Cilng's page

I will say, I'm not interested in trying to convince you.

Perhaps some others are, but to me the text is clear and not ambiguous.

If you reach a different conclusion, I'm not sure I can instruct you on how to read it to reach the same conclusion. For me the conclusion is as basic as replace where the rules text says 1 hour with 10 minutes in the description of treat wounds. As I already posted earlier.

I don't know what motivates you to read and post of course, but as I am interested in challenging my own interpretations of the rules I'll happily read and look for arguments. And yes, you stated it above and I believe I captured it in my list of arguments.

Perhaps this is a summary of the arguments presented.

Argument:
The temporary immunity of Continual Recovery lasts for 10 minutes as stated in the feat, preventing further applications of the same effect for the duration of the immunity as stated in the temporary immunity rules

Counterargument:
The duration of the temporary immunity is expended during the activity itself as that is how Treat Wounds work

Counterargument
The default action of Treat Wounds has a specific writing of overlap that isn't existing anywhere else. Since Continual Recovery's writing is also specific, it should stand.

Counterargument:
Unless the target is immune against treat wounds during the actual treatment, several people at the same time could do it.

Counterargument:
Working together on the same task (and its restrictions) is solved via Aid, not via Temporary Immunity. Such reading is inconsistent with the rules of Temporary Immunity and ignores the existence of Aid

Counterargument:
Aid is an optional action to take. Nothing stops four PCs from Repairing the same item at the same time in RAW.

Cilng wrote:

please point me towards any mistakes you see.

There:

...this interval overlaps with the time you spent treating...

Which can be argued belongs to that specific sentence, i.e when the treatment time is 10 minutes, the immunity is one hour. A support for that argument lies in the clarification in brackets.

I'm not 100% sure exactly what point you are trying to make. Could you try to elaborate on exactly where you are coming from? Are you saying that the rules could be worded differently to be more specific? Or are you saying that you don't interpret the rules to work in the way posited up thread?

Yes, thanks for asking! To me the rules are clear. But it's also clear that I have interpreted them differently from others in this thread. I see inconsistencies with the positions presented above and in order to shift my position I'd like to see arguments for their interpretations.

I have brought the topic to the table and spontaneous interpretations from some players have supported my position. One does not support it, and he has posted above.

At our table we have never had problems with how you work together in Pathfinder 2e. Repairing a shield comes up often and it's never been a topic that four PCs should be able to simultaneously Repair it in order for it to regain more hitpoints faster. All these cases are solved with the Aid action, which in the GM guide specifies it can be used for encounter mode or long-term actions (example "research). The mechanics for Aid also resonates in other portions of the game - Rituals is a good example.

I am surprised of the position that "nothing RAW prevents 4 players to simultaneously Make an Impression or Repair the same target". This, to me, is solved by Aid. And I don't see repairing a shield as a corner case, as it happen every session at our table.

Treat Wounds would follow the same logic. If someone would want to do Treat Wounds on the same target as someone else they would Aid them in Treat Wounds.

Therefore, to me, the writing of the overlap in Temporary Immunity in Treat Wounds is a thing purely for convenience. Think in hours, not in 70 minutes. And when you take Continual Recovery which explicitly states you have 10 minutes of Temporary Immunity you have that immunity after the application of Treat Wounds, preventing further applications as described in the Temporary Immunity rules.

Thinking in 20 minutes isn't as inconvenient as thinking in 70 minutes. 20 minutes allows the Champion to Refocus and Repair, for instance.

Hope that helps clarifying my interpretation and please point me towards any mistakes you see.

Try the Bestiary, It show up there all the time.

I can't find any example of where Temporary Immunity must mean "several people cannot perform this same action on the same target at the same time". Would you mind helping me?

And your argument is instead assuming that there can be only one reason and purpose for a particular rule such as temporary immunity.

My argument assumes that Temporary Immunity works in the way described on p453 in the Core Rulebook. I would actually argue that adding the effect "several people cannot do the same thing to the same target at the same time" is redundant.

One the difference between

frequency once per round
as seen in abilities like Psi Burst and Communal Sustain

and the Flourish trait on abilities like Twin Takedown and Flurry of Blows.

The difference between the two -- 'Frequency: once per round' will only prevent you from using that action again during the remainder of that round. The Flourish trait will prevent you from using that action for the rest of that round and prevent you from using other Flourish trait actions for the rest of that round also - two purposes and intents in the Flourish trait.

I understand the difference between these two rules but not the connection you want to make to Temporary Immunity. Why are how these rules work relevant to the dicussion?

Temporary Immunity does two things by default - it prevents you from using the ability on the target, and it prevents others from using that ability on the target too. In places where it is not intended to do both, it will say so.

Temporary Immunity doesn't state "this prevents multiple people from doing the same action on the same target at the same time". And if that was one of its main purposes, hadn't it been stated clearly there? As an example it says "For example, the blindness spell says, “The target is temporarily immune to blindness for 1 minute.” If anyone casts blindness on that creature again before 1 minute passes, the spell has no effect." To me it's clear that Temporary Immunity does not prevent anyone from casting Blindness on the target, only that there is no additional effect from it.

Nor do I find any other examples of when Temporary Immunity is used in an ability, action, item or spell where it is clear that "it prevents multiple people doing the same thing at the same time" must be the purpose of Temporary Immunity.

In my mind, interpreting that effect into Temporary Immunity is redundant because the rules on Aid already stipulates how you can help another do the same thing at the same time.

"Nowhere else" is a pretty bold claim. One I will have to check.

Please do.I browsed through the core rulebook but I wasn't able to find another example, but I could of course be wrong.

If you write "No more than one person can perform Treat Wounds on the same target at the same time" in Continual Recovery alone, then it is simply redundant. Treat Wounds already accomplishes that with the temporary immunity.

This argument assumes that temporary immunity's purpose is to prevent several people doing the same task on the same target at the same time, which is exactly what I am not finding support in the rules for it to be. But I am happy to be shown otherwise.

Also the general ruling of temporary immunity I've referenced above doesn't clarify this in my meaning (it would have been an excellent place to do so if that was the designer's intent).

Removing the Temporary Immunity from Treat Wounds means that it could be used unrestricted. By any number of people and without any restriction on frequency.

I suggested that if it is was the designer's intent to not have temporary immunity on Treat Wounds when you select Continual Recovery, not the default version of Treat Wounds, it would have been easy to state that.

And having Continual Recovery remove the temporary immunity from Treat Wounds - for starters, isn't what you proposed - and is potentially ambiguous. Does it remove the temporary immunity from other people using treat wounds also, or just you?

So if you want, as an exercise, you could write up full and entire replacement rules text for both Treat Wounds and Continual Recovery and we can all nitpick it to death to see what exploits you have inadvertently introduced.

If not, maybe slow down a bit on the criticism.

I am not sure what the purpose is with this paragraph? It is not my intention to criticize anyone, and I am sorry if I have offended you. It is clear that I have interpreted temporary immunity differently several others here and I am looking for arguments that supports your interpretation of it. I'd like to have a polite conversation around arguments for and against a certain interpretation.

Cilng wrote:

Why didn't they write "there is no temporary immunity" in Continual Recovery?

Why would they?

Because writing that there is a 10 minute temporary immunity in Continual Recovery and mean there is no temporary immunity breaks the consistency of how temporary immunity is used as a rule throughout the book and explained on p453.

Nowhere else has temporary immunity been used for the purpose of stopping people from executing the same task on the same target at the same time. If that was the intention in this specific case it had been easier to just state "No more than one person can perform Treat Wounds on the same target at the same time".

Cilng wrote:

Why didn't they write "there is no temporary immunity" in Continual Recovery?

So that it explicitly prevents allowing multiple high level characters from doing low-proficiency easy DC Treat Wounds on the same character at the same time and crit-succeeding the check to heal 184 HP every 10 minutes.

Why would they use the temporary immunity rule to enforce this when it's not used for that purpose anywhere else? Why not just write "no more than one person may treat the same target at the same time."?

Also, if the purpose for creating an exception to the general temporary immunity rule was for "timing" purposes, have we not already establish that the purpose was not for "multiple people treating the same individual"-purposes?

Why didn't they write "there is no temporary immunity" in Continual Recovery?

The temporary immunity rule (p453 CRB) is used in many different actions, spells, consumables etc. Why, do you think, they made it different when creating Treat Wounds? It seems to be only example of the temporary immunity overlapping with the time it takes to perform the action.

I find it interesting in this thread how the tone has shifted from such certainty how immunity in the treat wounds action must be interpreted to the relaxed attitude that it’s up to the GM and common sense on other closely related matters.

Sure, but circumstance bonuses don't stack so it's a bit of a gamble if people will actually contribute.

Another example of an exploration actiivty is Make an Impression. Can two people Make an Impresession on the same target at the same time?

Ok, and why wouldn't you use all of the mechanics in Aid? The aiding character rolls their aid check and if successful the repairing character gets a circumstance bonus on their Repair check.

As a GM, I would probably limit it to 2 people repair at the same time, unless the item could be repaired in parts or was very large.

Do you find any support in the rules for this ruling?

I agree with breithauptclan. Note however, that in both cases they become immune to treay wounds while being treated, so two people cannot treat the same person at the same time.

So this would mean that two people can Repair the same item at the same time? As the Repair activity doesn't stipulate anything about immunity.