|
So...I haven't GMd Starfinder for over a year or two and I'm rusty on the Society rules. But I think you still can slot boons. PFS 2 quests are really short which I think is why you don't slot boons for them but SFS quests are more like a scenario that's divided into four parts. But someone correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
So there are four quests; the order doesn't really matter unless there is somebody that needs to complete one of them because they played this before without getting full credit. So if no one has any objections, we could just do them in the order they are in the scenario; which would be doing EMBROI INFILTRATORS first.
|
Player name: azjauthor
Character name: Dawnfriend
PFS #: 108452-703
Chronicle #: 12
Downtime: Check off a box on the Cultivating a Faith boon
Slotted Boons:
Personal: Nufriend Skittermander (New Character + Existing)
Promotional: T-shirt Reroll
Social: Cultivating a Faith
Ally: Living Translator (Common, Shirren, Ysoki)
Starship: Skitterfriend
Slotless: Private Vault, Mobile Translator, Marked Field Agent, Star Sugar Heartlove
|
|
Slotting Top of the Charts (from Band on the Run)
Top of the Charts (Social Boon): When you slot this boon, you are treated as if you have a boon indicating your knowledge of a specific musical group (e.g. Abysshead or Strawberry Machine Cake!) if a scenario calls for it.
Tune-Bot2000 (Ally)
Slotless: Star Sugar Heartlove, Starfinder Insignia, Marked Field Agent, Private Vault
Promotional: T-Shirt.
Faction: Wayfinders
|
|
Just so that people don't get upset; the only consequences your team is going to have is that it this point you have definitely triggered the combat. It's fairly hard to avoid because there's a lot of ways to trigger it, but yeah; you're definitely fighting your way out of the facility at this point. But if you enjoy combat, then it's kind of a win win.
|
Not to be insulting but the way that Dawnfriend is being played I do not see how we will be able to succeed on any of our missions. I would appreciate it if the player would tone down the naivety a bit so we have a chance to succeed.
I understand RP but when it is also a group game with shared goals so reeling it in a bit when appropriate would be appreciated. :)
|
|
If someone is going to do something that will cause failure of a scenario or gaining infamy, I will warn the player. But if they are merely doing things that are going to make the scenario a little messier or chaotic I generally let it stand. Usually it's more about trying to get the person back on track for time sake because generally they are doing something irrelevant rather than harmful. But rest assured that I have never let a table fail because of one disruptive or uncooperative player.
So just to be clear, you were going to get the combat anyways because the cameras in that first room were not disabled (note that I said Octavio thought the cameras were disabled, which is what would happen if you fail a check by 5 or more) Its pretty tough avoiding the combat in this quest actually because so many things can trigger it. I'm mostly trying to make it clear that the other tourists are a deadend and that Dawnfriend should move on. And trying to maintain the illusion that there is a time crunch and reminding him that this IS an covert mission.
|
|
I'm not insulted, but to be honest I'm not sure that my behavior is the cause of this. I tried to open a door. I was told not to open the door ... and at that point, I stopped trying to open the door, I instead began talking to people. George is the one who opened the door after being told not to without confirmation that the cameras were de-activated in a room full of people ... at which point I attempted to distract their attention toward the opposite side of the room.
Somehow, the tourists in this room have realized that a bunch of people who haven't spoke to each other since entering are actually all together. From my perspective, I haven't done anything to indicate that I'm with the wierdos who are now patrolling the northern hallway. My cover - Don Fiend the overly-helpful skittermander - appears to be completely intact.
As a player (and a character), I'm certainly trying to focus the skittermander craziness in a way that is helpful to the group. But that largely means clearing the path for the people with hacking skills to get to the computer with the demonic screen saver. I have no skills that would allow me to hack a biometric lock.
|
|
Okay, so I got that Rattus was trying to Bluff but ignored it. They have the team on camera and generally your socializing options are pretty limited once initiative is rolled.
So in Starfinder its a good idea to let the GM know what damage type your doing and whether it targets KAC or EAC. Its a good habit to get into and and it doesn't have to be much work to do so. For example:
Or
So what bugged me about Dawnfriend's post was that it seemed to be questioning my GMing and maybe my general competence. Because yes, I know how to look at your profiles and I could see that Rattus only has the one gun. I have been playing and GMing on the forums for awhile. And normally I do put a lot of thought into what I post, so if I say something its for a reason. I'm sure you did not mean it that way, but it just rubbed me the wrong way. I should've PM'ed you though and not posted my irritation publicly; so I do apologize for that.
|
|
The weapon damage seems to be completely out of whack in this game with small arms doing so little damage at this tier. Characters are potentially doing an average of approximately 2 points of damage a round when you factor in their need to actually hit with the weapon. On the other hand a glorified axe (Daisho) does d12+strength+power attack. It is really crazy. :)
Spells (and other special attacks) are limited resources at this point so they cannot be fairly compared to weapon attacks.
|
|
Yes, I think that if they redesigned the system they would make small arms a bit stronger. I guess I will say that long arms aren't much better until specialization kicks in. Ranged is kind of weak at low levels. You sometimes have to shoot things s comically large number of times to kill it.
But yeah, I remember arguing with people about Strength not being a "dump stat". At first most of the people I played with thought that every character just needed a high Dex. Strength based builds can do a lot of damage! But then a few people playing the soldier Pregen kind of turned people's minds around
And giving a support or caster class like a mystic 14 str and heavy armor is a very cheap way from a stat point perspective to give a character some defense and a good back up.
Good call on cover! I do actually pay attention to it, including soft cover. If you're ranged you can also go prone, although it does disadvantages that cover doesn't have.
This is a quest, so they usually only have one encounter and some skill challenges or hazards in them. So go all out! Use your spells or if you have abilities that consume Resolve!
|
|
Since this is a Quest pack, spells really aren't a limited resource. Once we get out of this, it'll be days before the next encounter, so there's no reason to hold back.
The issue with the small arms is almost entirely around making sure the operatives aren't completely overpowered ... but it means that anyone else utilizing from small arms has to deal with the same power levels, without the trick attack damage.
|
Some of it is also that dex is also used for a LOT of skills, perhaps most importantly pilot. dex also gives an AC boost and reflex saves. So having lower base damage isn't that much of an issue.
At higher level I seem to recall the base damage between small arms and melee attacks drops a bit, but at level one that static bonus from str makes a huge difference.
|
|
Small arms are definitely designed that way to balance for operatives. And part of what makes their damage seem particularly pitiful is that monsters on average have a lot more hp in Starfinder than they do in Pathfinder. So 1d4 damage with your azimuth lazer pistol just feels super pathetic, especially if the party has a high strength doshko wielder.
On the other hand, I've seen a lot of doshko wielder's go down on the second round of combat after they charged right into a hail of laser fire or the maws of some giant alien monster. 1d12+4 damage doesn't look so great when you only get to do it once before getting knocked out. You definitely want to be tactful about going into melee because it is very risky.
|
|
Small arms just does not cut it for anyone but operatives at low levels. The problem is that many builds have them as the default option. So it is very possible to have a party rolling bare d4 for the entire combat and thinking that this is normal. :)
The fact is that sometimes you need characters that can deal damage. Now how they deal the damage is less relevant than the fact that they bring the pain. During my last adventure (a Tier 1-2) we squared off against a powerful opponent that could heal himself. My character spammed all of his Technomancer spell slots on Magic Missile to take him down (15d4+15 damage total) but daisho wielders, operatives or characters spamming a breath weapon could have done the trick as well.
|
|
This is definitely not a large damage-dealing party, but if you compare low-level small arms to the Cantrips that magic users can use if they're out of higher levels spells, you've got telekinetic projectile for 1d6 and energy ray or hazard for 1d3. So the 1d4 isn't wildly out of line at low levels as the alternative.
|
|
Damage is pretty important. If you're not able to bring decent damage to the table then there should be something else that you're doing to pull your weight. Otherwise, you're kind of just relying on there being more optimally built characters at your table to do the fighting for you.
I don't know...my first character I've built was an envoy and I stubbornly refused to get long arms for her. I just really don't see her as someone using a rifle. But I have to acknowledge, it would be a stronger character if I picked up the two feats I need to get that extra damage. I've been able to mitigate the weakness somewhat with the Double Tap feat, but once again just one more feat and I would have a much more effective character. So its definitely not an optimal character but I work hard to be as useful as possible.
So I don't think you always have to pick the "most" optimal choices for combat for every character. Otherwise, everyone would probably be playing Android Soldiers and the party would just stand in a line firing their reaction cannons at everything other over and over again. But its still a good idea to consider what your character brings and whether you would pick them out of a line up.
|
|
The problem with small arms is that they do too little damage to matter at low levels which results in many characters not being effective in combat as they regard small arms as the default choice. In short this design flaw encourages characters to stink in combat which is never a good thing.
GM Badblood has the right of it. Build your character in a way that you can contribute in a meaningful way in most combats. You do not have to be the "best" but at least be reasonable at combat. This includes doing reasonable damage (or have some type of control option that is typically effective in the majority of combats).
|
|
If your point is just that a melee character with high strength does good, consistent damage, then no argument. But, if anything, this becomes more pronounced at higher levels than low levels. My first character was an envoy, and now at level 11, certainly I have Solarian and Soldier builds that do base damage that is nearly what I can hope from the envoy on a critical. I don't think anyone is saying it isn't nice to have some powerhouses ... but a low-level mystic or envoy with a pistol isn't going to be that powerhouse.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even longarms are not that great at very low level. A semi automatic pistol does d6 which is as good as any long arm at level 1.
Yes, at L2 you can use a L3 weapon doing d8 instead, and that extra point adds up, but you could pick up a small arms handcannon instead.
The big difference is after level 3 when you get weapon spec and there is the only adding half your level to the damage. At that stage, changing to a longarm is probably a good move. Until then... I'm not sure it is really worth it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, Lifft, that is a good point. At low levels the difference is pretty small but the gap gets bigger and bigger as you go up in level.
I think small arms do have some advantages though.
1) You save two feats. Feats are pretty good in Starfinder and you don't get a lot of them.
2) they have light bulk, so a low strength character can carry as many guns as they want. My pistol using envoy has on several occasions out damaged long gun users simply by virtue of having more than one option.
And that's about it. Otherwise long arms are way more powerful and slightly more versatile.
|
|
Starfinder like Pathfinder has you winning (or losing) at the game even before you even sit down at the table. If you want something then your class or race has to provide it or you have to build for it.
Mystics: Big easy button here. Just pick up Mind Thrust and do 2d10 damage at first level. For bonus points pick up the connection that grants you Magic Missile and/or pick up some spell gems for endurance. Mystics have a solid list so you should have no difficulty as you level granted you pick your spells well.
Envoy: This class does not provide much in terms of damage output so you will have to build for it. Pick up some weights and get a sturdy melee weapon or go the standard route and max out your Charisma and then shell out for Dragon Breath for the price of a laser gun. With your high resolve (from your high Charisma) you can recharge it if needed. Either way you will doing more than 1d4/1d6 damage when it counts.
|
|
Just a quick note about full attacking. Basically the math works out for you as long you expect to hit with a 13 or lower.
A 13 basically translates into a 40% chance to hit, so full attacking gives you 2 attacks with a 20% chance to hit. Same chance of hitting basically,. but since BOTH rolls also have a chance of getting a critical hit; its still a good deal. And if you can hit on a lower roll, then it's even more beneficial. But if you're fighting something that normally requires a 14 or higher to hit, then it's not worth it.
So sometimes you have to make an educated guess, but generally if you are fighting a bunch of things the AC tends to be low and a single big alien is probably going to have a pretty good AC. For example, in the last fight the shadowwisp larva had EAC 10 and KAC 11, so any character would benefit from full attacking such a weak monster (unless of course you have something like trick attack or an envoy improvision to do instead!)
Of course, there are a lot of useful things to do with a move, like...moving, for example. And of course cover adds a +4 to AC, so that will also change whether its worth full-attacking. But it's something to definitely keep in mind if you don't have a better use for your move action and you think you have a decent chance of hitting.
|
|
Full attacking is a great way to strip an opponent of their Mirror Images as you do not have to hit their full AC anyways so like the GM has mentioned full attacking can be very useful at times.
So far I find that anyone rolling to attack is really behind the curve for levels 1-4. When you add in cover and the possibility of Mirror Images which I find to be very common in the scenarios that I have played the chance to do any reliable damage is quite low especially for ranged combat. This is really problematic in a society game where character distribution is completely random and you might have a party unable to generate any significant damage output. Low level martially inclined characters in PF classic in comparison are typically very good at inflicting damage. Certain builds like a Mad Dog Barbarian with a suitable animal companion could just inflict absolutely insane amounts of damage even at level 1.
We can pull the damage number per character per combat to illustrate this point but I can see already that it is going to be very skewed in favour of automatic damage.
|
|
The only reason that I'm harping on it is that so far I don't think *anyone* has tried it yet, and some of you actually have a pretty decent chance of hitting the foes you've been fighting. It's kind of rare to see no one full attack and makes me think people might be forgetting about it or underestimating their chance to hit while doing it. Most of you do have spells or improvisations to use instead, but I think at least Lifft and Octavii could benefit from full attacking more.
Also, good point about using it to take out mirror image!
Expendable abilities like spells or dragon glands really stand out in quests because the fights tend to be tougher but you also don't have to worry about conserving resources over multiple encounters so you can go all out. The reliability of being able to swing a sword or shoot a pistol over and over again without having to worry about it running out is a lot better in normal scenarios where you have to more pay attention to resource management.
One thing this party is missing is a good bruiser. Melee remains good at higher levels but a high strength character really stands out at low levels and they can definitely compete with magic missile or mindthrust for damage.
|
|
You have a very valid point about the melee characters. It is just that the flavor of the game skews so heavily towards ray guns that many players are just going to miss out on that type of build completely. It is really too bad because hitting something with a big stick is just so satisfying and clearly effective. :)
I have to disagree with you somewhat in terms of quests vs scenarios. While being able to go out all out in one combat is useful it is not that difficult to build a character with a good level of endurance with automatic attacks as well. My character is only 2nd level and has access to 8 spells plus Dragon Breath plus the ability to recharge his Dragon Breath with his 6 resolve points. And if that is not enough there is always the option to buy first level spell gems which are incredibly cheap at 140 credits a pop.
Burst damage is generally better in society games which have a very limited number of combats. Once your party has the tactical advantage in a combat and is sure to win you can always slack off and mop up with your unlimited "free" attacks. So in general being able to do damage only really matters at the front end of the combat and is much less important during clean-up phase where the danger to the party is greatly diminished.
|
|
I'm well aware of the advantages of full attacking. Especially with mirror images. But when there is cover involved, it just seems that moving would make more sense.
This is doubly the case if one is actually counting ammunition/charges used...
To be fair, because recharge is free, I often skip over doing this for energy weapons, but in a normal scenario where you might have four battles each of several rounds, full attacking can leave you quite short/out of power if you don't carry a spare battery (and use an action, or time between combats, to change it)
|
|
I thought recharging weapons is not free. I thought the cost of recharging a weapon battery is typically half the cost of the original battery. I guess it depends on the generosity of the GM and if you are allowed to charge your batteries for free (for example on our group ship).
It is pretty safe to say if you are away from HQ and do not have a private charging station (like on a private ship) then you would be required to pay to recharge. At least this is my understanding of the rules.
|
|
I was probably thinking about the line:
"At the GM’s discretion, some larger starships might have onboard recharging stations. These might offer recharging at low or no cost, but they typically take 1 minute per charge to recharge a battery or power cell."
Many parties also have a technomancer who can use recharge battery on party batteries as well.
But you are right, battery charging is not free. But not horribly expensive either.
|
|
I'm actually not clear about that myself. In my area, battery charging is hand waved but I don't know if the rules have been clear about that or not. It is a little unfair to slug users making them keep track of ammo, but I've always been happy to handwave it because I absolutely hate tracking ammo.