schnoodle's page

The loss of a round of air happens at the end of the creatures turn for first two listed.
For the last two those happen in that moment so if a creature casts a spell that requires speech with 2 actions they lose all their rounds of air after that spell is cast thay are no longer considered holding their breath and now with their last action must strain to breath the stifling air. If they had no actions left after casting the spell their turn would be over and next turn if still in the area of the spell would need to strain to breath then.
If a creature is crit on an opponents turn and loses their last round of air at that time, if they are still in the area when it becomes their turn they will need to use an action to strain to breath.
It doesn't specify that breathing needs to be the first action just that it needs to happen in the turn if the creature is not holding their breath.

This makes sense for the most part, but wouldn’t the specific requirement of spending an action override that spell (if you had no actions after the spell)?

To me that kinda seems like straight up ignoring a part of the spell if you could cast a spell without repercussions. Like if you casted a 3 action spell and just ignored the action tax?

When you run out of air, you fall unconscious and start suffocating.

The exact timing on when you lose all air whit casting spell and when you fall unconscious is debated some, its like if breathing out all the air in your lungs but keep holding it, you would fall unconscious (hard/imposible to do irl since we dont have 100% body controll)

For non spellcasts los of air happens at end of turn or out of your turn(saves).

but i guess you are talking about stopping holding their breath before they runs out of air, but then the condition would happen since you are not holding your breath and would need to resolve the spell since it dont have a enter/start turn wording on its effect.

a side note

There is also some discussions on what happens when you run out of air in a breathable environment, since you fall unconscious do you still hold your breath and are therefor still suffocating?
Logical if you would just fall unconscious woudld you not stop holding your breath?

Edit even if you rule that they dont fall unconscious when they run...

Above, it was being said you don’t suffocate at all with this spell

I treat holding breath as automatic/no cost for those that have rounds of air left to do so when the spell is cast on an area they are in.

Its those creatures that have run out of rounds of air that have to deal with straining to breathe the stagnant air.
And when considering this spell lasts for a minute and the rules for holding breath:

a creature has rounds of air = 5 + Con
They lose 1 round of air each round holding their breath
They lose 2 instead if they attack or cast a spell
They lose a round of air if they suffer a critical hit or critical fail a save
They can't cast a spell that requires speaking without losing all their rounds of air

The effect is limiting and can become punishing even with holding breath as a given.

What happens when you run out of breath mid-turn? Do you instantly lose an action? If you’re casting a spell using all your actions, do you lose that spell?

The “once they do” is confusing to me. As written the effects only happen if/when that action is taken, so… if the action isn’t taken (such as being stunned), not being able to take an action to breathe implies you don’t breathe.

And when does spending the action happen? The start of turn? Is it a debt like Behold the Weave, where you do it at some point in the turn?

For what it’s worth, I’m on the side of it not suffocating as it doesn’t explicitly say so, but these were points brought up that I can see the angle of.

As a note, it doesn’t even explicitly say you begin suffocating. That’s just what is being inferred in the event of not taking a breath nor holding your breath.

I’ve had a lengthy discussion with my friends about Stifling Stillness, and while we’ve come up with our own ruling, I think it would still be healthy to have something official.

“breathe air and aren't holding their breath must spend a single action on their turn straining to breathe”

So is holding your breath an action? If it’s cast on top of you, do you get a free action beforehand to hold your breath? Do you suffocate if you don’t/can’t spend an action to breathe and aren’t holding your breath? Do you have to take the action to breathe at the start of your turn, or just sometime in it as long as you’re in it? Do you just suffocate if you cast a spell in it?

For all sorts of different ways to see breathing handled…
See spells like: Vacuum, Air Bubble, Toxic Cloud
Effects like: Inhaled, Swallow Whole, being submerged

You can also point to Behold the Weave for action debt, and Avert Your Gaze for preventing a similar sense (and can you just choose to be blind instead?)

Really excited for the Invasion's Edge story!! Do we know how big the ship is? It's a little hard to tell. The size of a mountain maybe? I'd love to throw foreshadowing into the level 1 encounter from a couple blogs ago, but I'm not sure if it'd be big enough on the horizon :)

That would be a wonderful addition to our lineup! I do not have confirmation on this, but I'll update you when I do!

Any chance on an update of this? :)

A bit confused, is this a one-book AP? I thought those were just "Adventures"

Flash of Grandeur clarification also means Delay Consequence is also kinda worse. People in all the circles I knew tended to recognize the ruling of rounds for spells on other creatures’ turns as lasting until the start of that creature’s turn as well, because it generally didn’t make sense for only that spell to use the “round” wording as a reaction, while everything else uses “until the start of your next turn” to be be more clear.

SO EXCITED!

Playtest was so fun, can't wait to see what's been cooked up.

The theoretical bonus to PDF subscription is early release PDF. Which, is basically what they already sell their subscriptions on -- otherwise, there's very little reason to buy directly and not from a FLGS. I'm with what someone else said: PDF-only subs might actually benefit local game stores, and bring in more subscription income overall.

Paizo really ought to endeavor to meet customers halfway. I mean, you still have to email them to cancel your subscription. Even barring a recent FTC Rule in the US, it's just pretty anti-consumer to put barriers to stopping automatic charges to a card.

I'm happy to support Paizo, but I would be happier to do so with practices that are more friendly to my own sensibilities and wallet. I plan to unsubscribe from everything after Divine Mysteries, because I am not comfortable spending so much on books I'm not incredibly hyped for. If it was PDF prices, I'd remain subscribed instead of "spot-"subscribing.

When will the subscription let us "Start with Divine Mysteries" instead of the Tian Xia stuff?

I LOVE a lot of these, but sniper still struggles because of the single shot rifles for very, very little upside in comparison to others. Hair trigger nerf is amazing though, it actually makes a lot of sense too! If only I could actually use it with Sniper reliably, it would be like keeping an enemy in my sight...

After some thought, my biggest issue actually comes out to be: instead of adding stuff for the subclass to supplement/build upon Sniper weapons, it feels like they built all the weapons around the Sniper subclass. So it's really inaccessible for anyone else to use even at a rudimentary level.

For instance, one of my character ideas is to be a sniping Mechanic. I don't want to be as effective as a Sniper, but I'd like to have a reason not to just use a laser rifle. The fatal 1d10 is not worth the tradeoff of unwieldy and mag 1 reload 1 for anyone but a Sniper, *maybe*.

An entire weapon group shouldn't be built around a single subclass. The subclass should build upon existing options, like every other subclass does.

I LOVE a lot of these, but sniper still struggles because of the single shot rifles for very, very little upside in comparison to others. Hair trigger nerf is amazing though, it actually makes a lot of sense too! If only I could actually use it with Sniper reliably, it would be like keeping an enemy in my sight...

I can't wait to play this adventure at the end of the month, it sounds so cool!!! AND ERRATA TOMORROW?? This month is so much HYPE!

Witchwarper doesn't have the aforementioned weapon increase at level 11 on the pdf

Good changes, but god sniper operative is just looking less and less appetizing. No reactions with any of the Snipers, unless you can manage to reload the Seeker Rifle.

I like to specialize in crafting from a flavor standpoint, but mechanically it just feels like investment for no real gain, even in PF2e. If I don't gain anything from it, make it built into the system via Activities or some such available to all.

I also agree with the sentiment posted in here that Crafting as a skill on its own doesn't fit Starfinder (and frankly, it never fit pf2e either. too many types of things can be crafted, all covered by one skill?).

Crafting/Engineering should, at the very least, be treated like they treat Lore now to some extent: allowing specialization, adding some sort of benefit that isn't negligible.

Like, what if I wanna make a character be a gunsmith specifically, with access to unique mods or cool abilities? That can't even really be accomplished by *Inventor* right now, let alone Crafting. Crafting is incredibly hollow and boring.

schnoodle wrote:

…

If it helps, I’ve seen them say “Compatible but not necessarily balanced” a lot on Discord and Reddit and social media, so I think they’re trying to get that message across. :)

They’ve said it in just about every way except a “more official” channel, such as a proper blog post! Comments and discord messages are unfortunately easily dismissible.

But I sure do hope you’re right, that they’ll continue that direction!

I’m so excited, I really hope the end has more support for a pseudo biohacker (we already have inject serum and Critical Care!!)!

Is there any chance we could get the team to reiterate that “compatible” doesn’t mean “fully balanced”? It has been a big contention point since the start, and people have been dismissive of the 4-month-old discord comments on the matter. “Fully compatible with PF2e” I feel has been a detriment to player perception of things, and could muddy the playest with people trying to force it to fit into pf2e balance.

And if that’s *not* the case any longer, then that would be nice to know too.

I’m a bit concerned about how it sounds like they really want a negative for taunting, when it’s already eating an action and you are getting hit, ideally. Ultimately, if you’re making the effective AC to hit the people you’re protecting the same as your own, there’s still no reason for the creature to not just ignore you, as everyone is on the same level at that point and the others are still priority.

I understand the fear of it being overpowered, but what good is the class if it can’t do its main function? in my humble onion, I would rather a more interesting interpretation like fascinated and must attack you or something.

GET DOWN!

HAHA, I LIVE!

Surprised not to hear what spell tradition(s) it casts.

I guess we do know it's spontaneous and not prepared, since it has signature spells.

I'm going to guess Occult. Things to do with Time or weird things tend to be occult.

schnoodle wrote:

I appreciate this article a lot, but something stuck out -- aren't Starfinder and Pathfinder different continuities? I was fairly certain this was established a while back.

They're different enough so that Starfinder employees don't have to be Pathfinder employees, and vice versa, but at the same time we DO have a lot of shared lore between the two games. So when we CAN maintain that continuity between the campaign settings, we do.

And with this storyline, which is the BIGGEST world event we've done ever in Pathifnder, it was a friendly and collaborative element to work with the Starfinder team so that this story could potentially be one that adds to the lore... or at the very least, doesn't subtract from the lore by taking an established Starfinder deity and scrubbing them out.

Also... we wanted this event to stick. The god is dead, and if they come back to life, that's cheesy and a bait and switch. We don't want to do that, and had we chosen a deity who is still active in Starfinder, the perception would be that "some day, they'll come back" regardless of how much Gap-shenanigans we have out there.

Thanks for the response, I see what you're saying. I do find it a bit confusing to be different-but-same, so to speak, but it does kind of open up the possibility of time-travel shenanigans that would now allow players to do a pathfinder2e AP into starfinder2e, which I appreciate a lot. Easier to do with a continuous, overarching story that doesn't revive gods for sure.

I appreciate this article a lot, but something stuck out -- aren't Starfinder and Pathfinder different continuities? I was fairly certain this was established a while back.

D'oh

Thanks for helping this dense GM out! lol

The Spiked Shield weapon is on page 105 of Tech Revolution.

So it is! Apparently I missed it several times…

The claws are probably just custom to this model. They give all the necessary stats right there. (Except cost to try to reverse engineer them into a different model.)

You can't sub the Hammerfist for the claws because the claws are better. Medium damage instead of high, bleed critical vs none, both have peneterating. If it costs 4x instead of 2x tier that fixes the discrepancy right there for a level 3 weapon.

Perfect

Not all slots should be used if you don't have enough MP.

Yes, I figured this was the case if they had enough MP to hit the Mech minimum. I guess my issue is 3 and 4 together: I don’t understand how a party of level 3 should, mechanically, be able to have individual tier 3 mechs. It doesn’t really matter at first, but I know my players would like to upgrade stuff ASAP, so I wouldn’t know exactly how to handle that?

Unless they’re expected to be 4 before any upgrades.

I may be a bit confused overall about mechs, but I noticed a few... maybe problems? With the Lynkor Valko:

First, I have no idea what the melee (adamantine claws) nor spiked shield are in term of slots/mech points. I don't see the weapons in either book.

Second, doesn't it violate the "minimum MP" rule? As far as I can tell, it's looking at 48 MP out of the minimum of 60 (duello pod), if we sub the claws with hammerfist in the lower limb slot.

Third, not all the mission cores have all the slots used. Are we expected to add the others ourselves?

Fourth, at 3rd level, each player having a tier 3 mech would mean you don't have enough MP to split between one another.

Again, since this is all new for me, I might be misunderstanding the mech rules from TechRev.

schnoodle wrote:

Is there... any chance of Mechas in SF2e? Having such a big, cool sf1e AP and not including them in SF2e would be considered Cruel and Unusual Punishment. At least, by my Gundam-loving players' minds.

"Hell YES we have plans for mechs in 2E! Otherwise, I riot. Everyone knows this. Alas, it won't be right away, because we have so many other awesome things to playtest first. So expect them in some later supplement. Until then, you can play or read Mechageddon! for all your big stompy robot needs."

-Jenny Jarzabski, Senior Developer, Reddit AMA April 4th 2024

Thank you!

Oh heck yeah! I'm gonna run this for my players, we've been chomping at the bit for SF2e but I didn't want to have to come up with things.

Is there... any chance of Mechas in SF2e? Having such a big, cool sf1e AP and not including them in SF2e would be considered Cruel and Unusual Punishment. At least, by my Gundam-loving players' minds.

Since it's been asked for a few times, I'll clarify the language roots and inspiration of the names. I can't, however, give you the characters/kanji/hanja for each right now, either because I've lost my notes, can't remember the tone, or because it might potentially spoil story elements. Probably best for us to return to that topic after all four books are out...

[snip]

Is there any chance of revisiting tone for stuff now that they're all out? I feel a bit silly and guilty trying and failing to pronounce these names lol

I'm so excited to run this, my players equally so! Thank you for your work here, it's all such a cool story reading through it.

"Doom Scroll" is a hilarious spell.

Are we going to see more of the same with spellcasters being generalists? I'm really hoping to see something more interesting. Though I do enjoy the spontaneous healer deal.

I once again express my dismay at losing EAC and KAC as separate things. Adds really good flavor honestly, and would allow for some funky builds using pf2e engine.

schnoodle wrote:

Why does the orc look like a green human with tusks and slightly pointy ears, when they used to look like this?

This art is not new and appeared in Pathfinder Lost Omens Ancestry Guide, page 49. It represents the spectrum of orc appearance, not a shift in orc art concept.

There is some new art in the Player Core, but this is a good example of how the remaster is also a remix of sources.

Ah, thank you. I appreciate the spectrum a lot more than one-size-fits-all.

Who made the Nephilim? That's an amazing piece, I love everything about it.

EDIT; nevermind, I thought I had seen it once before: back in a 2020 book, I think the APG? Pedro Kruger Garcia is the artist.

Why does the orc look like a green human with tusks and slightly pointy ears, when they used to look like this?

schnoodle wrote:

Matthew Jaluvka wrote:

schnoodle wrote:

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.

what about rolling high on the 3d4 cantrips

is that just something you've decided can't happen

If you want to assume that then sure. But otherwise — if we're talking about a 1d6, with +4 modifier: a range of 5-10 is going to produce better emotional attachment than a 2-12. the minimum being more than double is pretty big, and the high being only 2 more in exchange... Yeah, no, I'd prefer the consistency.

3d4 is a range of 3-12, and you have more chances of it being higher than 5 on 3d4 than you had to roll a 1 on 1d6...

The chance to roll a 1 on 1d6 is 16,6666666...%. The chance to roll lower or equal to 5 on 3d4 is 15.625%.

For one, the issue isn't an already existing cantrip (Needle Darts). It's those being changed.

Second, you're proving my point. The whiteboard math is fine, but in the moment — what players actually feel when they see numbers — doesn't care about whiteboard math. The low low outweighs the high highs, especially when you can compare the difference of a high and low rolls the spell previously was capable of.

schnoodle wrote:

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.

what about rolling high on the 3d4 cantrips

is that just something you've decided can't happen

If you want to assume that then sure. But otherwise — if we're talking about a 1d6, with +4 modifier: a range of 5-10 is going to produce better emotional attachment than a 2-12. the minimum being more than double is pretty big, and the high being only 2 more in exchange... Yeah, no, I'd prefer the consistency.

At your home table, you can still use any of the old spells if you want to and your table agrees.

This is still very up in the air for the FoundryVTT version, so probably not the best advice given how much it has boosted paizo and pf2e in general.

Everything is nice, except...

Cantrips losing modifiers is awful. One thing that I adored about pf2e, coming from 5e, is that even my low rolls did a decent amount of damage. Every player I talked to from the community I come from felt the same way, too. Now that's gone, it's right back to wonderfully terrible feeling cantrips of 5e, where you just low roll constantly and have no bonus.

Whiteboard math is great and all, but most players aren't math nerds who see a number and think averages. They see low dice rolls and feel like they did nothing in comparison to the martials.

I wish there was a place to give this feedback before it all went to print, but alas.

Absent any specific outside factor, I would tend to assume that emotivores are loners, or at most one senior emotivore with a couple of enslaved spawn. After all, even an ordinary emotivore is a powerful monster, who wouldn't normally need to rely upon numbers for defense. Combine that with the need to feed on people, and you wouldn't want to concentrate, lest you overfeed and expose yourself.

Generally speaking, vampires in fantasy are also very powerful creatures, often necromancers. Still, though they see the advantage of working together. The book does outline a "mastermind," which going back I noticed a bit of info I didn't see before:

and the regular emotivore:

So that kind of answers part of the question. I'm still curious though how these small groups or individuals interact with a society. Do they try to live among the people? Seclude themselves in a sewer? Solitary political manipulators?

Also, the book outright says what happens to someone fed upon: they gain a negative level. So, no, being fed upon is not good at all.

Ye, I meant more from a... "normal" person perspective. Generally NPCs that just ekk out a living aren't as tough as PCs, so what happens to those weaker people? Do they remember the encounter? It doesn't go into detail whether this always has to be an active feasting, or if they can subtly draw power from a creature if, say, they pretended to be their lover.

I guess that's all up to the GM, I just like to know more about the canon lore from personal intrigue.

Emotivores in Archive 2 immediately strike me as interesting - we haven't gotten any vampires yet, but the look and need to feed reminds me of it. They don't have very much extra fluff to them, but I wonder if it makes sense for them to actually live as a society?

The first indicator being the clothes they wear - depicted as fairly clean and even having trinkets and utility pouches. Given that they are shapeshifters, they seem to fit that role that vampires often did well - be able to manipulate a group of people from behind the scenes, and laying out the framework for perhaps "raising" a society as cattle, much like vampires do in many fantasy settings.

It doesn't seem to indicate, though, whether they work as a group, or are just single isolationists that come out to feed. Do they have complex thought, or are they basically just cunning, hungry zombies? Also, what does psychically feeding on feelings do to the victim - do they die or are they left stunned? Do they become a thrall to the emotivore?

I really like these creatures and would love to hear your thoughts. I think it'd be super interesting if they introduce vampires, as these emotivores would probably have a place in that society.

When I first got the CRB, the first character idea I had and worked on was one that was a bit edgy, a bright and innocent character with something dark haunting him. He was to be a spellcaster happened upon his power after some junk, and basically was scared but used this void power to try to do good (while fighting off the dark influence). From glancing over classes, at first the Solarian seemed to fit this so well! You could channel the energy of the void, of a black hole! A small black mote followed you around, and you could make it do things! As I was trying to get the character to work though, I found that the vast majority of Solarian makes balancing very important, as you rely on Photon powers to deal damage, while "Graviton" are more utility.

At that point it became obvious, it wasn't a spellcaster at all, but a utility melee/tank. Which is still cool! It just made me so disappointed, as Mystic and Technomancer don't really fulfill the "class fantasy" I was looking for.

Does anyone else have any hopes for new classes in the future like this?

Roll20 has a grid you can place over a map, tokens, and dice. For playing the game, what more do you want? There are character sheets too, in case you're playing with people you don't trust not to cheat for some reason.

I know, I know - you get the basics, but there's a LOT of room for improvement, largely revolving around the atrocious UI. I really don't have the energy to think through all of the issues, but essentially it boils down to how long it takes to get fairly simple information - loading between content is obtuse and there's no decent way to quickly store information.

It's a decent product, but 6 years of development and counting for what I assume is the largest in the industry, where their first feature is titled "elegantly simple" - there's nothing "elegant" about it.

In part, having some history in web development and design, my patience wears a bit thin for the age of the company, with what (I feel as) useless features are getting added recently while there's already existing features that need a lot of polish.

As far as a character builder goes, Lone Wolf is currently being slowed down by a certain misadventure called "trying to keep up with a playtest".

While that makes sense, it doesn't assuage the inconvenience. The pricing, though, is probably the biggest concern. I don't want my friends to have to each pay ~$50 to get complete functionality. Now if I could just have a few friends use my "books" at a time, like I do IRL, that would be a lot more justifiable of a purchase.

I appreciate the responses, everyone.

I'd way rather have Paizo working on FAQ updates and new material first, though.

I mean, I'm all for that too, but I don't think it's unfair to expect some sort of online support for those of us who can't game in-person.

The result is that Paizo has tended to license their IP for projects outside their Core Competency. Such as character builders or virtual tabletops.

I'm definitely for that, but they seem a bit slow on the draw to this market. Of course I don't know the ins and outs of this business, but if WotC can provide all sorts of cool tools and partnerships, I wish Paizo would embrace even just outsourcing it all to a tried-and-true development team.

Looks like it is on indefinite hold.

Thanks for this link, I found Fantasy Grounds through it, and though it doesn't seem like the prettiest interface I'll definitely want to look into it as an alternative to roll20.

Especially being that they partner with them in the past, though I don't know if that partnership still holds today. I'm surprised I hadn't heard of them, that being the case.

Compared to DnD, there's not a lot intuitive tools for character or campaign building. Obviously Starfinder is fairly new, especially being a bit unique in its science fantasy setting, but as a new GM it would be really nice to have character / encounter / world-building pieces all in one.

We have roll20, but its UI is very... disappointing. It becomes a slough to jump between the unresponsive menus and awfully lackluster options (and overall unattractive interface). I also checked out Hero Labs, but between the pricing and that it doesn't have all current sources, it's pretty much not an option.

So in a space that doesn't have many decent alternatives, it almost seems backwards not to support something, in a world where people are friends with others across the globe. To draw comparisons, DnD 5e has DnD Beyond, which is actually fairly intuitive and makes character tracking really nice for both online and in-person play, however I don't particularly want to play 5e over Pathfinder or Starfinder.

We recently got Archives of Nethys (which is really quite nice, just lacking a simple search function for Starfinder...), so it would be great if they continued to at least support growing tools, especially for character and campaign management. Do we have any word from Paizo on the subject?