Alexander Augunas's page

Very excited to see y'all get your books next week. ^^

I had a lot of fun writing Gravelands Survivors, and there's a lot I love about this book. It has some of my favorite prose work out of any of the 3-4 adventures I've written for Paizo thus far. I'm curious to see if anyone can find the line I like the most. (Hint: It's in the opener, since most adventure prose is about setting the scene and all. :3)

Huzzah!

Hopefully y'all survive this one. >:)

WHOA, there's no more product exhibit compatibility list for the new Paizo compatibility license? That's FANTASTIC news.

The Dead Walk seems SUPER cool and fun!

It's a lovely story!

Now I need to know—how long does it take Shirren to go from larval size to adult-size like Chk Chk? GIVE ME ALIEN SPECIES LIFE CYCLES STARFINDER TE—

*gets carried away by vulkarisu, frothing*

I'm looking forward to this for my swashbuckler. I think, "You always get Panache on a fail," is better than having scaling skills, personally. It means that when I roll my best skill and do poorly, I still get something. Having a higher bonus isn't going to help me when the die roll is low.

This seems like the right call to me. Hopefully War of the Immortals has an option for clerics who are former worshipers of a god that died. It would be interesting, given that such an option could also be applied to former Arodenites!

This is far from real feedback, just a couple things that make me wonder a bit.

Androids not being able to survive in a vacuum does bring up some questions. Is it this way because it was too strong in sf1e? Being able to bypass a chunk of hazards or effects, not having to worry about environmental protections in a bunch of situations, etc? Is the decision partially to keep sf2e in line with pf2e? Personally being able to survive in a vacuum was, to me, so useful that it made android feel almost like the optimal choice in sf1e, which I didn't like. In my ideal world, in sf2e having an early level, cheap augment giving the ability to survive indefinitely in vacuum would be ideal, making and ancestry able to fit into sf2e much easier.

The other thing I wonder about is the ancestry option of having a hollowed out arm. It's very cool, but I hope in the end product that will be something anyone can get as an augment? Having that as an ancestry feat makes me worry it won't be an equipment option.

The whole, "Androids don't need to breathe" thing works fine in a game where everyone gets that blanket immunity via their armor. But honestly? That blanket immunity SUCKS like Thursty said several posts up. If you ask me, Armor is too important in Starfinder 1E; you basically have no ability to dodge or defend yourself against attacks on your own without it, and it literally renders entire chapters of the Core Rulebook into wastes of paper. Honestly, androids needing to breathe is fine in my opinion.

I do, however, think that both teams need to look at giving a better benefit than just, "You get +1 to saves against this specific thing that monsters with your trait are generally immune to!" I know that one of the Three Action System's mantras is that, "Every +1 is important!" but that doesn't change the fact that a +1 in a sea of +1s doesn't feel fun. I'd love to see it change to something like, "If you get a critical failure against a disease, you get a failure instead. If you get a success, you get a critical success instead." I think that would feel a lot more fun and impactful then a small numeric bonus, but that's just in my opinion.

As a freelancer who worked on a significant amount of Starfinder First Edition, this document actually reinforces the vibe I got playing the envoy at PAXU last month—Starfinder 2E feels WAY more like Starfinder 1E then Pathfinder 2E felt like Pathfinder 1E. Like, for starters every feat and heritage in this document is a thoughtful conversion of at least one of SF1's alternate racial traits. Great example is the android heritage that lets you pick a function your body was designed for and specialize in it; I wrote that alternate racial trait in SF1's Character Operations Manual. Contrast that to a lot of what's been going on in Pathfinder 2E where the design often feels like it goes out of its way to avoid legacy conversions, and this has me pretty excited.

I agree with some of the points that have been made about the conversion. Yeah, the system plays differently. My Starfinder 1E players can regularly take fights up to CR +4 with a lot of damage taken, but not too much difficulty, so the math is going to be pretty different there. And I definitely prefer everything about the PF1 Soldier to the PF2 Soldier we saw in the first Field Test, but the Developers have been pretty clear that their internal documents for the Playtest have changed substantially. I like the direction this team is going in, and I'm excited to see where they take Starfinder 2E.

G!~ D#@N the rizz on page 27's illustration, am I right?

Unarmed Exemplars, by beloved!

Here's hoping that ikon works with weird unarmed strikes like foxfire and seed pod!

Quick note that I'm loving these discussions! Everyone's words here are equal parts motivating and touching and I can't wait for everyone to get an opportunity to play a Mystic during the Playtest next Summer!

Standard disclaimer: Nothing I say here is canon, the opinion of anyone else on the team, or even my own finalized thoughts, but this is a transparent process so I'd love to share my thoughts concerning magic and technology. Starfinder exists in a time so far into the future that archaeologists are finding computer chips in the ruins of "lost civilizations". We've only had personal computers around for less than a century and have already incorporated plenty of "tech lingo" into our modern vernacular. Even if a Mystic is using magic similar to the magic used by spellcasters back in ancient Golarion, they exist in a world where communits and laser rifles are the equivalent of wood-pulp paper letters and automatic recurve crossbows.

Now nothing I post here in the forum is canon, and nothing in these field tests are finalized: But in my own head-canon I like to think that both Doomscroll and Motivating Ringtone could have been cast without the use of technology: magic that channels truths that cause a target to reel in terror, or that composes a melody so perfect for someone at just that time that they feel soothed. The problem is without the technology this magic isn't viable for an encounter. Especially if these truths/songs only affect the target at that moment: by the time you figured out how to sing that song or wrote down the news the moment may have already passed. Thus the technological item is a foci, but that doesn't mean the caster itself is a "technomancer" anymore than a Cleric using a weapon as a foci is a "magus".

In short: the mystic using technology inspired terminology and having access to spells that utilize technology does not mean it's taking the place of the technomancer!

(Now I await my GM to tease me as this entire post runs quite contrary to the beliefs of my own SF1...

Hey there, it's your GM here to tease you because for the first 5 levels of Teenaged Wasteland your mystic was a luddite who hated technology and preferred that his magic be "old fashioned."

Fun factoid, as Dustin's GM I can confirm that this class OOZES with flavor from his kitsune mystic in our home games.

Title says it all. I'm getting ready to play my exemplar on Saturday, and this is by far the coolest class in this game. It literally has everything I wish other martial classes had:

1) It's not weapon locked. I know there's concerns about it not having an unarmed attack ikon yet, but Mike Sayre's comments make it pretty clear that it's on the table. That means this is one of the only martial classes that has support for every possible weapon style. Most other classes get locked into specific weapons like an MMORPG classes, and the exemplar can just do anything and has support for everything. I would like to see this as the standard for PF2 classes going forward.

2) Cinematic as Hell. The class just DOES cool things and makes you feel cool as you level up. I'm a big fan of the ability that just drops lightning bolts onto people. It's also got a ton of neat feat options.

That's it.That's all I've ever wanted. This is by far my favorite martial class, and I can't wait to report back on it after our game on Saturday!

Okay, I wasn't expecting picture clearly inspired by sirenhead :D

man I love how starfinder aps by the end of softcovers finally got art budgets similar to 2e aps xD

Jason Keeley and I are both huge fans of creepypasta and weird Internet things like Don’t Hug Me, I’m Scared! I was really excited to use the data constructs in the Dataverse in that way.

...B-but I like alignment :(

I don't like alignment personally, but I don't think its a matter of your preference versus my preference. Chances are that alignment is considered a mechanic that might be indefensible in the court if Wizards decided to sue Paizo over using their brand identity. The concept of, "a mechanic that measures your goodness" is definitely a game mechanic that probably couldn't be sued over, but using that rule and calling it alignment could be argued as D&D product identity, and it's probably easier to trash it as a result.

"slightly different mix of monsters, spells, and magic items, the rules remain largely unchanged"

That's some weasel wording there. Why a different mix? There shouldn't be. Either it's changed, or it's not. "largely" is also an out for "ok, so there are changes [beyond errata]!"

SO, I know nothing about what Paizo may or may not be doing, but here's some likely considerations.

If the goal is to break free from the OGL, then there's a VERY legally gray zone regarding, "What can we use without using the OGL?" For example, the concept of, "rolling a die for an attack against a value to determine what happens" is not copyrightable because it's a game mechanic, but arguably, terms like "Armor Class" and "saving throw" might be. I don't know, I'm not a lawyer, but lawyers probably don't know either because basically every TTRPG company in America has been doing their best to avoid going to court because the ruling given could be ... interesting.

This means it's VERY Likely that we're going to see soft changes, ie terms changing that don't change the actual rules of the game. This is likely necessary to play ball in the same stadium as a company of wizards that seems okay with ruthlessly dismantling the tabletop games community.

NO MORE ALIGNMENT!
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

Weren't Robot Dragons already in an Alien Archive? Or am I thinking of something else?

They are, but when I wrote Into the Dataverse I wanted a disintegrator dragon, which doesn't appear in an Alien Archive. So I wrote one. >: )

I was really looking forward to that Shadowfinder that Owen K.C. Stephens was working on. Maybe Paizo had him stop because something like it was in their future plans?

As far as I'm aware, Owen was never contacted by Paizo to not do Shadowfinder. I think the stall was more about his health, which hasn't been great for a while. He's currently diagnosed with Stage II Colon Cancer and there are two different PDF Bundles (Bundle #1 and Bundle #2) up to help him try and cover the costs.

I asked him a few months ago, and he said he's very intrigued by Starfinder Enhanced and is looking forward to seeing how a new crop of designers moved the game forward.

Re: the "Starfinder becomes PF2 Compatible" discussion, I know my personal hope is that when the time for a Second Edition comes, that Starfinder takes a few good ideas from Pathfinder 2E like the 3 Action Economy and transitioning the Leveled Equipment system to a Mk upgrade system that mirrors fundamental runes in PF2, but also gives itself the space to be it's own game. I'm not in Starfinder Enhanced (I was assigned to Into the Dataverse at the time, and that was a three-month project), but I think a book like this that turns Starfinder into the best version of itself is better than a theoretical book that turns Starfinder into a different version of a different game and am really excited for it to get into people's hands! Including mine.

Nice to look forward to the future of Starfinder I guess.

I think that when you get a chance to read the adventure and how it leaves the state of the galaxy, it'll be pretty clear that the future of Starfinder is bright. Bright and weird, my favorite. ;)

Melinda R Schreffler wrote:

From the perspective of player choice in character advancement, I'm disappointed not to see mystic included in the list of classes with new versions. Mystic is the only class where the player does not get to choose their character's new special ability at every even level. Instead, they pick a connection at level one, and the special abilities gained at even levels are chosen for them. They are not able to mix and match different "paths" as other classes are. I understand from a gameplay/mechanical balance perspective this may not be an issue, but it does feel unbalanced from a player choice perspective.

I am excited to see adjustments to starship combat and scaleable equipment however!

I had the same initial reaction. Luckily mystics do have epiphanies as alternate class features, and there are some decent ones. Hopefully we get even more of them in this book!!

I hope so too! I originally wrote epiphanies thinking that we were going to see a lot of new ones over time, and that hasn't been the case. We definitely need some customization love for the Mystic. Being the strongest spellcaster shouldn't mean that you don't get to customize much.

Name's in the thread. Why do I need to Play Pathfinder 2E to play kitsune, grippli, hobgoblin, or kobolds in Starfinder? Like, I get that it's supposed to be a cool crossplay thing, but now I feel like I have to use my Achievement Points for Pathfinder to play what I want to play in Starfinder. It just feels bad.

What do you still need?

Interesting question!

While there are definitely a lot of great class concepts out there that I would really appreciate seeing in Pathfinder 2E, I think the thing I can definitely say that I need more than anything else is that I need a hero.

I'm holding out for a hero until the end of the night. He's gotta be strong (key ability: Strength), he's gotta be fast (+10 Speed bonus for sure), and he's gotta be fresh from the fight (maybe something to help him regain Hit Points after an encounter?).

Yeah, definitely think I need a hero, and I'll be holding out for one until the end of the night. Gotta double down on the Strength and the Speed. Ooh, I know! Maybe something to give him enlarge person? My PC really needs to be larger than life.

... wait. I just described a giant instinct barbarian, didn't I? Hm. I'll have to think more on this tomorrow.

I got a shout-out! <3

Good. It’s about time!

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

Come along, friends! I have such wondrously fascinating things to show you!

I am VERY excited for y'all to see this AP next year.

But tell me, Luis, does this book have rules for property values?! I NEED TO BUY A HOUSE FOR MY PC, LUIS!

This could have been called the Deck of Many Faces?!?!

WHYYYYYYYYY!

(Still looks rad, though!)

I thought the same thing watching that video! The know direction beyond crew is nothing if not honest about what they think about products, and they gave this very high praise.

Thank you!

We try very specifically to be honest about how we feel about content so that when we offer praise, our fans (and Paizo staff) know that it means something. I mean, we're biased; my name's in the Starfinder CRB and V's written hundreds of pages of awesome Starfinder content, like two whole AP volumes at this point. But it's very important to us that we're biased with integrity, and I'm glad that our honesty shines through about the book!

In addition to reviewing our early access PDF last month, we had John Compton on at twitch.tv/knowdirection to talk about the making of Drift Crisis, so if you want even more behind-the-scenes info about the book, check the episode out there. It'll also be available to listen to in podcast form tomorrow (5/13) at knowdirectionpodcast.com.

You know, unless we get SUPER unlucky, it being Friday the 13th and all.

Cool!

Thank you for taking the time to write this up, Mark! This is great. :D

Also, there were a few people who were like, "Your post got too heated and passionate so I stopped listening to anything you said."

You're perfectly entitled to that response, but I'd challenge you to question in yourselves why perceived emotion devalues the quality of my opinions in a thread literally titled, "Respectful Opinions about PF2." I may have been emotional, sure. I am an emotional person. But being emotional and having feelings doesn't invalidate my thoughts and opinions. You don't need to be an unfeeling bastion of rationality to have valid thoughts and experiences, and respect doesn't necessitate a lack of emotion.

A lot of people replied to my post and I thank you for that (as well as 22 Likes!!). Out of respect for the OP and the spirit of this thread, I'm not going to engage in a discussion for any of them, but there was this one post I saw that I wanted to speak on:

The only other major unaddressed issue I can think of is Recall Knowledge rules. Both in terms of clarity and structure.

I agree with this, mostly because all the different rules for recalling knowledge are all over the place. The rules in the skills chapter don't, like, list DCs or anything. I found them later in the GM chapter, which is weird to me. I feel like it's okay for players to generally know how difficult something is, so why put that in the back of the book?

Also, I agree that for the number of options that there are in the game that interface with Recall Knowledge in encounter mode, it's strange how vague it is. I'm currently listening to the Outcast and Outclassed 2E podcast, and there was one point where the GM-appointed Rules Lawyer was like, "Yeah PF2 handles it one way but that way is confusing so I recommend just doing it like PF1."

I don't think that's a good look for a rule, personally.

1) The Math.
Usually when I say this, someone jumps down my neck about how I'm a power gamer who can't appreciate a balanced system. For me, PF2's Math issue is that the d20 is too important. Since difficulty scales perfectly with my Level, I never feel like I'm getting better as I level up. This is in part because enemies and DCs tend to account for the highest possible proficiency rank at a given level, so if I keep my ability scores maxed and my proficiency ranks capped, I'm doing just as I did before those values rose. And if I don't, I'm objectively worse. Usually by 10 to 15%. I think PF2 needs a rebalance around assuming players are, like, a rank lower then they actually are. Design for the median so everyone can have fun, but the people who specialize do better. Not "expected."

2) Feats
I hate how class feats are split up, so there's a new category at every opportunity. It makes me feel like if I don't take a new feat from the highest possible category, I'm playing wrong. And oftentimes I would be; the power level between a 1st-level rogue feat and a 2nd-level rogue feat is pretty crazy by itself. Starfinder's system of having fewer silos (usually 2nd / 8th / 14th) is much better because now I get to pick a few choices from three silos instead of one choice from ten.

Similarly, the game doesn't give enough feats for how niche many of them are. This is evidenced by how popular Free Archetype is, in my opinion. One of the most common statements I see is, "Pathfinder 2E doesn't feel complete without free archetype," and in my opinion that means the game doesn't give enough feats baseline (or that those feats aren't meaningful, but that's another discussion).

3) Free-Bies
There are a TON of feats that feel like their benefits should be rolled into the baseline effects of the actions they modify. (Group Impression, for example.) Like, "Oh, you're an expert in Diplomacy now? Cool, when you Make an Impression, you now can target multiple creatures." The only counter I've heard to this is that doing so makes it easier for players to "forget" the rules because a feat on a character sheet serves as a visual prompt for remembrance, and I honestly don't think that's a good excuse, but that's just me.

4) Rarity
This mechanic has no idea what it wants to be. It's used for like four things all at the same time: restrict access to things that class feats give you access to (see most focus spells being Uncommon), restrict access to campaign elements that could be disruptive (see dominate), restrict access to campaign elements based on an arbitrary measure of how common Golarion's developers say those elements are in their campaign setting (see every ancestry published since the Core ones), and rituals. What ends up happening is that people see stuff like dominate and possession being rare and go, "Oh no! If this is rare, something like the shoony must be as disruptive as these spells, right?" It's not a good system and placing access traits on ancestries is sort of like giving your player to gatekeep, but specifically gatekeep Paizo IP from your games I guess? It really doesn't make sense and I would prefer to see it gone.

5) Overcorrection Mechanics
If you played highly optimized PF1, it's very easy to see the places where Pathfinder 2E overcorrects things that were overpowered in Pathfinder 1E. A great example is the pest form spell, although polymorphing in general falls into this category. In Pathfinder 1E, there was a nasty build where you basically were a swashbuckler who debuffed enemies if you shared their space, and because of how Tiny creatures worked in that edition and some poor wording on the ability's part, players would frequently use items, spells, or feats to transform into Tiny creatures to activate that ability. So Pathfinder 2E responded by making sure the default way to become Tiny (pest form) put as many debuffs on you as possible. I see the incapacitation trait similarly, as well how many spells were adapted from PF1 to PF2. My point isn't that we should bring back the OP mechanics, but I do feel that Pathfinder 2E treats players as rabid beasts who need to contained rather than people who are trying to engage with a story. Pathfinder 2E is a great game and it's extremely successful, but I also know that there are a lot of people who refuse to play it because of how the game's rules treat them.

There's sort of this design idea that games need to be catered to the GM because, "Without no GM, no one can play our game!" And I think Pathfinder 2E did a good job making a game that's legit fun to GM. I enjoy running Pathfinder 2E. But none of my local friends want to play Pathfinder 2E because of how the game treats players and character building (quantity of feats is not quality of feats), so I don't get to run PF2 unless I do it with strangers online. If a game isn't fun for players to play, they won't.

6) The Investigator Class
As someone who loved PF1's investigator so much that I levelled it from 1 to 19th in PF1, I could literally write a thesis on how angry the PF2 investigator class makes me. But, like, I get legit ANGRY about it. I played investigator from Level 1 to Level 3 in a home game, and I had to ask my GM to let me swap to mastermind rogue. I loved the setting, I loved my character, I loved the plot, I loved the people I was playing with, but every time dice rolled and I Devised a Stratagem, only to roll a 6 and have nothing to do that combat because I'd be locked into that roll.... It happened so many times that I got so salty that it wasn't good for me or my table.

To me, it feels like they took every cool ability that could have been a neat thing for the investigator to do and gave it to the rogue instead, so I wish they just didn't make an investigator and folded all those investigator feats into the rogue. Maybe make an investigator racket out of them. Which is sad, because I think there's real value in having a skill-focused class that isn't flavored as a criminal, but the investigator is just flat-out worse than the rogue in every mode.

Dubious Scholar wrote:

:( Fox form kitsune still have broken legs. (Why is it necessary to limit them to 10 foot speed when transformed?)

That's more of a system-wide issue that we're just stuck with going forward, unfortunately. :/

The rules of a tabletop RPG are more than printed words on a page of a book. They're a prism of endless possibility. Where a single sentence can be struck and replaced at a whim, creating homebrewed systems radically different from the core gameplay experience. Each custom tailored to the individual needs of the people surrounding the table upon which it is played. Some rules will be beloved. Others will be scorned and scoured. But nothing will be the same.

I am the Everyman Gamer. I am your guide through these vast new tabletop experiences. Follow me and dare to dabble in design, and ponder the question... What if (you just house ruled that a kitsune's pest form doesn't adjust their speed)?

Also, shameless plug, I should have Kitsune of Golarion published on Pathfinder Infinite this week, and a tweak to this is something that appears in that PDF! :D

Ramanujan wrote:

I enjoyed the first 90%, but I didn’t get the ending.

I’m guessing the ability use at the end is a reference to something I’m not familiar with?
Did I miss it being foreshadowed in the text?

Vellero's vanguard powers activated for the very first time and crushed the boulder into powder before it could kill them.

Yes! Specifically, I was trying to show what an entropic strike might look like; he touches the boulder and the bonds between the rock fall apart, changing from boulder to stones to pebbles to gravel to dust in an instant.

Thank you, Paizo, for the opportunity to write this tale!

ALRIGHT! That was heart-poundingly AWESOME!

May or may not have been considering creating a shobhad character for SFS recently...

This reaction made me smile! Glad you liked it so much. <3

I agree that it's not very clear whether manifold array limits the maximum item level of weapon you can manifest as a gear array.

I can see an argument that the effective level reduction of manifold array should apply to the maximum item level of weapon you manifest, but I also agree with Milo v3 that this interpretation essentially makes it so you can't use gear array to form a weapon, because weapon damage is bounded by your level and having a weapon that is significantly lower item level is not going to be helpful. (Would having a lower-level cybernetic augmentation be helpful? Maybe? But weapon certainly wouldn't.) It also creates an option trap where you basically have to keep lower-level weapon and augmentation options to not lock yourself out of being able to use one of your class features.

I think this could use an FAQ clarification, but in the meantime it should probably be ruled in favor of player fun.

Hi people in my latest game I'm playing a kitsune outlaw from the Azlanti Star Empire and was wondering how they would be treated their

Species in the Azlanti Star Empire fall into five categories:

2) Second-Class Sapients: Gathols, gosclaws, neskintis, screedreeps, shatoris, slivaras and vilderaros

3) Non-Citizen Sapients: Brakims, dessamars, elanayas, filsoks, mercoys, stelliferas and volotins

4) Enslaved Sapients: Androids, hortuses, iztheptars and tromlins.

5) Non-Sapient: All others.

So, let's take a look at your question. Kitsune in Starfinder aren't on this list, so they're non-sapients. In your tailless form, you'd probably be considered a member of that sapient's class while you were disguised as them. For example, you'd be a non-citizen as a brakim, a second-class sapient if you're a gosclaw, or a first-class sapient if you're a pureblood azlanti.

BUT let's say your tailless form is a pureblood azlanti ... and you get caught. You're something AWFUL to the Azlanti, then. You're basically a silverfish, right? A parasite pretending to be something far above your station, and therefore you're likely disposed of promptly like a parasite. Below non-sapient, likely reviled.

There's a reason that the Azlanti Star Empire is an evil empire. ;)

In the spirit of this, I’m going to provide some of my own thoughts on what I perceive to be the evolutionist’s rough patches, aka my top 3 “concerns” and what would make me think twice about whether I wanted to play this class, below. I hope that we can start a dialogue that creates more top-rate feedback for the Star Chamber!

1) The description of this class made me think it was gonna be a shapeshifter and it’s not, and that frustrated me. Starfinder’s polymorph rules aren’t great for combat, so I thought based on the description that this was gonna be the combat polymorph class and it wasn’t, which was really disappointing to me. It wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of the negatively surrounding the Playtest stemmed from this missed expectation.

2) EP is too much like vanguard points. This is an aesthetics thing, but I feel the EP mechanic works too much like a vanguard’s entropy points in practice. They’re both even different kinds of EP, which is bound to get confusing. In talking with John, since this class is supposed to feel like “corruptions the class,” I think the stronger option is to model the progress after an affliction. Instead of EP bench marks, give the class steps similar to an affliction with each step having a minimum level requirement to attain it. A much more homogenized progression would likely help sell the feel of a transformation, since that way there is a tangible point where you’re “fully transformed” aka “transformed as far as you can.”

3) This class wants to be a combatant / expert hybrid, but it lacks the math to do either well. One of the biggest problems with the evolutionist is that in order to have maximum effectiveness in combat, they need to spend their points on a full BAB. Even if that isn’t the only way to spend your points, it’s always going to feel like the only way to spend your points. Additionally, this class doesn’t have enough starting skills, and since Intelligence isn’t it’s key score (unlike operative or
biohacker or mechanic), it is always going to feel dramatically behind. The evolutionist needs 6 skill ranks per level for the same reason the vanguard does; it just doesn’t have the combat power to justify having fewer.

Additionally, instead of spending EP for a BAB bonus, it should just have 3/4 BAB but gain a scaling boost to attack rolls with unarmed strikes and adaptive strikes, similar to how the biohacker handles the same problem. (Though maybe with better bonus scaling, since the biohacker’s bonus doesn’t fully make up for not having full BAB.

James and I asked John tons of evolutionist questions! Check ‘em out here in our hour-long interview!

Obviously because of the nature of the interview, we couldn’t ask every question we got and at this stage of the Playtest, the Star Chamber hasn’t been able to thoroughly assess feedback yet, so we’re hoping to have either John or Joe (perhaps both) back for our October or November show once the data’s been reviewed for an update on how the playtest went. But since it’s still going, please continue to give your feedback because it is being listened to!

Knowing who you are and feeling safe to express your love is so important and I'm overjoyed that Paizo not only recognizes but celebrates its diverse staff and freelancers all year long.

I'm so proud to have the opportunity to write in this post, as Alexander Augunas' post from the Paizo Pride 2019 and our subsequent talks for the past two years were instrumental in helping me understand myself and build up the courage to come out. My only regret is not having met you a decade sooner.

Paizo has fostered an anti-toxic community that makes me feel safe and accepted being who I am, and I can't thank our community leaders enough for giving us this space.

D'aw, silly foxtato. You didn't have to thank me publicly like this. Being friends with you is more than enough.

Hey, you even used a picture from my Hao Jin assignment for the blog! Thanks, Alex! :D

The Slayer favored class bonus for catfolk states "Add 1/3 to the result of any sneak attack damage that the slayer deals after all sneak attack damage dice have been totaled." What does this mean? 1/3rd of what? A point? The total? 1/3 of the total seems OP, but if it is just 1/3rd of a point, why did they add "after all...totaled?

ReWord Option 1: Add 1/3pt to the total of all sneak attack damage dice rolled.

Option 2: Add 1/3pt to each sneak attack damage die rolled.

Option 3: Add 1/3 of the total result of sneak attack damage dice rolled.

Hi! I'm the author of this section. The correct operation is:

1) Roll your sneak attack dice.
2) Total the damage you rolled on your sneak attack dice.
3) Add +1 damage for every 3 times you selected the Favored Class Bonus.

For example.

"Alex is playing Kohdaehan, a catfolk slayer. Kohdaehan is 9th level, so he has sneak attack +3d6. He's also taken the catfolk slayer favored class bonus at every level, so he's picked it 9 times. When he sneak attacks someone, he rolls 3d6 ( [4] + [1] + [6] ), totals the result (4 + 1 = 5, 5 + 6 = 11), and then adds +1 for every 3 times he's chosen his favored class bonus (9 / 3 = +3, 11 + 3 = 14 damage from sneak attack).

As a general rule, most Favored Class Bonuses are balanced around 6 selections being about as good as a feat. This is why in Blood of the Beast you get Magical Tail for selecting a kitsune Favored Class Bonus 6 times, or why many classes give bonus features that could be selected with the Extra Rogue Talent or Extra Revelation feat 6 times). At 1/3, this means 6 selections is +2 which is about the same as Weapon Specialization.

Hope this helps!

Or maybe the unexpected return of the Ruby Phoenix herself threw things off a bit?

Honestly, I don't think it would, but I'm biased because I wrote Hao Jin's entry in Lost Omens: Legends. Hao Jin's kind of unique among the Lost Omens: Legends in that she had more words devoted to her than almost any other character in that book simply because she's intrinsically tied to her tapestry. When I wrote Hao Jin's article, I had to read through about a half-dozen scenarios, the Ruby Phoenix Tournament module, and a few articles scattered throughout a bunch of different Campaign Setting Guides, Player Companions, and so on.

When I finished all my research (especially her content in Season 10), I came to this realization: Hao Jin only really established the tournament as a way to ensure she had a positive legacy, but when she returned to Golarion she realized that hosting a Dragonball Z-style match wasn't really enough to undo the fact that she effectively stole cultural treasures and locked them away in her own private museum for over 300 years. So a lot of what you see Hao Jin doing is like a form of repentance, giving back things she took and working to actually build herself a newer, better legacy.

I personally think that keeping the tradition of the Ruby Phoenix Tournament, which is now over 300 years old, makes perfect sense for her from this regard. First, why would she want to rob Goka of a time-honored tradition if returning traditions to people is sort of her motivating operation now, and second, what better way to build your legacy than to preside over the fighting tournament that bares your name?

I suppose we'll see soon enough whether or not I'm right, though. ;)

CorvusMask wrote:

Aww man this survey skips over AP bestiary entry alien races :'D I would have liked to have expansion on some of those!

AP alien archive races are in a fill-in-the-blank at the bottom! Trust me, I had the same reaction. Amrantahs and moyishuus... Give me more!

The Star Chamber will be able to spot my survey specifically because of that box. >_>