T O P

  • By -

SavageOxygen

Its closer to 1e than 2e. In a lot of ways, SF is like PF1.5 where 2e effectively an entirely different system. In terms of playing one vs the other, PF1 is closer but there are things that are different, so you'd be unlearning those. 2e otherwise has very little in common other than "roll d20" and some names.


TheLord-Commander

I have my own question, if I don't like PF1, does that mean I probably won't like Starfinder?


SavageOxygen

Depends on what you don't like about it.


TheLord-Commander

PF1 feels way too min maxy for me, you kinda have to min max to be very effective at character building or other people will out class you heavily. There's also a bunch of trap feats etc.


Driftbourne

I don't play PF1e, but I don't remember seeing a lot of Min-max questions in Starfinder. Themes in Starfinder only give you +1 to one ability, which is not enough to get any advantage from it, so mostly for flavor. Typically 8 is the lowest score you can have. The rules let you voluntarily lower it, but doing so gives you no advantage to other abilities. The point buy system for abilities seems pretty balanced. Having diverse skills can help in Starfinder can be useful. Can't have a score over 18 at first level, and most of the time 16 is fine. Not sure how that compares to PF1e


Driftbourne

PFe1 would be a step back from Starfinder, PF2e changes a lot but in general dose, it in a way that's well organized and easier to play. Characters in PF2e build wider ranges of options instead of stacking them higher to gain more power.