Ectar's page

I was using this guide to help with making a homebrew version of the Monk's Spade:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j0uUtVcTgvn2a0oMYFKMwe_-tAPOdnFY21_0FOi X2DI/edit?usp=sharing

when I thought the following question:

Could you place Versatile on a weapon more than once?

The 1e version of the Monk's Spade could do any of the 3 types of weapon damage, so I'd like to do something like this for the homebrew version.
Currently, 0 weapons have versatile for more than one type of damage. Modular does something kind of similar, but requires extra actions.

So would y'all consider having a weapon with two versatile traits on it? Would you "dock" the weapon in other ways to compensate?

Does this volume use the faction influence mechanic in a meaningful way?

I'd love both an errata to the price of the Amphibious Chair and the introduction of a chair with the functionality that a chair-bound character can swim using the athletics skill. (It might be true that the Traveler's Chair already allows the functionality, if you consider "water" to be "common adventuring terrain". Which I suppose it might, but BOY would I have appreciated the devs specifically calling that out because there's a mighty difference between uneven terrain and liquid)

I think it'd be an ideal half-measure between "person in chair cannot function in water" and "person in chair has superior water mobility with no skills/feat investment".

I'd probably secretly roll something like n+2 sets of attacks and flat checks, where n is the number of unnoticed/undetected creatures in the whirlwind's area.

Whirlwind Strike is definitely not considered an area attack; it's a series of individual strikes.

But you can, in theory, attack every square in your reach if you knew it had an enemy in it. So why couldn't you attack every square in your reach if you suspected an unseen foe?

I'd probably allow that as GM. If a player were using WS in this way, Just make sure you (the gm) is rolling both the attack rolls and flat checks, as is the norm for targeting unseen foes with strikes.

And frankly, I don't even think it's OP.
Seek lets you search a 15ft burst with one action and a skill check.

WS lets you attack for 3 actions:
-base 5 ft
-10ft with reach or large size (plus the 15ft diagonals)
-15ft with reach and large size
-20ft with reach and huge size (yay Titan's Stature!)
(And presumably if you hit something in a square, now you know something is in that square)

If you wouldn't have to move in the case of seek + strike, you're rolling 3x to try and hit once for 2 actions.
However, if the seek succeeds you've gained some benefit, even if the strike misses. And you still have an action remaining to Point Out the invisible foe.

For WS, you're rolling 2x to try and hit 'n' number of times for 3 actions.
But missing either the flat check or the attack roll means you've spent 3 actions and accomplished nothing.

I think you've answered my original question fully. Thank you all!

I think the best sort of fix for this new chair-based optimization might be to add "An ally can use an Interact action to help right you, allowing you to Stand as a free action triggered by their Interact action." to the Stand action.
This is the wording given to the mobility device ability "Quick Righting".

It removes the incentive for PCs to use a traveler's chair who don't require one, while fully preserving the functionality and giving it to ALL PCs.

Perhaps for non-disabled PCs it would be best to assume that if they were to buy and use them for their own needs out of a desire for better mobility in place of their own working anatomy that they should pay 2x the price, which from my quick napkin math seems to be about correct based on the ongoing permanent benefits it provides.

The crazy part is that this isn't even true.

To re-orient a bit:

Suppose I want to create a new magic item for my PCs that grants some underwater abilities, including water breathing and a swim speed. What price and level should it have? We're directed to look at existing items, and use those as our guide. But in this case it's not clear which items to look at.

afaik, the magic item creation rules are a little less fleshed out than their 1e version, but I'll give it a shot:

Starting with Ring of Swimming as a baseline= 1,750gp
Add Elemental Wayfinder (water) for permanent water breathing= 900
=2650.
Now we have to account for the item providing a full swim speed, opposed to the ring's normal 50% of land speed. For that, I'd probably bump the item level by 3 or so. That's give me an estimated cost for just the swim speed to be about 5675.
5675+900=6575gp for my estimation of permanent swim speed plus water breathing.

Done another way: A level 4 water breathing lasts 24 hours. So you're effectively getting a 4th level spell for that effect, with would require a 7th level caster. A 1/day spell effect has a general item level +2 from that baseline caster level, so a 9th level item. Which checks out, that's one below the level of the Elemental Wayfinder, but doesn't have an additional activated effect.

As far as I know, there isn't just a "swim speed equal to land speed" spell. But a potion of swimming (greater) has that effect for an hour.
Considering a magic items that has the several times per day effect of potion of swimming (greater) would have a level of at least 15 (11 for the base potion and +4 for multiple uses). Which sorta tracks; the ring of swimming is a 12th level, but is half speed. So a theoretical ring of swimming (greater) might have an item level of 15.

Taking the average cost of items of levels 9 and 15 (since water breathing and swim speed are both what I consider to be secondary effects) totals: 6,537.5 (637.5gp + 5900gp). Probably drop that to 6,500 for round numbers.

Gotta say I'm pretty pleased at how close those numbers came out. ^_^

Small disclaimer: this still don't account for the potential effect of bundling. So while I think this is a good estimate for the cost of JUST the effects, getting the effect of 2 invested items in one item probably should bump the cost more. But afaik, there is no guidance for how MUCH more.

On a meta level, I think it's important to prioritize inclusivity over strict balance here. Imagine the Amphibious Chair is costed "appropriately," with the Ring of Swimming and the Water Wayfinder together coming out to ~2600gp. As there's no practical way for a standard wheelchair to navigate water, wheelchair-using characters would be completely hosed in any scenario that involves not only delving the ocean depths, but also crossing any river or risking being knocked into a lake until they have the assumed starting wealth of an 11th level character - over the halfway point of the game's progression!

That's beyond the range of almost all printed Pathfinder Society scenarios, and is kind of a huge kick in the drawers to disabled PCs who want to play without risking drowning and/or not being able to participate in play. All that said; if you want to have Morhen's innovation become more widely known, adapted for forms other than a wheelchair (or worse, have him shaken down by people who want his methods!), I doubt anyone would mind.

I'd be totally fine with a dirt cheap "athletic wheel chair" that let you do all the skill actions that are based around your land speed with the chair: jumping, swimming, climbing, ect. (probably you can do that last one without ANY modifications since they come standard with adjustable seat belts). It IS a fantasy game, after all. Self-ramping wheelchair actually sounds dope.

But even with the amphibious chair, those problems you mentioned still exist. There ISN'T a way for mobility impared characters to readily overcome those kinds obstacles, up until the midlevels. They'd have to rely on cooporation from allies. Thankfully, the vast majority of groups would likely be willing to provide that kind of assistance.

From a verisimilitude perspective, I think so yes. Mostly because you still have both hands available to do stuff.

And that's fine but it's also a common item, so it's not exactly presented as an item from a specialty shop.

But even totally ignoring the fact that it's a mobility device: it's still a magic item that totally outclasses existing options to the point of making them obsolete. It's really this point I take issue with, not that it's a Mobility Device. Just that, to me, it seems like so clearly the best option for underwater adventuring as to obviate other item choices.

Supposing, of course, you need to underwater for more than an hour, an Aquatic Chair seems to me to be the most economical and effective strategy.

As Mobility Device, your land speed continues to be equal to your speed. As far as I can tell, there's no detriment to handedness especially true if you also acquire Impulse Control, a common and cheap upgrade.

Other items meant to facilitate underwater adventuring:

Bottled air (level 7, 320gp) Requires actions to breathe. Doesn't grant swim speed.

Potion of Swimming, Greater (level 11, 250gp) Lasts an hour. Doesn't grant water breathing.

Ring of Swimming (level 12, 1750gp) Swim speed 1/2 land speed. Doesn't grant water breathing.

Elemental Wayfinder, Water (level 10, 900gp) Uncommon. Doesn't grant swim speed.

Compared to: Amphibious Chair (level 9, 575gp). Common. 20ft land speed, unless yours is better. 20ft swim speed, unless yours is better. Unlimited water breathing (or air breathing if you normally breathe water).

I'm on board with Mobility Devices being 100% non-detrimental. But, to me, it sorta breaks verisimilitude when a wheel chair is by far and away the most effective means of underwater traversal.

There's very likely an angle to this that I'm missing, and I look forward to reading it ^_^

Mechanically speaking.

As far as I can tell, there are almost no differences to not being in a wheel chair, save that someone else can spend an action to help you stand, whereby you can stand as a free action triggered by your ally's help, and that you can be immobilized by having your hands bound, prior to Impulse Control.

I play in a 5e game, I play in a PF2 game, and I GM a PF2 game.

The first is every Friday, the second is every other Saturday, and the third is every Sunday.

I only really play 5e because I have some friends online that I play with. I haven't caught them at a time where they'd be up to learning a new (albeit not TOO dissimilar) system yet.

Personally, it takes almost no energy to go between systems regularly. The only real wires I get crossed is that I'll sometimes call a Dexterity, Constitution, or Wisdom save a Reflex, Fort, or Will save. But only in that direction.

If I were also GMing a 5e game, I imagine I'd mess up a bit more. Probably mostly in trying to remember the skills between games.

On the other hand, it locks you out of a versatile heritage, most of which are quite good and allow more feat flexibility, and into a pair of specific ancestries.

With as strong as the versatile heritages are, I don't hate non-versatile heritages getting a few strong options to compensate.
Assuming you are a class that can benefit from always-on medium armor.

I don't have the book yet, but this sounds basically identical to the Conraau's Rite of Reinforcement.

And I really don't see the issue. It's a poor choice for some characters. So... don't choose it for those characters?

"Just don't make bad choices" isn't a super helpful response.

Also, you can't really undo those choices legally: you can't retrain heritage and each of those feats say you can't retrain them, too.

Finally, it's just kind of weird. A whole heritage more or less prevented from taking a particular bucket of classes because of immutable physical characteristics beyond their control.
That's the kind of blatant, native restrictions that the most played ttrpgs have been moving away from for a while now.

Edited because I misread the feat: you can train OUT of them, but not in to them. Still can't retrain heritage, tho.

Huh, that's really interesting.
I don't think I've ever played it that way, but I'm going to try it at least once going forward.

Usually I just tell my players that a wall of force has been erected in the appropriate area.
But it IS invisible, so unless they identify/recognize the spell, it wouldn't have any indication that a wall is suddenly present, much less where it is.

Standard DC for a creature's level is just that, the unmodified level-based DC for that creature's level.
That's what exploit vulnerability goes against.
The DC to recall knowledge on that creature is modified by the creature's rarity.
+2 for uncommon, +5 for rare, +10 for unique.

Yeah. Make sense.
Just kinda feels worse to have a whole heritage cut off from a bunch of classes compared to not being able to select a particular ancestry feat.

The list of Lore feats is not restrictive. Human Lore should exist in the right context. It is just not a printed option.

The list of lore SKILLS is not an exhaustive list.

But not every ancestry has a level 1 ancestry feat that fits this template or naming scheme.

Edit: big fan of your guides, btw <3

To a lesser extent, this question also applies to Kashrishi who take the Tough Skin feat. That's at least a bit more of a choice.

Adding Kashrishi to the list of ancestries without a _____ Lore feat. And they REALLY don't have a viable alternative: none of their level 1 ancestry feats grant training in any skills.

Relevant rules text from AoN: "Your scales are medium armor in the plate armor group that grant a +4 item bonus to AC, a Dex cap of +1, a check penalty of –2, a Speed penalty of –5 feet, a Strength value of 16, and have the comfort trait. You can never wear other armor or remove your scales. You can etch armor runes onto your scales."

The way I read it, nothing suggests you should be. But having a heritage that makes you incapable of wearing armor while not guaranteeing that you can use the Scales armor feels wrong to me.

If I were GMing for a PC with this ancestry who was not proficient in medium armor, I'd at least make them automatically trained in the Scales armor, specificity.
Later down the line, I'd have to check their AC vs another light armor PC to see if they're taking behind.
If they are not, I might have their proficiency in scales match their class armor progression. I'm not home atm so I can't adequately check right now.

Reading the stat blocks on Nethys, the Necrohulk Flailer had the following feature:

Alchemical Cartridge (alchemical) Critical hits rupture the necrohulk's alchemical cartridge. The first time the necrohulk takes a critical hit, it loses its regeneration. The second time it takes a critical hit, it takes 15 persistent acid damage that it can't heal unless the cartridge is stitched back into place.

Problem is, the stat block doesn't have regeneration.
Since I don't have a copy of the book yet, is this a problem with AoN, did the regeneration get removed from the stat block, or was the regeneration left off by mistake?

Edit- the necrohulk smasher has a similar situation.

Forgot I started this thread!

To clarify, I'm proposing basing the Aid DC on the Primary Check DC, but lowered by -2 or -5, to represent that Aiding is easier than Doing.

This replacing the standard DC 20 default.

This means that low level characters might be able to Aid their fellows with level appropriate DCs like 15 or 18 (instead of 20).

And that higher level characters might be able to Aid their fellows with level appropriate DCs like 25/28 (instead of 30) or 35/38 (instead of 40).

I know GM essentially has full discretion to make these judgements.

I'm just wondering the long-term impact of making lower-level Aiding easier and higher-level Aiding harder!

Because it "feels" like an okay move, unless I am greviously overlooking something unintended!

Cheers.

In effect, if the regular check is a normal DC for a given level, the Aid check would be an easy or very easy check of the same level.

I like this idea since it does away with the weirdness of a completely non-scaling DC.
At the same time, it's almost always the case that the player with the best check modifier is making the primary roll and the one(s) with lower modifiers are attempting to aid. So making the aid DC a bit lower makes them more likely to succeed than if it were the same DC as the primary check.

I think using the Easy modification is probably better than the Very Easy one, lest the checks become TOO easy to succeed on by virtual consistent aid checks.

Yeah, the solid majority of races have "Ancestry" Lore as a feat. Even a bunch of versatile heritages have something quite similar; Celestial Lore as opposed to Aasimar lore, but that's easy enough to figure out imo.

And ALMOST every single one of them grants trained in two predetermined skills as well as training in Lore (Ancestry).
Fetchling grants Lore (Shadow Plane) which is a slightly broader lore skill than Lore (Fetchling) probably would be.
Also the Shisk Lore feat grants trained proficiency in 3 lore skills of your choice plus Lore (Shisk), instead of the usual 2 predetermined skills and Lore (Ancestry).

ALSO also, in my haste earlier I appear to have missed that Gnomes don't have a Gnome Lore feat, either, and there's not a particularly great replacement IMO.
Gnome Obsession is probably the closest, granting scaling proficiency in a Lore skill of your choice, but it's an even larger departure from the formula than Human's Natural Skill.

Relevant rules blurb for context:

When choosing an ancestry for a simplified ancestry character, you gain the ancestry’s normal abilities at 1st level, choose a heritage, and gain the appropriate lore feat (Dwarven Lore for dwarves, for example) as your ancestry feat. Simplified ancestry characters never gain ancestry feats beyond that first lore feat. If you want to keep the power level of your game consistent, you can replace the ancestry feats gained at higher levels with general feats.

The problem lies in the fact that not every race has a _____ Lore feat. Most of these are rare races, so it's not too big of an issue: Fleshwarp, Poppet, Skeleton, Sprite. There may be others that I overlooked.

The big HOWEVER, though, is that there is no Human Lore feat. Humans are one of the big core races and one of the most common races in the game.
I understand that extreme versatility and societal/geographic/cultural flexibility are cornerstones of the Golarian human's design, so it makes sense that there isn't a "Human Lore" feat, since humans are so varied (arguably should be true of a lot of the more widespread races, but that's a topic for another channel).
But it is something of a failing for the alternative rules system.

For those wondering: this problem is partially, though not wholly, ameliorated by versatile heritages. Only Beastkin and Ganzi VHs don't have an associated Lore skill feat.

Natural Skill seems like a nice replacement compromise. You get trained proficiency in any two skills you like at the trade-off of not getting a lore skill.

A house rule like this would certainly reduce the efficacy of the Quick Unlock feat.

Though, I think there's some merit in it. Namely, if nothing else exciting is coinciding with the unlocking.
But if unlocking is being done on a tight timetable, most notably combat but others instances could certainly exist, I'd much rather run with the prescribed number of successful checks for unlocking. Better for dramatic tension.

The 'unconscious' condition says "You take a –4 status penalty to AC, Perception, and Reflex saves, and you have the blinded and flat-footed conditions. When you gain this condition, you fall prone and drop items you are wielding or holding unless the effect states otherwise or the GM determines you're in a position in which you wouldn't."

None of those effects, of the effects of the nested conditions, affects the fortitude DC, which is what athletics to grapple goes against. Kinda silly.

It's the kind of thing every GM I know would probably house rule in some way on the spot.

It was alluded to in the blog post, but: does this book contain a 5e stat block for EVERY monster in the AP, or does it reference other bestiaries/monster manuals like other Paizo APs?

Riobux wrote:

Porridge wrote:

A narrative question. At the start of the book, Unakite tells the party "it has become clear to us that your task-bringing together the energies of the five aeon orbs in Aroden's sanctum in the Kortos mountains-is of dire importance".

But I don't recall this task (or Aroden's sanctum) having been mentioned before. Am I missing something?

I can actually answer this because I literally just hit it. In Book 2 Chapter 3, there's a book you can find that talks about the deeds of Aroden. At that point a ghost commands you to find the each of the reflections and take them to Aroden's throne in the mountains. Page 35.

Thanks! I'd totally forgotten about that bit. I'll have to make sure to continue to remind the players as they proceed.

On the topic of people catching things I've missed: Is there any lore (in the AP or some other book) explaining why the Circle of Stones took the aeon orb from Willowside? And what they're using it for?

(And although I expect this is something that hasn't been written about, I'm also curious to learn more about the origin of the aeon orbs. Where did they come from? And who placed them underground in the Vask in the first place?)

This is hinted at in the Lost Omens World Guide:

The bit in parentheses are particularly relevant, since the Empty Stones mention that the Circle of Stones stole the Aeon Orb approximately 10 years ago and they think the orb was relocated to Absalom.
As far as I know, it has never been mentioned why Grand Holt suddenly required the support of the Aeon Orb, since it had been extant even before the city of Absalom and was a massive figure in the city for ages.
Perhaps it was beginning to fail as a result of the faltering strength of the Aeon Orbs, so the Circle of Stones sought to power their singular tree directly from one of the orbs, instead of more passively be virtue of being on Kortos.

When will this book be available at my flgc?

"Your fly sped no longer restricts the height you can fly." -Sentence 2 of Unlimited Ghost Flight.

However, nothing I can see in either Floating or the Ghost Flight feat indicate this to have been the case previously.
Floating keeps you generally tethered to the ground, whereas Ghost Flight lets you fly wholly unrestricted for 10 minutes.

I suppose it's somewhat implied in Floating, since you can high jump up to your fly speed?

However, it kinda reads like an earlier version of the Ghost archetype or maybe the Ghost Flight feat used to previously allow unlimited flight up to a height capped by your fly speed.

With a lack of direction, I defaulted to the 3.5 idea that a large creature takes up roughly 4x the space as a medium one. So when something could swallow one large creature, it could instead swallow 4 medium ones.
When I looked, I was somewhat surprised to find that PF1 lacked similar guidance, at least that I could find easily.

Total Party Kill

Name of PCs: Ravillia Alurith Nikoslava, Uuki OohAahAahTingTangWallaWallaBingBang, Sokkit Decko, and Darmak Kegshield
Classes/Level: Oracle of Battle, Bard, Rogue, Fighter, all 12
Adventure: Siege of the Dinosaurs
Catalyst: Consumption
Story:

Having recently saved the Densirt family from certain death, the humble performers were asked to look in on the folks at Fortune's Hall. Upon arrival, the party had decided to check building exterior and surrounding structures before entering the Hall. Ravi and Darmak went to scout the stable, while Uuki and Sokkit checked the main building and the area around the pond, respectively. Darmak mistakenly awoke the Starved Staff, who swallowed the dwarven fighter after mere moments. Ravi began blasting while the other two arrived on-scene. After another few moments, Ravi, too was consumed. As both were specialized into heavier weapons, neither were able to deal sufficient piercing/slashing damage to rupture the undead's leathery innards. The only potential saving grace was the Air Bubble granted to Ravi by Drecko as she was consumed.
Uuki was the third to be swallowed whole, attempting to deal as much damage as possible before being taken. Drecko, the only one able to reliably overcome the monster's resistance to piercing and slashing weapons, was the last to be swallowed, as his raptor companion could only watch.
With the the whole party consumed, unable to free themselves, and continuously taking damage from their starvation aura as well as the beast's grinding innards, desperation came to the party. Darmak surrendered his last round of air to heal Ravi, Uuki gave his last breath to Soothe Ravi as well.
With the support of the whole party on her side and her Orcish Ferocity expended, Ravi bet it on all Searing Light. With the roll of a one, the light was extinguished; the whole party consumed.
Having eaten mightily of the party, the spirits of the Starving Staff were able to rest, dispersing the undead creature.

Drecko's faithful companion was able to escape and make the long journey back to town. It's only a matter of time before The Professor becomes worried at the disappearance of the circus's star performers and sends out a search party...

While true, at least ice and stone can be broken somewhat reliably.
Force is much harder to deal with.

Also, though a DC isn't given, I can't think of a reason why you couldn't climb a wall of stone.

But to be fair, those are 2 and 3 spell levels higher than water, which means by the time it's expected a party encounters them, they'll have much more resources to deal with them.

Ectar wrote:

2.) Every spell I can think of that has a secondary check/save uses something that automatically progresses.

Both Spell DC and Athletics check to swim automatically progress with level. At least as much as an Acrobatics check to escape does that you reference with Entangle.

So what are you talking about with point #2 here?

Every character IS trained or better in all saves as well as perception.

Every other spell I can think of has SOME option for EVERY character to use a modifier that receives your level-based scaling without requiring any additional investment, because they're things that always receive level-based scaling at at least trained level. Being saving throws or perception.

Given that, from a dice-roll perspective, wall of water can ONLY be defeated via athletics, which not all characters have, I'm positing that it should have a basic DC, not a level-based one.

2.) Every spell I can think of that has a secondary check/save uses something that automatically progresses.

Those also inflict an effect upon a character. Wall of water, being a wall, can't be thrown onto a character so the character must be choosing to attempt to swim through it before the DC comes up, making the comparison not really 1:1 - it's not unfair of the game to expect that someone choosing to attempt to swim has put a resource into being more capable of doing it.

Nothing in Wall of Water indicates that it cannot be placed in the same space as a creature, nor do the general rules on Walls.

3.) Because nothing in the spell says that that's what the DC is.

On this point, you're confusing helpful reminders for mandatory mentions. The general rules for setting DCs tell us a check/save against a spell uses the spell's DC as a default, it isn't actually required that every spell specify that detail.

The general rules for setting spell DCs tell us for a saving throw against a spell, you use the caster's spell DC. Nothing is mentioned as a general rule for setting skill DCs.

Ectar wrote:

Considering it's a third level spell, I don't think it should be equal to the spell DC.

Why wouldn't it be the spell DC?

Are there any cases in which the DC of something involved in a spell that isn't a flat check is explicitly not the spell DC?

Couple of reasons why I don't personally think it should be vs spell DC:

2.) Every spell I can think of that has a secondary check/save uses something that automatically progresses.
A lot of things use Escape checks, which at LEAST progresses with unarmed attack proficiency, which all characters have, but also Acrobatics and Athletics. Maze uses perception checks or survival. Every other spell I can think of uses either a save or their choice of a save or skill check.
I can't think of any other spell that would require exactly one kind of skill check to overcome.
And because ONLY athletics can bypass the wall of water, a ton of non-athletically inclined characters would be SOL. Even having a swim speed doesn't guarantee success if the water is turbulent, which isn't specified either way by the spell.

3.) Because nothing in the spell says that that's what the DC is.
Using Entangle and Maze as examples:
"Creatures can attempt to Escape at entangle's DC to remove these effects."
"Once each turn, the target can spend 1 action to attempt a Survival check or Perception check against your spell DC to escape the maze."

In other spells I've looked at, if the spell gives the victim a kind of skill check to escape/reduce the effects, the wording of the spell specifies that the check DC is the same as the spell DC.
Here it doesn't.

The answer to this question significantly impacts how good of a spell it is.
Considering it's a third level spell, I don't think it should be equal to the spell DC.
Nothing in the spell description describes the quality or stillness of the water, so I'm unsure which of the non-level based DCs would apply.

Looking at the art in the blog post looks kinda "swiftly flowing river" to me, but I'm really grasping at straws when I'm trying to discern rules from art.

Why is the whip of compliance worth 3000gp?
That's an extremely high amount for a 9th level item. On par in price with some 13th level items.
The closest item of its level is the 10th level Galley, and that's an entire ship.

Hmmmmm. Looking through the bestiaries 1 and 2, there is only one stat block with reach 5ft listed, and that's the gorilla, a large creature.
The demilich's reach 0 is also unique, as far as I see.
At least as far as I've found.
This also means that there are zero tiny creatures with a reach of 5ft listed. So either all tiny creatures have 5ft, because that's the assumption when a range isn't listed, or zero tiny creatures have 5ft reach and the reach 0ft of the demillich is extraneous.

But it also means that every single large-long creature has no reach listed because it's assumed, and every large-tall creatures has its reach specified.

I'm not sure what set of assumptions I like better.

For games that I run, I'll probably be going with: if a reach isn't listed, it's 5ft.

ps- The tiny trait doesn't actually give a "typical reach" the way that the other size traits do. It merely mentions that if a creature has reach 0ft it must enter another creature's square to attack it.

If that were the intent, it'd be nice if it were explicitly said so.

The Demilich is actually specified to have reach 0ft with its jaws attack. As far as I can tell, it's the only tiny creature that specifies a reach, but it specifies the reach you would expect a tiny creature to have.
Additionally, a whole mess of large-tall creatures have their reach explicitly stated as 10 ft, the expected amount.

Seems really odd when it's a huge creature, and a full size category over the regular nightmare which also has 5ft reach.
I couldn't find many instances of a huge creature having only 5ft reach. The Quetzalcoatlus has talons at 5ft, but it also has beak at 10. Both the Greater Nightmare's jaws and hoof are not given a range, so it defaults to 5ft, yeah?
Seems odd.

Name of PC: Tolius Viben
Class/Level: Swashbuckler 4
Adventure: The Show Must Go On!
Catalyst: Channel Smite is a hell of a drug
Story: Ashagith and her warriors were swiftly defeated, but not before alarming the rest of the Xulgaths with the gong. Three rounds later, the reinforcing warriors showed up to turn the tides. However, they came down the stairs in perfect AoE formation and two rounds later, only one warrior remained. The sole survivor bravely ran back to his master above. The party gave chase and were met by the big bad. Tolius, as the first of the party up the stairs, attempted to trip the fleeing Xulgath, but wound up tripping over his own feet. Cavnakash, having buffed himself in his first round, walked over to the prone swashbuckler and delivered a mighty channel smite, dealing almost max damage, dropping the unfortunate gnome to dying. The rest of the party arrives and begins to spread out. Tolius fails his first recovery check and advances to dying 2. Cavnakash dropped his Death Knell, which Tolius initially critically failed. He used his last remaining hero point to reroll the save, but failed once again.
Cavnakash went on to bring our Battle Oracle and Monkey Goblin Bard to dying, but was slain by our Leshy Druid's produce flame, after a hero point was able to turn a miss into a hit.

Tolius will be remembered by the town of Abberton this Sunday, and is survived by his fellow circus performers, and especially Bardolph who had begun performing again with the charismatic gnome.

Yeah. From the list of 2e APs, Extinction Curse also has the Agents of Edgewatch stuff on it.
It's weird and took me a few minutes to notice that Extinction Curse is actually on the lower half of the page, but I don't think other AP pages have 2 APs worth of stuff on them, especially when the stuff that should be up-front is on the bottom.

Ectar wrote:

Two-Headed Trolls have an action called "Reactive Chomp", but it seems like it should be a reaction based on the wording.

The Two-Headed Troll looks like it was going to work like an Ettin, with separate turns for each head. Some of the language needs to be updated.

It does. It has the same "independent brain" ability that Ettins have.

Additional errors I noticed:

Two-Headed Trolls have an action called "Reactive Chomp", but it seems like it should be a reaction based on the wording.

Jotund Troll have a reaction called "Fast Swallow" that allows them to use Swallow Whole on a creature it grabbed with its jaws, but the Jaw strikes lack Grab.

Related: all static numbers that you compare your checks to are DCs.

Most critically, armor class is a DC. So if you're frightened or sickened, giving you a penalty on all checks and DCs, your AC goes down by that same value.

When performing high jump and long jumps, the wording of the actions states that you perform a stride of at least 10 feet, then make either a vertical or horizontal Leap. Make an athletics check.
So, if you have a feat that modifies your Leap action, does that affect high or long jumps, since they have a Leap action nested inside of them?

So a feat like Raging Athlete:
"Physical obstacles can’t hold back your fury. While you are raging, you gain a climb Speed and swim Speed equal to your land Speed, the DC of High Jumps and Long Jumps decreases by 10, and your Leap distance increases by 5 feet when you jump horizontally and by 2 feet when you jump vertically."

Obviously it reduces the DC for high and long jumps. But does the last bit about Leap distances also apply to high and long jumps, since the high and long jumps still use the Leap action?

Secondly, how high can you jump with Sudden Leap? Specifically this line:
"When attempting a High Jump or Long Jump during a Sudden Leap, determine the DC using the Long Jump DCs, and increase your maximum distance to double your Speed."

The patron in PF1 was pretty bland and uninteresting.

The patron in PF2 is non-existent. It's a two paragraph blurb in the class mechanics section that doesn't have any associated mechanics. If every instance of the word "patron" were removed and the class copy/edited, it'd play exactly the same.

From the Patron section: "You weren’t born with the power to cast spells, nor have you spent years in devotion to tomes or specific entities unlocking mystical secrets. Your power instead comes through an unknown being that has chosen you as its vessel to carry forth some equally unstated plan in the world. "

It's a cool write-up, genuinely. It's just a shame that it doesn't translate into anything mechanically.

I think it'd be fine if there were a standard list of patrons that lay out lesson plans, with a "You can work with your GM to determine a different patron with their own lessons" or something if there's a patron you'd like that isn't represented.
Heck, even if the listed patrons just have suggested lessons and familiar types and whatnot it'd be better than it is now.