| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to hear what people think about the Envoy now that it's fully released. I feel that the issues with the class in the playtest weren't actually addressed and the class kind of feels worse. The directives for subclasses are nice, but some of them are kind of bad and I don't think the inclusion of them is that much of an addition considering the fact that you can only use one Directive per turn.
The one Directive per turn thing just seems to be a backwards decision, especially when directives themselves aren't all that powerful. Including more directives at low levels while making you unable to use multiple seems like a poor decision. Also the fact that directives were nerfed by being one or two actions activities instead of one action activities that can be followed up by using the prescribed action for Lead By Example makes this even more questionable.
Get Em! being a status bonus, especially when Paizo explicitly stated they would make it a circumstance bonus is equally disappointing. Like other's have said, the Bard and Rhythm Mystic have basically a better version of this feature, providing a similar bonus at lower levels. The advantage of Get Em! is that the damage bonus scales (nice but it scales too slowly and not high enough), and that the Lead By Example effect lets you add your Cha bonus to your own strike as part of it (which is good but it's a selfish bonus and becomes less important at higher levels). This also leads into the issue of status bonuses to attacks being very common, which makes this feature redundant in a lot of parties. Moreover, it only applies to strikes and has no impact on Area Fire or Automatic Fire, which sucks.
It sort of just seems like this class's support capabilities are pretty much strictly worse than a spellcaster, or even the Commander. It gets to be a martial with a pretty good chassis, but it really feels like it needs better support capability.
I have a few pet peeves with Infosphere Director, like the fact it requires a decent Intelligence on an already MAD class. This isn't unusable, and I think it's actually one of the better subclasses despite this, but even the Bard gets to use Charisma for Bardic Lore. Also Digital Diversion, really?
That's all I can think of off the top of my head but I'd love to hear what others think and if they disagree/agree with my thoughts here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Envoy is what happens in my opinion when a Bard and a Commander decide to have a child. That child did not inherent magic which is what makes the Bard stronger in all capabilities.
Get'Em! Being their primary Directive is a problem (Because it's so weak). You get +1 Status bonus to Strikes made against that one target, that one "only" target. Unlike Bard's Courageous Anthem which is a 60ft Emanation, effects all allies and gives them +1 Status Bonus to Attack Rolls against any target until the Spell runs out. It's also only 1 action similar to Get'Em!
Some of the other Directives gives Reactions but Starfinder 2E gives every class a decent Reaction by level 6, so that because do I use my ability and make my ally use their reaction or rather will they use my reaction? Since unlike Commander they do not give out a free Reaction till the highest of levels.
Also locking them to CHA was bad, you then get the realization unlike Bard who has +4 CHA you also have +4 CHA but the difference if Bards get to use their +4 CHA to make Spell Attacks or Used as Spell DC. The Envoy needs to spent 1 Action minimal to match the attack bonus of a regular Martial.
This is only really talking about level 1 Enovy. Which makes it crazy that Get'Em is so....weak. Ge'Em! Isn't even considering the Envoy is a 8 hit point class. Let's look at the other classes real fast.
Envoy
Get'Em Directive - 2 Actions - Adds Charisma to damage against that one target.
Inventor
Overdrive - Can just choose to get INT to damage unless you crit fail the craft check. Lasts for a minute.
Investigator
Strategic Strike - If you hit with Devise a Stratagem you get 1 or more D6s bonus damage. (Which with 1 item becomes D8s) Which sometimes can be used for free.
Rogue
Sneak Attack - Must I say more?
Thaumaturge
Implement Empower + Exploit vulnerability - Adds way more damage which lass for an entire minute if I recall.
Also locking them to CHA was bad, you then get the realization unlike Bard who has +4 CHA you also have +4 CHA but the difference if Bards get to use their +4 CHA to make Spell Attacks or Used as Spell DC. The Envoy needs to spent 1 Action minimal to match the attack bonus of a regular Martial.
Yeah it's very odd how the class has Cha as it's key stat but it really doesn't actually get much out of it. Like you could have a 14 Cha and the class wouldn't really be that different.
Get'Em! Being their primary Directive is a problem (Because it's so weak). You get +1 Status bonus to Strikes made against that one target, that one "only" target. Unlike Bard's Courageous Anthem which is a 60ft Emanation, effects all allies and gives them +1 Status Bonus to Attack Rolls against any target until the Spell runs out. It's also only 1 action similar to Get'Em!
It really shouldn't be weaker than Courageous Anthem or the Rhythm Mystic's Focus Spell. Those are full casters who can do so many other different things.
I think making directives not once per turn would go a long way, but still not enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You'd need to adjust Get'Em! to become a Circumstance Bonus to Attacks if you keep it on a single target which makes it go from weak since it is +1 Status to +1 Circumstance, which makes it able to stack with Bard and Rhythm Mystic's Focus Spell. Yeah would a Bard + Envoy be a strong combo? Absolutely but lets not kid ourselves, it is required to make the Class at leas competitive when compared to an objectively stronger full casting classes. Not to mention Mystics also get a secondary class feature which makes them absurdly strong, maybe stronger then heal font clerics.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that the issues with the class in the playtest weren't actually addressed and the class kind of feels worse.
This is my feeling for a lot of SF2e's content, tbh. Perhaps I'm not seeing the full picture, but it felt like the community across all discussion spaces gave pretty clear and unified feedback on a lot of issues that barely affected the final product at all. The Starfriends did include a few improvements here and there, including the Envoy's extra directives, but in my opinion it wasn't nearly enough.
When I posted my playtest notes for the Envoy, my assessment was pretty positive: compared to some other classes especially, the Envoy had some good things going for it, and the main problems that needed to be solved were feature bloat, a lack of directives, and a rigid action economy. The class got more directives, but retained all of its bloated features, and worst of all I think its action economy got even worse, with the new directive model making the class's actions far less flexible and lending themselves even more to fixed rotations. Really, switching to Commander-style tactics with allies doing things as reactions I think was a major step down, because it not only made the class a lot less unique in my eyes but also took away what I thought was a very interesting model of having persistent buffs interact with a variety of actions. Although the class does have some things going for it still, like the combination of watered-down tactics with a skill monkey chassis, I'm much more tempted now to recommend a Bard or Commander instead to provide a more fully-formed version of what the Envoy has to offer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that the issues with the class in the playtest weren't actually addressed and the class kind of feels worse.This is my feeling for a lot of SF2e's content, tbh. Perhaps I'm not seeing the full picture, but it felt like the community across all discussion spaces gave pretty clear and unified feedback on a lot of issues that barely affected the final product at all. The Starfriends did include a few improvements here and there, including the Envoy's extra directives, but in my opinion it wasn't nearly enough.
When I posted my playtest notes for the Envoy, my assessment was pretty positive: compared to some other classes especially, the Envoy had some good things going for it, and the main problems that needed to be solved were feature bloat, a lack of directives, and a rigid action economy. The class got more directives, but retained all of its bloated features, and worst of all I think its action economy got even worse, with the new directive model making the class's actions far less flexible and lending themselves even more to fixed rotations. Really, switching to Commander-style tactics with allies doing things as reactions I think was a major step down, because it not only made the class a lot less unique in my eyes but also took away what I thought was a very interesting model of having persistent buffs interact with a variety of actions. Although the class does have some things going for it still, like the combination of watered-down tactics with a skill monkey chassis, I'm much more tempted now to recommend a Bard or Commander instead to provide a more fully-formed version of what the Envoy has to offer.
It's weird, cause they added more directives but also nerfed your main Directive, and then made them less flexible. I genuinely have no idea why the directives are once per turn, I don't see a way to really exploit this in a problematic way. They also barely added any more directives, like you still only get 3 by default, the Commander gains so many more Tactics, and they can swap them
I also agree with the criticism of making the Directives more like the commander. Maybe one or two options would be fine, but it would be nicer if they focused on giving actual buffs to teammates.
Then comes the fact the class is Cha based, but it's features barely interact with that.
You'd need to adjust Get'Em! to become a Circumstance Bonus to Attacks if you keep it on a single target which makes it go from weak since it is +1 Status to +1 Circumstance, which makes it able to stack with Bard and Rhythm Mystic's Focus Spell. Yeah would a Bard + Envoy be a strong combo? Absolutely but lets not kid ourselves, it is required to make the Class at leas competitive when compared to an objectively stronger full casting classes. Not to mention Mystics also get a secondary class feature which makes them absurdly strong, maybe stronger then heal font clerics.
Yes definitely agree. I personally also think it should give a -1 Penalty to reflex saves and boost all attacks, not just strikes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Envoy
Get'Em Directive - 2 Actions - Adds Charisma to damage against that one target.
That's not all it does your missing Regardless of whether the Strike hits, you and your allies gain a +1 status bonus to damage on subsequent Strikes made against the enemy until the start of your next turn. Increase the damage by 1 at 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've played a healing oriented envoy (Through Desperate Times) in several low level PFS adventures. In those, it seems to perform adequately if not wonderfully.
Get Em is NOT the only directive. I've got a fair bit of use out of Get in There.
My basic impression has been mostly "Meh". I've been playing most classes and enjoying my dragonkin Solarion and my mystics most so far
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've played a healing oriented envoy (Through Desperate Times) in several low level PFS adventures. In those, it seems to perform adequately if not wonderfully.
Get Em is NOT the only directive. I've got a fair bit of use out of Get in There.
My basic impression has been mostly "Meh". I've been playing most classes and enjoying my dragonkin Solarion and my mystics most so far
I'm playing a Through Desperate Times safety inspector envoy that uses the watch out feat, and has skills and a boom pistol for taking out hazards. It's been fun and effective, although my definition of effective is likely an anathema for anyone optimizing for max damage.
I'm playing a Through Desperate Times safety inspector envoy that uses the watch out feat, and has skills and a boom pistol for taking out hazards. It's been fun and effective, although my definition of effective is likely an anathema for anyone optimizing for max damage.I've played a healing oriented envoy (Through Desperate Times) in several low level PFS adventures. In those, it seems to perform adequately if not wonderfully.
Get Em is NOT the only directive. I've got a fair bit of use out of Get in There.
My basic impression has been mostly "Meh". I've been playing most classes and enjoying my dragonkin Solarion and my mystics most so far
I'm certain it's effective enough. I don't think the class is bad per se, but it seems like it could stand to be better when compared to other options, and the class has clear issues.
|
|
Get Em! being a status bonus, especially when Paizo explicitly stated they would make it a circumstance bonus, is equally disappointing.
I don't know the history of what Paizo said the bonus type would be, but regardless of what type it is, it wouldn't stack with 2 envoys using Get Em! in the same party on the same target. Having played an envoy in such a party, I worked out well. There are some situations where having Get Em! on different targets would be a good thing, or being able to use Get Em! again in the same round after the first target was killed. The other advantage of having 2 envoys was that one of us would use Get Em! freeing up the other to use their leadership style instead, often that came down to who rolled better on initiative.
I have a few pet peeves with Infosphere Director, like the fact it requires a decent Intelligence on an already MAD class. This isn't unusable, and I think it's actually one of the better subclasses despite this, but even the Bard gets to use Charisma for Bardic Lore.
I don't see Intelligence as a disadvantage in a skill monkey class, especially when lots of the published scenarios give lore skills a +2 or +3 advantage over other skill checks. I don't think the problem here is the class; to me, it's SF2e dropping SF1e profession skills to use PF2e style lore skills. Lores are all Int-based, whereas professions were split up into Cha, Int, or Wis, making them usable by a much wider group of characters. The Bard getting to use Charisma for Bardic Lore is basically an SF1e profession.
I don't expect my skill monkey character to have any abilities maxed out. I often compensate for that with equipment and ancestry options. This is kind of funny because I also use equipment and ancestry options to compensate for characters that are only good at one thing.
Also, Digital Diversion, really?
I love the flavor of it. After rereading it a few times, it seems the intended use is to make an adjacent opponent off guard without having to flank them. The other use would be to sneak away from an opponent with reach and a reactive strike safely and still have an action left for a ranged strike vs an off-guard opponent.
RAW Digital Diversion says "on an adjacent target carrying, wearing, or wielding a tech item." Personally, I would rule to allow that to include being accent to and able to see a vid screen. The other option is to plant your com unit on the target. We don't have holo grenades yet, but I could see using one to trigger Digital Diversion; the rules for that could be with the grenade without updating the feat.
The problem with status bonuses to attacks is that they're not that uncommon: notably, heroism is a frequently-used source of this, such that Get'Em!'s contribution ends up becoming significantly overshadowed by divine and occult casters later on. While I'm more or less okay with an Int skill-based subclass on a Charisma class, as the Envoy does have the skill increases to not need to commit attribute boosts, Digital Diversion is one of the most useless skill feats you could give to said Charisma class, who can Create a Diversion just fine already with a much larger modifier.
After rereading it a few times, it seems the intended use is to make an adjacent opponent off guard without being flanking them.
This is effectively what the Feint action does already for melee attacks, which the Envoy is also particularly well-equipped to do as a Charisma class who will almost certainly be at least trained in Deception (and who also gets bonuses to checks for that skill from their class). I personally love Digital Diversion's flavor as well, but of all the Starfinder classes who'd benefit from it, the Envoy in my opinion is not the one.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Heroism Range touch; Targets 1 creature. It's got a bigger bonus than Get Em! But range is touch and only affects 1 PC
Anthem is a focus spell as long as you sustain it; it's mostly better than Get Em! Get Em! does more damage, especially for the envoy. If you don't sustain Anthem, you're likely to run out of focus points during the fight.
Courageous Anthem is better than Anthem since there's no need to sustain it, and it's a cantrip.
Get Em! was so overused in SF1e, they made it a class feature so players had room to choose other directives. When I'm playing an envoy, I'm happy to get a chance to do something other than use Get Em! But I'll never complain about an envoy in the party yelling Get Em! Also, using Get Em! just sounds better.
So what do you do when there are 2 bards in the same party? What do you do when your 3-piece rock band has a bard, an envoy, and a rhythm mystic? I would help the players get along as well as the Villarreal sisters; you have been warned!
__________
I do think Teridax has some good points about Digital Diversion. I hadn't considered. My current Infosphere Director has +3 Con... Think I'm going to try an Infosphere Director with +3 Cha, Int, Wis
Heroism Range touch; Targets 1 creature. It's got a bigger bonus than Get Em! But range is touch and only affects 1 PC
The spell's duration is 10 minutes, though, meaning it can be easily cast before battle. At higher levels, casting lower-rank versions of the spell becomes so cheap that it becomes fairly easy to keep the buff on whichever party members you want.
Personally, I feel the base bonus doesn't even really need to be to attacks, so much as damage rolls: a major problem in my opinion with Starfinder's combat at early levels is that guns feel like pea-shooters, because they only deal a single and relatively low die of damage with no modifier. If Get'Em! provided a bonus to damage rolls from its base effect (and to all damage rolls, to avoid the issue Kitusser mentions of not benefiting AoE attacks), then having an Envoy on the team would likely make gun-based combat feel a lot more satisfying, and their Lead By Example's bonus could be a lot higher instead.
This might be something for another thread, but based on the feedback given here and some long-standing feedback from other discussions, I've come up with a homebrew Envoy rework that I'll be starting to playtest. The basic principles behind this rework are: directives are stances that provide team-wide buffs, so you no longer get action taxed each turn (but you do get action compression when switching directives), you get to retrain your skills as well as your skill feats on the fly, and you also get to hype up your allies during exploration to Aid them using your Charisma skills. As an added bonus, your effects no longer require only sight or hearing to be effective, so your deafblind vlakas don't get excluded from the Envoy's mechanics.
I have a few pet peeves with Infosphere Director, like the fact it requires a decent Intelligence on an already MAD class. This isn't unusable, and I think it's actually one of the better subclasses despite this, but even the Bard gets to use Charisma for Bardic Lore.
I don't see Intelligence as a disadvantage in a skill monkey class, especially when lots of the published scenarios give lore skills a +2 or +3 advantage over other skill checks. I don't think the problem here is the class; to me, it's SF2e dropping SF1e profession skills to use PF2e style lore skills. Lores are all Int-based, whereas professions were split up into Cha, Int, or Wis, making them usable by a much wider group of characters. The Bard getting to use Charisma for Bardic Lore is basically an SF1e profession.
As Vortext noted above, Bardic Lore doesn't let you use Charisma with it, so there's actually no problem here. Bards must also invest in intelligence to use this.
|
|
but even the Bard gets to use Charisma for Bardic Lore.This has been mentioned twice now in this thread. Where do you get that from? Bardic Lore, unlike Esoteric Lore, is just another Lore skill and should use intelligence, shouldn't it?From the OP's OP
I don't play a lot of PF2e. I've never played a bard, or even played with a bard in the party. I mostly play SF1e and SF2e. I also only play in organized play, so mixing classes between isn't something I've looked into yet. I do hope it's officially supported someday.Regardless of whether Bard gets to use Charisma for Bardic Lore or not, I was using that as an example of the SF1e professions vs 2e lore, since professions are not limited to just being an Int skill, but also include Cha and Wis.
_____
I started building an Infosphere Director with +3 Cha, Int, and Wis last night. I was trying to reach +4 Int, but I'm having a hard time finding a combination to make it happen. I was hoping to boost my Int to +4 to make Digital Diversion a better option than just using Create a Diversion. At +3/+3 Cha/Int, Digital Diversion is at least equal for the dir roll, but Digital Diversion's other requirement makes it very situationally. I wish you could use Digital Diversion to help another party member against an opponent they are adjacent to, remotely.
I also wonder if going full in on Int for Infosphere Director and using Int for class key attribute. I also wouldn't mind a Cha option like that for the solarian.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking of questioning the first post...
Also the fact that directives were nerfed by being one or two actions activities instead of one action activities that can be followed up by using the prescribed action for Lead By Example makes this even more questionable.
I'm not sure what the practical difference is.
Playtest version:
* You use Get 'em for one action.
* You Strike for one action to invoke Lead by Example.
* You use Get 'em for one action.
* You do something else for the rest of your turn and forego Lead by Example benefits.
Release version:
* You use Get 'em for two actions and make a subordinate action Strike and get the Lead by Example benefits.
* You use Get 'em for one action and do something else for the rest of your turn and forego Lead by Example benefits.
-----
There isn't any difference in the action economy costs.
The only nerf that I can see is that the playtest version allowed strange interactions like triggering Lead by Example with a spell attack roll spell, or potentially triggering Lead by Example of multiple Directive abilities for the same action (if having multiple Directive abilities active was possible).
I'm not convinced that those are not deserved nerfs. Lead by Example is supposed to be closely tied to a particular action. Having loose wording that allows unrelated actions to trigger Lead by Example also feels like something that should be (and was) fixed.
The main difference is that whereas previous directives let you use different actions, including composite actions that might include the triggering Lead By Example action, the new model only allows you to spend an extra action to use that one action. Additionally, leadership styles previously let you activate the Lead by Example benefits using other actions, which in one particular case even let you do so as a free action (Infosphere Director, Recall Knowledge using Automatic Knowledge); that is no longer a thing. The new directives are therefore far more prescriptive and rigid as a result, and block synergy between those directives and abilities that might include action compression of their own.
I don't see Intelligence as a disadvantage in a skill monkey class, especially when lots of the published scenarios give lore skills a +2 or +3 advantage over other skill checks. I don't think the problem here is the class; to me, it's SF2e dropping SF1e profession skills to use PF2e style lore skills. Lores are all Int-based, whereas professions were split up into Cha, Int, or Wis, making them usable by a much wider group of characters. The Bard getting to use Charisma for Bardic Lore is basically an SF1e profession.
You already want Dex and Cha, so you are making some sacrifices for a decent RK.
I don't expect my skill monkey character to have any abilities maxed out. I often compensate for that with equipment and ancestry options. This is kind of funny because I also use equipment and ancestry options to compensate for characters that are only good at one thing.I love the flavor of it. After rereading it a few times, it seems the intended...
Also, Digital Diversion, really?
You can just do this by default with Deception already. On the charisma class this feat is literally useless unless your Cha is lower than your Int.
As Vortext noted above, Bardic Lore doesn't let you use Charisma with it, so there's actually no problem here. Bards must also invest in intelligence to use this.
I have a few pet peeves with Infosphere Director, like the fact it requires a decent Intelligence on an already MAD class. This isn't unusable, and I think it's actually one of the better subclasses despite this, but even the Bard gets to use Charisma for Bardic Lore.
I don't see Intelligence as a disadvantage in a skill monkey class, especially when lots of the published scenarios give lore skills a +2 or +3 advantage over other skill checks. I don't think the problem here is the class; to me, it's SF2e dropping SF1e profession skills to use PF2e style lore skills. Lores are all Int-based, whereas professions were split up into Cha, Int, or Wis, making them usable by a much wider group of characters. The Bard getting to use Charisma for Bardic Lore is basically an SF1e profession.
I must've gotten confused with Thaumaturge. I swear I remember Bards having this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main difference is that whereas previous directives let you use different actions, including composite actions that might include the triggering Lead By Example action, the new model only allows you to spend an extra action to use that one action. Additionally, leadership styles previously let you activate the Lead by Example benefits using other actions, which in one particular case even let you do so as a free action (Infosphere Director, Recall Knowledge using Automatic Knowledge); that is no longer a thing. The new directives are therefore far more prescriptive and rigid as a result, and block synergy between those directives and abilities that might include action compression of their own.
Yes, this is what I was referencing.
|
|
I found this combination last night, that can work with a Dex, Int build.. Networked Android, Infosphere Director gives Digital Diversion a 30-foot range and doesn't require having a hacker's toolkit or free hand. It is also a lot less situational than the default requirement of the opponent being adjacent to you. So this is more versatile than just using Create a Diversion.
Then the problem for me is in Digital Assessment! needing class DC to make a target becomes glitching 1 on a failure. If the Infosphere Director allowed you to use Int for your class key attribute, it would be better at doing what it's trying to do. This also solves class DC for grenades or other area weapons.
I found this combination last night, that can work with a Dex, Int build.. Networked Android, Infosphere Director gives Digital Diversion a 30-foot range and doesn't require having a hacker's toolkit or free hand. It is also a lot less situational than the default requirement of the opponent being adjacent to you. So this is more versatile than just using Create a Diversion.
If this were for an Int-based character, I'd agree, this makes Computers a much more versatile skill. As an Envoy, though, training in Deception and Computers will net you even more versatility without requiring that same investment, and your mod when Creating a Diversion will be higher. I think the build you're suggesting would work very well on a Mechanic or Technomancer, though, or even a Witchwarper given their Int key attribute.
|
|
I found this combination last night, that can work with a Dex, Int build.. Networked Android, Infosphere Director gives Digital Diversion a 30-foot range and doesn't require having a hacker's toolkit or free hand. It is also a lot less situational than the default requirement of the opponent being adjacent to you. So this is more versatile than just using Create a Diversion.If this were for an Int-based character, I'd agree, this makes Computers a much more versatile skill. As an Envoy, though, training in Deception and Computers will net you even more versatility without requiring that same investment, and your mod when Creating a Diversion will be higher. I think the build you're suggesting would work very well on a Mechanic or Technomancer, though, or even a Witchwarper given their Int key attribute.
Part of it is also trying to maximize the skill monkeyness of the envoy. With a +3 in Cha, Int, and Wis, you can be trained in all skills related to those attributes. I'm also considering a Cha, Dex, Int envoy concentrating on having at least 3 lore skills. I'm assumming on a skill monkey, you're never going to have a +4 attribute.
If I were focusing on more Diversion/Digital Diversion, the Int classes you suggested make sense.
|
|
Part of it is also trying to maximize the skill monkeyness of the envoy. With a +3 in Cha, Int, and Wis, you can be trained in all skills related to those attributes.
Obviously, you do you. But this character will need to pick up medium armor proficiency pretty quickly to not be absurdly fragile and its direct contribution to killing things in combat will pretty much be throwing grenades.
It can be made to work in a home game but it seems a very significant outlier from expectations.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part of it is also trying to maximize the skill monkeyness of the envoy. With a +3 in Cha, Int, and Wis, you can be trained in all skills related to those attributes.
Obviously, you do you. But this character will need to pick up medium armor proficiency pretty quickly to not be absurdly fragile and its direct contribution to killing things in combat will pretty much be throwing grenades.
It can be made to work in a home game, but it seems a very significant outlier from expectations.
I only play in organized play. I tend to build a skill support or resource (lots of consumables) support characters that aren't great at any one thing but can help any party, no matter what classes the other players bring. Although I have fun playing combat-optimised characters almost every time I play them, I feel the party would have been better off if I had played my support character instead.
Besides the medium armor proficiency, getting a force field as an armor upgrade and the Dermal plating augmentation would help defense.
Grenades are my go-to for odd characters in SF1e, as well as grenade tactics most would not consider. Sometimes dropping a grenade on yourself is the best option. Grenades are great for having multiple damage types, which would go great with an Envoy with all the Recall Knowledge skills for dealing with creatures. But looking more into it, it looks like grenades might not work with Get Em! Grenades also don't work well with Digital Diversion.
So until we get more equipment or something else to help compensate, I'm scrapping the +3 in Cha, Int, and Wis in favor of the +3 in Cha, Dex, and Int idea.