ESttt's page

Great with a ruling on if non-telepaths can talk back!

I think a lot of the ruling can probably be found in the spells regarding telepathy, as this is in fact the basis for Limited Telepathy:

Telepathy (5th level Mystic):
"...You can’t use telepathy to locate creatures to communicate with them, but once you’ve established telepathic communication, you don’t require line of effect to maintain it."

This indicates that to initiate telepathy, you need a line of effect, but once communication is established, you don't need it anymore (but you still need to be withing range).

I also wonder how easy it is to discover if a character is speking telepathically. For guidance here, we can look at Telepathic Message (0th lvl Mystic/Technomancer):
"You can send a short telepathic message and hear simple telepathic replies. Any living creature within 10 feet of you or an intended recipient also receives your telepathic message
if it succeeds at a DC 25 Perception check. You must be able to see or hear each recipient. The creatures that receive the message can reply telepathically, but no more than a single message can be sent each round, and each message cannot exceed 10 words. A technomancer casting this spell can also use it to send a message to a computer or a construct with the technological subtype if the receiving target is designed to receive messages."

For this specific spell, other creatures can HEAR the message if they succed on a (quite difficult) Perception check. None of the other telepathy spells gives any chance of overhearing the message. I would say that Limited Telepathy is more closely related to the Telepathy spell, but less powerful (shorter range and must share a language).

Basically, to detect if anyone is speaking telepathically, you would need to know telepathy exists. Otherwise, you wouldn't even consider another being speaking telepathically. I don't know how common knowledge that is.
Knowing that this character in question can communicate telepathically will help. If you see a Lashunta or Shirren and knows that these races can speak telepathically, you would expect them to.
This of course leads into the question of what Limited Telepathy looks like, to an observer. Do their antennae glow? Do they have to the Professor X hand-to-the-temple gesture?

Another thing I wonder is if it's possible to shut out telepathic communication. Using telepathy together with social skills (bluff/diplomacy/intimidate) might provide for increased efficieny of the action, especially if the creature exposed doesn't know about telepathy. It would also do for a lot of fun roleplaying.
Related to this, say that I form a link with an enemy, hides and then just starts being as annoying and threatening as I can directly into their mind. Could they block me out?
When I think about it, I think I would rule it as "It's as hard to block out unwanted telepathy as it is to block out someone yelling at you with sound." Even harder if you're not familiar with telepathy (Tinfoil hat might work XD )

The core rule book has rules for grappling and what happens when you're grabbed (you're immobalized and you can use the Escape action on your turn). The book also has rules on if you want to carry creatures as bulk (p272). This has a table of standard bulk for creatures (small=3, medium=6 etc). If this bulk is only the creature or includes it's gear (I would guess it's only the creature without any gear). It also specifies the rules for Dragging (which specifically includes both items and creatures).
For these scenarios, we treat the bulk of the creature you're grappling as the recommended creature bulk (based on size) + the items they carry.
If you look at the rules as RAW, you can do the following:
1. Grapple a creature
2. Add it's bulk to your current bulk (from items you carry). Depending on the total number, you get a couple of different scenarios:
2.1 Total bulk is less than your encumbered limit (5+str mod): You're so strong in relation to the creature weight, that you can pick it up easily and just carry it off at your normal speed (consider a half-orc picking up a gnome for instance).
2.2 Total bulk is equal to larger than you encumbered limit, but lower than your max bulk limit (10+str mod): You can pick up and carry the creature, but you're Encumbered (clumsy 1 and -10ft speed).
2.3 Total bulk is larger than your max bulk limit: You can choose to Drag the creature, thus reducing the bulk of the creature by half. This allows you to move the creature at 50ft/min which would be 5ft per round.
3. Once it's the creatures turn, they can try to escape.

This does not take into account the fact that the object you're carrying might not be willing (remember, they can't say no if they're unconsious or dead :P ), which would indeed make them harder to carry.

My suggestion for ruling this (having not tested to see if this is broken):
Use the aformentioned scenarios (adding the targets total bulk to yours), but either require the grappler to make another Grapple action or allow the target to attempt an Escape action as a reaction before you can carry/drag them away.
If you crit during the initial Grapple action, you don't have to perform another grapple or the creature doesn't get their reaction.

Some slight necroposting, but relevant question:
Can you use dual-action unarmed strikes (such as Tiger Slash or Wolf Drag) with your Flurry of Blows? Both of these are technically the same as Tiger Claw/Wolf Jaw (they even state that you make the corresponding attack, but it's better).
It's probably not intended, but you could interpret them as such.
A possible house-rule could be that you can use your FoB to make the whole attack, and thus using only one action for it.

A similar question would also be for an OA. Could you use Tiger Slash/Wolf Drag as an OA?

The biggest trip up here I think is that you're assuming you're making Dragon Tail attacks with something. But you don't. Dragon Tail attacks are functionally weapons in their own right (although unarmed strikes aren't actually weapons, that's another issue).

You don't make a Dragon Tail attack with your Tail. Or with a Kama. You just make a Strike using your Dragon Tail (or any other attack).

You don't make a Dragon Tail attack with a kama, any more than you can punch someone with a longbow. So the properties on a dragon tail attack are just the ones the dragon tail itself gives you (unless you have another ability adding properties).

Your GM might be cool with you flavoring your Dragon Tail as using your character's real tail, or as using a version of Dragon Tail that involves a kama, but it's still a Dragon Tail attack and nothing else.

I guess I'm slightly confused from playing DnD 4E for quite some time (where you have attacks you can make with various weapons) and also having experience of martial arts with various weapons.

So, one way to look at it look at it might be to assume that the Dragon Tail stance (or the other stances) are to be considered weapons I can make Strikes with. When I assume a stance, I arm myself with the corresponding weapon, in addition to other weapons I happen to be carrying (be it Unarmed, Kama, Longsword). Just like a Kama, Longsword, or Longbow are weapons with certain traits you can make Strikes with. This would make sense from the point of the traits and it's flavour.
For example Backswing on the Dragon Tail attack would give you +1 attack if you've already missed with the Dragon Tail attack. Flavourvise, if you miss with that attack, it might be easy to re-direct the already moving swing and provide a stronger strike.
The same interpreation also holds for the Iruxi natural weapons. It's basically weapons with specific traits (Sweep for tail, agile and finesse for the claws) you can use to Strike with, just like a Longsword.

Haven't used wolf stance but it likely let's you make a trip with your attack instead of as an attack. Trip as an attack just attempts to knock the opponent down, trip as an extra in another attack (barbarians and fighters have options similar to this) let's you hit for damage and try to trip.

The interpretation of "A monk stance arms you with a weapon of this trait" also holds for the Wolf Stance and the trip trait. For one, it will let you add the bonus your Handwraps of Might Blows, as well as being helped by the other traits (Finesse lets you use dex to trip and Agile reduces MAP by 1 for your trip action).

What makes the "A stance and and nautural weapon is a weapon you are armed with and can make Strikes with" is the description of Monestic weapons:
"You can use melee monk weapons with any of your monk feats or monk abilities that normally require unarmed attacks, though not if the feat or ability requires you to use a single specific type of attack, such as Crane Stance."
However, the stance attacks do not require you to be unarmed, nor do they specify with what you attack. There are other monk feats that requires you to use an unarmed attack (such as Flurry of Blows or Flying Kick). With this, the "stances are weapons" interpretation still holds.
With that, I guess you could use any stance attack (except for the exclusive ones) with the Flying Kick i.e?

I guess one of the main benefits of the Iruxi unarmed attacks is that you're always armed and can perform attack, even if your hands might be occupied. And also that since the monk provides profiencey and bonus for unarmed attacks, the Iruxi natural weapons should also gain this bonus.

We usually joke that monks have a separate rulebook. Seems like still holds true for PF2 :P

I'm making an Iruxi Monk with focus on grapple and there are several things I'm confused about (some of which have already been answered in the forum I've seen).

Question 1 (Regards the monk stance attacks and weapons with traits):
Monks can take Monastic Weaponry, which basically lets you use strange weapons, including using them for Monk stance attacks, except if they require a specific attack. Since the monk stance attacks have weapon traits and various damage types that might differ from the weapon you use, do you select which of them you use the traits/damage type for, do you get all of them, or can you mix and as you would like? Note that most of the monk stance attacks don't specify what you actually attack with. They usually give a description on how you stand, and then it says "You can make this attack"
Example1: A monk with a Kama (Slashing, Agile, trip) uses a Dragons Tail attack (Bludgeoning, Backswing, nonlethal) with the Kama. They miss, and then try the same attack again. How to interpret this?
1.1a: Which damage type does the attack have (slashing, bludgeoning, both, or choose one)?
1.1b: Which damage dice is used (I would assume 1d10, because it's higher)?
1.2 What are your modifiers for the second attack, given MAP? Do you get both the +1 for agile, and +1 for missing with a backswing.
1.2b) What would have happened if your first was NOT a Dragon Tail attack? Would you still get your +1 for missing the first attack, because Dragons Tail has backswing (which only specifies that a miss with this WEAPON gives you a +1 bonus)
1.3: If this attack crits, which would be the critical specialization (provided the monk has the Brawling Focus feat)? Would it be Brawling (slow) or Knife (1d6 bleed)?

Question 2 (regards the Iruxi unarmed attacks/bodyparts and synergy with monk attacks):
For all the Iruxi unarmed attacks (claws, bite, tail whip) it's stated that the attacks have a weapon trait and a specific damage type.
Examples:
Claws: "You have a claw unarmed attack that deals 1d4 slashing damage and has the agile and finesse traits."
Tail: "By birth or through training, your tail is strong enough to make for a powerful melee weapon. You gain a tail unarmed attack that deals 1d6 bludgeoning damage and has the sweep trait."

What I wonder is if it's the weapon used (your actual claws, teeth, tail) or the attack (the specific action of clawing, biting, or beating someone with the tail) has the traits? Pathfinder 2 really doesn't have any clear rules for attacks with traits. When reading the weapon trait summary, some of these seems kinda weird.
Reading the explanation for Sweep (which the tail has) makes it kinda weird:
"Sweep: This weapon makes wide sweeping or spinning attacks, making it easier to attack multiple enemies. When you attack with this weapon, you gain a +1 circumstance bonus to your attack roll if you already attempted to attack a different target this turn using this weapon."
Example 1: An Iruxi monk uses the Dragon tail attack, utilizing their natural tail for flavour (it totally makes sense to perform the Dragon Tail with an actual large tail!). This attack misses. The monk then tries to perform this same attack again, but on a different enemy. What happens here?
2.1 What damage will be dealt? (again, I assume that the 1d10 damage).
2.2 Will the monk gain the attack bonus for both backswing (dragon tail) and sweep (actual tail)?
Example 2: An Iruxi monk uses a standard strike with their claws. They miss and then go on to use their claws(hands) again to make a Dragon Tail attack (There's nothing that says which body part the Dragon tail must be made with).
3.1 Which damage type does this second attack do?
3.2 Do they get the agile bonus from the claws, considering the claws made the attack? Do they get the backswing bonus, due to missing with the same weapon (the claws) as before?

Question 3, Regarding actions other than attacks using Iruxi natural weapons:
How does the natural weapons work together with other attack actions such as grapple, trip, shove etc considering their traits? None of these natural weapons have any such traits (except for a case with Wolf Stance, which I'll come back to), but it's only logical that you would use your hands (which have claws) to grapple, or your tail for trip, considering they are a part of you. Would you get your natural weapon attack traits for these skill-attacks too (such as agile for the claws or sweep for the tail).

Question 4, regarding the weirdness of the Wolf Stance (which I know has been a very debated subject)
The Wolf Stance gives your wolf jaw unarmed strike trip. What the actual f? Why can't I just trip exactly as effeiciently by just using the standard trip action? The only benefit we could come up with here would be that if I attempt to trip and critically fail, I could drop my stance, instead of dropping prone. It would of course take an action to re-take the stance, which is better than ending up prone. But it still feels like a very small, circumstantial bonus.

In general, it feels like there's something missing regarding how to handle attacks with weapon traits. I'm going to suggest to my DM that it's easiest to just handle the Iruxi appendages as weapons with the traits the have, and be able to use them for things/attacks that make sense flavourvise. That will solve one of the problems...

(Boy, this turned out to be quite an essay)