As it's written on the Field test, and this also takes the same route as Starfinder weapon table, I would suggest changing the layout to the same as Pathfinder.
Even though making different Listing for weapons gives a feeling of new weapons to use, they are not, they are practically the same with some small upgrades. This structure takes up too much space.
Instead of making 3 listings for Laser Pistol, make one listing for each weapon then on another table for a Quality Grade (or some other name) for the upgrades and prices
Commercial - - AS in the table
Basic - Tracking +1, Plus 1 Mod
Common - Tracking +1, 1 Extra Dice, Increase ammo consumption for energy (this does not make sense for ballistic weapons
Tactical - Tracking +2, 1 Extra Dice
Advanced - Tracking +2, 2 Extra Dice, Plus 2 Mod, Increase ammo consumption for energy
Military - Tracking +3, 2 Extra Dice
Mastercraft - Tracking +3, 3 Extra Dice, Plus 3 Mod, Increase ammo consumption for energy
Weapon Mod, this system would allow players to create or customize their weapons like the weapons in real life.
Scope I, Increase weapon range by 10 ft (increase by 5ft each tier), Only on Ranged weapon
Silencer I, Reduce the noise the weapon does when firing, only on Ranged
Reinforced Grip, Reduce the multiple attack penalty by 1, useable in melee and ranged weapons
Expanded Magazine, Increase Magazine size, for battery upgrade to the next tier.
Light frame, reduce the weapon Bulk by 1, it can never go below L
Efficiency Regulator: Reduce Ammo consumption by 1
Attachable accessory: Grenade Laucher, Bayonet, Shotgun or other smallarms (sound, electric... too many options)
I think the separate listings are done to allow you to see what each level does at a glance, without having to calculate it first. Because it isn't just the stats you listed that are changing, it's the range increment as well and this will be different for most weapons. Combined with the rest, that's 5 things, which is honestly too inconvenient. And given that it might not stop there, I think the current model works decently well.
I think the separate listings are done to allow you to see what each level does at a glance, without having to calculate it first. Because it isn't just the stats you listed that are changing, it's the range increment as well and this will be different for most weapons. Combined with the rest, that's 5 things, which is honestly too inconvenient. And given that it might not stop there, I think the current model works decently well.
That's the beauty of PF2e Weapon table, the Magig upgrades are the same for every weapon, therefore you don't need them to be described on the same table.
Yes weapons on Starfinder advance in certain ways as they level up but this can be done by attachments, small things that you can put on your weapon (like in real life). Things like Scopes, Bigger magazine... This will give players options to customize their weapons for situations.
If they done it like this there is no need for multiple entries in the table for the same weapon. As time passes, they can also add more attachments in other books and campaign settings.
Besides, if you look at pricing they are all standard. If you pick a Longbow on PF2e and give it magic or make it compatible with a higher level character it does not increase range and etc as levels go up. Some might say it's low-tech equipment but, I say, it's a game, and things need to be balanced (in a way).
I think the separate listings are done to allow you to see what each level does at a glance, without having to calculate it first. Because it isn't just the stats you listed that are changing, it's the range increment as well and this will be different for most weapons. Combined with the rest, that's 5 things, which is honestly too inconvenient. And given that it might not stop there, I think the current model works decently well.That's the beauty of PF2e Weapon table, the Magig upgrades are the same for every weapon, therefore you don't need them to be described on the same table.
Yes weapons on Starfinder advance in certain ways as they level up but this can be done by attachments, small things that you can put on your weapon (like in real life). Things like Scopes, Bigger magazine... This will give players options to customize their weapons for situations.
If they done it like this there is no need for multiple entries in the table for the same weapon. As time passes, they can also add more attachments in other books and campaign settings.
Besides, if you look at pricing they are all standard. If you pick a Longbow on PF2e and give it magic or make it compatible with a higher level character it does not increase range and etc as levels go up. Some might say it's low-tech equipment but, I say, it's a game, and things need to be balanced (in a way).
Yeah, if it was just the usual +1 and added damage dice (which have to follow the PF2 model anyway) that wouldn't be an issue. The question is whether the range increases for example are standardised or not. If they are, then your way would 100% be better. You would just have a box that says what types of weapons can mount what customisations and done. If they are not, then that doesn't really work.
Yeah, if it was just the usual +1 and added damage dice (which have to follow the PF2 model anyway) that wouldn't be an issue. The question is whether the range increases for example are standardised or not. If they are, then your way would 100% be better. You would just have a box that says what types of weapons can mount what customisations and done. If they are not, then that doesn't really work.I think the separate listings are done to allow you to see what each level does at a glance, without having to calculate it first. Because it isn't just the stats you listed that are changing, it's the range increment as well and this will be different for most weapons. Combined with the rest, that's 5 things, which is honestly too inconvenient. And given that it might not stop there, I think the current model works decently well.That's the beauty of PF2e Weapon table, the Magig upgrades are the same for every weapon, therefore you don't need them to be described on the same table.
Yes weapons on Starfinder advance in certain ways as they level up but this can be done by attachments, small things that you can put on your weapon (like in real life). Things like Scopes, Bigger magazine... This will give players options to customize their weapons for situations.
If they done it like this there is no need for multiple entries in the table for the same weapon. As time passes, they can also add more attachments in other books and campaign settings.
Besides, if you look at pricing they are all standard. If you pick a Longbow on PF2e and give it magic or make it compatible with a higher level character it does not increase range and etc as levels go up. Some might say it's low-tech equipment but, I say, it's a game, and things need to be balanced (in a way).
Let me put this in another way
These variations that the table mentions and also others can be done with attachments. Attachments are small pieces that you attach to your weapon to customize it.Scopes - Increase weapon range
Magazine - Increase Ammo
and other attachments described in the first post.
With this, you can customize your gun and reach the same result as a multiple-row table without multiple-row, this would add a new table but players don't actually need to use them. And this would also include more options for players.
Don't worry, I know what you meant ^^. What I meant if range was heavily individualized for many guns, you would basically have to have multiple dozens of the respective attachments. Maybe as many as 1 for every +5 range increment up to possibly the hundreds. This wouldn't actually save much space and be quite convoluted.
What I'm hoping for is a relatively standardised progression depending on several weapon "archetypes", which your system would support much better than the current one. If all else fails, very unusual weapons could still have their own special attachments. That should save on space at least.
Don't worry, I know what you meant ^^. What I meant if range was heavily individualized for many guns, you would basically have to have multiple dozens of the respective attachments. Maybe as many as 1 for every +5 range increment up to possibly the hundreds. This wouldn't actually save much space and be quite convoluted.
What I'm hoping for is a relatively standardised progression depending on several weapon "archetypes", which your system would support much better than the current one. If all else fails, very unusual weapons could still have their own special attachments. That should save on space at least.
Attachments could be generic, and available to a set of weapon types, this would save a lot of space and leave room for further creations.
Hahahah imagine people attaching a scope to a Hammer... yeah +5ft reach awesome hahahaha that's why there should be limits.Attachment structure:
Namme:
Description:
Attachable to:
Number of attachment slots:
Grade:
Common:Does X and cost Y
Tactical:
Military:
Legendary:
The attachment would use a similar structure as feats and spells.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would also like a weapon system that doesn't result in pages upon pages of weapon tables. The Starfinder 1e CRB has 7.5 pages of weapon tables, including ammunition, and every single book/Adventure Path published since has only added to that list. It's quite a chore to find appropriate weapons at each level, even with Archives of Nethys' search functions.
Can we please have LESS weapons, not more? I don't understand why we can't just borrow the rest of PF2e's weapon system: Basic stats at level 1, apply bigger numbers at these given levels, can add other runes/fusions to add other features.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we please have LESS weapons, not more? I don't understand why we can't just borrow the rest of PF2e's weapon system: Basic stats at level 1, apply bigger numbers at these given levels, can add other runes/fusions to add other features.
That's what I hope.
Each weapon template could have slots for you to customize the damage type, output and traits.
|
I hope that, whatever final form weapon itemization ends up being, it doesn't completely remove the design space for crazy super-science / super-magic-science weapon descriptions. One of the things I love about Starfinder now is how crazy and ridiculous some of the weapons are. Things like: the black hole cannon! Handheld electromagnetic rail cannons! The transmuter rifle that turns your enemies' kidneys into stones! The sniper rifle that doesn't fire projectiles, but instead targets bits on your enemies' insides, and teleports them to their outsides!
That stuff is awesome, and honestly, cool enough to hang entire character concepts off of. Hell, I made a sylph weapons developer PC because I read the description of the stormcaller and thought "yes." There's so much flavour and lore dripping from stuff like that, and it'd be a shame to lose out on that vector of worldbuilding.
It seems people like this idea of "generic weapon templates that you add widgets to for additions/upgrades/changes/etc." I really hope that that model doesn't preclude writers and designers from still coming up with ridiculous science fantasy weapons, though. It feels to me like "this is an energy rifle that I've strapped a scope, a barrel elongator, and a Cold damage-type crystal too" is a lot less creative and, well, cool than, "using the basic principle that m=E/c² I've devised a weapon that converts all of the thermal energy in this room into a microscopic cloud of hydrogen!" I realize that a modular "base weapon + upgrade widgets" model still means people can flavour their own weapons however they want, but I think we all know that if the Core book has a few tables of base weapons, and a few pages of upgrade widgets, we're not going to get the craziness and lore drops of a write-up about, say, the "kaiju caller" from Daimalko, or the underwater flechette thrower grown from magnetic coral from Kalo-Mahoi.
I hope that, whatever final form weapon itemization ends up being, it doesn't completely remove the design space for crazy super-science / super-magic-science weapon descriptions. [...]
It seems people like this idea of "generic weapon templates that you add widgets to for additions/upgrades/changes/etc." I really hope that that model doesn't preclude writers and designers from still coming up with ridiculous science fantasy weapons, though.
There shouldn't be any changes in regards to that. The new system's way of handling weapons isn't that much different from the PF1/SF1 way, at least if you just look at the base models. You have the base stat block plus a description and maybe a picture somewhere, just as before. If they were represented just like other weapons before, there is no reason they cannot be now.
There's also the "specific magic weapon" format which gives unique options that don't fit the normal build-a-sword format.
There's also the "specific magic weapon" format which gives unique options that don't fit the normal build-a-sword format.
I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few of the crazier concepts end up in that space. There, you simply have more levers to pull to make an item unique.
grumble... and if they were actually mechanically relevant at all that would be good news...grumble