Raxius Malgorian

Shinigami02's page

Organized Play Member. 978 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 to 50 of 978 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Metaphysician wrote:
... if it is altering the psychic medium of an entire planet, in what way is *that* not detectable, like a giant beacon?

If you dropped a drop of dye into a swirling tank of water (the swirling in this case being representative of the telepathic communication occurring on the planet anyways, which would theoretically muddy the telepathic medium), even a minute later would you be able to look at the now colored water and pinpoint where the drop of dye was dropped in? Because I think that's the comparison (or at least similar to it) they're making. Using it changes the entire medium of the planet via a cascade reaction, rather than a constant input.

Of course it's not quite a perfect comparison given the effect does change if you remove the device, but then the water would revert to colorless if you removed the dye too, that's just a bit more complex.

SirShua wrote:
As a side note. Stars continue fusion past iron. All known elements are the product of fusion or are synthetic. Iron is the point where fusion consumes energy rather than releasing it however.

I think the science classes I've taken have said anything beyond Iron is generally the result of supernovas, but I'm no astrophysicist or anything so all I've got is gen-ed.

Ascalaphus wrote:
What this box is really about is "oh please don't split the party between a space combat and a regular combat". If only because you can't fit both maps on the table at the same time. GM responsibly :P

From what I remember of discussions that happened a while back, it's also at least in part just to promote actually using space-combat rules. After all, why do all these space combat things when you can put the ship on auto-pilot, board the enemy ship, and treat it as a (possibly somewhat time-constrained, auto-pilot isn't perfect) dungeon crawl instead.

Dracomicron wrote:
Garretmander wrote:
Operative-property weapon so that you can go properly Dex-Light Armor/Cha-Soulfire
I get that the damage is still low, but can't you do this now with solar armor and an operative melee weapon?
I believe that Soulfire only goes on crystals.

It does indeed, rendering the fusion completely useless for armor Solarians.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:
Even when published materials sometimes fall well under WBL.

I think except for hells rebels every adventure path I've seen has left my characters horribly under WBL: kingmaker, dead suns, pirates, .. I think kingmaker was the worst. My character at 7th level had starting wealth and his spellbook which had increased in value from him scribing into it...

Funny thing: In my group (at least for Pathfinder APs) we quite often houserule sale price = full cost rather than the default 1/2. Despite that we still wind up under WBL (sometimes dramatically so) surprisingly often.

WatersLethe wrote:

Also, consumable items would literally never be used if it meant each one sets you further and further back from your expected WBL.

Same goes for recouping lost items/limbs.

GM: "Oohh, I'm sorry, since you spent too much on consumables you're now permanently behind in wealth. All the math surrounding encounter design is going to go out the window from here on out, good luck and make sure you roll up a more miserly character just in case."

Just for point of note, this is literally exactly why my group almost never uses consumables except the occasional healing item in emergencies. Because our GMs don't tend to adjust things like this, they tend to run things by the book. Even when published materials sometimes fall well under WBL. Some GMs hesitate to even change Pathfinder item drops to the slightly-less-common things the party is specced into instead of five hundred longswords or greatswords.

I mean it did also apply to pretty much everyone ever using a Spell-Like Ability, as those are almost if not literally always component-less.

Ascalaphus wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:

It wasn't at all clear before psychic magic. That you could hide a spell with Silent+Still magic was something a lot of people believed and it required a rather specific reading of Spellcraft to determine otherwise.

But when Occult Adventures came out, suddenly the ability to cast discreetly wasn't something that you needed feats for anymore, it seemed as if these new classes could do it for free. The design team looked for a way to avoid such a situation, because it'd really allow these classes to wreak havoc consequence-free. They went with this Spellcraft interpretation, basically saying "hey all along it's been like this", which surprised many people, rather than coming out and saying "we're changing this rule for balance".

It wasn't FAQ'd properly, but obvious casting had definitely come up in the forums well before that. It's kinda like the "Hands of Effort" thing in that it's existed forever but if you didn't frequent just the right parts of the forum it's easily missed, and even when it's not missed a lot of groups tend to ignore it anyways because it's one of those divisive rulings.

Xenocrat wrote:
Spells get called out because they have no components and the introduction of psychic magic in Pathfinder infamously required them to state that all spell casting was always visible regardless of direct spell effects or components being sensed.

Small note, the whole obvious casting thing way predates Psychic Magic. It was originally created to prevent things like Silent Stilled spells (or just Silent spells cast while Invisible) or Spell-Like Abilities (which have no components) being undetectable. And it's been a controversial ruling the entire time.

SuperBidi wrote:

Archetypes have one big flaw which can't be removed:

- Soldier asks for a few feats to get an archetype in. Feats are part of the Soldier, but not much of it. And you can get feats in the normal way.
- Envoy loses Improvisations. Improvisations are all the class gives you, and there is no way to get them out of the Envoy class features.

So, currently, for one class you don't lose much for another one you lose everything.

And then there's Mystics. The Mystic trade-outs are a bit of a mess, and IMO a bit larger of a loss than pretty much any other class has, making them horrible for taking archetypes.

Nerdy Canuck wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:
Nerdy Canuck wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
In addition to seems like a bit much, and again, leads to mandatory archetypes.
I mean, yes, they'd literally be mandatory in that system; selecting an archetype would become a part of the character creation process as an element of further customization. But in that scenario that's not any more of a problem than, say, feats being mandatory.
Except it is more of a problem simply because an Archetype (especially as designed in Starfinder) means so much more than a feat does.

While that's a true statement, it's not particularly relevant as the comparison I'm making there is to "feats", not "a feat" - which is to say, I'm comparing archetypes to the set of all feats a character takes in ordinary progression.

And in any case, the point of that statement is "being mandatory in this situation isn't a problem, but a designed and intentional outcome" - what I'm saying is that if you made it "optional" to take feats, whether or not to take feats wouldn't be a real choice either. In the system I'm proposing there, it moves from "you may choose an archetype" to "everyone chooses an archetype". I'm increasingly considering just writing such a system out next week (entirely too busy writing some important stuff this week), and I'm partially looking for what to watch out for in doing so.

The thing is, it being mandatory still creates a problem that feats being mandatory doesn't, especially because feats are several small decisions while archetype is one big decision, which is that it severely limits what character concepts are usable based entirely on which ones can fit with an existing archetype. Even if you completely extract it from class mechanics, most archetypes have a sizable chunk of flavor built into them that is much harder to ignore.

Nerdy Canuck wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
In addition to seems like a bit much, and again, leads to mandatory archetypes.
I mean, yes, they'd literally be mandatory in that system; selecting an archetype would become a part of the character creation process as an element of further customization. But in that scenario that's not any more of a problem than, say, feats being mandatory.

Except it is more of a problem simply because an Archetype (especially as designed in Starfinder) means so much more than a feat does. An individual feat rarely means that much in terms of build or story, and having the several that we do means you can piece them together to make whatever character you're after. In contrast, an Archetype has a fair bit more meat to it. There's a lot of mechanical impact, (the weakness, perceived or real being subjective, of which of course is part of the issue a lot of people have with them right now,) which needs to be considered, and then there's also usually a fairly large chunk of flavor impact too. And for some (possibly even most) characters, well, there's just not an archetype out there that actually matches the flavor of the character. And shy of releasing a book with several frankly extremely bland archetype options for no other purpose than to specifically be applicable to basically anything (and possibly not even then,) there's really not much chance there could be a guarantee that every character will have an archetype that fits it.

And on top of that, there's just the matter that archetypes require much more design space to write than a feat. Feats don't take up a whole lot of space in a book, you can generally get multiple on a page even, while archetypes are generally going to take up at least one, probably multiple pages. And because feats are such small-scale items they usually don't require too much cross-comparison (outside of balance considerations we of course hope are happening, whereas because of the inherent lore to archetypes they require a lot more consideration, both just in creating the lore and then double-checking it doesn't intersect too much with another existing archetype. But at the same time, with archetypes divorced from class you have to keep that consideration in mind so that archetypes don't clash too much with class (or get rendered completely useless by a class, either is bad) so you have to design around that too... basically it's all just a very involved process.

One thing I think is worth noting is that the Energy Shield is considered a Force Field as far as Solarian's Particle Field ability (in the Armory) is concerned, as having an Energy Shield up prevents you from using Particle Field same as a normal Force Field does, as is specifically stated in Particle Field's description.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
that's no moon... (spaceship sized mimic!)

Few months back I learned about DnD's House Hunter, a house-sized (and shaped) mimic, so my first thought was a Starfinder version of that that took on the form of a spaceship.

As for a more normal sized mimic, you could have a particularly fancy Mimic Null-Space Chamber for the new hungry bag, Tent Mimics of all shapes and sizes, Mimic Escape Pods, Mimic Vehicles, Mimic Storage Lockers (both horizontal like you'd find in a barracks and vertical like schools/workplaces/etc, some large species may even form an entire walls of lockers, with each locker just being a separate mouth), Mimic Arcade Games, Mimic Control Panels... a Mimic Recharging Station could be quite dangerous, go to recharge your batteries or even your environmental protections, and the wires suddenly come to life to grab you and drag you into a well-hidden mouth.

Basically, it's not as simple as 'treasure chest' anymore, but with some creativity there's all sorts of stuff of all sizes that someone might approach, many someone might even open.

Jasque wrote:

There is a recycling system expansion bay for starships that states:

Starfinder #6: Empire of Bones pg. 46 wrote:

Note: The following Expansion Bay is compatible only with a Supercolossal ship.

A recycling system enables a Supercolossal starship to be nearly self-sustaining, operating independently for decades or even centuries. A combination of smelters, biomass processors, manufacturing, and UPB converters allows the ship to convert almost all its waste into goods and materials.

It appears that items can be broken down into UPBs with "smelters, biomass processors, and manufacturing." I assume the "UPB converters" then convert the UPBs back into useful items.

The recycling system is the size of a cargo bay, and it can convert "almost all" the waste generated on a starship into UPBs.

I do think it's worth noting that while it is 1 Expansion Bay in size, the recycling system only works with supercolossal ships. AKA a size beyond the "15,000+ feet" long category. So while technically all expansion bays are supposed to be the same size, that kind of size restriction makes it not unreasonable to believe there might be something more to what goes into the recycling system. Like, it might not be all that compact.

And maybe John Cena's a Verthani. With their camo skin, you really can't see him.

Steve Geddes wrote:
I think you get more out of being a level 17 soldier than that gear boost (not least of all the bonus to hit, which increases your damage without appearing to do so, but also the non-damage boosting benefits you get).

The problem with holding up the "to-hit" bonus like this, is that (at least as of the Char-Ops Playtest, and probably the final book since I doubt Vanguard is going to stop being a full-BAB class) 2 and a half classes have the same bonus to attack you have (Solarian, Vanguard, and Exocortex Mechanics). Another can pretend to be on par until level 9 with their main trick; and yet another can pretend to be on-par until level 13 (even surpassing you occasionally) with a couple talents, while even buffing the entire party (Operative with Trick Attack and Envoy with Get 'Em and later Clever Attack respectively.) Granted those last two won't necessarily be as mobile as you are, and can't full-attack, but still. Meanwhile you put your talents into damage which... becomes a drop in the bucket. Especially compared to the damage bonuses Operative is getting with their Trick Attack, though I suppose that's mostly because of how much their weapons kinda suck without the handicap. ^.^;

Steve Geddes wrote:
If the "I want to do lots of damage" option for soldier added as much to the average damage as the increase in weapon damage inherent in the gear progression, then it would become the only choice.

While I agree that flat out doubling your damage would be insane, I do totally agree with others that I really wish the damage options scaled more than their piddling drop-in-the-bucket amounts. It really hurts with this part of your conclusion:

Steve Geddes wrote:
FWIW, I think feeling like your choice matters is more important than actually mattering (though I take your point that they should line up).

After all, if you know that the damage boost you're getting from your gear boosts is only going to save you maybe 1 attack in 20 (possibly hyperbolic, don't have the time to actually calculate things ATM), it's hard to even feel like that choice actually matters. Especially since I doubt many enemies take 20 attacks to take down, meaning it doesn't really save you much at all.

Claxon wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:
Kinetic Converter is also absolutely life saving, but can't be used in SFS.
What is this kinetic converter? I couldn't find it on Archives of Nethys.

Starfinder Armory, page 123. For some reason the Archives don't have the rules text for it, so here's the most relevant paragraph of 4 or so.

Kinetic Converter wrote:
If you are the target of an attack, spell, or similar effect that deals you damage while you wear the kinetic converter, you can activate the device as a reaction, provided the effect wasn’t a critical hit. Once activated, the converter disperses the kinetic energy of the attack. Instead of taking damage, you are knocked away from the source of the damage a distance based on the convertor’s type, rounding the damage up to the nearest 5. You can fall prone during this movement to halve the distance you move. If you hit an obstacle before moving the distance the converter threw you, you take 1d6 bludgeoning damage per 10 foot increment you would have traveled, rounded up to the nearest 10 feet.

Exact distance you travel and how many times you can use it per day depends on the mark (of which there are 3 tiers), and Mk 1 is level 8 and 10.5k Credits for a 1/day that knocks you twice as far as the damage you would've taken (unless you fall prone). And you can't get around the uses limitation by getting several of them, because using more than one in a day leaves you Sickened until you rest for 8 uninterrupted hours.

Basically it lets you no-sell damage a few times a day in exchange for being knocked across the room.


Also, as far as the Dented Kasa goes, the 2 Resolve points and Reaction cost for each use is pretty steep, but it's definitely great for no-selling stuff like, say, a Wounding weapon.

DM_Blake wrote:

The problem is that this results in an infinite supply of these torpedoes on the PC's starship.

The minute I tell my players that they have an infinite supply of weapons that cost 3.8 million credits each, they will happily open shop and start selling them. Even at the game's staggering 1/10 selling penalty, they can still unload theoretically infinite torpedoes for 380,000 credits.

...and this is part of why ships exist outside of the normal economy. On top of the several million (or possibly even billion) credits it would take to buy the ship itself, that no APL 1 party could possibly afford.

Hmm wrote:

The only thing that I want from 2E in Starfinder is the action economy. Starfinder was a rebalanced version of Pathfinder 1. Is it terrible to say that I hope they don't change it for years yet?


Yeah, that's totally understandable. I just kinda hate how thin the 10-point stat gen is. And to be honest, outside of it throwing all the math for a loop, the Playtest (and possibly PF2e, I don't know yet if it survived the transition) stat gen would be the easiest thing in the world to convert, since all the pieces are already there.

Pantshandshake wrote:
*patiently waits for a "Can we tape 15 nuclear warheads to a detonator" thread*

Ignoring the issues with placement on that, that's gonna be a lot of duct tape.

Ixal wrote:
Don't only focus on the nuclear weapon. Yes, they can't be triggered by a explosion, but the other tracking weapons available likely can.

It still ties into the first point, likely even more than an actual nuclear warhead would, because while the rigged nuclear material is going to be big, bulky (especially with the likely lead lining) and awkward, straight up explosive ordnance that can do even remotely comparable damage is going to be even bigger. And still probably shielded so that it doesn't chain-reaction explode the first time your weapons system takes a hit, so you still have to bypass that shielding to attach the detonator.

Ixal wrote:
And the text about the limited quality of starship weapon says that the ship fabricates them on its own. So you do not have to buy the weapons but just whatever resources the ship needs which is "free".

That material still has to come from somewhere. Yes the ship probably has an entire store-room of UPBs somewhere specifically for making ship-based weaponry. Yes that store-room of UPBs comes out of the same nebulous "ship fund" that lets a level 1 party have a ship in the first place because it's outside of the normal economy. No that still does not make it actually infinite, and the GM can still give you at least a metaphorical slap on the wrist and tell you to stop it if you try to abuse the system.

1) Size is probably an issue. A high-powered or nuclear warhead probably isn't going to be small. It's probably big, clunky, and heavy, making it very obvious if you're trying to take it somewhere it shouldn't be.

2) I'm no demolitions expert, but I don't think you can just use any random detonator for nuclear warheads. Based on my limited knowledge of explosives, detonators work by basically triggering either a small ignition or strong heating element which then ignites the larger explosive package. From what I know of nuclear explosives, that just isn't going to fly with a nuclear warhead unless you take the entire thing apart and rebuild it with the detonator in *just* the right place, which is probably going to be a long, involved, and probably high-DC task, because from what I know of nuclear explosives the function by triggering a blast of *just* the right size in *just* the right place to split the unstable atoms of certain radioactive elements, thus causing the fission reaction that leads to big boom. And if it's a Fusion bomb (if those are even a thing in Starfinder, I can't remember,) well, based on my sci-fi readings, that might not even work with a detonator at all but rather something like a miniature particle accelerator. Which means it's going to take time to warm up, which is fine if you're taking the time to load up, aim, and fire, and then take travel time into account, but not so great if you want to blow up this thing right here when you want it to go boom.

And of course the final point, while mechanically it may seem infinite, your supply of warheads isn't *actually* infinite. You actually have a limited supply, it's just that reloading that supply is part of ship upkeep, which happens outside the normal economic system and thus there's no actual 'cost' to it.

From what I remember of developer comments an enemy built with PC rules is supposed to at least roughly line up with benchmarks for a level X NPC, which absolutely would not fly in Starfinder, so I'm not sure how good an idea the +/-10 rules would be. Experimentation would probably be the best way to show if it is or isn't good though.

Garretmander wrote:
Stinger-X wrote:
I actually use the 3 action economy in my home game and it's fun as hell
How do you run all the specific standard and full round actions? Envoy's improved get 'em, Bombard's heavy fire, the solarian & blitz soldier's standard action charges?

Not Stinger, but I don't think it would be that hard to convert them. Full-Round Actions still take your Full Round, aka 3 Actions. Might take a bit more judgement call on Standard Action stuff, but I could see those either being 1 or 2 action things, depending on the situation. For instance, the Standard Action "move twice your speed and attack" Charge, IIRC from the PF2e Playtest, is actually a perfectly reasonable 2-Action activity for a martial class to get. In contrast, Improved Get 'Em I'd probably make a 1-action thing. The entire point of it seems to be messing with Action Economy, and if you made it a 2-Action activity then there would be literally no difference between using it to debuff-and-shoot an enemy and, ya know, just debuffing and shooting an enemy. While yes that would theoretically allow you to use it more than once in a turn, well, it's not like the bonus is going to stack so you have to spread your fire... and being able to do more cool stuff in a turn I'm pretty sure is a feature of the action economy, not a bug.

I'd love to see the action economy in Starfinder. Also the Stat Gen, but that's mostly because I just kinda really dislike Starfinder's very small point buy.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
"Dr." Cupi wrote:
It has a hardness of 20 and, by Pathfinder rules, the hardness of a substance a weapon is made out subtracts from the hardness of the object it is attacking. This allows a weapon made of adamantine to ignore the hardness of any nonmagical substance.

...Pretty sure this isn't a thing, and Adamantine's ignoring 20 points of Hardness is unique to it.

BigNorseWolf wrote:
You could... have your real talent elsewhere (Jean Claude Vesk damn: 8 charisma but looks REALLY good when he's tailwhacking people)

I do think it's worth noting that if you are playing an Icon background, unless you are specifically using the "reduce your stats for no benefit" rules (which you might be, but I tend to assume that's not going to be an average thing) your Charisma cannot go below... I don't think anything reduces by more than 2, so 9. And it won't be below 11 on a Vesk, since Int is their reduced stat. Icons do tend to be more charismatic than average for their race, but it doesn't have to be by a lot.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

There's really two ways I can see it being explained, since I don't know of any official reasoning:

1) Adamantine Alloy is, when compared to raw Adamantine, kind of like comparing Steel to raw Iron. Iron's good, but Steel is better, and likewise the Adamantine Alloy is more effective than raw Adamantine would be.

I think there's stuff that goes against that somewhere in one of the books though, so the other option:

2) It's a few thousand years past Pathfinder. Metal refining has gotten much better, allowing for metallurgists to work with something closer approaching Pure Adamantine than what their relatively primitive predecessors were using in Pathfinder days. And since by this time it should be relatively simple to examine the effects different elements have when alloyed with Adamantine, it should be simple enough to create an alloy that stretches Adamantine supplies as far as possible while still retaining that strength that the purer-than-Pathfinder-era Adamantine possesses.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
EltonJ wrote:
FormerFiend wrote:

I want more biotech augmentations. Specifically, I want disgusting, body-horror-esque biotech augmentations. Kinda stuff that the PF 1e alchemist could do to themselves; tentacles, removing & preserving organs, parasitic twins, tumor familiars.

Pact worlds has a picture of a (half?)elf who's biotech'd his arm into a tentacle as the picture for the Biotechnitian theme; so far as I'm aware, something like that isn't actually possible under the current rules, although it would be easy enough to home brew.

Necrographs & some velstrac gear are a good start but I don't feel that we're there yet.

Can I say that this sounds sickening?

Meanwhile, maybe it's the [PG Unfriendly] in me, but it sounds kinda awesome to me. Tentacles are fun.

SuperBidi wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
No, but the difference between an 8 and a 14 is rather noticable. A 16 and an 18 on something harder to measure not so much.
And if he had a 10 in Intelligence, would you give the solution?

Given 10 Intelligence traditionally was average intelligence (even if adventurers only really go up now) I absolutely would.

avr wrote:
@Arutema, pantshandshake: I'd always assumed 'spoony' came from 'I'd eat them up with a spoon', i.e. the person is being compared to ice cream. I'd be surprised if a video game was the original source tho' it might have popularised the term in your social circles.

I've also only ever heard it originating from the game. Which, since FFIV came out in 1991, it doesn't seem unreasonable for a game in that time period to be the origin for a term that circulated from there through geek culture.

HammerJack wrote:
There is absolutely no penalty for firing into melee. Not sure why you think full attacking isn't usually a good idea, though. It's usually a great idea, if you're comparing it to standard attacks it wins out anytime that your standard attack would hut on a die roll of 13 or less, though special attacks and move action abilities can change the matchup.

I'm not generally sure I trust attack roll to be high enough to hit on a 13+. Also I have pretty bad luck which may make every penalty more extreme in my eyes ^.^;

2 people marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:
Zed Flashbang wrote:

Me, I imagine there are races from 70,000 light years away that shortcut through the Pact World's system daily to take advantage of the Starstone's beacon, much to the consternation of the Verces-originated Pact Worlds Stewards and the Triaxian-originated Skyfire Mandate!

You've been hired to keep part of the Absalom Station Armada safe after two unknown interstellar powers with strange technologies decide to use the Starstone as a beacon for a place to go fight...

I don't think that actually works. The Pact Worlds system is indeed 1d6 days away from any place in the Galaxy, but stopping by that system on your way to somewhere else simply adds 1d6 days to your trip. The only considerations for how long a trip to a given place takes are the number of Drift beacons in your destination system and the quality of your Drift Drive.

Which is why it makes a much better Trade Hub than Waystation. Assuming you figure out it's not some galactic anglerfish, 1d6 from your Vast homesystem to Absalom, trade your goods, and however long home is better than however long to some Vast trading hub, then similar amount of time home. So it seems like the biggest blockade to Absalom becoming such a galactic landmark is figuring out that the big bright spot in the Drift is not going to kill and/or eat you on arrival.

Metaphysician wrote:
Shinigami02 wrote:
Metaphysician wrote:
Uchuujin wrote:
Ixal wrote:
The cynic in me mostly expects a big power creep with the new classes and that they together with shields break the math for monster attack bonus.
My thought on shields is more along the lines of the developers expecting PCs to use cover more than they generally do, so it's more of filling in that gap in AC.
While I agree that there are probably far too many players refusing to use cover, I think the better solution is to keep killing off PCs until they learn their lesson. Eventually, they will learn that the solution to all problems is not "stand in the open, do full attack".
Shields strike me more as a replacement for Cover for the melee-inclined, who can't exactly position for cover while in the middle of a cluster of enemies melee'ing it up.

Actually, they kind of can. The enemies themselves provide cover, so if you choose your target properly, you have both the "firing into melee" 'bonus', as well as partial cover vs most of the other enemies, so long as your target is standing.

If the enemies are both fragile enough that you kill them in one turn, but they are also numerous and powerful enough that you can't afford to have them all firing back at you? Then pick a different strategy, it means "charge into melee" is a bad idea given the opposition and the terrain.

Yeah enemies provide cover against other enemies if you're not surrounded. They don't provide cover against the guy you're attacking though, which to me seems like why most of the bonus is only against a single enemy. Full-Attacking is rarely a good idea IMO, so it also gives you something to do with your move action if the enemy doesn't leave your reach.

Also, I'm 99% sure that the Firing Into A Melee penalty isn't a thing in Starfinder.

Ascalaphus wrote:

I'd be surprised if they came out with alignment-based connections though, they're downplaying alignment in Starfinder compared to Pathfinder.

But more connections would be welcome yeah.

They could do alignment-based connections while still downplaying alignment itself if they instead do it via aligned-planes-based connections. Could even allow some Ghost Rider type stuff, with for instance a CG Mystic drawing on the mystical power of Hell.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Metaphysician wrote:
Uchuujin wrote:
Ixal wrote:
The cynic in me mostly expects a big power creep with the new classes and that they together with shields break the math for monster attack bonus.
My thought on shields is more along the lines of the developers expecting PCs to use cover more than they generally do, so it's more of filling in that gap in AC.
While I agree that there are probably far too many players refusing to use cover, I think the better solution is to keep killing off PCs until they learn their lesson. Eventually, they will learn that the solution to all problems is not "stand in the open, do full attack".

Shields strike me more as a replacement for Cover for the melee-inclined, who can't exactly position for cover while in the middle of a cluster of enemies melee'ing it up.

Albatoonoe wrote:
Another thing for Solarions I want is new solar manifestations.

Agreed, or at least something playing with the subclass mechanics.

Garretmander wrote:
...Can an operative trick attack with a graviton pistol?

I believe the answer is technically yes, but like weapon specialization it deals "additional" damage, which you can't add unless there's some base damage to increase. I believe you could still use it to Debilitating Trick someone though. I'm no expert though.

Themetricsystem wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
Paint ball guns might be a neat way to target EAC with non-injection poisons and gases and things.

Oh wow I didn't even think about that, that's even an existing gap in the mechanics that already exist that these could fill!

I agree too, a class of weapons that deal really low damage (I'm talking 1d4 with NO benefit from Weapon Spec scaling up to 5d4 at higher levels) but instead ALWAYS trigger the special effect on a hit would be really interesting.

It would definitely be interesting yeah, but there's also some fusions that it could be potentially unbalanced if it's not worded very carefully. Like you don't want to be able to put Vorpal on it and now every hit is removing a body part of your choice.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Garretmander wrote:
Reskin an existing operative weapon to the kind of weapon you want it to look like? Same stats, different name and different physical appearance.

Fun Fact: Not all GMs let you just reskin stuff as you please, even if it doesn't make a mechanical difference. Especially when you'll be reskinning something like a dozen (possibly very different, given how sporadic some of the advancements can be, when they even exist in the first place) weapons by the end, because of how the Starfinder equipment system works.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dracomicron wrote:
How many years into Pathfinder did the custom weapons/spells/magic items/whatever rules appear? I'm legit curious now.

The original Custom Magic Item rules were in the CRB, as were basic NPC creation rules. Custom Weapons were in Weapon Master Handbook roughly 6 years after Core. Custom Monsters were in Bestiary 4, 4 years after Core. Custom Spells were Ultimate Magic, only 2 years after Core. Classes (and by extension Archetypes) were Advanced Class Guide, 5 years after Core. And Races were Advanced Race Guide, 3 years after Core (and about a year before Monsters, interestingly enough.) Those are all the custom rules I know of off the top of my head.

And I've really got nothing else to add to the conversation other than to say that these things take time, especially one something as chaotic as weapon design. Mostly posting to answer Draco's curiosity.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Dracomicron wrote:

Everybody in Starfinder is ambidextrous and can dual-wield for free.

They just don't get any more attacks out of it than any other combat style.

What's the point then if you're still making only one weapon strike per round?

Aesthetics, flexibility of damage types, some feats (Deflect Projectile works really well with a longsword in one hand and a plasma sword in the other), flexibility of range (sword-and-pistol style, or sword and rifle with the right build), exploiting a multitude of weapon traits... there's lots of reasons to dual-wield besides extra attacks.

The advantage of a Fusion Seal is that it only takes 1/10th the amount of time to transfer over and doesn't require training in Mysticism. And of course it's a one-time payment no matter how many weapons you put it on. Sure buying a fusion on a level 2 weapon then paying to bump it up to level 10 does save you roughly 40% on that level 10 seal (not counting the value of the level 2 weapon.) That however only works for a new fusion you're just now getting. If you first got that fusion at level 2 and have been upgrading it every 2 levels to keep up with progression however, you've paid 4160 credits so far, roughly 116% the value, to get it onto that same level 10 weapon, a bit more of the value it would take to just have a Fusion Seal to get you to level 10, and until you get past 14 or maybe 15 that every-other-level upgrade stays around the same cost as a seal of that level, basically making a fusion seal act as a stand in for lump-summing a fusion you intend to use throughout your entire career (though unfortunately such a thing is only available as loot, as you can't actually afford such a seal even if item level restrictions weren't a thing, and if you got one as loot you would probably break WBL to pieces even with 10% sellback. The sell value of a level 14 Seal is worth more than a level 6 fusion after all.) Of course, once you get to level 16+ (maybe 15+, I've been running Even levels) though the cumulative cost of the fusion you've been upgrading your entire career is actually less than the cost of a fusion purchased directly to a level appropriate weapon, just the joys of high-level play I guess.

Torgrin Deepsmith wrote:

So the 4th level item, Domestic Drone.

It is like a level 1 drone with level 1 capabilities of a mechanic. i.e. Master Control, Skill Unit, Limited AI, except with the modifications of each domestic drone. So as an example, the physician drone:

HP - 10
Master Control, Limited AI, Skill Unit (both Acrobatics and Medicine)
However, if they get one rank in Medicine, even with the increase of intel to 8, this means the total modifier is 3? (1+3+(-1)) So even the lowest medicine check, at 15, is not the easiest roll. And there is never any increase to this (or HP, etc) Even assisting my character on a medicine check is only a 60% change or so.

Yep, this sounds about right. It's a Domestic Drone, not a combat drone, so the HP probably shouldn't matter much (though it might for the Elite, more on that in a bit.) As for the skill bonus, +3 may not be great in the long run, but isn't horrible for level 4. And it's main purpose seems to be Aiding, which it does have a 70% chance of doing.

Torgrin Deepsmith wrote:
Also the Elite model says "elite models often have additional abilities and greater autonomy" I see the additional ability, but what does greater autonomy refer to?

Each Elite drone (with the sole exception of Porter, though Physician's is subtle) gains two things: A new Mod and a new Action. The Mod is the new Ability, and the new Action (which it might be able to do without you needing to make it do so? Or at least definitely requiring no more than a Move Action command compared to a full-action Direct Control) is the new Autonomy. In the case of the Physician specifically, the new Ability is the Medical Subroutine healing, while the Autonomy is it's ability to come to you and give you aid while you're unconscious. Porter's just kinda weird in that the only thing it gets is Resistance.

As for the HP thing, it's the Elite Physician's new Autonomy that is one of the few reasons it might actually come up, if it comes crawling to help you mid-combat.

Darrag Oathsbane wrote:
The Artificer wrote:
I think the item I would most like is a device that can generate UPBs. My idea for this is to have a digital grinder that renders down items to create "Uncharged" UPBs in Greater number than the 10% sell back value which, in addition, also need to consume charges from batteries to make them work like normal for a brief time to balance out a better ratio vs just reselling the items for 10% worth in credits. In addition to to being "Uncharged" I think that should also be "unstable", which would also mean they could not convert to credits and would also begin decay over time making it very difficult to stored up large amounts of the "Unstable" UPBs. I personally would love to hear feedback about this idea because I'm tempted to make it myself lol.
Your description could easily be solved by just using a heavy bayonet. Doesn't require powered quality and can be used as is. No need to switch as a swift action. As far as i know, the only penalty is for full attacking just like if you had attacked with the axe and a pistol.

(Gonna guess there was a screwed up quote involved here, they tend to happen on this board)

The transformation is half the fun though, and the bulk limit does mean some options aren't really available. Otherwise it would probably work though, thanks for pointing that out.

EDIT: And on further reviewing, the one-handed limitation does hurt a lot as far as what the melee component can be, so my Crescent Rose expy will still have to be powered and burn an action shifting. Oh well.

And I mean why not? This is a game where losing an arm or leg really is just a flesh wound, potentially not even piercing Stamina damage. Heck, some races you have to lop off a limb 6 times to properly disarm them.

I kinda feel like it being a joke weapon was the entire point, given it's own flavor text describes it as being meant to drive up the sale of batteries, and even gives it the in-universe nickname of the "snakebite laser". That said, while it is a horrible main weapon (and the level 2 and level 17 versions should just not be used ever) the fact that it is so much cheaper than the equivalent Laser Rifle (for every version but 2 and 17) and gives you access to similar (or even equivalent) damage often a level earlier means that if you have access to free recharges (which many do) then some classes (Solarion and Vanguard come to mind) might find the levels 5 and 8 versions to be useful backup ranged weapons. Especially since 40-charge batteries should be not-uncommon loot and don't exactly sell for much.

Honestly, all you need is a basic statblock (like the ones in the AAs or APs) and AA1 and it should be easy to pull out on-demand level-appropriate enemies, because for the most part it's literally as simple as changing the numbers to be appropriate to the chart's designation for that CR, or maybe add/take away one or two special abilities (if desired) if your CR changes dramatically. For instance, from CR 2 (3 for Expert Arrays) to 11 the only thing that should be changing is the exact numbers, which are designated on the appropriate chart (well, charts plural because damage is it's own chart). At CR 12 you can add a special ability, and then from then until CR 18 (19 for Experts) it's again just changing numbers. Really the main things that might trip up are Spellcasters because spells are complex, and making up appropriate loot afterwards, everything else should be a matter of seconds.

That said, I can still see the appeal of what you're asking for, since it would be nice to not have to hot-swap from the chart, and maybe be able to have spell lists and loot tables on-hand. I just don't think it's going to be a big priority given how quick it should be to just adjust a block on the fly.

Metaphysician wrote:
1. "Should Witchwarpers be able to bring back to dead?" I am inclined to say yes. . . but the most basic mechanic would be "Distorting reality and imposing one where the decedent never died". Which is to say, it really is the same person, the Witchwarper just edited out their death. The stresses on reality from the paradox produce effects that are, functionally, the same as any other Raise Dead.

To be totally honest, I could even see this being more of a Breath of Life effect than Raise Dead. Shift a recent event so they don't die and take X much less damage (probably a bit less than an on-level Heal.)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another combination of rules:

Holding and Wielding Weapons, page 168 wrote:
You can attack with a weapon (or threaten an area with it, for all melee weapons except unarmed strikes) only if you are wielding it with the correct number of hands.

Unarmed Strikes are listed as a One-Handed Basic Melee weapon. The fact that Unarmed Strikes are called out as an exception to Threatening but not attacking in this sentence implies that they are still subject to this rule. So normally you would need one hand to wield an unarmed strike. Improved Unarmed Strike then removes that requirement.

1 to 50 of 978 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>