I haven't played Starfinder yet (today is my first session), but what struck me pretty quickly was that number of skills got axed (compared to Pathfinder or so it seems - I actually didn't bothered to count them, sorry), while classes retained high number of skill ranks at the same time. You may argue that this is Sci-Fi (or Sci-Fantasy) and nanotechnology makes people more universally capable, but this is also a game. A cooperative game (like all TTRPGs) and what makes cooperative games interesting is when group of different people with different set of skills work together towards common goal.
I'm saying this, because one of the players found out few days ago that his character (let's call him wannabe Han Solo) is not the only pilot in the crew. In fact everyone is almost equally good pilot, with slight differences being set by dexterity mod.
On the other hand my wife is playing as Envoy with high Cha and Int. I've made mechanic and I've noticed that we too share a lot of common skills -- skills that I thought would be more exclusive to mechanic class.
Am I the only one being bothered by this? I know that many people want to play Sci-Fi Super Heroes, just like some people want exactly this (just a fantasy version) in Pathfinder, but I never believed that having more of everything (or being universally good) transists to a better gaming experience in Roleplaying Games. In other words it seems almost impossible to roleplay the best pilot in the galaxy when that phlegmatic diplomat behind you is almost equally good at it.
What are your thoughts about it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, exactly. They consolidated the number of skills while making sure each class got 4-8 ranks plus Int. I noticed that from day one as a problem. It’s just simple math.
The result is that it’s really easy, especially for envoys and operatives, to be really good at pretty much everything and (often) be almost as good as the “specialists.”. This problem increases with experienced players who know that, at least in published adventures, Computers and Engineering will be used ten times more often than Disguise and Sleight of Hand.
In Dead Suns, I’ve had to intentionally stop my envoy PC from having ranks in certain skills in order to preserve the flavour of his not being pretty good at everything.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It gets balanced back out by the fact that the DCs are rather high. Max ranks + trained skill made you competent in pathfinder but the math is so tight in starfinder that you almost need a maxed stat and an operative level competence bonus to be relevant with a skill.
It gets balanced back out by the fact that the DCs are rather high. Max ranks + trained skill made you competent in pathfinder but the math is so tight in starfinder that you almost need a maxed stat and an operative level competence bonus to be relevant with a skill.
Hmm... I hope it really is that way and my mechanic won't get overshadowed by Envoy or Operative in computers and engineering. ;)
It gets balanced back out by the fact that the DCs are rather high. Max ranks + trained skill made you competent in pathfinder but the math is so tight in starfinder that you almost need a maxed stat and an operative level competence bonus to be relevant with a skill.Hmm... I hope it really is that way and my mechanic won't get overshadowed by Envoy or Operative in computers and engineering. ;)
So long as you invest in Int, the mechanic will start a few points behind, but will end a point ahead of most operatives. If the Envoy takes Expertise in your skills, they will come out ahead.
However, Envoys also can take the Expert Advice (Ex) talent which lets them grant their expertise dice to others when using the Aid Another action, which is frankly amazing if they're getting expertise in your skills then because they become a huge boost to you, who will generally have the better stat boost to Int than the Envoy.
Starfinder seems to strongly encourage multiple characters be good at skills in order to pile on Aid Anothers to beat some of the higher DCs.
It gets balanced back out by the fact that the DCs are rather high. Max ranks + trained skill made you competent in pathfinder but the math is so tight in starfinder that you almost need a maxed stat and an operative level competence bonus to be relevant with a skill.Hmm... I hope it really is that way and my mechanic won't get overshadowed by Envoy or Operative in computers and engineering. ;)
Either class can easily go toe to toe with you on those two with the right class features/stats.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the other hand my wife is playing as Envoy with high Cha and Int. I've made mechanic and I've noticed that we too share a lot of common skills -- skills that I thought would be more exclusive to mechanic class.
As science-fantasy, Starfinder really doesn't go in for "exclusive" skills. Pretty much any class can be good with any skill.
This is a good thing. A player should not feel like they "have" to take a specific class to act in one of the starship combat roles.
On the other hand my wife is playing as Envoy with high Cha and Int. I've made mechanic and I've noticed that we too share a lot of common skills -- skills that I thought would be more exclusive to mechanic class.As science-fantasy, Starfinder really doesn't go in for "exclusive" skills. Pretty much any class can be good with any skill.
This is a good thing. A player should not feel like they "have" to take a specific class to act in one of the starship combat roles.
The mechanic is a little underwhelming at being good at things the mechanic should be good at. Both the envoy and the operative have comperable if not better abilities with computers if they chose to pick them up. (the operative scales ALL of their skills faster and the envoy can have +1d6 that scales even higher) The mechanic allegedly stays ahead by having a higher int, but almost everyone will up their int as they level , meaning the people starting with 12s and 14s will narrow that gap.
Don't let mechanics get in the way of your character fluff.
And in the end all skill rolls become an Aid Another pile up.
Well, not all of them. Sometimes only a limited number of people, or no people at all can really aid.
That being said, while I do think that the implementation of Operatives Edge was a mistake, I would not expect computers and engineering to be unique to the mechanic, when they are specifically skills that can be an envoy or operative's main focus, depending on what class feature choices they make.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly prefer the sheer volume of things a character can be quite good in Starfinder to its fantasy cousin. Most of the fictional people we emulate in these games are highly competent at a variety of things, and not simply hyperfocused on a small number of things like your 2+Int classes with no in-class Int focus were in Pathfinder.
Like if you think about it- a lot of different people on the Enterprise were capable (if not the best) at doing a lot of different things on the Enterprise.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like the direction they took the skills. Playing a 2 + Int fighter in Pathfinder meant you basically didn't participate mechanically outside of combat.
I mean, if you read through some of the threads in this forum, there are many posts which suggest that Solarians, for example, don't get enough skill points at 4 per level. I didn't hear anyone complaining about 6 skill points per level for Vanguards in the playtest.
I also like the fact they don't tie concepts like Best at Hacking, or Best at piloting to any single class. It allows freedom in how to approach it rather than you must always play X to do Y.
In turn it means playing multiple copies of the same class isn't a terrible idea. A party of 4 Soldiers can actually be effective outside of combat. They aren't all forced to do the same thing and can have different specializations. Where the specialization is determined by investments beyond just skill points. Themes, feats, racials, class options, augmentations and equipment all matter.
|
I think I'll nerf Operative's Edge a bit in my home game, to only apply to skills you have skill focus in (remember, you get two skill focus feats from your operative specialization). You're free to take more skill focus feats but then you're intentionally focusing on those skills instead of accidentally crowding other people out of their niche.
Another part of it is that as a GM there are different sorts of skill challenges you can build. "One person needs to pass this check" is about the simplest skill challenge, and problematic if you have a lot of people who want to get some spotlight.
An easy alternative is "we need four things done in two rounds, and each person can try only one per round". That requires at least two people to succeed per round, so you probably want to have even more people trying.
My point is: skill challenges are a thing you design as a GM, not something that just happens.
Don't let mechanics get in the way of your character fluff.
And in the end all skill rolls become an Aid Another pile up.
If your fluff is that you are the galaxies best computer hacker, the mechanics of the operative being just as good at it as you are a little versimilitude straining.
If your fluff is that you are the galaxies best computer hacker, the mechanics of the operative being just as good at it as you are a little versimilitude straining.
As long as you believe in it...
Or advertise yourself as such...
Then you just need to roll high and jump ahead on skill rolls before the competition.
|
I think I'll nerf Operative's Edge a bit in my home game, to only apply to skills you have skill focus in (remember, you get two skill focus feats from your operative specialization). You're free to take more skill focus feats but then you're intentionally focusing on those skills instead of accidentally crowding other people out of their niche.
What you're suggesting wouldn't work - both the Skill Focus & Operative's Edge provide Insight bonuses, which don't stack. You be effectively deleting the Operative's Edge ability.
I think I'll nerf Operative's Edge a bit in my home game, to only apply to skills you have skill focus in (remember, you get two skill focus feats from your operative specialization). You're free to take more skill focus feats but then you're intentionally focusing on those skills instead of accidentally crowding other people out of their niche.What you're suggesting wouldn't work - both the Skill Focus & Operative's Edge provide Insight bonuses, which don't stack. You be effectively deleting the Operative's Edge ability.
They'd get the +3 right away
the ability to take 10
and it would go to +4 at higher levels.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I'll nerf Operative's Edge a bit in my home game, to only apply to skills you have skill focus in (remember, you get two skill focus feats from your operative specialization). You're free to take more skill focus feats but then you're intentionally focusing on those skills instead of accidentally crowding other people out of their niche.What you're suggesting wouldn't work - both the Skill Focus & Operative's Edge provide Insight bonuses, which don't stack. You be effectively deleting the Operative's Edge ability.
Deleting a significant part of the ability is exactly the intent - it's far too broad, so broad that it tends to completely overshadow other character without trying.
I'm totally okay with it if the hacker themed operative is a really good hacker, just as good as the hacker themed mechanic. But if the wilderness survival operative is also just as good a hacker, that's operative's edge being too broad in what it gives bonuses to.
Example: a mechanic's Bypass ability gives him +1 at level 1, +2 at level 5, +3 at level 9, +4 at level 13. And that's a bonus only on the mechanic's signature skills, Computers and Engineering. An operative gets +1 at level 1, +2 at level 4, +3 at level 8, +4 at level 12, on all skills.
So my nerf (and yeah, it is a nerf) is to restrict it to whatever skills this particular operative really cares about; his Operative Specialization gives him two, and he can take more if he wants. But that's intentionally going for the skills, rather than crowding out other people without even trying.
And yeah, it's an insight bonus just like Skill Focus. So it won't even do anything until level 12. That's also the intent - it's got to do with the way skill DCs scale in starfinder. As described in the Game Mastery chapter:
A challenging DC for a skill check is equal to 15 + 1-1/2 × the CR of the encounter or the PCs’ Average Party Level (APL). For an easier check, you might reduce the DC by 5, while increasing the DC by 5 makes for a more difficult check.
So to keep up with a DC that goes up by 1.5 every level, characters need something more than putting in a rank each level. You get a +1 from 5th level ability increases a few times, you get some personal upgrades. But without a scaling bonus like Operative's Edge, you're eventually going to fall behind. With Operative's Edge, you instead slowly get ahead of the curve, but only on those skills that you really cared for.
Your game, your call.
Not the game I'd want to play.
What about doing it the other way? Speeding up other classes bonuses so that the party operative isn't as good a pilot as the star shaman AND as good at hacking as the mechanic AND isn't as good a talker as the envoy?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure about such a change (Operative's Edge only to skills with skill focus). Since for most APs, that means a Soldier with two skill focus feats is just as good as the Operative at skills checks.
What would you expect such an Operative to have in terms of skills at say, level 5 or level 10, where someone might be 90% done with Against the Aeon Throne or Dead Suns? How might that compare to say, just a Soldier that spent some of their spare feats on skill focus and has similar base stats?
I guess I'm asking, take a 4 to 6 person team with one playing an Operative, and replace them with a Soldier with skill focus in the same skills, what has the team lost in terms of making skill checks in a typical AP?
I feel the default Operative lets a party have capability in those skills no one wants to spend resources on since they come up infrequently (sleight of hand comes to mind, or disguise, or perhaps survival for certain types of campaigns).
|
|
Well, as someone who plays several soldiers - I've seen operatives be just as effective in combat, especially by level 7 when trick attack becomes automatic. Soldiers on a full attack can do a bit more damage but operatives do close to that with a single attack while staying mobile.
So, in my eyes it's the operative not playing nice - being overwhelming in the skills arena and not really paying any price for it in combat. What do operatives still have if you tone down operative's edge?
* the most skill points
* the most class skills
* two free skill focus feats that scale up at higher level to keep you ahead of the standard difficulty curve
* the ability to Take 10 on those skills, and any others you want to sink a feat into.
* exploits that let you do more with skills than other classes can
Some people think class roles should be all "you're good at combat so you don't get skills, and the poor rogue is bad at combat so he gets skills". But operatives aren't bad at combat at all. Their trick attack gives them mobility, an accuracy bonus and so much extra damage that they're quite free to pick up cheap low level weapons and spend the rest of the money however they like.
I think each class should have a role to play during each of the game's main arenas - combat, starships, "skills". Operatives are the best or nearly the best in all of those arenas.
|
|
What about doing it the other way? Speeding up other classes bonuses so that the party operative isn't as good a pilot as the star shaman AND as good at hacking as the mechanic AND isn't as good a talker as the envoy?Your game, your call.
Not the game I'd want to play.
It's something I was thinking about after I posted. I'm thinking it might not be crazy at all if Skill Focus scaled like Operative's Edge for everyone. It would help a lot with starship combat DCs which are quite problematic at higher levels.
I think given Starfinder's fascination/success with bounding DCs, that making the scale-by-level skill bonus scale the same scale for all classes would not be such a bad thing.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, a better solution for my money instead of ripping the guts out of one of the classes is just to have some pre-consultation about people's builds and roles.
One of Starfinder's best features is that you can produce a wide variety of character concepts using many different classes (and you're allowed to be competent in combat and good or even better at other things), which means you can be one of the galaxy's bestest hackers with an operative, a technomancer, an envoy or a mechanic equally easily. But this does mean that if someone is going to be upset if someone else's character is going to be able to compete with an ability they wanted to be exclusive in, that's going to take some planning and some clarity about concepts and niches.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me, the only problematic Operative is the Intelligence-based Operative. This one is overwhelming, having all skills to levels equivalent to the ones of his companions.
The classical (Dexterity-based) Operative tends to be excellent in Dexterity skills, and in general very good in a second attribute (Charisma, Intelligence or Wisdom). But he doesn't overshadow everyone.
Also, Starfinder considers that having full ranks in a skill doesn't make you capable with it. You also need to have a class bonus (or Skill Focus) and a high attribute. Having a bonus just a bit higher than the Operative is the difference between rolling the die and providing Aid Another. And in general, unless you focus on non primary attributes, you are always better than the Operative in the skills you need to be. After all, the Mechanic has high Intelligence, and Bypass. So, if the Operative gets better than him in Computers and Engineering, there's an issue with the Mechanic, not the Operative.
The mechanic DOES have issues. Namely his bonus to two skills is smaller than the operatives bonus to every skill and they really don't have another ability to make up for it.
There's also no reason that the mechanics int should be that much higher than the operatives. they really don't get as much out of int as they do out of a to hit stat (most likely dex but strength is an option). A lot of starfinder "primary" stats are really secondary (Int for the mechanic, charisma for the envoy, wisdom for non brain blasting mystics)
You know we don't agree on that :)
My Mechanic started with 18 Intelligence, my Envoy with 18 Charisma and my Mystic with 18 Wisdom. And I don't feel weaker in combat, but I clearly have an edge out of it.
In my opinion, it's a mistake to have a higher Dexterity than your primary stat, but this discussion will be endless for sure :)
You know we don't agree on that :)
My Mechanic started with 18 Intelligence, my Envoy with 18 Charisma and my Mystic with 18 Wisdom. And I don't feel weaker in combat, but I clearly have an edge out of it.
In my opinion, it's a mistake to have a higher Dexterity than your primary stat, but this discussion will be endless for sure :)
I have an int mystic skill monkey and a dex envoy. They really don't suffer anything if at all from their off model stats.(the strength operative is a little more of a trade off) Wisdom doesn't matter at all if you avoid one spell (mindblast) , and nothing the envoy does is really all that charisma dependant. The buffs to the party are the same.
An operative starting with a 16 int isn't out of the question either (especially the engineering one from the armory) , they'll be at most a point behind you, and will occasionally catch up to you and even pass you when you have a 19 int and they have an 18 but their operatives edge is higher.
You might not feel weaker in combat but its pretty demonstrable mathematically that you are. There aren't many boosters in this game but there are still way more skill boosters than attack boosters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have an int mystic skill monkey and a dex envoy.
I have nothing to answer to that. You can create and play whatever character you like and if they suit your likings, then I can't tell you you're wrong.
My Mystic has 18 for a starting Wisdow, and if he had, say, 14, he would have been behind the Operative I've played with recently. From the one making all the Survival checks, he would have been the one aiding another on all of them. The difference between playing and watching. I would have greatly suffered from just that far more than I've "suffered" from missing a few attack rolls. And, as you point out for the Mechanic, starting with less than 16 in Intelligence may put you in the very same situation.
So, it depends on how you see your character. I want my characters to shine, not to be efficient "on average".
An operative starting with a 16 int isn't out of the question either (especially the engineering one from the armory) , they'll be at most a point behind you, and will occasionally catch up to you and even pass you when you have a 19 int and they have an 18 but their operatives edge is higher.
Nope. If the Operative has Intelligence as secondary skill, he has less or equal than an Intelligence-based Mechanic in Computers and Engineering whatever the level. Because, by the time he is at 18 in Intelligence, the Mechanic is at 21. You need to max out Intelligence if you want to compete. That's why I say the Intelligence-based Operative is too strong, as he will outperform Mechanics and Technomancers for the very least, and, roughly, only Envoys will roll dice for the Charisma-based skills.
For me, the only problematic Operative is the Intelligence-based Operative. This one is overwhelming, having all skills to levels equivalent to the ones of his companions.
Uh, jack-of-all-trades is one of the basic sci-fi archetypes Operatives are supposed to be able to fill. It isn't "problematic" that they can do so. It would be "problematic" if they made trade-offs against their key stat (around which all their combat stuff is built) and still couldn't do so.
Uh, jack-of-all-trades is one of the basic sci-fi archetypes Operatives are supposed to be able to fill. It isn't "problematic" that they can do so. It would be "problematic" if they made trade-offs against their key stat (around which all their combat stuff is built) and still couldn't do so.
For me, a jack-of-all-trades is someone good in all skills, but specialist in none.
The Intelligence-based Operative is a specialist in all skills as soon as he reaches level 12. So, it's clearly too strong.He's the best in all Intelligence skills (unless he faces an Intelligence-based Envoy, which is quite rare). He's the best in all Dexterity skills. He's the best in Strength skills. And he's the best in Wisdom skills, outside the ones from the Mystic Connection (if they are Wisdom-based).
The only area where the other party members will roll dice is Charisma-based skills.
Operative: jack of all trades. Master of all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Operatives on and off become a power arguement on these forums all the time. There's the new players which complain of overshadowing or a lack of weakness to which more experienced players step in and advise of other things being more powerful, and then the people who've gotten 12 levels in and complain the Operative's Edge is the strongest ability in the game.
I don't entirely disagree. Basically every level Operative's Edge goes up, it's a level where the Operative is best while everyone else is waiting for their next level for their bonuses to rise. Not going into my table specifics, it's a big problem that our Operative is the Hacker and we have a Mechanic, though as of last level I as the Envoy got Expertise in Engineering and do better than both of them (going for Expert Advice though so it'll make my Aid Anothers for both of them just fantastic).
Honestly I don't think Operative's Edge should go. Too heavy modification like removing it from non-Skill Focus skills would kill Operative exploits like Jack-of-all-trades which apply to skills you have no ranks in.
Honestly I think two fixes would be to take 2 of the Operative's skill points and give them to the Solarian, since I found out a Human Operative can actually overflow their skill points (10/level + 1 from Skilled + 9 from Max Int of 28 = 20/Level out of 20 skills) and the Solarian doesn't even recieve enough to cover their Sidereal Influence. The second would be to stagger Operative's Edge one bonus back (basically remove the +1 from level 1 and give boosts starting level 3), this has kind of the downside of pushing back Specialization Skill Mastery to 11 (when Operatives Edge would now hit the +3), but the new balance would be one level of Operative being equal to everyone else, and the subsequent level others would bounce ahead in the Insight Bonus race instead of bouncing to even.
However I'm neither a GM (at the moment) nor a designer, and as a rules traditionalist I will insist on the Operative being played as the designers intended, because perhaps they see something that I do not in the longterm health of the game.
|
I also like the fact they don't tie concepts like Best at Hacking, or Best at piloting to any single class. It allows freedom in how to approach it rather than you must always play X to do Y.
This right here.
It's something the developers have mentioned a few times, in relation to like class backstories and all that. They designed the game with the flexibility to make a lot of builds viable, regardless of class, race, theme, etc. Yes, from an optimization perspective, you can calculate the best possible bonus to whatever skill you want at a given level, by cherry-picking this race, that class, this other piece of equipment, etc. But you can probably get within spitting distance of "best-in-slot" with just about anything.
It reminds me a lot of the Saga Edition of the Star Wars RPG, where everyone got to add +1/2 lvl to all skill checks. As you get higher in level, you get good at just about everything, although a dedicated specialist will always be better. I like the concept - and it helps everything feel more, well, heroic. It sucks in Pathfinder when your character who has battled devils and felled tyrants is foiled by...an unknotted rope, because they have low Str and never had the spare ranks to put a point into Climb.
In my opinion, the problem with the Operative Edge is, mostly, the high levels. Getting up to +6 to all skills overshadows the difference in attributes level. It should be limited to +3 or +4.
Also, the +1 at first level encourages dips in the class, which is not a problem in itself, just a bit powerfull.
Nope. If the Operative has Intelligence as secondary skill, he has less or equal than an Intelligence-based Mechanic in Computers and Engineering whatever the level. Because, by the time he is at 18 in Intelligence, the Mechanic is at 21. You need to max out Intelligence if you want to compete.
I think this indicates a more serious problem than you realize. "What does a mechanic class give you to be good at skills" when the answer is "a high intelligence modifier). Thats a serious problem with the class. It's just not really that good at the thing its billed as being good at.
The envoy is fine because having a reroll on tap is worth a whopping +8 statistically (and for diplomacy at least you dont just want the take 10 result you often want the higher roll) So they'll have talents that actually make them good at a few skills no matter what the operative does.
I have nothing to answer to that. You can create and play whatever character you like and if they suit your likings, then I can't tell you you're wrong
Just saying I'm not just sitting on my butt and theory crafting. (i'm sitting on my butt and doing things. See I know sit) Any class can have a high int mod and skill focus.
In return for trying to monostat your mechanic to stay ahead of another party member your party gains a +1 or +2 that the party was going to have anyway. If people are building cooporatively that seems a little weird to do. it also happens because you're shoveling coal as fast as you can into that one thing and the operatives higher class bonus is just carrying him along.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this indicates a more serious problem than you realize. "What does a mechanic class give you to be good at skills" when the answer is "a high intelligence modifier).
The opposite would be a serious problem, in my opinion. If classes no more rely on attributes to use their abilities, you'll end up with a complete mess, with Intelligence-based Soldiers, Charisma-based Mechanics and Constitution-based Operatives.
The whole game is balanced on the fact that you need high scores in your associated attributes to be able to use your abilities. Being the best in Computers whatever your Intelligence would be the issue.The envoy is fine because having a reroll on tap is worth a whopping +8 statistically
Not at all. It's a +3.575 on open ended rolls if you can take any of the dice.
And at high level, it's nearly pointless due to how high your expertise die is. At level 20, you reroll only 1s if you don't have information about the DC you need to break (rolling a 2 on your die gives you the same average roll (10.5) by rolling your expertise die than by rerolling the d20).Just saying I'm not just sitting on my butt and theory crafting.
I know, I'm not saying your point of view is wrong, I'm just saying we don't have the same. You maximize combat efficiency, putting aside out of combat efficiency. But you can't complain about the fact that a non-Intelligence-maxed Mechanic is worse than an Operative in Computers. It's your decision to let out of combat skills on the side, so you have to pay the price.
In my case, I consider that my character has to be good at what he's supposed to be good. My Mechanic has to top Computers because it's what I want. I don't want anyone at the table to roll Computers but me (unless I'm incapacitated).
Then, I'm a bit worse in combat efficiency, and that's ok, as I would play a Soldier/Solarian if I wanted to top combat efficiency.
The thing is: If I fail to hit an enemy, this is ok. If I fail my Computers check, it isn't, as I'm the one supposed to do it and the party is expecting me to make it.
We'll have to agree to disagree :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For me, a jack-of-all-trades is someone good in all skills, but specialist in none.
Yeah, and here's the thing: I don't believe there's a big market for playing someone who has a bunch of skills but basically sucks at all of them. What you have then is a character whose skills are marginally useful in any context but probably constantly outclassed by at least one other specialist party member on any given occasion. The "master of none" in this sense seems to me to be rarely seen at tables for just this reason. It's uselessness. It's the opposite of getting to play a heroic character.
The point of being an Operative with a skills focus is being Space James Bond. You have a wide skill set on which you can consistently deliver. An Envoy or an Operative focused on being a "skill monkey" will inevitably become this kind of character. If you have people at the table who are going to resent that character or feel like they're overshadowed, then aside from planning and communication, it may also be worth remembering that skill checks are only a small subset of the class powers and abilities that make up the game.
James bond is a solo hero. This is a group game. It changes the dynamics a fair bit
The opposite would be a serious problem, in my opinion. If classes no more rely on attributes to use their abilities, you'll end up with a complete mess, with Intelligence-based Soldiers, Charisma-based Mechanics and Constitution-based Operatives.
I'd argue that's the world we're living in now. What you're describing is my SFS filing box o characters... (The operative is strength based: The quadrants strongest ysoki in fact. She's 4 feet tall by four feet by four feet and its NOT fat)
Soldiers and operatives get a lot out of their associated stat because it's also their to hit stat.
Envoys have class abilities that jack their selected skills so high that +2 from a 14 or +4 from an 18 are kinda indistinguishable.
Mystics that don't brainblast have very little need for an uber wisdom. You can summon things, cast haste, and remove conditions just as well. The slower spell progression means you can start at a 14 without worrying about losing a bonus spell.
The whole game is balanced on the fact that you need high scores in your associated attributes to be able to use your abilities.
It might supposed to be I don't think it is in a lot of cases. When you take a hard look at what you get for the classes allegedly main stat it's kind of meh.
Being the best in Computers whatever your Intelligence would be the issue.
Look at it the other way.
I want to play the computers guy. What class should I play?
The mechanic SHOULD spring to mind immediately. erm.. well. mechanically he does not. Because he has very little unique bonus or abilities with computers. The class designed to be the computers guy isn't very good at being the computers guy. You can just slap a max int on any class and have just about the same thing.
The envoy is fine because having a reroll on tap is worth a whopping +8 statistically
Not at all. It's a +3.575 on open ended rolls if you can take any of the dice.
If you're looking for a number yes but not if you're looking at pass/fail.
And at high level, it's nearly pointless due to how high your expertise die is. At level 20, you reroll only 1s if you don't have information about the DC you need to break (rolling a 2 on your die gives you the same average roll (10.5) by rolling your expertise die than by rerolling the d20)
After 9 you save the braincells counting cards and just spend the resolve.
You maximize combat efficiency, putting aside out of combat efficiency.
Nope.
The system has diminishing returns that leave a lot of sweet spots. For example, starting with an 18 means from level 5-10 you don't go anywhere vs starting with a 16. Envoys are barely below ranged soldiers once you consider get em. Envoys don't actually gain all that much from charisma. Thing like that.
My characters tend to go for just below maximum in combat and just below maximum in skills. They're only a LITTLE worse at both. Mind you most of them are made for the SFS bag of mixed nuts at the table where you have to be able to cover a lot of roles.
But you can't complain about the fact that a non-Intelligence-maxed Mechanic is worse than an Operative in Computers. It's your decision to let out of combat skills on the side, so you have to pay the price.
That's not the complaint. Its that a non int maxed mechanic only beats a non int maxed operative. And operatives edge means they'll exceed you on occasion. The mechanic CLASS isn't helping you be the best computers guy, your int score is. The class that's supposed to be the computers guy really should be putting more into computers than the operative puts into everything.
In my case, I consider that my character has to be good at what he's supposed to be good. My Mechanic has to top Computers because it's what I want. I don't want anyone at the table to roll Computers but me (unless I'm incapacitated)
You have to be the best to be good. Thats a little different.
It seems a little weird to be competing against your own party in a cooporative game. You should get together and see what skills you need to cover.
If you're in SFSs bag of mixed nuts i don't think 1 or 2 points is going to drastically alter how often you're the lead on a skill check.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
James bond is a solo hero. This is a group game. It changes the dynamics a fair bit
Depends a lot on the group. Which probably explains the different points of view expressed in this thread.
There are apparently groups which have no problems with an operative in the party as well as some that do have interal conflicts.
If you don't have internal conflict in the group, the operative is fine and fills a niche that no other class does. Namely, keeping up with NPC scaling DCs in skills no one wants to specialize or spend resources on. It doesn't break the game or let a group accomplish something any other class couldn't fundamentally do.
Unlike say a Mystic or Technomancer with spells. Or Mechanic with some the technology item swapping tricks. Or having an expendable drone perform suicidal skill tasks at a long distance.
Going back to the OP's initial point, everyone gets more skill ranks, and there are fewer skills. Being able to have every skill at max rank is isn't worth as much in Starfinder as it is in Pathfinder, when in Starfinder any 4 classes can have every skill at max rank for the party. So what if an Operative has 10 skill ranks + Int. 4 Soldiers or Solarians have 16 + Int x4. There's only 20 skills (ignoring Profession's multiple types). If in a typical party of 4 no matter the class composition you have enough skill points to cover everything, then more is just backup or a +2 here and there from aid another.
Which is partly why I think the developers wrote operative's edge the way they did. A skill focused class needs more than just skill ranks to stand out in the Starfinder system.
Skills aren't the only place you might have party conflict. You can have parties where a single melee character literally does more damage than the rest of the party combined. Solar weapon solarians versus small arm wielding classes springs to mind. Certainly in the level 1-4 range, they can do twice as much damage as an operative with just a single attack.
Which is where house rules come in. If its not working for your group, changing it is a good idea. Its just if not all groups are finding the same problem, that problem may not in some sense be fundamental or universal in the system.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
From class features, the mechanic (with the expert rig) ends up with +1 higher in computers (for hacking) or engineering than an operative. Plus, the exocortex mechanic at lvl 11+ can get further bonuses to hacking. Plus, the mechanic gets the unique ability to hack at a distance which, in my experience is...much more useful than the hacker operative things (except maybe the take 10 option, but even so, hacking at a distance is cooler). This is not even including the +2 bonus from aid another you can get from your exocortex if you are not in a rush.
Both with maximized options end up being around +30 (@ lvl 10), where a challenging DC for that level is supposed to be.... 15 + 1.5*10 = 30. So....
As it turns out, the system doesn't require you to do everything you can to succeed at skill checks. Your distaste for Operatives Edge (which I dislike as well) is made meaningless due to the fact that it really doesn't matter. So what if another player is better or just as good as you at something? Roll the check anyway! You want it, then get it. If you don't want to be caught in a perpetual aid another situation, then just don't aid another. Surprise, there are other ways of playing than the optimum. Just relax, and play the game. So far it hasn't actually been that hard, relish the opportunity to play something that isn't the most powerful X that ever did X.
Oh, and, maybe talk to the other players at the table about you wanting to be the best X that ever did X. Chances are they'll give you the go ahead. This isn't as much a cooperative game as a cooperative experience. Cooperate and have a good experience.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So what if another player is better or just as good as you at something? Roll the check anyway! You want it, then get it. If you don't want to be caught in a perpetual aid another situation, then just don't aid another. Surprise, there are other ways of playing than the optimum. Just relax, and play the game.
This.
The thing I've kind of refrained from mentioning but is kind of important at Starfinder tables I think is: "don't let mania for optimization get out of hand." Personally, I find the mentality that stews in resentment of another character getting to be as good at something as mine... rather on the petty side. And needlessly so.
I mean, I play a Solarian at a table where she's consistently competitive with our Cha-focused Envoy at certain social skills (b/c I built to maximize my key stat and powers). I have never once had to field complaints from that player when I "beat" him at a Bluff or an Intimidate check. Because, why would I? We've both got plenty of other space in the system to expand out and strut our stuff.
Yeah, and here's the thing: I don't believe there's a big market for playing someone who has a bunch of skills but basically sucks at all of them.
The Intelligence-based Operative has all the skills at higher levels than all his party members, save from Charisma-based skills if there is an Envoy. There is a market for that, it's called solo hero. You should build one just to see how you outshine everyone in the skill department once reaching level 12.
Soldiers and operatives get a lot out of their associated stat because it's also their to hit stat.
Your fascination for to hit makes me say you just focus on combat. Only my Mechanic carries a gun. I don't care of to hit unless I play a Soldier, Solarian, Mechanic or Operative. We won't agree because we don't have the same focus when building characters.
I want to play the computers guy. What class should I play?
Mechanic, period. You will hardly get equivalent in Computers than a Mechanic by playing other classes, and most of the time by building your character in a non-classical way. So, the opportunity cost is high, and it should only be done by an experienced player.
If you're looking for a number yes but not if you're looking at pass/fail.
A reroll is ideally equivalent to a +2.5 if you keep the Expertise die and reroll any check below 11 (which means you don't know the result you need to pass).
A reroll is equivalent to a +5 if you know the result you need on the die and that this result is 11 (you max out a reroll efficiency on 50% chance rolls).So, it's nowhere near +8.
We can speak of maths if you want.
If you're in SFSs bag of mixed nuts i don't think 1 or 2 points is going to drastically alter how often you're the lead on a skill check.
If you're 1 or 2 points away from the top, a non focused Operative can get ahead of you. So, 2 points is what makes the difference between being competitive and not being competitive. Between acting and watching. I don't watch my games, I play them. If I play my Mechanic, I'm the Computer and Engineering guy, and I won't accept someone to outshine me in the area.
Both with maximized options end up being around +30 (@ lvl 10), where a challenging DC for that level is supposed to be.... 15 + 1.5*10 = 30. So....
+23 is the best you can get at level 10 (without racial bonuses and theme bonuses, and then it's +26). There is nothing like automatic success in Starfinder.
Also, hard checks are at DC35.So what if another player is better or just as good as you at something? Roll the check anyway!
You can't enter a discussion about classes efficiency saying that it doesn't matter. If it doesn't matter to you, then, ok, but it matters to us (at least a bit).
Your fascination for to hit makes me say you just focus on combat.
Which is ridiculous and shows that you're not listening. You can (and SHOULD) be concerned with more than one thing when you make a character.
My characters tend to go for just below maximum in combat and just below maximum in skills. They're only a LITTLE worse at both.
That's completely incongruous with JUST focusing on combat.
Hit is VERY important. Its a roll you make frequently , its pretty irreplaceable, and hitting or not is very important to your group. Combat is a group activity, everyone being better at it contributes more linearly. Taking that into account when making your character is not just focusing on one thing. Its making a well rounded character that can still function in all aspects of the game.
What I've found is that if you take something like an envoy and focus them on combat you're just a bit below the non melee soldiers in terms of combat effectiveness but miles ahead of them in terms of skill utility. You trade a little and get a lot, because you stop at the point of diminishing returns. Go for the sweet spots on combat and skills , not all in on either.
So in order to make a class that is marginally better than the operative at your own specialty out of combat you had to make a character that is completely useless IN combat? And that doesn't seem like a problem with the class?
And to top it off....
Mechanic, period. You will hardly get equivalent in Computers than a Mechanic by playing other classes, and most of the time by building your character in a non-classical way. So, the opportunity cost is high, and it should only be done by an experienced player.
Why not make a hacker operative? The bonus you think is fine on a mechanic (+9: 4 starting int 1 rank 3 trained +1 bypass) can be had by an int 14 operative with the hacking specilization ( 2 starting int 1 rank 3 trained 3 skill focus) or passed by starting with a 16.
Until 13th level the mechanic basically just has skill focus. Anyone can do that.
And so what if you have to build off model? Envoys don't HAVE to be spoony bards. The spacerogue doesn't have to be han solo. All the mechanic seems to have going for it as the computers guy is the same kind of mystique the chained rogue had of "he's supposed to be the guy doing it"
A reroll is equivalent to a +5 if you know the result you need on the die and that this result is 11 (you max out a reroll efficiency on 50% chance rolls).
I'll take it at a +5 then. High enough that I'm not worried about the operative eating my ysoki's cheese sandwhich.
If you're 1 or 2 points away from the top, a non focused Operative can get ahead of you. So, 2 points is what makes the difference between...
..playing when you have a non focused operative in the party or not if you pick the guy allegedly supposed to be the computer hacker.
You're still back in that situation if a focused operative or a focused envoy shows up. (the later is rarer because the envoy has the same preconceptions around them going the other way as the mechanic has going their way)
If your party is planned, then you don't need to worry about what you're packing nearly as much. The operative just puts their skill points elsewhere once they hit +9 for the assist.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure...you are not wrong that a difficult DC is 20 + 1.5*APL. That is a true statement. So, at level 10, since we're going on about hacking, let's stat this out. Mechanic (Exocortex); 24 Int; 10 ranks; it is a class skill; bypass is at +3; and the expert rig counts as a specialty hacking kit (so +2 circumstance). Right now we're at +25. But there's also an accelerated datajack augmentation, so +2 more circumstance; +27. What if we we're a Lashunta? +2 racial; +29. So now we are having automatic success on 'difficult' checks. But, you know what? A tier 5 computer has a hack DC of 33, so we can't stop yet. What if we chose the roboticist theme? +1 untyped; +30. Well, shoot guess we can't get auto success on a tier 5 computer...But wait! Our exocortex can hack, so why can't it just aid us (or we aid it, doesn't really matter); +32. Looks like tier 5 computers get auto hacked. Also, I believe we stop here as I can't come up with any more bonuses....Oh wait! Is there anyone else in the party trained in Computers, or even better, are we playing SFS, cause the Dataphiles lets you get a Digital Imp that can hack too!
So...the overarching points are these: 1) I'm pretty confident that the Mechanic make the best hacker. 2) If you wanna munchkin it up like you did in Pathfinder, there is definitely the opportunity. 3) Though some of you may have gotten sidetracked, my posts are very much intended for the OP. You are low level, the classes haven't had the chance to get off the ground, nor have you had the opportunity to focus your moneys on what you want to specialize in. 4) Though a mechanic can get this high, if you statted out other classes they could get decently close. That is how this system is made (as you pointed out) and yeah, it allows for some very interesting character build opportunities that aren't isolated to a single class per skill.
You seem to dislike it, but I like how the system lets me look at different classes when I want to build a character concept. Just recently, I have been looking at making a spy. Operative OR Envoy, or maybe even Technomaner or Mystic. I don't have to look at which will have the best numerical bonus (as most can get around the same numbers), I get to look at how I want to achieve the spy through each class's specific options.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
and the expert rig counts as a specialty hacking kit (so +2 circumstance).
I'm trying to find this rule, but all I see is that if you don't have a hacking kit, you take penalties. The custom rig class feature just ensures that a mechanic doesn't randomly get those penalties because he forgot to pick up a 20 credit item.