I'm unclear what an Anacite is, and don't currently have access to AoN. can someone explain that to me?
They're essentially the robot-natives of Aballon. They were created by some ancient species that's lost to history, and some believe they're meant to wait for their return while others believe they should follow in their creators' footsteps.
From the StarfinderWiki
Anacites are the self-modifying constructs native to the world of Aballon. Each anacite is a unique, self-improving construct, and over the millennia of their existence, thousands of different models have developed. Depending on their role, anacites can have any form and can reconfigure themselves to adapt to their circumstances. The most common anacite design is a basic arthropodan form of silvery metal, with multiple legs for efficient travel and claws for accomplishing their assigned tasks.
I read Basics of Magic, came back here to suggest multiclassing into Commoner for it, remembered that the OP was SuperBidi, and went back to look for the note at the end about not being able to multiclass into Commoner. It's still an incredibly strong feat compared to the other level 1 options, I feel.
The investigator [as described on Pathfinder Wiki] covers murder mystery forensics and might kindof cover archaeology? Not sure. Any class features that refer to medieval tech and magic would need to be swapped out, tho. Shooting people with serum darts optional, but it's a good way to deliver medicines and nanobots at range. Being able to debuff instead of kill also fit the character concept I had.
It's actually trivially easy to play an investigator in SF2. There's nothing you have to do to make it work mechanically, and flavor-wise I can't find anything that doesn't transfer over (not that you need to be over-worried about flavor).
A LOT of the complexity is reduced by non-obvious means, in comparison to PF1. Bucketed feat choices means you aren't usually comparing hundreds of options at a time, fewer feat trees means you're not planning out things far in advance, and standardized math progression means you can make "mistakes" in a build and still contribute well. Bonuses being fewer and less stackable means you aren't beholden to a complicated meta of buff stacking.
That's all to say that, yes, PF2 is a decently complex game, but in practice it's at least ENORMOUSLY less complicated than PF1, and its complexity is better spent on fun activities like tactical choices during play.
I just want to chime in to say that I grew up religious, became an atheist, and like to play religious characters because I have all the "training" to roleplay a religious person well, and it's fun to imagine there actually being a powerful entity worthy of that level of devotion.
The entity being worthy of your devotion is kind of key there. You have to have a character with firmly held beliefs that align with the deity in question to such an extent that your character would follow them faithfully to further their shared goals.
It's like selling your soul to a devil for power, but that power is specifically given for the purpose of fulfilling yours and that devil's goals, and when you die you get rewarded for it... Being a cleric is kind of a sweet deal.
I planned to have the party go to a VR gaming center called "The First Volt" run by a NPC technomancer and I thought it was a good pun and now I have to wait another week before I can share it.
Abadar's First Vault houses a perfect copy of everything that's ever existed, sort of like this guy's electronic VR machines can do!
Anyway, I gotta get back to staring out the window wistfully.
Not to be rude, but this sounds more like a problem regarding your play group rather than with Starfinder.
Maybe what your group needs to do is NOT assume you're racing against the clock. Even with all the technology, there is still a human (or nonhuman) element that could give characters time to breathe.
I want to push back on this. Racing against the clock feels correct from a narrative standpoint, at least to my group. Forcing the story to move slower just so that it fits in with the mechanical construct of spell recovery, which works well in fantasy settings, would be detrimental.
Do you find that in your games you have equal expectations about time pressure in SciFi vs Fantasy? I'd be interested to know if my assumption that SciFi being inherently more time-pressurey is false.
Mangaholic13 wrote:
Or, you could have your GM rule that your casters only need an hour or 2 of uninterrupted rest to regain all their spell slots?
I would like to suggest that there should be an in-world, RAW way for a GM to do that. Some kind of GM-controlled, use-limited pocket hyperbolic time chamber, or some rare drug, or a break-in-an-emergency mana crystal.
In brief: Science fiction settings tend to encourage faster paced action, which makes resting for 8+ hours to recover resources less narratively satisfying than in Fantasy.
In boxer: What I've found since at least as early as SF1 is that our group tends to instinctively assume a more strict background ticking clock when we're playing in a modern or futuristic setting. With cell-phones, email, security cameras, automated alert systems, internet, software assisted background checks, faster modes of travel... getting your objectives done as quick as possible always seemed to feel much more urgent. Missions also tend to be more complex with more moving parts (robotics megacorp factory infiltration versus cave full of skeletons), and reducing time spent on them reduces unexpected variables.
In our SF2 playtesting this trend has continued, and what it has meant is that spellcasters run out of spells (at least at lower levels so far) with much more regularity. This is exacerbated by the lack of staves giving you a reliable source of extra slots.
In Fantasy settings, news travels at the speed of horse, we have expectations of things like hunting for your own food, making camp, and talking around a campfire. The world turns at the pace of the seasons. Resting for a day or more feels a whole lot more acceptable in a wider range of situations in classical fantasy.
I wonder if it might be worthwhile to build in a spell slot recharge mechanic so that long adventuring days aren't so punishing in Starfinder. I certainly don't want to force Starfinder to adhere to the narrative expectations of Pathfinder, and I don't want casters to feel spell starved.
Wherever such a place might be, it'd also be the worst place to set an adventure, so it's thus the least likely place for us to ever spend time detailing. Or even mentioning.
I'm currently working on a Stardew Valley style homebrew with low-stakes and lots of NPC driven down-to-earth stories. Kinda think sometimes we get tunnel vision about what adventures can be.
Perhaps, but the core expectation of the person who picks up the Player Core is VERY DIFFERENT than the core expectation of someone who picks up Stardew Valley. Those games have to work pretty hard to do the other's job.
Yeah, the majority experience (for me when I played Stardew Valley) was non-combat. Yeah you can go into the mines, but honestly combat is hard. And I would mostly just try to run and avoid the enemy, because it was an anthesis to the otherwise chill aesthetic of the game. And like, you could avoid it entirely, but from what I remember there were some cool rewards at the bottom.
For sure there's lots at play about expectations, target markets, and demand. Perhaps a low-stakes adventure would appeal to a vanishingly small playerbase and in that sense a peaceful place would be the worst place to set an adventure. However, I'm not convinced we've adequately explored that space to know for sure, and I *am* convinced the standard AP model is getting stale. My Strength of Thousands experience was excitement about a new style of adventure crushed by what ended up being pretty same-old-same-old.
Also, combat is a pretty big part of Stardew Valley. Caves, Desert Caves, Island Caves are full of fun and exciting combat, and are important for standard advancement. You can even play a version of the Farm that spawns enemies at night! It's also one of the reasons I like the game so much. In fact, I highly doubt Stardew Valley would have gotten nearly as popular as it did without its combat elements. You know what else has fun and engaging combat? Pathfinder!
We can also talk about old-school D&D where the reason you went into the dungeon was to get treasure, not usually because there was some world ending threat you had to face.
(By the way, I'm sick and trying to distract myself)
Wherever such a place might be, it'd also be the worst place to set an adventure, so it's thus the least likely place for us to ever spend time detailing. Or even mentioning.
I'm currently working on a Stardew Valley style homebrew with low-stakes and lots of NPC driven down-to-earth stories. Kinda think sometimes we get tunnel vision about what adventures can be.
There are RPGs tailored around that, but it's a completely different system.
You can have RPGs be that, but I think trying to make Pathfinder that....isn't the path to go about it. A majority of Pathfidner rules are about combat. If you're story isn't about featuring combat, then there are other systems that are probably better.
Oh no, there's loads of combat. It's just lower stakes. Combat on the players' terms. Enough combat that the vastly superior PF2 combat engine is absolutely a heavy factor in system choice.
Also, Pathfinder 2e's non-combat effectiveness and versatility is super under-sold by the vast majority of the PF2 community. I've had loads of sessions where either there was no combat, or the combat was short and sweet, and it's been a blast every time.
I really think people are just overly tunnel-vision about what an adventure is. You can have low-stakes adventures.
Edit: Also, in my opinion (and full of hot air, as always) every setting should have a Shire (even if where that Shire is changes over time). If there's no place left for some simple folk to live out their lives, and everyone is constantly under some horrifying threat, or part of some war or other, then what's the point? Your setting becomes unmoored. I just happen to think that there's also interesting stories to tell in those Shires. Things like Bilbo there-and-back-again-ing every other week while spending most of his time worried about the village's crops.
Wherever such a place might be, it'd also be the worst place to set an adventure, so it's thus the least likely place for us to ever spend time detailing. Or even mentioning.
I'm currently working on a Stardew Valley style homebrew with low-stakes and lots of NPC driven down-to-earth stories. Kinda think sometimes we get tunnel vision about what adventures can be.
Alternatively, in my home games I aim for AT LEAST 1.5x the wealth by level table because it's way more fun that way. I would heavily recommend any GM to consider the wealth by level table a bare minimum that, if stuck to, should force your PCs to act like little, impoverished, victorian orphans.
Absalom 100%. Yeah, its the most logical target for BBEGs, but at the same time its the safest place since with the amount of APs that take place there and overall APs in general the amount of 20 level characters in that city can keep you totally safe from harm.
You may be right, but I don't know if I would consider having lots of 20th level PCs around as being "safe".
I want the Technomancer to be the equivalent of the Druid of technology. They should be considered kinda weird compared to most everyone, and be a little *too* into the mysticism of technology, with a strong bent toward *software* specifically. I think Mechanic can handle the hardware side of things quite well, and so giving narrative control of software to Technomancers could be a good way to give the two classes some space.
I'd like Technomancers to be able to influence, duplicate, or generate AI helpers that can do things as diverse as doing research automatically in the background to providing useful combat HUD info or targeting assistance.
I'd like Technomancers to be able to champion Matrix style modes of play, including things like allowing the party to physically enter artificial environments, computer systems, or data pads (if only to hide for a bit from real world threats).
I feel like Technomancers should be able to blur the line between virtual reality and reality, perhaps allowing AI helpers or software threats to take physical form to assist in combat or skill challenges, or create illusory effects.
I think Technomancers should be able to act as essentially a living matrix node, allowing them to project an aura of technological effects even in the wilderness.
Overcoming security systems and cameras should be second nature to Technomancers.
I don't think Technomancers necessarily need to be able to throw fireballs (though I think they should have a high damage potential). So I would like to put forth, looking at the sheer number and variety of effects the Kineticist can gain access to, that the Technomancer should be something more akin to a kineticist who channels only technological effects.
Mechanic:
I'd like to see Mechanics being able to swing their big narrative... wrench around. Having one in your party should be a bit like bringing civilization with you.
I imagine them meticulously and jealously assembling and caring for their personal engineering toolkit as essentially a personalized key to whatever the situation calls for, inside and out of combat.
A mechanic should be able to solve narrative problems that technology should be able to solve, without the party having to plan ahead or rely on begging NPCs for help. They should be able to quickly and easily convert UPBs into useful tools, and perhaps get some UPBs for free every day, so that they can always have an answer to the party not having the right tool for the job. From making an air conditioned shelter, to putting up a zipline, to building a permanent water harvesting system for a community, a mechanic should represent the kinds of power you'd normally get from utility spells in Pathfinder.
In combat I'd like to see Mechanics be able to do things unrelated to drones or modifying their own gear. Those things, I feel, should be pretty universally available options. I'd like it if they could do something more *sciencey*, possibly using their toolkit as a source of handwavium. Like spot welding enemy boots to the floor, generating a magnetic field that deflects bullets, welding a bulkhead door closed, creating an EMP wave, setting traps and snares, etc.
All in addition to being able to opt into computers/hacking, and naturally being able to use a gun.
I guess I kind of hope they fill more of a caster role in being able to solve problems and make flashy effects, but with the power of science.
I came in through the D&D 3.5 -> D&D 4E -> Pathfinder 1E pipeline.
4th edition didn't have the spark it needed, and was generally quite boring for our groups (recent revisionist historians like to gloss over its many, many flaws). I thought it was going to be a more streamlined and approachable game for brand new players who I was introducing to TTRPGs, but they all bounced off of it hard and we realized choices weren't compelling, and we weren't able to tell the stories we wanted to tell. The system lacked due respect for the fantasy, pushing homogenized game design over all.
I still remember the look of utter boredom on my friend's face as she wordlessly tapped her Eldritch Blast power card for the umpteenth time in a fight. I thought "oh, maybe TTRPGs aren't for her" but then that same players' eyes sparkled when we started diving into PF1, with its wealth of meaningful choices, customization, and respect for our imaginations. The difference was night and day.
From there, we were all-aboard PF1, playing regularly and with a lot of good stories to tell. I would still be happily playing PF1 if PF2 never came about, and I was convinced a PF2 was not necessary.
After diving into the PF2 playtest, however, I came to realize how much extra work I had been doing as a GM over the years and how much easier things could be. PF2 retained all the charm and zest of PF1, paying respect to the history of the game and keeping all my favorite sacred cows, while modernizing the engine underneath. I no longer had to guide my players into making characters on the same optimization wavelength, and I could build encounters on the fly. My GMing workload dropped to a tenth or less, and the stories we played were just as fun as before. We've played even more frequently than ever previously!
So here I am, enjoying PF2, excited for SF2 to bring those stories onto the same, well-oiled engine.
I thought OP's problem would be with the growing number of ancestries with no Fist attacks.
In Pathfinder everyone has a "fist" attack.
Awakened Animal:
Your heritage gives you a special unarmed attack instead of the fist unarmed attack humanoids typically gain.
So unless you pick an animal that happens to also have a Fist attack, you don't have a Fist attack.
I also thought Barathu didn't have Fist, which is why I thought it was a growing list, but I guess they do have fists. I wouldn't be surprised if more Fistsless ancestries come out of the woodwork in Starfinder though.
I will absolutely allow players to start with reload weapons loaded, lord knows they need it, but it does not make sense to keep things loaded all the time in-world. Dangerous, bad for the weapon, unrealistic. So my assumption for a stowed crossbow you didn't plan on using? Not pre-loaded. A go-to part of your combat kit? 100% pre-loaded.
I thought OP's problem would be with the growing number of ancestries with no Fist attacks.
In my games I've been running with a "don't cheese it" stance and letting unnarmed attacks qualify as weapons in most cases. Pretty much if it's a 1d8 dmg or less attack, it works fine with everything, and if it's higher it only works if other high damage weapons would work.
Having free hands is nice, but unnarmed attacks are generally lower damage, have fewer cool bells and whistles, and are often a flavor choice that ends up running into an unfair feeling number of blockers.
Im so used to an unkind spiteful internet that crushes ideas and people giving death threats over the smallest percieved slight. So i just factor in that im probably going to get my face ripped off.
Im glad that isnt the case here.
I'll just, uh... I'll just put these face ripping hooks away then. Let it not be said that I can't read a room.
My biggest issue was the immobile, cardboard cut-out thralls. I'm glad to see there's going to be more thought about injecting some more "life" into them.
I want products with a fully re-thought Adventure Path approach. APs have been such a pain to use, and so unsatisfying, that I think there's something fundamentally wrong with how the product category is being leveraged. I want an AP that has put in the work that I don't want to do (making the intricate networks of dozens of NPCs and their competing interests and goals and presenting that info in a readable format) and doesn't do things I don't want an AP to do (forcing my party through X number of individually boring encounters to justify reaching the level required for the next book written by another author who has an entirely different writing style). I don't know what that product would look like, but I get the feeling that it'd be a lot more infographics, random tables, and plothooks. I certainly don't think it will focus on maps with 15ftx15ft rooms with descriptions spread out over 20 pages. I think such products could also make de-emphasizing combat a whole lot more realistic, since the complex NPC connections make creative solutions, social rolls, and avoidance so much more interesting.
In short, I want a *new kind* of product.
I also still want to see a Deep Rock Galactic style randomized, board-game-esque hot-seat GM game mode that comes in a box set with cool minis, monster family decks from level -1 to 22. Beer and pretzels, zero prep, new GM training wheels.
As for conventional products, I would be very interested in a new Shifter class, ideally in a book that also has a Synthesist summoner.
I would really like some quality Tall sized understated-but-still-branded T-shirts, as well as good hats.
I kinda wish this conversation had happened 6 months ago. Like, when player commentary about things to put into Rival Academies would have mattered. A second cantrip hex per patron seems like a really easy add for that, and is fully in-theme with the idea of casters from different backgrounds and continents coming together to learn how the other peoples in the same class/subclass may yet do things differently. 'Your silence in snow patron grants you a snow hex? Oh, for us it grants a silence hex.'
I've been arguing that the Witch class should be focused on hex cantrips since day 1 of the Witch playtest.
Paizo has decided that familiars is the witch's "thing" and that the PF1 rad-as-heck hex-slinging witch is dead and buried.
I really don't see an issue with Untrained Improv being used with untrained Lores for RK.Assuming two characters have the same attribute modifier then even counting its full effect and the -5 reduction in DC you still only are marginally better (+1) to someone using a basic skill with expert proficiency, you are strictly worse than someone with master proficiency.
There's more than one RK skill, though. This makes you better than someone who is an expert in ALL of them. At the same time. For a single feat.
Outside of a Thaumaturge (because Esoteric/Diverse Lore) or high level Bardic Lore/Loremaster, no one is going to be a master of every RK skill, so this will basically always be an improvement except a WIS based character on Nature/Religion/Medicine.
"I'm untrained and better at it than an expert" is patently absurd if you stop and think about that sentence.
Yep, that's my exact problem.
If you consider a non-thaumaturge non-bard character without Untrained Improvisation (but expert in one of the standard knowledge skills) vs the same character with Untrained Improvisation....what happens if you give them the -5 to DC for recall knowledge for lore while using Untrained Improvisation (and ignoring Int vs Wis difference) the build with Untrained Improvisation is doing better in terms of what they need to roll to succeed. And that just doesn't sit right with me. And they can do it for every recall knowledge check vs just the ones that characters are spending their skill increases on.
Ultimately my view is that the rule to lower DCs was to encourage and throw a bone to people who might want to invest skill increases on Lore skills vs the general skill. Because without a decreased DC, why ever bother investing skill increases in a lore? Just invest in one of the generic knowledge skills.
So with that in mind, I don't feel it's fair to provide the DC adjustment for someone with Untrained Improvisation (or for someone trying to make an...
I agree. It's also not fitting the narrative of what Improvisation means. You can improvise in specialized fields of study for broad strokes, but improvising won't get you the depth of knowledge and experience where those DC improvements are coming from.
It's meant for being able to improvise enough to talk shop with a professional, but not actually having the experience to instantly apply specialized knowledge.
"Your proficiency bonus to untrained skill checks is equal to your level –2. This improves to your level –1 at 5th level and your full level at 7th level. This doesn’t allow you to use the skill’s trained actions."
-> See dog.
-> Make a Recall Knowledge check for Dog Lore to identify breed. The DC is set by the skill used, in this case Dog Lore is perfect so it would be DC10 vs DC 15 for Nature or Society (as decided by GM), and doesn't require training (also decided by GM)
-> Untrained Improvisation kicks in, you get your bonus based on your level
The problem is being able to make make recall knowledge checks with any lore untrained, not trying to use untrained improvisation. The problem is the same if a level 1 person without that feat and untrained in Nature or Society uses the Dog Lore skill they're also untrained in to target the lower DC.
In my opinion, I would make a call that when you're untrained in a lore, you would target a typical DC for a general skill instead of the specific DC, because you're improvising and it's harder to "wing-it" in more specialized fields.
My default rule for repositioning an ally is that, if you have both hands free and you could lift that ally without going beyond your maximum carry capacity (or one hand if they wouldn't even make you encumbered), you can pick up and move a willing ally to a position adjacent to you for two actions. This provokes attacks of opportunity against the mover and the movee.
If you couldn't carry them bodily, you have to start using Athletics, and it ends up working out similar to Reposition. You can't "chain repositions" and since it's willing movement, it provokes.
I don't think Jotunborn are the worst. There's a lot I like about the concept and design. However, I do agree that if "alternate plane of existence" is a rehash of the Dragonborn Abeir/Toril thing instead of say, coming from an existing plane in the Pathfinder lore, then I would rather they took another approach.
I am not a fan of the -born suffix since it got overused.
I think their physiology being so focused on making a large creature make biological sense is a bit of a mistake when actual giants don't have those conceits. It really makes them look unrelated to giants, so it's hard to accept them as the giant-kin ancestry I was hoping for.
I wanted a Cloud Giant offspring with a Hercules-esque story. What I'm getting is a brand new ancestry with vastly different visual language from what I'd expect, and that I'm unlikely to really embrace. I'd either reskin or go with Battlezoo for all the stories I want to tell with a Giant-kin type character.
I am drawing a complete blank, but I thought there was a feat somewhere that lets you apply your weapon's critical specialization effects at the cost of damage on a hit, or something along those lines.
Count me in for making thralls more individually interesting and impactful. Sticky melee thralls, archer thralls, caster thralls... it all sounds like a lot of fun.
I would err on the side of making caster thralls just do elemental/energy/force blasts and *maybe* some utility magic though. That's cool enough for me without making it a huge headache for everyone.
The extradimensional trait is kind of hilariously self referential.
"This effect or item creates an extradimensional space. An extradimensional effect placed inside another extradimensional space ceases to function until it is removed."
However, given that it doesn't provide a definition of what extradimensional means, we have to use the our commonly understood definition, which is:
extradimensional
1. (science fiction) Originating outside the known physical reality of the universe.
2. (science fiction) Coming from a world outside Einsteinian space-time.
An object in a space that is outside of our physical reality, should not interact with our physical bulk. If it did, I think the space would be, by definition, not extradimensional.
Bulk is also a function of volume and mass, so shrinking a 1 bulk object's mass to contribute to the mass of the belt it's linked to would provide an undefined bulk of the belt.
I just want to say our group has been having an absolute blast even just with the SF2 playtest stuff. Mixing and matching SF2 and PF2 content is so much fun (already played Barbarians, Inventors, Monks, Investigators, and Elemental Avatars* in SF2). I would love a Numeria book to sit as an unofficial SF2-PF2 crossover guidebook with options that archaicize modern tech and futurize ancient tech, while also providing all the in-world Numeria lore the setting deserves.
lol what are we expected to believe that a small skittermander is able to hold a regulation size disco ball in each hand? you're obviously unserious about this discussion.
The Drift exists as a technologically-only accessed and experienced plane of reality with its own rules and permanence. Drift engines let you physically enter, navigate, and exit.
What if someone created a scaled down drift engine using the same basic premise to partially access the Drift, creating a quasi-real bubble of Drift-like space with its own rules, access requirements, and features.
Why:
* Why bother programming virtual realities to sit on expensive servers when you can create ones with internally consistent and permanent rules and spaces via things like demiplanes?
* Creating a demiplane or jumping planes is difficult and expensive. It also requires magic. Borrowing the narrative conceit of the Drift as a relatively easily accessible planar technology might be easier to swallow.
* Virtual Reality is way cooler if you can actually enter it, and not even require magic to do so.
* I like the idea of being able to program realities, like Drift technology is borrowing the source code of the universe.
* Since a mini-drift-engine-for-VR is not for transporting whole ships, and doesn't travel the cosmos, it could be a small-sized or low cost device, like a VR headset or a personal transporter pad.
* You can easily tell stories where the party fully enters a VR space with all of their gear and abilities.
* You can introduce levels of depth: some spaces could be accessed through brain-computer interfaces and you don't fully enter, some could have rules that prohibit harm, some could be like 2b2t minecraft anarchy servers.
* It's a natural area to explore the "civilization uploads themselves to a simulated utopia" trope.
* Both the universe and the Drift are infinite and coterminous so this could work for a pretty ubiquitous version of AR as well.
* Technomancers having a fundamental connection to both the Drift and VR is SUPER satisfying.
I had so many problems with the AP, I had to do major surgery throughout. It also never felt like a magic school adventure, it felt like a political intrigue game with incompetent or hostile people in power. Also a huge empty hole in the AP where school-centric content should have been.
We felt like we were encouraged to run it like ALL of the teachers were either incredibly overworked, out in the field, or indisposed, and the school experience was essentially a do-or-die gauntlet of self-learning while fighting for your life so that the school could quickly get some new staff to start handling some of the endless problems they have on their hands. Your actual education was tertiary. The academic subsystem was mind bogglingly boring chore and massive oversimplification of what we really wanted to play.
The Magaambya felt like a black company in japan, and the city was so deeply under its sway that you couldn't rely on them for anything.
I regularly had to completely go off the tracks so that I could fulfill the original "magical school" promise to my players. I had to homebrew a school dance, magic staff creation lessons, student interactions, a party of rival students, extra-curricular activities, and high level magic school activities like plane hopping research.
My players also called for help when they realized there was a cadre of violent, unninvited snersons doing something obviously nefarious on campus.
I would too, sounds very intimidating. I completely failed Recalling Knowledge on these monsters.
In Steven Universe the conspiracy theorist Ronaldo believed snake persons, or snersons, were up to no good. As soon as it was revealed that there were snake people performing a conspiracy on campus, my group started calling them snersons, completely ruining their gravitas.
