Supreme Beings Pathfinder 2E Shattered Star (Inactive)

Game Master scranford

@GM I assume the bushes are not substantial enough for me to take a hide action in future turns?

@GM I assume the bushes are not substantial enough for me to take a hide action in future turns?

They indeed are. The growth is intense that near the river...

@GM there are a few typos in your Initiative template.

My name is Aduriel, and Âdayil is missing an y somewhere.

@GM there are a few typos in your Initiative template.

My name is Aduriel, and Âdayil is missing an y somewhere.

Thanks. Too late to edit now, but I'll correct on the next posting.

@SB: Escape says you can "attempt an Acrobatics or Athletics check instead of using your attack modifier if you choose". And to be honest I think I just read that part. Either way, the result is the same - Adayil is +6 to Unarmed Attack, and +6 in Athletics...

Telurion is up. I'm going to instigate a 24 hour no action policy so the game can keep active.

I'll post tonight when I get in the hotel if he hasn't posted by then.

Visiting family for my Dad's 95th Birthday... so I'll post but it might be delayed at times.

oooo-rah!!! go dad.

Visiting family for my Dad's 95th Birthday... so I'll post but it might be delayed at times.

and I actually had the day off with my husband, but I will post shortly :)

Welcome to the game Variel.

I believe Caks is on Deck before Aduriel.

I believe Caks is on Deck before Aduriel.

Thanks. Caught it in time to edit...

Apologies all, real life presented some snags this week.
17 posts is a lot, I will catch up shortly!

Sent a request for OBR…

@Caks/Ira Kroll - we are waiting on you in djdust’s Test game…

@Caks/Ira Kroll - we are waiting on you in djdust’s Test game…

Is there a link to that game? I haven't seen anything since the Recruitment page.

From Gameplay, re “options and horizontality”.

Yep, didn’t want to try the exact same schtick with Krutk again, feels a bit “shticky” to endlessly order my crab to jump up on people; Trip is fairly hideous, Grab - probably a good idea, Demoralise…well, I thought possibly killing them might be a better idea than possibly debuffing them…”thievery to stealth a weapon” you mean search around for things (my stuff for one) or use the Seek action…well, not going to wait for the results of that, I’m already holding folks up. I’m not sure “horizontal” means the same thing to you as it does to me. Currently I’m a hammer. The orc looks like a nail. Pretty sure I can make a weapon with two Actions the next round.

As for “crawling” so I can then use a two Action cantrip: the *only* reason my character would Crawl, which I have literally never seen as an Action used in *any* PF2 game would be because my player completely metagamed the fact that on the map, my player can see that there is an enemy *near the outside of the tent* my character can’t see *at the start of my turn*. Why would Adayil Crawl? Who Crawls around, when they can walk? It just blows my mind that “thinking horizontally” is essentially metagaming the situation to take advantage of the eccentricities of the ruleset.

You know what? Sometimes people are just f89cking frustrated by things and constantly telling them to “think outside the box” is getting just as if not more annoying than my constant complaining. I try “thinking outside the box” all the time, and most the time I’m told “You can’t do that” or “Well you can, if you have the feat for it”. It’s tiring. It’s enervating. And it sucks all the vestiges of enjoyment out of the game because the box isn’t really very interesting and ultimatey there’s nothing really outside of it except for predetermined mechanical niches. I really feel that a super granular ruleset doesn’t have to at the same time be so recklessly reductive. Otherwise all people are going to do is go down the list of available, metagameable mechanics and try one that might work instead of using ingenuity and storytelling.

I punched the f86king orc. It was a good hit. Apparently non-lethal. I just merely wished I could have used a different hammer and was obviously quite miffed I didn’t have the available cantrip. Unless of course, there really *aren’t* any 1 Action cantrips worth…anything.

Let’s carry on, before Krutk pincers me on the ass…

I believe all those Discussion don't belong into the gameplay thread

As for the content of the complain, I don't believe there significant 1 action damage spells in PF2e and if there are they are probably not worth using.

Spells have the advantage of being
- providing very decent and scaling damage.
- mostly ranged
- always on(without having to draw weapons, stand up etc)
- Able to target specific weak points of the enemy (Instead of always vs. AC)

OTOH spells have the disadvantage of costing 2 or more actions unless they are minor buffs, which makes your action economy that much harder to juggle.
And I don't expect that to become easier in higher levels, you just get better at it.

And finally Damage is not the end of everything in PF2 Some opttions where mentionedd already, but also you could try to hide to make it easier for you to hit them next turn with your electric arc.

Pretty sure I could have just stayed in the tent too! Pretty hidden in there!

Good points on spells Aduriel, though possibly not the prone point. Weapons can still be used prone, even unarmed attacks. Supreme Being and I are in a game where our plucky Half-orc ranger party member managed to drop an opponent with a particularly well placed kick (Critical Hit, unarmed strike) while lying in the prone position. I think it was flavoured as a kick in the unmentionables.

@SB - this talk of spells targeting weak saves brings up an interesting point. As an actual orc, do I get an automatic success to RK orcs, or do you rule that I need to make an RK or Lore: Orcs check. I mean, there probably isn’t much to learn in terms of saves etc, but still, curious.

Pretty sure I could have just stayed in the tent too! Pretty hidden in there!

Good points on spells Aduriel, though possibly not the prone point. Weapons can still be used prone, even unarmed attacks. Supreme Being and I are in a game where our plucky Half-orc ranger party member managed to drop an opponent with a particularly well placed kick (Critical Hit, unarmed strike) while lying in the prone position. I think it was flavoured as a kick in the unmentionables.

Yes, I am not totally firm on all those rules yet, but I assumed as a martial those attacks are at a penalty, while spells still have there full power.

PS: I really don't like how those orcs have positioned themselves. Really put a cramp in my planned spell.

Good points on spells Aduriel, though possibly not the prone point. Weapons can still be used prone, even unarmed attacks. Supreme Being and I are in a game where our plucky Half-orc ranger party member managed to drop an opponent with a particularly well placed kick (Critical Hit, unarmed strike) while lying in the prone position. I think it was flavoured as a kick in the unmentionables.

Yes, I am not totally firm on all those rules yet, but I assumed as a martial those attacks are at a penalty, while spells still have there full power.

PS: I really don't like how those orcs have positioned themselves. Really put a cramp in my planned spell.

@Aduriel - well you are partially correct about Prone as it imparts a -2 circumstance penalty to attack rolls so any spell *without* an attack roll is thus a superior option to a weapon Strike (or other Action with the Attack rider like Trip etc) while also Prone.

Also, speaking of rules, can anyone here help me with this question I had in a game I’m in with Ira - my Fighter just hit 4th level, and I’m looking for a useful feat:

I asked that group the following question:

“Can someone help me parse the Slam Down feat? It says “If you’re wielding a two-handed melee weapon, you can ignore Trip’s requirement that you have a hand free.” Are they just putting that in there for 2-handers? I.e.= Does that mean I can still use the feat to trip if I’m wielding a one-handed weapon and a shield? Or does Trip have the unenviable position of being really, really, situational?”

My GM replied:

“Trip Action Requires you have at least one hand free. Your target can't be more than one size larger than you.

Some weapons have the trip trait that allows you to use the trip action without a free hand.

The Slam Down only removes the free hand requirement for two-hand weapons. Looks like you can't use trip if you are wielding a longsword and shield.

(I may have been playing my druid wrong in another game with regard to trip.)”

Can this be correct? What then is the point of the feat? To *not* be used by a person wielding a sword and shield, or two weapons, but able to be used by a 2-hander? Or I guess, an unarmed attacker. Why make the weird caveat that if both your hands are on one weapon, you can ignore the Trip requirement, but if both hands are on two weapons, or a weapon and a shield….you….can’t ignore the Trip requirement. “Oh, OSW, of course, you idiot, it is in the title. SLAM DOWN. It is clearly a trip.”

Gah. Ok. It really seems like Fighter feats are designed to a)only afford assistance to a category of weapon-style (two-weapon, two-handed, “ranged”*; with little *offensive* support for shield users AND/OR are b) completely situational, and in my opinion, more akin to general Actions any character should be able to commit.

But sure, let’s keep looking.

Hmm. Ok, this looks vaguely great.

Quick Reversal. Alrighty then! Ok, so I have to have gotten myself into a pretty bad situation, flanked on both sides. Sure. That occasionally happens. And, it gives you two strikes for one Action, AND the second strike had the same MAP as the first strike. Yay! ….. Oh, wait a minute. Ha. You got me. It has the Press trait. Of course it does. Which means you can only use this “Action” if you are *already* suffering from MAP. Yep. That makes sense, if I’m being flanked, before I use my special maneuver, I’m going to make a basic, other Strike. Sure. Thanks for nothing Paizo.

Hmm.

Ok, what about….Swipe. Hmm, on the surface it looks ok. Fairly situational again, the foes have to be in reach, and adjacent. It foes cost two Actions however. Also, you have the awesome opportunity of rolling really low for damage and applying it to *both* foes. Yay again! Plus, this one *does* count as two Strikes for MAP. Because nothing feels me better than being punished over and over for just trying to do something interesting beyond “I stab it with my Intimidating Stealth glare of Recall Knowledge.” Also, extra points for being a Flourish traited gated thingy. Because of course, the only time this actually would matter, is if you somehow get an extra action, precisely the only time you might actually *want*, let alone be *able* to do this twice in a round.

I think my problem is that I believe the ruleset chassis is robust, dynamic and elegant, but the feat interactions do absolutely everything possible to return it to narrative stagnancy.

You certainly know about Orc's so you wouldn't need to recall knowledge about the heritage... however you might need a RK: Society Roll to know about this particular clan. I've already revealed that you're familiar with this tribe and their ways, however.

Top of Round 4 action

Telurion steps up to the sergeant and tries to put the leader down. With a roar he swings to split the orc in half.

step, vicious swing

Vicious swing: 1d20 + 10 ⇒ (8) + 10 = 18

dmg: 2d8 + 4 ⇒ (4, 7) + 4 = 15

Not going to reply to a lot of the posts here... but a couple of thoughts.

It was mentioned that nobody used crawl... Imagine the following:

Adayil's muscles were stiff and unyielding due to her being tied up. She flipped over onto her hands and knees in the low tent and crawled to the entrance. She saw one of her captors standing with his back to her and a javelin in hand. Rolling onto her side she cast Electric Arc (Or spell of choice on the creature.
Crawl is only 5-feet, so it isn't always to be taken literally.

As far as steal. The following would be possible:
◆ Rise from Prone
◆ Stride to Orc 4
◆ Thievery check vs. Creatures Perception DC to take either a javelin from his back, or his knuckle dagger. This is one action and can be used untrained.

Top of Round 4 action

Telurion steps up to the sergeant and tries to put the leader down. With a roar he swings to split the orc in half.

step, vicious swing

[dice=Vicious swing]1d20+10

[dice=dmg]2d8+4

I'm assuming you meant to post this in the gameplay thread. I'll resolve it there.

Apologies all, real life presented some snags this week.

17 posts is a lot, I will catch up shortly!

... and now it's 31 posts, but I really am about to read them.

I believe all those Discussion don't belong into the gameplay thread

As for the content of the complain, I don't believe there significant 1 action damage spells in PF2e and if there are they are probably not worth using.

Spells have the advantage of being
- providing very decent and scaling damage.
- mostly ranged
- always on(without having to draw weapons, stand up etc)
- Able to target specific weak points of the enemy (Instead of always vs. AC)

OTOH spells have the disadvantage of costing 2 or more actions unless they are minor buffs, which makes your action economy that much harder to juggle.
And I don't expect that to become easier in higher levels, you just get better at it.

And finally Damage is not the end of everything in PF2 Some opttions where mentionedd already, but also you could try to hide to make it easier for you to hit them next turn with your electric arc.

Normally I try not to go too far down any given rabbit hole, but I can also admit that this intrigued me as I almost always play casters or caster-lite characters ... and I had zero awareness of Scorching Blast from the Kingmaker AP until I looked at this a little bit.

Not entirely sure what its RARE designation derives from, but I will look at the KM Comopanion at some point to figure it out.

A 1-sction somatic-only fire spell that deals this kind of damage is pretty extraordinary. Tbh, with the base damage increasing by d8 for each Heighten, anyone would want this spell.

I thought Orc 4 was female - the narration mentioned something about her and alcohol she had drunk?

As for the crawl scenario - this is PbP. I had no idea what I might see when I hypothetically walked/crawled out of the tent. C’mon, you can’t seriously expect me to use metagame knowledge to see something I can’t see while still resolving my turn after possibly using an action I’ve never seen used before. At least at some point think about what you are suggesting. Yes, it *could* happen, but it could only happen at a face to face table where: I take one action to crawl; then ask you what I can see *without* a Seek action; and then take my other actions based on that new knowledge. I now know I should have taken the time to post a whole bunchof questions about what my options are. I essentially hate that I feel like a complete noob, and have to ask a whole bunch of clarifying statements every time I want to do something that isn’t even out of the ordinary. And SB, your descriptions need to be better. Please tell me what my character can see, before I ask “What can I see”. Sadly, I seem to be the sort of player that relies on information to make a post.

I thought I was being astute by following the lead of Orc 4 and dutifully rising from prone and Striding *just to get out of the f*6king tent*. Sheesh.

The Thievery is a good idea *in theory* but I’m not au fait with the uses of Thievery - I had no idea you could steal objects from people. Which also makes me wonder why *I can* use Thievery to steal from them unawares, while at the same time am *unable* to get the off-guard bonus for attacking them unawares. They totally have their back to my position, but alas, Pathfinder has no facing. It’s like fighting 2d-rendered sprites in a First Person Shooter. ;)

Also, I don’t need to steal a weapon, I just needed to have a one action spell that *actually* is useful (don’t laugh, I actually considered using prestidigitation to try…something…anything…) or…a fist. Because next round, if I’m notdead, I can use all my glorious Actions.

You certainly know about Orc's so you wouldn't need to recall knowledge about the heritage... however you might need a RK: Society Roll to know about this particular clan. I've already revealed that you're familiar with this tribe and their ways, however.

Ah, yep, gotcha. Will look at possibly using RK: Society for deeper info about their clan. Thanks for the heads up.

I thought Orc 4 was female - the narration mentioned something about her and alcohol she had drunk?

As for the crawl scenario - this is PbP. I had no idea what I might see when I hypothetically walked/crawled out of the tent. C’mon, you can’t seriously expect me to use metagame knowledge to see something I can’t see while still resolving my turn after possibly using an action I’ve never seen used before. At least at some point think about what you are suggesting. Yes, it *could* happen, but it could only happen at a face to face table where: I take one action to crawl; then ask you what I can see *without* a Seek action; and then take my other actions based on that new knowledge. I now know I should have taken the time to post a whole bunchof questions about what my options are. I essentially hate that I feel like a complete noob, and have to ask a whole bunch of clarifying statements every time I want to do something that isn’t even out of the ordinary. And SB, your descriptions need to be better. Please tell me what my character can see, before I ask “What can I see”. Sadly, I seem to be the sort of player that relies on information to make a post.

I thought I was being astute by following the lead of Orc 4 and dutifully rising from prone and Striding *just to get out of the f*6king tent*. Sheesh.

The Thievery is a good idea *in theory* but I’m not au fait with the uses of Thievery - I had no idea you could steal objects from people. Which also makes me wonder why *I can* use Thievery to steal from them unawares, while at the same time am *unable* to get the off-guard bonus for attacking them unawares. They totally have their back to my position, but alas, Pathfinder has no facing. It’s like fighting 2d-rendered sprites in a First Person Shooter. ;)

Also, I don’t need to steal a weapon, I just needed to have a one action spell that *actually* is useful (don’t laugh, I actually considered using prestidigitation to try…something…anything…) or…a fist. Because next...

Orc 4 is female. My bad.

* The post about Adayil crawling wasn't meant as a suggestion to what she "Should" do it was an example in response to your comment that the crawl action would never be used in an RPG.

* In response to the non-lethal punching... Are you saying that if you get into a bar fight you're trying to kill whoever you are fighting.

* The seek action is looking for something concealed or you're unaware of. That is not the case here.

* I'll never provide all the details about a situation... but I give great respect and leeway for you to create the details of your situation. As long as it's not outside the rules or overpowering then I'll usually let you create the situation. If I think it's overpowering or takes too much time then I'll let you know.

* I'm not saying what you did is wrong. This in response to you whining about not having a damaging Cantrip that took one action, and that this was your only choice. I was just providing you options that you might have not considered as we learn this "New" game system.

* Let's take the Electric arc spell and make it one action.
◆ Fort Save and two targets take damage.
◆ Fort Save and two targets take damage.
◆ Fort Save and two targets take damage.
That would be way overpowering. It's easy to nit-pick little details... but in my experience the game works fine if not perfect the way it is.

I think perhaps we need to readdress how the timing is working here. Remember it's not chess. It's not one person acting, then another acting. The whole thing is happening in the same (6) Seconds, so these quick judgements and reactions are not only possible but encouraged.

Please feel free to change details about the environment, npc's or treasure as you see fit. I certainly do, and usually encourage this creativity.

Re: Electric Arc: No, let’s make it one Action *with the flourish trait*, which, becomes 2 Action when heightened. That’s my point. It isn’t to make it “overpowered”, it’s to make it satisfyingly useful and in line with being a “cantrip”. I mean, what is a cantrip that separates it from a spell, and a focus spell or a ritual? If it is plinky, like at 1st level, why is it two Actions? And yes, I probably have dissonance from much earlier editions where cantrips were also incredibly slight.

Re: knuckling up in a bar fight: If the patrons are wearing armor and wielding weapons, I’ll be trying to kill, maim and incapacitate. Let alone the fact that foolish people seem to be able to one-punch kill people all the time outside of bars/on the street in Australia, almost “by accident”. It’s like a national pastime.

Re: narrative agency: I am extremely uncomfortable “creating narratively useful physical materia, situations, objects” etc. This strikes me as either an incredibly reckless move to offer such as the GM, or an incredibly relaxed GM. I much prefer to rely on you to explain what my character sees, to create the world, so that I can react to it. I very much dislike “shared creation” as in every single case you get wildly different concepts of what the shared world actually is, ending up with a pastiche of poor, disjointed and jarring concepts at variance with one another and not at all assisting verisimilitude. To be clear: I don’t think this is lazy or passive on my behalf, I move in as much as I can with the little I allow myself - Krutk’s form, my tribe. That’s about it. The rest is, in my opinion, entirely on you and, again, in my opinion, you should revel in it and run it how you see fit.

Re: timing - yep I get it. You don’t see or understand everything, but still, every bit helps the player make a decision based on what they understand their character sees, hears, smells, touches etc…

Re: “whining”. Ha! Guilty as charged! You think I don’t notice that by and large, it’s only me that has a problem?!? Clearly I’m the problem!!!

re: The Kingmaker spell.

Spells, Archetypes, and other things from APs are almost always at least uncommon. This is for a variety of reasons beyond letting the GM say no to them. Primarily, it is because they are often rewards in that AP or something you can learn from people in it, and that's really cool. Save someone's life, and they teach you a new spell, and the player feels extra rewarded. They are often used as a sort of unlock, as well. Finish this AP, and you can use this going forward.

re: Fighter feats.

Swipe can be useful or niche, depending on the campaign. Dungeon crawls in tight quarters where enemies will be stacked up. Useful. Lots of wide-open battlefields like we've had, less so.

Quick Reverse can be very powerful. You make a full MAP strike against one foe, then you get to make [i]two[i] more Strikes, one against each Flanking foe, both of which are likely to hit with Fighter accuracy and still have an action left. It's action compression.

Slam Down is great primarily because Trip is brokenly OP. Normally to Trip, you need a free hand or a weapon with the trip trait. With a two-handed weapon, you do not have a free hand as both are used on the weapon.

So, say you have a great sword and want to Trip someone. Without Slam Down you have this locked-in action sequence:

Free Action: Release Grip to give you a free hand. Action 1: Trip. Action 2: Regrip Weapon. Action 3: Strike.

With it, you have: Action 1: Trip, Action 2: Strike, Action 3 whatever you want.

I am all for continuing this fascinating discussion, especially since it also concerns How I develop my Wizard, but in the meantime that orc is slipping oin his banana peel and would greatly benefit from knowing if lies on his behind or not :-)

Im currently onsite at a customer so won't be able to resolve till late afternoon.

<<snip>>

◆ Thievery check vs. Creatures Perception DC to take either a javelin from his back, or his knuckle dagger. This is one action and can be used untrained.

Steal using Thievery states: "you automatically fail if the creature who has the object is in combat or on guard."

* That electric arc above isn't heightened. If you were level one and it was a one action spell that's what you could do. And... no MAP as it requires a save and it's not an attack.

* Caks... Thanks for the clarification on that. I do know you've got to read to the end of the paragraph in PF2e. I would however allow the character to take the stealth action and move half speed. If succeeded I would have allowed the thievery check.

* Collaborated World Building... I must admit I've been both running and playing RPGs since 1977, and that is the first time I've had someone say they weren't interested in helping with the world building. All I've gamed with feel they're more involved in the story and the world that they've helped create. But... I note what you desire out of the game and will try to provide more. This requires a giant investiture of time on my part to come up with every detail... but I'll do what I can to provide more detail. This is the reason I quickly tire of video RPG's is that the detail of the world is there, and you can't go outside of what's presented.

* I tend to change things about the world when I make mistakes. For instance in this battle, I forgot all Orcs have "Die Hard" which could have changed the battle quite a bit... but instead of backtracking I have decided that there is a reason that this particular tribe of orcs does not have this ability... but it's been replaced by something else... which might or might not be revealed if you follow that part of the twisting path of the adventure. I'm DM'ing off the cuff at the moment. The battle vs. the undead in the town was an adventure but everything else has been written by me... so I'm sure I'll continue to make mistakes. Please feel free to point them out, and I'll try not to repeat them.

* RPG Analogy: While at the customer today I came up with an analogy which I feel like perfectly capsulizes the way I approach Gaming. I'll call it the coloring book approach.

1. The adventure / campaign is a coloring book.
2. The PC's and characters are the crayons. Some like a basic (8) pack and some want the giant (64) colors pack. Both are fine.
3. The rules are the lines of the pictures you choose to paint. Some like to always stay in the lines, and some just give a general idea. You can also choose to color your trees blue, and sky Green if that's what you feel like doing.
4. The completed picture is what we do with the adventure... and as they say beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. (I am colorblind in real life BTW).

Personally, I'd rather you all help me color in the book instead of handing you a completely colored in page.

not familiar with "MAP", someone enlighten me.

Multiple attack penalty

thank you.

That electric arc above isn't heightened. If you were level one and it was a one action spell that's what you could do. And... no MAP as it requires a save and it's not an attack.

If it was a level one spell, and it wasn’t heightened, but it *did* have the flourish trait, then that’s what you couldn’t do, and it wouldn’t be overpowered.

* As for worldbuilding, you are taking what I said to an extreme position. I’m happy to collaborate, but I’m not wanting to create my surroundings, tell *you* or the other folks what I see or hear - I’ve never in my experience since…1982? seen that, or seen it work. My job as a player is to interpret and act accordingly, not to make up the color of the walls, the type of weather we are having or the current temperature. Or if there is a handy rock I can pick up and smash over the head of the orc. You say that there is a line we can’t cross, and in PbP, that is going to be really, really hard to determine.

I want to inhabit the world you, as the GM are presenting. I’m not asking for anything *extra* just a little more description of what it is around me where you think it might help players interpret where they are. Surroundings, light levels, weather; what our foes *obviously are wearing/holding* - the more you add the tiniest of touches, the more we can bounce off. That doesn’t mean we will, or even realise that the drawn curtains are aiding the shadow-creature, but we can’t bounce off what isn’t there.

* I don’t get point 3 part of your analogy. I think it needs to be clearer. Not surprising given you and I see the rules and the way the rules are interpreted so differently.

@Supreme Being - I now realise something very clearly - you and I are almost diametrically opposed.

I want the rules to be loose and pliable, able to comport themselves to needs of the narrative. You want the rules to be solid and able to accommodate and navigate every action the players wish to do.

I want the world to be solid and robust, detailed and described as presented by you so that I can feel comfortable moving within it. You want the world to be open and collaborative to allow the players agency and help with the worldbuilding.

Neither of is right, neither of us is wrong. We are just diametrically opposed.

Also, there totally is a rock on the ground next to Adayil. I think….yep….I can almost see it on the map. It’s brown. And rocky. Like our relationship. ;)

Supreme Being wrote:

That electric arc above isn't heightened. If you were level one and it was a one action spell that's what you could do. And... no MAP as it requires a save and it's not an attack.

If it was a level one spell, and it wasn’t heightened, but it *did* have the flourish trait, then that’s what you couldn’t do, and it wouldn’t be overpowered.

* As for worldbuilding, you are taking what I said to an extreme position. I’m happy to collaborate, but I’m not wanting to create my surroundings, tell *you* or the other folks what I see or hear - I’ve never in my experience since…1982? seen that, or seen it work. My job as a player is to interpret and act accordingly, not to make up the color of the walls, the type of weather we are having or the current temperature. Or if there is a handy rock I can pick up and smash over the head of the orc. You say that there is a line we can’t cross, and in PbP, that is going to be really, really hard to determine.

I want to inhabit the world you, as the GM are presenting. I’m not asking for anything *extra* just a little more description of what it is around me where you think it might help players interpret where they are. Surroundings, light levels, weather; what our foes *obviously are wearing/holding* - the more you add the tiniest of touches, the more we can bounce off. That doesn’t mean we will, or even realise that the drawn curtains are aiding the shadow-creature, but we can’t bounce off what isn’t there.

* I don’t get point 3 part of your analogy. I think it needs to be clearer. Not surprising given you and I see the rules and the way the rules are interpreted so differently.

I really don't understand what you're saying regarding the Electric Arc CANTRIP. What I'm saying is that if it was one action... not heightened in any way that you could still do 2d4 damage to (2) different creatures (3x) in one round with no multiple attack penalty.

Point three of my "Coloring Book" analogy simply means that this is the way the individual applies the rules which are defined by the lines of the picture to be colored. These are the choices you as a character make to use whichever "Crayon" you want in whatever color you want... as long as it addresses the presented image.

1. Here is the set-up
2. Here is the character I've designed to accomplish these goals.
3. Here is the way my character chooses to adapt to the current scene.
4. This is what we have created.

Caks Actions

[ooc]Caks made a caveat for her third action:

Caks wrote:

{If Orc prone and is dead after the first strike, then move following the blue arrow}

[/ooc]

That is true... but things changed a bit

◆ Caks attacked and one-shot killed the Orc next to him
◆ Caks moved 25' along the designated path.
◆ If Caks continues along the path then he's moving himself next to Orc 4 with no actions left. If he throws his dagger he gets an attack, if he takes some other action then he can do so. Moving next to the creature with no actions left would be a poor use of action economy as you're not forcing the enemy to use an action to move to you.

*SB - my point about electric arc is entirely theoretical. The way to “balance” this heinously overpowered 1 Action homebrewed electric arc is to also throw the flourish trait on it, which then prevents it from being used more than once per round. All this would do would be to give a caster more options for things to do with one now unused Action than they could have - freed up agency and narrative power for characters that aren’t otherwise given a lot. It would prevent them using any other 1 Action Cantrip (as you would make them all 1 Action, but with flourish) and therefore wouldn’t just move the problem around.

The whole make Cantrips one action thing seems great on paper, *if* you only consider yourself in this one situation.

How would it be broken?

Well, first of all, *every* caster in the game would be able to Cast a normal 2-action spell, and then a cantrip. That alone would be bad enough.

But, wait, anyone who took any dedication that allowed spellcasting would be able to cast a Cantrip as their third action. That would be significant power creep.

How would you adjust Magus? Would you make Spellstrike 1 action when done with a cantrip? It's two currently, but that's because Cast a Spell costs 2 actions, so it's reasonable action compression. Would you let a Magus Spell Strike twice in one round, as long as one was a Cantrip?

How about once you hit level 3 and Cantrips scaled? A spell slot spell, plus an auto-heightened damage cantrip would be insane damage output and take us back to the days when once you hit level 7 or so, casters would be all that mattered.

How about with enemies? Would you be happy when that enemy caster got to both Cast a Spell and then lay into someone with a cantrip?

Cantrips in PF2 are not D&D 3.5's do 1d3 damage things. They are effective all the way to level 20. You may use them less as you get more spell slots, but when you pull them out, they still have an impact.

I posited initially that once heightened above 1st level version, all cantrips become 2 Action activities.

I don’t see a particular problem with Spell and Cantrip, because Spell still uses up a slot, so there resources (limited spellslots) become the limitation.

Spellstrike….possibly keep it at 2 Action given it really is 2 things, but possibly not - also see the resources point above. Amd if not, give Spellstrike the flourish trait.

Sure, monsters can do it if you can. At least that is SB’s mantra. But given monsters are built differently than PCs though still beholden to the same spell mechanics and action economy, I’m sure it could be tweaked.

Honestly though, this is more about low-level agency for casters than improving power or damage output.