Gazing into the Abyss

[Rysky]

You’re probably going to make Monster and NPC creation exactly like Starfinder so there’s not much for me to say there unfortunately, but if you model Archetypes on the Starfinder chassis pleeeeeeeeeaase have them give proportional costs, like VMC and feats, rather than a random grab of class abilities that hurt some classes too severely to use compared to others.

[Tusk the Half-Orc]

Oh god not the Starfinder monster/NPC creation rules noooo

[james014Aura]

I agree completely; but I also feel NPCs should be different from monsters, not indistinguishable.

[DRD1812]

Rysky wrote:

you model Archetypes on the Starfinder chassis pleeeeeeeeeaase have them give proportional costs, like VMC and feats, rather than a random grab of class abilities that hurt some classes too severely to use compared to others.

I like the Starfinder archetype design in theory, but it's tough to know the limits of the style based on the handful of archetypes we've seen. Pathfinder 1e (that's weird to type) archetypes vary in strength, so I'm not convinced that Starfinder won't give us some mechanically strong options as it develops.

[Rysky]

DRD1812 wrote:

Rysky wrote:

you model Archetypes on the Starfinder chassis pleeeeeeeeeaase have them give proportional costs, like VMC and feats, rather than a random grab of class abilities that hurt some classes too severely to use compared to others.

I like the Starfinder archetype design in theory, but it's tough to know the limits of the style based on the handful of archetypes we've seen. Pathfinder 1e (that's weird to type) archetypes vary in strength, so I'm not convinced that Starfinder won't give us some mechanically strong options as it develops.

Strengthening the Archetypes doesn’t change the fact that they’ll be better picks for classes that don’t give up a lot (Soldier) vs ones that give up too much (Solarion).

[QuidEst]

Yeah. In Starfinder, I feel like Soldier should take an archetype, and nobody else can. Plus, the universal nature means most issues I have with a class are there forever. Want a Solarian that focuses on gravity? Never going to be a good choice. Charisma-based Mystic? Gotta ask the GM for a hot-fix.

[blahpers]

Was Starfinder so well-received that thr natural reaction in the office was "sweet, they love it, let's risk all of our hard-won player base's goodwill on those gimped mechanics"?

[Cylerist]

I like the pathfinder mechanics- the talk of bringing in the "simpler" Starfinder monster/npc and 5e "easier less thought" character creation (Background selections and proficiency bonus for everything) makes me shake my head

[Lord Fyre]

Given the thread title, I MUST make this joke!

[gnoams]

I do hope they keep archetypes class specific, not the generic starfinder version, but I do like having separate monster generation rules to pcs. I would love to see a minion monster type too, the one thing I thought 4e did right.

[Shadrayl of the Mountain]

gnoams wrote:

I do hope they keep archetypes class specific, not the generic starfinder version, but I do like having separate monster generation rules to pcs. I would love to see a minion monster type too, the one thing I thought 4e did right.

I'd say the inclusion of actual tanking mechanics for martial characters was my favorite 4e mechanic. But the minion thing was high on my list, too.

5e's Bounded Accuracy seems like a better solution than minions to me, though.