Keep in mind, a "CR 1/2 civilian" is still a CR 1/2 character. They are low level, sure, but CR 1/2 NPCs include quite a few low level criminals, conscript grunts, and such. They may be weaker than a Level 1 PC, but they aren't helpless; if they were, they wouldn't be CR 1/2, they'd be even lower. And the system does not distinguish between a CR 1/2 "combatant" vs "civilian". CR 1/2 is CR 1/2, if the character is a 'civilian', they still have enough awareness and courage to be a challenging opponent at the CR 1/2 level.I mean a round's worth of damage from a 1st level pistol is 2d6 against a CR 1/2 civilian's 10hp. It doesn't really need more than that, tbh.I always kinda thought that low level Starfinder weapons were such garbage as a sort of stealth gun control initiative. Like, a tactical semi-auto pistol does 1d6 damage, which can theoretically kill a CR 1/3 goblin in one shot if and only if it rolls max damage.I justify it as everyone is wearing armor all the time. That 1d6 is the damage you take after much of the force is absorbed by your protective gear. Otherwise low level weapons are the equivalent of bb guns and "frag grenades" are firecrackers.
I get what you mean, and a civilian that is helpless (not mechanically) probably wouldn't even have statistics. I mainly said civilian just to give the example NPC a generic identity.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This has been known for ages and it's a lost battle at this point. Everyone has issues with the economy, both for character progression and Starship progression (that has been revamped, but only tweaked numbers, not the actual problem of dealing with abstract gamey points that rub some people off).Did anybody mention how prices of Starfinder don't make gameplay sense?
"Everyone"? That seems a little presumptuous. Everyone is certainly aware that there are people with issues with it. That is not the same as everyone *agreeing* that there are actual issues with the economy, or that these issues rise above the trivial level.
Note: I consider them largely trivial not because they are insignificant and minuscule. . . but because any issues or problems with a system only exists in comparison with other alternatives. *All* systems are flawed, the question is whether the particular flaws in a system are worth it compared to other, different flaws. And I've yet to see a convincing case presented for why the flaws in the Starfinder economy are intolerable, that doesn't boil down to some variation on "I want the entire system to have been rebuilt from the ground up with completely different, incompatible design axioms". Or, as I like to summarize: if you want to play GURPS Space, why aren't you playing GURPS Space?
Of all the things I've seen in this forum being discussed, Envoys, Starship Combat and the whole economy (Build Points included) have always popped up in some form or other. There's been people trying to homebrew new systems, trying to find credit equivalencies to BPs, discussing and complaining about the gear treadmill, etc. They've been staple.
If it's lack of argument, I'll give you one: The current system completely disregards one of the best aspects of sci-fi and sci-fantasy in general, which is world-building, from top to bottom its economy doesn't make any sense and there's no apparent benefit that compensates for that, there's a lot of redundant weapons, very few meaningful traits that significantly alter a weapon in play. The system is built so that players have to recycle their items at every level they can, with very little money being left for anything else, specially because gadgets, implants, etc, are also built on the same treadmill, so resources end up being scarce and if you're not upgrading your AC as the system expects (just a roundabout way of saying demands), you're probably risking your character's life (I don't know if this still holds true with the introduction of shields or newer options and monsters, but this was very much so earlier in the system).
Also, having character progression mainly tied to items has always been a problematic way of progressing, regardless of legacy, it simply makes so that the characters are just lucky people with tons of money, rather than more effective and deadlier with experience. This is true, because at higher levels the majority of your damage will come from the extra damage die from the weapons, Specialization Damage does alleviate that but a system akin to Automatic Bonus Progression (PF1e and PF2e) is much better and solve a lot of mechanical problems and issues with world-building, since there's no need for a 5d4 pistol be dealing more damage than a 1d12 grenade launcher (but having a skilled character with a Pistol dealing more damage than a less skilled character, makes more sense even if the extra dice would've been also a gamey abstraction to showcase prowess).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meh, it's 3.5 with enough tweaks to still feel like 3.5.
Pathfinder 2 feels more like its own thing.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The current system completely disregards one of the best aspects of sci-fi and sci-fantasy in general, which is world-building, from top to bottom its economy doesn't make any sense and there's no apparent benefit that compensates for that, there's a lot of redundant weapons, very few meaningful traits that significantly alter a weapon in play.
I'm going to go ahead and say that I disagree here.
The thing that I absolutely adore about starfinder is it's worldbuilding.
That said, I am not blind to the problems that starfinder's worldbuilding has in terms of verisimilitude, I just don't find those to be deal breakers. The rope I use to suspend my disbelief is strong.
|
I'd like to point out that item level doesn't actually restrict purchases per say, despite what it says about typically item level +1 or +2.
The thing with wealth system of starfinder is that you wouldn't have money to buy those items anyway, but item level also works as abstraction for permits and licenses and such rather than simulating them. However you don't need permit to buy boardgames so as long you have money you can do so at level 1 (but you won't because item levels are how the price scales :p)
Though yeah if you go by 100% rules as literally written, then you could argue that starfinder says you need permits to buy high level board games :p
I'd like to point out that item level doesn't actually restrict purchases per say, despite what it says about typically item level +1 or +2.
The thing with wealth system of starfinder is that you wouldn't have money to buy those items anyway, but item level also works as abstraction for permits and licenses and such rather than simulating them. However you don't need permit to buy boardgames so as long you have money you can do so at level 1 (but you won't because item levels are how the price scales :p)
Though yeah if you go by 100% rules as literally written, then you could argue that starfinder says you need permits to buy high level board games :p
A world where Mothers Against Dungeons and Dragons gained a foothold?
The current system completely disregards one of the best aspects of sci-fi and sci-fantasy in general, which is world-building, from top to bottom its economy doesn't make any sense and there's no apparent benefit that compensates for that, there's a lot of redundant weapons, very few meaningful traits that significantly alter a weapon in play.I'm going to go ahead and say that I disagree here.
The thing that I absolutely adore about starfinder is it's worldbuilding.
That said, I am not blind to the problems that starfinder's worldbuilding has in terms of verisimilitude, I just don't find those to be deal breakers. The rope I use to suspend my disbelief is strong.
Yeah, I do like Starfinder's world as well, but I think that a world could be vastly enriched by adding some more details and verisimilitude in some aspects. The worlds, factions and some of the lore just fills you with ideas of how to come up with interesting characters and adventures, but some details could've been more expanded. I've always been fascinated with well built worlds that can incorporate their ideas on the setting itself and the impact in the world that certain things would have.
But the item economy and built points, on the other hand, are two huge elephants in the room. It's kinda hard to ignore when you don't need even a surface level scrutiny to realize its ramifications, or lack thereof, in the world. Things would, in my opinion at least, be so much better if the power was in the characters and not the weapons, making it with a system akin to Automatic bonus Progression (Look it up if you don't know what it is), that would preclude the need to change gear as frequently. The better items could've been gated behind permits and contacts, like some here mentioned, thus making less items that mattered more, kinda like augments are, earlier ones are quite "simple" while high level stuff allows someone to do amazing things. Alas, this is just the opinion of someone that ever since realized that RPG systems forced players to buy their treadmill items has been advocating for bonuses being built into characters so choices matter during play, actual choices not the illusions that base Pathfinder 1e/2e and Starfinder offer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rather than meticulously track every arms dealer, contact, guild, and license a character has access to, the game assumes that in typical settlements you can find and purchase anything with an item level no greater than your character level + 1, and at major settlements items up to your character level + 2. The GM can restrict access to some items (even those of an appropriate level) or make items of a higher level available for purchase (possibly at a greatly increased price or in return for a favor done for the seller).
PCs/NPCs can buy higher level items than recommended at the GMs discretion. So yeah, NPCs can buy trucks and shop keepers can own and sell items much higher level than themselves.
Restricting higher level items is just a guideline for PCs, not a strict mechanic for your entire game.
|
Item level also helps convey the fact that buying equipment is more involved than just placing an order. Even finding the items you desire isn’t always easy, and those who have access to things such as powerful weapons and armor tend to deal only with people they trust. Legitimate vendors don’t want to get reputations for selling hardware to pirates or criminals, and even criminal networks must be careful with whom they do business.
So normal shops carry items of level 1-2, in a big city they carry items level 1-3. If you want something higher level than that, it takes contacts. Levels aren't just about licencing. A level 10 item could be a rare out of print toy, or a painting by a famous long dead artist.
The Wild West really was a thing. Space Western was a thriving genre even before humans went into space.
Starfinder is D&D/Pathfinder in Space. Even a "civilized" place is going to have alien predators in the air vents, cyber-zombie outbreaks, etc. When the environment really is dangerous, carrying weapons makes sense.
Unlike some settings (and the real world), in Starfinder, a single hit from a pistol is unlikely to drop a foe. Also, armor is much more effective in Starfinder than in other settings. So heavier weapons and armor will naturally be more common.
If the GM wants to have a place where the PCs shouldn't start fights, all that should be needed is to make it clear that they will gain infamy for doing so.
I freaking wish that Starfinder borrowed a lot more from Firefly. Alas, there's no actual support for the "Wild West" at all, aside from the Diaspora. Everywhere else you see functioning societies in an way or another, every planet has their structure, while something like Cowboy Bebop or Firefly (two of the freshest, and best, examples in my mind) would have lack of law enforcement, broken down societies and a much deeper lore tied to this situation, which Starfinder most definitely doesn't have (unless you homebrew it in). We have The Stewards, acting throughout the whole galaxy and each planet is basically a willing participant of the central government.
There are no clear disparity between them, nor any stated reason why there would be the need for random adventurers. Hell, even adventuring is institutionalized with the Starfinder Society, which can be far more prominent than its pure fantasy counterpart because of technological advancements.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean keep in mind that the Gap happened, which robbed a fair amount of time from memory and caused confusion in the solar system.
Also, until recently the threat of the Vesk was a big problem, and now there's the even more external threat of the Swarm and the Azlanti Star empire.
And before all of that you had the undead of Eox being pretty menacing to the solar system.
And bear in mind that the Pact world government is a lot like the UN...which is to say not particularly effective and really only gets involved in dealing with existential threats, e.g. a pact worlds member being attacked ( by external forces or even by another member).
The do not get involved with the day to day governing of individual planets and all planets still have their own independent governments.
The only significant actions I know the pact world government to have taken are recognizing the personhood of intelligent undead and of androids.
In the diaspora or potentially many space stations sitting in the solar system there is no government really to enforce rules. The stewards exist, but from what I understand are too few to actually handle matters like a proper police force where it counts and are probably more generally looking for governments that aren't enforcing the agreed upon pact world laws.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With Aucturn as your neighbor, you'd want to walk around armed to the teeth.
If the setting bothers you too much, rewrite the Starfinder Society to be about exploring the rest of space outside the solar system, which little is known about. And those are your adventurers. Governments don't go there because they've already got enough to handle.
People have started to move there to get away from governments they don't like. Be the outlaws looking to escape or people who simply want to get away from civilization.
It takes very little imagination to turn Starfinder into a wild west in space, the only part that I will grant makes less sense if having a wild west setting in the cities of major planets.
No, that is exactly the problem. That the only playstyle supported in SF is dungeon crawl far away from the pact worlds. Because the setting itself is "look, don't touch" because of how little sense it makes and won't survive people playing in it.
I remember commenting on this in another thread, think it was "how to make SF grittier." So... forgive me if this is repetitive.
I share similar sentiments on the SF setting. The way I reconcile it, I read the vanilla text as propaganda, exaggerated idealism, and halcyon-tinted retrospect. It's brochure fodder obscuring a tense, dilapidated, and duplicitous reality governed by jealous, paranoid, and divisive powers whose bickering, saber-rattling, and skirmishing keeps piracy and mercenary adventurism alive.
With Aucturn as your neighbor, you'd want to walk around armed to the teeth.Don't forget that "neighbor" means 1 week distance and that we are talking about planets, so even when something comes to the planet you live on you have a tiny chance to actually meet it and armed forces will contain it anyway before it becomes a threat.
No, that is exactly the problem. That the only playstyle supported in SF is dungeon crawl far away from the pact worlds. Because the setting itself is "look, don't touch" because of how little sense it makes and won't survive people playing in it.If the setting bothers you too much, rewrite the Starfinder Society to be about exploring the rest of space outside the solar system, which little is known about. And those are your adventurers. Governments don't go there because they've already got enough to handle.
People have started to move there to get away from governments they don't like. Be the outlaws looking to escape or people who simply want to get away from civilization.
It takes very little imagination to turn Starfinder into a wild west in space, the only part that I will grant makes less sense if having a wild west setting in the cities of major planets.
I disagree. There's plenty of space on every planet where it's not entirely civilized and not monitored by the police, and not in range for police to respond quickly.
And that's really all you need for an adventure to take place.
My previous suggestion was basically to say that if that absence of government isn't enough to satisfy your ideal of how an adventure can happen, then go outside of the pact worlds.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
With Aucturn as your neighbor, you'd want to walk around armed to the teeth.Don't forget that "neighbor" means 1 week distance and that we are talking about planets, so even when something comes to the planet you live on you have a tiny chance to actually meet it and armed forces will contain it anyway before it becomes a threat.
No, that is exactly the problem. That the only playstyle supported in SF is dungeon crawl far away from the pact worlds. Because the setting itself is "look, don't touch" because of how little sense it makes and won't survive people playing in it.If the setting bothers you too much, rewrite the Starfinder Society to be about exploring the rest of space outside the solar system, which little is known about. And those are your adventurers. Governments don't go there because they've already got enough to handle.
People have started to move there to get away from governments they don't like. Be the outlaws looking to escape or people who simply want to get away from civilization.
It takes very little imagination to turn Starfinder into a wild west in space, the only part that I will grant makes less sense if having a wild west setting in the cities of major planets.
It survives playing in it just fine. The PCs, random civilians, and shopkeeps all are wearing various kinds of armor, and they all have a sidearm at least. Violence doesn't break out often in civilized areas despite this.
When it does, the random civilians have enough defenses to vacate the area quickly without dying.
The only unrealistic part is that when the police do show up, there isn't a couple months of downtime/house arrest so everyone who survived the shootout can appear in a court of some sort that figures out who is at fault if anyone. That bit of unrealism is perfectly acceptable to me. I have no problems handwaving that bit to keep the game going.
If you want to roleplay a court appearance do so, but that sounds like a stupendously boring game.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only unrealistic part is that when the police do show up, there isn't a couple months of downtime/house arrest so everyone who survived the shootout can appear in a court of some sort that figures out who is at fault if anyone. That bit of unrealism is perfectly acceptable to me. I have no problems handwaving that bit to keep the game going.
If you want to roleplay a court appearance do so, but that sounds...
I agree that the only part of the game that really bothers me is that the police are totally okay with a random group of Starfinders policing their town.
I'm playing Dawn of Flame currently, and when the plot line started off as "you're scientist, or helping scientist and you end up in a fire fight, followed by you kinda joining the Starfinder, and then they want you to figure out why this thing just disappeared into the sun..."
My thought was....why are they asking us to do this? We (from our characters perspective) barely know each other. My character is a graduate student from one of the universities in the Burning Archipelago. Frankly, the character is really responsible enough to be trusted with anything this important, but...I'm rolling with it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My thought was....why are they asking us to do this? We (from our characters perspective) barely know each other. My character is a graduate student from one of the universities in the Burning Archipelago. Frankly, the character is really responsible enough to be trusted with anything this important, but...I'm rolling with it.
Because the universe is a big place. No. BIGGER....
While the stewards are having you look into that thing disappearing into the sun, they've also got a gang fight on the docks, 478 gang fights in the pipes, reports of drug price fixing, a baby kaiju floating in from deep space with the People for the ethical treatment of aliens around it as a humanoid shield, a missing ysoki family , a derelict space ship, and an unknown alien ambasador outside the window banging to be let in right now turning people...either from lack of oxygen , anger, embarrassment, or as a mating display who the heck knows.
So if some random person can be convinced to spend a week traveling to and looking at one of those things for a 15 minute mission briefing, coffee, doughnuts instead of sending a trained agent spending 2 weeks of travel? Oh hell to the yes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't forget that "neighbor" means 1 week distance and that we are talking about planets, so even when something comes to the planet you live on you have a tiny chance to actually meet it and armed forces will contain it anyway before it becomes a threat.
I guess in Starfinder most civilized people prefer to defend themselves instead of counting on government forces. I don't think even the Azlanti forbid their second class citizens of owning guns.
And Aucturn is just the most glaring example, danger is actually present everywhere, coming from any direction, just a drift travel away, all the time, nonstop. If the little law there is allows you to pack as much weapons as you can afford, why not?
With magic being abundant and monsters roaming around, common sense has to adapt.
----
Looks like this mechanics thread devolved into a fluff discussion.
Its also home to trillions of people. Meaning that unless the stewards and every other organisation is criminally underfunded it is very likely that there is someone available who has actual authority to look into investigate things instead of telling random people to go somewhere and shoot things up with the authorities not reacting at all for no reason besides "its a game, don't think about it".
To be fair, that's more an adventure writing problem than a problem because of the setting.
Its also home to trillions of people. Meaning that unless the stewards and every other organisation is criminally underfunded it is very likely that there is someone available who has actual authority to look into investigate things instead of telling random people to go somewhere and shoot things up with the authorities not reacting at all for no reason besides "its a game, don't think about it".
Doesn't matter how many people you stuff into it, the people per square mile has definitely dropped.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My thought was....why are they asking us to do this? We (from our characters perspective) barely know each other. My character is a graduate student from one of the universities in the Burning Archipelago. Frankly, the character is really responsible enough to be trusted with anything this important, but...I'm rolling with it.
Because the universe is a big place. No. BIGGER....
While the stewards are having you look into that thing disappearing into the sun, they've also got a gang fight on the docks, 478 gang fights in the pipes, reports of drug price fixing, a baby kaiju floating in from deep space with the People for the ethical treatment of aliens around it as a humanoid shield, a missing ysoki family , a derelict space ship, and an unknown alien ambasador outside the window banging to be let in right now turning people...either from lack of oxygen , anger, embarrassment, or as a mating display who the heck knows.
So if some random person can be convinced to spend a week traveling to and looking at one of those things for a 15 minute mission briefing, coffee, doughnuts instead of sending a trained agent spending 2 weeks of travel? Oh hell to the yes.
I mean it still doesn't really make sense, as they're potentially sending people to die, have no idea of their qualifications or ability to get the job down. I understand being understaffed and not being able to allocate resources to a specific problem because you already have a lot more. So asking us to help out during the fire fight because we're already there is one thing. Asking us to Investigate why a thing flew into the sun...makes a lot less sense IMO.
But again, this is just a flaw of writing campaign where you don't want to specify everybody's background.
Honestly, I would be more for campaigns actually having primers that say things along the lines of "You're character should have a background with BigScienceCorp. Maybe you're with SunUniverisity because they have the most advanced research and information about the sun and have been contracted to work with them. Maybe you're with Security. Maybe you're a corporate manager type."
Provide background on the company and who they would be working with and let players build their character with those built in hooks and information in mind.
Sure players can't build whatever the hell they want, but at least the premise makes a lot more sense (IMO) and personally I'm okay with having some restrictions in place, they actually help me develop a character better than having a huge wide spectrum of options.
I'm playing a ifrit college grad student who's researching the sun, but is so obsessed with the sun she went to a solarion temple to learn to connect to the sun and it's power.
I mean it still doesn't really make sense, as they're potentially sending people to die
If you don't come back they know there's something dangerous over there, and they don't send in their rookies.
have no idea of their qualifications or ability to get the job done
This would be a good argument against an incompetent party but a competent party with a good variety of combat ability and skills has qualifications and the stewards can probably research what they are. The grad student in X for example probably knows more about solar physics than most of the police force so they're more qualified.
I understand being understaffed and not being able to allocate resources to a specific problem because you already have a lot more. So asking us to help out during the fire fight because we're already there is one thing. Asking us to Investigate why a thing flew into the sun...makes a lot less sense IMO.
Maybe you're with SunUniverisity because they have the...
SUNNY university student ? (state university of New New york)
Contributor
|
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or, as I like to summarize: if you want to play GURPS Space, why aren't you playing GURPS Space?
Ah, GURPS, my first and most passionate love. I adore GURPS Space and the lovely game balance of all the GURPS books. With GURPS, you can have a dimension and genre-hopping game that shifts continually and still have a game that works. GURPS is marvelous, and I am a huge Steve Jackson games fan.
Let me take a stab at why I am not currently playing / GMing GURPS Space.
1) There is no equivalent to the Organized Play system for GURPS. Although I love the nitty-gritty customization and balance of GURPS, I adore so many things about Paizo's OrgPlay system:
a) Scheduling Flexibility -- If I'm busy, I am not letting down a regular gaming group. It I have a free period and the desire to get in tons of gaming, I can do that too.
b) Portability -- I can take my characters anywhere in the world and find a game for them. (Okay, this has been less true with reduced travel during than Pandemic, but still.)
c) Fewer Toxic Gamers -- OrgPlay is better about weeding out the toxic folks than my other home game GMs have been, and there aren't the disinterested gamers who spend all their time doing anything but gaming. Everyone who is there wants to be.
d) The Satisfaction of Accomplishing Stuff -- OrgPlay missions by nature are generally done in a single session, but have a shared universe and NPCS. This means that your campaign and personal story can continue, but you manage as a character to have concrete goals and accomplishments and closure to individual missions, while still having the ongoing Starfinder Society storyline. It's beyond awesome, and Thurston Hillman is a devious and delightful plot genius.
2) The Starfinder Setting Rocks. The Pact Worlds are just freaking awesome, as are many of the worlds in Near Space. There are so many wonderful story possibilities. Heck, I'd love to move into the Pact Worlds, despite all their dangers, and that is saying something.
3) The published adventures are top-notch. Home-brewing my own adventures with GURPS ate up all my writing energy. There was too much heavy-lifting. I don't mind doing some home brew -- my favorite adventures are campaign-mode APs that I can customize a bit -- but creating all original content was exhausting at times.
As for me, I like Starfinder's game system more than PF2's, though I play both. I found Starfinder to be the most enjoyable D20 system I've ever played. Paizo seduced me away from GURPS not just with well-written adventures and the fantastic Organized Play program, but also with fun. Yes, fun! I just love how exuberantly FUN Starfinder is. GURPS can be a little too serious at times, too focused on game realism.
One lesson that I've learned as a freelancer (who is now writing for the system that I love) is that you can never get too weird with Starfinder monsters or setting. Keep a good story consistency and constant adventure hooks and you can let your imagination run wild!
Hmm
Thanks for the thread WatersLethe! I've been mulling over a lot of the same thoughts. Starfinder is an odd system. They managed to fix a lot of things that were holding 1st ed Pathfinder back, but the result hasn't quite matured into the smooth, eminently enjoyable gameplay of Pathfinder 2E. Starfinder feels a bit rough around the edges. Its plenty of fun, but it could be a lot better.
Some specific thoughts on your rant:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
100% agree! I love Starfinder so much that these, admittedly, not huge problems bother me. But thank you and the OP for shining a light on it. In particular the point about mortality rate (and resolve points) making killing PCs almost impossible. I cringe every time I hear somebody saying this or that encounter is so deadly.. no it's not xD
The challange tables at low levels severely underestimate PCs power and resources. They do get better at representing challenge from 10th level to 15th. Then, I don't know, because and this is another problem: high level play basically does not exist, thanks to the unrefined 1E mechanic of progression.I would not advise putting out a 2nd edition Starfinder out any time soon. However... secretly, I would LOVE THE S@*# OUT OF IT. xD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose the gods that intervene on the setting all the time actually keep everything running, including nonsense economy.
Abadar got your back.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose the gods that intervene on the setting all the time actually keep everything running, including nonsense economy.
Abadar got your back.
Abadar is secretly an old school dnd DM who makes sure the economy works exactly that way and no other.
As someone that's getting into Starfinder in the next few days and someone that HATED the Playtest and still can't find enjoyment in PF2; this is gonna be interesting.
I see bits and pieces in Starfinder that looked to be testbeds/test case for PF2 and disliked them after the idea was fully fleshed out.
So it's gonna be weird going back and playing the Test case that tries to move forward and still stumbles with it's 3.5 roots.
As someone that's getting into Starfinder in the next few days and someone that HATED the Playtest and still can't find enjoyment in PF2; this is gonna be interesting.
I see bits and pieces in Starfinder that looked to be testbeds/test case for PF2 and disliked them after the idea was fully fleshed out.
So it's gonna be weird going back and playing the Test case that tries to move forward and still stumbles with it's 3.5 roots.
Well if you don't like the PF2's system much, maybe Starfinder will do it for you. I hope you have lots of fun playing the game, it's still my favourite sci-fantasy rpg out there, and I will keep playing it as much as I can. :)
As someone that's getting into Starfinder in the next few days and someone that HATED the Playtest and still can't find enjoyment in PF2; this is gonna be interesting.
I see bits and pieces in Starfinder that looked to be testbeds/test case for PF2 and disliked them after the idea was fully fleshed out.
So it's gonna be weird going back and playing the Test case that tries to move forward and still stumbles with it's 3.5 roots.
For me Starfidner is the great middleground between PF1 and PF2.
Not as much craziness as PF1, but I still feel heroic (in PF2 I feel a like lame cop trying to be a super hero who's barely not dying).
I had a similar experience as OP last month. I was extremely excited to finally get to play the class I’d been imaging since shortly after Starfinder launched, the Nanocyte.
I sat down to assemble a lvl4 character for Skitterhome.
And basically hissed like an enraged cat at the character building options.
How quickly one forgets the annoying parts once they’ve stopped being in your face every day. I made it through, but I don’t think I’ll be doing more than dabbling. I still love the Starfinder setting, but count me as someone hoping they’ll make a conversion to PF2 at some point.
Which honestly surprises me. I didn’t care much for the PF2 playtest, but I enjoyed release enough to get used to it, and now I prefer it.
I had a similar experience as OP last month. I was extremely excited to finally get to play the class I’d been imaging since shortly after Starfinder launched, the Nanocyte.
I sat down to assemble a lvl4 character for Skitterhome.
And basically hissed like an enraged cat at the character building options.
I mean, it's the playtest. Getting annoyed is kinda the point. I hope you filled out the survey. I wouldn't count that against Starfinder as a whole (not that there's a shortage of non-playtest Starfinder stuff to be annoyed about).
I, personally, had fun with the nanocyte playtest, partially because I figured out pretty quickly how limited the options were and built around them.
I had a similar experience as OP last month. I was extremely excited to finally get to play the class I’d been imaging since shortly after Starfinder launched, the Nanocyte.
I sat down to assemble a lvl4 character for Skitterhome.
And basically hissed like an enraged cat at the character building options.
I mean, it's the playtest. Getting annoyed is kinda the point. I hope you filled out the survey. I wouldn't count that against Starfinder as a whole (not that there's a shortage of non-playtest Starfinder stuff to be annoyed about).
I, personally, had fun with the nanocyte playtest, partially because I figured out pretty quickly how limited the options were and built around them.
You misunderstand. It wasn't the nanocyte that repelled me. It was every other aspect of building a character, up to and including picking up a race and subrace.
I actually liked the class quite a bit, though I admit the tool option seemed a bit fiddly. I much preferred the cloud and sheath options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You misunderstand. It wasn't the nanocyte that repelled me. It was every other aspect of building a character, up to and including picking up a race and subrace.
I actually liked the class quite a bit, though I admit the tool option seemed a bit fiddly. I much preferred the cloud and sheath options.
Can you elaborate?
Honestly I find building Starfinder characters pretty straightforward assuming you're starting at level 1. Typically the hardest choices to make are feats which is pretty easy at level 1.
Elaborate on what?
I wasn't confused. I just didn't like it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Elaborate on what?
I wasn't confused. I just didn't like it.
Elaborate on what you didn't like.
From my personal experience, I don't understand what there is to dislike, especially specifically with "race and subrace" that you mentioned.
Elaborate on what?
I wasn't confused. I just didn't like it.
I mean, you don't like what you don't like, but, like Claxon, I'm a little baffled, since Starfinder character creation is exceptionally straightforward compared to some other games. There are even fewer complicated or trap options than its predecessor, Pathfinder 1.
The races got a little more complicated with COM and Near Space, but, like, you don't have to use those options.
From my personal experience, I don't understand what there is to dislike, especially specifically with "race and subrace" that you mentioned.
*shrug* You're not me. As Dracomicron said, I dislike what I dislike. I am not trying to say the process is bad or fails at some objective standard, simply that I disliked it enough that I got bored and stopped several times during what should have been a fairly quick process. I am also not trying to convince anyone else that they should dislike it; my post was merely sharing my own reaction, and that I was surprised to have it.
I am also not asking you to defend it, or try to convince me to give it an additional look, which is why I am purposefully dodging this question. Any answer I give, I assume you'll try to have an answer for, or explain how PF1 or PF2 is worse, and I don't want you to trouble yourselves.