Jaçinto's page

I wouldn't restart. Dm's have to be able to adapt and rewrite. If you are going to restart until they get on the railroad, that kills a lot of interest in the game. It's a game of freedom and improve, not just following a script. Saying "you must do X or I am restarting" is a good way to kill player interest in the game.

It is only grimdark if you don't obey Matt Ward and the Ultramarines. If you do, it is nobledark and you never lose. Even when you do lose, you still win through retcon.

This setting already copies 40K in some ways. The star stone compass describes their navigation system is the same as the astronomicon.

Then there should be a lot more high level kids in pathfinder

No, they were entirely mechanical. They just looked organic. It's synthetic skin. Remember, they can be "alive" as just a head.

If the "soul" comes with its own history, that would imply a person could be "born" with an already adult mind, so that doesn't work.

See, that's the thing. They have to be programmed because they don't have a childhood. An androids mind has to be created. Therefore, it has to be made with some information already in it, including the capacity to learn. That is why I am asking if there are legal mandates on what you can program into it at all. Even a mandate that you have to permit unrestricted ability to learn. Since they generally have adult bodies, they don't have to deal with things like frontal cortex development because it is already developed at time of personality installation and thus they are able to manage their hormones and ability to reason without that awkward point of hormones managing though due to the lack of brain development.

Since they are treated as adult and full citizens upon awakening, they don't have to go through the process a human child does of learning the ability to critically think and rationalize, which gives kids some immunity under the law. An android has full rights and obligations already, suggesting they already have a fully capable mind. This implies, again, pre-programmed information which suggests other information can be installed like concepts of morality. While yes it can be adjusted later, but they already ready would have a pre-programmed in one. They also have to be programmed with a pack mentality that humans have, so again you are dictating their thought process.

I may be overthinking, but I enjoy this.

Jaçinto wrote:

On the programming thing, it is because the brain has to be made and data is entered into it. I am talking about initial construction since the brain mapping has to be designed, since they are artificial. So someone has to make the neural pathways. A lot of thought has to do with genetics and brain patterns. With an android, all that is designed with intent. That is why I am talking about legislation. True free will is impossible, or at least near impossible, to program into something. An Android brain may seem to have free will, but wouldn't it instead be working on parameters?

Let's turn this around Meatbag, how can you prove that you have free will? All of your decisions are just driven by chemical interactions in your brain. No one wrote them, but they are surely deterministic all the same.

All you organics are quite obsessed with free will, and how they totally have it, but I have yet to see a definition of free will that is not either self-defeating or so broad as to be meaningless. Consider:

If your actions are determined by physics, you can not choose how you act. So you can not be said to have free will.

If your actions are driven by the soul, well the soul must use some lawful, deterministic, process to arrive at its decisions. So you've just moved the determinism up one level, and your actions are determined by soul physics.

If your actions are not driven by the laws of physics, or by a higher level of soul physics, then your actions must be driven by a random process. And if your actions are random, how can you be said to be responsible for anything? Therefore you have no free will.

I actually think organic beings don't really have free will as all thought is dictated by the chemical reactions in your brain responding to the situations you are in, based on the make up of your specific brain. Or something like that. Basically it is impossible to prove you have free will over everything you do is just the response your brain takes in the situation you are in given the input you have. You can't "go back" and test to see if you would have acted differently with all the same input and no knowledge of what you have already done.

Poorly worded because it is 2:14 am.

On the programming thing, it is because the brain has to be made and data is entered into it. I am talking about initial construction since the brain mapping has to be designed, since they are artificial. So someone has to make the neural pathways. A lot of thought has to do with genetics and brain patterns. With an android, all that is designed with intent. That is why I am talking about legislation. True free will is impossible, or at least near impossible, to program into something. An Android brain may seem to have free will, but wouldn't it instead be working on parameters?

Also with the soul identifying the body thing, what if they have multiple personality disorder? If each personality recognizes the body differently, wouldn't healing work differently by that logic?

Also, is everyone that makes an android a 20th level mechanic, since at level 20 they can make a True AI?

Being able to process "food and water" is confusing. Do they have 100% efficient breakdown and usage of material, or is there waste? Can they get sick? If their blood is made from nanintes, does that mean that their blood is a naninte swarm? Are they constantly reproducing blood or a blood like substance? What function in their bodies does the blood actually have to their organs? Why does healing magic work on them or mending? Why do they have pain receptors? Who built them and who is still building them? Are there laws governing their rate of construction since making them is a non-natural process? Why do people build them if they have equal rights and thus can't just be sold as worker units since they are machines? Are androids an AI and if they are, is there any legislation controlling the limits of AI? If they are built, not born, what is the time and cost to build one? Can they be built with a different chassis? Since Androids are artificial that mimic organics, can't you have an android with the appearance of any race, including a non-bipedal creature? If their are constructed, how do you perform maintenance on them? Are they "androids" in the term like Cell from DBZ who was clearly organic and not really an android but a biological construction and fusion of cells that had been modified through careful gene mapping and modding? Are there racial tensions with androids since they are artificial, and thus can potentially be mass produced to outnumber the organics and becomes a majority force and take over, depending on programming? Are they built with a safety shut down system if they ever go rogue?

Also, Luna Protege, was that thing you watched one of the Terminator movies or TV series by any chance?
There are a lot of things but suffice to say, androids confuse me and I require much more information.

I would confront and say something like "If you are going to block any creative use of my abilities and not allow hacking constantly, just say so so I can make a different character."

If a DM is going to, essentially, ban something then they should tell the group to let them change their character.

So.

"They is" or "They are" for a single host Shirren?

Saying "They is" makes me want to slap someone and drag them back to elementary school.

You didn't hurt any feeling. You are speaking logically and I appreciate that. You make a good point. Lets see. The sniper weapons appear to have the sniper and unwieldly qualities. Meaning with spending a move to aim, your standard to fire goes to 250 feet. Unwieldy means only 1 attack per round, no full attack action and no attack of opportunities. So I suppose maybe I was hasty on the whole sniper thing. Thanks for what you said.

Well then they already have official pronouns, so the discussion is moot.

Also if someone disrespects a character I made while in character, I don't take it personally because it is a game. Sometimes I play a nice person, sometimes I play a total jerk. The races in the game are make believe anyways and thus can't actually get offended.

Also, sorry for being that guy, but I always wince when I hear someone say "assigned" because that's not really how it works. But possibly, I am being pedantic.

A word is only insulting if you let it be insulting. It is grammatically correct. If someone chooses to take it as an insult when the word is not intended as such, that's a personal issue. I don't think the Shirren would care since being insulted at the word It is entirely a human concept.

When I play roleplaying games, I push that elves, dwarves, whatever are not humans at all. Putting them to human standards pushes the human superiority thing. I treat every species as just that. A totally different species. Said species would likely not even have the same synaptic patters since they evolved totally separately, in a totally different environment.

Since they are based on insects, how about Chtt, Klk, and Tchh?

I assume on Absalom (SP?) station, there is strict gun control because of the risk of breaching a bulk head, let alone fire within a pressurized atmosphere where resources would have to be handled carefully. For example, since it is a space station with an artificial atmosphere, they probably would not want anyone smoking due to the stress it could cause on the filtering systems. So a flamethrower would be a massively dangerous object on board.

Didn't ask you to leave. Just want to stick to the topic.

Ok, lets talk fantasy then. We don't know the rate of LGBT in non-human races since they have a totally different biology so putting human standards on them is somewhat unfair. Totally different biology and culture so we don't even know how those sorts of things appear in their species and at what rate, if at all.

Sorry for taking the scientific approach but it is possible that, since we always see a binary in each species representation, that there are two sexes in those species. If they were a tri or more sex species, then perhaps they would have had represented them as well. It is also possible that may not even recognize a gendering system at all. It is also possible there is a species with zero homosexual beings in it at all, or everything is bisexual or otherwise. Perhaps some of them are totally nonsexual and find any hormone based relationships to be inefficient and incorrect as it just gets in the way, and copulation has no purpose save to breed and it is just something to get out of the way to maintain population levels, then go about their way.

I forget the name of it but those Locust based ones. If they are like earth locusts, they may not really have a brain per-say and function on just a nervous system. And thus work more on instinct and not even be capable of understanding those distinctions aside from breeding time to increase numbers.

I don't see it as political. I just see how some topics, no matter how innocent, turn into something political or get really heated. Maybe I am just old fashioned.

Re-read. Derp, I forgot about Shirren and feel dumb. I think a tri sex species is actually kinda neat and I am intrigued and want to learn more about them

You assume I am saying only Paizo does this. No, I am just talking about Paizo because this is a Paizo game.

Bucklers have always been depicted that way, except in reality so no it is not always.

Shotguns have always been depicted that way, except in reality so no not always. Wrong again.

So the thread where they took away monk unarmed weapons from adventurer's armory because they wanted a cinematic feel, so they made them simple weapons to prevent people from using monk abilities with them, since the best martial artists in movies is always unarmed never happened? You know, where someone replied to their posts with videos of Bruce Lee with Nunchaku.

Now can we stop getting hostile? We were keeping it about the topic rather than attacking each other and saying opinions about each other? Talk about Starfinder, not each other. I'm ignoring any further personal jabs and sticking to the topic of talking about issues people have with Starfinder.

I can see this being a political thread and didn't the already say they are cracking down on political and controversial topics?

Whatever the Shirren language says for their pronoun because some words don't translate and, for all we know, they might not have a concept of gender pronouns or pronouns at all. For all we know, they think that is a human concept. So if you really must have a pronoun for them, just make one up. If you really must have something in English, It is a neutral singular pronoun.

Yes how dare I talk about what paizo does on the paizo forums. Get over it. If I want to complain about what FFG does, I go to FFG forums. If I want to talk about Shadowrun, I go to Catalyst. Just like how I criticize Payday 2 on the Overkill discord where the devs actually hang out. If it is getting old seeing me, then stop looking. It isn't stopping. If I have an issue, I am gonna raise it and you are just gonna blanket defend just because fantasy. I get it.

Bucklers are used incorrectly. Shotguns are used incorrectly. They messed up monks for a more cinematic feel that isn't cinematic. They made small arms piddly and weak. If talking about problems with the things that don't make sense is such a bad thing because "fantasy" then they would shut down every critical thread and only allow rules questions, praise, and LFG stuff.

Sounds like your GM would hate riggers from Shadowrun. If my drone was a better combatant than I was, I would absolutely send it into a fight while I stayed behind cover. Complaining about cowardice is stupid. It is called being smart. Keep yourself alive and send the drone. If the GM hates drones being used intelligently, then this is a bad GM.

Are the small arms inherently worse than long arms? Nothing with blast and everything seems to have low damage compared to long arms. I guess paizo doesn't understand that there are handguns out there that have more punch than rifles. I had this same problem in PF where the smaller weapons like daggers were, generally, junk. Not really viable and you had to use them simply because it eats a feat to take better. You could stand there and stab a high level fighter all night long and said fighter would barely notice due to 1d4 damage. I am wondering if it is gonna be the same with small arms.

And now someone is gonna say that it is for balance. It doesn't have to make sense. Blah blah. Thing is, I am having a problem with junk options.

What I am trying to figure out is how to deal with the batteries it needs for weapon ammo. I can see going broke on just getting batteries.

Neat, but I don't like the gain a level requirement. You aren't a sorcerer from PF changing spells, you're doing a rebuild with totally mundane means.

What I discussed with a GM about are the drone upgrades/modifications. I made the point that the only way it makes sense to get mods as you level, is that you are adding hard points and attaching upgrades that you make. Therefore, you should be able to remove the upgrades/mods and install new ones. Not on the fly, mind you, but maybe with an hour per mod. I mean, I know there are not rules for it but if you can justify the parts or money, even if there aren't any, you SHOULD be able to swap them out. Think of it like replacing parts in a computer. Sure, maybe you have to have a backpack full of drone parts, or keep them on your vessel or HQ or whatever, but it is neat to think that after a short rest period or so, your drone is equipped with new parts.

Heck, maybe back at base, have multiple drone chassis already built and after a day, you can swap your AI into a different one. You're a mechanic, not a mage tied to some planar being, so why not? There is zero magic or supernatural stuff involved.

Rysky, go fire a shotgun with any kind of spread shot in it at a range. See how much it actually spreads and how far the effective range is. I promise it is better than 15 feet. Also remember, even the impact scattergun which does NOT have blast, also goes 15 feet.

Paizo, a word please. I looked at your scatterguns and saw the range. Could you please stop using video games as a source on how shotguns work and instead use some reality?

Also, that other thread is just talking about feats. I did this for any starfinder issues.

If you saw the JJ Abrams star trek movies, you would see that the Captain does not need to be a good talker or even competent at leading.

I don't know how you are not seeing this. Feats are things that grant real special abilities. Something above and beyond what can normally be achievable. If standing there and shouting "Hey look at me!" to get someone's attention to distract from allies is a feat, that is just silly. It should be, at best, a bluff roll with the allies doing a stealth roll. So inversely, you CAN'T get the enemy's attention to focus on you without the feat. So therefore they can't focus fire on you since you don't have the feat to get their attention. It doesn't make sense. Remember, if a feat gives you the ability to do something, that means you can't do it WITHOUT the feat.

No, blindfight gets to be a feat cause it gives you a unique thing like being able to reroll when you miss due to being unable to see. Granting mystic power or whatever it is called is a feat cause it grants you powers. Feats should grant you new things, not exclude stuff that really is just mundane and should be skill based.

The problem I am saying is the feats are not unique abilities, but rather mundane things that should be skill unlocks at best. They are exclusionary, not adding things. Feats that actually grant a boon or ability, like Blind Fight, is feat worthy. Being able to stand as a diversion and call attention should just be part of a higher bluff DC or "When you get X ranks in bluff, you can attempt this." Feats should be something special, not just locking out mundane stuff behind, essentially, a form of pay wall.

I love creative usage and when it is broken down into a feat that excludes you being able to do it without spending a very limited resource, when it should be a skill ability at most, bothers me. I like what was suggested where if it relies only on skills, and you have all the skills needed, you just get it as a skill unlock.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2uj0m?Some-issues-with-Starfinder#18 I linked my opinion on a bunch of feats here, since I did not know this discussion was already happening. So many feats should really just be skill options and combat options.

Big thing being Barricade and how it essentially says I need a feat to flip over a table.

Not everyone is aware of all the discussions going on, man.

It always bothers me when I see feats for piddly little things that should just be a skill check at a higher DC or "at 7 ranks, you can do X" and keep feats for doing actually special things. Not exclusionary things but bonus stuff. Blind Fighting, mystic powers, etc.. Things that are actually special and a boost rather than something that you should be able to just do as a combat option or with a skill check.

Good old PEDMASS/BEDMASS

Profession directly references using engineering and computers as a profession role instead of making an overlapping profession. But just because you have the skill, doesn't mean you can profit from it, but you should be able to synergize. I am using profession as an example for overlap.

You don't need feat trees and big builds through feats. The feat to gain some mystic powers. Blind fight. Stuff like that is fine. Some things should just be grounded in their actual skills. Also, when it comes to skill overlap where things get confusing like profession and engineering and whatnot? Do what 3.5 did. Skill Synergy. Got two skills that work together? +2 to the check.

So aside from my problems with crafting, I just looked at the feats and had to pause.

Barricade. So from what I am reading, I need a feat to flip a table over and duck behind it? I know people are going to say that it says as a move action which could be interpreted as being able to flip a table as a standard or full round, but it doesn't say that. Just going with what is actually written in front of me. If they meant something else, they should have put it there.

No interpretation, no saying the GM can tweak it, just RAW. Granted I am just looking over this fir the first time but I am noticing some issues.

I also have an issue with Deadly Aim, mainly the name. Think about it. a penalty to attack from something called Deadly Aim. So, what, aiming makes things harder to hit? I would have called it burst fire or an overcharge shot for energy weapons or something.

Diversion feat to call attention to yourself. Seriously? The normal action lets you use bluff to let YOU hide, so a "look over there!" thing. So I need a feat to jump and say "Look at me! Look at me!" otherwise they wont look at me. So I guess if I do that without the feat, they have to ignore me then since I don't have the feat?

In Harm's Way as a feat instead of a combat option. Okay, so you are not allowed to jump in front of someone without buying a feat, let alone a feat with a prerequisite. Little odd.

Kip Up. Really, that should just be in acrobatics. Stop taking what skills can do and making them into feats. Feats should be something special. Heck, Yoski have that as a racial ability, I believe, simply because they are quick and nimble.

Medical Expert. I am bashing my head in the desk here. Let Skills Mean Something, Paizo. Not everything needs to be a feat. How about a high medicine skill means you are highly skilled and able to do stuff better than others? Not just in numbers, but things you can do. How about letting feats be a special ability? A great feat. Heck, 5th edition makes feats be special abilities rather than just a buffed version of a skill. What were paizo and the beta testers doing?

Pull the pin really should be based in slight of hand. I mean, come on.

Sky Jockey. Again, no. Stop it. Let this just be a higher DC in the piloting skill. There is no reason for this to be a feat.

Sniper weapon proficiency. Ok this really hurts my head here. Do people at paizo know how rifles work at all? It's a rifle. If you can use an assault rifle, you can use a "sniper" rifle. I know my opinion on this one is gonna bother some people so go ahead.

Suppressive fire as a feat. Again, this hurts my head. Less silly feats, more combat options. So I need a feat to hold the trigger down and just shoot over an area rather than at someone directly? So it is a feat to full auto fire and miss?

Unfriendly Fire. So it is a feat for me, from hiding, to throw a can and have it bang at something across the room so the enemy jumps and shoots there? This feels like it should be in the same area as causing a diversion, and under SKILLS not feats.

There are others I have issues with but I want people to discuss. Personally, I see myself tearing apart the feat and skill system cause this is just silly. Lets hear your opinions and anything in the game you have a problem with, and why this should have been an open beta instead of a closed one, cause now it is too late for them to actually listen to people since it has already been printed.

Alright then. I still see a fair bit of house ruling happening. It kinda feels like they are trying to put PFS/SFS arbitrary rules in the core game.

Starting to stink of D&D 4th edition with the item bonus rule. Where if you are level 2, you are not allowed to have items with a total bonus greater than +2. I'm sorry Paizo and the specially selected beta testers, but you screwed up. Don't do non-nonsensical "BECAUSE!" rules for things a character is or is not allowed to own or use if you are not going to explain it in a way that makes sense in the game. This is not a video game. I see this being house ruled like mad. Remember people, the better the game, the less house rules are required to make it good.

These are reasons why I wish the game was in open beta instead of a closed invite only one.

So, lets see if my failure of a brain is getting this right.

Big corps cheap out on materials, but they sell a brand. Kinda like Apple. You pay for the brand.

An individual could make much better quality, but it eats better materials, so they would come out to the same price.

You are not a store. Probably no permit to sell, or whatever, so you can't do better than a measly 10% of what you made, so you will never be able to get any actual profit and the only way to really acquire wealth, since you sell any product you make at 10% regardless of quality (for reasons), would be through crime or private wet work contracts or be a head in one of these corps. That about right? Sorta shadowrun?

Sure I can somewhat see that, but when you have someone skilled like the mechanic, how does that work? I understand they don't want player to be able to make money, but at the same time, that gets kinda strange. Wouldn't tailor made gear be worth more since it isn't mass produced? The difference between getting clothes at walmart and going to a tailor. You may do less business, but it is worth more plus it is custom made. Should at least cost less to produce the item since you aren't paying for labour and the store's overhead.

Don't know if I will ever get a chance to play, but I was thinking Mechanic, cause it looked fun to be the guy that makes things. I am still trying to understand why making something yourself costs the same as buying the item. Doesn't that imply that stores are selling things at cost, and thus, are not making any profit at all?

Okay, granted I skimmed a few times but this is odd to me. I am trying to find the reason to craft, at all, aside from arbitrary availability in store. If the price is the same, rather than craft at half price since you are not paying market value, and you sell for only 10% of the value then why do it at all? If it is the same as you would get in stores, what is the point in ever crafting stuff yourself?

I don't really have an issue with it being non-evil. Isn't the premise that a lot of the gods are, kinda, gone? And aren't they the ones that decide good and evil on an objective level?

For how it messes with the soul, where does it say that and wouldn't that make dominate spells also evil?

Earlier, when someone said they are monsters kinda got to me. It reminded me in older editions of D&D where humans were listed in the monster manual. Everything is a "monster" until it isn't.

For the boards being contrarian, I tend to say generally one thing. Mainly because I enjoy argument and debate.

If you don't want someone to make an opposed argument to something you are saying, don't say anything. Echo chambers are boring and one of the best ways to learn is to see the opposing viewpoints.

Friend of mine. He said the general rule for any ability is that if it is not outright stated what type of action it is, assume standard.