Tharkune's page

Longarm Proficiency and Specialization are worth two feats, probably.

Then again, Heavy Weapon prof and Heavy Weapon spec are probably worth three feats if you have Str 13+.

This may change as feats are published.

Couldn't you take Versatile Specialization after taking Long Arm Proficiency? At third level everyone gets Weapon Specialization so any follow on proficiencies like Heavy Weapons or Special Weapons would be covered right?

I had the same problem. I called Paizo customer service and they set up a replacement and it shipped the next day. They asked for pictures for quality improvement which I sent them. I should have the replacement soon.

I actually cap it at ten, since that's one bulk, no need to get ridiculous with it after all.

19 is correct. You drop the fraction so 01-19 is one bulk. Pg 167 CRB. Of course the volume of 19 pistols may cause the GM to question the ability for said space rodent to store this arsenal in one cubic foot of cheek space.

I'm fairly certain you can add a turret mount. The wording is very strange, but the gist of it is *I think* that 'turret' is simply a special arc to which mounts can be added.

Here's the weird sentence: "By spending 5 BP, the crew can fit a new light weapon mount on a turret that has enough free space" (p. 305, second sentence, last paragraph of New Weapon Mounts). It sounds like they mean you can have two weapon mounts (and two weapons) on a single physical turret, but I think the implication is that 'a turret' refers to the arc, not an actual turret mount.

Take a look at the Transport's list of mounts (p. 295). It describes an arc, and then the weapons in that arc. There are two 'forward arc', and two 'turret'. I don't think we are supposed to assume those are on the same turret. Now look at Carrier, Battleship and Dreadnought (p. 296). They have lots of weapons listed in 'turret'. Are we to assume despite these ships size and crews, they have only one turret?

Furthermore, there are rules specifically designed for linking weapons (p. 301) and no suggestion that that's already happened in some of the ships, or that it is required if they are in the same arc, or within the same set of 'turret' parentheses'.

It seems pretty clear to me that, while the key sentence is oddly formed, that one isn't meant to infer that there is a special meaning to 'a turret' beyond the turret arc, and that you can add turret-mounted weapons to a ship without turrets as easily as you can add side arc mounts to a ship without side weapons.

I think the rules assume one turret with multiple mounts. If you look at the last section "Tiny and Small starships can have only two weapon mounts per arc (and per turret). Medium and Large starships can have only three weapon mounts per arc (and per turret). Huge and larger starships can have only four weapon mounts per arc (and per turret)." it seems to indicate that it considers one turret with multiple mounts. Turrets are a mount that have a 360 degree arc, so whether you have four single weapon turrets or one-four weapon turret, it shouldn't make much difference as long as you don't exceed the turret arc maximum per ship size.

So i was doing some building tests, and i noted that the shuttle bays are for large only, and that escape pods take a entire expansion slot? but no rules or information on things like docking collars, boarding mechanisms, items that might be pretty critical in a roleplaying game of ship vs ship. and i dont know about you but the inability to equip a ship with at the very least a small shuttle option, or something where a player could hang a tiny craft from the exterior (like firefly or robotech or starwars) to allow tiny or even medium ships to dock and use larger ships, becuase lets face it with the current rules its at bear miniumim 52 points for a drift drive for just PCU, large frame, and drift drive, well out of the range of any player for several level, not to mention a full sized hanger is for gargantuan only, or that the shuttle bay only allows small or tiny ships, there is no mid range options for a player group to dock a fighter or 2 without a significant investment of points, i feel like they need to expand on some of these like allowing 2 shuttle bays to be converted to hold 1 medium ship to dock.4 for a large. i mean essential you would end up with a ship shell, but realistically, docking and expanded shuttle bays. only allowing tiny shuttles on large ships. exterior docking collar rules would be nice,i mean they are making us pay a entire expansion slot for escape pods, but we cant dock a shuttle with anything smaller then a large.

In creating my spreadsheet to build ships I saw a few areas of ship build that made my scratch my head:

I think there are a lot of cool things that could be added to ship design but they probably had to pair it down to a few options for the sake of brevity. You could probably do a whole source book on new ships, expansion bays and options. Who knows, maybe they will but I already see a few people in the community coming up with new things to add.

I see when using Google sheets there is a validation error. I don't get that in Excel but I am looking at it.

Edit: After testing, it appears that running it in Google Sheet seems to corrupt the data validation. I suggest running it locally in Excel.

8/15/17 Updates
-Fixed the error thrown by Tier selection
-Updated the Total BP to subtract for the Drift engine

Looks cool, but whenever I change the "Tier" I get this error "The data you entered in cell B2 violates the data validation rules set on this cell.", that said I've only run it in GoogleDocs and Open Office, so that may be the problem.

I saw that too and thought i cleared it up. I made the cell into Text to accommodate the fractions for the tiers below one and I think it doesn't like it. I will look at it tonight.

The spread sheet looks pretty awesome! Great job!

I don't think the drift engine BP cost gets factored into the total remaining BP though.

I am also running into an issue when attempting to change the tier, but it looks like it should work. Maybe it's an issue with the fractions being options? -shrug- I'll poke at it later and see if I can figure it out.

I will take a look at it. I may have forgot to add in the cell to the total calculation. Thanks.

How many crew fit in a single crew quarters?

The book just says you pay for Common, Good, or Luxurious. I assume it covers the maximum number needed for the frame of the ship. For example, a Transport can hold six crew. Common crew quarters are free in BP, good 2, luxurious 5. It doesn't change with the frame size. A Dreadnought can have luxurious crew quarters for 5 BP. Seems a little strange but that's how it reads.

Fellow Starfinders!

I created a quick spreadsheet to aid in ship design. Hope it helps. There are a few little idiosyncrasies to the design of start ships (like Array weapons). Feel free to provide feedback on bugs or mistakes.

Go to Starship Designer

I keep wondering if Light and Gravity/Entropy will be the only things Solarians can channel, or if in the future they'll get more option.

I have this image in my head of a Solarian that channels ionizing radiation instead of light, instead of a miniature star it creates a nuclear blast!

What other cool "elements" do you think a Solarian could end up being given the future? Time perhaps? Force, even?

Since the Solarian seems to work off the balance of the two forces, it would seem they wouldn't add new forces but maybe new ways to utilize the energy one way or another. I know in one of the play tests, the Dwarf Solarian did a sort of super-nova like explosion ability.

If they did add a new type, it would need to a paired set so they could shift back and forth. It's hard to say though without seeing the full set of abilities the Solarian will have.

I am playing a character that has has 1 level of Investigator (Steel Hound) and 1 level of Swashbuckler (Picaroon). At level 3 when I take another level of Investgator (Steel Hound) I get the following:

"Packing Heat (Ex): At 2nd level, the steel hound gains both the Amateur Gunslinger and Gunsmithing feats as bonus feats. He also gains a battered gun identical to the one gained by the gunslinger. This ability replaces poison use."

Amateur Gunslinger says:

Although you are not a gunslinger, you have and can use grit.

Prerequisite: You have no levels in a class that has the grit class feature.

Benefit: You gain a small amount of grit and the ability to perform a single 1st-level deed from the gunslinger deed class feature. At the start of the day, you gain 1 grit point, though throughout the day you can gain grit points up to a maximum of your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1). You can regain grit using the rules for the gunslinger's grit class feature (see page 9). You can spend this grit to perform the 1st-level deed you chose upon taking this feat, and any other deed you have gained through feats or magic items.

Special: If you gain levels in a class that grants the grit class feature, you can immediately trade this feat for the Extra Grit feat."

--------------------------------------------------------------------- -

My question is: At level 3, when I take level 2 Steel Hound do I get Extra Grit instead of Amateur Gunslinger becuase I have access to Panache? Is Panache considered the same as Grit for this purpose? The reason I ask is that the Advanced Class guide says if you have access to both, they share one pool.

Also, I am using Hero Lab to make the character and it flags Amateur Gunslinger as an error since it thinks I have a class with the grit feature . Not sure if this is a bug or an actual rules interaction based on the combined pools and the special part of the Amateur Gunslinger feat because Hero Lab doesn't let me repalce Amateru Gunslinger with Extra Grit.

Send me a PM and I will send you the invite, you can also apply directly here:

Forgeholm

Done

Heya! I am in game an playing and need an invite. I was one the original Land Rush sign up. I will look for the people listed in game. Can someone invite me? Tharkune Ironfist (in game).

I want a 'Chef' class. Make fantastic meals that last hours per level and give passive, untyped bonuses to everything... Bonus points if they can cook a creature and gain EX, SLA, or SU abilities of it's race for a limited time.

Oh, and they fight with frying pans. Because frying pans are awesome.

Maybe it could be a Monk Hybrid. Sort of a Drunken Masteresk class. Monk/Wizard? Monk/Sorcerer.

I wonder of the Bloodrager would allow the character to use hit points to empower spells or some sort of mechanic like that. Makes sense with the Barb Rage. Maybe feets to increase the HP gained or focus the stat bump to be CON specific.

On the Swashbuckler, I hope the focus on the combination of a pistol/sword and abilities around that. There are some feats that allow some bonuses when using melee and ranged weapons. That would be neet. On an unrelated topic I believe the name Swashbuckler can from the noise made when someone would "swash" their rapier on their buckler to make a noise. Sort of an announcment that they wanted to duel. So, I wonder if they will get any bonuses for buckler use in combination with pistols/swords.

@Tharkune

To attack a settlement you will need to be at war (or prepared to take huge alignement and reputation hits possibly). This means that it while you may be the aggressor currently there is nothing to stop us coming over and kicking over your sandcastle.

Bear in mind as well the much more important metagame, a settlement constantly warring with neighbours is unlikely to be winning many friends amongst the other settlements. This may manifest in losing out on potential trade all the way to counter attacks from other settlements forming an ad hoc alliance

Thanks. That helps. There is obvious incentive for the attacker (taking over the selttlement) with some potential dowsides (repuation hits).= but for the defender, besides protecting what they have, do they get any boosts or compensation for a successful defense. I would assume it would take some resources to rebuild structures etc. destoryed during the seige.

Will there be any risk vs. reward associated with attacking or defending a settlment? There should be consequences if you attack a settlement and loose. Is this tied in with flags for criminal bevaior etc? Also, if a group successfully fends off an attack, they should get some sort of boost to DI or economy boost. Just some thoughts.

I see they used my idea about the statue at the $2500 level! Pretty cool. I don't have $2500 to spend but maybe they could toss a dwarf a bone :). Cool to see these ideas are used.

This would be an idea that required programming: Create a backer memorial in game.

Create a room, somewhere in the game. In this room is a memorial / wall / statues engraved with the names of the backers. As you go up in backing your name is on a more elaborate piece of the room. Now here is the kicker - Publish a pic of the room and don't tell people where the room is in the world. Now we have our name immortalized in the game and we have an incentive to explore the world. Make it very hard to find / gain access. It should be something to strive for and it's location also becomes a nice piece of info that we can sell / trade for in game.

This is sorta what I was thinking with a statue. You could put a statue up in a town with the persons name on a plaque or something. That way people passing by could see it and the backer would have that notoriety. Maybe the townsfolk in the area can mention something like "Hey have you seen the statue of Tharkune the Giving?" :)

That makes me think of another idea that might have been mentioned. Titles based on backer level. But you could tie that to NPC interaction someway where an NPC will recognize you.

As far as the voice work goes...expensive. You now have to fly someone out to your sound studio and pay for room and board just to get an NPC's voice. I like the idea but it could only be a super high paying backer who could get this.

Maybe you could have some sort of web interface where you could record a pre-scripted line and submit it. It would be in the format they want and go directly to them. They quality is the issue so they would have to have final say on if its used or not. Nihimon mentioned something about this a couple posts up.

Tharkune wrote:

... the life-time sub would need to be $1000-$1500...

I don't recall Ryan putting a price on it.

From Pathfinder Online Kickstarter:

Ryan Dancey wrote:

It's hard for me to imagine ever selling a lifetime subscription. Frankly, I think they're always vastly underpriced, and if they were offered at the real value, I doubt most people would buy them.

For example, 20% of the people who played EVE the first month it was on line are still playing. Multiply that number by the 7 years its been in operation and you get a figure in the thousands of dollars. Now compound that by knowing that about 20% of the people who join in any given month also stay effectively forever, and you start to see how much money is lost if you let the hardest of the hard core buy a "lifetime subscription" for $250 or something.

Lab_Rat wrote:

As far as the voice work goes...expensive. You now have to fly someone out to your sound studio...

I originally thought this would be cheap, but I think you're right. They'll probably want the recording done in a decent studio.

Although I'll still hold out a little bit of hope that they'd be able to take a simple recording I made on my PC and process it enough to make it usable.

Right, I knew I read it somewhere. He said thousands. Which is worse than $1000-$1500. The point is it is cost prohibitive to sell a life time subscription for $200.

Some pretty cool suggestions. I like the "Voice an NPC" or "name a lake" ideas. A lot of people are talking about life time subscriptions. I think they talked about this in another thread and basically explained to make it worth while, the life-time sub would need to be $1000-$1500 if you look at the lifetime of a game (as compared to Eve) and figure out how much you loose on the monthly sub after the first year. I paid for a LoTRO Life time sub early on but I didn't end up playing that long but could theoretically go back to it. However, it was made free to play with purchasable content. So, one thing they have to weigh is what the long term look of the game will be. Many games MMOs these days are going from a Sub model to a FTP model. Personally, I would rather pay a subscription than have micro-transactions for experience boosts etc. but a lot don't want to do that. Guild Wars 2 seems to have a pretty successful model so.

So, thinking about ways they could give value without out increasing production time, we have to look at things that either don't involve the development team or are easy to do without adding significant production time since we all want the game sooner than latter.

Possible add ons should be things that don't give a "pay to win" advantage. Any in game items should really be cosmetic or very insignificant such as things like guild banners for your castle, a statue of with your guild name as a founding company or something like this. These types of things make cool additions that are unique, give identity but don't give an unfair advantage or take a lot of resources.

Added $100 to my level for the printed materials!

If they try to stay true to Pathfinder, it can't be twitch based which is good that they arnt going that way. I can see it be similar to the upcoming Neverwinter system where the cooldowns are based loosly on how often you can use them (at will, encounter, daily etc). Obviously the cooldown would be much shorter than a day but for those types of abilities you do want the use to be more strategic and meaningful than just spamming one or two attacks over and over.

The challenge is making it visually pleasing while staying true to those principles.

When I watched the technology demo, the one thing that got me was the combat seemed pretty stiff. Then, I thought to myself, this is really early in the process and hope things will change. The one good thing as crowdforgers, we can hopefully influence that. I would like to see a more fluid combat system. The rules for pathfinder are supposed to give framework to a representation of real combat situations. The demo looked like it was following the rules more than mimicing real life. I think there can be a good balance between realism and keeping true to the core prinicples in Pathfinder.

I am excited to be a part of the process and shape how the game will look. I have beta tested a lot of MMORPGs and have played D&D for a long time. The level of involvement that this process promises really appeals to me since I am passionate about the subject. I plan to wait and see how things develop and try to add my input to make a great game.