Aseroth_Blackward's page

@Hiruma Kai

Interesting. One point though. The idea behind advanced weapons according to the core rulebook is that Advanced weapons have more advantageous traits than martial weapons, not just larger damage dice.

Regardless, your analysis does make sense. I think part of my concerns will be dependent on how many advanced weapons end up coming out. If it continues to be a small more specialized group, well, time will tell I suppose.

So i'm looking at converting some P1 weapons to P2 for a campaign setting that I am working on. The problem I have with advanced weapons that quickly became apparent is that they are a tier of weapon that, barring certain conditions, no one can really use except for fighter.

While it is not currently an issue because of the 4 advanced weapons that I am aware of (from the core rulebook), are racial weapons. But the sawtooth sabers show the issue that future weapons are going to run into. Unless some specialized feats come out to allow other classes to use them, advanced weapons are not going to useful to anyone but a fighter unless they have some sort of racial link to the weapon.

So basically, you have to be some form of fighter to be able to effectively use advanced weapons that you can't learn through your heritage. That feels, quite flawed.

If he takes dwarven weapon familiarity (first level ancestry feat), "For the purpose of determining your proficiency, martial dwarf weapons are simple weapons and advanced dwarf weapons are martial weapons"

Poor example on my part, apologies. Perhaps it would be better to say that if a human wants to use a Dwarven battle Axe, or to gain mastery in using the sawtooth saber? How does one gain proficiency in non-hereditary advanced weapons passed the proficiency level?

Fighters gain advanced weapon training proficiency advancement from leveling, but is there someway to increase proficiency for other classes? For example, if a lvl 1 Dwarven Ranger takes weapon proficiency to learn how to use a Dwarven Axe, is he stuck at the proficient level all the way to level 20+?

I'm finding the description of the stellar mode for Solarian to be a little confusing. From what I have read of the solarian abilities 1 to 20, I believe it goes like this, but anyone who can provide confirmation or clarification would be appreciated.

At the start of battle, you chose to be either photon, graviton, or un-attuned. If you enter photon or graviton, you gain 1 point right away. On the next round, you gain your 2nd point, and the 3rd point the next round after that (assuming you do not change modes). If you change to the opposite mode, you go back to 1 point, and start over. If you become unattuned, you lose all points, but once you re-attune to photon or graviton, you gain 1 point right away.

So If i am reading this right, the solarion always has 1 point point in the mode he enters until level 20, when he gets 2 points. you get 1 point a round, except at 20 when you get 2 points per round, which makes no sense since the cap is supposed to be 3. Am I missing something?

No. If the character makes the initial save when she is hit by the affliction attack, she does not contract the affliction. If the character fails that initial save, she moves to the first step of the affliction.

For example, if the character is hit by an attack that gives the bubonic plague disease, she has to make an immediate saving throw. If successful, nothing happens, and she stays healthy. If she fails the saving throw, she goes to the first step of the disease track (which in this case, would be latent). From there, she makes saves to determine if she moves up or down the track. If she gets 2 consecutive saves, then she manages to kick the diseases, and starts to get better (how fast that goes might be determined by the GM).

As for the rising part, if you're referring specifically to void death from the first dead suns adventure path, the void death entry itself is iffy. However, if you read the void zombie entry, it does state that only victims who die of void death become void zombies. So as a hard yes or no, it would be a no.

However, void death is a parasitic disease, and parasites can be tenacious. In theory, if the disease has progressed far enough, the parasites could still take over if the host dies prematurely. Personally, I would say that if the character had reached the bedridden or comatose stage of the disease track and was killed then, the parasites could still take over and turn the corpse into a void zombie. However, it would take something along the lines of at least an extra day before the 2d4 hours kicks in. That also assumes nothing untoward happens to the corpse during that time frame.

I'm not much of a fan of the "man in front" rule. It doesn't strike me as realistic and seems awkward. This implies that people are just standing around and not actively moving, like these games imply. That would be like assuming that a creature has to "stand" after a run action before taking another one on their next turn.

It also assumes that people take up an entire square space, which again doesn't seem realistic, to me. If anything, they should, at best, benefit from having soft cover.

I agree in that sense. People in front would take more damage, but they wouldn't cover the people behind them unless they're very bulky. There's also the potential of bullets just punching through the first guy and hitting the guy behind him. This setup was more of a compromise to try and not get too mired in rules. Thinking about it now, it could be said that the person behind the one in front would get something akin to a +1 or +2 bonus to AC.

As for the person in the square thing, I probably shouldn't get started on that. If it was to be more realistic, you would probably shrink that to a 3x3 instead of a 5x5. That would really complicate the map for some people though. Inside a square, you're not assumed to be just standing there. The square represent's your total range of movement without actually moving from point A to point B (least that's always been my assumption since 2nd edition dnd). When you look at the grid, you gotta look at the grid in more of a tactical sense than an actual 'where is he in the square' and 'I move half a step that way', etc.

Now, if you really wanted to use up all the ammunition in your clip and try to make sure someone dies you would use something like this.

Automatic
In addition to making ranged attacks normally, a weapon with this special property can fire in fully automatic mode. No action is required to toggle a weapon between making normal ranged attacks and using automatic mode. When you make a full attack with a weapon in automatic mode, you can attack in a cone with a range of half the weapon’s range increment. This uses all of the weapon’s remaining ammunition. You get one attack per two rounds of ammunition spent. Roll one attack against each target in the cone starting with those closest to you. If a target is directly behind an earlier target (ie. In the same row), that target cannot be hit. Make one damage roll for all targets hit. If ammunition remains, repeat until all attacks are spent.

For example, if you were using a tactical X-gen gun with 27 rounds remaining, you can make a total of 13 shots. If there are 5 targets, but 2 of the targets are behind someone else, they cannot be targeted until the person in front of them is knocked unconscious or killed.

Each pass confers a -2 to hit to attack rolls as weapon recoil builds up. If you don’t have enough cartridges remaining to shoot at all equidistant creatures, determine randomly which one you target. You can’t avoid shooting at allies in the cone.

Alternately, you can skip the man in front rule and just target everybody once for each pass. Also, you could just do one damage roll for all passes, applied multiple times depending on how many times a target was hit.

This one is at least a little more realistic (and complicated), as one can expected to get hit multiple times if caught in a full auto hail of bullets, with the people in front taking the brunt of the attack, and the people in the back taking less damage (assuming there isn't enough rounds or the shooter can't shoot to save his life). However, this also ensures that the people in front are hamburger before the people in back get hit. Even with the hit penalty for each sweep, this makes full auto fire insanely powerful. I would probably only use this rule for a carried heavy weapon, but it would definitely work for a fixed gun emplacement.

I'm kinda not a fan of the way they have the automatic rule either. This rule is more like your sweeping the gun over an area (ie. the cone). Rather than say you use all the ammunition, you would only use a number of rounds equal to the number of targets in your cone, so if say, you have a tactical x-gen gun with a full clip, and 6 targets in your cone, you would only use 12 rounds in that sweep.

I'm in the process of setting up a campaign, and I have some items of my own design and/or converted from pathfinder that I want to add. The only real problem I am having is trying to figure out an accurate way to determine cost. Has anyone put out some data or numbers on how the book prices were developed? Or knows of some similar threat that can help me crunch the numbers?

Aseroth_Blackward wrote:

It should be able to do lethal damage, least in my mind.

Then let it do lethal damage. If it makes sense in your universe then change it. I see it like this... "Are you really going to try and hit me with your fists human?" I hope to understand one day how in a universe with highly advance tech, people still want to use their bare fists to do lethal damage.

Poor Genos never gets any credit for being awesome. #JumpJets & #RocketPunches

My unarmed fighter <3

It is doable. In a lot of ways, someone doing unarmed damage is like a bullet hitting a kevlar vest. The vest may stop the bullet, but not the bullet's kinetic energy. So that bullet can still do damage even if it doesn't penetrate. As long as the target isn't a robot, or wearing enough armor that your essentially punching a steel wall, you can do damage, just not in the traditional fantasy sense.

It should be able to do lethal damage, least in my mind.

So, looking at the feat in the Core Rulebook, the flavor text says that it makes your unarmed attacks lethal, but does not say so in the benefits text itself. I would assume since every other version of the feat I've seen in Pathfidner or DnD say that you can do either lethal or non-lethal damage, that the same would apply here. Has there been any clarification yet?