In Starfinder 1e, Engineering is the skill that you use to identify tech items. So far, I don’t think that we have any reason to assume that is changing in 2e, but who knows?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are several skills that I am curious about that exist in Starfinder that don't really have any equivalents in Pathfinder.
Computers
Engineering
Life Science
Physical Science
Piloting
In Pathfinder2e there are rules for vehicles. Those rules have Piloting as a Lore category. Which doesn't really seem very satisfying.
But as for the others, I am quite curious how they are going to be handled.
|
The playtest FAQ does say that new skills are within the scope of SF2, and the Computer Glitch Gremlin stat block in the Field Test even mentions it.
That said, the likes of Physical Science, Life Science, Piloting and maybe Engineering all seem like they might be relegated to being categories of Lore (though ones that might be referenced by specific parts of the game more than others, like how Engineering Lore and Piloting Lore come up in some PF2 archetypes and subsystems despite the Lores' otherwise fuzzy nature).
I'm not thrilled about how some PF2 skills might end up showing up in SF2 even if they don't quite fit (I sure hope we can get away with not having Performance in core, given the lack of bards and envoys not needing that flavor), but that's a different concern.
I'm not thrilled about how some PF2 skills might end up showing up in SF2 even if they don't quite fit (I sure hope we can get away with not having Performance in core, given the lack of bards and envoys not needing that flavor), but that's a different concern.
My biggest concern is if there are a different number of base skills. Because that would mean that classes would end up needing to have a different number of skill points - or else skills will end up costing a different amount between the two systems.
So with PF2 Performance becoming a Lore skill in SF2 that frees up some room for one of the Starfinder exclusive skills to be non-lore.
Let's see... My best guesses for how this is going to match up:
PF2 => SF2
Acrobatics => Acrobatics
Arcana => Arcana
Athletics => Athletics
Crafting => Engineering
Deception => Deception
Diplomacy => Diplomacy
Intimidation => Intimidation
Medicine => Medicine
Nature => Nature
Occultism => Occultism
Performance => _____
_____ => Computers
Lore => Lore
Religion => Religion
Society => Society
Stealth => Stealth
Survival => Survival
Thievery => Thievery
Perception => Perception
But that still leaves us with Piloting and Physical Sciences not accounted for.
I am guessing that Physical Sciences could be absorbed into Crafting/Engineering. The only thing that Physical Sciences does is crafting some types of items and recall knowledge - both of which Crafting does in PF2.
I don't like having Piloting not be a base skill. It works fine as a Lore type in Pathfinder because vehicles are not standard parts of the plot.
It's not a standard part of the plot in Starfinder either for anyone who isn't the designated pilot of the starship in starship combat either tbh and it'd probably be a good thing if starship combat wasn't tethered to being skill checks in a system that is immensely stingey about how many skills you can have at max.
Hey, it not because both games are compatible that they wont differ to adapt to the context
Long time ago, some games were all based on the same "compatible" system (I think it was name chaosium D100); RuneQuest, HawkMoon, Chtullu, ...
though they were using the same rule engine, the set of skills were adapted to each game context. we could also talk about the different book in the World of darkness (Vampire, WereWolf, Vampire, Changeling,...) using the same rules and 100% compatible.
I think that in the world of Starfinder, Magic is still present, Howerver, the distinction between Arcana, Nature, Occultism and religion is less important and will probably continue to be grouped under the label "Mysticism", leaving some space for Physical science, life science and piloting, the latest being more relevant in Starfinder settings.
Ok, some other skills could (or not) be renamed like
- Engineering to crafting (not fan of it, it's removing a part of the technological progress)
- Sleight of the hand into Thievery (yay !! )
- Culture into Society (I actually prefer culture)
- Sense motive moved to perception and thus not being a skill as such
I am not worried about those items, personally. The team behind SF2 is the team that has worked on drift crisis, they know and I think they enjoy Starfinder, its universe and the atmosphere that must be kept to ensure Starfinder 2 will provide the same experience as SFRPG
I don't really think that Starfinder needs all four of the different "Magic Tradition" skills from Pathfinder. If we were to merge two of them into "Mysticism" we might have some compatibility issues with questions like "how do I take the Wizard archetype" but not ones that are unsolvable.
I'm not sure that Performance needs to be a full skill- I've literally never seen anybody other than Bards take it in PF2. It might could be a lore, and we could expand the category of "fill in the blank" skills to cover stats other than INT.
I think SF2 should try to keep "about the same number of skills as PF2" but it doesn't necessarily need to have the same ones. I think it would also be acceptable to have PF2 and SF2 have the same skill with different names- like you could do Society/Culture and Craft/Engineering as one-to-one substitutions.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure that Performance needs to be a full skill- I've literally never seen anybody other than Bards take it in PF2.
My fortune-telling oracle in Pathfinder 2e uses fortune-telling Lore for telling fortunes for income telling fortunes. I use deception when I want to fake fortune-telling to encourage or persuade someone to do something or not. I use Performance for fortune-telling for entertainment income or as a distraction at social events. I realize that's a lot of skill overlap/overkill... but that's how I roll...
|
Crafting => Engineering
...
Thievery => Thievery
Oh, I hope this bit doesn't come to pass. I love that handling traps and locks is a thing that so many classes get access to, via Engineering. The number of Int-based classes, and classes with Engineering as a class skill, mean that we broke away from the oppressive 3e-ism of "gotta have a rogue in the party, or you'll fall into a spiked pit and die." Just like how you don't need a mystic, for fear of dying from 0 HP.
Crafting => Engineering Rename mostly. Would lose Disable Device action.Someone from Pathfinder shouldn't be able to use crafting to design or build a spaceship in Starfinder or prevent a reactor core from exploding. But they should be a way for them to learn Engineering.
Well, for one, I am not talking about Pathfinder. This is what I am anticipating (completely without evidence, mind) about what Starfinder is going to have in its own rules - a skill named Engineering that serves the same role as Crafting does in Pathfinder.
And if a class is imported from Pathfinder to create a Starfinder character, I would expect them to use the same skills as other characters in Starfinder.
You seem to only be considering the 'time travel' option for how to get Pathfinder content into Starfinder. There are other ways of doing that more natively.
Oh, I hope this bit doesn't come to pass. I love that handling traps and locks is a thing that so many classes get access to, via Engineering.Crafting => Engineering
...
Thievery => Thievery
Well we already know that Crafting is a skill still, since it's in the field test.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We know that it is a skill ... in the field test.
The field test is not the finished release.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the Pathfinder 2nd edition playtest had a class called "Paladin" in it.
We know that it is a skill ... in the field test.
The field test is not the finished release.
No one said it was the finished release?
Saying "This is the current way Paizo is handling it" is relevant info in a discussion where people are asking "how will Paizo handle it".
Crafting => Engineering Rename mostly. Would lose Disable Device action.Someone from Pathfinder shouldn't be able to use crafting to design or build a spaceship in Starfinder or prevent a reactor core from exploding. But they should be a way for them to learn Engineering.Well, for one, I am not talking about Pathfinder. This is what I am anticipating (completely without evidence, mind) about what Starfinder is going to have in its own rules - a skill named Engineering that serves the same role as Crafting does in Pathfinder.
And if a class is imported from Pathfinder to create a Starfinder character, I would expect them to use the same skills as other characters in Starfinder.
You seem to only be considering the 'time travel' option for how to get Pathfinder content into Starfinder. There are other ways of doing that more natively.
Well if you wanted to do a crossover, you could have characters from Golarion's past whom have not been in the future long enough to adapt (or somehow find themselves unable to adapt) might have a feat/disadvantage/trait applied to them that makes them Archaic which stops them from using certain items or skill uses requiring trained use of 'higher tech' items.
So if an Archaic character has crafting, they can fix a blade, or other analog weeapons or armor, but we could say they can't fix a laser or space suit, etc. They might be able to use a computer console to open a door untrained, if that's main purpose of the panel is to access the door, but wouldn't be able to use it to access the door log or other trained computer skill uses.
Having such a trait is certainly a do-able option. It also something that is part of many science fiction/fantasy stories.
Personally, I don't have a problem with bypassing physical device traps and/or locks with either crafting or thievery. A task like that doesn't have to only have one way to tackle it, if you ask me.
Actually, with that in mind, it isn't impossible to imagine that since we already have Archaic and Analog traits, we could have other traits that tier levels and families of technology. In pathfinder, we have Alchemical and Magical crafting branches, and I suppose Tattoo may fall into a similar less common branch. Starfinder has Magical Items, Hybrid Items, Biotech, cybernetics, Magictech, Necrografts as some quick example above an beyond just basic Tech.
Well if you wanted to do a crossover, you could have characters from Golarion's past whom have not been in the future long enough to adapt (or somehow find themselves unable to adapt) might have a feat/disadvantage/trait applied to them that makes them Archaic which stops them from using certain items or skill uses requiring trained use of 'higher tech' items.
Yeah. Absolutely. The 'time traveler' style crossover is fun.
But the system could also support a more native style. A Shirren character born and raised on Akiton who became an actual Wild Order Druid (rather than a Xenodruid Mystic) and has spent several years using laser pistols, spell gems, hovertrikes and polymorphing into an Electrovore to protect some pristine wildlands of Castrovel.