Red Metal's page

Fix: Reduce mine deployment at range to 1 action instead of 2. This smooths out early levels without overpowering later gameplay, since later levels already bypass this cost with Double Deployment.

The errata already changed deploying at range to 1 action (2 actions is for deploying a mine in an already occupied space)

Advanced & Elite Drone Prerequisites: Change the prerequisite of Advanced Drone (feat 14) to Refined Chassis. Change the prerequisite of Elite Drone (feat 18) to Advanced Drone.

We still don't know what Advanced Drone actually does, and Superior Customization still has Superior Drone as a prerequisite.

I'm guessing you meant 1 action heal, the 2 action heal already has a 30 range so using it in a grenade would likely shorten the area of effect. Although I do like the idea of a healing smoke grenade, so you can provide cover for the person you are healing at the same time.

Except that a 2 action heal does more healing and only affects one target, so using it with Grenade Spell would let you deal the full healing in an AoE.

Quote:

You Reload a ranged weapon using the consumed item and Overclock Gear.

Problem number two and three. You aren’t required to be wielding a ranged weapon, just a weapon. So can you reload a non-wielded ranged weapon? If you need to be wielding the ranged weapon that is being loaded (I presume this is the case, because this whole thing doesn't make sense otherwise), then the requirement should reflect that.

This sentence lists three things, of which you can only wield two: the ranged weapon, the consumed item (a spell gem you just used, or the device a spell chip is/was installed in) and the Overclock Gear. “Overclock Gear” is a bit confusing, because that’s an action, not equipment. Is it referring to the gear you have Overclocked, or the Overclock Boost that is affecting your gear? I assume the latter (for multiple reasons, not least of which is that you don't have a third hand to wield things in), but again, it’s unclear. Also, assuming that it is referring to the overclock boost, does that eat your overclock boost, or do you just need to have an overclocked item to use this? That presents problems for Viper because you would then need a third hand to have a second gem/chip because if you just used your overclocked gem it is gone and presumably no longer overclocked.

I'm pretty sure this means that you reload, and then use the Overclock Gear action. And Viper wouldn't need a third hand; you can use Overclock Gear on worn items, and items positioned in a way to be drawn with an Interact action are considered to be worn items.

Worn items are tucked into pockets, belt pouches, bandoliers, weapon sheaths, and so forth, and they can be retrieved and returned relatively quickly.

The rewards are on page 34, in the treasure section.
The part about Julzakama bailing the party out is on page 32, in the second paragraph of "Planning the Heist".

Mystic Armor is already on the divine list, which is likely why it got replaced in Divine Mysteries.

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Evan Tarlton wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

Does she appear in the supplemental table? Because if yes then its just matter of space, if no, then that raises eyebrow.

Nope, no sign of her...I suspect it might be because of what she's the goddess OF, and the risk of portraying that as glamorous or romantic...

Naderi is in the table... right after Milani.

Neither Milani nor Naderi are in the supplemental table.

This is the PF2 rules forum, you want the PF1 rules forum here

As for your question, it's completely valid to take a five foot step in the middle of a full attack https://www.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=146

The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.

The first sentence is essentially describing the two options that Quick Alchemy lets you use: Create Consumable and Quick Vial.

Create Consumable says

You expend one of your versatile vials to create a single alchemical consumable item of your level or lower that's in your formula book. You don't have to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical raw materials or need to attempt a Crafting check. This item has the infused trait, but it remains potent only until the start of your next turn. (As normal, you need only one formula for an item to create any level of that item.)

Note that it explicitly says that it expends one of your versatile vials

Meanwhile, Quick Vial says

You create a versatile vial that can be used only as a bomb or for the versatile vial option from your research field (it can't be used to create a consumable, for example). This item has the infused trait, but it remains potent only until the end of your current turn.

It says you create a versatile vial, and unlike Create Consumable, makes no mention of expending a versatile vial to create it.

Yes https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2288

When you use a Strike action or make a spell attack, you attempt a check called an attack roll. Attack rolls take a variety of forms and are often highly variable based on the weapon you are using for the attack, but there are three main types: melee attack rolls, ranged attack rolls, and spell attack rolls.

If it says "rounds" it counts down at the start of the turn of the creature that created the effect. If it says "turns" it counts down at the end of the turn of the creature it's inflicted on.

Redblade8 wrote:

I had a similar question about the Avenger, given that if you're deity's FW isn't finesse, you would probably not be Dex-based, no?

AFAIK Exemplars don't use their deity's weapon, they use whatever weapon they want since their "deity" isn't alive anymore.

Avenger is the rogue class archetype mentioned in this blog post, nothing to do with Exemplars.

So i understand better, Vindicators are Holy and Inquisitors are Unholy? So Vindicators have to choose a deity with Santification.

Vindicators won't require sanctification, otherwise Imrijka there would be an illegal option as a vindicator of Pharasma.

Level 7, from the Operative's Edge class feature.

AFAIK there hasn't been any confirmation about the nature of the book that Mechanic and Technomancer are in. People are just speculating based on the fact that the two tech classes are being relegated to a second book instead of being in Player Core.

Hiruma Kai wrote:

Driftbourne wrote:

If you can't run all the way in one round drop prone to get +4 to your AC against ranged attacks. Crawl to stay prone.

Unfortunately, taking 2 actions, one to drop prone and one to take cover only gets you a net +2 bonus to AC (possibly less if you're already getting circumstance bonuses to AC). Prone makes you off-guard, and thus includes a -2 circumstance penalty to AC, and Take Cover while prone provides a +4 circumstance bonus to AC, for a net of only +2 versus ranged ttacks, and -2 versus melee.

That's a lot of actions, in SF1e dropping prone was a swift action and gave you the full benefit and the attack penalty was only to melee attacks. Is there a third action to get comfortable?

If you crawl while you are prone do you have to take another action to hunker down again?

The effects of Take Cover last until you move from your space or make an attack, so if you're crawling along the ground you do have to spend an action to Take Cover every turn. And crawling is 5 feet per action, so doing this you're moving 10 feet a round unless you take the Nimble Crawl acrobatics feat.

GameDesignerDM wrote:

Not really sure what your point is, nor trying to be slick - I've exclusively posted using this alias since like, over 8 years ago (and I only made 11 posts using my default name) because this is my handle everywhere on the internet and couldn't change my default name, so I just use this. (And I had one for Starfinder 1E, but like, just to fit the theme, but I haven't used that one in 7 years, so.)

I'm not hiding or anything like that, so not really a gotcha? I'm not even 'known' enough around here for it to matter, just a way around a finicky forum system.

That's a nice story, but why then do you switch aliases every time you want to favorite comments that agree with you? Why not just use the same alias for both? Because right now, you are going out of your way to post as one alias and favorite comments as another, which is deceptive no matter how you slice it. You're not the only one who abuses aliases in arguments on these forums, but that makes the practice no less distasteful.

Aliases just straight up don't have a "Favorites" tab, Favorites always show up under your "main" account. You're trying to pull some gotcha over software functionality when you don't actually know how the software works.

Precision damage works just fine against corporeal undead and robots in PF1, PF2 and SF1, I don't see any reason for that to change now.

Not to mention I would like to add in a secondary line to Get'Em! If your Ally is using Area Fire or Auto-Fire, the -1 Circumstance penalty to AC because a -1 Circumstance penalty to their Reflex save.

Get 'Em! already does that

Select a creature within 60 feet that you can see. That creature takes a –1 circumstance penalty to AC and Reflex saves until the beginning of your next turn.

The ammo price is the same between SF2e and PF2e, and is the minimum price for SF2e. Seems fine.

In PF2, 1 silver gets you 10 arrows, 10 crossbow bolts, or 5-10 firearm rounds (depending on the type of firearm). In SF2, 1 credit gets you a single cartridge, which is a single shot. Ammo is 5-10x more expensive in SF2 than it is in PF2.

This has already been addressed in the playtest FAQ https://paizo.com/starfinderplaytest/faq

The other melee weapons are for From the Front envoys.

Super Zero wrote:

No. It's better in exactly one way, if you have a Strength of +2 or higher.

It has a greater range too.

But note that propulsive is a DISadvantage if your Str is less than 10

Composite bows have the same range as their regular versions, you're thinking of PF1 composite bows.

Runic Body make all your unarmed attacks +1 striking. The unarmed attacks from monk stances have the unarmed trait, so they would be affected by Runic Body.

Keep in mind that Runic Weapon is also a rank 1 spell, so you could give a fighter or barbarian a 2d12 greatsword at level 1.

The class feature "Clarity of Focus" gives Psychics a third focus point at level 5.

Quickened Casting also only works with whatever class you get it from.

1- no more than it currently is
2- not from paizo
3- probably not
4- idk
5- don't think so

thanks for coming to my TED Talk

Mellored wrote:

Wearing it doesn't count.

Commander wrote:

As long as your banner is visible (such as by being affixed to your weapon or worn attached to a pole alongside your backpack)

=)

That's for the bonus to Will saves and fear effects. It doesn't work for the Banner trait.

YuriP wrote:

My initial propose to solve this situation was simply just change the key attribute to Str or Dex but historically the designers never accepted any key attribute change suggestion in any playtest before so its very unlikely that they will accept this now.

It happened with the kineticist though.

Kineticist had Con as its key ability in the playtest and in Rage of Elements.

You complain that the gnome flickmace in PC1 is just a flail, but the AI picture is just a flail with a fancy handle (that gives you no tactical advantage whatsoever) so it doesn't really feel like an improvement.

Base cleanse affliction reduces the stage of an affliction, but cannot reduce it below 1 (so cannot remove it entirely), and does not attempt to counteract afflictions. Higher rank cleanse afflictions attempt to counteract afflictions in addition to reducing the stage.

No, because sneak attack requires a strike, and gouging claw is a spell attack, not a strike. Ruffian loosens the restriction on what weapons you can sneak attack with, but it doesn't change the fact that sneak attack requires a strike.

If you want to sneak attack with gouging claw, you need the magical trickster feat.

A long, jagged needle jabs into the target foe’s psyche whenever it tries to attack a creature your patron holds in special regard. Name yourself or one of your allies. The target takes 2 mental damage any time it uses a hostile action against the named creature, with a basic Will save.

Since the Will save mentioned as part of what happens when the target takes a hostile action, I'm pretty sure they make a save each time they take a hostile action, and the save only affects the damage they take from that specific hostile action. At the very least, that's how I'll be ruling it at my table.

MEATSHED wrote:

Yeah it being a 4 slot caster like wizard and sorcerer feels weird when it has better hp and armor.

Well, SF2 has different assumptions than PF2 does. It also has less spell flexibility than, say, the Sorcerer. Sorcerer gets a spell repertoire of equal number to its slots, plus the spells from its bloodline. Mystic gets spell repertoire of equal number to its slots, and the spells from its connection spells are mandatory first picks.

That's not true, your sorcerer bloodline spells count towards your repertoire normally.

At 1st level, you learn two 1st-level spells of your choice and four cantrips of your choice, as well as an additional spell and cantrip from your bloodline.

Two 1st-level spells + bloodline gets 3 1st-level spells, same as the number of daily spells you have at level 1.

When you gain access to a new level of spells, your first new spell is always the spell granted by your bloodline, but you can choose the other spells.

First spell of a new spell level has to be the one granted by your bloodline.

OR they don't have spell ranks, therefore they aren't spells, therefore it doesn't work. Pathfinder 2e has always sided on the rule of conservative. If it doesn't explicitly say it does it, it doesn't do it. It doesn't explicitly say what to do with non-spells, so it doesn't work on non-spells.

It explicitly says you're immune to effects, why would you not being immune to certain spells prevent that?

They don't have spell ranks, therefore they don't have a spell rank more than half your level, therefore they're always blocked by Apparition's Possession.

re: class DC, the Embodiment of Battle vessel spell grants you critical specialization, which uses your class DC if it has a save. Pretty sure it's been stated in the remaster that every spellcaster is getting at least trained in class DC to cover situations like that.

What is a control effect, exactly?

I assume a control effect is an effect that applies the Controlled condition.

Life Science is used to identify aberrations, animals, humanoids, monstrous humanoids, oozes, plants, and vermin.
Mysticism is used to identify magical constructs, dragons, fey, magical beasts, outsiders, and undead.
Engineering is used to identify technological constructs.

Blowing up a planet could be a way to explain the Drow disappearing. Just a wild guess.

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43trh?So-what-is-going-to-happen-to-Apostae#12

The biggest element that we've agreed on for this whole situation, is that we don't just be "disappearing" drow and having Apostae suddenly become a barren world or have it entirely populated by xulgaths. What we are leaning towards is likely a change to Apostae's primary residents that keeps the spirit of what they currently are in-line with what we have, but make them less directly pulled from OGL-isms. This means a redesign that would remove their existing name, and a lot of the old associations with certain elements that, quite honestly, we've barely had time to delve into with Starfinder beyond stuff like the write-ups in Pact Worlds and some appearances by drow in APs.

I want to imagine that Thurston wasn't lying to us when he said that.

Red Metal wrote:

I don't think they're going to design the system around having to use PF2 content in order to use stuff in the SF2 system.

We already see that they are though in the very first Field Test.

That is why the Soldier isn't allowed to "The martial class" anymore, because Fighter & Gunslinger already cover those. So for mechanical identity, they needed to find a new spot for it and realized they could lean into having assault weapons and other big weapons be area based attacks.

In that case, why would Operative specialize in finesse and one-handed ranged weapons, when we already have the rogue, the swashbuckler, and the pistolero gunslinger?

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Since the Soldier is going to be focusing more on Big Guns and AOEs, I'm assuming things like melee and snipers will move on to other classes, such as the Operative?

My guess is they'll assume you'll just play Fighter or Gunslinger if you want to play those, with Operative being focused on Finesse weapons and 1 handed ranged weapons.

I don't think they're going to design the system around having to use PF2 content in order to use stuff in the SF2 system.

The section originally being quoted is from the PFS Character Options page, so it is an organized play specific thing.

The capacity trait was updated in Treasure Vault to explicitly work with reload abilities.

Capacity: Weapons that have the capacity trait typically have multiple barrels or chambers capable of containing a bolt or round of ammunition. Capacity is always accompanied by a number indicating the number of barrels or chambers. After firing a capacity weapon, you can select the next loaded barrel or chamber as an Interact action that doesn’t require a free hand. You can use abilities that let or require you to Interact to reload to switch barrels or chambers of a capacity weapon instead. Each barrel or chamber can be individually reloaded after it’s fired as a separate Interact action.

MrCharisma wrote:

gesalt wrote:

Monk speed bonus is a status bonus

Derp, I even checked that, apparently I'm just not very good at reading =P

Thanks all.

Deriven Firelion wrote:

At least one designer has said battle forms benefit from weapon specialization as it is untyped additional damage that stacks as long as the type of attack you're using is covered under weapon specialization.

Do you have a quote for that? I'm not too worried if I can't use it but my general plan is to send my GM to this thread eventually and let him decide what I do and don't get, so if there's a quote to back that up then great. If not no biggie, it won't be the end of the world to miss out on 2 damage.

Ascalaphus wrote:

No <Finesse with Animal Form attacks> doesn't work. While it's true almost anyone could make a fist attack, or something analog to a fist attack (kick, headbutt), that doesn't mean that all other unarmed strikes get the traits of fist attacks.

Honestly that's how I read it too, but I saw some dissent reading it and thought I'd check with the community.

I don't have the quote. I think it was Mark Seifter that replied. Someone else probably has the quote somewhere. He seemed to think of weapon specialization as additional damage that added to everything as long as it was an attack that you had proficiency in. Battle Forms use unarmed attack, so weapon specialization applies.

I think it is similar with barbarian rage damage. That's another one that hasn't been clarified I believe.

You're probably thinking of this post, where Mark says that rage is additional damage (and so doesn't need to be a circumstance or status bonus), but says nothing about battle forms.

Yeah, normally I think they're both item bonuses so wouldn't stack, but in ABP they're both potency bonuses and still don't stack.

Regarding combat maneuvers with the attack roll trait, perhaps I misunderstood but I thought there was a ruling that they DID count as attack rolls, because they increase MAP, are affected by MAP etc.

Was there an explanation for why they shouldn't count as attack rolls?

Anyways, the RAW may be that it wouldn't count but since (or if) a normal potency rune would work I (as a GM) would rule that it functions the same way under ABP.

They're attacks, because they have the attack trait and so affect and are affected by MAP, but errata clarified they're not attack rolls, which refers only to strikes and spell attacks.

Page 446: Attack Rolls. There was some confusion as to whether skill checks with the attack trait (such as Grapple or Trip) are also attack rolls at the same time. They are not. To make this clear, add this sentence to the beginning of the definition of attack roll "When you use a Strike action or make a spell attack, you attempt a check called an attack roll."

To clarify the different rules elements involved:

An attack is any check that has the attack trait. It applies and increases the multiple attack penalty.

An attack roll is one of the core types of checks in the game (along with saving throws, skill checks, and Perception checks). They are used for Strikes and spell attacks, and traditionally target Armor Class.

Some skill actions have the attack trait, specifically Athletics actions such as Grapple and Trip. You still make a skill check with these skills, not an attack roll.

The multiple attack penalty applies on those skill actions as well. As it says later on in the definition of attack roll "Striking multiple times in a turn has diminishing returns. The multiple attack penalty (detailed on page 446) applies to each attack after the first, whether those attacks are Strikes, special attacks like the Grapple action of the Athletics skill, or spell attack rolls." There is inaccurate language in the Multiple Attack Penalty section implying it applies only to attack rolls that will be receiving errata.

idk, I don't really feel like the two changes (spell slots to spell points vs. daily powers to gauge) are comparable. A lot of the things you can do with spell slots can still be done with spell points, but that applies less to changing a dailies to a gauge. With spell slots, spell points, and daily powers, I can whip out a whole bunch of them right at the start of a fight to make that one fight much easier, but I can't really do that with an ability that requires time to charge up. It has an entirely different structure around using it compared to the alternatives.

Red Metal wrote:

GM DarkLightHitomi wrote:

The combat-as-sport is also taken to extreme level and the mechanics are often dissociative. Play Neverwinter for a while

I played a shitton of Neverwinter back when it first came out, it plays nothing like 4e.

Strange how our experiences can be so divergent on the issue. What made them seem so different to you?

I feel like it'd be easier to list the things that made them feel similar than it would to list the things that made them feel different, one being an action game and the other being turn-based is already such a huge difference that comparing them feels like comparing apples to oranges. I suppose the big one that distinguishes post-WoW MMOs from tabletop RPGs is resource management. All versions of D&D, including 4e, has some element of managing resources over the course of an adventuring day. 4e spreads that out to all classes, instead of constraining it to just casters, while also adding an element of per-encounter resource management with encounter powers. Modern MMOs I've played, including Neverwinter, are pretty much entirely focused on in-combat resource management, with the only continuity between battles being consumables that are bought en masse, or some resource gauge that builds up during fights. D&D wears on your resources as you have more fights during a day; MMOs are designed assuming that you go into each fight with everything available to you. In 4e, once you use a daily power, it's gone until you have a rest, and each daily stands on its own; in Neverwinter, your "daily" powers are attached to a gauge that fills up as you fight, and all your dailies consume the gauge, effectively locking each other out.

The combat-as-sport is also taken to extreme level and the mechanics are often dissociative. Play Neverwinter for a while

I played a shitton of Neverwinter back when it first came out, it plays nothing like 4e.

Dumb question that doesn't matter just curious. If Player core 2 replaces the apg why are 4 core classes iconics on the cover instead of the 4 apg classes?

Going by the product descriptions, the core + APG classes are going to be split up evenly between the two books, instead of Core 1 having all the CRB classes and Core 2 having all the APG classes.