| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I read a thing on a different thread that rang very true to me.
I do not think Starfinder necessarily needs "generalist combat class". It needs the ability to make characters with a wide variety of combat styles without dipping into Pathfinder classes. The answer to "How do I make X in Starfinder" should never be "Use this Pathfinder class." – Starfinder should stand on its own.
In other words, you should be able to make a martial artist, a sniper, a pistolero, a commander/tactician, and an assault trooper in Starfinder. They do not all need to be Soldiers, but they should all be doable within Starfinder itself.
Now, this is incredibly premature, but I thought it might be interesting to point out various character types that really ought to be doable in a Starfinder-like universe that aren't likely to be well-served by the existing classes, and then come up with classes that might fit in and be interesting that they would work well with... without either dippign into PF2 or copying anything over wholesale.
Further, let's assume for the moment that both "Mechanic" and "Technomancer" come out in a solid, playable form within reasonably short order. So... what else is left?
/*****/
Well, Operative has your pistols, knives, and sniper rifles. Soldier has your big heavy weapons (ranged and melee) and in particular, is covering the "I'm the party tank" role pretty well as far as weapons are concerned. So what's left is... the mid-range stuff? Like, yeah. We don't have anyone who's particularly good at rifles, or swords, or spears. We don't have anyone who's really focused on the "just being good at killing people" part of martial combat. We don't have any class that really works for Doomguy or the Master Chief or a random "more violence than skill" ganger out of Necromunda or that "brother, I hurt people" moment from TF2, or anything like that.
For the moment, let's call them the Reaver. I'm sure there are better names, but it's a start.
...and part of the problem there is that you kind of want to give them a fighter-like weapon proficiency track, and once you do that there's not all that much space left to differentiate them, and then they wind up being kind of bland and also mostly a fighter reskin. Still... let's start with the fighter, and see what we can pull off.
- Well, we can remove the bonus flexible feats they get. That's not nothing
- We can drop them to a base 8 hp, rather than a base 10. With the Soldier here, they're pretty much explicitly *not* there to serve as party tank.
- We can ditch the "favored weapon group" thing. This is kind of a big one, really. For that matter, we can delay some of their weapon proficiency growth. I'd still want them to hit Legendary eventually, but they don't necessarily have to start at Expert.
- Again, given that this is supposed to be a brutal DPR killer rather than a tank, you can drop the Opportunity Attack and the Shield Block. The Reaver doesn't need that stuff.
...and that's actually a decent chunk of stuff to play with. It's not huge, but it's not nothing. It's enough to make a few class paths to meaningfully differentiate subtypes (one of which might give back some of the tanking ability that we're stripping away here) and still have enough left for a useful class feature or two. Regardless, it *is* at least doable. Bonus points if you make the "I can still tank" subclass work by some means other than "shield block, 10 base HP, and opportunity attack"
I'm thinking that one of the other subclasses ought to be some sort of shock and awe focus - like, bonuses against enemies that haven't acted, bonuses when they kill someone or deal crits, tosses around a bunch of intimidation, possibly as free actions under certain circumstances - stuff like that.
I'd even go so far as to say that we should see what we can do entirely without legendary weapon progression. It's not like it shouldn't exist in SF2, but there will always be the "it's pretty much the Fighter" comparison in the background no matter what. Legendary in weapons just doesn't leave a whole lot, as you said.
The theme behind legendary is also subtly off, as it implies a reliance on technique, which really isn't the theme you are going for with this. I'd rather have the Hotline Miami class achieve massive overkill in a different way, one that more accurately represents that fever dream of a fighting style.
A "goes full ham" class should definitely exist sooner or later, though. Sounds fun ^^.
Apart from that, the Solarian might have a lot of the "one guy that brings a sword to a gun fight" angle covered as part of its niche. But other than that, I'm drawing a blank right now. Scifi really is a much narrower field when it comes to character archetypes, so it's good that we have magic to mix things up.
And if nothing else, there is no shame in just porting over the Fighter in a later supplement book (maybe even a collaboration between the teams?) and giving it a distinct SF2 spin with some alternate features and a strong line of new feats.
Rogues can spec either strength or dex, clerics can be cloistered or warpriests, I don't see any reason that the heavy weapons Dakka soldier couldn't be one kind and the melee bash people could be another.
I really do hope the tinkerer, hackerman, ships mechanic, guy with robitz is soon like you say...because thats honestly one of the sci fi pillars, and inventor was created inside a fantasy setting framework and doesnt cut the mustard for that role
Rogues can spec either strength or dex, clerics can be cloistered or warpriests, I don't see any reason that the heavy weapons Dakka soldier couldn't be one kind and the melee bash people could be another.
It could... but I think that the results will be better if it is not. Like, yeah, we got both cloistered and warpriests... and the warpriests have kind of suffered for being crammed into a box that doesn't quite fit them ever since.
Now, we totally will have Soldiers who bash people... but unless you massively overgenericize the class, then it won't both be a dedicated damage-dealer at both range and melee and a party tank at range and melee. Don't do that. The results wont' be as good. Letting the classes have more specific niches lets them inhabit those niches more fully and in more interesting ways... and then we can put other classes in the other niches.
After thinking about this some more, I think there are really two classes here. Ultraviolence and the generic "just a really skilled fighter" one. And while the first one is a matter of taste, the other one is a game staple for a reason. Human Fighter might be absolutely basic, but a lot of people like basic. Especially people just dipping their toes into the game or those who can't play a lot.
So, longer-term it is definitely a good idea to fill that Fighter-shaped hole with something equally generic.
Random thought, the Operative is no longer the skill monkey class and instead pivots into the "my skill is killing you" angle. What if the Operative is actually taking up a lot of the "general combat class" space, they just split it up instead of having one dedicated class?
If you think about it, you can do a lot with the concept of "Operative" without fully drifting off into the Fighter/old Soldier:
- the sniper
- the classic "rogue" infiltrator/assassin, focusing on stealth with smaller melee weapons and compact ranged weapons (handguns, PDWs, SMGs and possibly modern crossbows and such?)
- the much more overt hitman featuring solid direct firepower via longarms such as ARs (I can very much imagine John Wick here)
- (maybe) the real "this is about sending a message" Eversor version
and probably quite a few more specialized subclasses. With the Soldier taking shotguns and heavier weapons and a few other options for melee, that should cover everything, shouldn't it? And I doubt this will be the only ways to play these weapons either.
Dunno if that would work out or not, but I'd be atleast an interesting take.
That's sort of been my thought, too. We're already seeing them moving away from the Starfinder 1e weapon categories and more toward Pathfinder 2e's with the scattergun being a simple two-handed weapon, so there is a lot more conceptual room for an Operative's loadout.
Something along the lines of the ruffian rogue racket could really open up the build option.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the general topic, I feel like Starfinder very much trying not to be Pathfinder carries the risk of imprinting Pathfinder's shadow upon the game, to the point where SF2e may still end up feeling influenced by Pathfinder's classes despite being a distinct product. The soldier I think is a good example of this, as the class as implemented so far has had to contort its design in awkward ways just to avoid being a fighter in space. It's a very good thing that Starfinder's classes are distinct from Pathfinder's, and I feel the mystic goes about doing their own thing in a way that feels much more natural, though any mode of design reasoning that's "like X Pathfinder class, but not" is likely to feel like a product of both games, rather than just Starfinder.
With this in mind, looking at the concept of the Reaver class, my first question would be why we're going for legendary weapon proficiency as opposed to other mechanics intended to make a character more lethal: legendary weapon proficiency exists not just to output more damage, but also to make attacks exceptionally reliable, which thematically I'd argue conveys extraordinary precision and training. If we're going for a class that's all about messy, gory violence, I'm not sure legendary proficiency would be as good a fit as, say, master proficiency with damage bonuses, splash damage, or other damage increases. I'd argue both Doom Guy and Master Chief fit the bill as soldiers, but if we're going for a squishier class who can absolutely rip and tear through masses of opponents, I also feel anything that makes the class better at target-switching or AoE is going to bump up against legendary weapon proficiency, which affords the best possible single-target power.
I would also consider what such a class would do outside of combat: Doom Guy, Master Chief, Ultrakill's v1, etc. mostly just do a lot of killing, which is fine for shooter games that are all about that, but Starfinder is a roleplaying game that will have long periods of not-killing in-between combat encounters. Already, the fighter easily struggles to contribute out of combat, and I feel it may be to this hypothetical class's benefit if they also had a well-defined role in exploration or social gameplay, with tools in their features and feats to support that.
With all of that said, though, I do think OP makes a valid point that a sci-fi setting sets a good space for a "unhinged weapons-based dealer of mass carnage" niche that isn't really a part of more classic fantasy fare. Stuff like raiders in Borderlands and Mad Max, Junkrat from Overwatch, or even 40k's Orks, whose powers can make any random nonsense happen, don't really fit the bill of barbarians, fighters, or soldiers, and could potentially make for a distinct martial class that would be really fun to play. In this respect I also feel that rather than adopt the fighter's weapon proficiency track and drop their flexible feats, I'd personally go for the opposite, using the simpler chassis of a martial class to let the player improvise lots of BS on the fly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to add on. I feel like i missed part of the argument on my first pass. It's possible that I just didn't catch it at the time? The other part is that I feel like SF2 deserves to have a class that can get up to Legendary weapon proficiency somehow. It's not like sci-fi lacks for the "obsessive master of the (weapontype) trope, after all, or heroes (or villains) with preturnatural accuracy, or... you get the idea.
I feel like if there is no Starfinder class with any sort of access to legendary weapon proficiency, then the strong implication is "Starfinder 2 doesn't get to have one of those because PF2 ate it" and that feels like the wrong answer.
I'd like to add on. I feel like i missed part of the argument on my first pass. It's possible that I just didn't catch it at the time? The other part is that I feel like SF2 deserves to have a class that can get up to Legendary weapon proficiency somehow. It's not like sci-fi lacks for the "obsessive master of the (weapontype) trope, after all, or heroes (or villains) with preturnatural accuracy, or... you get the idea.
I feel like if there is no Starfinder class with any sort of access to legendary weapon proficiency, then the strong implication is "Starfinder 2 doesn't get to have one of those because PF2 ate it" and that feels like the wrong answer.
I completely agree with this; I do think there should be slots left open for legendary weapon proficiency classes in SF2e, with my main disagreement on the matter being that I feel it ought to go on a class that's about extreme precision and single-target engagement rather than mass destruction. For instance, any sort of Terminator/Predator/cyborg assassin who'd blend adaptive technology and sheer single-mindedness to hunt down individual targets could probably fit the bill, so long as their legendary proficiency led to something different from the fighter's top-of-the-line damage output. In the case of the gunslinger, their legendary firearm proficiency is balanced by the weakness of Pathfinder's firearms to let them be more supportive instead, with the occasional mega-crit.
On a semi-related note, I'd also be interested in exploring martial classes with a legendary class DC: perhaps this is something the Mechanic or Technomancer will do, but I'd be really keen to play a hacker character who specializes in applying debuffs and crowd control via their tech, perhaps even with a focus on single opponents rather than the usual AoE fare of casters. Rarer than legendary weapon proficiency is legendary class DCs, as we only have one so far in Pathfinder (the kineticist) and the class basically treats it like spellcasting proficiency.
Other than that, other sci-fi concepts I'd love to see implemented as classes, or at the very least archetypes:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, yeah. Definitely support the magical girl transformation schtick. Get some MGLN up in here.
Another one, too... the wielder of magitech. It's a great niche for someone who has a very small number of individual spells that they can case, but is particularly good at them. Basically lets you build spells into your gear and then use them repeatedly with some sort of energy pool. You can refresh your pool a lot faster than 1/day, but you probably don't have as large a tank to begin with, and you've got a lot less flexibility. Possibly somewhat better accuracy?
I was also thinking about the magitech gunner idea - someone who's really good with firearms, and occasionally pulls out the special bullets and fires a spell instead. Then I realized that I was halfway to remaking the magus, so I don't really know what to do about that.
I don't think that "pilot" works, sadly. It's a bit too Shadowrun. We're going to have situations (lots of them) where vehicles are not appropriate, and that very quickly hits a point where "This scene turns off your specialness, so now you suck" is a thing. We don't want that.
I do think that symbiote works, and it's certainly a character type with plenty of examples from the literature. I'm not sure what it would look like mechanically, though. Possibly some sort of high-mobility natural weapons melee character? Maybe easy access to reach and athletics maneuvers? Almost certainly some solid toughness in there, if only because "Oh, God, why won't it die?" feels like about as core to the archetype as anything is.
I'd also like to see a character whose whole schtick is that they're host to multiple symbiotes of varying kinds... but that's mostly just because I think the concept is really cool, and I'd like to see someone do it somewhere, rather than any sort of real feeling that the genre demands it.
Another one, too... the wielder of magitech. It's a great niche for someone who has a very small number of individual spells that they can case, but is particularly good at them. Basically lets you build spells into your gear and then use them repeatedly with some sort of energy pool. You can refresh your pool a lot faster than 1/day, but you probably don't have as large a tank to begin with, and you've got a lot less flexibility. Possibly somewhat better accuracy?
I was also thinking about the magitech gunner idea - someone who's really good with firearms, and occasionally pulls out the special bullets and fires a spell instead. Then I realized that I was halfway to remaking the magus, so I don't really know what to do about that.
Yes, 100%. Magic-as-science and the seamless hybridization of magic and technology is the perfect niche for a science fantasy game, and having advanced tech that also runs on magic in my opinion has immense untapped flavor and mechanical potential. Stuff like hextech and chemtech-based characters from League of Legends could be an inspiration for this in my opinion, as well as various other sci-fi stories where people have built advanced technology off of magical or incomprehensibly advanced artifacts. Given how the magus is very much a melee character who has one option to go ranged, that definitely leaves a spot wide open for a primarily ranged character who supplements their gunfire with tech and magic. Rather than a spellstrike for pure blasting, something like using a weapon attack to deploy various forms of utility or otherwise play with the way gunfire typically works (e.g. curving shots around corners and cover) could definitely help convey the assorted benefits of magic and tech.
I don't think that "pilot" works, sadly. It's a bit too Shadowrun. We're going to have situations (lots of them) where vehicles are not appropriate, and that very quickly hits a point where "This scene turns off your specialness, so now you suck" is a thing. We don't want that.
That's fair, and I can definitely agree that a pilot class risks feeding into long-standing issues with large characters and how they struggle with areas made for medium and smaller creatures. In a game where large creatures can generally move around freely, a pilot class could potentially work, though I also wouldn't want to make every area in Starfinder big and wide when sci-fi classics like System Shock, Alien, or 2001: A Space Odyssey show just how claustrophobic one can feel in space.
I do think that symbiote works, and it's certainly a character type with plenty of examples from the literature. I'm not sure what it would look like mechanically, though. Possibly some sort of high-mobility natural weapons melee character? Maybe easy access to reach and athletics maneuvers? Almost certainly some solid toughness in there, if only because "Oh, God, why won't it die?" feels like about as core to the archetype as anything is.
Some sort of form change with appropriate lockout traits, similar to the barbarian's rage or psychic's unleash psyche would likely be a good start, and from that I definitely agree that any such class, whether a symbiote or a magical girl, should be ultra-mobile, with a potential split between your nigh-unkillable, Venom-style melee symbiotes and your ranged magical girls with various assorted special powers (and maybe a hybrid in-between of your Kamen Riders/Power Rangers with a melee focus and special powers rather than uber-tankiness). Perhaps I'm mixing entirely different fantasies here, but this could be an opportunity to have subclasses really drive a lot of differentiation, so that the same class could opt into some radically diverse strengths depending on their dual nature. Unlike existing classes with altered-state mechanics like the barbarian and psychic, I'd also like to put more importance on both sides of the form-switching, so that there'd be a meaningful place for each in a character's story and perhaps even incentive to switch on the fly.
I'd also like to see a character whose whole schtick is that they're host to multiple symbiotes of varying kinds... but that's mostly just because I think the concept is really cool, and I'd like to see someone do it somewhere, rather than any sort of real feeling that the genre demands it.
Also yes please. If we're putting any sort of transforming class under the same umbrella, it could be interesting to either have a Multifarious Muse kind of deal where the same character could be a hybrid of multiple things at once, with feat support to make them talk with one another, or a specific subclass dedicated to having you be a colony of things, even a hive mind like Mass Effect's Legion, or Mortal Kombat's D'Vorah. A singular host to a multitude of creatures is absolutely a sci-fi trope that deserves to be explored, potentially even given its own full class.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, hey - and another one. The character who's managed to put themselves in control of a small hivemind worth of biohorrors. Kerrigan from Starcraft is the most immediately obvious example, but I know it's not the only one. I guess it would be SF2's version of not!Summoner. You have a person with perhaps some psychic powers and some mods, who's mostly helping out with gunfire and buffs, and then you've go the big brute Thing - a swarm or a monstrosity or a bodyguard droid with a neural interface, or whatever. Would differ from the PF2 Summoner in that the Thing in question pretty much always physically exists, and there's not nearly so much magic.
You know, the image of the little girl in tactical gear whooping and hollering for joy. She's clinging to the back of some Dreadful Abomination of Science as it crunches its way through the people she doesn't like, shrugging off gunfire, just wanting her to be happy. Success!
...or for a different image? "You shouldn't have done that, Mister. Now you've made him mad." Cue a whole bunch of flesh-rending in the dark that could be taken as either straight horror or oddly heartwarming, depending on who you choose to sympathize with.