While the Exemplar's Ikons have many flavorful abilities, quite a few are redundant with existing feats already available to the Exemplar, either by temporarily granting the feat or by granting a similar benefit to an existing feat. While class features/feats that grant other feats are nothing new, the fact that these other feats are granted temporarily changes things. Temporary feats don't count for prerequisites and taking the feats permanently results in "wasted" abilities, which never feel good.

Some of these effects, like the Gaze Sharp as Steel's Transcend ability (which grants AoO/Reactive Strike) are powerful, but the Exemplar already has native access, so if you take the Reactive Strike feat (which is pretty much a must-have for melee martials), it feels underwhelming to have one of the main benefits of your Ikon be completely pointless. Instead, these Ikons should either grant more unique effects or improve the effects of the feat if the Exemplar already has them.

An example where this could be applied would be Skybearer's Belt, which grants an effect similar to the Titan Wrestler feat. Unfortunately, any character already interested in using Athletics maneuvers is likely going to take the feat anyways, and the feat actually ends up better once you hit Legendary in Athletics. Rather than granting a redundant effect, the Ikon could grant the feat or give a +X to those Athletics maneuvers if the Exemplar already has the feat.

With the nature of the Exemplar as "magic martial" that's not really a gish and really emphasizes raw physicality, I think it would be a neat opportunity to introduce the ability to cast spells with STR or DEX. This would be flavored much like Strike Rivers, Sieze Winds feat, representing the ability to perform the supernatural by wrestling it into submission.

Given the current list of Weapon Ikons, there are obviously some weapons that don't have support.

At a glance, I noticed that there wasn't support for bludgeoning weapons in the Brawling, Flail, or Shield groups.

There are likely other unsupported weapon types, so we should make a list of unsupported weapons that can be added in during the full release.

One of the more emphasized aspects of Starfinder is how much of a character's abilities come from gear and how those pieces of gear interact with the rest of the system. A lot of these different aspects can be pretty janky or unintuitive at times, but choosing gear generally has some interesting decisions even at the earliest levels.

In contrast, one of the weaker aspects of the Pathfinder Second Edition system is that low-level gearing, especially armor, isn't that interesting. Plenty of weapon traits feel inconsequential and mundane armor is largely an obvious decision determined by your other stats. While Armor Specialization does help differentiate armor within the same category, it's somewhat forgettable, low-impact, and doesn't come online until 7th level.

To help make low-level gearing more interesting in Starfinder Second Edition, I would be interested in more weapons and armor coming with traits that grant activities. For example, the Overcharge trait could grant a two-action activity that fires a single, enhanced shot like the Inventor's Megaton Strike. Another example would be a Lasso trait that grants an activity to yank a distant foe toward the wielder. The more weapons that have traits like these, the better.

Automatic/Area weapons already do a fantastic job of introducing similarly high-impact activities, and I would love to see these types of ideas applied to more weapons and armor in the future.

While we have seen little of the new edition, I would like to provide as much feedback as I can early into the design process so that Starfinder 2e can be the best it can possibly be. As such, I've prepared a thorough analysis of the entire Field Test. Sections in italics are subjective changes that I would like to see.

Preface
This analysis is to break down the designs shown in Field Test 1 under the following assumptions:

• Full Compatibility means that creatures, classes, and gear from PF2e and SF2e work in the other system, but are not wholly balanced and may need small adjustments (such as adding/removing the Computers skill).
  
• SF2e is "feature complete" and covers a wide array of possible fantasies without the addition of PF2e content
  
• The expectation is that most SF2e groups will only use SF2e content.
  
• SF2e may have system changes to better sell the space fantasy genre, and those changes do not break PF2e if backported or can easily be removed

Soldier Class Features
Overview
The Soldier is a class designed around two main ideas: tanking hits via HP and laying down covering fire with heavy weapons to reduce enemy accuracy. Most of the class features and feats accentuate these ideas rather well.

Importantly, the Soldier is deliberately designed to be significantly different than a PF2e Fighter. While this makes sense for players who wish to use either class in either system, the deliberate avoidance of overlap results in the Soldier being fairly narrow.

I would like to see the Soldier opened up to a more weapons-agnostic class. While the area weapon support is appreciated, supporting a wider array of playstyles is generally preferable. This could be done by tweaking its existing mechanics, or by overhauling them entirely. One suggestion I have seen that I would enjoy would be to shift Solider to being a Ready Action specialist, with different subclasses being able to Ready different, more complex activities.

Base Statistics
Constitution as the Soldier’s Key Ability Score accentuates the class’s nature as a defender, though it does result in some weirdness with weapon accuracy, which can betray the class fantasy. In addition, the saving throws do not suggest a defense-oriented class, which is somewhat concerning. Finally, the small snippet of the class we received doesn’t show how the Soldier’s class DC scales with level, so it’s impossible to know how well the class scales with Area weapons (more on those later).

I would like to see the Soldier be more reliable with a wider array of weapons, either by moving away from Constitution or by improving its weapon proficiency. The latter solution would also make the Soldier rather unique as a Legendary martial with a non-accuracy KAS.

Suppressing Fire
Suppressing Fire is the core, defining mechanic of the Soldier class that cements it as the Area weapons specialist. As-is, it does not change how Area weapons are used, but instead adds a rider effect via the Suppressed Condition (more on that later). This is somewhat bland as it does not necessarily change the player's decision-making other than what weapons the class wants to use.

In order to support a wider variety of playstyles, I would like to see Suppressing Fire work with any weapon. Meanwhile, the subclasses would bolster specific fighting styles by providing additional effects against suppressed targets, much like the current version of Armor Storm

Suppressed Condition
Suppressed is an interesting new condition that hinders both accuracy and movement. Few conditions have two distinct, unrelated effects outside of nested conditions. Interestingly, the accuracy penalty is circumstance while the movement penalty is status. With all of these different elements, it's somewhat on the clunky side.

Rather than Suppressed being a single condition, it is instead split into a separate accuracy penalty and movement penalty. This makes it a little less kludgy and more in line with the majority of conditions.

Primary Target
This feature allows the Soldier to use a weapon attack roll instead of forcing a saving throw against a single enemy when attacking with Area weapons. Unfortunately, with how saving throw effects are generally more reliable than attack rolls and how the Soldier has a higher class DC than they do weapon accuracy at various levels, the feature brings some nasty anti-synergy. This is particularly noticeable with the Bombard subclass. As it stands, this only seems to be useful for triggering on-crit effects and the Punishing Salvo feat.

How this ability would be changed heavily depends on how Area Weapons and the Soldier work in general. If both were changed to emphasize weapon accuracy, then this could be the default for Area Weapons, but it's overall a weird feature that I expect will get ironed out.

Walking Armory
This feature is fantastic for reducing potential "STR Tax" for Soldiers uninterested in melee combat.

Using STR+CON for carrying capacity might feel better for hybrid melee/ranged Soldiers who need to carry additional weapons.

Fearsome Bulwark
While CON instead of CHA to Intimidate is useful, the specific flavor of this feature makes it feel more like a class feat. In addition, ability bonus replacer features, especially for secondary/tertiary class features, seem like a 1e-ism. Finally it being a 3rd-level feature causes what I like to call “Zen Archer Syndrome,” where the value of a stat (CHA, in this case) drops dramatically after a few levels thanks to a new feature.

Since the class already has another ability bonus replacement feature in Walking Armory, I don't think this feature is necessary. Soldiers who wish to specialize in Intimidate should have room to invest in CHA, especially with how an Area Weapon-only Soldier needs neither STR nor DEX.

Concluding Thoughts
Overall, I think the class features are both a bit too narrow when it comes to weapon choice and playstyle while also being a bit kludgy. They also do not address what appears to be the biggest issue with Area Weapons: a rigid action economy.

In addition to seeing the weapon choices opened up, I would like to see the Soldier receive a class feature to make switching weapons less costly. This should make the class both more versatile and ease some of the pain points of relying on Area Weapons.

As the title says, there are some Starfinder-exclusive mechanics that aren't in the preview for 2e that we've seen. What elements would you like to return?

Personally, I would like KAC and EAC to return to really emphasize the fantasy of ballistic vs energy weapons. For compatibility purposes, you'd average the two for calculating "regular AC," and they'd never be more than +/-2 apart. The distinction is too important for the flavor of Starfinder to exclude, even if it means a smidge of extra work when converting from PF to SF.

In addition, I would like class-exclusive ways to spend Hero Points to replace some of the Resolve spenders.

Finally, I'd love the looser "hand economy" of Starfinder to return to better encourage using multiple weapons.

To mirror Gortle's thread on the Core 1 classes, here's a thread to discuss potential changes to the Core 2 classes.

The Core 2 classes are Alchemist, Barbarian, Champion, Investigator, Monk, Oracle, Sorcerer, and Swashbuckler, and of these, Alchemist, Champion, and Oracle are slated for substantial reworks.

Alchemist: I'd like to see them be a little bit better at using their own items as a tradeoff for their items being a little worse in terms of support. Give them things like quickdrawing alchemical items so they can do more in combat rather than being best when they hand things out before combat.

Barbarian: They're really solid, but I'd like more decision-making when it comes to using Rage, either with more abilities that allow you to end Rage prematurely for a benefit (like Furious Finish) or abilities that let you spend rounds of Rage for similar effects. As-is, Rage feels like the purest form of action tax where there's not much of a reason to not use it and unlike DaS/Hunt Prey, you don't have to choose a target.

Champion: Pretty much perfect. Maybe give an option for non-theistic Champions.

Investigator: Similar to Barbarian, they need more decision-making with DaS. Give more uses for it, let it be used multiple times, let you choose to just make a regular strike if you roll poorly, etc. The class overall needs the lead mechanic to be less clunky and needs more combat feats. In addition, I would like DaS to always be a free action regardless of lead, but you could manually activate it a second time via an action against a lead to reroll it.

Monk: Pretty solid as-is, but maybe give it a free Style feat at the start since they don't get a subclass.

Oracle: I like it despite its clunkiness, but maybe make it like a Divine counterpart to the Psychic where it's 2 spells per spell level per day and it gets extra beefy focus spells to compensate.

Sorcerer: Nice and solid. Maybe some balance tweaks between the bloodlines and a few more interesting feats, but that's it.

Swashbuckler: Very fun, but I'd like an option for STR-based "Flashy Warriors" as a class archetype or something. It could use a little bit more oomph on its attacks or a few more ways to generate panache but is pretty damn solid at its current fantasy.

While there's a significant amount of variety within the various impulse feats available for the Kineticist, each element only has a single type of basic blast. Could additional blast types be made available for each element, either via feat or just baked into the class?

For example, Air and Water both get feats that deal with lightning and ice respectively, but there's no electrical nor cold blast options.

In addition, the return of composite blasts for dual-element Kineticists would be nice.

Every now and then, I notice a player option that grants an unarmed attack, but doesn't specify what weapon group they belong to.

Now, most if not all unarmed attacks belong in one of two weapon groups: Brawling (for melee) and Sling (for ranged)

For these options that don't have a weapon group (such as the Lizardfolk's Claws), I pose two questions:

1) Do they still belong to the "default" weapon group for their unarmed attack type, or do they have no group at all?

2) if the latter, is this intentional, or is it an oversight?

I've always noticed that the Inquisitor has been highly requested, but never understood exactly why. The class is a variety of discrete mechanics playing to a specific theme, but never had a cohesive mechanical identity nor a single defining feature like the Magus's Spellstrike. In addition, its flavor is often hard to distinguish from the 1E Warpriest or "X but Cleric Archetype" (substitute Ranger/Rogue/Fighter/Investigator/Thaumaturge).

With that in mind, what specifics do you want out of Inquisitor in 2E? Full class with new, revamped mechanics? Focused archetype? Class hybridized with 1E Warpriest mechanics?

What weapon niches, both thematic and mechanical, do you believe are still missing from PF2e? Could be weapons that have underutilized traits (Grapple), weapons that fulfill missing stat combinations (Slashing Shield Attachment), or weapons that don't really exist at all (double weapons that qualify for dual-wield abilities).

For me, one weapon that seems to be sorely missing is some sort of Martial equivalent to the Gauntlet/Spiked Gauntlet. d6, Agile, Freehand. This opens up thematic combinations that had damage issues before.

After looking through various Rogue feats for some homebrew stuff, I noticed Battle Assessment Rogue Feat.

This gives similar information to Find Flaws, is significantly easier to utilize, and isn't attached to any of the other baggage that Recall Knowledge uses (such as Rarity).

Given that there's already precedent, I think it's reasonable for the Thaumaturge to utilize Perception for a Battle Assessment-like ability, but substituting WIS with whatever its KAS is going to end up being.

I've seen the topic of Recall Knowledge's poor interactions with Rarity discussed to death already, but I realized I hadn't actually seen a visual representation of the data. I knew average rarity went up with level, but I did not know the exact numbers. This pushed me to make a table and chart using Exocist's wonderful spreadsheet of official PF2e monsters using data scraped by Easytool.

TL;DR, it's not pretty.

This data shows that before any other changes are made to the class, Find Flaw's interactions with rarity must be addressed. It does not matter how it is addressed to fix this issue, be it still using RK but ignoring rarity, using Perception, or not using a roll at all. The numbers show that creature rarity goes up significantly as you level up, so the Thaumaturge will, on average, get progressively worse at activating their core class mechanic.

This issue already exists for other class paths as well, such as the Mastermind Rogue, but it is at its worst with the Thaumaturge. Ideally, the issue is fixed for both. At minimum, the Thaumaturge should not have to deal with it.

Here's the raw data for those that want it.

One thing that's become more and more apparent to me as a GM is how awkward it can be to create high-level encounters with many lower-level monsters without making combat incredibly slow due to how monster HP scaling works.

At 5th level, a 1st-level monster goes down relatively fast. At 15th-level, an 11th-level monster is comparatively more durable. This results in slower combats and enemies that don't fulfill the cannon fodder role as well.

Other systems have tried various solutions to this problem. 4e has a dedicated Minion enemy type, which has average stats, few abilities, and flat damage, but dies in a single hit. 13th Age has Mook Mobs, which are groups of enemies with a shared HP total where damage can "spill over" to the next mook when one dies. PF2e has Troops, but these have strict movement rules and other caveats to them. Another method I've seen recommended for PF2e is a template that cuts a monster's HP to 1/3rd and reduces the Level by 1 with no other changes.

However, none of these methods seem terribly satisfactory on a first pass, and I'm having issues determining which to use.

How do you guys handle mooks in a way that they can fit into an encounter budget?

While everything introduced in Guns & Gears allows for a wide variety of Inventors, there's certainly various ideas it does not touch on as much as others.

What sorts of Innovations and Feats do you believe the Inventor should receive in the future?

For me, it seems like the Armor Invention is missing options for a Large Size (big power armor) as well as an Unarmed Strike (since many options specifically call out unarmed strikes for the Armor Invention).

In addition, I think there may be more room for some magic option integration, such as a feat that lets you place a wand inside your weapon to cast from it without a check, flavored as using technology to draw out the magical power stored within the wand.

Among the other discussion about the Key Ability Score, it seems that people who do not like Charisma as the Key Ability Score tend to point to Intelligence as the alternative, but I believe there is a potentially stronger case for Wisdom over both Intelligence and Charisma.

To preface, this is operating under the assumption that the Investigator will receive a similar occult-themed subclass/class archetype in Dark Archives, and thus the niche of "Occult Investigator" is thoroughly filled.

---

First, let's look at the flavor text of the class as presented within the class itself. Not any promotional materials, not any preconceptions one might have about the class, but what is explicitly in the written material contained within the class.

Keywords that show up in the flavor text:
- Exploit
- Connections
- Assess
- Manipulate
- Understand
- Investigate
- Research
- Look
- See

Many of these keywords refer to tasks typically associated with INT and WIS, but all of these focus on the same category of tasks: Discovery. This shares a parallel with another class, namely, the Investigator. However, while the Investigator focuses on material connections and drawing on the physical, the Thaumaturge draws on the spiritual and metaphysical, which is a strong representation of the dichotomy between the more rigid Intelligence and the more ethereal Wisdom.

---

Second, let's look at the actual mechanics of Charisma in the class. What actually uses Charisma? Currently, it's Find Flaws (notably not Esoteric Antithesis), Binding Oath's bonuses, Counteracting with Chalice/Lantern/Sever Magic, and Save DC for Wand/Scrolls/Warding Circle. There's not a lot, and the latter two are necessitated by the current Key Ability Score, and would work with any other Key Ability Score. Binding Oath is the only ability that naturally uses Charisma, but Find Flaws is still worth looking at.

Now what is Find Flaws, exactly?

You determine a creature’s weaknesses, whether a literal weakness or a metaphysical one. Recall Knowledge about a creature, using your Charisma modifier instead of the usual ability modifier for the skill you’re using to Recall Knowledge. The creature must be either one you can see or one you’re specifically Investigating in advance during exploration. The result depends on your Recall Knowledge check, which has the following additional effects as well as the usual effects of Recall Knowledge.

Note that the effect which actually uses Charisma is about learning and finding the weakness that you then use your training to exploit. Then, it specifically mentions Recall Knowledge, a typically Wisdom/Intelligence-based action.

Compare this again to the Investigator, which examines a creature to determine the best, physical location to strike from. Instead of using existing knowledge to formulate an ideal plan, the Thaumaturge observes the creature and perceives the hidden connections to divine a weakness where there might not be a traditional one. Another example of the material vs spiritual dichotomy provided by Intelligence vs Wisdom.

---

Third, what does Wisdom do for the class right now? It's involved in every ability that uses Recall Knowledge Skills (Lantern Bonuses, Esoteric Lore, Rituals, Know-It-All, etc.) as well as a few Perception-based abilities (Lantern Bonuses again and Haunt Cunning). Compared to the one, singular ability that naturally uses Charisma (instead of an ability score replacement), Wisdom is far ahead. Even Intelligence falls behind, simply due to lacking in Perception.

---

Fourth, why is it worth changing? Since flavor reasons are rather subjective, let's focus on the mechanical advantages.

1) The Thaumaturge simply has more abilities that interact with Wisdom. Between Perception and Recall Knowledge abilities, it simply does more for the class naturally than Charisma does. This allows it to be better at more abilities that it tries to support.

2) It provides a clear, concise fix for Find Flaws. Wisdom has the perfect replacement for Recall Knowledge when it comes to Find Flaws. Right now, Find Flaws runs into issues where it requires you to pump four different skills (five if you count Society for humanoids) just to keep up to par, struggles against creatures of higher rarity (which should be the Thaumaturge's specialty), interacts poorly with Recall Knowledge Skill Feats, and runs into a nasty clause where you can't actually try Find Flaws against a creature you've critically failed it against by RAW due to the way Recall Knowledge is written.

The fix for this is for Find Flaws to use Perception. That way, it actually *Finds* the Flaws. This allows it to scale from the class itself, gives it an edge against higher rarity creatures relative to Recall Knowledge users, gets around awkward Skill Feat interactions, and doesn't fall into the other issues with Recall Knowledge.

---

Fifth and finally, what does it do relative to other classes?

This is the primary reason why I can see Charisma for the class at all. After all, it's already rather similar to the Ranger, and changing to Wisdom would make them even more similar. However, there are other avenues for differentiation, such as changing Esoteric Antithesis from a damage booster to a strong utility feature, such as a debuff mechanism.

Now, this can create even more interesting synergies. If players want a more "Monster Slayer" character like the current damage focus, multiclass Ranger/Thaumaturge would do that incredibly well.

---

Overall, I believe this is a convincing argument as to why Wisdom makes perfect sense as the Key Ability Score for the Thaumaturge.

Now that Secrets of Magic is out and we finally have Class Archetypes, we can see how they work in more detail. They fully replace existing features, come with the required dedication feat, may come with additional unique feats, and seem to be largely sidegrades rather than upgrades.

Seeing as how Class Archetypes are sidegrades, already use your second-level feat (most of which remove some sort of limiter on the Class Archetype features), and are inherently exclusive from one another, is it really necessary to give the dedication feats the typical "Dedication Clause"? By "Dedication Clause", I mean: "Special: You cannot select another dedication feat until you have gained two other feats from the X archetype."

It seems rather strange to restrict Class Archetype characters from additional archetypes for the following reasons:

1) Class Archetypes are ostensibly sidegrades. There is no additional power to them, so balance shouldn't be a concern. Only individually problematic Class Archetypes would be a concern, but restricting those this way also means restricting weaker Class Archetypes.

2) You cannot "dip" into a Class Archetype since it fundamentally changes how a class works. One of the reasons the dedication clause exists is to prevent dipping into an archetype for a single or two-feat power boost.

3) The differences between Class Archetypes and typical Archetypes are enough where further differentiation wouldn't be any more confusing (and possibly less confusing)

Between these three reasons, it seems unnecessarily restrictive to include the dedication clause, especially when one of the archetypes (Spellshot in GnG) has a special qualifier that lets it take other specific archetypes, which may or may not be expanded in the future. This can result in thematically sensible archetypes not actually qualifying because the designers forgot to include the asterisk.

On a related note, there is a Class Archetype without the dedication clause already, and that is because it introduces no unique feats.

---

On a related but separate note, this can call into question the need for the "feat tax" to begin with, but that is outside the scope of this discussion.

Building off of some other discussions I've seen and had both on these forums and elsewhere, it's worth considering whether Find Flaws + Esoteric Antithesis as a utility feature rather than a damage feature. Beyond the various other issues with the current implementation of the mechanic (skill-intensive, scales poorly with rarity, doesn't reduce the MAD issues of the class, etc.), one common thread I've noticed among actual playtests is that the mechanic makes the class feel too much like a beatstick, and doesn't satisfy the fantasy the flavor suggests.

While raw damage is nice, many other classes already fulfill that niche quite well, and strange objects that can cause weakness in foes can be represented in more ways than damage-boosting Weaknesses. Conditions, for example, would be an excellent way to represent it creating and exploiting weakness. That broken chain you pull from your bag to weaken the slaver could harrow them, inflicting Frightened. However, the best condition I can think of to represent the mechanic on a basic level is Sickened, for the following reasons:

1) It represents the opponent feeling some sort of deep wrongness when presented by the esoterica
2) It is a powerful condition that can support the entire party
3) It is both rarely applied and doesn't step on the toes of Demoralize specialists, giving it a unique niche

In addition, the Thaumaturge could expand their weakness exploitation to inflict other effects, including other conditions (Paralyzed, Stunned, Slowed, Confused, and Immobilized are all powerful and interesting options), Afflictions (curses seem very on-theme), persistent damage (for those who just want the raw damage), and potentially more elaborate effects (such as a geas). These can reflect different items the Thaumaturge could pull out against the same foe and allow for a deeper level of customization of the feature with feats.

---

On a slightly unrelated note, I do think it may be possible (and would be pretty cool) to include other ways to gain additional benefits from Esoteric Antithesis, such as a feat that lets you pull out a relevant item when you use EA in addition to its effects, such as pulling an Alchemist's Fire that you purchased out when using EA against a troll. If this could be combined with Handy/Implausible Esoterica, that would be even cooler.

Currently, there's been an overall acknowledgement that the Thaumaturge is incredibly MAD among other issues, but I haven't seen much discussion on how to address it.

Right now, the class wants Charisma for its core abilities, STR/DEX for accuracy, and DEX/CON/WIS for defenses. This leads INT, an ability score that makes thematic sense to boost for the class, to be your best option for a dump stat. In addition, STR Thaumaturges will be stretched incredibly thin.

Similar to how the class is stretched thin on ability scores due to MAD syndrome, it is also stretched thin in terms of skills. In order to stay up to par with it's primary mechanic, it must pump all 5 creature identification skills.

Both of these leave little room for customization, and I believe both can be addressed with the same change.

---

If you look at the other martial with a non-STR/DEX Key Ability Score (the Investigator), you can see it helps alleviate the MADness by keying it's accuracy off of Intelligence with Devise a Stratagem.

I believe a similar solution could be found for the Thaumaturge. Rather than using Charisma in conjunction with Recall Knowledge to activate Find Flaws (which is thematically awkward already), it could instead use Charisma for accuracy after already using Find Flaws/Esoteric Antithesis, with Find Flaws working closer to something like the Psychic's Mental Scan or tied to a singular skill.

This would greatly reduce the need for STR and DEX to keep up with combat math, allowing for more customization in Ability Scores. In addition, it would reduce the need to keep pumping 5 separate skills.

---

While not necessary for this possible solution, it would also be nice to choose your Key Ability Score between different mental stats like the Psychic, with each one subtly changing how Find Flaws works, but I understand that would contribute to more clutter on an already cluttered class.

While I understand that the current design of the Psychic is contentious, and I myself believe it needs a boost, I believe it provides an excellent foundation for a future Kineticist class. In addition, I believe that because the class shows how a Kineticist can be done in the future, it should not move to a Focus-only class.

Amped Cantrips are an excellent concept, allowing the class to expend resources to boost their magical capabilities by empowering existing ones. This mirrors how the Kineticist can empower their Blasts with Infusion Talents, which could be done in the same way. The Kineticist can have their Blasts as Focus Cantrips, but with the various Infusions as Amps (some of which could cost multiple Focus Points). They could even have various Wild Talents be regular Focus Spells.

As for the Kineticist's Burn, this could be represented very well with a mechanic similar to that of the Oracle's Curse. It could let you cast Focus Spells and Amps even without any Focus Points, but if you do, you begin to incur various downsides.

Because this sort of "Focus Only" caster using the Amp mechanic would be such a perfect fit for the Kineticist, I believe that such a design space should be reserved for it. The Psychic should remain a Full Caster with Amps because of it in addition to other reasons such as versatility.

Currently, both of these classes have their main mechanics tied to a rather small list of weapons, barring character concepts that would otherwise slot perfectly into them.

Current reasons for keeping it as-is:

1) Balance with damage dice size
2) Strength vs Dexterity balance
3) Goes Against Themes
4) Too much to errata

I do believe that all of these points can be addressed using both existing mechanics in the game as well as tropes in fiction.

---

The Damage Dice Argument:

I agree that allowing Precise Strike and Studious Strike to use d10 and d12 damage weapons would be too strong. However, limiting to Finesse and Agile (and in the case of Investigator, ranged weapons and saps as well) is not the only way to do this. We can instead limit strictly by damage dice size, just like the Ruffian Rogue. This way, your Swashbuckler could use a scimitar or your Investigator can use their staff.

The Strength vs Dexterity Argument:

While I understand that being able to use Strength weapons instead of Finesse weapons allows for more damage without sacrificing accuracy, the Strength vs Dexterity difference isn't even an issue. The two already have their own distinct benefits, such as Dexterity offering better defenses, and in the case of the Swashbuckler, better access to Panache. As for the Investigator, it does not even use Dexterity for accuracy to begin with, and already wants Strength for damage.

The Thematic Argument:

The restrictions present do not add any particular flavor, simply restrict who is allowed access to mechanics that could better fit their own flavor. Before the Swashbuckler is a fencer, it is a "Flashy Warrior." Why are the mechanics that best fit "Flashy Warriors" restricted to only nimble duelists when the trope is also represented by characters unsupported by finesse weapons? Flashy Warriors such as dervish dancers, professional wrestlers, showboat gladiators, and even cutlass-using pirates are excluded by the current mechanics. As for the Investigator, there aren't really any particular weapons that seem thematically dissonant with the Intellectual concept except some of the beefy two-handed weapons, which would be excluded with the damage dice limit described above instead. These changes also do not detract from any existing concepts that use these classes, and instead simply allow concepts that would be best represented by the classes to actually use the class. A character who is thematically identical to a Rapier-using Swashbuckler, except that they use a mace or hatchet or scimitar, should not be excluded from the mechanics that best suit their concept.

The Errata Argument:

This is perhaps the least sound argument, as the rest of the APG needs errata to begin with. In addition, we've seen much more extensive errata of classes already with the Alchemist. These changes would require a change of text to one feature of each class, and for the Swashbuckler, changing the Key Ability Score from Dexterity to a choice between Dexterity or Strength, just like other martials.

---

With all these in mind, I do not believe there are sufficiently valid reasons to bar Swashbucklers and Investigators from using additional weapons provided they are not d10 and d12 weapons, which are the only ones that could cause balance issues and might be too much of a stretch thematically.

In order for the class to function, it has several abilities that let it "cheat" the action economy/hands limit when it comes to pulling items out and putting them away, but these abilities all work in different ways and there are some weird holes in them like you can stow and draw a new Implement as a free action but can't draw one with an empty hand as a free action.

Would it be possible to instead consolidate these into a single, defined feature that could also be applied to other feats in the future?

Right now the abilities that get better action economy or ignore "hands limits" are:

1) Esoteric Antithesis (doesn't need any free hands)
2) Implement Adept (can swap Implements as a free action but needs one already in one hand)
3) Handy Esoterica (takes 2 actions instead of 1 minute)
4) Implausible Esoterica (upgrade to Handy Esoterica to take 1 action)

There are also some other abilities that could benefit from similar action economy adjustments, such as Scroll and Talisman Esoterica.

Because of this, a defined feature built into Esoterica that allows you to draw/stow items more freely into the Esoterica could help cut down on this extra space. All these items could be stored in the Esoterica and items can be stowed freely in the Esoterica and pulled out with a number of actions determined by the ability in question. This could also get around some of the "hands limit" issues that can come up, like when using a two-handed Weapon Implement.

Examples:

Esoterica could have "You may store items that are part of your Esoterica as a free action. Certain abilities may add items to your Esoterica."

Implement Adept could read "Your Implements are part of your Esoterica. You may pull an Implement from your Esoterica as a free action when activating its ability or otherwise using the Implement"

Handy Esoterica can read "The items you create with your Prescient Planner/Consumable features are part of your Esoterica. You may pull the items from Prescient Planner and Prescient Consumable from your Esoterica as a two-action activity."

Scroll Esoterica could have an ability that says "The Scrolls you create are part of your Esoterica. You may pull these Scrolls from your Esoterica as a free action when activating them."

There could also be additional feats in the future that add more items to your Esoterica, and this would help future-proof for those feats to make sure they interact cleanly with other abilities.

The Implements as they are are incredibly flavorful, but do have a couple of weird little incongruencies and opportunities for improvement.

Right now, only half of the implements interact with the other core feature of the class.

- Amulet and Weapon require FF/EA to be active
- Lantern gives an indirect bonus to using FF/EA
- Wand and Chalice don't care about FF/EA at all

This feels rather strange, like if half the Barbarian Instincts didn't care about Rage or if half the Hunter's Edges didn't care about Hunt Prey. My ideal for this would be all Implements are usable without FF/EA, but gain a bonus when they are active. Fixing the wand would be simple, just let it gain bonus damage from FF/EA. The Chalice might be a bit harder, but I have faith in the designers to come up with something satisfying.

In addition, the Implements could use a bit of extra customization to fit different characters in the form of open-ended feats that allow multiple options but take up little space by referencing existing material. Examples can include:

- A feat for your weapon that gives it a free property rune like the Paladin's Blade Ally
- A feat for your amulet that gives it a free armor property rune
- A feat for your wand that lets you choose a spell of X level or lower and cast it using the wand Y times per day
- A feat for your chalice that lets you fill it with a potion of X level or lower and grant the potions effect when drunk Y times per day

This way, Character A can make their Weapon Implement found at the bottom of a frozen lake feel different from Character B's Weapon Implement that was plucked from the forge too soon and burned a blacksmith's hand.

The more that I'm thinking about the class, the more convinced I become that these two features don't sufficiently sell the feel of finding the right tool for the job when hunting monsters.

They are the core of the class, but the actual rules and mechanics of the abilities do very little to suggest that Thaumaturge is actively rummaging through various trinkets and knickknacks to find a tool that can exploit the weakness of an opponent.

By spending an action (or two) to look at a creature, the Thaumaturge gets extra damage to attacks against a creature. This is hardly any different from the Mastermind Rogue, the Investigator's Strategic Strike, or the Ranger's Hunt Prey.

The primary mechanical differences are:

1) The Thaumaturge uses Charisma to access the damage boost
2) The Thaumaturge benefits *less* when exploiting the existing weakness of a creature
3) The Thaumaturge feature works around some of the issues of Recall Knowledge (which should just be fixed itself, rather than needing a class to patch it)
4) The Recall Knowledge is built in (which is the case for the Mastermind Rogue, but needs a level 1 feat for the Ranger and Investigator)

These differences just don't feel like enough, especially when the flavor doesn't do enough to support (1) existing, (2) is actively against the flavor, and (3) is needed because RK is way too vague atm.

This leaves a couple questions.

1) Should the mechanic be relegated to a side feature/feat of the class (with appropriate balance changes) or removed altogether in favor of greater focus on the Implements?

2) If the feature is going to stay the core of the class despite its similarities to the Investigator's core features, how should its mechanics change to better differentiate it and fit the different flavor?

3) If the feature should be removed/turned into a feat, what changes would you propose to the rest of the class to compensate for it?

While I loved the flavor the Thaumaturge and have issues with the mechanics of its current implementation (locked to Charisma as opposed to flexing between the various mental stats really doesn't feel appropriate given its current abilities and flavor), on a second read-through, something feels deeply off about the Thaumaturge.

Its base abilities don't seem to interact with any existing systems and many of its class feats are so specific that it feels "empty" in a way, that when combined with its already narrow concept and restrictive mechanics (penalized for not using 1-handed weapons), make it seem fundamentally flawed.

Given that the core of the class's customization, the implement system, is exclusive to the class and does not interact with any other systems, the Thaumaturge seems highly parasitic.

Compare it to the Alchemist. Alchemical items are its specialty, and it uses them quite well. However, Alchemical Items are available to everyone, and its status in the system guarantees future support. The same applies to spellcasters and traditions. Traditions can be accessed in many ways and their prevalence in the system encourages continued support.

Meanwhile, the Thaumaturge, at its core, is tied to implements that serve no purpose outside of the class. It will only receive updates if it gets dedicated support in the future, and does not cleanly interact with any systems that may grow later on. If it had stronger ties to existing mechanics, such as rituals, magic items, focus spells, etc. it wouldn't feel quite as egregious. Even its use of Recall Knowledge is entirely divorced from how it works in the system.

This combined with the specificity of many of the class feats (save for the talisman, scroll, and ritual feats which are fantastic ways to integrate it with the core system) as well as the other restrictions created by the class, make me strongly dislike the current mechanical skeleton of the class.

Mechanically, I can see why there'd be some caution. Wisdom is a stronger stat than either Charisma or Intelligence, but there's already a balance mechanism built into the Unconscious Mind feature: the drawbacks. Wisdom, due to being a stronger stat to key off of, could receive a harsher or more common drawback.

Thematically, I don't see a reason whatsoever to not allow wisdom-based Psychics. It's an excellent way to represent someone who has gained spiritual power through personal, mental enlightenment, not through reverence to a deity or nature. Rather than through force of emotion or precise study, the Wisdom-based Psychic could unlock the power of the mind through reflection and contemplation. It would form the strictly mystical counterpart to the more martial-focused Monk, who approaches enlightenment through perfection of the body as well as the mind.

Okay, so looking at the official stats and description of the Kusarigama, it has the double (1d6/1d4), reach, trip, grapple, and Monk properties.

However, it fails to mention which ends have which properties.

Logically, the d6 is the Kama (following normal Kama stats) and the d4 is the weight. However, how reach applies to the weapon is quite confusing. Is it the same as the Double Chained Kama (Either two light weapons or one single reach attack), or does the Kama have normal range and the weight had reach (makes sense logically since the weight is meant to be swung from the chain while the Kama is always held in hand)?

Then there's the other properties, but those could just be extrapolated from the Kama statistics.

After some play with the Envoy and Solarian at low levels, I am notably underwhelmed, and would be even more so if I was using an archetypes, since they get so few of what makes them unique. A 3rd level Envoy has up to three tricks that aren't skills and are only especially effective in up to three skills, at least, moreso than other characters (and even then its one or the other, not three and three).

So, to counteract this underwhelming phenomenon, I decided to brew some fast, easy feats that will also ease the burden of archetyping and gives some more feat options for characters who already had the feats they wanted.

There's a feat for each class, and while the stronger classes are buffed by this, the weaker ones are buffed much further since none of these increase power, but rather increase options.

---

Extra Improvisation: Learn another envoy improvisation that you qualify for.

Extra Mechanic Trick: Learn another mechanic trick that you qualify for.

Strengthened Connection: Gain an extra Resolve Point that can only be used with connection powers.

Extra Exploit: Learn a new operative exploit that you qualify for.

Extra Revelation: Learn a new stellar revelation that you qualify for.

Extra Gear Boost: Learn a new gear boost that you qualify for.

Extra Magic Hack: Learn a new magic hack that you qualify for.

---

While this could be exploited a bit, it's a simple change which I believe helps far more than it hurts, both by increasing the utility of less powerful classes and giving players more options for customization.

Say, for instance, my character is a 5th-level Sun Singer Skald. They have a special ability (that replaces Spell Kenning) that allows them to channel energy. However, the ability is not named Channel Energy, but Channel Solar Energy. On the other hand, it explicitly states that I channel energy as a cleric does. Normally, I can only do this once per day (twice at 11th and three times at 17th). Can I take Extra Channeling to increase my uses per day?

Exact text for reference:

Channel Solar Energy (Su): At 5th level, a sunsinger skald can channel energy as a cleric once per day to heal wounds or harm undead like a good-aligned cleric.

EDIT: I also forgot to mention that unlike a Necromancer's Turn Undead ability, the ability does not explicitly disallow Extra Channeling.

This quandary came up when I was thinking of potential villains, with one of them being an Antipaladin that kills good people and leaves evil people alive because they know that good people go to much better afterlives.

So, which part of killing good (so ones that will definitely go to a good afterlife) people (in-universe, this is not about the real-world ethics) strictly qualifies as Evil if killing them drastically improves their quality of life (or rather, afterlife)?

Is it because it deprives them the choice to stay? Is it because it will sadden those who knew them? Is it something else?

I'm building a Living Grimoire Inquisitor which has a special book which is both a melee weapon and a divine focus.

I've seen conflicting statements regarding whether or not the same hand used to hold a divine focus can be used to perform somatic spell components, so, can I use the hand that is holding the book to also perform the somatic components?

If not, can I switch the book to another hand as a free action and then back as another free action after casting a spell if the other hand is holding a light shield (can't perform somatic components but can still hold items other than the shield in that hand)?

I'm new to society play, and one of the big questions I've had regarding it is whether I can use VMC or not, since it makes some concepts a bit easier to build (spell-less Bard, for one).

What's up with Smoke Grenades? They only provide regular concealment despite producing a dense smoke, and instead of giving those outside the cloud concealment from those inside the cloud, it only goes the opposite way, rather than both.

Or, as a matter of fact, what's the deal with all of the different subtypes of evil outsiders? I'm in the process of porting a bunch of fiends to Starfinder, but I don't quite understand most of the subtypes.

- Demons like destroying things for fun
- Daemons seek universal annihilation
- Devils are classic schemer fiends
- Kytons are fiendish sadomasochists like that thing from Hellraiser
- Asuras are ???
- Qlippoths were there before Daemons but I don't know what they want
- Demodands are ???
- Divs are evil genie spirits
- Oni are fiendish trickster ogres

Any others that I'm missing?

I just started society play with an Envoy, but I noticed something that I couldn't quite figure out.

The Menacing Glare expertise talent allows you to demoralize a group of enemies all at once, but the shaken condition lasts for one round (even if the DC was exceeded by 5). Rattling Presence allows you to forgo adding the Expertise die to increase the duration of the shaken condition.

I don't see any reason why they wouldn't work together, since the Rattling Presence isn't an increase from exceeding the DC, but I could be wrong.

A question recently came up to me about the Alchemist. While it's Bombs (Su) ability is listed as supernatural, there's been confusion as to which element is supernatural. Is it making the bomb that is supernatural, or are the bombs themselves supernatural? Or is it both?

I'm currently thinking up a concept for a character, mainly being a combat engineer who focuses on deploying turrets, but I can't seem to find anything that can quite do that. The mechanic drone is close, but it's only one and isn't the primary damage-dealer of the pair.