Xa'sha's page

They don't really speak to much about size or appearance of powered armor.

From what I see, powered armor is used to augment the user so don't really add to the over size of the character. It is not like Battletech.

It does reference bulk but that only comes into play when the suit is picked up or carried. It does not impact the characters normal carrying capacity.

There are rules to remove it yes. but it is not overly large so there may not be a need to remove it to go inside.

Thank you for the info, I knew they weren't mech sized but I didn't know if they were Rifts Glitterboy sized, Or powered armor from Fallout sized, Or Mjolnir powered armor sized etc.

Edit: What is the avg bulk number?

Could anyone describe what the size or appearance of powered armor is like in Starfinder based on what is in the book?

How tall are you while wearing it?

What should we be expecting bulk wise?

Will we need to remove it to move well indoors?

Edit:I'm just trying to get a mental image.

Thank you very much for this post this is very valuable.

I've been silent in this thread until now, but I want to say that I am a huge fan of the Envoy. It's a really cool class with lots of options.

One of the issues that we're all dealing with is that Starfinder has changed how the numbers of combat works in a number of very subtle ways. If the Envoy were transported to Pathfinder, it would be underwhelming because Pathfinder is a math game where players stack as many sorts of buffs as they can in an ever increasing game of rocket tag with the monsters.

In its own milieu, the Envoy has a ton to offer -- both in and out of combat. Remember always that the Envoy is not a solo player. It's part of a team.

Starfinder has deliberately removed most of the buffs from the game and simplified the math in a thousand different ways. I would like to urge all of you who are now feeling buyers remorse to actually play the game. The system is elegant. The adventures that I have seen are delightful.

This is going to rock.

Yours with Jet Boots On,
Hmm

I agree whole heartedly with this sentiment, I watched the twitch game and everything seemed like it was working quite well.

We should attempt as a whole to reserve any judgments until we start playing adventures and take the whole of the game in as the sum of it's parts in it's native environment.

Xa'sha wrote:

I mean honestly considering everything I've read in this thread I still wouldn't call Starfinder a bad game or system especially considering the room it has to grow from here.

Nothing is going to be perfect and while improvements definitely could be made this is still a good looking game.

Also no one in this thread excluding the dev that was posting has tabled the game yet, at least play it before making final judgments.

I haven't ever called Starfinder a bad game or system. Furthermore, I said several times I like Starfinder as a system more than Pathfinder.

There, however, are parts that I dislike.

I didn't say that you did.

I was making a statement for the record.

Nothing I have said today has been aimed at you.

I apologize If I have given you that impression.

I mean honestly considering everything I've read in this thread I still wouldn't call Starfinder a bad game or system especially considering the room it has to grow from here.

Nothing is going to be perfect and while improvements definitely could be made this is still a good looking game.

Also no one in this thread excluding the dev that was posting has tabled the game yet, at least play it before making final judgments.

Also I'm speaking to everyone generally here.

There's more to a character than their numbers. While I can see the potential issues for those who like to optimise their characters/parties to the max I don't see a lot of these issues affecting the groups who just wanna hang out and play a game (most of the groups I've played with anyway) as the numbers are only a part of the character. Even if the class skills are underwhelming or not good, as long as you can turn up and hit the thing without getting constantly downed and you're enjoying it the numbers aren't a big deal. I know I'll probably still play the 'bad' classes and enjoy it.

T~T Thank Triune that there is someone who also thinks this way!

I was beginning to feel alone in this regard.

Evilgm wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

While there are some great builds with the solar armor, melee solarians don't generally have really high Dex, so a typical melee build with heavy armor and a solar weapon is going to wind up with more AC than the same character with light armor and solar armor. Unlike in PF where armor proficiency feats weren't that great for the most part, Heavy Armor Proficiency is excellent in SF, and I'd recommend most characters who aren't soldiers or operatives to at least add it on the list they're considering taking.

If the Solar Weapon is no better than a regular sword of similar level, and the Solar Armour is no better than heavy armour of similar level, then what's the point of them? Flavour's cool and all, but shouldn't a class feature that replaces gear be somewhat better than the gear?

Especially in a more modern setting, there are a huge number of possible scenarios where carrying big weapons and wearing big armor are not going to be viable options. And I'm not just talking "you've been captured and all your stuff taken", I'm talking things like social events, meetings with various people, and all sorts of other places where weapons and armor are either not allowed or would stand out to a massive degree. How do you think people today would react to four or five people wandering around downtown dressed in full tactical gear and carrying assault weapons?

It may not be better than what others can do mechanically, but it offers more options in various situations. If you're taking a meeting with the CEO of a corrupt corporation thinking you're getting a job offer, but it turns out it's an ambush and he wants you dead, you'll be pretty damn thankful that one of your teammates can pull a sword or suit of armor out of thin air.

This isn't D&D or Pathfinder, where the vast majority of adventures are assumed to be dungeon crawls where you'll always be in full kit, or set in faux-medieval times where people don't blink an eye at a fully armed and...

This is a part of what I have been attempting to convey.

Trying to mathematically determine whether certain options are worth it for offense or defense is going to be really hard until the Alien Archive comes out and we have hard numbers for opposition to gauge things against. Actually gauging whether a character is worth their salt in combat or even what combat numbers mean in the setting is pretty close to impossible. A lot of the text in the book might as well be gibberish until then.

That doesn't mean we're short on problems to point out before then, unfortunately. Like carrying capacity scaling linearly (so that your endgame power armor suit can only lift about 290 pounds), most of the class options being both mechanically ineffective and extremely bland, stealth still being broken in the same ways it is in D&D, and and traps still being totally undetectable if you don't specifically stop and spend actions to find them.

Could you elaborate on "Mechanically ineffective and extremely bland"?

Xa'sha wrote:

Considering the character I wrote for Starfinder is an "Expert Armor Technician"

('Exocortex' Mechanic/'Armor Storm'Soldier multi-class), I think i'll be fine.

However I just wanted to say something....

I don't always go for what is the absolute most effective, I build character stories first and build the rest around that.
Saying that a certain class has no purpose completely "because x does it better" ignores that individuals may choose classes for reasons aside from "what is the best at X". Who cares if someone else from class X would be better in that role? It's a group activity, the sum of the team really decides everything anyway it isn't a competition.

I may just be an idiot but I'm still looking forward to Starfinder.

It's just generally poor form to have something obviously superceded by something else.

I just think that sometimes in these discussions player preference, character themes, coop benefits, or the "mouth feel" of classes get ignored in favor of pure mathematics arguements that put the numbers of the classes in direct competition with one another.

I'm not making an arguement about what is good or bad for the game.

I'm just saying there are other factors to consider.

The reward of a class isn't just how it helps you in combat.

Considering the character I wrote for Starfinder is an "Expert Armor Technician"
('Exocortex' Mechanic/'Armor Storm'Soldier multi-class), I think i'll be fine.

However I just wanted to say something....

I don't always go for what is the absolute most effective, I build character stories first and build the rest around that.
Saying that a certain class has no purpose completely "because x does it better" ignores that individuals may choose classes for reasons aside from "what is the best at X". Who cares if someone else from class X would be better in that role? It's a group activity, the sum of the team really decides everything anyway it isn't a competition.

I may just be an idiot but I'm still looking forward to Starfinder and the adventures I'll have within it.

Thank you for answering me! I appreciate it!

I plan to roleplay an armor technician mechanic character so here's to hoping that it isn't too difficult for mechanics to get the feat for powered armor.

Also are Bio-Armors in Starfinder?

((some clarifications about my earlier question; non in game examples would also be acceptable...I'm just trying to get a general idea of where the lines of the two categories are so I can make a better mental image))

Owen could you describe with any specificity the differences between Light armor and Heavy armor...OR rather an example of what could be considered Light armor or Heavy armor in Starfinder?

Just to give an example would "Power armor" fall under Heavy armor or would it be a special category?

(I joined this site today after lurking for years because I wanted to ask you this question.)