crusaderky's page

The Boost trait needs errata badly, as it does not specify a duration.
One could just pre-boost all of their boostable weapons for sweet extra free damage on round 1.

However, it gets worse.

Take an Operative with Instinctive Aim, or any other feat or feature that lets you draw for free.

Equipment: Duo Enhancers, one improved weapon (any), many commercial Boom Pistols. There is a limit on how many you can carry imposed by Bulk, but I expect they'll soon print an item like Sleeves of Storage to raise it.

You pre-boost all your boom pistols ahead of combat. Enjoy an extra d8 for each d6 of your pistol, once per round (or more, as soon as Paizo prints a class with a Draw->Strike compression feat).

This becomes extra bad with Automatic Bonus Progression rules, where an Operative with Twin Draw (or just a skittermander) can draw 2 weapons for 1 action. Trigun priest anybody?

If you do keep injury poisons on your person, then this is character-defining activity.

It's a level 10 feat. It's meant to be.

Yeah. I mean, it's theoretically possible that the overall amount of wealth a given character is meant to have each level will be higher than PF2E

SFS treasure bundles are identical to PFS ones.

I agree that the whole game seems designed around carrying two weapons.

no idea about the outcome, but I have to step down from this.

does feel a little janky that Strike>Auto ends up being significantly better than Auto>Strike.

For a soldier it's straight up worse though?

Area Attack/Auto-Fire have the [Attack]Trait, so they increase your MAP even though you didn't make a strike. So your strike with Punishing Salvo is -5 (Because the primary target atrike didn't count).

oof. I didn't notice.

I’m happy to announce the fruit of ~4 years of ADHD-fuelled labour: pathfinder2e-stats, a numerical simulator for Pathfinder / Starfinder second edition written in Python.

Do you have a collection of enormous spreadsheets where you calculate the benefits of this or that class or weapon or feat? This software is for you.

Are you writing an amazing homebrew feat, spell, or class for Pathfinder or Starfinder, or maybe even an entire new game like Hopefinder and Hellfinder, and you don’t want to wait for beta test to figure out if your content is balanced? This software is for you.

Do you itch to test the median damage output of a greatsword with Vicious Swing versus a longsword+shortsword pair with Double Slice, and are you tired of writing horribly complicated and non-reusable functions in excel that use RANDOM() to roll dice? This software is for you.

You couldn’t care less about the game from a numbers perspective and you play exclusively for the roleplay part of it? Awesome! However, this is NOT for you, please move along, nothing to see here.

Full documentation and download instructions here:
https://pathfinder2e-stats.readthedocs.io/

I’m happy to announce the fruit of ~4 years of ADHD-fuelled labour: pathfinder2e_stats, a numerical simulator for Pathfinder / Starfinder second edition written in Python.

Do you have a collection of enormous spreadsheets where you calculate the benefits of this or that class or weapon or feat? This software is for you.

Are you writing an amazing homebrew feat, spell, or class for Pathfinder or Starfinder, or maybe even an entire new game like Hopefinder and Hellfinder, and you don’t want to wait for beta test to figure out if your content is balanced? This software is for you.

Do you itch to test the median damage output of a greatsword with Vicious Swing versus a longsword+shortsword pair with Double Slice, and are you tired of writing horribly complicated and non-reusable functions in excel that use RANDOM() to roll dice? This software is for you.

You couldn’t care less about the game from a numbers perspective and you play exclusively for the roleplay part of it? Awesome! However, this is NOT for you, please move along, nothing to see here.

Full documentation and download instructions here:
https://pathfinder2e-stats.readthedocs.io/

I stand corrected: the above melee exploit does not work specifically due to the obscure rule about subordinated actions.

Close Quarters Soldier treats melee weapons as area weapons *for Soldier Feats* only. In Whirling Swipe, Shot on the Run, etc. the Area Fire is a subordinated action which cannot proc Punishing Salvo. If you don't use a Soldier feat, your melee weapon does not have the Area(burst 5ft) trait.

This is really, *really* poorly written. It is not supposed to be this difficult to decode.

Particularly when two feats that SEEM to be OK to be used together (Shot on the Run and Punishing Salvo) are printed literally on the same page and to realise that they don't work together you need to scavenge very lengthy discussions on the forum.

...and if my table allows to play a Tengu from Pathfinder, or an ancestry is printed at some point with the right weapon familiarity, oh look I have a 2d8+4 fatal d12 grindblade and a free hand. Hitting 4 times in a round at MAP 0.
Or if they allow a greatpick from Pathfinder (why wouldn't they? _It's a mining tool_), 2d10+4 fatal d12.

To my understanding, neither Area Fire nor Auto-Fire increase MAP. So after a Primary Target -> Area Fire, your MAP is still 0, regardless of what you do next.

Punishing Salvo is exclusively useful if you are
(a) using an Area Fire-only (not melee) weapon or
(b) you're hasted, Close Quarters, and with a melee weapon.

RAW if you are a hasted Close Quarters Soldier, you could do in a round

>> Area Fire
Primary Target (MAP 0)
Area Fire (MAP not applicable)
> Punishing Salvo (MAP 0)
> regular Strike (MAP 0)

This is with a 2d12+4 doshko or 2d10+4 reach painglaive.

Which is insane. It blows out of the water any and all hasted low-MAP pathfinder builds.

Notes:
- Punishing Salvo does not work with automatic guns
- a regular Area Fire weapon can't do the final strike
- Punishing Salvo does not work with Shot on the Run due to a fairly obscure rule of "your last action" requirements vs. subordinate actions, which brings *some* sanity to this combo.

In theory you could make it work as a Bombard too, but the final Strike needs to be with a different weapon:
- Laser Eye for 2d4,
- Solarian Dedication -> Solar Flare for 2d6 30ft/2d8 15ft,
- or some other ranged weapon that doesn't require hands.

I'd love to bring Rattus, level 7 gnome Laughing Shadow magus.

He's a grumpy old man, already bleaching and too old for people messing around. Constantly brooding. He was born a slave in Cheliax, escaped, and he's on a personal crusade to antagonize the slaver empire. A member of the Firebrands, although at odds with the typical boisterous members of it.

And yes, that is an attitude that I have from playing Pathfinder1e. I had to stop playing my Catfolk Skald because Skald couldn't be optimized hard enough to be playable in that group. And I couldn't change to Catfolk Magus because Catfolk is not an ancestry suitable for building a Magus with.

And thankfully PF2/SF2 are not PF1. The gap between a character optimized to the extreme and one that is just for fun is small now. Maybe 20%.

(note: this is given the same level of competence _from the player_. Of course players that do nothing other than hit a monster 3 times without moving - I'm sure you know at least one - perform a lot worse than skilled players, and that's by design).

That really sucks. I could see the utility of moving your upgrades around for your solar flare but for twin weapon builds, there's no merit.

maybe the twin weapon feat is missing some text that they share crystals or something. Would be nice to see in the errata anyways.

My answer was about Solar Weapon + Solar Flare specifically.

For Twin Weapons, it would be silly if they didn't either share the crystals (like the Exemplar's feat) or allow for Duo Enhancers. I agree that it begs for an errata.

Note that if you Boost and area fire as a Soldier, your Boost damage will go to the Strike against your Primary Target, unless you decide not to do the Primary Target at all - which is a big tradeoff.

Also, I just noticed this combo:

Level 2 Soldier (Close Quarters) with Painglave and Shot on the Run.
For 3 actions, boost your painglave, stride, and strike. You only get a 5ft burst and not the 10ft that you would get with Whirling Swipe though.

In SF2, but not in PF2, a shield with the hefty trait gives standard cover.
This makes mobile bulwark (SF2) fundamentally different from the fortress shield (PF2) and opens a can of worms re. cover rules that I have not seen anywhere else.

General cover rules (identical in PF2 and SF2) state that cover is relative and that it is ultimately determined by drawing a line between your center and the center of the other creature and see what it intersects. And while the general text say "you" have cover, the examples always refer to two creatures having cover from each other.

Take Cover while Prone is an exception to the above: you get greater cover and off-guard, which translates to a net +2 vs. all ranged attacks, without needing to draw any lines (a sensible GM will disallow it if someone shoots you point blank, but that's a house rule).

Take Cover ends when you take an attack action, so no need to discuss sniping enemies after you hunker down on the floor. IRL it works very well (if you see Prone as ass on the floor but chest may be raised, while Prone -> Take Cover as belly pressed against the floor), but in game it doesn't. Striking breaks Take Cover, and you end up with a net -2 to hit and -2 to AC.

In theory, though, you could be prone, Take Cover, and then shoot a line or cone effect emanating from you. If cover was always symmetrical, enemies completely out in the open would have +4 reflex against that. Which does not make any sense.

Another exception to the rule of adjudicating cover by tracing a line between you and the enemy is the Take Cover you do with a Tower or Fortress shield, as it is generally understood (but not spelled out in the manual) to be omnidirectional like Raise a Shield.

Mobile Bulwark in SF2 says "you have standard cover."
Does it mean that enemies you Strike are at +2 AC, and that if you Trip someone they have +2 reflex? If yes (by logic of having a massive shield in the way), why is there no penalty to grappling an enemy?

The Solarian's Eclipse Strike has the same issue. It says that YOUR cover increases from lesser to standard to greater. Does it mean the cover the enemy gets from you too?
You Eclipse Strike someone from behind a wall vs. AC+2, and gain Greater Cover from them for a sweet +4 AC and +4 reflex for as long as any of that cover lasts. Or, even better, you Eclipse Strike at no penalty and then you Stride behind a cover. My (arguable?) reading is that Eclipse Strike applies to all cover for a round, not the cover you already have.
But if you Strike again (say a Nimbus Surge), do they get +4 AC?

And of course there's the combo Mobile Bulwark + Eclipse Strike vs. someone larger than you.
Eclipse Strike, raise Shield. Your standard cover is immediately upgraded to greater against that enemy. But then you Strike again (e.g. nimbus surge). Did you just shaft yourself and you now have to hit at -4?

There is wording for GM fiat: https://2e.aonsrd.com/rules/422-special-circumstances

> Your GM might allow you to overcome your target's cover in some situations. If you're right next to a narrow window, you can shoot without penalty, but you have greater cover against someone shooting back at you from far away. Your GM might let you reduce or negate cover by leaning around a corner to shoot or the like. This usually takes an action to set up, and the GM might measure cover from an edge or corner of your space instead of your center.

Examples of asymmetry are found frequently in the wording for Concealed. a dazzled creature treats everyone as concealed, but not the other way around, if you have blur everyone treats you as concealed but not the other way around, and many effects like Obscuring Mist explicitly state that "All creatures within the mist become concealed, and all creatures outside the mist become concealed to creatures within it." The Solarian feat Nimbus Rush is another explicit case of asymmetry in giving the Concealed condition.

To recap:

- Prone -> Take Cover -> Lightning Bolt against an enemy in the open: it is patently absurd that an enemy should get +4 reflex bonus
- Concealed is asymmetric by default and the manuals explicitly spell out when it is symmetric
- Raise mobile bulwark -> Strike or trip: do they get +2 AC and reflex vs. you? Does the "shooting from a slit" rule apply?

'No, if you want to play a Swashbuckler in Starfinder2e you will need to play Kasatha or Skittermander or pay for at least one synthetic extra arm augmentation. That way you can Double Slice with two weapons while still having a free hand for Extravagant Parry.'

Basically, 'no, change your character concept to match the game mechanics better. Optimize harder, noob.' I can't stand that.

You just came up with an extremely optimized combo and then complained that you need to cherry-pick your ancestry very carefully or it won't work.

This is the same argument as the many PF builds that simply don't work unless you're a human or ancient elf, so that you can squeeze in an extra class feat or two. If your build is so tight that you MUST have 1 extra class feat than normal or it won't work, it's an optimized build, and it is not meant to work with all options available for ancestry / equipment etc.

I would like to point out that a level 4 4-armed character can, both RAW and RAI,
for 400 credits (2 grenades + 2 reusable shells),
Switch arms -> throw grenade -> throw grenade -> Switch arms back on the next round, for 6d8 (~27) AoE. That's kind of insane.
For comparison, an area burst weapon does 2d10 (~11), costs 1000 credits, and has bulk 2. 6d8 AoE is in the ballpark of a rank 4 spell slot.

This works once per day, or once per combat if you get more grenades (twice per combat as a skittermander). 400 credits at level 4 is already a modest price, and in SFS you'll find use-it-or-lose-it grenades as you explore on top of what you bought.

Compare this to pulling the same trick as a 2-armed character. Unless you are a caster going around unarmed, you would need to start combat with the 2 grenades in your only hands and hope that the enemies are nicely grouped up on round 1, throw them and switch to a two-hander. Or maybe one grenade occupying one of your two hands (which translates to a reduced damage as you need to trade your 2-hander weapon for a 1-hander) so that you can swap gun for grenade -> throw -> throw -> swap back next round.

4-handed characters can just have the two frags on standby waiting for the perfect opportunity.

Given this (which again, is plain RAW and not flexing any obscure rule or interpretation), I think that it puts in perspective grappling or drinking a serum with an inactive hand as a powerful, but still less insane ability.

The painglaive is a melee Boost 1d10 weapon.
Whirling Swipe is definitely going to work with it.

I think this is fine because boost + swipe costs 3 actions and you need precise positioning to capitalise from it. So you need to

a. start your turn surrounded by enemies (which, TBF, it's what the soldier class is designed to do), or
b. boost on your previous round, so that you can stride in position and swipe, or
c. be hasted so that you can stride -> boost -> swipe.

It's still an insanely powerful combo (which completely eclipses the Doshko also due to its lack of reach), mind you.

> Would duo enhancers work on a one handed solar weapon and solar flare assuming you're holding the solar flare? (Embedded in the palm of your hand)

I've been pouring over this for the last few days.

RAW, no, because solar weapons don't have a tracking trait, so the potency crystal wouldn't be replicated, and you can't have a striking crystal without a potency crystal to support it.

RAI, I also suspect no. The section about solar crystals clarifies that you need separate crystals for solar weapon and solar flare, and it feels weird that it doesn't mention that you can buy an item to work around it.
I think that paizo thought that having both solarian armaments maxed up is substantially powerful, so you need to heavily invest for that, both in dexterity and in money. Forgetting that your solar flare exists and building a DEX+0 character makes a perfectly reasonable build.

The Solarian iconic at level 5 has 2 separate potency crystals and enough cash to buy a striking crystal (but then again iconics have a habit of being comically undertuned).

Also note that unlike PF runes, Solarian crystals need a single interact action to install/uninstall. If both your armaments have a +1 potency crystal, in a pinch you could move the striking crystal for 2 actions. Not great, but not terrible if all enemies are airborne and you can't fly.

When a rule is published in Pathfinder, and then it is later reprinted in Starfinder with the same name but different wording, does it count as an errata for Pathfinder (and vice versa)?

Case in point: the Hefty trait in the Starfinder PC1 gives you standard cover, but as of the latest Pathfinder errata (which is older) it does not. Does this count as an errata to Pathfinder's fortress shield?

> problem 3: the Gauntlet Bow can be used in melee or ranged without switching. The Crescent Cross, however, cannot as it is a Combination weapon. So RAW, you can use a Crescent Cross in melee configuration to do the punch and the grab, but not the shot.

Correction: this RAW works thanks to this clause of the Combination trait:

> if your last action was a successful melee Strike against a foe using a combination weapon, you can make a ranged Strike with the combination weapon against that foe without fully switching to the ranged weapon usage, firing the ranged weapon just as you hit with the melee attack. In this case, the combination weapon returns to its melee usage after the ranged weapon Strike.

On the same page:

INFILTRATION ASSASSINATION [two-actions]
FEAT 10
ARCHETYPE
Prerequisites Crossbow Infiltrator Dedication
Requirements You’re wearing a loaded gauntlet bow.
With a high-priority target in reach, you quickly move to
eliminate them. Make a melee Strike using your gauntlet bow
as a gauntlet. If the Strike is successful, you automatically
latch onto the target, giving them the grabbed condition,
then make a ranged Strike against them with your gauntlet
bow. This Strike does not trigger reactions normally triggered
by ranged attacks. If you are holding or wearing an injury
poison, you can apply it to the bolt used in the attack as a
free action before making the ranged Strike.

problem 1: the condition, RAW in and by itself, does not expire, does not occupy your hand, and does not even need you to stay adjacent. Things that give the grabbed condition (Grapple, Combat Grab) normally explicitly clarify these details.

problem 2: the feat requires you to use a gauntlet bow, which has the Free-Hand trait which makes the grab non-controversial RAI. However, Crescent Cross Training says you treat the Crescent Cross as a gauntlet bow, RAW allowing you to use this feat. However it remains unclear (both RAW and RAI) if that means you snag the target in your blade or if you need a free hand to maintain the grab.

problem 3: the Gauntlet Bow can be used in melee or ranged without switching. The Crescent Cross, however, cannot as it is a Combination weapon. So RAW, you can use a Crescent Cross in melee configuration to do the punch and the grab, but not the shot.

On Battlecry! page 56, we have

CRESCENT CROSS TRAINING
FEAT 4
ARCHETYPE
Prerequisites Crossbow Infiltrator Dedication
You have familiarity with the crescent cross (Treasure Vault
31), an ingenious weapon that combines an arm-mounted,
multi-chamber crossbow with a crescent-shaped blade. For
the purposes of proficiency, you treat both its configurations
as simple weapons.
Feats and abilities from this archetype that normally work
with a gauntlet bow also work with your crescent cross,
treating the melee form of the crescent cross as a gauntlet
where appropriate. You gain the Crescent Spray action.

The problem is that the Crescent Cross was bumped from Common to Uncommon when the Treasure Vault was remastered, but it looks like this class was written before it.
"familiarity" AFAIK is not a rule, and this feat lacks the wording of other "weapon familiarity" feats that say you gain access to the item.

So until either this gets errata'ed or the Avid Collector - Treasure Vault boon is amended, to the best of my understanding this feat is unusable in PFS play.

Following as I stumbled on the same.

- If they don't waive any of the material costs,
- they don't waive any of the feats (potions would require you to be expert in crafting to add insult to injury),
- they don't waive the need for a formula,
- they offer LESS days discount than the Envoy's Alliance Crafter's Workshop boon,
- AND, in case of Naturalist, you have to re-buy the boon for every single batch you craft (or is it every formula? it's unclear) - unlike Crafter's Workshop, which you pay once and lasts in perpetuity,

they really make very little sense to me.

+1 for a clarification