|
I have just started playing starfinder in society play and I was wondering if you could use the option in the core rulebook to start with lower stats than normal. I know there is no benefit to doing so but I just wanted to see if it was an option. I can't find anything in the guide or FAQ that prevents this.
Anything I am overlooking or can you play 9 in all stats man?
|
|
Don't think so. But you can play your character as much dumber than their int score says.
Ok do you have page numbers or a link to a dev post I am missing?
I know it seems obvious but I can't find anything telling you not to do it and it is an option in the core rulebook.The guide says
Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild characters buy their ability scores as detailed on page 18 of the Starfinder Core Rulebook. Starfinder Roleplaying Guild characters must use the Buying
Ability Scores rules and should never use the optional methods of Ability Quick Picks or Rolling Ability Scores.
The core rulebook has this section
Optional Rule: Character Flaws The buying ability scores method makes sure that your character is always at least close to average—your race might push you slightly below the average of 10, but you won’t be severely hampered. Sometimes, however, it’s fun to play a character with a major flaw. If you want to reduce any ability scores for your character below what this system would normally allow, that’s fine—playing a brutish soldier with an Intelligence of 5 or a noodle-armed technomancer with a Strength of 4 could allow for some fun roleplaying opportunities—but you don’t get to reassign those lost ability points elsewhere. Beware making your scores so low that your character can’t keep up with the rest of the party!
So it is clearly optional but it isn't banned, unlike the other character creation options, in the guide. The guide says to use the core rulebook and the core rulebook says it's fine. I can't find anything in the faq that disallows it.
So if a player rolled up to your table with a 1 in every stat is that a legal character?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guide page 21
Starfnder Society Roleplaying Guild characters buy their ability
scores as detailed on page 18 of the Starfnder Core Rulebook.
Starfnder Roleplaying Guild characters must use the Buying Ability Scores rules and should never use the optional methods of
Ability Quick Picks or Rolling Ability Scores
The flaws are optional rules on a different page so not allowed.
Contributor
|
Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild characters buy their ability scores as detailed on page 18 of the Starfinder Core Rulebook. Starfinder Roleplaying Guild characters must use the Buying Ability Scores rules and should never use the optional methods of Ability Quick Picks or Rolling Ability Scores.
Emphasis mine.
The "Character Flaws" optional rule is a subset of the "Buying Ability Scores" header that begins on page 18 in the Starfinder Core Rulebook, and thus, by the wording of the current version of the Starfinder Society RPG Guide, is legal for play.
The "optional methods" listed in the RPG Guide begin after flaws are discussed.
Note, however, that character flaws also come with a warning:
Beware making your scores so low that your character can’t keep up with the rest of the party!
Speaking as a GM, if a player came to one of my tables with all of their ability scores at 1, I'm not sure I'd let them play, since that character would not be able to reasonably contribute in a positive way to a scenario. That said, if someone wanted a human character to have a bit of, well, character by having a slight deficiency by dropping an ability score down to a 9 or 8, I'd be totally fine with that.
Starfinder Society Developer
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Generally, the logic behind not allowing PCs to intentionally "tank stats" relates to how we, as the Organized Play Team, want to avoid meta-concerns at the table. Specifically, when a player shows up with an intentionally suboptimal character, then that has the potential to lead to player disputes and create awkward social conditions at the table. Similarly, there are players who've sometimes attempted to use intentionally lowered stats to play offensive and/or stereotypical types of characters that we really don't want to see in our campaign or be used to represent our game.
As with all things, what you do in a home game is up to you and your friends. Organized Play needs to be cognizant that we're presenting the game in a manner that can and should be approachable from the outside.
Hope that sheds some light on these decisions!
|
|
I think there are some excellent role-playing reasons to have sub-optimal ability scores. My Stephen Hawking homage character has been very useful in SFS play even if his Dex is intentionally a 1.
There’s no point in trying to dev micro-manage intentional weakness. I might have a level 9 PC who only uses level non-powered archaic gear, a techno-mancer who only uses oddball non-combat spells, or someone who has multi-classed every class in the book from levels 1-7 (soon levels 1-10!).
The super-optimizers will always far outweigh the occasional intentional under-optimizers at any given table, so please let us have our creativity and fun
|
Contributor
|
While I may personally agree with Gary and Jhaeman, it's a moot point now that Thurston has made a ruling on the ambiguous language. We can just hope that future iterations of the RPG Guild Guide will clear it up so the question doesn't come back around again in the future.
And if it does, we'll just have to point people back to this thread :)
|
|
Was it an “official ruling”? It seemed like more like continued discussion. I’d be bummed if a PC I’ve got up to level 5 and applied several Chronicles to is destroyed in an off-hand comment.
If it was an official ruling (Thurston had the right hat on), it raises that thing we’ve been saying for a few years now: we [i]really[\i] need a better system to capture official PFS/SFS decisions than random forum posts that will soon get buried.
|
|
Could I suggest an alternative: leave it to Venture-Lieutenant discretion to declare a character unplayable for not sufficiently contributing to the group? (after complaints, I guess?)
I just think if we’re embracing diversity, allowing for PCs with a sub-10 ability score to represent a physical or mental impairment is a part of that.
|
Starfinder Society Developer
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am seeing about clearing up the language in the guide with the impending update to remove the option for character flaws, as yes, it is unclear. I've spoken with the team about this, and we all recognize that lowering stats is not something we want to be available in Organized Play. The potential for abuse is very high, especially when it comes as a threat of people using those lowered stats as justification for acting inappropriately at a table or stereotyping real-world conditions that could lead to other players feeling uncomfortable.
This is also not something we're comfortable with allowing being a regional/Venture-Officer choice, as it has the potential for problems if those characters go to other regions. As with all Organized Play rulings, this obviously doesn't apply to your home non-Organized Play games, so feel free to use those character concepts there!
Apologies for any potential character rebuilds that need to come of this, but it's something the team feels passionately about.
(And yes, I certainly recognize the issue of how rulings come through in forum posts. We're looking into other ways of handling this, but if my time with fans at conventions and online over the past two years has taught me anything: fans much prefer to have _something_ to point to, rather than silence!)
-Thursty
Starfinder Society Developer
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
I'm not sure what's the differencet between having a character with dex 1 in a wheelchair, and dex 8 (or 10) (or even 11) in a wheelchair. You don't have to roll those dex based skills if you don't want to, You'll get hit less in combat but maybe that's just because of the wheelchair taking the hits, and if you need to roll ref save, you can just willingly fail it, I think. At least willingly failing saves was a thing in PF, but can't remember off the top of my head if that exists in SF as well. You can still continue playing a dude in a wheelchair who's nearly immobile, even though your stat sheet doesn't accurately reflect nearly total paralysis.
And if, for some reason, a situation arises where playing such a character would be highly inappropriate, you can either switch characters, or just forget about the wheelchair for the duration of a scenario.
Adding a "0" to after the "1" in your dex score shouldn't, hopefully, prevent you from roleplaying the character in the way you want, most of the time.
|
If it was an official ruling (Thurston had the right hat on), it raises that thing we’ve been saying for a few years now: we really need a better system to capture official PFS/SFS decisions than random forum posts that will soon get buried.
Speaking as the former creator of the PFS Campaign Clarifications document, I've mentioned to Thurston about doing something similar for SFS, but in a delightfully different way.
Probably won't be up until after Guide 2.0 is released, tho.
|
|
May I then suggest the equitable remedy of grandfathering in PCs made before this new ruling? I think many of us made these PCs in good faith.
I don't think this a new ruling. This is just a clarification of the guide. BigNorseWolf said it at the start what I was missing.
"Guide page 21
Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild characters buy their ability
scores as detailed on page 18 of the Starfinder Core Rulebook.
Starfinder Roleplaying Guild characters must use the Buying Ability Scores rules and should never use the optional methods of
Ability Quick Picks or Rolling Ability Scores
The flaws are optional rules on a different page so not allowed."
The rules for lowering scores are on page 19. Therefore not allowed. But since unlike other games you didn't get anything from this it seems like the simplest fix would be to change your stats. I don't think any dm would turn your character away for an honest mistake so it should be fine.
|
|
I think I’m most annoyed because there’s this sudden, swift action to ban something on the basis of one post’s hypothetical question, with no evidence whatsoever of an actual problem. Of the million ways to play a sub-optimal character, this one gets banned without time for broader discussion. I can’t play Stephen Hawking if his Dex is better than a PC with a racial penalty to Dex—it’s absurd. The goal is to have legitimately disabled characters still contribute. Would the Society kick him out? Apparently.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Finland—Turku
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're mixing up banning a character and banning a mechanic. Your character isn't banned, the statline just needs to conform to the rules of the game.
Likewise, if you wanted to play an obese human character, you could describe them as being big and heavy, but you couldn't have them take up 4 squares even if you wanted to, because large sized humans aren't allowed by the rules. This doesn't mean that obese characters are banned - it just means that the mechanic you want to use to represent them just isn't available for character creation.
There's no sudden, swift action to ban anything. The language in the guide might have been clearer, but as a general rule of thumb, no optional rules are ever legal unless specifically mentioned in the guide or AR.
Further, please don't mix up mechanics (PC character creation rules) and IG world together - that's absurd. That's like saying that society doesn't allow races other than android, human, kasatha, lashunta, shirren, vesk or ysoki - simply because those are the only races available for character creation - The society probably has a wide variety of other races as well.
Your character isn't banned, society didn't kick him out, he can still contribute, you're just using mechanics which are not available for PC's in the SFS.