Search Posts
or "The Unstoppable Force Meets the Immovable Object" How do you think the battle would go if... 1. A fighter and Champion (of any particular build) fought one-on-one?
Unsure where exactly this question belongs, but: I purchased the core rulebook, and am keen to to prepare a campaign. As soon as the 2e prd was put on Archives of Nethys, I started pouring over the monster entries to get ideas. I found that, for reasons not listed there, many monsters do not have any attacks listed, even if they should. The Barbazu, for instance, lists that is has Attack of Opportunity, but no damage or attack modifier is listed. Is there a reason for this in the Bestiary that is not listed on the site?
Proficiency with shields is listed in the playtest as its own thing; separate from weapons and armor. Now that they've been added to the game, some core classes should be proficient with shields at 1st level also, but which? I think it should just be these four (listed in the order of necessity), and as I continue to playtest with shields, these classes will be proficient with them for now: Soldier: Soldier is the one class with access to all equipment by itself; even Power Armor proficiency can be gained with the right fighting style. It stands to reason then that soldiers should also get proficiency with shields. Solarian: As the OG melee-focus class, solarians should also get shield proficiency. An argument could be made that they don't need them; that solar armor stacked with a shield might be too good, but feat taxing them for their best option would not sit right with a lot of solarian players/fans, I think. The premiere melee class is going to reach for shields as soon as they are available: put them within reach. And now for the more subjective choices... Envoy: Comparing backwards to Pathfinder, the Envoy is like a non-magical intersection between a paladin and a bard: getting into scraps and inspiring allies or distracting enemies more than dealing the highest damage, and what will help them do both better? A shield. Giving them free shield proficiency would make their role as mid-fight healer and inspiring leader easier to do since they would last longer doing it. Mechanic: For the class most likely to tinker with volatile, explosive tech, carrying around a blast shield seems natural. It goes along with the idea of a class that emphasises being a smart, resourceful engineer over being an offensive powerhouse. It also serves a little bit of a buff to those mechanics that decide to go with a drone (and lack the offensive power gained from long arm proficiency).
For my first bit of playtesting, I set my party of 5 PCs against a a biohacker, vanguard, and witchwarper bounty hunter crew, building the enemies as PCs of the same level (11th). The purpose of this was to show off the new classes and to see how powerful the new classes are and how strong the combos are. I'll summarize here what I will also submit in my survey (after I've had a chance to test out a few more of the new classes' abilities; one combat is not enough). PC Summary:
Operative (melee-focus) Soldier (eldritch assailant*/blitz) Solarian (solar weapon, photon focused) Mechanic (exocortex, not optimized for combat) Techomancer (all spells, has not fired a gun in 4 levels) Enemy Summary:
Kasatha vanguard (able to wield a shield, polarity gauntlets, and smoke grenade at once) Genetics Biohacker (with injector pistol and smoke grenade) Blasty Witchwarper (only carrying grenades) A Synopsis of Events:
After a brief chase (which served mainly to position PCs on the battlefield based on their speed) the fight broke out in an alley that was conveniently 25ft wide and 60ft deep. The operative engaged the vanguard right away. The first thing the latter did was drop a smoke grenade right at her feet; with blindsight (heat), and her environmental protections on, she could see him (and the solarian when he closed in) clear as day. By chance, everyone in the smoke made saves against breathing smoke on their first round, after which they could protect themselves from it so concealment was the only issue. The witchwarper was able to keep anyone from escaping effectively by using Infinite World to lower the battlefield where the vanguard was and make everything difficult terrain (which allies of the Biohacker ignored, thanks Limbering Restorative!). The technomancer was able to significantly reduce the threat of the vanguard with a slow spell, but he still was virtually impossible to harm due to both his very high AC[i] and the concealment. Mitigate was not even necessary during this encounter. Through a creative combination of supernova, quick teleportation, and wall-walking magic items, the PCs were able to minimize (but not completely eliminate) the obstacle of the smoke. While they tried to deal with this problem, the witchwarper was able to pepper the backline with fireb- excuse me, with explosive blasts, while the biohacker was able to weaken the operative with counteragents to keep herself safe. She was able to hit reliably enough to be a problem, but not well enough to be a deciding factor (she failed, blessedly, to make the bloodied players vulnerable to the witchwarper's spells). The biohacker was the first to die, lacking any real defensive of mobility skills. The witchwarper was hard to pin down, as she could keep flash teleporting away (with 13 Resolve points, she could afford to) through the incredibly complex battlefield she created. Someone would reach her, hit her once, and she would escape and cast another spell. Eventually, though, she was clear of the smoke, and the soldier and technomancer were able to take her down with a couple attacks. The vanguard never died. With level-appropriate armor, personal upgrades, and a shield, she still had well over 200 health by round 7. She did not need to use mitigate or align her shield during the fight. Because the solarian and technomancer with both a hit away fro being down (and, frankly, because they were all getting tired) they decided to flee with one last dimension door spell rather than risk someone going down with the vanguard. Post Combat Impressions: Biohacker -Biohacker is on equal footing with the existing classes, but [i]their support/defense is much worse than their offense. Each attack applies decent damage as well as multiple conditions while support options on apply helpful conditions. In practice, the best thing for her to do was try to hit every enemy at least once, which might be the whole combat. Vaguard/Shields
-It's also worth noting that the addition of sheilds gives a vicarious buff to small arms as well as race with extra hands, like kasatha, as it's a worthwhile trade to have lower damage, but higher AC. Both of those are things I like. Witchwarper
I'm in the "infinite worlds is good as is" camp, but I would like the opportunity to invest in it more, specifically gaining the ability to alter it's shape, making it more useful. Should this be added, and how "expensive" should it be? Should it be automatic, or require investing a talent in? If so, at what level?
Elves and Gnomes can choose an ancestry feat that gives them a cantrip as an "innate spell", which "heightened to a spell level equal to half your level
Let's say I'm playing an elf fighter with this feat and I take acid splash. At 6th level, I decide to take Wizard Dedication, and get a spellbook with 4 "regular" spell cantrips. At this point my innate acid splash is heightened to 3rd level. Because I can cast this spell at 3rd level, are my other cantrips also heightened to 3rd level?
Favored Augmentation (2nd Level):
Select one system of the body for which you can acquire augmentations. When you purchase and install an augmentation with an item level no greater than your character level into that system, you reduce the augmentation’s price by 50%. Do individual arms count as separate systems for the purpose of this ability, or one system? I'm inclined to think that they count as separate (and you would have to choose "left arm" or "lower right arm"), but would like some clarification about the intent of this rule. Given that they do less damage than normal weapons and that TWF isn't nearly as powerful as it was in PF, it doesn't seem game breaking for a player to get 2 boneblades for the price of one (one in either arm) if both arms would benefit from this feature, but it might also be too good for what you give up and, at any rate, not what the developers intended (I'm big on the latter).
My GM just gave me a high-end, multiple use magic item (think Rod of Lordly Might, but sillier). It's final use is as follows: "When button 6 is pressed, the rod points in the direction of the nearest cloud. No one as of yet has figured out the purpose of this button." I'm taking this ability as a friendly challenge from my GM to come up a purpose or benefit to being able to pinpoint the location of clouds. Can y'all think of anything?
TREAT DISEASE
TREAT DRUGS OR POISON
The words "every time" imply that a single treatment session is enough to cover more than one saving throw. The question is, how many? If my patient makes 1 saving throw every day for their disease, does one treatment cover them for just one day? Does one treatment last them forever? If they are poisoned and make a saving throw every round, do I have to spend a standard action each round to treat them, or only once, and they'll get that +4 bonus each round until they die or are cured?
Invigorating Treatment:
Prereq: Cha 11, Int 11, Medicine 1 rank
Your focus and positive bedside manner further improves the condition of your patients. When you use the Medicine skill to provide first aid, treat deadly wounds, treat disease, or treat poison to another creature, your patient regains stamina points equal to twice your ranks in Medicine. This effect has more to do with the act of giving treatment than the treatment's actual result, allowing the patient to regain stamina points whether or not the associated skill check was a success. Intention: Create a feat that makes Medicine-based healing worthwhile and cost-effective at low levels without breaking it at high levels or invalidating the Envoy's Inspiring Boost ability. Too weak? Too good? Just right?
I have yet to find an official, canonical illustration of a living kasathan mouth. The closest I have seen were the illustrations of kasatha skeletons in the first part of Iron Gods. Any other time, there is always at least a scarf. Please show me what they look like!
Borrowed or created, does it give the target a soul? Polymorph Any Object can turn a pebble into a human, or any other creature, for up to 20 minutes. It can also, more disturbingly, turn a human corpse into a living human for at least 3 hours. Do humanoids created by this spell have souls? Whether they do or not, they WILL have an Int, Wis, and Cha of 5. How should they be RP'ed?
Alien Archive 2 will have rules for polymorph spells. How do you think they will work? Paizo opted to not put any spells that grant +X to ability scores/AC in their core rules, so it seems unlikely that they would add spells that do so now, as the classic beast shape, elemental body, etc did. However not changing ability scores at all would be very strange for turning into tiny or huge creatures, and immersion-breaking for a lot of people. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if these spells limited you to within 1 size category of your normal form, and simply added type/subtype grafts and natural attacks as their boost. That would hit all the important parts of polymorphing while being simple and not too powerful compared to other spells.
While it is true that the Seeking Shot spell (from the Pact Worlds sourcebook) specifies that you create a link with "one target" that allows your next shot to ignore cover and concealment, it also says that you do not need a line of sight "as long as some route exists between the weapon and the target (regardless of how circuitous that route is). No line in the spell proscribes using it with a weapon that can affect multiple targets at once. Scenario:
If I fire the plasma rifle, the attack should follow his path and make those same turns in the hall to strike him. Does it then also strike each of those allies he ran past, assuming they are also in the same "circuitous route"?
-Armor provides 1 day of protection/level
Other than being able to take off their armor from time to time, there seems to be no reason to power or maintain life support on one's starship once you get a few levels in, unless I'm forgetting something. Even if the group has no spellcaster, if the ship has a Drift Rating of at least 2, a group of 9th level or higher wouldn't have to worry about life support unless they were going to the Vast. And that's not even touching androids and star shamans.
In what context is it legal, or even just socially acceptable, to manufacture androids? We know the technology is still available (and that some evil corporations abuse it to create slaves). Who is allowed to? Is it considered ethical at all to manufacture a person with a soul, or is it more unethical to restrict? Are only androids allowed to create other androids in the Pact Worlds? Because androids don't die of old age (and simply choose to "recycle"), I imagine that, if it continued at even close to the same rate after they were liberated, android production would cause their population to grow tremendously, creating pushes for androids to become the first pioneers to terraform/colonize new worlds (which they are ideally suited for, since they do not have to breathe).
The Divine Champion archetype grants the ability to use connection spells related to your deity as spell-like abilities. Lesser Divine Power: At 6th level, you can cast the 1st or 2nd level spell.
Each of these sets has its own separate daily uses. What I'm not sure about is how this interacts with connections that grant multi-level spells, like the Healer connection. I imagine three possibilities: A) I only gain access to Mystic cure. The lower level spells are never replaced by new ones (remove condition, remove affliction, etc.). B) The lower level-spells are completely replaced as higher level version of mystic cure are unlocked. Mystic cure can only ever be used as the highest-level SLA. C) As B, except that once I unlock a higher level of Divine Power, I can still choose to cast mystic cure using one of the lower-level SLA "slots". This, in effect, gives me more "spells known" if I choose the Healer (or Mindbreaker) connection than any of the others.
Because I wanted to adapt items from other games into Starfinder, I decided to make a spreadsheet on Google Drive that would have the average damage amount for most, if not all, weapons in the game for a specific level in order to give me some sort of formula or framework for creating new weapons, and to figure out how much adding crit effects or special qualities should affect damage. Eventually, I wanted to do the same with price. What I've done so far has helped me, but I'm a layman when it comes to statistics, and this is... a lot for one person to do, I've realized. I'm sure there are plenty of other GMs out there that would benefit from this type of document and have some time to spare to help it grow!
And for my fellow subscribers:
This applies to the Stage Magic feat line as well The way that the Psychic Power feat line was designed is a bit mind-boggling to me when it exists in the same game as Technomantic Dabbler and Connection Inkling. It almost feels like they were designed for two different editions of the game, and the developers just forgot to update one pair. Am I missing something important? Is the lower ability score requirement on Minor Psychic Power really that valuable?
I started an alchemist converstion for fun, and would like to know what people think of what I have so far. The concept behind the alchemist would make a good fit for Starfinder, where science is an even bigger deal. I also feel like Psychic and Kineticist have a place in the game, too (with the former being re-written as a Cha-based spellcaster), and would like to know if people have thoughts on those as well before I begin them.
I love the idea of the Arcane Assailant fighting style, but in practice, it is really, really ineffective compared to the other styles. It's described as giving you "arcane options" that, when all is said and done, amounts to 1 good ability and 4 abilities that just let you sort of overcome DR (but not really). When one of my players, who has been running as one for almost half a year, voiced these concerns as well, I worked with him to make some adjustments. This is what I arrived that. Spoiler: General Change: The Electric Arc, Flash Freeze, and Sonic Resonance gear boots apply based on damage type, rather than weapon category. This makes weapon fusions more valuable in general, but especially for the class that gets to add them for free. Specific Additions to Arcane Assailant: At 1st level, as long as you have at least 10 Int, choose one 0-level spell from the technomancer spell list. You may cast this spell at will. Your effective caster level for this spell is equal to your soldier level.
What are your favorite parts of the game that could only exist in the "sequel" to Pathfinder? Those little bits about the a fantasy world thrust into a "modern" mindset? Other than that mentioned in the title, one of mine is the thought that any sapient undead that a necromancer creates (especially Eoxian necrovites) would be legally considered their children.
I've noticed something similar for multiple PC races listed in the Alien Archive: the NPC statblock has an ability not listed in the racial traits box for PCs. For example, dragonkin do not get a bite attack (or any natural attack for that matter), yet the NPC is listed as having a bite attack. This specifically bothers me for dragonkin, since it seems more fitting for them to have a natural attack than vesk do. What am I missing here?
Interested in any sort of precedent for how it might be different, whether it's an actual rules decision somewhere or even just an anecdote from a Pathfinder novel. In absence of that, I'd jsut liek to know what people think. Would the creature "feel" the spell being cast on it and wake up? Can verbal components be done quietly enough to avoid waking a sleeping creature?
One of my favorite types of moments"in this game is when a caster is out of "useful" spells but comes up with a very clever use of a cantrip that ends up making a big difference. Sometimes it's a matter of wanting to keep contributing to the party after you're out of good spells, sometimes it's actually a matter of life and death. What are some of yours? My personal favorite was when the party was fighting a master level Hungry Ghost monk that was about to land a killing blow on a PC when the druid blinded him at the *exact* right moment by dumping two gallons of water on his, preventing him from landing the attackr and giving the rest a chance to take him down.
I wonder about the potentiality of this. On the one hand: While I am not a non-binary person myself, I have friends that are, and a lot of them play TRPGs. These days there are close to as many nb folks as there are trans folks, and it'd be great to se nb representation in the iconics just as we now have a trans one. On the Other: There are still no "rules" for how to address this in the English language. Different nb people use different words to refer to themselves, and plenty of people just have no knowledge of this issue at all, and encountering alternate pronouns (like, say, if the rules text for a new class used "they" in the singular) could be confusing. But then, at the same time, I remember a lot of readers that had no experience with gender issues being confused by Shardra Geltl's Meet the Iconics entry which describes her experience of being raised male without a preface saying "this is a trans woman". So, it wouldn't be the first time that Paizo took a progressive approach that resulted in some short-term confusion in readers... but the Meet the Iconics entries are also not in the rulebooks, so it's perhaps not as significant as using agender pronouns (or some other solution) in a rulebook would be.
This is more out of curiosity than for any character I actually plan on making, but using: 1. A humanoid PC race (kasatha)
What is the maximum number of arms I would hypothetically have? As far as I know, only 6 (kasatha alchemist with two vestigial arms), but there may well be additional spells or magic items out there that I'm unaware of that can increase this number to 8 or more.
I've never done this, but I'm wondering what the ramifications might be of trying to run a game with just two "Buddy Cop" PCs and few if any supporting NPCs. Mainly because the studio behind one of my favorite short films is getting close to releasing their TV pilot and the whole thing is a buddy-cop style fantasy adventure.
There are a variety of older men of various races and, naturally, a plethora of young men and women, but not *yet* any older women among the iconic characters, as far as I can tell.
A GM directly controlling what a character may or may not do is wrong, I think we can all agree: "No, you can't take that side-strret", "No, you cannot visit the witch first and the dungeon second", etc. Many also feel that "excessive restrictions" on character options also makes a bad GM, i.e. "You cannot play a dwarf wizard because I decided dwarves can't be wizards", and the countless myriad of variations. My question, though, is: Is it acceptable for a GM to veto a decision based on the in-character reasons the player has come up with? -Is it unfair to restrict player options if the story does not warrant them? (i.e. does Story trump Rules?)
While I'm confidant they will be, because that just makes the most design sense, has this ever been confirmed (or *gulp* denied)? It's really the only potential negative I see to the book.
What, exactly, does that part mean? Does this, for example, get around a construct's immunity to necromancy spells and disease?
This isn't an issue with metagaming; my players are all very good about that, and the only time THAT'S become a problem is concerning just what the characters would be able to know/guess about the odd computerterminal/circuit breaker/etc. they come across in the ruins of the Iron Gods AP. My issue is with Knowledge check DCs. Does anyone else feel this way? By RAW, the DC for identifying the abilities and weaknesses is 10 + CR. When the game begins, any character that put ranks in a class-skill knowledge is going to have a minimum +4, which is an approximate 78% for a CR1 monster, close to 93% if another person in the party has the same bonus and uses the skill (if I'm doing my math right, and I may be off here, correct me if I am). Identifying the weakness of an "Epic" enemy (CR is APL +3) is 50%, 75% if a second player has the skill, and this is not accounting for positive INT modifiers. With those, it becomes even easier. I can't be the only one that feels this is a bit much. In my group, the monster is successfully identified in-character nearly every time (the one time it didnt happen recently was when the Cleric player was absent from the group and they had to fight undead creatures). Telling them how to quickly kill the boss almost every time feels... wrong. I have half a mind to jack up the identify DCs but I only ever change rules as a last resort, after a long series of issues (which this is starting to become, but isn't quite enough yet) Thoughts?
A thread for advice, anecdotes, and cautionary tales of running campaigns with mystery and crime solving as a focus Whatever system we're talking about, mystery games feel like the most challenging type to run. Where do you draw the line between challenging the character (roll to investigate crime scene) and challenging the players (which lead is worth following)? And to what degree is the "truth" set in stone? If as a GM one plots every detail of the crime and evidence to a T beforehand, two pitfalls may arise: the players may spend so much time in pursuit of a red herring that a whole session passes where they are no closer to the truth, and they feel frustrated. On the other hand, if there are no red herrings and the solution is always obvious, where's the "mystery"? These are questions I ask myself lately while I run isolated World of Darkness one-shots and prepare to start a Hunter: The Vigil (think Batman meets the Supernatural TV series) campaign. In one single-session game of Hunter I ran, I ended up completely changing the identity of the dark mage cabal from crooked city politicians to university board-members because the PCs were focusing on a different aspect of the clue than I intended. Some of the things I planned got thrown out the window (the mayor didn't get assassinated mid-game, there was no assault on city hall) but this was definitely a successful change because other interesting things happened instead (the dean's interrogation was hilarious, and the attack by shadowy figures in the park by the college was dramatic). Who else has run mystery/crime-solving themed games? Were they Pathfinder, or some other system? What worked, what didn't work? Or do you just avoid the motif altogether, feeling it would never work for your group?
Trying to make a little extra money over the summer while getting valuable work experience. Guild Wars 2 / World of Darkness characters get an additional 10% off right now because that's what I'm currently playing, but Pathfinder PCs are always welcome in my queue :)
A question for the people that use them, at least a roleplaying tools. In my neck of the woods, alignment doesn't come into play much beyond helping people roleplay and providing some good ol' party friction, so mechanical/spell benefits aren't a deciding factor for me, but for you: What is your most commonly played (or favorite to play) alignment and why? For me it's gotta be Lawful Evil. I've always been a "planner" and it's a nice release to be able to cut loose and use that part of my self for completely selfish reasons without actually hurting anyone IRL. In other words, let's me be the ruthless, methodical villain I always could be but never would. 
When you cast a spell with a touch attack, you can hold the charge until you decide to attack. I have two hands. If I spend the 1st round of combat casting Shocking Grasp, and hold the charge, during round 2 can I cast it again and hold that charge until round 3, and then make both attacks ala TWF (I guess it would be THF, in this case).
Anyone else out there testing what looks to be a great product? I have a player right now that trying out the Draconic Paragon (copper) and she loves it. It seems really strong at first glance, but it's mitigated by the fact that they rely entirely on their natural attacks, and most of their supernatural abilities rely on Con, so they're more difficult to min-max than other martials. Definitely buying this when it's finished.
For the purposes of this thread, "houserule" is defined as "altering an existing feature of the game for any reason". Excluding things (like, say, the Samurai and Ninja classes) don't count. Me: Firearms Houserule—attacks against flat-footed AC instead of touch at close range and take twice as long to reload, but cost 5% price. Simple weapon. I love the style of old-fashioned guns, but I want to make them fit a world where they're common, not where they're practically magic items by default. With the above rule, they're less powerful than a compound bow, but easier to use (which matches the history as close as I think it can).
I've seen a few of these and I wanted to take a stab at one of my own: Nucleids
Nucleids have a body that consists mostly of acidic ooze held together in humanoid shape by a durable, translucent membrane. Suspended inside their bodies are their slightly less translucent internal organs. [spoiler=Traits]
|
