|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Description of the scenario and math below
To counteract this, the pilot can make A DC 20 piloting check to automatically dodge the main gun, but it isn't clear to the players how vital this is. It's also possible for the enemy ship to win initiative and achieve this killshot before the PCs ever act.
I concur this encounter was very poorly balanced, and it's bad enough to merit an emergency errata. This is going to make people despise starship combat.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did you run it in standard mode or with one of the adjustments?
My players also would have been defeated in round 2 if I hadn't applied the easier adjustment on the fly. We ended up going 5 rounds, with the PCs winning. There were a few rounds where they could have easily been oneshotted again.
In SF1e, ship combat never felt like there was a risk to it because they were balanced to avoid TPKs. I don't like killing PCs, but personally, I liked it being that risky, especially since
Becasue the crew actions are not in a player facing book, I feel it's up the the GM to make sure the the players under stand them, especially since this is the first time in orgnized play we have use the CSS ruels. When my player started just doing the same action every trun I gave them hints and reminders they had other options in their roles, and could change crew roles.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding the DC 20 piloting check
In the game I ran, most rounds, the pilot got a +5 bonus:
+2 item bonus from the ship's computer
+1 situation bonus from another PC aiding
+2 status bonus from the Captain's using Inspire Crew
The scenario doesn't list any one action crew actions, so I made my players aware of what the GM Core says
PCs have 3 actions during their turn, which they'll use to perform special actions granted by their role or other actions of their choice. As most starship actions require 2 actions to use, each PC is likely to have a single action to spare on their turn, which might include a PC preparing to Aid an ally, a spellcaster casting guidance to improve their odds of success on a skill check, or a PC taking a shot at an enemy boarder invading the bridge.
Character Abilities: Some characters might have special abilities, such as feats or spells, they can use during a cinematic starship scene. Core class abilities, like Aim for an operative or Suppressing Fire for a soldier, aren't intended for cinematic starship scenes. Most applications for feats and spells are left up to the GM's discretion for what's appropriate to the specific encounter but generally should veer on the more permissive side when it makes sense. Spells might be usable on a PC's turn, with some single-action enhancement spells like guidance fitting exceptionally well into the action economy a character receives during their turn. Similarly, a GM might provide a bonus or reward for casting particularly powerful spells, like phantasmal fleet, instead of taking a bespoke starship action on their turn. Remember, the goal is for every player to have fun playing the characters they created.
I had 2 players who aided every turn. The other 2 didn't have the skills needed to aid the other crew members, so they never used a 3rd action. For rules that are not player-facing until they are used in the game, I think it would help if we had a list of one-action actions that can use.
|
|
Each encounter also contains Easier and Harder adjustments in a sidebar. GMs use their best judgement and adjust encounters accordingly based on the number of PCs, their level, and the players’ experience level.
A GM’s goal is for the players to complete the adventure and feel as if they have overcome obstacles to do so. Attempt to run games which are neither extremely easy nor extremely hard; cakewalks are not the desired experience, but neither are consistent TPKs. GMs can alter their adjustments partway through an adventure based on the PCs’ performance, using different adjustments for different encounters.
____________GM Adventure Adjustments
GMs must:
.Run combat encounters without substantially increasing difficulty, except as dictated by the scenario.
____________GM Discretion
As a Starfinder Society GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever judgments you feel are necessary—within the rules—to ensure everyone has a fair and fun experience at your table.
Getting one-shotted before your turn starts or after just one round is not fun in my book. Simple solution,
In SF1e, I've been in starship combats that lasted over 10 rounds, but the likely chance in this scenario of the PCs' ship getting destroyed prevents that. I think that's a good thing, especially considering that
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another issue with this encounter. The next time cinematic starship combat shows up in a scenario, Please Please Please give us pre-made role cards. Players need to have that information in front of them to have any idea what's going on, and if someone has to pick up a scenario like this last minute at a con, they're in for a miserable time.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another issue with this encounter. The next time cinematic starship combat shows up in a scenario, Please Please Please give us pre-made role cards. Players need to have that information in front of them to have any idea what's going on, and if someone has to pick up a scenario like this last minute at a con, they're in for a miserable time.
I made handouts you can use
Printable Crew action handouts
Crew action slides for play-by-post
Archive of Nethys has the missing creature stats in an easy-to-print format now
Corpse Fellt infentry encounter stats
|
|
Hero points can be used to Avoid Death (All Points): Spend all current Hero Points (minimum 1) to avoid death when your dying condition increases. You instead stabilize with 0 HP and do not gain the Wounded condition.
What if all players could spend their hero points to save their ship? Or something similar in the Retail Incentive Program, Accessory Perks, and Promotional Boons?
|
Just to add one more data point: I GM'd 1-17, and initially ran the narrative starship combat as-is. My players had a couple bad rolls and couldn't recover; I changed to Easy Mode modifications, but their ship was still dropped to 0 HP by Round 3. I'm glad there's a "fail forward" ending to this encounter, though, and it's not a scenario-ender!
It will be interesting to see, if there are future Narrative SSCs in Scenarios, if they're this deadly, or if this one is just a one-off!
In a way, it's sort of fitting - there's a sense of symmetry, compared to, say, the "ship killer" Nuke Boats of 1e's Dead Suns XD
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just to add one more data point: I GM'd 1-17, and initially ran the narrative starship combat as-is. My players had a couple bad rolls and couldn't recover; I changed to Easy Mode modifications, but their ship was still dropped to 0 HP by Round 3. I'm glad there's a "fail forward" ending to this encounter, though, and it's not a scenario-ender!
It will be interesting to see, if there are future Narrative SSCs in Scenarios, if they're this deadly, or if this one is just a one-off!
In a way, it's sort of fitting - there's a sense of symmetry, compared to, say, the "ship killer" Nuke Boats of 1e's Dead Suns XD
Did your players figure out how to get the pilot maximum bonuses to Dodge the Crosshairs?
Something I like about the "fail forward" ending is that if the PCs lose their ship, next time they go up against the Corpse Fleet, they will have a personal reason for wanting to beat the Corpse Fleet.
|
|
Did your players figure out how to get the pilot maximum bonuses to Dodge the Crosshairs?
No - but that's something I will definitely highlight if I ever GM Narrative SSC again. "You have a third action - you should definitely be using it to Prepare to Aid, or casting Guidance, or whatever.
|
|
First time I ran it, I had a party of 4, Captain. Pilot, Magic and Science Officers. At round 4, I reminded the player that they could switch roles. One of them moved to Engineering to repair the ship for a round, and in round 5, once Quagmire Points had an effect, one jumped to Gunner for the final shot. I like that just using the guns wasn't the only or best option. Next time I run this, I'm definitely spending more time pregame going over CSS rules and Crew actions.
My first game is a play-by-post that's still going on. I'm running this scenario again in person on Saturday. I'm wondering how long this scenario has been running at other tables?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Description of the scenario and math below
** spoiler omitted **I concur this encounter was very poorly balanced, and it's bad enough to merit an emergency errata. This is going to make people despise starship combat.
Too late. I hated starship combat in 1e and reluctantly decided to give it a chance in 2e.
While we didn't die to a crit I found it incredibly tedious.
If at all possible, I'll never do it again.
Reading the above comments, it also seems like they are still doing the thing I loathed from 1e. Losing the combat doesn't have any actual consequences (you're being attacked by the Corpse Fleet. Losing should, if you are lucky, end up with you dead. If you're unlucky, you're the new recruits to the corpse fleet as some kind of undead).
I played this, haven't run it and don't own it so I may be wrong that they came up with some complete BS Deus Ex Machina excuse in order to "fail forward". I do know that it very likely (based on 1e experience) would NOT have been one that I enjoyed or thought plausible.
One of my biggest objections to 1e starfinder combat was that it was all so irrelevant. You spent an hour or 2 of game time to get a +2 bonus or penalty to your initiative in the next encounter or something similarly of no real consequence.
|
|
The "Fail Forward" is
I don't think the initial implementation is bad, but the ship repairing itself is a dumb deus ex machina. I think it would make more sense if losing the ship locked you into a choice in the finale because you had to scramble to the closest port
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The "Fail Forward" is
** spoiler omitted **
When I ran for my group, and their starship dropped to zero HP, I said
Felt more tidy.
|
|
The "Fail Forward" is
** spoiler omitted **
For the PC's ship, I'd just assume the ship's AI is using astromech drones to fix the ship. Having just come up with that, my next game, the PC's will see maintenance drones aboard their ship at the start of the scenario before they get the distress message.
My main concern about the PC's ship getting destroyed too quickly is that it shortens the length of the scenario. To compensate for that, if it happens, the ship's AI only gets the ship repaired enough to be safe for the crew to return, and the crew will have to do some skill changes and deal with hazards to get the ship to its destination. I'm also going to have the ship's AI tell the PC's when they are on the other ship that they can't finish the repairs without a new power coupling (because in Star Wars, it's always the power coupling). So the PCs have to find and bring one back.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, thanks for that spoiler. I sincerely appreciate it
Yeah, to me that definitely falls into the category of some complete BS Deus Ex Machina excuse in order to "fail forward"
I should make explicit the fact that I'm NOT trying to call badwrongfun or the like. Just explaining why gritty starship combat is just not remotely of any interest whatsoever to me. Obviously other people enjoy it and that is absolutely fine and good and wonderful.
I really, really liked the totally cinematic ship combat in the free RPG day adventure (I think that is the only time I've seen it in action). Felt like my character was on a ship in combat and that I was helping while still doing the normal PC types of things.
But I will now avoid like the plague any SFS scenarios that have starship combat and any published or home brew adventures that have more than a tiny bit of it. For me, it is just a complete waste of time.
I should probably note that the character I played 1-17 was an Envoy who could contribute little to the success of the combat. Wow, I get to make a diplomacy roll that, if successful, gives a +1 bonus to another characters roll. Not at all surprisingly that +1 never actually mattered so my net contribution was exactly 0 (I may be getting some details wrong since I was so totally disengaged from the combat). At least in Starfinder 1e I knew that I had to make sure that my character could participate in starship combat but it came as a complete surprise to me in SFS.
|
|
First, thanks for that spoiler. I sincerely appreciate it
Yeah, to me that definitely falls into the category of some complete BS Deus Ex Machina excuse in order to "fail forward"
I should make explicit the fact that I'm NOT trying to call badwrongfun or the like. Just explaining why gritty starship combat is just not remotely of any interest whatsoever to me. Obviously other people enjoy it and that is absolutely fine and good and wonderful.
I really, really liked the totally cinematic ship combat in the free RPG day adventure (I think that is the only time I've seen it in action). Felt like my character was on a ship in combat and that I was helping while still doing the normal PC types of things.
But I will now avoid like the plague any SFS scenarios that have starship combat and any published or home brew adventures that have more than a tiny bit of it. For me, it is just a complete waste of time.
I should probably note that the character I played 1-17 was an Envoy who could contribute little to the success of the combat. Wow, I get to make a diplomacy roll that, if successful, gives a +1 bonus to another characters roll. Not at all surprisingly that +1 never actually mattered so my net contribution was exactly 0 (I may be getting some details wrong since I was so totally disengaged from the combat). At least in Starfinder 1e I knew that I had to make sure that my character could participate in starship combat but it came as a complete surprise to me in SFS.
I agree the free RPG day adventure Battle for Nova Rush was the best you're on a starship during combat I've seen so far, but it's not really using the cinematic ship scene like Corpse Fleet Conflict is, and Nova Rush wasn't direct ship-to-ship combat.
Am I guessing your envoy was the captain? If so, your max possible contribution was +2 to 3 other characters in 1 round, with +2 +1 being more likely. What were you doing with your 3rd action? Also, Enspire Crew wasn't your only action available for that role, but that might depend on what skills you have. Did you consider changing roles? Although there might be fewer opportunities to change roles with 6 players. With 4 players at my table, the captain changed roles some rounds. It was the captain switching to gunner that made the shot that took out the Corpse Fleet Ship.
I do think the captain should have had a 3rd crew action. I think there is only so much space you can put in a scenario for crew actions. I also think it would help to have some common action outside of the scenario that could be used, especially more 1 action actions. That way, the scenario can have new actions directly related to that ship or encounter.
If combat is your thing, any role other than captain or engineer has direct combat actions. I was pleasantly surprised that the magic and science officer had good direct combat actions, although I suspect some players might not realize how good Quagmire Points are. The game I ran the party only used one of the guns once.
|
|
I honestly don't remember all the details. One issue was definitely that neither the players or GM really knew what we were doing so there was a lot of fumbling about until somebody read the book rules and realized we had more options. Or some characters did.
I shot the gun that my simple weapon proficient character with +2 Dex could shoot as well as captaining. Missed a lot :-).
I definitely came in prejudiced against the system. But the scenario really did nothing to address my concerns. And, as they say, you only get one chance to make a first impression.
The 2e rules were LESS tedious than the 1e rules in that the tedium lasted a shorter time :-).
Obviously the issue is that anything more gritty than Nova Rush is just not to my tastes. While I know that quite a few people held a similar opinion in 1e I have no clue what proportion. And hopefully 2e has addressed some people's concerns even if they missed with me. I genuinely hope that I am the outlier here.
I had hopes that the very cinematic approach in Nova Rush was going to become the default. That appears to be a false hope. Which unfortunately means that I will just not enjoy an aspect of Starfinder. Now I'll hope that there is MUCH less starship combat in 2e than there was in the early days of 1e :-(
As an aside, there was the SFS adventure on a train. That was fun. That could easily have been on a starship. The key, for me, is letting PCs do normal PC stuff with the vehicle stuff being in the background. And setting things up so the destruction of the ship is obviously NOT something that is a possibility the PCs have to worry about for whatever reason (even if the reason is just that it is beyond their control. The ships actual captain or AI or whatever is handling it)
|
|
I honestly don't remember all the details. One issue was definitely that neither the players or GM really knew what we were doing so there was a lot of fumbling about until somebody read the book rules and realized we had more options. Or some characters did.
For my live game tomorrow, I have handouts for Zeor G combat, Cinimatic Starship Scenes, and individual handouts for each ship role. I'm going over all of that before even starting the game to be sure everyone is up to speed on the rules. This is especially important since no one has run this subsystem before. As you said, first impressions matter, but if no one knows the rules going in, that's also not a good game to judge the subsystem by. I'll put my hand out up on the GM prep site once I get to test them in a live game tomorrow.
I had hopes that the very cinematic approach in Nova Rush was going to become the default. That appears to be a false hope. Which unfortunately means that I will just not enjoy an aspect of Starfinder. Now I'll hope that there is MUCH less starship combat in 2e than there was in the early days of 1e :-(As an aside, there was the SFS adventure on a train. That was fun. That could easily have been on a starship. The key, for me, is letting PCs do normal PC stuff with the vehicle stuff being in the background. And setting things up so the destruction of the ship is obviously NOT something that is a possibility the PCs have to worry about for whatever reason (even if the reason is just that it is beyond their control. The ships actual captain or AI or whatever is handling it)
Battle for Nova Rush and The Great Grav Train Robbery are fun; they work because they mostly just use your characters' normal actions and abilities. Cinematic Starship Scenes are more like other subsystems and not actual combat; a CSS doesn't even have to have combat. I think CSS is more meant to be a quick encounter before getting to the rest of the scenario, and not the whole adventure like Nova Rush or Grav Train. I think that's why The Corpse Ship is so dangerous, so it doesn't drag on like SF1e starship combat could be.
I think because each Cinematic Starship Scene can be as varied as any creature encounter, it's hard to judge with one example. I think the system is fine, the tuning may be too high for some, but that's just one weapon in the whole CSS, and it's easy to fix if you drop the fatal or make it the second attack and apply MAP.
I'm courious to see what the full starship combat rules are like in Tech Core, I know they are some what baises on a game called Faster Than Light, liiks like it might focus more on things going on in the ship, like Nova Rush. I'm hoping it mixes ship-defined, crew actions, and being able to use your normal character abilities.
Everyone seems hyper-focused on one or two issues in Corpse Fleet Conflict. I don't have a problem fixing those on my own as needed, because for me RAW is
GM DiscretionAs a Starfinder Society GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever judgments you feel are necessary—within the rules—to ensure everyone has a fair and fun experience at your table.
And setting things up so the destruction of the ship is obviously NOT something that is a possibility the PCs have to worry about for whatever reason (even if the reason is just that it is beyond their control. The ships actual captain or AI or whatever is handling it)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All of that sounds wonderful and if you were my GM I might even give CSS another try :-) :-) (I'm sincere in that).
But alas, you're not :-(.
If another scenario comes out using CSS or the new rules AND it gets rave reviews from lots of different people AND I get to try it with a GM that I trust then I may try it again.
Edit: It is listed as coming soon in the Paizo store. You apparently have to visit the page listing many scenarios to get access to reviews. If you hit the next/previous buttons no reviews show up. I'm SO glad that the web site has been "improved" the way that it has. Actively having to look and do weird stuff to see reviews is SUCH an improvement on them being easily available on the product page.
So, it currently has two reviews, both 1 star. Both because of the insta-kill problem. So, if I wait for a scenario that gets 4 or 5 reviews there is a chance that it will actually not suck :-)
|
|
So, how was the rest of the scenario after the ship combat?
Not sure if this is serious or a riff on “other than that, how was the play Mrs Lincoln?”
But I’ll play straight man and answer. No real idea. By the time I got to it I was too frustrated to notice. So probably ok ish. Worse or better than that I’d likely have noticed
|
|
I mean, one of those reviews is mine and I'm 90% sure the other is the OP's, so you're not increasing your sample size.
My play by Discord group reached the end of the encounter in question last night.
I will say that "role cards" as handouts are nigh on mandatory for explaining things in a timely manner (And the GM needs to rely on the community to prepare them if they don't have the time themselves). And ~2-5% chance the PCs get taken out before they get to take a single turn does not help. matters.
|
|
I mean, one of those reviews is mine and I'm 90% sure the other is the OP's, so you're not increasing your sample size.
My play by Discord group reached the end of the encounter in question last night.** spoiler omitted **
I will say that "role cards" as handouts are nigh on mandatory for explaining things in a timely manner (And the GM needs to rely on the community to prepare them if they don't have the time themselves). And ~2-5% chance the PCs get taken out before they get to take a single turn does not help. matters.
For any ship encounter, I think banter helps a lot. In one game, I kept track of all the banter, and in the mission briefing next session, my character gave all the other characters a t-shirt with their best line of banter. The skittermander in the party had the best, their t-shirt said "Eat My Shead Fur!"
I agree handout are a must for this scenario. I linked to mine in a previous post. I'm planning on putting them up on the GM prep website, but they don't have a link for this scenario yet.
My second time running the Corpse Fellt Conflict scenario went well, everyone seemed to have a good time. The extra handout helped a lot, and the player said the map I used with some Armada ship models and android tokens helped visualize the encounter, which helped a lot wiht engagement. I've started adding maps to lots of non-combat situations or encounters. Another GM used a map for an influence encounter. One of the PCs had a character that refused to engage with the other NPCs at first. Having the map, they could actually find a corner to hide in, and then started to sneak around.
I did have one player who seemed a little frustrated that their actions didn't matter during the ship combat, because every time they gave someone a bonus on a roll, the other PC either failed despite the aid or succeeded by enough that the aid wasn't needed. That's not a starship combat issue; that can happen in any combat or skill check using aid, guidance, or any other ability giving a bonus to a roll. This got me thinking, what if something like guidance to an attack roll succeeded on its own could then instead apply the +1 to damage, or guidance on a skill check that crit fails, just fails instead.
|
|
So, how was the rest of the scenario after the ship combat?Not sure if this is serious or a riff on “other than that, how was the play Mrs Lincoln?”
But I’ll play straight man and answer. No real idea. By the time I got to it I was too frustrated to notice. So probably ok ish. Worse or better than that I’d likely have noticed
That was an actual question, to anyone. I'll just leave it at that.
|
|
The rest was ok.
Nothing groundbraking, noting as bad as the start.
One minor logical gripe i had:
If this is a ship piloted by a sarcesion, why do we (expect flip map purposes) use 5ft corridors...
My headcannon is half full; I don't look for gripes, I look for solutions.
For example. Sarcesion looks skinny to me; the map doesn't show how tall the corridors are.
Turns out I don't even need my own solution.
Here's the Sarcesion description:
Also, if a Sarcesion starts to feel too confined inside a starship, they can just fly around outside the starship for a while to stretch.
I'm 6'1", my bathroom doors way are only 24" wide, I don't have to squeeze through them. I don't see why a large, skinny humanoid creature would have a problem moving in a 5' wide corridor.
I just took a look at the map again, there's only one 5' wide corridor, and it's only 10' long. All the other corridors are 10' wide. There are two other 5'x10' spaces; the rest is all wider. Are we even talking about the same map? It's an SF1e map. I just noticed the store is out of physical copies, so maybe the GM had to substitute another map.
I played in this scenario a few weeks ago and would like to share a bit of my experience with it.
Background: I'm fairly new to Starfinder 2e. That session was only my second time playing in SF2 Organized Play. Originally I had bought SF1e nearly a decade ago but despite that group's love for Pathfinder 1e, but never could get my group back then to play it. I then had a long break from ttrpgs and recently came back to the hobby. I have bought and read most of the SF2e book line, in anticipation of running these games myself. (Exception being most of the Society Scenarios, for now.) So, admittedly I'm pretty much considered to be a newb.
Admittedly, I did see those product reviews for #1-17 (but not this thread) before playing the session and thus was a bit concerned of a TPK.
This ship combat was quite suspenseful and almost getting one shotted on round 2 was still an eye-opener despite kinda expecting it. There were 5 players, including myself. We heavily used our Hero Points in the this early part of the scenario.
I found it extremely helpful that the GM had printed out copies for each player the crew actions page. We figured a pattern to recover and did eventually disable the other ship after several rounds. We each usually round-robin-ed an aid role with our remaining action point, as everyone happened to have at least one skill that they could use to aid another and a few also had applicable secondary skills to allow a few of the characters to switch ship roles when needed and still aid. Perhaps repetitive, but it worked.
Having read this thread, I think that it would have been good to have reviewed or had a hand out of what the GM Core has about single actions available for this kind of ship combat or tips on applicable character abilities.
Interestingly, the other players in this last session, most of whom are veteran 1e players & GMs and also 2e play-testers, expressed at the end of the session that their experience was positive and they were receptive to these ship combat rules over their experience with 1e ship combat, despite the close call we just had.
Of course I don't know what tweaks the GM had made but I think they are at least a little active here in these forums, I'll message them that this thread exists and see if they'd like to share any input and experience on that session concerning this scenario.
|
So far played once live and ran it on Foundry VTT. On the good side, we never had to deal with the ship being in danger of destruction, but in both cases, the fact that the ship combat was on multiple pages caused major issues. (I now hve those player cards shown above downloaded. Many thanks there.) Also, while I could see what they were trying for, there were simply too few choices for players. Every player pretty much picked the same action every round until the battle ended. Captain gave an bonus to the pilot, or maybe the gunner. Pilot eveaded the Enemy big gun, Gunner fired the laser, and Science officer picked their favorite psychic blast. In both cases, we also tried to help the players come up with uses for their 3rd action each round. One thing we allowed was allowing the Envoy to use Get em' on the enemy ship. Since it only gave a +1 to 1 or 2 actions, it didn't seem overpowered.
One other note for Online play. In foundry, the Starfinder 2e includes Alien Core and all monster stats for all Modules, APs, and Scenarios up to 1-18. So the missing creature stats were in the VTT. (no pics though, but you can save the images from the Scenarios PDFs and add them to the VTT. It takes maybe a half hour to completely prep a Scenario from PDF to mapped and ready to pllay in Foundry (except for the dungeon style maps. Adding all the walls can take time.)