developer

Jack Brown wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Mr. Hillman! We need a clarification please!

Answered on the previous page regarding the missing attack bonus.

Also, do not factor Ability score bonuses into the math for NPCs. They're don't always perfectly line up in Starfinder. People can't "Reverse Engineer" statblocks like they could in Pathfinder.

Dark Archive 5/5 5/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

Thurston Hillman wrote:

The ranged attack bonus of both the Quest Pack Mercenaries should be +3.

The ranged attack bonus of the miners should be +5.

Ah, we missed this. And apparently this is the case for both tiers.

Thank you, and apologies.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Two questions regarding "The commencement"

The commencement details:

If the PC's pass the DC 21 intimidate check vs. the gangers trying to apprehend Ceren, does the combat just not happen, or do the thugs just immediately attack the PCs?

The thugs are carrying battons, which have a listed damage code of +3 [1d6 B]. They also have listed a str bonus of +2. Should this be added to the melee damage, as per normal melee rules? I assume they're using them as operative weapons, hence why they get +3 to hit, but my understanding was that someone using the operative property still gets to add their strength bonus to the damage roll.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

1: combat doesn't happen.

2: This might be an error, but might just be part of the new NPC system. I've seen more npcs that don't follow the strength to damage rule for PCs.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Damanta wrote:

1: combat doesn't happen.

2: This might be an error, but might just be part of the new NPC system. I've seen more npcs that don't follow the strength to damage rule for PCs.

They have said repeatedly that NPCs don't follow the same rules as PCs.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Right, I'm aware that they don't follow the same rules for stats and the like. The confusion stemmed from page 501, in the rules for converting pathfinder monsters to starfinder. Yes, different rules I know, but it emphasizes "Remember to add str bonus to melee damage". That, and it's a core rule that we're ignoring here, moreso than just an odd calculation in a stat block.

It just seemed like an accidental omission since later on in the scenario, another NPC combatant DOES appear to have their strength bonus included in their melee and thrown attack, so I thought I'd ask.

Nonetheless, the powers that be have spoken. We shall run as written. Thank you for the clarification.

Paizo Employee Starfinder Society Developer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Adder007USA wrote:

Right, I'm aware that they don't follow the same rules for stats and the like. The confusion stemmed from page 501, in the rules for converting pathfinder monsters to starfinder. Yes, different rules I know, but it emphasizes "Remember to add str bonus to melee damage". That, and it's a core rule that we're ignoring here, moreso than just an odd calculation in a stat block.

It just seemed like an accidental omission since later on in the scenario, another NPC combatant DOES appear to have their strength bonus included in their melee attack, so I thought I'd ask.

Nonetheless, the powers that be have spoken. We shall run as written.

One thing I will note, is that the final rules for Creature/NPC creation do also allow for "Creator Fiat" when making an NPC. So while the finalized rules may gives some people hopes of "reverse engineering" a creature/NPC, there will be cases where we intentionally derive from that math. Either to make an encounter easier, or because it makes sense from a story perspective. It's important to note that the Organized Play teams wants some encounters to be difficult, and that we also want some encounters to be fairly simple to overcome.

Certainly, feedback like "The miners are missing a ranged attack bonus" is useful and important for us to hear—again, sorry about that. But trying to reverse engineer math, or (when Alien Archive is released) trying to point out differences between creatures/NPCs and the assumed math, aren't necessarily going to be the best feedback.

As always, posting reviews and comments (especially in GM discussion threads) about scenarios are the best way to let us know what you think of how encounters played out. I'm way more interested in hearing about the perceived difficulty of an encounter than I am knowing a ranged attack bonus is off by 1 or 2 points. As ever, actual play-tested information on these encounters is the most useful information for me to work off of, because it helps inform how to tune future encounters I develop. It may even lead to use changing freelancer guidelines for writing encounters.

I've already been seeing a lot of people deride some scenarios on the forums and in reviews, mailny because of the attack bonuses and damage potential on some creatures/NPCs. I'm not entirely sure if these encounters have led to TPKs or if they're just hard encounters. Similarly, Starfinder is an entirely new system and, as people are starting to notice, you get hit a lot more and take a lot more damage. Either way, be it hard encounters or learning the lethality of a (mostly) new system, this is a situation that I'm monitoring closely.

Please keep providing feedback on how you feel encounters run and how your actual play experiences with the scenarios has been. Don't worry so much about the difference of 1-2 attack bonuses or damage, but do tell me if a creature is regularly murderlizing a full party of smart PCs. The more information like this I receive, the more I can act on it.

As always, I'm open through multiple avenues of communication, and check these forums way more than I healthily should. Similarly, if something strikes you and you don't want to post it in a public venue, feel free to email me: thurston.hillman@paizo.com


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Thank you sir for the hard work, and for the clarification. It's a new system, we're still getting used to the new math, or lack thereof compared to the old what-we're-used-to.

Sovereign Court 4/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Online—VTT aka Imhrail

Save to assume we run Construct traits as they were in Pathfinder?

Grand Lodge

A question regarding Claim to Salvation, the chronicle my GM gave me has 2 xp listed is that even possible? Similarly, it has 2 fame gained but only 1 reputation. My understanding is that you get 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the primary objective and 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the secondary objective. Is it possible to get 2 fame and 1 reputation?

Liberty's Edge Contributor

Kalsier wrote:
A question regarding Claim to Salvation, the chronicle my GM gave me has 2 xp listed is that even possible? Similarly, it has 2 fame gained but only 1 reputation. My understanding is that you get 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the primary objective and 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the secondary objective. Is it possible to get 2 fame and 1 reputation?

Based on the Primary and Secondary success conditions from Claim to Salvation, it is possible to earn up to 2 Fame and 2 Reputation. However, the second Reputation point has certain conditions.

Spoiler:
PCs meeting the secondary success conditions gain "1 Reputation with any one faction for which they hold a faction champion boon, despite not being able to slot a faction boon during this scenario." Given that this was probably the first scenario most people played, it wasn't possible for them to earn the second reputation point.

I can't find anything that says PCs playing in that scenario get 2 XP.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Kalsier wrote:
A question regarding Claim to Salvation, the chronicle my GM gave me has 2 xp listed is that even possible? Similarly, it has 2 fame gained but only 1 reputation. My understanding is that you get 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the primary objective and 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the secondary objective. Is it possible to get 2 fame and 1 reputation?

It is possible that the GM just put the numbers in the wrong boxes.

I suggest contacting the GM if possible to get a new one issued. If you can't, contact your VC to have them make a change on the chronicle.

3/5

Paris Crenshaw wrote:
Kalsier wrote:
A question regarding Claim to Salvation, the chronicle my GM gave me has 2 xp listed is that even possible? Similarly, it has 2 fame gained but only 1 reputation. My understanding is that you get 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the primary objective and 1 fame and 1 rep for completing the secondary objective. Is it possible to get 2 fame and 1 reputation?

Based on the Primary and Secondary success conditions from Claim to Salvation, it is possible to earn up to 2 Fame and 2 Reputation. However, the second Reputation point has certain conditions.

** spoiler omitted **

I can't find anything that says PCs playing in that scenario get 2 XP.

Spoiler:
Quote:
PCs meeting the secondary success conditions gain "1 Reputation with any one faction for which they hold a faction champion boon, despite not being able to slot a faction boon during this scenario." Given that this was probably the first scenario most people played, it wasn't possible for them to earn the second reputation point.

That same language is on the primary success condition and every character starts with a champion boon, so I'm not sure why you say it is not possible.

If you received 2 Fame, you should have also received 2 reputation.

Liberty's Edge Contributor

GM OfAnything wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

If you received 2 Fame, you should have also received 2 reputation.

Spoiler:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the condition, but if you don't have a faction champion boon at the time you receive your chronicle sheet, you don't get that Reputation point.

If that scenario is the first SFS scenario you've ever played, then you wouldn't have a faction champion boon, yet, so you wouldn't be able to claim that point of Reputation.

3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Everyone starts with a faction boon. There is no case where a character would not have one.

Liberty's Edge Contributor

GM OfAnything wrote:
Everyone starts with a faction boon. There is no case where a character would not have one.

You're right.

Ugh. I'm a dolt. Time go to back and re-read the Guild Guide so I don't screw up anything else.

2/5 5/5

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I interpreted it to mean that you get the reputation when you apply the Chronicle to a character you create--that character will always have a faction.

3/5

Paris Crenshaw wrote:
GM OfAnything wrote:
Everyone starts with a faction boon. There is no case where a character would not have one.

You're right.

Ugh. I'm a dolt. Time go to back and re-read the Guild Guide so I don't screw up anything else.

I missed that part on my first read-though, but my GenCon GM helpfully pointed it out! I did purchase a second champion boon so I can choose which faction I want to support each scenario.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It appears a digit was dropped from the EAC of the Subtier 1-2 Ambushers in SFS 1-2. Their EAC is listed as 1. Should it be 11?

The Exchange 5/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Washington D.C. aka Grolick

While I understand somehow stats for NPCs aren't created using the same rules (which seems really confusing to a long time PFS guy), I'm pretty sure the Ysoki Ambushers in tier 1-2 of 1-02 should not have an EAC of 1.

5/5 5/55/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Central Europe aka GreyYeti

I might be wrong here, but looking at similar CR 1/2 NPCs i think the EAC should be 10.


I am looking at the Chronicle Sheet for "The Commencement" and I am not seeing how much XP,and fame the players get for completing the scenario. If someone could please let me know if they receive anything aside from the credits and boons please let me know.

Liberty's Edge Contributor

Vigorta wrote:
I am looking at the Chronicle Sheet for "The Commencement" and I am not seeing how much XP,and fame the players get for completing the scenario. If someone could please let me know if they receive anything aside from the credits and boons please let me know.

The Fame and Reputation point awards are explained on Page 19 of the scenario:

Spoiler:
PRIMARY SUCCESS CONDITIONS
The PCs complete their main mission if they satisfy the requests
of at least three of the four faction heads. Doing so earns each
PC 1 Fame and 1 Reputation for any factions associated with their
current faction boon.

SECONDARY SUCCESS CONDITIONS
If the PCs satisfy the requests of all four of the faction heads or
convince Ceren to aid the Starfinders, they earn 1 additional Fame
and 1 Reputation for any factions associated with their current
faction boon.

Players get the usual 1 XP for completing the scenario and apply it the same way they do for any scenario in which they play a pregen (see page 6 of the SFS Roleplaying Guild Guide).

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/55/55/55/5 Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

Thuston, two questions about #1-02:

1 - On Page 5, one of the two "pitfalls" says, "If the PCs failed the check by 5 or less" while the other says "If the...check failed by 5 or more". Should I assume that both should be "5 or more"?

2 - If the negotiations in location A go well for the PCs, but the fugitive escapes in the end, how should this affect the chronicle sheet boons? The Development section on page 17 suggests that it is covered in the Conclusion section, but it does not appear to be so.

Thanks in advance.

4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Tennessee—Nashville aka Wolfspirit

Question for Scaling #1-01:
For the Scaling the Scrap Battle, the scenario says, "To accommodate a group of four PCs, lower the DCs on all skill checks by 2. In addition, groups of four PCs receive 6
prerace actions per PC instead of 4."
Does this include the piloting DCs for the race? And does it only apply for the Players?

2/5 5/5

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I ran it as only applying to the players, and only for the pre-race stuff. It is a bit ambiguous though . . .

2/5 5/5

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Trevor Burroughs wrote:
While I understand somehow stats for NPCs aren't created using the same rules (which seems really confusing to a long time PFS guy), I'm pretty sure the Ysoki Ambushers in tier 1-2 of 1-02 should not have an EAC of 1.

Prepping this right now. Do we have an official answer?

2/5 5/5

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Apologies for the self bump, but I've got 48 hours before I just have to guess during the session (or stick with what's written and make my players *very* happy)

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Given that EAC has a base of 10, I don't think it is unreasonable to go with an EAC of 11.

Paizo Employee Starfinder Society Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It should be 11.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/55/55/55/5 Venture-Captain, Indiana—Southern aka CanisDirus

Mike Bramnik wrote:

Thuston, two questions about #1-02:

1 - On Page 5, one of the two "pitfalls" says, "If the PCs failed the check by 5 or less" while the other says "If the...check failed by 5 or more". Should I assume that both should be "5 or more"?

2 - If the negotiations in location A go well for the PCs, but the fugitive escapes in the end, how should this affect the chronicle sheet boons? The Development section on page 17 suggests that it is covered in the Conclusion section, but it does not appear to be so.

Thanks in advance.

In addition to a self-bump...how would you recommend the GM adjudicate things if the fugitive is killed but the PCs make a good impression during negotiation (especially in reference to the check-box conditions)?

Thanks again, and in advance.

2/5 5/5

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mike Bramnik wrote:
Mike Bramnik wrote:

Thuston, two questions about #1-02:

1 - On Page 5, one of the two "pitfalls" says, "If the PCs failed the check by 5 or less" while the other says "If the...check failed by 5 or more". Should I assume that both should be "5 or more"?

2 - If the negotiations in location A go well for the PCs, but the fugitive escapes in the end, how should this affect the chronicle sheet boons? The Development section on page 17 suggests that it is covered in the Conclusion section, but it does not appear to be so.

Thanks in advance.

In addition to a self-bump...how would you recommend the GM adjudicate things if the fugitive is killed but the PCs make a good impression during negotiation (especially in reference to the check-box conditions)?

Thanks again, and in advance.

For # 1, I just ran it as written, assuming that they have to get *close* to the DC on the first one to get the basic information but that AbadarCorp learns about it, while the second set of info is easy to pick up but that on a really bad check word spreads all over Maro and Tasch that the PCs are looking for Talbot.

For # 2, I interpreted the "AbadarCorp Respect" boon to require not just friendly negotiations but *also* delivery of what was promised (Talbot). Because in the game I ran Talbot escaped, I crossed that boon off and left the players with the "AbadarCorp Annoyance" boon.

101 to 150 of 243 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Starfinder Society / Starfinder Society Scenarios - First Wave Clarifications & Errata All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.