If the wound effect gave "severed limb", would that also not be a condition?
I just want to be clear, because that's what brought all this on anyways when we searched through rules on how to get back an eye. People were saying that a lost limb would need a prosthetic, and a lost eye would just suck until you can buy "eyes". That was for non SFS play though.
I would greatly appreciate your version, I also just don't want to run into this in the future and have lots of variance.
Do you by chance have a section in the rulebook that I may reference?
So in yesterday's session two of us received a critical hit from a weapon with the wound critical effect. We coincidentally both lost an eye. My character just hit level 2 and has effectively burned all credits on improving gear. The cheapest replacement "eyes" (dark vision capacitors) will take my weapon, armor, and the scenario reward. And the other player doesn't even have the option as he just doesn't have enough credits even after selling gear.
According to the Guide, all conditions with a mechanical effect have to be cleared by the end of the scenario or the character is effectively "dead". Since a lost eye imparts a -2 on perception, does this mean that the other player's character is dead? Does this mean that my character (a soldier) is running into the next scenario equipped with no weapons or armor?
How does this work? The GM is holding off on any final calls until we see what the community thinks on this. Seems strange that if we had lost a limb instead, this wouldn't be much of an issue as the scenario rewards could pay the 100 credits to buy a prosthetic, yet the same critical effect hitting an eye is now drawing problems.
By the way, the puzzles were amazing this year, and there would have been no way for me or the wife to have solved the "secret puzzled" without Jason's and Joe's help.
I'm super excited that this has been made public!
My Envoy in an AP is going for a computer to place into the Datajack he has installed in his head.
He was eventually going to load it all up with some Library Chips as well to sort of act like a walking infosphere. He can control a Shirren-Eye rifle from up to a mile away with it as well. I thought it was all pretty cool.
"Handsome" Twik wrote:
But based off what it says:
Wireless Hack wrote:
It says you can spend your actions to work in concert with your exocortex. Meaning you can spend a Move and a Swift, and use the "Exocortex's effective standard action" toward the total time required.
And since the rule on how actions can work, you can trade your standard for a move or a swift. Or you can trade your move for a swift. So in the end, you have multiple combination of actions on how you can wirelessly hack using an exocortex.
My only "question" would be can you break down the duration of the full round per tier? For example:
The exocortex can have one standard per round (which can be traded as a move or a swift, per rules on actions) to attempt a hack. If we gave it nine rounds, could it attempt to hack a Tier 3 computer? I currently don't think so, but I am curious if I could be pleasantly surprised.
Darrell Impey UK wrote:
Maybe he was thinking that he could buy a wand of Fabricate Bullets with Prestige? He would still be incorrect of course as that costs 850gp and not 750gp, but I know many players who forget that the material components can and will up the cost of a wand if applicable.
I would like to thank the GMs I had this weekend. I only know one's name, as he was staff, but they all were amazing!
To the gentleman that ran Oath of the Overwatched for our group Friday morning, thank you for completely destroying us! It was frustrating at the time, but looking back, I had a great time. Thank you for your time and dedication.
To the gentleman that ran Star Sugar Heartlove!!! at an ungodly hour of the morning Sunday, thank you for providing such a fun game! I got to play my character the way I had hoped, and I appreciate that!
And to Cosmo, me and the wife loved your railroad game! She is still talking about how much fun she had, and I cannot deny that I enjoyed our tables shenanigans just as much!
Thank you everyone!
Joe Pasini wrote:
Thank you so much! I will hopefully be able to finish it using the first two of the three hints you gave me! I'll look at the third if I still feel stuck.
Thank you again! I'll definitely post back later!
Jason Keeley wrote:
I'm still scratching my head at this, I got an extra hint before I left, but I'm still not understanding
Secret Puzzle Spoiler:
THE DIAMONDS! I was told that the poems reference paizo products (big hint, so I'm thankful as I would have never thought of it). Which I want to say references the adventure paths (pretty sure I got them all). I've then tried using the diamonds as hints. Like, each page has between 2-6 diamonds. The diamonds never land on the same "space" twice on the entire twenty one line.
I've tried seeing if maybe the number references a specific book of an AP (as 6 is the highest).
I've tried using it to count words, letters, and even noticed that the diamonds were the same shape as some of the cities in the booklet, and tried cross referencing that (might have been reading too much into it for that last one).
I feel like I'm missing something important.
I've found the Alchemist to be a pretty flexible class overall. So a level dip (or a few levels) in another class shouldn't be too much of a problem. The only big downside is the loss of time on the mutagen. I've seen STR get pretty crazy with a barbarian (maybe bloodrager), alchemist, dragon disciple build once.
Although natural attacks are good, they are not necessary. If you'd prefer to swing a blade or a spear around, I'd say go for it. I was just mentioning that the Feral Mutagen is pretty common for mutagen based alchemists.
And those discoveries with Alchemical Allocation are great, especially if given time to pre-buff (potion of heroism anyone?). The biggest problem I had building alchemists is that they have so many good discoveries. There really is no "bad" way to build an alchemist, in my opinion, unless you intentionally do so.
I think that as long as you have a concept in mind, you're going to have a great time playing the alchemist regardless of the choices you end up making. My alchemists typically evolve around what I feel has been needed between level.
My first alchemist started as a punch-you-in-face ragechemist, but ended up taking a bunch of discoveries and feats that allow her to close into melee quickly and be able to stay there for the majority of the fight. (Dragon Style and Iron Will were definitely on her list of feats, and Spontaneous healing, Preserve Organs, Mummification, and Elemental Mutagen were a few of her discoveries) If you feel that your character is missing something at given levels, I can safely say that there's a discovery/extract for that.
Going for the Master Chymist prestige class will net you a few extra transformations a day. But then you would have 2 personalities, and I'm not sure if that's something you'd like.
I would also like to mention that although occasionally the timing of the mutagen is limiting, I mostly only experienced it at low levels. Any scenario I played often either had the encounters throughout numerous days or within a relatively short span. And on the rare occasion it wasn't, I usually had an hour to prep another one. If it's really concerning though, you could pick up the Infuse Mutagen Discovery and drop 1000gp to have a backup mutagen.
It's pretty common to go for the Feral Mutagen. My alchemist ultimately went for the Mummification discovery and didn't regret it one bit. The two preserve organ discoveries had saved my character from a possibly deadly crit more than once.
Also, I can't think of any feat being more valuable than Extra Discovery. So many of the Alchemist's discoveries are just better than feats.
My Tumor Familiar used to be a Protector, but since the reprinting, I've switched to Valet personally. I've heard good things about making it a Mauler as well.
My first PFS character was an alchemist. I intended on her being the whole "Dr. Jekyll, Mr. Hyde" kind of persona. In order to add some flavor to the character I wanted her to be really short roughly the height of a female dwarf. Then, after she drank her mutagen, she would grow into this monstrous physique that was roughly the height of a male half-orc. None of this provided me any mechanical benefits, so I never had any real problems.
In fact, only once did a GM question whether or not it was legal. I just told him that for all ruling purposes, my character is a medium character and if height plays a part in a ruling, I'll be more than happy to assume my character was as tall as an average human female for that purpose. We just moved on from there.
Most of her ruling problems was that she combined unarmed strikes with natural attacks and many believed I was attempting to "flurry" with unarmed strikes.
It says to declare an area of up 1000 cubic feet. I'm no expert at math, but isn't that just a "10 foot cube"?
A cubic foot is defined as "the volume of a cube with sides of one foot in length", meaning 1ft x 1ft x 1ft = 1 cu ft
10ft x 10ft x 10ft = 1000 cu ft
Am I mathing this wrong? Does the Sentinel Fusion only cover a 10 foot cube?
Thanks for all the responses! I will talk with my GM as to what he feels the limiting factors of the computer should be. I just thought about how cool it would be for my character to have a miniaturized computer in his data jack to control a bunch of functions remotely.
I appreciate all the ideas as well!
First off, I understand that this seems a preposterous question, but bear with me.
So I was thinking of getting my character a Tier 3 Computer with a few upgrades and started wondering if I would just be wasting the hard earned credits we are making.
In the beginning of the section, it talks about giving tools for the GMs to use. Does this mean that the computers weren't designed to give players options so much as challenges? (Which I'm okay with, just curious)
I know that the players have access to computers in general, but could I (as a player) purchase a computer that could remotely fire a weapon or start our starship? What about store secure data to have access to when not in range of an infosphere? Or even to have an AI for those lonely nights out in the drift?
I'm just curious what other people thoughts are on this? I just want some ideas to take to my GM about it, and to have hopefully a better understanding of what I could do.
I know that this thread is a couple of weeks old, but I have a question about the faction boons as well.
When we purchase a faction boon, is that boon permanently available to us? Example, I purchase the "Collector and Examiner" ally boon from the Exo-Guardians (meeting the Tier prerequisites of course), can I slot that boon whenever I want without paying the cost again? Or do I have to make the purchase each time?
Fine. Phil brought 6 (or even 10) of his buddies from the academy. I still think that Bob should be able to handily take them all down with a dagger.
Just my opinion though, not attempting to sway yours. We all have our rights to feel how we want to feel about such a subject.
So far, I'm all for the "level" bonus to skills. I hated being a level 16 Cleric who actually just barely knew religion. (+7 total if I recall)
My character went across seas and mountains and faced off against monster after monster, threat after threat, and still could not make swim check naturally to save her life. At least I had spells unlike my Fighter friend. Like, did my character learn nothing except to keep her eyes peeled? (I tossed the other 1 skill rank at anything to give me a bonus)
And more skill ranks doesn't feel like enough. That's still saying that even though I've experienced just about everything, I still suck at most things except for those I work really hard on (what kind of "hero" is that?)
I do think it's weird with perform/profession/craft stuff... Mayhaps you fake it better?
Just my opinion thus far.
I'm actually okay with a Level 20 Wizard being able to tear apart a Level 1 Fighter with nothing but a dagger.
That level 20 Wizard (Bob from hence forward), has seen things. Experienced things. Bob has had to face down Dragons, Demons, Devils, and gods knows what other horrors.
Then this Level 1 Fighter (Phil) want's to raise a blade against him? Who is this Phil anyways? A once upon a time farmer who picked up his grandfather's sword? He's been "training for months" on how to wield it. Like that's supposed to mean something to Bob.
The more you've experienced, the better you are. Bob has experienced ALOT (19 levels worth of crap), Phil may not have even seen a zombie in his life, and is supposed to be a challenge to Bob simply because Bob is only armed with a knife and decided it would be nice to leave the spell book in his tower within the demi-plane "Bobbiton"? I don't think so.
Just my feel on it. If you think a level 1 should be able to compete with a level 20 simply because circumstance is against the level 20, that's okay. I just so happen to disagree with the sentiment.
I don't know about the campaigns you've played in, but even at low levels, most if not all of my characters have had the opportunity to use all the skills on the character sheet. Some of which I could not perform because I was not trained in them even at the mid to high level games where one would think that I should have learned something by then.
I like to build flaws into my characters just like everyone else, but I expect my character to learn to grow around those flaws. I don't expect my character to adventure for months or years or whatnot and never be able to learn to at least grow in most areas of their adventurous life.
A socially inept Wizard is great idea at level 1. But to forever be socially inept after being in countless social situations seems more farfetched at level 20.
As for your final paragraph, Mark has mentioned numerous times in this thread about the gaps being much larger than just -/+3.
I am not without concerns of this new system, most of the blog post was vague and didn't necessarily say anything other than "The system is going to be totally different and great". Right now, I'm hoping that at least the last part is true. But before accusing Paizo (seeming to specialize in the field of character options) of removing options off the table, I think it would be most fair to wait until we have more information.
Please don't take this as an attempt of me silencing your or anyone else's concerns. Voices from all sides matter, I just wanted to point my view on this system and your post looked like a great building block for me to speak mine. Thank you.
So, I have been playing PFS for quite a while now, and have moved to the stage of my life where I would rather play AP's over the scenarios provided. I have fun with them, but I just feel that I never really get to see my characters progress.
I always need to change characters to fit tiers, to make parties more balanced, or just feel that the character would better fit the description of the scenario. Overall, I just feel like I'm jumping all over the place and don't even know who my characters really are any more.
To the task at hand, is PbP right for me? I live a pretty busy life in general. I have a 40hr/week job (with 7.5hr/week commute), am a Venture Agent for a Thursday game taking up another 4-5hrs/week, am in a bi-weekly AP (6hrs/2 weeks), bi-weekly games of Starfinder (10ish hrs/2 weeks), am happily married (24hrs/day technically, but only requires genuine effort for roughly 16-18hrs/week), and I sleep, eat, etc... Also, I'm expecting the first little one in a few months, so time will be even tighter. So although I want another game, I don't know where to find the time.
That's where I'm hoping PbP will be of help. Is it perfectly acceptable to make 2-5 posts a day around my work schedule? I almost always have my computer with me, so I should be able to make a post or two around the same timeframe daily.
If so, then how do I start? Like, I've read the Guide on the discussion... But I don't know how to make a "character sheet" for PbP. Is it just my PFS character listings? If so, what if I desire to play in a non-PFS game? I may have a couple more questions arise after these, and I thank you all in advance for any help you provide.
Well, this will be my final post on the matter, because I will probably make better use of my time teaching my cat how to play a proper game of chess than to explain how an amulet of mighty fists works to you.
The flaming weapon property gives all the attacks of the enhanced weapon the effect. Spell storing gives one attack of the enhanced weapon the effect. Same goes for the amulet... like every other enhancement works. The only difference is that the amulet can apply the effect to your unarmed strikes and natural attacks.
The amulet is spell storing. The amulet holds one spell of 3rd level or lower. When a natural attack or unarmed strike makes contact, you may discharge the spell that the amulet has stored.
Also, the Magi's ability tells you exactly what happens, so I'm still not seeing the relevance here. Are you looking for help as to what it's ability does? Does a part of it confuse you? I'd love to give my interpretation, if you point out the part that doesn't make much sense.
Where are you getting the idea that every attack gains the spell storing property? If I can attack with my spell storing sword 3 times, can I put 3 spells into it? If the answer is no, guess what? It's the same with the Amulet, since when does a weapon special ability work differently on an amulet compared to a sword unless specifically stated otherwise?
Gallant Armor wrote:
How does that "logic" equal what I had said?
Amulet is enhanced. Not natural attacks. Not unarmed strikes. Amulet.
Magi grants enhancement bonus to weapon wielded. If weapon already has enhancement bonus, increase appropriately.
Like, I don't see the confusion here. The ability says exactly what it does.
Gallant Armor wrote:
It says it right in the line you quoted, "this AMULET can GRANT melee weapon special abilities". The AMULET, the necklace itself, has the enhancement that's being GRANTED.
Gallant Armor wrote:
The Amulet has +1 Flaming, and passes that benefit to unarmed strikes and natural attacks. Spell Storing is no different.
Sword with Spell Storing:
Amulet of Mighty Fists with Spell Storing:
Just to show it has the same build as a "Flaming"
Sword with Flaming:
Amulet of Mighty Fists with Flaming:
The amulet has the enhancements, and passes those bonuses to your attacks. Your attacks don't have enhancements themselves. Drop a sword, sword is still enhanced. Drop an amulet, your attacks are not enhanced any more.
Gallant Armor wrote:
Did you give your claw or bite spell storing? Or did you give the amulet spell storing?
That's where this trickles down to. Your Amulet has the effects, not your natural weapons or unarmed strikes. Your natural weapons and unarmed strikes are just benefiting from the effects.
Kali Nassim wrote:
Thanks, Link. Do you have a preferred source for spell cards? Printing isn't an issue, though flexibility on layout would be helpful.
For customization purposes, I sort of made my own for the Druid I have been doing this for. I use Word's custom page size (5" width, 3" height) and margins (.2 around) and have access to a pretty decent printer. Otherwise I was considering using PRJ's solution for my upcoming Arcanist, as it took a pretty decent amount of time to get everything looking how I wanted with word for nearly all of the druids spells up to spell level 6.
I've personally used spell cards and I think they work out pretty well. The 2 "big" issues that I have come across:
1) I need a way to organize the cards for switching them out. I use one of those index card cases with index card tabs to keep them in order alphabetically.
2) I had to make a couple of "extras" for spells that I frequently prep multiple times a day. I suppose it's not needed because I could just have a sticky note or something telling me what I've used, but I prefer to have the thought "it's in my hand, so I can use it". If it's a spontaneous spell (like clerics with Cure spells), I have them on different colored cards and just put down another card of the same spell level to represent the loss of the prepared spell.
Neither of these are really big problems, but they added an extra cost on my end, so not the most budget friendly solution. I would also like to warn that it didn't cut down much on spell prep time, but it definitely keeps the game moving, especially if you have all the key info of the spells on each card (target, duration, saves, etc.).
Just because he wasn't trying to kill them doesn't make the encounter any easier. A monk can choose to do lethal or non-lethal freely with no penalties. The OP even said that outside of that, the monk went all out. It was surely a tough encounter. The only thing that made it "easier" was that they didn't actually have to take down a CR 19 creature to win.
Iziah Gile wrote:
The "hitting" portion doesn't seem like it will be too much an issue later on as it looks like 1 attack turns are going to be a staple for the majority of combats, even at high levels. Armor has so far seemed like a pretty twisted joke. All classes are at least 3/4 BAB, and many offer something to increase the ability to hit. Weapon focus is even a thing, and in this version, once one of those 3/4 BAB classes hit level 12, they get an additional increase in ability to hit.
I'm really interested in seeing how mid to late levels play out in this game with the whole "no iterative attacks" thing that's going on. Will the days of ending a boss fight in first round of combat end? I can only hope.
Fred Strauss wrote:
With the loss being less stamina and fort saves, I don't think it's horrible overall, although the fort save penalty will hurt down the line. I say nothing ventured nothing learned!
Iziah Gile wrote:
It's also required to increase ability scores in Pathfinder, but in Pathfinder you kind of have to keep raising that main ability score or you're going to fall behind when it comes to the enemies, making your character even more "shoeboxed" into it's role. I personally think it's great that at higher levels the character can grow into a smarter, wiser, version of themselves from adventures ago, where as Pathfinder we're kind of the same guy except better at what we were already good at.
Disk Elemental wrote:
They were very different... I'm not sure if you read my post correctly, but I was VERY skilly, little shooty. The "Ace Pilot" was very shooty, had Minor Psychic powers and outside of a small handful of skills wasn't very skill based. He used his drone for recon. The lady playing the "Combat Medic/Engineer" used the drone for her main combat capabilities, spending her actions on using her Medic feat. I don't see how those did "the exact same thing".
Disk Elemental wrote:
Really? The big difference between bards is the same big difference between fighters, what skills you pick, what feats you pick, and are you melee or ranged. They have benefit of a different spell selection.
But I'm game, what Starfinder Class would you like me to make significantly different builds with? I'm willing to bet I can make 4 significantly different builds at level 1 for any Stardfinder Class. Assuming of course you interpret significantly different builds in the same fashion or more as your "significantly" different bards.
Disk Elemental wrote:
Compared to pathfinder that says in order to do a SINGLE combat maneuver without risking getting knocked out, requires two feats with ability prerequisites. I'll take it. At level 1 it stinks, but I'm willing to see what mid level brings, because that's when Combat Maneuvers start to fail in Pathfinder without min-maxing the build.
Iziah Gile 288 wrote:
And at 1st level, that's true. What about 5th level (Easily within reason for SFS as time goes forward)?
In Pathfinder, using a race with 2 +2s and a -2, the best spread-out/balanced stat array one can get is 16, 16, 14, 12, 12, 10. You could also do 14, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12, if that's your bag. Two 16s, a 14 and two 12s (assuming modifier increase > score), or four 14s and two 12s
In Starfinder, the best spread out array you could get is 16, 16, 15, 14, 10, 10 (Including buying out the negative). Two 16s, a 15, and a 14 (better than the same in PF) is pretty good. They could also go for 15, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12 and have a positive modifier for all stats.
In Pathfinder, the best focused/unbalanced array you can do is 20, 16, 10, 10, 10, 8 (Assuming you're aiming for modifier increases). Versus Starfinder, the best focused array one could build is 18, 18, 12, 12, 12, 8 (Once again, assuming you're aiming for modifier increases).
I don't feel it's that different in the beginning, but mid levels, everything has much more opportunity to spread.
Iziah Gile 288 wrote:
But your 6 points behind because of a choice you made (reducing CON and WIS).
And of course if you made a race choice that better fit the class it would be better. I'm going to make an Orc Wizard in Pathfinder with 20 pt buy:
STR 11 - -4 pts
That's a pretty poor Wizard by most standards, if I had an Elf Wizard it would look more like:
STR 10 - 0 pts
Much better, but of course I picked a class that had a boost to INT over a penalty to it, which is exactly what you are doing with the Shirren. Notice that I sacrificed the Orcs STR to try and achieve a better intelligence, and didn't even get the "best" score possible for the Elf. The smartest Orc possible at level 1 is still less intelligent than a moderately educated Elf. Just because your character has less <X>, it doesn't mean he's more <Y>. The system isn't that different. If, for flavor reasons, pick a poor race/class combination, it's going to show. And that's okay.
The main reason why they can't do the "reduce" a stat gain a stat method is basically because in Starfinder, everything is 1 to 1 for point buy, where in Pathfinder, everything exponentially increases in point value as you try to buy into a higher score. Reduced a 10 to a 9 in PF? Still not enough to turn that 13 into a 14... In SF, it is. That would mean that racial modifiers would be worthless, as a player can shift the points how they please. Might as well make it a 12 pt buy instead.
Another interesting tidbit, if we were to theoretically use the PF point buy system to make your Shirren vs the Ysoki version it would look like this:
Ysoki: (With 11 pt buy, same as Shirren above)
What above means, that the Ysoki is always going to win out on the Shirren as an Envoy, emphasizing the same stats. Just like the Orc and the Elf, that's just the way the game plays when a race/class combo isn't good.
Disk Elemental wrote:
I feel like I have had very different experiences than you thus far. I've played at a table with 3 Mechanics, myself included, and none of us played the same. Two had Drones, and I had an Exocortex. The 1st drone mechanic was an "Ace Pilot" and had a stealth drone, the other was a "Combat Medic/Engineer" who had a Glammered "wrench" that was actually a laser pistol using a Combat Drone, and I was a "Hactivist" that used my Exocortex to help me stay relevant in combat.
And although we all invested in DEX and INT, the "Ace Pilot" had significantly invested in DEX (16 or 17) and INT was hovering around 12, the "Combat Medic/Engineer" had a more even stat array (15 being the highest, if I recall), and I had a 14 DEX and 18 INT. The other two were Yoski and I was playing an Android.
I'm not stating your observations are incorrect, all characters are going to look similar based off class sets (especially with only 2 archetypes and 10 themes), but is that different than Pathfinder?
I wouldn't say combat maneuvers got "nerfed" yet either, though they are much more difficult to perform so far without the feat. I like that now they don't provoke. Want to try and trip someone? Go Ahead! May not work just like it may not work in Pathfinder, but at least you don't have to worry about being punished for not taking a bunch of feats.
By the looks of it, you would only be truly one point behind your ideal statline.
STR 10 - 0 pts
When you factor in Theme, you are only 1 pt short, and you are choosing to take a hit to WIS and CON, stats that are typically better than the average individual for your race. Not only that you are choosing to increase stats that are not typically associated with your race. Those choices are fine, but the idea of that you should be "rewarded" (I am using the term loosely here) for them isn't something that I personally agree with.
Essentially you are making a Shirren fit into a role that the typical Shirren wouldn't be able to fill, and that's fine... But it shouldn't be expected that since your Shirren is less wise than the typical Shirren that yours is suddenly more charming.
In any case, we should also be considering the Ability Score Increase that occurs every 5 levels... Increase four stats by +2 (if base stat is 16 or lower) or by +1 (if base stat is 17 or higher). That is a huge boon to all characters that's going to make it tough to keep a "weakness" for 20 levels. And I like it, because really, all characters would ideally develop upon their "weaknesses" as they grow.
Note: I promise I'm not "attacking" you. I'm just stating my opinion on the matter and your post is currently the most relevant. I truly like the idea of your Shirren, and although he is one pt shy of your ideal stat array, I think he would be an excellent character to play with.