Flight Suit and Second Skin

[Aristophanes]

Can a character wear a Flight Suit over Second Skin?

[kaid]

Second skin is slated as able to be worn under clothing so I assume so. I don't know there is any particular reason to do this though.

[Aristophanes]

The character is a Pilot type. I like the Flight Suit look with Sunshades, but the Second Skin is better protection at 1st level.

[kaid]

Aristophanes wrote:

The character is a Pilot type. I like the Flight Suit look with Sunshades, but the Second Skin is better protection at 1st level.

Should work fine the better of the two would be the one that takes effect. Second skin is literally a skin tight bodysuit so if you can wear something normally there isn't any reason you couldn't wear it over second skin.

Easy enough to also play it as a pilot fully understanding you can never have too much redundancy when it comes to life support and having a backup air supply in the second armor could be handy.

[Aristophanes]

kaid wrote:

Aristophanes wrote:

The character is a Pilot type. I like the Flight Suit look with Sunshades, but the Second Skin is better protection at 1st level.

Should work fine the better of the two would be the one that takes effect. Second skin is literally a skin tight bodysuit so if you can wear something normally there isn't any reason you couldn't wear it over second skin.

Easy enough to also play it as a pilot fully understanding you can never have too much redundancy when it comes to life support and having a backup air supply in the second armor could be handy.

I'm also going by the assumption that, since Second Skin is "Tech", you can't get around the rune restrictions by putting them on the Flight Suit.

[DMurnett]

Flight Suit is Analog but not Archaic. It can't have runes at all anyways.

[moosher12]

This does lead to the question of whether it would stack with explorer's clothing for the purposes of Pathfinder compatibility, but I'd assume the more logical answer is "Technically possible, but likely not intended, and most GMs would probably say no."

[kaid]

moosher12 wrote:

This does lead to the question of whether it would stack with explorer's clothing for the purposes of Pathfinder compatibility, but I'd assume the more logical answer is "Technically possible, but likely not intended, and most GMs would probably say no."

I believe it would be viable but you would basically get to count whichever was better ac wise and worse dex penalty wise. There could be some weird interactions between one thing with mods and the other with runes but most of the status bonuses would not stack so should just get the best bonus from either and the lesser would just do nothing.

[PossibleCabbage]

I'm really not sure it's worth ensuring that some items only accept runes and some items only accept tech upgrades instead of making it so that you just can't have both on the same item.

Like I don't think there should be a problem with putting magic runes on your Doshko or having a high tech rapier.

[moosher12]

Agreed. Way I see it, if a complicated clockwork weapon or armor, say from an inventor, can have runes, I think letting the allotment allow mixing runes and upgrades seems reasonable to me.

[DMurnett]

moosher12 wrote:

This does lead to the question of whether it would stack with explorer's clothing for the purposes of Pathfinder compatibility, but I'd assume the more logical answer is "Technically possible, but likely not intended, and most GMs would probably say no."

I mean, the description of Plated says you can only wear the Flight Suit. RAW you wouldn't be able to use legacy unarmored options to begin with, nor other unarmored options from future Starfinder releases if those come about.

[moosher12]

DMurnett wrote:

I mean, the description of Plated says you can only wear the Flight Suit. RAW you wouldn't be able to use legacy unarmored options to begin with, nor other unarmored options from future Starfinder releases if those come about.

Adventurer's Clothing is not Legacy though, it's Remastered. Unless I'm misunderstanding your point.

Though I should probably note that I was not talking about Flight Suit and Plated Vesk. Though that's my own fault for not specifically mentioning which one in the original post. I was talking about Flight Suit and Second Skin. Though upon a recent reading, Second Skin specifically says "Casual Clothing" of which Adventurer's Clothing probably would not be considered casual.

[DMurnett]

moosher12 wrote:

DMurnett wrote:

I mean, the description of Plated says you can only wear the Flight Suit. RAW you wouldn't be able to use legacy unarmored options to begin with, nor other unarmored options from future Starfinder releases if those come about.

Adventurer's Clothing is not Legacy though, it's Remastered. Unless I'm misunderstanding your point.

Though I should probably note that I was not talking about Flight Suit and Plated Vesk. Though that's my own fault for not specifically mentioning which one in the original post. I was talking about Flight Suit and Second Skin. Though upon a recent reading, Second Skin specifically says "Casual Clothing" of which Adventurer's Clothing probably would not be considered casual.

Note to self: Never write a forum post when you're so tired you fail to remember what thread you clicked on. Either way, whether it's Plated or Second Skin we're talking about, Explorer's Clothing hasn't been reprinted for Starfinder 2e, at least not yet. That's what I meant by legacy. Agreed that it raises questions for PF compatibility but so do cloth casters, Piloting Lore, and many other things. This playtest is not meant to answer those questions, this is about Starfinder's viability as a standalone system. Although I would agree that "casual clothing" probably wouldn't inclue explorer's clothing. Probably not even flight suits or designer clothes, actually.

[moosher12]

DMurnett wrote:

Either way, whether it's Plated or Second Skin we're talking about, Explorer's Clothing hasn't been reprinted for Starfinder 2e, at least not yet. That's what I meant by legacy. Agreed that it raises questions for PF compatibility but so do cloth casters, Piloting Lore, and many other things. This playtest is not meant to answer those questions, this is about Starfinder's viability as a standalone system.

I'm personally on the interpretation that the existence of the Archaic trait and the Human's Golarion Survivor heritage is an indicator that an entry not being in a Starfinder book does not mean it's not allowed in Starfinder.

As it feels like a bad move to give an ancestry a heritage that grants them proficiency in weapons that would be considered "Not in the game" in a PFS scenario. Unless of course the entry was immediately banned.

The only real way to enable such an interpretation, is if Archaic weapons only appeared in an optional rules page in the Starfinder GM Core that enabled Pathfinder weapons. Otherwise I'd assume any Pathfinder item is available, though potentially uncommon or rarer.

Granted, we're early in the playtest, and Paizo might do just that. And the current goal of the playtest is to test how Starfinder works without Pathfinder, as you said. But what I am saying above is talking in terms of final draft Starfinder, not playtest Starfinder.