oimandibloons's page

Not sure if this is proper errata territory, but the grenade launcher distances look too big compared to weapons (or weapon and spell ranges are too short compared to grenade launcher ranges). I mean, what's going on here?

Okay here's a weird idea: what if starting from 5th level and every 4 levels afterward (5,9,13,17; coincidentally maps to each time proficiency for either strikes or class DC increases to expert and master), what if the solarian got a free feat? Seems the way to sneak in feats without needing too much page space to me.

How does the Solarian compare to the Ranger?

A lot of people consider the Ranger Class to pretty much be exactly at the middle of the pack for Martials. The very definition of not exciting but perfectly usuable in all but the most hyper-optimzed campaigns.

If a class is as strong as it or stronger it's probably fine. If it's weaker it needs some help.

So where does the Solarian stand. On par? Above? Or Below?

Right now? I'd say the solarian is either on par with, or slighty better than, the inventor. Lots of the cooler abilities are backloaded with a surprising amount of AoEs available, but with low level performance feeling *off*. At least this is what I think after poring through Nethys and comparing to the closest available strength martials (which are usually in PF2). Maybe if I actually play one (I'm thinking a Natural Ambition'd midline skirmisher with Stellar Rush, Hampering Flare, and a +4 STR/+2 DEX/+2 CON with Toughness), I could mellow out my opinion.

I wouldn't call standard martial progression on a martial class "rock solid" so much as part of the bare minimum. Basic stat progression, even one with proficiency bumps on the earlier side of the standard, isn't really the main selling point of a martial class so much as the foundation upon which one lays the actual features that make the class special, and if those bits were missing then the class would be truly dysfunctional. This is also why I generally don't think calling a class "playable" or "functional" really helps evaluate their balance, because it's such a low bar: unless you miss essential bits of the class's core stat progression, which even most homebrewers manage to avoid but which did happen with a few classes in the playtest, your class is always going to be playable in 2e; that doesn't mean it can't be weak. In fact, a class with nothing but this basic progression would be extremely weak, and while the Solarian does have a bit more than that in their core features, it's not actually all that much more on balance.

Yeah you're right; I was grasping at straws for why a low level solarian would be more fun than a melee class ported from PF2e. The rider effects, as of now, are not even that flashy or impactful to justify cycling attunements beyond the lvl 1 feat that you may choose (most likely Stellar Rush, and maybe Hampering Flare if you're Natural Ambition-ing and changing your playstyle to be more akin to a midline skirmisher).

Now that I've read through some playtest forum posts about the solarian, I wonder how much contradictory information did the devs get that made them only address reactions. Also I have to say, the two-hand d10 trait was a slap in the face because I remember putting in that I would've loved to see 2 handed weapons. I meant a weapon that needed to be held in 2 hands to even be able to make a strike with, such that the trait budget could be expanded, not a trait that would be worth two ;-;.

So for fall errata (which will probably be out by November because that's how it went down last year), I'd maybe hope for the photon flat damage to get a slight bump (say 1 + ceil(half level)), and *maybe* Brutal trait'd solar flare (no matter how much I'd want it, someone would argue that it would be too much.). To get back level 1 AoE, I can't see that coming back via errata as it is effectively an amount of change you'd see in a remaster to fundamentally alter the class chassis like that. Not to mention the relatively anaemic solar weapon would need a significant rework in my view to compete with actual weapons (unless if the intent is that they do slightly less damage than actual weapons because of the rider effects of your attunement mode, in which case the riders should be buffed by a class feature. Maybe when class DC scales?) Also seriously, the sample degradant solarian having reach and disarm on their solar weapon while that being impossible for an actual character is definitely not helping the feeling that this release was rushed.

To note: solarian is still a rock-solid class if you look at its bones. Standard martial strike progression, 1/9/17 class DC scaling, and 1/11/17 medium armour scaling (heavy if you take the feat at lvl 2) are very good. The photon solar weapon damage does scale better eventually, and the graviton rider is decent enemy movement control. Solar flare, if invested in your build, can also put in real work. I guess my biggest complaint is losing the AoE powers at level 1, which is how it was in the playtest (now available as level 4 feats), because that cool flashy nova burst (hehe stupid pun) did inform my preconceived notions of the solarian being a non-Vancian gish class. Also yes I'm purely looking at it from a theoretical place, because while I haven't gotten a chance to play, a lot of the changes from playtest to release have me confused if anything.

I was pretty unhappy with the playtest version, but when I saw it in play, it just kind of ripped through enemies like hot butter- the player had a great time. And now, the final release version is even more fun.

I am struggling to see where you're coming from when you say that the release version is more fun than the playtest (at least in low levels). Because sure, now the advantage of losing the arrangements and getting those revelations as feats does increase the mixing-and-matching of feats thus letting you double up on 1/ten minute AoE powers at 6th level (or get Supernova/Black Hole and Plasma Ejection). But level 1 AoE powers are still not a thing anymore, so the low level experience is even sadder than the playtest solarian's in my opinion.

Even tho it has a smaller flat damage boost than most PF2E martials, the comparison would probably be more like the Exemplar- another "stance dance" class that doesn't have their damage boost always on.

You raise a good point. I checked and the exemplar does not go beyond 2-8 extra flat damage from the immanence of the weapon ikons (except Shadow Sheath which does 3-12 extra flat damage against an off-guard target.) The thing that does rub me the wrong way is that beyond four feats from levels 1-2 (which you can pick a maximum of two of at those levels) the solarian does not have many reasons to cycle their attunement at low levels. And beyond those four, the other cycle feats are at levels 4,8,10, and 12. Not to mention the lack of nova options at said low levels. Now compare this to Exemplar having 3 options to stance dance with at level 1. (Granted it is a rare class so I don't know how much it pushes the balance in PF2's meta, but the solarian still feels underwhelming.)

But there is a damage boost that you're taking for granted- the rarity of your strength modifier damage in SF2E. I noticed that the Solarian really feels good at a Starfinder 2e table when you're just consistently putting out higher flat damage than everyone else.

So the thing is that (+3) strength melee envoys (From The Front) can also get a bigger flat damage boost than solarians, but only for one strike that costs two actions (which can be reduced to one by taking Size Up and Acquire Asset but that is a build-specific thing). And striker operatives can get Aim damage in melee, which is greased by their metastrike feats. They can also reasonably sink some ability modifier boosts to strength at lvl 1. And soldiers are harder to quantify given their propensity for area damage and suppression, but having Primary Target as a base feature augments their single target damage to be about on par with a solarian striking twice.

They also offer so much more battlefield control, through both natural athletic maneuvers as well as the graviton rider. Even a melee soldier inflicting suppressed and tripping targets can't pin people down like you.

Actually I'd argue a solarian would be on par with a melee soldier when it comes to pinning enemies down. A melee soldier would need to invest their build into that direction (strength boosts, armor storm or close quarters subclass, and maybe a reach weapon).

I'm sure they may not feel as good at a table with a Fighter+Barbarian+Exemplar, but I think they make a lot of sense in the context they were made for.

Precision rangers, inventors, thaumaturges, investigators, and rogues too. At least those that want to mix it up in melee.

After seeing a lot of discussion in discord servers, I wonder if Solarian is undertuned or not. My reasons include:
- No 1/ten minutes AoE powers at level one anymore. The playtest had Supernova and Black Hole as the level 1 revelations for Radiant and Degradant arrangements, respectively. The lack of AoE options at level 1 in general seems to be a greater downgrade in power from the playtest and I wonder if this was intended, and if it was intended, why?
- The photon mode's solar weapon does less additional flat damage than most PF2 non-fighter melee martials' damage booster features. This is also true for envoys that can add +3-4 damage at level 1 through Get 'Em, and striker operatives (which are expert in their relevant melee weapons at level 1) get Aim which is 1d4 at base and can scale to 4d6. Is it less for photon solar weapon strikes because unlike envoys and operatives there is no action cost? (Except manifesting)
- No option to take Dexterity as a Key Ability Score. The fact that Solar Shot is a ranged brawling attack that uses dexterity and that it has an extensive feat line dedicated to it feels odd when only Strength is available as a Key Ability Score. With the option for Dexterity KAS I feel it would be possible to have slightly weaker melee solar weapons but overall a greater versatility.
- Less flexibility in solar weapons when it comes to damage, handedness, and finesse. For instance, I would have expected two handed solar weapons do d12's of damage and 3 traits, with d10 reach weapons available as an option with two traits available to add. This logic would extend to finesse weapons being one handed d6 weapons with one trait available and 2 handed d8 weapons with 2 traits available to add.

I'm sorry that you are sad.

And if the playtest version is decided to be too strong and is reined in for the release, then people will naturally like the playtest version better because it is stronger.

Too strong? How so? Would you say that In The Spotlight was too powerful during the playtest?

Personally the direction taken for Spotlight Envoy was not clearly signposted and now a few builds that were anticipated from the playtest don't really function well anymore and that's not great.

For what it's worth, I'm Okay with how Envoy is now. It's still a potent martial leader class that can put in work with skills and other actions that aren't directives. Ironing out the weird bits of the two directives I brought up should smooth it over for me though.

If we're talking about 2e Vanguard/Entropath class schticks, I'm going to fling these ideas at a metaphorical wall and see what sticks.

-12 + CON HP
-Expert unarmored defence
-Reaction to resist damage directed to it or an ally (specifics can be workshopped)
-Stances that give specific unarmed strikes and/or Area Fire effects.
-Big punchy attack you can do after doing the damage-absorbing reaction (similar to swashbuckler's finisher)

In the playtest the Envoy had the problem of being too one-note, what with one directive available at level 1 and more through feats. However, Acts of Leadership at level 6 highly increased flexibility. Adding subclass directives and moving Acts of Leadership to level 1 would have squared the circle in my opinion.

However, the released state of Envoy makes me very sad.
-The flavourful skill feats (Inappropriate Joke, Sparkling Performance, Dazzling Performance) getting removed does affect Envoy because it's a leader class that doubles as a skill user, and as such has a PF2 Investigator amount of skill increases.
- The structure of directives changing to the 1 action bonus with 2 action Lead By Example really feels restrictive to the point of "boring".
- Limiting directives to once per *round* feels unnecessary (though I wonder if it was balanced like Pathfinder Bard's Composition Spells).
- Now onto two subclasses and their directives:
-- Guns Blazing's Ready Arms directive (two action) does not say that you can Strike/Area Fire/Auto Fire with any gun you may be holding, and requires you to change weapons (drawing/swapping arms/swapping) to even shoot the damn thing.
-- In The Spotlight is very perplexing. In the playtest, this subclass at lvl 6 got to Lead By Example by issuing a second directive, thus acting as an extremely versatile martial support. Now, it's a soft-locked melee build that does not have the hardiness as From The Front. And Dance Partner confounds me even more because:
--- It nominates an ally *within ten feet* of me. Then I stride, and then ally strides to me.
--- It then counts any enemy we both "threaten" as "flanked". Now I do not know 1e jargon but I've been told that "threatening" refers to "having enemies within my melee reach".
--- After that, we're both concealed to ranged attacks *within ten feet of us*.
First of all, why is there this limitation of 10 feet for both picking my ally AND being concealed to ranged attacks? Furthermore I do not believe this subclass has the hardiness of From The Front to be able to withstand any amount of melee pressure that ends up being more action intensive than a Pathfinder Rogue feat (Gang Up at level 6).

As for what I'd do with the subclass directives:
- Ready Arms: The two action Lead By Example can simply be used to Strike/Area Fire/Auto Fire and then an ally can spend a reaction making a ranged weapon Strike.
- Dance Partner: For all this action intensiveness, I'd rather nominate an ally within at least 30 ft of me, and be concealed against ranged attacks within 30 ft of me. Furthermore, being limited to melee targets in this Ranged Meta will be difficult to justify using over Get 'Em, so I'd've preferred if "enemies you both threaten" were changed to "enemies within reach or the first range increment of both of you and your weapons", for added versatility and action-intensive ranged flanking.

Horrible that these corporate twerps think they can just take stock they don't own and/or got on credit and sell it without paying you.

They should either not being able to do it or beyond forced to consider you a debtor they have to repay with the liquidation.

Even then the liquidation will hurt book companies because the stock will be liquidated for pennies and will end up in clearance stores that won't give any of the sales to the publisher will also selling them cheaper.

Buy direct, folks! Avoid clearance emporiums for books if Diamond gets away with this. They are basically trying to fence stolen goods!

From what I can find, Paizo has claimed creditorship, so at least the company has that recourse.

My personal unannounced dreams of SF2e are:

-Nanocytes becoming a martial class whose gimmick is controlling multiple AoEs.
-Vanguard as a 12+CON HP class with expert in unarmored defence and a class gimmick of taking damage to gain energy to discharge in an attack option depending on stance. Entropy and other physics-y flavour highly desired.
-Weapons upgrades that are basically the SF2e equivalent of reinforced stocks and bayonets, but also expanded to d4 pistols that attach to melee weapons.
-Archetypes that are designed around focusing on one ranged weapon group, like an archetype around plasma weapons or laser weapons, etc.
-A 2-slot prepared occult spellcasting class that can create hardlight walls at-will, and have burst damage focus spells (and feats) revolving around old-school prismatic magic. Think PF2 necromancer but hardlight walls.
-Any indication of the abandoned Armored Mage class that was talked about in either PaizoCon or GenCon 2024.

Glad you've taken notice of the issues with both classes, though I am still concerned that you haven't mentioned the issues with Robot Companions.

On a mostly unrelated note, Minibots sound kind of like purchasable Familiars. I wonder how they're going to compare once we actually see them in action.

For posterity's sake, which issues are you referring to?

Great writeup!

Lengthening the duration of mods and making them usable by allies is great to see, and I'm happy that changes to turrets will be made to make it less confusing. (Still wondering about the fate of the Integrated Weapon Mount drones with area/automatic weapons.)

Also good to see that some of the focus for technomancer is being redirected away from spellshapes, and hopefully this leads to a class that is less slot hungry than even the PF2e wizard. Also, I get the sneaking suspicion that minibots will be Starfinder's equivalent to familiars.

I was wondering about this too, I can't find any guidance for this. All other animal companion abilities that have a DC tell you how to determine it on a case by case basis.

Even on the mechanic, the drone exocortex feats that give your drones stuff like spinning blades call for the Mechanic's class DC. Maybe this is belated playtest feedback but I think Integrated Weapon Mount, if it's going to make it to final release, should have a clause about Area and Auto Fire using, idk, Mechanic class DC or something.

If I install a Stellar Cannon or Machine Gun on my drone with an Integrated Weapon Mount, am I able to use Area/Auto-Fire? If so, what DC do I use?

Welcome to the team, Aras! Also happy to have a fellow engineering student-turned-2eFinder Person aboard. ONE OF US!!

Looking through the feats, Cloud Storage and Void Warranty(!) are utterly hilarious! Seriously, whoever wrote Void Warranty has earned themself a confection of their choice. The general design of feats around the vitality network is also very lovely and is leaving me wanting for MOAR.

The spells are very flavourful in this field test. I'm particularly jazzed about more one-action cantrips, and Doom Scroll is hilarious.

With regards to the 4-slot-per-rank caster topic, I, as someone who fully intends to mix and match PF2 with SF2, am curious about how sorcerers, wizards, and witches will fare compared to the beefier mystic. (Potential material for a Pathfinder-Starfinder crossover supplement? Call it Path to the Stars? Would be very funny. Also the thought of a technomagus or honestly any PF2 class in a high-tech sci-fi makes me giddy.)

QuidEst wrote:

I do feel pretty strongly that arcane goes against both Mystic's identity being not the rote formulae of arcane, and equally against arcane's biggest limitation of not having healing magic. The class's focus on the bonds between people is very occult in feeling, but that doesn't carry over to arcane at all.

While for the most part I agree, it's the least likely to get a connection and probably should be, don't forget that it's happened before.

This feels like it would be in a Galactic Magic-esque supplement, and more likely as a class archetype of the Mystic than just a connection (mainly because the arcane spell list is designed to not have any healing at all).

I think I see a technomancer being more drawn to occult than divine magic. (Then again I'm a PF2 player who doesn't have it in him to try Starfinder 1e.) Also there is potential for a lot of focus spells (subclass focus spells or otherwise) that could be drawn from the magic hacks in the Enhanced Technomancer (as seen in Maple Table's vid ofc). (And if the Mystic field test is anything to go by, one-action cantrips might just get to be very juicy for action economy purposes)

While I can see the Technomancer focusing on the software side of things to better differentiate it from the Mechanic, I'd instead like to see those sorts of distinctions broken up via subclass.

So, the Technomancer as a whole would focus on the broader integration of magic and technology, but each subclass would focus on different types of technology. You'd have a subclass for software, one for hardware, one for wetware, "animaware" (soul-based technology), etc.

To add onto that, a feat like the Psychic's Parallel Breakthrough could work here too. Maybe it can be called "Import Library" to keep up the programmer theme.