Mutty06's page

What if this was an armor rune. Does the fact that it takes up one of a limited number of armor rune slots make it more balanced?

Would house ruling to allow a drifter to use a two handed firearm with a bayonet or reinforced stock be too strong or too weak? Initial deed allows the draw of a two handed firearm instead of two weapons. Abilities that call out a melee strike or weapon are redworded to reference the attached weapon, and anything referencing a one handed firearm is changed to twohanded.

Reloading Strike: strike with attached weapon and reload
Into the fray: draw a twohanded firearm and start your first turn with a stride
Drifters Juke: (unchanged) step strike step strike. One trike with firearm one with melee weapon
Finish the Job: missed a firearm strike then attempt a melee strike with attached weapon without MAP increase
Drifters Wake: stride and make three strikes during stride, firearm and attached weapon for strikes. (mostly unchanged)

Additional Pros
- can be used after taking damage from a source that doesn’t trigger shield block
- has no upper limit like the break threshold
- can be paired with a two handed weapon
- no shield hp pool to track

Additional Con
- uses the reaction immediately after regaining it meaning the player has no reaction for an entire round taking a layer of depth out of combat and a removes a reason for the player to pay attention (waiting for reaction triggers) when it’s not their turn.

As to your point of a shield block preventing a fatal blow I would counter that if you had used the troll regen thing at the top on your turn you’d have the hp to withstand the blow.

The biggest reason I like using the reaction is the player must be conscious meaning it can’t be used to self pick up players while dying

Modeling the fast healing progression on shield hardness is a great idea!

Item 4
Reaction: Trollblood something something something
Trigger: Your turn begins and you have not taken acid or fire damage since your last turn.
You regain 5 hit points

Item 7
You regain 6 hit points

Item 10
You regain 8 hit points

Item 13
You regain 9 hit points

Item 16
You regain 10 hit points

Item 19
You regain 12 hit points

That is 60% of hardness of each sturdy shield

The life boost focus spell is actually what got me thinking that permanent fast healing might be acceptable. A focus point is easy enough to regain making life boost available for every encounter. And the duration is is long enough to last a full combat 90% of the time. So I didn’t see permanent fast healing as a big leap.

What about a reaction the trigger being your turn begins and the effect is you gain hp equal to the item level?

More of a pseudo fast healing.

I’m trying to create a magic item that grants fast healing and I’m somewhat uncertain about balance. After looking at current spells, feats and equipment that grant fast healing I have two rough ideas.

1) permanent fast healing equal to half item level

2) once a day fast healing equal to item level

My party has access to lay on hands and a master in medicine with multiple medicine skill feats and an alchemist with healing elixirs. 10 or 20 minutes after every fight they’re back to full so I personally am unconcerned with the out of combat consequences of permanent fast healing. I’m more concerned with having it for every encounter vs one encounter a day.

So, for another idea... what about a slotless take on the Intercessor (Inquisitor)? They might or might not have cantrips. What they would have is a lot of focus spells... and a variety of ways to recover focus points. They'd be about as martial as a Magus, with the focus spells (and recharge of same) being the main thing that brought them up to par. So... they might have a few Blessing aura spells (30 foot radius, all allies gain some boon, lasts until end of fight), and some judgement spells (deals some damage immediately, plus a meaningful until-end-of-fight debuff). Class subtypes would be the things that controlled the focus point recovery - like a Martyr subclass that has a reaction that let it take a hit instead of an ally, and regained a focus point when you did, or one that kicked in when you managed a critical hit with a melee weapon. Probably have something in place to say that the recovered points could only be used on Intercessor spells, in order to limit the chances of cheese being an issue.

What if instead you had free action or reactions with specific triggers that allow you to cast focus spells for free. This would give a similar effect while safeguarding against cheeses without the extra book keeping that restricting regenerated focus points would cause.

Currently using the hybrid version in the game I’m GMing. I’ve instituted a few house rules to help integrate the system.

1. Crafting check when refining/imbuing to determine how efficiently they made use of the parts. Example they decide to use 10g of monster parts, they make a craft check vs a dc based on the current refine/imbue level. No crit fail effect, fail they add 8g to the refine/imbue progression. Success adds 10g and crit success adds 12g. So far this has work rather simply. DC is found with a quick check on the screen. And value is just + or - 20%.

2 I allow them to refine/imbue a small amount every morning as part of morning preparations. His helps streamline things a bit so they don’t have to wait for downtime.

I love this system, and two of my players are monster hunter fans, I think they really like it too. Just wish there were more imbues

So how I imagined a flow caster working would be having spells like this.

Spark (two Actions)
Range 30ft Targets 1
Saving Throw Basic Reflex
Sparks leap at target. You deal electricity damage equal to 1d6 plus your spellcasting ability modifier.
Special: You gain the Charged 1 condition
Heightened (+1) The damage increases by 1d6.

Spark Dance
Actions 2
Duration Sustained
Special: Requires (the Charged 1 condition, gain the charged 2 condition)
Range Self
Electric Sparks Dance around all creatures adjacent to you take 1d6 plus your spellcasting ability modifier electric damage.
Sustained: Sparks continue to dance around you and enemies that hit you with unarmed attacks or metal weapons take 1d6 electric damage.

Heightened (+2 the damage increases by 2d6 for the initial damage and 1d6 for the damage from the sustained effect)

Lightning Bolt (As the third level spell)
Special: Requires Charged 2, Consumes all charges once cast)

So basically full spells are balanced by the fact they can't be cast more than once every three rounds and you stick to elemental spells or ones that aren't problematic if they are cast at will out of combat.

I like this idea, the set up and payoff play style is reminiscent of swashbuckler panache. I might be inclined to simplify it to a focus cantrip that allows you to build up the condition you want before casting your spell but I think it works the way you have it written too. I think it would be important to tie this caster to a spell list, this would allow new spells added to the spell list to become available to the flow caster. I feel like a spell repertoire feels like the way to go after that. Tie the conditions to a spell trait, for instance charged 2 allows you to cast a spell from your repertoire with the electricity trait.

So I'm looking to design an encounter where the players must survive multiple waves of low level creatures with less than 10 minutes between waves. I'm thinking 4-6 waves of creatures at approx party level -2. I cant just sum the creature xp and use standard encounter budgets.

Has anyone run/designed an encounter like this? Are there any published adventures featuring anything like this?

Shield boss is listed as a weapon right. Could you use your drifter initiative ability to draw a shield boss (and in turn the shield attached to it)? Could you use the drifter reload to reload and strike with the shield boss?

I’d like more gun modifications like the scopes and stock. Large bore is cool but what about a sawed off barrel for scatter weapons. Shorter range but higher scatter radius. Or a long barrel to improve range. Or an axe and hammer version of the bayonet so we can have alternate versions of the axe musket and hammer gun. Or attach a shield to a gun to grant it the parry trait for the vanguards out there.

Also one more for the black powder bomb, I really like that idea too

And a ‘vehicle’ innovation for the inventor, or a ‘siege weapon’ innovation.

I agree we need more gadgets but at least they are a great design space for home brew! I’ve already rewatched some old inspector gadget episodes for inspiration. Helicopter hat anyone?

So if you use hit the dirt and leap to end up prone and the you get a new reaction from slingers reflexes with the next creatures turn can you then hit the dirt again? Hit the dirt has no requirement that you not be prone. A prone character leaping feels a little weird, almost like it shouldn’t work but I can’t find anything in the rules to prevent it.

I guess my question boils down to “can a prone character leap?”

Finally got a chance to build and test a thaumaturge. We fought a pair of giant tarantulas at level 6.

Thaum 6
Human/Aasimar
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 18
Wearing +1 scalemail
Rocking a +1 striking longsword in one hand and my amulet in the other.
Took the wand as my second implement but it never came up in combat.
Fighter dedication at 2 and dueling parry at 4
Rule of 3 at 6

Rest of the party is a Animal Barb, Archer Ranger and Caster Cleric.

Round one Barb and Ranger square off against spider one while cleric and I square off on spider two. I succeed at find flaws so I get my antithesis for free. I stride up to the spider and strike. +15 to hit and dealing 2d8+13 I felt pretty solid. And as the fight went on I only got more accurate because of rule of three. Amulet is a great implement, used that reaction every round. The cleric added a bit of damage, and the Ranger swapped to spider 2 in round 4 after the barb killed spider 1 in round 3. Leaving me to finish off the spider in the middle of round 4. I did about 2/3 of the damage to it, maybe 1/2. Walked away with 25 hit points when all was said and done.

Conclusion.
The fight was largely satisfying. The amulet is great and between the antithesis and empowerment I felt like I did a lot of damage. Rule of 3 was really cool too. Building the character was less satisfying. I felt really MAD and ended up starting with a 16 in cha and 16 in str. I’ve never started with less than an 18 in my attack stat, I don’t like the idea of being behind for 10 of 20 levels, thankfully 6 wasn’t one of them. I felt forced to invest my skill increases only in Recall skills, not leaving me a lot of interesting skill feat choices. I got lucky that the spiders were a nature check (one I boosted to expert). I feel like the thaum needs additional skill increases even if they are restricted to the recall skills. And maybe something to ease the MAD problem, cha instead of str on attack rolls? Less dependence on cha so that it’s feasible to start with a 14? I don’t even like the solutions I’m throwing out I just don’t know what the fix would be.

While that is the current design plan, the whole point of a playtest is to find out what the players like. I say if this is an idea you like voice it.

I really like the idea of the implements all having an active or reactive component. 'Getting' passive boosts is great 'choosing' passive boosts is boring imo. None of my players have chose the class feats that grant bonuses to saves or checks. My guess being they're not as exciting as the other options. Admittedly, thats just my table and my opinion.

Yes! I'm all about this. I love the implements wish there were more. More options and access to more of them, favorite part of the class.

Branding Iron

A branding iron that remains perpetually hot. When used to strike an enemy it brands them leaving them with a status debuff of some kind. Adept and Paragon could increase the severity or duration or maybe both.

Broken Chain

A length of chain left behind when something powerful broke free. This one I'm imagining as being similar to the liberator champions reaction.

Banner

A flag hanging from a post that when planted in the ground grants a status bonus to allies within a radius. Adept and paragon could increase the bonus, in crease the radius or maybe both.

Building my first Thaumaturge and the first thing I do is put the runescarred archetype on him for magic tattoos. Got me to thinking magic tattoos feel so on brand why aren't they part of the core class? Could even do it better that way by making the spells draw from the occult list and drop the thassilion flavor.

So my hesitation to start combat with stride and spellstrike is the lack of arcane cascade. I want that speed boost to the stride and damage boost to the spellstrike. Am I over valuing arcane cascade?

I'm building a laughing shadow magus for a one shot/short adventure. I love the concept and flavor of the laughing shadow. High mobility striker teleporting and stabing folks, sounds great to me. But when I try to put all the pieces together I feel like I'm missing something, I'm not seeing an obvious combat flow.

Issue 1 - What am I even doing in my first round of combat.
round one for most classes is clear. The barbarian rages, strides and strikes. The monk takes his stance, strides and flurries. The laughing shadow though...I"m not sure. I want to get into arcane cascade asap for the speed and damage boost. Am I starting with Ray of frost and Arcane Cascade? is that my optimal choice here? arcane casecade says the previous action must be a spell, if I end my first turn casting a spell can I start turn 2 with arcane casecade?

Issue 2 - When should I be using dimensional assault.
If I start outside melee and use it to enter melee or start in melee and use it to gain flank and follow it with a spellstrike not only is my conflux spell no longer recharging my spellstrike but my spellstrike suffers MAP. Do I spellstrike first and then dimensional assault? my conflux spell just recharged my spellstrike sure but if I can spellstrike I don't need to teleport to strike again and now my dimensional assault is suffering MAP of -10. I'd be better off to save the focus point and just use the concentrate action described in spellstrike. Being able to teleport for a focus point from 1st level was what I loved most about the laughing shadow but I'm having trouble seeing it applied practically.

I need a laughing shadow combat for dummies book is what I need.

So interesting idea came up when talking to a friend about megavolt. Inventor themed metamagic. Variable action megavolt. And a 5e warlock casting system for megavolt.

Metamagic
This idea was straight forward. 'Widen spell' on megavolt. This would also encourage the design space of spells as unstable actions and therefore 'metamagic' on those unstable actions.

Variable Action
I REALLY like this idea. Imagine using megavolt one action for a shocking grasp like effect. Two actions for a lightning bolt effect and three actions for a chain lightning effect. Or a simpler example, explosive leap could offer more distance per action used.

5e Warlock style casting
Imagine if your innovation could handle a limited number of unstable actions (equal to your int mod or something, if it were up to me I would use this limit to replace the flat roll.) before requiring some out of combat repair time (10 min or 1 hr or something). This sort of mimics the 5e warlock regaining spell slots on a short rest.

These are admittedly not fully fleshed out ideas but what do people think?

Personally I think more of the fix needs to go into the slinger than the guns. As they are guns are underpowered. This will prevent everyone and their uncle from using them. That’s good. What I think the gunslinger should do is bring martial guns up to par with martial bows. Gunslingers don’t get heavy armor proficiency like fighters, so if they’re gonna be glass cannons they need high damage output. If reload is going to restrict their shot per round they need to hit consistently and they need to hit hard. (I’m not saying anything new here I know.)

This all leads me to my point the ways need to be game changers right from level 1. The gunslinger picks a type of firearm to focus on via the way and becomes as good with it as a fighter archer. I want to see the math fixers given to the gunslinger for free at level 1. Level the playing field at 1 and I think a lot of the problem goes away. Beyond that I think the way could add as many as 5 deeds

A pistol way should upgrade one handed firearm damage die (I’ve done some number crunching and this doesn’t appear to be over powered when balanced against reload) I think the pistol way could also allow hands holding pistols to count as free hands for the reload action. (This would greatly aid in duel wielding pistols) those two boosts at level 1 make pistols viable.

I think there needs to be a two handed firearm between the sniper and pistol. Sniper damage die with a range between sniper and pistol but without the unsteady or sniper traits. I would then suggest a way to support this rifle. Increase the damage die (from d8 to d10 with d12 fatal). Maybe minor reload boost.

Finally the sniper way. Same damage die boost to two handed firearms but the one shot one kill damage (that needs a shorter name) should apply anytime you are suffering the unsteady penalty. This is a d10 damage die with a d12 fatal with bonus damage when taking an action to aim that feels pretty sniper to me.

Boosting the base damage die makes the class less reliant on crits. Which I think is what the OP is getting at. Guns will still appeal to a few builds that want to crit fish. I think some gun focused class types could also follow this pattern. A rogue racket that allows you to use the fatal die size when dealing sneak attack, or maybe change your sneak attack dice to the fatal dice on a crit? A ranger edge that increases damage die vs hunted prey? Inventor breakthrough that increases damage die?

IMO keep guns weak and put the onus on the class features to bring it up to par. Features not feats, feats should be awesome and exciting features should be your balance and math fixes.

Pepperboxes are a good idea. The question to address is "how many actions to reload an n-barrel pepperbox?"

I could see this either as a "one action per barrel, your advantage is that you didn't have to reload after the first few shots" or as a "you get an action discount if you spend your whole round reloading all the barrels."

Maybe a variable action activity that gets more efficient with more actions. 1 action 1 barrel. 2 actions 3 barrels. 3 actions 5 barrels.

What if instead of int the damage for overdrive was based off your crafting modifier? It would therefore scale due to proficiency and still use int therefore keeping the key ability score relevant. Though this would have to be tuned down I think. Might have to scrap offensive boost, it would be too much to have both.

So crossbows are simple ranged weapons with 1 shot per reload. Bows are martial weapons with multiple shots without reload. Could we not take that model to firearms? Drop flintlocks completely. Make the current martial simple and make some firearms with capacity into the martial firearms? We then have simple firearms that are similar to crossbows and martial firearms that are similar to bows. I’d probably limit it to 4 shots otherwise you’re not likely going to need to reload at all in combat.

He chose it for the free stride on turn one. He said with such short range (he’s used to 120ft) it would help him get into position on turn one, and it did both combats.

I decided to re run a few adventure path encounters my group recently played to minimize the amount of prep I had to do :p The original group was all 4th level. We had a Champion Tank, Cat Barbarian damage dealer, Persicion Crossbow Ranger damage dealer, Abjuration Wizard support and damage and Alchemist support and damage. In the re run the Ranger was swapped for a drifter gunslinger with a single dueling pistol and the barbarion was swapped for and armor inventor rocking a blunderbuss

We talked after, and some of what I’m sharing are my observations and some of it is what the players expressed to me.

The gunslinger was almost a direct down grade from the ranger. The gunslinger had a higher chance to hit and the possibility of two strikes per turn. A 2d6+2 into a fatal 3d10+2 while the ranger was doing 2d10+1d8+2. When using his 2nd level feat hunters aim (why is the gunslinger version level 8?) his attack bonus was the same as the gunslinger. He enjoyed not having to hunt prey and used risked reload almost every round. He told me that the 8th level deed rebounding strike sounded ridiculous and he wouldn’t use it even if he had it. He had no interest in duel wielding, but wanted to be like the gunslinger from the Idris Elba movie Dark Tower.

I’ll be honest, I kinda twisted the barbarians arm to play the inventor and had to nearly build the character for him but in the end he said he had a ton of fun. I won him over by giving him a shotgun (blunderbus). The resists he gained from only came up once, his innovation almost forgotten about. He loved Overdrive and his unstable actions (explode, explosive leap and megaton strike). He began both fights with overdrive and explosive leap (very similar to rage and sudden charge).

The first fight was against a “big boss” one size larger level 7 baddie. Admittedly the gunslinger was rolling poorly but in 9 strikes they got 2 hits and 1 critical. With an attack bonus 4 lower than the gunslinger the inventor still hit 2 out of 4 strikes, and with the blunderbuss dealing splash on a miss the inventor easily out damaged the gunslinger.

The second fight was against a bunch of “cultists” one leader and 4 mooks. The gunslinger cleaned up in this fight. First strike was a crit that outright killed a mook. This fight he made 6 strikes, 2 crit a and 4 hits resulting in 3 killing blows. The inventor got a megaton strike crit for 42 damage to finish the leader and the fight.

In conclusion the gunslinger felt underwhelmed, even in the second fight largely due to his hits doing the same as the inventors hits. Maybe this just comes down to the pistol vs the blunderbuss? The inventor said to me “I didn’t know inventors were damage dealers, and that unstable stuff was a blast” yes I facepalmed at the pun too.

Until or unless there are firearms with magazines of some kind, using two guns is frankly madness.

You might not be wrong, if that’s the case I’d want to see more than one ‘way’ for single gun users.

Lightdroplet wrote:

Vidmaster7 wrote:

How about a feat that lets you reload the fire arm without the free hand. hold it under your arm pit and reload. It would probably be awkward but characters are suppose to get pretty fantastical at later level.

Such a feat already exists (Two-weapon Reload for the Dual Weapon Warrior), but I really think Gunslinger should get it as a baseline. It is necessary for one of the Ways, and extremely useful for another of the Ways. I don't think having a feat that close to 2/3rd of all Gunslingers have to pick if they want their advertised fighting style to function is a good idea. 2e was supposed to move away from mandatory feats to fix problems that shouldn't be problems in the first place.

it's also feelbad to not at all use a class feature, I'd make it a free feat for 2 of the ways and give sniper a free feat of their own. Basically the same thing but less feelbad.

Remember, free feats are still feats, and feats are available for multiclassing. So my question is should you be able do do this if you’re only multiclassing? I’m not saying you shouldn’t, just posing the question. If it’s something multiclassing should have access to then I think you’re on the right path with the way granting a free level 1 feat.

That was just an example. I copied and pasted the modification from the currently available construct modifications and made a few minor changes to make it valid for both construct and armor, meant just to illustrate my thought.

Not tank the role, tank as in a heavily armored panzer or abrams. When I first heard that inventor was a play test class I envisioned a goblin inventor riding into combat atop a cannon with four legs. I thought maybe riding a construct, but It seems less practical as I read the actual class more, any advice? Is it plausible?

Anyone else envision overwatches Doomfist?

What if instead of the modifications being sorted by innovation, they were presented in a list with a innovation heading that listed the innovations they could be used for. For instance, I think it would be fun to have the climbing limbs construct modification on my armor innovation.

• Climbing Limbs (armor, construct) With appendages that can claw or create suction, you or your construct becomes a capable climber. Your innovation gains or grants a climb Speed equal to half its land Speed.

I like the idea of the nimble fingers feature someone mentioned above but I fear that removing the free hand requirement for reloading may lead to unforeseen shenanigans. Someone else mentioned “way” themed reload boosts, like pistoleros being able to reload while duel wielding. I think the pistolero would be better off with a 1st level deed that makes a hand wielding a gun count as a free hand for the reload action. Therefore we get the effect we’re looking for without unforeseen consequences. The drifter gets the same but with melee weapons? The sniper gets to combine reloading with the aim action for their unsteady weapon trait?

I also really like the end of turn free action reload. Sounds like a good 4th or 6th level feat to me, for those that want to invest in the reactions

I agree, the entire class is built around guns, you might as well just give them a feat for +2 damage to all strikes.

I feel like this should be broken down into various playstyles if it remains at all. The ranger analog represents a ranger specializing with crossbows instead of bows or melee. If this feat were to remain maybe it's separated into pistols and rifles or something.

I had an idea for a magic item but I'm unsure how to go about assigning an item level or gp value to it. I'm looking for more general advice that I could hopefully use for future creations. That said the item I'm currently trying to assign a value to is a magic quiver. It would reduce the reload value of wielded weapons to a minimum of 1. Essentially allowing my player with a crossbow ace ranger to use a heavy crossbow.

I’ve been fond of the idea of a character with a big crossbow ever since the bolt ace gunslinger archetype. So when I read the crossbow ace feat for the ranger I got pretty excited. After crunching the numbers I became instantly less excited. This feat seemed to imply to me that you can focus on crossbows and be at least adequate, but my math showed he did less than half of a archer fighters dpr. Am I missing something here? Three actions used on reload then hunters aim using the precision hunters edge.

My question is about the type restrictions on the polymorph spell. For example 1st level is restricted to animal and humanoid. But neither of these are listed under type and subtype in Appendix 3. So does this mean if I base my form off a specific creature that it needs to be an animal or humanoid? Can I base the form off an aberration and it just doesn't grant the creature type? Why grant creature types that don't grant bonuses as listed in the Appendix?

I’ve not played a barbarian in the play test myself, though I have read up on them as Ill be making one after my paladin. so take this with a grain of salt.

I’m a fan of rage #2. Go big or go home, that how I think of barbarians. Will you get 2 round rages? Yes, but not often. But sometimes you’ll get 4 plus rounds. Will it cut out at an inoportune moment, yes, That’s the risk that comes with a high risk high reward class. That said basic rage probably needs a buff.

I like the idea of some class feats that interact with rage length. Something that decreases the scaling of the flat check from 5 to 4 but makes it 2 rounds of fatigue or adds an additional condition (slowed maybe). Maybe something that synergizes well with the rage powers that add climb, swim, and fly speed. Increase the hampered penalty but allow the travel speed to be maintained one round after rage (allowing it to last through the fatigue)

Someone compared barbarian rage to starfinders solarion atunment. That might be a completely different path to take but it sounds awesome. On your third round of rage you can use a big finisher move but that is followed by the round of fatigue.

Does anyone agree that small arms should be viable for more than just Operatives?

Currently Operatives make small arms viable through skills. So the other options would be magic and tech. The simplest way I see is to make a technomancer magic hack and a mechanics mechanic trick.

For balance sake it would be important that they don’t stack with trick shot or with each other. Now trick shot is a full class feature and does competitive damage on its own. The hack and trick, are not full class feature, just a part of one, so my thought is that they stack with other tricks and hacks to produce that same competitive damage.

So how much should this increase the damage? Im thinking these tricks and hacks should make small arms do damage equal to an equivalent long arm. This would be less than the operatives trick shot but both classes have other means of bringing their damage up from there.

How do you prevent it from being stacked with trick shot. Either make it cost a move or standard action or the small arm becomes unwieldy. If the trick and hack called out a non-unwieldy small arm they would not stack with each other. Mechanics would do best using the unwieldy route as the exocortex would be hard up for action economy with tracking and overcharging. The technomancer has the move action to empower and standard to use spell shot, seeking shot or phasing shot so they might also do better with the unwieldy route.

Thoughts? Opinions?

Upon doing more digging, I think I've found an anwser in the begining of the feats chapter of the CRB. In the CRB pg 152 where it refers to prerequisites it says "a character can't use a feat if she loses a prerequisite, but she doesn't lose the feat itself." To me that means Incompetence if used to strip a character of small arms, would also make the character no longer have the prerequisite for long arms, but as they still have the long arms feat they would still have all the prerequisites for heavy weapons. It would take away specialization (small arms) but not specialization (long arms) or versatile specialization.

The first level technomancer spell Incompetence (Armory pg 157) makes the target lose proficiency with a class of weapon on a failed will save, If I were to target say "small arms" would they then lose longarm proficiency since small arm proficiency is a prerequisite? would they then also lose heavy weapon proficiency, weapon specialization, weapon focus etc.

Are you playing with house rules? Int 19 should be impossible out the gate.

I worked that one out with my GM. He told us to try and stick to 18 or under but due to my rolls and racial bonus I was either going to have a 19 or a 17 and he allowed the 19 as it was still only a +4 mod.

Your first magic hack if your intent is battlefield control should be Fabricate Tech, which lets you melee-range summon physical objects, such as walls made of glass, paper, or dry ice.

I just assumed Fabricate Tech was limited to the "technological items" section of the book. It does mention a item level limit though, how would you apply an item level to a glass wall for instance. I really like the idea of being able to conjure simple gear that's not in the book like saws or drills and stuff.

Your character looks fun, but I don't know what you mean by support when none of your spells support other players. You lean toward "control".

You're right, Controller would better describe what I want to do. Though I'm open to buffing and debuffing, I really just want to contribute to combat without taking or dealing damage.

Look at your stsrship role. If you'll be the Engineer, a very important role, then you don't need Piloting, which only the Pilot & 3/4 BAB Gunners need. Of course, with your Dex, you'd be a great gunner or pilot too, so it's a matter of what your allies will be doing.

Think about taking Medicine. It's quite good with high Int which gets added to the healing, especially in a party with no Mystic. I'd prioritize this over Stealth (or being a backup pilot).
Remember, if you're boosting Int at 5th, you'll get another skill at max ranks to pick up whatever you switched out. Likely even earlier with a stat boost item.

I will be the ships primary pilot, though I could give up stealth (this is hard for me having played so many rangers and the like in pathfinder). We have two players already with Medicine which is why I passed on it, I'll have to read it again I didn't realize my int added to the amount healed.

A friend of mine is starting a new starfinder campaign and I'm looking to play a support character. None of out pathfinder games have gone past level 6 so I'm looking for low level advice. The party is composed of a Melee Blitz Soldier, A ghost operative using pistols (also playing the party face) and a Ranged Exocortex Mechanic. I've always played stealthy melee types in pathfinder and I'm trying to branch out. I've read a lot about how great battlefield control is and I'd like to try that but I don't really understand how a grease spell can swing the tide of battle. I guess what I'm really looking for is a real break down on What battlefield control really means and how to pull it off well. Some examples maybe. I'm looking at playing a Ysoki Technomancer focused on battlefield control.

Ysoki Technomancer 1
Ace Pilot
(we roll our stats.)
Str 11
Dex 18
Con 11
Int 19
Wis 18
Cha 10

Skills: Computers, Engineering, Life Science, Mysticism, Perception, Physical Science, Piloting, Stealth.

Feats: Long Arm Proficiency

Spells:
0 - Detect Magic, Psychokinetic Hand
1 - Holographic Image, Grease

I'm really unsure of my spell, feat, and magic hack choices. Everyone keeps staying "just play whats fun" yea well being useless is "not fun"