lordcirth's page

With the airtight RAW, no, there really is no other interpretation.

The argument that 1 is a dice value makes no sense because every dice value in the book is written as "XdY". Simply putting in a value (X) is not "XdY," otherwise we can take every number in the game and treat it as a dice value by that logic. Weapon Specialization? It's actually a bonus 2D1, up to 4D1 based on weapon proficiency. Implosion dealing 75 damage? It's actually 75D1. Seems silly to argue that this is the case.

The argument that 1D1 is a valid dice ruling is also incorrect, as we have rules that state that 1D4 is the lowest dice value allowed. There are no D3s, there are no D2s, there are no D1s. There is also the issue of what to do when you have dice-increasing effects applying to it (such as Deadly Simplicity with a Deity's Favored Weapon), as the rules don't discuss what happens with this. Even if we can come up with a favorable compromise, that isn't RAW, nor can we even say it is RAI.

I could have sworn there's a version of the "increasing and decreasing dice" chart that lists "1" as a die, but I can't find it. I suspect it may have only been in the playtest.

The fact that it explicitly makes Fly and Strike actions (rather than merely moving and attacking) implies it is a creature. In which case it could presumably be grappled. In the absence of anything better, I'd probably use save DCs for the weapon's level (the wielder's saves would also be reasonable). If it could Escape, I'd use its attack bonus, but the problem is that it can explicitly take Fly and Strike actions and therefore plausibly can't do any other actions. Then again, "The weapon can't use reactions" implies there's some reason to think it could.

Unfortunately I think this one is well into GM interpretation territory.

I believe a Double Slice with slashing and piercing would be treated the same as a single strike with a slashing flaming weapon; you combine them into one attack, but they are still separate damage types.

Yes, an argument can be made that, by RAW, teleporting out of a grapple doesn't remove the grabbed condition. However, this is clearly absurd and not RAI - though there are some ways of inflicting grabbed that you plausibly couldn't shake by teleporting, like Grasp of the Deep.

VampByDay wrote:

Let's take the Crane Stance, which increases your horizontal leap distance by 5 feet.

And Dancing leaf increases it by a further 5 feet.

Does that equal a distance increase of 10? Or do the two not stack?

This also reminds me of the currently-unanswered question of if movement speed increases stack.

Some (Monk Incredible Movement, Swashbuckler Panache) have a type to their increase and so they wouldn't stack.

Others (Fleet general feat) don't have a type.

The general rules for checks says that bonuses of the same type don't stack. It doesn't actually say that bonuses cannot be untyped. It does say that penalties can be untyped, and that this is different than bonuses.

Penalties wrote:

Unlike bonuses, penalties can also be untyped, in which case they won't be classified as “circumstance,” “item,” or “status.” Unlike other penalties, you always add all your untyped penalties together rather than simply taking the worst one.

So that does indirectly say that bonuses must be typed.

Though that may be limited only to bonuses applied to checks. And a speed bonus is not applied to a check.

TL;DR: The rules don't actually say if bonuses to things other than checks can be untyped or if untyped bonuses stack. This applies to speed increases as well as leap distance increases.

One case that we have confirmation of something being untyped and that not being an error is untyped damage.

IMO, The simple (if odd) answer is that an "increase" is not a "bonus". Rage damage and Powerful Leap are not bonuses, therefore typing is not applicable (as opposed to being "untyped" bonuses).

I predict no more easy dipping into Champion for heavy armor and the champion's reaction.

It is almost strictly better than Sentinel, yeah. I could see them dropping it down to match Sentinel.

Rogue dedication is great on any cloth-caster; light armor, skill, and skill feat is good value. I made a sorcerer / rogue that opened combats with maxed Deception + Incredible Initiative whenever possible and dropped a scorching ray / blazing bolt on anyone I beat. It was fun. Getting Sneak Attack on spells is a huge investment and not worth it, but Surprise Attack is built in.

You can activate an item, but I don’t think you can invest one if you don’t meet it’s requirements. So no staves.

Staves aren't actually invested items; staff preparation is an independent thing.

Hunh, I was going to mention Staves, as dropping one's staff seems a rather common occurrence.

However, once I checked the rules, there is no mention of investing in staves at all. As far as my reading comprehension goes, it seems that as long as the daily prep was done to add charges, the staff remains ready all day. It seems RaW to actually hand off a staff you don't intend to use to another spellcaster as well.

A caster can only prepare one staff, so staves don't need to also count against the 10-item limit. Staves effectively are their own item slot.

You can hand a staff to another caster if you want. It will be a stick they can bonk people with, unless and until they prepare it themselves at their next daily preparations. And you can take it back and begin casting from it immediately at any time until daily prep happens.

(There is an argument you could use Trick Magic Item to use someone else's staff; this isn't clear IMO)

Example 1) A character is in a room with his back to the wall, surrounded by thugs. Player says, I am by a feature that can provide cover (tech he is right, it can provide cover to someone on the other side of the wall), so that allows him to take cover. And the take cover action states, if he doesn't have standard cover, then he gains it "Otherwise, you gain the benefits of standard cover (a +2 circumstance bonus instead)".

Question 1) As a dm, would you allow him to have the standard cover +2 bonus to ac verse the thugs because he was "hugging" the flat wall for cover?

He gets greater cover against anyone the wall would give him standard cover against, which is nobody in this scenario. Putting your back to a wall means only 5 enemies can be adjacent to you, and only 2 of them can flank you; that's it.

Example 2) A player is on the ground, surrounded by thugs. He uses the take cover action to try and get standard cover (+2) vs the thugs. Under take cover action, it does say you can take cover while prone. Under prone condition it does list you can gain greater cover vs ranged attacks, but nothing else.

Question 2) As a DM would you allow the player to gain a +4 bonus to ranged and +2 vs melee? If no to the previous, would you allow him to perhaps just gain standard cover using the take cover action because the ability lists prone as a possible requirement fulfilment?

He can Take Cover for +4 AC vs ranged. The ground is not in the way of any enemy's attacks, therefore he doesn't get any cover except via the special case listed in the Prone condition.

Example 3) A player has a tower shield; it says he can use the take cover action for +4 ac. Player says he also gains the bonus to reflex saves (and other stuff) because he took the take cover action while holding the tower shield and he is also benefiting from standard cover because there is no actual cover nearby. That the +4 isn't a replacement effect, that it's an additional affect.

Question 3) As a dm would you give him the full standard cover benefit or just the +4 AC as called for under shields....

The rules don't say that Take Cover with a tower shield *only* grants AC. I parse it as "Take Cover, and gain +4 circumstance to AC". My reading is yes, Taking Cover using a tower shield gets you +4 AC and +2 to Reflex saves, and people taking cover behind him get +2 AC & +2 Reflex - but the enemy can just drop the Fireball behind him to bypass the Reflex bonus.

"You must have a spell in your spell repertoire at the level you want to cast in order to heighten it to that level."

This means that, in order to *cast* Haste (7th), you must have Haste(7th) in your repertoire; ie you cannot pick only Haste(3rd) then cast Haste(7th).
If you pick Haste(7th) as one of your spells for 7th rank, or if you made Haste(3rd) a Signature Spell, then you can cast Haste (7th).

Honestly, the thing that I'm most curious about regarding Wizards is if the "School of Unified Theory" mentioned in other previews will function the same as the prior "Universalist" school, IE that you don't gain the bonus spell slot per rank to prepare certain spells into, but instead you get to use Arcane Bond to recast a spell at each spell rank, instead of just 1/day.

My forthcoming Wizard was planned as a Universalist, so it'd be nice to know if that's going to be radically different in the Remaster, especially since my group's GM is going to enforce the Remastered versions of ALL affected classes once we start playing PF again next summer.

I think and hope so! Universalist is by far my favorite.

I wonder if curriculum slots can be used with heightened versions of lower level curriculum spells

I'd be very surprised if you couldn't - it would go against how all prepared casters work in PF2.

I’m a bit confused by the feat. It sounds like it’s meant as battlefield control. I don’t see it ever doing damage because taking a minimum of 7d6 to your allies so that the creatures stay in the area seems like mutually assured destruction. Doing this at range with no allies guarantees that the bad guys move. I’m guessing the intent here is to have it make bad guys use an action. Seems awful high level of a feat for this though.

Seems like decent area-denial to me. Say you've got 2 allies and 2 enemies in melee. You cast a Howling Blizzard (or Fireball 5th, or whatever) such that it hits the 2 enemies but stops short of the allies. You spend an extra action to place an impending 5d6 explosion right behind the enemies as well; now they must spend at least 1 action to Step out of the explosion. And, of course, if your melee allies go first, they can grab or trip the enemies to make this more difficult, or they may have already done so. Placing it so it won't friendly-fire isn't any harder than your usual fireball targeting, easier in fact.

The floor on Secondary Detonation Array is a 1:1 trade on actions as the enemy is forced to stride away, which itself opens it up to getting hit by reactions. Not bad but not sure I'd call it 14th level good. You can of course combo it with spells that grab creatures like Transmute Rock and Mud.

Edit: Never mind, spell needs to do damage. My searching seems to indicate there are no spells in the game right now that actually work with this spellshape, all other options for grabbing with a spell have a duration. That's unfortunate.

Being able to both create the zone and trap the enemy in it, in one round, would seem somewhat broken. (Of course you can do it at level 20 with Quickened Spell and Metamagic Mastery, but that's 20). Also, if you're casting an area spell, probably you are catching two enemies in it, so it's probably 2:1.

RaptorJesues wrote:

What is a slide pistol though? Is it a semi automatic gun loke say a mauser HSc?

It's a gun with 5 barrels, and then you slide the gun to another barrel to shoot.

roquepo wrote:

How does the kickback trait functions exactly? Do different weapons have different STR requirements? Is it 1 damage per weapon damage die or does it scale like Backstabber?

Basically propulsive, gives you +1 damage but you need 14STR to not take the -2 penalty to your attack roll, have a modification that increases it to +2 but requires 18 STR to not take penalty.

So it's not per damage die? That seems quite weak.

Build 46: Raging Dragon Monk
~ 18 Str, 16 Dex, 14 Cha, 14 Con
Max Intimidation, then Crafting

1. Skilled Human -> Whatever
General Training -> Shield Block
Dragon Stance
2. Barbarian Dedication (Dragon Instinct)
Quick Repair
3. Toughness
4. Basic Fury -> Raging Intimidation
Cat Fall
5. General Training -> Incredible Initiative
6. Instinct Ability (Draconic Rage)
7. Diehard
8. Dragon Roar
Battle Cry
9. Haughty Obstinacy
10. Advanced Fury -> Swipe
Kip Up

12. Advanced Fury -> Cleave

14. Advanced Fury -> AoO

16. Shattering Strike

18. Diamond Fists (dragon tail Strikes gain forceful)

20. Enduring Quickness

Stride or Demoralize, flurry at 0,-5 with dragon tail strikes + rage damage, and raise a shield.

Only class change that really bothers me is the Champion/Paladin losing Smite Evil for the Champion's Reaction(s). I think some sort of alternate class feature could be possible in the future though (though that would end up being more like 1E archetypes, so maybe that's a can of worms they don't want to open.)

The CRB does have rules for class archetypes, even though none currently exist.

Brutish Shove adds this failure effect to your attack

"Failure: The target becomes flat-footed until the end of your current turn."

So if your attack roll fails, but does not critically fail, you get that effect.

Getting spells when raging and getting the sorcerer dedication at level 1 seems too strong to me. Not to mention that those innate spells are higher level than you could cast at level 1.

Perhaps give the sorcerer dedication only, and grant the spells in Specialization ability.

Saros Palanthios wrote:

That depends...

If all you're doing is moving, a non-minion mount can move 3 times per round. However you have to use all three of your actions to command the mount to move three times, so you can do nothing else during your turn. (You can of course use fewer command actions, but then the mount would also get fewer move actions.)

A minion can only move twice per round, BUT you only need to spend one action to command it to do so-- meaning you have two actions left with which to cast a spell, attack, recall knowledge, raise a shield, etc. Plus animal companions can Support you, or attack, and gain other abilities as you level up. Also they tend to have more HP than ordinary mounts.

So if all you're interested in is running away from a battle as fast as possible, then yes, a mundane mount can flee 50% faster than a companion mount (assuming it has the same base movement speed). However if you plan to actually participate in encounters, companion mounts are far superior.

Isn’t it also true that if you take multi action activities outside of combat they are fatiguing after 10 minutes?

That would mean that outside of combat you would get two moves for one action with a minion (and not be fatigued) and one move with one action for a mundane mount unless you want to ride hard and get fatigued.

I realize this might not be directly quoting the rule but seems to be more or less what was indicated by other exploration actions.

Traveling in exploration mode does not use actions. You look at your mount's speed and compare it to the travel speed table.

Any rule *may* be overridden by the GM, but some rules specifically state that the GM may/should do so. That is not the same thing in terms of GM guidance, and it's not really helpful to conflate the two.

Darksyde wrote:

Just a quick double check. there isn't any adjustment to weapon stats in 2ed for size just bulk and cost? So the main thing the giant instinct barbarian gets is the reach? I looked for info on changing the damage die for size but didn't find anything.

The really funny thing is the Titan Mauler-granted oversized weapon explicitly doesn't even change the bulk or cost of that weapon. So the weapon in and of itself doesn't actually do anything but give you Clumsy 1, and then allow you to use the other abilities as relevant.

Large weapons have increased bulk and cost, as detailed in the equipment chapter.

I had a monk PC climb a cliff, up to a kobold that was on the edge shooting down. He wanted to yank him off. I ruled that was a Grab and a Shove. He made the grab but missed the shove; the rogue immediately killed the flat-footed kobold with a shortbow. Everyone seemed content with that.

I heard long ago that one of the 3 devs of the d20 engine other than Monte Cook (surprise) had some serious hate of Sorcerers, for reasons not clearly known. As I heard he hated Fighters too, I personally think it was some sort of an "intellectual preparation play" snobbism.

Now it seems that his poisonous grudge somehow managed to contaminate both 5E and PF2 by placing unexplainable and unnecessary nerfs to Sorcs...

Assuming malice on the part of a game developer because you don't like the class is entirely uncalled for.

As the rules you posted say: "the second morph effect attempts to counteract the first". So you roll and see which effect wins, and the losing effect ends.

The Kraken also says its tentacle attacks are magical, which left us scratching our heads when a player had Freedom of Movement on themselves and got grabbed a kraken. The spell says "...they automatically succeed...unless the effect is magical", so I had to figure out if that applies to the grab as well.

I don't think that's a magical grab.

Your daily preparations happen once per day. You have to make a trade-off between efficiency and speed, and you can't change your mind until the next day.

Everyone has "daily preparations", even non-casters, even if they don't currently have any abilities that mention it.

lordcirth wrote:

Someone using a bow has a hand free to trip. They only need both hands when they shoot.

This is technically correct. However how often do you see somebody with a longbow in melee? And even if the monster gets through, lets look at the following example at its associated action economy.

1) Monster attacks some fronline character twice, then uses his last action to move up to a ranger.
2) The ranger lets go of the bow (free), trips the monster (action), moves back (action), grips his bow again (action).
3) Monster gets up (action), moves up to the ranger (action), attacks (action).
4) see 2)
5) see 3)

Repeat ad infinitum.

If you need to grip your weapon again you will lose 2 actions for every trip you do, which of course is less then ideal. Thats what I meant when I wrote you "lose" actions, when you need to change grips in order to conduct a trip attempt.

There is no action to re-grip a bow. Bows are not 2-handed weapons, they are 1+.

Ascalaphus wrote:

Assurance in Athletics can give you a good enough third attack trip that you can topple any mooks still left in your reach at end of turn.

Do you all run Monks or 5 to 6 player groups? I have seen this argument come up very often, however when looking in our 4 player group there is exactly 0 persons who can do a regular trip or grab. Not because we are shy of Athletics (3 of 4 chars have it), but because we are shy of hands to actually use the skill.

Sword and board fighter (0 hands free), sword and board warpriest (0 hands free), ranger (either bow 0 hands free or bastard sword 0 hands free) and wizard.

As soon as the fighter uses a block all monsters can swarm past him like no tomorrow and while the ranger could possible have a hand free while he is using his bastard sword one-handed he most often is backline just like the wizard.

And as changing grips actually makes you "lose" actions I see no reason how we will ever use grab or trip in the near future.

Someone using a bow has a hand free to trip. They only need both hands when they shoot.

Champion will get you d6 fists. Monk Dedication will get Powerful Fist, which won't stack but does grant lethal attacks without penalty. You can use light armor at first, until you get stances that require unarmored.

Replying to Fuzzy-Wuzzy and Captain Morgan:

action 1: as cleric, cast a 1-action divine spell (Heal? Shield?) Non-cantrips only if not Cleric.
free action: Divine Weapon
action 2: cast a 1-action spell from wizard/sorcerer multiclass
free action: Bespell Weapon
action 3: attack with weapon

You can use a 2-action spell for one of those if you're under a Haste effect. Such as, from wizard or arcane/occult/primal sorcerer. Also Bespell weapon is lower level than Divine weapon, so Cleric/other caster.

It's not at once, but it's still the same turn. It looks like both last until the turn's end, not just the next action.

Clerics can't use Divine Weapon after a cantrip either. Cantrips don't use spell slots.

I don't know that you need Selective Energy as a prerequisite, just as a means of avoiding smacking your allies at the same time.

Perhaps something like this would be more appropriate:

Twinned Font - Level 8 Cleric Feat
Prerequisite: Versatile Font
You can channel to both heal and harm at the same time. You gain the twinned Font Focus Spell.

Twinned Font - Focus 8
1-3 Actions - focus, somatic, verbal
Expend 1 use of divine font to simultaneously cast heal and harm, with an area of effect equal to the number of actions spent to use this focus power.

This Focus power would expend both the focus point and a use of divine font - which isn't how focus powers usually work, but might balance things out. My concern with making it a Focus point cost only would be making what is, with 10 minutes of rest, an unlimited daily use divine font.

By making the actions variable, you also technically allow this to be used as part of the single action and two-action versions of divine font - although the use of such would be rather limited, I grant you.

Casting both spells for one font slot is far too strong.

I really would like to see the twin channeling feature. That was my favorite part of the EoB PrC. I don't know if this would be better off as a feat. Because another thing the EoB did was treat your versatile channel as the same level instead of level - 2. Now the 2E version of this just allows you to cast either Heal or Harm (Assuming your deity allows it). So some of the abilities are automatically given.

Focus Spell: (A feat gives access to it)
Prerequisite: Versatile Font, Selective Energy
Level 8 (or around this level)
3 Actions
It allows you to cast both Heal and Harm as appropriate for your level.

Not sure if in this system this would be too powerful. I know in 1E you didn't spend multiple uses of channeling, to my knowledge.

A focus point to simultaneously cast both bursts, still paying both slots, is strong. But I don't think it's broken. Perhaps it would need to nerf the spell level of the channels.

The Ancient Elf Heritage lets you take a level 2 dedication at level 1, but you still need all the other requirements.

I tried to post this last week, but the forum ate it.

I ran a session last week (level 1 oneshot, 4 players), and it went well. The biggest problem I noticed is that everyone, including me, found the diagonal movement rules to be cumbersome. I like that it's more realistic, but how much does it really matter in practice? Has anyone tried houseruling 5e-style movement in? Alternatively, what about hexes?

One problem is that whatever weapon trait budget they're using means that Longbow probably affords its higher damage dice by taking on a negative trait.

Negative traits are decent in some cases, when they make sense, but putting a positive trait on Shortbow would skew it against other weapons in the category.

The volley trait is not an example of a negative trait that I would be okay with. The reason is that it's singular purpose appears to be punishment, not flavor.

Here are some quick/brainstormy version of negative traits Longbow could have that would fit:

Volley: All attacks with this weapon during a round must be against targets in the same range increment

Bulky: This weapon can't be used while mounted

Strenuous: Using this weapon is tiring. For every strike you make with this weapon your movement speed for the round is reduced by 5.

"Same range increment" is nearly irrelevant, given the massive range.

I am liking combat grab and might make that my usual floating feat at 15th and I like certain strike and could make that my level 16 feat.

I assume that all of these feats are “either/or”? I cannot use lunge with combat grab or combat grab with certain strike buy pick one and only one feat to use with my action, if the feat costs an action?

Correct, either/or. Lunge is an action which allows you to make a strike, modified with +5 reach. It doesn't passively modify all strikes you make. Same with Certain Strike.

Atalius wrote:

rainzax wrote:

Intimidating Prowess and Battle Cry.

Frightened reduces Saving Throws.

Might want to 18 ST so that at 10th level you have 20 ST and that second +1 kicks in?

Or if you are willing to wait until 12th level you can MCD Sorcerer?

Or do both?

Don't think it's possible to start with 18 STR?

You can, but it involves using the ‘Optional Flaw’ mechanic during character creation. This is where you voluntarily take additional Flaw in two separate ability scores (can be the same score if ancestry gives you a boost to it, but can not be applied to a score which already as a ancestry flaw) to increase one other score (can be a score already boosted by ancestry) during the ancestry part of the character creation process.

A 18 Str Cleric would be possible at LV1, by gaining two ancestry boosts to Str, using the optional Flaw feature, at the cost of lowering generally two other scores.

You can never get a 14 in anything at the Ancestry stage. You can only put the extra boost from voluntary flaws in a stat you boosted if it's also your ancestry flaw.

Why is covering your tracks, or tracking, problematic? They are basic uses of the Survival skill.

I personally love the new Ranger. I never saw why the ranger had to have spells. Obviously a Ranger with the Druid Dedication works great too if that's what you want. I'm personally looking forward to trying other spell lists as well for some interesting characters.

All attacks use MAP normally unless specifically mentioned otherwise. There are many monsters and PCs that can make 4 attacks in a round. Keep in mind that MAP caps at your third attack (-10, -8, depending on weapon).

Mountain Stance does slow you a little, but you're a monk. Moving is cheap when you have Flurry of Blows, and at level 3 it will barely matter anymore. Also, dwarves with Unburdened Iron won't care.

I ran a game yesterday, with four players. Two had played 5e a lot, and not PF2; one had played PbtA RPGs but not d20, and one had never played an RPG. None of them had any real trouble with their character sheets after a minute of explanation.

The two new players were rogues, btw, and the party was level 1.

The max AC that any non-monk can have at level 1 is 18. A dex monk can have 19, and a strength monk can have 15 base, 19 with mountain stance. And the strength monk can easily have a lot of HP to handle a possible first-round attack.

Ho, I thought the movement penalty was also removed with the proper strength. It's quite a big difference, yes. For bullwark, it's only in full plate. Other heavy armors don't have it.

Going light armor could be also great then, to avoid the movement penalty. Movement is quite important in PF2.

Having the strength for the armor reduces the move penalty by 5. So light and medium won't slow you down at all, given you have the strength. Heavy armor would be -10ft but is only -5ft if you have the strength.

Regarding shields, fighters get more fancy options with them, but champions get good ones too, and Divine Ally (Shield) is really strong.

I think that Resilient Bulwark is very strong, and also a bit too complicated, though I like the idea. At level 1 with medium armor and no shield, you could resist 5 damage, which is the same as a steel shield. Unlike shield, this doesn't take a hand nor damage a shield. I would make it either your item bonus to AC, or your proficiency, not both. Proficiency would probably be better, since it would not unduly punish behemoths wearing, say, hide.

I would also cut the shield aspect, and maybe make something like it a level 1 class feat.

It's also unclear how this should interact with the armor specialization abilities.

Dude literally swore off a system forever because he couldn't cheese his way through a fight. Sorry, but this statement isn't consistent with his behavior as you're describing it.

A rogue being a rogue isn't "cheese". Sneaking and assassination is what the character does.

Charisma is entirely optional, yes. I love it. That stat array looks fine to me.