I have played this once and GMed it three times. 75% “Above my pay grade” and 25% “Let it live.” I’ve only had two players vote to lobotomize and one to kill outright. Almost half of the players seem to vote to let nature take its course, but end up outvoted by the people saying “Who am I to decide the fate of an entire planet’s worth of life?”
I ran this 2x at Origins and saw some very creative solutions. In one party they [/spoiler]...they had two level 8 pregens who were unaffected by the medium radiation in their ilvl armor suits. We had a Ysoki (we'll call him Ysoki A) who happened to be high enough ilvl armor, but then we had the other Ysoki (we'll call him Ysoki B) in ilvl 5 armor.
Ysoki A grabbed the Mk2 Null Space Chamber they found and Ysoki B hopped inside to reduce his exposure time, at which point Ysoki A stuffed the chamber containing Ysoki B into his cheek pouch. When skill checks were needed or combat imminent, Ysoki A would spit out the chamber as a swift on one turn, then summon Ysoki B out of the pouch on the second turn, at which point Ysoki B then fell prone out of the pouch and began participating in combat for 30-42 seconds, then hopped back into the pouch.
As he was the only one initially affected by the radiation, he was the only one eligible for the boon.[/spoiler]
On a note regarding the personal boon, I totally took the first option for my GM credit for my Manifold Host Maraquois. Now when he hits Tier 3, he will be able to use it combined with the race boon. Let's be honest, a Daredevil (Versatile Movement) Operative Maraquois with that particular benefit is too much fun to pass up the opportunity to play!
Awesome! Thank you so much for the clarification on this. I had a lot of fun running it last night and the players had a blast. You might find it entertaining to know that a Technomancer used a spell grenade to target "something" in encounter D2 that had a confusion effect. I was not prepared for that, but had a great time working through it with the players at the table!
Second question: Since Ipsoth’s Balloon attack requires the foe to be adjacent and immediately lifts the opponent 30’ into the air, this would also provoke an AoO, but it’s currently his turn. If a second PC were to approach him, (he has reach) would they provoke since he hasn’t acted since his last turn, or would provoking on his turn count as “after” for those purposes?
Arc Riley wrote:
Arc, you are correct. All 6 books are sanctioned. The problem is player lockout. Until you have a chronicle for book 4, you cannot legally play that character in anything. At all. Period. Until the chronicle for 4 is received on that player. So while 5 and 6 are sanctioned for play (even though items/races are not) you cannot play 5 if your character is locked out on 4. Neither can you play any scenarios on that character. It's not so much about sanctioning as it is about "multi-session adventures and extended play" per the roleplaying guild guide.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Mr. Bonkers wrote:
That was exactly the case. Half move speed, -EAC/KAC, etc. He was not proficient. He was just built to get in, administer treatment and get out. Mind thrust or magic missile when there's no healing to be done. Legit combat medic.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
So, to answer the question in your post title, without reading your post, an emphatic HELL YES, YOU CAN!!!”
Let me tell you about a mystic I GM’d for at Origins. Tier 5-6, 4 player. He was a level 6 Mystic doctor.
The doc wore powered armor with DR/5- and a force field. He also took Technomantic Dabbler and carried no weapons. When he would recall knowledge, the first thing he would tell me was that he was trying to remember wether or not Mind Thrust was effective against this type of creature. He literally acted as a front line fighter built primarily around Con, Wis and Dex with some Int iirc. He would run in to touch patty members, eat AoOs in the process and generally not care. If no one needed his medical services he would Mind Thrust or Magic Missile accordingly. He never needed a weapon.
This guy was a real treat to have at the table and built an outstanding combat medic. This goes to prove that if he can tank mobs and receive a proper front-line beating, you can absolutely make a melee Mystic!
I think the tiers should be ability based. In SFS, 4-level tiers make perfect sense for a few reasons.
Weapon proficiency in SF at level 3 is a complete game changer. Factor in additional feats at 3 and 5 (4 additional feats in the case of the soldier) and having even a single level 5 at a tier 1-2 table becomes completely broken and pointless. The 5 at a table with levels 5, 1, 1, 1 (APL 2), 5, 3, 2, 1, 1 (APL 2.4), 5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1 (APL 2.3) or a 5, 3, 3, 1, 1, 1 (APL 2.3) will hit everything on a 4 or 5, probably one-shot most NPCs, obliterate skill checks, and make the whole game no different for the low level players than it would be if they were to just watch someone else play and listen to the story. A level 5 in tier 1-2 would be obnoxious and ridiculous in terms of SF scaling.
Second, if you care about new players and omission of unnecessary complication as a design aspect, adding a sandwich tier between the tiers doesn't seem to be value-added or help your case.
Frankly, limiting the sub-tiers to one increase per feat universally obtained is one of the best things Paizo did with SFS. Limiting the tiers to a maximum of 2 complete sub-tiers per tier that every player neatly fits into also makes great sense.
Anything larger than two sub-tiers should be reserved for multi-table specials.
Thursty, we appreciate all you do for the SFS OP program. I would like to second the idea that we’ve got it pretty good compared to what PFS has. While we eagerly anticipate sanctioning, I think we also eagerly anticipate our monthly scenario drops. I imagine that having to choose which to delay would result in a nearly unanimous agreement that the scenario drops should have priority.
Thank you for keeping active and telling us where things are. No news is worse than bad news and I appreciate your keeping us out of the dark. Except for your evil menacing plots. I spend far more time than I should trying to hypothesize what nefarious plot twist will come from the dastardly duo of Thursty and John.
Thanks for all you do and stay thirsty, Thursty.
I offered that up, but nobody here wants to have characters locked out from other scenarios while they wait on a chronicle.
Basically, if they were to play 4, they cannot play 5 or any other scenario for credit, until they receive the chronicle for 4. My players unanimously elected to wait for a chronicle rather than risk lock out or having to play 5 for no Society credit until the chronicle is released.
“Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide Version 1.0, pg. 11” wrote:
Roleplaying Guild characters can only played in one scenario or Adventure Path at a time. Characters are considered to be playing in a scenario or Adventure Path until they receive a Chronicle sheet for sanctioned content.
Bill Baldwin wrote:
My 8 year old daughter decided to play SFS for the first time recently, so I happily GMd a table for her to sit at in our LGS. I rendered her pregen unconscious with sleeping gas in that scenario. The party had to help her handle it. She had a good time though and took it in stride. She wants to play a character with a higher fort save next time, however.
I would be surprised if Faction J is not one of the ones listed in the RPGG. There is currently no published way to join it. No boon. Only a way to earn a bonus rep unslotted. Given who the faction is and the legal technicalities in the lore, I expect we will all have the option to champion them via the RPGG.
6 tables a month during the week (every Thursday and every other Monday), plus two tables one weekend a month and a third store possibly starting SFS in the near future.
In St. Louis a player can currently play as many as 10 tables a month before the third store goes active. We slowed down intentionally before a local con in order to make sure people had scenarios other than repeatables to play, but we’re back at full strength.
AP’s are essential for us. We have two groups eager to play book 4+ and awaiting the next AP as well.
I don’t think that’s the case. Anyone can purchase any champion boon at any time. You could buy the “Faction J” champion boon on a level 8 character as soon as the RPGG lists it as available for purchase. It will likely be 2 fame if it is an additional purchase or free if it is the first one for that character, as that is the current standard and I haven’t seen any mention of changing that. I could be wrong. It would be neither the first nor last time that would happen.
Specifically related to 1-99, there is no access to the champion boon. Only a single point of bonus reputation.
The Masked Ferret wrote:
@Adam, absolutely. I think there was also a post from Thursty confirming that...
I purposely didn't link to the official clarification from Thursty because he ends up posting a couple more times clarifying things further. It really is best to read this particular thread with context rather than focus on a single post within. I hope this helps.
You can absolutely stack the GMing and playing version. Source: This post by Thursty.
*Edit* I should have read page 5 before replying. I would have seen that someone already answered your question and saved myself a lot of Paizo style Google-Fu. I am immensely terrible at that particular style.
Until you resolve tank to stand up with 1hp and suffer massive damage and go from possibly needing an unconscious body (or bodies) recovered to needing recovery and resurrection.
“CRB p. 250” wrote:
Also, don’t forget that resolve tanking requires 2 points of resolve. If you fall below 25% of your maximum resolve, you cannot self-stabilize and may end up dead anyway. I’m glad it worked for you against the Garaggakal (spelling?) but it should certainly be weighed against the possibility of withdrawal.
Facing head on is a should. Not mandatory for the honorable conditions. The PCs only agreed to not intentionally target the rear arc. Preventing you from doing so didn’t violate that. The agreed that you “should” face head on, but did not agree that they would. Outsmarted the Vesk by taking advantage of a loophole in the terms of the agreement is well within their right. Exploiting an enemy’s weakness, (even their verbal ones) is kind of how many encounters are resolved.
Thurston Hillman wrote:
Do you anticipate an update on the poking before the weekend?
What is the appropriate channel for asking about information from 1-99? I’m asking as I prep for Origins. The last paragraph on the left column of page 10 lists three things, but only two are explained in the section above. Obviously, I’d like to ask a more specific question and ensure the other Table GMs have the information as well, although I’m sure Thursty can probably derive my specific question from the above information.
There are several ways race boons are acquired.
Possibility 1: Three race boons are available via scenario. These are awarded to the GM and the player.
Possibility 2: GM at a brick and mortar convention. This is the gate that 8 race boons are locked behind.
Possibility 3: GM for the online community in a qualifying setting. This grants access to its own race boon.
Possibility 4: GM 12 times during a season. This grants you access to the current season's race boon.
Possibility 5: PLAY (GM credit is NOT allowed for this) 6-12 tables. Three more races are gated behind this.
Possibility 6: Special events. Sometimes the OP team give race boons out for participating in special events, wether it by charity fundraisers, watching podcasts that they appear on, etc. This grants access to additional races.
There are other races that were once active but no longer accessible. The GenCon GM boon and auction boon for example.
Ok. So I'm printing this map to scale (roughly 48x78) with 2"x2" squares but I'm printing it posterized on letter sized paper like a personally printed map pack. In this instance, using the existing grid, the correct implementation would be to allow 4 medium creatures/PCs to occupy a single preprinted grid as if that "space" were actually comprised of four 1" squares.
Is that correct?
In AP book 3, as I was going to print off the maps, I saw that the squares on the first map are 10 foot squares. Do I just use imaginary lines and allow medium creatures to occupy a quarter of a square, or are they limited to one character per square? How do reach and AoO's work? How did Pathfinder address the issue of maps published with 10 foot squares using a rule set designed for 5 foot squares?
*Edit: This is for society play this evening, so RAW matters, as we are not campaign mode.
But can my elf from Castrovel learn Cyrunian via some sort of online learning program, study abroad, or growing up with a friend who spoke it and learning from them and their family (like how I learned German growing up in America because my Godmother was German and watched me during the day while my parents worked.)
RAW, I believe my answer is no, but it doesn't hurt to seek to be contradicted by an authority.
Keep in mind that for society play you can't purchase the Mk 1 Mnemonic Editor (ilvl 5) with credits until level 4. This means you can, at level 4, go back and correct level 2 or 3, but not level 1. Unless you gain access to a Mk 1 Mnemonic editor at level 3, via a chronicle sheet or boon, you cannot do a level 1 rebuild once you hit level 2. As of this writing, no chronicle sheet (scenario of AP) grants access to a Mk 1 Mnemonic editor.
This does not preclude using fame to purchase.
So, after re-reading the AR, the only explicitly sanctioned content consists of items and spells. I can't help but question if that was the intent. Perhaps we can get an official clarification about languages. Are they limited to the native languages of the associated race and only accessible via the appropriate race boon?
Can any PC obtain a copy of Rosetta Starstone and study any other language so long as the player owns the appropriate source material?
The expression on one of our resident lore expert's face when Ylga mentioned Torag was awesome! When I said The Quest for Sky, his eyes widened and his jaw literally dropped. It was a wonderful reaction to witness. I also made up a sheet of twenty brief commercial spots (some were very punny) and rolled a d20 to decide which to read as we "cut to commercial" while the booth was set up and a PC was prepped for the interview with the ghast.
As for the big reveal, every player went back into the booth to provide their speculation. The alien zoo was one. A controlled experiment with an unknown purpose was another, but my favorite were the two Gap conspiracies, the second of which is my own.
A) An entity (possibly a deity) became aware of the Gap before it happened and created a space ark within the moon, shielding it against the Gap to preserve as many sapient species as possible
B) Triune is responsible for the Gap and prior to setting the Gap in motion collected hundreds of sapient species, mind-wiped them and put them in a simulation as a means to study the various races and how they would react to different historical events based on varied inputs. Simultaneously, the Gap would effectively create an opportunity for Triune to present itself as a deity by saving the races and introducing the Drift. Furthermore, a forgetful Golarion could theoretically be susceptible to Triune's influence, broadening their ability to guide the future. This was discovered by other deities who were able to "squirrel away" Golarion prior to the Gap actually taking place, thus keeping Rovagug safely imprisoned.
The secondary success condition criteria states...
1) the PCs spared the spicodranth in area A2) the PCs resolved the encounter in area B nonviolently
3) the PC ended the scenario with at least 2 Fan Favor
4) the PC ended the scenario with at least 4 Fan Favor
Which of these does not belong? (I am assuming that the 3rd and 4th are not both intended for the same purpose of the secondary success condition.)
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Oh, here's another thing: the "slot your boons phase" seems to occur only once at the beginning of the session, usually after mission briefing and knowledge checks. So you probably can't use the hireling for those knowledge checks. Or would it be fair game to slot boons even before mission briefing and take your chances that with more information you'd have chosen differently?
You should talk to your GM, because they are (probably inadvertently) short-changing you. The standard sequence is Receive Briefing --> PC's ask questions --> PC's slot boons --> PC's (and/or hirelings) use Culture/Diplomacy to recall knowledge/gather information.
There has never been a SFS scenario or quest published where slotting a hireling would take place after those checks. In fact, aside from the two scenarios that don't allow for slotting boons (1-00 & Quest), 1-08 is only exception (at this time) to this pattern, and even then you slot earlier than normal, not later.
If you go to "My Organized Play" --> "GM/Event Coordinator" it will show your Nova status based not on the number of tables you have GM'd, but the number of reported tables you have GM'd. Literally as soon as your 10th table is reported, it should show up. Check your "GM Sessions" tab to see which tables have and have not been reported. Also, some tables early on were reported as "Path" not "Star" by mistake. If that is still true for any of your tables, they may not apply correctly and your reporter will need to rectify that. When I reported my 30th table, my second nova showed up as soon as I hit "Save and Exit" on the reporting page.
This information is current as of 15 Feb.
The boon is there to provide a benefit, not a duplication until later. That wouldn't even make sense. I have been awarding based on total earnings being profession check x2. After calculating the total earnings, the boon's wording comes into play, where you multiply your total earnings. It's not a loophole for extra cash, it's the faction who acquires things giving you a boon to help you acquire things. The amount is a nice amount, but nowhere near game breaking.
The point I was implying was that 75% accuracy from behind cover is a significant reduction, but still good. To elaborate, assuming a 95% success rate in combat with no cover (which no sane person would do under threat of fire) 95% is a reasonable accuracy level. This 20% reduction is comparable to the reduction of d20-4, it is still a 20% reduction of your basic ability to shoot from what you would have achieved without cover.