CrisprCass9's page

I was wondering about the discrepancy between new and old Lore ancestry feats (new giving additional lore, old giving only training). I recently posted about this topic here , and I thought it might also make sense as a PFS ruling, so I am reposting it here so the PFS rules people might see it.

Something I recently realized that bothers me is that certain older ancestries are worse in an easily fixable way. Currently, Elf Lore gives Additional Lore for Elves, while Vanara lore only trains you in Vanara Lore. This also hurts fetchlings, kitsune, nagaji, androids, and more. It would be really easy to put out errata that says “If your ancestry lore feat would train you in a lore, you instead get additional lore for that skill.”

2 main questions: if I have, say, a clan dagger (p vers b), does it count as a “bludgeoning weapon” for things like the crushing rune? Conversely something like the switchpick (b vers p) clearly would be bludgeoning, but does a weapon’s “being a damage type weapon” depend on its primary damage type or all of its damage types?

Second question: if I have a switchpick (b vers p) and use the piercing damage, do I still get the effect of crushing? The description of the rune doesn’t mention being based on dealing bludgeoning damage, just being applied on a bludgeoning weapon.

Also this is all based on descriptions from AoN, I haven’t looked if they updated this for PC2.