Core Rulebook Updates


General Discussion

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Are there plans to issue an errata list for the most recent changes to the CRB? Herolab Online has inferred they won't update the Starfinder info until that is available.
More importantly, it's frustrating to have try and find the changes otherwise.
Please issue an errata!

Paizo Employee Starfinder Lead Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Toothy wrote:
Are there plans to issue an errata list for the most recent changes to the CRB?

Some of the changes are already listed on our FAQ/Errata page; the rest of the changes will be added to that page as soon as we are able. Thanks for your patience!


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Joe, do you think you could note on the FAQ/Errata page which items (including any new items) have been included in the new printing of the CRB? Just a superscript or other marking would be really helpful. That way if you're new and using the newest CRB PDF, you know which FAQ entries you can skip, and if you want to know what's new in the newest CRB printing you can identify it quickly.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

A .pdf listing all the changes would be top.


Joe Pasini wrote:
Toothy wrote:
Are there plans to issue an errata list for the most recent changes to the CRB?
Some of the changes are already listed on our FAQ/Errata page; the rest of the changes will be added to that page as soon as we are able. Thanks for your patience!

Thanks the quick response!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

So, uh, not to open a can of worms, but are what we to make of the majority of starships published so far being overbudgeted now?

I've only just started checking the math but, for example, the new weapon costs mean all of the Drake-class ships for PCs in Starfinder Society are way over the BP limit for their tier, and that's not even bringing the design budget optional rule into consideration.

Scarab Sages

John Mangrum wrote:

So, uh, not to open a can of worms, but are what we to make of the majority of starships published so far being overbudgeted now?

I've only just started checking the math but, for example, the new weapon costs mean all of the Drake-class ships for PCs in Starfinder Society are way over the BP limit for their tier, and that's not even bringing the design budget optional rule into consideration.

What's this about increased weapon costs because if they're having that effect its cause for concern.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The short version is that the Core Rulebook errata increased the BP costs for coilguns and most heavy, capital, and tracking weapons, quite considerably in some cases. (Also, a handful of weapons light weapons got cheaper.)

The errata also recalculates how NPC starships determine their gunnery bonuses.

The sample ships in the Core Rulebook use the new gunnery math, but as far as I've seen so far, they weren't redesigned to take the new, higher weapon costs into account. And of course, starships from other published sources don't match the new costs either.

I'm tempted to wander through and check the adjusted BP costs for these ships now.

Over in Starfinder Society, the guild rules use two types of ships for PCs to use: the science-focused Pegasus and the combat-focused Drake. At least at low tiers, the Pegasus ships (which are lightly armed) still fit the budget. But the low-tier Drakes, with their coilgun and high explosive missile launcher, blow the budget.

Scarab Sages

Hmm worrying, especially if defences aren't also increased it may be impossible to actually damage an opposing ship. Thanks for the reply.


Senko wrote:
Hmm worrying, especially if defences aren't also increased it may be impossible to actually damage an opposing ship. Thanks for the reply.

While not required the starship manual has an optional build budget that if I ever gm I am going to use. It sets limits of the total % of the ship budget that can be spent on shields/weapons/armor and other stuff so that you have a more realistic ship and not a flying death ball of turret mounted coil guns with insane amounts of shields and almost nothing else.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Yes, the build budget rule should honestly probably be a core assumption. That being said, you have to apply a little leeway to it for extremely low tier ships (like the fractional tiers), because of the expense of essential systems like power cores.


Yes its a rule of thumb and at low end some make the ship go comps may be a bit higher than listed but overall its way saner than slam all your BP into shields life support a gun and a turret.


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

I'm going through a bunch of published ships to check their BP budgets (including design budget) and will post when I'm done.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
kaid wrote:
Yes its a rule of thumb and at low end some make the ship go comps may be a bit higher than listed but overall its way saner than slam all your BP into shields life support a gun and a turret.

Does the design budget take into account new weapon prices or is it made with old ones in mind?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Senko wrote:
kaid wrote:
Yes its a rule of thumb and at low end some make the ship go comps may be a bit higher than listed but overall its way saner than slam all your BP into shields life support a gun and a turret.
Does the design budget take into account new weapon prices or is it made with old ones in mind?

No, neither. It's a budget like "X percent max on weapons, of that only Y percent can go in turrets, Z percent max on shields" and the like. The changes to the cost of some specific weapons have nothing to do with it.

Scarab Sages

HammerJack wrote:
Senko wrote:
kaid wrote:
Yes its a rule of thumb and at low end some make the ship go comps may be a bit higher than listed but overall its way saner than slam all your BP into shields life support a gun and a turret.
Does the design budget take into account new weapon prices or is it made with old ones in mind?
No, neither. It's a budget like "X percent max on weapons, of that only Y percent can go in turrets, Z percent max on shields" and the like. The changes to the cost of some specific weapons have nothing to do with it.

Yes but lets say we have a ship that can have X% on weapons which works out to 20 points. Then we have a weapon that originally cost 8 points meaning you could equip 2 of them and link them for a single shot doing 30 points of damage on average. Now with the new costs the weapon costs 11 meaning you can only equip one without going over budget doing 15 points of damage on average. However the shield points haven't increased and they are under budget so your doing half the damage vs shields that are just as powerful as before.

Hypothetical example but since we already know some pre-existing ships have gone over budget (not budget rules but default build points budget) my concern is that if the new budget rules are based off the old weapon costs they're going to be off for the new ones. Resulting in an undergunned ship because you can't equip it as the budget rules intend using the budget rules because they're calculated based on old weapon values.


Wouldn't a GM have to rebuild NPC ships to follow the optional budget rule anyway, regardless of the cost of various ship ingredients?

I mean, I presume nothing in the books have been using this optional rule, so if a GM is forcing players to use it, I'd think the GM would also have to use it.

Scarab Sages

Pantshandshake wrote:

Wouldn't a GM have to rebuild NPC ships to follow the optional budget rule anyway, regardless of the cost of various ship ingredients?

I mean, I presume nothing in the books have been using this optional rule, so if a GM is forcing players to use it, I'd think the GM would also have to use it.

They would but my point is that if the optional rule was made and balanced with original prices in mind it may not work at all rebuilding or no with the new weapon prices. That is original prices is X to Y power level depending on build, price rebalance already drops them to X. Now you impliment the budget build if you apply it to the original prices you get the same result of limiting power levels to X. HOWEVER if you apply it to the no rules you actually elminate X as well meaning it is impossible to build a workable ship if you combine the budget rules AND the errata to weapon prices. This is for both NPC and PC the new errata'd weapon prices have already broken the budget for building ships on a number of pre-built models they simply don't work now. Applying the budget limiting the amount of points may move it from rebuild to can't use.

Old System
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Ship B wins.

Rebalanced Weapons
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Price rebalance means Ship A has X shields and Y weapons while Ship B has Y shields and has to go back to the drawing board on its weapons.
Step 3
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons, Ship B has Y shields and Y weapons
Step 4
Fight can go either way depending on rolls.

Budget Limit changes
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Budget Limit means Ship has to go back to the drawing board for its shields while Ship B has to go back to the drawing board for its weapons.
Step 3
Ship A has Y shields and Y weapons, Ship B has Y shields and Y weapons fight can go either way depending on dice rolls.

Weapon cost change PLUS Budget Limits
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Both ships have to go back to the drawing board. A for shields and weapons, B for weapons.
Step 4
Ship A has Y shields and T weapons, Ship B has Y shields and T weapons however because the combination of higher costs and lower limits per section neither is actually able to do enough damage to overcome the others shields so they just sit there miserably shooting each other and getting nowhere.

That's my concern raising the weapon prices changes the ship build options, introducing BP limits changes the ship build options, introducing ship build limits based on pre weapon price increase may make it useless as the ships can no longer do enough damage to overcome shields.

Weapon cost pre-errata
8, twin link two cost is now 20 and it can take down shields.

Weapon Cost post errata
15, can still twin link two for a cost of 35 (with a sacrifice elsewhere) and can take down shields.

Weapon build limit
12
You can't even put one of the weapons you used on the ship and have to look for another weaker option.

Do you see where I'm coming from now?

Scarab Sages

Pantshandshake wrote:

Wouldn't a GM have to rebuild NPC ships to follow the optional budget rule anyway, regardless of the cost of various ship ingredients?

I mean, I presume nothing in the books have been using this optional rule, so if a GM is forcing players to use it, I'd think the GM would also have to use it.

The issue is the ships are being rebuilt due to errata'd weapon prices not the budget rules. Existing Paizo built ships now can't be used/created because they break the ship budget with the new weapon cost increases. The budget limits how much you can spend on the various components.

Which is my concern if the optional rule was made and balanced with original prices in mind it may not work at all rebuilding or no with the new weapon prices. That is original prices is X to Y power level depending on build, price rebalance already drops them to X. Now you impliment the budget build if you apply it to the original prices you get the same result of limiting power levels to X. HOWEVER if you apply it to the no rules you actually elminate X as well meaning it is impossible to build a workable ship at all if you combine the budget rules AND the errata to weapon prices.

This is for both NPC and PC the new errata'd weapon prices have already broken the budget for building ships on a number of pre-built models if on top of this you apply the optional rule for the budget limiting the amount of points you might move it from needing to rebuild to being unable to make a viable ship. If they've based the optional rule on non-errata'd prices.

Its like making a weekly budget where you can spend $20 on frut, $30 on other foods and $12 on toiletries only to find when you get to the store that to get the fruit you want instead of spending $14 it'll cost $24 because the prices increased without your realizing it when you made the budget rules on what you can spend.

Old System
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Ship B wins.

Rebalanced Weapons
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Price rebalance means Ship A has X shields and Y weapons while Ship B has Y shields and has to go back to the drawing board on its weapons.
Step 3
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons, Ship B has Y shields and Y weapons
Step 4
Fight can go either way depending on rolls.

Budget Limit changes
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Budget Limit means Ship has to go back to the drawing board for its shields while Ship B has to go back to the drawing board for its weapons.
Step 3
Ship A has Y shields and Y weapons, Ship B has Y shields and Y weapons fight can go either way depending on dice rolls.

Weapon cost change PLUS Budget Limits
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Both ships have to go back to the drawing board. A for shields and weapons, B for weapons.
Step 4
Ship A has Y shields and T weapons, Ship B has Y shields and T weapons however because the combination of higher costs and lower limits per section neither is actually able to do enough damage to overcome the others shields so they just sit there miserably shooting each other and getting nowhere.

That's my concern raising the weapon prices changes the ship build options, introducing BP limits changes the ship build options, introducing ship build limits based on pre weapon price increase may make it useless as the ships can no longer do enough damage to overcome shields.

Weapon cost pre-errata
8, twin link two cost is now 20 and it can take down shields.

Weapon Cost post errata
15, can still twin link two for a cost of 35 (with a sacrifice elsewhere) and can take down shields.

Weapon build limit
12
You can't even put one of the weapons you used on the ship and have to look for another weaker option.

Do you see where I'm coming from now?


My initial post about the GM rebuilding ships was to make sure I understood the dynamic we were talking about. That being, if every ship has to use the same build rules and the same build prices, then nothing has changed. The playing field is still level, everyone has the same options relative to their opponents. Maybe you’re doing a total of 10d4 damage instead of 15d6, but so are they, and each ship’s defensive arrangements are likely in a similar state.

That being said, Senko, I find your post to pretty much be wrong. I believe you're theorycrafting without enough actual play experience to back your points up. I could be wrong, and if I am, I apologize.

However, nobody needs the best twin linked turreted weapon to win a space fight. That it might not be affordable with certain weapons at certain tiers now is immaterial. I've been building and rebuilding the ship for my party through 10 tiers of ship now, I've never twin linked the best gun, and we’ve yet to get into a fight we couldn’t win. (honestly, I find the entire idea of the ball of death super turret ship to be distasteful min-max munchkinery, and if I have the option, I won’t play with those kind of people.)

Additionally, with the highest rated power core, and assuming 1 engineer to divert every turn, a ship is getting 15 shield points back per turn. And that’s with the BEST power core. In all likelihood, it’s a less powerful core, with an associated lower amount of shields per divert action. Granted, there might be a second part-time engineer for emergencies, but that character probably has another job that isn’t getting done now.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

A second engineer can't also be using a Divert action, even if there is one.


What page is the optional budget rule on? I can't seem to find it in my starship manual.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Page 79. It's in a weird place.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Senko wrote:
Pantshandshake wrote:

Wouldn't a GM have to rebuild NPC ships to follow the optional budget rule anyway, regardless of the cost of various ship ingredients?

I mean, I presume nothing in the books have been using this optional rule, so if a GM is forcing players to use it, I'd think the GM would also have to use it.

The issue is the ships are being rebuilt due to errata'd weapon prices not the budget rules. Existing Paizo built ships now can't be used/created because they break the ship budget with the new weapon cost increases. The budget limits how much you can spend on the various components.

Which is my concern if the optional rule was made and balanced with original prices in mind it may not work at all rebuilding or no with the new weapon prices. That is original prices is X to Y power level depending on build, price rebalance already drops them to X. Now you impliment the budget build if you apply it to the original prices you get the same result of limiting power levels to X. HOWEVER if you apply it to the no rules you actually elminate X as well meaning it is impossible to build a workable ship at all if you combine the budget rules AND the errata to weapon prices.

This is for both NPC and PC the new errata'd weapon prices have already broken the budget for building ships on a number of pre-built models if on top of this you apply the optional rule for the budget limiting the amount of points you might move it from needing to rebuild to being unable to make a viable ship. If they've based the optional rule on non-errata'd prices.

Its like making a weekly budget where you can spend $20 on frut, $30 on other foods and $12 on toiletries only to find when you get to the store that to get the fruit you want instead of spending $14 it'll cost $24 because the prices increased without your realizing it when you made the budget rules on what you can spend.

Old System
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2
Ship B wins....

It seems like you're really spinning off into generalities that don't really apply in the way that you're presenting them.

Here is the rule: https://aonsrd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=596

You can build workable ships with it. It is true that at the very lowest tiers, you'll need to loosen the budget's a little, as I said earlier.

Some of the weapons you may have wanted to use before have had their price changed because they were out of line with other weapons. That does not translate into being unable to arm a ship. The amount of shields applied on a ship are also constrained.

Scarab Sages

Pantshandshake wrote:

My initial post about the GM rebuilding ships was to make sure I understood the dynamic we were talking about. That being, if every ship has to use the same build rules and the same build prices, then nothing has changed. The playing field is still level, everyone has the same options relative to their opponents. Maybe you’re doing a total of 10d4 damage instead of 15d6, but so are they, and each ship’s defensive arrangements are likely in a similar state.

That being said, Senko, I find your post to pretty much be wrong. I believe you're theorycrafting without enough actual play experience to back your points up. I could be wrong, and if I am, I apologize.

However, nobody needs the best twin linked turreted weapon to win a space fight. That it might not be affordable with certain weapons at certain tiers now is immaterial. I've been building and rebuilding the ship for my party through 10 tiers of ship now, I've never twin linked the best gun, and we’ve yet to get into a fight we couldn’t win. (honestly, I find the entire idea of the ball of death super turret ship to be distasteful min-max munchkinery, and if I have the option, I won’t play with those kind of people.)

Additionally, with the highest rated power core, and assuming 1 engineer to divert every turn, a ship is getting 15 shield points back per turn. And that’s with the BEST power core. In all likelihood, it’s a less powerful core, with an associated lower amount of shields per divert action. Granted, there might be a second part-time engineer for emergencies, but that character probably has another job that isn’t getting done now.

HammerJack wrote:
Senko wrote:
Pantshandshake wrote:

Wouldn't a GM have to rebuild NPC ships to follow the optional budget rule anyway, regardless of the cost of various ship ingredients?

I mean, I presume nothing in the books have been using this optional rule, so if a GM is forcing players to use it, I'd think the GM would also have to use it.

The issue is the ships are being rebuilt due to errata'd weapon prices not the budget rules. Existing Paizo built ships now can't be used/created because they break the ship budget with the new weapon cost increases. The budget limits how much you can spend on the various components.

Which is my concern if the optional rule was made and balanced with original prices in mind it may not work at all rebuilding or no with the new weapon prices. That is original prices is X to Y power level depending on build, price rebalance already drops them to X. Now you impliment the budget build if you apply it to the original prices you get the same result of limiting power levels to X. HOWEVER if you apply it to the no rules you actually elminate X as well meaning it is impossible to build a workable ship at all if you combine the budget rules AND the errata to weapon prices.

This is for both NPC and PC the new errata'd weapon prices have already broken the budget for building ships on a number of pre-built models if on top of this you apply the optional rule for the budget limiting the amount of points you might move it from needing to rebuild to being unable to make a viable ship. If they've based the optional rule on non-errata'd prices.

Its like making a weekly budget where you can spend $20 on frut, $30 on other foods and $12 on toiletries only to find when you get to the store that to get the fruit you want instead of spending $14 it'll cost $24 because the prices increased without your realizing it when you made the budget rules on what you can spend.

Old System
Step 1
Ship A has X shields and Y weapons vs Ship B with Y shields and X weapons.
Step 2

...

I'm theorycrafting because I can't FIND the actual changes to weapon prices hence my questions earlier in this thread and why I said I'm concerned not stating "This is definately going to do X.". I don't know for sure how the new budget rules and errata prices will affect things if applied together. I'm just concerned the budget rules migtht have been made with the old prices in mind as I have had prior experience with games where two seperate people have worked on fixing a perceived weakness with the result the changes unintentially stack for a harsher result than either intended. Either alone would fix the weakness but combined they have unintended consquences making that portion of the game rules unuseable. However since another poster has said the weapon costs have already made a number of official ships no longer work. I feel I'm justified in being concerned the combination of the two might not have been thought through only the impact of either alone. Yes the new rules apply to both shields and weapons but if you want specifics.

1 Persistent Particle Beam (Heavy) does 10d6 damage and costs 32 build points for 40 PCU.
1) Superior shield blocks 150 points per ark of damage to start with and recharges 64 points a minute for 40 build points and 160 PCU.

The very best shield only costs 8 more build points than one weapon. Now yes shields have a higher limit 10% compared to 35% but if weapon prices are already causing problems by themself I'd like to know how the changed prices interact with the optional rule and if it was made with the new or old prices in mind. That is did they balance that 35% with X weapon prices and if so would they have raised it to 40% to allow different options. If you see what I mean?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

A lot of weapon prices haven't changed at all. The coilgun, which was exceptionally efficient compared to other weapons around that level, is a bit more expensive. A lot of tracking weapons are significantly more expensive, because they were dirt cheap for the firepower they supplied. Some weapons that were overpriced came down.

It isn't a global shift in weapon prices, just weapon prices changing relative to other weapons. That's why I'm saying "which prices are the budgets based around?" isn't a question that really fits.

Here's a bunch of them on a quick scan

Weapon - old cost- new cost
chain cannon - 15 - 10
coilgun - 6 - 10
flak thrower - 5 - 5
gyrolaser - 3 - 3
laser net - 9 - 9
light EMP cannon - 8 - 8
light laser cannon - 2 - 2
light particle beam - 10 - 10
light plasma cannon - 12 - 12
high explosive missle - 4 - 14
light plasma torpedo - 5 - 11
light torpedo launcher - 4 - 7
micromissle battery - 3 - 5
tactical nuclear missle - 5 - 18
graser - 35 - 35
gravity gun - 30 - 30
heavy emp cannon - 24 - 12
heavy laser array - 10 - 10
heavy laser cannon - 8 - 15
maser - 22 - 22
particle beam - 15 - 20
persistent particle beam - 25 - 25
plasma cannon - 20 - 20
railgun - 15 - 15
twin laser - 12 - 18
x-laser cannon - 35 - 35

Scarab Sages

HammerJack wrote:

A lot of weapon prices haven't changed at all. The coilgun, which was exceptionally efficient compared to other weapons around that level, is a bit more expensive. A lot of tracking weapons are significantly more expensive, because they were dirt cheap for the firepower they supplied. Some weapons that were overpriced came down.

It isn't a global shift in weapon prices, just weapon prices changing relative to other weapons. That's why I'm saying "which prices are the budgets based around?" isn't a question that really fits.

Here's a bunch of them on a quick scan

Weapon - old cost- new cost
chain cannon - 15 - 10
coilgun - 6 - 10
flak thrower - 5 - 5
gyrolaser - 3 - 3
laser net - 9 - 9
light EMP cannon - 8 - 8
light laser cannon - 2 - 2
light particle beam - 10 - 10
light plasma cannon - 12 - 12
high explosive missle - 4 - 14
light plasma torpedo - 5 - 11
light torpedo launcher - 4 - 7
micromissle battery - 3 - 5
tactical nuclear missle - 5 - 18
graser - 35 - 35
gravity gun - 30 - 30
heavy emp cannon - 24 - 12
heavy laser array - 10 - 10
heavy laser cannon - 8 - 15
maser - 22 - 22
particle beam - 15 - 20
persistent particle beam - 25 - 25
plasma cannon - 20 - 20
railgun - 15 - 15
twin laser - 12 - 18
x-laser cannon - 35 - 35

Thanks, not sure I agree with raising the prices on tracking weapons yes they are powerful but they take time to reach an enemy, can run out of fuel, can be shot down. Lots of drawbacks already. Especially increasing by that much nuclear missiles are over 3 times more expensive.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

They have a lot of drawbacks in theory. Most of them don't end up being that big of a problem in practice. A lot of them were definitely underpriced. I won't commit to saying that I think the new price is perfect on all of them (haven't crunched firepower/bp on all of them yet), but raising them, in general, was a pretty solid call.


Senko wrote:
Thanks, not sure I agree with raising the prices on tracking weapons yes they are powerful but they take time to reach an enemy, can run out of fuel, can be shot down. Lots of drawbacks already. Especially increasing by that much nuclear missiles are over 3 times more expensive.

Inside the range of their speed though, they are very very high damage weapons with minor drawbacks. I'm definitely okay with nukes being more expensive.

Scarab Sages

Still it is an example of why I'm concerned a tier 1 ship used to be able to have a missile and beam weapon now with the optional rule and the increase in nuclear missile prices you can only mount that missile.

Not saying that's necessarily a bad thing but it is an area of concern for me that the person who increased the prices and the person who made the opotional build limits didn't talk to each other and the combination of the two might make certain ships simply not viable.


Any word on the list of updates? It can't be that hard to compile a list.
Nethys also does not have updated their rules as far as I can see. Guess the mods of it are waiting on the update list like us.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

OK, here's my "audit" of a wide collection of published starships so far. I'll organize them by source, but I'm not including any potentially "spoilery" ships in here. (No Azlanti Star Empire, no grays, no outsiders, no species intended to be discovered during an AP, etc.)

A couple of notes:

1. The Core Rulebook ships were not redesigned in the reprint and thus a good rule of thumb is that most higher-tier ships are substantially over-budgeted. I'm keeping in mind that most of these ships were correct at the time of publication, so the question is just what to do about them now.

2. I'm including design budgets, with a mind that they're just recommendations, not hard rules. Since we're often dealing in fractions here, if a ship is "over-budget" by 1 point in a given category, that's just the margin of error. And if it's up by a few points in a category, that's fine too, so long as it matches the theme of the ship.

3. The costs given here include any discounts from SOM's manufacturer's perks (but they don't come into play often).

4. I really did try to double-check my math but I cannot guarantee that I haven't overlooked errors here and there.

Core Rulebook:

Ringworks Wanderer (Tier 1/4)
BP Total 25/25
Frame (25%) 6/6; Armor & Defense (25%) 6/6; Power Core (15%) 4/3; Weapons (35%) 2/8; Shields (10%) 2/2; Unrestricted 5

Idaran Voidrunner (Tier 1/3)
BP Total 38/30
Frame (25%) 6/7; Armor & Defense (25%) 4/7; Power Core (15%) 6/4; Weapons (35% total) 3/10; Shields (10%) 2/3; Unrestricted 17

Death's Head Necroglider (Tier 1/2)
BP Total 40/40
Frame (25%) 6/10; Armor & Defense (25%) 7/10; Power Core (15%) 6/6; Weapons (35%) 11/14; Shields (10%) 2/4; [b]Unrestricted 8

Kevolari Venture (Tier 1)
BP Total 64/55
Frame (25%) 9/13; Armor & Defense (25%) 11/13; Power Core (15%) 10/8; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 18/19; 15/8; Shields (10%) 3/5; Unrestricted 13

Starhive Drone Mk III (Tier 1)
BP Total 61/55
Frame (25%) 10/13; Armor & Defense (25%) 6/13; Power Core (15%) 9/8; Weapons (35%) 21/19; Shields (10%) 2/5; Unrestricted 13

BMC Mauler (Tier 2)
BP Total 88/75
Frame (25%) 8/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 15/18; Power Core (15%) 9/11; Weapons (35%) 35/26; Shields (10%) 5/7; Unrestricted 16

Idaran Vanserai (Tier 4)
BP Total 145/115
Frame (25%) 40/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 24/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35%) 45/40; Shields (10%) 5/11; Unrestricted 16

Blackwind Sepulcher (Tier 5)
BP Total 129/135
Frame (25%) 15/33; Armor & Defense (25%) 32/33; Power Core (15%) 14/20; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 31/47; 14/20; Shields (10%) 8/13; Unrestricted 29

UIE Hiveguard (Tier 6)
BP Total 166/155
Frame (25%) 30/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 26/77; Power Core (15%) 20/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 50/54; 7/23; Shields (10%) 8/15; Unrestricted 32

Norikama Dropship (Tier 8)
BP Total 213/205
Frame (25%) 15/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 38/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 69/71; 24/30; Shields (10%) 12/20; Unrestricted 54

Hivonyx Titan Hauler (Tier 9)
BP Total 251/230
Frame (25%) 55/57; Armor & Defense (25%) 33/57; Power Core (15%) 30/34; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 78/80; 36/34; Shields (10%) 15/23; [b]Unrestricted 40

ATech Immortal (Tier 10)
BP Total 288/270
Frame (25%) 60/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 31/67; Power Core (15%) 30/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 82/94; 18/40; Shields (10%) 22/27; Unrestricted 63

Idaran Millennia (Tier 12)
BP Total 380/350
Frame (25%) 120/87; Armor & Defense (25%) 53/87; Power Core (15%) 40/52; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 93/122; 28/52; Shields (10%) 20/35; Unrestricted 54

Thaumtech Omenbringer (Tier 14)
BP Total 459/450
Frame (25%) 150/112; Armor & Defense (25%) 90/112; Power Core (15%) 40/67; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 103/157; 32/67; Shields (10%) 23/45; Unrestricted 53

Vindicas Tyrant (Tier 16)
BP Total 643/600
Frame (25%) 200/150; Armor & Defense (25%) 174/150; Power Core (15%) 50/90; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 152/210; 25/90; Shields (10%) 22/60; Unrestricted 45

Pact Worlds:

Terminator Star Drake (Tier 1/4)
BP Total 25/25
Frame (25%) 4/6; Armor & Defense (25%) 3/6; Power Core (15%) 4/3; Weapons (35%) 2/8; Shields (10%) 2/2; Unrestricted 10

UC Pod (Tier 1/2)
BP Total 42/40
Frame (25%) 6/10; Armor & Defense (25%) 7/10; Power Core (15%) 6/6; Weapons (35%) 8/14; Shields (10%) 2/4; Unrestricted 13

CompEnt AEV (Tier 1/3)
BP Total 30/30
Frame (25%) 4/7; Armor & Defense (25%) 3/7; Power Core (15%) 4/4; Weapons (35%) 5/10; Shields (10%) 2/3; Unrestricted 12

Infernex Burning Nail (Tier 1)
BP Total 65/55
Frame (25%) 8/13; Armor & Defense (25%) 6/13; Power Core (15%) 8/8; Weapons (35%) 31/19; Shields (10%) 3/5; Unrestricted 9

Inheritorworks Brightsword (Tier 2)
BP Total 81/75
Frame (25%) 8/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 20/18; Power Core (15%) 7/11; Weapons (35% total) 25/26; Shields (10%) 5/7; Unrestricted 16

Redshift Pleasure Sail (Tier 3)
BP Total 99/95
Frame (25%) 12/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 29/23; Power Core (15%) 15/14; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 19/33; 5/14; Shields (10%) 5/9; Unrestricted 19

CompEnt Group Defense Frigate (Tier 8)
BP Total 220/205
Frame (25%) 30/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 42/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 55/71; 5/30; Shields (10%) 18/20; Unrestricted 50

Inheritorworks Shieldcraft (Tier 8)
BP Total 218/205
Frame (25%) 15/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 47/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 67/71; 19/30; Shields (10%) 25/20; Unrestricted 39

UC Arkship (Tier 10)
BP Total 284/270
Frame (25%) 30/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 83/67; Power Core (15%) 25/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 59/94; 9/40; Shields (10%) 15/27; Unrestricted 72

UC Gardenship (Tier 10)
BP Total 281/270
Frame (25%) 55/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 101/67; Power Core (15%) 20/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 30/94; 10/40; Shields (10%) 20/27; Unrestricted 55

Multifold Seedship (Tier 11)
BP Total 317/310
Frame (25%) 55/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 74/77; Power Core (15%) 30/46; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 64/108; 19/46; Shields (10%) 22/31; Unrestricted 77

Opulos Drift Cruiser (Tier 11)
BP Total 276/310
Frame (25%) 55/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 78/77; Power Core (15%) 30/46; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 38/108; 10/46; Shields (10%) 23/31; Unrestricted 86

Infernex Interdictus (Tier 13)
BP Total 371/400
Frame (25%) 60/100; Armor & Defense (25%) 68/100; Power Core (15%) 20/60; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 99/140; 30/60; Shields (10%) 25/40; Unrestricted 100

Infernex Diabolical (Tier 16)
BP Total 662/600
Frame (25%) 150/150; Armor & Defense (25%) 135/150; Power Core (15%) 50/90; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 190/210; 30/90; Shields (10%) 28/60; Unrestricted 109

Inheritorworks Cathedralship (Tier 16)
BP Total 610/600
Frame (25%) 120/150; Armor & Defense (25%) 177/150; Power Core (15%) 50/90; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 118/210; 18/90; Shields (10%) 28/60; Unrestricted 117

Near Space:

Sword-Class Attack Vessel (Tier 2)
BP Total 79/75
Frame (25%) 12/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 6/18; Power Core (15%) 13/11; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 18/26; 10/11; Shields (10%) 5/7; Unrestricted 25

SC Farseer (Tier 3)
BP Total 99/95
Frame (25%) 12/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 12/23; Power Core (15%) 15/14; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 16/33; 10/14; Shields (10%) 13/9; Unrestricted 31

Norikama Reliant (Tier 4)
BP Total 120/115
Frame (25%) 10/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 16/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35%) 43/40; Shields (10%) 6/11; Unrestricted 45

Sledge-Class Boarding Vessel (Tier 6)
BP Total 154/155
Frame (25%) 30/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 26/77; Power Core (15%) 20/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 34/54; 10/23; Shields (10%) 15/15; Unrestricted 29

Personal note: The Sledge is fine as far as the math goes, but could benefit from a slight rebuild to incorporate SOM's boarding rules.

SC Vaultship (Tier 7)
BP Total 180/180
Frame (25%) 40/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 35/45; Power Core (15%) 20/27; Weapons (35%) 5/63; Shields (10%) 27/18; Unrestricted 53

Vindicas Punisher (Tier 7)
BP Total 190/180
Frame (25%) 30/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 47/45; Power Core (15%) 25/27; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 35/63; 10/27; Shields (10%) 18/18; Unrestricted 35

BMC Predator (Tier 9)
BP Total 232/230
Frame (25%) 6/57; Armor & Defense (25%) 26/57; Power Core (15%) 25/34; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 35/80; 5/34; Shields (10%) 15/23; Unrestricted 125

Vindicas Enforcer (Tier 12)
BP Total 395/350
Frame (25%) 60/87; Armor & Defense (25%) 93/87; Power Core (15%) 50/52; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 129/122; 35/52; Shields (10%) 18/35; Unrestricted 45

SC Metropolis (Tier 13)
BP Total 393/400
Frame (25%) 120/100; Armor & Defense (25%) 68/100; Power Core (15%) 50/60; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 28/140; 8/60; Shields (10%) 32/40; Unrestricted 95

Naginata-Class Attack Vessel (Tier 14)
BP Total 450/450
Frame (25%) 150/112; Armor & Defense (25%) 65/112; Power Core (15%) 40/67; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 112/157; 16/67; Shields (10%) 23/45; Unrestricted 60

Merciless Blade (Tier 19)
BP Total 993/900
Frame (25%) 250/225; Armor & Defense (25%) 80/225; Power Core (15%) 70/135; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 250/315; 100/135; Shields (10%) 40/90; Unrestricted 303

Conqueror of Worlds (Tier 20)
BP Total 1,125/1,000
Frame (25%) 350/250; Armor & Defense (25%) 330/250; Power Core (15%) 60/150; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 255/350; 40/150; Shields (10%) 40/100; Unrestricted 90

Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild:

Starfinder Society Drake (Tier 2)
BP Total 89/75
Frame (25%) 15/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 9/18; Power Core (15%) 13/11; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 27/26; 24/11; Shields (10%) 6/7; Unrestricted 19

Starfinder Society Drake (Tier 4)
BP Total 139/115
Frame (25%) 15/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 21/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 59/40; 24/17; Shields (10%) 10/11; Unrestricted 19

Starfinder Society Drake (Tier 6)
BP Total 177/155
Frame (25%) 15/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 29/77; Power Core (15%) 20/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 68/54; 18/23; Shields (10%) 15/15; Unrestricted 30

Starfinder Society Drake (Tier 8)
BP Total 227/205
Frame (25%) 15/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 38/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 99/71; 45/30; Shields (10%) 20/20; Unrestricted 30

Starfinder Society Drake (Tier 10)
BP Total 290/270
Frame (25%) 15/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 50/67; Power Core (15%) 30/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 123/94; 45/40; Shields (10%) 22/27; Unrestricted 50

Starfinder Society Drake (Tier 12)
BP Total 362/350
Frame (25%) 15/87; Armor & Defense (25%) 67/87; Power Core (15%) 30/52; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 154/122; 53/52; Shields (10%) 25/35; Unrestricted 71

Starfinder Society Gorgon (Tier 2)
BP Total 82/75
Frame (25%) 30/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 6/18; Power Core (15%) 15/11; Weapons (35%) 15/26; Shields (10%) 3/7; Unrestricted 13

Starfinder Society Gorgon (Tier 4)
BP Total 121/115
Frame (25%) 30/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 16/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 37/40; 18/17; Shields (10%) 8/11; Unrestricted 15

Starfinder Society Gorgon (Tier 6)
BP Total 154/155
Frame (25%) 30/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 28/77; Power Core (15%) 20/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 68/54; 18/23; Shields (10%) 13/15; Unrestricted 15

Starfinder Society Gorgon (Tier 8)
BP Total 201/205
Frame (25%) 30/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 47/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 89/71; 18/30; Shields (10%) 20/20; Unrestricted 15

Starfinder Society Gorgon (Tier 10)
BP Total 306/270
Frame (25%) 30/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 78/67; Power Core (15%) 30/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 130/94; 10/40; Shields (10%) 23/27; Unrestricted 15

Starfinder Society Gorgon (Tier 12)
BP Total 378/350
Frame (25%) 30/87; Armor & Defense (25%) 111/87; Power Core (15%) 40/52; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 155/122; 35/52; Shields (10%) 27/35; Unrestricted 15

Starfinder Society Pegasus (Tier 2)
BP Total 80/75
Frame (25%) 12/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 9/18; Power Core (15%) 15/11; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 16/26; 10/11; Shields (10%) 5/7; Unrestricted 23

Starfinder Society Pegasus (Tier 4)
BP Total 115/115
Frame (25%) 12/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 15/28; Power Core (15%) 17/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 31/40; 10/17; Shields (10%) 8/11; Unrestricted 32

Starfinder Society Pegasus (Tier 6)
BP Total 161/155
Frame (25%) 12/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 26/77; Power Core (15%) 20/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 46/54; 10/23; Shields (10%) 15/15; Unrestricted 42

Starfinder Society Pegasus (Tier 8)
BP Total 213/205
Frame (25%) 12/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 39/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 69/71; 18/30; Shields (10%) 20/20; Unrestricted 48

Starfinder Society Pegasus (Tier 10)
BP Total 263/270
Frame (25%) 12/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 49/67; Power Core (15%) 30/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 70/94; 20/40; Shields (10%) 22/27; Unrestricted 80

Starfinder Society Pegasus (Tier 12)
BP Total 356/350
Frame (25%) 12/87; Armor & Defense (25%) 72/87; Power Core (15%) 30/52; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 115/122; 20/52; Shields (10%) 25/35; Unrestricted 102

Starship Operations Manual:

Inheritorworks Truestrike (Tier 1/3)
BP Total 30/30
Frame (25%) 6/7; Armor & Defense (25%) 2/7; Power Core (15%) 6/4; Weapons (35% total) 7/10; Shields (10%) 2/3; Unrestricted 7

UIE Petaltail (Tier 1/3)
BP Total 30/30
Frame (25%) 4/7; Armor & Defense (25%) 3/7; Power Core (15%) 4/4; Weapons (35%) 4/10; Shields (10%) 2/3; Unrestricted 13

KC K-51 Sky Fisher (Tier 1/2)
BP Total 38/40
Frame (25%) 3/10; Armor & Defense (25%) 2/10; Power Core (15%) 7/6; Weapons (35%) 11/14; Shields (10%) 2/4; Unrestricted 13

Norikama Defrex (Tier 1/2)
BP Total 38/40
Frame (25%) 6/10; Armor & Defense (25%) 8/10; Power Core (15%) 6/6; Weapons (35%) 10/14; Shields (10%) 3/4; Unrestricted 7

Nebulor Skymedic (Tier 1)
BP Total 51/55
Frame (25%) 4/13; Armor & Defense (25%) 7/13; Power Core (15%) 7/8; Weapons (35%) 0/19; Shields (10%) 4/5; Unrestricted 29

Redshift Revolution X-62 (Tier 1)
BP Total 55/55
Frame (25%) 8/13; Armor & Defense (25%) 5/13; Power Core (15%) 9/8; Weapons (35% total) 8/19; Shields (10%) 5/5; Unrestricted 20

AAC Dyad (Tier 2)
BP Total 75/75
Frame (25%) 8/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 9/18; Power Core (15%) 9/11; Weapons (35%) 25/26; Shields (10%) 5/7; Unrestricted 19

Infernex Unshakable (Tier 2)
BP Total 81/75
Frame (25%) 6/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 15/18; Power Core (15%) 10/11; Weapons (35%) 16/26; Shields (10%) 8/7; Unrestricted 26

Idaran Keris (Tier 3)
BP Total 94/95
Frame (25%) 8/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 11/23; Power Core (15%) 12/14; Weapons (35%) 29/33; Shields (10%) 15/9; Unrestricted 19

Multifold G7 Autohauler (Tier 3)
BP Total 94/95
Frame (25%) 10/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 22/23; Power Core (15%) 12/14; Weapons (35%) 16/33; Shields (10%) 6/9; Unrestricted 28

Hivonyx Ambassador (Tier 4)
BP Total 111/115
Frame (25%) 12/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 32/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 17/40; 9/17; Shields (10%) 13/11; Unrestricted 22

Ulrikka RC-HPR (Tier 4)
BP Total 107/115
Frame (25%) 15/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 21/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 36/40; 12/17; Shields (10%) 8/11; Unrestricted 12

Opulos Opulence (Tier 5)
BP Total 134/135
Frame (25%) 6/33; Armor & Defense (25%) 22/33; Power Core (15%) 13/20; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 19/47; 9/20; Shields (10%) 8/13; Unrestricted 66

UC Librama (Tier 5)
BP Total 128/135
Frame (25%) 6/33; Armor & Defense (25%) 18/33; Power Core (15%) 15/20; Weapons (35%) 10/47; Shields (10%) 6/13; Unrestricted 73

Dashadz Wayfarer (Tier 6)
BP Total 155/155
Frame (25%) 12/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 32/77; Power Core (15%) 17/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 33/54; 10/23; Shields (10%) 12/15; Unrestricted 49

Idaran Thunderbolt (Tier 6)
BP Total 150/155
Frame (25%) 6/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 46/77; Power Core (15%) 17/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 14/54; 9/23; Shields (10%) 22/15; Unrestricted 45

Idaran Peregrinasi (Tier 7)
BP Total 179/180
Frame (25%) 15/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 25/45; Power Core (15%) 20/27; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 50/63; 19/27; Shields (10%) 18/18; Unrestricted 51

Terminator Slingshot (Tier 7)
BP Total 179/180
Frame (25%) 40/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 16/45; Power Core (15%) 25/27; Weapons (35%) 38/63; Shields (10%) 15/18; Unrestricted 40

ATech Resolute (Tier 8)
BP Total 205/205
Frame (25%) 40/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 34/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 51/71; 11/30; Shields (10%) 17/20; Unrestricted 38

Sov-El Korinath (Tier 8)
BP Total 194/205
Frame (25%) 10/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 32/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 60/71; 10/30; Shields (10%) 22/20; Unrestricted 45

Death's Head Charon (Tier 9)
BP Total 234/230
Frame (25%) 40/57; Armor & Defense (25%) 46/57; Power Core (15%) 25/34; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 46/80; 9/34; Shields (10%) 17/23; Unrestricted 59

Sanjaval Redsun (Tier 9)
BP Total 245/230
Frame (25%) 40/57; Armor & Defense (25%) 36/57; Power Core (15%) 25/34; Weapons (35%) 90/80; Shields (10%) 15/23; Unrestricted 39

Brevak Vermelance (Tier 10)
BP Total 269/270
Frame (25%) 45/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 62/67; Power Core (15%) 25/40; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 64/94; 12/40; Shields (10%) 15/27; Unrestricted 58

Dashadz Griffon (Tier 10)
BP Total 265/270
Frame (25%) 40/67; Armor & Defense (25%) 31/67; Power Core (15%) 25/40; Weapons (35%) 71/94; Shields (10%) 18/27; Unrestricted 78

BMC Dmolanfari (Tier 11)
BP Total 282/310
Frame (25%) 55/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 63/77; Power Core (15%) 20/46; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 83/108; 18/46; Shields (10%) 25/31; Unrestricted 36

Infernex Justiciar (Tier 11)
BP Total 322/310
Frame (25%) 30/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 31/77; Power Core (15%) 40/46; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 114/108; 10/46; Shields (10%) 23/31; Unrestricted 77

Inheritorworks Javelin (Tier 12)
BP Total 346/350
Frame (25%) 30/87; Armor & Defense (25%) 62/87; Power Core (15%) 40/52; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 87/122; 22/52; Shields (10%) 32/35; Unrestricted 95

Idaran Saga (Tier 13)
BP Total 414/400
Frame (25%) 60/100; Armor & Defense (25%) 120/100; Power Core (15%) 40/60; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 87/140; 25/60; Shields (10%) 30/40; Unrestricted 67

Star-Nambulance Void-Eater (Tier 13)
BP Total 189/400
Frame (25%) 20/100; Armor & Defense (25%) 35/100; Power Core (15%) 20/60; Weapons (35%) 35/140; Shields (10%) 27/40; Unrestricted 52

I crunched the numbers several times on the Void-Eater, but unless I'm really missing something, this vessel is close to actually being Tier 7. Several areas could easily be boosted considerably.

AAC Hoardmaster (Tier 14)
BP Total 442/450
Frame (25%) 120/112; Armor & Defense (25%) 50/112; Power Core (15%) 50/67; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 110/157; 9/67; Shields (10%) 32/45; Unrestricted 88

BMC Devastator (Tier 14)
BP Total 442/450
Frame (25%) 120/112; Armor & Defense (25%) 83/112; Power Core (15%) 40/67; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 127/157; 25/67; Shields (10%) 18/45; Unrestricted 54

Norikama Valkyrie (Tier 15)
BP Total 498/500
Frame (25%) 150/125; Armor & Defense (25%) 153/125; Power Core (15%) 40/75; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 82/175; 20/75; Shields (10%) 23/50; Unrestricted 50

Starhive Vespiar (Tier 15)
BP Total 498/500
Frame (25%) 150/125; Armor & Defense (25%) 117/125; Power Core (15%) 40/75; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 103/175; 35/75; Shields (10%) 27/50; Unrestricted 61

Kevolari Golarion-Class Battleship (Tier 16)
BP Total 615/600
Frame (25%) 147/150; Armor & Defense (25%) 77/150; Power Core (15%) 50/90; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 222/210; 62/90; Shields (10%) 32/60; Unrestricted 87

Ringworks Specter (Tier 16)
BP Total 597/600
Frame (25%) 150/150; Armor & Defense (25%) 104/150; Power Core (15%) 50/90; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 159/210; 15/90; Shields (10%) 28/60; Unrestricted 106

CompEnt Those Who Are (Tier 17)
BP Total 671/700
Frame (25%) 250/175; Armor & Defense (25%) 108/175; Power Core (15%) 50/105; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 180/245; 45/105; Shields (10%) 15/70; Unrestricted 68

Ringworks Peacebringer (Tier 17)
BP Total 680/700
[b]Frame (25%)
200/175; Armor & Defense (25%) 67/175; Power Core (15%) 50/105; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 217/245; 27/105; Shields (10%) 40/70; Unrestricted 106

Inheritorworks Redeemer (Tier 18)
BP Total 806/800
Frame (25%) 200/200; Armor & Defense (25%) 90/200; Power Core (15%) 100/120; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 299/280; 36/120; Shields (10%) 35/80; Unrestricted 82

Pyre Spike Station (Tier 18)
BP Total 802/800
Frame (25%) 200/200; Armor & Defense (25%) 90/200; Power Core (15%) 100/120; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 204/280; 34/120; Shields (10%) 40/80; Unrestricted 168

Citadel Zirval (Tier 19)
BP Total 855/900
Frame (25%) 250/225; Armor & Defense (25%) 99/225; Power Core (15%) 70/135; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 233/315; 75/135; Shields (10%) 40/90; Unrestricted 164

Driftmaven (Tier 20)
BP Total 1,004/1,000
Frame (25%) 350/250; Armor & Defense (25%) 99/250; Power Core (15%) 70/150; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 275/350; 35/150; Shields (10%) 35/100; Unrestricted 159

Shalar (Tier 20)
BP Total 983/1,000
Frame (25%) 250/250; Armor & Defense (25%) 262/250; Power Core (15%) 60/150; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 240/350; 60/150; Shields (10%) 32/100; Unrestricted 139

This last category is a grab bag from Alien Archive and various Starfinder Adventure Path volumes.

Miscellaneous:

Death's Curtain Necrofighter (Tier 1)
BP Total 61/55
Frame (25%) 8/13; Armor & Defense (25%) 9/13; Power Core (15%) 8/8; Weapons (35%) 21/19; Shields (10%) 4/5; Unrestricted 11

Thaumtech Cairncarver (Tier 2)
BP Total 89/75
Frame (25%) 10/18; Armor & Defense (25%) 7/18; Power Core (15%) 12/11; Weapons (35%) 41/26; Shields (10%) 5/7; Unrestricted 14

Aurora Yellow Dwarf (Tier 3)
BP Total 113/95
Frame (25%) 12/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 21/23; Power Core (15%) 15/14; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 44/33; 10/14; Shields (10%) 5/9; Unrestricted 16

Grave Casket (Tier 3)
BP Total 92/95
Frame (25%) 6/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 38/23; Power Core (15%) 9/14; Weapons (35%) 12/33; Shields (10%) 8/9; Unrestricted 19

Sanjaval Vagabond (Tier 3)
BP Total 95/95
Frame (25%) 12/23; Armor & Defense (25%) 13/23; Power Core (15%) 15/14; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 22/33; 10/14; Shields (10%) 8/9; Unrestricted 26

It's nice that the original, "iconic" PC starship remains a perfectly valid build (if you count the gym/HAC as a single recreation suite).

Nebulor Outfitters Starhopper (Tier 4)
BP Total 110/115
Frame (25%) 12/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 21/28; Power Core (15%) 15/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 24/40; 10/17; Shields (10%) 8/11; Unrestricted 30

Pale Butcher Scout (Tier 4)
BP Total 132/115
Frame (25%) 12/28; Armor & Defense (25%) 19/28; Power Core (15%) 13/17; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 45/40; 10/17; Shields (10%) 13/11; Unrestricted 30

Ringworks Sentinel (Tier 5)
BP Total 129/135
Frame (25%) 12/33; Armor & Defense (25%) 29/33; Power Core (15%) 17/20; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 35/47; 5/20; Shields (10%) 20/13; Unrestricted 14

Sanjaval Palanquin (Tier 5)
BP Total 141/135
Frame (25%) 40/33; Armor & Defense (25%) 16/33; Power Core (15%) 20/20; Weapons (35%) 19/47; Shields (10%) 15/13; Unrestricted 31

Steward Banshee FA Frigate (Tier 5)
[b]BP Total
155/135
Frame (25%) 12/33; Armor & Defense (25%) 13/33; Power Core (15%) 15/20; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 52/47; 37/20; Shields (10%) 12/13; Unrestricted 41

I'm fairly certain that the Banshee's stats were designed without taking into account that its turret weapon requires adding a weapon mount and then upgrading both weapon mounts. Remove the linked heavy laser cannon and all of its associated costs (leaving the turret with a single heavy laser cannon) and you wind up with a total BP cost that's legal and much closer to the target.

Tetrad Caravel (Tier 6)
BP Total 169/155
Frame (25%) 15/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 10/77; Power Core (15%) 20/23; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 57/54; 20/23; Shields (10%) 15/15; Unrestricted 52

ATech Bulwark (Tier 7)
BP Total 208/180
Frame (25%) 30/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 44/45; Power Core (15%) 20/27; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 59/63; 14/27; Shields (10%) 13/18; Unrestricted 42

Crypt Warden (Tier 7)
BP Total 177/180
Frame (25%) 30/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 34/45; Power Core (15%) 20/27; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 49/63; 8/27; Shields (10%) 15/18; Unrestricted 29

Roselight Oracle (Tier 7)
BP Total 197/180
Frame (25%) 40/45; Armor & Defense (25%) 26/45; Power Core (15%) 20/27; Weapons (35%) 45/63; Shields (10%) 15/18; Unrestricted 51

Antumbra Overseer (Tier 8)
BP Total 206/205
Frame (25%) 30/51; Armor & Defense (25%) 18/51; Power Core (15%) 25/30; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 54/71; 10/30; Shields (10%) 8/20; Unrestricted 71

Inheritorworks Crusader (Tier 9)
BP Total 270/230
Frame (25%) 30/57; Armor & Defense (25%) 28/57; Power Core (15%) 30/34; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 107/80; 9/34; Shields (10%) 23/23; Unrestricted 52

Opulos Ambassador (Tier 11)
BP Total 307/310
Frame (25%) 15/77; Armor & Defense (25%) 90/77; Power Core (15%) 30/46; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 62/108; 22/46; Shields (10%) 28/31; Unrestricted 82

Blackwind Annihilator (Tier 20)
BP Total 1,053/1,000
Frame (25%) 350/250; Armor & Defense (25%) 86/250; Power Core (15%) 60/150; Weapons (35% total, 15% in turrets) 315/350; 80/150; Shields (10%) 25/100; Unrestricted 217

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm kinda confused about that if they didn't update the old npc ship statblocks whether future starship statblocks will use the new rules or not?

Scarab Sages

CorvusMask wrote:
I'm kinda confused about that if they didn't update the old npc ship statblocks whether future starship statblocks will use the new rules or not?

I don't think that list is with the optional ship budget those are ships that have been made invalid with the new weapon prices which is a permanent errata from what I understand.


Senko wrote:
HammerJack wrote:

A lot of weapon prices haven't changed at all. The coilgun, which was exceptionally efficient compared to other weapons around that level, is a bit more expensive. A lot of tracking weapons are significantly more expensive, because they were dirt cheap for the firepower they supplied. Some weapons that were overpriced came down.

It isn't a global shift in weapon prices, just weapon prices changing relative to other weapons. That's why I'm saying "which prices are the budgets based around?" isn't a question that really fits.

Here's a bunch of them on a quick scan

Weapon - old cost- new cost
chain cannon - 15 - 10
coilgun - 6 - 10
flak thrower - 5 - 5
gyrolaser - 3 - 3
laser net - 9 - 9
light EMP cannon - 8 - 8
light laser cannon - 2 - 2
light particle beam - 10 - 10
light plasma cannon - 12 - 12
high explosive missle - 4 - 14
light plasma torpedo - 5 - 11
light torpedo launcher - 4 - 7
micromissle battery - 3 - 5
tactical nuclear missle - 5 - 18
graser - 35 - 35
gravity gun - 30 - 30
heavy emp cannon - 24 - 12
heavy laser array - 10 - 10
heavy laser cannon - 8 - 15
maser - 22 - 22
particle beam - 15 - 20
persistent particle beam - 25 - 25
plasma cannon - 20 - 20
railgun - 15 - 15
twin laser - 12 - 18
x-laser cannon - 35 - 35

Thanks, not sure I agree with raising the prices on tracking weapons yes they are powerful but they take time to reach an enemy, can run out of fuel, can be shot down. Lots of drawbacks already. Especially increasing by that much nuclear missiles are over 3 times more expensive.

Why not just. . . *not* take the most powerful available category of missile, and instead take one of the weaker types of missiles instead? Your choices are not limited to "nukes or nothing".

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Senko wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
I'm kinda confused about that if they didn't update the old npc ship statblocks whether future starship statblocks will use the new rules or not?
I don't think that list is with the optional ship budget those are ships that have been made invalid with the new weapon prices which is a permanent errata from what I understand.

Umm. I'm now confused because I was talking about the new prices for starship stuff. What are you talking about? I wasn't talking about optional budget rule at least...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
CorvusMask wrote:
I'm kinda confused about that if they didn't update the old npc ship statblocks whether future starship statblocks will use the new rules or not?

More recently published starships tend to have fewer budget-busters, so I'm sure ships will be designed with the revised BP costs going forward.

Scarab Sages

Metaphysician wrote:
Senko wrote:
HammerJack wrote:

A lot of weapon prices haven't changed at all. The coilgun, which was exceptionally efficient compared to other weapons around that level, is a bit more expensive. A lot of tracking weapons are significantly more expensive, because they were dirt cheap for the firepower they supplied. Some weapons that were overpriced came down.

It isn't a global shift in weapon prices, just weapon prices changing relative to other weapons. That's why I'm saying "which prices are the budgets based around?" isn't a question that really fits.

Here's a bunch of them on a quick scan

Weapon - old cost- new cost
chain cannon - 15 - 10
coilgun - 6 - 10
flak thrower - 5 - 5
gyrolaser - 3 - 3
laser net - 9 - 9
light EMP cannon - 8 - 8
light laser cannon - 2 - 2
light particle beam - 10 - 10
light plasma cannon - 12 - 12
high explosive missle - 4 - 14
light plasma torpedo - 5 - 11
light torpedo launcher - 4 - 7
micromissle battery - 3 - 5
tactical nuclear missle - 5 - 18
graser - 35 - 35
gravity gun - 30 - 30
heavy emp cannon - 24 - 12
heavy laser array - 10 - 10
heavy laser cannon - 8 - 15
maser - 22 - 22
particle beam - 15 - 20
persistent particle beam - 25 - 25
plasma cannon - 20 - 20
railgun - 15 - 15
twin laser - 12 - 18
x-laser cannon - 35 - 35

Thanks, not sure I agree with raising the prices on tracking weapons yes they are powerful but they take time to reach an enemy, can run out of fuel, can be shot down. Lots of drawbacks already. Especially increasing by that much nuclear missiles are over 3 times more expensive.

Why not just. . . *not* take the most powerful available category of missile, and instead take one of the weaker types of missiles instead? Your choices are not limited to "nukes or nothing".

Actually I just used nukes as an example they aren't the most powerful. I could have used any of the other tracking weapons that have also increased in price.

CorvusMask wrote:
Senko wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:
I'm kinda confused about that if they didn't update the old npc ship statblocks whether future starship statblocks will use the new rules or not?
I don't think that list is with the optional ship budget those are ships that have been made invalid with the new weapon prices which is a permanent errata from what I understand.
Umm. I'm now confused because I was talking about the new prices for starship stuff. What are you talking about? I wasn't talking about optional budget rule at least...

Ah miscommunication never mind then.

Dataphiles

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am not a fan in general of the weapon BP cost redo. I do think coilguns were too cheap but I think the tracking weapons price increase to the levels they went up has basically cost themselves out of the game.

I am running my 7th AP and so far my players Don’t want tracking weapons. There is to many drawbacks as is and they slow down game play if they don’t hit in the first round. I have seen the players just straight up out run tracking weapons or make sure they have to lock back on.

This revamp was extreme in my opinion and I will now just house rule the changes to something else.


Darius Silverbolt wrote:

I am not a fan in general of the weapon BP cost redo. I do think coilguns were too cheap but I think the tracking weapons price increase to the levels they went up has basically cost themselves out of the game.

I am running my 7th AP and so far my players Don’t want tracking weapons. There is to many drawbacks as is and they slow down game play if they don’t hit in the first round. I have seen the players just straight up out run tracking weapons or make sure they have to lock back on.

This revamp was extreme in my opinion and I will now just house rule the changes to something else.

My players on the other hand, are never outside their tracking weapon's speed, and therefore only need one attack roll. For my table, the price increase at least made them look at other options.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
John Mangrum wrote:
OK, here's my "audit" of a wide collection of published starships so far. I'll organize them by source, but I'm not including any potentially "spoilery" ships in here. (No Azlanti Star Empire, no grays, no outsiders, no species intended to be discovered during an AP, etc.)

This post looks useful enough that if I were you I would seriously consider posting it in its own thread rather than have it buried in this one.


So if I order a print copy of the CRB, is it the new version now? What if I get it on Amazon.uk? How do I know if I’m buying the newest version or not?

(I already own a print copy of the old version and the new pdf , but want the new print copy with the revisions. I live in UK so would rather not pay shipping from US via the Paizo site if possible)


The pocket version will have the updates guaranteed. Others, not so much.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The revised edition is the third printing. Check the Table of Contents, blue column to the left, very bottom in fine print.


Alangriffith wrote:

So if I order a print copy of the CRB, is it the new version now? What if I get it on Amazon.uk? How do I know if I’m buying the newest version or not?

(I already own a print copy of the old version and the new pdf , but want the new print copy with the revisions. I live in UK so would rather not pay shipping from US via the Paizo site if possible)

As a general rule, the only way to guarantee the latest printing of a paizo book is to order from them direct.

paizo dont have insight into other distribution channels - the distributor your retail outlet buys from may accept returns years down the track (or may suddenly uncover previously purchased, original printing stock).

The exception is non-mint copies bought from paizo. They are not guaranteed to be latest printing.

Dataphiles

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Spamotron wrote:
John Mangrum wrote:
OK, here's my "audit" of a wide collection of published starships so far. I'll organize them by source, but I'm not including any potentially "spoilery" ships in here. (No Azlanti Star Empire, no grays, no outsiders, no species intended to be discovered during an AP, etc.)
This post looks useful enough that if I were you I would seriously consider posting it in its own thread rather than have it buried in this one.

There are flak weapons, limited fire and players can run away and force rerolls as desired. DO you think it justifies the amount the cost went up?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darius Silverbolt wrote:
Spamotron wrote:
John Mangrum wrote:
OK, here's my "audit" of a wide collection of published starships so far. I'll organize them by source, but I'm not including any potentially "spoilery" ships in here. (No Azlanti Star Empire, no grays, no outsiders, no species intended to be discovered during an AP, etc.)
This post looks useful enough that if I were you I would seriously consider posting it in its own thread rather than have it buried in this one.
There are flak weapons, limited fire and players can run away and force rerolls as desired. DO you think it justifies the amount the cost went up?

I find point weapons to be less than worthwhile, limited fire to never run out in a fight, and enemies to be hit the same round a tracking weapon is fired, so...

Dataphiles

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Garretmander wrote:
Darius Silverbolt wrote:
Spamotron wrote:
John Mangrum wrote:
OK, here's my "audit" of a wide collection of published starships so far. I'll organize them by source, but I'm not including any potentially "spoilery" ships in here. (No Azlanti Star Empire, no grays, no outsiders, no species intended to be discovered during an AP, etc.)
This post looks useful enough that if I were you I would seriously consider posting it in its own thread rather than have it buried in this one.
There are flak weapons, limited fire and players can run away and force rerolls as desired. DO you think it justifies the amount the cost went up?
I find point weapons to be less than worthwhile, limited fire to never run out in a fight, and enemies to be hit the same round a tracking weapon is fired, so...

You and I have very different experiences. I have seen limited fire run out shots nearly every fight.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I've definitely seen ammo run out sometimes. Not every fight.

Also had some engagements that took place, at least in part, at very long range and gave a noticeable disadvantage to tracking weapons. That doesn't happen every time, either.

I've also had decent return on investment from Point weapons, even before it was possible for Horacalcum Defensive Countermeasures to make Point Defense more accurate.

With those things in mind, I don't see any case to be made that the old costs of tracking weapons were where they should be, though I think some may have been overcorrected slightly (not so drastically as some people seem to think).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, at least as far as the ammo goes, I would almost be inclined to create a new Engineer action, called 'Reload' or some such. Basically, if the Engineer is willing to spend an action and make a suitably scaled check, success restocks a new set of missiles ( or possibly just one, with more on a good roll ).

1 to 50 of 56 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Core Rulebook Updates All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.