I guess drone meld must not be that popular. I guess I don't use any of these drone chassis so it doesn't really matter to me but it's absolutely not answered in the book and it should be.
Search Posts
I also follow the author on twitter and agree with this interpretation. The original version of this thread actually said "based on what I know about the author there's no way they intended for this chair to provide a carry weight detriment of any kind - their philosophy is usually that mobility aids in TTRPGs should never provide detriments as that defeats the whole point". But I was worried about getting into fights with people who don't agree and getting the whole thing derailed into the usual bad faith discussions about disability in TTRPGs. Glad to see that's not where the conversation went! It seems like most folks say this is common sense so I'm not too worried about having to convince my GM that's how it works but that's basically why I made the thread was to see if this was a common sense way to interpret what's written or not. Still think it could use more specificity but I'm no longer as concerned based on this discussion.
Fun fact: You can also wear Light Armor underneath it. I have a nesting armor build already and I'm so excited to add another layer to it. I'm sad the upgrade slots get combined, but at least I get another weapon slot. My question is: If you use Drone Meld can you wear the drone over the outer layer of power armor?
Tech Revolution introduces 3 new drone chassis: Artillery Drone, Protocol Drone and Sage Drone. There is no listed update to the Drone Meld trick for these chassis - even though you should absolutely be able to use it with them and gain some manner of benefit. We should have an update as to what mods / features are kept when you meld with these drones. My assumptions: Artillery Drone - Proficiencies and weapon slots
However, no details are ever given.
I think that makes sense, it's just vague as to whether the cutoff point at which it shuts down is "encumbered" or "overburdened", and it would have been so much easier conceptually to just say: "If the user becomes overburdened, the chair shuts down. Also it has pockets that allow it to function as a backpack, increasing carrying capacity by the listed amount." So it's all just the slightest big vague and perplexing. But I agree with your analysis I just would have to convince my GM of that and he might look at this and read something completely different.
I would also note that the chair's pockets seem to be similar mechanically to a backpack. So that is another reason I don't think they are supposed to represent max bulk.
"A hoverchair can carry its user in addition to an amount of bulk based on the model. If its bulk limit is surpassed, the chair powers down and must be restarted. Also, each hoverchair features one or more compartments for storing gear (again, based on the model)" The bulk limits are never specifically addressed in any of the entries. The only bulk listed is the bulk the pockets are capable of carrying. This is a problem because going over the limit shuts down the chair, and from this description it SEEMS the limit is 2-3 bulk which is very small. I have SO MANY questions about this: 1.) "A hoverchair can carry its user"
2.) "An amount of bulk based on the model"
I'm very excited for the virtual intelligences, mech system, and the science-fantasy tech segment, we did a lot of work with our characters on like their favorite holovids / games / restaraunts etc. and entertainment tech like music is a fun way to explore more of that.
I am hopeful that:
2.) Power armor users who already invested a lot of build in feats to get powered armor proficiency get some benefit out of it when piloting mechs, since the large power armors are not very different from small mechs conceptually, and I'm a little worried that you're going to see characters who invested heavily in power armor rendered obsolete when everyone is in big mechs.
Yeah, I feel like I probably shot myself in the foot by ordering things in my sidecart. Last time I didn't and it shipped super fast, this time I did and it is going to be the street date by the time the content unlocks on my downloads. My faith was not strong enough.
Wait whaaaat? We CAN get more food related content?! Show me were to sign! Let's take to streets!Maybe if enough people ask, Keeley and Robert will let me do an expanded article about food and dietary requirements as backmatter in an AP or something. If you want more food lore, be sure to let the team know!It's kung fu that you do, too. My only complaint is that I wanted it to be longer. I was hoping for 2-3 pages of that. :)Hey! I wrote that section! (The second one you quoted.)Any cool lore things that you're seeing?I personally like the list of Manufacturers, beginning on page 55. I also love the idea of more food content. I'm in a campaign with a custom setting and the players have been inventing content like this for the GM. We made up a fast food chain called the Gastronaut, a line of soft drinks called "Mozty Cola" which comes in flavors like "Spiced Flash", "Orange Enigma" and "Cranberry Six". There's also a special "Holiday Blend" available only in rare holiday cases. I haven't read the new content yet (my faith has not yet been strong enough to grant me the boon I seek) but I can't wait. It sounds so interesting! I want to incorporate it into my roleplay. Would love to see more.
Brothers and sisters We have gathered here today to see the fulfillment of the promise that was made in the sacred prophecies! For today IS the day that was foretold and if you have faith as I do in the divine oracle Su'Scrib Shun then you shall join me and all our brothers and sisters around the world in the shangri la of shipping, the nirvana of new content, the Valhalla of this beautiful brand new Volume sent directly to your hallowed place of residence for the low low price of 39.99 plus shipping and handling. FEAR NOT the darkness of despair for Su'Scrib Shun whose eyes see the future has heard your prayers and the desire in your heart and if your faith is strong then YOU SHALL RECEIVE AN EMAIL. And then... there will be peace.
This is not the place to have this discussion, there's a lot of threads on the forums. But the question comes up a LOT. So I'm going to get into it briefly. A lot of people say exactly what you just said. Which would not be an unreasonable response... in an faq. But if there is that much confusion, it should have a response in there. Yes even if the response is "Did I stutter?" As it is there are a lot of reasons to suspect that rule wasn't thinking of the drone as a class feature. There are already a handful of exceptions to the rule that class features can not be used in space, and there's a lot of reasons the drone might be one of them - chief among them that the drone is classified as a Creature, and is almost a character unto itself with its own skills and levels and the ability to take independent action on command - even if not a full round action until you hit a higher level. If a generic NPC that you bring aboard your ship can participate in ship combat (which they can - otherwise you wouldn't be able to crew larger ships or you know... fight other ships), it is not unreasonable to assume that a drone could also participate. You can also argue that the Drone is a partner character whom you gain access to through a class feature, but that for purposes of this rule the fact that it was spawned from that feature is irrelevant and it is just a creature like any other who might board a ship and take actions if able (obviously it could not take any action at all if the mechanic was disabled and could not issue commands). In a rulebook where there are FAQ responses like "No, death and dying (a core part of the combat system of this game) doesn't work the way we said it does here. The rules in this other section which contradict that are correct." and "Many of the DCs for crew actions aboard a starship (a core mechanic of our game) are incorrect. Please use this table instead" it a takes a whole ton of stones to say "Listen the rules as written are very clear, and I don't see why your misgivings would warrant an FAQ, just trust that what it says is always correct". The rule in question is intended to prevent a player from using various class features designed for ground combat in space. If a dog NPC that was trained in the Engineering skill but took a severe penalty to their rolls due to poor intelligence could take an action as part of the crew of a starship, then it seems pretty damn reasonable a robot could as well. When you think about what you actually gain, it may be significant at early levels but it rapidly becomes completely insignificant as you get into bigger and bigger ships. So it's not like it's some huge exploit. I think that gives enough reason to doubt. If you don't agree that there's even a slight ambiguity there to justify an interest in an FAQ, I'm fine with you thinking I'm an idiot. Let's not argue here. Find one of the threads I posted in on the forums and we'll pick this up. This day is supposed to be about the Armory, and the glory of the prophecy that was foretold. Bask in the glow of the PDF, my friend.
This book actually got EXTRA time for gencon, it was supposed to be early July but got pushed to accommodate the convention. I'm disappointed that there are more mistakes in this book, from the sounds of it (still don't have the PDF yet), because the original Starfinder book is loaded with mistakes and ambiguity. We still haven't got an FAQ on whether mechanic drones can participate in starship combat or if needlers can use healing serums and whether or not they still deal damage when they inject one or if the injection replaces the usual damage. I have a whole huge list of things I wanted errata for. It feels like they could use more editing resources for Starfinder. My excitement for this release is undeminished. Soon. Soon the day will arrive.
Fingers crossed that today will be the glorious day that was foretold in the prophecy. May the blessings of Su'scrib Sh'un, whose eyes see the future, fall upon us all and bring our people a bountiful harvest. In space.
So what's going on with this book? I was charged for it a while ago but it hasn't shipped and I don't have a PDF.It can still take 1-2 weeks for it to actually leave the warehouse, which is when we get the pdfs. Mine took exactly 14 days last time. According to a thread linked earlier about July subscriptions: First the order is created, you are charged, and a confirmation email is sent out. This happened around the 12th. Then they begin preparing orders for shipment. This takes one or more weeks because they're doing it for all the subscribers (and probably some non-subscribers as well). Orders began shipping on the 18th. They will continue shipping until the 27th at which point they SHOULD all be shipped unless it takes longer than expected - which it may. When your order ships, you will get an email confirming that the shipment has left the warehouse and you will then receive your PDF in your downloads. And then... there will be *peace*.
That's awful! The email you think is a shipping email is likely just the order confirmation email. They look extremely similar, but the subject line would read "Paizo Order #XXXX Shipment" instead of "Paizo Order #XXXX". It is very likely that both books are included in the same order, and that no order has shipped yet (though it is likely to do so very soon). If the previous email is the Order Confirmation email, as I suspect, then there will be a second email when it ships that will very clearly say "shipment" in the subject line, so I wouldn't worry about getting the PDF after the physical book. You'll probably get the shipment email soon with the PDF, and then get both books in the mail simultaneously. Per the page I believe you linked us to on July 3: •Subscription Authorization (Order Spawning) Date: July 12th
It looks like the 13th would have been right around the Order Spawning date where order confirmation emails are sent, making it very likely you misunderstood what the email was for rather than that Paizo happened to go against their usually very strict subscription shipping process and ship out a non subscription book a week early. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you that you get the ship notification today!
Note that there are two different notices that Paizo sends for each subscription order: One is just an order summary (Subscription Authorization) - the "Order Spawn" date for these in the thread you linked earlier was the 12th. There is a separate email when that they send when your order officially ships. The first email reads "Paizo Order #XXXXX" and the second reads "Paizo Order #XXXXX Shipment". But in your case since you ordered two, it may very well be that you got separate emails for each and one was earlier than the others! I dunno, I only mention this because Friday was the 13th and that's just about when the order summaries were supposed to go out (on the 12th). My personal guess would be email 1 is your order summary for the subscription and the next email you'll get will be a shipment notification email, and the non-subscription item would ship later. Based on what I understand, non-sub items usually ship later. Unless you put them in your sidecart! I don't know what the limits to the sidecart are but I know for example that I have some sidecart items shipping, and I hope they don't delay the shipment too much.
I've never paid this much attention to my subscription releases before so I don't know how close to the shipment of your item they unlock the PDF. I really wish I'd paid attention this much to the last release as a test case, but I seem to remember it unlocking that day. So it's possible that the one that shipped was a non-subscription item but it's also possible they just unlock it at the end of the day? I dunno. But they're clearly shipping which is exciting!
Nothing yet but I think it's like you get it when yours actually ships so it could be a while!!
That's just as well, it gives me something to look forward to tomorrow. I can get excited about tomorrow.
Update: The ship date for subscribers has pushed to the 18th
Also I should note the begin shipping estimate has changed to tomorrow on the page someone linked a while back. So I can cool my jets for a day. I'm not impatient just excited
Dear Diary, It has been but one day since shipping was to start and yet the hour that was foretold in the prophecy has not yet come to pass. My thoughts are with my brothers and sisters in their suffering. I wonder whether any of them have yet been blessed with word of their products shipping? The range of ship dates is great and though I fear it may be the 27th or early august before the glorious documents are revealed to me my faith is strong that some happy news will reach mine browser any day now. My character's shoes and weapons are much worn from an encounter with an Assembly Ooze, and the shipment of goods from the Armory are much needed by all of his comrades. We have made an agreement to remain on this station until the shipment leaves port and we will not fail in our duties. With every passing moment it is harder still to wait knowing our salvation is at hand. May Grandmother Rat have mercy on our souls. July 17, 1018 PS. I wonder whether yonder Gastronaut has any chicken tenders on their menu?
This is by far my most highly anticipated book in the set so far. I can't wait for these to ship so I can get that PDF. I haven't had a good RPG book to dig into in a few months. And now that I know who all the characters in our party are, it's not just about me anymore. I've got to find gear my character is eventually going to build for THEM too. It's everything I can do to prevent myself from pounding the refresh button on the downloads page - I know it's likely not to actually show up for a few days so that's probably fruitless.
I'm very excited for this book, been waiting a long time for the armory! At this rate it should be showing up: - Before our party hits level 2 - which incidentally is when I'll be able to swap out my robot's mods
I was really worried we were going to be deep into level 3 and off the first planet by the time this book wound up in my hands, but thanks to the complexity of grenades and vehicular combat we didn't get through the LV. 1 plot fast enough! Shopping adventures here I come.
Yeah RAW it looks like you can't grant proficiencies only feats, so if you obtained a proficiency through an alternate means you couldn't grant that, as the way you learned it is weird and can't be taught in this manner. In general I don't see a problem with granting someone a feat you don't have if all it does is grant a proficiency and you have that proficiency. Unless you don't meet the requirements for the feat. But this gets into sticky territory so I'd typically avoid it. Mostly I was interested to see if someone could grant a drone the ability to be proficient in armor but alas. Explicitly disallowed.
I see it now, sorry it took a lot of reading to get to that part. You should probably cite rules and abilities when you use them to save people some trouble. Checking it out.
Where does this ability come from? I have never heard of Lend Expertise
I'm excited for this, but I'm MOST excited for the Armory book. Why can it not just be July already?
Yeah I am really hoping we eventually get a clarification on this one as it does come up a LOT. That was a really insightful comment.
OK But I'm just going to say it here because one thing in the interview read to me as a bad misconception. They are NOT good on space ships as we currently stand. The game is presently completely lacking any kind of stealth system for starship battles, and there's all kinds of amazing third party stuff that has come out that blows away the meager offerings we've seen so far. New hulls, new hull sizes, new modules and systems. So that's not accurate. Starships aren't in a good state where they just don't need any more content. There is so much more creativity to be plumbed.
That interview is amazing, and is presently easing my anxiety waiting for the book's release. SO CLOSE. SO CLOSE. I like the mage power armor description. And the shotgun glove.
The primary argument I see regarding drones not being "separate characters" is "They are a class feature and can not be used in starship combat" to which I would respond "They are a partially separate character that you get as a class feature, and are therefore an exception to this rule"
The fact that the ship economy is detached from the player economy is very strange, but in this case I say you have to let go of the desire for a realistic simulation and leverage fluff to explain it rather than try and homebrew something. I like BigNorseWolf's idea that the UPBs are just used along with spare parts and scrap to make repairs, hence the low cost. You can't really screw with the balance in the way many people are talking about by charging hundreds of credits for repairs unless you are also giving them similar amounts of extra credits for salvaging wrecked enemy vessels when they win encounters. And ultimately it's easier to explain it this way: "Okay you salvage the enemy ships, use a few bits of scrap and UPB and make repairs" rather than building up complex systems where they just pay more UPB and you throw off the whole economy balance of the game.
I've had this discussion before. There is no part of the RAW that I have found that indicates that you must be a Player to take on a crew role. This is essential because NPCs can also take on crew roles. From what I'm reading the RAW specifies Characters fill crew roles, not necessarily players. So the question is whether the Drone is considered a separate character from the player for the purpose of starship combat. I personally consider the Drone to be a separate character for purposes of starship combat. It has its own levels and skills and is specifically able to take engineering actions on its own without direct control from the player as long as the player is conscious and able to issue commands. I believe that is really all it needs to be roughly equivalent to an NPC in terms of ability to take crew actions aboard a ship. They would absolutely have to have either manipulator arms and a toolkit or a tool arm, but I'm almost positive that drones are intended to be able to be used as starship crew in a pinch, especially in a two person fighter situation. Star wars quotes as justification seem to be popular here so my example is "R2, that stabilizer's broken loose again, see if you can't lock it down" Some people argue that only a max level drone should be able to do this, when it attains True AI and can operate autonomously. I argue that this is overkill, as it is perfectly capable of acting independently enough to qualify as a character capable of taking on a crew role even at first level if it has Engineering as a skill - either through Skill Unit, Bonus Skill Unit or Skill Subroutines.
I disagree. Fabricate Arms is cast as if it were, itself, a spell of the level of the slot consumed. It is NOT modifying the attributes of an existing spell. You could absolutely use them together according to RAW.
Thanks I'm almost thinking someone typed "Ammo" by mistake and meant to type which TYPE of ammo.
So the Police Cruiser is the only vehicle listed with a weapon: The Autodisabler. The weapon is listed as "Ammo 2", which I assume is meant to be its capacity. But "Ammo" isn't an actual type of ammunition so there's no rules for buying more of it. It seems like it should be using a battery of some sort, but no battery is listed and "2" wouldn't make sense for a capacity in that case. Can it only take two shots ever? Is it considered to have infinite ammo and reloads after every two shots? How in the heck is it supposed to work? Is there further information elsewhere in the rulebook that makes this distinction clear? Next up on my list of confusion with the police cruiser: So the weapons can't harm people. That's weird, but I am guessing that they didn't have enough space in the rule book to go into how mounting weapons on vehicles or modifying them might work, and didn't know how they wanted to handle the concept of "vehicles that are designed to shoot people" yet, so they're saving it for later. Ok. Can I still TARGET people? Can I apply an Anchoring fusion to it so I have a chance of pinning a target? For GMs out there: Do you bother with this restriction? Obviously you have to if you're in organized play, but at the home table do you let players pay to remove that restriction? Because it sounds annoying. I would have just made the gun count as "Merciful" vs. creatures. I guess the writers just really wanted to limit vehicles to shooting at each other starting out. I hope we see vehicles with weapon mounts in the future.
So I read this thread a while ago and wanted to come back to it once I'd had more time to poke around at the rules. Powered armor seems to have a lot of advantages with one major drawback: Power. Power is the root of all the problems people are experiencing. Too hard to just be in it all the time, so it's tough to even take it with you. One of the advantages that hasn't really been talked much about may end up being the one that helps solve (at least partially) the power problem. According to the entry for powered armor: The cockpit of powered armor is too small to fit a person wearing heavy armor. If you’re wearing light armor while in powered armor, you gain the higher of the EAC bonuses and the higher of the KAC bonuses between the two suits of armor, and you take the worse maximum Dexterity bonus and armor check penalty. None of the rules I'm seeing seem to indicate that the light armor's upgrades cease to function when you wear powered armor over it. To me, this seems like an oft overlooked feature of powered armor. You can stack upgrades like nobody's business. But I want to focus on one upgrade in particular, which has come up in this thread: The Backup Generator. It's listed in the description of the generator that each generator can only be attached to one item. It does NOT say that each item can only have one generator attached to it, meaning you could theoretically connect one battery to a bunch of generators to charge it more quickly. It's at the very least not explicitly forbidden in that entry. So how many of these do you need to power your armor? The Battle Harness seems to be very easy to run indefinitely with a single backup generator. The Flight Suit could be charged using the multigenerator technique if you equipped a light armor with six upgrade slots, and put generators in all 10 slots available to you. The others are short at least 2 slots. So maybe not super useful. You can be always charging in the light armor, but you still charge too slow for continuous use of the Jarlslayer or Spider Harness. But thus far, no cheese alarms are going off for me. However, I do have one interesting observation regarding the mechanic class's drone meld capability, and I should warn you that the following section contains some moderate cheese warnings: Drone Meld As a full action while in contact with your drone, you can reconfigure it into a mechanical drone suit (or a backpack-like apparatus, for the Tiny hover drone) that you can wear. While in this form, the drone can’t take any actions or use any of its abilities, but you gain either the drone’s flight system mods if you have a hover drone, reactive camouflage (and an invisibility field if your drone has it) if you have a stealth drone, or reductive plating if you have a combat drone. Now some of the Drone's Mods grant it Armor Upgrade Slots. The Mod might be considered an ability (as mods "grant your drone additional abilities"), but (cue the cheese alarm) the armor slots are technically equipment that you have installed in something you are wearing. So while it is not explicitly stated that you can benefit from the drone's Armor Upgrades, there is a slightly cheesy argument to be made for being able to access the armor upgrades. On to the next part of the equation: Can you wear the drone into the cockpit of your powered armor? It's worth noting that the drone doesn't technically count as either light or heavy armor. It's a special case that doesn't change what you're wearing (this one I think is just correct RAW not a lot of space to debate it), so it seems to me like you could wear it in the cockpit if you had light armor on. Therefore, in theory, power any armor on the list indefinitely using the following setup: 1.) Light armor with six slots, each equipped with a backup generator.
And then as the mechanic you also get some cool tricks like your energy shield that can augment your ability to survive in the suit. Anyway, this whole theory relies on the following somewhat dubious ideas: That Armor Upgrades equipped by the drone do not count as abilities but rather as equipment and therefore can be used by the person wearing the drone
and You can hook up more than one generator to a single item.
I guess it is also assuming that you can plug up an item (like a battery) which is currently in use, in the way you would a cell phone, rather than that you have to eject the battery first. I'm curious as to what folks think about this clear and blatant shenanigan. On the one hand, I LIKE it as a solution to the power problem. Which is a problem. I shouldn't have to invest so much in a skill if I never get to use it because my armor is not able to travel with me. On the other there are other solutions that are easier to justify in the rules system: Nobody seems to be saying you can't ride your motorcycle with your power armor on (Though if a player told me they wanted to ride their junk cycle in a flight frame I would laugh them out of the room), and you could carry your armor in a sufficiently large null space chamber. So I can see a scenario where someone just transports the armor using one of those methods, but (using the trick above) loads up both the drone and the light armor and the heavy armor with a force field each, so that the player can benefit from their own mechanic shield in addition to three high quality force shields, a titan shield and all manner of damage reduction and energy resistance. Not to mention the boundless number of purple aeon stones you can have wizzing around your head. In the end something feels slightly broken. But, then, you can already do almost all of that to a lesser degree just by wearing light armor inside of powered armor. And also there's a trade off - if you use the armor like that, it's not going to last. You'd be a monster tank for a little while, but you'd have to deal with all the inconveniences of swapping batteries and transporting it, getting in and out when a fight starts, etc.
Honestly, what I'm in it for are the starships and the equipment. I know that Armory is coming out soon, though and I figure that book will be more my speed, but right now I'll take whatever scraps I can get. I wish the armory book were coming out earlier! We've got a campaign starting and I want to be able to take advantage of the equipment-based character options without having to re build my character a few months in. Alas!
So here's what I'm seeing when I read the text of the spell: You can learn this spell twice. Learning this spell allows you to make 4 creature selections for each spell level you are capable of casting. One choice at each level may be a lower-level summons, which follows special rules as listed on the table. You may learn the spell twice.
So if you learn it twice you're making 8 selections per level.
I think it's fine to turn a ship invisible as long as it's part of a larger system of hiding / detection, and as long as every action that could gain you some advantage increases your odds of being detected. And so long as enemies can also participate in the stealth mechanic. It's just a lot of work. A cloaking device that gives you a surprise round is also a way to do it, but it depends on what you're going for. If you just want a chance to sneak attack, then cool. I still like the stealth / detection homebrew idea. I think it makes for a tense, exciting and suspenseful scene and a whole different style of combat.
If you're trying to make the power armor more mobile you can try storing it in a null space chamber. And yeah, roboticizing powered armor is a bit of a stretch. Another technique I've seen people try is to build an artificial body from prosthetic cybernetic limbs... but I also don't think THAT is really how it's meant to be done, either. Those are supposed to be brain-controlled not computer-controlled. Honestly I anticipate that we'll see more robots in the Armory when it comes out but until then I think we're out of luck.
So the object being controlled seems to need to have robotic parts that are electrically operated in order to control the object by computer. Heavy armor couldn't, but powered armor is clearly digitally controlled, and doesn't require a human body for structural support. The fact that a vehicle can be controlled is what makes me feel there's room to control powered armor. But I don't think it would be very good. If you assume based on the fact that the computer is proficient with weapons it control that it's also compatible with the armor and its weapons, then you're still relying on its tier or your own abilities for skill checks. And you'd be relying on the armor's hp and you'd have no saves because items don't get them unless they're worn by a creature with saves. Raw, you probably shouldn't be able to do it but you can make an argument for it. Is it worth it? I dunno
That’s not quite right, there’s a section that states if you have the feat but no longer meet the prerequisites that you lose the benefit of the featYeah I'm also FAQing that because the distinction is really important, and if it's intentional then it should really be specified that the intent was that the ability be useless without the feat prerequisites. If a feat requires another feat, then not having the prerequisite feat would violate the prerequisites of the advanced feat. If the advanced feat requires a proficiency, then it doesn't matter if you get that proficiency from your class or from a feat that grants the proficiency. Either will fulfill the requirements. What the user you are responding to was saying is that if your class grants you the proficiency required for a feat, then you meet that particular prerequisite. You don't NEED to get the Heavy Armor feat to take the Powered Armor feat. If you get Heavy Armor proficiency from your class, that is enough. SO what you are saying about how losing prerequisites works is true, but the user you are correcting is actually also correct. You're talking about different things. The major observation of this thread is that it's easy to conflate the proficiency with the feat that grants said proficiency - in fact the rulebook apparently does this in some spots! But they are not the same thing, and you can be granted proficiency in something from your class without a feat getting involved.
I disagree 100% with the idea that the needler was absolutely meant to deal damage in this scenario as well as that it was intended to be used vs. enemies. I noted the spot I think is ambiguous above. I think that there's so much ambiguity and contradiction between the needler, injection and dart rules that it looks like healing serums are an edge case that the designers intended to include but did not thoroughly explore and document in the rulebook. I don't feel like it's possible to make a really good call in this situation because of how much weirdness and ambiguity exists in the definition of these rules. Which is why I think this needs an FAQ. In terms of whether it's intended to target enemies, even the description of the weapon indicates it's used by healers on their allies. I now have one more thing I'd also like FAQ'd, and that is whether drones count as a "character" that can take on a role in starship combat or not. There's a separate thread on that, but I thought I'd add it to my list here. Basic arguments are: 1.) Drone is not a PC or an NPC, it's a class feature and class features can't be used unless explicitly stated. Vs. 2.) If it has a creature type and takes actions independently of the character and has the right skills and the proper arms or tools to do the job then it is a character and can have a role on the ship just as an NPC would. There's a lot of posts about all of these different subjects, I'm less trying to debate the ruling, because I don't think it's particularly useful to debate in any of these cases. The information simply isn't covered. And that's why I think it all needs to be FAQ'd. The only way you can make a ruling in any of these cases is to cherry pick rules to prove a point, and you can do that in either direction in most cases.
This seems like a scenario for which there is not a lot of support in the rules as written, but which could be accomplished in a way that would be exciting for your players with significant homebrew. Weirdly I remember there being a line somewhere in the book about running silent by turning off all of your communications systems in order to avoid detection, but I haven't seen anything on re-reading to support that. It sounds like the OP primarily wants to know how one would do this using RAW, to which the answer is: I don't think you can. Talk to your GM about letting the joy of homebrew into their heart. I love the idea of adding ship systems to augment stealth. Replacing the shields, in particular, creates some really exciting gameplay and meaningful design choices when the players are building their ship. It might be interesting if you had to choose between allocating SP to either shields or stealth on a particular facing. Ships on that facing couldn't target you if they can't detect you. You'd probably have add stealth ships as something you could actively scan for. DC modified by the ship's stealth bonus. I think it's important to allow detection systems if you are making stealth systems as well. I would love to see other types of ship systems modified to include mechanics for stealth and detection, and expansion bays that interact with the system. It would also be cool to work stealth and detection mechanics into the actions the players are able to take. Some actions should generate signature and introduce penalties to stealth, other actions should specifically boost stealth at the expense of course of having to devote an entire action to it - taking away from the pool of other actions your crew can take. Examples by role: Captain: All of the captain's current actions would inflict penalties to the ship's stealth. They would get a new action called Ominous Silence that would allow them to boost the ship's stealth. Engineer: Repairs of any sort and the Overpower action generate signal fluctuations that can lower stealth, but diverting power is silent. Gunner: I would give the gunners active sensors that can be installed to search for ships on various arcs of the ship with a special detection action that is only available if the equipment is installed. Firing a weapon of course would be devastating for stealth, so most of the gunner's other actions would be stealth-breaking. Pilot: Failing a piloting skill check would result in the enemy getting a free opportunity to detect you. Some skills would increase stealth. This would add a lot to the tension of the moment. Maybe if you lose your stealth you would have to pull some kind of piloting maneuver to hide from your target in order to regain it again. But that might require there being something present to obscure your signal - a star or a planet or a debris field. You could call it "Get Me Closer To One Of The Big Ones." Science: Balancing shields would allow you to redistribute stealth allocations as well. Scanning could also be used to attempt to actively detect an enemy vessel. Furthermore, I would work signature cloaking into the damage rules for the ship. If you take damage to a system, it might cause you to emit signatures that would make you easier to detect. This would give the Engineer reasons to risk repairs in spite of the reduction to stealth, if there is a greater reduction in play from a damaged system. Of course you'd have to investigate all the bonuses and penalties and make sure that the system was balanced and fair. It's no good if you can get so many bonuses that nobody will ever be able to detect you, or if the penalties for ship damage or taking normal actions typically negate the entire benefit you get form the stealth systems. Balancing this could potentially be exhaustive, and might not be as easy to put together as a far simpler system. But with proper time and effort you could have a system that gets the entire crew involved in the stealth mechanics, and really makes the players feel like they made significant, meaningful gameplay choices when kitting their ship out for stealth. I would honestly run this like a WWII submarine fight, and I think it would be really a lot of fun. But it would take a good deal of work. Possible content for a future supplement?
Yeah I'm also FAQing that because the distinction is really important, and if it's intentional then it should really be specified that the intent was that the ability be useless without the feat prerequisites.
So this actually brings up a good point: Darts can also clearly be coated in Acid, as there's an Acid Dart Gun that also uses Darts. The interesting thing here is that Dart doesn't mention Acids specifically (though perhaps it falls under "Toxins") while it does explicitly mention Serums. No weapon is explicitly given that injects Serums, but the Needler does inject Medicinals and is listed as a weapon for stressed field medics. Honestly the problem here is that the Needler, Darts and the Injection special rule require further clarification in an FAQ. It appears to come up in threads here a lot, because people don't know how to handle special cases or what the limits really are. Like I'm reading here that some of the poisons we're explicitly pointed toward for use in this weapon are actually inhalation only. And it's not like there are a lot of things on the poison list to begin with, so what exactly are we supposed to use or not use in this gun? DM fiat works fine for casual play, but for organized play people need a more definitive answer and right now there's a lot of contradiction.
|