IvoMG's page

Even though we don't know how Mechs and Starships will be in the new version I made this post so that Paizo could see things from a different side or a better even balance.

I'm not going to request some kind of crazy stuff but, when you guys are designing the gameplay for mechs and Starships, please take into consideration some types of campaigns that were not considered in the first Edition. That is 1 to 1, what I mean by this is one Pilot for one Mech or one Ship.

Why would I request this kind of design?
So that I could play campaigns like a dogfight in space where every player has their own unique starship (like star wars) for mechs I would Say, Evangelion, Gundam, or even Macross.

--- Mechs---
What I mean by this is, at level 1 a player does not have points for a mech of his Tier, and there is no Tier 0 Mech. This means that a campaign that is focused on Mechs should start at Level 2 with Tier 1 Mechs, in the best cases.

I get the design idea that a Party using Mechs can fight more serious threats +3 encounter difficulty (if I'm not mistaken), the mech would probably be out of combat but the characters would be able to finish the fight out of the mech. I also ask you to consider the situation where mechs are the main focus of the campaign and the characters are powerless to fight serious monsters (like Pacific Rim, Evangelion, or even Power Rangers)

---Starships---
For ships is the calculation for the Encounter difficulty, it's strange when working with multiple ships.

---Mech vs Starships---
Since Mechs use the same rules as players, starships are a different thing that will do an incredible amount of damage to mechs and players, would it be possible to make mechs and starships fight on the same scale?

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Karmagator wrote:

One thing I just noticed - Suppressive Fire also affects allies. The save against damage is fine, but also heavily debuffing your allies seems like a lot.

Friendly fire isn't.

Heh. Now I want a feat or class feature or something called "To whom it may concern" that picks one target at random out of a group that you're slamming with area effect and deals extra damage to them in particular.

"It's not the bullet with your name on it you need to worry about."

I suppose it might also work as a boost to crit damage when targeting multiple enemies with an area effect.

Hahahaha that's cool

I honestly feel like using Con as the Soldier's KAS is more trouble than it's worth: at the end of the day, Con feeds into HP and Fort saves, nothing more. A Soldier with Strength or Dex as their KAS could be given 12 HP/level and legendary Fort saves and still be one of the toughest classes around, particularly given their heavy armor proficiency on top. Dex as a KAS in particular would avoid class DC and ranged Strikes having wildly different modifiers and accuracy levels, and at the end of the day it should be up to the Soldier to decide whether to opt into Strength for heavy armor, or Charisma for good Intimidation checks. We don't need feature bloat just to have Con cannibalize the function of other attributes, and I can only think of one other instance of attribute modifier replacement in 2e (Esoteric Lore using Charisma rather than Int), so classes can have diverse options without needing to make one attribute work like the other.

I think that all physical stats are useful to a Soldier.

Balancing this out would be hard. Like in Starfinder, heavy guns can have a strength requirement, forcing players to use a secondary stat.
I would probably save CON as key score for Vanguard and leave the soldier as DEX/STR. Increasing the HP per level to make it more durable also looks like a nice idea.
Having Feats that rely on CON Modifier would also be a great optional way of suggesting to players that they should increase Constitution.

I will be using SF2e rules adding classes of PF2e as options for the players.
As a GM I will also be using the Monster Manual from PF2e.

I won't be importing things from SF2e to PF2e, whenever I play PF2e it will be a separate thing.

I think that you can have both. Some Themes would be great as Backgrounds while others as Archetypes.
The problem in doing this is the amount of work that would require to make a lot of feats for those new archetypes.

Piloting lore makes your team scientist the best pilot rather than the hotshot rogue though.

As far as compatability goes, I don't think it breaks compatibility if starfinder has skills that pathfinder doesn't like computers or fly spaceship. The skills just don't DO anything in PF1 because.. well. No one had a computer. (till you get to numeria anyway...)

Or they could just make flying part of acrobatics.

To me there is no big deal if they add a Skill that is relevant to the system or the world. A character made on Starfinder would still be compatible with Pathfinder.

What I mean is this: You can create your solder using the Pathfinder Sheet and use it in the game session of a Fantasy setting without too much effort. Or you could create a Fighter using PF2e Rules to use in Starfinder game using Starfinder Sheet and skills because they are relevant to the world.
To this is what it means when they are saying compatible.

There are advantages to the PF2 system, the main one being that the skill DCs don’t become nearly impossible to balance at high levels.

I am hopeful that the new edition will be an improvement. I can imagine a number of things that could be improved by using the PF2 system and I must say that I have come to really enjoy the three action system.

Although the two systems will use the same rules, I expect there to be differences in how they are used. As an example, I expect the Medicine skill to be quite different. I will be disappointed if a Master in Medicine with a Med Bay can not Resuscitate a person. There are already ways for characters to use an Advanced MedKit as if they had a Med Bay. There are also vehicles that can provide a Med Bay.

That's true but this is something that is expected from a Sci-fi universe like Starfinder. Flying is another example, can't fly? Well, buy a Jetpack... Things like these are easy and accessible with technology.

My group stopped playing Starfinder because the system really became unbalanced at high levels. PF2e has a really tight math at all levels, to me this is really good news.

I completely agree and I would make a few suggestions:

Soldier Class Feature:
Unwieldy and Area Weapons: You use your body to stabilize these weapons before making an attack. You may use your Constitution modifier instead of your Strength or Dexterity modifiers.

Heavy weapon specialist:
This could work like a rogue sneak attack but with Unwieldy and Area weapons, where you would add a d6 to the damage you do with Unwieldy or Area Weapons (only when using area, not a normal shot).

Soldier Feat: 2A, Burst Fire, when using automatic weapons this allows you to make 3 ranged strikes against a single target using your gun, each attack will be made with a penalty.

Regarding SF1e to SF2e, I don't see a problem with using the same rules:

Automatic:
When you make a full attack with a weapon in automatic Mode, you can attack in a cone with a range of half the weapon’s range increment. This uses all the weapon’s remaining ammunition. Roll one attack against each target in the cone, starting with those closest to you. Attacks made with a weapon in automatic Mode can’t score critical hits. Roll damage only once, and apply it to all targets struck. Each attack against an individual creature in the cone uses up the same amount of ammunition or charges as taking two shots, and once you no longer have enough ammunition to attack another target, you stop making attacks.

Blast:
For each attack you make with a weapon with the blast special property, roll one attack against each target in the cone, starting with those closest to you. Each attack takes a –2 penalty in addition to other penalties, such as the penalty to all attacks during a full attack. Roll damage only once for all targets. If you roll one or more critical hits, roll the extra critical damage only once (or any other special effects on a critical hit that require you to roll) and apply it to each creature against which you score a critical hit. You can’t avoid shooting at allies in the cone, nor can you shoot any creature more than once.

Line works almost like Blast and Automatic

For Explode I they should really use REF but the DC would be specified by the weapon, Soldiers might have feats to increase this DC, and some weapon upgrades might also increase the DC.

Also for gaming purposes, I would also give Automatic weapons as an Agile trait.

I don't really see the problem of making one attack roll against each potential target. Some might say that that's a lot of rolling, but it's still the same number of d20s being rolled – they're just all being rolled by the attacker rather than by the defenders.

I don't see a problem using SF1e Automatic rules, considering that you will be using the 2 actions...

"In addition to making ranged attacks normally, a weapon with this special property can fire in fully automatic Mode. No action is required to toggle a weapon between making normal ranged attacks and using automatic Mode.

When you make a full attack with a weapon in automatic Mode, you can attack in a cone with a range of half the weapon’s range increment. This uses all the weapon’s remaining ammunition. Roll one attack against each target in the cone, starting with those closest to you. Attacks made with a weapon in automatic Mode can’t score critical hits. Roll damage only once, and apply it to all targets struck. Each attack against an individual creature in the cone uses up the same amount of ammunition or charges as taking two shots, and once you no longer have enough ammunition to attack another target, you stop making attacks."

A soldier could have feats to reduce the ammunition cost, Add critical, Autofire and reload with the same actions and etc.

Even what little we have for SF2e is clearly outside the design paradigms for PF2e, I have no idea how people can look at how weapons work and the soldier's stat-replacing class features and think "yeah this is going to be completely identical".

Hahaha So far I would pick a d12 weapon-wielding fighter with power attack instead a d10 heavy cannon Soldier (with any feat)

I’m not seeing the alleged issue with flight.

If GMs don’t want jetpacks in their PF games then don’t allow them. PF adventures won’t be built around all SF options being allowed.

They’re compatible with each other, not balanced by each other.

Totally.

So in the end it's up to the player and GM to decide what to use and how. But they should work just fine System wise not Lore wise.

Great report.
I will do the same with my findings but i will build the mechas knowing what enemy it will face. I will consider this because every part of the mecha can be swaped, maybe players work for a certain organization with the resources.

Here is a thread to list everything we can to improve the rules ^_^

* The ability to use a Solar Weapon/Flare while piloting a mech

* The ability to cast spells while piloting a mech

I desagree with these two, althou it would be funny to see a mech with a solar weapon or a spell casting mech.

Table page 15
* Non linear MP
* Removal of minimum mech MP

Mech Parts and building:
* Shield generator: various type of shield generator to give more variation to mech building

* More options for frames like Skirmisher MK0, MKI, MKII, subtracting power in exchange for MP

* More frame options for single operators

* Mech Frames with lower HP but more SP

* Hybrid mech

Weapons:
* Welder - 1arm slot 2 ammo medium damage blast weapon with PP ability to spend ammo and fix (heal) other mech for a certain amount

* More low cost weapons for low budget mechs (1xLevel)

* Hability to turn weapons into plasma weapons (Plasma Sythe or Plasma spear) for added cost, making it target eac and adding more damage.

* Rail gun, long range penetrating rifle

* Surface-to-air missile battery (only targets Starships or flying targets)

MECH UPGRADES
* Targeting assist: +1 to attack

Mech Combat

* If mech is destroyed all operators take fall damage based on mech size (thei are tied to a chair or other equipment) and operators can be trapped in the rubble meaning that thei do require time or help to get back in the fight.

Auxiliary systems
* Auxiliary system with fixed cost (even if it's low)

* Fall absorption: protects operators from fall damage

* Ejection seat: In case of emergency the operator can be extracted at the right time

* Nano repair system: nano machines can repair the mech every 10 min, this can be purchased for additional uses.

I've not run into problems with powered armor at lower levels, it tends to be expensive to upgrade, with a lot of gaps between levels where there isn't an upgrade to grab. I think the jockey just manages to gap those levels.

And looking at level 20 isn't a great starting point, pointing out if something is OP or not.

I know that at lower levels it make little difference but as level go up player equipped with powered armors will have better combat power. My group is at level 9 i do have a good str, dex and con. I've already done my progression sheet til 20, it will take time but its there.

Mechas and powered armors are different... Ok
Mechas are vehicle's, while powered armors are armors.
In the first book it's clear that a few powered armor where a first attempt to make mechas because of: size, weapon slots and armor strength.
A creature smaller than the armor will use armor limbs to interact, to me this is basicly a vehicle since you will probably be in some kind of cockpit (imagine a skittermander in a gargantuan powered armor).
But what happens if a large or larger crature where to use a medium powered armor? We will increase the powered armor size.
Mechas are fuelled by a energy core but why huge and above powered armors are fuelled by crappy batteries?
Powered armors are OP and it's kind of hard balancing normal characters and mechas.

In my group i play with a soldier powered armor jockey, once i hit level 20 i will have 36 str and a lot of other stats, another player in my group it's focused str build but will reach 28, with alot of efforts, if he wears starguard all of his efforts are wasted because the armor has 30str. The whole group started to wonder, what if all the party used powered armor?
Building a solo mech for level 20(it's capped at tier15) it's not really impressive compared to a soldier powered armor jockey(maybe we don't even need the jockey)... But not everyone is a soldier.

From my point of view in the mecha book should come with optional rules to nerf powered armors.
Rules proposal:
1- powered armors do not have size, although thei can offer reach. Thei will funcion as armors using the users size or even raising it by one to a maximum of Large.
2- powered armors should disable your biggest personal upgrade. This will prevent 30str 28con players, or consider a powered armor a personal upgrade equivalent.
3 - every ranged weapon attached to the armor will consume a number of weapons slots equivalent to the number of hands required to operate.
4 - max dex should also be applied to reflexes
5 - review battery usage for charges/hour. Having powered armor with consumption per minute it's is not player friendly.
6 - if you have a base str higher (whitout personal upgrades) then powered armor level, increase the powered armor strength by 2. (Yes i know that using powered armor you are using the powered armor strength but two forces going in the same direction add to each other) this will reward str build characters.

Indeed unarmed mecha attacks need some clarification. I would sugest having some reinforced platings in places where the mech is goint to do those unarmed strikes similar to hammerfirst, if the mech does not have the proper gear colision rules could be a great use and both the target and the attacker take damage.

BIPED, HEAVY and HOVERPAD, i belive this 2 are missing Hit points and HP progression.
Is there a place for this info and i missed it?

the dedications to me are a mixed bag.

a barbarian trying to get AoO or some fighter feats essentially wastes the dedication feat.

The Ranger dedication is pretty bad for most people

i think they should change all the dedications to give some level of proficiency and a small class unique thing.

fighter dedication should give you martial, armor, and AoO for instance. champion should be more or less the same but instead of AoO you get the healing touch equivalent.

like as it is, a lot of dedications just aren't good at all for classes that already have similar backgrounds.

the dedications have that feeling of old pf1 where you'd have to wait for like level 4 or so before you can even start getting things that fit your concept. like the only reason i think anyone would get ranger dedication is to get the animal companion...

it really makes almost no sense for say a barbarian to try for the ranger dedication, and i don't think that's how they should be set up.

I couldn't agree more. I was wishing that dual class could be some sort of fix to that and be able to make good multiclass 50/50