| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...This caused many problems, for many of you power gamers, addition of feats and other accoutrement; and yes I am using that word correctly, look it up; led...
Yes that is the correct use of accoutrement, but it certainly isn't the correct use of a semicolon.
What you wanted are called parentheses.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
+1 no full casters (+1 get over the system difference. It's different, we know. It doesn't need justification it just is)
+1 If you can't handle the max of 60% success, then don't play starfinder. This is intended blunt but not mean. For example: I do not like the system mechanics of Shadowrun, therefore I don't play it. It is not an insult to SR or me saying that it is a bad system, just that I don't enjoy playing with those established mechanics.
Personally, I never want to see an opportunity for Dex to damage. Maybe having unarmed strikes be operative, but still no dex to damage. It breaks things.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't mind an Adventure Path built around trying to find that answer :). Of course it seems like the Starfinder design team is reserving the right to put in higher level spell casting if they want to in the future. Hell maybe they could have an Adventure Path that reintroduces high magic! (though I really hope not. 6th level spellcasting is a pretty sweet spot).
seriously. Spells are still really strong when you get up there. But now the gap between the spell slingers and the punch stabbers has closed significantly.
Starfinder has a far better action economy than pathfinder, and I think that this is forgotten in all these pathfinder. V starfinder arguments.
+1 If you can't handle the max of 60% success, then don't play starfinder. This is intended blunt but not mean. For example: I do not like the system mechanics of Shadowrun, therefore I don't play it. It is not an insult to SR or me saying that it is a bad system, just that I don't enjoy playing with those established mechanics.
Honestly, you can push it a good bit higher than 60% it's just you can't passively do so. If you are flanking a guy, have the mechanic improving your weapon and the envoy yelling you'll hit pretty high values.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+1 no full casters (+1 get over the system difference. It's different, we know. It doesn't need justification it just is)
Saaammmmeeee
When I see plans announced for by 3pp detailing an intent to bring full casters into Starfinder, I write them off immediately as simply not grasping a lot of the game's design philosophy.
Also, there really does not need to be an in-lore justification for the sudden loss of 7th-9th level spells. Most of the effects have been reproduced cheaply and effectively by tech at this point and the vast majority of the population likely never saw spells above 3rd level at the most.
L9 spells... spend your lifetime getting to that level.
L6 spells... spend part of your lifetime getting to that level, then taking early retirement.
Seems like it'd go the 'easier' way quickly enough, as the older folks died off (even with the sorts of L9 shenanigans that could be pulled off).
|
Maybe having unarmed strikes be operative, but still no dex to damage. It breaks things.
I don't necessarily want a way for unarmed strikes to be operative, but I would like a way for unarmed strikes to be non-archaic that doesn't involve being a vesk or one of the other races with a natural attack. Unfortunately, improved unarmed strikes appears to increase damage but doesn't remove this property.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Off the top of my head...
Feats or other game mechanics that essentially say “Hey, that thing you thought you could do anyway or that was merely an application of an existing skill, you can’t do it any more, but if you take this feat, you can re-be able to do that thing”.
There’s a wonderful little blurb on page 25 to the effect of “Starfinder plays 100% the same even if your gaming group doesn’t so much as look at alignment”. I definitely don’t want anything that interferes with my beloved page 25.
I don't want to see companions. Don't get me wrong I like the concept and all. But in pathfinder I find 90% of them to be a complete and utter waste of money. They have become very lacking and subpar. I feel Paizo is just pumping things out for the money and have abandoned the lets make quality material. I think they need to dial back the companions and make them worth while. And the fact that they never truly get an errata or updates like the rulebooks.
In Starfinder I feel like there is WAY to much content for them to do companions. Like they could do a whole book on just weapons and Armor. A whole book on just Starships etc. This way we don't have to worry about REPRINTS and because they are of the rulebooks we can get the errata needed or update.
My headcanon is that Golarion was a uniquely magically charged place as it was the prison planet of Rovagug which all the gods dedicated themselves to defeating and containing. As such, it attracted an incredibly massive amount of divine interest and the attention of magic focused gods like Nethys also led to an extreme amount of arcane energies to tap into.
With the gods being more distant now and Golarion vanished, we're now playing in a setting with a far more sedate amount of magic.
The Starfinder setting doesn't have an usually low amount of magic. It's got quite a lot! It's the Pathfinder setting that had a weirdly high amount of magic.
Hell the amount of reality warping energies that rampaged across Golarion probably caused problems everywhere else and might be why the gods said "Screw this" and vanished it away.
this whole gap thing is making the gap between my ears ache. I remember what I forgot but never knew. Azih makes a lot of sense for us of the lazy caste.