DocReason's page

But why would you want to confuse a new player letting them stack bonuses that they won't be able to do in any other scenario after they move on from the BB? I would say no if I were (and will) GM it.

I have always felt the initial attack was part of the two action cast. Cast spell, weapon moves and makes first attack, hence Attack tag. Third action if sustained is at -5. Not cast spell (counts as attack) then the weapon makes a strike action (2nd attack).

"When you cast the spell, the weapon appears next to a foe you choose within range and makes a Strike against it."

I saw in another post where a person might want to cast but not attack (therefor not suffer the attack penalty as well). This situation I could see why it shouldn't be on the spell cast itself but I also might argue that not attacking isn't an option since the spell description say it "makes a strike".

During a session this past weekend I let the player tell me, in general, what he was interested in knowing. If it's not something very unique to the creature I give him the info on a successful check. I know some people don't like this approach but I feel if they won the check they should be able to get something that is more relevant for them at the moment.

I did get a comment from a gm (who has probably been doing it longer than I have and was a player in the game)counseling me that "in PFS2 the GM simply decides the most important thing to tell the characters (this also speeds up play)"

The RK exchange took all of 10 seconds in the game. Player asked if the creature had any known resistance. Answer: it does not. That was the end of it.

I feel a player gets more satisfaction from succeeding on their check this way than random info that may not be useful. Curious how other's feel about this approach?

Ah, thanks. Still learning about boons but that makes it pretty simple. Appreciate you pointing it out.

bearcatbd wrote:

No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.

"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."

I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.

Feel it should or was meant to state the tools are also within 'easy reach' but the tools take up all the space in the bandolier and there is no room for potions too.

Just want to point out that I'd agree on a bandolier being related to the action economy... in that it allows you to retrieve an item in one action rather than two (similar to benefits of a belt pouch). One of my first questions as a GM when a player wants to pull out a potion/etc is, "where were you carrying that?" If I get a blank stare, that means it was in a backpack (2 actions to retrieve) because the player never thought to purchase items to carry stuff.

bearcatbd wrote:

Intuitively, a player with Battle Medicine can reach into their bandolier, pull out their bandages and Treat Wounds in 1-action but you can't pull out a vial, pop the cork, and drink it in 1-Action?

Battle Medicine is a feat, and thus allows a character to do things faster than normal as a result of specific training. If paizo were to reprint a version of Accelerated Drinker as a feat in PF2, I could see you drinking a potion in one action - but until then I'd rule 2 actions total to take out and drink.

Yeah, after looking into this a lot more I do believe the bandolier is meant to be 'something better than a backpack' but not to pull and drink in 1-Action. I think the fact that there is a Quick Bomber Feat was the most compelling reason to see it the other way for me. You wouldn't need the Feat if you could just buy a bandolier for 1 sp. So I recant my earlier position on use of the bandolier. Apologies for cluttering up the original thread on this issue.

I do still believe it could be clarified a little better regardless of what others here have said. Searching through other posts as well as what I've seen happening in game play there is confusion on how the bandolier is used. I've seen some say you can use things like Sunrod or Smokestick in 1-action because they are tools which I don't believe since it says for full set of tools.

"It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong. I am NOT a big man." - Fletch

No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.

"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."

I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.

Feel it should or was meant to state the tools are also within 'easy reach' but the tools take up all the space in the bandolier and there is no room for potions too.

Intuitively, a player with Battle Medicine can reach into their bandolier, pull out their bandages and Treat Wounds in 1-action but you can't pull out a vial, pop the cork, and drink it in 1-Action?

I'm afraid that's wrong. Drawing the tools as part of the use actions is only for toolkits. The full sentence is bolder below. Quoting part of a sentence is usually not the best approach.

Quote:

A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions. If you are carrying or stowing a bandolier rather than wearing it around your chest, it has light Bulk instead of negligible. A bandolier can be dedicated to a full set of tools, such as healer’s tools, allowing you to draw the tools as part of the action that requires them.

The reference to Alchemical Items or Potions in the first sentence is the qualifier (and was mentioned in my previous post). I have played at a few Paizo local conventions and various other Society scenario events and every GM has allowed it as 1 action. In fact, I've seen GM's ask players if they have a bandolier while pulling a potion just for this reason. I believe there are posts on this in the past (I will look again). I mean, I suppose it could be coincidence that every one of them is wrong. One of them happens to be a VC. Maybe it is an interpretation dispute but if you can point me to where potions aren't included I will concede to your opinion.

In the description for Khopesh weapon it says "The tip of a khopesh is usually hooked so that it can be used to disarm an opponent’s shield or weapon." However, it does not have the 'disarm' trait listed, just 'trip'? Assuming it was omitted by mistake?