So something I came across when building an Operative PC...
My idea was to build a super fast high initiative space cowboy quick draw gunfighter that could trick attack like in a duel... except it doesn't work that way thanks to how swift actions work.
A Full Action (like Trick Attack) consumes the Swift, Move, and Standard action. So the fastest I can currently find to draw a weapon is as a swift action, either through the Quick Draw Feat, or the Quick Release Sheath Armor Upgrade. So if when the fight starts the weapon isn't already in hand, you wouldn't be able to full attack or trick attack.
It just seems like something that could easily be overlooked by Pathfinder players due to the changes for the Quick Draw Feat, and that swift actions are now consumed as part of a full Action, when they used to be in addition to a full-round action in pathfinder.
The only work around I've found so far to be able to trick attack in round one and not be constantly walking around holding or twirling my pistol like an accident waiting to happen... was to use the glamered weapon fusion to make the pistol look like a pack of cards or something else that I could walk around with.
But part of the Trick attack is a move. Presumably in that move, or as that move action (for BAB=0), you can draw a weapon.
Alternatively, if the GM doesn't let you do a Move Action for the "Move" of a Trick Attack, there is another option. Pay 3,050 gold for a Quickdraw Hideaway Limb. Lets you draw a weapon as part of an attack, like the attack of a Trick Attack.
I think a pretty fair way to handle it is to treat it like a charge which says that you can draw a weapon as part of the movement as long as you have a BAB of 1 or higher. Admittedly, the trick attack rules dont say that so its not RAW and it doesnt really help for a lvl 1 operative but it seems like a reasonable middle ground to me.
No, read the rules more closely, it doesn't work.
Quickdraw Hideaway Limb:
If you have a quickdraw hideaway limb, the compartment is integrated with a specific weapon. This allows you to draw the weapon as a swift action or as part of making an attack or full attack (similar to using the Quick Draw feat).
Quick Draw Feat:
You can draw a weapon as a swift action. Additionally, when making an attack using a thrown weapon as an attack or full attack action, you can draw a weapon as part of the action of making a thrown attack with it. You can draw a hidden weapon (see Sleight of Hand on page 146) as a move action.
The Quickdraw hideaway limb would only let you draw as part of an attack with a *thrown* weapon, otherwise it is drawn as a swift, just like the feat or the armor upgrade describes.
As for drawing as part of a move that too got more specific wording that makes it only possible when taking a *move action* which you are NOT doing, you're are making a trick attack as a *full action* which consumes your move action as part of it. You're making a full action that lets you move up to your speed, it doesn't allow you to take a move action or get any of the additional tings that can happen as part of a move action to move up to your speed.
Draw or Sheathe a Weapon:
Exception: If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you can combine drawing or sheathing a weapon or weapon-like object with moving up to your speed as a single move action.
These are both things I already considered as I had run at least 5 games as a GM before making an Operative and realizing the specific implementation and changes to quick drawing and action consumption prevents it from working. It seems stupid to me and restrictive to the point where I expect the majority of people will handle it differently either out of habit or confusion, but this is where we are.
|
If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you can combine drawing or sheathing a weapon or weapon-like object with moving up to your speed as a single move action.
The phrase "moving up to your speed" and that the actual move action to move is "Move your speed" is what makes me think that you can draw an a weapon with the trick attack.
The trick attack says:
As a full action, you can move up to your speed. Whether
or not you moved, you can then make an attack with a melee
weapon with the operative special property or with any small
arm.
It comes down to the fact does a "Full Action" contain a Standard, Move and swift "action" or is a Full action its own thing.
For Society play, I need to run it exactly as is, which means no trick attack on round one if a weapon isn't already drawn. The most important part of the +1 BAB exception is the part of the sentence "as a single move action." A trick attack does not involve a move action. It's a special type of full action that allows you to move up to your speed. In execution, almost identical, but because the exception is tied to the type of action (move) and the thing being accomplished (drawing a weapon) the two don't work together.
I suspect if it was intended by the designers to allow this to work, they would need to rewrite the entry on Trick Attack to e more in-line with how charge works:
Charge:
"...You can draw a weapon during a charge attack if your base attack bonus is at least +1."
So the fact that the Charge verbage specifically says you can, and the trick attack verbage doesn't say you can, I have to assume until errata or clarification that this was not a design/editing oversight and it was intended this way. *shrug*
For a home game, it's at the top of my list for what I'm calling "Starfinder 1.5 Houserules"
Hopefully they'll do a Trick Attack FAQ down the line, cover both that and the Sniping action, because as is Sniper weapons are poor for Trick Attacks too since their one benefit doesn't work and they don't get the damage.
The sniping situation was another point of confusion I was tracking that needed clarification.
The more I read and the more I play, the more I see lots of things that *seem* like it would make perfect sense for them to work, but given the default rule, they don't, and they lack the specific verbage that lets them exist as an exception to that rule.
I think it would fix things to just make the "trick" component require a swift action or move action. Swift Action: skill Check, Move Action: Move up to your speed, Standard Action: Attack against flat footed AC if Trick skill check succeeded. You could then instead just use the move action to draw your weapon, or with a +1 BAB you'd be taking the move action so it would allow the draw during that move. Alternatively you could use that move action to not move up to your speed, but instead steady the sniper weapon for the sniper shot with the move action.
It might seem cumbersome to split up the full action this way, but given the complications current with what does and does not work in specific combinations, the specification of what is happening with each action actually seems more simple.
This also opens up some interesting combinations for using trick attack with other special abilities of other classes, which might be something the designers were trying to avoid:
Operative 1/Mechanic 2
Swift: Trick Skill check (if successful +1d4)
Move: Draw Weapon
Standard: Attack with Overcharged Weapon (Level 1 or 2)
Total: 1d4/1d6 + 1d4 + 1d6 = 3-16 dmg
As a best case scenario that doesn't seem all that crazy to me compared to a static Operative
Operative 3
Swift: Trick Skill Check (if successful +1d8)
Move: Draw Weapon
Standard: Attack (level 1 or 2)
Total 1d4/1d6 +1d8 +3 (Weapon spec) = 5-17 dmg
blending multiple classes opens up all sorts of possibilities if their exploits start working together better, but they aren't going to create drastically different results. At first glance they all appear to be pretty close at low levels anyways.
I think it would fix things to just make the "trick" component require a swift action or move action. Swift Action: skill Check, Move Action: Move up to your speed, Standard Action: Attack against flat footed AC if Trick skill check succeeded. You could then instead just use the move action to draw your weapon, or with a +1 BAB you'd be taking the move action so it would allow the draw during that move. Alternatively you could use that move action to not move up to your speed, but instead steady the sniper weapon for the sniper shot with the move action.
I like this idea -- I'd opt for it in a home game. Though obviously doesn't resolve the issues in SFS.
So here's another RAW problem: using Trick Attack when you're prone. Technically being prone doesn't change your speed. So what can I do with the "move up to your speed" part of Trick Attack in this situation?
I can come up with at least 6 possible ideas:
1. Nothing -- no movement allowed.
2. You're not even allowed to Trick Attack while prone.
3. Stand up and that's it?
4. Stand up and move your speed?
5. Move 5 feet while staying prone?
6. Move my full speed while staying prone (perhaps in the form of stand up, move, and drop prone again)?
RAW, #6 seems to be the answer, though it's also the most ridiculous.
Of course, your proposed rule would fix all of this, but it's a real issue in SFS play where the Ysoki Operative is a natural pairing, and Ysoki love going prone.
Slurm,
I think standup and trick attack is your full action. Standing is a move action, right? Ysoki kip up wouldn't aid in this case.
I don't think there is anything that says you can't trick attack while prone.
The prone thing isn't as much of an issue, you just can't move while prone, but it wouldn't prevent you from Trick Attacking. Standing up from prone is explicitly a move action. in current RAW, it's not even an option for your trick attack as it doesn't say you can take a move action, it says "move up to your speed."
I'm further confusing myself here, because if I recall correctly, PF had deliberate verbage to indicate while prone the only movement you coudl take was to crawl or to stand up, but I can't find that specifically in SF. Prone as a condition just says standing up is a move action, and under move actions you have
Crawl:
You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. A crawling character is considered prone.
So what the hell does that even mean? Is crawling a move action that you take while prone? if so, why does it need to rider to say you are considered prone? If you're standing up, does it mean you can take a "crawl" action to move five feet while dropping prone ending your action in the prone condition and being considered in that condition during your movement for purposes of attacks of opportunity and such? I'm not seeing the restriction anywhere that says you need to be standing in order to take a move action to move up to your speed, and being prone doesn't seem to explicitly restrict you to the crawl action...
The more I look at this the more it hurts my head because I know what the book "should" say, but I'm just not seeing anything coverign it in the most common areas.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
HWalsh, that's part of what i'm trying to address here. This isn't a weakness that every other class has, it's a poor implementation of the basic rules for Full Actions and swift actions that create a silly and unintuitive restriction that will more often than not force rules between players and fun without people specifically making house rules to go around them.
There ARE Full Actions that allow the ability to draw a weapon and use it, such as a charge. There aren't so far as I can see any ways to do it with a Full Attack. The idea here is that the same thing is still happening, a weapon is being drawn, and an attack is being made. If you wanted that attack to be two shots as part of a Full Attack, then you'd need a re-write of the core rules on Full Actions to not consume the Swift Action, the same way the Full Round Action worked in PF.
EC, the standup wouldn't be allowed for the same reason currently a draw isn't allowed, they're both listed specifically as move actions, which is consumed by the Trick Attack Full Action.
It's the barriers I continue to run into that plenty of abilities and options sound fantastic like they're letting you do something different from everybody else, until you actually step back and compare the real mechanics behind it and find that things aren't compatible or are happening in the same way, just with a different name.
If the Swift action wasn't consumed by the Full Action, it would make so much more sense and offer so many more possibilities to work in concert as real benefits when they "speed up" an action like drawing a weapon or standing up as a swift action.
If Full Actions are meant to be super restrictive and exceedingly rare and difficult to pull off, then they shouldn't make that the key way that the Operative does damage on par with other combat classes. Compare it to the Mechanic, which seems like a support character, until you realize they can add more damage (+1d6) with the overcharge ability, and it happens as PART OF the standard action, doesn't even consume a separate action, and doesn't have any chance of failure as it doesn't require a skill check like Trick Attack.
OK, so RAW you can move full speed while prone, got it. I hadn't caught that part because I was just focused on it regarding Trick Attack. Probably not how we're going to play SFS though.
I suppose the errata needs to start with fixing the description of Prone and Crawl and make sure the solution unambiguously covers Trick Attack. The way Trick Attack works now, I think you should be able to crawl and that's it (that's my Option #5 above)
I'd just eliminate crawl and say that your speed is reduced to 5 (if higher than 5) for all purposes while prone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the Swift action wasn't consumed by the Full Action, it would make so much more sense and offer so many more possibilities to work in concert as real benefits when they "speed up" an action like drawing a weapon or standing up as a swift action.
I think you hit the nail on the head here. Full Actions consuming your Swift is seeming more and more like a bad rule change. Is there some specific abuse that it's meant to prevent?
A lot of swift actions are investments of resources to reduce a move to a swift (examples are Kip Up / Ysoki and various methods of quick drawing). Is it fun to say, "Actually, in this situation where you want to do that thing quickly that you built your character to be able to do quickly, it will not actually help you do it more quickly in any practical way?"
yeah I'm trying to look at the whole system with the collective issues I've identified, and it's hard to see everything the designers changed for the sake of a real reason.
Oddly enough, with what I have in front of me, a prone operative with weapon in hand would be able to stay prone, move up to their speed, skill check and attack.
It seems dumb, and this is the kind of stuff that I'm starting to think was less intentional and more of an editing issue that ended up on the cutting room floor.
As for the alternative, even if they go back and errata the whole prone/crawl situation, you are still perfectly allowed to use Trick attack and not *have* to move at all especially in a case like this where you *couldn't* because it's not an option to you. "As a full action, you can move up to your speed. Whether or not you moved, you can then make an attack with a melee weapon with the operative special property or with any small arm." So it even says you don't have to move at all. It doesn't say that you need to be able to move even. It seems clear to me that this isn't in anyway providing its own exception to your circumstances either, so if there's a situation preventing you from being able to move as normal, that would still apply.
What hwalsh is saying is that trick attack is equivalent to a full attack. Other classes cannot draw a weapon and do a full attack. Charge specifically has wording to allow you to draw a weapon, but you still only get a single attack not a full unless you have a specific exemption.
A character which has sleight of hand and stealth and which does not have their weapon drawn at almost all times?
Ok, fine, so if you get ambushed you don't get trick attack...then again, you have perception so hopefully get an action to draw your weapon while making a move for cover in the surprise round...
But honestly, if there is going to be danger, you have your weapon drawn. If there's even a whiff of trouble in a situation where it's inappropriate to be armed, you have the skills to have your weapon drawn and concealed.
If you're not playing your operative as paranoid and ready to go off at a moment's notice, you might want to reconsider your choice of class. ;)
***
The rules say no. I run SFS, so I have to say no, but I'm also inclined to just say no anyway because it's pretty simple for operatives to work around these things. They use small arms, which are very much something you can conceal if you feel things are about to go badly. In any instance where you're in a true ambush, you should be able to get a single action (to move and draw a weapon), and in those very rare cases where you just flat out don't have your weapon out, you can still do a single attack after moving and only be missing out on your TA damage for a single round...
***
As an aside, your full speed while prone is 5' because the only move you can make is a crawl. I can see how you could interpret the rule differently, but I hope you can see how it's possible to also interpret the rules as limiting prone movement to a crawl.
I think that you may have passed into a weird space and might want to step back. You appear to be making things much more complicated than they need to be.
yeah I totally get that, which is part of the reason why the title of this thread includes "Full Attack as not working.
I'd rather see a simple solution that fixes all of this issues collectively, which boils down to undoing one of the major changes the designers incorporated into SF with regard to Swift and Full Actions.
The idea of changing the wording for Full Attacks and/or Trick Attacks seems cumbersome, but could totally be part of a simple errata that wouldn't be viewed as too obtrusive since it's just affecting the components that are exceptions to the basic rules. Changing the basic rules themselves is paramount to releasing D&D 3.5.
If these were intentional and purposeful changes that the designers really wanted us to be able to move double our speed, draw a weapon, and attack with a -2 penalty to attack and AC, but didn't want us to be able to stand still and draw a weapon and take two shots at a -4 penalty, then the system itself is telling us "you can't" a lot more than "you can."
Bonuses from multiple sources (sometimes from allies) not stacking because somebody got trigger happy with the word "insight", benefits from options that appear to speed up actions to allow new combinations don't actually work the way you'd expect them to, when running the game strictly as written I'm having to disappoint people a lot more as they realize things don't work the way they would like or expect.
As an aside, your full speed while prone is 5' because the only move you can make is a crawl. I can see how you could interpret the rule differently, but I hope you can see how it's possible to also interpret the rules as limiting prone movement to a crawl.
Right, that's clearly and obviously RAI, but it's worth noting that they've never spelled it out, in a rules-heavy system that bothers to define a lot of different things. After searching, I'm finding now that the prone discussion was largely copy-pasted from PF, and really from 3.5.
The difference is that prone seems to be coming up a lot more in SF, thanks to its benefits in ranged combat and the existence of the Ysoki.
Curiously, 5e, a more rules-light system, leads off its description of prone by saying: "A prone creature's only movement option is to crawl, unless it stands up and thereby ends the condition." PF/SF take the approach of listing crawl as an option, but the description of prone never says what the movement-related consequences are, and the description of crawl is very odd.
For all that, on my original point, I guess your opinion would be that RAI is you can crawl as part of a Trick Attack (Option #5 above)? Or that you are stuck in place if you're prone (Option #1)?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you can draw and trick attack, at say level 10, you get, on say a 3d6 pistol, you get 3d6+5d8+5 (1/2 level in spec) damage on a single shot. That is an average damage of 39 damage.
Minor nitpick, but 3d6 (10.5 average) + 5d8 (22.5 average) + 5 is actually 38 damage.
You're aware that Small Arms is the only ranged weapon proficiency that Solarians get right?I gave them the same weapon.A weapon that one of the two classes is built around using and one of the two classes is not. That's the point. You're ostensibly comparing how 'fair' the damage is while skewing the numbers as hard as possible in the operative's favor, which makes the whole thing bogus.
That's... A little besides the point, since you're completely ignoring the fact that Solarians get access to advanced throwing weapons. There are two options here:
Option A is that the solarian is melee spec, in which case he's going to have a much higher strength than dexterity - ie he's much better off using a thrown weapon than a pistol, since thrown weapons use strength for attack bonuses instead of dexterity. A sintered Starknife is only level 8 to your level 10 pistol (ringing in at just over half the price, 9810 to 18200) but would hit for 4d4 (average of 10) +10 (specialization) + 6 (strength) +2 (Photon mode) for an average of 28 damage without even trying. That's about 25% less damage than the ranged-focused operative, which is fine since the strength-focused Solarian will do much more damage in melee - playing ranged is just a hobby for him. If he's smart he sprung for a quickdraw hideaway limb (a bargain at 3050 credits) so he can draw the starknife as a free action, throw it as a standard action, and then make a move action to get closer to the action to set up a full attack or get into cover.
Option B is that the solarian is ranged spec and dex focused, in which case he's obviously going to have longarm or possibly even heavy weapon proficiency - pistols dont enter the equation at all.
I'm not sure if you're intentionally misrepresenting the solarian to make operative trick attack look better or if you just hadn't realized the potential of thrown weapons, but I agree with Swoosh that you're definitely selling the solarian short in your comparison.
Math discussion aside, I do think that RAW the operative has to wield his weapon before he can use Trick Attack, since Trick Attack is not called out as a "regular move". RAI I'm honestly not sure what the intent is, so this might be a good candidate for a FAQ down the line.
It feels strange that the only class that can be a viable "gunslinger", that is centered around using pistols and small arms is so... Clunky. The whole point of small arms is that they're supposed to be light, nimble and quick to get on target. Having your damage drop from "viable" to "pitiful" because you drew your pistol rather than already have it in hand feels wrong to me. The idea that "a pistol and a machine gun does the same damage if both weapons are drawn, but if you draw them at the same time the pistol falls apart" seems backwards. It's the kind of mechanic I'd expect for a heavy weapon - you need to spend a round to "set it up", deploy the bipod etc, and then it starts chugging out high damage. The pistol, in contrast, is quickly whipped out and put to use.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lets give the Operative a non-Small arm too then?
Sniper Rifle
2d10 +10 Specialization +5d8
Gonna stop you right there:
(...)make an attack with a melee weapon with the operative special property or with any small arm.
You never get Trick Attack damage with sniper rifles. That means your damage with the sniper rifle goes from 2d10 +10 +5d8 (which is an average of 22.5, not 18) to 2d10+10, ~21 damage. No operative that cares about damage is going to be using a sniper rifle in combat unless he's planning on engaging at absolutely extreme range, 500+ feet - in which case he's likely taken Debilitating Sniper and using the rifle primarily as a debuff option rather than a damage option. You'd be much better off making full attacks with a pistol than taking a sniper rifle.
If you want to make the argument that we can make Solarians better by upgrading weapons... We can do the same thing with Operatives.
Not sure where you got the idea that I was upgrading the solarian's weapon? I reduced the level by 2 and the cost by half, all I did was pick a weapon that fits the class. Again, a level 10 solarian that relies on a pistol for ranged combat is an idiot. If you're going to spend enough money to keep your backup weapon at your level, at least pick something that works with your class.
As for upgrading the operative, you'd be hard-pressed to do that since the semiautomatic pistols are pretty much the best possible Trick Attack weapon for the operative if you only care about damage. Personally I expect most operatives to use energy weapons to make up for their lower attack bonuses, which deal less damage.
We can't go with Photon because we don't know what mode they are in.
Why not? If the only purpose here is to compare the potential damage output in a theoretical "start of combat"-scenario, why wouldn't the solarian be in Photon mode?
Lots of faulty math based on Trick Attacking sniper rifles.
The ranged-focused operative (once we've accounted for the rules) is firing his level 10 semiautomatic, doing about 3d6 (10.5) +5 (specialization) for an average of 15.5 damage in his first round, not 39. He's also struggling to hit since he's missing his accuracy booster, since he can't make his target flatfooted. So the ranged-focused operative is doing ~40% less ranged damage than the melee-focused solarian in the worst possible scenario for the Solarian, despite the operative having a weapon with twice the cost and the best possible damage scaling for his level.
That, to me, is a problem. I'd much prefer that the class that, to quote the class flavor text: "moves swiftly, strike suddenly", and "uses speed, mobility and quick wits" actually not be the worst possible class in a "oh s#@&, we're caught unawares and are in combat"-scenario.
Letting operatives get in a trick attack in the first round does not make them overpowered. It does not make them "premiere damage dealers" compared to soldiers or solarians any more than a Pathfinder archer rogue getting a good initiative roll and making a full attack with SA dice make rogues a "premiere damage dealer" compared to a barbarian.
I suggest you go back and read the classes again. I suspect that your class analysis is somewhat flawed since you keep missing details like the potential of thrown weapons for Solarians or the heavy limitations of sniper rifles for operatives. Maybe a second read-through will help calm some of your concerns. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't play Operatives
I gathered as much.
I literally wrote the guide on Solarians.
I skimmed it now, interesting read! It's clear you put a lot of time into it. Since you specifically ask for feedback on it I strongly suggest you add a section on thrown weapons for melee Solarians. Suggesting pistols... Well, it kind of makes me wonder about the quality of the rest of the guide. I'd also consider changing your color coding to follow the original template from Treeantmonk's Wizard guide - Blue>Green>Orange>Red. It's the standard most people are familiar with, and many assume it's in use by default. Reversing green and blue in particular seems unnecessarily complicated.
Operatives should barely be able to compete for damage with a Soldier or Solarian. They should almost never be out damaging them. They have their own niche, and that niche ain't combat.
Just to be clear: while I disagree with you on this specific topic (draw weapon + trick attack) I agree with you that the Operative shouldn't be able to consistently outdamage a soldier or solarian. I just don't think this aspect is "enough" for the operative to beat a dedicated combat class. As for the parts where we do disagree, you're perfectly entitled to your own opinion. I'm happy to agree to disagree on the topic.
I only stepped in because it seemed you were arguing in bad faith by intentionally presenting the best possible damage scenario for the operative and the worst possible scenario for the Solarian, and getting a fair bit of the rules and math wrong in the process (sniper rifles, average damage etc). Now that I know you've written a guide on the class and you say things like "I am quite familiar with the Starknife but dealing 40% more damage doesn't matter" (paraphrasing here), it seems very odd that you still went with pistols to prove your point. Frankly I still wonder if you were intentionally putting your finger on the scale to make your argument look stronger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No the point was, in the round that they have to draw a weapon a Solarian can only attack. That is about it. They can't full attack either. They get one normal swipe. The same thing an Operative gets.
To be pedantic, if a Solarian (or any character with advanced melee proficiency) has multiple Starknives and the Quickdraw feat, they can draw each as a free action when they throw it, allowing 2 attacks from a full attack on the first turn of combat, starting from nothing in hand. Even if they only have one free hand. If they have the returning fusion, at the beginning of the next round, they now have at least one melee weapon in hand that didn't take any actions to get there.
Lastly, its not generally applicable to most players, but a level 20 Solarian with the Solar Acceleration Zenith Revelation can in fact on the first turn move and draw weapon, full attack, and still have a swift left. Pretty sure its the only class that can do that, although only because of its capstone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+2 from being level 10 and photon attuned. Half your level from plasma sheathe.Uh...
That requires a move action to turn on. You're not going to be able to activate that, draw a weapon, and charge. Because drawing a weapon can only be done as part of movement, you're not going to be able to pull that off without quick draw. In theory, if you have plasma sheath, you could attune, swift action draw with fast draw, then stellar rush, but that is highly unlikely as feats are at an extreme premium on Solarians due to Charisma being a primary stat.
Out of curiosity, why does having Charisma as a primary stat make your feats be at a premium?
Since you can’t raise Con, Dex, AND Wis if you also have to worry about Str and Cha, one of your Saving Throw ability scores is going to lag behind, and you’ll need feats to make up the difference.