Pathfinder 1e

[Ft_Hood]

Is there a forum on here for Pathfinder? I primarily play D&D 5e but getting my feet wet learning Pathfinder and looking for a discussion group that deals with Pathfinder.....

Thanks!

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Ogre: As a d20/3.x variant, Pathfinder goes in this section, D&D 3e/3.5e/d20. Tagging your PF1e content as PF1e helps manage expectations of other posters.

[Morphic tide]

The Mod Ogre: As a d20/3.x variant, Pathfinder goes in this section, D&D 3e/3.5e/d20. Tagging your PF1e content as PF1e helps manage expectations of other posters.

I feel that it's important to note that despite several years since Paizo started putting out separate systems, there's still only a Pathfinder thread prefix, with no way to distinguish PF1e from 2e from Starfinder.

[stack]

I feel that it's important to note that despite several years since Paizo started putting out separate systems, there's still only a Pathfinder thread prefix, with no way to distinguish PF1e from 2e from Starfinder.

People talk about Starfinder?

[KillianHawkeye]

People talk about Starfinder?

Starfinder is cool, man! :smallcool:

[pabelfly]

People talk about Starfinder?

Starfinder is pretty good if you want to run a d20-inspired sci-fi and fantasy game.

[Crake]

I feel that it's important to note that despite several years since Paizo started putting out separate systems, there's still only a Pathfinder thread prefix, with no way to distinguish PF1e from 2e from Starfinder.

I'd like to echo this sentiment. I think it's also worth noting that PF2e is NOT actually a d20 system game (and neither is 5e), as it's not based on the d20 system OGL, despite what people think ("It uses a d20 as it's primary dice, that means it's a d20 game!" - not correct).

[Elves]

I'd like to echo this sentiment. I think it's also worth noting that PF2e is NOT actually a d20 system game (and neither is 5e), as it's not based on the d20 system OGL, despite what people think ("It uses a d20 as it's primary dice, that means it's a d20 game!" - not correct).

d20 game, not a d20 (TM) game

[Kurald Galain]

I feel that it's important to note that despite several years since Paizo started putting out separate systems, there's still only a Pathfinder thread prefix, with no way to distinguish PF1e from 2e from Starfinder.

I'd say that P2 and Starfinder belong in the "other RPGs" subforum, not the 3E subforum, since neither is descended from 3E. The "other" subforum doesn't have tags for every RPG anyway.

[stack]

Starfinder is cool, man! :smallcool:


Starfinder is pretty good if you want to run a d20-inspired sci-fi and fantasy game.

I wasn't criticizing it, just poking a bit of fun at its lack of presence on this board. I don't have much of an opinion on it.

[Asmotherion]

People talk about Starfinder?
Starfinder is cool (although I've never had the pleasure of actually playing it). But it's true most people don't talk about it.


I'd say that P2 and Starfinder belong in the "other RPGs" subforum, not the 3E subforum, since neither is descended from 3E. The "other" subforum doesn't have tags for every RPG anyway.
I can see that for Pf2e, but isn't starfinder based on the d20 system?

[Arutema]

Starfinder is cool (although I've never had the pleasure of actually playing it). But it's true most people don't talk about it.


I can see that for Pf2e, but isn't starfinder based on the d20 system?

Yes, Starfinder is mostly PF1E updated for a sci-fi setting. It keeps the standard d20 move-standard-swift action system, BAB, and save progressions. (Though the full attack and 5' step rules are changed.)

PF2E uses a completely different system with some resemblances to d20.

[Crake]

Starfinder is pretty good if you want to run a d20-inspired sci-fi and fantasy game.

More people need to try out d20 modern/future

[Psyren]

Starfinder isn't too popular around here but I saw several tables for it at DragonCon, so it's still kicking. I'm also lucky in that two of my FLGS run SFS games, though not at the frequency they do D&D or PF2.

[Telok]

Starfinder is pretty good if you want to run a d20-inspired sci-fi and fantasy game.

Nah. Its a d20 "space" fantasy game with lazor!Gunz! in it. There's no science and pretty much no real setting logic. I doubt they ever fixed the iseues with using radiation weapons against NPC ships*.

They got their numbers right tho. You just have to accept that you can't go against your class archetype after about level 5 ot 7.

* rad weapons do hp damage to crews because poison saves carry a dc-10 damage rider on them (a dc 13 poison save causes 3 damage) and the rad weapons put a d4 of rounds of radiation poisoning the whole crew on any ship they hit. Higher level armors make you immune to lower levels of radiation if you're sealed up on full life support. But npc ships get equal level officers us potentially large amounts (hundreds plus) of crew. If everyone on the ship has armor high enough level to survive the radiation it can easily bust wealth by level with even a dozen survivors willing to trade armor for rescue. WBL which is required for the game to work. If they don't have that high level armor a few rad weapon hits should drop the ship below crew minimums to keep everything going and the space combat isn't balanced around that. And this is just one issue that cropped up in an early space combat in the first couple months.

[pabelfly]

Nah. Its a d20 "space" fantasy game with lazor!Gunz! in it. There's no science and pretty much no real setting logic.

I don't see the point of complaining that the setting isn't hard sci-fi enough or trying to differentiate between sci-fi, science-fiction fantasy and fantasy in a science fiction setting. There are plenty of classic sci-fi stories that handwave scientific realism and grounded logic in favour of conveying fun and interesting ideas and settings.

For example, Dune is one of the greatest sci-fi novel ever written. It's also extremely unrealistic that aliens could produce something nearly perfectly compatible with human biology, that landbound, unintelligent worms are capable of making a product that makes space travel work, that we'll be sword-duelling in the future, or even that their depiction of space travel is unrealistic or whatever. And you could make those nitpicks (and a hundred others, I'm sure) but that doesn't stop Dune being a great novel.

The real questions to ask- did I think there were plenty of good, fun options when I was building a character? Yes. Did I have fun playing the game in real life? Yes. Have I enjoyed the stories being told in the APs I've tried? Yes. Seems like it's ticking all the boxes for a good system to me.

Even if you don't want to engage with the magical aspects of the setting and system, there are good, scientifically-grounded classes that will perform well in and out of combat.

[Crake]

I don't see the point of complaining that the setting isn't hard sci-fi enough or trying to differentiate between sci-fi, science-fiction fantasy and fantasy in a science fiction setting. There are plenty of classic sci-fi stories that handwave scientific realism and grounded logic in favour of conveying fun and interesting ideas and settings.

My issue with starfinder has always been JUST HOW MUCH they eschewed verisimilitude for a gamified and “balanced” system. Everything about it from the wbl, to the utter absurdity of difference between the entry level weapons and the end game weapons just strikes me as a gamified system focusing on gameplay first at the wild expense of immersion. I play rpgs for immersion first, if i wanted gameplay, id just go play a video game. They do it better on almost every level

[pabelfly]

My issue with starfinder has always been JUST HOW MUCH they eschewed verisimilitude for a gamified and “balanced” system. Everything about it from the wbl, to the utter absurdity of difference between the entry level weapons and the end game weapons just strikes me as a gamified system focusing on gameplay first at the wild expense of immersion. I play rpgs for immersion first, if i wanted gameplay, id just go play a video game. They do it better on almost every level

I don't know if the drastic difference in weapon prices is unrealistic. The difference in price between a cheap second-hand car that runs and is registered and a brand-new, custom-built hypercar is something like ten thousand times, even if they both are four-wheel vehicles that provide personal transport. The same dramatic scaling applies to all sorts of other things too. No reason this wouldn't be true for weapons in the future.

[Gnaeus]

I don't know if the drastic difference in weapon prices is unrealistic. The difference in price between a cheap second-hand car that runs and is registered and a brand-new, custom-built hypercar is something like ten thousand times, even if they both are four-wheel vehicles that provide personal transport. The same dramatic scaling applies to all sorts of other things too. No reason this wouldn't be true for weapons in the future.

It's true, my daughter can't drive my car until she is level 9. It just doesn't work for her.She only knows how to drive used cars... Luckily my house upgrades based on APL and when she hits level 3 we will be able to install better air conditioning. That's free of course, because houses don't cost money.

[Arutema]

I don't know how people got the idea that Item Level is some MMO-style "required level to use" mechanic. It's a GM suggestion, just like CR for monsters.

[pabelfly]

It's true, my daughter can't drive my car until she is level 9. It just doesn't work for her.She only knows how to drive used cars... Luckily my house upgrades based on APL and when she hits level 3 we will be able to install better air conditioning. That's free of course, because houses don't cost money.

I don't get what point you're trying to make. One poster said the drastic difference in the price of weapons was unrealistic, and I disagreed, using cars as an example of an item with a huge variety in terms of price and performance while still fundamentally meeting the same need of providing personal, private transport of a particular size. None of your post is an argument for or against what I or the person I'm arguing with posted. Why try to argue for or against something that no-one was talking about?

[Gnaeus]

I don't know how people got the idea that Item Level is some MMO-style "required level to use" mechanic. It's a GM suggestion, just like CR for monsters.

Page 282. The nicer the vehicle, the higher the DC to drive it. Not a GM suggestion at all. No, you are thinking of the equally ludicrous purchase rules, in which what you can buy is based on character level, not wealth, despite the fact that items sell for 10% of value. With gems like "the distant future, where you can't figure out where to buy a motion detector until level 7." And no, that isn't a GM suggestion anymore than anything else in the rulebook. It does say the GM can allow higher level items for higher cost or a favor. Like when I walk into the BMW dealership with 80,000 and the dealer makes me do a side quest, or charges me double because I'm not fancy enough to have a BMW.

[pabelfly]

Page 282. The nicer the vehicle, the higher the DC to drive it. Not a GM suggestion at all. No, you are thinking of the equally ludicrous purchase rules, in which what you can buy is based on character level, not wealth, despite the fact that items sell for 10% of value. With gems like "the distant future, where you can't figure out where to buy a motion detector until level 7." And no, that isn't a GM suggestion anymore than anything else in the rulebook. It does say the GM can allow higher level items for higher cost or a favor. Like when I walk into the BMW dealership with 80,000 and the dealer makes me do a side quest, or charges me double because I'm not fancy enough to have a BMW.

3.5 had rules about not spending more than 25% of your wealth on a single item, and structured wealth by level so 3.5 players have the same gates between character level and the items they could purchase, even if those gates were not as overt as Starfinder's.

[Gnaeus]

3.5 had rules about not spending more than 25% of your wealth on a single item, and structured wealth by level so 3.5 players have the same gates between character level and the items they could purchase, even if those gates were not as overt as Starfinder's.

You are wrong, but if you were right it still wouldn't matter.

First, 3.5 has a rule about not spending more than 50% of your STARTING wealth on a single item, or 25% on consumables. And a WBL table based on expected reward x number of encounters. This did sometimes serve as a functional gateway, but there is no rule about purchasing items other than settlement sizes. There is nothing preventing a party in a metropolis spending the entire wealth of the party on a single item. Those rules exist so that if I introduce a new character into a campaign, there will be a guideline on how much stuff he should have, but he shouldn't be able to be better than a "naturally progressing character" who got a bunch of his loot in items that were inconvenient to sell.

And even if you were right about the guidelines, there is nothing preventing a starting character from entering with a high level scroll, for example. There isn't a "You can buy these grenades, but not these grenades" function.

But regardless, when you are talking about suspension of disbelief, the OVERT is exactly the problem. If 3.5 worked exactly as you suggest, but it gated items behind the screen of WBL so that players weren't constantly confronting the gamist elements of the system, it wouldn't be nearly as bad as SF. Much of the reason for THAT is the other gamist decision to speed game play by basing DPR on weapon rather than level. This means that a SF character needs to be completely reorganizing his equipment every level or two. If a 10th level fighter has a sword +1 he is behind the curve by about 10%, and could solve that with a str item or a GMW or some other buff or feat. Or if a first level character gets a +4 sword it doesn't actually change the game all that much. If a 10th level PF character has a first level weapon he does first level damage. So you are constantly replacing your rifle with an identical but better rifle. With the 10% sale rule making it feel like you aren't even getting anything meaningful from the old gear. It isn't inherently a problem that the system has milepoints for what gear you are expected to have. It is a problem that those milepoints are explicitly staring you in the face, and are very clearly designed to prevent parties from having meaningful choices on how to spend their gear. The best example being the ship system, which is obviously, painfully designed to prevent parties from skimping on a ship to have better weapons, or skimping on weapons to have a better ship, because spaceships don't have or cost value. There is literally no in game reason why a low level character with good social skills and ties couldn't buy better weapons than a 10th level down on his luck bar drunk if they have the same credits, but they can't because it will throw off the entire game.

[zlefin]

I don't see the point of complaining that the setting isn't hard sci-fi enough or trying to differentiate between sci-fi, science-fiction fantasy and fantasy in a science fiction setting. There are plenty of classic sci-fi stories that handwave scientific realism and grounded logic in favour of conveying fun and interesting ideas and settings.

For example, Dune is one of the greatest sci-fi novel ever written. It's also extremely unrealistic that aliens could produce something nearly perfectly compatible with human biology, that landbound, unintelligent worms are capable of making a product that makes space travel work, that we'll be sword-duelling in the future, or even that their depiction of space travel is unrealistic or whatever. And you could make those nitpicks (and a hundred others, I'm sure) but that doesn't stop Dune being a great novel.

The real questions to ask- did I think there were plenty of good, fun options when I was building a character? Yes. Did I have fun playing the game in real life? Yes. Have I enjoyed the stories being told in the APs I've tried? Yes. Seems like it's ticking all the boxes for a good system to me.

Even if you don't want to engage with the magical aspects of the setting and system, there are good, scientifically-grounded classes that will perform well in and out of combat.

that's because great novels are about the human condition far moreso than about their settings. At least most of the time.

Imho Dune does at least do a decent job of justifying the sword combat though. Sure there's unrealism, but a reasonable amount of work was put into justifying it passably enough. The space travel seems as well justified as is typical of many scifi works.

I agree it's not worth complaining about whether something is sci-fi or space fantasy. But there are times where it's useful to make the distinction, even if one still shouldn't complain about it.

[Telok]

The space travel seems as well justified as is typical of many scifi works.

I agree it's not worth complaining about whether something is sci-fi or space fantasy. But there are times where it's useful to make the distinction, even if one still shouldn't complain about it.

The whole drift drive set up is pretty hilarious. Every point in real space corresponds with a point in drift space and the drive just flips you back and forth. Whether the correlation was near:near or near:anywhere is left to the DM as far as I can tell. In the adventures it's plot based, just like time and chases.

If you go with near:near then you can defend an area in drift space that maps to something like your spacestation. Nobody ever does this despite the ability for a ship to pop up next to (or within for small fighters) your station and open up with some "everyone inside takes 2d6 damage every time we fire it" weapons. If you go with near:anywhere you can ditch all chases by just flipping your drive on and off a dozen times while drifting at any speed. Plus it means you can't effectively defend any points in real space from the afore mentioned drift based attack. Its all super hand wavy speed-of-plot stuff, even more so than Star Wars.

Have we mentioned space hex size & ship stacking? Spaceship weapons doing "level appropriate hazardous environment" damage when used on people, leading to the "light nuclear missile" possibly being less dangerous than something like three grenades? The range of spaceship sensors in atmosphere? The spaceship weapon mod (this might be errata fixed by now) combo that lets you shoot through a planet? Nothing is allowed to travel at relavistic speeds? If you turn off your engines in space you stop moving immedately? They added an entire spaceship subsystem to give strength based characters something to do during combat and its just basically giving small bonuses to the characters making the dex & int skill checks.

Seriously, the logic is all game balance based for doing "D&D/PF in spppaaaccceee!!! with lazorGunz!". Which translates to basic standard D&D/PF style game play with some space/technology words added and everyone using "guns". Verisimilitude isn't a factor.

[KillianHawkeye]

Yeah, but it's really fun

[Crake]

I don't know if the drastic difference in weapon prices is unrealistic. The difference in price between a cheap second-hand car that runs and is registered and a brand-new, custom-built hypercar is something like ten thousand times, even if they both are four-wheel vehicles that provide personal transport. The same dramatic scaling applies to all sorts of other things too. No reason this wouldn't be true for weapons in the future.

I don't buy it. A level 1 handgun in the hands of a brilliant marksman is still an utterly useless weapon, while a level 20 weapon in the hands of an ameture will still mow down everything around it. It utterly breaks realism, because in real life, and especially in corpo-scifi settings, you can definitely expect completely inexperienced rich people to have masses of wealth that they could use to completely break the system by having the best gear at low level, and it to be realistic.

But when it comes down to it, guns should be, for the most part, largely equal in effectiveness, because getting shot is getting shot. Whether it be by a $100 handgun you bought from walmart, or a $10000 custom bling desert eagle.

As to the car reference, the ACTUAL difference between a used, second hand car, and a brand new, luxury car, is almost entirely in the branding, and not in the performance. Sure, there's an extreme variance in cost, and that is something you could expect in a corpo-scifi setting, but there's NOT an equivalent extreme variance in performance. The difference in damage in SF weapons would be the equivalent of horse drawn carts and flying cars existing in a culture at the same time and being expected norms between the top and the bottom eschelons of society, but that's just not how technology works. There's usually a fairly narrow band of performance between bleeding edge, brand new tech, and consumer grade, entry level equipment. The difference between power in SF equipment is legit several tech ages of value apart.


But regardless, when you are talking about suspension of disbelief, the OVERT is exactly the problem.

But yeah, ultimately, this is my main gripe. Just how in your face the gamification is. You can practically see the rails holding you in place.

[pabelfly]

I don't buy it. A level 1 handgun in the hands of a brilliant marksman is still an utterly useless weapon, while a level 20 weapon in the hands of an ameture will still mow down everything around it. It utterly breaks realism, because in real life, and especially in corpo-scifi settings, you can definitely expect completely inexperienced rich people to have masses of wealth that they could use to completely break the system by having the best gear at low level, and it to be realistic.

So I'm not sure I get the complaint here. The typical RPG gameplay loop is Fight enemies, get experience and loot, use this to get upgrades and then fight stronger enemies. Starfinder is guilty of this, sure, but... most other RPGs are too?

To take your example, if a rich character with no experience with a particular weapon starts using that weapon, they could still do a lot of damage, but they'd be less accurate and do less damage than a high-level person with experience with that weapon. The experienced character has the support of class levels, abilities, stats and feats that make them better at using those weapons than the rich newbie.


But when it comes down to it, guns should be, for the most part, largely equal in effectiveness, because getting shot is getting shot. Whether it be by a $100 handgun you bought from walmart, or a $10000 custom bling desert eagle.

Surely the same critique could be applied to 3.5? Realistically, anyone taking a sword thrust or an arrow isn't going to have a good time afterwards either, but we abstract this into a loss of hitpoints that becomes increasingly irrelevant at higher and higher levels.


As to the car reference, the ACTUAL difference between a used, second hand car, and a brand new, luxury car, is almost entirely in the branding, and not in the performance. Sure, there's an extreme variance in cost, and that is something you could expect in a corpo-scifi setting, but there's NOT an equivalent extreme variance in performance. The difference in damage in SF weapons would be the equivalent of horse drawn carts and flying cars existing in a culture at the same time and being expected norms between the top and the bottom eschelons of society, but that's just not how technology works. There's usually a fairly narrow band of performance between bleeding edge, brand new tech, and consumer grade, entry level equipment. The difference between power in SF equipment is legit several tech ages of value apart.

There isn't a narrow band of technology at all, the gap is extremely wide. There are many people around the world that don't even have the luxury of a horse or a cart, let alone even the smallest, slowest and unsafest of cars, and you also have people with cars made of high-performance exotic materials capable of driving at over three hundred kilometres an hour.

So let's specifically compare cars. Here's the specs for a 2002 Toyota Corolla. I'd guess you could pick this, or a car similar in performance and appearance, for approximately $1000.

Engine Power - 125HP
0m/h to 60m/h - 8.3 seconds
Top speed - 184 km/h

Here's the specs for a 2022 Bugatti Divo. This costs about $5.8m

Engine Power - 1479HP
0m/h to 62m/h - 2.4 seconds
Top Speed - 380 km/h

There are a few reasons to use car performance as a comparison point, but the main reason I chose them is that they have concrete performance stats to compare, and, generally, gaining increased performance for a car costs increasingly more money for increasingly less gains. Rather like Starfinder weapons.

[Telok]

Here's the specs for a 2022 Bugatti Divo. This costs about $5.8m

Engine Power - 1479HP
0m/h to 62m/h - 2.4 seconds
Top Speed - 380 km/h

There are a few reasons to

If I recall correctly the Bugatti will blow out its tyres in about 10 minutes trying to go max speed. But that's OK! The fuel runs out in 8. That last 190 mph is a super sharp cost curve. On the other had, if I pass 6 mil to a random 18 yr old they can totes lay out & pick up a Bugatti.

[pabelfly]

If I recall correctly the Bugatti will blow out its tyres in about 10 minutes trying to go max speed. But that's OK! The fuel runs out in 8. That last 190 mph is a super sharp cost curve.

And I imagine that a Toyota corolla travelling at 180km/h is causing similar problems for its fuel and tyres.

In any case, if you think reliability is an issue that somehow disqualifies my point, you can compare the aforementioned Corolla to a race car made for Le Man's racing, which I imagine has a similar price to the Bugatti but also needs to run reliably for twenty-four hours straight

[Telok]

In any case, if you think reliability is an issue that somehow disqualifies my point,

Nah, I don't care about your whatev. Its just an interesting wiget stuck in my memory.

But the SF scaling and level limiting really is a pure game construct with no relation to RL anything. Starship launched nuclear missiles do level appropriate environmental hazard damage. If the pcs are 8th level it doesn't matter if a 1st or 20th level npc shot them at you or if its the pcs shooting it, or if they're the "light" or "heavy" ones. You don't defend any of by trying to justify anything, thats a waste of time. They did however get their numbers mostly right as long as you're playing the game the way they want you to, more so than many many other games.

[LibraryOgre]

I'd like to echo this sentiment. I think it's also worth noting that PF2e is NOT actually a d20 system game (and neither is 5e), as it's not based on the d20 system OGL, despite what people think ("It uses a d20 as it's primary dice, that means it's a d20 game!" - not correct).

It does, however, have the whole OGL 1.0a license in the back, referencing the d20 SRD from 2000. It may not bear the branding, but it's definitely got its roots firmly there.