That's a great catch.
There are still reasons one might Delay (and perhaps too much of that depends on meta-knowledge of when the Commander goes), but it's no longer a given for the most common Tactics.
Search Posts
Any bonuses to damage would have to be offset by penalties so the net result remains the same, such is the tight balance of PF2's numbers. A proportion of damage is random/dice and the rest is static/bonuses. PF2 is a bit more consistent there than PF1 where weapon dice via size & energy damage (often Holy) were about the only ways to increase the random portion. I remember being stunned that weapon dice increase in PF2, "That's so much!", but this was alongside "DR from a shield!" so there was a legit tension in one's weapon choices (later noticing the importance of free hands & how some feats/equipment that made that valuable). So while having the net result end up the same seems feeble to me, it's better than trying to increase the dice via size without an offsetting bonus to other choices. And I'm saying this as someone who loved piling up my weapon dice in PF1. And introducing bonuses to alternate options is too much of an overhaul! (Never mind its rippling effects on everything else.) So while size matters psychologically, even narratively, it shouldn't matter mechanically; too late for that. PF2's parts are too tuned for one cog to swell in importance. Yes, there can be a disconnect looking at a giant's 1d4 dagger next to a Halfling's 1d12 greatsword, but in play much of that washes away, i.e. giant's seldom use daggers and a Halfling with a greatsword will typically be an astounding anomaly much like those thin anime heroes stronger than beefy brawlers. Then there's how hit points are only partially physical anyway, much of it being plot armor and/or preternatural ability, which implies increases in damage might have similar elements beyond the weight of one's weapon.
I thought the rarity system explicitly *wasn’t* supposed to be about in combat power. I hadn't referenced combat power, had I? The Treasure Vault is notorious for its leniency, some have said sloppiness. The updated version fixed some instances thankfully. In this instance it's about the imbalance of action-item efficiency, mirroring that of the Uncommon gloves/belts I did reference (and the gloves which have long been a staple item). I don't find the Potion Patch particularly powerful, but when a new item changes the metagame so much there should be reservations which I think the Uncommon trait addresses. Hmm, or maybe it is power creep and should be nixed? Also the narrative-RPGer in me balks at heroes suddenly spamming patches as if it's a fashion fad. If anything, this means wealthy NPCs expecting battle on a given day should also be sporting them, especially those whose tactics mention drinking a potion (like say Invisibility to escape where saving actions and avoiding Reactive Strikes is critical). Giants and others that carry manufactured magic items should want these too for raids, but what are the chances we'll ever a Potion Patch in a published adventure? Practically zero. The fad should've spread far and wide...unless explained by them being Uncommon. Reminds me of a situation GMing Deadlands where there's a cheap piece of equipment for +1 to a gun's attacks. I said I'd let the PCs buy them if the players let the NPCs equip them. The players refrained.
It's that unarmed attacks are not weapons, natural or otherwise. Just informing. No blame. It is something Fighters need to pay attention to too, and Twin Takedown Rangers. Hmm, "they function like weapons in every way except..." might even be misleading since those exceptions are numerous. I think Paizo kinda wrote themselves into a corner, running out of synonyms that distinguish nouns from verbs without getting too esoteric. "Unarmed type of attack" is too clunky, and apparently they wanted to avoid "weapon" on purpose though it worked as PF1 jargon and likely what a nature documentary would call them.
I will miss the aboleths, as OP as their illusions were for their level.
"Edit: let me change the perspective a little. Imagine a 4500gp permanent item that said 1 action, once per 10 minutes, quicken self (strike+stride only). Price equal to 50 quickness potions. Likely enough to last your whole career, and then some. This would be a great pickup, and probably better than most real printed items. It's even better as potions since you don't have to buy them in crazy bulk. But you can, same way you might buy that 4500gp item."
I'd buy that item, and (if it weren't so high a level item) would use it more than 50 times because I'd spam it pre-combat at most doors. :-) Saying it's better than most real printed items highlights the problem rather than supports allowing the bulk purchase. IMO this goes back more to the Potion Patch though, one of those Treasure Vault items that should've been caught in editing and made Uncommon if unchanged (if only for the same reasons as Gloves of Storing/Retrieval Belts). Look at Propulsive Boots, 3,000 g.p. for 1/day! Level 13, no Strikes, & Invested too (even though yes, it does have a mediocre speed boost). That's the baseline to measure against. --
Sure, maybe that's too granular when Paizo made a point of simplifying buying, but GMs do have to consider verisimilitude otherwise PCs could build insta-armies with their gold. (Lord knows a bunch of low-level individuals armed with splash weapons can obliterate many Troops). To clarify, I'm not against the ideas to overcome the issues, most of which would work in a higher-level world (i.e. Forgotten Realms w/ its hordes of archmagi), but I think it's unfeasible in most situations. And given the undue impact mechanically, not worth allowing anyway.
Um, okay, but why you called an unarmed attack a natural weapon isn't the point, is it? It's that unarmed attacks are not weapons, natural or otherwise. And neither are Handwraps, though they often get explicit exceptions to qualify in specific instances. Not so in this case and I'd figured you'd want to know. As for Paizo's reasoning why, naturally you'd have to ask Paizo or bypass them and ask your GM to bend the rules. Paizo encourages tables having authority anyway so they don't have to address every specific instance, like say antlers which could easily hold a Banner (it seems) or tiny weapons where a GM might disallow it (as another commenter said they'd do). If you're not going to use Brandish Tactics, consider Plant Banner.
Common for an 8th level item is different than common for a 0th level item, much like how common 8th level monsters aren't something hunters commonly run into vs. say boars and bears. And something being available differs from something being available in bulk. How many high level customers are fighting daily (or much, much more)? AND we're talking about the highest levels here when such items become affordable to the PC. That's late IMO for this melee build to come online...for a basic Strike. I'd expect to see Heightened Haste showing up around these levels instead anyway (though maybe not so much in a party with a Commander who can get those martials into position). Availability & lateness aside, one also needs a free hand holding the potion and to spend an action drinking it. Both have ramifications on build and tactics that the potion and its Strike don't warrant. Only my martials who already have a free hand would bother, and those with weapons are more likely to carry a Whetstone at the highest levels. Alley-Oop would change the dynamics, but that's a complex strategy highly dependent on the party.
Yeah, "3rd action should be Strike" (for a melee build) presupposes the Commander's in position, has built & equipped for it, and lacks enough allies to make a 1-action Tactic worthwhile. I'd say it also relies on using a two-handed weapon since they lack a damage boost. All of that, then sure, one should Strike/round. But the odds of payoff + opportunity cost don't feel worth the investment, and that's not counting the competing 3rd actions available (IF one doesn't already have to move for one's Banner to work), i.e. Bon Mot as Claxon mentioned or commanding one's animal or others from the class feats. If I did end up in the thick of things I'd rather Raise a Shield or Aid or maybe Battle Medicine. A ranged build is more feasible, though the damage remains mediocre. But hey, it's at range so it's consistent and fills an important niche in some terrains & battles. It trades out cashing in on Bulwark, but pure Dex is ultimately better anyway. As for running out of Reactions to pass out, I think most martials would prefer a Stride + guaranteed Strike attempt over no Stride + possible Strike attempt. And one can give that bonus Reaction to any such exceptional PC. While there are few reasons to have two hands free, there are many actions worth having a hand free. If one hand's already accounted for, then having one's Banner on a Free-Hand weapon in the other adds utility. OrochiFuror, "natural weapon" is a PF1 designation that might lead to thinking an unarmed attack counts as a weapon in PF2. It doesn't, so you can't put your Banner on it (w/o GM permission of course).
Yes, not making attacks yourself makes perfect sense. It's more that you're making attacks via proxy, and those attacks are better than yours. Look at the key Tactic Demoralizing Charge; it gives you two better Strikes (no MAP) and Strides to position your allies (making their turns better) and a fear effect as frosting. It's rather ridiculous IMO, but Paizo's generous to support actions. I imagine many martials would Delay to make better use of it much like for Haste. It does require two melee martial allies for best effect (and in a small party that has ramifications), but it's even worth the two actions if you only get one Stride + Strike out of it, plus another ally could Stride forward. At 1st, Strike Hard! is like getting a melee attack at range (and again, it's from a PC w/ better Strikes). Fortunate Blow (12th) seems like the only ability making Strikes tempting, ranged ones that is. A Commander should have better actions to take than moving (except to keep allies in their Banner aura) and isn't built that tough (even feebler if they had to invest in Str on top of Int). If one does use their shield to survive, that hurts both actions and damage (though if you have enough allies who can benefit from it, Shields Up! does recoup those actions and more for the party as a whole). Of course Shields Up! works fine for a non-striker too; may as well have a shield if Bulk's fine. If one wants to build a striking Commander they're much better off building a martial class PC w/ MCD Commander. This suits the classic fantasy imagery better, i.e. the class's iconic's backstory that reads more like a Barbarian w/ MCD Commander.
There don't seem to be any limits, and I'd recommended free-hand weapons in a thread a while back. You could also put the banner on a shield boss or shield spikes for similar results. It leads to odd imagery, a flowing banner hanging from one's hand essentially, but it works. Just remember you wouldn't count as holding the banner whenever your free-hand weapon doesn't count as a weapon. And since Commanders lack damage boosts to Strikes, they're more dependent on weapon size if interested in dealing damage. But I think melee Commander is both more dangerous and less productive than other builds so yeah, a free-hand weapon works fine. Make your impact through your minions, I mean peers and valued party members, that's what Commanders are best at.
Given how many people who dislike 4th do like PF2 or happily have switched over from PF1, you're in the minority, Cory. Maybe you make that comparison out of a similar sense of betrayal? I see you've GMed tons of PF1, so likely have such deep attachment that it's hard to shift over. Sorry about that, but I'm not sure what you hope to achieve by venting here other than spreading sorrow. I'd think there'd be Reddit threads about this where you might find similarly minded folk to gripe with. Maybe 3rd parties (with Paizo people even) still create 3.X/PF1 material (though PF2 should be easy to adapt, much easier than 4th would be). I found 4th a major hiccup which discarded much of my accumulated DnD savvy, something I do not experience with PF2. Having DMed/GMed 100+ games of 3.X/PF1 I find PF2 superior to PF1 and a natural extrapolation of the game's origins when factoring in modern understanding of game theory. Some of that overlaps with choices made by 4th ed developers, but as Paizo's noted (maybe in this thread even), the changes in PF2 that resemble ones in 4th were developed before 4th existed. And oh my gosh PF2's higher levels are so, so much easier to balance, adapt, and run than PF1's (and 4th's balance was lopsided throughout). So yeah, have to disagree with you; I'm still loving Paizo's choices. Good luck to you in finding a gaming home.
Well, yeah, "nobody's forced" is the solution and truth (and PFS GMs running older material need to be aware of this when a scenario lists "generic" ghoul, the situation might warrant using the legacy version like if a harpy's effects need to be sound based for the listed tactics.) But what I find interesting is how the zeitgeist will shift over the decades. Not that PF necessarily dominates that, but "stinky ghouls" and "windy harpies" will become the norm for newer PF players who'll become the grognards of 2050...in whatever awesome, tech-based way that becomes. I also think PCs would notice a difference between stinky area and Stench itself. One might need to toss in some red herrings re: Stench. Hopefully alchemy to turn off Stench would be cheap since it's not giving a power, it's removing one, and so low-level ghouls (et al) could reasonably access it. That is for y'all who see hunger-driven ghouls as being able to act civil around fresh food. Their images were primarily feral and they used to be Chaotic Evil. So even though ghoul cities date back to Gygax, the concept eludes me, comparable to a cannibalistic post-apocalyptic raider outpost except somehow able to transcend into even larger scope...with municipal services? Oh well, nobody's forced to play with such cities either.
Hmm, has anybody sniffed Mr. Jacobs recently?
So yeah, civilized ghouls (which IMO was an oxymoron) can't function with such a stench. Their cities must smell wretched, but funnily enough that also means any visitors should have the one-minute immunity to stench auras ongoing at the beginning of most combats (assuming they're strong enough to easily make the save DC of the mundane ghouls). Hmm, this consistent need to save vs. stench would make infiltration difficult too, as natural 1s would reveal most people who'd need to resort to infiltration, assuming being Sickened enough to be Slowed stood out. Hmm, some older material had ghoul troops working alongside or for snobbish types that I doubt would accept such odors in their presence. Not that they'd have smelled fine before, but we're talking now about smells that impair people.
I really hoped they would not do 3-4 because getting the Striking Rune at level 4 makes Martials a completely different beast. It's more awkward than that, it's only some martials, the ones with big die weapons, that get a huge leap. Swashbuckler & Rogue, for example, get two smaller ones: Striking at 4th plus a damage boost at 5th. So even a 4th-5th level adventure would have distinct differences (as well as Fireball for the casters & stat boots). So it kinda has to be 3rd-4th. The difference between 1st & 2nd can be large too, depending. Much harder to kill a 2nd level martial who just purchased heavy armor than their 1st level counterpart. And if anything, highlighting these power gaps emphasizes Paizo's (likely) reasoning for tightening the level bands.
"There are lots of ways to justify nearly anything happening in a story."
This is the heart of any answer re: Golarion infrastructure, more so given how Paizo regards narrative as more the driver of the setting than vice-versa. In the older policy re: submissions (which I'm unsure Paizo even accepts anymore, rather contracts out), Paizo gave PFS authors the freedom to introduce new concepts into Golarion lore...as long as the geographical impact was limited. So you could have a rural village with a unique deity with its own holiday, a lost valley with bizarre physiology/evolution, or on this topic, as backward or forward a sense of infrastructure as one needs for one's scenario in its distinct space. Broad-scale infrastructure like postal systems and road networks would still be left to setting devs (who in turn might upgrade/downgrade infrastructure as suits a major project like an AP). But if a scenario required a unique dam built by a genius in the remote wilderness, that might be a marvel of Golarion tech surpassing Absalom's best (though perhaps not Numberia's unless set nearby). I imagine if said scenario involved the collapse or destruction of said infrastructure, all the better to explain why such ideas don't impact Golarion in the future (until desired). And then there all the Vaults underground where you could introduce continent-level infrastructure and have some authorities like in Numeria who contain their knowledge to themselves. So Kineticist construction companies, dragon delivery, and...well, there's already steampunk and Wild West tech broadly available. Couple those with magical creatures and one can stretch pretty far, with little off the table (your group's table) if it suits y'all. It's a bit reminiscent of how superhero tech usually works, where earthshaking advancements shake only a manageable portion of the earth. Writing this brought to mind dogfighting dragons with Gatling guns on their backs. Dunno why, they'd probably be better wielding them. :-)
Because of the elven immunity to dnd ghoul's paralysis, I always thought it was a nod to LotR where even the dwarf Gimli has terror paralysing him from entering the subterranean way guarded by undead, whereas the elf Legolas feels no such fright. Maybe post-hoc, but originally that trait appeared in Chainmail, D&D's fantasy-war simulation predecessor. Elves were expensive, but were just as susceptible to ghoul paralysis which proved too big an Achilles heel for game balance so they made elves immune to ghoul paralysis. Since proto-D&D used Chainmail creatures on a smaller scale (I believe in a sewer even), the abilities carried over as part of the lore. (No citation available, but I believe it was from a printed interview.)
The ability says it's nourishing, so it does nourish no matter its duration, as long as you eat it before it's gone. And for water, you could just squeeze juices into your mouth. That should qualify even if one has to dedicate a certain percent of the produce to the water stat rather than the food stat. Obstacle overcome (for better or worse narratively). And as noted before, this is what the Kineticist does. At worst they might get fatigued from ceaseless effort, but if augmenting some of the other resource successes of the party this obstacle simply isn't one. (I've seen it happen with other scenarios when the party simply had emphasized that type of threat, but it does come at the cost of not addressing other obstacles as thoroughly.) Arguably Kineticists should've been Uncommon given how they can break so many scenarios (except they were already established in PF1). Even post-Kineticist scenarios have a hard time accounting for their endless resources so a GM should be alert to this possibility at session zero. Heck, in the infrastructure thread Kineticists pose a major X factor as to what's possible, being more impactful than labor & spell slots at least per Kineticist, so infrastructure questions depend on how many there are as much as most factors.
Lol, Rust Monsters.Who know what society might have achieved without them. I think of them as underground dwellers, but yeah, if there was a long line of food/railway, it'd only take one (or gasp, a breeding couple) to derail the next car. Heck, sentient scavengers of many types might not even recognize a railway's purpose (much like happened in rural Japan w/ telegraphs and Eastern Europe w/ internet wiring!).
With Walls of Stone I wonder how viable stone railways might be, not so much on a regional scale, but local in a city, mine system, or port. Again the Kineticists would do even better here. They're so game-changing.
Overall it feels like most of these data are first impressions from a veteran player more than a guide. Thank you for adding quotes. :-) Caveats should be the norm for most Tactics. This is the most party-dependent class there is (as you've noted). For Strike Hard, if you think it loses its oomph, then it could have different ratings by PC level because yeah, Demoralizing Charge dominates when it arrives. So I could see several ratings for each Tactic, one for PFS w/ zero party knowledge, one for when there's party synergy (both which you have, so yay!), and others if level/newly competing Tactics arise later. I'd likely add more, like noting which ones work well w/ Plant Banner's risks plus which have synergy with a melee vs. ranged vs. non-combatant Commander (which I prefer). Also I'd reckon a Commander's Strikes about as valuable as the second/MAP attack of a dedicated martial given the class's opportunity costs (and the movement needed for melee is hardly worth the Tactics lost). If you agree, point that out to prospective players. A Commander focused on Strikes works better as an MCD Commander IMO. The stats section feels shallow, maybe separate for different builds? Cover Int as primary vs. secondary cost/benefit. Weigh the stats vs. each other more, i.e. Wis has "definitely invest in this", but is ranked Green, decent. What's a reader to make of that, much less a new player? Plant Banner is a game-changer, even if risky. I go into detail in a post many moons ago (and I seldom start a thread so it's easy to find if interested), but the primary tidbit is it's worth it even if you just Plant & pick up. The temp h.p. remain, even if they don't refresh. I love the Commander's AC, but 5 stars? Must one really have a very good reason not to choose this? It's a major build commitment, takes a valuable action, and IMO requires some party support to cover a Commander's gaps, i.e. healing it. With so many blues at 2nd level, there should be some guidance on how to pick from among them. You're just reiterating what they do & clapping.
Reactive Strike should only be blue for melee Commanders (which is obvious to us, but you're even saying Wizards should take it which is silly and might mislead a new player reading this). Fortunate Blow IS game-changing, I agree, which should be mentioned in its prereqs (which alone are mediocre IMO) and in choosing one's overall build-type. I might put Confusing Commands in the same category, bad prereq, but game-changing feat; if playing into high levels it'd be a major reason I wouldn't ignore Int...if the prereq didn't interfere. ---
I'd think a new player needs to review this with a purpose in mind. If they just went with the "best-rated" feats it'd be a mess. So an opening about the different builds would help.
Pure speculation...
So instead of the scenario's trying to fit in a range of PCs (and perhaps losing some precision for some of that range/one of those tracks), it's the PCs that are adjusted to fit in the scenarios. Which yes, is done already with mismatched parties so it's not a foreign concept. I'm reminded of the earliest PFS1 scenarios with extreme level ranges, and it made all the difference in the world whether Lord so&so was at fireball levels or not, making for quite different table experiences and NPC tactics. "Don't play adventure X at high level" was an occasional warning. With level differences mattering more in PF2, maybe this further tightening is necessary for finer tuning and more effective writing & balance. As mentioned, just spitballing.
A Master in Survival w/ Forager can feed 16 people per Subsist. In a forest or jungle with an easy DC, one could take the -5 to do it in 8 hours (and maybe hire extra help too, noting that these people would likely be needed as handlers & bodyguards anyway). And as Mathmuse mentioned, even paying for its food would pay for itself if crossing mountains as well as other treacherous terrain. It'll bypass earthbound monsters and deter most airborne ones who'd likely prefer to attack that team of oxen over there stuck in the swamp. :-) The harder part IMO is getting a Roc, though in other campaign worlds they have been for sale, at least as eggs or fledglings. Don't know their lifespan. Probably quite long based on size (and longer w/ magical healing and curing). Looked up Create Food and boy does that change the math! It implies a Gargantuan creature eats 1000x as much food, so one might settle for a Huge creature at 100x as much. But standard feed x1000 is only 10 g.p./week which is affordable (and that's the cost of 20 pigs or 5 horses/week so it's not a loophole IMO). A Druid might offer these services, keeping that many more people from disturbing nature. --
Did I miss the point that flying would be expensive and involve smaller items when I explicitly wrote that flying would be expensive and involve only key items plus mentioned their major difference would be in rougher terrain? Hmm. ---
Reminds me of a PFS1 scenario with beetles that could destroy any local merchant and challenge the strongest village factions. But the beetles were incidental, just normal fauna (though an excuse for PCs to rescue an info source, with a good chance of failure). Saving villages is a common enough PF/RPG theme, which would suggest a reason trade routes struggle; they're even harder to defend than a village (plus intrude in areas other creatures might call their own). ---
That seems a setup for a scenario, PCs meeting/intercepting aquatic couriers.
I don’t think dragons would willingly perform mundane shipping tasks. Too proud. Appeal to greed for stereotypical ones. But there are lots of dragon options other than the hoard-sitting proud ones. Just a few dragons would make an impact so look for exceptions. Maybe appeal to their unique talents, how non-mundane their labor (truthfully) is. Maybe they're the ones who own the business, or it's for allies/higher goals, or maybe they're dumb/animalistic/controlled. Community-minded ones might see it as a way to contribute that's rather easy for them, yet bestows great benefit. Golarion has shied away from domesticated dragons, but it's feasible; and because you can reason with many it's maybe more so than the Rocs, mammoths, and dinosaurs which are available. And dragons are just a handy example among the many large flying creatures out there. Not saying they'd be a given in any city, rather where they did show up they'd function much like helicopters.
On Earth. -Golarion seas have aggressive megafauna and sapient inhabitants, so I'd move them a notch down. They're terrifying enough on Earth where we only imagined nearly all such creatures.
Kineticists skip so much engineering development, their population is a significant statistic re: infrastructure (see Korra, though I hadn't been thinking of that). And then there are genies, elementals, fey, and a list of other sapient creatures that can work magic all day, including Cantrip casters. Telekinetic Projectile light debris away. :-) Maybe magic schools lend out their students who can practice.
We don't want Golarion mapmakers to have mastered precision yet, mid-level adventurers need adventuresome tasks...some might even say paths to find.
I suspect the friction will go beyond the bad laws because it sounds like your party will be operating in enemy territory (and if inspired by an older version of Irrisen, definitely so). Champions of Justice don't do subterfuge & espionage well as that will often require breaking the good laws, standard ones for civilized societies like breaking and entering or theft. Unless it's just that the dungeons & enemies happen to be there rather than an adventure dealing with the government.
Tying it back to infrastructure, highest-level heroes (a squad of which pop up every year or so) would also bend infrastructure. Somebody's paying their wages when they Earn Income doing a Legendary task. But somebody has to protect against all those mid-teen level monsters preying on rural victims, neither of which have the treasure to be AP material. I find it odd how many monsters are described in a folksy way as if a village could stand up to them. Nope. So maybe it's the former AP PCs, perhaps downplaying their abiities? I'm reminded of Marvel Comics where the god Ares (stronger than any construction equipment ever) was working construction or Damage Control swept in repair super-fight damage. Golarion would also have adapted to uber-beings. A high-level caster devoted to developing infrastructure could put in their hour and a half of work (counting morning prep) and have accomplished more than dozens of workers could do all week. And Kineticists, even lower-level ones could do the work of a corporation or major utilities building. I imagine governments (et al) would dedicate a lot to harnessing them somehow. Bidding wars would ensue, and assassination or abduction of rivals too. A lot of gold would be at stake, more if you get extradimensional interests involved. Oh, my, now I'm imagining an extradimensional Wal-Mart which drives out local competition by undercutting them and dominating market share only to show their true unholy faces after there's no one else who can provide their goods and services. Or maybe drug suppliers or simply unique fads from other worlds. How well would Golarion markets & cultures compete with angelic creations? Hmm. I imagine there'd be aqueducts and dikes made of Walls of Stone. D&D used to have more terrain-altering magic, and one would think there'd be a lot of high-level spells developed for non-adventurers, an unusual amount geared toward libraries and education. :-)
Unless, like Planescape somewhat addressed, there were guilds and unions that opposed such methods (& centralization/consolidation too). They'd need their own high-level forces to exert any influence though.
The default is that creatures can perform Athletics maneuvers so the burden of proof is on you, Easl, to show where Eidelons can't. You say "my reading", but what exactly are you reading? Advanced Weaponry implies no such thing as no hands or no maneuvers (no matter how bad Disarm is as an option). And the example shapes of most if not all Eidelons include options with hands or comparable limbs.
Yes, of course a Mist Stalker can perform the Trip action. Yes, an Anger Phantom (an Eidelon) should be able to do all the maneuvers that any non-Eidelon Phantom can (barring being Incorporeal because that trait does state a rule barring that). And yes, an Anger Phantom can play piano w/ a Perform check, however badly. Your examples make no sense. It's even worse in light of the fact players choose how many hands their Eidelons have and whether or not their unarmed attacks involve those hands or not.
All of those creatures you listed do have hands mechanically with which they can do maneuvers. Any generic creature form, even one that lacked any attack actions or limbs, could perform all of the maneuvers. But not Eidelons? For Familiars, Paizo had to explicitly state their limitations, but not for Eidelons? Animal & Construct Companions, even snakes or exotic ones w/ no hands, can perform maneuvers. But not Eidelons which are superior?
Yes, there's a mediocre feat that uses perhaps overly inclusive language because there's no corresponding high-level feat yet for Disarm. This doesn't imply an unseen rule which would indicate Paizo devs lack of basic communication skills. It just makes Disarm a poor choice since you only get minimal benefit (but not zero benefit). I think the whole of PF2 on this topic, other than that single feat, points at the conclusion that Eidelons can perform maneuvers just fine.
Well, an "army" might be five high level killers who can teleport together, such is the imbalance of power. Sheer numbers and meat-waves matter less on Golarion (even with Troop rules) where a single warrior can routinely face a thousand veterans at once and come out healthy, perhaps unharmed after being topped up w/ a Heal spell or Medicine. As well as Earth's usual determiners of military might, Golarion adds magic, extraordinary creatures (often w/ AoEs), and level-advancement which IMO shift large-scale battles beyond recognition though for narrative purposes authors tend to stick to extra spicy Earth-like combats. Sending out a nation's champion for single combat makes more sense there. They might represent a good portion of one's power, and you could skip the devastation of war itself. If one nation assassinated another's elite individuals, the end would seem inevitable (excluding outside or extraordinary factors).
Yes, you are being too restrictive. You're deciphering intent to fill a hole that doesn't need filling, and which would need explicit language in order to be a rule exclusive to Eidelons. Using their unarmed weapons requires weapons traits to perform those maneuvers, yes, but Eidelons have limbs too (usually). They have two free hands* as normal and we would need notation if it were an exception. These limbs are not tertiary attacks that need to be listed much like no other creature in the game has their "limbs for maneuvers" listed. And no, even if one were to count it as listed, "fist" is not tied to performing maneuvers at all (hence fist not listing the maneuvers even though one's free hand can perform all of them). Heck, fist doesn't even require limbs. So yes, Advanced Weaponry is mediocre, giving only a different magic item for one's bonus and a prereq for higher level feats (in a game which tries to avoid gating feats). I imagine a Remastered version will rectify this imbalance...somehow. *As a mechanic not tied (much) to their form or actual number.
Even if the unarmed attack isn't a fist they still have two free hands, so yeah, other than using the "weapon" bonus/Handwraps instead of the bonus to Athletics, I don't think there is a reason in isolation. But some later feats do require a specific trait, i.e. Pushing Attack requires the Eidelon's attack has the Shove trait.
Nope & nope. An RPG collaborative story experience is too dissimilar to soccer's competitive experience for that analogy to hold. For example, table variation is a norm in one while field variation (if caused by refs) sparks hostile responses. The basic social contract of an RPG is the GM promising a worthwhile RPG experience and all participants being civil, etc. There's no required adherence to some imaginary platonic rigor. Whether or not and to what degree a GM should tweak encounters, even mid-encounter, has been an ongoing discussion since the dawn of D&D. So when you say that it's both cheating and subverting the expectations of the game and the players I laugh. It seems you have that expectation, but a citation would be necessary to show where the game does or players as a whole. Does PF2's advice to GMs ever argue such rigidity? Following campaign threads shows many veteran GMs & their players accept such tweaking without batting an eye. Which is to say it's a given that doesn't need to be announced in fear of cheating, etc. This includes Paizo leadership & devs so I doubt they've integrated rigidity into their own RPG or consider invisible tweaking to be cheating. If anything they're very fluid about GMing styles, that is as long as it's done in the spirit of providing a worthwhile RPG experience that's suitable for those GMs' tables. Heck, I've seen GMs explicitly tweak stats in response to players metagaming about those stats. ---
Any GM who tweaks existing stats without informing his players that, that is something he might do from time to time during the course of play is not only cheating, but subverting the expectations of both the game and its players. Citation needed.
Do you have their email?What happens when someone time-travels from lost omens to before Aroden's death? Do they create a zone of non-prophecy while they're in the past or do they become ruled by prophecy while in the past?You'd have to ask Shyka or Yog-Sothoth about that. Your keyboard would melt trying to type the symbols, if your mind hadn't already. Maybe tag them in a TikTok instead.
the morrowkin's Swallow Future (doomed 4 without the death trait)This one doesn't work. Breath of Life doesn't remove Doomed, so while it can heal you and you get back up... you're still Doomed 4 and immediately die again. But think of how healthy you'll look...under whatever detritus you've accumulated in battle.
It's still a Demoralize, so the target would gain immunity as usual. You'd also get any carrier effects you might have w/ Demoralize too, like gaining Panache if such a Swashbuckler.
Yeah, the same event (gaining the Dying condition from being reduced to 0 HP) that makes you unconscious also makes you die in this case, it's not a an ordered chain of events where one comes before the other. Since the trigger allows you to preempt death, it ought to allow you to preempt unconsciousness as well here, as they happen in the same moment. I agree. The rules parse it out in a sequence so a player can follow the logic & mechanics, but the event isn't so granular IMO. There is no length of time for which they are unconscious, but not dead in the given scenario. I suppose one thought experiment is if someone other than the caster were in the same situation; Wounded to where they die when dropped to zero hit points. The target gets struck with a killing blow & revived by Breath of Life; generally I'd picture that as dying from the blow and falling, thus the BoL stops that, the person's standing and still holds their weapon. That would lend itself to the OP working, while if one demands they must fall first before dying, that feels unnecessary. Funnily enough the spell's quite useful by/on NPCs who normally die when hit to zero hit points. Well worth a higher level slot as you're nearly guaranteed to use it if fighting PCs plus likely have lots of slots you won't be using due to brevity of life/screentime.
I love redacted. It's my favorite plot element. I see it everywhere!
Woohoo, I'd thought it had been to strip the cliche away and give players agency rather than search for the "right outcome". I've left a published campaign (w/ a scarcity of other tables to play at) that was too inflexible re: player agency (and almost left another, but we wrapped it up soon). Yes, that falls somewhat on the GMs, but in one instance for example, you could back NPC X, NPC Y, or neither, and no matter which one you picked, each plot thread "corrected" for your choices so you'd get the exact same impact on the campaign world: zero. Oy. This difference might be foundational to why I've loved Paizo for decades.
If it were phrased "the target's Taunted" then range wouldn't matter, but instead it's saying you Taunt the target, which is you getting a free Taunt action which would be subject to normal limitations (and perks too). So you'd benefit from the Long-distance Taunt feat if using a ranged weapon. And it's 2nd level, which makes it hard to argue it gives you both action compression and a potentially longer version of a 1st level feat.
Unconcious: "You can't act" He's going from Wounded to Dead, not Wounded to Unconscious to Dead so it's a bit trickier than that. And it's "would die" so there's the vibe of interrupting, at which point the victim/spell target/(in this case caster too) wouldn't have died yet. So it seems fine, given the extreme situation. Funnily enough, this does make it better than "just shy of dying" then dying on your turn.
I'd assume one's already chosen the best damage & movement type and can only maintain that level unless the battlefield changes. So yeah, it's a horrible cost unless one gets h.p./round, and yes, there doesn't seem to be a consensus (not that I've noticed comments on it in months). For balance I'd allow it, and like with all adjudication it'd be provisional depending on how it plays out in practice.
People in Golarion would definitely know that the armor's gauntlets are weapons. Even if the GM forgets. "Runes on the inside" is a bit of an assumption too, as is thinking screeners wouldn't be using Detect Magic (especially at high levels). The cold iron & silver ask for attention. It's a bit of an RPG conceit that weapons are allowed in social circumstances if the threat level requires weapons, so I wouldn't worry about it overmuch. Plus screening for weapons opens up a can of worms with encounter balance & party composition/preparedness, at least in published material. Yeah, subterfuge isn't one of the free-hand weapon niches.
I now desire to make a Tick-like Champion pointing his finger at an undead enemy, "You are the clogged artery slowly choking out the pulse of creation and I'm the exercise of justice!" (or whichever cause they have)
Very good point that, with more knowledge, things can change. Maybe that is why Starfinder's view of undead significantly differs from the Pathfinder's one. Poor wolf. At one time they were seen as defenders against undead, likely due to how they'd dig up corpses and be seen "fighting" with them. As often happens over time, that association eventually led to them being linked with undead as allies or incarnations* (which served the agendas of ranchers and others that wanted to be rid of them). Glad that now we recognize they're both normal and valuable. Just shows how insidious fear can be, which ties back to necroethics; that even if known as a defender, one might become seen as a threat if linked to threatening beings so long. *Werewolves, at least in Europe, were considered undead long, long ago. Just pitch everything into one pile of "bad juju creatures" I guess.
|