Delphince's page

I would have thought this would come up sooner, but c'est la vie. The consensus seems to be that item bonuses to Handwraps of Mighty Blows applied to Trips and Grapples in 1e, but not in 2e, and I can find no reason why--more importantly, it defies common sense to say they wouldn't. Before you just hit "reply" without reading further, hear me out.

A weapon potency rune increases a weapon's accuracy to strikes. When making an unarmed strike, your body is the weapon; to say otherwise is a logical fallacy. Your hand, foot, tail, or face is being used as a formed shape and product of leverage to perform damage. Since you can't tattoo a weapon rune on your skin, you put them on handwraps, that go over your skin.

So here we go:

A Hook Sword with a +1 potency rune gets a +1 to its ability to Strike a target.
Handwraps with a +1 potency rune gets a +1 to your hand's ability to Strike a target.

A Hook Sword has the ability to be used to trip a target, because it has the Trip trait.
A Free Hand is normally used to trip a target, so while not listed, it is directly inferred that your hand has the Trip trait.

The Trip maneuver states that a weapon with an item bonus to attack rolls applies that bonus to the maneuver.

A Hook Sword with a +1 potency rune that is used to Trip instead of Strike applies the bonus to the Trip maneuver.
Handwraps with a +1 potency rune where your hand is used to Trip instead of Strike SHOULD apply the bonus to the maneuver.

The logic is sound. It's fundamental, and not in any way convoluted. So why is it thought otherwise? My GM has tried to explain with definitions of Unarmed Strikes and the like, but nothing contradicts the fundamental posit that you body must be regarded as a weapon, with traits, when performing an attack roll or maneuver with it, and therefore subject to the item bonus rules.

The only concrete alteration from base rules provided is that you can roll Athletics instead of a Reflex save to Grab an Edge, but both the name and the description strongly imply that you can pull yourself up more quickly than normal. Even the short description in the General Feats table on Archives of Nethys uses the limited space to mention how quickly you can pull yourself up, rather than the change in roll.

Is the declaration "--as a single action" missing from the description "When you Grab an Edge, you can pull yourself onto that surface and stand", or is this feat just incredibly misleading in how it's advertised?

Religion is a wisdom-based roll, so why wouldn't an additional lore about a god and their teachings (like Aroden Lore or Sarenrae Lore) be wisdom-based as well? Isn't that just a specific religion? Pathfinder seems to try very hard at maintaining sensibility in its RAW, even when it means confusing wording and exceptions, rather than just have sweeping rules for rules' sake. So why does this detail feel overlooked?

Sounds like a stupid question, but we ran into the seemingly-common golem conundrum. They're listed as immune to "magic", except within the purview of their Golem AntiMagic, but only energy types are listed under the latter. Nowhere in the damage rules is something listed as "magical damage", only types like physical, mental, energy, etc, with the latter occasionally having magic listed in the flavor text, like Force being made of pure magic.

Trying to sort through this has had my GM trying to qualify whether damage is done from an attack based on whether it has the "magical" trait on it or any of the schools of magic in the traits, like Evocation. So in the case of a stone golem, it would be immune to damage from a fire rune or fireball, but take damage from a fire bomb. It would take AntiMagic damage from conjured water, but not from being submerged in a lake.

So are the listed energy damages (acid, cold, electricity, fire, sonic, positive, negative, force) considered inherently magical, or is the concept of magical vulnerability needlessly complicated?