Gazragar's page

The first Starfinder Second Edition Errata is here! Check out the blog for impactful changes to the game from the Starfinder Design Team!

I'm not sure what's going on with my browser, but the entire page in that link is black, and the only way for me to see the text is to highlight it with my mouse! Is anyone else having similar issues?

I think this is definitely a side-effect of discord discussions vs play experience.

I was pretty unhappy with the playtest version, but when I saw it in play, it just kind of ripped through enemies like hot butter- the player had a great time. And now, the final release version is even more fun.

Even tho it has a smaller flat damage boost than most PF2E martials, the comparison would probably be more like the Exemplar- another "stance dance" class that doesn't have their damage boost always on.

But there is a damage boost that you're taking for granted- the rarity of your strength modifier damage in SF2E. I noticed that the Solarian really feels good at a Starfinder 2e table when you're just consistently putting out higher flat damage than everyone else.

They also offer so much more battlefield control, through both natural athletic maneuvers as well as the graviton rider. Even a melee soldier inflicting suppressed and tripping targets can't pin people down like you.

I'm sure they may not feel as good at a table with a Fighter+Barbarian+Exemplar, but I think they make a lot of sense in the context they were made for.

Agreed with this assessment - I just got done with my first Society game as one with a Solar Shield, and even when my dice weren't hot, I was consistently dealing damage to enemies while soaking up attacks/damage from them so my squishier allies didn't have to.

Nefreet wrote:

You cannot reasonably expect the Guide to lay out everything that's already been written in the Core Rulebook, can you?

7 days is the default. If Leadership wants to change the default, they can. They do not, however, need to confirm the default.

That's what the Core Rulebook is there for.

I'm not going to have this fight with you, nor do I think you're fairly characterizing what I'm saying. There's a world of difference between clarifying every ambiguous statement ever written in the Core Rulebook and adding a sentence acknowledging the very obvious question "Ask your GM question" that anyone would have about this particular downtime activity.

The Org Play team doesn't have to do anything. They could leave it as is; they could clarify it marginally in the Downtime section of the guide like I suggested; or they could say "You know what, this is too ambiguous and maybe isn't right for organized play so we're going to restrict it." We've obviously gone a year without it. I'm not trying to die on this hill and I'm not attacking them by pointing this out, so I don't think the Org play team needs you to white knight for them on this.

But to answer the OPs question, in the absence of any clarification the Train Animal feat and any background that grants are it are, at best, open for a lot of table variation and, at worst, completely useless.

Agreed with you on this one, as the CRB doesn't always reflect what is allowed in Society play - and that said, I'll likely swap to the Refugee background, as it grants similar benefits and a more useful Feat. Thanks for the input!

I have to admit, I wish she had a bit more muscle to her. It kind of makes sense that she'd be more pale, what with being a Northerner, but not so much the skinny, waifish look when she's hauling around the massive bastard sword.

The alchemist erratum isn't doing what we had hoped (we were trying to clarify that you definitely do get 8, since people weren't sure between 4 and 8). This will be reflected in the next errata update!

"We apologize for the fault in the rulebook. Those responsible for sacking those who have been sacked have just been sacked."

Incidentally, clarification on how Advanced Alchemy works (the pre-gen Alchemist confirmed for me that you CAN use it multiple times at the start of the day!) would be nice, as would the Alchemist's Tools requirement for using Quick Alchemy, as the aforementioned Level 1 pre-gen character simply doesn't have them. At all. And the Level 5 version has it stowed, which would defeat the purpose of requiring it for Quick Alchemy.

I wanted to bring up something I don't think anyone has pointed out.

The Level 17 Feat, "Alchemical Alacrity", is completely useless to anyone that DOESN'T get the level 4 "Enduring Alchemy" feat. Why?
Because AA reads: "When using the Quick Alchemy action, you can spend up to 3 Resonance Points to make up to three alchemical items as described in that action (1 per Resonance Point spent). These items need not be the same." But as we've definitely discussed, Quick Alchemy items fade by the START of your next turn - so you've just used 1 action of 3 to grab 3 items, of which you can only POSSIBLY use 2, short of an ally coming to take one off your hands.

What the hell, Paizo?

Beyond that, I was initially holding out hope regarding the bombs, as actually using them does NOT require the use of a Resonance Point... but it's functionally required because of the wording of the level 3 Feat "Empowered Bombs", which applies only to bombs you've crafted AND have the Infused trait. So much for the idea of crafting a bunch during downtime!