|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I'm wondering if they are applying a system like in DND 5e, where STR is needed to wear higher powered armor or to use the bigger guns.
Like there are probably some stealth suits that have no STR requirement and high EAC and low KAC, and some sweet powered armor that has good EAC and high KAC – overall higher defenses.
This way, STR has some defensive function.
Looked through First Contact and it seems like the CR4 Space Pirate Captain, with +5 STR/+3 DEX, has a +12 1d8+9 attack with a dueling sword and KAC 18 and EAC of 16.
Meanwhile, the CR5 Sarcesian Operative has +0 STR and +5 DEX, and a +10 dueling sword attack for 1d8+5 and KAC 18 as well, EAC just higher at 17.
Interesting to see the role STR plays in this...
Reposting my current idea...
I'm thinking about doing some sort of space Anabasis – the players represent the crew of a ship in a small fleet sent in an offensive expedition to a foreign system... only to suddenly receive information that their patrons/empire suddenly collapses and now they have to make their way out.
Here's a breakdown of what I'm planning so far:
Hey guys, Im planning a campaign for Starfinder (a sci-fi TTRPG) once it comes out. I'm thinking about doing some sort of space Anabasis – the players represent the crew of a ship in a small fleet sent in an offensive expedition to a foreign system... only to suddenly receive information that their patrons/empire suddenly collapses.
Unable to warp back home (because the destrucion of the empire's hub prevents them from jumping back), they need to inch their way back to a warp station (I'll make some options of routes they can take to four or five jump points).
Any ideas for a setting of this type? How can I make the inching back more interesting/entertaining?
Here's a breakdown of what I'm planning so far:
If you go Tengu, Half-Elf or Military Tradition Human, you are well on the curve.
Oh man double-plated is great, now you can get full AC with heavy armor users much faster and cheaper!
Too bad it sucks for Medium armored dudes...
Evan, Rednal's stuff is missing:
- Finesse training on a weapon of your choice (likely daggers or shortswords)
- Rogue's Edge on a skill of your choice (literally anything)
1. Deific Obedience is not necessary. It's a big boost for sure, but that gets a bit into munchkin territory, where you start gaming your religion.
2. Rednal's mock up has you spend TWO feats into different Weapon Focus feats. That's probably not a great idea. Replace one for Toughness or Twist Away.
3. Talk with that GM about swapping STR and CON after Finesse Training becomes a thing!
All Rogue archetypes are compatible with Unchained.
Honestly, the most important thing granted by the Unchained Rogue is Debilitating Injury. Having a way to increase accuracy is golden.
I personally don't like Knife Master. I feel like it trades a great utility for a bit of extra damage, and I feel the Rogue is already covered if he can sneak attack. I personally like the base Rogue, except in niche cases.
I'd retrain Improved Initiative for Toughness, and talk with your GM about at least switching STR and CON. Your HP pool must be too shallow.
As mentioned, Twist Away is godsent for Rogues.
Evan Pearce wrote:
I'm not unchained, I'm not sure if I want to reroll everything. I may not be the most optimized rogue, but I have something where I'd like them. I'm just wondering if there's a way to build up from where I am now. But if rerolling will help, I'll definitely bring it up with him
If you are a regular Rogue, you will find that your character's power dips way, way down as you go through the game, as your accuracy fails to keep up and your defenses become paper thin.
Either get Unchained or consider another class.
"Ice", fourm pyromancer wrote:
1. Pummeling Style is crap for Unchained Monk. Dragon Style is where it is located.
2. You don't need to punch things as an UnMonk. Get a ki focus weapon and a bodywrap of mighty strikes and you can use a weapon/unarmed mixed monk that works perfectly fine.
3. I asked Mark about the criteria needed for an option like this to work, and clearly Ascetic Style fell short.
By the way, I asked Mark Seifter about this in his thread, and he provided two additional reasons why Ascetic Style is banned in PFS:
1. It makes unarmed-exclusive options less special (argument against allowing something like the brawling enhancement to apply to a weapon while using Ascetic Style)
2. It has an unfair budget advantage over Amulet of Mighty Fists' users (argument against the featline in general).
It's called Sister-In-Arms.
What it do:
- You deal half Challenge damage because you suck.
- No mount, but you get Order of the Dragon and Order of the Lion both simultaneously. Choose the edict of either.
- Bodyguard as a bonus feat instead of cav's charge.
- Will save bonus vs. compulsion instead of expert trainer.
- And the same replacements for the other charge feats as the Constable archetype.
Heisenberg Style? Collapse the wave function?
Mark Seifter wrote:
Dolphin and Shark Styles: Based on actual dolphin and shark hunting styles. And it turns out actual dolphins are jerks to their prey.
I think they are the only recorded animal other than the human to kill for fun.
This is basically +1500gp for +1 AC for DEX builds.
Would there be anything that I, as a Monk enthusiast, should be excited about? Any particular magical items for unarmored or unarmed dudes?
Singing Steel? What's that?
The new featsHook Fighter and Weapon Adept... what do?
The Lantern Staff is quite possibly the coolest stupid weapon I've seen in recent days, solely because it's not exotic. Basically anybody can get their Battle Lamppost game on. And that's how stupid weapons should work.
"Imagine if I had a real weapon..."
DM Beckett wrote:
As I said in my post early on about AoMF/AoNA – it doesn't make sense that some characters power-spike when using Automatic Bonus Progression.
Unarmed Brawlers are worse than Cestus Brawlers because Cestus Brawlers get to pay less for a weapon while maintaining the slot for AoNA.
As Chess_Pawn stated, it's from Villain Codex. I'd wait for Archives of Nethys to update in the coming weeks.
The Extra Investiture Points aren't that useful early on. Fights aren't that prevalent and they aren't that useful. Consider Cunning for your first feat to compensate for low INT.
I like the S17 build a lot more than the other. If this is for PFS, even more so, because providing diverse utility is more important.
I, of course, was talking about the Advanced Fighter, the UnRogue, the UnMonk and the UnSummoner.
And yeah, I think there's a consensus that PF2.0 needs to happen, but everyone has their own ideas about it.
I'd like to see more class consolidation –– I think the Vigilante, the Swashbuckler, the Gunslinger, the Slayer and the Fighter are the same class, but they don't know it. Like the Vigilante got it wrong – it should have been a subclass option for the Fighter and Rogue, not the other way around.
Speaking of Brazen Disciple, is it compatible with Unchained Monk? One of the Hellknight archetypes specifically called out it was for the Unchained Summoner so Im unclear if its just an accidental omission from Brazen Disciple or intentional.
Brazen Disciple is expressly compatible with UnMonk, otherwise I wouldn't add it to the guide. CF: Nornkith Monk from Legacy of the First World.
Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.