|
Arcehetypes are by and large absolutely terrible for non soldiers. (although I understand some of the smaller ones work well with technomancers)
The problem is twofold: 1 is that they replace abilities. The other is that starfinder generally has a meh ability you need to pick up as a prerequisite for a really good ability (like get em to improved get em) meaning you're putting picking up that good ability out past levels where starfinder doesn't usually get. They might be balanced out over 20 levels, but for the levels you'll play they are a horrible trade.
The flavor options that you pick up can be gotten another way. Archtetypes don't add flavor. Players do. The only thing an archetype does is mechanically let you meet the flavor. They don't do that very well. If you want to be a steward, poof you're a steward.
|
|
The flavor options that you pick up can be gotten another way. Archtetypes don't add flavor. Players do. The only thing an archetype does is mechanically let you meet the flavor. They don't do that very well. If you want to be a steward, poof you're a steward.
...the counterpoint to that is if you want your flavor to have an in-game effect, it helps to have the archetype when you're petitioning the GM. In one scenario that Hmm ran for me, I was able to get circumstantial bonuses to dealing with the Stewards because my character had the Steward Officer archetype AND a law-enforcement Profession. If I just said, "oh yeah I'm a Steward," without backing it up with a sacrifice, I wouldn't have gotten those considerations.
I'll grant you that this is all nebulous and not hard-and-fast rules, but I think that having the mechanics to back up your flavor is important, when possible.
Another example; he isn't even 2nd level yet, but my Solarian Hellknight Order of the Pike will lose all of his Revelations until level 8, but will get heavy armor, free Demoralize debuffs on attacks, and Reach on his Stellar Weapon... more importantly, he'll be able to legitimately claim status as a Hellknight beyond reproach if it ever comes up in a Society Scenario (already planning a Jadnura replay for a certain library-themed scenario...).
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Right now I have on a character with an archetype and I already made a couple of sub-optimal choices with her (melee mystic... yeah, but I am having fun).
I have toyed with other concepts, but for a lot of classes quite a number of archetypes just eat up too many of my class granted choices.
It really depends on what you want and how relevant the action economy and choices are to you.
|
I feel that if you're not playing a Solider that they are *typically* not ideal for the most part. A lot of the benefits can be replicated with gear or class features elsewhere. As a Soldier it's just bonus feats that you really miss in standard Society Play, anything else and you end up narrowly defining your scaling.
That said, I do enjoy their flavor and my soldier is a Knight of Golarian :D
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My Technomancer is a Starfinder Forerunner. Magic Hack being delayed until Level 5 didn't hurt him; level 5 is when Hacks become fun anyways. That being said, I talked a friend out of Starfinder Forerunner for his Operative because losing three talents probably isn't worth it.
All archetypes *can* be useful, but the combination and trade-off has to be appealing to the right player.
I'll be honest, I keep looking at archetypes for my characters and deciding they just don't suit. For the most part I feel like the archetype abilities just aren't worth the lost abilities for most of my builds. But I'm not against archetypes as a mechanic.
Though I do have a similar situation with multiclassing; I get looked at as weird because most of my characters are multiclass. So I can understand the concern over the reception of a mechanic.
|
The reason I like archetypes is that they give you a chance to do something a little bit different. Like that vehicle repair I did. Or rolling twice while hacking. Or using that spellgem I found without using it up.
Look, I certainly won’t deny that if you’re going for “the most optimized combat character” archetypes are not your friend. Fortunately, the combat math in Starfinder is different than it is in Pathfinder and - at least at this stage in the system lifecycle - there really isn’t much difference between “combat optimized” and “capable combatant.” Which leaves plenty of room to have a character with offbeat abilities that may not turn out to be useful in every scenario, but are absolutely perfect when they come up.
|
|
Oh right, the other part...
Starfinders archetypes apply to all classes paradigm means that you have to balance the archetype for where it's the best trade (the soldier) Which means when you're comparing it to a class where you pretty much give up your entire class ( like the envoy or solarion) it becomes a really bad trade.
|
|
Look, I certainly won’t deny that if you’re going for “the most optimized combat character” archetypes are not your friend.
Stormwind much?
The backhanded insult by implication that people have a problem with archetypes because they're combat focused munchkins isn't any better than doing it outright.
An ability can be powerful, useful, relevant, interesting AND flavorful. It can compliment and work with a class and characters existing abilities and be balanced for what you're giving up. And it should be. If it's not that's a game design problem.
And there is a game design problem. The every archetype is playable by every class paradigm hurts archetypes.
he reason I like archetypes is that they give you a chance to do something a little bit different. Like that vehicle repair I did. Or rolling twice while hacking. Or using that spellgem I found without using it up.
Vehicle repair really should just be an engineering check to play macguyver. It will very likely be a spell at some point. The arcanium sage is one of the better archtypes for spellcasters.
I love imaginative off the wall bizarre builds. I don't want to do 11nty billion points of damage I want to make the dm go "what?" so hard his head explodes. My pathfinder characters have an adorable bundle of fluffy death, a druid that runs at half the monster manual and belly rubs it, and a transmuter who turns the party into a form refered to as "Princess twilight carnage" Even with starfinders limited build options I have a high strength ysoki operative , a high int skill monkey mystic and an envoy gym teacher who fires a zamboni.
But they have to work. A metal axe is useful but boring. A wooden axe is unique but useless. Making some sort of gnomish lever axe? That's hard.
|
|
Look, I certainly won’t deny that if you’re going for “the most optimized combat character” archetypes are not your friend.Stormwind much?
The backhanded insult by implication that people have a problem with archetypes because they're combat focused munchkins isn't any better than doing it outright.
Well, no. It wasn't intended as an insult, and it wasn't a response to any other post. I firmly believe that the abilities you get by taking an archetype are usually not as powerful in combat as what you give up. There is absolutely nothing in that sentence or the rest of the paragraph that says you can't be a roleplayer if you like powerful characters. I said "in Starfinder you can give up the most powerful abilities for less powerful abilities with minimal impact to your combat effectiveness."
An ability can be powerful, useful, relevant, interesting AND flavorful. It can compliment and work with a class and characters existing abilities and be balanced for what you're giving up. And it should be. If it's not that's a game design problem.
And that's where we disagree. I don't think it's a game design problem just because an ability isn't powerful, or isn't always relevant. It's great when it's all those things but it can also be fun while being just one or two of those things. Even leaving aside the old saying that "balance is in the eye of the beholder," I don't believe that it's wrong to be asked to give up an ability for something that is less useful but fills a different design space.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I firmly believe that the abilities you get by taking an archetype are usually not as powerful in combat as what you give up
It's not just about combat. Again, you are straw-manning the objection down to people number crunching combat monstrosities and that is NOT the limit of the complaint.
An envoys ability to add a D6 to diplomacy is not usually a combat ability. But you delay or give it up for an archetype. A mystics spells aren't all combat oriented, again, you give some up to use an archetype. An operative can take the gadgeteeer ability to pull the bat shark repellent out of their..utility belt.
The trade is usually bad even if you're looking for versatility and ability rather than combat power. Its not about combat its about utility isn't a good response if the utility isn't there.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You only delay or give up your skill expertise at level 9,
Missing the point.
The canard that people dislike archetypes for reducing combat effectiveness at the cost of utility and versatility ignores that there are non combat and versatility enhancing options inside the classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To put bluntly what I don't like about archetypes (and this may or may not help the wolf); for many classes you're giving up your customisable options for a locked in sequence of abilities. If those abilities fit the concept better than the options for customising, I'll take it, otherwise I see no reason.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This feels like a very "you love it, you hate it" topic, though I'm inclined to land in the middle with a Marge Simpson response of I think they're neat. They do have their advantages over standard class options, but at the same time and without proper planning they can gimp a character's build. That said, making a character that in entirely unique from the "norm" of standard builds is a feature I'd rather they keep and explore more even if I don't make use of it, and having more options isn't never a bad thing in the early stages of a game's life.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like archetypes could work in theory, but the current ones are just a bit too feeble.
The thing to keep in mind is that archetypes are focused, base classes have broad potential. You should be able to gain some power in special situations by giving up some general power, but not too much. Don't want the rest of the party to be redundant when the story fits your concept, don't want to be useless when your archetype isn't that relevant to the current scenario.
What I want from the archetype design process is that:
1) Someone has a design for a specific archetype ("Cult X member")
2) Comes up with some basic ideas for abilities and levels
3) Tentatively pins them to particular levels
4) Looks at existing classes what abilities you'd be giving up/delaying for those powers
5) Refines the abilities gained to be comparable in power to the things you give up.
Repeat 2-5 until a good balance is found. You can make abilities more powerful or weaker, split them up or consolidate them to influence how many original class abilities you're trading, and shift ability levels to alter which original class abilities you're trading.
A good result should leave the character noticeably strong in stories that play to concept, a bit weak in scenarios that don't play to it at all, and on a fairly even footing in the majority of scenarios where your concept has some traction but isn't the main topic.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
but the benefit of a hacker spec operative is at level 7 they are pretty much guaranteed to identify.
At level 7 you're just about guaranteed to get your sneak attack off anyway.
Steward officer gives both extra face tools like languages
In a campaign with a limited number of languages you could run into and no other alternative but to learn a language the hard way this would be valuable. In a universe where the things you really need to talk to speak a language you can't possibly know, and there are an infinite number of languages, a magical or technological translator becomes mandatory. Once you have that item (spell throwing weapon + gem of share languages, tobgues,universal translator), your number of languages spoken becomes almost irrelevant.
while the demand surrender
relies on an offensive readied action (which you should never take) and only provides a very small bonus. You could do the same thing just delaying until after you're shot and then unloading on him. Or skipping your turn singing meet me at St louis. has the same effect as a ready against 1 person.
|
|
You missed my point. I said identify not trick.
Sorry, thought you were talking about a specific operative combo
often times being able to identify enemies weaknesses strengths and resistances beforehand can help a party develop a proper tactic
Being slightly better at identifying creatures isn't that big of a deal.
Being able to save skill ranks is nice, the problem is that once you dump points into life science they're more or less stuck there when the data jockey ability makes them neigh irrelevant.
Without this ability monster identification still happens. (And probably happens faster. Even a data chip is going to require a non mechanic to sit there looking at his ipad for a round or two)
Other people (and probably the data jockey themselves) still have other skills and can identify creatures without this ability. They're just better at it.
Being able to pool all your bonuses into 1 skill and then use that skill for other skills is neat. But you can't compare that to not being able to identify creatures at all because there are other ways of identifying creatures. The ability only makes you BETTER at it, the question is how much? Yes, a sports car gets me to the store, but if i want a sports car or a jeep I don't compare a sports car to walking i compare it to every other car in the lot.
For the purposes of identifying creatures your skill int mod and training bonuses are usually good enough. For an operative taking ten and the operative bonus and full ranks will always be enough (if its not? Shoot your slowest party member and then Run)
Additionally tactical acumen at level 9 allows me to turn that ridiculous identify into a buff for the whole party. Sure I could probably trick attack against their Dr 4 reduced damage or I can reduce that DR and ER for the whole party.
It's a pretty meh buff in starfinder. Its very easy to use an energy weapon, and more importantly its easier to use different energy weapons. If you have a flame doshko and are fighting Molten Man you just whip out the cryopike instead.
Also just for playing a character who's all about gathering Intel it has a lot of appeal.
Which you can do with a boatload of int and ranks. I don't know why people think that the "ordinary" levels of skill have to be ordinary and flavorless.
the universal translator requires 10 minutes with a willing member of the species.
The device requires 10
minutes of observed conversation to gain enough informationto operate. The device then acts as a rudimentary translator
Or sneaking into their camp and leaving it duct taped under the aliens dinner table and getting it in the morning. (or with desert if you have a really good stealth score)
Or steal their cable and let the translator watch sesame street.
Share language again requires the target to be willing
It doesn't. Whaping someone with a glowing hand gives them a save to avoid it (and probably isn't the best way to start off first contact) but it works if they miss the save. My space shaman has literally slapped some sense into many a reluctant alien that way, mid combat.
and when encountering random species they may not be willing to let the strange alien creature touch them for one reason they can't understand.granted knowing known languages isn't going to help with that either but neither will your solutions if the alien species you are encountering doesn't trust you.
Tongues is high level but works (you cast it on your envoy, he explains the situation to the locals. if he can't convince them to take a share language spell ya'll are probably hosed anyway) Yes, my mystic has it.
You can usually diplomacy the aliens into taking a share language
(I use an N +1 mechanic. My star shaman starts off with a handshake to a party member. Then he casts token spell and shakes the party members hand again. Then puts his hand out to the alien and hopefully shakes their hand, then casts share language and puts his hand out again)
And sometimes they can cast it. Magic is a known quantity in the starfinder universe and some of them can recognize the spell if not cast it themselves.
ALL of those options failing is... pretty unlikely. The aliens speaking that one extra language you just happened to pick up... far far less likely.
Being able to use diplomacy to demoralize as well means that that's two more skills that you don't necessarily have to spend skill points on.
Given SFSs ad hoc skill checks the party face skipping on a social skill seems like a bad idea. Those skills do other things besides demoralize.
|
|
you get that ability at level 2. In society You can rebuild your skill points out of those knowledge skills at level 2 when you pick up the archetype. Even if you don't, sense says that if you're going to be using computers from now on, why put more ranks in it. So you should be wasting few, if any, skill ranks.
At 8th, 14th, and 20th levels, you can select an additional skill to use with this ability.
That's wasting a bunch of skill ranks or it's burning a good chunk of your career where you can't do those skills.
All armor's have a personal communicator built in
Now that's a really good argument for it happening as fast as any other Identification.
Second, it's a vast improvement. It's not a sports car vs a jeep. It's the batmobile vs a wagon. At...
So there's no room for a passenger or groceries and nowhere to attach a babyseat...
At level 7 my Data Jockey could guarantee identify ANY regular creature cr 14 or less.
How useful is that really? Is that something you need to regularly do?
It's overkill. You can ask about vulnerability and DR. Those are really all your character can actively change. You can ask about the special attack but your chances of being able to do much about it are pretty slim. "Don't let it grab you..." doesn't help much because there's no active ability you can take. Your melee characters aren't going to forgo attacking it with their secondary fighting style (which probably wouldn't help anyway)
There's diminishing returns on the information you get.
I'm confused, are you talking about trick attack again?
No, I was making a joke about what to do if your level 7 runs into a CR 14 critter. (shoot the slowest party member and run)
It's like saying your ruler is accurate to the nanometer. It's NICE but.. how often is that relevant?
|
|
I'm an operative, I've got skills to burn.
As a quick side note/public service announcement every character should have 1 rank in mysticism just so they can move their own weapon fusions around
"Spread out, it has AOEs"
"It has reach, don't shoot from there."
"Don't waste your invis spell, it has natural see invisibility."
"Don't get too close, it has an aura of confusion."
So how often is that going to be relevant?
1) the creature has something more complicated than its a robot get your zappy weapon
2) the ability is something you can do something about (the point of fireball is everything is fireball formation)
3) No one in your party makes the same check
4) and this is a biggie, the die roll is such that your goatee wearing alternative mirror universe you-without-the-archtype would miss the check but the you with the archetype would make it. Starfinder characters (especially operatives) have skill ranks to spare. The problem is getting another bonus on top of that to really be relevant with a skill (a problem the operative natively solves). How much of a discrepancy are you planning between your computer skill and your other skills that this matters?
Now what does that cost?
You lose your second AND 6th level exploits... and operative exploits are awesome. They're not as dependant on version/improved version as envoys but but there are still a number of prerequisites or awesome combos (like innoculation+stalwart) You also lose a d8 sneak attack which kinda hurts. But its not a unique ability like the exploits are.
You technically get system Guru, but this looks like a non ability. How often are you hacking a computer half your level and missing?
Tactical advantage would almost always be a waste to use, it would almost always be better to yell out "use a non fire weapon on the fire elemental" and just trick attack for a bigger hit bonus.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that given this conversation seems to pertain heavily to "Hacker Specialization Operatives", it might be useful for me to interceede with my reasonings(being one such person) for not taking the "Data Jockey" Archetype. I will preface with the admission that the flavour of the archetype does match who I was, and to some extent who I still am. However, lets get down to business:
My skill ranks. While not something one should advertise, It does appear pertenent to this conversation:
Athletics 6
Bluff 1
Computers 8
Culture 8
Diplomacy* 0
Disguise 0
Engineering 8
Intimidate 2
Life Science 8
Medicine 8
Mysticism 8
Perception 8
Physical Science 8
Piloting 8
Profession(Professor) 8
Sense Motive 8
Sleight of Hand 2
Stealth 4
Survival 4
Diplomacy is marked with a * as it is my only non-class skill.
Now, the class abilities:
Like Lone Wolf(an ability I regret getting and have since changed to 'Celebrity' through use of a boon), this ability means that I would treat a list of skills as possessing half my ranks in computers. Given the fact that I have skill points to spare, this was never a problem as I can have full ranks in the listed skills. All other benefits of this ability can be bought with the "Library Chip" item from the same book(which I highly recommend, the ability to take 20 during mission briefings is exceptionally useful)
Instead, I took "Holographic Clones", which has proven to be an excellent defensive ability.
Reroll when trying certain Computers checks on computers of Half my tier or less.
Without putting any effort into improving my skill with computers beyond what my class progression has given me, right now I automatically succeed at these checks. I will need to look into some slight boosts later but it's nothing money can't buy.
Instead, I took "Uncanny Mobility", which increases my field mobility and has also proven to be excellent defensively.
Possibly the best ability of the lot; Make a skill check with half your computers ranks/ The pertinent Identify skill in order to gain +1 atk(meh) and the ability to bypass some DR and energy resistance.
A note must be made however that you cannot take 10 on this check, ever. so even if you bought Skill Focus(Life Science) in order to always take 10 with it, that does not count here. You are using half your computers ranks(if you didn't want to "waste" skill points) in order to make an identify check.
Consider a reasonable example: L10 vs CR 13. L10 your modifier is 5(half comp ranks) + 5(being generous for Int) + 7(class + Edge) = +17. DC is 28, meaning you need to roll an 11. If you had full ranks, you'd only need to roll a 6. In neither case can you take 10, so it's not 'automatic'.
Even if you do feel this skill check is worth it, you do realise what you're giving up right? You're giving up 1d8 trick attack for ~+5 damage. Just take "Bleeding Trick" and impose that damage constantly(and scaling) without any risk of failure.
Congratulations, you hobbled this far on half skill points in the selected skills, so at least one of your allies has taken advantage and boosted the skill, and now you are standing beside or just below their work. This ability is part of why Fast Retrieval is terrible, it actively encourages you to put 0 ranks in the skill in the long run, as when you get it those skill points are not refunded.
In all, The only ability this archetype would give me that I can't get from an item, feat, or boon(yet) is "Tactical Analysis", and it isn't as good as it looks on the surface.
The non archetype version would not be nearly as good at identifying things with life science, and doing so with Mysticism would be a near impossibility.
Atlas-1's Computers, Life Science, Mysticism, Engineering, Medicine, and Physical Science mods are all +19. It is possible for non archetype to do it just as well.(Though this is due to multiclassing to make them class skills, but the "skill synergy" feat would do the same thing)
Besides I'm past the point where a mnemonic editor would allow me to undo the archetype. So there isn't much value in trying to convince me I made a bad decision. I'd rather think about ways that I can continue to push my vision for this character, that I'll enjoy and the people I play with will appreciate going forward. It's okay if he's not perfect.
Not trying to convince you to rebuild or anything. Just explaining why it doesn't necessarily suit all Hacker Operatives. I apologize if it came across that way.(as a note, I'm past the point where the editor would help. There is one change I wish I could make but sadly cannot because he's level 8 and the decision was at level 2 xD)
I'd be willing to help pick out a feat, but it's really based on the whole build that you have.
|
|
Also, I was responding specifically to bnw's hypothetical "overwatch without the archetype."
At his current level he has two ranks in life science, and none in Mysticism. With the library chips he has a 15 to identify using life science, with help from Alien Archive. So without Fast Retrieval his knowledge options are limited.
But without the archetype I don't think you'd avoid putting ranks into the skill and your bonus would be higher. How much higher is your computer skill than a maxed out life science or even mysticism your goateed twin would have? Is that difference and the extra skill points really worth the two best operative abilities you could pick for your character?
I don't mean to dunk on your character but the abilities in the archetype seem to have been weirdly limited and constrained in order to tone down the power without seeming to take into account their opportunity cost to either take or use for non soldiers.