C4M3R0N's page

This may be asking too much, but I'd really appreciate it if we could make the shield projectors "functional."

They should obviously target an AC of 15 like covering or harrying fire do. That's the bare minimum though.
After that, it'd be great if the "shield" was written as damage and the shield property inverted it to a shield. That way something like weapon spec can provide more shield, overcharging actually does something, even trick attacking with a shield projector would do something other than damage the person (this is an intentionally silly example).

But it'd be nice to be able to actually have a chance of hitting your allies at least. Just look at the math for NPCs to hit bonuses vs PCs to hit bonuses, it's absurd to think these "guns" do anything as is given the statistical improbability of anyone hitting an ally to begin with, much less a support character hitting the party tank.

So, Tl;Dr... all that's on my wishlist is actual shield projectors

A Paizo partnership Kickstarter. Hmmmm. Haven't had that good a batting average at project completion of those in the past.

As of this moment... It's at like 81% funded with 29 days left.

Even just adding a line in injection expert, you can take weapon focus (injection weapons) could be a decent fix here lol.

Mark is out, but I think the answer you are looking for is that file sizes increased when we when we decided to make our maps higher res for VTT use and provide them as both jpgs and PDFs, across both lines.

We are trying to improve VTT play; there is an internal task force, which Mark leads. They had to prioritize maps over images. As a player, I understand your desire. But I also know Paizo needs to protect its intellectual property. To give away the rules for free with the open gaming license, and then the raw story text, maps, and art at high res levels at the low price of a PDF—even if they are individually watermarked... well, you can see why there is a task force. If it were up to me I would charge a premium for such access.

Don't get me wrong, everyone here certainly appreciates everything you guys do and have done and especially the OGL. But it seems like there may be something missed/lost here...

The PATHfinder stuff is and has been fine for the same time. But there are numerous issues with the STARfinder stuff. This reply really doesn't address the issue there at all.
...Or am I missing something here?

A new Strong Absolom Movement?

That sclerite harpooner though!! Can't wait to show up with my lvl 9 gun that only deals 25d8 damage!!!! Weeeeeeeeeeeee!!!

I expected more of an example city layout with potential plot hooks and locations of note. Who lives where on the street with how they interact with their neighbors and relationships there.

That said, this was a lot more an interesting thought game considering the effects of various abilities on a given city structure.
Thanks for sharing!

C4M3R0N wrote:

We're definitely hesitant to give full spec to small arms too given how strong an operative can already be. And that sort of invalidates the double tap feat.

Ah that brings up another house rule.

Double tap: Small Arms Only, Within First Range Increment Only.

-2 To hit and on a successful hit roll damage twice.

All Other Double Tap Rules Apply.

This makes a double tap truly what it is.

A short range, quick double pull that when executed properly hits the target with 2 projectiles with a better overall accuracy than firing two separate shots (ie -4 for full attack).

Now... Do you mean just full blown double damage, like roll weapon dice twice AND add weapon spec twice? Or is this just weapon dice twice?

I mean honestly, either way, it's a bit absurd. You're essentially getting a full attack out of a standard action. But only with a -2 penalty. That's outright better than all the other options that allow a standard action double attack, and bound better than any form of full attacking, even with the best penalty reductions.

The abstraction the system applies of a +1 to hit, since there are twice as many rounds coming at an enemy, and the bonus damage, are already considered a great feat, even required. You've essentially house ruled this feat into deadly aim on steroids, such that you basically roll at a -2 for critical damage.

All that said, if it works at your table, more power to you! But that just seems completely insane

Hawk Kriegsman wrote:

Weapon specialization is equal to you character level for all weapons.

Grenades now benefit from weapon specialization.

Grenades prices are for a box of 6.

No experience points. Level up is done when appropriate and in character downtime. No leveling halfway through a complex or the like.

Ascalaphus wrote:

So after some shots, you had to take an action to reload, but you didn't have to turn over every trashbin to look for more ammo.

Hmmmmm seriously considering using these.

We don't do full spec on grenades, but we bump all grenades damage by 1 per dice. It's not a huge difference.

As for pricing, as players we tend to avoid buying grenades and just using what the GM hands us, typically off corpses lol. But with the lower prices they're not quite as bad. Plus with a cluster launcher, you can reproduce some of the higher level grenades by clustering the cheaper ones.

We're definitely hesitant to give full spec to small arms too given how strong an operative can already be. And that sort of invalidates the double tap feat.

C4M3R0N wrote:

While I don't dislike this, this effectively invalidates a fair bit of usefulness of the computer interface, and consequently the new voice-command modules. At our table, the people that use force fields have went through the cost of hooking then up to one of these to free up the action cost.

For me in the 7 AP's I have run force fields are just not used. I had one guy in Aeon Throne slot it as he had the free space and never turned it on.

So to me it is a house rule worth trying out as the idea of Force Field in a SCI FI game make sense that fact no one uses them from what I can tell, says something about how useful people find them.

That's very fair. Again, I don't dislike the rule. I'd even be willing to run it like that myself. But I'm not currently the GM for our game lol. For 2 upgrade slots, it certainly seems fair for it to be always on, or at least turn itself on after the first hit. Which that might be how I run it, you can turn it on as a reaction. So then there's still some advantage to CIc and whatnot.

Belabras' house rules wrote:

I don’t track ammunition.

This isn’t as hard and fast as the above, but in general, if a character has a weapon with enough batteries/clips on hand to function in a 10 round combat and reasonable access to technology to recharge those batteries (or access to tech that can make more bullets), I’d just as soon not get bogged down in keeping track of every bullet spent. This is slippery ground though, as there are feats, items, and abilities that are built around ammunition expenditure, not to mention weapons with extremely small capacity as a trade off for power. So far I have done my best to deal with those situations as they come up, but I’m also open with my players about the rule. If it ever becomes an issue, or if we are playing an adventure where resource management is granular and important to the story, I would change the rule.

A trick I found in a Shadowrun computer game is that the game didn't track how much ammo you owned, but did track how many were remaining in your gun. So after some shots, you had to take an action to reload, but you didn't have to turn over every trashbin to look for more ammo.

An interesting gameplay effect of this was that before opening a door to a new room, I'd make sure all guns were freshly topped up. Gave a real "get ready" feel that was quite enjoyable.

I'll second this. Short of special ammo types, trick the guns clip, but don't get bogged down with the ammo in your bag. Reloading is definitely a thing and depending on the build, can be the limiting factor to the power level of a given build.

Ellias Aubec wrote:

I have forcefields active constantly and only drain charges once hit and begin regenerating the temp HP. Otherwise it never gets used in my experience.

Consider this house rule officially stolen :-)

While I don't dislike this, this effectively invalidates a fair bit of usefulness of the computer interface, and consequently the new voice-command modules. At our table, the people that use force fields have went through the cost of hooking then up to one of these to free up the action cost.

Most GMs that homebrew material, in my experience, either state everything that's within the bounds, or state the online sources that are valid. That said, I've always played at tables that allow all paizo material.

Politely inform them the rules that the game will be played by, at your table, and if that's an issue then simply inform them they'll need to seek an alternative GM.

I appreciate the mildly heated debate here, but I believe the takeaway here is the FAQ button needs more love...
This is a fairly too common occurrence in general.
Yeah, I'm looking at you gunner harnesses and you too level 4 witchwarper archetype trade off...
No further debate is going to be able to figure out the intent though sadly as there's no way to definitively get there given the (occasionally lack of) text provided.
So let's get that FAQ warmed up please.

Also, a Starfinder Adventure Card Game could be REALLY cool, especially if you can make another high-quality App for it like with the original one.

I second the app for sure. I loved the first, spent a good bit of money in it. I'm disappointed it doesn't seem to work anymore but it is fairly old. So yeah, I'd love to see this.

Also second the SF2 on the PF2 ruleset. Or at least an unchained book with the 3 action economy and whatnot.

Random related question that I also thought was answered:

Can you recharge hybrid items with limited uses from a battery?

Not unless it's one of those few odd "hybrid" items that actually uses battery charges. Like the few powered armors that are hybrid but still use a battery. Otherwise, nope. They're basically just magic items.

To answer the original question(s) since this has somewhat been reopened, more information is available, and for a more complete answer.

The armory mentions it, almost off handedly, that the advantage of an automated loader is you don't need a free hand, and that's basically it. (Although it is still a place to store spare ammo). It's in the powered armor clarifications about mounted weapons and hands.

Also, the move action of reloading actually includes drawing any readily accessible ammunition, so I assume everyone that has a holstered gun also has clips and holsters of ammo, within reason, with or without the specific bandolier mentioned previously.
It's safe to say that there's no need for a swift action to adjust your grip either (assuming both hands, for 2 handed individuals, are wielding the weapon being reloaded) based on the text of the reload action.

As for Darkling36's question, the loader only lists a single entry for it's bulk, that being 1 bulk, rather than multiple listed for fully loaded vs unloaded. And the text doesn't include anything to indicate you would ignore the bulk of the ammunition loaded within, such as mentions of a null-space chamber. So in my opinion, it seems safe to say that you count the bulk separately still, the loader being 1 bulk and however much ammo you fill it with being its own, additional, bulk. Up to a maximum of 3 total bulk with a minimum of 1 bulk still.

So I want to check if this is a valid combo, it makes sense to me...
First an aasimar takes Angelic Flesh and Metallic Wings (and all other other necessary feats).
And a sorcerer casts Mass Dazzling Blade, are the wings valid targets for the spell?

I feel like logic and common sense say yes, they're metallic due to your metallic (like?) flesh. It's in the name of the feat for the wings even. But I want to make sure this is legit...
So please let me know if you would or would not allow this and why please.

I'd worship Gozreh for that touch attack lightning bolt trident spell. Touch attack tridents sounds good to me.

That's what I was afraid of. I'll talk to him and see what he says.

Thanks for the input though!