Probably theme would be turned into archetypes. Not all archetypes are Class feat focused some gives some skill feats instead not directly competing with your class feat (except for dedication).
Also many themes feels like general skill feats like diplomat or battle medics. Whats makes me think that it will be split between skill feats and archetypes.
|
Wishes, a sword, and a planet book that's a mix of near space and ports of call.
Concerns, if we lose themes, what's going to replace Ace Polit?
Perhaps it is an archetype. I am not certain if a character could start with an archetype. Maybe there can be a pilot background that will help meet the ace pilot a\rchetype requirements.
Also, starship combat should support different types of ships. So, perhaps we can see some fighter pilots in small craft. (tCharacters might have access to ships similar in theme to like X-Wings, Star Furies, or vipers) as well as larger vessels.)
Themes in Starfinder are backgrounds in PF2. They're one and done up front things that don't amount to a lot. An Ace Pilot background would give you a choice between a dex and maybe int boost, training in piloting and the starship lore skill, and a skill feat related to piloting.
|
|
Themes in Starfinder are backgrounds in PF2. They're one and done up front things that don't amount to a lot. An Ace Pilot background would give you a choice between a dex and maybe int boost, training in piloting and the starship lore skill, and a skill feat related to piloting.
Perhaps the pilot background might have all the skills necessary to go into an Ace Pilot archetype?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Might be interesting if they make ancestry feats something more akin to ancestry/background feats, to make it easier to just give base stats for a new ancestry without outright crippling them from lack of options.
Heck, maybe that’s where themes could go- instead of Ancestry feats, they’re Theme feats.
|
So it looks like backgrounds replace the first level of a theme. Archives and feats can replace the higher levels of a theme. Archetypes could also be a great way to get skills or feats from the other game. I think Archetypes will be something that gets used a lot when trying to mix between the two games.
|
|
Theme going away is almost the thing Im saddest about.
Background is who my character was where Theme was always who my character is and I feel thats a very important narrative distinction.
Perhaps there will be a way to do this. We still are not sure about a lot in the PF2 Remaster. Perhaps backgrounds can be revised to be more like themes or there might be other mechanics to do so.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I liked the idea of themes but they always felt underwhelming. I think Theme is actually far better incarnated as a Free Archetype.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I liked the idea of themes but they always felt underwhelming. I think Theme is actually far better incarnated as a Free Archetype.
I think you're right, Archetypes gives you more options at each level you get new feats through them, and more often too.
With themes and the cantina crossed off of my list of concerns that just leaves Starship combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Themes didn't really do much from my experience, them getting replaced by equivalent backgrounds and appropriate skill feats sounds fine.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
SF2 actually has the opportunity to improve on some weaker aspects of PF2, which I find pretty interesting. For example, itemization is not something I'm particularly happy about.
Fix syarship combat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’m not seeing the alleged issue with flight.
If GMs don’t want jetpacks in their PF games then don’t allow them. PF adventures won’t be built around all SF options being allowed.
They’re compatible with each other, not balanced by each other.
Like in PF2, the Advanced Ancestry guide literally has a sidebar that says "if you want to give winged ancestries full flight at level 1, here's how to do that, but be aware that this might break or unbalance some things."
Many of those broken/unbalanced things are noticeably less broken/unbalanced when nearly everybody around is capable at ranged combat because they own rayguns or are at least designed around a paradigm where they have to fight people with rayguns.
|
|
Wishes: Keep EAC/KAC, Resolve System, Stam/HP system, Downtime system, weapon fusions. Starship combat - every one rolls an attack roll every round; starship weapon damage is based on the number of hits, i.e. 3 players hit, they each roll their 2d6 damage, add it up. All character classes have combat abilities, exploration abilities and downtime abilities unique to their classes, and perhaps have some choices too. Also, weapon fusions are brilliant, keep it.
Concerns are: abandoning Stam/hp system means heals fall on one class again. The brilliance of the Stam/hp split between envoy and mystic is a keeper. Please don't abandon it. Resolve brought incredible player agency into the SF game; don't abandon it, it is too good to let go. Classes like the vanguard, evolutionist and nanocyte are really well designed, with terrific player agency and choices. Those should be the inspiration for the redesigns.
I’m not seeing the alleged issue with flight.
If GMs don’t want jetpacks in their PF games then don’t allow them. PF adventures won’t be built around all SF options being allowed.
They’re compatible with each other, not balanced by each other.
Like in PF2, the Advanced Ancestry guide literally has a sidebar that says "if you want to give winged ancestries full flight at level 1, here's how to do that, but be aware that this might break or unbalance some things."
Many of those broken/unbalanced things are noticeably less broken/unbalanced when nearly everybody around is capable at ranged combat because they own rayguns or are at least designed around a paradigm where they have to fight people with rayguns.
These unbroken/unbalanced things is more a warning saying "keep remembering that you characters that can fly can trivialize some hazards, Hazardous Terrain and cliffs/holes and many low-level monsters and APs have some challenges that can be trivialized by flight, so pay attention to adjust the difficult or change the creatures/hazards if you thing that needed".
For SF2 probably the things is more ajusted vs fly earlier so probably we can have creatures with fly speed earlier and the note will be the opposite, waring that if you want to move an fly creature of SF2 to PF2 for some reason consider into restrict its fly abilities to prevent trivialization.
|
|
Fix syarship combat.
Paizo has clearly stated they what to get starship combat right in Starfinder 2e. I don't expect to hear much about it until after Starfinder Enhanced comes out. Because it has a new form of starship
combat in it. The new starship combat in Starfinder Enhanced sounds more like an optional variation for ship combat, so I don't expect that to be the final version they're going to use for SF2e, but it will add more pieces on the table to debate over to get to a final version for SF2e. Even then I think we won't hear much about starship combat until more core issues have been dealt with first.
Wishes: Keep EAC/KAC, Resolve System, Stam/HP system, Downtime system, weapon fusions. Starship combat - every one rolls an attack roll every round; starship weapon damage is based on the number of hits, i.e. 3 players hit, they each roll their 2d6 damage, add it up. All character classes have combat abilities, exploration abilities and downtime abilities unique to their classes, and perhaps have some choices too. Also, weapon fusions are brilliant, keep it.
Concerns are: abandoning Stam/hp system means heals fall on one class again. The brilliance of the Stam/hp split between envoy and mystic is a keeper. Please don't abandon it. Resolve brought incredible player agency into the SF game; don't abandon it, it is too good to let go. Classes like the vanguard, evolutionist and nanocyte are really well designed, with terrific player agency and choices. Those should be the inspiration for the redesigns.
Well...
In general SF1 downtime, weapon fusion and between encounters stamina healing was used as base to current downtime, runes/talismans and 10 minutes healing that we have in PF2 today. This proably will evolve to become more adapted to PF2 core rules being improved instead of being abandoned.
I hope we get a conversion guide for adjusting pf2 content to starfinder balance and vice versa. I'd love to really go nuts with mixing content sometimes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In Field Test they already added some simple adjustment notes:
...
Archaic: This weapon is crafted using traditional methods and materials but is not suitable for striking modern armor. All weapons from Pathfinder Second Edition have the archaic trait. Weapon runes (as found in Pathfinder) function normally with archaic weapons. When a creature with non-archaic armor takes damage from an archaic weapon, that creature gains resistance 10 against the attack.
...
Tech: Weapons with the tech trait incorporate electronics, computer systems, and power sources. Sometimes the weapons use such little energy that they can rely on integrated power sources (such as melee weapons that don’t have a capacity), while others drain batteries with attacks. Weapon runes (as found in Pathfinder) don’t function on these weapons.
...
Credits & Gold: The standard currency in Starfinder is the credit, and all items in this document are priced in credits. In Pathfinder Second Edition, the standard currency is typically in gold pieces (gp). The conversion rate between credits and gp is that 10 credits = 1 gp.
...
PATHFINDER LASER WOLVES
Since tashtaris originated from Castrovel, they’re in the same solar system as Golarion and make for a particularly unique encounter in Pathfinder games. Due to the existence of magical portals and other strange events that link Golarion to other worlds, it’s entirely possible to include a portal to Castrovel that allows for the migration of a pack
of tashtaris into a region they might otherwise never be found in. A typical pack of tashtaris consists of anywhere between three to 12 tashtaris and one to two alphas. The alphas lead the pack, and typically one is active in daytime to protect the pack from intruders.
...
I don't know if this will stay here just for field tests or if will appear in SF Core too or if it will go to a cross-conversion document. But all this compatibility ajustments are being made since the beginning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope we get a conversion guide for adjusting pf2 content to starfinder balance and vice versa. I'd love to really go nuts with mixing content sometimes.
There is no way that won't be coming. Not only does it make a lot of sense from a player-friendliness standpoint, it is also a great way to broaden your playerbase. In fact, sidebars to help with adjustments were already mentioned.
|
|
In Field Test they already added some simple adjustment notes:
...I don't know if this will stay here just for field tests or if will appear in SF Core too or if it will go to a cross-conversion document....
Archaic: This weapon is crafted using traditional methods and materials but is not suitable for striking modern armor. All weapons from Pathfinder Second Edition have the archaic trait. Weapon runes (as found in Pathfinder) function normally with archaic weapons. When a creature with non-archaic armor takes damage from an archaic weapon, that creature gains resistance 10 against the attack.
...
Tech: Weapons with the tech trait incorporate electronics, computer systems, and power sources. Sometimes the weapons use such little energy that they can rely on integrated power sources (such as melee weapons that don’t have a capacity), while others drain batteries with attacks. Weapon runes (as found in Pathfinder) don’t function on these weapons.
...
Having Archic and Tech define it like that helps a lot. With EAC/KAC going to AC only, having an archaic weapon is like having a high KAC armor. I wonder if runes will be able to overcome the archaic trait.
Having Archic and Tech traits will make, making a Falsh Grodon type setting easy. Where one side controls all the tech and forces the other to only use archaic.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
.
Concerns are: abandoning Stam/hp system means heals fall on one class again.
Out of combat healing in PF2 is handled via Medicine skill, which anyone can get and anyone can get even better at it via skill feats. There are several classes that are good at in-combat healing via spells, I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least two of such classes in the SF2 core (probably one being Extra Good at healing).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely want my starship to fly at 1st level, whether PF2 or SF2…
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely want my starship to fly at 1st level, whether PF2 or SF2…
It wouldn't be much of a starship otherwise, would it? It'd be a star brick :D
I wonder how "compatible" the SF team would consider PF2 variant rules or at least parts of them as the SF2 baseline. And how the community would accept them.
There are two I can see being very useful here.
One, Automatic Bonus Progression (ABP). For the SF-only crowd, PF2 uses runes you can buy/find to allow weapons and armour to keep up with the math ("fundamental runes"), as well as grant bonuses to skills. These come online at certain levels and give stuff like +1 to hit for your weapon or additional damage dice. ABP just gives these bonuses automatically at the appropriate levels, which I like a lot since I don't think having to buy the math boosts that keep you relevant is a good idea. The other big advantage of this is that it allows people to have multiple useful weapons, which seems right up the SF alley.
Two, Ancestry Paragon, as ancestries seem to be a much more integral part of the appeal of SF. The original basically just doubles the amount of ancestry feats (abilities for your ancestry) you get, mostly spread out over your character's career. But this wouldn't need the "full" version, which has its own problems. No, a condensed version would fit much better. Instead of spreading the feats out, you would get 1 or 2 additional ones at level 1. This way, ancestries would feel reasonably complete from the start, as they do now.
In Starfinder Enhanced, weapons are getting scaling system. I wonder if that will deal with some of the issues that ABP would help with.
I can see Ancestry Paragon getting used a lot more in Starfinder. I tend to build my character more around species than class.
Something like that is in the Field Test as well. There, the weapons already have the mechanical equivalent of fundamental runes built directly into them. At level 2, they gain tracking +1 and at level 4, they gain a second damage die. That's exactly the same as the rune progression.
|
|
Concerns are: abandoning Stam/hp system means heals fall on one class again. The brilliance of the Stam/hp split between envoy and mystic is a keeper. Please don't abandon it.I'd rather not have healing be a thing for any one class, but a thing many classes can do in different ways. The envoy can shout inspiring/encouraging words, the mystic can channel vitality, the technomancer and/or mechanic shoots you full of healing juice, and the solarian could focus healing sunbeams or something. The problem with having one class being "the one that's good at healing" is that you need to have that one class around, or at least that there's a really big difference between parties with and without that class. Even in PF2, where PCs have fairly adequate downtime healing, you really feel the difference when playing without the safety net a cleric with their additional heal slots provides.
I imagine that we will see some previews in the next few weeks. Healing is something that will be a concern. Also, I can imagine a few martial characters developing some skills as healers. We will have to await the previews.
I suspect that Stamina will vanish, but multiple classes with access to healing should help. There should be several ways to keep a party going. (I have seen alchemists and others provide healing to groups in PF2 who don't have a cleric.)
Also, let's remember that there may be significant changes between what we might see now or in the near future and a final playtest document. So, let's keep providing some feedback and insight to the developers.
I think there is one essential question here. How far does "100% compatibility" go? What are the limits, so what is even on the table?
For example, is it ok to have PF2 variant rules as standard in SF2? So if you want to transfer things, you can just reverse-engineer them?
Managing Creative Director (Starfinder)
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think there is one essential question here. How far does "100% compatibility" go? What are the limits, so what is even on the table?
For example, is it ok to have PF2 variant rules as standard in SF2? So if you want to transfer things, you can just reverse-engineer them?
Default assumption is that the games are mostly independent but the rules all work with each other. If you want to mix some of your chocolate/peanut butter, you can. Org Play is its own beast in this regard. Also, we'll be talking about a bunch of specific points in the equivalent of the Gamemastery Core book when we reach that point.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Default assumption is that the games are mostly independent but the rules all work with each other. If you want to mix some of your chocolate/peanut butter, you can. Org Play is its own beast in this regard. Also, we'll be talking about a bunch of specific points in the equivalent of the Gamemastery Core book when we reach that point.I think there is one essential question here. How far does "100% compatibility" go? What are the limits, so what is even on the table?
For example, is it ok to have PF2 variant rules as standard in SF2? So if you want to transfer things, you can just reverse-engineer them?
Which brings up the important question, Which game is peanut butter, and which is chocolate? OR is this under an NDA and were are getting too close to the secret recipe?
some current theories are.
I feel like peanut butter best represents the grounded, muddy terrain more often associated with the Pathfinder medieval setting, where as chocolate, with it's deep, dark, richness, more accurately represents the space setting of Starfinder.
To that theory, I'd like to add. black holes are made of the darkest chocolate possible. Are black holes filled with peanut butter is another mystery yet to be solved.
1) Definitely. Non magical medic has to be the build I've seen tried so often only to turn out meh.
6) The SF1 rules are really. Really variable on chunky salsa vs. GI joe for downed enemies. NPCs either explode at zero into ludicrous gibs or can stay there and die after 3 rounds, usually giving you enough time to stabilize them at the DM's call. Though there are a bunch of things you can do to help that: the merciful fusion, just punching people in the face, or the Envoy's take em alive. I usually have one because so many society DMs think the mook instadeath is THE rule.
The -4 to hit is pretty harsh though.
How are the PF2 rules on non lethal in practice? My main campaign has its own thing for that and my PFS2 character doesn't care...
Most of the rest are going to be a no go from joining pf2s engine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Medicine is very useful in P2 (hereafter referred to as TAS, Three Action System, to cover both systems)
2) irrelevant in TAS.
3) Range works like it always has.
4) Weapons seem to work like a mix of S1 and P2, there certainly won’t be a “realistic” instant kill weapon.
5) you’re wanting a different game
6) I believe in TAS it’s simply “last hit decides” or some such.
7) most likely not staying in TAS with the degrees of success, though individual armors giving resistances and bonuses are a given.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About unarmed Strikes they are just a to hit using weapon without non-lethal trait and only the last hit matters.
Also you can ask to your GM in opponent that you want to capture and then stabilize it.
|
|
The -4 penalty to make a non-lethal attack with a lethal weapon is pretty harsh, enough to encourage people not to use that as an option very often, if at all. If the whole point of making a non-lethal attack is not to harm someone as much, why not reduce the amount of non-lethal damage for the attack instead of making it harder to hit?
This would make using a weapon with the trip or disarm traits easier to use their traits in a non-lethal way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The penalty is -2 not -4. But I agree that if it reduced the damage instead of hit rate it would make more sense but is not how it was made and due the compatibility with PF2 will be how the SF2 will operate.
Anyway probably will better to just ask to your GM to use dying rules in the enemies that you didn't want to kill and them stabilize them with medicine or cantrip.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The penalty is -2 not -4. But I agree that if it reduced the damage instead of hit rate it would make more sense but is not how it was made and due the compatibility with PF2 will be how the SF2 will operate.
Anyway probably will better to just ask to your GM to use dying rules in the enemies that you didn't want to kill and them stabilize them with medicine or cantrip.
It's -4 in Starfinder so that's some good news about 2e
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wishlist: A starship economy. I know people kept saying "They could retire by selling their ship" but thats not true. If spaceflight is as common as it would need to be, selling it would be like selling at most a nice RV. Plus the fact that saying that is kind of a cop out, considering so can getting any hoard or magic item. Remember, the average person lives a year on a single gold. Getting a decent magic item could bank roll you for the rest of your life.
You’re missing the point, no one has said sell it and retire (to my knowledge) it’s sell it and buy upgrades for themselves. So now the adventure continues on that planet or the GM has to put together another way for them to get a ship.
Which leads into the possibility of the party capturing and selling multiple ships, completely throwing off the balance of the game.
Also from the other side, the GM, either intentionally or accidentally, choking the party’s equipment since they have to spend their wealth buying/upgrading their ship.
In short, having the price of the shop alongside normal party wealth royally screws things up.
“Remember, the average person lives a year on a single gold.”
Which has nothing to do with Starfinder.
To your point though, the majority of players aren’t gonna take the first chance they can get to screw over the GM/other players and quit the game by retiring, unless they don’t like the GM/campaign, which is a player/GM issue, not a mechanics issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wishlist: A starship economy. I know people kept saying "They could retire by selling their ship" but thats not true. If spaceflight is as common as it would need to be, selling it would be like selling at most a nice RV. Plus the fact that saying that is kind of a cop out, considering so can getting any hoard or magic item. Remember, the average person lives a year on a single gold. Getting a decent magic item could bank roll you for the rest of your life.
Forced Item Progression: Don't assume I want to upgrade my gear, maybe I want to stick with the lower gear for roleplay purposes. Maybe it has a sentimental value. Honestly these reasons are the only reason I don't run Starfinder, no one wants to play it with me because they can't choose to upgrade things.
Counter argument, keep BP for ships and also use it for standard gear. Let credits and a figity item economy be left for lore and RP. You get a certain amount of BP per level which you can spend on gear/upgrades/etc as you like. When you level you can completely respend BP or just use the new points for new stuff as you like. Whether you are upgrading the same trusty weapon the entire time or always buying the latest toy is also left to 'lore'.
Or maybe just fold all of that under "experience points" that you can spend on skills, physical/magical upgrades, gear, class abilities, etc? Yeah I know, but what if we just had some fun huh?
“Remember, the average person lives a year on a single gold.”
Which has nothing to do with Starfinder.
To your point though, the majority of players aren’t gonna take the first chance they can get to screw over the GM/other players and quit the game by retiring, unless they don’t like the GM/campaign, which is a player/GM issue, not a mechanics issue.
Look at Rysky and I agreeing on things. Yeah, if your players get an awesome new space ship and their first reaction is "Cool, now we don't have to play anymore" then I think they just didn't want to play the game. In the very least they don't want to play those characters anymore. In literally every game I've ever played or run, a bigger and badder ship just meant they could do bigger and badder things in space.
And even if you do somehow break the economy with the space ship, there are few gold sinks as good as a space ship the players own. Repairs, system issues, replacement parts, license updates, I mean you can just come up with a never ending list of excuses for them to have to pour money down the drain.
And if they have an emotional connection with that space ship phhh forget about it! They've put a loaded gun in your hand. Anytime you improve your way into a wall, just put that gun to the space ship's head and watch grown adults cry.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Counter argument, keep BP for ships and also use it for standard gear. Let credits and a figity item economy be left for lore and RP. You get a certain amount of BP per level which you can spend on gear/upgrades/etc as you like
If SF incorporates/allows Automatic Bonus Progression like in P2 we more or less will get this.