I watched a bit of the playtest stream that was uploaded to youtube. It looked fun but I noticed the damage dice for futuristic weapons seem to be pretty low (basic d4, d6, d8, etc)
Do you think primitive weapons like bows will still have the same dice as Pathfinder or is everything going to be re-balanced?
I thought Starfinder was going to be mostly compatible with Pathfinder, but this just fills my head with a thousand questions :S
Macona wrote: I watched a bit of the playtest stream that was uploaded to youtube. It looked fun but I noticed the damage dice for futuristic weapons seem to be pretty low (basic d4, d6, d8, etc)
Do you think primitive weapons like bows will still have the same dice as Pathfinder or is everything going to be re-balanced?
I thought Starfinder was going to be mostly compatible with Pathfinder, but this just fills my head with a thousand questions :S
The reason it's so "low" is that in the future people have better armor and materials than they had in pathfinder. Moreover, it's kinda dumb for a 1st level character to be able to 1-shot most enemies or get 1-shotted themselves because of a friggin 6d6 laser rifle. Na, what's probably gonna happen is either the pathfinder weapons will be scaled back, or they'll have some pretty decent sized penalties to attacking (like -8 to attack and half damage, or something). Someone somewhere already said (this isn't a direct quote, it's paraphrasing) that a barbarian with no armor and a battleaxe charging at some dudes with machine guns would get mowed down pretty easily.
I am infering a bit here but here are two thoughts on the matter:
1) Weapons are set to scale so a level 1 or 2 laser pistol is a piddly D4 or D6 against EAC. a Longbow might well still be a D8 against KAC but a longbow only improves with magic to a +1-+5 whereas laser pistols upgrade every level or two going up to 3D6 or something eventually getting to where a high level but otherwise unremarkable laser pistol hopelessly outclasses a +5 Composite Longbow +5. As is, a 20 STR archer with a +5 bow averages 14.5 damage just from weapon and str, a laser pistol scaled up to 3D6 almost matches that without any augments or enchantments. i also would expect primitive worlds can make armors with mid grade KAC but little to no EAC so your energy weapons on those worlds act like touch attacks in Pathfinder whereas their counter fired arrows bounce off your super space armor.
2) The developers have specifically said they have rescaled how damage works and from the start have intended for tech weapons to outclass comparatively primitive bows and swords.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I believe this web page may be germane to the discussion.
Torbyne wrote: I am infering a bit here but here are two thoughts on the matter:
1) Weapons are set to scale so a level 1 or 2 laser pistol is a piddly D4 or D6 against EAC. a Longbow might well still be a D8 against KAC but a longbow only improves with magic to a +1-+5 whereas laser pistols upgrade every level or two going up to 3D6 or something eventually getting to where a high level but otherwise unremarkable laser pistol hopelessly outclasses a +5 Composite Longbow +5. As is, a 20 STR archer with a +5 bow averages 14.5 damage just from weapon and str, a laser pistol scaled up to 3D6 almost matches that without any augments or enchantments. i also would expect primitive worlds can make armors with mid grade KAC but little to no EAC so your energy weapons on those worlds act like touch attacks in Pathfinder whereas their counter fired arrows bounce off your super space armor.
2) The developers have specifically said they have rescaled how damage works and from the start have intended for tech weapons to outclass comparatively primitive bows and swords.
Hmm, I like that solution.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
I also like the scaling idea. Weapon damage could scale with level. It could also be further increased by class abilities and feats.
Dave2
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Distant Scholar wrote: I believe this web page may be germane to the discussion. I don't know how Starfinder is going to function, exactly, but I would say this doesn't apply to Pathfinder, considering it has high tech weapons like laser rifles, too. Something like a 2d6 laser rifle with 120 ft. range that targets touch and give free rapid shot is way more deadly in the hands of a realistic foot soldier than even a +5 great sword ever could be. People who have issues with low tech easily competing with high tech don't really understand that it's because god like beings such as high level characters make them that way.
That isn't established at all. The numbers we have are not laser rifles that do 2d6. The only numbers we have are laser pistols that do 1d4+0 (and have a fairly short range, 50 or 60 feet) a something something slug thrower that does 1d6 ( and targets kAC rather than eAC) and a solarion energy blade that does 1d6 plus presumably Str bonus.
And an in detailed statement that equipment has levels, which we've taken to mean that higher level guns do more damage.
But scavenged gobbo guns and PC starting equipment guns are equally bad.
Nothing establishes that bows or normal swords and etc have been downgraded to do even less damage than the fairly shoddy guns that have been shown.
And PCs have hit points and stamina, so may well be more durable at low levels. Gobbos, by contrast, seemed identical to their bestiary stats if one assumes touch AC and eAC are equivalents.
I think the Technology Guide is a preview as to how weapons will work. This isn't going to be a Rifts style game with Mega Damage classes.
Voss wrote: That isn't established at all. The numbers we have are not laser rifles that do 2d6. The only numbers we have are laser pistols that do 1d4+0 (and have a fairly short range, 50 or 60 feet) a something something slug thrower that does 1d6 ( and targets kAC rather than eAC) and a solarion energy blade that does 1d6 plus presumably Str bonus.
And an in detailed statement that equipment has levels, which we've taken to mean that higher level guns do more damage.
But scavenged gobbo guns and PC starting equipment guns are equally bad.
Nothing establishes that bows or normal swords and etc have been downgraded to do even less damage than the fairly shoddy guns that have been shown.
And PCs have hit points and stamina, so may well be more durable at low levels. Gobbos, by contrast, seemed identical to their bestiary stats if one assumes touch AC and eAC are equivalents.
Here are some developer statements on equipment and scaling.
From Black Gate:
"We took inspiration from things like the Technology Guide, certainly, but the changes to the underlying mathematical system behind weapons and armor mean that gear in particular is probably our largest departure from the Pathfinder system. In addition to the needs of the math, however, it’s also important to remember that the Technology Guide was made to use futuristic science-fantasy gear in a regular fantasy game without breaking it. In Pathfinder, if you have a laser gun, it’s a totally unique thing that makes you a badass. In Starfinder, anyone you pass on the street could easily be packing one. Modeling those two different game experiences requires a totally new approach."
"As I know I’ve said before at conventions, if your barbarian comes running shirtless down the corridor with an axe, he’s going to get mowed down by some security guard with a machine gun—as he should! That was actually one of the considerations we made when changing how equipment works—if we had just erased “longbow” and written in “laser rifle” without changing the way damage scales, that would have made it difficult to run the adventure where you land on a planet with a medieval technology level, and we know that’s something we’re interested in."
The only thing we have actually seen was a level 2 playtest so the numbers used may not be final yet but even then the level 2 caster with magic missile did double damage compared to a Pathfinder caster and using a single spell they were able to massively increase the damage of a laser pistol (i heard it as "adds 4D6 to their next attack"). So resource expenditure seems to have a much bigger bang for your buck at the moment. Exactly how tech weapon damage or capability scales is unknown, sure, but we can infer from their statements that numbers have been reworked and its no longer optimal to bring a greatsword to the gun fight.
Something else to note is that we havent seen a playtest of a traditional front-liner or gear dependent class yet, the Solarion was doing his own thing with a class feature as a weapon (and swinging twice in a full attack which is already really good damage compared to a level 2 Pathfinder PC) and the other two PCs we saw were a pet type and caster type, traditionally two roles that come with hefty reductions in weapon choice and direct weapon damage capacity. If we had seen a Soldier or Operative in play i suspect we may have seen more impressive attacks.
Also, the fact that a level 2 Drone using what seemed like a starting weapon was able to put out a cone effect with its auto rifle has some huge potential for characters, how does a fight look when every PC can drop overlapping cone effects onto the map for overwhelming fire power?
So, yeah, damage, defense and HP are apparently re-worked but also your choice of actions seems to have expanded with full rounds having innate value for every class from the get go and auto-fire weapons being a thing you can play with from level 1, that has already changed the balance from what Pathfinder Bows and blades could do.
That was helpful, Torbyne. I wonder if the prevalence of ranged weapon use could change how attacks of opportunity work? If I'm an Operative hidden behind cover, for example, and a Soldier runs past my barricade at a ten ft distance from me, will I be able to take a quick shot at him as he passes by? Seems somewhat OP, but a little more plausible scenario in a blaster fight. Seems like it'd be another factor that might heavily affect how combat plays out.
The difference between futuristic weapons and Pathfinder weapons is range and armor. All the melee weapons from Pathfinder are still useful in a futuristic setting if you can sneak up and get real close to your enemy. Most people won't be wearing power armor all the time, a sword can still to some grisly work, as can a battle axe, the main disadvantage is the large melee weapons can't be concealed so easily, they are heavy to carry around and thus its hard to look inconspicuous while carrying a Greataxe around, a knife or a garrot perhaps, anything that can fit in a pocket or under one's coat can be useful in a futuristic setting, as they allow you to get close to your unsuspecting enemy. If a melee combat goes on for long enough, someone is eventually going to bring firearms to the conflict, the police are going to arrive and eventually someone's going to show up in power armor.
Tom Kalbfus wrote: The difference between futuristic weapons and Pathfinder weapons is range and armor. All the melee weapons from Pathfinder are still useful in a futuristic setting if you can sneak up and get real close to your enemy. Most people won't be wearing power armor all the time, a sword can still to some grisly work, as can a battle axe, the main disadvantage is the large melee weapons can't be concealed so easily, they are heavy to carry around and thus its hard to look inconspicuous while carrying a Greataxe around, a knife or a garrot perhaps, anything that can fit in a pocket or under one's coat can be useful in a futuristic setting, as they allow you to get close to your unsuspecting enemy. If a melee combat goes on for long enough, someone is eventually going to bring firearms to the conflict, the police are going to arrive and eventually someone's going to show up in power armor. Which may or may not be specced to take bullets while charging into melee. It's not an uncommon use for power armour.
Tom Kalbfus wrote: The difference between futuristic weapons and Pathfinder weapons is range and armor. All the melee weapons from Pathfinder are still useful in a futuristic setting if you can sneak up and get real close to your enemy. Most people won't be wearing power armor all the time, a sword can still to some grisly work, as can a battle axe, the main disadvantage is the large melee weapons can't be concealed so easily, they are heavy to carry around and thus its hard to look inconspicuous while carrying a Greataxe around, a knife or a garrot perhaps, anything that can fit in a pocket or under one's coat can be useful in a futuristic setting, as they allow you to get close to your unsuspecting enemy. If a melee combat goes on for long enough, someone is eventually going to bring firearms to the conflict, the police are going to arrive and eventually someone's going to show up in power armor. You're making a lot of assumptions, none of which are supported by what information we have. The dev q&a specifically mentions armored pcs as a default assumption, and the iconics so far are toting quite significant arsenals openly on their persons.
And in the dev session, everyone got into very close range to fire their lasers, they didn't stand outside and fire from cover, they consistently had to move into rooms and down corridors to shoot at targets.
If you are coming within melee range of your opponents, you are eliminating some of the advantage of using firearms, just saying.
Tom Kalbfus wrote: If you are coming within melee range of your opponents, you are eliminating some of the advantage of using firearms, just saying. Depends on the firearm, I guess. I've seen plenty of games with noticeable damage falloff with range, something like a gaming shotgun (scatters much more widely than an IRL shotgun) would be best point-blank, I've even seen a gaming gun be effective at short range and long range but not midrange. The thing with scifi/high tech settings is you can make the weapons do pretty much anything you want.
Tom Kalbfus wrote: If you are coming within melee range of your opponents, you are eliminating some of the advantage of using firearms, just saying. Depends on how the game system works. If 5' step and point blank shot are still in, then not necessarily, unless the gun damage stays bad (1d4 vs 2d6+str is a terrible comparison).
But if guns are always better, that is also a problem.
Anyway, short range and piddly damage on 'diazo' laser pistols is all we know for certain right now.
Maybe there could be different classes of weapons. I toyed around with stuff like the following for old D&D campaigns.
A class I weapon is anything with one damage die total, or 2 damage dice not greater than 2d6. Most of these are weak archaic weapons or nonlethal modern weapons.
Class II weapons have 2dX damage greater than 2d6 (2d8 or better). Militarized archaic weapons, standard-issue firearms, and weak energy weapons such as lasers and sonic stunners.
Class III weapons have 3dX damage (3d4 to 3d12). Explosives, advanced projectile weapons like plasma rifles or coil guns or gyrojets; standard energy weapons such as flamethrowers or lightning guns.
Class IV weapons have 4dX damage (4d4 to 4d12). Advanced energy weapons such as gravity guns, disruptors, and so on.
Class V weapons have 4dX damage (5d4 to 5d12). Antimatter is difficult to weaponize but it can inflict horrific damage, from 'bottle rocket' launchers to arc guns that spray naked antimatter like a water hose over everything.
Pathfinder Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
In most sci-fi settings, the ability to conceal a weapon can be more important than how big a hole it will put in someone. Something like a TOW can take out a tank, but you are going to be stopped if you try to carry it in the open on the street. I would expect there to be weapon limitations as part of the setting.
There will be times where you don't care that everyone sees that massive weapon you are carrying. I expect there will be other times where security asks you to step to the side, we don't want that weapon on our space station.
I watched the Humble Bundle playtest session. It is difficult to tell, but it doesn't look like they are treating armor as DR which I find somewhat disappointing. The characters were only second level, but seemed to have a variety of abilities which sounds good.
I hope we find out more of what they have planned.
Voss wrote: Tom Kalbfus wrote: If you are coming within melee range of your opponents, you are eliminating some of the advantage of using firearms, just saying. Depends on how the game system works. If 5' step and point blank shot are still in, then not necessarily, unless the gun damage stays bad (1d4 vs 2d6+str is a terrible comparison).
But if guns are always better, that is also a problem.
Anyway, short range and piddly damage on 'diazo' laser pistols is all we know for certain right now. i think they were "diode" lasers but anyway, the ranges we saw in the playtest have size limits based on the "dungeon" environment, i didnt see many situations where a 120+' range would have changed things. Also i suspect that range increments are still around in some fashion and being such a low level it would make sense that no one wanted to eat a penalty to their already low accuracy, again, the ranged weapons users we saw (Mechanic, Drone and Technomancer) were likely to be 3/4 BAB classes with other stats they wanted to boost aside from DEX so their rolls were probably 2-3 points below where a martial would be. Since we have already seen a level 2 get an extra attack on a full attack which maybe was a class ability but based on the full round magic missile i feel it may be a core mechanic for everyone now. (WILD SPECULATION: no more iterative attacks, just one attack for a standard or two for a full.) This would make higher accuracy much more important for damage as getting a second shot on target at lower levels could end a fight before the enemy closes or even starts acting in combat.
BretI wrote: In most sci-fi settings, the ability to conceal a weapon can be more important than how big a hole it will put in someone. Something like a TOW can take out a tank, but you are going to be stopped if you try to carry it in the open on the street. I would expect there to be weapon limitations as part of the setting.
There will be times where you don't care that everyone sees that massive weapon you are carrying. I expect there will be other times where security asks you to step to the side, we don't want that weapon on our space station.
I watched the Humble Bundle playtest session. It is difficult to tell, but it doesn't look like they are treating armor as DR which I find somewhat disappointing. The characters were only second level, but seemed to have a variety of abilities which sounds good.
I hope we find out more of what they have planned.
Setting specifically, the main currency seems to be UPBs which are as i understand it, ultimate legos, they can be used to build anything out of themselves if you have enough and some sort of macguffin plan or knowledge or something. If i have that right than anyone could carry around some random amount of cash, go on up a tower, assemble a particle canon and start a rampage. I have no idea how security on Absalom station would handle that. From what i gather some planets like Akiton might not care that you are walking around with a repeating fusion carbine because everyone is armed and other planets might have a surveillance state drone system constantly checking for newly manufactured weapons... looking forward to how or if they address stuff like that in the core book. its like the 3D printed guns issue of the future.
Torbyne wrote: BretI wrote: In most sci-fi settings, the ability to conceal a weapon can be more important than how big a hole it will put in someone. Something like a TOW can take out a tank, but you are going to be stopped if you try to carry it in the open on the street. I would expect there to be weapon limitations as part of the setting.
There will be times where you don't care that everyone sees that massive weapon you are carrying. I expect there will be other times where security asks you to step to the side, we don't want that weapon on our space station.
I watched the Humble Bundle playtest session. It is difficult to tell, but it doesn't look like they are treating armor as DR which I find somewhat disappointing. The characters were only second level, but seemed to have a variety of abilities which sounds good.
I hope we find out more of what they have planned.
Setting specifically, the main currency seems to be UPBs which are as i understand it, ultimate legos, they can be used to build anything out of themselves if you have enough and some sort of macguffin plan or knowledge or something. If i have that right than anyone could carry around some random amount of cash, go on up a tower, assemble a particle canon and start a rampage. I have no idea how security on Absalom station would handle that. From what i gather some planets like Akiton might not care that you are walking around with a repeating fusion carbine because everyone is armed and other planets might have a surveillance state drone system constantly checking for newly manufactured weapons... looking forward to how or if they address stuff like that in the core book. its like the 3D printed guns issue of the future. Maybe they'll handle it like Nova Praxis does: things can only be assembled like such using a "compiler" or some other device to coordinate the assembly, and each compiler thingy can only build things when you plug in the schematic you need in order to build the thing. Using this system, in order to just build a gun or something, you need to acquire the schematic, which would be restricted or require a license of some kind.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
I would say that weapon damage is established Paizo just has not said what it is. I believe last month it was asked why no previews and it was indicated staff was bussy getting ready to send the core rules to the printer. So weapon damage is done and established we just do not know what it looks like. I have never been a fan of the slow release of information approach. Paizo should release major previews of classes, combat, equipment and feats. I think they get more fans upset than they do building any kind of anticipation.
I believe on EN World along with the Minatures announcement the Starship combat was
Demoed. I have not seen any links to the demo. I would think that Paizo would post the link, but maybe that is just me.
Dave2
Dave2 wrote: I would say that weapon damage is established Paizo just has not said what it is. I believe last month it was asked why no previews and it was indicated staff was bussy getting ready to send the core rules to the printer. So weapon damage is done and established we just do not know what it looks like. I have never been a fan of the slow release of information approach. Paizo should release major previews of classes, combat, equipment and feats. I think they get more fans upset than they do building any kind of anticipation.
I believe on EN World along with the Minatures announcement the Starship combat was
Demoed. I have not seen any links to the demo. I would think that Paizo would post the link, but maybe that is just me.
Dave2
The only demo i know of was the party scale adventuring, i havent heard of any ship scale demos being done though there was a photo of an earlier ship playtest that was posted... But as for the larger reveals, those are supposed to release starting this week, arent they? And probably continue at a pace of 1-2 things a week until August i would imagine.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Looked at EN world again and the Starship Combat system was demoed at the GAMMA trade show, but no further information was available. That was my point for the above post. That Demo could have been recorded and provide allot of valuable info, but we are not sure that it was.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?3913-STARFINDER-Minis-Starship-Com bat-Demo
Dave2
Dave2 wrote: Looked at EN world again and the Starship Combat system was demoed at the GAMMA trade show, but no further information was available. That was my point for the above post. That Demo could have been recorded and provide allot of valuable info, but we are not sure that it was.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?3913-STARFINDER-Minis-Starship-Com bat-Demo
Dave2
Awesome, i had no idea that photo or playtest existed :)
So ship combat is expected to be common as a default and there are crew size limited based on ship base size, though i expect there will be a rule to adjust for small crew on large ships and large crews on small...
I also finally see some ship designs! are those borrowed from another system, does anyone recognize them? the map is branded and they look like the same format as Pathfinder pawns so are those actual Starfinder ships?
Its odd, from the layout it looks like the yellow fighter is the PC ship but that ship also looks too small to be more than a 2 person crew... But it also looks very human-y or at least like the product of a familiar design. Futuristic but recognizable while the other four pawns, or three designs among those four, all look more extreme or alien in design. Are those two red ships aiming towards the planet or away from it you think? the big blue ship also looks like it is massively larger than the yellow ship but they are on the same size base... and all of the bases are round! its not impossible to use round bases on a hex grid but it makes it much more annoying to deal with... the Brown Spiky ship looks kinda hellknighty or chaosy maybe? i like them all over all but the red and yellow ships look to be between light and heavy fighters while the blue and brown ships look like they are battleships. I hope the sense of scale between ships is clarified a little bit more in the final product...
So what was even happening there, was a small group of allied ships trying to get bast a blockade by the blue and brown ships? or am i not reading the red ships right and they are actually facing the yellow ship? I am not sure how it will feel if that yellow ship is much larger than a shuttle or would be able to take on a task force of that size by itself...
Ooh, this is something i hadnt connected yet, if all the PCs are in one ship than i suppose that single ship must outclass most other ships in a one vs one fight? i wouldnt want to lose everyone all at once just because ships are balanced so that you cant send two on one in a fight. In Pathfinder action economy is an extremely powerful force, having the enemies outnumber the PCs by 4 to 1 can make things very tricky unless the PCs are prepared and make some sound choices.
Thanks for the post, it brings up more questions than answers though!
One imagines the player ship would be more powerful than most ships in the same class: consider the Millenium Falcon vs a stock YT freighter.
There are other factors that can help to balance the single ship vs multiple enemies through: multiple weapon turrets, range, and firing arcs.
Playing FASA Star Trek PnP I (and my gallent crew) where able to to defeat eight Orion pirates in my Constitution class ship by manouveing in such a way to split the hostile fleet and taking them on one or two at a time.
Something related to this that just occurred to me; We assume that EAC has taken the place of Touch AC and is a separate armor track that seems to be competitive with KAC, which we related to regular AC, but if Touch AC is now around the same levels as Regular AC than a lot of spell attack math has to be redone. It is no longer a wise choice to roll against Touch or EAC with a limited daily resource on a low BAB class when that AC is the same as just shooting with your regular old laser pistol. How do you think this will be approached?
1) No more touch attack spells? seems to eliminate too many favorites and would really fly in the face of expectations and moving everything to save or suck could be very unbalancing.
2) Spells have an innate accuracy bonus, DEX mod + Casting mod + BAB?
3) Held charges on missed blasts?
4) We've read it wrong and EAC doesn't scale with level the same way that KAC does... which makes me wonder why make it EAC to begin with instead of leaving it as Touch?
EAC is for attacks with energy weapons (e.g. Lasers).
KAC is for attacks with projectile weapons (e.g gauss rifles).
If touch spells use either (and I'm far from convinced they do) it would be KAC.
I think that generally spells wil be more focused on buffs and utility, rather than direct damage. The Soldier will be the go-to class for dps.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
It may just vary and there might be both kinds of spells...for example, some enemies may have armor optimized against energy attacks, in which case a spell that targets regular armor class might be preferable, armor optimized against physical attacks, in which case the reverse might be preferable, or armor that provides reasonable protection against both. I think it does make sense with advanced in armor, though, that spells that attack directly might be reduced in efficacy...but that doesn't mean that area effect might not still be an option? In addition to the obvious buffs, debuffs, and other indirect methods of contributing to a fight.
Fardragon wrote: EAC is for attacks with energy weapons (e.g. Lasers).
KAC is for attacks with projectile weapons (e.g gauss rifles).
If touch spells use either (and I'm far from convinced they do) it would be KAC.
I think that generally spells wil be more focused on buffs and utility, rather than direct damage. The Soldier will be the go-to class for dps.
For what logic would spells move to KAC? The Majority of damage spells rely on energy for damage... no, i am not even going to put together a list of direct damage spells here but please trust me that the majority of direct damage spells are Fire, Cold or Electricty based with a few Acid and Sonic options out there. There are conjuration based physcial damage spells but those are almost a specialty to themselves as they are often area spells or have some other special mechanic to boost their effectiveness vs armored targets.
If spells dont target either than are you suggesting that Starfinder Characters now have to track KAC, EAC, Flat Footed and Touch ACs? That would be a bit much to worry about, not to mention keeping track of conditional modifiers and sources, where do Dodge bonuses go, what about natural armor or deflection? Add in the traditional saves and you now have seven defense categories for every character to track before you even get to special circumstances such as miss chance, DR, Hardness or resistances. I was hoping Starfinder would par down on of these things...
As for the removal of direct damaging spells... that would both be a bit extreme and an odd choice since we have already seen Super Magic Missile has made its way into the game.
I dont even think i agree that Soldier will be the go to DPR (damage per round vice damage per second) class, i expect Solarions will be able to outdo them in melee and Operatives should have something to be competitive with them as well since that seems to be out default Ranger/Rogue/Spec Ops class. And i kind of expect Mechanics will be able to build battle drones that put out a lot of DPR too. So Technomancer, Mystic and Envoy towards the bottom of the DPR scale but they should also have more toys to play with between Buffing or X/Day options, hence damaging spells being a thing. Heck, the playtest Technomancer's spells looked like the highest damage single target ability we saw.
I imagine Starfinder rules that space armour is effective against touch attacks, so no need to track it seperately.
I think that EAC might be bad news all round for spell damage. Forget about your touch attacks, worry about your fireballs.
I suspect that Starfinder's combat and spell mechanics more different than you are assuming.
Fardragon wrote: I imagine Starfinder rules that space armour is effective against touch attacks, so no need to track it seperately.
I think that EAC might be bad news all round for spell damage. Forget about your touch attacks, worry about your fireballs.
I would like to think that in thousands of years of having to deal with the threat that, yes, armorers have learned to make armors that are equally useful against energy attack as they are against physical ones but that same realist part of me looks at all of the iconics who are not in sealed full body suits and thinks, "nah, a fireball would totally mess up all of those guys."
EAC is a numerical value to overcome, not energy resistance. What i am not sure about though is if EAC and KAC have some sort of trade off where you cant keep them both up and instead have to choose which you'll focus on. I dont think that would work because all that means is that half the enemies you'll face will use machine guns and the other half will use lasers, no matter what someone is attacking your weakness. And even if EAC could soak up energy blasts, we have already seen Magic Missile, that ever so iconic level 1 spell, blasted right past defenses and did full damage so we need to account for that as the standard for a Starfinder attack spell. If the paradigm still holds, Magic Missile is actually less damage than most other attacks spells to make up for its 100% accuracy.
So a level 2 damage spell should be capable of at least 2D6 but more likely 2D6 with a rider or 3D6 damage. Which sounds ridiculous until you consider that a blaster focused Pathfinder caster can be putting out 4 or 5D4+5-10 damage around those same levels. Maybe the optimization floor and ceiling have just been brought in together for the core book in Starfinder. The Kineticist is much the same way in that regard.
My guess is that characters equip a personal forcefield to gain "EAC".
If EAC defends against spell damage then you can ditch a lot of saving throws, making spells significantly different.
It's possible that the Magic Missile spell seen in the playthrough had not been updated to the new rules at the time, hence it's apparent unbalance.
well it had been updated to something since at level 2 it was a 2D4+2 spell so at least by that point in the development it had been made stronger than the baseline. similarly, if EAC is meant to defend against spell attacks, that is one that completely bypassed EAC with a level 1 spell. Its an interesting idea and there might be something that works like that in the game but i dont get any impression that EAC itself provides a spell defense in lieu of saving throws or AoEs.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
All the rules used in the streamed play test were current as of the time we ran that game. Of course since we were play testing, things have changed since then, but we weren't using any holdover rules at the time.
Owen K. C. Stephens wrote: All the rules used in the streamed play test were current as of the time we ran that game. Of course since we were play testing, things have changed since then, but we weren't using any holdover rules at the time. Hrmm. so we just need to figure out the date that the playtest happened and then the date at which the final product was sent to the printers and then figure out how much time there was between those points and then if there was enough time to redo the spell system in that time...
By the way, have you thought about maybe doing a blog post talking about the changes to the AC system? :D
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
We're working on various blog posts right now, both in writing some of the upcoming ones, and in planning some of the ones further out. So yes, we're thinking about it. :)
The book just shipped at the end of March. (We had a party to celebrate and everything!). So there was plenty of time for changes, and I am pretty sure we made some. But mostly they were fine-turning things for the last several months.
Thanks, its always great to see the Paizo crew interacting on the forums!
Recent threads in Starfinder General Discussion
|
