Finally, Answered Questions!

Squeeee its in one spot!

Another great resource revealed. Thank you!

Can the solarian's solar flare solar manifestation (page 84) benefit from the soulfire weapon fusion (Starfinder Armory 65)?

No.

What? Why? Solar Flare says that any weapon fusion works on it as long as it explicitly doesn't work on small arms. Soulfire weapon fusion is the big selling feature of solar weapons.

Starfinder FAQ wrote:

Can the solarian's solar flare solar manifestation (page 84) benefit from the soulfire weapon fusion (Starfinder Armory 65)?

No.

What? Why? Solar Flare says that any weapon fusion works on it as long as it explicitly doesn't work on small arms. Soulfire weapon fusion is the big selling feature of solar weapons.

As long as it works on small arms. (the word explicitly isn't there. The idea of explicitly is on the -has to be able to effect your solar weapon- clause not the -prohibited from working on a smallarm- clause)

Anything that specifically affects solar weapons (such as solarian weapon crystals) affects your solar flare in the same way, though it can’t gain any weapon special property, critical hit effect, or weapon fusion that can’t be applied to a small arm.

The soulfire weapon fusion can't be applied to a small arm.
So the soulfire weapon fusion can't go on the solar flare.
(there's a very long thread about it)

This looks great!

Thanks for the FAQ updates Mr. Pasini!

The new FAQ portal's looking good too. Search function is awfully slick.

Umm, your FAQ does not match Core in one section, and there is no errata for it...

Can an operative use a skill to make a trick attack without meeting the normal conditions for using that skill for other purposes? For example, can an operative make a Stealth check as part of a trick attack when they couldn't use Stealth to hide from the target of the attack?

Yes, you can use any appropriate skill (those granted by the trick attack ability or your specialization anytime you attempt a trick attack) to determine if your trick attack does extra damage and applies any penalty.

Specifically the Specialization Hacker states this...

You can attempt a Computers check with a +4 bonus to make a trick attack by creating a computerized distraction (you can’t use this option if stripped of all computerized gear in an area with no computers).

I don't see an errata for that so there are times when you can't use a skill to make a trick attack without meeting the normal conditions for using that skill.

Umm, your FAQ does not match Core in one section, and there is no errata for it...

FAQ wrote:

Can an operative use a skill to make a trick attack without meeting the normal conditions for using that skill for other purposes? For example, can an operative make a Stealth check as part of a trick attack when they couldn't use Stealth to hide from the target of the attack?

Yes, you can use any appropriate skill (those granted by the trick attack ability or your specialization anytime you attempt a trick attack) to determine if your trick attack does extra damage and applies any penalty.

Specifically the Specialization Hacker states this...

Core wrote:

You can attempt a Computers check with a +4 bonus to make a trick attack by creating a computerized distraction (you can’t use this option if stripped of all computerized gear in an area with no computers).

I don't see an errata for that so there are times when you can't use a skill to make a trick attack without meeting the normal conditions for using that skill.

I think this is the time where "specific" overrules the "general". You don't need to normally be able to use this skill (Stealth while observed) to trick attack, unless specifically told otherwise by the ability in question.

Darn, I was really hoping the shield projectors from the Armory would be addressed.

YAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAY!!!!!!

Thank you, Joe and the team, so much for your diligent work on this. Regular updates to the FAQ really really help in the online region of Organized Play.

I think this is the time where "specific" overrules the "general". You don't need to normally be able to use this skill (Stealth while observed) to trick attack, unless specifically told otherwise by the ability in question.

But that is not what the FAQ says... It specifically over writes those conditions you normally would not be able to use those skills, like stealth.

I can understand Computer being the exception to that, but then the FAQ needs to say that.

My biggest question from the COM: How do I Qi Adept?

This new FAQ and Errata page looks great, but doesn't seem to have any highlighting that lets us know which are the new entries. Plus, it doesn't show when it was last updated. Could those features be added somehow? It made the old format really easy to figure out what's new and when it was added.

By... selecting it as a fighting style? I'm not sure I get the question, buddy.

I believe that's a reference to the rules that are missing from the fighting style, like having the option to make explode attacks with no defined radius.

I believe that's a reference to the rules that are missing from the fighting style, like having the option to make explode attacks with no defined radius.

I'll be damned, you're probably right.

Unless you think the idea of Ysoki barfing up cars and strangling a T-rex with a garrote is pretty cool, you might want to add all of the old errata back that has suddenly gone missing.

Unless you think the idea of Ysoki barfing up cars and strangling a T-rex with a garrote is pretty cool, you might want to add all of the old errata back that has suddenly gone missing.

I would like to know what this is referring to. I never saw any kind of errata adding size limits to grappling.

Unless you think the idea of Ysoki barfing up cars...

Ysoki can store up to 1 cubic foot of items weighing up to 1 bulk in total in their cheek pouches, and they can transfer a single object between hand and cheek as a swift action. A ysoki can disgorge the entire contents of his pouch onto the ground in his square as a move action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity.

I'm not sure how a car can be a 1 cubic foot big and weighing no more than 1 bulk, unless it's a Hot Wheels car. I am unaware of any previous errata on Cheek Pouches, or that it needed it.

Also... anything strangling a T-Rex with a garrote is pretty damn cool...

So hoverdrones are meant to have a -2 to wisdom for absolutely no reason whatsoever? Come on, the 6 str I can understand, but the 8 wis is just plain dumb. There's no reason for that! If it has to do with chassi size, then shouldn't there be a ton of drone mods it can't employ? Where's the logic here?

Oh, and you forgot the whole Mechanic "Coordinated Assault" and "Control Net" not being compatible with the prototype class features due to wording. They're both an easy fix, though, just saying you should add them in.

HammerJack wrote:

I believe that's a reference to the rules that are missing from the fighting style, like having the option to make explode attacks with no defined radius.

I'll be damned, you're probably right.

Also how do I make my unarmed attack automatic when the number of possible targets for an automatic weapon is based on my remaining ammunition? How much ammunition do my fists have?

The entire style has gaping holes like this. I made a thread about it.

So hoverdrones are meant to have a -2 to wisdom for absolutely no reason whatsoever? Come on, the 6 str I can understand, but the 8 wis is just plain dumb. There's no reason for that! If it has to do with chassi size, then shouldn't there be a ton of drone mods it can't employ? Where's the logic here?

Oh, and you forgot the whole Mechanic "Coordinated Assault" and "Control Net" not being compatible with the prototype class features due to wording. They're both an easy fix, though, just saying you should add them in.

** spoiler omitted **

It would make more sense to create individual threads and click the FAQ button on them than to throw random "you forgot" posts into a general thread about the questions that have been answered.

Well, that one's easy at least. You have unlimited fist ammo, so you can hit as many targets as you can stuff into that cone.

Well, that one's easy at least. You have unlimited fist ammo, so you can hit as many targets as you can stuff into that cone.

Do I, though? There's no capacity/use stat on an unarmed attack. Normal fist attacks don't have use ammo, so how can they have an ammo score? The technical answer is "zero." Automatic unarmed strike can hit zero targets.

Also why would Blast, with its -2 attack bonus, be an option if you could Automatic with impunity?

Because automatic can't crit? And has a cone that is only half of a range increment?

Of course, automatic still has full attack penalties, so the better question is why you have automatic when you can blast with impunity.

My only answer is to have 2 cone sizes to choose from.

It would make more sense to create individual threads and click the FAQ button on them than to throw random "you forgot" posts into a general thread about the questions that have been answered.

I did actually make a thread about the hoverdrone wisdom issue in august 2019. No real answer came to light. Same with the other problem, there have been threads, but looking at my post history, I was the last one to comment in both the thread I made, and the other one. No official answer has been given.

Can the Solar Flare benefit from other weapon fusions that can only be applied to solarian weapon crystals (assuming more such fusions are released in the future)?

The Soulfire thread has a heavy dispute over whether or not this line excludes Soul Flare from benefiting from any "solarian crystal only" weapon fusions.

Anything that specifically affects solar weapons (such as solarian weapon crystals) affects your solar flare in the same way, though it can’t gain any weapon special property, critical hit effect, or weapon fusion that can’t be applied to a small arm.

I have to assume future fusions of that sort will have more explicit language.
I suspect Soulfire coming out before Flare is likely the cause of the issue : flawless future proofing is a hard trick to pull off.

Anyways, glad to see some answers, not entirely sure about the faq redesign (though I'm fine with it). Also kinda hoping this is the prelude to more, cause there's a bunch more interrogations floating around.
Still, thanks for the update.

Indeed, let me be clear. I am super duper happy to see FAQ.

I'm really happy to see Paizo folks work so hard to further engagement with the community.

It's really good to see Paizo working on this issue.
However, the Alien Archive 1 is still FULL of errata that haven't been addressed: https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uoeb?Alien-Archive-potential-errata#1

The biggest offender for me is the Expert NPC progression table listing a good Will saves progression (same as the Spellcaster progression). That should instead be a good progression on REFLEX saves, obviously. Please someone address this.

If Joe is feeling froggy, we don't seem to have gotten a FAQ for this...

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42az1?Are-Spoiler-really-an-11-Point-Buy#1

Even though Owen at the time said it obviously needed one.

Nothing I said when i worked at Paizo should ever be taken to determine priorities now. Joe's inside the building, and honestly only he has a really good view of the cost/benefit analysis of various specific rules questions vs the thousand other things on his plate.

Hi Joe and team! I'm excited to have an new resource for official FAQ clarifications and/or errata.

Does this signal a new emphasis on regular updates? I am definitely encouraged to post more questions on the rules forum. I'd hope that we can receive some further clarifications based on the vast number of posts that appear to not have well defined answers or lack consensus.

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. Much appreciated!

Nothing I said when i worked at Paizo should ever be taken to determine priorities now. Joe's inside the building, and honestly only he has a really good view of the cost/benefit analysis of various specific rules questions vs the thousand other things on his plate.

I didn't mean to imply that it does. I simply assumed that the dev/editorial team was (internally) keeping track of things to FAQ/Errata in some sort of list and assumed that when you made the comment on the forums at the time, you added it to that list, and that possibly, in the transition or the intervening time since making the statement, it fell off the list. I'm hoping that, if it isn't already, it's added back to the list. Since it appears that he's currently working on that list, or at least thinking about it, I felt now was an appropriate time to broach the subject.

I want to like this, but I'm really going to miss the "highlight everything that changed in the last month" button.

This is great. But if I go to the FAQ from the Organized Play direction I only get to the Starfinder FAQ from a year ago.

That link needs to be updated ASAP.

Priorities are ever a-shiftin' around here, but we'll do what we can to address as much as we can.
Also, we'll continue to look at what we can do to present this information in the most useful way!
Thanks, all, for your feedback.

Priorities are ever a-shiftin' around here, but we'll do what we can to address as much as we can.

Also, we'll continue to look at what we can do to present this information in the most useful way!
Thanks, all, for your feedback.

I am enjoying this reactivity, after a long time of guessing and assumptions for how certain things are supposed to work, this is really a breath of fresh air.

Yes. I'm looking forward to buying the second printing when it comes out with all these sweet sweet updates.