It came from the Vast issues

[Tempest_Knight]

The scenario assumes that party has Environmental Protection available... the issue is all of the Armor is level 0, so 0 days of Environmental Protection... with the sole exception of the Flight Suit (+0 ac/+5 Dex cap)...

As currently written the party fails almost as soon as they start...

[Teridax]

The scenario is intended for a level 5 party, so at that point everyone should have access to level 5 tactical armor. I do agree there likely needs to be a "minimum 1" stipulation to the number of days of protection you get from armor, but in this particular case you should be equipped to handle the final bit of the scenario, which is where you'll be dealing with the vacuum of space, rather than most of the scenario leading up to it, where you'll be under normal atmospheric and gravity conditions.

[Tempest_Knight]

You might have technical access, but going by the starting wealth table, you have 2700 cr or Items of 4,3,3,2,1,1 + 500 cr...

Tactical (Lv 5) armor costs 1600+base cost, so you are spending just over 2/3 of your lump sum on just the armor... leaving you with less than 900 cr for all of the rest of your gear...

If you are going with the 6 Items + 500 cr. You don't actually have access to Tactical armor...

Unless you know you will NEED armor above level 0, you are not likely to have armor higher than level 0.

[MaxAstro]

Teridax wrote:

The scenario is intended for a level 5 party, so at that point everyone should have access to level 5 tactical armor.

This is not true. Regardless of whether you use the wealth table or the lump sum option, the maximum level of item you are allowed to start with is 1 level lower than your actual level.

Since the players are level 5, it's impossible to have level 5 armor at the adventure's start.

[Erik Wolff]

MaxAstro wrote:

Teridax wrote:

The scenario is intended for a level 5 party, so at that point everyone should have access to level 5 tactical armor.

This is not true. Regardless of whether you use the wealth table or the lump sum option, the maximum level of item you are allowed to start with is 1 level lower than your actual level.

Since the players are level 5, it's impossible to have level 5 armor at the adventure's start.

Where is it written that you can't have access to a level 5 armor at character level 5? Page 267 of the Player Core says that characters can use items of any level. As well, on page 60 of the GM Core, it says "You can provide items of slightly higher or lower level as long as you take into account the value of the items you hand out."

I see no reason that a players couldn't use the lump sum to purchase a level 5 armor and some other gear for the scenario.

[Karmagator]

No, MaxAstro is correct on the RAW. The "Treasure for new characters" section reads:

Quote:

If you choose, you can allow the player to instead start with a lump sum of currency and buy whatever common items they want, with a maximum item level of 1 lower than the character’s level.

This is the CRB version (according to AoN), but I don't think that has changed in the Remaster.

[Erik Wolff]

Karmagator wrote:

No, MaxAstro is correct on the RAW. The "Treasure for new characters" section reads:

Quote:

If you choose, you can allow the player to instead start with a lump sum of currency and buy whatever common items they want, with a maximum item level of 1 lower than the character’s level.

This is the CRB version (according to AoN), but I don't think that has changed in the Remaster.

You are correct. It's on page 61 of the GM Core, the last paragraph under the "Item Selection" section. Thanks for pointing it out.

With that said, I believe my players may stumble across some level 5 armor before venturing outside the ship.

[Karmagator]

Oh yeah, absolutely. Those might be the rules, but if the rules are dumb... well...

[Foozini]

I guess this is as good a place as any to comment on the handout provided with this scenario...

I printed it both in color and in black and white, just to verify... the contrast of the lettering is horrible in both instances, and poses problems for those with even minimal sight issues. Whoever thought it would be a good idea to use white on pink for the color scheme should be taken out back and spoken to in a harsh tone. Even the black and white doesn't play well, as the contrast there is just as bad. I have no idea how this would play out for those that suffer from color blindness issues.

Another thing to remember is that a number of games are played in rooms with low-light environments. This was not the case for me, but I can imagine that this would be even harder to read in a low-light environment.

I will say that the font is a reasonable choice, and a lot better than some of the fonts I have seen in PFS scenarios that use a pseudo-script like font... those can be just as unreadable!

I am not necessarily calling for a moratorium on presenting handouts like this, but if there is a readability issue with a handout, could you at least provide a high-contrast version of the same text? Even a regularly written blurb containing the same text without all of the prettiness would be fine.

The way I think of this is the same way that web developers are starting to handle images... they will create an alt-text version that describes an image for those that have vision issues. This is the same idea... create an alt-text version of the handout that those with poor vision can read as well.

[Teridax]

One bit of good news is that with the most recent round of errata, level 0 armor provides 1 day of environmental protection. This scenario can now be run RAW.

[Super Zero]

...handout with white on pink?