GideonKnight's page

Thank you, Paizo!
~~~
New Spring 2026 FAQ for Player Core
~~~
Page 408 (Clarification): The rules on weakness and resistance refer to an “instance” of damage, but that term isn’t defined. The weakness text says:

“If more than one weakness would apply to the same instance of damage, use only the highest applicable weakness value. This usually only happens when a creature is weak to both a type of damage and a material or trait, such as a cold iron axe cutting a monster that has weakness to cold iron and slashing.”

So what happens if a character hits a terotricus with a +2 striking holy flaming cold iron battleaxe and has two different spells that add cold damage to their Strikes? The terotricus has “Weaknesses cold 15, cold iron 15, holy 15, slashing 10; Resistances fire 15.” Let’s say the damage roll results in 4 fire damage from the flaming rune, 7 spirit damage from the holy rune, 16 slashing damage from the cold iron battle axe, 3 cold damage from the first spell, and 6 cold damage from the second cold spell. So we’re starting with a total of 36 damage.

The holy trait adds 15 damage from weakness to holy; the trait applies to the whole Strike, and happens only once. The flaming damage is negated by resistance. The spirit damage doesn’t get any weaknesses or resistances. The cold iron battleaxe is where the “instance of damage” rules apply! It’s both slashing damage and coming from a cold iron weapon, so we apply the 15 weakness from cold iron and not the 10 from slashing. The two instances of cold damage come from different spells, so each sets off cold weakness individually for an additional 30 damage. Now our total is 92 damage!

You’ll notice the example for resistance to all damage found further down the page shows the opposite side, applying resistance multiple times to different instances of damage on one attack.
~~~

Hopefully, this is sufficient evidence for Foundry VTT PF2e System Developers to change how they approach Resistance to traits like Unholy/Holy knowing that trait damage constitutes its own "instance" - i.e. bucket of damage - not unlike damage types. Traits do not apply to all damage types. It's not Unholy Fire, Unholy Poison, Unholy Acid. It's Unholy, Fire, Poison, Acid.
~~~
So... maybe next topic for clarification

Hopefully, we'll see this covered in the next FAQ in Summer or Fall of 2026 or maybe PF3e.

How do Weaknesses & Resistances for the same damage type, trait, or precious material interact?

This doesn't seem to cause a problem unless there are multiple resistances and weaknesses within an instance (seeing as they compete with one another).

For example,...

What should happen if a Creature with the following:
Weaknesses cold iron 15, slashing 10
...were to find a magic item that granted it Resistance cold iron 10?

Do you first calculate the higher of the two weaknesses first - in this case, cold iron 15 beats out slashing 10 which means weakness slashing 10 gets "overruled" BUT then seeing as the item granting resistance cold iron 10 reduces the cold iron damage by 10, the resulting cold iron delta would have been equivalent to weakness cold iron 5 which is lower than the weakness slashing 10.

This is an order of operations conundrum.

Personally, I like the calculation of a Resistance - Weakness delta before determining which is 'highest' to avoid another resistance/weakness being rendered unimportant.

BUT... that debate probably warrants its own thread.

Thanks everyone!

...we do not know for sure if trait resistances and weaknesses should cancel out ... trait resistances ... were (nearly) non-existant back then.

True.

Post-Remaster, we were introduced to more "traits" (namely holy/unholy) and corresponding weaknesses and resistances to those traits. Yet, while Player Core pg. 407 lists Damage "Groupings" to include "types", "categories", and "precious materials", "traits" are notably absent from that list.

Due to the 2023 OGL controversy and the resulting rush to overhaul the system, it appears that "traits" slipped through the cracks of the formal Damage Grouping rules.

If no FAQ/Errata is going to be released to further clarify this topic, then do we need to wait until PF3e comes out? When might that be? 2029?

Trip H: It is ironic that you claim there is "no problem" while simultaneously providing "Door #1, #1.5, and #2" workarounds to "solve" it. If there were no problem, those workarounds wouldn't be necessary.

You are attempting to turn a specific request for technical consistency into a philosophical debate about "Word of Dev" vs. RAW. I am not interested in that.

The "Signal" is this: > Foundry VTT currently applies Approach Y (traits apply to all damage buckets) for Resistance, but Approach X (traits are a separate bucket) for Weakness. This creates a mathematical state where Resistance 5 and Weakness 5 to the same trait do not cancel out.

That is a mechanical contradiction in the most widely used VTT for this system. Whether that's because of a dev post or a misreading of the Core text is irrelevant—the community is currently split on the implementation because the text is ambiguous enough to allow for this disparity.

My request is for consistency, not your personal "Door #2." If you truly believe there is "no ground left to discover," then you have no reason to keep posting these long-form guides in this thread. Let the request for clarity stand or fall on its own merits without further clutter, **please**.

It is disappointing to see this thread—intended for a high-level logic discussion—be treated as a platform for personal 'SEO-optimized' workarounds.

Trip H: Frequent posting does not equate to official clarity. By providing your own 'Doors' and instructions, you are effectively creating noise that obscures the core issue: the inconsistent math between Approach X and Y. This thread was never intended to be a workshop for community homebrew or a way to farm engagement.

I would ask that you take a beat to reflect on the core technical disparity I've presented rather than 'thinking aloud' in long-form replies. If we want a fix from Paizo or Foundry, we need to keep the signal clear. Let’s stop trying to provide 'solutions' that only serve to bury the actual problem.

My friend SgtBalanced was kind enough to post this question on my behalf.
I'm afraid the post has since devolved and become less constructive.
My hope is that people realize the difference between 'having something to say' and 'having to say something'. I thank everyone for their contributions & thoughts on the matter. My hope remains that someone from Paizo sees this forum and opts to address the matter in a FAQ/Errata - assuming they don't opt to chime in herein. Alternatively/additionally, my hope is that Foundry VTT Pathfinder 2e System Developers see this and
1.) give the community a way to choose their own interpretation on the matter (introduce multiple options that GM can implement),
2.) recognize what they've done is inconsistent and opt for consistency (one way or another - X or Y)
3.) further press Paizo for more clarity on the matter.
or
Other Foundry VTT PF2e developers introduce a new module to undermine the default way the PF2e System developers have interpreted matters.
~~~
Hoping this entire post has helped stimulate further thought on the matter and resulted in us all growing to find mutual purpose and treat each other with mutual respect!
-GK (Bill)

Thank you again for maintaining this critical discussion. While we have rightly focused on the stacking inconsistency, I would posit the root issue is the fundamental disagreement on how a Trait (like Unholy) is factored into the damage calculation flow.

To reiterate 3 schools of thought for where the Traits (like Unholy) are factored:
~~~
X. Traits get their own bucket (weakness/resistance only).
Y. Traits get factored into ALL damage type buckets.
Z. Traits get factored into one specific damage type bucket(s).
~~~
At present, it appears Foundry VTT PF2e system developers have implemented Weakness consistent with Approach X (arguably Z), but Resistance is consistent with Approach Y. I believe this disparity should be resolved.

IF we consider ... Approach Z (a Single Damage Type Bucket)

Using an example I previously provided:
~~~~~~~
A Daemon with the following attack:
* Jaws (unholy): Damage 1d8+12 piercing + 1d6 cold + 1d4 poison;
Rolls 15 piercing + 5 cold + 5 poison damage (25 total damage)
~~~~~~~
IF... a Trait is to get applied to a Single "Damage Type" Bucket,
THEN... there's immense difficulty in us trying to figure out into which "Damage Type" the trait should be applied.
~~~~~~~
* In the example above, into which bucket would it be assigned: Piercing, Cold, or Poison?
* Is there a rule that forces a trait to be assigned to the damage type that dealt the most damage?
* Because there is no clear rule for this assignment, we should likely take Approach Z off the table and focus on the two main conflicting approaches, X and Y.
~~~~~~~
* IF... you said ALL 3 (Cold, Poison, and Poison)
* THEN... you'd ascribe to Approach Y.
~~~~~~~
* IF... you said NONE, a trait only gains a numerical value if there is a corresponding Weakness,
* THEN... you'd ascribe to Approach X.
~~~~~~~

The problem with how Foundry VTT PF2e system developers have interpreted matters is that they used
* Approach Y for Resistance (i.e., that it applies to all "damage types")
...BUT...
* Approach X for Weakness.

At present, in Foundry, Resistance 5 vs a trait does *not* cancel out Weakness 5 to that same trait.
~~~~~~~
* IF... we consider Approach X,
* ANDIF... the ONLY time there's a conversion
-- FROM: A trait (e.g. Unholy)
-- TO: A trait with damage type numerical value (e.g. Unholy 5) is when there is a Weakness present
* THEN ... does it also make sense that the only time resistance with a numerical value kicks in is if there is a numerical value to reduce in the first place?

If so, then this would mean that affixing a polished demon horn spellheart to your armor - granting you resistance 5 vs. unholy - gives the wearer no benefit UNLESS they also possess an unholy weakness.

If an attack does not do unholy damage in the first place, then there is no damage type value to resist.

~~~
This interpretation means the item's benefit is strictly conditional. The Polished Demon Horn Spellheart would function not as a standalone defense against unholy attacks, but as a mechanism to cancel out or mitigate a pre-existing Weakness to Unholy that the wearer may have (such as that often possessed by an angel or another celestial creature).

In this view, the item is not a general defense against Daemons, but a highly specific Weakness Countermeasure.
~~~
Food for thought.

Again...
~~~
Paizo, we urgently need clarification here.
* Release an Errata to make Weakness & Resistance consistent with Approach X
...OR...
* Release an Errata to make Weakness & Resistance consistent with Approach Y
...OR...
* Overhaul Trait Weaknesses/Resistances altogether.
~~~
If either Approach X or Approach Y were adopted consistently for both Weakness and Resistance, the statistical imbalance would be resolved (a Weakness 5 and Resistance 5 would cancel out).
~~~
Alternatively, if there are any Foundry VTT PF2e system developers out there reading this, please recognize the logical flaw of applying Resistance (Approach Y) when Weakness (Approach X) is used.

Reticence to change thus far has been because Paizo has not offered clarity... for over a year now.
Perhaps you might consider introducing an option for GMs to be able to toggle between the approaches rather than make the decision for us.

Thank you for your consideration!

Trip.H wrote:

If that procedure is being run without special pleading hypocrisy, then every type-instanced bucket is genuinely a separate instance, and each one gets reduced by the Holy resist independent of each other.

I think one of the reasons you tend to have so much difficulty with the rules is that you like to get away from arguing the actual point of contention and instead create these fanciful edge cases that do not actually exist to debate instead.

Like, nobody does this and there's no RAW or RAI anywhere to suggest you should apply the same resistance ten times to a single attack or whatever. It's not a thing.

When a major component of your rhetoric involves inventing positions that nobody made to argue against, it might be worth reconsidering your approach, because it means you're either building a strawman or fundamentally misunderstanding the entire topic. Neither of these are great things for building understanding of the game.

Alas, this is what Foundry VTT PF2e system developers have done. And a lot of people use Foundry VTT. When I brought this up in their Discord, they shot it down saying (somewhat understandably) we're not going to change code until we get something more definitive from Paizo - hence this post.

At the time of this post, Foundry VTT PF2e System Developers have determined that the way that Unholy/Holy works is inconsistent depending on if you have resistance or weakness.
~~~
There's a "How's Its Played" video that does a great job explaining...
~~~
* Each damage type is calculated in its own bucket.
* Immunities, weaknesses, then resistances are applied in that order to each bucket.
* The Subtotal of all the buckets are added together into a grand damage total.
~~~
The problem here is that "Unholy" is not a "damage type" (like slashing, spirit, or poison). It's a "trait". There's no such thing as "unholy damage" per se. In other words, you don't roll a die or get a numerical value assigned to unholy damage like you did pre-Remaster by inflicting evil damage. Instead, my understanding is that you only take damage from a source that has a trait if you have a weakness to it.
<pause>
So... into which bucket do we factor the Unholy trait?
There appear to be 3 schools of thought...
X. Traits get their own bucket (weakness/resistance only)
Y. Traits get factored into ALL buckets
Z. Traits get factored into one bucket(s)
~~~
Foundry VTT PF2e System Developers have determined, X (or Z) for Weakness and Y for Resistance - though this may be because Paizo has not responded to requests for clarification nor generated Erratas regarding this topic.
~~~
Here's an example scenario you can test in Foundry...
~~~
* Target A has *Weakness* 5 to Unholy (no immunities nor resistances)
* Target B has *Resistance* 5 to Unholy (no immunities nor weaknesses)
~~~
IMAGINE this weapon strike:
* 7 Slashing Damage : (1d6+4 Slashing - Rolled a 3)
* 3 Spirit Damage : (1d6 Spirit - Rolled a 3)
* 3 Poison Damage : (1d6 Poison - Rolled a 3)
Normally: This would be a total of 13 pts of damage against targets with no immunities nor weaknesses nor resistances.
~~~
IF..
* Target A were to be struck by this strike
THEN....
* Target A would take 18 pts of damage total
(13 + Unholy Weakness 5) - in other words the Unholy Weakness proc'ed (aka triggered) once. This is in accordance with X (or Z). Unholy damage wasn't inflicted as much as the Unholy trait triggered an Unholy Weakness.
~~~
IF..
* Target B were to have been struck by this (same) strike
THEN....
* Target B would have taken 2 pts of damage total
(2 unholy slashing + 0 unholy spirit + 0 unholy poison)
In other words the Unholy Resistance proc'ed (aka triggered) three times. This is in accordance with Y. In this scenario, Unholy was factored into each damage type and wasn't considered to be in its own bucket.
~~~
What's strange about this is that in Foundry VTT PF2e, Weakness 5 and Resistance 5 do *not* cancel each other out.
Resistance to a trait (like Unholy) in Foundry is mathematically more advantageous than Weakness to said same trait.
~~~
In Foundry, when...
* Target C has *Weakness* 5 to Unholy AND *Resistance* 5 to Unholy (no immunities)
IF..
* Target C were to be struck by that same strike
THEN....
* Target C takes 7 pts of damage total
(5 unholy weakness + 2 unholy slashing + 0 unholy spirit + 0 unholy poison). The weakness added 5 damage. The resistance subtracted 11.
Anyone else think this is wrong?
~~~
In which damage type bucket was unholy applied to trigger the weakness Foundry? Does it matter? Presumably, the one that does the greatest amount of damage, yes? If so, I'd argue the resistance should be applied to that same bucket.
~~~
I'm of the opinion that no matter the decision, Paizo ought to weigh in here and clarify. I suspect they want Resistance and Weakness to both be weighted equally and for them to NOT be inconsistent.
~~~
Aside...
Cold-Iron and Silver (both special materials) apply to "physical" attacks - i.e. slashing, bludgeoning, piercing
Right after the re-master I think most people thought alignment damage would simply get converted into spirit damage, but holy & unholy were created and there's no equivalent for lawful/chaotic (yet). <Please introduce Axiomatic and Anarchic>.
I think the initial prevailing thought was that the Unholy/Holy trait might have some sort of rider-effect on spirit damage much in the same way that cold-iron & silver does on physical damage, but it looks to be more complicated that this.
~~~
I, for one, welcome our benevolent Paizo overlords!
~~~

It used to be that Good damage was it's own "damage type" (same as evil)
Holy, however, is not a "damage type" but is instead a "trait"
The water "trait" isn't a damage type. It triggers a "water" weakness, however. So upon discovering the "Polished Demon Horn" spellheart was remastered to grant Resistance 2 to Unholy when affixed to armor, I thought it had a very niche use.

I thought the only time something takes Holy or Unholy damage is when their target has a weakness to it.

So I thought the only time "Polished Demon Horn" would be useful is if/when something had a weakness to unholy, they could gain a "resistance" as well. Or... maybe it might have use against a sanctified holy cleric/champion who might be targeted by a spell like "Chilling Darknesss" that states "If the target has the holy trait, you deal an extra 5d6 spirit damage."

My understanding is that special materials like cold-iron and silver, get put into the same Damage Type bucket as "Physical" damage when determining weaknesses & resistances.

I thought holy and unholy would be put into the same bucket as spirit damage.

BUT... then I came across this:
---
Lacridaemon Speed 25 feet, fly 40 feet; resistance 10 to cold; Melee [one-action] jaws (magical, unholy), Damage 1d8+12 piercing plus 1d6 cold and 1d4 poison; Melee [one-action] claw (agile, magical, unholy), Damage 1d6+12 slashing plus 1d6 cold.
---
it's jaws don't do spirit damage. they do physical damage + cold + poison.
So,...into which bucket does the "unholy" go?
unholy piercing? unholy cold? unholy poison? none? all?
Foundry VTT PF2e system developers determined.... all three.
unholy piercing + unholy cold + unholy poison - so resistance can get proc'ed 3x, yet weaknesses only get proc'ed once? that doesn't make sense.
In looking back at my post, I realize I was kinda proposing "none" - or rather only those that have unholy weakness can benefit from unholy resistance
..
maybe paizo will rule just a few like ... physical &/or spirit?
or maybe any? but I have a hard time accepting "all"
I mean I guess I can see a creature doing unholy electric damage or unholy bludgeoning damage or ... unholy sonic? unholy bleed? unholy precision? c'mon.. it gets a little ridiculous.
---
Point is.. it's gotta be cleaned up. Help us Obi-Paizo-Kenobi. You're our only hope!

Thank you for raising these crucial questions. I agree that official clarification is necessary.

Presently, in the Foundry VTT PF2e system ...
~~~
* Holy/Unholy Weakness is applied one time per damage "instance" (regardless of the number of damage types).
whereas...
* Holy/Unholy Resistance is applied one time per damage "type"
~~~
I raised this concern in Discord, but the Foundry VTT PF2e system development team remains hesitant to make changes until Paizo officially clarifies the matter.
~~~
My recommendation would be to explicitly call out that resistances and weaknesses can be triggered in various ways. "Kinds" of resistance include:
* damage "types" (e.g. fire, acid)
* damage "categories" (e.g. mental, physical)
* "traits" (e.g. water, holy), and
* "materials" (e.g. silver, cold-iron).
~~~
The Weakness Rule specifies...
~~~
"If more than one weakness would apply to the same instance of damage, use only the highest applicable weakness value. This usually only happens when a creature is weak to both a type of damage and a material or trait." (Player Core pg. 408)
~~~
This leads one to believe that Weakness to a Trait (like Holy) is calculated only once per instance, regardless of how many damage types carry that Trait.
~~~
The Resistance Rule specifies...
~~~
"If you have more than one type of resistance that would apply to the same instance of damage, use only the highest applicable resistance value, as described in weakness." (Player Core pg. 408)
~~~
This leads one to believe there is Resistance parity with the Weakness rule. Demanding the reader come to their own transitive conclusion might be asking a lot.
~~~
For example, I interpret "resistance type" to mean "resistance kind" (e.g. trait, damage type, category, material) but others might conclude "resistance type" means "damage type".
~~~
To further complicate matters, Resistance also specifies...
~~~
"It's possible to have resistance to all damage. When an effect deals damage of multiple types and you have resistance to all damage, apply the resistance to each type of damage separately. If an attack would deal 7 slashing damage and 4 fire damage, resistance 5 to all damage would reduce the slashing damage to 2 and negate the fire damage entirely."
~~~
To me, that whole section is specific to Resistance to All, but others might conflate the wording in that section with Resistance to Traits (like Holy)
~~~
Point is,...
...please help clarify the rules surrounding Weaknesses AND Resistances
~~~~
If what I believe is true, help folks understand that ...
...an effect with a Trait (e.g. water, holy) triggers a corresponding Weakness to said Trait once per instance

...an effect with a Damage Type (e.g. fire, acid) triggers a corresponding Weakness to said Damage Type once per instance

...an effect with a Damage Category (e.g. physical, mental) triggers a corresponding Weakness to said Damage Category once per instance

...an effect with a Material (e.g. cold-iron, silver) triggers a corresponding Weakness to said Material once per instance
~~~
Likewise...
~~~~
If what I believe is true, help folks understand that ...
...an effect with a Trait (e.g. water, holy) triggers a corresponding Resistance to said Trait once per instance

...an effect with a Damage Type (e.g. fire, acid) triggers a corresponding Resistance to said Damage Type once per instance

...an effect with a Damage Category (e.g. physical, mental) triggers a corresponding Resistance to said Damage Category once per instance

...an effect with a Material (e.g. cold-iron, silver) triggers a corresponding Resistance to said Material once per instance
~~~
Below is an example that demonstrates just how much of a difference these various RAI make...
~~~
Imagine a Daemon with the following attack:
* Jaws (unholy): Damage 1d8+12 piercing + 1d6 cold + 1d4 poison;
Rolls 15 piercing + 5 cold + 5 poison damage (25 total damage before applying Weakness or Resistance)
~~~
WEAKNESS Scenario #1:
The Weakness only triggers/procs once per instance (1x total)
* A target with Weakness Unholy 2 would take 27 pts of damage.
~~~
WEAKNESS Scenario #2:
The Weakness triggers/procs once per damage type (3x total)
* A target with Weakness Unholy 2 would take 31 pts of damage.
~~~
RESISTANCE Scenario #1:
The Resistance only triggers/procs once per instance (1x total)
* A target with Resistance Unholy 2 would take 23 pts of damage.
~~~
RESISTANCE Scenario #2:
The Resistance triggers/procs once per damage type (3x total)
* A target with Resistance Unholy 2 would take 19 pts of damage.
~~~
As you can see, this can have significant impact on the outcome of an encounter depending on the rule.

It looks like Foundry VTT PF2e presently has a mixed approach. They went with WEAKNESS Scenario #1 + RESISTANCE Scenario #2
~~~
I would imagine, regardless of how you clarify the rules, there ought to be consistency - i.e. both are Scenario #1 or both are Scenario #2

This is of particular interest to me due to Remaster changes to an Adventure Path I'm running where a "Polished Demon Horn" is discovered by the party in a demon-ridden land (Sarkoris).

Thank you for your review!
-GK (Bill)

I'm running Gatewalkers AP. I'd like to convert the "Polished Demon Horn" (PF2e Legacy Content) spellheart to Remaster Rules. The items states that when affixed to your armor "You gain resistance <#> to evil and chaotic."
I watched "How It's Played" Youtube video "How Does Sanctification, Holy and Unholy Work in Pathfinder 2e Remaster?"

As per the video @13min41sec he states, "Resistance to Evil becomes Resistance to Unholy". So seems pretty straightforward, someone wearing the spellheart would gain resistance to unholy damage. But if the wearer doesn't have a weakness to Unholy damage, would I be right in thinking this'll likely never proc/trigger/benefit the recipient? There's a part of me that wants my PCs to gain resistance to Unholy Spirit Damage - i.e. Resistance to Spirit damage but only if it's Unholy, but this seems a bit of a stretch.

Also, at the same timestamp in the video he shared "Creatures with Resistance to Evil gain the Unholy Trait" does this mean that affixing this spellheart to your armor - which makes you Resistance to Unholy - results in your character gaining the Unholy Trait? or does the Unholy trait only reside on the item? Or does this not apply since he wrote Evil and not Unholy? I'm just trying to better understand the nature of the transitive relationships (if any).

Ruling that affixing this spellheart gives the wearer resistance to spirit damage seems too much of a let down. Where's the Unholiness of this device factoring in?

I imagine most GM's would rule that the resistance granted is to both Spirit (from Chaotic) and Unholy (from Evil). Thoughts?

Omg look at that setting. Is like Warhammer meets Pathfinder. So Awesome as always!!

Finally official turn based! :D

Hi! I currently have all my subscriptions suspended because of Covid19 and the issues of sending stuff to my country, who es experiencing a catastrophic rise in infection cases. But I have some questions regarding the state of my previously purchased items.
Order 15933645 - It never arrived, I assume it was sent back?
Order 18587829 - It never arrived, I assume it never even reached the country of destination?
Those Orders I have the PDFS, so they were shipped, what is the state of those orders?

Order 24325952 I assume is suspended, when I would be able to have these items? I would need to purchase them all at once?

Thanks in advance!

Hey guys, I just updated the payment method in those orders for them to be resumed. Do I need to do something more? Or it will continue with the shipping?