Gaulin's page

Karneios wrote:

I always guessed the strength requirement on form control was there to be a sorta guide to that if you were gonna use the form controlled forms in combat you'd want high strength anyway to have better accuracy from using your own unarmed attack mod

That only works if you're using a spell that caps out below your current maximum, or on like 4 levels otherwise. Building to use your own bonus is largely pointless if you're using the most recent form spell."

I think that's the point, perfect form control is a form spell 2 ranks lower than your max. To make it less of a trap for some players, giving a 4 str requirement makes the feat work much better when you use your own attack bonus.

(C-c-combo breaker)

Ended up putting in a request to opt out of remaster. Not much point paying for a ton in shipping when in a couple days I could go local and have a chance at a special edish. Not to mention from what I've seen so far there was a lot more stuff I wish was touched up.

Gaulin wrote:

Does anyone know if the new remove curse skill feat on the religion side needs the pc to follow a deity?

There is no mention of needing to be devout. You do, however, need to perform the act of prayer.

Hmm that's an odd middle ground. Guess just pick an appropriate god at the time if you don't worship one lol, never heard of prayer that isn't to a god or ancestor or something.

Does anyone know if the new remove curse skill feat on the religion side needs the pc to follow a deity?

No time for requests, but here's some stuff:

Divine Lance is 2d4, but also gets a range of 60 feet. So pack Needle Darts for your main damage and Divine Lance

Weapon Surge is now a scaling amount of spirit damage.

Electric arc is indeed 2d4 as expected, otherwise it is pretty much the same.

Chain Lightning is unchanged (oh hey Calliope5431)

Lots of nice little hex buffs, but I haven't caught them all. Shroud of Darkness now works on anything without greater darkvision.

Pretty sure the reflavored tattoo familiar lets your patron abilities still work, if not the higher level feats, so there's an easy way to keep it alive if you don't mind keeping close to the fray yourself. There might be a viable melee witch build for fortune and night that stack penalties on adjacent enemies.

You can use familiar abilities to add a variety of traits like plant or dragon. Construct looks like the only one with inherit benefits because of the huge immunity list. Also seems like you can use that to do the object familiar.

Inventor is now a second level feat, which is fine because formulas don't really matter anymore for common item. Though with GM permission this lets you invent uncommon or rare formulas.

New 7th level break curse skill feat lets you use Occultism or Religion to counteract curses as an 8 hour activity. Nice caster replacement.

Oh my God, I love that skill feat so damn much. Holy s@~!. Thank you for sharing

Sigh, looks like witches armaments doesn't have the bit eldritch nails had about putting runes directly on your body anymore. I loved that about it, was unique and flavorful, runes becoming part of your character.

Welp I definitely disagree. There's a ton of spells and such that deal damage and have the death trait and only a single save for both. As I said earlier death ward has been huge for my character against some threats with crazy breath weapons that turn characters to ashes and such. If you're telling me death ward only applies to saves that literally only kill character or not (no damage involved), then I'll just have to agree to disagree. It really sounds to me like you're cherry picking what you want to happen. I think that RAI all shall end in flames is probably meant to damage undead. But saying that even RAW it does is a little fishy.

If anything all this discourse also proves that the death trait should be further clarified, or as op wants, less things should have the death effect. Even if you are right, breithauptclan, it's not clear that your view is what's intended.

I was just trying to say that if the actual damage part of a death effect (fire damage from all shall end in flames) and the actual dieing part of a death effect (being reduced to ashes) really are totally seperate, then things like bonuses to saves vs death effects makes things murkier. Looking through the list of things with the death trait on AoN, almost all of them deal damage and the damage dealt needs a save. The actual dieing part just happens because you reach 0 HP. So either death wards saves to death effects do almost nothing because it applies to almost nothing(which would be a bummer since it's been very useful in my game for not insta dieing to a few things) or death trait and the damage dealt by effects with the death trait are linked.

That's the sort of thing that makes the death trait on all shall end in flames fiddly on things that are immune to death effects. I could see a gm ruling either way, and I do recognize it as a bummer similar to the OP.

Gaulin wrote:

Well it's confusing because then what would something like death wards bonus vs death effects ever protect you from? What's the difference between finger of deaths save and all shall end in flames save? One is negative damage and one is fire, but you should get the extra bonus from death wards against finger of death because of the theme of it?

Also, curious how you feel about Death Ward's lack of adding a bonus to saves against Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill.

I don't understand what you mean? Those things don't have saves?

Well it's confusing because then what would something like death wards bonus vs death effects ever protect you from? What's the difference between finger of deaths save and all shall end in flames save? One is negative damage and one is fire, but you should get the extra bonus from death wards against finger of death because of the theme of it?

I mean personally another line along the lines of "a creature immune to death effects is only immune to being killed immediately if brought to 0 HP by the effect, not to effects such as damage.". I'm not a writer and I'm sure there are loopholes in what I wrote but something to that effect.

One more small clarification to hope for in the remaster, I suppose. Would make sense for all shall end in flames to have it if there is a slight change to the rules, since it's a post ogl book technically.

Gaulin wrote:

Well taking a look at some spells in RoE, such as hungry depths which says it deals void damage. Unless I've been running it wrong, such a spells void damage (just the void damage portion) would just deal no damage to undead. A new player might see this newly worded undead trait and either rule the void damage is energy so heals the undead, or void damage would damage the undead. I could be reaching a bit but I wouldn't blame a newbie for being confused.

It is hard to get this defined properly with just the traits. The best way to do this is to put in the definitions of energy types and damage that healing doesn't do damage and damage doesn't do healing.

For example:

Gaulin wrote:

Maybe all undead will also have void in their immunity stat block I guess?

Void immunity would mean that the creature is also immune to Void Healing effects.

Yeah I could see another explanation elsewhere about energy types. Would be pretty confusing for a newbie still to have to flip through the book to get all these specific definitions but it would work. It's just odd to me to say vitality energy damages (so vitality damage damages, makes sense) but void energy heals (now we change the definition of void energy to only healing heals). Personally it won't be a problem in my games or anything but it really doesn't seem especially clear to me. No sense getting worked up about it when we don't have all the pieces though.

Gaulin wrote:

Call me crazy but shouldn't there be a line saying they benefit from void healing effects? The way it's written it makes it seem like all vitality effects damage them and all void effects heal them, which isn't true

Not if "Vitality energy" is a defined damage type.

And as long as it is made clear that damage effects do not cause healing and healing effects do not cause damage even if there do exist energy types (such as Vitality and Void) that can do both.

If those are both the case, then it is clear that the Undead trait as it is presented will only cause the Undead creatures from being healed or restored or otherwise affected by Vitality Healing effects. Without causing any additional restrictions with Void Healing effects.

Well taking a look at some spells in RoE, such as hungry depths which says it deals void damage. Unless I've been running it wrong, such a spells void damage (just the void damage portion) would just deal no damage to undead. A new player might see this newly worded undead trait and either rule the void damage is energy so heals the undead, or void damage would damage the undead. I could be reaching a bit but I wouldn't blame a newbie for being confused. Maybe all undead will also have void in their immunity stat block I guess?

breithauptclan wrote:

Calliope5431 wrote:

Well, technically undead are immune to Healing. Says so right in the Undead trait:

Undead Trait

I can only assume the remaster will change that somehow.

The Undead trait that is also defined in the Core Rulebook ... The Core Rulebook that is being Remastered and reprinted...

Yeah, I also expect that somehow the Remaster is going to fix that.

Pretty safe bet.

Player Core wrote:

undead (trait) Once living, these creatures were infused after
death with void energy and soul-corrupting unholy magic.
When reduced to 0 Hit Points, an undead creature is destroyed.
Undead creatures are damaged by vitality energy and are healed
by void energy, and don’t benefit from healing vitality effects.

Call me crazy but shouldn't there be a line saying they benefit from void healing effects? The way it's written it makes it seem like all vitality effects damage them and all void effects heal them, which isn't true

Is divine mysteries a remaster of gods and magic or more of an entirely new book?

Precious Materials: Elements you create (using Base Kinesis to generate an element, for example) must typically be ordinary materials of negligible value. You can't create precious or valuable materials like silver, gemstones, or duskwood unless otherwise noted.

Base kinesis is just an example, not the only hing the rule is referring to. And I would personally say that proliferating is still creating your element.

Hmmm... Did they add that at some point? I thought that initially that wording was only in the Potion rules text.

I'm not sure. But it's because of that that I made my ruling. Though you're probably both right, it does bother me to so clearly contradict RAW.

Focus Cathartic is intended to work and be usable.

Ruling that you can't use it yourself because drinking an elixir is not Strike or casting an offense cantrip, and your teammates can't feed it to you because you don't consider them to be an ally... is Technically RAW. But also fails the checks in the Ambiguous Rules rule, which is also RAW.

Similarly it can be argued that you can't feed an elixir to an ally - only a potion.

Wait what do mean you can't feed an elixir to an ally RAW? From Aon;

You usually Interact to activate an elixir as you drink it or feed it to another creature. You can feed an elixir only to a creature within reach that is either willing or unable to prevent you from doing so. You usually need only one hand to consume an elixir or feed it to another creature.

I ran into a situation last night that frustrated one of my players. Basically one of his allies, another PC, was confused and he wanted to feed him a focus cathartic elixir to attempt to counteract the confused condition. But confused means you don't treat anyone as your ally, and this confused person is straight up attacking this guy trying to pour an elixir in his mouth. After a bit of back and forth (maybe an attack roll, etc) I said whatever they want to do, just know that it opens the door for enemies to force poisons into your mouth. Eventually they gave up and just attacked him but the Alchemist player was a little annoyed.

Am I wrong, is the item an oversight, or any other insights into this situation?

Using real life stats to decide in game stats is a slippery slope. Probably best to use the material statistics in the CRB or else things can get wonky. Also note that a kineticist can only make so much bulk with basic/extended kinesis.

There's this text in the gmg;

The different types of actions representing movement are split up for convenience of understanding how the rules work with a creature’s actions. However, you can end up in odd situations, such as when a creature wants to jump vertically to get something and needs to move just a bit to get in range, then Leap, then continue moving. This can end up feeling like they’re losing a lot of their movement to make this happen. At your discretion, you can allow the PCs to essentially combine these into one fluid movement as a 2-action activity: moving into range for a Leap, then Leaping, then using the rest of their Speed.
This typically works only for chaining types of movement together. Doing something like Interacting to open a door or making a Strike usually arrests movement long enough that doing so in the middle of movement isn’t practical.

So things like tumble through or balance should, imo, be fine to combine with other movement. I would love a more solid rule but it's something

Guess no shipping today. Did the technical issues from generating orders push shipping back? Understandable if so.

Keep in mind that if your player is anything like me, the fact that you can't take a solarians mote/solar weapon away is a big draw of the class for reasons like still being functional in a scenario when your weapons get taken away. There are lots of things you could do to put a character out of commission without actively going against what the book says. Full restraints, sedation, solitary confinement with walls too strong for the weapon to break, astral prison, etc.

All this wishlisting about how casting can be improved. Seems to me like paizo is actively making classes for those who want to be more sustainable over long adventuring days. Psychic with its powerful cantrips/focus spells, kineticist with its at will impulses, and now animist with encounter long focus spells. Maybe they don't match the flavour and mechanics blend that some want but you can never please everyone. Personally it seems to me like we're getting more and more of a balance between martial, full casters (depending almost entirely on spell slots), and everything in between.

Pretty difficult to be prepared for anything, to be able to do everything. Especially if you take out magic. When I build a character I try to tick as many boxes as I can off of my own checklist;

Damage - different damage types (fire, cold, electric, acid, sonic, piercing, bludgeoning, slashing, vitality, void, mental, force, sanctified, earth, water, poison), long range, area damage, save targets (reflex, will, fort), ghost touch,

Defense - resistance (as many as you can get), high Ac, shield block, high saves, temp hp, miss chance,

Movement - high move speed, climbing, swimming, burrowing, flying, teleportation, ethereal,

Healing - hp, poison, disease, curse, deafness, blindness, drained, enfeebled, clumsy, stupified, doomed,

Sustainability - food, water, air, environmental protections, shelter, old age,

Senses - darkvision, see invisibility, see ethereal plane, any kind of heightened senses, high perception,

And then there's (imo) silly stuff like monsters you need a ninth level dispel magic or a vorpal weapon to kill but those types are so specific that I feel it's on the gm to make sure the party has those tools. Another thing to consider is getting as many buffs and debuffs available as you can, spread through status, circumstance, and item bonuses.

So with all that said, some of the better options to cover a lot of those bases without just being a straight caster;

Ancestry - kobolds are great. Breath weapon to target an area, a save, and a damage type of your choice. Darkvision, possible cantrip, possible resistance, even poison damage once a day all at level one. Later on you can get flight, small selection of spells, snares, and other goodies. Huge amount of variety.

- elves getting feats for arcane or primal cantrips, ancient elf, a good chunk of feats to survive in harsh climates, and flexible skill proficiency is also strong.

- humans cause humans

- Iruxi have a lot of similarities with kobolds, with cantrip/cool spell options, movement types, and adapting to environments.

- automaton may be the most customizable but also is rare and harder to fit into some campaigns I imagine.

- lots of great versatile heritages, especially nephalim to get spells, flight, senses, etc.

Classes - if we're discounting most magic, I think inventor has a huge amount of versatility. The weapon inventor can have a bunch of options for aoe (explode, megavolt, deep freeze), damage type (modular options, offensive boost, variable core, overdrive can be fire damage), healing through searing restoration, visual fidelity for a bunch of sense coverage, and then you could have a pool of gadgets on top of that. Also just big numbers to damage (unlike Alchemist)

Every class has features that people argue about. Kineticist has maybe a little more because of the size of the class, the newness/lack of errata/the time crunch in making it. It can be a little frustrating but this thread is sort of silly, no offense. There are already threads about things that may need errata or a handful of other rules questions.

In time I'm sure we'll get at least some questions answered, but in the meantime either stay away from impulses that might cause problems or be okay with the worst interpretation. A lot of us think the class is the coolest, even if there are some hijinks.

There's definitely a chance I'll change my tune once it's actually in my hands, but I'm still very much excited for this book if it offers a similar amount of builds as COM did (and multiple devs have said it's a lot like COM). From what little actual class options we've heard this far, some of the player options are going to be nutty (in a good way).

My personal hope is some especially good evolutionist options since this will likely be the only expansion the class gets (I've heard two things so far, a divine niche and a high level adaptation that gives certain weapon properties to adaptive strike). Even then I personally still love the class as is, just a little bummed that it didn't get a chance to get explored.

I wonder how conceal spell works against reactive strike. If someone can't tell you're making actions to cast a spell, how do you react to it? Definitely feel like RAI it's more of a social situation use, but as a gm I don't know how I would describe the interaction between a caster trying to hide their casting and a martial trying to prevent the caster from casting.

Right, but it's that sort of thinking that is why the rare tag is in place, to give GM's an easy out. I don't think it's fair to say I'm the problem immediately. You're pretty much proving my point.

Oh man I got so excited when I saw this thread, recognize your forum name immediately. I love your write ups so much. Looking forward to more!

Gaulin wrote:

Not a huge concern for me since I don't see it being a class I enjoy, my only worry is that it is well received and I don't allow it in my games and it makes players unhappy.

If you're worried about that you could always just let your players play the class. Literally makes your entire problem go away.

Hang on, are you telling me when two people disagree on something all one has to do is give in to the other person's view and then the conflict is over?! That can't be right. Huh, maybe if I do get into a disagreement with my players (I don't want the vibe of a demigod in the games I run) I'll just tell them when we argue that all they have to do is give into my viewpoint and the problem will go away. Mind blown, thank u

Oh it's for sure just a matter of taste. In this case I am actually glad for the rare tag because I can at least point to that when I want to disallow he class. But I could still see a player or two I play with really liking the class but me not be cool gming for it. It's a taste/personal table thing. Not limited to this class (same issue with some archetypes for example) but it is a bit amplified since it's a whole class.

I got exactly what I wanted with kineticist so I'm not as invested in these classes as I usually am now that I have what I want.

That being said, I like everything about the animist. Another wisdom caster finally, get the preparedness of cleric with a side of specialized spontaneity, and some strong sustained one action focus spells? All very cool.

Exemplar I'm a little more conflicted about, as are a lot people it seems like. On the one hand, it's cool to be able to fill that fantasy of being Thor in Avengers or wonder woman in justice league. On the other the narrative isn't going to fit in some cases, which is why the rare tag exists; because of that I would feel weird about it being my favorite class if you have to be that person that begs their gm to allow it. Not a huge concern for me since I don't see it being a class I enjoy, my only worry is that it is well received and I don't allow it in my games and it makes players unhappy.

I definitely like the idea of getting a bunch of archetypes based on different types of immortality. I hope there are some more common ones but I wouldn't be surprised if they were all rare though

Add one to the non existent faq, I guess. Honestly might be a good way to balance the impulse, it is very good.

Core rulebook p.455

Some effects target or require an ally, or otherwise refer to an ally. This must be someone on your side, often another PC, but it might be a bystander you are trying to protect. You are not your own ally. If it isn’t clear, the GM decides who counts as an ally or an enemy.

I love kineticist so damn much. Barely gotten to play the release version (just played as a gmnpc in a game I ran because I was desperate, some players were surprised by the utility) but I will definitely be playing one asap.

There are a couple things about the class that bugs me but it checks all the boxes I wanted it to going into the class. The fews things that bug me are nitpicky at best (could be clearer on how some things work, gm variation usually means I steer clear of certain impulses). I do hope we get more impulses at some point, I find single element builds don't have enough choice if they want to be pure kineticist (no archetype).

Honestly I don't know if I can even go back to building other classes anymore

Probably wishful thinking but the shirtless iconic makes me think a shifter like class. Scars, tattoos, bones or teeth adorning them, few clothes... Someone who probably doesn't spend a lot of time in big cities.

Just wanted to pop in here and say that, now that kineticist (my favorite class) is out for pf2e I keep thinking about how it would fit into starfinder 2e. I hope that there are minimal hoops with bringing a pf2e class to sf2e (honestly I would be okay with some hoops with bringing a sf2e class to pf2e, that's a harder pill to swallow imo) in organized play or mechanically.

There are also definitely some question marks on things like 'what way is up' in the vacuum of space, how do some spells/abilities work when there is no ground to speak of, etc. I'll still be playing sf2e (and sf1e until/a while after sf2e releases) but only having 6 classes at launch is understandable but also not a lot of variety. Especially since no vanguard or evolutionist:CCCC So yeah if we get the easiest translation possible for pf2e classes to sf2e I'll be happy

I'm not someone who wants it all that much but I have to say mythic rules does make some sense. If we're going to maybe be directly involved in the death of a god (assuming pc characters will be involved and not just hear news of it or something) then we might have to get a little more juice to our characters.

While I have little experience with 1e pf I've heard mixed things about mystic rules there. Some really like it but high level play was already unbalanced, where 2e is totally fine at high levels so it does feel more doable. Not to mention a lot of aps do go all the way to 20.

Yeah earth is my favorite element but I'm not a fan of a lot of the mechanics of some earth impulses. Only three damaging impulses and each one problematic in their own way; tremor has weird scaling and GM variation, weight of stone is decent utility but for three actions the damage is pretty lacking, and tSMW aoe dot could be a pain for your party.

And then you have rebirth in living stone which has its own issues. Control is where earth excels but it's a little lacking in other areas, imo. Best to pair it with another element to do decent damage or more defenses.

It's definitely something that can vary between gms, hence my hope for a faq for it. Personally I would love to take it but I'll skip it if it's going to vary between games.

Personally my hopes for future kineticist support is more impulses per element and/or kineticist feats. Would also love a faq for some stuff like tremor (can it hit things not on the ground, what's the deal with damage scaling?) and kinetic pinnacle working with effortless concentration. An actual errata for things like the aoe of roiling mudslide will come in due time I'm sure.

Yeah being both a stance and sustained is rough. Especially since when it ends you can't get the temp hp again for ten minutes.

I've had/am having a hard time deciding on level 18/20 feat choices for sure. Two of the impulses are hell of a million needles and shattered mountain weeps. Some general observations;

Hell of 1 million needles (henceforth Ho1MN) has a much longer range and bigger area. Damage is higher initially and if hazardous terrain ticks a couple times it can do a ton of damage (especially if you can hit a precious metal weakness). Immobilize is a great condition to inflict, potentially disabling weaker enemies and for bosses you at least waste an action (assuming they don't just sit there and attack/cast at range). Combos well with other elements that could push or pull through the hazardous terrain. I also like the combo of being in your own Ho1MN (taking metal resistance junction), sustaining it to do electrical damage, allowing the electric damage to affect you but use consume power to empower your next metal impulse, and retch rusting/etc. Reflex is a little easier in general to target as a save compared to fortitude, or so I've seen people say.

On the other hand the hazardous terrain could really be a pain for your allies. Enemies with resistance are going to ignore the hazardous terrain (at level 18 that could be a good amount of enemies?). I personally am unsure about placing a cube also; I feel like you don't need a 30x30 area or it won't work, but it also seems silly to just place a small corner of the cube in a smaller room? I dunno exactly how that works.

The shattered mountain weeps (tSMW) does a lot of damage if enemies end up taking the 4d10 area damage (more than even all shall end in flames). Prone and difficult terrain in a 20ft aoe is useful, hopefully you can ground enemies which is good for a lot of earth impulses (though if they fly they could just use the arrest a fall reaction). The aoe dot doesn't need any actions to keep up.

On the other hand, other than recasting tSMW you can't get rid of the area which could definitely be a pain for allies. The extra damage in the area is only at the end of enemies' turns, so they can move to avoid it (of course that's half the point of it but still). If you cast it in an area that you're in, unlike Ho1MN, even if you have elemental resistance you will take damage at the end of your turn unless you also pick up kinetic pinnacle (which is a good choice but kind of annoying that you'd have to take it to avoid the aoe dot, even though it is a pretty specific scenario). The difficult terrain aoe is also maybe a little irrelevant when you have the earth aura impulse (at least the actual difficult terrain part).

Gaulin wrote:

So rebirth in living stone both ends on overflow, but can be sustained through overflow?

Rebirth in Living Stone is a Stance. As well as needing to be sustained.

Rebirth in Living Stone doesn't have override text to override the Kinetic Aura rules about deactivating Stances. So if your Kinetic Aura deactivates, then the Stance ends. Regardless of whether you try to sustain the effect or not.

There is also nothing preventing you from re-activating your Kinetic Aura and using the free 1-action Stance Impulse to turn back on Rebirth in Living Stone again. You just won't get any more Temporary HP from it.

You could be right. I just wonder about the intent behind having to sustain a stance, is it because it's so strong that it needs that extra penalty?

I would say that after the stance ends your temp hp is gone. Also there is little benefit to using the stance at the start of your turn if you're going to use an overflow impulse. It could be the intent is that while you have RiLS active you just move, blast, and use a handful of other non overflow impulses but that just seems so wrong to me

This is half wishful thinking, half mechanical relevance, but I keep looking at rebirth in living stone and questioning exactly how it works. It will likely never get clarified as devs have better things to do and high level play is rarer, but I thought I would pose the question to the community.

Rebirth in living stone text - Rock overflows from within you to consume your form before cracking open to reveal your body transformed into living stone. You gain 40 temporary Hit Points. You’re immune to critical hits and precision damage. You can’t be pushed, pulled, or tripped while you’re standing on earth or stone. Your earth Elemental Blasts deal an additional 1d10 damage of their normal type.

These benefits last until the end of your next turn, but you can Sustain them up to 1 minute.

After you gain temporary Hit
Points from this impulse, you can’t do so again for 10 minutes.

And then there's the relevant text for channel elements - Your kinetic aura automatically deactivates if you’re knocked out, you use an impulse with the overflow trait, or you Dismiss the aura. Though you can’t use new impulses while your kinetic aura is deactivated, ones you already used remain, and you can still Sustain any that can be sustained. Stance impulses are linked to your kinetic aura and end when the aura deactivates.

So rebirth in living stone both ends on overflow, but can be sustained through overflow?The wording of RiLS makes me feel like it does persist through overflow and just lasts a round unless sustained. It would also be a bummer if you got the temp hp, had to do an overflow, and then lost them and couldn't regain them until ten minutes were up. If it did end on overflow it would seem counterintuitive to me, but I do understand becoming immune to crits is a very strong effect so maybe that is the intent. Just stinks like a fart if you couldn't use it and the other earth capstone in tandem. What do you all think?

Yeah tremor doesn't say anything about manipulating earth, just that if there's earth in the area it becomes difficult terrain. If the impulse is basically just a shockwave it makes the impulse so, so much cooler to me. Never liked mini earthquake style damaging moves, it's really hard to visualize a small area causing a ton of damage by just shaking (and not having building collapse and such)

I would also like if, only for my own sanity, the feat specified it only affected enemies on the ground. Theres a part of me that feels like it could affect enemies even in the air but I'm sure the intent is the ground shakes.