| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are a lot of weapons which, while they are available at multiple levels, have large gaps between the different levels of the weapon. A vanguard focused on using a specific weapon will face multiple levels where that weapon just won't be usable with their primary class feature. Take, for example, the immature xenolash (a level 4 weapon from Pact Worlds). A vanguard can use that weapon with entropic strike through level 6. Upon gaining level 7, they suddenly lose the ability to entropic strike with the xenolash, even though the entropic strike damage doesn't even improve at level 7. The next xenolash isn't until level 10, leaving a three-level gap where you have to find a different weapon to use.
I really dislike the concept of a character losing capabilities by leveling up.
I understand the the reasoning behind the item level requirement is probably to prevent someone from greatly increasing the damage of a level 1 weapon. But is there some middle ground? Maybe a vanguard can choose to act as being lower level for purposes of entropic strike? So, to use my example of the immature xenolash, perhaps it could be used for entropic strike by a vanguard of any level, but it can never deal more than 2d6 damage (the damage for entropic strike at level 6, which is the item level + 2).
Hmm... Again being pedantic. The level 7 Vanguard doesn't lose the ability to use the tier 4 xenolash with the entropic strike. Just the ability to apply the critical effects, weapon special properties, or weapon fusions of the xenolash.
It does still seem strange to lose abilities for leveling up though.
It almost feels like this rule was written backwards. Since Entropic Strike is often an unarmed attack, using a weapon with it seems like a bonus. Using it with a simpler (lower tier) weapon could give more of a bonus. So instead: for a weapon that is more than two tiers below your level you can apply the critical effects and weapon fusions from the weapon.
Though in reading through the ability again, using a weapon doesn't give you much of a bonus on its own. The damage dealt is still identical to if you didn't use a weapon. The only bonus using a weapon would do is if the weapon has a special ability like reach or trip, or if it has a weapon fusion or critical effect. So I guess the point of the minimum weapon tier rule is to force you to upgrade your weapons the same as all of the other characters. You don't get to keep using that same tier 1 spear with reach for your entire career.
Starfinder Design Lead
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Part of the logic is that your mystic entropic strike becomes too powerful to channel through a lesser weapon. It is, after all, a magic effect you add your Con to that targets EAC, not just some punch.
One core issue with balance is that if you can use any level weapon, then at 9th level you can buy a ton of 1st level weapons with 1 level weapon fusions, and apply them to your 9th-level appropriate attack.
But that doesn't mean there aren't things that could be done, conceptually as well as mechanically, if this is an issue numerous people have. That is, after all, the point of playtesting.
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Part of the logic is that your mystic entropic strike becomes too powerful to channel through a lesser weapon. It is, after all, a magic effect you add your Con to that targets EAC, not just some punch.
One core issue with balance is that if you can use any level weapon, then at 9th level you can buy a ton of 1st level weapons with 1 level weapon fusions, and apply them to your 9th-level appropriate attack.But that doesn't mean there aren't things that could be done, conceptually as well as mechanically, if this is an issue numerous people have. That is, after all, the point of playtesting.
For me, and I think I'm far from the only one, there's a disconnect in the way the game presents "what you should be doing with equipment", and what we're actually doing.
Item levels make it look like we should be aiming to regularly ditch old weapons and buy higher versions, enchanting those all over and so forth. But this doesn't happen all that often in my experience:
* For quite a few weapons, there's a big gap in between versions. The CRB starknife jumps from level 1 to 8 with nothing in between that can quite scratch the same itch.
* The increase in damage dice for a lot of weapons just doesn't justify the expense. Static damage bonuses from strength and weapon specialization matter a lot more on melee weapons than going from 1d6 to 1d8.
* Because items sell back at only 10%, upgrading is quite unpleasant. It's not something you can afford to do every level. It's actually rather unclear when you're "expected" to do it.
* Other purchases are competing for your credits. Higher degree armor provides AC bonuses that you can't really get in any other way, and are necessary to not get wrecked. Armor upgrades provide strong or just plain interesting benefits, much more interesting than damage dice upgrades.
So to a large degree, I just don't really want to spend so much effort on upgrading weapons. There's only one compelling reason I upgrade weapons: minimum level for fusions. In the case of entropic strike, I would really really want the Holy fusion to ensure I could always penetrate acid resistance on fiends and undead.
But this rule would move the finish line for that every level, because otherwise my fusions don't apply to entropic strike. I'd have to buy weapons every level. That's an enormous imposition on the freedom of the player on where to spend his wealth.
I get that you want to set a limit on how many different convenient fusions a vanguard should have at his beck and call. The PF2 playtest also shows a struggle against "many cheap efficient" items over big-ticket "one expensive item to do it all" choices. I think you have to be careful not to end up on the "badwrongfun" side in that. Don't make it too hard to have multiple weapons, but you don't have to allow dozens.
Possible fix: you can attune a small number (1-3) weapons to be carriers for your entropic strike. You can change the attunement but it takes time (at least 1 standard action, maybe as much as 10 minutes), so players do need to make real choices about their weapons. This provides players an incentive to balance quality against quantity, but doesn't dictate playstyle too heavily and doesn't highjack most of the player's WBL.
|
|
Also, I think the current rule makes dipping vanguard disproportionately attractive:
If the melee weapon or shield is no more than 2 item levels below your vanguard level, you can also apply any weapon special property, critical hit effect, or weapon fusion the melee weapon or shield has to your entropic strike.
First level of vanguard looks quite front-loaded to me, an operative dipping one level would gain:
* BAB, HP/STA, Two improved saving throws* A couple of extra class skills, and for a melee class, quite large amount of skill points.
* Unlike Solarian or Soldier, doesn't require Strength; Operatives want Con and Dex anyway.
* An EAC weapon for trick attacks that's always on, adds Con to damage, and enables some properties that are otherwise unheard of on trick attack weapons, such as reach on an "entropic taclash".
It'll always be an 1d3 weapon but trick attack damage can compensate quite well for that; quite a few operatives are still using L1-3 weaponry at level 7 anyway. Once again, it's about having just enough item level to load up the fusions you think you need. Since you're at 1d3 damage anyway, you're not even looking at weapon damage dice anyway so you can make optimal choices of cost and weapon abilities without worrying about low damage dice tradeoffs.
Also, you can totally have many different weapons for any possible enemy, because your vanguard level remains level 1 so all items qualify for fusion use.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of hard limiting what weapons you can use it with, why not say your effective level for entropic strike and entropic attunement when used with a weapon is treated as your class level or the weapon's item level +2, which ever is lower.
I.e. you're level 10, using a level 1 weapon, you deal 1d4 base damage and no fancy abilities, but you can still do it and use the fusion on the weapon.
Or alternatively keep the same wording, but add a clause to allow the character to treat their effective class level for any given entropic strike as voluntarily lowered (and affects everything that keys off class level for the attack). But most importantly, lets them use the lower level entropic strike with lower level weapons.
Its very weird to go up a level, and not be able to do what you could do the day before (not any stronger, just the same numbers and benefits you had at the lower level).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am pretty sure dipping isn't a primary focus of character design, hell probably isn't even a distant last concern.
|
Starfinder Design Lead
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There absolutely are other possible solutions, as I noted. One of the good uses for playtesting is to try something that seems like it might go too far, and see if actual play experience supports it, or not.
Entropic strike, and how it reacts with items and item levels, is one of the things I most want feedback on. It's super helpful.
Level dipping, especially between operative and vanguard, IS one of the things I'm carefully looking at. My internal analysis suggests that it's a valid multiclass option, but not an overpowering one. I'm fine with interesting character options being valid choices through level-dipping, but I don;t want it to be the unquestioned "best" build.
Being limited to a d3 base weapon as an operative x/vanguard 1 seems to offset the advantages of that combination's advantages, but I am interested to see what playtesting reveals.
See, this is why I wish Starfinder had had a playtest before the initial core rulebook and why I've posted on the subject on the P2E boards. So that we could have done something about the required equipment treadmill before it became so ingrained and caused exactly these sorts of issues (and also Bulk, but that's separate). So that a player envisioning (as per the above example) his character using a starknife can just use the starknife without being expected to stay on the treadmill and, as soon as it becomes available, buy the new-but-really-the-same level-appropriate starknife. Except, depending on the weapon, he might have humongous gaps in the game where no such equivalent exists. Or to avoid the constant litany of "Second verse, same as the first" that is the armor section*.
*
Still, would that that had been the core methodology, then so much of this could have been avoided.
And also, so that players wanting to explore the options of multiple weapons, multiple special effects, multiple damage types (something they can do at low levels since they don't yet have to devote their WBL to an increasingly narrow range of gear) can continue to do so as the game goes on.
Unfortunately, it feels too late to do anything about it. This really just feels like an issue with the Vanguard specifically and the entire rest of the game in general that's just going to have to be tabled until Starfinder 2nd Edition rolls out.
Unless this book is going to be Starfinder Unchained Lite, with rules for taking the entire equipment treadmill and ramming it down the nearest black hole...
For me, and I think I'm far from the only one, there's a disconnect in the way the game presents "what you should be doing with equipment", and what we're actually doing.Part of the logic is that your mystic entropic strike becomes too powerful to channel through a lesser weapon. It is, after all, a magic effect you add your Con to that targets EAC, not just some punch.
One core issue with balance is that if you can use any level weapon, then at 9th level you can buy a ton of 1st level weapons with 1 level weapon fusions, and apply them to your 9th-level appropriate attack.But that doesn't mean there aren't things that could be done, conceptually as well as mechanically, if this is an issue numerous people have. That is, after all, the point of playtesting.
For me, it more the difference between what the game says you should be doing with equipment and what I wish I could be doing with equipment. For examples that do it well, see SWSE and Iron Kingdoms Full Metal Fantasy.
|
|
There absolutely are other possible solutions, as I noted. One of the good uses for playtesting is to try something that seems like it might go too far, and see if actual play experience supports it, or not.
Entropic strike, and how it reacts with items and item levels, is one of the things I most want feedback on. It's super helpful.
I'm worried though that the current playtest setup isn't really able to observe this issue;
* No multiclassing allowed, so dipping doesn't get tested.* Each playtest character is an isolated wealth event; you start at the level you play a session at, and if the next adventure is 4 levels higher you rebuild completely with new wealth. You never get to test what it's like to have to level up your weapons every level (or drop a boatload of cash on a weapon that'll last a bit longer).
Level dipping, especially between operative and vanguard, IS one of the things I'm carefully looking at. My internal analysis suggests that it's a valid multiclass option, but not an overpowering one. I'm fine with interesting character options being valid choices through level-dipping, but I don;t want it to be the unquestioned "best" build.
Being limited to a d3 base weapon as an operative x/vanguard 1 seems to offset the advantages of that combination's advantages, but I am interested to see what playtesting reveals.
I think to a large degree this is an artifact of the particular way retraining is set up in Starfinder. At low levels a dip in vanguard could be amazing for an operative, actually for several classes because substituting Con for Strength as a melee damage stat and attacking EAC is huge. But at level 8 or so you might regret it and want to get rid of it; but in Starfinder's retraining system unlike PAthfinder, you can't get rid of choices made long ago that made sense for 5 levels but not for 10 levels. And I don't think Starfinder made the right design choice there.
* No multiclassing allowed, so dipping doesn't get tested.
I thought the "no multiclassing" thing was Society only?
|
|
I thought the "no multiclassing" thing was Society only?
* No multiclassing allowed, so dipping doesn't get tested.
What other big organized playtest is there?
I mean, of course home testing is good too, but SFS does have its uses as a base for comparison: how does this class do in adventures where we know how well other classes have done?
|
Starfinder Design Lead
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What other big organized playtest is there?I thought the "no multiclassing" thing was Society only?
* No multiclassing allowed, so dipping doesn't get tested.
We expect to get a fair amount of data from non-OP playtesters, and the surveys will help us sort which feedback is from which group.
We already have people testing NPC builds as GMs for example, which is another thing not possible with the OP playtesters.I very much appreciate the OP people taking the time to do this, but it's only one game environment (though an important one), and it looks like the playtest reach with be significantly broader than that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part of the logic is that your mystic entropic strike becomes too powerful to channel through a lesser weapon. It is, after all, a magic effect you add your Con to that targets EAC, not just some punch.
One core issue with balance is that if you can use any level weapon, then at 9th level you can buy a ton of 1st level weapons with 1 level weapon fusions, and apply them to your 9th-level appropriate attack.But that doesn't mean there aren't things that could be done, conceptually as well as mechanically, if this is an issue numerous people have. That is, after all, the point of playtesting.
Wouldnt something like "attunement to a single weapon" limitation fix that issue, without the need for level limits? If you aren't attuned to the weapon, you don't get the benefits of it.
Perhaps you could allow for additional attuned weapons at higher levels (maybe 3 or 4 by 20th)?
There would still be incentive to use higher level weapons since they generally have more abilities and allow for higher level fusions (or more low level infusions). If you feel you must keep the level restriction, then perhaps it could be relaxed slightly every time the vanguard gets a new attuned weapon slot.
Just some ideas.
Wouldnt something like "attunement to a single weapon" limitation fix that issue, without the need for level limits? If you aren't attuned to the weapon, you don't get the benefits of it.
Perhaps you could allow for additional attuned weapons at higher levels (maybe 3 or 4 by 20th)?
There would still be incentive to use higher level weapons since they generally have more abilities and allow for higher level fusions (or more low level infusions). If you feel you must keep the level restriction, then perhaps it could be relaxed slightly every time the vanguard gets a new attuned weapon slot.
Just some ideas.
I still feel like that doesn't get around things like a level 7 weapon used by a level 12 character with multiple fusions dealing level 12 damage. Because of the exponential wealth gain assumption, that is a significant advantage in terms of credits.
Take a Holy, Disruptive, and Entangling level 7 weapon in use by a level 12 Vanguard character. The difference in the value of the fusions between level 7 and level 12, assuming 50% cost to move them, thats 10,380 credits. Combine that with the difference in the base weapon cost (say 7,000 vs 40,000), that is around a 43,000 credits difference, or over a 1/4 of your wealth budget at level 12.
I think that is what they're trying to avoid. They've already given Vanguards the option of completely ignoring buying weapons, but at the cost of not being able to use fusions if they go that route. Throwing effectively cheaper fusions on top is probably too much.
Yeah, Owen noted that ONE core issue with balance was the "many cheap weapons" options. Just having a cheap weapon to boost your entropic strike capability is surely another core issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I'd also like the tradeoff between "weapon" and "no weapon" to not lean too heavily towards weapon. That would take away some of the fun of the class if it's weaponless-but-not-really. As it stands, you need a weapon to make your attacks ranged or to add fusions. If the choice is "that or 25% of WBL", that's a fair choice to make. If it's "that or 5% of WBL", then I'm stuck wielding a rocket dagger or whatever again.
I think there’s a case to be made that, in order to stay useful, Vanguards need to upgrade their armor more often than other classes. I can totally see why that may still leave them a bit more flexible in spending credit, but I still think that buying a new weapon every two levels for the sole purpose of maintaining reach or a crit effect seems like a pretty high cost/value ratio.
Well, don't all of the other classes have to do that too? Spellcasting classes can maybe get away with having lower level weapons if they are not fighting many fights per day. Otherwise even the spellcasters are going to want to upgrade their weapons fairly regularly too.
So why shouldn't the Vanguard class also have to upgrade their weapons fairly regularly too?
Especially when they don't actually have to buy a weapon at all in order to do decent damage. Just to get weapon attributes or weapon fusion effects.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can see the argument why vanguards maybe shouldn't get weapons too cheaply. But there's still a problem that there are some fairly big level gaps between different versions of the same weapon.
Longsword: jumps from 1 to 7.
Taclash: level 1 to level 11.
Starknife: 1 to 8.
Doshko: 1 to 7.
And yeah, there are weapons at other levels, but those are different. Different shapes, energy types, powered/analog, properties - not just straight higher versions of the same weapon.
Now, in other classes it's pretty much your own choice when you upgrade. If you have your heart set on a particular type of weapon, you can just keep that weapon for seven levels until you can buy the next version. Waiting that long may be extreme, but most classes can get away with only upgrading a main weapon every few levels, not every other level.
The vanguard doesn't get that choice. He has to keep up with minimum item levels all the time. So he's constantly faced with a choice: do I start using a totally different weapon, or do I lose access to fusions/properties. This is not a fun dilemma.
Proposal: include rules for upgrading only the level of weapons:
Provide a general system in SCOM for increasing the level of a weapon, without changing anything else, except the cost. If I want a level 3 starknife, it'll have the same stats as a level 1 starknife, but a bit more expensive. However, I can put more fusions on it, and a level 5 vanguard can still throw entropic strikes with it.
This would be useful not just to vanguards; it's also extremely useful for melee soldiers who have a particular weapon they like, that is just annoyingly low level. Like the starknife. We'd like to pay more please, for better fusion service.
This should be a really generic rule; like a table with flat fee or percentage increases. And if you increase the level of a weapon enough that it hits the level of the next version of the weapon, then finally the rest of the stats also improve.
Example: Joe Soldier starts out at level 1 with his favorite Called tactical starknife. At level 3, he pays some UPBs to enhance his favorite starknife to a level 3 tactical starknife (because Joe has 3 ranks in engineering so he can craft weapons). He can then add a Holy fusion to it. When he reaches level 8, he forks over some more UPBs to upgrade his favorite weapon to a sintered starknife, which actually has better damage dice.
Obviously, some math work would go into designing such a table of upgrade costs; but it would also save a lot of design troubles in the future because you no longer need 8 different versions of each weapon spaced closely apart in level.
It would also fulfill something that I think a lot of people desire: that you can keep a favorite weapon around without losing out on damage. That you don't have to constantly throw away your trusty weapon with all its good memories for a new higher level one.
If the intenfed reasoning is tgat lower quality weapons can't withstand being used as the focus if a more powerful entropic strike, it might be possible to reflect that in the mechanic.
Instead if the current limit, where a given weapon can no longer grant properties or fusions, when you out level it, I would recommend that underleveled weapons remain usable, but begin taking damage from every higher level entropic strike that is used through them. This would not fix people's woes when the weapon type they want to use does not exist at a proper level, but would give a character an incentive to acquire an upgrade without losing the ability to do something they could do yesterday.
As a supporting rule, it would be a nice option if the Vanguard could make an ES at lower damage dice to use a weaker weapon safely. A level 7 vanguard using only the 1d6 strike they were able to deal at level 5, to use a level 3 weapon without destroying it, for example.
Proposal: include rules for upgrading only the level of weapons:
Provide a general system in SCOM for increasing the level of a weapon, without changing anything else, except the cost. If I want a level 3 starknife, it'll have the same stats as a level 1 starknife, but a bit more expensive.
And have more HP.
This is a great idea.
It would also fulfill something that I think a lot of people desire: that you can keep a favorite weapon around without losing out on damage. That you don't have to constantly throw away your trusty weapon with all its good memories for a new higher level one.
Especially since it fixes this too.
About a month late, but after considering the future of my own Vanguard that I'm expecting to start up soon, I'm gonna have to throw my hat in with this one too. And here's some basic math as to why:
For my Vanguard, I'm planning on focusing on delivering ES through shield bashes with Tactical Shields, since they're introduced alongside each other so why not use them ya know? But here's the thing: Tactical Shields are only available (roughly, level 1 throws things off) every 5 levels. So let's look at how that works:
Level 1 you get a shield, on level, no problem. Level 1 shield will work properly through level 3.
Level 4 you now have to upgrade to keep full functionality to the level 5 shield. Level+1, not horrible, but a bit expensive. And of course you have to upgrade any Fusions you have at this point to level 5 too. Level 5 shield will last you to level 7. And this is where things start getting touchy.
Level 8 you have to upgrade to a level 10 shield. Level+2, so first you have to be in a big enough place the GM even lets you buy one. On top of that, Level+2 stuff is frequently cost prohibitive. In fact, I ran the numbers on this one. A level 8 character is supposed to have 33,000 credits. A level 10 Advanced Tactical Shield costs 17,250 credits, roughly 52.27% of your WBL. And of course you also have to upgrade every fusion you plan to keep using to level 10 as well. Say you have 2 fusions by this level. That's an additional cost of 7,160 credits to upgrade them, bringing your total cost to 24,410 credits, roughly 73.97% of your WBL. And on top of that you also still need to factor in level-appropriate armor, any armor upgrades you have, any augmentations you have, and any other gear you have. That's a lot to fit into a smidge over 1/4 your WBL, but you don't have a choice, you have to upgrade to keep using your main thing.
And then that will only last you until the start of level 13 anyways, at which point you drop that 24,410 credits worth of expenses for 10% and have to buy level 15 gear, worth 135,600 credits. It just... doesn't seem viable long-term to have to do this every 5 levels, but if you don't do it you lose access to those Fusions that may well be vital to your battle strategy.
EDIT: I would say how this works out in play but sadly I don't think I'll actually be able to get beyond the first few levels before the playtest ends.
There will be more shields in the op manual
I quite like the idea of Entropically attuning to a weapon to allow the critical effects, weapon special properties, or weapon fusions to work with Entropic Strike. Then taking ten minutes to a day to attune to another. Maybe a discipline that would let you attune to two or even three weapons simultaneously. That would be fun build path for the Entropic Disciplines.
There will be more shields in the op manual
The thing is, the issue does still stand for any weapon that does have limited scaling, shields were just the personal one that really tipped me off. The most you could ever use a weapon would be 5 levels, and that's if you do buy it at level+2. Any other class could be lax a level or two to stick to their preferred weapon if need be, but only Vanguards have that hard limit of 2 levels beyond Item Level that mean you have to keep updating to use Fusions at all.
That is very good to hear, can't wait to see the final product. Sadly I don't think my game's going to get off the ground in time to play before the deadline, but I'll be waiting with bated breath.