Marcus Versai's page

Striker definitely seems like it's made in mind with options and weapons that the playtest just, uh, doesn't actually have a lot of? Your best option for melee appears to be playing something like a Pahtra or Vesk for access to a feat that grants you a 1d6 agile finesse claw, if you want to exclusively build with things that are in the playtest (discounting the ability to swap your ability boosts to the two free floats).

I think it's probably in a mildly rough place, but could pretty easily work fine as long as it gets more support for its playstyle. It doesn't mandate Str, and a Dex switch-hitter playstyle would be really welcome.

Oh, I get that but not maximizing str further widens the gap in damage with still putting yourself in greater danger. You have better defense if you maximized Dex but then why even offer str?

Also I disagree with lead from the front envoy being the target of all the other melee weapons. They can make use of them, yes. But they are easily building to be the most defensive envoy and they can close the distance while leading by example but that is the only benefit they get in using a melee weapon. Alternatively, they could raise a shield to lead by example and then shoot something, forcing that something to potentially use an action to come to them. It's not like they even have a reaction they can use to disrupt one they get to melee against ranged opponents.

While I understand what you are saying, this is less an after thought and an attempt to stay true to the original operative in 1st ed. But if you are taking a character in light armor into a melee with high str, at least just make it one handed melee weapons instead of 'agile only' weapons. Or at the very least offer weapons that have better than a d4 damage.

This would allow for a high risk, high reward playstyle that deals more damage on average than just shooting a rifle at the cost of being in melee range of creatures while wearing light armor and not having the dex to back up that armor. More than that being that close you are also likely target number 1.

And as a final note there is exactly no class in the game right now that cares to use 1 handed melee weapons regardless. Soldier uses big 2 handers if they use melee at all. Solarian uses their solar weapon. Operative uses 'agile' weapons. What are all the other weapons for? Flavor? I get it, someone -could- pick them up and use them. But they could also shoot a gun instead. Yes, situations arise where melee weapons are better, but right now I don't even see much point for the others if the couple classes built with those weapons in mind can't use ~half.

This might just be a playtest issue but losing martial guns to gain 'agile one handed melee weapons' seems a net loss. The only agile weapons we have are 1d4 weapons. So I can give up 1d8 or 1d10 weapons to get 1d4+4 weapons (if I take the strength boon) thar require I close the distance to my target. Not only that, I'm only wearing light armor, and I didn't full stack Dex because I took strength to get my to hit up to cap.

So now that I've moved to melee I get to aim and strike for a few extra d4... netting me about similar damage to what I could get from say 50ft away.

What's worse is that the more accuracy and damage dose reasons get the worse that striker becomes. 4d4+6 dealt from melee in light armor is always going to be worse than 4d8 or 4d10 from gun distances away woke hiding in cover. Even moreso when you can just ignore their cover.