Helgraf Dragon's page

Quote:

Unless the PCs are in some strange scenario, starship combat always starts with all combatants' shields up and weapons armed.

I think you have not understood my question.

I'm not asking if starship combat starts armed, I take that for granted.
I say travel with shields raised and arms weapons.

ummmm, when I leave work I will look in AP o Starfinder Society Scenario a some introductory text to see and comment on. that maybe I'm wrong.

Quote:

Unless the PCs are in some strange scenario.

You are right here, my question it comes from a scene in AP 3, a surprise assault on starships, which this rule no exist in the Core, and of course, it depends if they are always raised or always travel with navigation shields and only get up in combat.

I remember read in other combat, before start combat, rise shield and arm weapon, how Star Trek reference of our comrade Jhaeman said, I have always thought that it worked like that, because of the references read.

If the players have built their vessel so it has enough PCU to power everything at once, then yes, they can have everything running at once 24/7.

It is not uncommon however, for them to have enough BP to fit more stuff on their ship than they'll have the PCU to support simultaneously - and in those cases, they need to establish what is considered powered at any given time.

In short, check the BP/PCU math for their vessel and its systems and expansion bays. If they're over on PCU, you have the right to request they indicate which systems are running when and make sure they're not reaping bonuses/benefits from unpowered devices. If they played conservatively and only put in enough systems to be within the Power Core's PCU allowance, then RAW, they absolutely can have everything going at all times. (THey still need to be motionless for 1 minute to enter/leave Driftspace or to restart their engines if somehow they got shut down).

So, I tried a search on this, didn't get a hit.

The Natural 20 enhancements provide little extras when that lovely 20 comes up for various starship actions.

The ptoblem is, the the Full Power Pilot Action:

Full Power (Helm Phase, Push)

If you have at least 6 ranks in Piloting, you can spend 1 Resolve Point to move your starship up to 1-1/2 times its speed. You can make turns during this movement, but you add 2 to your starship's distance between turns.

Does not call for a piloting check, merely the spend of a Resolve Point. The few other actions that don't receive a d20 roll in starship combat do not have natural 20 effects - and yet, in Starship Operations Manual, we have ...

Natural 20: You maintain steady control over your starship during its movement and add only 1 to your starship's distance between turns.

... a Natural 20 effect for an action with no d20 roll.

As written, the natural 20 effect will never occur.

So, did we ever get a clarification on poison from spells (poison spell, green prismatic effect)?

Kyle Baird wrote:

Any time you push the boundaries of what seems reasonable to make your precious little snowflake, expect table variation.

I understand there is a whole segment of players who like to squeeze every last drop out of the rules, but there's (imo) a larger contingent of players and GM's who hate seeing this done and usually resent the players who bring it to their table.

Most players (again, in my ever so limited experience) want to spend their 5 hours having fun at the table, NOT watching someone waste precious time arguing with the GM or other players about whether or not their super-special-awesome-build-combo is legal or not via FAQ posts, Paizo posts or emails. It's almost like players want to come up with some combination that "surpises" the table. It's more likely they just want the attention gained from finding some rules combination out on the fringes of the game.

Even if you go to the length of printing out the FAQ or messageboard posts, I could completely see a GM not allowing a lot of these things. To which you might respond, "but it's all written right here, why can't you come to the same conclusions?" Not everyone is going to agree that this is legal, even after being presented with the information here. Again, expect table variation.

Deja vu, I just replied to a deja vu response of yours where you preached the same thing..again. Allow me to recipricate. "No problem GM ma'am, I got my double-barreled, rapid shooting, Musketeer I haven't played in awhile. You do know how a gunslinger works right? Great, let's get started!"

Now comes the fun part. Walk around acting all nonchalantly taking your time to position etc. Maybe taking one well aimed shot at some point when a mob's heavily damaged to get back the grit you just used to kill it so you could get back the grit you just deje vu, as the GM eyes you warily...she (GM) then starts relaxing comfortably into a euphoric (yet clueless) state until the BBEG makes its grand entrance when you BAM BAMBAM BAM BAM...

Long as the replacement character build is legal, sure. Did you meant to demonstrate that the answer to a GM disagreeing with you is to deliberately try and steamroll another event they run just to show off your character optimizing-penis?

My group consisted of a dwarf cavalier (Order of the Bro ;)), a human inquisitor, a halfling gunslinger, a dwarf cleric of Angradd, and a human rogue. While it was a damn tough battle, none of them died. Xanesha ended up trying to retreat after getting knocked below the morale level of hp.

The dwarf cleric leapt off the tower onto her; attacking with height advantage. Battleaxe crit (killing Xanesha), and then a long ride down to the base of the tower. Thankfully (for the PC) the falling damage wasn't enough to seal the deal on the cleric, and the whole table was whooping at the awesome kill.

Now some of it was damn lucky saves on the PCs part; and any of those could have broken the momentum just enough to make the difference.

EDIT: Ahh. I see. I'm running the Anniversary Edtion version; I'm presuming from the comments the original (3.5) version was rather tougher then?

8 or 10, is it really such a big deal, given you can only choose 3 at most and that's assuming you stay single class till 19th level?

If you're going for parity, you might as well go the whole distance. Is it some huge issue that will unbalance Pathfinder forevermore? Of course not.

If they're supposed to have two more feat options, that would lead me to believe they're underpowered in some other aspect if this was deliberate. If they aren't, I'd just as soon know.

Whilst going through the extra sorcerer bloodlines in Advanced Players Guide, I noticed the starsoul, unlike every other bloodline in the core book or APG has 10 options to choose its bonus feats from, as opposed to 8.

Quoting APG p 140, Starsoul/Bonus Feats
"Blind-Fight, Craft Rod, Dodge, Endurance, Improved Counterspell, Improved Iron Will, Iron Will, Quicken Spell, Skill Focus (Perception), Toughness."

Was this deliberate - and if not, which two feats are not meant to be on their list to choose from?

(Removed bit about Undead as apparently I'm blind)