VampByDay's page

Can someone remind me of what’s going on? I know there were. . . Robot first seekers? And I think a swarm? And there were some damage resistances/immunities?

Do we have the chronicle sheet from last game?

I need to know how much money (treasure bundles) we got.

Sure!

Random question: I've run this for one group, and I'm running it for another shortly. What do people think about the multiple animated armors? Hardness 9 can be really nasty at low levels, especially without a striking rune. And the weak adjustment does NOT reduces its hardness. It almost wrecked my first group, and that group had multiple characters with big, d10/D12 weapons, AND a monk with flurry of blows. I can see this easily downing a party if they rely on the death by 1000 cuts strategy.

See the Character Options page, under "Using options from Pathfinder sourcebooks."

Thanks, don’t know how I missed that.

Are there any rules for getting PF2 weapons in SF2 society? There’s a human feat that opens them up to you, but, like, what are the rules. Are there even rules? I’d love to make a space pirate with a phalanx piercer. But (AFaIK) the feat is legal but there is no rules support. Do we have an official ruling.)

Just so I don’t miss the start, do we know when we are starting?

My character is made up, though I can change them if need be.

Thank you for running this game. I can go playing as mystic. I like playing as support for the group.

If that's the case, I do have an idea for an operative that I've been wanting to play since SFS 1

Hey guys, new to SFS2, but I've played a lot of PFS2 and SFS1. I have a bunch of ideas for a bunch of different characters, but I have a feeling I'll have to play the healer (I always do, *sigh*). I do have an occult witchwarper I'm willing to play, but his only healing is motivating ringtone so . . . be warned? Also, I have a bunch of other character ideas as well.

Recruiting for Starfinder Society Scenario #1-02: Mystery of the Frozen Moon. I'll have the game thread up Sunday or Monday

VampByDay has a reserved seat; all the other seats will be first come. Until I get the game thread set up, you can just reply to this comment.

Yeah, I'm down. I'll have to make my first SFS character. Very excited.

GameDay runs through late November. However, at least some of the games here that started in early September should be winding down soon.

I'm already seeing open game announcements on Discord, if that's more your jam.

I just want to get into Starfinder 2e and no one in my local group is playing it.

No new games in 3 weeks?
okay, I'll keep waiting.

My party doesn't have any animal companions (we have an Eidolon for a Summoner), but Mr. Oats is an often talked about backup character as an Awakened Animal on our table.

That's fantastic!

No one else took Mr. Oats as an animal companion?

Starting with our Champion. As soon as I mentioned Mr Oats, a player completely reworked their champion to have Mr Oats as their divine steed.

So this quote from GM Core seems to hint at the idea of being able to turn archaic items into 'modern tech items' and letting them loose the archaic trait, but it stops short of actually saying that. Is there a ruling (maybe in one of the paizo lives) that I missed?

By spending an additional week and paying half the base

Price of the equipment, you could install the technology
required to apply upgrades, integrate tech like comm units
and environmental protections into armor, and add upgrade
slots to shields and weapons.

Another question. I seem to recall (maybe it was mentioned in the Sept. 2025 livesteam) that you can pay to upgrade a pathfinder weapon to be a modern, tech item, and get rid of all the penalties (and let it upgrade using the starfinder system, instead of pathfinder's runes system.) But I can't find that in GM core. The closest I can find is this quote, which comes close to saying that, but doesn't explicitly say it:

By spending an additional week and paying half the base

Price of the equipment, you could install the technology
required to apply upgrades, integrate tech like comm units
and environmental protections into armor, and add upgrade
slots to shields and weapons.

Anyone know of a more clear ruling on this?

Looking for the entrance to B1 in the first book. The cavern explicitly empties into C1 . . . and I can't find where the entrance to B1 is. I did a cntrl-f to find it and didn't. Am I blind?

Xenocrat wrote:

You can't if you're playing a PF2 level of technology/magic in an uncontacted planet who are only contacted by aliens with tech as the campaign progresses. These alternative rules then give you a disadvantage as you play out your Aztecs vs Cortez scenario and give you an incentive to switch to tech ASAP if that's the vibe the GM is going for.

One of the SF1 AP backmatter planets was a tyrannical magocracy with no tech and who suppressed the Signal and wiped out (via extreme high power magicians who are the ruling elite) the rare starships who came into contact, while fearing the day they arrive in force and the genie can't be kept in the bottle and tech spreads to the masses.

If you played a campaign set on that planet/system (I think it was multiple planets with magical gates connecting them) the rules could fit in.

Thanks for reminding me about my idea of a PF2/SF2 XCOM campaign.

Psychics as the only spellcasters?

To all that say you can’t target armor, I’d like to remind you that there are monsters that specifically target armor like the Shuln so monsters that specifically target armor are not unreasonable in SF2. That’s where my mind went to.

Also, why have it as an optional rule. You can already spend a tiny amount of money to retrofit any archaic item to be a tech item.

Anyone still recruiting? I'd like to get into some Starfinder Stuff.

Looking through GM core and I'm trying to get ahold of how Archaic items are supposed to work in Starfinder.

Firstly: Archaic items accept runes and can't be normally upgraded. Fair enough. Also, they don't have upgrade slots, but can accept property runes. Also fair.

Secondly: You can spend some money to retrofit an archaic item to no longer be archaic. Great.

But let's say you find an ancient set of full plate, and an ancient longsword, and you don't have the time/workbench to retrofit them. Here are the rules.

1) Archaic Items are easier to break. Destroyed at 3/4 HP, broken at 1/4 . . . fine.
2) Armor has weakness to non-archaic weapons . . . is that . . . is that the ARMOR that has weakness? Like if I try to sunder a set of full plate sitting on a bench without anyone in it . . . it takes extra damage? Or is the person WEARING the armor is vulnerable to modern weapons. If so . . . why? Are you telling me, if someone shoots me with a laser pistol, I'm WORSE OFF with a bunch of leather in the way blocking the laser beam, than if I am bare-chested?
3)Weapons reduce a die of damage when attacking armor. Same question, is this if attacking a person IN armor, or is this to suppose if I took a longsword to some defiance armor, without anybody wearing it, that the longsword would do 1d6 damage instead of 1d8?

I think you just roll your ranged attack bonus. They're listed as two action ranged attacks and specify both a gunner role to use them and either martial or simple weapon in parenthesis.

I would say they don't count as guns, they don't list a tech or analog trait. And there's no reason for a class that specializes in shooting people in the head with precision ranged weapons to be especially good at aiming ship to ship missiles or laser cannons with whatever console interface they use.

That said operatives can still be the best gunners and pilots because they'll have max dexterity.

Piloting a ship can also use computers sometimes, so oddly enough, some witchwarpers could be really good pilots too!

Going over Starfinder GM Core, and I am wondering if I am missing something. What's the deal with Starship ranged attacks? It doesn't say what you use to attack with. Is it your ranged attack bonus? If so, are all starship weapons considered 'simple?' Do they count as 'guns' for the operative? I looked over the chapter and I didn't see any rules for it? Am I just blind?

Please accept my apologies for the major delay. Personal health and family issues have kept me away from my keyboard. I hope to re-establish a good rhythm of at least daily posting.

No problem. Real life comes first.

What are you trying to do, OP? You're correct that right now Primary Target doesn't ignore unwieldy, but it also almost never matters that it doesn't either.

Just trying to get all my ducks in a row is all.

Christopher#2411504 wrote:

The rules are unclear and clarificaitons have been requested in the Errata suggestion thread.

My currrent undestanding is:
- the Primary target strike is extra
- it works even with area wapons
- it doesn't consume ammunition
- it doesn't run into Unwieldy

While a bit unclear it almost specifically has to work with area and unwieldly. I believe this ability was put in specifically because early play test soldiers basically didn't give a rip about their proficiencies with weapons at all. They just never used it as everything was always just class DC area attacks. So basic/martial/advanced prof just didn't matter to them which felt very weird. The primary target strike makes sure they have at least one attack that uses their actual weapon proficiencies to strike.

Their reactive strike option also ignores the unwieldy and area modifiers in a very similar fashion to make a basic MAPless attack.

I too assume it has to work with unwieldy, but you know what they say about assumptions. And while you can adjudicate it at your own table, like I said, I’m trying to produce some 3rd party content under pathfinder infinite.

So AFAICT the new starfinder2e rules for a Soldier’s Primary target doesn’t say that they ignore the unwieldy trait. Is this intentional? Trying to get an official ruling so I can produce 3rd party stuff.

Hot take: I'm kinda okay with overclocking archaic/analog weapons. I mean, the idea behind a technomancer is that they are hacking magic. Using some residual magic to turn a stone axe into a techno-stone axe seems rad to me. I dunno, just my two cents.

Other then modify, I don't really see how they could interact with tech more without stealing from skill feats. Getting some low level repair or hacking enhancers could help the same way inventor gets repair feats and gadgets.

A few 10 minute style exploration mods could fill that avenue perfectly.
.

They could get the ability to make temporary tech items through a feat, kind of like Talisman dabbler or the inventor’s ability to make temporary gadgets.

Any thoughts? Rebuttals? Anything anyone has to add?

I haven't got a chance to play, but after a thorough readthrough, I have some thoughts.

Mechanic:
**The good: I like the clear class deliniation, and I like that people have tried to differentiate it from the Inventor. I also like the free skill upgrades; sorely needed in the PF2/SF2 system, even more so in starfinder 2e where you have more skills.
**Concerns:
1) Weak Chassis. Only becomes Legendary in Perception, and then only at level 17. That means that at PL 16, when you can expect to start finding level 19 hazards, they CANNOT detect legendary traps to disarm them, even if they are actively looking. I'd throw in a legendary save (fort?) and/or legendary in class DCs (given how much they need class DCs for things like exploding mines/area fire.)
2)I'm not 100% on the math of companions, but does it work out? Genuinely asking how the math of a drone will compare to, like, the shooting of a soldier or whatever.
**I'd like to see: An exocortex without a companion, that just is like a targeting computer like SF1. Also a vehicle Drone would be cool.

Technomancer:
**The good: I've never been so into spellshapes. I like the Spellshape/Jailbreak combo you've laid out. Also, got a kick out of the terrible programming language puns.
**Concerns: A whole list of them:
1) As others have pointed out, ServoShell doesn't really work with Starfinder action economy.
2) DPS++ Wants you to be shooting a gun, which you in general won't be good at as a full on spellcaster.
3) Viper REALLY needs an overhaul. I love the concept of getting more than one use out of a spellgem, but it's very problematic.
--a) Can't use it out of the gate. An initial Level 1 Starfinder won't have spellgems, turning off a good chunk of their class.
--b) Requires the GM to hand out spellgems for your basic class to work. If you are playing a prewritten scenario without a lot of spellgems, your subclass doesn't work.
--c) Even if you buy a bunch of spellgems to get it to work, that's a big chunk of your WBL that you should be spending on weapons and armor, that you just spend to get your class to have basic functionality.
--d) You never get above trained in class DCs, so your 'turn spellgem into grenade' becomes all but useless at higher levels as all enemies will just crit save against the grenade.
4) Action starved. Because Overclocking takes an action, and spellcasting takes two (usually) that's an entire turn. Leaving you no time to duck for cover or move into range or whatever.
**I'd like to see: Maybe a few more programming languages. Maybe a datapad or Comm Unit based one, or a melee weapon based one? I have an idea for some more terrible puns.
Nikl (COBAL), SIMPLE (BASIC), Itch(Scratch), Construction (Assembly). DPS blunt (C#, maybe make this one the AoE damage one.)

Am I crazy? The Viper Technomancer can make free grenades out of spellgems, but don't grenades use your Class DC? Which never gets ANY better for a technomancer? Meaning eventually everyone is just going to crit succeed against the grenades? Seems . . . terrible?

Arachnofiend wrote:

I do feel like the languages should all have an extra, "get you started" bonus. DPS++ should get martial weapon proficiency, servoshell should give you a robot familiar, Fortrun should get heavier armor. Viper should probably get a free per day spell gem? That might be too strong comparatively, the equivalent existing ability would be the Scroll Trickster's Basic Scroll Cache which is not nearly as strong and is a 6th level archetype feat. Still, I suspect it's not gonna feel great to blow your entirely WBL on basic class functionality. Some access to free spell gems should be available somewhere.

All the non-Viper suggestions are approximately a 1st-level general feat. The closest general feat for Viper is Prescient Consumable, which is much higher and wouldn't solve the funds issue. Maybe a daily spell gem of a first-rank spell you prepare?

Yeah, I dunno. The feat Scroll thaumaturgy is sixth level, but it lets you make a scroll from any tradition, it doesn’t need to be in your spellbook/spell thumb drive, and gets better at level 8. Quite a bit more powerful than we are asking for. I dunno.

With legendary class DCs and weapon enhancements adding to AoE weapon DCs, the soldier dc is +5 over the mechanic’s turret, pretty bad considering they are supposed to do the same thing.

I think legendary perception is because they want it to be a top shelf trapfinder. With computers/crafting and the option to do Arcana/Occultism it will be able to disarm a lot of common hazards/obstacles.

I believe they avoid legendary class DCs on things that do good/repeatable AOE damage, like the mines/exploding turret/drone AOEs all doing fireball equivalent damage that can be spammed many/every round with some action constraints. The one legendary DC AOE class we have is the kineticist, which does notably poorer damage than the mechanic options and what spellcasters can do with their slotted spells.

Soldier gets legendary class dc, and their entire thing is AoE.

So, like, the base chassis of the mechanic is pretty poor. Legendary only in perception, no saves, no weapons, and most importantly, no class DC. I'm not super familiar with the math of companions, can they get magic items to boost their bonus to hit and DCs vs spells? I know the Area of Effect weapons add their enhancement bonus to the DCs to resist them, but I don't know if that can be given to the exocortex mechanics? Anyone know if this math is mathing out?

Not having access to the spell gems and chips you need for your class ability is a bit of a kicker, but honestly shouldn't come up too often. To be blunt, if the problem is "The GM isn't giving out any/many spell consumable to the class who's entire schtick is using spell consumables," that sounds like a GM problem, not a Technomancer problem.

The situations where it could arise, though, could be handled by crafting? To that end, maybe the Viper language could grant you the Fabricator skill feat (SF2 PT Core P. 150) so you can use Computers to craft tech items, possibly with a rider along the lines of "Viper allows you to craft spell gems and spell chips without needing the Magical Crafting feat; crafting other magical items require that feat as usual" so you can make some basic stuff right out of the gate? If we wanted to get really fancy, you could even say a Viper user's spell cache also functions as a commercial Creator Capsule (p 211) for printing spell gems & chips.
(Feels a bit silly if your spell cache is, like, an implant or a virtual construct or something, but, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

I agree that being able to craft your own spellgems would alleviate the problem, but I still think its a potential problem. What if your GM is running an AP that just happens to be lite on Spell Gems? Also, like I said, not being able to use your primary class ability out of the gate is a bit concerning.

Also, not every GM is perfect at GMing every aspect of the game. Giving the PCs enough spellgems that they can feel useful, while not enough to just let the party steamroller fights with 50 gems of fireball (I'm being hyperbolic for effect) could be a difficult tightrope for some GMs.

VampByDay wrote:

I think a mechanic's Modify ability didn't get properly edited between play-test versions. So it says that you can mod an item, it lasts until the start of your next turn, and you can apply one of these mods. If you mod a second item, the mod on the first item falls off. Simple enough.

But then the level 13 ability Enduring mods mentions "This mod doesn’t count against your limit." What Limit? And the level 18 feat again mentions counting against a 'limit' of mods?

I think Enduring mod should just say "Choose one item you carry. During your daily preparations, you can enhance that item AS IF you had used one of your known mods on it. This lasts until your next daily preparations, and does not prevent you from further using your modify ability on other items."

The mod limit I believe is one. By default if you mod one item then mod a different item before the start of your next turn the first item loses its mod. Enduring mod lets you mod something that lasts all day so you can still do your 1 mod per round on other things. The wording is feat proofing and future proofing for mods that let you mod two things at the same time or feats that may let you maintain more than one mod at a time.

Then I suggest the mod class ability says "You are limited to one mod at a time, unless other class feats or abilities change that." or something to that effect so that it is more clear.

First off: love the puns. Love me a good pun, and all the programming languages being a riff on Real world programming language (or programming language adjacent thins in the form of Servo Shell) is just fun.

Can't wait for the expansion book that adds Construction (Assembly), Nickl (COBAL), Itch (Scratch) and Coffee (Java)

But there are a few things that stand out.

As has been pointed out before, ServoShell doesn't really work with standard Starfinder action economy, and will need to be fixed.

But I want to talk about Viper. I'm worried it is a little niche. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of being able to spellshape to use ANY spell gem (essentially a spell scroll), but it is the only one of the programming languages that you absolutely CANNOT use out of the gate. DPS++? You'll most likely have a weapon. Fortrun? You'll have armor. ServoShell(if it gets fixed)? You'll be able to summon a robot. But you don't start off with spell gems, and you are kinda reliant on your GM to give them to you. While most shops will have a gun or armor, they might not have spell gems.

I think Viper should overclock an item, like maybe a datapad that you start with or something. And then they should get a feat that lets them cast from any spell gem, or something. As it stands, that subclass could get really hosed if the GM doesn't give you many/any spell gems, as their entire class is kinda predicated on it. Like I said, I love the concept of being able to do more with spell gems, but it doesn't really work as is. I think it would be better as a series of viper-specific feats.

Also, super minor nitpick, I don't think the Spell Database technically says that it contains spells you learn from the learn a spell activity, or how you add new spells outside of levelups. Like I know wizards scribe scrolls into their spellbook, but I don't think it says anything for technomancers. Might want to spell that out for new players.

I think a mechanic's Modify ability didn't get properly edited between play-test versions. So it says that you can mod an item, it lasts until the start of your next turn, and you can apply one of these mods. If you mod a second item, the mod on the first item falls off. Simple enough.

But then the level 13 ability Enduring mods mentions "This mod doesn’t count against your limit." What Limit? And the level 18 feat again mentions counting against a 'limit' of mods?

I think Enduring mod should just say "Choose one item you carry. During your daily preparations, you can enhance that item AS IF you had used one of your known mods on it. This lasts until your next daily preparations, and does not prevent you from further using your modify ability on other items."

The Player Core playtest is over, the playtest for the classes in the Tech Core starts towards the end of April

playtest guideline

Blog Post wrote:

Players should avoid using Pathfinder Second Edition ancestries, backgrounds, classes, equipment, and feats that aren’t explicitly included in the playtest. Note that most of the skill feats and some class feats from Pathfinder Player Core have been included in the skill feat tables and are part of the playtest. Spells should be selected from the Playtest Rulebook and Pathfinder Player Core. While these options are available, we encourage players to try the new feats and spells from the Starfinder Playtest Core Rulebook to provide us with new data.

from Starfinder Playtesting Overview.

More playtest info here starfinderplaytest .

Thanks, it was from the blogpost. I appreciate it!

Usually when Paizo asks for a playtest, they ask for some restrictions when playtesting, such as 'don't use archetypes, we want to see how the class stands on its own' or something to that effect. I can't find that for the Starfinder playtest. Was there a set of rules like that, and if so, where could I find it?

And yes, I know the Starfinder Playtest is officially over, just looking for the official rules.

Thank you!

"Interesting . . . unfortunately this may indicate this infestation was . . . sabotage? I hope I am wrong."

If the room is clear, we can proceed to the other side room.

Did we stall? No posts in over 24 hours.

I will play a mystic pregen for this game if no one objects.

I'm all for healing!

Placeholder for the moment. Already doing a solarian and witchwarper playtest elsewhere, so looking to try one of the other classes. Which one, and whether it's a pregen or my own creation, I will decide as the party fills out.

How about the mystic?

Are there official rules for starting gear for 5th level, or is it just 'use the Pathfinder 2 rules?'