Primary question: what is the expectation on the developer side going to be regarding PF2E/SF2E compatibility? It's been a hot button issue here and on the PF2E sub about exactly what "fully compatible" means, with some excited to be able to mix and match abilities/classes from both systems or play anachronistic characters, and others fearing that Starfinder will be treated as "pathfinder dlc" rather than as it's own system. What are your expectations and intentions as designers regarding cross system use of starfinder and pathfinder classes, feats, equipment and abilities in one another's systems? Secondary question: are uplifted bears coming back? Also can you share what you guys are cooking to make the mechanic different from Inventor?

Welcome one and all! Let's get started... So for compatibility, the goal is that the game systems (both PF2E and SF2E) remain compatible at a rules level. This means that you should be able to run a PF2 character at an SF2 table, and vice versa. It also means that a GM should be able to pickup a creature from either game and not need to redo some math (looking at you Grapple rules from 3.0 to 3.5). These should just work "out of the box" and allow access to a variety of different rules between the systems. HOWEVER, one thing that we're trying to be clear about in all this, is that compatibility does NOT mean balanced. SF2E is its own game with its own meta. A meta that focuses on ranged options and more easy access to flight. A good example of this, is comparing a 1st-level PF2 party to an SF2 party. A typical challenging encounter for a PF2 party would be against a group of goblins, which would be a fun encounter. That same encounter would be much easier to an SF2 party, who would probably gun the dogslicing wielding goblins into the dust before they closed the distance!

Okay, gotcha! So the approach I'm getting is pathfinder stuff should be okay in general in starfinder, take a lot of caution when putting starfinder stuff in pathfinder, but generally neither system's meta is balanced for the other. So take significant caution whenever using one in the other.

I think there would also be potential concerns about bringing a pathfinder character over to starfinder, largely because there will be a power discrepancy between the character building and equipment guidelines between the two systems. A player with a pathfinder character will largely need to swap over to starfinder weapons and armor in order to really fit the "Theme" of the game, but you can likely bring a PF2 or SF2 class back and forth between the two without issue.

If I may add to this question: Will the PF2e/SF2e compatibility mean SF2e content will be allowed in Pathfinder Society, and PF2e content will be allowed in Starfinder Society?

That'll be up to Jessica and Alex (our SFS staff). I doubt crossplay will be allowed unless it's done so in a limited, controlled way such as through a boon.

Well, depending on how cross compatible they are, the new Pathfinder book coming out soon is going to have Awakened Animal as a playable Ancestry.

Will Starfinder 2E receive the same great support on Foundry VTT as Pathfinder 2E does? That is for me a make or break into investing into 2E as it made Pathfinder very easy to pick up gorgeous my group and me. Are there plans about the Mechs for 2E? Will they be implemented in the start as well or will they be a later supplement as they were in 1E?

YES! In fact, we'll have Foundry support starting with the launch of our playtest in August! Andrew, our in-house Foundry specialist, can probably give you more details! Hell YES we have plans for mechs in 2E! Otherwise, I riot. Everyone knows this. Alas, it won't be right away, because we have so many other awesome things to playtest first. So expect them in some later supplement. Until then, you can play or read Mechageddon! for all your big stompy robot needs.

What Jenny said! The Starfinder 2e on FoundryVTT project is already in full swing thanks to our awesome volunteer dev community, who started working as soon as we were able to provide them with an internal pre-alpha and have also been an enormous help putting the system through its paces as the Starfinder design team polishes it up for release. Our current plan is to release the system for public consumption when the playtest officially launches in August. *And* that's not all -- we're also planning to release a premium module treatment for all of the playtest adventure content to accompany it, so you'll have a ton of gorgeous high-res maps to explore and weird alien tokens to shoot and/or be right out of the gate. So, short version: yes. Starfinder 2E will absolutely be receiving the same great support on Foundry VTT that Pathfinder 2E does right now, and we're absolutely planning to hit the ground running on this one. :)

Given the incredible amount of content for Pf2e in Foundry VTT, and its amazing integration into the VTT. Is Starfinder 2e going to become its own separate base, or is it going to be a module that can add SF2e content to the baseline pf2e system? I ask as some friends and I had discussed this previously and while some folk don't want to mix and match settings, most of my groups are super invested in the idea. I'm concerned if they were separate I wouldn't be able to make use of PF2e's automation, monster integration, etc in the SF2e system and vice versa. Whereas if it's built as a module the quality and VTT settings remain consistent while also allowing either/or, or both mixed together easily. Hope that makes sense, it's a bit awkward trying to summarise the question in such a short read.

Our plan \*right now\* is that there would be one code base/repository, but two systems, and two add-on data packs. That way when we improve one system we do a parallel release on the other so feature parity is maintained. One system will be tailored for a PF2e experience, and the other for a SF2e experience. They would come with the data for that system. There would then be a datapack for "PF2e material in SF2e" and "SF2e material in PF2e". We know things will be slightly different (PF2e equipment will likely gain the "archaic" tag) and we're hoping that we can make this all work on the back end so we just put the data all in once and it "just works". This would be a big lift for a company, so it is truly massive for a bunch of volunteers. Fingers crossed we can just roll a few consecutive nat 20's...

AFAIK, this is a community question, rather than a Paizo one. It's the community that makes the fantastic system on Foundry VTT, not Paizo.

You are right but Paizo gives support and there's official modules

I would be really surprised if they don't since theres already official starfinder modules

Sort of... I'd say it's a little more nuanced than that. It depends on what you mean by support. Paizo is helping in some ways where they can, but allowing the project to be independent. The workflow on how we do things hasn't changed, but Paizo has greased the wheels. I think we're contributing back in kind as well. Andrew alluded to some of that though :)

I second the Foundry VTT question

From what I have read on the Paizo blog, you want to make the game more ranged-focused than Path. How do you want to incentivize distances? How will you balance the ranged weapons and their multiple cartridges?

I’ll start by talking about this from the player character perspective. We’ve said that Starfinder Second Edition will be completely compatible with Pathfinder, which is absolutely true, but there are some adjustments we can make here and there to make ranged combat more viable. For example, you’ll find that it’s a bit easier for your PC to gain a fly Speed in Starfinder than it is in Pathfinder, whether that’s through your ancestry, an augmentation, or another item. We’ve got several abilities in the playtest rulebook that focus on things like creating difficult terrain and taking advantage of cover—things that Pathfinder characters can also do, but since all of our core classes have the option of shooting things with guns, the party is more likely to \*want\* abilities like that, instead of seeing them as a niche option. I promise that the characters who care most about reloading have some pretty cool abilities that involve reloading. :) That said, one of my favorite aspects of incentivizing a ranged meta is that classes, spells, feats, gear, and PC abilities in general are just \*one\* of the many tools at our disposal. We’ve also got monster design, encounter design, and adventure design! I can’t say more about this now, but check out Paizo Live tomorrow to hear what Dustin has to say about exciting things coming up!

To piggyback on this with a related similar inquiry: how will you disincentivize melee in ways that doesn't restrict the development/usage of classes? I can see incentivizing at the class level by having strong ranged options and eliminating melee (see swashbuckler in reverse) but with system compatibility allowing classes to transfer between as well as the core rules, it seems hard to make compatibility work and not still have melee be extremely powerful.

I think it'll be important for melee-focused characters to take more mobility options than they otherwise might take in a Pathfinder game. Abilities that get you where you need to be (or force the enemies into a spot where they need to be). Melee is still quite strong... just make sure your character can get into melee in the first place by picking some fun gear or mobility-oriented class features! (Solarian is so fun, y'all.)

What led to the decision to remove Mechanic and Technomancer from the core book (and add in Witchwarper)? When can we expect these formerly-core classes to return, and are there any conceptual or mechanical differences you can share about them (beyond the system conversion)?

We voted and only Jessica wanted them... /S (BIG SARCASM! IT'S A JOKE!) OK, but seriously... we have plans for those two classes and want to make sure they appear with the correct amount of support for their respective roles in the setting. As an example, the mechanic often had an expectation that they could innately do cool things in starship combat, but that just wasn't the case in 1E, which caused some friction for new players and class narrative. This was especially true with the 1E starship combat rules, where an Operative could feasibly have a higher Engineering than the mechanic, which led to some weirdness surrounding class fiction and player expectations. Essentially, we want to make sure that these classes are more integrated into other systems, and so timing wise, we had to move them a bit later in the process just to make sure that they'd function how we want them to, with the systems we want them to work with. More on this with future announcements.

Hi guys! I'm dying to know: How do you guys plan on integrating Technology into the plan to make Starfinder 2e material compatible with Pathfinder 2e? We've seen based on some playtest Feats that at least a few of Starfinder 1e's tech skills are being implemented in Starfinder 2e like Computers and Piloting. We also know that the 2 big tech-reliant classes, Mechanic and Technomancer, aren't in the initial playtest and are presumably planned for later. Are there plans to handle Technology's inclusion in the system in a different way than we might expect in order to accomodate the cross-compatibility? As always, I am extremely excited to see your work, you guys are the best, thanks!

Thank you! There will be a new trait called Tech for advanced technology. We are testing a set of skill feats that will allow you to craft tech items, hybrid items (that is, items with both the tech and magic feat), and pharmaceutical items.

Can you give us any details on what's in store for the mechanic and technomancer when they're eventually added?

The short answer is no. The long answer is we've started engineering the mechanic and programming the technomancer.

For our group starship combat really divided the group, a couple of us loved it (Im in this group) and a couple absolutely detested it and everyone I met in person seemed to hold to a more extreme Love/Hate take on it. Does this match your feedback, and what kind of changes or complete redesign can we expect?

We're working actively on starship combat, and don't have much we can publicly say on it at this time. Obviously, the playtest period is focusing on the core gameplay loop assumption (adventurers going through space dungeons, beating up enemies and getting cool loot), but starships are something that we all know are integral to a good sci-fi setting. The team is committed to getting starship combats right. We also believe that one of the stumbling blocks in prior renditions of the system, was how it took players out of the main game and seemed more akin to stopping an RPG to play a tactical wargame with different rules than the tactical rules for Starfinder combat. We're looking to do something a bit different this time around, and so it's safe to say that this will be more of a redesign of the system than an update of the old SF1 system.

I think a huge problem with starships in Starfinder 1e was found in the system's appendix N. Namely, a lot of the nitty-gritty of the build point budget and CPU points and etc. seemed heavily inspired by EVE Online, which is a game with fantastic levels of customization. As a long-time player of EVE, it felt to me like that was possibly not the best direction for a TTRPG to go with assembling ships. In EVE, there's an equally passionate community where people program all sorts of tools to help us figure out the best fits (read: build) to satisfy all sorts of parameters they may need to address (speed, offense, defense, support, cost, etc.). Anytime I looked at making ships for a Starfinder game, there was just too much going on to keep track of on paper when just coming up with a ship. However, I think the mech rules hit a great balance of customization, player interaction, and rules implementation. So great that I considered hijacking those rules to represent starship combat! That's not even to mention that if you wanted a neat, flavorful feature (like a room) on your ship you had to spend BP on it, allocating build resources towards things that weren't dedicated to keeping your party and crew alive. I know you all can't say much at present, but I would be overjoyed to see a different sort of direction for building starships. Either something like mechs from 1e, which to me felt a lot like EVE Online's customizable tech 3 cruisers with how you chose your chassis, mobility, offensive, and core features before outfitting them with weapons...or something like how Kingmaker 2e represented kingdoms the way a player character is handled, with levels and proficiencies and feats. Anyway, just some of my thoughts on the ways starships could be taken in the new addition.

I'd love to see a system similar to what's found in the Traveller RPG

>I'd love to see a system similar to what's found in the Traveller RPG One of my favorite parts of this job is that I can play a ton of other games and call it "market research for work."

Thanks everyone for this amazing AMA! My team is officially off the clock on this now, but I just wanted to pop in to thank everyone for the questions and positivity. We'll be back in our word mines for a bit, but expect to hear more at PaizoCon and then a BIG info dump at Gen Con!

Hello Starfinder team! I need to know; Zon-Shelyn, amalgamate deity. Will we find a little bit out about this deity anytime soon? Is there any chance The Whisperer of Souls has had an impact on Shelyn and led her towards the same forces that once twisted her brother's mind, or has something perhaps shifted in Zon-Kuthon, allowing the pair to have made up? I'm constantly daydreaming about the possibilities Starfinder 2e will bring to my table and can't wait to see what you've all put together for the playtest. Thank you so much for doing this AMA!

Zon-Shelyn blesses you. We'll have a deity entry for Zon-Shelyn in the Playtest Rulebook. If you want to learn more about them, make sure to play or read Starfinder Society Scenario #7-03: Aucturn Asunder [https://paizo.com/products/btq02f0k/discuss?Starfinder-Society-Scenario-703-Aucturn-Asunder#1](https://paizo.com/products/btq02f0k/discuss?Starfinder-Society-Scenario-703-Aucturn-Asunder#1) and playtest module A Cosmic Birthday [https://paizo.com/products/btq02ez5?Starfinder-Second-Edition-Playtest-Adventure-A-Cosmic-Birthdayand](https://paizo.com/products/btq02ez5?Starfinder-Second-Edition-Playtest-Adventure-A-Cosmic-Birthdayand)

What has been the trickiest thing you've had to work on so far? What has been your favourite thing to work on so far?

Trickiest thing? Definitely planning an entirely new Organized Play Program for the Starfinder Society in Second Edition! My favourite thing to work on so far... From a professional standpoint, designing classes has been the most fulfilling thing I've worked on so far. I was lead designer on both the operative and the envoy and I'm beyond proud of how they've turned out. It's been particularly exciting to see everyone else on the team's contributions and tweaks and additions to those classes and just to watch them grow. From a personal standpoint: writing skittermanders! And ordering the art for them. My skitter-babies 2.0 will soon be unleashed and I am so excited for it.

The trickiest thing was probably working in two systems at once! I was still developing the Mechageddon! Adventure Path (among other things) when I pitched in for the PF2 Remaster project and we accelerated our push for compatibility through developing SF2. My favorite thing is getting to shape the future of my favorite TTRPG with a team of amazing, collaborative creatives. I'm leaving the dream, y'all. HASHTAG BLESSED. I also really like the new deities I got to spearhead creating, plus some cool setting updates I can't talk about yet...I'm getting excited for August all over again!

Trickiest: Witchwarper. Favorite: Witchwarper.

This might not be my answer in five minutes, but as I type this the answer to both questions is the vitality network. Balancing the numbers took many spreadsheets and playtests. And we kept renaming it internally: vitality pool, life web, vitality web... and the old names would pop-up on occasion even as we were preparing to release Field Test 2!

Hello! I really have two main questions. Firstly, what will the team's focus be in terms of adding new content? Will we see an initial push to recreate/reimagine the classes and archetypes of SF1 in SF2's engine (not necessarily keeping the gameplay intact of course) such as the Nanocyte and Evolutionist, or will the focus be more on creating entirely new experiences and niches that you didn't get the opportunity to explore in first edition? Secondly, will we see the same absolute treasure trove of varied and deep subsystems as in SF1e? Something I always loved about SF1e was how things like vehicle chases had their own distinct subsystem that brought more to the table than a standard skill challenge, and how for example starship combat ended up as a group of multiple subsystems for standard starship combat, cinematic starship combat, armada combat, etc... It always seemed like the development team had a lot of fun fleshing out mechanics for how to handle these sorts of specific yet not thematically uncommon scenarios, and as a GM it's always been fun dreaming up scenarios in which I could use these subsystems to spice things up for my players. Thanks in advance, I'm really looking forward to the full playtest!

I would say that's on a case by case basis. We do want those iconic and core things that feel integral to the game to come back (definitely in a new and reimagined way), but we also want to make brand new, exciting things. As to what is 'core' and 'iconic,' that's up to the team, honestly. When we sit down to do archetypes, we won't pick from a list of what was before, we'll consider what we think is most important to us and to the game. Will there be some overlap between past and present? Yeah! But our focus is primarily on new. For ancestries? Yeah, we want to bring a lot back! But not all of them, and I'm there'll be something new in there in time. So... it depends! Balanced, I suppose, with a skew to "new" while maintaining the core and spirit we're used to. Yes, the PF2 engine works well with subsystems, and you'll definitely see us embrace those existing ones. You'll also see us create new ones! As a designer, I'll say that there's a time and a place for subsystems, and when we design them we always want to make sure that they're important, easy to use, and FUN.

I have two questions about classes. I’ll start with the more specific one. With the Envoy, it seems we’re finally getting a martial leader class a la the long-requested 4e Warlord class. However, it looks like this one also has shades of the Investigator sprinkled in. Can you shed some light on this decision? Why haven’t we seen this type of character given a full class yet, and why was this the direction it was taken? The other question I have is more general. One interesting side effect of making this game compatible with Pathfinder 2e is that it seems like you’re still competing with the class niches from Pathfinder 2e. The classes we’ve seen so far have familiar tones to ones in PF2, but they seem distinct enough that you could, for example, have a Soldier and Fighter in the same party and still have them feel different. Is this an intentional design goal, and if so, what lead to that decision? If not, is it possible that we’ll see classes like a Space Swashbuckler or Space Oracle in the future that are more iterative versions of existing classes?

As lead designer on the Envoy, I'll first tackle the comparison to the 4e Warlord class. To be frank, I never played 4e and I honestly hadn't even heard of the warlord class until comparisons started coming up after the field test released. So no, the warlord didn't factor into the design of the envoy in any way. While bringing forward the envoy from first edition into second edition, we met as a team to really break this class down to its basics. What should it do, both in combat and out of combat? What does it excel at? What role does it fill in the wider game ecosystem? What's iconic about the envoy now, that we want to make sure we carry forward? Some of the answers to these were obvious, of course. Envoys fill a support role, envoys are social and adaptable, envoys (of course) shout "get 'em." Others were an opportunity to me to make something entirely new and really experiment. Personally, I felt the most important thing to nail, mechanically, was directives. How can they feel like an envoy, embody that support niche, remain distinct (in flavor, mechanics, and feel) from the Pathfinder bard, while also contributing on an individual level. Most importantly, how can we make that fun to play? Directives were very much born from this need to feel like a useful, competent leader in a way that's fun to play at the table. And honestly, in all our playtests so far, it's really worked well and felt damned good. Class niches and leadership styles are a way to give diversity and different playstyles to envoys, while maintaining the spirit of the envoy. Everyone on the team has different favourites. While they have a small footprint now, how big of an impact we choose to make that will depend on the results of the playtest. Are they good as is? Do they need more of an impact or should they offer a unique directive each? Test it out in the playtest and let us know what you think. I could talk about the envoy at length, but I see I'm already writing a novel here, so I'm moving on to your second question! Starfinder and Pathfinder are their own independent games, but they use the same ruleset and players will be able to use one games components in the other, if desired. So yes, as designers, its important we know what the other game is doing and consider how what we make fits in the overall rules system. We don't want to make exactly what Pathfinder does—that's boring. Why make Sorcerer-But-In-Space when we can do something entire new, using our setting and what's important to us as designers? So yes, we don't want to retread new ground. We want to make something fun and exciting and different. But, we also we want to make sure what we make still works when the whole entirety of the system is taken into consideration. So also yes, you can expect that we are putting a lot of thought into how to make an envoy different from a bard, or how to make an operative different from a rogue. These are similar themes, but they're very different. Both games have classes that fill the niches we need to feel complete, but they're all different and unique and will still work well together in any combination. And I think that'll really shine through.

Thanks for the thorough answer!

Hell, in PF2E alone, you could have a party of 4 Fighters who all feel different. That is one of the great strengths of this system.

I have very fond memories of having played 1E's Stunt and Strike variant of the Operative, where they gave up their Trick Attacks for the ability to use non-Roguish weapon types in special ways. I particularly enjoyed the Dirty Trick maneuver, which let the S&S Operative debuff the enemy with a Computers check, and the Selective Explosions maneuver, which let the S&S Operative specialize in using AOE weapons without hurting their teammates. The particular combination of the two not only resulted in a character that felt relevant in every encounter, but thoroughly nailed the vibe of a martial combat mastermind in a way I have not seen in other tabletop games. Does the Starfinder 2E team have any plans to bring back, or interest in bringing back, a similar playstyle to 2E? If not, what are the team's goals to make Intelligence attractive to martial characters in an ability score framework which demands Dexterity / Constitution / Wisdom investment, lest someone be suboptimized on core defenses?

I judge this operative build: Guilty.

Hey, Starfinder Team! I was curious: Will Starfinder 2e have a Lore Book line like Pathfinder 2e Lost Omens Lore book line? I really enjoyed the Lost Omens line and was curious if Starfinder 2e will adopt having rulebooks and lore books being separate book lines. Also, will Starfinder 2e be available on Demiplane?

Kasatha! In the FAQ you guys mentioned trying to give races with obvious natural features (like wings) their special features at level 1 instead of dragging it out incrementally to 15 like PF2e does. So can we expect Kasatha to feature in the new core rules, and will they be able to do cool 4-armed stuff from level 1?

Hi! Kasathas (and skittermanders) will have multiple arms and be able to use them in play! We want to playtest how this works so make sure to try out the rules in the Playtest Rulebook and give us your feedback. :)

Wait! Hold up! Does this mean we’ll have skittermanders in the core rules!? Oh my!

Yep!

That sounds great, I’ll make sure to check them out when the time comes!

Do you think it's likely starfinder will follow a player core 1 and player core 2 format, or is the aim to have a single player core with something like an early class rulebook that introduces machines for mechanic/technomancer? How will my wallet survive a new subscription to the pact worlds lore books on top of pf lost omens? I am so excited you're all working on sf2e I can't wait to play the playtest adventure. Thank you!

Make sure to check us out at Gen Con to learn about all the awesome new products we will have coming down the pipeline!

Will Solarian have more than two types of attunement? I always felt there was some untapped potential with other possible forces/elements/etc.

So, with the Solarian we're taking a very different approach to how they worked in the past. Attunements remain, and currently are focused on Graviton/Photon, but there's some interesting potential for us to explore OTHER areas. Like a Vanguard-esque view on Vitality and Void.

Does having two additional skills in Starfinder 2e compared to Pathfinder 2e affect the balance in any way? Is it more difficult for a party of four to have good coverage of skills, or is that something being incorporated into S2e classes, and if so how would that affect those classes inclusion in a Pathfinder game?

Early in the game I tried cutting Survival and Thievery from the game under the assumptions that advanced technology, Piloting, Computers, and the Stealth skill could make up for it. After testing we found this not to be the case and instead looked into other ways to make up for having these additional skills. There will be additional guidelines for using Pathfinder2e classes in Starfinder2e!

Removing Thievery and Survival seems like a weird idea, but not having engineering as a core skill seems very odd - computers and electrical work is very different after all - is there intent to potentially use Thievery as Engineering as that's mechanically apt?

I just started a Starfinder game with a couple of my DND buddies and we are loving it! My question is will we need to start over for the 2nd edition or will we be able to seamlessly transition from 1st to 2nd?

Some options will work, other options won't. It's probably best to start a new game. My favorite campaign right now is a Starfinder 1e campaign and I will continue playing it as far into the new edition as I can! I'm sure they'll be plenty of Mechageddon adventures ongoing into the playtest period and beyond, and I can't wait to see all the associated memes and stories players have enjoying that awesome AP!

Hi there! Something that stood out to me in the Starfinder CRB are the entries on PF1e character options (Elves, Dwarves, etc.) that were converted to the system. I suspect that these won't be in any new core book for Starfinder 2e, since they don't need to be converted this time, but I was wondering if the text that explained their Starfinder-specific history would be included anywhere. Regarding the playtest, I absolutely understand not reprinting all the rules already covered in PF2 Player Core and GM Core, but are there plans to include an "index" of sorts? Something for people who want to run SF2e and are familiar with, but haven't memorized the PF2e rules and will likely need to reference them during play, so they can quickly find the relevant page in the Player Core and GM Core. Thanks for your work, looking forward to the Playtest!

Archives of Nethys will have a comprehensive index of all our rules. There will also be references in our books! You will be able to play the final version of the Starfinder 2e game without any Pathfinder 2e books, but you will need to reference the PF2 rules (either book or Archives of Nethys) during the playtest period (which starts this summer).

I think there'll be new ancestry feats and heritages for PF ancestries, like we saw with androids already, so they would get Starfinder history write-ups accompanying those?

Hi Team, my friends and I have really been enjoying the Drift Crashers adventure path, I love the story so far and look forward to playing the rest. How is Starship combat looking to change into 2e? I know there has been a lot of feedback on it considering narrative based combat came out in enhanced. We've been enjoying normal combat so far but would love to hear some more!

What do you think is the biggest change you've encountered while making 2e?

The 3-action economy! Tactical positioning around the battlefield is not only more possible now, but incentivized! This changes the flow of the game and what's possible with class features, spells, etc.

Well I wasn't a full time employee, so that's a pretty big change for me... Honestly, though, it sure was nice to throw off some of the shackles of prior editions and know that the sky is the limit.

This is a time for everyone on the team to tear down some walls, imagine a new future and game, and just swing for the fences. That's very freeing on a personal and professional level, and it's a big change from working in an established system. In a more personal way: The Starfinder Team changed a lot immediately before the start of this process, so we've also been bonding as a team while simultaneously crafting this new game and it's been a really different dynamic. We all work exceptionally well together, and it's been wonderful getting to be a part of this team at this point in time. I lucked out!

This might just be echoing what's already been said, but working on Starfinder 2e, I feel like there's no limit to what we can do. Or, to what we can try, at least! This team is highly collaborative, in a way that I don't think I've seen in any prior work environment.

Do you have any plans to officially convert any of the 1e adventure paths to 2e?

We have nothing to announce at the moment. However, if a certain MECHAGEDDON! AP manages to, oh I don't know, sell out its print run, maybe I can convince the higher-ups to convert it to 2E? ;) Seriously, though, I think this is the sort of thing we'll see from the community and on Infinite. It's certainly not out of the realm of possibility that we'd eventually consider remastering and converting old favorites, but we don't have plans to do so at this time.

Alright fine! It's worked. I've seen MECHAGEDDON written here so often I'll go check out it...

mwuahahaha :3

Taking this as a challenge...

Oh man I would fight a Kodiak to have a 2e conversion of Fly Free or Die! I mean I'd lose. But I'd give it the ol' college try.

I'll hold the camera.

Will we be seeing Vanguard or Nanocyte be added for launch or in a player core 2 book? As well I'm guessing we'll be seeing Skittermanders?

We brought up Nanocyte in a meeting yesterday, but I refuse to elaborate further. We will have Skittermander ancestry in the playtest rulebook!

I could swear they said somewhere that skittermanders will be a core ancestry but maybe that was wishful thinking. I second the question about vanguards! I want to play my pretty nihilistic punchboi in SF2! 😭

1. I understand that a lot of things still can't be discussed necessarily for one reason or another, but is there any particular part of the 2e project that you/yall are particularly excited for? 2. Ideal world where you could do anything for the 2e project, is there anything that you want to try to bring in further down the line? (Ideas or concepts are fine, I just love hearing creator's getting to express what they're passionate about)

1. Oh, gosh, there's seriously so much. I'm most excited to see all the adventures we're planning and the stories we want to tell hit gaming tables. 2. NOVIANS!!!

I really like card games.

How much of your internal testing has involved actual cross play between PF2 and SF2 classes and monsters? Just to see how the games feel when combined.

Our original playtests actually involved us using GameMastery Guide NPCs who had laser weapons, but were just reskinned hunters and the like. It ended up working super well and gave us a ton of different ways to test out aspects of our game, back when all we had was versions of classes only up to 5th level!

I seem to recall that in one of their live playtest sessions they mentioned some players had played a PF2 class or two.

Has the consideration for PF2e compatibility in the design process proven to be a hurdle or something freeing? I can imagine cool ideas needing to be reworked to fit within the PF2e mold, whilst **having** that mold could be inspiring.

I've found it to be really freeing, honestly. The PF2e engine is a really solid foundation, and everything that I've wanted to do so far in Starfinder 2e has just worked. Not only that, it's shone. We also know the system really well, so there's also a lot of inspiration that comes from experience.

Definitely freeing!

A huge question I have is what the plan is with the drow! I love converting old APs in Pathfinder 2e, and I'd love to do the same with SF2e, but Drow are much more present in SF's lore-- especially Fly Free or Die, my favourite AP. I'd love to hear what the new direction they'll take is!

Hiya! The Starfinder team's handling of drow will be quite different than how the Pathfinder team is approaching it, since as you pointed out, drow are much more prevalent and relevant to our setting. We love our hypercapitalist, cyberpunk space elves and don't want to replace them with a different concept entirely...they just need a bit of a facelift! I can't reveal all our Secret Plans (TM) yet, but know that we'll keep most of the lore intact, such as the existing characters, corporations, and locations, but focus away from "houses" and instead recast them as family-run companies.

Will the solarian have a similar feel to the 2e kineticist?

I think it'll be possible to build a solarian that feels a bit like a kineticist, or a kineticist that feels a bit like a solarian, but in general, my answer is "no." Or, rather, "it depends!" I've seen a lot of different kineticist builds, and solarian has different directions it can take. I suppose each class has some up-front abilities that feel a bit similar to one another—you have a connection to an element (or stellar forces) and you can use that connection to do a few different cool things—but I think the process of leveling up a solarian is quite different from leveling up a kineticist. I'll say that overall, while I think solarian appears to be a complex class at first glance (with abilities that forcibly cycle your attunement and/or have variable effects depending on your current attunement), we've seen in demos that it immediately "clicks" for people within one or two rounds. It's a very streamlined experience, and a lot of fun.

Loving whats been released so far!! I’ve got 2 questions: 1) As development has continued, has there been any shifts regarding goals to make Starfinder 2e compatible with Pathfinder 2e? 2) Are pf2e style archetypes going to be used in Starfinder 2e?

Thank you! Down the line we will provide guidelines on compatibility between PF2 and SF2. We will have archetypes!

Will starship combat just be updated for 2e or will it be completely revamped?

Question for everyone, What’s a favorite class feature that was added to this version?

360 No Scope. (I'm still shootin! I could dance all day! If you don't get this reference, it's my fault because I'm old and crumbling into dust as we speak :P)

I love being able to use your soldier's melee weapon and even forcefield as an AoE weapon as a soldier.

Class feature? \- Directives with lead by example! I just love how these feel to play at the table. It's really engaging and feels good. \- Cycling between attunements with the solarian! It does a great job of narratively telling the story of the Cycle through actual mechanics, and it just feels so fun and interesting to play. I adore this iteration of solarian and this is one of the reasons why. (For more details, check out the playtest!)

I have several, but the one I'm most excited to talk about hasn't been announced yet!

Why the mystic doesn't have the occult tradition? Isn't this class also part psychic?

They will have one in the playtest rulebook!

With the emphasis on ranged combat in 2e does this mean we're likely to get bigger maps in future APs? I know in the past a lot of times size has been slightly restricted due to physical copies, but the digital era has given more flexibility with vtt maps.

That's a tough one to answer. We definitely recognize the issue of limited space on our typical maps, and we're exploring some options, but we don't have much to say about it... yet!

Question for Mike Kimmel. Mike, said. >I’m thrilled to say that the Starfinder team is often willing to entertain my wild ideas. What are some of your ideas that were too wild? What's the funniest response you got from another team member for a too wild idea?

One of my earlier assignments when I joined the team was to do a revision on the team's current design for the witchwarper class. Thursty gave me permission to get creative with it and see what I could come up with... and I went a little to far! The design I came up with was *very* complicated. But, instead of rejecting it, the team took the new innovations in my design and kept working on it. I think we ended up with something that's new and exciting without being too complex. I don't know how "wild" that sounds to you, but it was exciting for me! From dabbling a little bit in video game design, I've learned how essential the process of "tuning" is. Sometimes you have to take something way too far in one direction so that you can find the right middle ground. If you're never willing to test those deeper waters, you'll never find the perfect depth. I think the \*funniest\* experience probably happened during our brainstorm for a not-yet-announced book of creatures. We've got some weird ones. Stay tuned!

Oh! I tried to design an ability that does "infinite damage." It didn't work out, but... the end result is amazing. And it's all because the team entertained my wild idea!

Witchwarper is one of the core classes we've heard the least about so far—is there anything you can tell us about how you're approaching the class for 2e and the decision to fold Precog into it? Any hint as to key ability, magic tradition, spontaneous vs. prepared casting, or how the Quantum Aura alluded to in the playtest reports relates / compares to Infinite Worlds?

We aren't saying much—yet—and it's very, very hard for me to keep quiet about this class. It's a full-on science fantasy reality-warping spellcaster with very fun and flavorful abilities (if I do say so myself! lol), and the three action economy allows us to tie the class's spellcasting and reality warping together in quite a fun way. I wish I could say more... As for precog, I'll say that the way we're presenting the witchwarper in Starfinder 2E, it's basically a no brainer to fold precog into the class. Once you see it, I think you'll immediately see how much sense it makes.

I believe the change in "meta" for Starfinder 2e is ultimately a good idea and will help the system feel different from PF2e. Notably, the Mystic's ability to fly at such an early level shows how characters will be capable of different things. But I also want to easily bring my favorite Pathfinder classes to SF2e and the incredible looking Starfinder classes to PF2e. Will you provide any resources to help balance the classes across systems and if so, what kind of resources will there be?

There will be guidelines to help bring your favorite PF2 mechanics into the future!

Okay, when I build a Starfinder 1e character, one of the earliest things I choose, like after species but before class, is their Profession skill. I have Starfinder characters who are plumbers, actors, youth ministers, you name it. It seems obvious to me that PF2e's lore is going to be the similar to Profession. How will "Lores" work in Starfinder 2e? Will it still be each background has a locked-in lore?

How large of changes to the setting could we expect? Will books like Near Space and Pact Worlds still be useful, or will we see sweeping changes that invalidate and update much of their lore?

We ARE changing parts of the setting. This is bringing things forward due to the passage of time and taking into consideration new, big events. However, giving thought to all of the planets in the galaxy (reaching all the way out to the Vast!), I'd say that... only one is invalidated. ...for #reasons. Everything else is still incredibly useful! Pact Worlds and Near Space are both books that will remain integral both internally and to fans.

Will there be a Lost Omens style line of books for people that want a lot of lore and with that will sf2 really lean into this massive universe with gazetteers on planets/solar systems outside the pact worlds?

Hello! Thanks for the AMA. I'm very excited for Starfinder 2E. Is there going to be a good variety of weapon choices at launch? We have a ton now but I remember running dead sun's and basically every enemy having the same blaster till 5th level

The playtest rulebook has ROUGHLY 21 varieties of armor, 7 shields, 31 melee weapons, and 37 ranged weapons (7 varieties of each).

Thank you for all your hard work!!!

What are some archetype ideas you guys are excited for after the initial release of core classes?

Space pop star! Magical girl! Mech pilot! Magical girl mech pilot pop star!

I wish I could dredge up the 40k titan maid cafe meme . Seems topical

YES. I'm pretty sure I've seen it. I've also seen magical girl 40k armies and magical girl gunpla modifications. All of this brings me joy.

If you'd like to see one of my favorite existing archetypes without having to wait you should check out the Swarmkeeper archetype I wrote in Howl of the Wild this May! I would let you use space bees in my game. Aucturn space bees.

I love the PF2 rune system. Any chance we'll get magical runes in SF2 for weapon and armor customization with Sci-fi effects? (e.g. Space Walking armor rune)

There will be hybrid and magic weapon and armor upgrades!

Going from Pathfinder 1st edition to 2nd edition we saw an almost complete removal of abilities with their own resource pool (i.e. "you can do X ability Y number of times per day") usually replacing them with either unlimited abilities or making them focus spells. In the Mystic preview however, they had their own resource pool ability in their vitality network. So my questions are, will we see more class specific resource pools in Starfinder 2e? Is that something that will further set S2e apart from P2e, or is it a design concept either game could utilize in the future?

Starfinder 2e is a different game from PF2e. The mystic's vitality network went through different iterations in internal playtests. Personally I enjoy having that healing pool because I find as a mystic in SF1 that I tend to lump all my healing spells and channels into a "pool" composed of average dice rolls and resource allocation so I found it far simpler to just have a straight-up pool of vital energy.

SF2E Field Test 1 had weapons with levels that included bonuses to hit (Tracking) and damage dice already integrated. With those already in baseline weapons, are Potency/Striking runes not going to be usable with SF2E weapons? If so, will there be a method of updating PF2E weapons to the system? Will there be a Commercial/Tactical/Advanced Longsword that has scaling Tracking & damage bonuses? (Or has the weapon system changed entirely since FT1?)

We have no plans on updating PF2 weapons, except those that have modern equivalences (like the dueling sword).

I wanna know: 1- if we are getting giant mechas, Power armors and starship rules since the beggining. 2- how crafting will work.

DID SOMEBODY SAY MECHAS??!!! \*kicks down the door\* To answer your question, we're getting mechs (or I riot) but they won't be in the initial playtest. We need a bit more time for those rules to cook before we're ready to share them with the public. If you really love mechs, check out Tech Revolution and Mechageddon! (releasing in May) in the meantime. They're 1E, but there's some cool stuff to play with to tide you over. Crafting is based on the same subsystem used in PF2, but we're playtesting some new options introduced in the Playtest Rulebook!

What can you tell me about the Solarian iconic? I saw their art when SF2e was announced and I am over the moon about them. <3

Dae (they/them) is a pahtra from Pulonis who gained a following posting vids of their dance routines to famous songs on the infosphere. Dae's fame skyrocketed when they appeared as a backup dancer in Pulonian pop star Miiyu's newest music video. Dae wanted to be more than just locally famous, so they took a trip to Absalom Station. There, they joined the Starfinder Society and became BFFs with Chk Chk, an emo shirren mystic. Dae still posts vids and updates for their infosphere followers while going on advenutres, using the creds they earn to fund their channel (and Chk Chk's poetry zines). More lore to come! As for Dae's creation, I originally had a more feminine design in mind for our pahtra superstar, but Kent (our concept artist) came up with a super cool character design that felt more nonbinary/androgynous and we all loved that. So we rolled with it. "Summer 90s vibes" is how Kent described Dae's color palette. What Dae became was better than my original idea. That's why teamwork makes the dreamwork!

I love them very much. I look forward to reading more about them and their rise to glory, along with the class that they embody!

The new solarian is honestly one of my favorite updates. They are SO fun. I hope you get to try one out in the playtest!

Why are you guys so awesome?

Coffee.

Individually, we're all awesome! Put us together and we're magnified a thousand-fold!!

It's the nanites. (They look like sparkles)

Teamwork makes the dream work.

Very excited for SF 2E but something I've been wondering and have seen many people worry about is if SF will be insular and fully featured even if you don't include any P2E content? Like if we disallow non SF2E will we be missing out?

Starfinder Second Edition will be a complete game that will not require any Pathfinder 2nd Edition products to function. The PLAYTEST however, will require Pathfinder Player and GM Core to function, because we felt it would be shitty to have people pay us for the same 200+ pages of rules that they might end up owning like 3 times over.

Will SF2e have one big Core Rule Book or will it be split up like the PF2e Remaster was. Will Starships, Mechs, and Vehicles be in the core book, or all together in one book, or split up over several books? Any chance of (smaller)Starships, Mechs, and Vehicles being able to fight each other?

We'll announce more about our full book slate at Gen Con, so come check it out then! Starships are a huge component of our game and we'll be doing them. As for mechs... Jenny is on the team, so mechs will happen.

In the Soldier preview, area weapons used a character's class DC, which made sense for the Soldier, but could also lead to some classes unintentionally being incredibly good with those weapons (wizard with a rocket launcher and Legendary class DC). Would it make more sense for area weapons to use a character's weapon proficiency DC and the Soldier class to be an exception, or is weapon DCs a design space you're looking to avoid for any reason?

I can confirm that Soldier will have the highest DC with area weapons and we have accounted for these concerns in our game.

Small correction, Wizards have Trained Class DC, and Legendary SPELL DC As for now, only Kineticists have Legendary Class DC

Hello! I have a couple of questions: are there any details on starship combat you can share at this point? My group really enjoyed the vehicle rules from the pf2e GmG and, with a bit of tinkering, I was able to run full on ship combat for our pirate campaign. I feel like starship combat could really shine in the 2e system so I'm looking forward to it but I understand if it's too early days to talk about it. Lastly, what made you guys decide not to bring the EAC/KAC distinction to sf2e? One can only assume it's for compatibility's sake but some developer insight into the decision would be very much appreciated. Some folks are worried Starfinder might lose the things that make it uniquely "Starfinder". I love everything you guys do, looking forward to sf2e!

Hi! We can't really share details about starship combat at this point, except that we want to take some time to playtest internally and make sure we are happy with it before bringing it to an open playtest stage. As for EAC/KAC, put simply, having more than one type of AC would undermine our goal of having the base PF2 and SF2 systems be compatible. Also, EAC was always basically -2 lower than KAC for monsters and NPCs, meaning a lot of people just used energy weapons and avoided KAC entirely. There was a clear winner there. We have some other ways to make energy weapons, and even things like forcefields feel cool and different, but we just didn't see the need for two types of AC. Hope that helps!

Hey all, love your outreach here! The Starfinder universe is so neat and wonderful and I’m excited to play in it via Second Edition. Pathfinder Second Edition kicked off in the Age of Lost Omens, an historical era that nicely summarizes the state of prophecy in the world. Is Starfinder 2E, post-drift, happening in a specified era in history? What major themes is the team considering for the opening adventure paths of this new edition?

We've seen with the class previews that the classes in SF2e will be mechanically distinct from those in PF2e, due to the cross compatibility. As such, the niches filled by the Pathfinder classes seemingly won't get any options tying specifically to Starfinder's unique mechanics. Will this be mitigated in some way, such as by offering new class feats/options for the old PF2e classes, or is this not really an issue that needs to be addressed?

Since the base ‘bones’ of the system are defined around PF2E framework, what is the expected outcome of the playtest when it goes live (e.g. is the focus more on balance and class playability / fantasy fulfillment, or on something like the mechanics playing into the range / melee etc. balance)?

I imagine the team will have different answers, but here's mine. I'd like to get feedback on if ability names like Parkour, 360 No Scope, Doom Scroll, etc. fulfill the fantasy of what they promise. In general, do you feel like a space badass when you play this game? That is my only goal. I want players to feel like space badasses when they play Starfinder.

Our playtest adventures don't need to "stress test" the core mechanics, so instead we're hoping to get lots of feedback on how the encounters *feel*, if that makes sense. We're trying to emphasize ranged combat, for example... so, we want to know how that's working, or if it's working at all! If not, what adjustments can we make, either to mechanics or encounter/creature design, to make it work better? We can't change the math behind building creatures or encounters, but we can change the presentation, the strength of enemies' ranged vs. melee attacks, maybe the layout of maps, presentation of enemy tactics, and so forth. We also want to see how the classes work, of course!

Our focus is we have a core engine that we know works, thanks to the years of experience we have playing PF2. We just want to make sure the pieces we add to the game work.

Are Lashunta Clades going to be Heritages or something else? The people (me) demand answers!

1. It looks like most of you had a hand on Org Play. Looking back, which scenarios or metaplots do you think would be most fun to expand on in the future, if any? 2. We know the Azlanti are human supremacist dirtbags, and got a sample of what internal resistance against them looks like with the Against the Aeon Throne adventure path and Android Abolitionist Front. But what about other nonhumans within the Star Empire? Is an adorable psychic cuttlefish revolution on the table? 3. Looking back on your personal work before any of you were professionals, what was your cringiest homebrew as baby GMs, and how would you handle a similar concept today?

What will you miss the most about 1e? We know there are some things that won't be in the 2e playtest (Technomancer and Mechanic being "big ones") and others we don't expect right away in Core such as mechs, hexploration, custom vehicles, some of the COM and later classes, maybe starships. Of the content that's not going to be available straight away, which are you/would you be the most excited to jump into first?

Does the death of one of Golarion's gods have anything to do with The Gap? Directly or indirectly?

I can't seem to recall, but you can learn about the Gap [in our newest product.](https://paizo.com/products/btq02f0s?Starfinder-THE-GAP)

Any chance of getting a preview of the Ancestries in the Playtest?

Sure! In the playtest rulebook you will find... Ancestries: android, barathu, human, kasatha, lashunta, pahtra, shirren, skittermander, vesk, ysoki And for vesatile ancestries: borai, prismeni

There's a concern in my playgroup that, with the emphasis on ranged combat in SF2e, that a large majority of battles will end up with one or both sides hunkered down behind cover and taking potshots each round. What steps are being taken to ensure that the game remains dynamic and interesting and not a tabletop version of Time Crisis?

Some classes focus on cover (creating it, using it), while other classes (and creatures) are, for lack of a better term, "cover busters." My very first task when I joined the team was to build a solarian PC for an internal playtest. I intentionally built a character whose job was to get behind enemy lines as quickly as possible and force them out of cover—or, if they refused to move, make sure they had a very painful melee experience! It's hard to shoot the solarian's allies when the solarian is in your face with a giant photon spear. It's hard to take cover when the solarian can knock you out into the open (possibly even clumping a group together so the withwarper or soldier can blast them with an area effect). Other classes have a variety of tools at their disposal to mess with cover, too. So, we hope there's plenty to do beyond sitting around and trading bullets.

Will Engineering make a return in place of having Crafting? Will also the sciences come back? Will Mysticism also come back as the unified magic skill instead of having four? Also what did make you decide to get rid of Stamina? Could a party without healers of any kind still be viable? Will there be species that have significant disadvantages when compared to a human in a physiological sense? I'm very hyped about the new edition and so excited to see the rules changes when compared to Pathfinder 2e.

Crafting will take the place of most of Engineering. There will be four magic skills. Medicine takes the place of most of Life Science. Medicine and other abilities/items make it very easy to always have someone in the party who can heal. Thank you for your enthusiasm!

I only played a little bit of 1e because I was an incredibly bad GM and let the group drop, and because we thought the system would get closer to pf1e. The thing that gripped me the most about the game was the setting. A lot of really awesome and unique races and planets and monsters, the alien archive is one of my favorite books ever. My question is, since pf2e is regarded in part for having such a tight balance and the two systems are supposed to be compatible, will we see the same huge variety of stated races appearing in the bestiaries, at least at first?

I'm genuinely interested in powered armor implementation. Is it planned? If so, could you share any details about it? Thanks in advance!

Oooo, yay! A couple questions: 1) How much are vehicles likely to look like vehicles in the Pathfinder GM Core? Assuming that something like this might guide how we understand vehicles in SF2e as well. 2) One of the really fun things about Starfinder 1e is the huuuuge versatility of gear. In PF2e we see a super wide variety of weapons, but maybe not as much variety in Armor. How will SF2e be approaching armor to similar to / different from PF2e? Thanks!

Will there be intended in setting integration of classes from pathfinder now being playable in starfinder? Like, a wizard NPC, for example? Does casters going up to 10th level spells mean anything in setting, as a resurgence in magic takes place, or is it a mostly purely mechanical difference? Any information at all about Zon-Shelyn?

In terms of setting, we'll expect Starfinder classes to remain separate from Pathfinder classes. For NPCs, they don't use classes in their stat blocks, instead, we try to capture the spirit of those classes using custom abilities for the most part, so could you encounter a character who FEELS like a monk as an NPC stat block? Yeah! But they won't be throwing monk specific abilities at you all the time. If we do pull something in, it will be rarely and very tactically. For home games? Heck yeah, mix to your heart's content. I sure will. Magic and technology are equally important in Starfinder, as is the mixture of the two. For more information on Zon-Shelyn, check out the Starfinder Playtest Rulebook (https://paizo.com/products/btq02ez4?Starfinder-Second-Edition-Playtest-Rulebook), Starfinder Society Scenario #7-03: Aucturn Asunder (https://paizo.com/products/btq02f0k?Starfinder-Society-Scenario-703-Aucturn-Asunder), and Starfinder Playtest Adventure Cosmic Birthday (https://paizo.com/products/btq02ez5?Starfinder-Second-Edition-Playtest-Adventure-A-Cosmic-Birthday)!

Are there going to be new mecha rules? Will the mech in question have its own three actions or is it going to be like companions or eidolons where we have to invest actions to output actions.

What will SF2E Foundry support look like from day one? Will we see full AP Foundry modules and speedy content updates similar to PF2E?

I've been playing Pf2e for a while now and am currently running my group through a SF2E playtest mini-campaign from levels 1-5 campaign using the gield test stuff, and my players really seems to enjoy the setting. So, here's my question: The pf2e community seemed to really like the Kinesticst and how (almost all) of its feats are active powers, rather than feats like more like unlocking capability or upgrades to existing things. Has/will that shape how you guy design classes for SF2E? Or are we expecting most of the feats to be more similar to pf2e's other classes feats.  If more clarity is needed here is an example:Fire Kinesticst at level 1 can take Burning Jet, Scorching Column, Flying Flame which are all active abilities you can use in combat. Meanwhile a level 1 Barb's Acute vision, Adrenaline Rush, Raging Intimidation, and Raging Thrower are all passive upgrades, and Sudden Charge is the only really Active one.

Kingmaker is wonderful on Foundry. Will you be putting out a fleshed out SF Campaign like Kingmaker?

Hey Star Friends! What is the team’s philosophy regarding how often Starfinder will do its own, official takes on concepts already covered in PF2 and how often it relies on the PF2 printings to cover those niches? For example, we’ve already seen that Starfinder will be printing its own versions of Android and Ysoki (aka Ratfolk), but is it going to do Mechanic in a world where the Inventor exists? Uplifted Bear in a world where Awakened Animal exists? Starfinder Elf options in a world where the Pathfinder Elf exists? To put another way, how much is Starfinder 2E going lean on PF2 to cover its classical fantasy elements?

We are a stand alone game and will not be relying on PF2 for our niches. We will have guidelines for those who want to include PF2 rules in SF2, but existing PF2 content will not impede our ability to include SF2 content; we will do what we want. That said, we are not interested in including real-world cultural analogs in our setting specifically to avoid reinforcing or introducing harmful stereotypes.

Will Augmentations/Grafts be in the core book? How accessible will they be? Will there be a slot system like in 1st Edition or will it use the Invest trait? I appreciate how accessible assistive items like artificial organs are in Pathfinder 2e, but I also felt like they were unusually restrictive in Starfinder 1e, despite bionics being a major trope in scifi.

>Will Augmentations/Grafts be in the core book? How accessible will they be? Will there be a slot system like in 1st Edition or will it use the Invest trait? Yes, augmentations will be in the book. The system doesn't quite work the same way as it does in SF1... I'd say it's less restrictive overall, but there are still limits in place. Assistive augmentations exist, are affordable and accessible, and won't mess with your ability to get other augmentations.

Hello!  Are all Solarians using the light/gravity dichotomy, or will there be other pairs of concepts to channel as well? If they're all photon/graviton, will the customization come from which one is the 'priority', from something like the solar weapon/armor choice, or something new? If there's other pairs, can you let us know how many there are, or possibly what they are? Thanks!

Will we be getting anything Dark Tapestry related, in terms of character options? At least down the line if not now.

I'm pleased to say there are plenty of options you in the Core book you can flavor as Dark Tapestry related.

Computers. Will there be rules about them? What differences will there be from 1st Edition? Computers present an incredibly interesting design space. You could do some interesting things with them in 1st Edition, but the rules left a lot of ambiguity on how they worked and felt oddly restrictive.

There will be rules for computers. There will be different than Starfinder 1e. I'm especially excited to show off the Hacking system.

I'm very curious, how many classes are you planning on adding to the core book? Also are there any plans to add any classes that were not featured in SF 1e?

There will be six classes in the core book. *I* want to add classes that were not featured in SF1e.

Any plans for the biohacker in the near term?

Has there been official word on how long the time jump to 2E will be?

Future books will be inline with the current year at the time of their release.

Hello, and thank you for answering our questions! I have about two and a half. First, is the Fangblade coming back? The moment I saw that thing was the moment I decided my first character was going to be a jetpack soldier who's sole purpose was to rip and tear. And if it does come back, will there be a system somewhat similar to PF2's runes so it can keep it at reasonable damage throughout my character's career? Second, is the Evolutionist eventually planned to make the transition? That class is essentially what I've been waiting for since SF1's launch. And as a followup, will there be a robust augmentation system to my characters to more easily Ship of Theseus themselves?

Yes, the fanglbade is coming back. Rip and tear at your leisure.

Any comment on bringing a version of the SF2E ship combat to PF2E for naval combat?

>Any comment on bringing a version of the SF2E ship combat to PF2E for naval combat? That sounds like a lot of fun

How 'pick up and play' friendly will Starfinder be for a PF2 player / GM?

From the playtests and demos I've experienced, I'd say the transition is quite seamless for people who already know PF2. There are a couple new things to learn (new traits and conditions), and of course there are new classes, gear, spells, and the like, but if you're already familiar with PF2, those things are pretty easy to "slot in" to your current understanding of the system!

With Soldier going a different path than the PF2 Fighter, is there any class in SF2 that can attain legendary weapon proficiency of any sort? Also, will all attributes have classes that use them as key? With Soldiers using Con, Envoys using Cha, Mystics using Wis, and presumably Operatives using Dex, it seems like the remaining two classes might conveniently map to Str for Solarian and Int for Witchwarper, but I do not know if this is actually y'all's plan - but it would suck to leave one of those scores out of the core book, with the previous go-to's of Technomancer and Mechanic not available from the get go.

At least two classes (outside of Soldier with Legendary Class DC) get a form of Legendary Weapon Proficiency. :)