Alex Freeman's page

For best designed I really like the ranger. A good selection of skills, a little bit of casting, a wide range of combat styles, and some really unique abilities.

For most fun, cleric.

How often does your group meet? And have you decided what you're going to do about the sword? I'm curious to see how this goes for you.

Alex Freeman wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Alex Freeman wrote:

I don't get it, why don't you guys just house rule it? As James has said, it's a great idea and it will most likely be implemented in Pathfinder 2e, it will probably not be errata'd anytime soon, so why not skip the justification, because I think everyone will agree that at some level the ranger deserves Acrobatics. Even if you disagree, the game is already set up for you! Maybe I'll never understand the dynamics of beating a dead horse or arguing on a forum...

What are we to talk about on this forum then? And who is to tell us what we can talk about?

I suppose it's just me. Sorry to interrupt the thread.

Beside, the "you can house rule it otherwise" is not a valid argument when criticizing a rule. If it was a valid argument, then Paizo could sell us a book containing 575 blank pages for 52,99$ and ask us to write our own rules in it.

Sure we can always modify the rules that we don't like, but that doesn't change anything about the quality of the rules as written.

I'm not arguing against it, I'm completely for it. I just figured since James stated it was something he'd consider for the next iteration that it wouldn't need to be justified as a skill for rangers anymore. It's not going to be modified any time soon in an errata, by the ways James posted, so I just didn't think it needed anymore convincing.

Also, I totally think "you can house rule it" is a valid argument for criticizing a rule. Some people think Leadership is broken and house rule it away. I don't think there is a problem with Leadership, I've never had a problem with it in play, but some people have different tastes. House rules are like cultural cousine, everyone has a style they use, each unique to the group.

Alex Freeman wrote:

I don't get it, why don't you guys just house rule it? As James has said, it's a great idea and it will most likely be implemented in Pathfinder 2e, it will probably not be errata'd anytime soon, so why not skip the justification, because I think everyone will agree that at some level the ranger deserves Acrobatics. Even if you disagree, the game is already set up for you! Maybe I'll never understand the dynamics of beating a dead horse or arguing on a forum...

What are we to talk about on this forum then? And who is to tell us what we can talk about?

I suppose it's just me. Sorry to interrupt the thread.

I don't get it, why don't you guys just house rule it? As James has said, it's a great idea and it will most likely be implemented in Pathfinder 2e, it will probably not be errata'd anytime soon, so why not skip the justification, because I think everyone will agree that at some level the ranger deserves Acrobatics. Even if you disagree, the game is already set up for you! Maybe I'll never understand the dynamics of beating a dead horse or arguing on a forum...

For reference there was a post about this before.

I smell what you're stepping in Quandary, good point. I was trying to connect the two and overlooked that. Personally, I've never had a player bring it up and never really thought about it, myself, but will definately keep weapon finesse in mind if I ever manage to find a game to play in.

Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

"Armed" Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks).

Since unarmed attacks are light weapons and a touch attack is considered an unarmed attack then I think it makes sense to be able to use weapon finesse.

OP asks the question "Is Total Concealment the same thing as invisibility?" It isn't the same thing, but in many situations, the result is effectively the same.

This. As written, they are different. You can interpret all day with specific scenarios and situations. What it comes down to is that the two effects are not identical.

Believe me, I'm not saying that's how it has to be. You can use whatever rules you want for the two, as long as everyone is having a good time.

I think the easiest way to differentiate the two is the RAW. If you're hiding in the dark and have total concealment, darkvision can still see you. If you're invisible and have total concealment, darkvision does nothing.

If we're talking about someone without darkvision it's not terribly different. Invisible is a status effect. You only get the +20/+40 Stealth bonus if you are invisible, not for total concealment, by RAW. So, invisibility and total concealment are fundamentally different.

Does the guard have any concealment from the fog? If so, sneak attack is a moot point.

Hello.

I’m reduced to zero HP (not really, except in the long view, don't call emergency services; also by an attack that is not nonlethal) and I have the Wounded 1 condition.

Because I have Wounded 1, I get Dying 2, right? One for being reduced to 0 HP and 1 for having Wounded 1.

Now I fail my first DC 12 flat(ish) check for recovery, which means that my Dying value increases by 1 (to 3) AND (according to Player Core Remaster page 411) it also increases by +1 because I am wounded, for Dying 4, which means I am dead.

Seems a bit harsh and, more to the point, it seems there is very little point in having levels to the Wounded condition except in the edge cases of a PC having a Dying threshold of more than 4, unless it is to allow you to recover once then fail then recover, which seems...complicated.

Given that you are already adding in the Wounded condition when you first gain the Dying condition, do the rules really require that you add it in again every time you fail a save/take damage or am I misreading this?

I mean, whatever, I’m not doing it, I’m just asking because it seems odd and unnecessarily convoluted if that is the actual intention.

Apologies if this has already been addressed but there are an awful lot of posts on the topic of Wounded and I could not see this addressed.

So this came up tonight.

Someone protected by the Sanctuary spell is in the area of effect of an attack.

Sanctuary says that it DETERS attacks, which implies it prevents the protected person being attacked rather than protects them from attacks directly/makes them immune.

Interpretation: everyone in an AoE is attacked/targeted. Sanctuary does not protect the subject but does deter (read: prevent if the save is failed) attacks.

Moreover a failed save says that the action is wasted.

So if someone with Sanctuary protection is within the area of an AoE attack does that then (on a failed save) prevent the attack from working at all i.e. for any target in the AoE?

The Attack Trait is not relevant here, I believe, as that is only used to determine whether the Multiple Attack Penalty applies.

So the options seem to be:

1. AoE attacks ignore Sanctuary.
2. AoE attacks ignore someone protected by Sanctuary within the AoE.
3. AoE attacks against someone targeted by an AoE...
3a. are not used (the 'charge' is preserved) but the action used to try and use the AoE is gone
3b. are used but can not include the person protected by Sanctuary in the AoE (you can reposition the AoE)
3c. are used but have no effect if someone protected by Sanctuary is in the AoE
3d. Something else.

Hello, bit new to running Pathfinder 2e and Foundry VTT. Minor spoilers.

I've got the Beginner Box for Foundry VTT and I'm running a party through it. Just got to the second level and the first room has a couple of creatures armed with crossbows. When I click on the crossbow action it says that it can not be used because the crossbow needs reloading but, unlike PC character sheets, there is no reload option.

I can get around it by modifying the traits of the crossbow to either remove the reload trait, or setting the reload to 0, but there has to be a better way, right?

What am I missing?