Is the biohacker a dip class?


General Discussion


Despite (or perhaps because of) really loving the concept, there is a lot about this class that I don't like. Despite allegedly being a skilled class, the class itself grants the same Skill points as a soldier or solarion.

The way the class is written relies on nesting inside nesting but without the consistency that nesting normally gets you. It's very easy to miss a gotcha ability because one thing is another thing with this exception for being something else: for example your field of study grants an inhibitor which is a biohack, but because its not a BASIC biohack your Studious biohackers spark of ingenuity won't work on it. Or it will because its not a basic biohack but it follows the rules of a basic biohack.....

The injection weapon proficiency is kind of pointless. You really want to avoid half specialization, but your proficiency doesn't match up with the requirements you need for the feats: you need longarm proficiency for long arm specilization and weapon focus long arms.

Level 1 seems to have everything you need to biohack. You get the -2 penalty to AC Int number of times per day (not improved by your level), you can use your int for 2/3 of the wisdom skills, and you can use your gun to autoselect which dart in a needle gun you'd like to fire, and the class skills you need.

As you level too many of the abilities are Meh. Spark of ingenuity is nice, but its once per day and if you miss it does nothing. Thats.. kind of rare for a big boom. Even casters get more than one max level spell.

Medication mastery is pretty good at some levels but at other levels its not that hard to just buy the medication to do the same thing. The level 6 biohacks are all pretty bad: I'd go back and get the level 1 versions first. The healing the class has doesn't scale very well, and is only good to get someone off the ground. Healing serums do the same thing.


Well one of my players has a Bio hacker, played a couple games so far and it seems ok to me and the player likes it.
In your other post someone said they didn't like the effects 'just happening' without a reason why, the ability to do something akin to a poison to things immune. I would say its covered in the beginning of the Biohacks.
you keep a specialized micropharmacy of catalysts, nanites, and specialized chemicals, plus a small mixing apparatus and syringes.
This tells me its more then just toxins and poisons.
In living targets, your biohacks alter normal biological processes; in nonliving creatures, they emulate biochemistry via complex chemical compounds.
With the mention of nanites in the Microlab it does extend the concept that you can use them to cause glitches or electrical impulses to trigger effects that cause the penalty.

Also about the 20 to ID a creature. It shouldn't work on a disguised creature or shapeshifted one as a bypass. Disguise specifically goes against Perception, not Identify skills (Life science and the such).
The Biolab ID bit mimics taking 20 at an Info point, if you search for a detailed description of a Mongoose, you will be told about a mongoose, not the snake disguising itself as a Mongoose.
The way I have ruled it is you do your scan, get the info on a Mongoose, the GM rolls your perception to bypass the disguise, if you fail, its a Mongoose, if you pass, its a cold blooded Mongoose. A bit of info that makes you think, hold on, theres something odd about this Mongoose.


Flavorwise I don't have a problem with the biohacker. I just flavor fire vulnerability as injecting someone with magnesium flakes or off target as LSD or holy water or ferromagnetic fluid depending on the target.

Iding a creature doesn't work on disguises, otherwise no human could ever imitate anything else I don't see that as a problem with the biohacker, but with using one skill with a very easy flat dc to bypass what was designed to be an opposed roll: an opposed roll with the most often used skill in the game at that.


I'm fully loving my Biohacker. Sure I do do less damage. but I can do a lot of things. I ended up playing mine a debuffer style long ranger. I absolutely adore being able to debuff a ton.
Venomcaster at higher levels with its own debuff is fantastic.
I also went with the toxic study, as I love the stacking debuffs. WIth the right fusions and choices, you can make that DC pretty sturdy.

I think ultimately my main complaint about the class would be that I lack a "big" attack of some kind. As I'm reliant on injection weapons. Poison is too expensive as well.
Though I got the venom spur mutation. Which is used to load one shot per stamina rest with a venom shot. Not quite RAW but seems good and fun without being a problem. (Since we don't "stock pile" it)

I think the main thing the classes are missing are smaller details that work counter intuitively.

For me. I wish the medical healing theorom were actually just a supply of injections. Once that you could load into the weapon. That would open up a ton of things. I am biased though as I love the idea of "two coloured revolvers, one damaging and one healing" but as it stands that theorom just feels like its purely "Only ever use it out of a fight" thing which just makes it feel like the old annoying Wand of CLW trick for me.

I also wish there was a mid-level Theorom that was like medical mastery except it allowed for poisons, or unique poison-like (i.e. hp damaging) inectables that aren't poison for resistences if you wanted something stronger. a limited supply of damage oomphs (I realize sedative is similiar)

Last bit is the issue with weapons. I do think there should be a damaging injection sniper. I also think they could make a Heavy Weapon version off of a Crossbow, an Injection Crossbow sort of deal. or a Needler ala Halo, or needle grenade launcher
Well, I also wish they had Shield profiency.. because a Riot Shield + a Nightarch revovler or injection pistol is pretty fun times

i'm fine with the half specialization damage output until level 8+ theorom if you want that one. I don't find the diffiernce to be too big. Since I'm generally playing to set up the big hitters. I only feel it when I'm trying to handle something solo ish.

I do feel pretty much at a loss if I run out of speical shots. But I assume thats the same for casters as well. Though they can get some interesting weapons to use that I can't without losing my to-hit

==================

Honestly speaking most of my damage output complaitns would go away, if the lower level versions (say level 9 version) of Venomcaster had th Entangle property already. That + Hampering theorom + your debuffs can really wreck somethings day.
Which is why I get a lot of enjoyment out of the class I think.


Zwordsman wrote:
I also wish there was a mid-level Theorom that was like medical mastery except it allowed for poisons, or unique poison-like (i.e. hp damaging) inectables that aren't poison for resistences if you wanted something stronger. a limited supply of damage oomphs (I realize sedative is similiar)

Oddly enough the theorem like medication mastery for poisons is.. medication mastery. Take a look at some of the side effects from the medications. Pain killers give you a bonus against pain, but leave you flat footed for 1-4 rounds. Coagulants stop bleeding but debuff your relfex saves etc.

Quote:
I ended up playing mine a debuffer style long ranger. I absolutely adore being able to debuff a ton.

Right, but as per the title, what debuffs are you throwing as a biohacker 8 that you couldn't throw as a 1 or 2 biohacker/ other class here 6-7 ? The question isn't if a biohacker can debuff, its more that whats worth sticking around in the class for?

Quote:
I also wish there was a mid-level Theorom that was like medical mastery except it allowed for poisons, or unique poison-like (i.e. hp damaging) inectables that aren't poison for resistences if you wanted something stronger. a limited supply of damage oomphs (I realize sedative is similiar)

The problem I have there is that the only EAC weapon that delivers poisons shuts off its damage when you use it to deliver poisons.

Quote:
i'm fine with the half specialization damage output until level 8+ theorom if you want that one. I don't find the diffiernce to be too big.

The difference is huge.

I was going this route with my SFS biohacker. It turns out that once you hit level 8 and start doing full damage with the pistols, the pistol and longarm damages start diverting wildly. So from levels 1-8 you're doing a lot less damage from lack of specilization and from levels 9+ you're doing less damage from the weapon dice. I switched her over to long arms and her damage went through the roof, with absolutely no effect on her debuffing or emergency heals.

For spending one theorem and one feat (multiweapon fighting) you get +1 to attack when you two weapon fight. You can gain twice the benefit from using a bipod on a longarm.


My facetious answer: no, because there is no such thing as a "dip class". There are only "yes, this class is perfectly playable" and "this class is sufficiently broken that no one would ever play it, and so it should not be allowed at the table". A class being useful only as a multiclass bump for some other build is a very strong sign it fits into the later category. If no one would ever take 20 levels of Class X, they oughtn't be allowed to take 1 level of Class X, either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Metaphysician wrote:
My facetious answer: no, because there is no such thing as a "dip class". There are only "yes, this class is perfectly playable" and "this class is sufficiently broken that no one would ever play it, and so it should not be allowed at the table". A class being useful only as a multiclass bump for some other build is a very strong sign it fits into the later category. If no one would ever take 20 levels of Class X, they oughtn't be allowed to take 1 level of Class X, either.

This is really sidestepping and evading the big picture. A house rule against multiclassing is hardly the best context to use for examining multiclassing.


I think point is that if no one would hypothetically play the class through to level 20 then the class is trash and shouldn't be playable at all. If all you want from it is a dip that's fine, but if that's all everyone and anyone wants from it that's a crap class.


Metaphysician wrote:
My facetious answer: no, because there is no such thing as a "dip class". There are only "yes, this class is perfectly playable" and "this class is sufficiently broken that no one would ever play it, and so it should not be allowed at the table". A class being useful only as a multiclass bump for some other build is a very strong sign it fits into the later category. If no one would ever take 20 levels of Class X, they oughtn't be allowed to take 1 level of Class X, either.

Seems like a weird assertion. There's tons of PF1E class/archetype combos that are great for one reason as a dip and great for another reason when used for all 20 levels. All that takes is that they have one powerful feature at 1st level and one powerful feature at 10th, 15th or 20th.

As for the Biohacker, I've now spent some quality time going through it. I agree they get a lot of their power at 1st level, making them an attractive dip. Sticking with the class isn't without merit though. The Breakthroughs - usable once per 10 min rest - only get better and better as you level up. You keep getting more fields of study, broadening your options to deal with common situations (DR, resistances, diseases, poisons, mental effects, etc). Only the theorems are a bit blah.

Its a toolkit class, and leveling up makes your toolkit better and broader. That seems reason enough to me, even if it doesn't personally attract me for thematic reasons.


I agree. I played a biohacker and switched to int-based operative after level five.

I can’t remember why I picked level five - a range boost from memory?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My issue was they get broader, not deeper. Meaning at higher levels I’m picking things I could have chosen earlier - that are therefore low powered.

Sticking with biohacker seemed to me to be collecting lots of pretty meh abilities. Flexibility is nice, but you want a real boost to your main schtick too - I’d have preferred the biohack effects to scale with level or something.

Becoming a skill monkey seemed much more useful - especially since I used Int in place of wis for a bunch of skills.


Cellion wrote:
As for the Biohacker, I've now spent some quality time going through it. I agree they get a lot of their power at 1st level, making them an attractive dip. Sticking with the class isn't without merit though. The Breakthroughs - usable once per 10 min rest - only get better and better as you level up.

Genetics Gene therapy: 7 10 13 ability score damage and drain for 10 minutes/1 hour/24 hours.

10 mins to an hour is pretty good but you don't usually go more than an hour in between 10 minutes rests when it matters.

Also, since ability damage is the damage of higher levels, you almost need to have a suuply of hypo pens anyway.

Immunology Suppress Disease (Ex)Going from 10 minutes to 24 hours is huge. Going from 24 hours to one week for something you can do 50 times a day easily is kind of pointless.

Neurochemistry: Doesn't level at all (Its really good, but its really good regardless of level)

Pharmacology Alleviate pain: is going to be used to grant the saving throw attempt, so its duration is kind of pointless. Antiplague/antitoxin can do most of this.

Toxicology: doesn't level at all.

Many of these can be replicated with some fairly cheap pharmacuiticals. While medication mastery lets you get a lot of good tier 2+ medicinals, you're better off with 4 or 5 level 1 medicinals each granting a reroll.


Steve Geddes wrote:

My issue was they get broader, not deeper. Meaning at higher levels I’m picking things I could have chosen earlier - that are therefore low powered.

Definitely. And the level 8 theorems are meh enough that I'd consider grabbing more level 2 ones before most of those. Making it a grow out kind of class, much like the same problem the envoy has at higher levels.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Metaphysician wrote:
My facetious answer: no, because there is no such thing as a "dip class". There are only "yes, this class is perfectly playable" and "this class is sufficiently broken that no one would ever play it, and so it should not be allowed at the table". A class being useful only as a multiclass bump for some other build is a very strong sign it fits into the later category. If no one would ever take 20 levels of Class X, they oughtn't be allowed to take 1 level of Class X, either.
This is really sidestepping and evading the big picture. A house rule against multiclassing is hardly the best context to use for examining multiclassing.

I'm not suggesting a ban on multiclassing, as such. What I suggest is a ban on multiclassing into any class broken enough that no one would ever want to take 20 levels of it. If 20 levels of ____ is a perfectly valid and desirable PC build that people regularly take, than the class is fine for multiclassing. Its if a class *isn't* suited or desired for such that I have a problem.

Which is to say, if the only thing anyone wants to do with the Envoy or Biohacker is take 2-3 levels as an adjunct to some other class? Either they are well meaning players trying to make the concept work in spite of the class not functioning, in which case the GM really should rejigger the class itself to make it properly functional. Or they are trying to exploit an imbalance where those first few levels give disproportionate benefit compared to taking those same levels in your current class, in which case it should be banned anyway for imbalance reasons. Either way, it shouldn't simply be allowed to stand.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Metaphysician wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Metaphysician wrote:
My facetious answer: no, because there is no such thing as a "dip class". There are only "yes, this class is perfectly playable" and "this class is sufficiently broken that no one would ever play it, and so it should not be allowed at the table". A class being useful only as a multiclass bump for some other build is a very strong sign it fits into the later category. If no one would ever take 20 levels of Class X, they oughtn't be allowed to take 1 level of Class X, either.
This is really sidestepping and evading the big picture. A house rule against multiclassing is hardly the best context to use for examining multiclassing.

I'm not suggesting a ban on multiclassing, as such. What I suggest is a ban on multiclassing into any class broken enough that no one would ever want to take 20 levels of it. If 20 levels of ____ is a perfectly valid and desirable PC build that people regularly take, than the class is fine for multiclassing. Its if a class *isn't* suited or desired for such that I have a problem.

Which is to say, if the only thing anyone wants to do with the Envoy or Biohacker is take 2-3 levels as an adjunct to some other class? Either they are well meaning players trying to make the concept work in spite of the class not functioning, in which case the GM really should rejigger the class itself to make it properly functional. Or they are trying to exploit an imbalance where those first few levels give disproportionate benefit compared to taking those same levels in your current class, in which case it should be banned anyway for imbalance reasons. Either way, it shouldn't simply be allowed to stand.

To be fair, the envoy isn’t a dip so much as a class that plateaus at 8 or 12 depending on what you really want out of it.

I don’t have actual play experience with the biohacker, but my initial reading means it’s second on my list to play 1-20 if I ever convince one of my friends that GM to run star finder instead of me.

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Is the biohacker a dip class? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Starfinder General Discussion