| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does anyone else find it strange that the strongest Vesk in the Pact Worlds is no stronger than the strongest Ysoki?
Due to the new ability score generation method of Starfinder, racial mods seem to matter a lot less, creating little quirks like the above.
Sure the racial bonus to strength means that the average Vesk will be stronger than average representatives other races, but thanks to those magical ten points, the max potential ends up being the same.
Weird, huh? Seems like Starfinder is full of weird quirks like this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a feature, not a bug. It gets rid of the annoying fact in Pathfinder, as a rule of thumb, the ability score caps (and expense of even these diminished caps) make it mechanically unattractive to make a halfling barbarian or a dwarven sorcerer.
Removing these racial ability score caps, and making these cap values have a similar cost for all races changes that, and opens up the space of viable race/class combinations.
I dunno about viable. A 1st-level Vesk with 18 strength still has 4 points to put into other areas. A Ysoki with 18 strength, on the other hand, has a while lotta 10s.
So really does the racial modifiers actually do anything?
|
So really does the racial modifiers actually do anything?
It actually gives races that have a -2 on 1 stat and a +2 on two others an effective 14 pointbuy compared to races that only get a +2 on a single stat if you don't pull the negative up to 10. Those races have a pointbuy 12 with a bit more freedom of their bonus :).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So really does the racial modifiers actually do anything?
As Ravingdork says, I think it does what's intended - that an average Vesk is stronger than the average member of most other races.
It also allows for the fantasy that, if you train like Hell, you, too can enter the Vesk Olympics! :)
lol ok I got ya.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno about viable. A 1st-level Vesk with 18 strength still has 4 points to put into other areas. A Ysoki with 18 strength, on the other hand, has a while lotta 10s.
Yeah, so a Vesk Soldier who maxes str has:
S 18D 10
C 12
I 8
W 10
Ch 10
with 4 pts to spend (let's ignore the theme point). You definitely want at least 2 pts in dex, and I'd bump up int to the 10, since I hate low skill points builds. That gives us:
S 18
D 12
C 12
I 10
W 10
Ch 10
A Ysoki who maxes str has:
S 18
D 12
C 10
I 12
W 10
Ch 10
with no points to spend. A little lower con, a little better int, but basically the same array. Definitely viable!
So really does the racial modifiers actually do anything?
Well they're important in SF because they set the effective minimums for ability scores. I.e., they set the bar for how low you can dump a stat. So what you're looking for in SF for a given build is a race that doesn't have a bonus to, or has a penalty in, a stat you want to dump.
That's one of the reasons Androids look so good. Most classes are happy dumping cha, and it lets you do so. And pretty much no class wants to dump int and dex, making the fact that these have higher minimums less of a drawback.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a feature, not a bug. It gets rid of the annoying fact in Pathfinder, as a rule of thumb, the ability score caps (and expense of even these diminished caps) make it mechanically unattractive to make a halfling barbarian or a dwarven sorcerer.
Removing these racial ability score caps, and making these cap values have a similar cost for all races changes that, and opens up the space of viable race/class combinations.
Ironically, I think that was a feature, not a bug. Why would a 3 foot tall hobbit be as mechanically attractive a barbarian as a huge, hulking orc? If pc races are to be more than an aesthetic veneer, there should be differences in capability. An elf should make a better wizard than a goblin does. If a Vesk can be just as smart as a Ysoki, and a Ysoki can be just as strong as a Vesk, the race choice is mostly reduced to "Do I want to be tall and scaly or short and furry?" That's pretty boring.
Ironically, I think that was a feature, not a bug. Why would a 3 foot tall hobbit be as mechanically attractive a barbarian as a huge, hulking orc? If pc races are to be more than an aesthetic veneer, there should be differences in capability. An elf should make a better wizard than a goblin does. If a Vesk can be just as smart as a Ysoki, and a Ysoki can be just as strong as a Vesk, the race choice is mostly reduced to "Do I want to be tall and scaly or short and furry?" That's pretty boring.I think it's a feature, not a bug. It gets rid of the annoying fact in Pathfinder, as a rule of thumb, the ability score caps (and expense of even these diminished caps) make it mechanically unattractive to make a halfling barbarian or a dwarven sorcerer.
Removing these racial ability score caps, and making these cap values have a similar cost for all races changes that, and opens up the space of viable race/class combinations.
Yeah, I definitely agree that this was an intentional feature of Pathfinder, and so (in that sense) a feature, not a bug.
With Pathfinder, they decided to go one route, thinking that the pros of that approach (differences in maximal capabilities of species to emphasize their differences) outweighed the cons (making a bunch of race/class combinations unattractive). With Starfinder they re-assessed these pros and cons, made a different judgment call, and decided to go a different route.
So really, these differences are features of both rulesets. And the relative attractiveness of these two approaches is a judgment call determined by the extent to which one is pulled by the pros and cons of each.
Why would a 3 foot tall hobbit be as mechanically attractive a barbarian as a huge, hulking orc? If pc races are to be more than an aesthetic veneer, there should be differences in capability. An elf should make a better wizard than a goblin does. If a Vesk can be just as smart as a Ysoki, and a Ysoki can be just as strong as a Vesk, the race choice is mostly reduced to "Do I want to be tall and scaly or short and furry?" That's pretty boring.
I get what you're saying, though obviously our preferences differ. (I'd prefer a system which doesn't punish you for trying to make a goblin wizard, even though that entails that elven wizards won't end up being superior to goblin wizards, whereas I take it you'd prefer a system which goes the other way.)
But, FWIW, note that there are still mechanical differences between races in Starfinder, since your race influences the effective minimum of your stats. I.e. all Vesk PCs will be pretty strong; stronger than the average human.* And all Android PCs will be pretty smart; smarter than the average human. And so on. So character creation still imposes a clear mechanical difference between races. It's just that the mechanical difference comes in at the bottom (how low you can go) instead of the top (how high you can go).
[*Putting aside the "for the purposes of roleplaying, you can lower your ability scores for no benefit" option in the Starfinder CRB.]
|
|
I actually think it makes the problem of choosing the right race for a class far worse than in Pathfinder. At least in Pathfinder you could dump a stat so that you could have a high primary stat even if you took a racial penalty to it and still have decent scores in other stats. With the removal of dump stats in point-buy, you'll pretty much always be significantly less effective as a race with a stat penalty to their class stat.
I did find it odd; just like there minimal difference between being small and medium. I can live with it but it is odd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually think it makes the problem of choosing the right race for a class far worse than in Pathfinder. At least in Pathfinder you could dump a stat so that you could have a high primary stat even if you took a racial penalty to it and still have decent scores in other stats. With the removal of dump stats in point-buy, you'll pretty much always be significantly less effective as a race with a stat penalty to their class stat.
How? I mean, it does restrict your decision making ability, but we've already shown how you can make a decent character even with a racial penalty working against you.
|
|
I actually think it makes the problem of choosing the right race for a class far worse than in Pathfinder. At least in Pathfinder you could dump a stat so that you could have a high primary stat even if you took a racial penalty to it and still have decent scores in other stats. With the removal of dump stats in point-buy, you'll pretty much always be significantly less effective as a race with a stat penalty to their class stat.How? I mean, it does restrict your decision making ability, but we've already shown how you can make a decent character even with a racial penalty working against you.
So imagine making a Vesk Technomancer. In order to start off with a 16 INT (which is a good primary stat start for a caster) you have to spend 8 of your 10 points. So you'll end up with a 16, a 12, and all 10s.
Now lets compare this to Pathfinder 20 point buy (what the majority of people tend to use). Say I want to make a Nagaji Wizard (+2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 INT). I drop my charisma to 9 and my strength to 10, and I can end up with overall stats of 10, 14, 12, 16, 12, 9.
So in Starfinder I end up with a character who is significantly worse at things outside his core stat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually think it makes the problem of choosing the right race for a class far worse than in Pathfinder. At least in Pathfinder you could dump a stat so that you could have a high primary stat even if you took a racial penalty to it and still have decent scores in other stats. With the removal of dump stats in point-buy, you'll pretty much always be significantly less effective as a race with a stat penalty to their class stat.How? I mean, it does restrict your decision making ability, but we've already shown how you can make a decent character even with a racial penalty working against you.So imagine making a Vesk Technomancer. In order to start off with a 16 INT (which is a good primary stat start for a caster) you have to spend 8 of your 10 points. So you'll end up with a 16, a 12, and all 10s.
Now lets compare this to Pathfinder 20 point buy (what the majority of people tend to use). Say I want to make a Nagaji Wizard (+2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 INT). I drop my charisma to 9 and my strength to 10, and I can end up with overall stats of 10, 14, 12, 16, 12, 9.
So in Starfinder I end up with a character who is significantly worse at things outside his core stat.
Uhh, you don't end up with a 16, 12, and all 10s. You have 12 Str, 10 Dex, 12 Con, 16 Int, 10 Wis, 10 Cha, and 2 points left over. Say we put them in Dex for the AC.
So vesk technomancer: 12 Str, 12 Dex, 12 Con, 16 Int, 10 Wis, 10 Cha (total bonuses: +6)
Compared to nagaji wizard: 10 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 16 Int, 12 Wis, 9 Cha (total bonuses: +6)
Now take them to level 5
Vesk: 12 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 18 Int, 12 Wis, 10 Cha
Nagaji: 10 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 17 Int, 12 Wis, 9 Cha
|
|
Ah right! Haven't had my morning coffee yet and forgot to add the racial bonuses. I still prefer the Pathfinder way as I find the 10, 14, 12, 16, 12, 9 stat-spread more desirable than 12, 12, 12, 16 ,10 ,10.
And the Pathfinder spread actually has a total bonus of +7. It just had a penalty as well, which is more than fine imo. That's acrually my other issue with Starfinder character creation, there's no incentive to create a flawed character in point buy. And personally, some of my favorite moments in RPGs have come from characters with low stats.
Also, a 20 point buy is common in PFS, but 15 point buy is the core book default. Personally, in our home games we use 10 point buy because (a) we don't want high stat inflation and (b) we have an average of 7 to 8 players at the table, and lower stats mean less adjustment to Adventure paths upwards in power to compensate.
If using a 15 point buy, SF stats look FANTASTIC. :-)
One side effect I don't like is that it seems to leave a LOT of characters with a bunch of 10s and 12s - to be expected, I suppose.
One side effect I don't like is that it seems to leave a LOT of characters with a bunch of 10s and 12s - to be expected, I suppose.
That's really only if you shoot for that 18. In any case, you only need to suck it up for four levels. The level up increases are amazing in Starfinder.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I recommend the following arrays (barring themes)
Focused: 16 12 12 12 10 10
Dual Focused: 16 16 10 10 10 10
MAD: 14 14 12 12 10 10
I recommend these arrays because given how ability score advancement works and how you need both offensive and save stats. You receive increases at 5, 10, 15, and 20. But you can disregard 20 because very little time is spent there. Starting with an 18 and pumping it every time vs staring at 16 and pumping it every time provides a +1 advantage for levels 1-4, 10-14, and 20. Starting at 16 equals starting at 18 for levels 5-9 and 15-19, while at all levels you will have a better tertiary stat.
Progressions:
18 12 12 10 10 10
19 14 14 12 10 10
20 16 16 14 10 10
21 18 18 16 10 10
22 19 19 18 10 10
16 12 12 12 10 10
18 14 14 14 10 10
19 16 16 16 10 10
20 18 18 18 10 10
21 19 19 19 10 10
16 16 10 10 10 10
18 18 12 12 10 10
19 19 14 14 10 10
20 20 16 16 10 10
21 21 18 18 10 10
14 14 12 12 10 10
16 16 14 12 12 10
18 18 16 14 14 10
18 18 16 16 16 12
18 18 18 18 18 14
There is a pretty severe lack of save boosting items in SF (one item for your worse stat). That means it behooves you to either buff up saves with stats or feats. I recommend against starting with an 18 because every increase you spend on +1s is wasteful. Dex, Con, Int, and Wis are important for every character. Many concepts also require Str or/and Cha on top of that. The new point buy system lets you buy one for one because specializing is already punished by the system in a far more holistic manner.
As for races, this leads to more options. As long as the race isn't pumping your dump stats (10s), it will be an optimal choice not just good. You can even eat penalties to main stats by just buying through them. Now if you want EVERY last number, you select your race both on pumping needed stats and draining dump stats. I think that is entirely unneeded.
One oddity I found is that a 16 is better than a 17 in terms of ability scores. because once you get the level 5 increase, both become 18. Which means your other point could be spent elsewhere. Fun little oddity.
I haven't gotten to play yet but from I see your resolve seems to be very vital. So I feel putting an 18 staring into your classes key ability score is highly important. But I could be wrong on this.
Again haven't played and seen what impact this has.
I haven't gotten to play yet but from I see your resolve seems to be very vital. So I feel putting an 18 staring into your classes key ability score is highly important. But I could be wrong on this.
Again haven't played and seen what impact this has.
I keep seeing this stated throughout the forums, but after several read throughs of the rules, I'm just not seeing it. What's so damn great about resolve?
I keep seeing this stated throughout the forums, but after several read throughs of the rules, I'm just not seeing it. What's so damn great about resolve?I haven't gotten to play yet but from I see your resolve seems to be very vital. So I feel putting an 18 staring into your classes key ability score is highly important. But I could be wrong on this.
Again haven't played and seen what impact this has.
You spend 1 resolve as part of a 10-minute rest to regain Stamina Points.
You need 1-3 resolve points to not die when you reach 0 hit points, plus another 1 if you have Diehard and want to be back at 1 hp as part of not dying just yet. Or getting back up on the following round without Diehard.
Several spells require spending resolve, including
- for mystics:augury, shield other, divination, vision
- for technomancer: recharge, security seal (aka 'arcane lock'), nondetection, interplanetary teleport, terraform, wall of steel
Doing a whole gaggle of class abilities and starship combat actions requires spending resolve, especially for the ship's Captain.
There are a LOT of good Technomancer hacks that cost Reserve.
I keep seeing this stated throughout the forums, but after several read throughs of the rules, I'm just not seeing it. What's so damn great about resolve?I haven't gotten to play yet but from I see your resolve seems to be very vital. So I feel putting an 18 staring into your classes key ability score is highly important. But I could be wrong on this.
Again haven't played and seen what impact this has.
I feel an 18 in a stat is a bit too costly for most of the classes, though. A 16 should be good enough for most builds. And a 14 still lets you start with 3 stamina.
16s are plenty good to survive until 5th level and saves ability buy points (if you use ability point buys) for rounding out your other ability scores.
A key ability score of 14 should net you a minimum of 3 (1 minimum +2 key ability modifier) while a 16 gets you 4 at 1st level. Level advancement does not get you any more resolve until 4th level (5 resolve w/ 16 key ability score), then 5th level comes along and bumps the key ability score to an 18 (total of 6 resolve w/ key ability score 18) and again at 6th you gain another resolve point (3 from half-level +4 from key ability score for a total of 7 RP).
|
A key ability score of 14 should net you a minimum of 3 (1 minimum +2 key ability modifier) while a 16 gets you 4 at 1st level. Level advancement does not get you any more resolve until 4th level (5 resolve w/ 16 key ability score), then 5th level comes along and bumps the key ability score to an 18 (total of 6 resolve w/ key ability score 18) and again at 6th you gain another resolve point (3 from half-level +4 from key ability score for a total of 7 RP).
There is a good chance you are putting your personal upgrade into your key stat as well at around level 3 so that's another bonus resolve.
A key ability score of 14 should net you a minimum of 3 (1 minimum +2 key ability modifier) while a 16 gets you 4 at 1st level. Level advancement does not get you any more resolve until 4th level (5 resolve w/ 16 key ability score), then 5th level comes along and bumps the key ability score to an 18 (total of 6 resolve w/ key ability score 18) and again at 6th you gain another resolve point (3 from half-level +4 from key ability score for a total of 7 RP).There is a good chance you are putting your personal upgrade into your key stat as well at around level 3 so that's another bonus resolve.
I'd not paid attention to pricing those things since they, annoyingly, work the same way as the Pathfinder inherent bonus books/tomes/et al. I'd rather save up for the mark-3s.
I'd not paid attention to pricing those things since they, annoyingly, work the same way as the Pathfinder inherent bonus books/tomes/et al. I'd rather save up for the mark-3s.A key ability score of 14 should net you a minimum of 3 (1 minimum +2 key ability modifier) while a 16 gets you 4 at 1st level. Level advancement does not get you any more resolve until 4th level (5 resolve w/ 16 key ability score), then 5th level comes along and bumps the key ability score to an 18 (total of 6 resolve w/ key ability score 18) and again at 6th you gain another resolve point (3 from half-level +4 from key ability score for a total of 7 RP).There is a good chance you are putting your personal upgrade into your key stat as well at around level 3 so that's another bonus resolve.
You can upgrade to the next higher one by paying the difference in creds.
|
I'd not paid attention to pricing those things since they, annoyingly, work the same way as the Pathfinder inherent bonus books/tomes/et al. I'd rather save up for the mark-3s.A key ability score of 14 should net you a minimum of 3 (1 minimum +2 key ability modifier) while a 16 gets you 4 at 1st level. Level advancement does not get you any more resolve until 4th level (5 resolve w/ 16 key ability score), then 5th level comes along and bumps the key ability score to an 18 (total of 6 resolve w/ key ability score 18) and again at 6th you gain another resolve point (3 from half-level +4 from key ability score for a total of 7 RP).There is a good chance you are putting your personal upgrade into your key stat as well at around level 3 so that's another bonus resolve.
Huh? You can upgrade them for the difference in cost. And also can't ever have more than one each Mark 3, one Mark 2 and one Mark 1 at a time.
Just to be clear.
I'd not paid attention to pricing those things since they, annoyingly, work the same way as the Pathfinder inherent bonus books/tomes/et al. I'd rather save up for the mark-3s.A key ability score of 14 should net you a minimum of 3 (1 minimum +2 key ability modifier) while a 16 gets you 4 at 1st level. Level advancement does not get you any more resolve until 4th level (5 resolve w/ 16 key ability score), then 5th level comes along and bumps the key ability score to an 18 (total of 6 resolve w/ key ability score 18) and again at 6th you gain another resolve point (3 from half-level +4 from key ability score for a total of 7 RP).There is a good chance you are putting your personal upgrade into your key stat as well at around level 3 so that's another bonus resolve.Huh? You can upgrade them for the difference in cost. And also can't ever have more than one each Mark 3, one Mark 2 and one Mark 1 at a time.
Just to be clear.
Holy cow did I ever misread those things. Yikes! Thanks very much.
I personally don't care for the ability score cap of 18. I'm not someone who goes after 18's, but from an in game and out of game perspective I dont see the point on the limit. I'm ignoring if I run a game.
Even without a hard cap of 18 at creation, there isn't much incentive to go past 16 in my opinion. Points are limited, no option to increase them, and the level 5 increases work against hyper specialising.
|
|
I personally don't care for the ability score cap of 18. I'm not someone who goes after 18's, but from an in game and out of game perspective I dont see the point on the limit. I'm ignoring if I run a game.
I've had a similar cap in my games for a long time.
It has several useful effects, including forcing most people to not spend all their points in one stat, limiting the power of spellcasters and other SAD characters somewhat, and just generally making the game more pleasant for people who can only get a 16 in their main score. This is all even more true in a game with 1 for 1 point buy.
Also, I'm pretty sure the game's math if finely tuned enough that having a starting 20 will noticeably screw up a few things.
I'd recommend trying it out before changing it.
I personally don't care for the ability score cap of 18. I'm not someone who goes after 18's, but from an in game and out of game perspective I dont see the point on the limit. I'm ignoring if I run a game.
Basically, to keep there from being "right" and "wrong" races for a given class. For instance, if you don't have a bonus to dex, you still can be a great operative. Even if you have a dex penalty, you can still be a great operative. It's very freeing for making race/class combinations.
I feel an 18 in a stat is a bit too costly for most of the classes, though. A 16 should be good enough for most builds. And a 14 still lets you start with 3 stamina.I keep seeing this stated throughout the forums, but after several read throughs of the rules, I'm just not seeing it. What's so damn great about resolve?I haven't gotten to play yet but from I see your resolve seems to be very vital. So I feel putting an 18 staring into your classes key ability score is highly important. But I could be wrong on this.
Again haven't played and seen what impact this has.
Ok again I am only stating this based on what I have read. When I read if you are not stable and you have 0 resolve points you die. This is one of those things that kind of push me to believe that. Then if you take 10 minutes to rest to recover. Then if you have abilities that use resolve. Resolve goes quickly.
Now I haven't actually gotten to play yet and see how much an 18 vs 16 starting actually pans out. Also most of my play will come from Society Play.
I think a good way to describe it as such is 10 is the average baseline. Most people in real life are average for their races.... PC's are not average people and if you train hard enough than you can achieve greatness, but pretty much everybody has a limit, and if your race is naturally weaker in an area you want to be good in you have to hyper-focus in that position to keep up, meaning other aspects of your life would be slightly weaker.
Generally speaking if I have a racial penalty I usually leave it where it is. I usually don't bump it up any.
I personally don't care for the ability score cap of 18. I'm not someone who goes after 18's, but from an in game and out of game perspective I dont see the point on the limit. I'm ignoring if I run a game.I've had a similar cap in my games for a long time.
It has several useful effects, including forcing most people to not spend all their points in one stat, limiting the power of spellcasters and other SAD characters somewhat, and just generally making the game more pleasant for people who can only get a 16 in their main score. This is all even more true in a game with 1 for 1 point buy.
Also, I'm pretty sure the game's math if finely tuned enough that having a starting 20 will noticeably screw up a few things.
I'd recommend trying it out before changing it.
In my games I will highly recommend people not doing certain things, but if they want to ignore my advice such as spending all of their points on an 18 in Pathfinder, that is on them.
I am not saying it is wrong to save people from themselves. I just tend to get stubborn players, and they don't understand the "why" of something until they see it in play. Generally if it works against them they don't complain though because it was their choice.
As for not capping the 18 I can't wrap my mind around it, and it will just annoy me if I cap it. It will be one of those things that I know is not a really big deal, but it still annoys me, kinda like how some people hate the idea of a tiny creature being able to grapple a huge creature in PF.
More than like I will put the cap at your base racial score+8 so that a race with a +12(+2 from the racial bonus) to start will cap at 20, and the theme point can go somewhere else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my games I will highly recommend people not doing certain things, but if they want to ignore my advice such as spending all of their points on an 18 in Pathfinder, that is on them.
I like seeing stuff like this, because I can't count how many times I've been told on the PF forums that if I'm not starting with an 18, then my PC is a waste of space and useless to the party.
I love that the community is going away from that mentality.
I feel an 18 in a stat is a bit too costly for most of the classes, though. A 16 should be good enough for most builds. And a 14 still lets you start with 3 stamina.I keep seeing this stated throughout the forums, but after several read throughs of the rules, I'm just not seeing it. What's so damn great about resolve?I haven't gotten to play yet but from I see your resolve seems to be very vital. So I feel putting an 18 staring into your classes key ability score is highly important. But I could be wrong on this.
Again haven't played and seen what impact this has.
Ok again I am only stating this based on what I have read. When I read if you are not stable and you have 0 resolve points you die. This is one of those things that kind of push me to believe that. Then if you take 10 minutes to rest to recover. Then if you have abilities that use resolve. Resolve goes quickly.
Now I haven't actually gotten to play yet and see how much an 18 vs 16 starting actually pans out. Also most of my play will come from Society Play.
Just started the first AP, and at least through the first chapter, there didn't seem to be much call for resolve. This could change as the adventure goes on, but so far, I feel like starting with 3 resolve would be ok, which would be 14 in the primary stat. But that's just one play sample. The AP difficulty may be about to really ramp up.
|
I like seeing stuff like this, because I can't count how many times I've been told on the PF forums that if I'm not starting with an 18, then my PC is a waste of space and useless to the party.
I love that the community is going away from that mentality.
While "waste of space and useless" is obviously a gross exaggeration, it is certainly true that for SOME characters a starting stat of 20 in Pathfinder is absolutely the optimal solution. Wizards spring to mind since they can now get just about everything off of intelligence and (in Pathfinder) they STILL have enough points left over to afford 3 12s (optimally, of course, wizards dump Strength).
I for one love that my melee Ysoki, Mad Rattigan, can compete with the strongest melee Vesk.