Now that it's known how Trick Attack works (as a full action, make one attack and roll a skill check against a DC of 20+CR to gain 1d8 damage per each odd level, such as 1d8/2d8/3d8 at levels 1/3/5, etc.; in addition, you treat the enemy's *AC as 2 lower when you succeed on the skill check), I have another concern.
I believe such a formula is way too flat to be reasonably useful throughout the game.
First, let's imagine a level 1 Operative. Realistically, we can expect +4 DEX, 1 rank, and +3 class bonus in a skill for a total of +8. That means having to roll 13 or higher to get your main combat feature against a level 1 monster, which is oddly rare and doesn't sound fun.
Second, it's likely that, at high levels, similarly to Pathfinder, this DC will be really easy to meet due to there being ever more ways to boost skills, making the DC change from "too high" to "negligibly low" over the course of level progression.
For an example of the above assertion, a Sarcesian's stat block (using it for the example as it has trick attack) has +17 in its' highest trick attack eligible skills at CR 5, meaning it needs to roll a natural 8 to trick attack an equal-level creature, which sounds far more reasonable.
|
Now that it's known how Trick Attack works (as a full action, make one attack and roll a skill check against a DC of 20+CR to gain 1d8 damage per each odd level, such as 1d8/2d8/3d8 at levels 1/3/5, etc.; in addition, you treat the enemy's *AC as 2 lower when you succeed on the skill check), I have another concern.
I believe such a formula is way too flat to be reasonably useful throughout the game.
First, let's imagine a level 1 Operative. Realistically, we can expect +4 DEX, 1 rank, and +3 class bonus in a skill for a total of +8. That means having to roll 13 or higher to get your main combat feature against a level 1 monster, which is oddly rare and doesn't sound fun.
Second, it's likely that, at high levels, similarly to Pathfinder, this DC will be really easy to meet due to there being ever more ways to boost skills, making the DC change from "too high" to "negligibly low" over the course of level progression.
For an example of the above assertion, a Sarcesian's stat block (using it for the example as it has trick attack) has +17 in its' highest trick attack eligible skills at CR 5, meaning it needs to roll a natural 8 to trick attack an equal-level creature, which sounds far more reasonable.
Where did you get that info from?
I sorta share your concern, but I'm somewhat hopeful that the system accomodates for it, so that it stays relevant through the levels.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Never underestimate an operative's bonuses on skill checks.
There is a small mistake in the initial calculation if starfinder is designed the same way like pathfinder is.
In Pathfinder each encounter has a difficult level. a level 5 character has a difficult level of 5. But normally the difficult level is used for a whole group of 4 players. and then it should cost 20-25% of their ressources (hit points, spells etc).
If its the same in starfinder you should not match your character against itself in a 1v1 combat. Its a really hard fight then.
There is a small mistake in the initial calculation if starfinder is designed the same way like pathfinder is.
In Pathfinder each encounter has a difficult level. a level 5 character has a difficult level of 5. But normally the difficult level is used for a whole group of 4 players. and then it should cost 20-25% of their ressources (hit points, spells etc).
If its the same in starfinder you should not match your character against itself in a 1v1 combat. Its a really hard fight then.
Even against a hypothetical CR 0 creature, the number would only be off by 1.
Never underestimate an operative's bonuses on skill checks.
Fair enough, though the choice of an entirely flat formula still feels odd. Even if the difficulty is reasonable at level 1, it seems like it will become a negligible thing at higher levels, where most Operatives will simply autosucceed on their favourite skill.
Never underestimate an operative's bonuses on skill checks.Fair enough, though the choice of an entirely flat formula still feels odd. Even if the difficulty is reasonable at level 1, it seems like it will become a negligible thing at higher levels, where most Operatives will simply autosucceed on their favourite skill.
Your chances are intended to increase as you go up in level and become more and more assumed as you go on; as you've surmised, in Starfinder, if your chances are intended to stay steady at a skill, it'll scale faster than 1 for 1.
Your chances are intended to increase as you go up in level and become more and more assumed as you go on; as you've surmised, in Starfinder, if your chances are intended to stay steady at a skill, it'll scale faster than 1 for 1.Never underestimate an operative's bonuses on skill checks.Fair enough, though the choice of an entirely flat formula still feels odd. Even if the difficulty is reasonable at level 1, it seems like it will become a negligible thing at higher levels, where most Operatives will simply autosucceed on their favourite skill.
Completely reasonable, then. It just felt odd to me as I'm personally used to 4e-style strict math and vaguely expected to see something similar in Starfinder, given how many other 4e-isms it adopted, quite pleasantly surprising me in the process.
Either way, I'm fairly excited to try out the Operative.
P.S. Sarcesian's sniper rifle deals 1d810+5 damage as-written and you might want to amend that misprint. :P
P.S. Sarcesian's sniper rifle deals 1d810+5 damage as-written and you might want to amend that misprint. :P
Oh great now I have to buy a d810
Just get your GM to agree that you always do average damage, it's easier :PP.S. Sarcesian's sniper rifle deals 1d810+5 damage as-written and you might want to amend that misprint. :POh great now I have to buy a d810
You just have to go through the tricky little process of killing a Sarcesian wielding such a gun in the first place to get it. :P
But does the attack miss if you dont make the roll or do you just lose out on the trick damage? That is actually not bad at all since its a 3/4 class that would have had to eat -4 to make a second attack anyways so unless you have to move which would prevent you from either option it looks better to always go for the trick shot. By the time you are at... 3D8? the bonus is better than getting a second attack.
It does seem to be pretty good. Obozaya's 1d8+10 is average 14.5, 3d8 is average 13.5. Not losing out on accuracy in the process makes it an interesting alternative to full attacks.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm most curious about right now is how was the monster math changed...
But does the attack miss if you dont make the roll or do you just lose out on the trick damage? That is actually not bad at all since its a 3/4 class that would have had to eat -4 to make a second attack anyways so unless you have to move which would prevent you from either option it looks better to always go for the trick shot. By the time you are at... 3D8? the bonus is better than getting a second attack.
Actually it appears you get a move as part of your full action to trick attack. So unless you are actually in a position to do a full attack already, you will probably just be using trick attack for every attack(and as you said, even with a full attack available, trick attack may be better... depending on the enemies ac vs cr).
It is a little annoying that Operatives will be rolling a skill check and an attack roll on pretty much every single round. I suspect for speed, I'll insist they roll two D20s at once so we can resolve it all at once.
It is a little annoying that Operatives will be rolling a skill check and an attack roll on pretty much every single round. I suspect for speed, I'll insist they roll two D20s at once so we can resolve it all at once.
It shouldn't be any slower than most ranged characters full attacking every round and thus making two attacks.
It is a little annoying that Operatives will be rolling a skill check and an attack roll on pretty much every single round. I suspect for speed, I'll insist they roll two D20s at once so we can resolve it all at once.It shouldn't be any slower than most ranged characters full attacking every round and thus making two attacks.
Hmm, fair point. I didn't consider that.
This is interesting. So if as a full action an Operative can move, roll to debuff and get bonus damage on their regular attack vs just move and attack or stand still for two attacks at -4... unless regular attacks have some really nice and stackable rider effects i dont see when the Operative will ever choose an option other than Trick Attack.
I dont have the system math but the feeling i get is that it will be easier to get the trick attack damage than to land two attacks at -4 penalties.
Well, after all, Trick Attack is supposed to be the Operative's shtick.
This is interesting. So if as a full action an Operative can move, roll to debuff and get bonus damage on their regular attack vs just move and attack or stand still for two attacks at -4... unless regular attacks have some really nice and stackable rider effects i dont see when the Operative will ever choose an option other than Trick Attack.
I dont have the system math but the feeling i get is that it will be easier to get the trick attack damage than to land two attacks at -4 penalties.
Bolded to highlight. I don't know if regular attacks get any riders, but we do know for sure that the Operative's Trick Attacks get riders as they level, like giving -2 AC or attack, or moving without provoking. I'm pretty confident that as long as they have an Operative weapon, they'll Trick Attack every time.
Don't operatives also get a flat bonus to their skill checks in addition to everything else? Plus skill focus and your looking at a difference of 4.
Operatives might end up being better mobile fighters than Soldiers. i wonder if that is intended though, Operatives dont get the biggest guns or highest AC but can still get a move, big attack and debuff on any given round. It makes the class a lot more attractive at least.
There's a Soldier style named Hit-and-Run, so I imagine they would be better at mobile combat. Something like Hit-and-Run Soldier > Operative > other Soldiers > other classes. From the bit they showed of Shot on the Run's prerequisites, Soldiers will always get it first if they want, level 4 compared to level 6 for an Operative. I think it'll end up with Soldiers choosing what sort of combat they want to excel at, while Operatives are more limited to mobile styles.
Oh, that is a thing i havent seen yet. What does shot on the run do then? Based on how stringently they clamped down on number of attacks per round i would be surprised if there was a feat to get a second attack after a move like that. In general i wonder how Soldier will compete against operatives in damage output. Obozaya at level 5 was putting out 1D10+10 wheras the Operative sounds like they are shooting 1D8+5+3D8 pretty consistently. And the Operative will continue to scale up, how will Soldiers compete with that damage? I was briefly thinking the Soldier is meant to be more tanky but it is hard to tank against a competently thinking adversary since they will just manuever around the tank.Operatives might end up being better mobile fighters than Soldiers. i wonder if that is intended though, Operatives dont get the biggest guns or highest AC but can still get a move, big attack and debuff on any given round. It makes the class a lot more attractive at least.There's a Soldier style named Hit-and-Run, so I imagine they would be better at mobile combat. Something like Hit-and-Run Soldier > Operative > other Soldiers > other classes. From the bit they showed of Shot on the Run's prerequisites, Soldiers will always get it first if they want, level 4 compared to level 6 for an Operative. I think it'll end up with Soldiers choosing what sort of combat they want to excel at, while Operatives are more limited to mobile styles.
Tbh I think the math seems pretty solid and I enjoy what I'm seeing right now. The Soldier has high enough BAB to afford to attack twice.
The Operative instead attacks once, but with trick attack, while the trick attack damage is comparable to a second attack.It's a decently fair trade, except the Operative is more mobile while the Soldier is sturdier.
Oh, that is a thing i havent seen yet. What does shot on the run do then? Based on how stringently they clamped down on number of attacks per round i would be surprised if there was a feat to get a second attack after a move like that. In general i wonder how Soldier will compete against operatives in damage output. Obozaya at level 5 was putting out 1D10+10 wheras the Operative sounds like they are shooting 1D8+5+3D8 pretty consistently. And the Operative will continue to scale up, how will Soldiers compete with that damage? I was briefly thinking the Soldier is meant to be more tanky but it is hard to tank against a competently thinking adversary since they will just manuever around the tank.Operatives might end up being better mobile fighters than Soldiers. i wonder if that is intended though, Operatives dont get the biggest guns or highest AC but can still get a move, big attack and debuff on any given round. It makes the class a lot more attractive at least.There's a Soldier style named Hit-and-Run, so I imagine they would be better at mobile combat. Something like Hit-and-Run Soldier > Operative > other Soldiers > other classes. From the bit they showed of Shot on the Run's prerequisites, Soldiers will always get it first if they want, level 4 compared to level 6 for an Operative. I think it'll end up with Soldiers choosing what sort of combat they want to excel at, while Operatives are more limited to mobile styles.Tbh I think the math seems pretty solid and I enjoy what I'm seeing right now. The Soldier has high enough BAB to afford to attack twice.
The Operative instead attacks once, but with trick attack, while the trick attack damage is comparable to a second attack.
It's a decently fair trade, except the Operative is more mobile while the Soldier is sturdier.
This and the soldier gets more stuff that hasn't been seen yet due to not being in the monsters (also I'm not sure where the estimate 1d8+5+3d8 is coming from for an operative; it's pretty close in many ways, so strong guess, but I'd more expect to see 1d8+2+3d8, which is a significant decrease). The nice thing is that the operative starts to auto-succeed those skill checks for trick attacks just as its BAB is falling more behind the soldier; so you guys have independently discovered why I intentionally put the slow scaling on trick attack's skill DC. I like you guys; you do the math. ^_^
I see where you are coming from, whats hard to not see in my mind though is that the Soldier has to eat -4 to every...
There's always the possibility of a class-based accuracy bonus for the soldier, too...beyond BAB, that is.
Can an Operative just burn a feat to get the same rifles as the Soldier or is the Soldier supposed to move on to gattling guns, rocket launchers and man portable cannons to keep up with the sniper's output?
Note that the description from First Contact restricts the Trick Attack to weapons with the operative quality, so it seems likely that even with a feat to get proficiency with heavy weapons an Operative still won't outdamage the Soldier. Remember we still haven't seen much of the Soldier's fighting styles.
And I'm pretty sure Shot on the Run is just going to be the same as the PF version, a ranged version of Spring Attack.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Very true. From what i have seen of Mr. Seifter's work it is likely set to scale just like the Operative's trick so that the Soldier's hit bonus is about 4 points higher when the Operative can start auto passing their check and both are shooting at about the same bonus in the end.I see where you are coming from, whats hard to not see in my mind though is that the Soldier has to eat -4 to every...There's always the possibility of a class-based accuracy bonus for the soldier, too...beyond BAB, that is.
It's not going to end up precisely at the same accuracy after taking -4 by the time operatives are auto-succeeding trick attacks mainly for reasons you can reverse engineer with the damage numbers you guys have at hand here in this thread (and my adjustment for expected operative damage): 1d8+2+3d8 is about 20 damage, and 1d10+10 is about 15.5, meaning two attacks is 31 damage (I'm not sure how she was built for level 5, but I would have expected to see perhaps 1d10+11 damage based on having her full 1st-level stats from the delves, which would increases this further to 33). The interesting thing about that dynamic is that it means that the operative, unlike the rogue, is a really effective solo infiltrator type (since they can make their own trick attacks) but that their debuff potential, while great for the operative's own attacks, actually helps the soldier even more than it helps the operative themself (if I'm 70% likely to hit for 20 and the soldier is 60% likely to hit on each of two hits for 16.5, then if I give an enemy -2 AC as an operative, I've increased my own expected damage by 2 (+1/7 of previous) and the soldier's expected damage by 3.3 (+1/6 of previous, a higher ratio and overall)), so an operative can be a little bit of a team player too.
|
It's not going to end up precisely at the same accuracy after taking -4 by the time operatives are auto-succeeding trick attacks mainly for reasons you can reverse engineer with the damage numbers you guys have at hand here in this thread (and my adjustment for expected operative damage): 1d8+2+3d8 is about 20 damage, and 1d10+10 is about 15.5, meaning two attacks is 31 damage (I'm not sure how she was built for level 5, but I would have expected to see perhaps 1d10+11 damage based on having her full 1st-level stats from the delves, which would increases this further to 33). The interesting thing about that dynamic is that it means that the operative, unlike the rogue, is a really effective solo infiltrator type (since they can make their own trick attacks) but that their debuff potential, while great for the operative's own attacks, actually helps the soldier even more than it helps the operative themself (if I'm 70% likely to hit for 20 and the soldier is 60% likely to hit on each of two hits for 16.5, then if I give an enemy -2 AC as an operative, I've increased my own expected damage by 2 (+1/7 of previous) and the soldier's expected damage by 3.3 (+1/6 of previous, a higher ratio and overall)), so an operative can be a little bit of a team player too.Very true. From what i have seen of Mr. Seifter's work it is likely set to scale just like the Operative's trick so that the Soldier's hit bonus is about 4 points higher when the Operative can start auto passing their check and both are shooting at about the same bonus in the end.I see where you are coming from, whats hard to not see in my mind though is that the Soldier has to eat -4 to every...There's always the possibility of a class-based accuracy bonus for the soldier, too...beyond BAB, that is.
That's really familiar as someone who has played an unchained rouge and seen debilitating injury in action. I benefit from it, but it helps everyone who attacks that foe. The main difference is that it looks like trick attacks are much more reliable than sneak attacks.
It's not going to end up precisely at the same accuracy after taking -4 by the time operatives are auto-succeeding trick attacks mainly for reasons you can reverse engineer with the damage numbers you guys have at hand here in this thread (and my adjustment for expected operative damage): 1d8+2+3d8 is about 20 damage, and 1d10+10 is about 15.5, meaning two attacks is 31 damage (I'm not sure how she was built for level 5, but I would have expected to see perhaps 1d10+11 damage based on having her full 1st-level stats from the delves, which would increases this further to 33). The interesting thing about that dynamic is that it means that the operative, unlike the rogue, is a really effective solo infiltrator type (since they can make their own trick attacks) but that their debuff potential, while great for the operative's own attacks, actually helps the soldier even more than it helps the operative themself (if I'm 70% likely to hit for 20 and the soldier is 60% likely to hit on each of two hits for 16.5, then if I give an enemy -2 AC as an operative, I've increased my own expected damage by 2 (+1/7 of previous) and the soldier's expected damage by 3.3 (+1/6 of previous, a higher ratio and overall)), so an operative can be a little bit of a team player too.Very true. From what i have seen of Mr. Seifter's work it is likely set to scale just like the Operative's trick so that the Soldier's hit bonus is about 4 points higher when the Operative can start auto passing their check and both are shooting at about the same bonus in the end.I see where you are coming from, whats hard to not see in my mind though is that the Soldier has to eat -4 to every...There's always the possibility of a class-based accuracy bonus for the soldier, too...beyond BAB, that is.
As far as I've seen, debilitating trick doesn't really help the Operative deal damage? It applies the flat-footed condition (or, alternatively, makes them off-target, giving them a -2 penalty to attack), while any successful trick attacks already automatically treat the enemy as flat-footed.
I didn't mention debilitating trick as the way the operative helps themself, it was some of the other posts above and below mine (though it is the way to help others).
I didn't mention debilitating trick as the way the operative helps themself, it was some of the other posts above and below mine (though it is the way to help others).
Zoom-quoting your post:
...their debuff potential, while great for the operative's own attacks...
I assume that was simply poorly worded, then.
I didn't mention debilitating trick as the way the operative helps themself, it was some of the other posts above and below mine (though it is the way to help others).Zoom-quoting your post:
...their debuff potential, while great for the operative's own attacks...I assume that was simply poorly worded, then.
Yep, it may have been misleading; I was referring to trick attack's imposition of the flat-footed condition alongside other debuffs as a sum total generic "debuff potential" whereas it would be easy to assume I meant one specific ability. I was trying to be more generic rather than go into specifics, which I'm guessing might have made it harder to understand with the right set of leaked details than it would without them.
Yep, it may have been misleading; I was referring to trick attack's imposition of the flat-footed condition alongside other debuffs as a sum total generic "debuff potential" whereas it would be easy to assume I meant one specific ability. I was trying to be more generic rather than go into specifics, which I'm guessing might have made it harder to understand with the right set of leaked details than it would without them.I didn't mention debilitating trick as the way the operative helps themself, it was some of the other posts above and below mine (though it is the way to help others).Zoom-quoting your post:
...their debuff potential, while great for the operative's own attacks...I assume that was simply poorly worded, then.
Either way, thank you for responses in this thread. I started out worried math might be bad in Starfinder, and now I'm very optimistic about it, feeling like it will probably end up being better than Pathfinder.
I think the soldier will be fine. I think the damage boost from the soldier will come from several sources rather than just one primary source.
One will be specializations. It is much easier for the soldier to get that with heavy weapons.
Fighting Styles could provide damage boost. Could be the main source of increased damage.
Finally they get equipment boost.
I think the combination of these things could keep the damage scaling on track.
I also see the soldier having allot crowd control stuff with auto and full auto ect.
I think if you optimize your build with the soldier with weapon specializations, fighting style, and equipment boost damage will be on even ground with the other classes. However, you have allot of options with the soldier to do single target damage and crowd control.
I have been happy with all the classes so far
Dave2
