Loa's page

I'm using Mac OS 10.13.5 and Acrobat Reader DC 18.011.20058.

It's as if my PDF apps had the "calculate" option turned off. But I can't find such an option...

Well, I downloaded the file, opened it from the downloads folder using Preview (then Acrobat reader when Preview didn't work), and changing the strength did nothing to the modifier.

Am I doing something wrong?

Kaid: when you say that the file Gilfalas linked works on your mac, are you talking about the modifiers automatically updating?

When I tried it, both on Preview and on Acrobat Reader, it doesn't. I enter 18 for strength and the malus remains at -5...

I'll take a look at the other files later today.

Ok. The basic editing and saving/importing works, but all the "calculate and populate" buttons don't work.

Both on Safari and Chrome.

Hello,

I've found a number of fillable character sheets in these forums and elsewhere, but none of them work on Macs (using preview or acrobat reader).

Is there anyone that have made some that are compatible?

Thanks.

I don't understand why so many people say that PF casters break the game. I've DM'd a PF game for 8 years, with characters now up to 16th level. I've also played a few times with characters higher than that. The pure casters, either the players or my own NPCs, certainly don't break the game. Heck: I've even adapted a warmage to the PF system for a player. Nothing broke!

When I read that casters are breaking the game, I hear that players can't spec their non-casters characters properly or that the DM can't figure out a way to deal with high level casters.

And it's certainly not a reason why SF couldn't have pure casters. Make them all technology based for all I care. But a pure caster class is certainly possible without breaking anything.

Now, if you don't want pure casters in the SF setting, that's all fine. But to say that they don't fit there or that they will break the game is just nonsense.

There's a group of forum posters that subscribe to the opinion that the 6 spell level class design is nearly perfect

There's a difference between class design and actual gameplay. Give Mystics the same number of spells that a sorcerer has in PF, without changing anything else, and you'll have something a lot more interesting without breaking any other system.

Look, if the soldier and operative are the fighter and rogue basically unchanged, why would simply importing he number of spells per day of the sorcerer break anything in SF? The sorcerer, especially if we only look at the spell levels 1-6 (maybe 7 to make the levels comparison right), is not overpowered in PF.

My suggestion, that I will try with my GM, is to scale down the Mystic's BAB to a 1/2, and add the spell per day from the sorcerer. Hopefully he'll agree, if only as a test!

I know it's a matter of opinion, but this is what discussion is for. I get the technomancer class as a hybrid 3/4 BAB with some gimped (which means handicapped) magic compared to a full spell caster class. I'd take the mystic back to 1/2 BAB and get the sorcerer spells/day in a second! What mystic player wouldn't?

But I believe, like pithica42 and probably a lot of others, that a full caster class would have been very viable in SF even with guns and armor arcane failure. I could live with a sorcerer with light armor and a 10%-20% spell miss rate, or pay for the still spell metamagic which does allow for armor even if it costs a higher spell slot (specifically state at page 83 of PF core rulebook).

Heck, even at 20% miss chance, the sorcerer would end up having the same number of successful spells as the mystic!

So yes it's a matter of choice and design, but a sorcerer would be fully viable in SF. Maybe I'll GM a game with such a change and see how it does one day.

Metaphysician: Mindlink and healing touch are not necessarily things I would have chosen (and they don't fit well with some connections), and the connections are once again things you can't modify. You choose an entire package deal and, by reading other discussions here, most of them are considered "Meh" at best. Technomancers have it better (a bit more freedom), but not all that much.

In any case, by level 3, Sorcerers have 2 bloodline powers (same as connection powers), eschew materials and a bloodline spell. This is very similar to the mystic, but they know 2 more spells per day! Two!

Those two extra spells allow you, on average, to deal with 2 combats per day, not just one. Hell of a difference.

And yes, I'm one of those strange people that like his spellcasters to mainly cast spells.

Egil, I have no idea what, or to whom, you're talking about.

Hello,

I've been playing a mystic (now level 3) and it's clear that this class (as well as the technomancer) has been willfully gimped. The core element of the class has been nerfed compared the sorcerer (the class which handles spells the same way). Mystics have a lot less spells per day and the fact that we know 1 more spells per level doesn't come close to making up the loss. We end up out of spells after a single combat.

Add to this that there are about only 2% of the feats that affect magic, the core part of this class.

I haven't yet reached the higher levels so I can't comment on the 6 vs 9 spell levels of magic. But I fear it will be another power loss.

I get that magic can be less powerful in Starfinder than in Pathfinder. But then again, if you're going to make playable classes, it would be fun to have them as closely matched as possible. The other classes that closely match the pathfinder classes don't feel gimped at all when compared.

Why decide to do magic classes and willfully gimp them?

Loa

P.S. I know the spaceship roles are a new element compared to pathfinder, but spellcasters have no inherent advantages when it comes to this, so it doesn't matter in this comparison.