Djinn71's page

For better or for worse there are quite a few creatures that instead of having a weakness instead have resistance to all damage that is bypassed by specific thing. For example, ghosts are very resistant to damage unless it is from a ghost touch weapon, force, or positive. I've dealt this annoying distinction as I have GMed for an Oracle who repeatedly used Visions of Weakness on these sorts of creatures and got little helpful information until I decided to let them know what would bypass resistance when appropriate.

I feel like a Thaumaturge should be good at fighting ghosts on the fly as much as they are versus things with weaknesses, and I feel like these wide resistances that are bypassed by specific things are thematically very much a weakness. I don't know if it should be a separate feat or what, but I think this should be covered by the class somewhere.

Cauterize:
Requirements: You’re wielding a firearm that you’ve fired
this turn, and you or an adjacent ally are taking persistent
bleed damage.

You press your gun’s heated barrel to your wounds or those of
an ally, instantly granting a flat check to end the bleed with a
lower DC for particularly effective assistance (Pathfinder Core
Rulebook 621).

Given that all the feat really does is reduce the action required to use assisted recovery by 1, and that it only applies against one kind of Persistent Damage, it strikes me as a very weak 6th level feat.

Perhaps it should simply automatically end the condition as outlined in the Assisted Recovery rules? Or it should be one possible application of a more general feat that is a bit more versatile?

I especially don't like the feat because it seems as though pressing a superheated gun barrel to a bleeding wound should come to a similar outcome just following the normal rules for Assisted Recovery, given that it is a particularly appropriate type of help (cauterizing a wound) and it is highly efficient (pressing red hot metal you are already holding to a wound of an adjacent ally).

So, even disregarding the general nicheness of the feat, there is a decent argument gunslingers should already be able to do what is described in the feat following the normal rules for Assisted Recovery. I would hate to see GMs ruling that players can't use the normal rules for Assisted Recovery with firearms simply because there is a feat that explicitly allows them to do it.

There's a sixth level Gunslinger feat called Reloading Strike that indicates that you normally cannot switch your grip to reload a firearm if your other hand is occupied.

The feat: You attack and then reload your gun in one fluid movement.
Strike an opponent within reach with your melee weapon or
an unarmed attack, and then Interact to reload. You don’t need
a free hand to reload in this way.

Whereas the Reload rules say: Switching your grip to free a hand and then to place your hands in the grip necessary to wield the weapon are both included in the actions you spend to reload a weapon.

Does this mean that if you are wielding two pistols rather than, say, a crossbow, you cannot adjust your grip on both of them to reload them as part of the Reload action?

In addition, how does this class not have Dual-Weapon Reload feat from the Dual-Weapon Warrior Archetype?

The 8th level Barbarian feat Animal Rage does this:

You transform into your animal. You gain the effects of the 3rd-level animal form spell except you use your own statistics, temporary Hit Points, and unarmed attacks instead of those granted by animal form. You also retain the constant abilities of your gear. If your animal is a frog, your tongue’s reach increases to 15 feet. Dismissing the transformation gains the rage trait.

Animal Form

Given that you use your own statistics, what exactly do you get out of a 3rd level Animal Form spell? As far as I know everything the spell gives you can be referred to as a statistic, and has been by Paizo. For example, in Reading Creature Statistics it is implied that everything you might find in a creature's stat block is a statistic.

If you interpret the "statistics" the feat refers to as only those mentioned under "You gain the following statistics and abilities regardless of which battle form you choose:" and not those mentioned under "You also gain specific abilities based on the type of animal you choose:", then why would it be heightened to 3rd level?
As far as I can tell, the only thing that does is increase the Temporary HP (which the feat explicitly says you do not use), increases your AC and the damage bonus of the form (both of which are listed under the "statistics and abilities" section, and the damage bonus is listed as part of the unarmed attack which the feat explicitly says you do not use). The same goes for the Attack bonus and Athletics bonus.

Are there any answers here or are we stuck waiting for Errata/FAQ?

Battle form polymorph spells often set your damage bonus to a flat value, which cannot be adjusted except for status and circumstance bonuses. But what part of your damage falls under "damage bonus"?

In the rules for calculating damage it says "Melee damage roll = damage die of weapon or unarmed attack + Strength modifier + bonuses + penalties", so do Druids add their strength modifier to their attacks while Wild Shaped? In other areas of the rules there is also a clear distinction between bonuses, modifiers, and penalties. It also says that bonuses cannot be untyped, so I don't think the "damage bonus" wording refers to this.

Is Weapon Specialization increasing your damage, or does it increase your damage bonus?

Do Flaming Handwraps of Mighty Strikes give an extra 1d6 damage, or is this an adjustment to your "damage bonus"?

Do crits adjust your "damage bonus"? (This is a definite no, as crits are certainly meant to work with Polymorphs, but why?)

Does anyone have any insight on this?

There are a few cases where you can gain a damage increase to attacks or spells which cause multiple types of damage, such as Dangerous Sorcery and Meteor Swarm, or Precision damage and Alchemist bombs, or Precision damage and a Flaming weapon.

What type of damage is the extra damage in this case? I would've expected it to be the first damage type listed in the effect causing the damage but as far as I can tell there is no actual rules support for this.

I could believe that Dangerous Sorcery is untyped damage (though it is a bit weird for it to be able to damage things that are otherwise immune), but Precision damage is pretty clear:

Precision Damage

Sometimes you are able to make the most of your attack through sheer precision. When you hit with an ability that grants you precision damage, you increase the attack’s listed damage, using the same damage type, rather than tracking a separate pool of damage. For example, a non-magical dagger Strike that deals 1d6 precision damage from a rogue’s sneak attack increases the piercing damage by 1d6.

Some creatures are immune to precision damage, regardless of the damage type; these are often amorphous creatures that lack vulnerable anatomy. A creature immune to precision damage would ignore the 1d6 precision damage in the example above, but it would still take the rest of the piercing damage from the Strike. Likewise, since precision damage is always the same type of damage as the attack it’s augmenting, a creature that is resistant to non-magical damage, like a ghost or other incorporeal creature, would resist not only the dagger’s damage but also the precision damage, even though it is not specifically resistant to precision damage.

Does Precision Damage count as every type of damage that an attack deals? The rules definitely already allow for it to count as Precision + another type of damage minimum, so damage can definitely have multiple types. If it doesn't, then which damage type does it count as? Do you get to choose?

If it does, how does this interact with some of the more ambiguous damage types, such as persistent damage, or splash damage? These things definitely fall under "the attack's listed damage" as they are specifically referred to as the listed splash damage, or the listed persistent damage. (I know some people argue that persistent damage isn't a damage type, not hear to debate that point so just look at splash damage which isn't a condition. Or imagine instead that a Swashbuckler with a Rogue Dedication does a bleeding finisher (which is certainly both a damage type and persistent damage) and adds 1d6 sneak attack.)

I'm not necessarily expecting a definite answer on this because I don't think the rules are clear enough to come to any certain conclusions, but I would like to know if I missed a rule somewhere that clears this up.