I see some interesting points there. I also see a reference to "combat-less" campaigns, which I did not mention.
And then I see this:
I also feel you misread what I was saying, perhaps on purposeHappy to have these conversations, but not while having my honesty questioned. If that's where this is going I'll have to take a pass.
Apologies for that bit, I was having a grouchy day.
As far as the "combat-less" details, thays where we may have been talking past one another. I never meant to suggest SF must be mostly or only combat, simply that the system itself makes combat a focus by its very nature, and its best to let it be what its designed to be.
Honestly, in all the RPG works that I write, I prefer to find my way to make things work and work well, when others point to "what cannot be done with Starfinder" - I take it as a challenge to accomplish what the naysayers say is not possible.
True, but it doesn't always have to be square system and round hole, when done right. I'm not saying it can do everything, but I plan to include many non-combat social situations and investigative murder mysteries as a part of the development. I find those not impossible for PF/SF. I'm incorporating some cyberpunk aspects for example. I've done social/investigative before for Pathfinder as 3PP - it worked fine.
No I didn't apply a percentage on anything - at this time I don't know what that percentage will be, but certainly not 50% (I don't know where you got that idea from my post). D&D/PF/SF has always definitely hedged on the side of combat as majority and my publications will certainly be that way too. I just said, some state you cannot do this or that, not if you do it must be percentage X - I don't even think I implied that.
I guess I did, but wasn't being clear enough. I'd say that 50% of my modules may be premised on being social situations and other non-combat concepts at least to the lead in on a given adventure, but combat will still occur in all such adventures. Docking at space stations, dealing with the authorities, gathering supplies, equipment and repairs would be the starting premise in a given module, but combats will always be a part of any adventure, even ones that begin as social. I didn't mean that only 50% will be non-combat rather the story won't begin as "let's charge into combat".
Apologies for that bit, I was having a grouchy day.
Cheers, and no worries. Been there myself. :)
Getting back to it: I agree that we were maybe talking past each other a little bit. I certainly don't disagree that a whole bunch of the system ties into combat, and your point about Envoy Improvisations was a perfectly fair one, they're really the prime Envoy combat abilities pretty much from end to end. I was wrong to imply otherwise.
I guess I was just getting at that "primary draw" might be putting it too strongly. I'm playing in a game right now where we relatively rarely see combat -- once every two or three 3-4 hour sessions thus far -- and much of the action revolves around non-combat skills and character RP. I fully expect this to affect the way we plan character builds; in point of fact when I posted my build "plan," such as it is, for my Solarian character on Reddit, it brought no small part of those who read it out in hives. With feats like Connection Inkling, Revelations like Hypnotic Glow and a focus more on Charisma than on melee stats -- which granted are still above-average -- my character was not optimised for combat and thus would surely die.
(This itself is of course testament to the fact that combat is the primary draw for at least some players, and of course the vast majority of Solarian Revelations are combat-focused and that's fine.)
I have no particular read on whether my group is a minority or otherwise in our play-style. But if I were going to build an Envoy for that game, I'd probably build one like this (levelled up to 7, the highest level I yet have experience with in play, and not counting equipment and augments). Event thus, though I wouldn't call it the "primary" draw, of course combat is still a big part of the fun for me, I hugely enjoy that part of Starfinder, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait... are you saying people on Reddit think Conn. Inkling is a BAD feat? With the way ability increases work, its super easy to get and super useful (although i guess that depends on your spell choice).
Wait... are you saying people on Reddit think Conn. Inkling is a BAD feat? With the way ability increases work, its super easy to get and super useful (although i guess that depends on your spell choice).
Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. :) *shrugs*
One potential issue I've run into in some games is that rare combat doesn't mean easy combat, so characters still need to be optimized for combat, even if you want to focus the game elsewhere.
Doesn't seem to be an issue for our game yet. We're faring fine... although it admittedly does concern me a little that our group doesn't really have a healer. On the upside it gives me a fresh appreciation of the Medicine skill.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wait... are you saying people on Reddit think Conn. Inkling is a BAD feat? With the way ability increases work, its super easy to get and super useful (although i guess that depends on your spell choice).Yeah, that's exactly what I thought. :) *shrugs*
One potential issue I've run into in some games is that rare combat doesn't mean easy combat, so characters still need to be optimized for combat, even if you want to focus the game elsewhere.Doesn't seem to be an issue for our game yet. We're faring fine... although it admittedly does concern me a little that our group doesn't really have a healer. On the upside it gives me a fresh appreciation of the Medicine skill.
Starfinder seems to make it pretty easy to build a combat-savvy character without sacrificing too much out of combat utility. I've found it's usually better to figure out your character's combat features first, then whatever resources are left over are usually more than enough to make them useful in other parts of the game.
As for things Starfinder doesn't emulate super well, Cyberpunk staples like hacking "runs" or cyberspace combat aren't really well supported. It'd be nice to have hacking be a little more than a series of skill checks.
One thing I've been considering is trying to port some of the Occult Adventures Mindscape/Psychic duel stuff over to Starfinder and refluffing it as Gibson-style hacking.
Well, computers (and starships) are out of the Starfinder Armory, and are on the plans to be expanded later on.
Ummm it does Starfinder well. That's it.
Too many simulation-ist sacrifices for fun mechanics or ease of play. The more a rules set simulates things realistically (like interacting ship and player mechanics) the more you can use it for other things.
This makes the tying of mechanics with setting material make more sense. But I don't think it wise to pull Starfinder too much out of it's own niche.
The more that I poke and pull at the default Starfinder setting to adjust things to suit my own tastes, the more I discover Mr. H's observation to be true. The mechanics and the setting in Starfinder are closely intertwined. Pull on one strand and a dozen other strands move along with it, some making sense, others feeling absurd.
So far, I'm still enjoying the challenge of tinkering with the setting, pulling strings, adjusting knobs, and patching holes, but I do often arrive at a set of variables that leave me feeling that I would need to venture farther down the road of revision than I want to go. So I stop, back up, and try a different approach. It's a lot of trial and error, and I have a growing collection of partial notes and outlines that have yet to emerge into something more comprehensive and unified.