| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do we know if the new season/version of Starfinder Society supports slow progression?
The first 10 scenarios for the new Starfinder Society are all levels 1-2. Since it typically takes 6 games to get to level 3, this would normally mean creating a second character if we want to play all the scenarios. Slow progression (with half XP gains) would really be the only way to play all games with just one character, right?
Slow progression will not be present in Starfinder Society (second edition) at launch.
Thank you - I'll plan for multiple characters then, to get through all the 1-2 level scenarios, not a problem.
Contributor
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Slow progression will not be present in Starfinder Society (second edition) at launch.
Hello Awesome Starfinder Team!
I'd like to make a plea for slow track -- if not at launch, then maybe by the start of the new year?
Part of the appeal of SF2 is the granularity of PF2's 12 XP system. Slow track offers people options. You can slow track to enable yourself to catch all of a storyline, or to allow a friend to catch up with your XP count so that you can travel together into higher level scenarios.
While I have not heard of any shorter adventures (2XP quests) being planned for Starfinder 2, should you ever decide to introduce them, slow track on scenarios can help a player more easily bring their XPs back to a multiple of 4 -- for those players who aren't happy if their XP isn't easily divisible by 4. (Like me, I'll admit.)
We already have slow track in PF2, and it has been proven to work great. It's not a commonly taken option, but useful for when players need it. Also, I was hoping for as little rules change between the two systems as possible to make it easier to recruit players to try out both systems. Every time there is a rules deviation between the two systems, it makes it more difficult to recruit people because they get turned off by having to learn how each system works.
Please. Keep the Organized Play ruleset as simple and consistent as possible for system travelers.
Respectfully yours,
Hmm
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
May I also throw my support behind slow play? I'm GMing a few starfinder 2e scenarios and while I would like to apply my chronicles I get to characters, I would prefer if they didn't skyrocket to too high a level too quickly. Slow progression would let me GM while leveling my characters slowly.
|
Venture-Agent, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the most important part of this is slow track allows a friend to catch up while playing the same games.
I see a fair number of people playing mostly as a group. Usually this is either a family playing together or significant others playing together. They want to play those characters together most of the time. This becomes harder with the narrower bands of levels allowed in an adventure — only two levels. Without slow track, if someone gets out of sync they either have to play without any of the rest of the group (to catch up) or skip a session (to slow down).
Slow track would allow the people with more XP to slow down so the person that missed a session can catch up.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also support bringing back slow progression. Especially when playing pregens, I'd rather play slow so I don't miss out on experiencing each level as my own character. Sometimes you want to play a pregens to catch up in level, but most of the time I'm playing pregens to help fill tables during big PbP events, or live, I'm switching characters to help balance the party.
Locally, the gaming store we play at is next to a college campus. I noticed a lot of the students are playing PF2e with slow progression. All the students who were willing to take turns to GM have stopped GMing for the semester. I know some of the students are trying to avoid high-level characters, because most of the local games are lower level. I get the feeling some of the students don't have time to make a new character whenever needed.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
With the announcement of (at least) 8 metaplot scenarios in the 3-4 level range, I feel this discussion should be revived. Some degree of warning as to whether you should play all of the scenarios slow or only 4 of them slow and the rest at normal would be needed, of course, but it will be really unfortunate if people can't experience the entire metaplot on one character, especially when there were rumors there was an attempt to accomodate this.
Venture-Captain, Australia—NSW—Greater West
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With the announcement of (at least) 8 metaplot scenarios in the 3-4 level range, I feel this discussion should be revived. Some degree of warning as to whether you should play all of the scenarios slow or only 4 of them slow and the rest at normal would be needed, of course, but it will be really unfortunate if people can't experience the entire metaplot on one character, especially when there were rumors there was an attempt to accomodate this.
I am also in this camp. I was planning for one character to experience the whole metaplot, which is now only possible with Slow Track being available.
I was talking to my SFS2 players, and a number expressed the same thing.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With the announcement of (at least) 8 metaplot scenarios in the 3-4 level range, I feel this discussion should be revived. Some degree of warning as to whether you should play all of the scenarios slow or only 4 of them slow and the rest at normal would be needed, of course, but it will be really unfortunate if people can't experience the entire metaplot on one character, especially when there were rumors there was an attempt to accomodate this.
I'm also in this camp.
Playing Metaplot scenarios in order with the same PC is an essential part of how I do organized play now. I'm pretty upset about it. I will probably stop playing SFS2e after my first or second 3-4 scenario until the OP team re introduces the slow track (which is how I solve this problem when it happens to me in PFS2e).
|
|
Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.
Venture-Agent, Virginia—Newport News
|
Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.
With SFS2 going to the same 12 XP/level system as PFS2, this makes it lot easier to potentially track slow track versus tracking 1/2 XPs as you would in PFS1.
|
|
With SFS2 going to the same 12 XP/level system as PFS2, this makes it lot easier to potentially track slow track versus tracking 1/2 XPs as you would in PFS1.Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.
I agree it's much easier in SF2e, but it would be nice ot have one standard for both games. Here's an extreme PF2e example. If you wanted to delay leveling up one level while playing all bounties as slowtrack, you would have to plan that out 12 chronicals in advance, and track half points on all 12 chronicals. If my suggestion were used, you could play the first 11 bounties normally, then on the 12th, you realise that you would be too high level for next week's game, you would choose to play without advancing on your 12th chronicle.
In the case of SF2e, even if we had slowtrack, when the first 3-4 level scenario came out we didn't know in advance that there would be 8 in metaplot scenarios in the 3-4 level range to plan ahead to use slowtrack. Playing without advancing would have allowed you to make the decision not to advance when you played the 6th scenario, then you just choose not to advance for 2 sessions to be able to play all 8.
Another SF2e case. You're playing a Dragonkin, and a friend is playing your bonded partner, and they call out sick for a game that would have leveled both of you up. If you could choose to play without advancing for that session, and next week you're back to playing normally.
I think, combined with all the scenarios now being repeatable, having play without advance planning helps with not having to plan things out in advance as much, along with less to track.
__________________________
Something I haven't considered is how slowtracking affects GM chronicles, or when, if a GM would want to use it?
__________________________
I'm not against bringing Slowtrack back; I'm just throwing ideas out there, thinking there must have been a reason they didn't allow it from the start in SF2e.
|
Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.
Maybe I am misremembering but isn't a rule if you do slow track in PFS2 you have to be slow tracked for the whole level?
Right or wrong I wouldn't want to get no credit for an adventure, especially not a metaplot one. If a GM says "Who has played (adventure which comes before this)", I want to be able to say I have with a chronicle to prove it.
|
|
Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.
No, play without advancement is a nightmare. People play very differently when there are no consequences for them (but there are for other people), and not all of it is stuff that's easy to consciously override.
|
|
Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.Maybe I am misremembering but isn't a rule if you do slow track in PFS2 you have to be slow tracked for the whole level?
Right or wrong I wouldn't want to get no credit for an adventure, especially not a metaplot one. If a GM says "Who has played (adventure which comes before this)", I want to be able to say I have with a chronicle to prove it.
For my idea, people would still get a chronicle, downtime, and ACP, but no XP or credit($)
|
|
No, play without advancement is a nightmare. People play very differently when there are no consequences for them (but there are for other people), and not all of it is stuff that's easy to consciously override.Would it be simpler to do something like play without advancement instead of the slow track? Once you slow track once, if you want to go back to the normal track, then you have to odd amount of XP. Instead, when you play a scenario that would level you up, you can choose not to advance and not get any credits or XP from it, but still get ACP. Next time you play, you could do the same again, or choose to advance; either way, there's no half scenario's worth of credits or XP to track.
This isn't play without getting a chronicle; your character is still at risk of death, or other long-lasting effects. I don't see how it's less risky than a character playing slowtrack? Credit($) wise playing 3 sessions paid, then not getting paid for a session or 2 isn't much different from getting 1/2 pay for 6 scenarios. It's just more flexible without needing to plan ahead and has less to track.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
thinking there must have been a reason they didn't allow it from the start in SF2e.
Not one that they have articulated, as far as I know.
Which, for me at least, significantly adds to my hatred of the decision. It not only feels very very wrong it feels very very arbitrary.
|
|
thinking there must have been a reason they didn't allow it from the start in SF2e.Not one that they have articulated, as far as I know.
Which, for me at least, significantly adds to my hatred of the decision. It not only feels very very wrong it feels very very arbitrary.
We know it's temporary.
second comment to this thread from Jul 8, 2025:
Slow progression will not be present in Starfinder Society (second edition) at launch.
____________________________
I could be completely wrong, but at least to me it doesn't seem arbitrary. My guess is that not allowing SlowTrack during season one has nothing to do with SlowTrack itself. SF2e had a lot of big changes to how organized play works; they wanted to test before deciding to apply them to PF2e or not. Delaying bringing SlowTrack back might be a way to make sure the things they're looking to test get tried sooner than later. My wild speculation is that both not sanctioning APs and not having slow tack in season one were ways to focus on testing the changes to how scenarios work in SF2e (shorter run times, narrow level bands, all scenarios being repeatable, able to start character at higher levels). The first 3 have already been added to PF2e, or announced that they will be used in PF2e.
Again, this is all just wild speculation. The last one might be too soon to tell, because the first level 3 to 4 only came out 2 months ago. Not sanctioning APs, not having slowTack in season one, and having too many level 3 to 4 scenarios in season one, all suggest to me that Paizo is really courious what people will think about building a new character starting at 3rd level, or if they will just use pregens, and how this might affect the game overall. I will say local players are loving being able to build new characters at higher levels. If anything, I'm wondering if people will like it too much.
