Pantshandshake's page

1,319 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,319 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

It should be noted that an encounter where CR equals the APL is designated as 'Average' in difficulty for Starfinder.

I presume that calculation assumes the entire party is not optimized for combat, which, let's face it, is probably not the case.

All things considered, creating a harder encounter is really going to be personalized based on party composition, player ability, etc.


You know, I always assumed the gunner didn't have to choose to be manning the point defense weapons, and they just received a free shot against tracking weapons.

After this post, though, I'm of the opinion that the PD weapon needs a gunner manning them.

Which makes them an even less attractive choice than they were when I thought the shot was free!


Seems pretty reasonable to me.


Vo wrote:

From a practical sense, no it wouldn't work. The pistol would be horrible to fire, almost impossible to aim.

From a rules point of view, i'd point out that the uniclamp "holds" an item of up to 1 bulk. That's the same as a holster "holding" a sidearm, it's not being wielded.

The uniclamp's rules of operation are that it runs whatever controls necessary to use the clamped device to the trigger mechanism of the weapon its clamped to, making it as if you're wielding the clamped device.

Seems like in a technical sense it would work, you'll just have to ask your GM if a pistol is an acceptable item to clamp to a rifle.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seems pretty simple.

Are you gaining extra reach to your attacks? Then you're using the feat, and you gain the bonuses and penalties described in the feat.

Are you not gaining extra reach? Then you're not using the feat, and you gain neither the bonuses nor the penalties described in this feat.


Now I'm not even sure what your point is.


Xenocrat wrote:


Read the Expanse novels, the few space battles are quite exciting! It's the one area I think is definitely better than the tv show.

No kidding? I've rather enjoyed the space battles in the show so far.


It might make more sense once we have a few more source books with character creation options, but I'd love a Starfinder version of the Pathbuilder character creation app.

Hell, I'd settle for something like the Masterwork Tools app for Starfinder.


Except rules for a broken leg (well, a leg that suffered from the Wound Chart, anyway) actually exist.

The argument would more accurately be described if Paizo had included an item that is described as mending the broken bone and restoring the limb to full functionality, but we’re all arguing that something that repairs a bone but doesn’t take the treatment of blood clots or the toxins released by crushed muscle tissue into consideration can’t possibly work.

I mean, you’re adding rules into a system that the publishers didn’t add (for whatever reason) and then getting mad that items in the game don’t work right when you apply your special version of the game’s rules to them.


But the rules for spaceships are basically "Thrusters on, you're moving" and "Thrusters off, you're stationary."

So, ignoring How Things Really Work, and instead using The Rules of The Universe That Our Characters Live In, it becomes pretty obvious how the cloaking device works. We can toss all that momentum, 3d movement, relative movement, the impossibility of being stationary in space, and the impossibility of being stationary at all given that all of creation is actually moving all the time out the airlock. We don't need those rules here, because they're not part of the system.

Which isn't to say the cloaking device is any good. A device that keeps your ship hidden, but only if it happens to be parked, is incredibly niche and probably not great for most players. So I question the existence of the item, but as far as I'm concerned "It works when the thrusters are off" is as detailed as it needs to be, given the relative amount of detail the rules contain for the motion of the stars.


There are abilities and such that make a target flat footed only vs that specific ability. This spell isn't worded that way, so I would presume if you decide to be flat footed you're flat footed until your turn comes up again. Although, bleeding doesn't usually stack, so maybe the intent is that you can be hit with this multiple times per round. Hard to say.

Regarding the bleed damage, I think bleed is one of the effects that requires whatever deals the bleed to actually damage you, like an injury poison or what have you. I'm not 100% on that being that actual rule for bleed.

I'd bring this up with your GM before the session really kicks off, see if they have an opinion about how it will work at their table.


Doesn't bleed fall into the category of afflictions that don't happen if the triggering even doesn't hurt the character?


Garretmander wrote:

It sounds like the character in the spell is making a choice to be flat footed or take damage... but that's not at all how the spell was written.

So, for now, I agree with pantshandshake.

Yeah, it really seems like what the spell 'wants' to do versus how it was written are kind of at odds. I think it would be neat if it worked the way its trying so hard to, but as it stands, there's just no way to boil down character actions to get there.

I'd also like to mention, 1d8 is super low damage. Pretty much anyone who took Enhanced Resistance is immune to this spell, aside from the halved movement. Hell, anyone who can reliably have at least DR 4/ is pretty safe.


I'm having a hard time parsing this. The spell contradicts itself a little and seems like it wants to use rules that are way more granular than Starfinder has. In a nutshell, its probably somewhat poorly written. I hit the FAQ button, everyone else should too.

So, here's what I think:
1: No.
2: No.
3: No.
4: Yes.
5: No.

For 1 through 3 (spoilered for length):

Spoiler:
Here's my problem with how granular this spell looks like it wants to be. There's a series of things a character can do with an action, but at the end of the day, a move action is a move action, regardless of what you did with it. Instead of telling us "If your character moves defensively" (which isn't a thing you can 'do,' it's just the opposite of being flat footed) this spell should be defining what actions will trigger the damage and save. Since it doesn't, I'd default to actual movement and choosing to not be flat footed while being attacked. TLDR; If the spell was meant to do 1d8 damage and proc a reflex save vs bleeding if you make an attack within the area of the spell, it would say that. It doesn't say it, so it doesn't do it.

For 4: Since we know an opponent moving a character provokes attacks of opportunity against the character, I'd say yes, falling prone would count as movement and trigger this spell, regardless of why the fall happened.

For 5: Spells in Starfinder don't have a somatic tag, casting should result in even less movement than an attack action, and I don't think an attack action triggers this spell, so I definitely don't think casting would trigger this.


Seems like yes.

Spell gems only require that the spell is on your class list, and the FAQ about the DC just says:

The save DC of a spell from a spell ampoule or cast from a spell gem equals 10 + spell level + the modifier of the user's key ability score.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think he's saying that you can make the entropic strikes from whatever part of your body you want, but if you're using arm extensions to gain 5 feet of extra reach to the attack, you're taking the penalty. If you're not gaining the extra reach, then you don't take the penalty.

Which I agree with.


A permissive GM might allow this, but I don't think it would be rules legal, no.


I'm not sure why the type of bonus would particularly matter?

Also, this excerpt from the sensors entry:
All sensors have a skill modifier that applies to any skill used in conjunction with them.

'Any skill' seems pretty broad.


Yeah man! Much like everything else floated for this, that's 100% accurate!

In fact, I bet Shobhads don't cover their faces because they're the rebellious teen!

They aren't a warrior culture at all, just really emo and confused.


Or maybe the ancient Kasatha were visited by aliens who either wore masks, looked they wore masks, or had something 'mask-like' about their physiology, and Kasathas wore masks ever since. Kind of like some ancient Earth cultures doing cranial binding to lengthen their skulls to look like (sharp inhale) Ancient Astronauts.

Possibly ancient stone age Kasatha had a bad run in with some Xenomorphs, their culture was all but destroyed, but some lucky survivors had been wearing masks and so were not impregnated. However, do to time and destruction only the 'kasatha wear masks' part survived into the present.

It seems semi likely that the entire kasathan race is basically an alien version of a Hat Dude. You know Hat Dudes, wearing a hat inside, while watching TV, or what have you.

Oh, or maybe Kasatha didn't figure out dental hygiene for a long time, and wearing masks survived to this day because historically, they all had disgusting mouths.

I've got it! Kasatha are descended from a long line of people with crippling eating disorders, the mask helps to make ingesting food a conscious effort.


I'm going with just one at a time, with loading a new injectable after every attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A lone imperial staffer runs into the throne room, breathless from exertion.

“Sire!” he cries. “Two urgent missives await your attention! They come from the science outpost monitoring the stellar degradation beyond Point Lambda! They’re important enough that the couriers spent 5d6 days in the black to get them here!”

*opens sealed courier pouch to reveal two pieces of very expensive space vellum, upon which the most delicate calligraphy has been imprinted*

“This one says it’s from a certain prince on Akiton, who humbly begs that you loan him 1,000 credits, with which he’ll free his family’s ancient treasure from the vaults and repay you a hundredfold. This second one appears to be from the scientist in charge of the mission, and simply says ‘Do you like me?’ I presume he wants you to circle this ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and return it.”


Its as likely as the entire Kasathan race suffering from some kind of PTSD and the masks are like a weighted blanked or a thunder coat for them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

I don't see why they wouldn't. Scrying says it functions as Scan, except you use Mysticism instead of Computers.

Anything that modifies Scan should modify Scrying by extension.

I agree with this. It makes sense.

But.

Xenocrat is right often enough that I'd like to hear his reasoning for the opposing viewpoint.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I should point out:
Scrying (Engineering Phase)
You employ a substantial form of divination, such as dealing from a digital harrow deck, reading the future by interpreting the splatter of leaking coolant on your ship, or visually scanning the readouts of your starship’s myriad screens to pull deeper and predictive meaning from the lights and sounds around you. This functions as the scan science officer action, but you attempt a Mysticism check instead of a Computers check. For information about the effects of a successful scan action, see page 325 of the Core Rulebook.

There's no magic module, no crystal ball station (though that would be awesome.) Does the ship have sensors? Yes? How about the PC, does it have ranks in mysticism? Also yes? Then congrats, PC, you're the magic officer! Go read some patterns in the baked-in crap in the microwave and tell us how we're gonna die.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, you'd probably end up seeing a ton of Skittermander Soldiers using operative weapons in their 6 biologic and 2 cyber hands, with a cranked dex to maximize hit chance while wearing power armor for a pretty good strength bonus to damage.

Yes, they'll miss a bunch. But missing a third or even half of your 8 attacks a round still makes you better than anything currently available, and the chance of landing a half dozen attacks, or god forbid, several critical hits per turn would just be like candy to some people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:

They nerfed multi-armed characters...

There's no feat that allow one attack per limb, even if they could have slapped cumulative -2 to checks for each hand you add to use during a full attack.

Instead, they baked that very penalty into full attacks for everyone, with a correspondingly higher penalty for classes that can attack more than twice.


2 cybernetic arms is a level 14 item, which costs 70,150 credits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In general, if a race isn't listed as having more than 2 hands that can wield or manipulate items, you probably won't be able to use something that requires more than 2 hands.

For example, in the Trox entry:
Vestigial Arms
A trox’s four vestigial arms can be used to hold, draw, or put away items of negligible bulk, but not to make attacks, wield weapons, or use items.

Since you can't use items with those extra limbs, it still wouldn't qualify for a feat requiring more than two hands.


I mean, you have to ignore some words regardless of how you think this works.

A mnemonic editor retrains the previous 2 levels, so this ability differs from working ‘as though it had used a mnemonic editor’ right there. I understand that the reference to the editor is almost certainly referring to the retraining of a level, but the way they phrased this is like saying when your character puts on pants, it’s as though the pants were armor, meaning that both things cover your character from the waist down. The two things share a similarity, but are not analogous.

The other words, “it can retrain all the choices of one previous character level” are also questionable. If they meant “It can retrain the previous level,” then why say “one previous level?” “One previous level” means any level before right now.

To be clear, I agree with Nefreet as well, I’m just pointing out that not everyone will. Someone’s going to read this and think the copaxi ability redoes 2 levels, or allows any level previous to the current one to be retrained.


The language they used for the ability is a bit murky.

My opinion is that the Copaxi's ability allows it to retrain the previous level when the character levels up. I believe this is the intent of the ability.

However, the words they used literally mean the Copaxi can retrain any one previous level, regardless of which level that it.


I'ma call her Marni!

You know, when I talk about her with my friends.


Ok, so I had several paragraphs about why I think the whole adding expenses to try and simulate an economy is kind of an unworkable thing, which is WAY too long. So here’s my boiled down opinions, spoilered for length:

Spoiler:

You can either add in expenses that are too low for characters over level 3 or 4 to really care about. 50 credits for a level 1 character is pretty meaningful. It’s space change you find on the floor of your car for a level 5 character. Personally I wouldn’t do it, because I don’t want the players and GM keeping track of stuff for no reason other than to do it. Busy work is the worst kind of work.

Or

You can add in expenses that are actually meaningful amounts, which will slow down your player’s ability to upgrade weapons/armor or buy neat toys, like robot legs or big mechanical bat ears. You know, the stuff that makes this game really cool. Now, at that point, you can either add in some way to make up for the lost money, such as reduced purchase prices, increased selling prices, more loot, more credit rewards, etc. Or you can lower the difficulty of combats to account for your players doing 3d8 less damage than they should while also having 5 less AC than they should. Or you can do neither, and laugh when the team of Super Budget Heroes gets hit on an attack roll of 3, and needs 15 hits to kill an enemy instead of 9. This option might actually be better, since you’re probably adding some fun to the game (for someone) even if the end result is the same as the vanilla game.

Don’t get me wrong, I think it would be really neat to have a more functional economy in this game. I just don’t see a way to do it without rebuilding it from scratch.

So that's my rant. I hope you'll take it as it's intended, as an explanation of why the system doesn't like it when you get too real-worldy, and not a long exposition as to why your ideas are bad and you should feel bad.

PS: If anyone does start fiddling with money, expenses, earnings, and loots, please post about it. Let us know how it works, what doesn't work, what you had to tweak after putting into the game, etc. I'd love for my theories to be proven wrong.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, typically when something threatens a square, that's a square it can make an AoO into.


Well, I see 2 ways to go about this.

The first one is that at some point in the destroy the old weapon and create the new weapon process, you’d want a mysticism check to transfer the fusion. Perhaps lumping that credit cost in with the creation the new weapon?

The second way, is that since the new weapon has to exist before you can transfer a fusion to it, and the old weapon has to be transmuted into 10% of its value before you can make a new weapon, that unless you want to swap fusions across multiple weapons, you lose the fusion on the old weapon.

The second way is more technically accurate, and is how I would expect a “Rules!Rules!Rules!” GM to run this.


Master Han Del of the Web wrote:
...really dude? Here too?

Also, it's mighty early, but this legit made spray a little coffee at my monitors. Thanks for the morning laugh!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ixal wrote:
Master Han Del of the Web wrote:
...really dude? Here too?
The OP has stated that he wants to simulate an economy, so its better to tell him now that it won't work because the economy in Starfinder is completely idiotic and geared towards a loot crawler instead of pretending that it works because you are too much of a fanboy to acknowledge obvious problems.

I mean, he's not totally wrong. Starfinder isn't built to have a realistic functioning economy.

Fortunately, not everyone needs to or wants to care if all the NPCs in the universe can afford to eat. I think most people will just say "And the npcs didn't die of starvation, because the GM said so." Then, now that we can all breathe more easily knowing the millions of NPCs that we'll never meet are fine, we can get back to playing the game.

Beyond that? Money is maddeningly tight for players, given the things they need to buy and the sweet tech-toys they want to buy. Adding in more costs, such as spaceship upkeep, docking fees, refueling, etc, is only going to make this worse. Personally, after playing a fair amount of Starfinder, I wouldn't play in a game with extra money sinks, unless the players' income was also increased, at which point I'd say "Why are the players and the GM doing all this extra bookkeeping and math to end up in the same position as we were before the money sinks?"

That said, I wouldn't want to be in the test run, but I'd absolutely try a Starfinder where someone re-worked the entire economy from the ground up to see how it went.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can already move fusions around, so if you choose to not do this, or can't do this, then you lose the fusion.


HappyMan187 wrote:
Wingblaze wrote:
I've never seen anything in the rules suggesting that's possible. Do you have a page reference or something that suggests that's allowed?

Skill Unit (Ex) 1st Level

"....Additionally, whenever you are directly controlling your drone, it can use any of your skill ranks if you wish, assuming it has the appropriate tools to do so (a drone without manipulator arms cannot use Engineering to disable a device, for example)."

The player referenced this ability, which raised the question if the mechanic's piloting skill applies to attack rolls when he's in direct control of the drone.

When the pilot of a vehicle attacks with a vehicle weapon controlled through the steering, what are the mechanics for that?

That's what we were trying to figure out thinking that those mechanics would apply. Again, me and my players are brand new to the game and trying to figure these things out.

You might have gotten this a little mixed up with starship combat, where firing a weapon from a starship is a gunnery check, not an attack roll. However, that's only in starships, not all vehicles.


Its not even niche.

You could already purchase a higher level version of whatever weapon you're using while selling the old one for 10%.

You could already craft a higher level version of whatever weapon you're using, while using the grinder or a homebrewed solution to get 10% of the worth of the item back.

You could already buy or craft a different kind of higher level weapon, while selling or converting your old one.

You're doing the same thing, regardless of whether this upgrading rule exists or not.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

PC’s don’t get to win every time. Everyone died? Well, roll up some new characters and we restart somewhere, or play a different AP.

Maybe, without telling the players, start a one-shot homebrew adventure that leads to the rescue of the original characters. Maybe.


"To upgrade your old weapon to a better version, you simply go to the store and buy a new weapon!"

Ye Gods, I never would have figured this out. Thanks, Starfinder, for having this important rule in print.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, shields are an option, but as I said, I'm surprised Operatives don't have a NATIVE way to make their attacks be considered magic.

Though now that I reiterate that point, aside from soldiers and vanguards, I'm not sure if any other class can do it. So maybe it shouldn't surprise me.


thecursor wrote:

*Ahem* If I may humbly suggest: "As the oxygen and other precious gasses used in our station's life support system is the property of the Azlanti government, we now request all visitors purchase a one-time oxygen license to ensure our station's resources are being used properly. This license is subject to suspension or revision in the event the licensee is found to hold or espouse beliefs or motivations found to be seditious."

Yes, an off-world "Breathing License"

But some races don't breathe gaseous atmospheres, or breathe at all! You're really missing out on some income there.

I submit that you'll need to fill out this Respirational Material tax form if the substance you 'breathe' is not a gaseous medium.

I'm not sure how to monetize the existence of life that doesn't breathe yet, though.


I'm firmly in the camp that you'd need a different crystal for each manifestation.

My reasoning is that if you have two manifestations, then you have two motes, and the crystal goes directly into the mote.

Not to mention fusions are going to be incompatible, sometimes, between the the weapon, the shield, and the flare.


I'm really surprised Operatives don't have a native way to do that in their list of exploits somewhere.

I guess Pistol Whip, with a fusion-ed up pistol, is about it without feats or dips, eh?


Sounds like some smooth-cheeked jealousy there, Draco.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, apparently in addition to piracy and such, Besmara is the patron deity of space-dwelling leviathans.

So I wouldn't expect a space whelp egg to hatch into like... a nice kitty for your lap. More likely it hatches into a small version of something that's going to get very big.


And a new list of weird WiFi names was born!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
So who DOES do the routine traffic stops and stuff in Starfinder? Do they have a name?Who IS the local law enforcement that my more radical PCs can say are all B-words?

Just tell them to fly the A.C.A.B. flag high, if someone gets mad about it, call them a B word.

1 to 50 of 1,319 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>