Advanced Melee Weapons with Operative quaility


General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Armory has them. #BadWrong

Is the game as badly trashed by this as I think?

EDIT: I don't know what's in the rest of the book. I couldn't read any more.

Dark Archive

Oh no, DeX to hit. What is this world coming to...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
whew wrote:

The Armory has them. #BadWrong

Is the game as badly trashed by this as I think?

EDIT: I don't know what's in the rest of the book. I couldn't read any more.

Send me your book. I'll make sure it finds a good home.

But seriously, why is this bad? As long as the damage is not out of line, I'm not sure it is a problem. Operatives shouldn't be penalized for taking proficiency in other weapons. I have a Dwarf Operative and was having a crisis about her Advanced Melee Proficiency because her attack bonus was 5 less with an advanced weapon than just a basic operative weapon.


The operative property also allows a dex build to have a reliable back up weapon.

I think am operative burning a feat for access to a new tier of weapons is fine.


Gonna say, yeah. This isn't Small Arms vs Longarms. Operative Weapons, even advanced ones, still have 1/2 specialization in exchange for the Dex to hit. I fail to see an issue diversifying Operative options for trick attack weapons or their 4× full attack.

Edit: Especially locked behind a feat. Even if the damage is higher than basic weapons, it doesn't immediately make it "the only melee Operative option" because there's a feat barrier.

Edit 2: 2 feats if you include Versatile Specialization. That's 3 levels of devotion to make an advanced melee Operative. I don't see how this is an issue or game breaking in any way. :/


And I presume ( I don't have my PDF at hand ) that the Advanced Melee Weapons with the Operative property have lower damage than comparable weapons of similar level.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

After a very quick look at the advanced operative weapons, a lot of their damage looks lower. It seems they have other benefits, such as special properties and critical hit effects.

It would be interesting to see a side-by-side breakdown of the damage for basic vs. advanced operative weapons.


I think the only one that worries me is the polarity gauntlets. The polarize effect paired with Quad Attack might get out of hand. Especially if you add in the punishing fusion.


pithica42 wrote:
I think the only one that worries me is the polarity gauntlets. The polarize effect paired with Quad Attack might get out of hand. Especially if you add in the punishing fusion.

First: Sad face, I wanted those gauntlets for a Solarian and didn't notice thry were Operative. 1/2 specialization makes me sad, now I have to pick a new weapon.

Second: Brief note... I'm coming to hate how many weapons are in Armory. It makes the book really hard to navigate when a massive 40 page span is literally all charts. Kinda wish maybe they'd peppered the weapon descriptions in there or something to break it up. It's actually giving me some option paralysis...

Finally: To the third point though, it's not really that bad. Polarize only adds itself once, and though the earlier level ones it's equal to weapon damage, the later ones it caps at 4d6, which comoared to a lost 10 flat from 1/2 specialization isn't that bad. Even max roll it's barely more than double missing damage, and not many Operatives are going to build Str when Dex, Con, Int, Wis are much stronger on them.

Not many, you could always build it, but 4d6 at level 19 for 3 out of your 4 attacks I don't see it as that big of a scale. 13d6 after polarity vs 10d6 or 6d10 constant I think is about on par.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
pithica42 wrote:
I think the only one that worries me is the polarity gauntlets. The polarize effect paired with Quad Attack might get out of hand. Especially if you add in the punishing fusion.

Wow, those do a lot of damage if you manage to hit more than once. They also use a lot of battery power. Most polarity gauntlets (except 2 models) use 10% of the battery per hit. You'll really go through the batteries using quad attack with those. And their batteries are more expensive than the basic operative weapons.

They are a great option to nova, but they use more resources to do so. Operatives also have to take 2 feats to make good use of them.

Isaac Zephyr wrote:
Polarize only adds itself once

I think you meant that Polarize only adds itself once to attacks before the operative gets Triple Attack at level 8. And even at that point, the operative has to land all 3 attacks to use Polarize more than once.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unless there's something special about the Polarity Gauntlets, I don't think that they actually use 10% of the battery per hit. Melee weapon charges last 1 minute, or 10 combat rounds. So you pay that charge cost and you can make quad attacks 10 times before you have to spend more charges. Melee weapons are really efficient that way.


Is it clear that each attack after the first only adds listed damage? Or is that damage added again after each attack?

Ie
9d6, 9d6+4d6, 9d6 +4d6, 9d6+4d6 from quad attack

Or
9d6, 9d6+4d6, 9d6 +8d6, 9d6+12d6

Personally I like the idea of an attack ramping up like the second option, but i get the feeling that's not how is supposed to work.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dracomicron wrote:
Unless there's something special about the Polarity Gauntlets, I don't think that they actually use 10% of the battery per hit. Melee weapon charges last 1 minute, or 10 combat rounds. So you pay that charge cost and you can make quad attacks 10 times before you have to spend more charges. Melee weapons are really efficient that way.

I'm pretty sure you use the listed amount for each attack. For instance, powered (capacity 40, usage 4) means you use 4 charges per attack.

CRB wrote:
Usage: This listing shows how much ammunition is consumed with each attack you make with the weapon: The number of rounds from a magazine, the number of battery charges from a charged weapon, and so on.
SirShua wrote:
Is it clear that each attack after the first only adds listed damage? Or is that damage added again after each attack?

The exact wording is:

Polarize wrote:
A weapon with the polarize special property briefly builds up a polarized charge in a target. When striking a target multiple times with a weapon with the polarize special property in the same round, damage from each such strike after the first is increased by the listed amount. This resets at the beginning of your next turn.


@Jasque, check the Powered weapon property.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Dracomicron, thanks! You're right. I missed that completely. I've been playing it wrong this entire time. Fortunately, it hasn't made a difference in any combats yet.


Jasque wrote:
Isaac Zephyr wrote:
Polarize only adds itself once
I think you meant that Polarize only adds itself once to attacks before the operative gets Triple Attack at level 8. And even at that point, the operative has to land all 3 attacks to use Polarize more than once.

Yes, I meant it doesn't ramp up with each attack. It stays the flat Xd6 extra regardless of the additional attack. I.E. as it was pointed out, it doesn't 4d6-8d6-12d6.

I just worded it poorly, you are right.


I wouldn't worry about Polarity, mostly because its dependent upon hitting multiple times in a single round. Given Operative's 3/4 BAB, and no inherent bonus to hit otherwise, a full attack with 3 or 4 attacks is going to miss a lot. Say at level 10, 3 attacks against equal CR (say level 10) only expects 0.45*3 = 1.35. +7 BAB + 7 Dex + 1 Weapon focus -4 full attack = +11 vs EAC 23.

Given Trick attack is 5d8 at that level, you're generally better off just trick attacking with the gauntlets.

Its obviously better against easier to hit targets, but nothing game breaking I don't think.

Having just bought the book at Gencon and leafing through, to be honest I'd be more concerned about Bipods and Gunnery Harnesses affecting combat numbers on ranged Soldiers more than the advanced melee Operative weapons affecting

I haven't run the exact numbers yet, but a gunnery Sharpshooter in the mid-levels may actually out damage max strength melee Soldiers.


Quote:
1/2 specialization

Argh! All year I've incorrectly memorized that basic melee weapons get 1/2 specialization. To quote SNL, "Never Mind".


The Armory wrote:

Polarize

A weapon with the polarize special property briefly builds up
a polarized charge in a target. When striking a target multiple
times with a weapon with the polarize special property in the
same round, damage from each such strike after the first is
increased by the listed amount. This resets at the beginning of
your next turn.

Emphasis Added.

Increased implies that it's additive/cumulative. So, assuming you quad attack and get an AOO in the same round and all hit (5 total attacks), that means damage should go...

9d6...9d6+4d6...13d6+4d6...17d6+4d6...21d6+4d6

If you add the Punishing fusion...

9d6...9d6+4d6+1...13d6+4d6+2...17d6+4d6+3...21d6+4d6+4

At least, that's how I was reading it. It'd be nice to get clarification if that isn't the case.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Compare the wording of the relevant sentences for Polarize and Punishing, as they are in the same book.

Polarize
"When striking a target multiple times with a weapon with the polarize special property in the same round, damage from each such strike after the first is increased by the listed amount."

Punishing
"When you damage a creature with the weapon, you receive a +1 bonus to damage against that target with this weapon until the end of your turn. If you successfully damage the same creature with this weapon multiple times in the same round, the bonus increases by 1 on each additional attack."

The big thing to note is the verb conjugation on the Polarize; "damage from each such strike after the first is increased by the listed amount.". If it were cumulative then the correct wording would be "damage from each such strike after the first increases by the listed amount.". Is increased reads as once, where you see in Punishing, the correct term increases is used in it's second sentence.


Are any of the advanced melee weapons worth it? I mean i'm seeing spending 2 feats to go from a d4 to a d8


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Are any of the advanced melee weapons worth it? I mean i'm seeing spending 2 feats to go from a d4 to a d8

Some of the powered weapons like the Zero Knife and the Polarity Gauntlets deal only energy damage, which allows operatives to target EAC instead of KAC. Since EAC tends to be the lower AC, it works out to be a decent accuracy booster.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

A number of the advanced melee operative weapons are fairly low damage, for AMWs of their level. They are less underwhelming as a backup weapon for a DEX focused soldier, rather than an operative, since there's no 2 feat cost associated with using them. The dancing ribbons look to be full damage, though.

The polarize weapon trait is interesting and I kind of like it, but it's not a game changer.

I think the most significant change in the operative melee options is the addition of garrotes, which only do damage on a successful grapple, but let you use that grapple in place of an attack for trick attack, or the mechanic's overcharge trick (But only abilities that increase your damage, because someone made the terrible decision that envoys shouldn't get to strangle people.)


Ventnor wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Are any of the advanced melee weapons worth it? I mean i'm seeing spending 2 feats to go from a d4 to a d8
Some of the powered weapons like the Zero Knife and the Polarity Gauntlets deal only energy damage, which allows operatives to target EAC instead of KAC. Since EAC tends to be the lower AC, it works out to be a decent accuracy booster.

I think my ysoki ribbon dancer just sprang back to life..


Isaac Zephyr wrote:
The big thing to note is the verb conjugation on the Polarize; "damage from each such strike after the first is increased by the listed amount.". If it were cumulative then the correct wording would be "damage from each such strike after the first increases by the listed amount.". Is increased reads as once, where you see in Punishing, the correct term increases is used in it's second sentence.

I don't believe that is correct.

"Damage is increased by X" and "Damage increases by X" mean the exact same thing. The first is just passive voice (and generally considered bad writing) if you run a sentence like the first one through a grammar check, the latter is what the app will suggest as the correct wording. (At least, that's what it does for me.) The appropriate part of the phrase is "each strike after the first is increased", which implies each strike gets increased by the listed amount each time the same as "each strike after the first increases".


pithica42 wrote:
Isaac Zephyr wrote:
The big thing to note is the verb conjugation on the Polarize; "damage from each such strike after the first is increased by the listed amount.". If it were cumulative then the correct wording would be "damage from each such strike after the first increases by the listed amount.". Is increased reads as once, where you see in Punishing, the correct term increases is used in it's second sentence.

I don't believe that is correct.

"Damage is increased by X" and "Damage increases by X" mean the exact same thing. The first is just passive voice (and generally considered bad writing) if you run a sentence like the first one through a grammar check, the latter is what the app will suggest as the correct wording. (At least, that's what it does for me.) The appropriate part of the phrase is "each strike after the first is increased", which implies each strike gets increased by the listed amount each time the same as "each strike after the first increases".

Grammar checkers in general are terrible. English is one of the worst languages for it, something which I know as a trilingual individual (French because Canadian, Japanese because I don't like Subs).

I propose try and write it in English to mean attacks after a hit have their damage increased by the listed amount. Whilst also considering most classes do not get more than 2 attacks at max.

As even my attempt to pose the question, I use "increased" as it is a fitting choice. Even choosing a synonym like "raised" or "boosted" does not change the meaning. Increased is simply past tense, having happened, where increases reads as concurring. Your tense options increases, increase, increased (past participle), increased (past tense), and increasing.


Okay, I'd really like to avoid a full on grammar debate here, but the verb here is not "increased", the full verb is "is increased," which makes it present tense because the state of being verb "is" is in present tense. The same would be true for verbs "is raised" or "is boosted". These things are all happening, essentially, 'now' as you read them. It's just passive voice, which can cause subject/verb confusion and makes some things in a sentence ambiguous. In this case, it makes it confusing which noun in the sentence is the subject being increased or when it gets increased. I feel pretty confident in this because passive voice is a bad habit in my own writing, and I have been dinged on it (see what I did there) multiple times in essays.

All that being said, I kind of hope my reading is incorrect, as I'm pretty sure they intended for it to be read how you are reading it. I just don't think it reads that way.


Again, English sucks.

The onky other way I could concieve to write it would require the subject to change. Let me explain.

Polarize, woukd need to instead of listing the value it increses by, and instead list the total in the weapon entry. Instead of Polarize 4d6 reading as Polarize 13d6 for the highest level gauntlets. Then it can be written as "damage from each such strike after the first is increased to the listed amount." The downside being if you put the total value on weapon chart it does two things.

The first is that Polarize weapons would have these massive bonuses way above any of the others with how they're written. The second is if the choose to make a weapon fusion that offers Polarize then there really isn't a way to word it properly.

Additional though, the early Polarizes also don't always use the same damage die size, which would also cause confusion.


I think this warrants a FAQ request.

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Advanced Melee Weapons with Operative quaility All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Starfinder General Discussion