Please don't fix range issues with Class Features - fix them with Gear

[Christopher#2411504]

I know the books aren't out yet and I hope for some day 1 errata, but everything makes me worried you are fixing the range issues the wrong way.

Range issues

30ft in PF2 is a somewhat short, but usually safe distance.
A melee Enemy will need 1 - sometimes 2 - Strides to get to you. If they aren't entirely body blocked by you allies.

30ft in SF2 is barely distinguisable from melee range.
For most ranged attacks, that will be 0 Range increments.
For some particularly short ranged weapons, it might be 1.
Ranges just aren't that far, if even the wolves have laser beams.

The Current Solution?

Everything I see has me worried that you are doing exactly the wrong thing here - trying to solve the issue with Class Features:

- SF2 Casters have more slots. At least I assume this was partially for this issue, as Slotted spells tend to have better ranges then Cantrips - it is hard to find a Cantrip with the Range of Fireball.
- the Mystic has Network Spell at Level 1, which allows them to measure spell Ranges from any Bonded ally. The literrally just need Line of Effect and vision. Which is probably the most broken way to fix the range issue.
- Witchwarper on Level 3 have a Spellshape to hit anywhere in the Quantum Field, which is a lot more reasonable:
Later level, limits Spells range to "Quantum Field Range+Radius", caps AoE spells to your Fields Area, if the enemy moved out of your field you need a separate Sustain to move it first. A lot closer to Reach Spell in utility, but still way stronger then it and completely free.
- the Space Pirate Archetype gets a 60ft Area of Effect Demoralize when rolling Initiative

Why it is a bad idea

It really just makes compatibility harder.

The problem comes from the gear. But you fix it via Class Features. Which means:
- if you put SF2 classes with those features into a PF2 campaign or a SF2 scenario without the gear, their range will just dominate
- if you put PF2 classes without those features into SF2 campaign, they run head first into those range issues

Gear Problem, Gear Solution

The much better and more common ranged weapons of SF2 cause this issue.
If they are there, every class should have access to the solution.
If they aren't there, no class should have access to a solution (as otherwise, the solution itself would become a problem).
If the solution is gear, then the problem and the solution would be directly connected. No SF2 gear, no issue, no solution.

Casters need some kind of Item to increase their spell ranges. The details would be up to testing:
- maybe a feature of caster weapons, to just add the Range increment?
- maybe a flat range increase Identical to Reach and Widen Spell? Maybe with higher versions adding more?
- maybe it turns Spell ranges into range Increments (also apply penalties to Spell DC, to keep the balance between AC and Save spells)?
There are a lot of options here.

Auditory and Visual Actions (that aren't spells) do also suffer issues.
But Space Pirate has half the solution: It uses a Hologram to give the Demoralize Range.
Just give the a Communicator a "using Loudspeakes and Hologramms, you can add 30ft Range for non-magical Auditory or Visual Action that has a range".
If you wanted to go further, you could also make those actions usable via a Call? "The range becomes infinite and you ignore line of effect and line of sight, if the target has a open communicator or is a tech creature that can receive your call".

Does anybody agree with the issue I see?
Would gear be a better solution?
Are there any things that I overlooked?

[Xenocrat]

Death to compatibility, don't change anything.

I will note that the playtest Technomancer is missing a similar range boosting class feature.

[QuidEst]

I think the request is better presented as "Please add gear that patches range issues". It's too late to be retooling class features that are already published, but it's not too late to add alternate fixes to the problem- ones that will work for ported Pathfinder classes.

This is Starfinder 2e, and making classes that address these issues without needing gear is more important to the system than a bunch of mandatory gear just so a Wizard can slot into a game without problems (as long as they know what gear is secretly required). Just like every divine caster in PF2 has a feature to get some thematically relevant off-list spells to round out the divine list, every SF2 caster will probably have a range booster. But that doesn't mean that we can't also get some item that helps spell range for an extra action, or get an augment to boost the basic Demoralize's reach.

[moosher12]

If the concern is a spell reaching out to 60 feet, most spellcasters can get the Reach Spell class feat at level 1, which adds 30 feet to the range by adding an action. In the Playtest, Network Spell was a 1 action spellshape as well, it should not be that much more powerful than reach spell, especially since Network Spell required the ally be within 20 feet of you. Though I'm not sure if that changed into the 1.0

I've been skeptical at first of the Mystic and Witchwarper having 4 spell slots, but we don't have enough information to know what the Starfinder trends actually are. Most Pathfinder spontaneous spellcasters have 4 spell slots, and the only real trend I can catch is that if you can cast focus cantrips, you get 3, otherwise, you get 4. Neither the Mystic nor the Witchwarper go against this trend, I suppose.

[Christopher#2411504]

Xenocrat wrote:

I will note that the playtest Technomancer is missing a similar range boosting class feature.

It also saves them from having to invent new class specific fixes for every future caster. And every Skill user.

Because it is fixed in a general way.

I would put it in just to save myself future work.

QuidEst wrote:

I think the request is better presented as "Please add gear that patches range issues". It's too late to be retooling class features that are already published, but it's not too late to add alternate fixes to the problem- ones that will work for ported Pathfinder classes.

They made bigger rules changes in Erratas before.

If it helps, they will get around to fix it.
If it doesn't, they won't.

moosher12 wrote:

If the concern is a spell reaching out to 60 feet, most spellcasters can get the Reach Spell class feat at level 1, which adds 30 feet to the range by adding an action. In the Playtest, Network Spell was a 1 action spellshape as well, it should not be that much more powerful than reach spell, especially since Network Spell required the ally be within 20 feet of you. Though I'm not sure if that changed into the 1.0

30ft from Reach Spell is nothing.

Having it just resulted in me asking myself "should I just Stride closer, so I don't have to use Reach Spell next turn as well?"
Reach Spell saves you a Stride - unless you have to use it again next turn.

It is outclassed by the Free Spellshape you get at level 3. And the Witchwarper is the one with some sensible limitations. At least hte enemy can walk out (unless you invest into making that too hard).

Network Spell in the printed book has no range limits.
I did get the Level wrong - it is level 3 like the Witchwarper - but otherwise there is just nothing keeping it in check.
Just measure distance from any bonded ally. No maximum distance to the ally. Just have a line of effect and be able to see both bonded ally and target - measure range from the ally.

Group Chats telepathy has a 120ft range limit. I hope the Day 1 errata puts that into Network Spell as well. That would go along way towards making it more sensible.
But I realized that not having enough action for Transfer Vitality+Spellshape+2 Action spell could go a long way to making it a interesting choice.
But even with that, it makes Reach Spell laughable.

[Justnobodyfqwl]

I really don't want to restrict and need SF2E just because of the range concerns of Pathfinder 2e.

SF2E is its own game, made using the PF2E ruleset. It has its own concerns and balance issues, and a huge one is Range.

That's less of an issue in PF2e. It would be really silly to make the standalone game not deal with a core change in the system, in order to be used easier... With the game that the core change is a change from.

If you only designed SF2E as a PF2E supplement and balanced it around PF2E, it wouldn't be very good at the whole Ranged Meta it talks about having.

[moosher12]

Christopher#2411504 wrote:

30ft from Reach Spell is nothing.

Having it just resulted in me asking myself "should I just Stride closer, so I don't have to use Reach Spell next turn as well?"
Reach Spell saves you a Stride - unless you have to use it again next turn.

It is outclassed by the Free Spellshape you get at level 3. And the Witchwarper is the one with some sensible limitations. At least hte enemy can walk out (unless you invest into making that too hard).

Network Spell in the printed book has no range limits.
I did get the Level wrong - it is level 3 like the Witchwarper - but otherwise there is just nothing keeping it in check.
Just measure distance from any bonded ally. No maximum distance to the ally. Just have a line of effect and be able to see both bonded ally and target - measure range from the ally.

Group Chats telepathy has a 120ft range limit. I hope the Day 1 errata puts that into Network Spell as well. That would go along way towards making it more sensible.
But I realized that not having enough action for Transfer Vitality+Spellshape+2 Action spell could go a long way to making it a interesting choice.
But even with that, it makes Reach Spell laughable.

That changes things. Yeah, I was working off of the old version. With the playtest, it would have been weaker. Network Spell had a max range of 20 feet, which means you'd only get 50 feet off of a 30-foot spell, versus the 60-foot range of reach spell. If that were the case, yeah, my point would have stood.

The new version is definitely a lot stronger, I'll concede.

I guess time will tell how broken it is, at the very least, there is the balancing point that you yourself still need line of effect to the target, and your ally needs to move in. If it fails in actual play, hopefully it gets errata'd.

I am of the opinion that a class specific ability has a little bit of room to be more potent than a feat that can be taken by multiple classes, though, to help the class shine. But I mean a little, so I guess actual play will reveal if this is a bit, or overwhelmingly good.