Starship Skills & Playtest Classes -- do not 'pooh-pooh' our need for 'pew-pew!'

[Hmm]

So I am now in the process of GMing a PBP group of all Playtest People through SFS #1-27 King Xeros of Star Azlant. I will likely have an all Playtest group for a live run of 1-00, Claim to Salvation this Wednesday.

Both adventures feature starship combat, and now I'm wondering where the starship combat skills are for the Witchwarper and the Vanguard. The biohacker has engineering and computers, but where is the Biohacker's piloting skill? The Witchwarper only has the social skills, so can fill in a Captain role, but nothing else. Oh, I suppose there's mysticism, assuming that everyone eventually figures out the Azlanti trick of having mystical systems for gunnery, but that probably won't happen until you release your next starships book. The Vanguard only get Intimidate and Diplomacy. Now, granted, they have full bab so that they can be gunners too... But please give your Vanguards another option!

What's even more disturbing is that Witchwarpers get only 4 skill points as a charisma caster, and they get insight to only one skill -- fortunately, they can pick that skill -- but Vanguards and Biohackers don't seem to get insight bonuses to skills, which means that they will all fall behind in high level space combat.

I have run lots of Starship combats and I find that starship combat works best when most of the players plan for more than one role in Starship combat so that they can flex between roles or cover gaps in a group. This is not only true in SFS, but in my home game when we sometimes have absent players, our players can shift to other roles if needed.

But this only works if the classes have things built in that they can do in Starship combat. Give starship skills as class skills. Provide insight bonuses. Give us options.

At the moment, the only way to get some of those alternate starship skills is to take the right theme (and did you know that no theme currently grants engineering?) or to take Skill Synergy to open up new skills as class skills.

Please, let all classes be able to be good at Ship Combat! We've already had issues with Strength Solarians and non-Star Shaman Mystics. Don't repeat this issue with the playtest.

Thanks,
Hmm

[The Ragi]

Hmm wrote:

The biohacker has engineering and computers, but where is the Biohacker's piloting skill?

The standard biohacker (DEX>INT or INT>DEX) is a top SO and engineer using his class skills, but if he also invests ranks in piloting (even without the class skill bonus), he'll be one of the best, if not the best gunner on the ship, a decent pilot and a lousy captain (only focusing on encouraging other ship mates).

On this area, at least, the biohacker seems to have the leg up over his new COM buddies.

[Xenocrat]

Hmm wrote:

At the moment, the only way to get some of those alternate starship skills is to take the right theme (and did you know that no theme currently grants engineering?)

Xenoarcheologist from Pact Worlds, the one associated with Apostae, does in fact give engineering as a class skill.

[Hmm]

Ah, I stand corrected. Good. I missed Xenoarcaeologist's Engineering. Still, I think that many playtest characters willl have to pick themes carefully to get those needed starship skills. I'd like to see every class have inerent Starsh roles beyond Captain available to them.

Hmm

[Hmm]

Wow, I really should not post late at night. So many dropped characters!

What I meant to say: I'd like to see every class have inherent Starship roles beyond Captain available to them. There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

[BigNorseWolf]

Shooty biohackers (so.. most biohackers?) make amazing gunners. Which would be a welcome change from guy who can't do starship combat defaulting to gunner and missing a lot.

[Dracomicron]

Vanguards aren't just gunners; they're practically the BEST gunners with no skill investment. Full BAB + Dex to hit = almost guaranteed gunner slot; the Operative is usually busy driving the boat.

That said, I can see how people might want some options... that's what Themes and Skill Synergy is for, ultimately.

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

We are absolutely looking at starship roles for all these classes. And we are aware we likely don't have them all covered well enough yet. What we really want is feedback from people who have run these characters through both normal and starship combat, with other characters, and their experiences, so we can fine tune where to go with these.

[Tim Statler]

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Tim Statler wrote:

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

Solo.

[BretI]

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Tim Statler wrote:

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

Solo.

Cat

[VampByDay]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

We are absolutely looking at starship roles for all these classes. And we are aware we likely don't have them all covered well enough yet. What we really want is feedback from people who have run these characters through both normal and starship combat, with other characters, and their experiences, so we can fine tune where to go with these.

We ran several of the playtest characters through a few different games last week during our area’s week long toys-for-tots charity drive. I didn’t play one personally, but I sat at a table with a few. The general consensus was:

The new classes are cool, but have little to do in Starship combat.
Biohacker CAN do Engineering/computers (if they invest the skills) but are never going to beat, or even come close to a mechanic (or Technomancer for sensors) because their class gets no bonuses to those skills.

Vanguard’s only options are shooting IF they are dex based, or maybe face skills. A str-based vanguard With low Charisma is just boned.

Witchwarper again has nothing to do but captain.

Now this can be mitigated by skill synergy/skill focus/themes, but not all character builds have that option. At this point we now have mystic/Vanguard/Witchwarper that have nothing but captainry skills and all of them pale compared to the envoy. I mean, for a system that seems to want to push starship combat as a core part of gameplay, leaving out 3/10s of your classes unless they bend over backwards to fit YOUR mold seems. . . Counterintuitive.

[Hmm]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

We are absolutely looking at starship roles for all these classes. And we are aware we likely don't have them all covered well enough yet. What we really want is feedback from people who have run these characters through both normal and starship combat, with other characters, and their experiences, so we can fine tune where to go with these.

Well, you're in luck sir, because everything that I am GMing for Playtest will include both, and with teams of players with extensive experience with the other classes. And I am not shy about giving feedback!

Hmm

[Nathan Monson]

VampByDay wrote:

Now this can be mitigated by skill synergy/skill focus/themes, but not all character builds have that option. At this point we now have mystic/Vanguard/Witchwarper that have nothing but captainry skills and all of them pale compared to the envoy. I mean, for a system that seems to want to push starship combat as a core part of gameplay, leaving out 3/10s of your classes unless they bend over backwards to fit YOUR mold seems. . . Counterintuitive.

4/10, you left out the Solarion who is even worse off than the Vangaurd(wrt non captain roles) due to needing Str/Cha, as opposed to Dex/Con

[pithica42]

Solarians have the double penalty that even when they're captains (and they can be good ones), they don't get their insight bonus from sidereal influence because that doesn't work in combat.

[Jimbles the Mediocre]

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

We are absolutely looking at starship roles for all these classes. And we are aware we likely don't have them all covered well enough yet. What we really want is feedback from people who have run these characters through both normal and starship combat, with other characters, and their experiences, so we can fine tune where to go with these.

I'm in the process of running #1-25 as a PbP with six 4th level playtest characters (two of each class), and while the scenario doesn't have the starship tag (and the players weren't told to accommodate starship roles into their characters), it does have a few skill challenges based on starship crew roles; a few thoughts:

Between six 4th-level characters, there were zero ranks in Piloting. None of these classes has Piloting as a class skill.

Only one of the six (the Int-based biohacker) had ranks in Computers or Engineering. Wis-based Biohackers are going to be lackluster at those skills even if they put ranks in them, especially since it's tempting to build a Wis-based biohacker with a race with an Int penalty, such as kasatha.

All three gunners were lackluster. Sure, the vanguards have full BAB, but they've dumped so much into Con before splitting the rest between Str and Dex.

Starfinder lends itself to a lot of Dex/Int builds, which is great, but outside of that there are many interesting and fun characters that are gonna straight up struggle because they aren't naturally tuned for starship combat, and the playtest classes are really shining a spotlight on the issue. Yes, any character can be adjusted to fit into a role, by either sacrificing theme or a feat slot as well as 1 skill rank / level (hurts some more than others), but that doesn't really fit the intuitive style of character building that Starfinder seems to be trying so hard to promote, and as Hmm mentioned earlier in the thread, it's best practice to prepare for two starship roles, especially if you're at a Society table.

[Ascalaphus]

I feel like the Vanguard is weirdly theoretical, getting Culture, Life Science and Physical Science as class skills, but not Engineering, Computers or Stealth. It's not afraid of intelligence-based skills, but doesn't practice any applied ones.

I don't immediately see the thematic reason either - don't computers and machines break down too? The skills could govern both how to wreck them or how to repair them; because both wrecking and opposing stuff breaking down seems to be a theme of the class. Note all the damage mitigation disciplines.

[Dracomicron]

Okay.

I don't think that the playtest classes need more skills, at least the two I've played (Vanguard and Biohacker), but they should get some options as to how they use their current skills.

Biohacker Theorem (level 2):

Applied Spacial Mathmatics

An archangel once said that math is key to the universe. You can apply your Physical Science skill instead of Piloting to Piloting checks, and use your ranks in Physical Science as Piloting ranks in starship combat. In addition, you gain a +1 Insight bonus to Physical Science checks for for initiative in starship combat at level 3; this bonus increases by +1 at 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th levels (to a maximum of +5).

Biohackers are already good at Science Officer and Engineering, so they don't really need anything for free, but letting them choose to calculate the geometry (like the nerdy kid calculating the necessary force to apply to the ball for a home run) is fun and thematic.

Witchwarper class feature (level 1)

Multiphasic Overhaul

Witchwarpers are good luck in the engine room. There's gotta be a reality where the power core isn't about to explode, right? You can use your Mysticism instead of Engineering to take Engineer actions. Further, at 3rd level, you may make the Hold it Together action once per Engineering phase for free without using your action. At 8th level you may Hold it Together for free on two systems at once. At 13th level you may automatically Patch one Glitching system for free instead of using your free Hold it Together uses. At 17th level you may Patch one Malfunctioning system or two Glitching systems for free instead of using your Hold it Together uses.

I haven't thought of anything for Vanguard yet, but I'm not positive that they need anything, since they make excellent gunners, which is basically the most important role in the ship.

[The Ragi]

This won't work for SFS scenarios, since they are set in stone, but for AP and homebrews, there are options for high WIS and mysticism characters: https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42e93?Magical-Universe-but-Mundane-Space-battl es-y#9.

It just requires some creative negotiating, with both the GM and the NPCs that would get their hands into such gear.

[Xenocrat]

I hate to see people recommending the aeon cannon ship weapon for Mystics, as it leads the party to adopt a bad weapon just so one guy can be accurate. This only makes sense in a VERY narrow BP window where this is your best offensive option given other things you think you absolutely have to have. At some point, though, you're wondering why you don't upgrade this lame weapon to something beefier just because your Mystic wants to think he's contributing.

[The Ragi]

Xenocrat wrote:

I hate to see people recommending the aeon cannon ship weapon for Mystics, as it leads the party to adopt a bad weapon just so one guy can be accurate. This only makes sense in a VERY narrow BP window where this is your best offensive option given other things you think you absolutely have to have. At some point, though, you're wondering why you don't upgrade this lame weapon to something beefier just because your Mystic wants to think he's contributing.

Haha, c'mon, be more inclusive! Amongst the cheaper options it's not the worst one, and the player won't drone and moan during the starship combat, at least.

[The_Hidden_GM]

Maybe give the Vanguard some way to augment the ships weapons system or boost the engine propulsion?

Honestly, considering the importance of spaceships in some campaigns, all classes should have had a way to specialize their roles on a starship.

[Bigguyinblack]

We could also just create new roles. Vanguard could have an ability that is used during the Engineering phase and boosts shields or the ships AC.

[Metaphysician]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I feel like the Vanguard is weirdly theoretical, getting Culture, Life Science and Physical Science as class skills, but not Engineering, Computers or Stealth. It's not afraid of intelligence-based skills, but doesn't practice any applied ones.

I don't immediately see the thematic reason either - don't computers and machines break down too? The skills could govern both how to wreck them or how to repair them; because both wrecking and opposing stuff breaking down seems to be a theme of the class. Note all the damage mitigation disciplines.

Could be that the necessary mental training to become a Vanguard predilects one towards abstract knowledge. You need a good foundation in physics, mathematics, and philosophy ( the rigorous "how do you prove you know something" type ), not just physical resilience and training. Which is to say, whereas Solarians are charismatic monks, Vanguards are violent philosophers.

[Dracomicron]

Metaphysician wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

I feel like the Vanguard is weirdly theoretical, getting Culture, Life Science and Physical Science as class skills, but not Engineering, Computers or Stealth. It's not afraid of intelligence-based skills, but doesn't practice any applied ones.

I don't immediately see the thematic reason either - don't computers and machines break down too? The skills could govern both how to wreck them or how to repair them; because both wrecking and opposing stuff breaking down seems to be a theme of the class. Note all the damage mitigation disciplines.

Could be that the necessary mental training to become a Vanguard predilects one towards abstract knowledge. You need a good foundation in physics, mathematics, and philosophy ( the rigorous "how do you prove you know something" type ), not just physical resilience and training. Which is to say, whereas Solarians are charismatic monks, Vanguards are violent philosophers.

"Violent philosophers." I like that. Reminds me of the old Planescape stuff, where the Factions each believed that their philosophy was superior, and they were willing to go to war to prove it.

[The Ragi]

Put the unfit characters to work on creating weird missiles, just like the last battle in Star Trek VI.

[BretI]

In my opinion, every class should have Piloting as a class skill. It covers operating a wide range of vehicles and while some classes may make themselves much better at it, all of them should have a chance to be competent.

It would be best if every class had at least two roles in Starship Combat that worked reasonably well. They should have at least one in which they can get an insight bonus to the skill most used by that position.

[kaid]

VampByDay wrote:

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

We are absolutely looking at starship roles for all these classes. And we are aware we likely don't have them all covered well enough yet. What we really want is feedback from people who have run these characters through both normal and starship combat, with other characters, and their experiences, so we can fine tune where to go with these.

We ran several of the playtest characters through a few different games last week during our area’s week long toys-for-tots charity drive. I didn’t play one personally, but I sat at a table with a few. The general consensus was:

The new classes are cool, but have little to do in Starship combat.
Biohacker CAN do Engineering/computers (if they invest the skills) but are never going to beat, or even come close to a mechanic (or Technomancer for sensors) because their class gets no bonuses to those skills.

Vanguard’s only options are shooting IF they are dex based, or maybe face skills. A str-based vanguard With low Charisma is just boned.

Witchwarper again has nothing to do but captain.

Now this can be mitigated by skill synergy/skill focus/themes, but not all character builds have that option. At this point we now have mystic/Vanguard/Witchwarper that have nothing but captainry skills and all of them pale compared to the envoy. I mean, for a system that seems to want to push starship combat as a core part of gameplay, leaving out 3/10s of your classes unless they bend over backwards to fit YOUR mold seems. . . Counterintuitive.

I think one big thing they could do to help would be to make mystic weapons more common for ships. They exist on the azlanti ships that let you use your mysticism skill for gunnery which helps witchwarpers and mystics a lot. If you have a ship with extra spell casters giving them gunnery options is nice. Biohackers are competent gunners/science officers/engineers depending on skills and get a crap load of skill points so pretty easy to put some points to be competent enough to fill a hole. They may not be the best of the best but they would be competent.

[kaid]

Xenocrat wrote:

I hate to see people recommending the aeon cannon ship weapon for Mystics, as it leads the party to adopt a bad weapon just so one guy can be accurate. This only makes sense in a VERY narrow BP window where this is your best offensive option given other things you think you absolutely have to have. At some point, though, you're wondering why you don't upgrade this lame weapon to something beefier just because your Mystic wants to think he's contributing.

Given there are ships that are totally bioorganic and or mystical it makes a lot of sense to have more weapons flagged like the aeon cannon. Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

[BretI]

kaid wrote:

Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Although I have no problem with using Mysticism with Gunnery, I think it would be a bad idea to use it in place of Computers for Science Officer. The name of the position is Science Officer, not ship's diviner. The person filling that role should be using technical skills.

There are already enough places where the magical abilities completely trump technilogical abilities. We don't need another instance of that.

[Arnim Thayer]

BretI wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Tim Statler wrote:

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

Solo.

Cat

Mal

[Dracomicron]

Arnim Thayer wrote:

BretI wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Tim Statler wrote:

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

Solo.

Cat

Mal

Kangaroo

[Pantshandshake]

Dracomicron wrote:

Arnim Thayer wrote:

BretI wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Tim Statler wrote:

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

Solo.

Cat

Mal

Kangaroo

Crunch.

[Dracomicron]

Pantshandshake wrote:

Dracomicron wrote:

Arnim Thayer wrote:

BretI wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Tim Statler wrote:

Hmm wrote:

There can be only one Captain, and I would rather not see multiple classes forced into that role by the skill choices available to them.

Hmm

Which one? Kirk? Picard? Sisko? Janeway? or Archer?

Solo.

Cat

Mal

Kangaroo

Crunch.

Caveman?

[BigNorseWolf]

BretI wrote:

kaid wrote:

Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Although I have no problem with using Mysticism with Gunnery, I think it would be a bad idea to use it in place of Computers for Science Officer. The name of the position is Science Officer, not ship's diviner. The person filling that role should be using technical skills.

There are already enough places where the magical abilities completely trump technilogical abilities. We don't need another instance of that.

By that measure shouldn't the science officer be using physical science?

[Xenocrat]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

BretI wrote:

kaid wrote:

Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Although I have no problem with using Mysticism with Gunnery, I think it would be a bad idea to use it in place of Computers for Science Officer. The name of the position is Science Officer, not ship's diviner. The person filling that role should be using technical skills.

There are already enough places where the magical abilities completely trump technilogical abilities. We don't need another instance of that.

By that measure shouldn't the science officer be using physical science?

No, he should be using computer science to tell the computers what to do.

[Ascalaphus]

Xenocrat wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

BretI wrote:

kaid wrote:

Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Although I have no problem with using Mysticism with Gunnery, I think it would be a bad idea to use it in place of Computers for Science Officer. The name of the position is Science Officer, not ship's diviner. The person filling that role should be using technical skills.

There are already enough places where the magical abilities completely trump technilogical abilities. We don't need another instance of that.

By that measure shouldn't the science officer be using physical science?

No, he should be using computer science to tell the computers what to do.

By that reasoning, shouldn't the pilot be using computer to tell the ship what to do, the gunner computer to tell the guns what to do? I suppose the engineer is stuck fixing the computer...

[BigNorseWolf]

Use profession vidgamer for gunnery?

[Dracomicron]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Use profession vidgamer for gunnery?

Now we're just getting into The Last Starfighter.

[BretI]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

BretI wrote:

kaid wrote:

Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Although I have no problem with using Mysticism with Gunnery, I think it would be a bad idea to use it in place of Computers for Science Officer. The name of the position is Science Officer, not ship's diviner. The person filling that role should be using technical skills.

There are already enough places where the magical abilities completely trump technilogical abilities. We don't need another instance of that.

By that measure shouldn't the science officer be using physical science?

Yes that would have been a better choice, and there are scenarios where the Science Officer is called on to make a roll against Physical Science.

[Xenocrat]

That would be a very poor choice for what a science officer is doing in starship combat, which is electronic warfare, ECM and ECCM.

[MythicFox]

Dracomicron wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Use profession vidgamer for gunnery?

Now we're just getting into The Last Starfighter.

I'm having trouble seeing the problem.

[ThermalCat]

kaid wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

I hate to see people recommending the aeon cannon ship weapon for Mystics, as it leads the party to adopt a bad weapon just so one guy can be accurate. This only makes sense in a VERY narrow BP window where this is your best offensive option given other things you think you absolutely have to have. At some point, though, you're wondering why you don't upgrade this lame weapon to something beefier just because your Mystic wants to think he's contributing.

Given there are ships that are totally bioorganic and or mystical it makes a lot of sense to have more weapons flagged like the aeon cannon. Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Why not let Mystics cast spells to enhance ship functions? Magic Torpedo anyone? I wouldn't make it an always-hit spell like Magic Missile, but it should help tracking rolls. Nothing huge, but things here and there that buff other roles, could fit with certain campaigns. Leomund's tiny escape pod, or Bit of Luck could be useful. Nothing that crosses the boundary between character and ship scale, like a +1 to damage is too powerful at the ship weapons level, but a finesse action like a bit of illusion to act as an aid-another to the Captain's Taunt action might be interesting.

[kaid]

ThermalCat wrote:

kaid wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

I hate to see people recommending the aeon cannon ship weapon for Mystics, as it leads the party to adopt a bad weapon just so one guy can be accurate. This only makes sense in a VERY narrow BP window where this is your best offensive option given other things you think you absolutely have to have. At some point, though, you're wondering why you don't upgrade this lame weapon to something beefier just because your Mystic wants to think he's contributing.

Given there are ships that are totally bioorganic and or mystical it makes a lot of sense to have more weapons flagged like the aeon cannon. Also it would make sense to have some upgrade options like mystic sensors or something so you could have instead of a science officer have a mystic officer doing a lot of the same things.

Why not let Mystics cast spells to enhance ship functions? Magic Torpedo anyone? I wouldn't make it an always-hit spell like Magic Missile, but it should help tracking rolls. Nothing huge, but things here and there that buff other roles, could fit with certain campaigns. Leomund's tiny escape pod, or Bit of Luck could be useful. Nothing that crosses the boundary between character and ship scale, like a +1 to damage is too powerful at the ship weapons level, but a finesse action like a bit of illusion to act as an aid-another to the Captain's Taunt action might be interesting.

I am kinda waiting for more rules on Bioorganic space ships. In theory an engineer on such a vessel would get better use out of life sciences than engineering and a mystic could be a good "ship doctor" to such a vessel.

[GM OfAnything]

I would really like a feat or something that allows Mysticism for some of the basic actions of Science Officer, Engineer, and Captain. Enough that a Mystic can act as a competent backup, but doesn't completely replace the need for investment in Computers and Engineering.

[Ascalaphus]

Computers and especially Engineering get a lot of mileage out of spaceship combat as well. I'd say it's okay for mysticism to be used for one spaceship role.

[Dracomicron]

What was it that I heard for being the alternate skills for different kinds of ships?

Living Ship
Engineering: Medicine
Science Officer: Life Science

Magitech Vessel
Engineering: Mysticism
Science Officer: Perception

Maybe?

I mean, it would be kind of horrible because characters designed for regular ships could suddenly be terrible if they had to commandeer a vessel different than their regular ride.

[GM OfAnything]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Computers and especially Engineering get a lot of mileage out of spaceship combat as well. I'd say it's okay for mysticism to be used for one spaceship role.

Yes, you can specialize with Computers, Engineering, and Piloting. I'm suggesting that with some further investment, Mysticism be a Jack-of-all-trades skill.

[Zwordsman]

random odd bit.

Sci officer. I'd never played that role. I had fully assumed,(like in various media) they would use Life Sci and Phys Sci to do their job..

but apparently its tall computers. I never understood that honestly. I mean yeah you have to use a computer for it..
but it feels like phys sci for most of it and life sci for some of the scanning stuff would've worked. and not had so much damn overlap

[BigNorseWolf]

Computer science: The scanner says this is 51.9 kilograms of uranium 238

Physical science: Is already running out the door.