Ebon Hawk's page

English is my second language as well...

Where use of language is concerned, the way I see is that the cultural and referenced ideas come first. When someone says energy shield I believe people assuming that it is "an energy shield that envelops an object and protects it from damage" with all that is included from common points of reference (like Star Wars or Star Trek). I think that is important.

I play with some very creative people who are not rules heavy, I would rather encourage their creativity rather than confuse them with complex rules for the sake of "doing it RAW", so I tend to drift towards common meanings and understandable point of reference so that we can get on with what is important, that being role playing, and ignore what is not, that would be pausing the game and re-inventing/trying to explain terms and their contexts if those fall outside of common space opera and terminology references.

I am aware that this kind of experiences and preference may wary from group to group and I am not seeking validation of anything, I am just interested in people's opinions as they do contribute to those common references :)

Kind Regards

It doesn't need to be opaque to block lasers.
It could be a red field around yourself. This blocks red lasers pretty effectively. Or maybe it's more purple, to block both red and blue?
Maybe the AI in your custom rig measures the incoming wavelength and adapts accordingly?

This makes perfect sense but I think it also introduces additional logic and possibly rules behind the process that explains the way it all works (and does so outside of Core Rules). By doing so we are walking away from RAW (which is fine with me) and introducing clarifications that would need to be clearly communicated to the group as house rules or interpretation (because they are not in a book).

You will note that I am not too keen to touch on laser colours as that is yet another can of worms :)

Alternatively, and with my previous post in mind, I think there is a much simpler solution. If we were to acknowledge that the language is a problem and simply rename a trick to something else (example: Reinforcement) we would be removing shield/force field terminology from the discussion all together and achieving what we want, which is to grant some temporary hit points to a user.

This is why I strongly believe that anyone writing rules (official or house) should be very careful when using terminology. After all, we are discussing "a shield that does not act like any other shield, it acts like a force field, but it does not have same properties as other force fields have...". You and I may be able to follow that but an average player might be confused by it and isn't it our job (as Game Masters) to make sure that the rules are clear and consistent for our players?

Kind Regards

A Mechanic's Energy Shield is a barrier that protects against hitpoint removing effects, by providing temporary hitpoints. That's the only similarity they have with Force Fields. They do not allow light/laser sources to pass through to Stamina, nor do they regenerate like a Force Field.

By that logic the mechanic is in the dark because the shield is blocking laser therefore it is blocking light (as you have noted in your comment as well)... so, is that the case here or is this an exception to the rule which makes the system excessively heavy on exceptions that are not written anywhere anyway (which frankly, with no offence intended to anyone, is far from ideal situation).

Please keep in mind I am not the one who wrote the rules, I am simply trying to interpret them with two things in mind: Consistency and Precedents.

Things need to be consistent for rules to be clear and playable on the fly without excessive resource surfing every time someone reads a word and interprets it as something different and once a precedent is set one cannot simply excuse it (it does not work in the law and it should not work in a system or rules).

In a perfect world everyone around the table (players especially) would know the rules that govern their characters, often enough it is not the case and I am simply not in a business of my role playing sessions being heavy on learning the rules and full of interruptions needed to do so...

As for how to react to this? We could simply agree to disagree :)

You have provided examples of other rules discussing shields that work in yet again different way, that is very valuable input as far as I am concern as it underlines just how diverse the use of the word and how varying mechanics associated with it are.

We are all role playing enthusiasts here and I am pretty sure the hobby is diverse enough to accommodate all of us :)

If you feel this Mechanic skill is too 'Over Powered' for your game, you need to follow the age old advise and actually 'Talk to the player'.

My suggestion to you is to read the posts above because it appears to me that you have conveniently failed to read the part when I say that none of it is a problem... should I quote that for you again?

As for talking to the player, the advice goes both ways, perhaps you should learn to talk to your game master and not air your dissatisfaction on forums while the matter is under review and you are yet to do any due diligence and provide alternative interpretation as invited to do so.

Kind Regards

That's not how it works.

It only means that those two abilities cannot be used together and doesn't mean that suddenly the entry for Energy Shield gets altered to act like a Force Field.

Energy shield gives you temporary hitpoints. Nothing more, nothing less.

Thank you for your comments...

That being said I actually disagree and for a number of reasons. I am not suggesting that I am right and anyone else is wrong though, I am simply saying that I intend to interpret the situation differently (unless official clarification is provided) ... and here is why.

I believe the problem here is consistency and wording and it is the principal problem in many similar arguments.

There are two technologies in the use: force fields and shields. Force fields give you temporary hit points and work on personal scale, Shields give you shield points (see Core Rules page 292) and work on macro (vehicle) scale.

In my opinion (or if I was asked to rule on it in absence of the official ruling) use of terms like Energy Shield (where person scale is concerned) is no different to the use of term like Fighter, denoting a fighting person or a fighter craft and not necessary a character with Fighter class levels. More to the point, Corporate Agent does not necessary mean a character with that type of Background, it can also mean a person working for or on behalf of a corporation. Interpretation of language and context is the key...

So, if you remove the language confusion that I believe exists here, because rules are written by multiple people calling things differently for a flavour and/or not necessary remembering or not knowing how something was called before by someone else, you can easily reconcile the rules by saying that if it is personal it is a force field and if it is vehicle based it is a shield. In such case rules regarding those two different technologies apply accordingly and some consistency is established.

Furthermore, shields are designed to stop particles in space or upon atmospheric re-entry, so that your ship does not get blown up by atoms travelling at fast speeds or by super heated, corrosive, hostile atmospheres. Force fields however allow you to breath while having them active which means they do not stop particles in the same fashion shields do, this suggest different technology in application.

In the end I am content with this being RAW versus RAI situation :)
Kind Regards

One thing I think is worth noting is that the Energy Shield is considered a Force Field as far as Solarian's Particle Field ability (in the Armory) is concerned, as having an Energy Shield up prevents you from using Particle Field same as a normal Force Field does, as is specifically stated in Particle Field's description.

Interesting train of thought. Here is the wording for references (as per Armoury):

Particle Field (Su)

As a move action, you surround yourself with a swirling sheath of charged particles that absorb some damage from attacks made against you. This constantly renewing field of particles acts as a force field that grants 25 temporary Hit Points and has fast healing 4. This lasts for 1 round or until you leave photon mode. This force field does not function if you also have a force field from an armour upgrade, mechanic’s energy shield, or another similar effect. When you are attuned or fully attuned, the fast healing of your particle field increases to 6.

If you suggest that Mechanic's Energy Shield is considered a Force Field then the following (see third party link below) would apply and that would change the above discussed situation a lot.

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ujsk?Lasers-and-Force-FieldsShields

The above listed forum reference contains details about Force Field mechanics and its vulnerabilities (as mentioned in the original post).

In the end I somewhat agree that Energy Shield is Force Field due to... science... After all, personal shields as a technology is pretty important defence field and the technology itself would serve as a design principle for further versions of it. To consider them different is to suggest that Energy Shield is not being improved and mass produced for the defence market but Force Field is.

It should be noted that I like internal logic and consistency in my games, though I do acknowledge that others (some of my players included) may have different preferences.

Kind Regards

Thank you for your comments so far guys/girls...

I appreciate your examples of how this stacks up against other classes, I am just wondering how applicable it is to compare a non healer class to a healer class, but I guess given the variety of builds available in the game itself it just might be possible to customise a build in a way that does something like that.

The next thing that I find interesting is the whole balancing the session in order to provide a sufficient number of encounters to test the character and to drain his resources as the session moves forward, all done in order for him to consider economy of it all long term wise. My sessions tend to run for 6 hours and they include a lot of role playing and generally no more than one, sometimes two combats (meaningful and connected to players' actions and not included for the sake of it). This style (which has served me well and I am not looking to change it) imposes much less taxing of character's abilities and resources. This in turn does lead to everything being used when it can be used approach. There are some ways I can mitigate it and I will certainly look into that, but I will admit that I can taking only so far...

Finally where comments about temporary HP are concerned, my own take on it is always the rule of escalation (if you can do it to someone, someone can do it to you) and fairness at the table where GM will generally favour the player character but balance the game to be challenging rather than to be all the time in player characters favour...

Kind Regards

This is all quite reasonable though as someone who is not very proficient with practical play of all classes I am trying to find another class that can basically produce 200 hit points plus (more if your INT is high and you have extra RPs) at a moment's notice and without any kind of vulnerabilities...

I would like to think that things are balanced as well as they can be under the circumstances and avoid making comments about class A being overpowering when compared to class B because a role playing game challenges player characters in many different ways, not just combat... but I am struggling to see how 200+ hit points on top of your existing ones (CR 11 dragon has 183 HP and no RPs) is not an issue.

Asking for clarifications/opinions on a scenario involving level 10 Mechanic using the following tricks (see below)
Your comments are much appreciated...

(the following information is quoted as presented in Starfinder Core Rules, Page 68)

Mechanic Tricks

Energy Shield (Ex)

Your energy shield grants you a number of temporary Hit Points equal to your Intelligence modifier + double your mechanic level. In addition, if you have already used your shield, you can spend 1 Resolve Point to use it again without having to regain Stamina Points first. This replenishes your shield’s temporary Hit Points to full. You must have the energy shield mechanic trick to learn this trick.

Additionally, listing the mechanics referenced above.

Regaining Stamina Points

You can spend 1 Resolve Point to regain lost Stamina Points, up to your normal maximum. Using this ability requires 10 minutes of uninterrupted rest—if you’re interrupted partway through this process, you neither regain your Stamina Points nor lose the Resolve Point. You must take 10 consecutive minutes of uninterrupted rest to use this ability and cannot simply rest in intervals that total 10 minutes.

My questions are as follows:

- Are "Shield" mechanics same as "Force Field" mechanics or is this a special case? (specifically things like immunities/vulnerabilities)
- How exacly does the Shield protects against attacks like Life Leech (see: Garaggakal)
- Does Boost Shield still require 10 minutes cool-down that does not meet Regain Stamina Points condition to be re-used or can it be basically used again and again without cool-down and in combat as long as the mechanic has Resolve Points left (this would give a level 10 Mechanic at least 200 temporary hit points)?
- Does Boost Shield require the Shield to be fully cycled through Hit Points before it is re-charged or can you re-charge the Shield while is is still active with partial pool of Hit Points left and therefore do so without action penalty since Boost Shield does not list any?

Your comments are much appreciated...

Kind Regards
Ebon Hawk

It's basically a technological bag of holding.

Pretty much all your questions could be answered by know the answer to the bag of holding questions.

However, I don't know what those answers are.

You are technically correct but there are some differences there, for example null space device in null space device simply does not function, so there is a technological mechanism of activating the access to it (and possibly serving as a safety mechanism) while a bag of holdings is always "on" and if you put one into another, well...

This bag has an interior space considerably larger than its outside dimensions, roughly 2 feet in diameter at the mouth and 4 feet deep. The bag can hold up to 500 pounds, not exceeding a volume of 64 cubic feet. The bag weighs 15 pounds, regardless of its contents. Retrieving an item from the bag requires an action.

Placing a bag of holding inside an extra-dimensional space created by a Handy Haversack, Portable Hole, or similar item instantly destroys both items and opens a gate to the Astral Plane. The gate originates where the one item was placed inside the other. Any creature within 10 feet of the gate is sucked through it to a random location on the Astral Plane. The gate then closes. The gate is one-way only and can't be reopened.

Greetings,

I have added some additional comments and observations to the original post in order to extend the scope of the matter.

It also occurred to me that you could explain the technology by using the analogy of Pym Particle from the Ant-Man. The equipment placed inside is super compressed per say to a smaller size (within limit) and can be stored accordingly. All other physical properties are maintained as per original environment. However that would mean you need a mechanism to interact with objects inside, otherwise having your hand compressed while it is attached to the rest of the body that is on the outside, would not be healthy.

Kind Regards

Experiencing Null Space...

So, this is an interesting subject (at least for me) since Null Space appears to be a commonly used hybrid (tech/magic) technology in Starfinder. What interests me in particular is what the interaction with the Null Space is like. There are many items using this technology but none of them are clear on how it actually presents itself.

Starfinder Core Rules states:

A null-space chamber is a circular device often designed to be strapped to an arm or backpack. When you press a button on the side, the device creates a circular extra-dimensional rift to a pocket space, the size of which is determined by the null-space chamber’s model. You can close it by pressing the button again, causing the entrance to the space to disappear. Anything stored within the space remains, however, travelling with the item. The null-space chamber can be opened and closed only from the outside.

The only air within the pocket space is that which enters when you open the entrance. The device does not accumulate bulk even as its pocket space is filled. Each null-space chamber is associated with its own particular extra-dimensional space. Each null-space chamber can carry a set amount of bulk, after which it can no longer be closed (even if it has room left for more material). Spells and items that contain or create extra-dimensional spaces, such as other null-space chambers, do not function within a null-space chamber’s pocket dimension. A readout on a null-space chamber automatically catalogues all items within it, and if the chamber is open, you can call up any such item and have it placed in your hand as a full action.

The above suggest the following:

- there are controls of some sort,
- there is circular extra-dimensional rift,
- there is exchange of particles (the air enters the extra-dimension),
- there is a readout that catalogues what is inside,
- you can "call out" items from it,

It is also assumed that:

- you can enter it,
- you can exit it, as long as it is open,
- the process of entering/exiting does not kill you,
- you can survive inside as long as the conditions support it,

Naturally this raises some questions:

- how does the rift looks like? Stargate like event horizon or black hole like black space?,
- air enters on its own, but does not seem to exit on its own, does it mean the pressure inside builds up? or is it equalised?
- if the air enters, is the process of interaction similar to Stargate, that is once you touch the surface you are "sucked in"?,
- is there a gravity inside?
- are objects inside visible to an observer located inside?
- are objects inside visible to an outside observer (this would depend on what the rift looks like)?
- if you use Null Space somewhere where atmosphere is corrosive or contaminated do you need to purge it afterwards?
- the readout catalogues what is inside, to what extend? particles count? objects? objects known to it? objects by bulk/dimensions?
- you can "call out" object from it, so is this where "magic" kicks and ejects it?, why can you not simply reach inside and take it out yourself?

I am interested in people's opinions on this :)

I know one can assume that it "simply works" because of "magic" but I am one of those game masters who likes to take those things at least one step further and in this particular case tries to imagine what the experience of using Null Space technology would be like...

Kind Regards
Ebon Hawk

I do agree, its like saying that human raised by dwarves can see in a dark, well he is still human and adopted traits cannot cross physical makeup boundries. But interestingly enough there is no clear statement to that effect anywhere in the rules (that I can find).

Greetings everyone,

Here is a little gem that one of my players have stumbled upon. I am trying to get a better clarity on this particular rule.

As a game master in the game where a character have used this little trick, (I do think it is an exploit but cannot find anything in any of the manuals to prove it so) I can make a rulling that it does not work that way, but I would like something more solid to stand on than just my suspicions...

Comments?

Kind Regards
Ebon Hawk

To OP:

I cannot (and will not) argue any constructs you have inserted into your game to give justification(s) to its design and give player(s) excuses to do certain things. As a game master you have a right to do so, your group may or may not enjoy them but it does not make them any less/more valid than they are, it is your world and your design.

In said world you decide what is right and wrong, evil and good, lawful and chaotic. If you fail to apply those distinctions with some critical rules in mind (such as fair and consistent application, consideration of game limitations and so forth) they will not be any less valid but they will be flawed when exposed to a larger group of people.

If your players are enjoying the moral construct you are presenting them with then there should be no issue, if they are not then sooner or later you will encounter a problem.

However in the end and on this forum we are not your players and we are bound to disagree with you and among ourselves about the style of game we champion, approach towards moral and ethical dilemmas we prefer and so forth.

This usually leads to derailed threads and silly arguments (and I am pretty sure this is where we are heading right now).

So if you came here to hear me agree with you, validate for you your moral construct or do something else along those lines, I will have to insist that we agree to disagree. And if you came here seeking advice, then there is plenty of it in prior replies...

Kind Regards
EH

Explain the concept to modern tank commander who is about to put a shell on hostile target. He will tell you that it is a risk he must take and he can only do so much to ensure it is as safe action as possible where his allies are concerned.

Personally any Area of Effect spell/ability used in my game must be accompanied by Wisdom/Concentration check, the higher the check the greater the chance of landing the center of the effect in/at a desired coordinates.

Past that all you need to do is demonstrate that same rules apply to "bad guys" and I believe you have just added some realism to your fantasy game. It's not everyone's cup of tea but it works for my group :)

Remember: friendly fire isn't...

Greetings,

As a long term game master of many campaigns (fantasy, space opera and science fiction) I would like to add some observations to this thread.

First and foremost:
Example:

If you walk on a drow preparing breakfast for his daughter and cast detect evil unless he is planning on poisoning his daughter he is not evil. Detect evil, as far as I am concerned, shows intent and because being evil/good is a state of mind that comes and goes (though may linger where some creatures are concerned) based on a circumstances and surroundings, detect evil itself therefore cannot be absolute.

Feel free to consider my additional opinions/suggestions on the matter below:

1. Book of Exalted Deeds is your friend, use it to resolve any moral arguments at your table.
2. There is no such thing as always beyond redemption/beyond corruption, there are always exceptions and there is always hope/chance. Many examples of mythology and literature on which Pathfinder was based demonstrate so (example: Lucifer, an angel that fell from grace).
3. Personally I am not really interested in black and white games, I leave that for groups who lack their own moral reasoning so they choose to see things in two dimensions. Sure it adds to clarity of the game but it also removes one of the most important elements of a good role playing game... a choice.
4. Making creature evil just because is how bad villains are written...

Feel free to ignore everything above this line as it should be considered as my own personal opinion and interpretation of rules and experiences.

Kind Regards
EH