| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, the hack has been written in a way that almost completely denies shenanigans.
Improvised weaponry:
The magic hack can't create weapons, but it can create a fire extinguisher, for example, which could easily be used as an improvised weapon.
Yes, but an improvised weapon both takes attack roll penalties for being improvised and damage penalties for being archaic (in most cases). Its hardly a very effective weapon.
Springs:
There's no limit to creating traps that require an external force to be loaded. So one could create a bear trap and set it up, as long as it's used within the time limit.
Technological items is a category defined by the CRB in a table that lists all the available tech items. Other books have explicitly added other tech items. Springs are not one of those, nor are traps of any kind. You could house rule it, but its not part of this hack's base functionality to create these things. More importantly, since there are no rules for simple mechanical bear traps traps in Starfinder (AFAIK), you're at the mercy of your GM as to how effective/ineffective this might be.
Potential energy:
The technomancer can create a 100 pound item and drop it from some height. It's hard to imagine the damage that would be done by 2000ft of Adamantine alloy cable line dropped from a starship hovering a few miles above ground.
OTOH, this creates 10 bulk of mundane material. Since damage from falling objects entirely depends on size (for medium objects this is 3d6 max per the CRB) it doesn't matter whether you create a tungsten rod or just buy a 10 bulk block of iron. Yeah, it sucks you can't deliver tungsten rod-based annihilation, but those are the rules we have.
None of these seem like particularly powerful or exploitative options.
|
The CRB also has this to say about technological items:
Of course, there’s a vast array of technological devices available in most settlements—well beyond the number that could possibly be presented in any real-world book. In general, any minor piece of equipment with a real-world equivalent (alarm clock, camera, digital keys for Vehicles you own, timer, watch, and so on) can be purchased with GM approval, costs 5 credits and has light bulk.
Bear traps, tungsten drill bits, and magnets are all potentially valid with GM approval.
What's a tech level? Is that like an item's level? If so, computers have an item level equal to twice their tier if I recall correctly.
What's a tech level? Is that like an item's level? If so, computers have an item level equal to twice their tier if I recall correctly.I also thought this, but haven't been able to locate verbiage that verifies this - can you point me at the right location?
After performing a pretty thourough search of the Core Rulebook, I can't say I've had any luck finding it.
Every item has to have a level though, if only to help determine its general durability.
I had such a player in PF, he played a conjurer and tried to exploit his class ability in similar way.
I think abilities/spells like this should never be used outsider their power level or authors intent.
For spells I always rule that "improvised" weapon spells (e.g. the falling iron bar) deal damage one level below a similar equal level dedicated attack spell.
For this class abilities I would deny any offensive use of it (using this offensive wasn't clearly the intent of the designer, otherwise you wouldn't have the "no weapon" part in the description^^).
What's a tech level? Is that like an item's level? If so, computers have an item level equal to twice their tier if I recall correctly.I also thought this, but haven't been able to locate verbiage that verifies this - can you point me at the right location?
I was also under this impression but was told in a recent SFS game that it isn't the case, at least by RAW. I did a search through the CRB and SRDs and couldn't find it stated explicitly. So for SFS, my Tier 1 computer was only a level 1 item, per my GMs.
However, I do think this is RAI. If you look at the craft rules on page 235, using the computer skill, you can only make a computer with a Tier equal to half your ranks (round down) in the computer skill. So, for at least crafting, a Tier 5 computer is just as difficult to craft as a level 10 weapon. Computers also count as double level for Starships (a Tier 10 ship has a Tier 5 Computer).
So, for my home game, I've house-ruled that the computer has an item level of twice it's tier.
|
|
If computers are allowed, they would be limited to no more than 10 bulk and they would be of average quality.
An average quality computer, I believe, would not include any modules, upgrades, or countermeasures. That means no AI, no data modules, and no miniaturization. Additionally, Tier 3 is the highest tier computer that fits the bulk requirements.
That sounds pretty fair to me. It's the modules and upgrades that allow the most abuse.
|
This is definitely interesting, I can't find anything in the CRB that states the item level of a computer, but this blog post from Owen from a month before the game was released states, "[i]n general, a computer has an item level equal to double its tier." http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5ljy4&page=3?Override-All-Secur ity-Computers-and-Hacking
That was honestly always how I assumed it would be because of the craft rules on page 235. With other gear, you need ranks equal to the level of the item, but with computers, specifically, you need ranks equal to twice the tier of the computer. So I just sort of assumed a Tier 1 computer was a level 2 item (and so on). I got corrected the first time I played SFS because I put my tier 1 computer down on my sheet as a level 2 item, but after reading that blog, I think the RAI (if not RAW) is that the levels are in deed double the tier.
It'd be nice to get a FAQ clarification. It's kind of important for those of us that want to have our own computers in SFS.
I bumped and FAQ'd the linked thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People are arguing whether a magically created washing machine used as a weapon should be rejected? GMs should generally say yes to player inventiveness as it's fun and makes a better story. Of course, GMs should say no the game breaking exploits but a Fabricate Tech washing machine pushed out of a window isn't one of them: situational; non-repeatable in the same scene (move away from the drop zone); one-shot; weak save DC; burns a limited resource. The Technomancer is better off casting Magic Missile.
If a player thinks it's funnier to push a washing machine out a window than to cast Magic Missile, why say no to that?
People are arguing whether a magically created washing machine used as a weapon should be rejected? GMs should generally say yes to player inventiveness as it's fun and makes a better story. Of course, GMs should say no the game breaking exploits but a Fabricate Tech washing machine pushed out of a window isn't one of them: situational; non-repeatable in the same scene (move away from the drop zone); one-shot; weak save DC; burns a limited resource. The Technomancer is better off casting Magic Missile.
If a player thinks it's funnier to push a washing machine out a window than to cast Magic Missile, why say no to that?
Because in my experience, good GMs are a rare commodity.
Because in my experience, good GMs are a rare commodity.People are arguing whether a magically created washing machine used as a weapon should be rejected? GMs should generally say yes to player inventiveness as it's fun and makes a better story. Of course, GMs should say no the game breaking exploits but a Fabricate Tech washing machine pushed out of a window isn't one of them: situational; non-repeatable in the same scene (move away from the drop zone); one-shot; weak save DC; burns a limited resource. The Technomancer is better off casting Magic Missile.
If a player thinks it's funnier to push a washing machine out a window than to cast Magic Missile, why say no to that?
Let me get this straight. Pushing Fabricate Tech created washing machines out of windows to use as a weapon should be blocked because good GMs are rare. Due to the lack of good GMs, we should block an example of good GMing.
Or just grab any piece of heavy machinery nearby and toss it out the window instead, saving up your resources.
Because in my experience, good GMs are a rare commodity.People are arguing whether a magically created washing machine used as a weapon should be rejected? GMs should generally say yes to player inventiveness as it's fun and makes a better story. Of course, GMs should say no the game breaking exploits but a Fabricate Tech washing machine pushed out of a window isn't one of them: situational; non-repeatable in the same scene (move away from the drop zone); one-shot; weak save DC; burns a limited resource. The Technomancer is better off casting Magic Missile.
If a player thinks it's funnier to push a washing machine out a window than to cast Magic Missile, why say no to that?
And In my experience, it's the players saying "no" rather than the GM. Why waste time and resources on something that might work, when magic missile is gauranteed? I've found that such shennannigans, whether or not they are balanced, just gets on everyone's nerves. People just don't like waiting on a complicated ruling from the GM just so the clown can have their way when they could be earning their XP in half the time.
Sorry, that's the exact OPPOSITE of what I was trying to say. I DON'T want pushing washing machines out of a window to be blocked. I think it would be bad if it was blocked.
The joke I was trying to make was that bad GMs are common, and so most would block it.