Director Robot

Xenocrat's page

2,164 posts (2,224 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 24 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Voss wrote:

Rather baffled by these changes.

The resonance number seems aggressively meaningless. Unless WBL and items cost change, there is no point. You still have to dedicate most of your cash to the latest weapon(s) and armor upgrades, and if you have enough money to shoulder 8 more items, then it seems like a fluke or a flaw.

At high levels it prevents you from hot swapping a bunch of situational boots/rings/amulets for differing challenges.


I saw Salman Rushdie standing next to me at the Met. My wife noticed him, quietly but visibly freaked out as she pointed him out to me, and he practically ran for the exit, probably thinking she was an Iranian assassin. (She's Mexican, but looks ethnically ambiguous.)


Metaphysician wrote:
Absent other plausible options jumping out, I would tend to figure that after thousands of years, any random immortal probably has either ascended to outsider status or outright divinity. Assuming, natch, that they didn't otherwise get killed, or spent most of that time inactive.

She's already an outsider.

The long range outcome of almost all outsiders is to be destroyed and recycled, a vanishingly small proportion become (demi)gods. It's just a question of how many years (abyss), decades (maelstrom), or millenia (most others) it takes for your average outsider to get killed during interplanar warfare, expeditions to other planes, or other mishaps.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Glad to see splash damage now explicitly applies to the target of your bomb.


ghostunderasheet wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Magyar5 wrote:


That being said. That's just stupid. To think you can step out of cover, fire a weapon, and step back in to cover or move, fire, and move some more without that applying to grenades is nonsensical and ridiculous.

You've clearly never thrown a grenade.

i have thrown water balloons and played Airsoft before there was plastic pellets.

There are three types of triggers for a grenade as well, impact, timed fuse and pulled fuse. So you can toss one in a way that your out of the danger zone before it detonates.

Thanks, this was very funny.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's absurd to think the technology available to the outer planes has ever changed. Civilizations with technology more advanced than that in the Pact Worlds existed aeons before the Pathfinder/Starfinder timeline, and they sent their souls to the outerplanes (and were subject to interplanar trade) just as much as those in the present day. If outsiders aren't using high tech weapons when they interact with medieval societies it's not because they don't have access to it and haven't had access to it for a good fraction of a billion or more years.

The only significant thing about the Starfinder era is that the drift and resulting contact and technology dissemination means that low tech socities will start plunging as a percentage of active galaxy-wide civilizations. Of course, since the drift may be limited to the one galaxy, it's a tiny rounding error in the overall universe balance of souls and technological distribution.


Magyar5 wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
Magyar5 wrote:


That being said. That's just stupid. To think you can step out of cover, fire a weapon, and step back in to cover or move, fire, and move some more without that applying to grenades is nonsensical and ridiculous.

You've clearly never thrown a grenade.

Clearly you presume a great deal without knowing. I have, in fact, thrown a grenade, yes a live one, at a hotex at Fort Benning. I've also hit a tank at a mile out with a .50 cal Barrett sniper rifle.

I have many friends in the military and they will all tell you the same thing about grenades. You don't throw one and then stand there to watch it detonate. You get behind cover immediately. You also don't pull the pin and release the lever until you are ready to throw. Lastly this maneuver is how almost all grenades are thrown in live exercises. You step out, pull and throw, then get back in to cover. You sure as hell don't throw from the place you intend to take cover. That's grenade safety 101.

This is impressively beside the point. Is a grenade throwing motion related to a shooting motion, such that the same feat should cover both?


Magyar5 wrote:


That being said. That's just stupid. To think you can step out of cover, fire a weapon, and step back in to cover or move, fire, and move some more without that applying to grenades is nonsensical and ridiculous.

You've clearly never thrown a grenade.


Ravingdork wrote:

Now that more people have access to the book, does anyone else have any further ideas of how to build forms properly?

If my group doesn't get clarification, we may never be able to use it.

Not that many more people have access (just late subscriber shipments), it doesn't go on sale until next Wednesday. Try again next weekend.


I think there's no question that you can't use fly or swim speeds while in power armor unless the armor itself provides those speeds.


It’s no in Pathfinder, I think I remember it explicitly in the core rules being that way in Starfinder, 65% confidence.


Corrik wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
pogie wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
Apparently the inability for a small company to handle tens of thousands of users on their website simultaneously in the wake of a hotly-anticipated release counts as a "misstep" now?
Of course it does. What would the consequences be to Paizo if on the day 2E launches, their site goes down for 2 weeks?

If Paizo.com goes down on launch day due to the sheer number of people trying to spend money on their products, I'd call that the opposite of a problem.

But seriously, in order for it to be a "misstep" there would need to be something they did wrong. What exactly did Paizo do wrong here? They took precautions to strengthen the website before launch, and when it did go down they made the playtest documents available through an alternate download source. What was the mistake, not having the resources to make a website capable of handling 10,000+ concurrent download requests?

The misstep was them being unable to get the site back up and keep it up. Make no mistake, that was a professional embarrassment.

Why don't people like you ever think about the people on the Titanic who didn't die? smdh


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like a FAQ update.


Illeist wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
if the skill check fails you weren t hit by a trick attack you just got hit
What leads you to believe that? If you declare an action to trick attack and hit, how have you not hit with a trick attack?

You succeeded at an attack, but you failed at the trick part.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
D@rK-SePHiRoTH- wrote:
pogie wrote:
LuniasM wrote:
Apparently the inability for a small company to handle tens of thousands of users on their website simultaneously in the wake of a hotly-anticipated release counts as a "misstep" now?
Of course it does. What would the consequences be to Paizo if on the day 2E launches, their site goes down for 2 weeks?

The people who manage the website are not the same who design the game tho.

Yes, mistakes from the technical department CAN of course impact sales, but this tells us nothing about the quality of design choices themselves.

The ability of Paizo's senior management to handle the rollout of a big new revision to their web platform, including it's coordination with other business activities and choice of technology and personnel implementing it, does have implications for their ability to hand the rollout of a big new revision to their flagship product, including its coordination with other business activities and choice of rules structure/goals and personnel implementing it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Paizo will eventually become a Starfinder company that produces PF2 as a sideline.


Just give everyone line weapons, shield problem is solved...


Ravingdork wrote:
Vehicle and starship weapons are undoubtedly considered weapons (it's literally in their name), and they even have weapon levels so we know what could and could not be placed and how much it would cost.

Starship weapons do not have levels. Vehicle weapons are functionally the same as individual weapons, however.


Bull Rush has the most bonuses, you can get it very likely to succeed, plus a damage rider from the Armor Storm soldier style.


Realism suggests you don't fire a missile (as opposed to a rocket) without an active tracking solution. Patriot batteries don't fire a missile and then hope they establish a target link while it's in the air.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Tholomyes wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
The first Goblin Scuttle was indeed not supposed to be level 9 alongside the follow-up, as you guys guessed.
Follow up Q: Was Goblin Scuttle, then supposed to also retain the bestiary goblins' requirement of a "Goblin ally"? Because, outside of "We Be Goblins" type campaigns, I don't see it as all that common a trigger.
I read "Goblin Ally" as "An Ally of the Goblin in question."
Yeah, I read it as "Ally Who Is A Goblin", I think this feat might need some additional clarification.

I'm with you, given how it works for monsters and that they could have just said "ally," I think it restricts you to another goblin to trigger it.


I don't think it works that way. A book published one year before the gap ended that was a history of events that occurred before the gap started should have survived intact. It was only data/memories that directly covered the missing years that was excised.

If our gap was from 100 BC to 2016 AD, a history of the Peloponnesian War published in 1995 would be missing any comparisons to modern historical events, and perhaps the title page would be missing the company that published it, the date, and the name of the city it was published in (unless it was Jerusalem or Rome or a similar preexisting city, perhaps), but the details of the war itself would survive.


There is the Phase Shield from core. It's clear they put a very big balance point on that extra point of AC.


Yeah, modern explosives generally don't explode if shot, smashed, or even set on fire (the latter is more iffy and depends on the application of the munition). Starfinder explosives are surely at least that safe.


Plane Shift can traditionally (Pathfinder) be used to travel to a demiplane, but it can’t create one. There’s no Starfinder method to create one, and you’d have to get the appropriate key/focus to travel to one you discover.


Why wouldn’t they get weapon specialization? The feat says all weapons of the appropriate type get the damage.


Yqatuba wrote:
Cayden Cailean and Erastil to name a couple. Looking at the wiki though there are more left than I thought.

They aren’t missing, they’re just not important or worshipped in the Pact Worlds in significant numbers.


I’d say each provides a doubled (+4) insight bonus, which don’t stack. You get +4.


I strongly suspect it is the latter option, because that’s how Summon Creature works - four options locked to each level you can cast.


Thaago wrote:


Gear Boost: Massive Momentum: +5 to Bull Rush while wielding an unwieldy weapon.

All combined, if you move 20 feet before the attempt: The Bull Rush attempt is at +15 and the target is moved an additional 5 feet.

Not quite. Massive Momentum adds 5' to the distance moved IF you already succeeded. It does not add 5 to your result to enable you to succeed. So you get a +10 bonus, but if you succeed add a total of 10' to your normal result.

Ravingdork wrote:

The Bolida from the Alien Archive 2 are tailor made for this build!

Defensive Ball (Ex) As a move action, a bolida can roll its body into a nearly impenetrable defensive ball. While rolled up this way, a bolida can only uncurl itself as a move action, take the total defense action, or use its rolling charge ability. If the bolida takes the total defense action, its bonus to AC is increased to +5.

Rolling Charge (Ex) A bolida that is rolled up in a defensive ball can charge without taking the normal charge penalties to the attack roll or its AC, and it gains a +5 circumstance bonus to AC against attacks of opportunity during its movement. It can’t make a melee attack at the end of its movement, but it can instead attempt either a bull rush or reposition combat maneuver against its target with a +4 circumstance bonus to the attack roll. A bolida can’t use this ability again until it takes a 10-minute rest to recover Stamina Points.

In addition to the other issues noted above, this would replace, not stack with, the Juggernaut Boosters bonus.


Would some kind soul post something about which aliens have been added to the Summon Creature spell options?


What is the level range on the polymorph spells and their duration?


Tryn wrote:

I don't see the problem.

The item clearly says "you can create an illusion that functions as holographic image with a spell level equal to the model number of your holographic eyes"
So take a look at the related spell "holographic image" and you find your answer: Holographic Image

Mk 1 lasts for as long as you concentrate.
MK 2 lasts for as long as you concentrate plus 2 additional rounds.
MK 3 lsts for as long as you concentrate plus 3 additional rounds.
MK 4 lasts for 1 minute per level (so 4 minutes)

And like the spell you have to concentrate (this time as a move action) to maintain it.

The MK 4 is item level 20, so 20 minutes.


Dan of Hats wrote:

The fortification ability from force fields is a fair consideration, and isn't something the Stellar Revelation provides. There is the cheaper option for one slot that provides Fortification without the force field (I forget the name off the top of my head, it's in the Armory), but that might be worth swapping out for the Enhanced Mobility one.

Fortified Plates. One slot, but two bulk.


10 + half item level of your weapon (not fusion) plus attack stat (dex for ranged or operative, strength for melee or thrown)


Magyar5 wrote:

That's not explicitly stated.

And it doesn't really make sense according to the description.

This illusion is a result of tiny projectors in your eyes. The only magic in this item is the link between the rune and the tiny projectors. It makes sense that the image would cease to exist if you stop looking at it. Further it would cease to exist if you stop concentrating on it while you are looking at it.

Again, think of what you are saying. You can cast a 4th level spell at lvl 20 as many times per day as you wish. And you don't have to "maintain" it? You can just cast it and let it ride.. as many times per day as you want? A spell that lasts 20 minutes... as many times per day as you want, that you don't have to concentrate on or maintain?

Doesn't that sound a little bit overpowered? There's nothing on the market quite like it. It would be a steal at 800,000 credits.

I'm glad to see we've moved on from "my client didn't kill him" to "but if he did, it was justified."

An 8th level mechanic can take the Holographic Projector trick.

Holographic Projector wrote:
Your custom rig can project holographic images as a standard action as often as you like, as per 2nd-level holographic image except it can create speech and has a range of only 120 feet.

So this is infinitely spammable, and it lasts 2 rounds after you stop concentrating. It costs nothing but a mechanic trick.

The mk2 Holographic Eyes are item level 13, cost almost 50k, take up two important augmentation slots, and are less capable than this ability (minor sounds, no speech). The mk3 version can do smells and thermal, which aren't very important for most things, but can't do speech. The mk4 can do speech, but is level 20 and costs 820k. Infinitely spammable illusions that last are not the most powerful thing a level 20 character can do with that much money.

It's fine, really. And it might be the rule. It's hard to say.


Yes, and if you stop maintaining it, it starts to deteriorate, a process that takes some additional amount of time as determined by its spell equivalent.


I think the latter, but it’s very odd.


The entry device has to exist first for you to exit it. But if it’s part of your gear it would have to return (through itself...) simultaneously.


JiCi wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
JiCi wrote:
...for a fighter ship, you must have a tracking weapon and another Light weapon in the forward arc, and little to no use for weapons for both the aft and starboard arcs (seriously, who's going to sideways?).
If you don't arm all of your arcs, the enemy is going to take advantage of those blind spots every time you fail your Pilot check. You'll get blasted again and again, and your options for retaliation would be quite limited.

Aren't you always moving? You make it sound like I move, stop, shoot, [wait for my turn], move, stop, shoot, wait, rince and repeat... Shouldn't ship combats with smaller be similar to dog fights? I've yet to find evidence that a fighter jet had side guns :P

Granted... yes... that would be a bad idea to leave the arcs unarmed. However, it makes more sense for bigger ship which cannot turn on a dime than on smaller ships which maneuver much quicker.

That's like saying that my PC should hold a gun in his off hand to be able to shoot sideways because he "cannot" turns and shoot with his primary gun which he shoots a bad guy in front of him on the previous round.

If a fighter has to move first in the piloting phase there is a VERY high chance that the opponent with any kind of reasonable speed and maneuverability acting last will be able to get in its side arcs and bring to bear its own favored weapons, making the fighter completely unable to shoot in the gunnery phase. I don't think side arc weapons are smart for fighters but multiple fighters supporting each other are. So are flyby attacks if you lose the piloting check and have to act first.


Metaphysician wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

I'm not so sure about that. It seems pretty clear that your gear comes with you. If it didn't, you'd end up naked with every casting.

If the spell failed for some reason, you'd likely just end up where you started, along with your comm unit.

It is a bit ambiguous I suppose, but it's already weaker than dimension door in many respects, so I don't see the purpose in imposing such a limitation (especially since it isn't unbalanced to allow).

This issue is not your gear coming with you, its the device you use as a gate coming with you.

Yeah.

1. You enter your commlink, converting all of your gear and your body into digital information on the network.

2. You attempt to find an unsecured exit terminal or hack a secured one. If you fail, you exit your original device.

If your original device was a commlink that converted into digital information with you, how can you exit it? Do you die, become a ghost in the machine, or what?

It's safest and easiest to just insist that you entry device can't go with you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Sideromancer wrote:
And where are they getting the crews for their exclusively-capital navy, again?

The same cheap labor source available to PCs, at rates printed in Armory. Scrubs are cheap, only officers cost money. Fighters and interceptors have to be crewed by expensive officers, so they don't save as many labor costs as you'd think, especially if they are high tier.

I didn't say anything about exclusively capital ship navies, destroyers and explorers would be a lot more common, and cruisers a lot more common than battleships, carriers, and dreadnoughts. I'm just saying high tier fighters are a dumb idea and a bad investment.

Medium-to-low tier shuttles and light freighters are a better idea, since they can at least seat more crew, fire more weapons more accurately, boost shields, and use science officers to suppress enemy defenses or focus your offense.


Metaphysician wrote:
Note that, in setting, space navies do not use the BP system. When they have to deal with matters of cost, they have to deal with actual monetary cost. So, why build 12 Tier 10 fighters rather than 12 Tier 10 destroyers? Because those Tier 10 fighters probably cost a lot less than *one* Tier 10 destroyer, even moreso when you take into account crew.

Nonsense. BPs exist to prevent conversion into cash for personal items, but there's no reason to think they break all transitive relationships between the relative cost of items. If an item costs 10 times as much BP, it should cost 10 times as much "real" resources as well.

[Edit: Ok, on further review I don't believe the above 100%. Ten tier 3 ships at 100 BP each probably cost less to create in the "real" Starfinder economy than one tier 20 dreadnought. But I still think small ship frames are a bad investment of high BPs, and that relationship would carry over to the real economy.]

We can know that non-PCs don't get cheap tier 10 fighters because no one builds tier 10 fighters. They face the same trade off in effectiveness and size regardless of on paper tier and resources invested, and they choose to go up ship size/base frames in consistent tier intervals.


Metaphysician wrote:

*cough* If Polarize works for other weapons, I suspect it would be more than a tad broken. Don't think "I set up my comrade so he does extra damage". Think bigger. Think "me and my dozen friends surround the enemy and all bash away with polarity weapons". It goes from being a very situational and limited bonus, to being a cheap and easy way to always do tons more damage.

( It gets worse if they ever add weapon customization, or otherwise create a way for Polarize to be stuck on a *ranged* weapon. . . )

Polarize is already on a ranged weapon, the Polarity Rifle longarm. With polarize they do modestly more damage than a laser rifle, half the range, no crit effect. They're not that good even with polarity on every shot.

The polarize melee weapons are also not that great even with polarize on very hit. There are other comparable weapons that do similar base damage, but get a bigger specialization bonus (because not operative), and have a crit effect.


The drones are negligible on their own, the ability of a science officer to use his (very, very high) computers skill in place of their gunnery check is what makes them dangerous.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

What are the circumstance penalties for attacking 14 months after the enemy was last present?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sauce987654321 wrote:
I don't know what you think Paizos agenda or intentions are, in this regard, but the game as written doesn't seem agree with you. That'd be like if a CR 20 colossal monster gets to be better than a medium sized CR 20 because it's bigger, and that's not what CRs, or tiers in this case, are meant to represent.

Paizo isn't great at creating a consistent CR system, film at 11.


1. Armory's Juggernaut Booster armor upgrade (level 3) combos well with the Armor Storm fighting style for Soldiers.

Juggernaut Booster wrote:
Your armor greatly increases your momentum when you rush forward. When you move at least 20 feet toward the target before attempting a bull rush combat maneuver, you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to the check, and if the attack hits, you can move the target an additional 5 feet. Your armor also grants you a +4 bonus to Strength checks to break down doors and other barriers if you move at least 10 feet toward the barrier before attempting the check.
Smash Through wrote:
While you are wearing heavy armor or powered armor, you gain a +4 bonus to attack rolls to perform a bull rush combat maneuver (see page 246). If you successfully push the target back 10 feet or more, you can also damage the target with an unarmed attack (and can use your hammer fist ability when doing so).

So with both you have a +6 to your bull rush maneuver (which you'll take to +10 with Improved Combat Maneuver) and if you succeed you automatically get 10' movement and trigger your Smash Through unarmed attack damage. If you succeed by 10 (equivalent to an unimproved roll vs the standard KAC+8) they get knocked back 20 feet, and you can do it again next turn if they don't move closer on their turn. SOLDIER SMASH!!

Alas, Breach weapons require a full action to shoot down doors, so you can't combine them with the Juggernaut Booster.

2. The Tactical Scaffold heavy armor upgrade has two synergies.

First, you can use it to wield a two handed weapon with one hand, which means you can combine a longarm, sniper, or heavy weapon with an activated Phase Shield (also a heavy armor option) for +1 to EAC. Or carry a one handed melee weapon.

Second, you can wield a sniper with both hands and get the full range increment without a move action to aim. This allows you to full attack at full sniper range with the Coil Rifle snipers, which lack the unwieldy quality. Otherwise you can use this to play long range mobile sniper, taking your one shot as you move away (or pursue) your target with your (presumably speed enhanced) move action.

Note: This upgrade takes two slots (and 2 bulk!), joining the SR upgrade and the force field in that elect company.


The Sideromancer wrote:

Pretty much every time I see 3d warfare, I see bombers. From WWI pilots dropping bricks and flechettes, to a Y-wing running the Death Star trench, to a dragon, high-mobility high-damage builds are a major part. Are they usually pretty fragile? yes. Does this make them a poor choice for PCS? yes. But the reason interceptors exist at all is because otherwise the first person to strap some engines to a big-*** gun is going to do some serious damage with a lot less drain on building materials and personnel than their target.

To me, "plausible within the world" is likely going to imply the existence of low-rescorce glass cannons. At the moment, those are absent. Amazing fighters, I can take or leave (though their analog in melee of evasion-focused characters should at least still be around for fantasy reasons). But I feel we need viable bombers.

Fighters with Tactical Nuclear Missile Launchers and intercepters with turreted linked Coilguns are the most you're going to get, and they're already here.

What you really should see in professional navies are CR 3-5 pilots in those tier 2-3 frames, pushing up their to hit and defenses without BP expenditure.

EMP bombers for attacking big ships with depleted shields also make sense.


Sauce987654321 wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:
There will never be heavy weapons on tiny/small ships as a PC option. It would totally throw off the balance of carriers vs dreadnoughts. It’s not a mistake that most fighter weapons usually won’t overcome a big DT.
Considering that ship tiers work like CRs, that would make it a mistake. Also, some linked weapons will almost always beat a DT of 15.

A smaller ship of equal tier to a larger ship is usually objectively weaker. Just because you can cram (say) 12 tier worth of upgrades into a fighter frame doesn't mean it has a 50% chance against a tier 12 cruiser. The HP deficit and lost BPs to match weapon mounts hurt more than the saved base frame BPs, not to mention power core issues at high tier.

The fact that you can build high tier fighters that can reliably damage battleships and dreadnoughts is irrelevant to the underlying balance concerns. You'd be a fool to put sixteen tier 8 fighters into a carrier rather than build sixteen tier 8 destroyers. Ship combat and build efficiency is designed so that carriers can usefully provide a bunch of weak fighters who aren't worth the efforts of most larger ships to target (and can't be hit at all by the big capital weapons), but have individually low chances to hit and low chances to do damage against the really big ships. They can swarm small escorts and chip away at big ship shields to give an assist, but that's pretty much it.

If a fighter were built to be dangerous, it would get focus fired and killed in short order because it can't carry enough PCUs to support both good weapons and excellent shields, can't have enough crew to repair it, defend it, and rebalance it's shields, and can't have HP to soak up the hits.

If you want to house rule this to support your fighter fantasies, go ahead. But Paizo is building a system that (1) supports a single ship manned by a party of adventurers and (2) is plausible within the context of their world and designed naval organizations and balance of power. Fighters taking down dreadnoughts is not consistent with either of those concerns.

1 to 50 of 2,164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>