Armory 2 Wishlist


General Discussion

101 to 150 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

BPorter wrote:

Wishlist Items:

#1 - Better projectile firearms or ways of making them more viable such as increased magazine size. Projectile firearms have ridiculously low magazine sizes compared to energy weapons for no apparent reason and without a tangible trade-off to compensate.

The Energetic fusion covers this after 5th level.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I personally wish there were more swords with the operative trait than the sword cane. I'd really like play a character who dual-wields swords, and dual-wielding sword-canes seems kind of silly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
I personally wish there were more swords with the operative trait than the sword cane. I'd really like play a character who dual-wields swords, and dual-wielding sword-canes seems kind of silly.

Or just not making the player's decision to play an Operative (a decision that can easily come about for reasons that have nothing to do with weapon choice) dictate what weapons he uses.

"So what class do you want to play?"
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."
"Okay, that sounds like the Operative class."
"Sure, I'll do that thing."
"And of course, I can freely assume that you only want to be using pistols and knives."
"I... you... no. Just... no. How are you getting "only wants pistols and knives" out of what I said?"

It was a sucky aesthetic limitation in 4E, and it remains sucky no matter what other games continue to perpetuate that mistake.


Tectorman wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
I personally wish there were more swords with the operative trait than the sword cane. I'd really like play a character who dual-wields swords, and dual-wielding sword-canes seems kind of silly.

Or just not making the player's decision to play an Operative (a decision that can easily come about for reasons that have nothing to do with weapon choice) dictate what weapons he uses.

"So what class do you want to play?"
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."
"Okay, that sounds like the Operative class."
"Sure, I'll do that thing."
"And of course, I can freely assume that you only want to be using pistols and knives."
"I... you... no. Just... no. How are you getting "only wants pistols and knives" out of what I said?"

It was a sucky aesthetic limitation in 4E, and it remains sucky no matter what other games continue to perpetuate that mistake.

The operative property is a mechanics specification and has nothing to do with being able to wield it. It provides a specific benefit that Archpaladin Zousha is looking for. It's not that he cant duel wield swords, it's that he wants those swords to have a specific benefit and probably to benefit from the specific dual wielding feat.

-Beta

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Greydoch wrote:
Tectorman wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
I personally wish there were more swords with the operative trait than the sword cane. I'd really like play a character who dual-wields swords, and dual-wielding sword-canes seems kind of silly.

Or just not making the player's decision to play an Operative (a decision that can easily come about for reasons that have nothing to do with weapon choice) dictate what weapons he uses.

"So what class do you want to play?"
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."
"Okay, that sounds like the Operative class."
"Sure, I'll do that thing."
"And of course, I can freely assume that you only want to be using pistols and knives."
"I... you... no. Just... no. How are you getting "only wants pistols and knives" out of what I said?"

It was a sucky aesthetic limitation in 4E, and it remains sucky no matter what other games continue to perpetuate that mistake.

The operative property is a mechanics specification and has nothing to do with being able to wield it. It provides a specific benefit that Archpaladin Zousha is looking for. It's not that he cant duel wield swords, it's that he wants those swords to have a specific benefit and probably to benefit from the specific dual wielding feat.

-Beta

I'm confused, are you saying you CAN dual-wield without that feat?


Everybody in Starfinder is ambidextrous and can dual-wield for free.

They just don't get any more attacks out of it than any other combat style.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Dracomicron wrote:

Everybody in Starfinder is ambidextrous and can dual-wield for free.

They just don't get any more attacks out of it than any other combat style.

What's the point then if you're still making only one weapon strike per round?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Dracomicron wrote:

Everybody in Starfinder is ambidextrous and can dual-wield for free.

They just don't get any more attacks out of it than any other combat style.

What's the point then if you're still making only one weapon strike per round?

Aesthetics, flexibility of damage types, some feats (Deflect Projectile works really well with a longsword in one hand and a plasma sword in the other), flexibility of range (sword-and-pistol style, or sword and rifle with the right build), exploiting a multitude of weapon traits... there's lots of reasons to dual-wield besides extra attacks.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Hang on a sec does that mean you can get two attacks per round provided your weapon doesn't have the unwieldy tag? Have I been playing the game wrong this whole time?!


...yes?

To both.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Hang on a sec does that mean you can get two attacks per round provided your weapon doesn't have the unwieldy tag? Have I been playing the game wrong this whole time?!

Everyone can full attack for two (or more, for some classes) attacks at a penalty. If you're holding more than one weapon, you can divide those attacks up among the weapons you're holding. There is at least one feat to make this slightly unlame, the small arms one that reduces your full attack penalty if you use two pistols (don't ever use two pistols).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Hang on a sec does that mean you can get two attacks per round provided your weapon doesn't have the unwieldy tag? Have I been playing the game wrong this whole time?!
Everyone can full attack for two (or more, for some classes) attacks at a penalty. If you're holding more than one weapon, you can divide those attacks up among the weapons you're holding. There is at least one feat to make this slightly unlame, the small arms one that reduces your full attack penalty if you use two pistols (don't ever use two pistols).

Using SIX pistols, however, with your Skittermander, to Fullisade... wait, no, don't ever do that either.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Pantshandshake wrote:

...yes?

To both.

0_0

Ignore my previous suggestion about more operative swords, then.

Though, now that I've seen Alita: Battle Angel, it WOULD be nice for a slashy-sword weapon that lets you benefits from Dexterity...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Greydoch wrote:
Tectorman wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
I personally wish there were more swords with the operative trait than the sword cane. I'd really like play a character who dual-wields swords, and dual-wielding sword-canes seems kind of silly.

Or just not making the player's decision to play an Operative (a decision that can easily come about for reasons that have nothing to do with weapon choice) dictate what weapons he uses.

"So what class do you want to play?"
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."
"Okay, that sounds like the Operative class."
"Sure, I'll do that thing."
"And of course, I can freely assume that you only want to be using pistols and knives."
"I... you... no. Just... no. How are you getting "only wants pistols and knives" out of what I said?"

It was a sucky aesthetic limitation in 4E, and it remains sucky no matter what other games continue to perpetuate that mistake.

The operative property is a mechanics specification and has nothing to do with being able to wield it. It provides a specific benefit that Archpaladin Zousha is looking for. It's not that he cant duel wield swords, it's that he wants those swords to have a specific benefit and probably to benefit from the specific dual wielding feat.

-Beta

I wasn't referring to merely wielding non-operative weapons. Wielding whatever weapons you want and being proficient in those weapons are easy hurdles to clear. Here is what isn't:

The Operative class offers a wide variety of skills. It also grants class abilities for combat encounters. But those combat-oriented class abilities (Trick Attack, Debilitating Trick, as well as all the class features and Exploits that are derived from them) only work with "Operative" keyword weapons or small arms. So if I'm playing a character who I want to have exactly the wide variety of skills that the Operative class offers, but I want this character to use a starknife or a pulse gauntlet or even a doshko, I'm out of luck. I earned the XP necessary to get to 4th level Operative, but I'm not able to use all the class features I paid for. I can't even trade Trick Attack or Debilitating Trick away for something more friendly to non-operative weapons, or even just more non-combat abilities.

All because I had the unmitigated gall to not buy into "skillsy type" somehow equating to "of course, you want to stick with knives and pistols".

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, you could have used an envoy as your skillsy class..


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:
Well, you could have used an envoy as your skillsy class..
Tectorman wrote:
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Arbitrarily locking certain weapon types out of "sneak attack" style options has always been a pet peeve of mine. I'm okay with reducing the effectiveness, if only for a purely mechanical reason, but straight up disallowing any benefit from sneaking up behind someone and hulk smashing their most vital region is just lame in my opinion.

Especially given that "trick attack" in Starfinder is even more nebulous than "stab someone where it hurts" I just don't see a compelling argument as to why pretty much any weapon can't benefit from it.

I mean, trick attack is giving you a LOT of dice. Isn't there room for a balance where you get fewer dice if you use a non-operative weapon? I mean, it's not like you can trick attack *and* multi-attack.

But if that's not to be, a class specific archetype that trades out trick attack would be appropriate.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tectorman wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Well, you could have used an envoy as your skillsy class..
Tectorman wrote:
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."

The Envoy's class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Athletics (Str), Bluff (Cha), Computers (Int), Culture (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disguise (Cha), Engineering (Int), Intimidate (Cha), Medicine (Int), Perception (Wis), Piloting (Dex), Profession (Cha, Int, or Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Stealth (Dex).

Envoys have plenty of less-social skills. Likewise with expertise talents and improvisations, there's plenty of those that don't relate to being sociable.


WatersLethe wrote:

Arbitrarily locking certain weapon types out of "sneak attack" style options has always been a pet peeve of mine. I'm okay with reducing the effectiveness, if only for a purely mechanical reason, but straight up disallowing any benefit from sneaking up behind someone and hulk smashing their most vital region is just lame in my opinion.

Especially given that "trick attack" in Starfinder is even more nebulous than "stab someone where it hurts" I just don't see a compelling argument as to why pretty much any weapon can't benefit from it.

I mean, trick attack is giving you a LOT of dice. Isn't there room for a balance where you get fewer dice if you use a non-operative weapon? I mean, it's not like you can trick attack *and* multi-attack.

But if that's not to be, a class specific archetype that trades out trick attack would be appropriate.

Precisely and exactly this. Trick Attack also working on all one-handed weapons with the TA damage reduced by two levels (so, +1d4 where operative weapons and small arms get +1d8) and then working on literally anything in the game but at four levels reduced damage (so, doshkos getting +1d4 where operative weapons and small arms get +1d8) would have been my first thought, and there's plenty of room to tweak as necessary.

But "Being the skillsy type means I get to assume from out of nowhere that you must want to be stuck with knives and pistols"? Hated it in 4E, hate it in 5E, hate it in SF, and it unfortunately looks like the P2E Rogue is also going to be infected by that mentality.


Ascalaphus wrote:
Tectorman wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Well, you could have used an envoy as your skillsy class..
Tectorman wrote:
"I'm looking for a skillsy type, though not a face."

The Envoy's class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Athletics (Str), Bluff (Cha), Computers (Int), Culture (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disguise (Cha), Engineering (Int), Intimidate (Cha), Medicine (Int), Perception (Wis), Piloting (Dex), Profession (Cha, Int, or Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Stealth (Dex).

Envoys have plenty of less-social skills. Likewise with expertise talents and improvisations, there's plenty of those that don't relate to being sociable.

It's not just what skills are class skills. It's also how the class augments their use. The Operative has Exploits that the Envoy lacks. In everything BUT weapon choice, the Operative is the selection I'm looking for. Choosing the Operative class for that reason shouldn't auto-equate to weapon choice.

That'd be like deciding to play a Wizard in Pathfinder meaning my character has to have blue eyes and can't NOT have blue eyes.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tectorman wrote:
Hated it in 4E, hate it in 5E, hate it in SF, and it unfortunately looks like the P2E Rogue is also going to be infected by that mentality.

Fortunately, I'm in a position where I can house rule things if necessary.

Unwieldy weapons are a sticking point because no one can get multiple attacks with them, so that point of balance is skewed. I think a very modest damage boost (like +1 per five levels) and letting an operative apply their debilitating trick effect with single-target unwieldy weapon attacks would be sufficient. It lets the big bad AOE and line weapons be the forte of others.


I feel like it might be easier to run the numbers on the dice damage differential between operative and non-operative weapons at various levels and then house rule up some new operative weapons instead.

Otherwise, aren't you going to run into problems actually hitting an NPC, once you don't get to use Dex to hit? Unless you try and make a Str focused operative, but then you start tanking AC, and an operative in heavy armor is just... bad.

I guess you could try a medium-high Dex and Str operative, but that seems like it would lock you into a Dex based operative type.

Maybe a Str based operative type, or an archetype, that replaces the trick attack damage dice entirely with more, or longer lasting, debuffs?


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Why, exactly, should a player get to greatly increase the amount of damage they do, just because they want to use swords for their Operative rather than an actual light/agile weapon? The whole point of Trick Attack is that it is a clever, precise, swashbuckling attack, done with a clever, precise, swashbuckling weapon. So, logically enough, if you want to do a Trick Attack, you. . .need to use a suitable weapon. Which does not include large, heavy melee weapons.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Metaphysician wrote:
Why, exactly, should a player get to greatly increase the amount of damage they do, just because they want to use swords for their Operative rather than an actual light/agile weapon? The whole point of Trick Attack is that it is a clever, precise, swashbuckling attack, done with a clever, precise, swashbuckling weapon. So, logically enough, if you want to do a Trick Attack, you. . .need to use a suitable weapon. Which does not include large, heavy melee weapons.

But clever, precise swashbuckling swords do exist IRL . It's just that the only one available in Starfinder is an overgrown knitting needle.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Metaphysician wrote:
Why, exactly, should a player get to greatly increase the amount of damage they do, just because they want to use swords for their Operative rather than an actual light/agile weapon? The whole point of Trick Attack is that it is a clever, precise, swashbuckling attack, done with a clever, precise, swashbuckling weapon. So, logically enough, if you want to do a Trick Attack, you. . .need to use a suitable weapon. Which does not include large, heavy melee weapons.

As stated before, if it's a math/balance issue, the Trick Attack can go down with larger weapons (the less clever, precise, and swashbuckly the weapon, the less clever, precise, and swashbuckly the resulting trick). Alternatively, not having Trick Attack or Debilitating Trick at all AND gaining something else in their place less weapon-picky would do. But why does "skillsy" have to mean "knives and pistols only"? How does that logically follow?


Operatives can also use Sniper Rifles. They can use any weapons they take proficiency in, actually. They just can't trick attack with those weapons, because Trick Attack exists to boost the damage of operative melee and Small arms. You wanna play an operative with a laser rifle who just shoots? Go for it. Noone will stop you.

The Longarms and Advanced Melee don't need the trick attack damage boost when an operative chooses to use them.


It would be nice if there was an equivalent to debilitating sniper for longarms and non-operative melee weapons though.

Really easy to house rule though.


Elegos wrote:

Operatives can also use Sniper Rifles. They can use any weapons they take proficiency in, actually. They just can't trick attack with those weapons, because Trick Attack exists to boost the damage of operative melee and Small arms. You wanna play an operative with a laser rifle who just shoots? Go for it. Noone will stop you.

The Longarms and Advanced Melee don't need the trick attack damage boost when an operative chooses to use them.

Again, two issues with that. One, Trick Attack is not just a damage boost; it's also a gate for Debilitating Trick. Longarm- and Advanced Melee-using Operatives can't use that class feature even though we're past the point where damage is a balance issue. Two, it's still a matter of principle. If I pay 100% of my XP for levels in Operative, I expect to derive benefit from 100% of all class features that I paid for, or have the option to trade something useless out for something useful.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The only thing stopping you from gaining something from your operative class levels is you, and your strange inclination that you get to decide what a class does instead of the creators of the game. If you want to have the skills AND the guns, play a mechanic.

And yes, I know, it doesn’t have the skills the way you want. Too bad. If you can’t have fun with the game because everything isn’t just the way you like it, find a game that is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Metaphysician wrote:
Why, exactly, should a player get to greatly increase the amount of damage they do, just because they want to use swords for their Operative rather than an actual light/agile weapon? The whole point of Trick Attack is that it is a clever, precise, swashbuckling attack, done with a clever, precise, swashbuckling weapon. So, logically enough, if you want to do a Trick Attack, you. . .need to use a suitable weapon. Which does not include large, heavy melee weapons.

I don't want to jump all over you, because what you're saying makes sense and is evidently the thought process the devs went through.

The problem is it isn't satisfying from a character build flexibility standpoint, as well as a flavor standpoint.

As has been discussed ad nauseum, having a dead class feature just because you want to play a little outside the prescribed class narrative is unsatisfying and un-fun. If everyone is adamant about trick attack never applying, at any percent effectiveness, with anything but small arms and operative weapons, then at least give an option to swap it out.

Furthermore, trick attack says "You can trick or startle a foe and then attack when she drops her guard" not "You make a clever, precise, swashbuckling attack". If anything, the only thing that indicates a weapon is unsuitable is attack speed. So maybe unwieldy weapons are out, but longarms attack just as fast as small arms. Same with many non-operative melee weapons.

I'm just saying, any time class choice SO HEAVILY pushes players toward a small handful of weapon choices, it feels bad.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Pantshandshake wrote:

The only thing stopping you from gaining something from your operative class levels is you, and your strange inclination that you get to decide what a class does instead of the creators of the game. If you want to have the skills AND the guns, play a mechanic.

And yes, I know, it doesn’t have the skills the way you want. Too bad. If you can’t have fun with the game because everything isn’t just the way you like it, find a game that is.

Woah there buddy. You had your coffee this morning?

Pathfinder and Starfinder have *always* been about diverse character build options.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I'm not even looking to apply trick attack to advanced melee weapons and longarms in general. I'd be happy with just a basic melee weapon like the sword cane that slices things instead of pokes them, like if the dueling sword had the operative tag (which I'm surprised it doesn't).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm given to understand that Pathfinder was so committed to diverse character options that character design was basically the wild west, with any array of powers available to practically any class.

I don't mind flexible character design systems, but one of Starfinder's best traits is that it is simple and clean, without Pathfinder's bloat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pantshandshake wrote:

The only thing stopping you from gaining something from your operative class levels is you, and your strange inclination that you get to decide what a class does instead of the creators of the game. If you want to have the skills AND the guns, play a mechanic.

And yes, I know, it doesn’t have the skills the way you want. Too bad. If you can’t have fun with the game because everything isn’t just the way you like it, find a game that is.

Thank God Paizo never wrote either edition of Pathfinder to require Wizard characters to only have blue eyes, then. Otherwise, I'd probably be seeing this:

"The only thing stopping you from gaining something from your Wizard class levels is you, and your strange inclination that you get to decide what color eyes a member of a class has instead of the creators of the game. If you want to have the spells AND the not-blue eyes, play a Cleric.

And yes, I know, it doesn’t have the spells the way you want. Too bad. If you can’t have fun with the game because everything isn’t just the way you like it, find a game that is."

What with my equally strange inclination that "wanting to play a Wizard" shouldn't equate to "wanting your characters eyes to not be blue" and all.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

... Getting back to the topic

What I really want is a giant f@!~-off harpoon gun. Something that lets me impale an enemy at a distance and either reel them in or anchor them to a spot with some fancy, high tensile cable. Bonus points if I’m allowed to slap a ghost touch fusion on it and literally nail ghosts to walls.

Imagine non-biological/undead specialist bounty hunters hauling in targets on a line, or teams of titan hunters in dune buggies hammering some behemoth with volley after volley in an attempt to keep it from hitting a defenseless colony.


That raises a good point: is it possible to approximate a Ghostbusters proton pack yet?


In the movies they were mostly used to immobilize ghosts so that they could be trapped...

I think the closest in function would probably be the Graviton Pistols. I could see a team of skilled wielders coordinating with readied actions to keep a ghost functionally pinned between them. Some kind of larger caliber gravitation weapon with more flexibility would be more in line with the proton pack though.


To be honest I think there are enough straight up combat weapons. Adding more only leads to power creep.

What is needed are more utility and non operative stealth options. Unlike Pathfinder and other fantasy games in Starfinder you have (theoretically) big, modern and futuristic cities with a law enforcement which likely does not like peoole walking around in heavy armor and with obvious weapons which has all the capabilities you can expect from high tech societies like near total camera coverage with real time AI supported evaluation and global registry systems.

So imo we need more non combat stuff for this part. Arrows or shells which allows you to hack devices from afar by placing a receiver on them, heavy armor which can be disassembled into small parts that are harder to detect and stuff like that.

Basically just open the non-combat section of Shadowrun and start from there. Maybe even have stuff like fake licenses (SIN in Shadowrun) or at least forgery services that can do thise things for you.
Sadly the skill system in Starfinder is very basic which limits the amount if interesting and useful non-combat items.

Sovereign Court

Ixal's got a good point. There may be a few niches still unfilled in weapons - I'd like for the common melee weapons that now jump from item level 1 to 8 or 9 to get some intermediate results - but on the whole we have enough to work with.

What I'd like to see is more augmentations. There are already several abilities to fit more augments into a single body slot (verthani, geneture connection) but there aren't that many desirable augmentations yet.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tectorman wrote:

It's not just what skills are class skills. It's also how the class augments their use. The Operative has Exploits that the Envoy lacks. In everything BUT weapon choice, the Operative is the selection I'm looking for. Choosing the Operative class for that reason shouldn't auto-equate to weapon choice.

That'd be like deciding to play a Wizard in Pathfinder meaning my character has to have blue eyes and can't NOT have blue eyes.

Well, just decide that your character wears a Doshko, and use the knives values. I've often changed the weapon style of my characters, just to fit the way I see them without hindering my combat abilities. Well, never in such a way, but who cares?

Also, all classes are limited to some equipment. Soldiers don't use small arms or operative weapons, you can't have a rocket launcher flying drone (yeah, Airwolf drone), etc...
So, I really don't see why you have an issue with the Operative not carrying heavy artillery. There are lots of character concepts you can't play with the rules, still, I think they give quite some variety so you can find one you like.

Also, in Arcanis, psionics were having grey eyes :)


Ixal wrote:

To be honest I think there are enough straight up combat weapons. Adding more only leads to power creep.

What is needed are more utility and non operative stealth options. Unlike Pathfinder and other fantasy games in Starfinder you have (theoretically) big, modern and futuristic cities with a law enforcement which likely does not like peoole walking around in heavy armor and with obvious weapons which has all the capabilities you can expect from high tech societies like near total camera coverage with real time AI supported evaluation and global registry systems.

There are plenty of options for hiding/disguising/smuggling weapons and armor anywhere you please.


Xenocrat wrote:


There are plenty of options for hiding/disguising/smuggling weapons and armor anywhere you please.

For an operative yes. For a drone mechanic or heavy weapon/power armor soldier not so much. They would be like fish out of the water in any high class urban situation.

But as other classes like the mentioned operative are at full power even then you can't simply use lower CR enemies to address this.

Armory has some option to hide armor and weapons, but they have limitations and are easily sniffed out by detect magic.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ixal wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:


There are plenty of options for hiding/disguising/smuggling weapons and armor anywhere you please.

For an operative yes. For a drone mechanic or heavy weapon/power armor soldier not so much. They would be like fish out of the water in any high class urban situation.

But as other classes like the mentioned operative are at full power even then you can't simply use lower CR enemies to address this.

Armory has some option to hide armor and weapons, but they have limitations and are easily sniffed out by detect magic.

Heavy Weapons have the null harness to hide them, or the tattoo fusion.

Power Armor not being usable in social situations isn't actually a problem.

Pet classes being restricted by where you can take your pet is not a new thing.

Detect Magic doesn't matter, because it's not illegal to carry magic items and hybrid/magic items are both cheap and ubiquitous. It's as much of a problem as "Detect Electronic Item" would be - not at all.

If you as a GM want to invent social rules or a pervasive police state that provides problems that don't actually exist knock yourself out.


Xenocrat wrote:
Ixal wrote:
Xenocrat wrote:


There are plenty of options for hiding/disguising/smuggling weapons and armor anywhere you please.

For an operative yes. For a drone mechanic or heavy weapon/power armor soldier not so much. They would be like fish out of the water in any high class urban situation.

But as other classes like the mentioned operative are at full power even then you can't simply use lower CR enemies to address this.

Armory has some option to hide armor and weapons, but they have limitations and are easily sniffed out by detect magic.

Heavy Weapons have the null harness to hide them, or the tattoo fusion.

Power Armor not being usable in social situations isn't actually a problem.

Pet classes being restricted by where you can take your pet is not a new thing.

Detect Magic doesn't matter, because it's not illegal to carry magic items and hybrid/magic items are both cheap and ubiquitous. It's as much of a problem as "Detect Electronic Item" would be - not at all.

If you as a GM want to invent social rules or a pervasive police state that provides problems that don't actually exist knock yourself out.

You underestimate.

Not only power armor would not be usable in social situations, all heavy and most light armor would. Power armor would just bring in a Swat like team down on you as soon as you stepped on any lively street with it.
And just because having magic items is legal doesn't mean that the bouncers won't pat you for null grip or glamered armor when you want into the club, school or other area where they do not wan't weapons and they detect magic on you.

That has nothing to do with a police state. The amount of places where you can walk around in body armour carrying an assault rifle or even just a visible gun without provoking a response is limited to small part of the USA and several failed states. And with the increased technological capabilities SciFi brings those places will get more and more rare.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

His point, at least as far as the armor is concerned, is that you’re making that up as you go. It isn’t part of the Starfinder ruleset, so why would Paizo publish something to make the house rules you’re imposing less onerous?

While I, personally, would probably give it a coin toss to see if any NPC cared about powered armor (also depending on what, if anything, was mounted to it,) heavy and light armor are basically clothes for people spending any amount of time in space. I certainly wouldn’t disallow wearing them for anything less than a highly diplomatic situation, like meeting royalty or some such.

As far as magic goes, depending on PC choice, by around level 6 or 7, almost everything on the PC, several things IN the PC, and possibly one or two ability scores are going to detect as magic. When a good portion of the NPCs and PCs alive in the universe are going to ping multiple times on something that detects magic, it rapidly becomes a really bad metric to decide who to search. It would be like saying “Well, if you wear a hat, you get searched.”


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ixal wrote:

You underestimate.
Not only power armor would not be usable in social situations, all heavy and most light armor would. Power armor would just bring in a Swat like team down on you as soon as you stepped on any lively street with it.
And just because having magic items is legal doesn't mean that the bouncers won't pat you for null grip or glamered armor when you want into the club, school or other area where they do not wan't weapons and they detect magic on you.

That has nothing to do with a police state. The amount of places where you can walk around in body armour carrying an assault rifle or even just a visible gun without provoking a response is limited to small part of the USA and several failed states. And with the increased technological capabilities SciFi brings those places will get more and more rare.

You don't seem very familiar with the actual rules on these options.

A null harness is a small disk that requires a perception vs. sleight of hand check to even find (and a cavity search if your PCs are really determined) and a mysticism or engineering check to identify. Why are bouncers trained in mysticism and engineering not holding down better jobs?

A weapon tattoo doesn't have to be visible, having a spell on your body isn't illegal, and no one is going to be subject to a strip search for tattoos just because they have a spell cast on them.

Clubs are not going to grope people to see if they're wearing heavy armor, because women are going to mysteriously always detect as magic and stop going. Schools aren't going to employ bouncers. Controlling armor isn't going to make either of these places materially safer. And there's absolutely nothing you can do to stop a Furtive Garment hiding top of the line light armor, so why waste your time worrying about an AC a couple of points higher?

C'mon, you have to be smarter than this, AbadarCorp sells a line of light armor that is explicitly worn in boardrooms and diplomatic functions. No one cares if you wear armor in Starfinder. Security is via active measures and common sense (if you start a fight, you will have other people shoot back and probably hunt you down if you win), not doomed efforts at arms control.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
Ixal wrote:

You underestimate.
Not only power armor would not be usable in social situations, all heavy and most light armor would. Power armor would just bring in a Swat like team down on you as soon as you stepped on any lively street with it.
And just because having magic items is legal doesn't mean that the bouncers won't pat you for null grip or glamered armor when you want into the club, school or other area where they do not wan't weapons and they detect magic on you.

That has nothing to do with a police state. The amount of places where you can walk around in body armour carrying an assault rifle or even just a visible gun without provoking a response is limited to small part of the USA and several failed states. And with the increased technological capabilities SciFi brings those places will get more and more rare.

You don't seem very familiar with the actual rules on these options.

A null harness is a small disk that requires a perception vs. sleight of hand check to even find (and a cavity search if your PCs are really determined) and a mysticism or engineering check to identify. Why are bouncers trained in mysticism and engineering not holding down better jobs?

A weapon tattoo doesn't have to be visible, having a spell on your body isn't illegal, and no one is going to be subject to a strip search for tattoos just because they have a spell cast on them.

Clubs are not going to grope people to see if they're wearing heavy armor, because women are going to mysteriously always detect as magic and stop going. Schools aren't going to employ bouncers. Controlling armor isn't going to make either of these places materially safer. And there's absolutely nothing you can do to stop a Furtive Garment hiding top of the line light armor, so why waste your time worrying about an AC a couple of points higher?

C'mon, you have to be smarter than this, AbadarCorp sells a line of light armor that is explicitly worn in boardrooms and diplomatic functions. No one cares if you wear...

On top of this. . . where, exactly, have any of the actual canon setting descriptions suggested that any of the main locales actually enforce some kind of silly "drones everywhere, arresting anyone to step outside with a pocket knife" totalitarian hellhole?

I feel like too many people here insert their own assumption about a high tech future being a disarmed world of ubiquitous police crackdowns, when Starfinder is nothing of the sort.


Xenocrat wrote:
Ixal wrote:

You underestimate.
Not only power armor would not be usable in social situations, all heavy and most light armor would. Power armor would just bring in a Swat like team down on you as soon as you stepped on any lively street with it.
And just because having magic items is legal doesn't mean that the bouncers won't pat you for null grip or glamered armor when you want into the club, school or other area where they do not wan't weapons and they detect magic on you.

That has nothing to do with a police state. The amount of places where you can walk around in body armour carrying an assault rifle or even just a visible gun without provoking a response is limited to small part of the USA and several failed states. And with the increased technological capabilities SciFi brings those places will get more and more rare.

You don't seem very familiar with the actual rules on these options.

A null harness is a small disk that requires a perception vs. sleight of hand check to even find (and a cavity search if your PCs are really determined) and a mysticism or engineering check to identify. Why are bouncers trained in mysticism and engineering not holding down better jobs?

A weapon tattoo doesn't have to be visible, having a spell on your body isn't illegal, and no one is going to be subject to a strip search for tattoos just because they have a spell cast on them.

Clubs are not going to grope people to see if they're wearing heavy armor, because women are going to mysteriously always detect as magic and stop going. Schools aren't going to employ bouncers. Controlling armor isn't going to make either of these places materially safer. And there's absolutely nothing you can do to stop a Furtive Garment hiding top of the line light armor, so why waste your time worrying about an AC a couple of points higher?

C'mon, you have to be smarter than this, AbadarCorp sells a line of light armor that is explicitly worn in boardrooms and diplomatic functions. No one cares if you wear...

Its not a question of rules.

Sure, the club bouncers won't search for null discs. At best they might resort to a pad down if something seems fishy which will detect glamour armour. But if you want into a government building even null discs might not get a weapon in.
Schools do employ bouncers and xray scanners in some problem areas in the USA and other countries by the way.

The thing is, just relying on null grip doesn't "magically" make you able to bypass every security unless the GM wants to ignore it. It works in many cases but not in all. After all, security knows about those things, too.
Glamour armour works in even less circumstances.

Sure, prohibiting armour does not make the place safer, but someone trying to smuggle armour in will prompt a more thorough investigation. Wearing armour openly is socially not acceptable in most societies and will prompt the same response except for the armour specifically designed to fall within social acceptable limits (stationwear, secondskin, etc.).

My main point is that Starfinder is very poorly equipped to deal with adventures and GMing styles where moving within a modern society is required without a lot of handwaving. And instead of just more weapons the game would benefit more if instead we get more items and also rules in how to adventure in modern societies, including combat and other things you do in Starfinder without it getting unbelievable.

It doesn't have to be Shadowrun, but on the other hand players shooting up office buildings and having firefights in the streets and nothing happening like in Penumbra Protocol should be how Starfire should expect GMs to handle urban adventures.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Starfinder is not a modern society.

It is the wild west, made worse by the proliferation of easily concealable heavy weapons and armor.

In addition to every Tom, Dick and Harry having a dragon gland in their throat.

Don't let the skyscrapers fool you, might makes right in starfinder every bit as much as it did in pathfinder.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ixal wrote:
Wearing armour openly is socially not acceptable in most societies

You're just making stuff up. I agree, the fantasy in your head is very problematic. But the existing Starfinder world that everyone else is playing in works just fine.

101 to 150 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Armory 2 Wishlist All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.