|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two things I'm curious to get a benchmark on: lvl 1 telepathy, and lvl 1 blindsight/sense. Just like flight, they seem like things that could upset the PF2 balance, but are fairly common (and easy to add later via itemization) in SF species. Are there many species in PF2 that start with telepathy or blindsight/sense?
For the matter, I hope blindsight/sense gets some TLC in SF2. Currently, it's useable, but there's a lot of questions and grey areas about it. Does blindsight/sense (hereafter, bss) sound or vibration work in a vacuum, what's the difference between sound and vibration anyways, do more esoteric things like bss thought or emotion require a medium to work through, can non-mindless things that are usually immune to mind-affecting stuff (like necrovites or SROs) be sensed via bss thought, what blocks various bss, and so on.
There is a very real tension between keeping common SFisms in the game and allowing for clean porting from P2ERemaster
I do hope it leans more toward the former.
I wonder how comfortable SF2 is going to be just referencing rules from Pathfinder books. For example, Leshies probably are not very common in space, but could they just print a "Hydroponics Leshy" heritage and some Starfinderesque Leshy feats and rely on Pathfinder to support the rest of the rules? Since like "Harmlessly Cute", "Grasping Reach", and "Ageless Spirit" are totally valid feats for Starfinder Leshies (and are freely available on the Archives of Nethys) and you wouldn't necessarily want to devote page space to reprinting them.
This allows you to keep the Cantina pretty big by needing less space for "the traditional fantasy types". Since like Space Dwarves are still good at hauling things, so you wouldn't necessarily need to reprint "Unburdened Iron" you can instead just "talk about what Pact Worlds Dwarves are like."
I'm 99% certain that they won't release content where you have to have books from the other system to use them. So for them to print a leshy heritage, they would at least port the base ancestry plus maybe a few feats over first. When people asked about a possible PF2/SF2 crossover AP, Mona and Hillman were very clear that they didn't want to tell players to "go buy that book from the other system to use this". AoN usage simply isn't universal enough (yet) to not make that a problem.
But it would definitely be advantageous to reprint as few things as feasible and focus on original SF ancestries and feats as much as possible. I think SF fans will probably mostly focus on those anyway and this will help the system stand on its own. For PF players and interested SF players on the other hand the more minimalist additions would be enough to work with.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm 99% certain that they won't release content where you have to have books from the other system to use them. So for them to print a leshy heritage, they would at least port the base ancestry plus maybe a few feats over first. When people asked about a possible PF2/SF2 crossover AP, Mona and Hillman were very clear that they didn't want to tell players to "go buy that book from the other system to use this". AoN usage simply isn't universal enough (yet) to not make that a problem.
But it would definitely be advantageous to reprint as few things as feasible and focus on original SF ancestries and feats as much as possible. I think SF fans will probably mostly focus on those anyway and this will help the system stand on its own. For PF players and interested SF players on the other hand the more minimalist additions would be enough to work with.
I'm thinking... you could afford one or two books that were explicitly crossover books, but not particularly necessary themselves.
Like... take Leshies. SF2 is not going to need Leshies. If your SF2 game doesn't have Leshies in it, that's not an end of the universe scenario. At the same time, it would be cool to have localized versions of Leshies in SF2, and also it would be nice to not have to spend the page space to just write the same thing over again. So you have one book that's all about crossover adventures that includes the SF2 take on Leshies and the PF2 take on Skittermanders and possibly some rules clarifications on how to manage the crossovers and also some ideas about where and how these crossovers might occur. The folks that want to cross over (from either direction) can enjoy it, and the ones that don't can skip the book.
|
I was just looking at what species are available for play in SFS and just realized there around 40 species that are not playable. I was a bit disappointed to find Stellifera on that list, but more surprised by SROs not being playable. I just realized 1/2 the characters I've created are unplayable. Unfortunately, SFS is the only way I'm able to play Starfinder.
With time running out for Starfinder 1e I'm worried many of these will never get a chance to be played in e1 SFS. I does look like many of them are from APs not sure if that's an automatic disqualifier. But several aren't form APs so there's got to be more than one disqualifier. Any chance of making all the species playable in 1e SFS after the final season of 1e SFS, if it can't be done before?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will say, I find this response quite dismissive and upsetting. It's a legitimate concern that with the change to PF2 style ancestries, there will by neccessity be a lot less ancestries to play with in SF2 compared to SF1, especially given Starfinder's much slower release schedule. Seeing that very reasonable concern responded to with "The sky is not falling" doesn't actually fill me with confidenceSigh.
The cantina is not closing. The sky is not falling.
I can totally understand the reaction, given how more than a few people have chosen to voice their feedback. If you decided to make a project like this and for the next few days people were already burning it at the stake based on essentially nothing, I don't imagine you'd feel great either. Especially when you have already tried to assure them multiple times and they don't even acknowledge that.
Sure, it could have been phrased a bit better, but give the man a break.
Not all useful criticism is polite, not all polite criticism is useful. It behooves all creatives to internalize that.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, it behoves anonymous dorks on the Internet to try and not to be dicks, however low is the chance of that idea punching through their skulls.
|
|
I was just looking at what species are available for play in SFS and just realized there around 40 species that are not playable. I was a bit disappointed to find Stellifera on that list, but more surprised by SROs not being playable. I just realized 1/2 the characters I've created are unplayable. Unfortunately, SFS is the only way I'm able to play Starfinder.
With time running out for Starfinder 1e I'm worried many of these will never get a chance to be played in e1 SFS. I does look like many of them are from APs not sure if that's an automatic disqualifier. But several aren't form APs so there's got to be more than one disqualifier. Any chance of making all the species playable in 1e SFS after the final season of 1e SFS, if it can't be done before?
Both are accessible via scenario boon.
No, it behoves anonymous dorks on the Internet to try and not to be dicks, however low is the chance of that idea punching through their skulls.
Two things can be simultaneously true without being contradictory. It behooves everyone to be cordial with one another, but choosing not to listen to criticism because you don't like the tone it's delivered in is foolish & self defeating, and only listening to people who tell you what you want to hear isn't going to lead to better results.
I wonder if one way that Starfinder 2e can preserve "the Cantina feel" is by devoting less space in sourcebooks to new classes, and more space to new ancestries. Starfinder has added something like 6 classes since launch, whereas PF2 has added something like 11. Now PF1 was a game with like 43 classes while Starfinder is a game with about 12.
Rage of Elements devotes something like 26 pages to the Kineticist, which could be as many as 4 new ancestries instead.
Could they offer general ancestry feats that could apply to more than one?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Could they offer general ancestry feats that could apply to more than one?
This is a thing they should have done for PF2 to begin with, since they've printed the "Familiarity/Cunning/Expertise" and "Lore" feats for basically every ancestry.
I imagine if they could identify certain themes for ancestry feats that are going to need to be printed multiple times, they should make those the general ones.
Like I think they should figure out what the feat structure for "this ancestry can fly" and "this ancestry has multiple limbs" from the jump, then they can make those feat chains with prerequisite of "you have an ancestry that can fly/has >2 arms". Then if you need to print additional feats for "how Kasatha and Skittermanders are different in terms of limb use" you just print bespoke feats for that ancestry.
|
|
I wonder if one way that Starfinder 2e can preserve "the Cantina feel" is by devoting less space in sourcebooks to new classes, and more space to new ancestries. Starfinder has added something like 6 classes since launch, whereas PF2 has added something like 11. Now PF1 was a game with like 43 classes while Starfinder is a game with about 12.
Rage of Elements devotes something like 26 pages to the Kineticist, which could be as many as 4 new ancestries instead.
With classes being compatible between the two games, this is a lot of classes. It gets hard to create new classes that are different from all the other classes when you have that many. Species, on the other hand, are easier to come up with. I'd much rather new classes come out when there is a need for a new class to fill a hole, or there is a really great idea for a new one. I don't need a new class every time a book comes out. New classes might be more important to Pathfinder than Starfinder. I tend to build my characters around their species more than their class.
We don't have a two-headed playable species yet I'f love to be able to have my character argue with themself, or have to bluff their other head into doing something.
I wonder if one way that Starfinder 2e can preserve "the Cantina feel" is by devoting less space in sourcebooks to new classes, and more space to new ancestries. Starfinder has added something like 6 classes since launch, whereas PF2 has added something like 11. Now PF1 was a game with like 43 classes while Starfinder is a game with about 12.
Rage of Elements devotes something like 26 pages to the Kineticist, which could be as many as 4 new ancestries instead.
With classes being compatible between the two games, this is a lot of classes. It gets hard to create new classes that are different from all the other classes when you have that many. Species, on the other hand, are easier to come up with. I'd much rather new classes come out when there is a need for a new class to fill a hole, or there is a really great idea for a new one. I don't need a new class every time a book comes out. New classes might be more important to Pathfinder than Starfinder. I tend to build my characters around their species more than their class.
We don't have a two-headed playable species yet I'f love to be able to have my character argue with themself, or have to bluff their other head into doing something.
this i couldn't disagree with more. having more ancestries is fine and all, but classes are a much more interesting thing to play around with since that is the number one thing that changes how you actually play the game. SF2 is likely due to have far less classes for several reason, but i hope one isnt just to fit in more ancestries.
|
|
Both are accessible via scenario boon.I was just looking at what species are available for play in SFS and just realized there around 40 species that are not playable. I was a bit disappointed to find Stellifera on that list, but more surprised by SROs not being playable. I just realized 1/2 the characters I've created are unplayable. Unfortunately, SFS is the only way I'm able to play Starfinder.
With time running out for Starfinder 1e I'm worried many of these will never get a chance to be played in e1 SFS. I does look like many of them are from APs not sure if that's an automatic disqualifier. But several aren't form APs so there's got to be more than one disqualifier. Any chance of making all the species playable in 1e SFS after the final season of 1e SFS, if it can't be done before?
I was trying to find where it says SROs are playable:
Archive of Neythis says it's not and lists its source as Interstellar Species pg. 126 no boon info there or where to find it.
Starfinder Wiki list pact worlds as the source, no boon info there.
In the Organized Play section of my account on the Paizo forums I can't find it listed under boon, rewards, or achievement point options.
The organized play guide on the organized play foundation says * Species marked with an asterisk (*) are also profiled in Starfinder Interstellar Species, but doesn't list SRO. Then it says Additionally, there are many species that can be accessed via a Species Admittance boon. But I have already checked those.
Googling "which scenario has the SRO boon" the most useful result is the boon trading thread. Good find I didn't know that was a thing.
As you can see it's not a lack of effort that I still have not been able to find where to get that boon. In addition, once Starfinder 2e is out it will be much harder to find a group of players and a GM willing to run that scenario, assuming I ever figure out which one it is. And that's for each play species that is only accessible that way.
I'm hoping Starfinder 2e has a simpler way of allowing playable species, and 1st edition SFS makes it easier before it's done and forgotten about.
this i couldn't disagree with more. having more ancestries is fine and all, but classes are a much more interesting thing to play around with since that is the number one thing that changes how you actually play the game. SF2 is likely due to have far less classes for several reason, but i hope one isnt just to fit in more ancestries.
I agree that I care about classes more than ancestries, but Starfinder has averaged about a class a year for its lifetime and PF2 is easily twice that. You can also pick up some of the slack by importing actual pathfinder classes for specific niches.
Like if you wanted to be an "Intergalactic Rock Star" you can literally just be a Bard- the envoy doesn't necessarily need to support this anymore, which is fine since Envoys in my experience were more about "diplomacy and celebrity" than "music." If you want to be "Moriarty escaped from the Holodeck" likewise the Investigator works. These are people who are guest stars on Star Trek etc., not "members of the bridge crew" after all.
this i couldn't disagree with more. having more ancestries is fine and all, but classes are a much more interesting thing to play around with since that is the number one thing that changes how you actually play the game. SF2 is likely due to have far less classes for several reason, but i hope one isnt just to fit in more ancestries.I agree that I care about classes more than ancestries, but Starfinder has averaged about a class a year for its lifetime and PF2 is easily twice that. You can also pick up some of the slack by importing actual pathfinder classes for specific niches.
Like if you wanted to be an "Intergalactic Rock Star" you can literally just be a Bard- the envoy doesn't necessarily need to support this anymore, which is fine since Envoys in my experience were more about "diplomacy and celebrity" than "music." If you want to be "Moriarty escaped from the Holodeck" likewise the Investigator works. These are people who are guest stars on Star Trek etc., not "members of the bridge crew" after all.
doing make overs of pf2 classes would be great, and personally wouldn't mind doing a couple classes like that instead of a single new class. but if its just 'drag and drop' them over from pf2, i dont really think thats except-able, especially if that is used as a reason to make fewer classes. i assume in general the largest reason sf1 had less in the first place is the smaller team and fewer books in general and assuming that continues to be the case, swapping out a potential new class for 4 ancestries or whatever just does not seem worth it to me... or really any number of ancestries, since you can only really play 1 at a time anyways(well... 2 with Versatile Heritages, but still).
really though, there's a lot of room to play with for SF classes that pf2 classes wont easily fit and i think they should do as much with it as they can.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was trying to find where it says SROs are playable:
There is a very special boon from a very special scenario that allows playable SROs. The cloak-and-dagger around it is a huge pain, and causes exactly this problem, but it exists for a reason. It's an edge case, is what I'm saying. (DM me if you would like to know more, and have it spoiled, lol.) But I doubt that more species will be released, SRO-style.
|
|
I was trying to find where it says SROs are playable:There is a very special boon from a very special scenario that allows playable SROs. The cloak-and-dagger around it is a huge pain, and causes exactly this problem, but it exists for a reason. It's an edge case, is what I'm saying. (DM me if you would like to know more, and have it spoiled, lol.) But I doubt that more species will be released, SRO-style.
I hear learning of it is like finding the fight club...
looks around to see who has bruised eyes...
So I chose SRO randomly from the species I could not find boons for to look into, are there more secret boons out there? Let me guess you can't tell...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kinda glad I don't play Society now, that kind of secrecy would drive me bonkers.
I had zero interest in organized play when I first got into Starfinder and Pathfinder 2e. The two biggest reasons were the extra rules to learn and the limitation on some options, in addition to that I also had to learn to do Paly by Post. If it hadn't been for a very patient venture captain convincing me to try, I never would have. I'm very glad I finally did, organized play has been a lot of fun. I was also surprised how fun play by post was too.
|
|
I was trying to find where it says SROs are playable:There is a very special boon from a very special scenario that allows playable SROs. The cloak-and-dagger around it is a huge pain, and causes exactly this problem, but it exists for a reason. It's an edge case, is what I'm saying. (DM me if you would like to know more, and have it spoiled, lol.) But I doubt that more species will be released, SRO-style.
Not sure I want to find out, I like the idea of playing an illegally created SRO character as a fugitive on the run.
As for BSS? No clue. There are a few creatures with Mindsense ("[the creature] senses the thoughts of intelligent creatures and builds a perception of reality from this information, allowing [the creature] to “see” as a precise sense. Invisible intelligent creatures are visible to it.), but I don't think any existing ancestries have something like that.
No matter the detail, it would fall into being either an imprecise or precise sense in PF2 (and so SF2). An extra precise sense would be OP, and even a replacement precise sense would be tricky to balance, but an imprecise sense is well established as within the power level of a heritage or even base ancestry. Scent is most typical, but I think I recall coming across other imprecise sense options when I was analyzing heritages last year.
There’s also feats that turn an imprecise sense into a precise sense, but I can’t recall offhand the level.
As far as the main topic, I wasn’t too worried even before Thurston weighed in.
The biggest budgetary change is going to be the elimination of +4 ability score bonus. Assuming ability scores go away in SF2, +1 to any single score is probably all we’ll see. Which IS going to limit some of the design space, but I doubt there’s a good way around it.
I wish they would be able to axe heritages on species that don’ need them, if only to free up some budget to use on more base traits, but on reflection I don’t think that’s really likely. At the very least, increasing the number of versatile heritages to cover stuff like “station born” and “desert planet” seems reasonable, as others have suggested.
I'm assuming all ancestries in Starfinder will have a choice of either two fixed bonuses and one penalty plus a free boost or two free boosts. That's the way PF2 works now, except for not every ancestry has the option of a +/+/-.
So you will always be able to start with a +4 in your key ability score, but you will never start with a +5.
I'm assuming all ancestries in Starfinder will have a choice of either two fixed bonuses and one penalty plus a free boost or two free boosts. That's the way PF2 works now, except for not every ancestry has the option of a +/+/-.
So you will always be able to start with a +4 in your key ability score, but you will never start with a +5.
Even 2 boosts or whatever they call it would only get you to a +4 and 1/2
Even 2 boosts or whatever they call it would only get you to a +4 and 1/2
Well, the general rule is you can't put two boosts into the same attribute at any of the four steps. So you can never start with higher than a +4. You could make an exception to the rule since specific > general, but why would you?
Like starting with A +4 and a partial boost puts you 1 ahead from 5-9 and 15-19 and that's it. This isn't an interesting enough effect that it's worth carving out mechanical space for it.
I'm assuming all ancestries in Starfinder will have a choice of either two fixed bonuses and one penalty plus a free boost or two free boosts. That's the way PF2 works now, except for not every ancestry has the option of a +/+/-.
So you will always be able to start with a +4 in your key ability score, but you will never start with a +5.
Confession: I hope that gets overhauled in remastery. I would prefer core ancestries to have either +/free or free/free, and every ancestry outside core to get +/+/-. Doubt that’ll happen, but it’s what I’d like to see.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Confession: I hope that gets overhauled in remastery. I would prefer core ancestries to have either +/free or free/free, and every ancestry outside core to get +/+/-. Doubt that’ll happen, but it’s what I’d like to see.
At GenCon they showed a bunch of pages from the Remaster books, so it's confirmed that all Core Ancestries except Humans and Orcs are +Fixed/+Fixed/+Free/-Fixed with the general rule "Any Ancestry can choose to take two free boosts instead of the listed boosts and flaws." Humans and Orcs are always +Free/+Free.
PF2 ended up in an awkward place that before they created the "anybody can be +Free/+Free" rule they had printed a bunch of +Fixed/+Free ancestries. It would be better if every ancestry that could support it has a +Fixed/+Fixed/+Free/-Fixed option, so you can build SF2 to accommodate that from the beginning.
Like your Shirren PCs should be able to choose between +Wis/+Con/+Free/-Cha or +Free/+Free so you can choose to have an 18 Cha as a Shirren Envoy.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A Stellifera currently gets +2 Wis, +2 Cha, -2 Con, -4 Str
A +Free/+Free Stellifera could take +2 Con, +2 Str to become supper Stellifera with a hydrobody, instead of I play like a normal species when in a hydrobody.
A +Fixed/+Fixed/+Free/-Fixed This almost works if -Fixed can be a -4 Works better if +free can be used as + or -2 and -Fixed is -4
A Stellifera with flexibility in its stats and is still a Stellifera might look like this.
+Fixed/+Free/-2Fixed/-4Fixed
Currently, in Starfinder, ability modifiers range from
+2Free
+2Fixed
+4Fixed, -2Fixed
+2Fixed, +2Fixed, -2Fixed
+4Fixed, +2Fixed, -2Fixed, -2Fixed
+2Fixed, +2Fixed, -2Fixed, -4Fixed
Everyone has the same ability modifiers range options is fine in Pathfinder. Where the variable is a small and medium bipedal humanoid walking into a tavern. vs in Starfinder, a tiny cuttlefish using a hodrobody to move, a medium-sized overgrown floating brain, and an actual giant, all enter a cantina using very different means of movement.
I'm all for not having every individual in a species stuck with the same modifiers, but the diversity of species-to-species range needs to be preserved in Stafinder. Each species could have one or two of their +2 starts become a +Free while still keeping the greater variation in +/- range and in the number of modifiers per species. If you want to make all small and medium bipedal humanoids the same as in Pathfinder that works in most cases, but not for floating overgrown brains.
It's been said twice that the cantina is still open, and that the meta between the games doesn't have to be the same. I don't see why the ability modifiers range has to be identical to Pathfinder. or in the case of Starfinder the same for each species. It's possible to have wide species variation and individual variation at the same time, but not with a one size fits all rule.
Well, the general rule is you can't put two boosts into the same attribute at any of the four steps.
That would mean that the dragonkin or whatever doesn't have a +4 strength.
I was pointing out that even if you let them have the equivilant of a +4 strength, you only wind up at the equivalent of a 19 strength under pathfinder rules
2 boosts From dragon (+4)
1 Free boost
1 Boost from moving large heavy objects for a living ie porter
1 Boost from being a fighter This boost does NOT give you a +5, it gives you a +4 and a half.
Now, at level 5 you'd be the best fighter though, because you're going from 4 and a half to 5 where every other fighter is going from 4 to 4 and a half.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the Dragonkin when it makes it into SF2 will not have +Strength, +Strength as an option. Much like Goblins went from +4 Dex/-2 Str/-2 Cha to +2 Dex/+2 Cha/-2 Wis or how Orcs went from +4 Str/-2 Int/-2 Wis/-2 Cha to +Free/+Free in PF2. The stat mods from the previous edition have no bearing on what the stat mods for the new edition; after all Halflings went from a Cha bonus to a Wis bonus instead.
You could say "Dragonkin are extra beefy" by giving them the rare "+/+/-" with +Str and +Con though, a thing that's unprecedented since everybody else has a bonus to a physical stat and a mental stat. You'd want to avoid the penalty to dex though, since that's the one stat you would never, ever, ever want to start with an 8 in.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the Dragonkin when it makes it into SF2 will not have +Strength, +Strength as an option. Much like Goblins went from +4 Dex/-2 Str/-2 Cha to +2 Dex/+2 Cha/-2 Wis or how Orcs went from +4 Str/-2 Int/-2 Wis/-2 Cha to +Free/+Free in PF2. The stat mods from the previous edition have no bearing on what the stat mods for the new edition; after all Halflings went from a Cha bonus to a Wis bonus instead.
You could say "Dragonkin are extra beefy" by giving them the rare "+/+/-" with +Str and +Con though, a thing that's unprecedented since everybody else has a bonus to a physical stat and a mental stat. You'd want to avoid the penalty to dex though, since that's the one stat you would never, ever, ever want to start with an 8 in.
Make me a species with an 8 dex, and I'll play it, with all the spells that cause damage to whoever strikes them. That's a character Id love to make, and yes I'll be taking the toughness feat too that someone else thought was useless. I might even skip buying any armor while I'm at it. Now I'm really excited to make this character work!
It is very easy to optimize your armor class in PF2, and you want to do it because of the "beating the number by 10 is a crit" rule. If you take double damage on a 18+ instead of a 13+ that matters quite a bit. If you really wanted to intentionally have low armor class (which is not recommended, honestly) you' re going to want to end every turn in hard cover or out of line of effect.
Like there's 1 PF2 ancestry with a Dex Penalty- the Poppet. Every Poppet PC I've seen starts with at least a 10 Dex and as much as an 18.
|
|
It is very easy to optimize your armor class in PF2, and you want to do it because of the "beating the number by 10 is a crit" rule. If you take double damage on a 18+ instead of a 13+ that matters quite a bit. If you really wanted to intentionally have low armor class (which is not recommended, honestly) you' re going to want to end every turn in hard cover or out of line of effect.
Like there's 1 PF2 ancestry with a Dex Penalty- the Poppet. Every Poppet PC I've seen starts with at least a 10 Dex and as much as an 18.
The + 10 is a crit that does make Dex much more important. We have a new player I feel bad for his barbarian was reduced to 0 hp first round of combat so many times he started to hide behind the spell caster and just throw javelins, I don't think he ever once got a chance to hit anything with his sword before giving on up the game and quite showing up.
In the current Starfinder combat, I'm in if we had to deal with +10=crit I would have been reduced to 0 HP almost every round.
|
|
So I chose SRO randomly from the species I could not find boons for to look into, are there more secret boons out there? Let me guess you can't tell...
Kinda glad I don't play Society now, that kind of secrecy would drive me bonkers.
I consider myself fairly on the up-and-up about availability stuffs in SFS, and as far as I know, SROs are the only species with a top secret, cloak-and-dagger, boon. I believe it's very unlikely we'll see another species where the means of acquiring it is a secret, for this exact reason.
Starfinder Society is, like Starfinder in general, sort of experimental, and more willing of taking risks, trying new things, etc. SRO admittance is, I think, something in that vein. Don't let one species having an esoteric boon turn you off from Society, though, Perpdepog!