Lethallin's page

Suppose this is more of a Homebrew than general discussion, but I think you could run something like this if you wanted in a home game.

Unless my brain isn't thinking about it correctly, it should give you a slight advantage by giving a break on the MAP penalty for all these unarmed strikes, in exchange for giving up critical specialization and other things that would make it much less useful for "crit fishing".

Blurred Fist - Level 12 (?) Monk Feat
Whenever you perform a Melee Unarmed Strike attack, you may instead make two special Strikes upon the same target. These special Strikes inherit all special abilities of the original Melee Unarmed Strike, except only deal half of their usual damage, and if they are agile their MAP penalty is -3/-6.

If both attacks hit, combine their damage, and then add any other applicable on-hit effects. You add any precision damage only once, to the attack of your choice. Combine the damage from both Strikes and apply resistances and weaknesses only once. These special strikes count as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty.

These special strikes deal double damage upon a critical success, but gain no other critical special effects, such as critical specialization, nor do they activate any items or abilities that trigger upon a critical hit.

I'd always rule it as "If you're ahead or behind in AC compared to what the rules normally are/what characters are normally capable of, you're doing it wrong".

It's supposed to keep the math the same, while getting rid of "mandatory" magical items.

But it's your game, do with it as you want.

Echoing what's been said before, I enjoy them.

Your character is more powerful, but not too much more powerful, and allows for more options and flavoring if you want.

The hard action economy and stat stacking means it's impossible to be run-away powerful with it, but it definitely lets you have more options at your disposal.

If your players like feeling a little more powerful, go for it!

It's bizarre to me that people buy up combat focused APs so much more. Combat is so easy to prep for, I usually add combat as filler if I think a session might go short.

Locations, NPCs, motives, plotlines, and backstory is what takes all the time.

Maybe it's weighted by GMs who are only really comfortable GMing combat...

I have two of my four players that mentally check out whenever we're not actively doing exploration or combat. Social interaction just doesn't interest them much within the game. The other two tend to enjoy it, so I make sure to include it, but I do tend to speed it along a bit faster than normal, because I'd rather not have a completely disengaged couple of people for 2 hours when the other two are unraveling mysteries and discovering clues as to where the party needs to go next.

I've talked to them about it, and they say they don't mind that the 'other stuff' is in there, but they're just not engaged. Even when I attempt to bring them into it, by having their character be the lynchpin in a particular plot point, I still can't really get much of anything out of them.

On the other hand, everyone is engaged when it's initiative rounds and they're punching bad guys in the face and collecting loot afterwards. So that's what we mostly tend to do.

I get the feeling a lot of people just aren't comfortable actually role playing, and really just want to play a video game with people rolling numbers instead of an RNG. That's why combat heavy things sell well.

Ancient Elf:

"... You must still meet its other prerequisites to gain the feat."

Eldrich Trickter:

"...though you must meet its other prerequisites."

Part of the prerequisites for all dedications include: "Special: You cannot select another dedication feat until you have gained two other feats from the xxx archetype."

Seems straightforward to me that it's 'no'.

Aww, this used to say April didn't it?

I just wanna build a space colony and deal with what assuredly will come with it. Animal attacks, 'alien' invasion, the demonic hellspawn that accidentally teleported onto the planet, the corporation that's hell bent on stealing the planet's resources out from under you, spies that infiltrate and try to destabilize your colony in an attempt to unseat you from power, and of course the giant and evil creature(s) that happens to live inside the planet that you accidentally wake up.

I love the idea of a squadron, and having an HQ ship in order to facilitate them to fly around the Galaxy.
However the number cruncher is trying to figure out how lower level characters can even manage this without a lot of GM handwaving.

HQ Ships can be either a Heavy Freighter, or a Carrier. And the BP cost for them goes down to just 10%! Cool. Low level, lets assume Heavy Freighter then.

BP Cost: 4 for the frame.

So other expenses... well 4 person squadron needs 4x Shuttle Bays. That's fine since they also get the 10% cost, so they cost 1 BP each, total of 8 now.

Now lets get a power core in there! Needs one to do anything. Cheapest Core for a Large ship is the Core Arcus Ultra at 15 BP. Owch. 23 BP spend. Now, assuming we want the thing to move, add in the cheapest thrusters, so 4 BP on L4 thrusters, 4 BP, 27 total.

We probably want to also let it go into the drift, so the party can actually go on trips together, so a signal Basic is gonna cost 8 more BP (4 for size x 2 for basic), 35 BP total.

These last two are actually optional, but in theory you'd want to be able to see a little bit outside instead of just looking out the windows, so 1 BP for cut-rate sensors and 2 BP for basic shields to keep the rocks and bugs off those windows, rounds it out to 38 BP to build a HQ ship for 4 people that's bare minimum functional.

Problem is, that HQ ships only get 25% of normal BP. With 25% of the normal BP, this HQ ship needs to be Teir 6 in order to even get this stuff (155 BP x .25 = 38.75). And since the HQ ship is the same teir as the Squad ships, with a 4 person squad to have teir 6 ships you need an APL of 9.

tl:dr HQ ships are really impractical as written. It's good they're optional, as they're very useless for low level play.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong or missing something somewhere, because I'd love HQ ships to be practical.

Looking at it all laid out like this, there really should be a way to meditate with your swarm for 24 hours or something in order to completely re-do your gear array. This is just a paperwork headache, especially when trying to make a nanocyte character that starts at any level besides 1.

If all conditions ended that came from Debilitating Trick ended at the end of the operatives next turn, it would be a little odd when the enemy teleported back onto his feet after getting Knee Shotted.

So no, conditions are persistent unless otherwise noted, and the 'end of the operatives next turn' in the actual text of Debilitating shot is indeed just referring to Off-Target or Flat-Footed.

Priorities are ever a-shiftin' around here, but we'll do what we can to address as much as we can.

Also, we'll continue to look at what we can do to present this information in the most useful way!
Thanks, all, for your feedback.

I am enjoying this reactivity, after a long time of guessing and assumptions for how certain things are supposed to work, this is really a breath of fresh air.

I mean, the rules say its a weapon. They literally call it an advanced melee weapon with an item level equal to your Vanguard level. So someone is going to use this to argue it.

I still say no, though.

Well how about that, I remembered it say "treat it like an advanced melee weapon....", but sure enough it straight up says it just is.

It's still a no, as there isn't an object to apply the fusion to, and I don't think sticking a fusion seal on your forehead counts.

Joe Pasini wrote:

Our updated FAQ now holds the answer to this question: No, the soulfire fusion does not work with solar flare.

Can you provide an explanation to the FAQ why this is the case?

Is it:
A) Soulfire fusion only works for melee solar weapons? Or
B) Solar flare can only benefit from small arms fusions?

As written, a GM might assume that no solarian crystal weapon fusion can apply to a solar flare, which is so counter-intuitive and against the perceived intent of the class feature that the ability would deserve an errata.

It would depend on what you mean by B, but it's not A as there's been little debate about if Soulfire works with Solar Shield.

Solar Flare can't only benefit from "Small Arms Fusions", it just can't benefit from anything that a Small Arm can't benefit from.

I think of it like a black list or a white list, to put it a different way. Solar Flare doesn't have a white list, by saying "It can't benefit from a fusion unless it says it works with Small Arms", it has a black list by saying "It can benefit from any fusion, except those that say they can't affect a small arm".

It's a small distinction, but it's there. So since SoulFire excludes ALL weapon types except Solarian Weapon Crystals (including Small Arms), it's not valid.

Our updated FAQ now holds the answer to this question: Yes, forced movement provokes attacks of opportunity.

Reposition, Bullrush, and Black Hole received a huge buff this day in games around the pact worlds.

Umm, your FAQ does not match Core in one section, and there is no errata for it...

FAQ wrote:

Can an operative use a skill to make a trick attack without meeting the normal conditions for using that skill for other purposes? For example, can an operative make a Stealth check as part of a trick attack when they couldn't use Stealth to hide from the target of the attack?

Yes, you can use any appropriate skill (those granted by the trick attack ability or your specialization anytime you attempt a trick attack) to determine if your trick attack does extra damage and applies any penalty.

Specifically the Specialization Hacker states this...

Core wrote:

You can attempt a Computers check with a +4 bonus to make a trick attack by creating a computerized distraction (you can’t use this option if stripped of all computerized gear in an area with no computers).

I don't see an errata for that so there are times when you can't use a skill to make a trick attack without meeting the normal conditions for using that skill.

I think this is the time where "specific" overrules the "general". You don't need to normally be able to use this skill (Stealth while observed) to trick attack, unless specifically told otherwise by the ability in question.

You are the armor, the armor is you, just like second skin.

It gives some other bonuses and changes your size as well, but it is still you. All of it is you, even when gargantuan.

A little odd that someone stabbing the foot of your giant robot can drop you down to 0 HP and kill you? Yeah, probably. But it's armor, like any other.

Here's a few things I think an Envoy could gain at later levels that wouldn't be Improvisations:

Stuff like this is exactly what an envoy could use, I agree.

Gaining the ability to make improvs last longer, getting some of the improvs down to swift actions... even just these two things would allow the envoy more versatility in combat, allow the much more situational improvs to be very useful, and become more and more of a boon to the 'team lead/support' idea they're supposed to be.

Envoys are pretty dull to play at the moment, and having a giant bag of very situational tricks is nice and all, but not useful when you don't have the time to effectively use them all.

Can I source this thread for my Advanced English Language Theory class?

I'd disagree on you there, sort of. It doesn't really become good till level 10+ and only when making a single attack.

The amount of damage you get out of it for a much greater chance to miss is much too small.

If you normally would have a 50% hit rate with all your buffs, Deadly aim brings it down to a 40% hit rate. Since you're hitting 20% less often, Deadly aim would need to increase your damage by 25% to make up the difference. That's a tall order for just adding 1/2 your character level.

Even the near best case scenario for DA, a 95% hit rate, deadly aim triples your chance to miss with an 85% hit rate. Deadly Aim would need to increase your damage by 12% for it to be worth it even then.

(For math proof, assume 100 average damage per attack. 100 x 95% hit rate = 95 Damage per round. You would need 112 Deadly Aim average damage per attack x 85% hit rate = 95.2 damage per round)

The higher your base damage and the lower your hit chance, the worse DA is, because it's harder for 1/2 your character level to hit the damage increase needed to make up for the accuracy penalty.

Admittedly, Critical hits do swing the math towards DA being better, but the difference isn't enough to make it a good feat.

But hey, if it's fun and flavorful, go right ahead. Don't let the math and number nerds get in your way of a good time.

I realize the rules are a bit unpolished, but I think you may be going a bit mad, Morik.

Your fist functions as an uncategorized basic melee weapon, but you can't apply a fusion to it.

You can't apply fusions to a solar weapon or solar flare directly. Just because it functions as a weapon doesn't mean it is one in all senses of the word. And you're missing a ton of information about it, which you'd have to make a lot of assumptions for. IF you could apply fusions: What item level is your solar weapon? What does it cost to enchant it? How would fusion seals work with it?

I'd say let them re-work their characters from the ground up.

It would be easier than trying to convert them from a simplified version of the same. It would also help them learn more of the nuances and differences between the versions.

Or just go with the pre-gens as Mr Mosasaur suggests (though they're generally not exactly considered "optimal").

If your theme is to focus on Injection weapons and being a combat medic, why go the Mechanic route at all?

Seems thematically, a full Biohacker makes a lot more sense than a injection weapon inclined Mechanic. I'm just not sure what your vision of this Mechanic is for how they do their thing.

And as a Mechanic, you're going to be very limited in the type of weapon available to you (if you're just looking at using fist weapon injectors specifically).

In my interpretation...

Trick attack isn't a level variable ability. At operative level 5, gain an ability which is: Your trick attack deals 3d8.

Unless you want to argue that soliders lose their bonus feats, or gear boosts, there's no way that you'd need to pull out your character sheet from 2 weeks ago to play with a negative level.

The things that would affect, would be something that specifically calls out your level for calculation, including weapon specialization, effective caster level, abilities like Supernova ("1d6 fire damage plus 1d6 additional fire damage per solarian level").

My Favorite was Squad Fighting Style for Soldiers.

Level 1:
Coordinated shot as a bonus feat. Your allies gain the benefits of Coordinated shot even if you're giving that target cover.

Combine that with Advanced Coordination gear boost and it literally doesn't matter where you're standing, your allies will get +1 ranged attack vs anything you threaten, even if you're directly in its way.

Level 5:
Full Action to move twice your speed and make an attack, but the target must be threatening an Ally. Once per 10 min rest.

This can really give you some good battlefield maneuverability if something unexpected happens to your back line.

Level 9:
Move Action, spend an RP to teleport and swap places with on Ally within 60 ft.

This has all sorts of shenanigans you can do with battlefield control.

Level 13:
You and allies using you for Flanking increase the bonus to hit by 1. If the flanked creature takes a guarded step, it provokes AoOs from you and anyone else that you're flanking with.

Extra to hit, and better keeps enemies in your control.

Level 17:
Pick 3 Combat feats you have. When you start your turn next to an Ally, spend a reaction to let them gain the benefits of that feat for 1 round. They must meet the pre-reqs.

Situational, but can definitely be useful and allow a lot more adaptability for your party. Can even give give them DR or resistance with your reaction if you want to.

Overall, this is the team player fighting style I've been looking for, and finally will make me break from always leaning towards "I kind would rather go Blitz solider" all the time.

Shisumo wrote:

I am really hoping that this book contains a reprint with appropriate errata of all of the core rules for starship combat, in addition to the new ones. It would be really lovely if I could just grab this one book whenever a starship combat started and reference it all the way through, not needing to flip between different sections or different books or, most especially, between a printed book and my online pdf of errata.

Echoing this for emphasis. Please this be in this book.

Agreed.

An all-encompassing "Starship Rulebook" would be nice, when you could pretty easily tack in the errata's rules into this book as well with a few pages. I know a few pages makes a big difference when it comes to printing, but having to reference three different documents when trying to run space combat is less than ideal, especially since it's not something that players and GMs are likely doing often enough to have it all memorized.

It CAN be a focus of a campaign, but most people use it as kind of an aside between the 'meat' of starfinder.

That aside, I am also hoping for some more balance changes, to keep player ships from turning into spheres of death. Focusing entirely on turrets and shields is just too potent once you start getting to mid-to-high level spaceship building.

Bombard fusion is really your main option if you want to be a grenadier.

Larger initial investment, but you never 'spend' any resources to use it, outside of the once/day thing.

Being the Grenadier solider option helps also (free grenade every 10 minutes you spend building one, one at a time).

Nefreet wrote:

If the feat you get at 3rd doesn't count as a prerequisite for Versatile Specialization, then literally everyone is doing it wrong.

Except for the Paizo folks making their example builds in the Core Rulebook. They have people taking the Weapon Specialization feat when they would already qualify for Versatile Specialization from being counted as having Weapon Specialization at 3rd level.

It would still be valid for them to pick specialization for a specific weapon instead of versatile.

Stupid, but valid.

I find them incredibly underwhelming and had to really force myself to make a character concept that could make use of any of them.

And even then, so many of the classes feel like you're missing out on so much of what makes that class 'that class' with magic hacks, operative tricks, improvs, etc going away, that you feel so much like a gutting your character in order to get some rather lame-by-comparison abilities that often times aren't very interesting.

Solider is one of the few classes that can feel fine applying an archetype to, since they don't lose hardly any of their flavor (which is just being good at shooting/hitting things), since they can do that just dandy without the tons of extra feats they give up when applying an archetype.

If archetypes had some more 'oomph' to them, gave me more of a reason to pick them, I can definitely see them. But even if they were notably more powerful than they are now, they certainly seem like a harsh penalty when applying them to most classes. And I just don't like it.

It's a neat ability, to be sure. But as others have pointed out, it removes your ability to do damage, and is very cost-intensive.

Burning your RP like to get 25 temp HP is pretty dangerous when RP is your lifeline when you get downed, especially since you won't be helping to take down that baddie nearly as much.

At a certain point it's much better to take the stamina hits, use your RP a lot more efficiently by resting later, while actually shooting it.

And as for the other aspects of the force field, I'm currently having a specifics argument with a player I have as well about what a force field does and doesn't do.

I told him straight up all it is is temporary HP. It's no different than any other kind of vitality value, like stamina or HP. I've made a ruling that makes sense to me that if the field is not penetrated it can prevent certain things (Like bleed, getting diseased/poisoned) as the shield fully blocked the attack and didn't really hit him.

But in a similar topic and idea, Stamina Points are also supposed to represent 'not really getting hit' in a meaningful way. I made sure to make it clear to him that the shield protecting him from certain things is as far as I'll go with this 'mechanics vs sense' back and forth.

The recycling system is the size of a cargo bay, and it can convert "almost all" the waste generated on a starship into UPBs

I can envision certain people (like myself) being immensely amused by yesterday's biologically processed food being turned into a laser pistol.

Any quite a few others being rather horrified at the idea of their shirt being made of the same stuff.

That's not really how language works though. Specifically, that's not how the word "Additionally" works.

The word "Additionally" means "In addition to the thing I previously said". It does not mean "Instead of the thing I previously said.

I might say "This glass is full of water. Additionally, you may drink its contents." If you drink it, you would expect water. If it's milk, you would (at the very least) wonder why I said "Additionally".

When Paizo used "Additionally", they're literally saying "it's a swift action AND you can use it as part of an attack action in this special case."

I don't think they meant it that way. Neither do you. But they said it that way.

And if it said "Alternatively" there would be someone that argues that you only get one of the two abilities when you pick up the feat, or it loses the ability to grant you swift action draws if you use it this other way, or some other weird interpretation focusing on that single word.

I definitely read it as it's an additional ability the feat confers. It seems apparent that it is intended to let thrown weapon characters get 2-4 attacks with weapons they are not currently holding.