In general I'm not seeing the ways PCs have of increasing their skills keeping up with the higher level DCs.
Yeah, I guess if that’s where you think you’re wanting to be as the soldier, it might work.
I just don’t see them starting out with a 14 intelligence unless they have a very specific design in mind to skill up.
I see it as way down the line from Dex, Con and Wisdom, all of which add to saves at least.
But then, I’m also not worried about a character only having 50%chance of passing a skills test, honestly. It actually makes the dice important game again.
I personally tend to value Int over Con and Wisdom on a Soldier. An 18 Int at level 10 literally doubles the number of skills you have, which in some sense is more than doubling your contribution to your party outside of combat. I admit it is dependent on your party's composition and dynamic on how much it helps.
That particular Soldier I was referencing I happen to know is a Scholar Human Soldier, Dex based, with 7 skills at 1st level. Acrobatics, Computers, Engineering, Life Science, Medicine, Physical Science, Piloting. Certainly there's been a number of SFS games where she's the only one with Life and Physical Science.
The ability score increases by level and by enhancement, class features like techlore or operative's edge, occasionally odd other items like a datajack all help to keep up with the greater than level scaling. It does tend to push non-specialists out as levels increase.
First level technomancer VS an Ipad
+3 int +1 rank +3 trained= +7 vs DC 10 = come on 10...
Fifth level technomancer vs deep blue
+5 int +5 ranks +3 trained +1 techlore +1 DJ= +15 vs DC 25= come on 10..
5th level boost
+2 augment
10th level technomancer vs hal
+6 int 10 ranks +3 trained +3 techlore +2 DJ= +25 vs DC33 = come on 8
5th level boost
10th level boost= 1/2 a bonus
+4 augment
15th level technomancer vs WOPR
+8 int 15 ranks+3 trained +5 techlore +2 DJ= +33 vs 41= come on 8
+6 augment
all boosts
20th level technomancer vs skynet
+8 int 20 ranks +3 trained +6 techlore +2DJ=39 vs DC 53= come on 14
The problem is that you put something behind a firewall requiring not only a +2 to the dc (which drops your chances near or below 50 50) but more importantly 2 checks, which then drops your odds somewhere south of 25%
They dont. Mystics are more on the utility and debuffing side of things.
Theyre rather underexplored.
I think the primary reason why they don't have a "pure caster" who doesn't need a weapon or armor is because it would royally screw up WBL. ...
...You can, by the way, make a caster who only casts. You just spend the thousands of credits you would be spending on weapons on spell gems and the like.
The utilization of spell gems is paramount to your success as a caster. Not only can you access ANY spell on your spell list, but you can actually cast them of a higher level with a caster level check that doesn't even expend the spell if you fail. You can even slap multiple spells into one spell gem so that you aren't constantly pulling them out of your pack (though this is one large lump sum of credits).
I can understand where it may be challenging to play a caster over long combats or slow campaigns, but that's where other classes are going to be more conservative with their resources anyways. In the meantime: buy your extra spells per day!
I remember seeing someone math this out before, but I'm pretty sure it was determined this would at least account for being significantly less conservative with your spells much like people seem to want to be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can, by the way, make a caster who only casts. You just spend the thousands of credits you would be spending on weapons on spell gems and the like.
This is my plan right now for my technomancer. You save a lot of credits by just not bothering to buy new weapons, and by funneling that into spell gems you can play a pretty solid utility caster role.
You can, by the way, make a caster who only casts. You just spend the thousands of credits you would be spending on weapons on spell gems and the like.This is my plan right now for my technomancer. You save a lot of credits by just not bothering to buy new weapons, and by funneling that into spell gems you can play a pretty solid utility caster role.
Who buys new weapons? Enemies keep dropping them like clowns with candy during a parade. Just pick up a few of those along the way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair wealth by level doesn't mean credits by level. A lot of of your "wealth" is equipment dropped by enemies, and with starfinder's 10% on sale rule it's hard to transform a lot of that wealth effectively. So you could be a higher level character and not be able to afford to spend your weapon budget on spell gems simply because it's actually a weapon that got dropped, not credits. I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm just pointing out that if that is your plan you may need to make other sacrifices as you will likely be always behind on the expected WBL as you are spending credits on consumables vs durable goods and you are likely selling more of your "wealth" at a low return than a character who will use whatever weapon they happen to come by.
Now that items have levels attached to them, are there any "durable" goods anymore? You have to replace most things every few levels just to stay current!
Yes, but you only replace those every few levels, not every few fights. And some of those replacements will likely be drops, not something you had to spend credits on. SO you get a newer better gun and keep it, your spell caster buddy gets a similar gun, but doesn't want to use it so sells it for a dime on the dollar. If that happens often enough you spellcaster friend will be quite behind on cash.
The classes that we have aren't bad. I like them, but they aren't meant to be used for only casting spells. Trying to do so is kinda like putting a round peg in a square hole. You can do it, but it's not going to work very well.
"Durable" goods were those that either gave non-numerical benefits, or gave bonuses that didn't really improve. A caster can always benefit from a pearly white aeon stone, for instance, just as they could benefit from an orange prism in Pathfinder. Once you have the stone, that's basically it. There's no upgrade to find, and there's no need to ever replace it unless you manage to lose it. Aeon stones are particularly attractive for that sort of thing now that there's a limit of 2 worn magic items.
Other goods won't need upgrading, though they may not always be useful in all campaigns or adventures. Rope is still rope, even if it's now a cable line instead. Manacles are useful, as are the disposable binders. Fire extinguishers have to be recharged, but they'll keep you from burning alive just as well at level 20 as level 1 if you can find the time to use them. Many implants have no upgrade path either.
If you're specifically thinking about weapons and armor, then no; basically everything still has to be upgraded there, outside edge cases like an adamantine dagger being kept around for utility instead of combat.
|
Now that items have levels attached to them, are there any "durable" goods anymore? You have to replace most things every few levels just to stay current!
How much of this is the iPhone trap though? Do you really need to replace your items with stuff every few levels? Are the incremental increases that significant that players are going to be dropping serious cash just trying to keep up.
Now that items have levels attached to them, are there any "durable" goods anymore? You have to replace most things every few levels just to stay current!How much of this is the iPhone trap though? Do you really need to replace your items with stuff every few levels? Are the incremental increases that significant that players are going to be dropping serious cash just trying to keep up.
I don't know about you, but I rarely see players actually buy weapons or armor. Usually they just pick up new weapons and armor from the corpses of their dead foes, or find cool magical ones to replace the mundane ones.
Which is how one person I played with ended up with a bundle of 64 short swords to sell back in town. He ended up making a make-shift stretcher out of them for one of our unconscious characters.
My point is, I don't expect there to be much cash-dropping on new gear of that kind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For some people, item levels seem to have a psychological effect disproportionate to their actual importance. The "iPhone trap" is a really good way of putting it.
There are actual differences beyond just level. The best (highest AC) armor generally goes up by one point each item level. Item level affects how long your environmental protection on your armor lasts. The item levels affect saves, hit points, and save DCs for critical hit affects. Weapons generally increase in damage as item level increases. Moreover, you can fit more fusions on higher level weapons.
It's not like Item Level should be the end all be all you focus on, but it's going to affect how often you get hit, how quickly you kill monsters, and how easy it is for your opponent to sunder your gear. Walking around with 3rd level gear and trying to fight 8th level monsters with it is probably going to go bad for you.
Right, but if you have some level 6 armor you probably don't need to obsess over whether or not you have 8th level armor instead.
Obsess is certainly a strong word. I would agree that you shouldn't obsess.
But, also, looking at the chart for light armor, I see that the highest KAC level 6 armor is +6/+8/+5. The highest KAC level 8 armor is +9/+11/+5. Given that a level 8 monster is rolling around with a potential +19 to hit, that's a difference between hitting your KAC on a 4 or on a 7. It isn't a game breaking difference (they still hit more than half the time with a single attack) but that is a potential 15% reduction in the damage you take (over time).
Should you obsess over that? Probably not. But it's not the same as it not mattering. I'm all for conceding that the numbers aren't the most important thing, but that isn't the same as saying they aren't important, at all. It's a game built on numbers and imagination. That 15% could save your character's life. If you can afford it, I'd say it's sometimes worth it, at least generally. I think it's probably a bad idea to upgrade every item every single level. There is probably a sweet spot around every 2-4 levels where you should make the effort if you haven't seen a better item drop organically.
|
|
Obsess is certainly a strong word. I would agree that you shouldn't obsess.
But, also, looking at the chart for light armor, I see that the highest KAC level 6 armor is +6/+8/+5. The highest KAC level 8 armor is +9/+11/+5. Given that a level 8 monster is rolling around with a potential +19 to hit, that's a difference between hitting your KAC on a 4 or on a 7. It isn't a game breaking difference (they still hit more than half the time with a single attack) but that is a potential 15% reduction in the damage you take (over time).
Should you obsess over that? Probably not. But it's not the same as it not mattering. I'm all for conceding that the numbers aren't the most important thing, but that isn't the same as saying they aren't important, at all. It's a game built on numbers and imagination. That 15% could save your character's life. If you can afford it, I'd say it's sometimes worth it, at least generally. I think it's probably a bad idea to upgrade every item every single level. There is probably a sweet spot around every 2-4 levels where you should make the effort if you haven't seen a better item drop organically.
Every three or so levels isn’t going to break the bank either I guess. Assuming you’re able to stay close to WBL in a game.
Some people would call it an improvement.
everyone hates something. That thing you love yeah some body hates it. that thing you hate their is someone who loves it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is space, man! Leave the hate behind! Man.
Does Wealth by Level even apply in Starfinder? Or only during character creation?
That is, should the GM be concerned about party wealth, during play, from level to level? Or does it not matter after character creation, provided you stick to appropriately leveled items?
Does Wealth by Level even apply in Starfinder? Or only during character creation?
That is, should the GM be concerned about party wealth, during play, from level to level? Or does it not matter after character creation, provided you stick to appropriately leveled items?
Sideways growth is a thing too. Someone with just a level 7 weapon isn't as powerful as someone with a level 7 weapon, a level 7 melee back up weapon, level 7 armor. six different level 7 cybernetic augments, etc.
I believe both the CRB and the AP suggest that the DM should drop extra gear (or slow up or provide extra cash awards or whatever) if they aren't matching WBL, especially if you're advancing their levels at story points rather than giving out XP. I remember reading that at least once in one or more of the books.
EDIT: The CRB doesn't explicitly say that you have to force WBL, but it does imply that you should use it. The info is on pages 391-392 and does say you should moderate rewards so that the characters are close to this to maintain balance. It's not just for new characters.
To be fair wealth by level doesn't mean credits by level. A lot of of your "wealth" is equipment dropped by enemies, and with starfinder's 10% on sale rule it's hard to transform a lot of that wealth effectively. So you could be a higher level character and not be able to afford to spend your weapon budget on spell gems simply because it's actually a weapon that got dropped, not credits. I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm just pointing out that if that is your plan you may need to make other sacrifices as you will likely be always behind on the expected WBL as you are spending credits on consumables vs durable goods and you are likely selling more of your "wealth" at a low return than a character who will use whatever weapon they happen to come by.
This is why in home-play it's good for players and GMs to work together. If the GM knows that one player is foregoing weapons in favor of spell gems, they can swap out some of what would be (now pointless) weapons to instead drop some spell gems for that player. The same way you would probably be more likely to include Solarian Weapon Crystals for a party with a Solarian than for one without one. It is a cooperative game after all.
|
Does Wealth by Level even apply in Starfinder? Or only during character creation?
That is, should the GM be concerned about party wealth, during play, from level to level? Or does it not matter after character creation, provided you stick to appropriately leveled items?
I'm currently using a combination of WBL and appropriately leveled items. I treat both as guideposts. If the PCs are too far behind or ahead in either, I make adjustments accordingly. But I don't treat WBL as a strict rule that must be followed at all times.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that the designers were very intentional about not having 9th level casters in SF. I'd be very surprised if they added them at some point. This is not intended as a 'get over it' to 'just deal with it' it is more of a 'don't hold your breath'. With how the game is designed, they would have to do some serious spell level reworking to incorporate 9th level spellcasters.
As a player who often plays full casters in PF, I was excited to hear that they 'gimped', if that is what you want to call it, casters. As people touched on, most of the spells that I have used grossly overpowered were normal spells used creatively. A well placed wall of force or wall of stone wins combats. Create pit and all it's iterations are also fight winning spells.
All-in-all, and for the sake of the designers, the game was designed specifically with the intent to only have 6th level casters. This game is not Pathfinder it is Starfinder. If you like PF better then play PF. If you want to play "PF in space" there are very solid, simple conversions so that you can. Fish won't eventually climb trees just because you want them to.
|
|
Does Wealth by Level even apply in Starfinder? Or only during character creation?
That is, should the GM be concerned about party wealth, during play, from level to level? Or does it not matter after character creation, provided you stick to appropriately leveled items?
Not sure, in all honesty
In Pathfinder it was used as a guide to building adventures to get an idea on loot that should be dropped. I’m guessing it’s the same for this game but I haven’t really gone into it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not forget that WBL is also "self-replenishing" by nature. If you blow up 20k credits in spell gems in a very tough fight, you're supposed to regain these credits over time through your next encounters, with some of that regained wealth in hard credits, and the rest in the form of other consumables.
.
Yeah.....that’s not true.
If someone decides to spend all their wealth on consumable items and another party member spends it on retainable gear, why should the consumable guy get rewarded with more loot?
WBL is a guide of how much you’ve earned in that level. How you spend it is up to you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Fish won't eventually climb trees just because you want them to.
I miss Monkey Fish...
Even if you fell like a guy should get all of his WBL replenished who blew it all it's not simple to do that. Each character is part of a party and generally parties ten to split loot pretty evenly. So if one guy is buying tons of consumables and another guy isn't, the guy who isn't over time will still end up with more wealth than the guy who blows his cash all the time. Telling casters who don't want to touch guns to buy spell gems instead is a recipe to set up this exact bad situation.
Now see, if party members actually cared about each other and weren't greedy, then they would all chip in to buy that spellcaster some spell gems to make sure he can do his job properly.
Too bad all adventurers are greedy and would never do such a thing unless they got something in return at that exact moment.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the spellcaster wasn't a such up jerk he'd grab a gun and do his job shooting like everyone else instead of asking everyone else to buy his nice things for him...
|
|
Now see, if party members actually cared about each other and weren't greedy, then they would all chip in to buy that spellcaster some spell gems to make sure he can do his job properly.
Too bad all adventurers are greedy and would never do such a thing unless they got something in return at that exact moment.
This conversation will go downhill very fast if you start this up.
Wealth is divided equally among the group. They then choose to spend it in what is best for their goals within the group.
If the caster decides he wants to blow a tonof it on consumables, yay for him, but he has to balance their useage against the cost outlay.
If the soldier decides he doesn’t want to buy healing droughts (or their equivalent) then he has to balance that with techniques and tactics to avoid the need to dip into healing from catsers that goes beyond their spell slots.
No one should be required to lose out on their own potential wealth in order for another player to meet their agenda
Another way to look at it - my soldier wants to constantly lay down Burt fire on full auto. I want people to start chipping in for my batteries and ammo clips.
That’s not a reasonable request
Now see, if party members actually cared about each other and weren't greedy, then they would all chip in to buy that spellcaster some spell gems to make sure he can do his job properly.
Too bad all adventurers are greedy and would never do such a thing unless they got something in return at that exact moment.
This conversation will go downhill very fast if you start this up.
Wealth is divided equally among the group. They then choose to spend it in what is best for their goals within the group.
If the caster decides he wants to blow a tonof it on consumables, yay for him, but he has to balance their useage against the cost outlay.
If the soldier decides he doesn’t want to buy healing droughts (or their equivalent) then he has to balance that with techniques and tactics to avoid the need to dip into healing from catsers that goes beyond their spell slots.
No one should be required to lose out on their own potential wealth in order for another player to meet their agenda
Another way to look at it - my soldier wants to constantly lay down Burt fire on full auto. I want people to start chipping in for my batteries and ammo clips.
That’s not a reasonable request
You say it'll go down hill, and then you continue it. So I'll just simply say that I disagree and we can drop it there.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another way to look at it - my soldier wants to constantly lay down Burt fire on full auto..Now see, if party members actually cared about each other and weren't greedy, then they would all chip in to buy that spellcaster some spell gems to make sure he can do his job properly.
Too bad all adventurers are greedy and would never do such a thing unless they got something in return at that exact moment.
Does Wealth by Level even apply in Starfinder? Or only during character creation?
That is, should the GM be concerned about party wealth, during play, from level to level? Or does it not matter after character creation, provided you stick to appropriately leveled items?
Despite their best efforts, I can attest that Pathfinder veterans who can easily acclimatise to other aspects of the new system can get super-antsy about Wealth By Level and item levels, even if they have suffered absolutely zero adverse mechanical consequences from it. I've had to make adjustments in my game because of it.
There are upsides to an environment where everyone is kind of an armchair game designer because we benefit from so much awesome homebrew content as a result (I know I have); but there are also downsides, like people refusing to trust the game designers when they say something is "just a guideline" -- even where that is obviously, broadly and just mechanically true -- because it's not done how they would do it.
|
Now see, if party members actually cared about each other and weren't greedy, then they would all chip in to buy that spellcaster some spell gems to make sure he can do his job properly.
Too bad all adventurers are greedy and would never do such a thing unless they got something in return at that exact moment.
This conversation will go downhill very fast if you start this up.
Wealth is divided equally among the group. They then choose to spend it in what is best for their goals within the group.
If the caster decides he wants to blow a tonof it on consumables, yay for him, but he has to balance their useage against the cost outlay.
If the soldier decides he doesn’t want to buy healing droughts (or their equivalent) then he has to balance that with techniques and tactics to avoid the need to dip into healing from catsers that goes beyond their spell slots.
No one should be required to lose out on their own potential wealth in order for another player to meet their agenda
Another way to look at it - my soldier wants to constantly lay down Burt fire on full auto. I want people to start chipping in for my batteries and ammo clips.
That’s not a reasonable request
true though in most games i play in the players usually dont overly count gear they usually give it to who they think can use it.
though they do split the cash ..unless we have a thief slipping a little on the side :)
|
|
Burt fire?Another way to look at it - my soldier wants to constantly lay down Burt fire on full auto..Now see, if party members actually cared about each other and weren't greedy, then they would all chip in to buy that spellcaster some spell gems to make sure he can do his job properly.
Too bad all adventurers are greedy and would never do such a thing unless they got something in return at that exact moment.
Lol.
I’ve never been happier to make a spelling error
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On that note I've noticed the item levels actually give me more wiggle room on the WBL chart as a GM.
My players currently have 5th level wealth as 3rd level characters and outside of having "more" stuff it hasn't really translated into anything noticeably out of the norm for their level. In the meantime I can hold off on trying to ensure they have mad lewtz and focus on things like the story and encounter.s
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue I was trying to point out at the beginning of this aside is that loot is often an item like a gun. The other characters will often pick up said gun and use it. The caster that doesn't want to use a gun has to take his share of loot (in guns) and sell them, for which he gets a megar return. If he then is expecting to buy large amounts of spell gems to fill actions in combat that he isn't shooting, with the credits he got for the guns he's sold, he's going to run short very quickly.
Some people have been proposing that a character can do this and be just fine based on wbl charts. At character creation maybe, but unless a gm is going to drop quite a few spell gems instead of guns you won't be able to keep this statagy up.
The issue basically boils down to this. If you are selling stuff instead of using it starfinder punishes you. You can't expect to do this constantly and not fall behind characters that don't do this.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue I was trying to point out at the beginning of this aside is that loot is often an item like a gun. The other characters will often pick up said gun and use it. The caster that doesn't want to use a gun has to take his share of loot (in guns) and sell them, for which he gets a megar return. If he then is expecting to buy large amounts of spell gems to fill actions in combat that he isn't shooting, with the credits he got for the guns he's sold, he's going to run short very quickly.
Some people have been proposing that a character can do this and be just fine based on wbl charts. At character creation maybe, but unless a gm is going to drop quite a few spell gems instead of guns you won't be able to keep this statagy up.
The issue basically boils down to this. If you are selling stuff instead of using it starfinder punishes you. You can't expect to do this constantly and not fall behind characters that don't do this.
Then perhaps you could run it like my groups do. If an item drops and someone can use it, we calculate the equivalent monetary cost and ensure that others get that amount eventually. It’s a tally system.
Eg soldier picks up a gun worth 2000 credits. He decides to keep it.
Soldier doesn’t get any of the funds from selling loot until the 2000 credits is accumulated (either through credits or other guys picking up gear as well)
And I’ll also point out once more - if a person decides to deliberately ignore gear they can use because they decide they want to buy gear that isn’t dropping, then that is their issue, not everyone else’s. If a player says “I refuse to use that gun that’s an improvement to my gear, because I want to use more spell gems” well that’s really their cross to bear.