gigyas6's page

Look at the professions. Both VidGamer and Video Personality (paraphrasing) are available, and are on the same list as things like accountant, lawyer, mathematician, etc.

This seems to imply that both e-sports and blogging are relevant in Starfinder entertainment.

A player in my game liked this so much that he's playing an Icon with VidGamer as his linked profession skill. He's also playing a Technomancer. I'm immediately thinking of e-sports tournaments in which all participants use magic to some degree to modify the game.

I'm not going to go into too much more detail because he's mentioned that he browses these forums, but it's something that has some potential as far as pop culture.

gigyas6 wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Melkiador wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Androids are not constructs. They're humanoids. Humanoids are living creatures. Androids can only be targeted as a construct if it would be detrimental to them, as per the Constructed trait.

Do we actually have anything that says they are humanoids? We just have text that they can count as both humanoids or constructs. Nothing seems to label them as any more of one than the other.

Page 42. Under the heading "Size and Type."

"Androids are Medium humanoids with the android subtype."

The issue is that the they must choose the worst of construct or humanoid for effects. Would this apply with Mystic Cure? The worst would be that they were a construct, which are not living and thus not valid targets of Mystic Cure.

If it does not apply in the case of Mystic Cure, then why does it apply in the case of Mending?

Further, how much Bulk do characters take up? As far as I can tell, Bulk is not a measure of actual weight, but of difficulty to transport. How many full-on constructs would even be able to benefit from that - even in regards to the mechanic drones?

Even assuming Mending can't work because of Bulk, there are other spells that heal constructs and objects as well, besides just Mending - like Make Whole, which isn't all too different from a Mystic Cure spell of the same level (5d6 flat compared to 3d8 + however much the Mystic wants to give).

I'd definitely like to see some clarification here, officially. This isn't some minute rules-lawyer thing - I can see this coming up in a lot of games with a lot of different types of players, and can make or break class/race choice. Obviously Androids are meant to be affected by Cure - but why is that exception being made with no note, and why does the exception seem so specific? What other exceptions are there to this trait?

Mystic cure doesn't targeting creatures by type. Just living (*not a type) creatures, which android qualifies....

But Android counts as a humanoid or a construct - the worse of the two - for the sake of targeting. If constructs are nonliving, then no, they're not a living creature, and thus not a valid target for the sake of that spell, since it would be worse for them to not be targeted for it.

If the "take the worse effect" is supposed to be for things like dealing more damage or stunning certain specific creatures, and not for buff spells, then why wouldn't things like Mending or Make Whole then work, considering Make Whole in particular specifies it can target any construct creature?

Replying to the OP:

The danger of the Drift is actually an excellent plot point. I think the % chance of encounter is for the sake of abstraction for random encounters for the players, and one could assume general use may be lower.

That said, it could be this very danger which would be why adventurers are hired to begin with: as couriers across dangerous space, both in what's there and the risk of the Drift. This would also mean that trying to sell products across different systems (or even within the same system, considering) may be more expensive, as the cost of transportation would be increased, making certain items less expensive if produced domestically.

Also, there may be other methods of FTL - the Drift is just considered efficient in the sake of time, and primary for the sake of traveling to other systems. Warp and Wormhole travel, in particular, may be simpler methods of travel for things like trade.

It's amazing to me how much time people will spend to figure out how to play less at the table. It's not a video game - you don't get an award for speed-running an encounter, you just run your GM out of prepared materials faster. Focusing on damage and builds is fine - trying to squeeze all the damage out of a system like you're wringing out a wet towel on the other hand... You might as well just play a board or card game. You'll probably have a better time.

I've had quite an appreciation for the Solar Armor. It seems to me that, at level one, that can allow you to have the highest AC - particularly as a Vesk. I personally see more use out of ranged weapons with Solar Armor tho - Dexterity also benefits your AC, and a lot of enemies thus far seem to be designed around having ranged options, even if that's not what they're good at. Being able to stay in the front line, but still not needlessly take damage before engaging, seems like a good middle-ground.

I'm aware that Solarion benefits melee more, but if you were looking at something tankier, having a shooty-Solarion might not be too bad, and may limit your MAD issues - particularly if you mix with an operative weapon, and then take Opening Volley at some point.

That said, overall glad to see people focusing on more aspects of Solarion besides just their lightsaber. I think flavor-wise the Solar Blade is pretty cool, but there's a lot going on with Solarion besides just "hit guys" - even in combat.

Wow. I already pointed out I was wrong and there's still several posts after the fact trying to argue against me when I already agree with them.

In regards to realism - the Wounds and Vigor system of Pathfinder was an attempt to better explain Hit Points. It was still very game-y, but said "Here is you actually, really getting hurt, and here is you shrugging something off." The two concepts were much more separated than Stamina, here, but the similarities made me think that they were more similar than they are.

That all said, Stamina mentions how it is your ability to shrug off damage - not necessarily in a way of not caring about wounds (which is what HP is for) but in regards to just taking bruises, small cuts, dings, that sort've thing. To me, the design looks as if they added Stamina as a point of "realism" (as much as you can get in a game) to say "Look, yes, people can't take several dozen shotgun blasts to the chest and be A-okay, here's the reason why that's not happening." It seemed like it was trying to separate itself from HP. Basically, the way it is explained in the book, HP is an abstraction of physical wounds, and Stamina is an abstraction of smaller, less important injuries.

To then take a blast to the head, like from a critical hit, and be like "Nope, am fine, just gotta catch my breath a bit from that" with no actual damage at all seems weird.

To be hit by a motorcycle going at max speed and colliding with you directly in the chest to then get up and not be more than a bit bruised, starting from as early as 1st level, feels a bit weird.

It seems gimicky. It just seems like a second pool of hit points, acting like hit points, in regards to the abstracted nature of these two concepts in a thematic scene as compared to its gameplay mechanics.

If Stamina was defined differently (and yes, maybe even renamed) I might be able to take that better - mechanically, it functions as bonus hit points to protect your main hit points, but thematically, it's supposed to be... Well, your stamina. Your fatigue, how tired you are, how much pain you're in.

That's my criticism in regards to "realism" - I'm aware HP is also not realistic, but it seemed like the reason they even added Stamina was to help tailor the abstraction of HP and give more realism, only for it to have just the same issue.

Explosive decompression in space is a complete myth. Though trying to hold your breath is a good way to pop your lungs, so there is that.

That may be, but is not the case in Starfinder space, as per its rules.

In Starfinder, if you're in space, you start suffocating unless you hold your breath.

In space, you take bludgeoning damage just for being out in space.

If you enter space after being in a pressurized area, you take additional damage for the pressure change.

Sure, real space may not work just like that, but that seems to be what happens here when you're exposed to a vacuum. If that's incorrect, I'm not the guy to talk to.

The hp buffer is a big deal for gameplay though. I ran a space campaign using Pathfinder rules all last year and free force fields became a free staple because damage had a purpose and a danger but going for more than two battles wasn't certain death. If we instead had easy healing the danger and purpose is gone.

For one, you still have easy healing in Starfinder. This is part of my point. You literally bounce back to heal half+ your total hit points in 10 minutes for a resource you'll likely have at least 4 uses per day for, and Mystic Cure and Medicine can then cover the other half.

For two, Pathfinder Force Fields function entirely different from Stamina. Force Fields have fast healing, ignore critical hits, and are gone for a full day after they hit 0. Also, Force Fields are still in this game, albeit working differently.

For three, the HP buffer can still exist and be called, you know, "HP" without requiring extra fluctuating-stat tracking. If HP was based on twice the current values, and you're recovering half your HP at the cost of Resolve, that'd be more or less the same as recovering Stamina at the cost of Resolve.

As for exposure to vaccum damage applying to stamina first, 8:41 on this video is a great reason to allow it.

We're talking full-on exposure in which you need to hold your breath and start experiencing explosive decompression (bludgeoning damage). Starfinder doesn't seem to have rules in regards to this scene.

If a hull leakage would use the same rules, then that means, mechanically, being in an area with a cracked hull is the exact same as being in the middle of space completely naked.

Looking over it again, Poisons seem to actually do damage to HP directly and not Stamina. This, and cure spells, seem to be the only things which interact with HP directly - which is a bit strange, as well, as this means that this makes monsters benefit from HP and Poisons much more than PCs do (since poison would deal less damage, percentage-wise, to a monster, and since a monster's large HP pool with a lack of stamina allows it to better take advantage of cure spells).

This isn't a rules questions as much as me questioning the design philosophy present in the game.

Before I get into this, a preface: From my understanding, many of the rule changes from Pathfinder to Starfinder were made either for the sake of the larger system (with it being space-based and all), or were to simplify rules (in the case of full-attacks). When I question the rules, here, I question their point in regards to that principal.

So, in essence, why is Stamina simplified, more convenient, or more logical than just regular ol' Hit Points?

I only ask because the Stamina and Hit Point system has one glaring flaw as per RAW - any and all damage dealt to a character (with no exceptions that I've noticed thus far) deal damage to Stamina first, in all given scenarios.

Damage from a vacuum? Stamina damage.

Critical hits? Stamina damage.

Disintegrate? Stamina damage.

How does this make this different from just normal Hit Points then? Mechanically, Stamina is no different than HP, and is used in the exact same way, albeit recovered differently (see below). Why not just provide a character with twice as much HP per level if fights are meant to last longer?

Now, you may say "well, Stamina is there to quickly recover after a fight" which is all well and good. But, if all damage was HP, those healing rules could read as "Spend 10 minutes and 1 Resolve to recover up to half your Hit Points". Similarly, long rests could have a ruling of something like "Recover up to half your Hit Points, plus a number of additional Hit Points equal to your character level".

For most characters, Stamina will make up very nearly half of their total damage pool, and this only really changes if you're really Con-focused - which would otherwise not really benefit you since Con is only the Key Ability Score for Barbarians (a Legacy class), holding your breath, and Fort saves. No other class uses it for class features, and it benefits no skills. It would only otherwise change notably if the character's Con was similarly low. In this regard, healing could instead be noted as "Recover up to half your Hit Points, plus an additional number of Hit Points equal to your con mod per character level".

In fact, similar terminology could be used in other places - instant death could occur at damage into negatives of half your total hit points minus con mod per level, for instance.

A human soldier with 20 con has 144 HP and 240 Stamina, for a total pool of 384.

A human soldier with 20 con who received no stamina points, but double HP from class + con mod, would have 384 HP.

The only thing I've found that specifically deals with Hit Points, in particular, is Mystic Cure. That's it. Mystic Cure says it just recovers Hit Points. Is the entire game's Hit Point mechanics really being balanced around a single spell? Even so, why can't Mystic Cure just say it has no effect on creatures with more than half their hit points, or can't heal past half their hit points, or something similar?

Otherwise, this just seems like needless extra ruling. Even for the purposes of thematics, if anything, this sorta downplays mechanics (Stamina is described as the ability to shrug off damage. So I can shrug off the vacuum of space!?)

In my games, I will be house-ruling that critical hits and some other logical things (like space) will deal at least some damage to Hit Points regardless of stamina (certainly not all, but some) to make HP in and of itself feel more meaningful, and more pressing. That said, RAW, Stamina is just basically half your total hit points separated from the rest of your hit point pool for, from my perspective, no discernible reason.

I'd love to see an explanation for this or something else that justifies Stamina over just more Hit Points, RAW. As-is, it's just more bookkeeping for the same results.

Seriously - there are freaking lazer rifles! Why would you play a melee focused PC when there are lazers and particle beams?

Because charging guns are expensive when a sword cuts through armor and flesh just as well.

The most important thing I've found on this, which I've yet to see mentioned, is that despite the DC's raising in difficulty, the actions remain exactly the same. Sure, for a Gunner that can be a big deal, since things like Broadsides can become tremendously more powerful as you upgrade your starship weapons or mount new ones. Moving Speech can be a major game-changer. Most of the actions that recover shields do so based on percentage.

But, giving a +4 to an ally? Giving a +2 bonus to AC for the ship? Giving science officers +2 to their checks? Removing a single critical damage?

These are all actions with static results (except removing more crit damage for a higher DC, which already increases DC anyway), and yet the DC continuously increases. This is also in conflict with the skill listings themselves, which demonstrate an ability to learn to do new things at higher DCs, and things you knew before give better results. Here, things you were already able to do get harder for the same results.

This doesn't apply to all actions, but the fact that it applies to any actions is a bit strange.

Sniper weapons do more damage than Small Arms per item level. This roughly cancels out the damage you receive from Sneak Attack.

In this case, this is an additional option for operatives wanting to use Sniper weapons more often. They are one of only two classes that receive Weapon Specialization by default in Sniper weapons, where Operatives act as more supportive snipers compared to Soldiers who act more offensively as snipers.

The limited range seems to be to prevent Operatives from just sitting back and applying debuffs on everybody. In this way, they need to be a bit closer to the fight.

Your choice of weapons, armor, defenses, and shields (the most important of starship qualities for combat purposes) is not hindered in the slightest by your Tier (at least, not explicitly so). You can be Tier 1 and buy a Maser, arguably one of the best heavy weapons, with no penalties. You can be Tier 1 and even buy Mk 15 armor. The largest BP purchases which would be gated out from tier 1 ships would be the computers or the frame, since larger frames can't be purchased at tier 1 - but it's implied you're not supposed to have a frame larger than large, anyway (or at least the game's not designed around PCs have such ships). Because of this, it's easy to see a ship capable of reaching peak performance relatively quickly, probably around Tier 9 or 10, with future upgrades merely being conveniences or minor adjustments.

Since a bulk portion of the ships statistics are based on the party members and their levels, that means that you'll still gain in power overtime. The ship, on the other hand, just loses out on gaining maybe an extra weapon and maybe an extra bit of armor - the latter of which is solved easily by Pilot ranks rising as level does, potentially overcoming the bonus the armor could provide while taking no penalties.

What you then gain in exchange for not upgrading is the ability to make all your DCs at an easier rate, potentially being auto-succeed the higher level you get.

Some upgrades don't even really get that much better - armor actually causes problems, particularly with mobility, at higher ACs, thrusters at top-speed cause penalties to piloting, sensors get at best a +4 and only increase in range, and even most weapons feel more like options and choices with their own pros and cons until you reach Capital weapons - which, as mentioned before, probably aren't meant for players to use anyway, since you can only mount them on Huge or larger ships.

The most critical of upgrades are shields and computers, with computers draining more on BP and shields draining more on PCU. The best shields cost only 40 BP, where the best computer costs 200.

With all that information in mind, with a level 20 crew, what's stopping a Tier 10 ship from being able to absolutely demolish a Tier 15 ship? Keep in mind, that fights as a Tier 14 combatant for the sake of determining difficulty, and even then, according to the difficulty chart, that's well beyond an Epic challenge encounter. And maybe that's an exaggeration, but even then, it's not hard to see how a ship of much lower tier with a high-level party can completely trash a ship many tiers higher than them with the right upgrades.

So there's very little reason to upgrade a starship beyond a certain point, and there's a big reason as to why you wouldn't (skill DCs). Yet, currently, it appears that you're forced to upgrade as you level.

Porridge wrote:

Quote:

20 (from d20)

16 (from 2d8 Envoy True Expertise ability) [insight bonus]
20 (20 ranks in Engineering)
3 (Engineering class skill)
2 (Lashunta Student ability) [racial bonus]
2 (Themeless Certainty ability 1/day) [untyped bonus]
9 (28 Intelligence)
2 (Encourage bonus from Captain) [untyped bonus]
10 (Mk 10 duonode Computer bonus) [circumstance bonus]

That allows us to hit a DC of 84.

These are all bonuses are ones the game allows you to have at the same time... and they all stack... and they add up to a number greater than 70... huh?

(We must be talking past one another. When you said "I'd still like to see math saying DC 70 is possible", I took you to mean, well, that you'd like to see how making a DC 70 check was possible. But perhaps you meant something else? Like "I'd like see math saying DC 70 is possible *given restrictions X, Y and Z*"? Or something?)

they all stack, but for example to add 16 from 2d8 you need to roll 8 twice, which happens 1.5% of the time, roughly. And you need to roll that in exactly the roll you are using the 1/day bonuses, and so on. Which might work 1.5% of the time for *ONE* action in your ship from *ONE* of your crewmembers in a single given round.

So while this might be the highest theorycrafted roll possible, it's not something that is going to happen anytime soon in any game table anywhere.

Given the dice odds of both the d20 and the envoy ability, you still have a 60% chance to fail on that once-per-day ability to do something you can do readily at only a 37.5% chance of failure when you get the ability without having to use any once-per-day abilities or the ships computer (you can get around +15+1d6+1 as a level 6 envoy).

It may be possible, even readily so, but it's almost twice as easy to do the same exact same thing at level 6, while spending no resources beyond the Resolve necessary to use the action to begin with.

Honestly just give them a larger ship, or at least one large enough to house a hanger bay so that other players can fly racers/interceptors/fighters.

If they're building their own ship, point out "max crew" sections.

For something like the Shuttle, which has a "max crew" of 4, if you were running a party of 5 I don't see why you can't then fill all role. Starship entries showing shuttles or other low-crew ships having all roles but captain - does captain really need their own console to yell at people?

Ultimately, I'd settle with handing out additional, far weaker ships for players not in the main crew to dogfight with. You can then build encounters accordingly.

RAW a drone cannot be repaired as it is not identified as an object (or a creature for that matter they're a construct but that still doesn't help in regards to its HP until AA comes out) and there are no rules detailing how to repair it beyond a mechanic trick that increases your ability to repair it - an ability that is listed nowhere.

Based on the wording of the mechanic trick that says it increases the amount of HP you recover for your drone, I assume the method is supposed to be that you can spend 10 minutes and perform a DC 15 Engineering check (as per the Engineering skill), and then it recovers an amount of HP equal to 10% of the result. This would be increased to 25% with the trick.

I've no idea if that is how it's supposed to work, but there are no concrete rules for repairing a drone - it otherwise doesn't happen, and drone damage is currently permanent RAW.

Quick edit: It may recover hit points based on natural HP recovery, at a rate of 1 per Mechanic level during 8 hours rest, but again, this is unclear and not defined anywhere.

As long as we're posting suggestions, considering I would think actions would grow harder based on the enemies, due to stress and urgency, I'd see scaling as so:

10+3* or 20+2* = 20 + 5 * HP increment stage of highest tier enemy, +2 for every additional significant enemy.

15+2* = 15 + 5 * HP increment stage of highest tier enemy, +1 for every additional significant enemy.

10+2* = 10 + 5 * HP increment stage of highest tier enemy, +1 for every additional significant enemy.

This makes fights against multiple enemies have clear goals and additional tactics in combat, while still being easy to keep track of, and is something more hidden (which I personally like about DCs - they're a bit of a surprise, and checks are called for, not given). It's something I plan on using. DCs will still be high for some things at high levels, but not achievable. This makes 10+3*'s highest DC be 45, not 70. If they have a bunch of dog fighters, the DC could reach something as high as 70 potentially, but this is a problem that can then be rectified by intelligent use of tactics.

DC's as a base against a tier 20 enemy are at a rate of 45, 40, and 35, with the highest DC increasing harder with more enemies, but still only having a rough estimated difference of a 5 increase in difficulty between checks - similar to other d20 system's "easy, normal, and hard" DCs.

This also means that if you're fighting a bunch of weaker enemies, you're not crippled for having a better ship.

I think that the method IonutRO has shown would also work fine in the meantime as well, but still has the core problem of "things are getting harder because my ship is getting better". That said, these DCs are more dynamic and change more frequently - something not everyone's a fan of.

Keep in mind the monsters you've mentioned here are more or less "solo-encounters" - they're meant to challenge a whole party of characters with levels similar to their CR by themselves. If the DCs were then easy to save from constantly, that wouldn't make challenging fights (I know from experience creating my own NPC's/Monsters).

DCs from Pathfinder monsters weren't too different - the difference there was that you could easily stack on things like Cloak of Resistance, or had immunities, or a paladin, or similar such things.

The design philosophy for monsters so far (and, indeed, for Unchained Monsters) seems to be "Easier to hit, more HP" and "Deal their damage more consistently". Having relatively difficult DCs for difficult enemies makes sense in that regard.

That said, it's something for sure we'll have to check out when the Alien Archive arrives. I agree it shouldn't just be a coin-flip - that's not interesting. But even while specializing, these things are meant to be challenging.

"it's OK to write something that's technically wrong because it's obvious what they meant".

Everyone's been trying to tell you this, but... It's not technically wrong. It's correct for the region in which it comes from. You not liking it doesn't make it "technically wrong".

In some places in Europe, decimal notation uses commas instead of full-stops, and for longer numbers, it uses full-stops instead of commas. This makes "one-thousand" be written as "1.000", and "zero-point-three" be written as "0,3". Many books are written with such notation, and this is about as "wrong" as pronouncing the letter "z" by itself as "zed".

In some parts North America, particularly in the western parts, this is an accepted alternative form of notation to write out "1.5" without the inclusion of decimals - particularly in the context of a sentence (where the period may then look like it's separating the 5 into a sentence of its own). Using "1½" is also appropriate, but they're both correct.

If you have a problem with that, build a time machine and stop it from ever being taught that way in the first place, because it's larger than just Paizo.

Also tier is equivalent to character level so long as characters are equal level.

My point is that a spaceship of Tier 20 =/= power of a 20th level character. The tier to level comparison is only to determine when players reach new tiers and to create equivalent danger - it does not represent the same level of power. It's like comparing level to CR - sure, they're similar, but they don't function in the same way. Combat encounters are even built differently to accommodate.

As a result, I could very feasibly see 5 tier 15 starships for 5 level 20 players working out a bit better (still not great, but better). Starship challenge rules even support this concept.

It's not a good solution, but it may work as a band-aid in the meantime, until the convention is over and a dev can comment on this.

Summoning spells have also been removed, and spellcasting still scales to roughly the same level of power (you still receive spells like Disintegrate at 6th level, for instance).

My theory is that these sorts of all-powerful or fully arcane types of magic are simply not available to the classes at hand, since they don't work well the the themes of the classes (Mystic is presented as more psychic based, while Technomancer is a hybridization of magic and technology as well as a mix of arcane and psychic power). Very few spells like transformation, summon monster, and Gate made it through, and the few that did I'm actually surprised by (Animate Dead and Planar Binding spring to mind).

When classes arrive that make sense to transform, I imagine we'll see those spells again in those books (or the spells will otherwise come out later), and I imagine they'll even be available to the current spellcasters. In the meantime, if you really want to play a shapeshifter, you could always port a Pathfinder class over.

In the meantime, best way I can see around this is to give players multiple, weaker ships - like dogfighters or even their own fleet - as they get to much higher levels. Overall, Tier isn't quite equivalent to player level, and with players having enough ships up and about they should do just fine against harder starship threats. This may even be the intent, although I don't necessarily agree with said potential intent.

Either way, it should work as a minor patch.

Nonsense right back at you. The Starfinder Society is not a military organization.

What about the innumerable number of adventurers and types of stories that can be told using this system that don't involve the Starfinder Society whatsoever? The identical set of rules apply to them, too. Even long-term friends that have known each other for years and have adventured together from level 1 to 20.

Nah, it is literally, actually impossible for them to coordinate with one another.

Keep in mind that this is how these rules work no matter your AP or if it's your own setting or if it's your own adventure in the same setting or anything else. Unless you change the rules, this is how it works RAW.

Even if that were true... DC 70 to do so? As far as I can tell, that is actually impossible to make right now as a 20th level character, even with aid.

We are talking about a game in which you can have literally magical laser guns being wielded by an actual space wizard flying a ship built from adamantine firing weapons forged of cold iron using computer parts with mithral wiring that is about to travel at FTL speeds by opening a portal to another plane of existence and tunneling through, and we are really concerned that the weight isn't up to standard.

That said, spaceships, by design, need to be lighter weight. If a capital ship weighs several hundred thousand tons, it's going to be a nightmare to fly. I imagine they're deliberately designed to be lightweight in order to properly navigate in a vacuum, and considering the notes above, I don't imagine they'd have difficulty doing so. Starship parts are apparently ungodly expensive, based on both the book and the developers, which is why you buy them with BP instead of credits. Part of that expense may have something to do with using exotic metals.

But also as mentioned, starship weight (and even area, to an extent) plays no role in anything mechanically. You could say it weighs a hundred million tons and that would have no bearing on play. Weigh it what you like, the weights provided are examples.

Considering Soldier is one of two classes that is a good sniper by default without needing a lot of feats, and considering Soldier seems to feel more like a blend of Fighter and Ranger, it is a bit odd that their training doesn't then allow them to see good.

That said, it is pretty easy to work around this - as Alfray mentioned, feats and themes can give you class skills for free.

How many tiers are there?

Considering double checking the math... DC 15+(2*Tier), it might not be that bad.

You're right, it's not that bad - it's worse! DC 55 at Tier 20 (15 + (2*20)). Even a +40 to a skill still has a 70% chance to fail.

Yeah, this seems pretty odd. I think that, much like base Pathfinder, level 20 play isn't really optimized as much as compared to 1-10 (and a little after for "high level" play). Not too many groups hit 20 from level 1 in Pathfinder, or 1-20 rpgs in general, so that's to be expected. Even so...

Keep in mind that at level 1, you also have a roughly 50% chance on numerous actions. Attacking another starship is most of the time 50% or less (depending on armor), as you can get, at best, a +5 bonus on the role (capped to 18 at character creation outside of rolling for stats, +1 BAB or 1 rank in Piloting). Even attacking a small ship with basic Mk 1 Armor, that's still a baseline of 13 AC, meaning you're still missing 35% of the time - and that's assuming worse-case scenario for opponent and best-case scenario for you. Realistically, you're going to fall more in the 50% range (less dex on gunner and more armor/defenses on target).

Similarly, DC 17's, which are fairly common for starship combat early on, are usually also a coinflip for characters without things like skill focus.

The thing is, more than just skill focus and racials increase your skills.
Envoys (at 20th level) get 1d8+4 to their Expertise skills every time they use it if they have resolve, which not only includes diplomatic skills but also Engineering and Computers.
Mechanics receive a passive increase to Computers and Engineering, and can be aided either by their drone (albeit debatable... I've yet to see anything that says you can't aid somebody in starship combat but that doesn't mean it can happen).

Mystic can receive a similar bonus to a variety of different skills, including Piloting, Bluff, and Intimidate, to a point higher even than Mechanic's bonus (+7 at 20 to +6 for mechanic), and some Connection Powers interact with such skills.

Operatives can take 10 on any Skill Focus skills in combat, and gives free skill focus which can include on Engineering and Computers.

Solarions and Soldiers both are the only classes to receive full BAB, making them great as gunners, especially since starship armor doesn't seem to scale as well as BAB + stats.

Technomancers receives an increase to Computers similar to Mechanics.

Now insight bonus may not stack (although it may, it's a bit unclear RAW vs RAI), but these bonuses are still better than the ones you'd receive from Skill Focus.

Keep in mind, too, that a ship's systems beyond simply the computer (which is still a nice boost), as sensors can provide a +4 bonus to Science Officers, and certain frames and thrusters can improve Piloting.

Themes can help, too, even if just a little bit. The crew also interacts with one another to grant bonuses between roles using their crew actions.

That said, some of the scaling should probably be a bit smaller. I get the intent (thematically your ship is getting more complex, and mechanically in Pathfinder it was impossible to fail even hard skill checks at higher levels), but DC 70 right now is literally impossible to make, even with a +10 ability mod (I can get a +42 diplomacy on a level 20 Shirren mystic with 30 charisma - I'd still need to roll a 28 on a 20 sided die. If I was also a level 20 envoy, then I *might* be able to make it). I'm going to assume that the 10 + tier x 3 is a typo in that regards, considering.

The DC 45 tho seems fine - you're supposed to have some chance of failure even at high levels. It's just that the chance is supposed to be relatively smaller at high levels the more you specialize. I have a level 13 PC in my pathinder game right now who has something like a +42 bonus to Spellcraft checks. She can basically never not identify something. I think the design philosophy here was to avoid situations like that from happening as often.

Edit: It may also be that backup crew, as mentioned in the Larger Crews section, is meant to grant bonuses to their respective officer. See the Thaumtech Omenbringer, on page 307, that's receiving a +30 bonus on Intimidate checks with only 14 ranks. Has the same amount of ranks in Diplomacy, and is somehow getting a +5 bonus between the two from some mysterious force.

The basic set of clothes mentioned in the rule book is station wear, which includes environmental protection. But any other clothing would not.

So if the PCs find clothing that isn't station wear, such as planet side clothing, native clothing, relics from the past, or other items made up by the GM, it wouldn't have such environmental protection.

In addition, it's not difficult to simply state that a crack in the face plate no longer seals or that strong acid rain ruins the environmental protection provided by the armor, despite the fact that it isn't specifically mentioned in the rules. Sometimes, a GM Ruling (different from a House Rule) is necessary.

It's not something that would work for SFS, unless the SFS Rules gave the gm leeway to provide rulings as such, but it can work for home games easily enough.

And lastly, for a long term survival challenge, the PCs can run out of batteries. With no working ship, their environmental protection will go away.

I agree with much of this (and have changed my mind a bit since originally posting with how little use it will see). I do think there are ways to go about using the environmental rules, but it almost feels like I have to fight against the players to do so. If all it takes to circumnavigate my literally destroying their armor is for them to just pull out another set at bulk 1, that just seems weird.

Yeah, GMing I can see a lot of ways to use environmental rules. My issue is that there is this one-size-fits-all always usable magic wand that says otherwise, and in order to use those rules, I have to take the wand away first, which feels almost antagonistic. If they get stranded on a desert planet, I then also have to break their ship, and also drain their armor batteries, and also say "no you can't" when the players ask if they can use their batteries to recharge their suits, all that before I set up story hooks there. I want to set a nice scene of being stranded in a desert, a common storytelling scenario, and to do so I feel like I need to kick my players in the face first.

Does that make sense? It's that it's so easy to just wash it away that I basically need to railroad to get it to do something interesting involving the environment. It's not that there are tools to deal with the environment, it's that those tools are an all-in-one that are equipped to all players at any given time accessible literally at the press of a button. It's weird to then put 11 pages of rules regarding that which are then side-stepped by pressing that button.

I guess ultimately I'm more questioning the decision of having it like that, rather than it being armor upgrades or small portable upgrades. Even it were able to give players the ability to ignore environmental hazards all the time anyway, I could much more easily swallow the idea of a space suit (which is in the game, albeit a bit useless, as mentioned), or a portable breathing mask, or anti-radiation pills - even if that was all kept in an "emergency kit" or something for the sake of simplifying bookkeeping.

But otherwise having a standardize, almost always available option for all players of all classes in just about any given scenario to just ignore hazards feels weird, especially when there's 11 pages on those hazards. They had to sit down and have discussions on the nature of those environmental rules, and what they meant, and spend a few days discussing and designing them and editing them, and then they hand all players a magic wand that says "don't worry about it". I question the design philosophy from that standpoint. So much of Starfinder is simplified from Pathfinder (arguably for the better), and yet Environmental rules are far more complex despite being easier to overcome. I could boil down a good half of the rules to "exposure for 1d6 damage", "diseases", or "suffocation" for about how impactful they would end up being.

Let me get more direct. Heat, cold, and vacuum all do more or less the same thing - they all deal 1d6 damage over time due to exposure (albeit vacuum more rapidly, and with suffocation). And yet, the way they're written implies that they each require different forms of protection. That's why they're different forms of environmental hazards. There's even multiple forms of environmental protection in the equipment section that you can buy to protect against different types of environment.
And yet, here comes a one-size-fits-all fix, and everyone just has it. It's nothing special, it's nothing unique, you just get it. Why did we then need three separate sets of rules for that?

Me, personally, in my campaign, I can already see a way to throw in environmental rules. I'm glad that environmental rules are there. It just seems odd and a bit contrarian.

Sorry for the wall of text. I feel like a lot of folks aren't quite getting what I'm trying to lay down - I'm not angry or upset or anything. I'm confused by the ability to circumnavigate a large block of rules, that somebody evidently cared quite a lot about because they put a lot of time into it, simply by pressing a button. I'm a bit disappointed as a it seems to kill a lot of thematic moments (all the examples I've seen seem to get killed or shut down by this ruling). Ultimately, I'd at least like to know why, from a RAI standpoint, this was set up in this way. If they didn't want players to worry about environmental rules most the time for simplicity sake (environmental rules in Pathfinder could sometimes be tedious to keep track of over longer periods of time for some groups), why have the environmental rules then turn around and be so complex and varied?

That all said, I've yet to sit down a proper game with it, so we'll see - maybe it works out just fine in the context of actual play, and I would be thrilled to be wrong. There's only so much you can perceive when looking at things from RAW.

There is a great scene in season one of The Expanse. A young belter kid is on his uncles asteroid hauler when the uncle decides to use his cargo as an improvised mass cannon. He know his ship will be destroyed so he takes the kid, throws his helmet on, and throws him out the airlock. The kid is drifting alone for a few days until someone picks him up from his distress beacon.

This is super-science. Technology has the ability to fix these problems. If you're equipment is damaged or sabotaged, things can go badly. But it's no different than jumping out of a plane with a parachute.

I'm going to sound like a broken record, but the environmental protection is built into basic sets of clothing. Not military-issued armor, not super-tech armor - standard station-wear for as low as 95 credits, which are described as being basically just protective clothing. Even if we were to assume credit-to-dollar or euro transfer on a 1-to-1 basis, that's still incredibly cheap (for a full outfit, shirt pants shoes and even jacket, of brand new clothing that forever protects you from the dangers of space and also helps against getting shot).

That event you describe? Both the kid and the uncle can both make it out alive because their rudimentary clothing perfectly protects the both of them from space.

It's not like jumping out of a plane without a parachute, it's like having a parachute in your t-shirt you picked up from the mall - and all t-shirts available at the mall. This isn't some unique feature, it's standardized.

I don't mind that there are ways around the dangers of space environments. I mind the dismissive ease at which they are dealt with. It's these very tense and dramatic moments that I want most to see, and are what make the environmental rules interesting - and it's these exact sort of scenes that wearing armor (or, as we mentioned, basic clothing) completely negates.

Turn it around. What if they never implemented enviromental rules? Then your post would say: "Why doesn't Paizo include enviromental rules!? It's vital to the game! All different kind of planets and space occurences/gasses should be able to have hazard descriptions! Paizo is SO bad for leaving such a huge item in the universe out of their ruleset!"

I'm fine that the environment rules are there. My issue is that the environmental rules are extraordinarily intricate and detailed when more than half the time the rules will simply not come up. I feel like radiation could've been boiled down to "poison/disease" without needing its own set of rules, vacuum could've just been "they start suffocating", etc. Instead, the rules are very particular and spelled out over eleven pages when more than half are countered simply by "I activate my environmental protections." A lot of this information feels like it could've been boiled down or simplified for how little it otherwise appears.

Situations in which PCs may find themselves on planets without their protective gear can never happen in SF, so clearly these rules are just a waste of space.

I actually mentioned in my OP this exact scenario. My issue is that, even then, 1st level armor still gives you 24 hours and requires very little charge to get back up to 24 hours immediately. It can also be used in increments of an hour, meaning you can subvert harsher effects by simply turning it off when it's no longer a problem (like a desert planet at night).

Also, you can hack suits to turn those off you know. That actually can happen to PC's and NPC's alike.

Mentioned in the OP - I can see this happening if the armor is unattended, and considering there's no real penalties for sleeping in armor (that I've found, and I've checked - you can even sleep in power armor with no penalty RAW, I would love to be corrected on this), there's no reason to take it off. Otherwise, the creature has to be helpless, at which point if you really wanted to kill them (which the intent of turning off their environmental protections would almost certainly be) you could always coup-de-grace them.

The PCs are in a gambling den where all equipment is forbidden to limit cheating. Space pirates attack, and the protective dome is damaged, exposing the room to vacuum.

Much of the gear that provides the same full environmental protection is literally just clothing that also provides AC bonuses.

Ultimately, what irks me is the concept of comparing this to other sci-fi, or even trying to think of tense moments that could be ruined by "I turn on environmental protections." Like when Kirk lands on that deserted planet, just suddenly "oh no worries I'mma just click on this button and be perfectly fine for a few days at least". It's a bit strange.

I like the environmental rules. I want to use them. I can think of a number of ways that they can come up, but it feels like right now I have to bend over backwards to have those situations come up in which they apply - which seems really weird for a set of rules that's supposed to happen more or less passively.

Quick Edit: Ultimately, I'll have to wait and see how things actually play out in a full game to really see how well it works. On paper, however, it looks really befuddling, and tension breaking.

Science Fiction is hopeful.

I see you haven't looked into any Warhammer 40k.

Seriously. There's an entire section for it in the GM chapter, and yet any armor whatsoever gives you full environmental protection against all environmental hazards at all times apart from highly corrosive atmospheres (it says that acid resistance upgrade will fix that, but no such upgrade appears to exist). This functionality even applies if the item is broken.

This protection has a limited duration, but it's 24 hours per item level, meaning 1st level gear still gives you 24 hours of protection in 1 hour increments, and is recharged for free (more easily than batteries, even). It is implied that certain gear does not have these protections, but I've yet to find any. The only thing that shuts it off is hacking, which requires the owner to be helpless or the armor to be unattended (the latter of which I see as being more likely, but still very uncommon).

All classes are then given at least Light armor proficiency, and no classes receive benefits for not wearing armor. Similarly, no classes receive living pets, and summoning spells no longer exist.

Given that you are fully protected against all environmental hazards at all times, what's even the point of having such a long section on environmental rules with such intricate rules and specifications when they won't come up a vast majority of the time? I'm fine with saying "you take certain penalties in harsh environments", but the book is very specific about what happens in what environments under what conditions, only for that to not matter.

Similarly, why is there a "space suit" item when it is objectively worse in every single way? It can stop working very quickly after being hit, provides no armor, and only protects against vacuum/atmosphere. For only 70 credits more, you get all that, all the time, and more.

Best as I can see is that they're there for archaic characters that have yet received modern armor or for missions where you're stranded on a harsh planet for several days away from a functioning ship. But even then, this seems to imply that the game wants you to ignore all environmental rules a bulk part of the time. That just seems contradictory, especially when the environmental rules talk about "The harshness of space" (which you'll never have to experience...)

I'm sorta upset about this because I've been finding the environmental rules actually kinda cool, and the ability to just completely shut them down simply for the sake of wearing anything at all kinda ruins that.

Solarion has a 2nd level Revelation that allows them to have a Radiation aura as a standard action. It says it's low-level Radiation, but then says that the radiation causes nearby creatures to Fortitude saves or be sickened - which is not the same as how low-level Radiation as a hazard works.

Any kind of armor, even if it provides +0/+0 AC, makes you immune to low-level Radiation, and gives you a +4 bonus on saves against higher levels of radiation.

Given the discrepancy, is the Solarion radiation a magical/alternative form of radiation, or are any armored creatures whatsoever immune to it? (If they are, that's a waste both of a revelation and of a standard action unless fighting monsters that aren't immune to radiation.) If not immune, do armored creatures receive a +4 to save against this ability or not? If a monster is immune to Radiation, but not to the sickened condition, do they still need to make the save?

Edit: Additionally, is it supposed to be that the low-level radiation and the sickened condition are two separate things that occur from the ability?

Looking at some batteries now, High-Capacity Batteries are the most expensive batteries in the game for no real discernible reason.

I know they're technically less expensive than Super- and Ultra-Capacity, but when you calculate price-per-charge, they come up to a whopping 8.25. They're the most expensive ammo in the game (not including Mini-Rockets or Special Ammunition) at that price. What's more is that it seems like the majority of items that use High-Capacity batteries use 2 charges at a time, raising them to 16.5 price-per-charge.

Other batteries can be more expensive depending on what they're used in, but the other batteries are mostly (certainly not always) used on a 1-to-1 basis. I think I would've preferred batteries to just have names, not charge counts, with items then telling me how much usage I get out of an item using that battery, because this makes the second lowest energy ammo and one of the most required pieces of ammo (for items, too) be one of the most expensive.

Looking at some other items, the Blue Star Plasma Caster can't even be fully reloaded... Ever. It's capacity is 200 and the highest battery gives 100 energy. Even if you decided to load it with a battery, you're then spending about 44 credits per shot, and that's if you don't Boost it.

Overall, this seems to me like the intent is that you have a ship that allows you freely recharge all gear and batteries (which would be a part of what makes them so expensive - once rounds are used, they're just gone). This makes me assume that they want you to start with a Medium size ship, which makes sense - tier 1 ships start with 55 BP, which would be easily met by building a Medium size.

Meanwhile, the batteries that come pre-charged in your weapons and gear doesn't seem to be the same type of battery, but rather a battery meant for that weapon. RAW they're any old battery, but it looks like if you had a battery in your laptop vs buying a battery backup or external power-source.

I definitely think clarification should be in order, but mixing this info with the Absalom Station, it seems like the intention is that batteries are reusable and that you're meant to have places (not necessarily everywhere, but at least your HQ) where you can fully recharge with no problem. Bigger deal is bringing enough individual batteries on an away mission.

Now, there is one thing I see stopping this infinite loop:

Your GM?

Paladinosaur wrote:

I fail to see the problem here. D&D 3.5/4e/5e and Pathfinder had similar delays. 3.0 too, if I recall correctly.

The problem is that we have a game with no rules for creating balanced NPCs or monsters and with no library of enemies for players to face. Those books at least had monsters or NPC creation rules in them, Starfinder has nothing but an invisible CR 20 goblin.

This is something that's been true of just about every single tabletop RPG that's released nowadays, and is a practice that spans back a bit over a decade.

The reason for this is because the book of rules is not for the GM. The GM is meant to know the rules and enforce them on the player - but the GM has absolute power in their game, including the ability to create monsters and NPCs with whatever stats they feel like giving out whatever amounts of experience points they deem necessary. Books like the monster manual are filled with suggestions, advice, and quick-grab items - it is not a block of code for a non-existent video game. Numerous other games have a delayed release of a monster manual because a monster manual is giving rules to a person who need not follow those rules.

As per example: Dozens of other RPGs, Pathfinder included, have had releases with no monster manuals (some never releasing a monster manual) and have done just fine. Starfinder is not unique in this regard. This is standard practice.

In fact, Starfinder is in a much better place because of Legacy material, given it gives you a shorthand list of rules of conversion between the two systems that's relatively quick to do, and given that it names the sources for lists of monster manuals by name in the back of the book. It states by name a source for creating monsters.

D&D 3rd-5th, Pathfinder, and numerous other RPGs said "Just wing it or wait" on release, and Starfinder gives you rules on:
A) How to wing it with NPCs without an in-depth guide (pg. 382)
B) How to run a different form of combat to still run a campaign in the meantime with its own set of monster stats (pg 306-315, and again on pg. 326)
C) How to incorporate monsters from a different game into this one, listing books of information on such things by name (pg. 501)

and you want to say that there is no library of enemies to face?

If a GM looks at all that and says "Yeah, I don't have enough to run a game", the problem is with the GM, not the book.

you are not always going to be able to afford to have all your gear at your level or higher. You are expected to continue to use lower level gear.

The issue is, the intent seems to be that item your average item level is supposed to, roughly, equate to your level. They're meant to be items equivalent to the expected power level at that stage of play.

If you're meant to be using earlier grenades, then perhaps the item levels are not properly stated, rather than the credit value. I can't imagine a Level 10 character lobbing level 1 grenades over and over, for a whopping 1d6+10 damage at best, when compared to a tactical magnetar rifle that deals 2d8+10 damage to up to 6 targets for nearly half the cost of *even the level 1 grenade* in ammunition. Yeah, the grenade can hit up to like 30+ people, but that's only if everyone is packed-in incredibly close, and if you're even fighting that many people to begin with. Against single targets, it's worse, especially given you can double attack with that rifle, but not with the grenade.

Using a grenade of the same level is 6d6+10, but then you've spent 5,750 credits on that one attack. This, compared to your technomancer who can deal 9d6 fire from a longer range for a wider area of effect, and they can do that 4 times per day if they want for free if at the same level.

Unless you're specializing, and then constantly facing large squads of enemies at once, there's not much use to purely damage grenades. Status grenades? Maybe. Otherwise, they seem extremely situational, or require special abilities to use well (like Grenade Expert). Beyond that, I can't see why classes that either get them for free or get their own powerful AoE (which covers at least 4 classes) would ever want to buy them at any level - and even then.

But, that's all going off of what's on paper right now. In practice they may work out way better, which may be why they're so expensive.

I would assume that creating NPCs is going to be similar to Pathfinder rules - their CR is 1 lower than their total class levels or equal to their class level if fully geared (as the page 389 mentions), but they'd likely add their Stamina and HP together for a total HP (as monsters and NPCs do not have stamina). Page 389 states that full rules for creating statted NPCs will be in the Alien Archive, and it's also mentioned on 501 that full Monster Creation rules in general will also only be available in that book, so it looks like waiting for October at least.

Otherwise, it seems to me that monster creation works almost identically to the monster creation rules from Pathfinder Unchained, with a handful of differences to accommodate system changes. If people have access to the PRD and the dedication to then convert that as appropriate to Starfinder (mostly just increasing HP and setting up KAC and EAC) it shouldn't be so bad. I know that's not the answer you were maybe hoping for, but it currently looks like the only option.

For those unaware of Pathfinder before Starfinder, however, it does mention Pathfunder Unchanged by full name, meaning a quick google would hopefully allow a GM to quickly find the PRD and it's Unchained rules.

Excellent! My thanks.