
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:... Paizo hates martials?It's humorous that infamy will only hurt melee based character's. Caster's will only be slightly inconvenienced.
Har Har Har
Casters still need armor. And there is no mage armor spell.
Infamy also delays when you can buy your +2 and +4 stat boosting items.
Rings of resistance, Spell Ampules and Gems (equal to potions and scrolls)

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Thurston Hillman wrote:Sin of Asmodeus wrote:... Paizo hates martials?It's humorous that infamy will only hurt melee based character's. Caster's will only be slightly inconvenienced.
Har Har HarCasters still need armor. And there is no mage armor spell.
Infamy also delays when you can buy your +2 and +4 stat boosting items.
Rings of resistance, Spell Ampules and Gems (equal to potions and scrolls)
Casters have never needed armor, nor do they really need stat bump items. They help, but the CR system means that PC casters even with large infamy will still always be tossing out them save or suck spells.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

FLite wrote:Thurston Hillman wrote:Sin of Asmodeus wrote:... Paizo hates martials?It's humorous that infamy will only hurt melee based character's. Caster's will only be slightly inconvenienced.
Har Har HarCasters still need armor. And there is no mage armor spell.
Infamy also delays when you can buy your +2 and +4 stat boosting items.
Rings of resistance, Spell Ampules and Gems (equal to potions and scrolls)
Casters have never needed armor, nor do they really need stat bump items. They help, but the CR system means that PC casters even with large infamy will still always be tossing out them save or suck spells.
Hehehe... have fun with that. Just remember, this is sci fi, blasters are common, all casters are 6 level casters, and there is no such thing as casting defensively anymore. You may find there is no rear line anymore...

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Sin of Asmodeus wrote:FLite wrote:Thurston Hillman wrote:Sin of Asmodeus wrote:... Paizo hates martials?It's humorous that infamy will only hurt melee based character's. Caster's will only be slightly inconvenienced.
Har Har HarCasters still need armor. And there is no mage armor spell.
Infamy also delays when you can buy your +2 and +4 stat boosting items.
Rings of resistance, Spell Ampules and Gems (equal to potions and scrolls)
Casters have never needed armor, nor do they really need stat bump items. They help, but the CR system means that PC casters even with large infamy will still always be tossing out them save or suck spells.
Hehehe... have fun with that. Just remember, this is sci fi, blasters are common, all casters are 6 level casters, and there is no such thing as casting defensively anymore. You may find there is no rear line anymore...
Whats a rear line? As long as I get my Phule's company esque adventure fix from Starfinder I'm golden. Casting from the front, the back, upside down, in zero gravity, who cares?
Casters will still be far better than melee with infamy, and nothing heard so far changes this.
Howard197 |
Howard197 wrote:Don't worry, I got the book and things look pretty fun. The leveled equipment is actually really nice, and much more fun than the old enhancement bonus advancement.Hmmm. Infamy looks fine, as long as the rule about the GM needing to warn ahead of time that an act is evil/Infamous act still stands.
Levelgating Equipment though is terrible. Price is already an effective levelgate, and in those incredibly rare (though breathlessly talked-about) instances where characters spend all their gold on a single item, that's what fame limits are for.
Let's not forget the main reason 4E failed in the first place: Designers who were too obsessed with "Game Balance" at the expense of fun.
It's good to hear the system sounds fun. I never had a problem with the enhancement bonus progression on weapons and armor myself, since you generally had options on different areas to put your gold until you had enough to buy that enhancement or gear you really wanted.
I'm just worried there'll be something along the lines of "blaster of awesomeness, 4000 gold, 4th level and above only." For a player with a smart character who saves 4,200 gold by mid-third level, that kind of explicit ban in the name of balance really ruins immersion and fun, and punishes out of the box thinking.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Sample from the book:
Weapon - Level - Price - damage
Knife, tactical - 7 - 6,000 - 2d4 S
Dueling sword, buzzblade - 8 - 9,500 - 2d6 S
Incapacitator - 9 - 14,200 - 3d4 B
Battleglove, power - 10 - 16,100 - 2d8 B
Wealth by level.
6th 15,000
7th 23,000
8th 33,000
9th 45,000
10th 66,000
So with no infamy, on absolom station, you can buy a melee weapon up to about 1/2 your wealth by level. If it appears on a chronicle sheet, you could buy one up to about 2/3 you wealth.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

As an example, I already had to issue an infamy warning on Thursday night. I won't post scenarios spoilers os if this sounds vague, you should still get the point. Quig was storing a grenade in his cheek pouch. During the first significant role-play encounter, Iseph decided that he wasn't interested in the conventional methods of acquiring information from a non-hostile, non-enemy, non-combatant NPC. Instead, Iseph asked Quig for the frag grenade he had kept in his cheek pouch and said, something to the effect of maybe a frag grenade will get us the information we need.
Ok, cool. You can certainly attempt to torture this individual with a frag grenade to gain the information. And Quig, you can be complicit in this nefarious deed. I have to warn you though, that the two of you, and any who openly support this course of action will gain a point of infamy for this. Additionally, you may find that surrounding NPCs might be averse to the fact that you have used a frag grenade in this location.
They found a less murder hobos in space solution.
For those who need more justification and are familiar with the scenario 1-00, here is the specific set of circumstances.
I'll admit, the way they did this in character was funny as hell and I thoroughly enjoyed hearing it, even laughed, but it would have deserved a point of infamy.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

The Penecontemporaneous One wrote:Could remote-control of a squadron from a base/ship (a la Ender's Game) be a possibility, though?Having read through the rules a couple times, I didn't see anything that would allow remote-control of other ships. It could be added, but nothing out the gate.
Now that things have been released, I was referring to the "remote control" of various vehicle controls and weapons that occurs during one of the encounters in SFS #1-01 The Commencement as a precedent :)

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

JulianW wrote:Na, the Drake is a USB drive.Stone Dog wrote:Modern ships... they all look like electric razors.So true. So much so I now can't unsee it!
"I liked it so much I bought the squadron"
Dangit! Now I want someone to make a Drake-shaped USB drive with the rounded front part as the protective cap.