Gisher's page

Deadmanwalking wrote:

It's a very niche Feat if Unarmed normally progresses with Simple weapons, but not actually useless given the existence of Wizards, Cloistered Clerics, and potentially other Classes who lack Simple Weapon Proficiency rising to Expert (or above).

So...not actually useless or in need of change even given the currently unofficial errata.

IIRC they mentioned wizards getting expert in unarmed along with their other stuff during that stream.

They did specifically state that. And the phrasing they used for the general rule wasn't that Unarmed proficiency would match your proficiency with all Simple Weapons. It was more like "basically your Unarmed proficiency should match your Simple Weapons." While Wizards don't get proficiency with all Simple Weapons, all of the weapons they are proficient with are Simple Weapons. The reasonable conclusion is that their Unarmed proficiency becomes expert at 11th level with their other weapons. I included that assumption in my Guide to Proficiency Bonuses (Google Drive version).

So right now the only classes that benefit from the feat are Fighter (so the claws, bite, or tail will keep up with their Chosen Weapon Group) and Cleric (so they will keep up with their Favored Weapon). Note that neither Warpriests nor Cloistered Clerics get better than Trained in Unarmed Strikes unless it is their Favored Weapon. We might see future classes or Class Archetypes that can also benefit.

In the ZW sex-determination case, though, the offspring is not a clone of the mother and about half of the mother's genes are lost when she reproduces parthenogenically -- so this is something that will only work every few generations.

You would only have to go with a tribe of all-female clones if they always reproduce that way -- which means that they quite pointedly do not randomly select which genes are passed on.

I think that's right. I believe that the process I described is automictic parthenogenesis which utilizes meiosis to produce half-clones, whereas the process described in the feat is apomictic parthenogenesis which is non-mieotic and so produces full clones. I'm sure we have a few biology experts here that can clarify this.

larsenex wrote:

Glaive? (why is the deadly still 1d8?)

Guisarme (I loved trip)

Ranseur (disarm worth it?)

Fauchard (p.92 LOCG) - 1d8, deadly d8, reach 10 ft., sweep, trip

Ooooo, I hadn't spotted that yet. Thanks!

Gisher wrote:

I'm just hoping that the Lizardfolk don't get such a massive Intelligence penalty that it can't be overcome. I've wanted to play a Lizard-Wizard for a long time.

Now that the book is out, I hope you're pleased! Iruxi do have an intelligence penalty, but nothing that can't be offset by choosing the right background. And in terms of canon (and ancestry feats), iruxi culture has a strong emphasis on reading portents in the stars, with many lizardfolk working with their human neighbors to restore the city of Jaha--an ideal origin for lizardfolk spellcasters of all kinds!

Very pleased! I love the various types of Iruxi. I've been planning a magaambyan, Iruxi wizard with druid multiclass since the "You're a Lizard, Harry" blog, but now that I've got the book I'm considering wizard with Halcyon magic.

Aetheldrake wrote:

you'd think they would be getting their act together a little bit more with the new edition.

How do you suppose, when Campaign Leadership dropped from three people, to two?

They're aware of *what* needs to be done, there just aren't the hours available to do it all right now.

That's what Time Stop is for. ;)

David knott 242 wrote:

I did a search for "darkvision" in the Lost Omens Character Guide PDF and came up with the following:

Human: 5th level feat for Nidalese ethnicity
Hobgoblin: Default ability
Leshy: Fungus Leshy heritage

Hellknight Signifer: 10th level feat

I found nothing about darkvision for lizardfolk -- but apparently they do have the only option I have seen so far (the 1st level Parthenogenic Hatchling feat) for making a character with no father. While they do not directly say so, they strongly imply that such a character must be female (as a character with this feat is an exact genetic clone of her mother).

You're definitely reading the implication that was indeed intended! To me, it was a nice intersection of really old Pathfinder lore (as far back as Classic Monsters Revisited), real-world biology, and game mechanics. That kind of detail really grounds a setting like Golarion for me. And it can be an adventure springboard: If you come across an iruxi settlement that is predominantly women because of many such hatchlings, you know they've been through a rough time. Maybe some adventurers can help them out?

BUT the text is just vague enough (and biology weird enough, especially fantasy biology) that if you really want to play a male parthenogenic hatchling you should feel free--maybe that's just how chromosomes work in your world, or maybe your character is one in a million (with interesting story/destiny implications--think Dune's Paul Atreides).

Do what's fun for YOUR table!

Real world biology is weird enough to cover this. Some species have a ZW sex-determination system rather than the commonly known XY sex-determination system. Under this system the female is the sex with both Z and W chromosomes while the male has two Z chromosomes. Under this system females reproducing parthenogenetically can produce both female offspring (ZW) and male offspring (ZZ). (The third type, WW, usually don't survive.)

Komodo dragons have such a ZW system and have also been known to occasionally reproduce parthenogenetically, so there is a real-world example of a lizard that can parthenogenetically produce both male and female offspring.

Rysky wrote:

The Bestiary Leshies use 30ft so I'd go with that until official clarification.

That'd be great if it's correct. It'd mean you could make a monk with a respectable ranged attack they could flurry: the fact that the stat for the leshy actually fit for a monk is a bonus. ;)

Would that be a Bud-ist Monk? ;)

So let's all hope for some runed wizard robes and start cosplaying then.

Wizard robes with runes already exist. (Robe of the Archmagi) But they are Explorer's Clothing so they also have the +5 Dex limit.

Yeah, that was a mistake. I quickly went through my spell list containing all CRB spells and checked which seemed odd. Sound Burst is of course still on the Occult list. I was looking at Sunburst and just thought I was looking as Soud Burst. My bad.

It's close. SOUNDBURST ;)

I'm guessing that we will basically get an Int-based Rogue with the introduction of the Investigator.

Sadly the flavor of Unarmed Strikes comes with some mechanical costs. But if your goal was to combine Rogue and Multiclass Monk abilities, consider taking Monastic Weapons.

The proficiency will scale along with your Rogue weapons, and the Sai and Nunchaku are both finesse so you can get Dex to damage. You also use Ki Strike, Sneak Attack, and Flurry with them. They won't work with Weapon Tricks, but Brawling Focus will get you the critical specialization effects. Plus they can be made from special materials, unlike Unarmed Strikes. The Sai is agile so it works well with Double Slice.

Additionally, Rogues can get good use out of the improved action economy provided by Flurry, Stand Still, and Ki Rush.

citricking wrote:

Thanks for the credit, but credit vi isn't me, that was someone else, my success rate charts are here

Fixed it!

Thank you, it was Gisher's Table of proficiencies. They were pretty clean to make the comparisons.

I must have messed up while checking the different links to build the references. Sorry about that.

Your work was amazing with the data, and I thank you again. If you find anything wrong on the article please let me know.

Cool! Glad you got some use out of them. :)

First World Bard wrote:

Edit: To be clear, I'd find jumping over a Large enemy with the Jump spell to be fairly difficult if you want to get back on the ground without falling at the end. But jumping over Medium and smaller enemies should be pretty easy to do.

Well if it follows the rules of physics then jumping 30 feet (maximum distance at an angle of 45°) will let you clear 15 feet of height in the middle of your jump (that is after 15 feet). So if you start 10 feet away from a large creature it is not unreasonable to assume you will be able to jump over it.

By the laws of physics your maximum height for a 45 degree angle would be 7.5 feet, not 15 feet. (Ignoring details like air friction.) You move in a parabolic path, not a circular one. You could twist your body like high jumpers do to get past a slightly higher obstacle, but 15 feet is unreachable.

0o0o0 O 0o0o0 wrote:

That speedy but weak elf gets tangled up in the fruit cart as he crashes into it while the dwarf just powers through, barely hindered by the flying apples and melons.

I assume your chase sequence has a fruit cart

Bah, why use a fruit cart when there's always a cabbage cart around?

Banana peels.

Lizardfolk are interesting. Five varieties to choose from. A few interesting feats, like "Parthenogenic Hatchling" which says "You were hatched from an unfertilized egg during hard times for your people, and you are a biological copy of your mother." It gives bonuses to saves and surviving without food.

Good overall feat support for their natural weapons and a few other tricks.

Five varieties sounds awesome!

There is an important difference between in-world ethnicities (a lore and world distinction) and in-game heritages (a mechanical distinction). Members of a given ethnicity are not locked into only one mechanical option, though they may tend towards one or more in particular, to give you the maximum possible options for your character. I would expect many a Hollowborn might take Elf Atavism (Cavern Elf heritage) to get darkvision, but not all of them have to do so, if you prefer a different feat.

I have to say that I really appreciate this. Having some options to individualize characters without worrying about mechanical effects is really nice.

The "Casting Spells from a Staff" section (CRB p. 592) states "Casting a Spell from a staff requires holding the staff (typically in one hand) and Activating the staff by Casting the Spell, which takes the spell’s normal number of actions." I read the 'typically' to mean two-handed is an option at least some of the time. So I would take the 'usage' statement to mean 'at least one hand.'

However it also states "You must provide any material components, cost, or focus required by the spell, or you fail to cast it." So I would think that any spell needing a hand free to use such components would prevent you from holding the staff in two hands. Spells with only verbal and somatic components shouldn't cause this difficulty since both can be performed while holding things in your hands.

Were catfolk to be in this book too?

I believe they are coming in the Advanced Player's Guide. We might see them in the playtest later this month.

The interesting thing in this new guide is that they make honorable mentions of all the more well known ancestries such as Aasimars, Tengu, and Teiflings at the very end of the new ancestries. Does anyone know if this is going to be an ongoing series, where we get a book 2 like how bestiaries are "Bestiary" then "Bestiary 2" or if they're going to incorporate this in a different format? And if you do have those answers can you please point me to where you got them so I can stay in the look instead of constantly asking questions on these forums?

I believe that the next book with lots of ancestries will be the Advanced Player's Guide which will include Aasimars, Catfolk, Changelings, Dhampirs, Duskwalkers, Kobolds, Orcs, Ratfolk, Tengu, and Tieflings. The playtest is supposed to begin this month. I think that this was all announced at a convention.

Well, there is Desna...

Apparently not.

Desna is indeed an alien entity who's kind of "adopted" the humanoid form in response to her delight in how we humans look and act. She's not from "outer space" even though she enjoys outer space—she pre-dates sapient thought/mortal life in the Material Plane, along with some of the other really REALLY ancient deities.

She's not a Great Old One, though. She's a full-fledged deity who doesn't get a stat block. Nor is she an Outer God, because she actively cares for and likes and wants to help us people.

If Desna were in Lovecraft's stories, she'd be classified along with Nodens as an Elder God, I suppose.

(We don't have an "Elder God" category in Pathifnder because it's nonsensical—"Elder God" basically means "deities who aren't Great Old Ones or Outer Gods," after all, so pretty much every other deity in the setting is an "Elder God" if you look at it from the Derleth Mythos world view—the creation of that category of deity being something August Derleth introduced to the stories in his sometimes awkward attempt to categorize Lovecraft's creations into narrowly defined categories like elementals and the like.)

The Form Control feat says that you can.

With additional care and effort, you can take on an alternate form for a longer period of time. If your next action is to cast wild shape, wild shape’s spell level is 2 lower than normal (minimum 1st level), but you can remain transformed for up to 1 hour or the listed duration (whichever is longer). You can still Dismiss the form at any time, as permitted by the spell.

Pest Form, Animal Form, Humanoid Form, Insect Form, Dinosaur Form, Aerial Form, Elemental Form, Plant Form, Dragon Form, Monstrosity Form, and Nature Incarnate all include the sentence "You can Dismiss the spell" or "You can Dismiss this spell" so they all permit this.

Fuzzy-Wuzzy wrote:

How'd he get speed 40' at 1st level? He can have Nimble Elf to bring him up to 35', but has no way to get Fleet to make 40. Not that this changes your actual point, since moving 70 with 2 actions still beats the dwarf's 60 with 3.

Anyway, you are correct that the elf wins here while laughing maniacally (as a free action).

EDIT: And if the dwarf is foolish enough to carry a tower shield (-5' speed, not susceptible to Unburdened Iron feat 'cause it's not armor) then a regular 25' person of whatever race can pull off the same thing, moving 50 in 2 while the dwarf moves 45 in 3.

Anyway, you are correct that the elf wins here while laughing maniacally (as a free action). XD

While laughing is normally a free action, I believe that a proper maniacal laugh takes at least a full turn.

I presumed "go to Moon/Mars to live" was implied.

Me too. I was being silly. Thus my wink emoticon.

Squiggit wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Leaning into this rules ambiguity and clarifying that it works just the way the unclear wording leaves open as a possibility would mean that, for instance, if we had a throwing knife that was better for throwing, longer range, etc, but useless in melee, so we listed it in ranged like the javelin, a rogue would not be able to gain the benefit on a throwing knife.

While true, I don't think that's any weirder than, say, our same rogue here getting dex to damage while wearing gauntlets but not if they take those gauntlets off (because unarmed strikes aren't weapons).

That isn't true though, you should look at the rules before you say something like that. Gauntlets aren't finesse melee weapons so they don't get Dex to damage.

Good catch. I just assumed that gauntlets were finesse. It seems a little weird that they aren't.

Temperans wrote:

NPCs aren't [b]built[b] using the same rules as PCs to make it easier on GMs, they still need to follow any other rules

Why? What possible enhancement to the game can that bring about for those playing? Do we worry about crafting rules when we buy ale at the pub? Do we manage the innkeeper's inventory of ale? Or balance his accounts receivable?

This is being soooooooo overthought...

Oooo! Balancing the tavern's accounts! My OCD is into that idea.

FYI, we have already gone to the moon. ;)

Honestly we're getting into people close reading the wording of citricking's mention of the fact that I said something, so here is what I said. It was in response to talking about the same question with Rage and Raging Thrower (it has identical language and the reading that ranged attacks with some thrown weapons and not others are melee weapon attacks would make the feat do nothing):

Me wrote:

We have Rage on the list to look at for clarity updates, I can add the thief ability as well. Are there any other that are ambiguous and seem to work with thrown melee weapons if you read them a particular way?

and then I said

Me wrote:

Javelins for instance are clearly ranged

since they don't have a melee usage.
It would be weird for thrown daggers to work differently than thrown javelins

Given how often debates regarding the status of thrown weapons came up in PF1, I was a little surprised that this issue wasn't definitively resolved in PF2. I would have expected something in the thrown weapons description like "When thrown, these weapons are considered ranged weapons, not melee weapons, for all rules."

Mark Seifter wrote:

Leaning into this rules ambiguity and clarifying that it works just the way the unclear wording leaves open as a possibility would mean that, for instance, if we had a throwing knife that was better for throwing, longer range, etc, but useless in melee, so we listed it in ranged like the javelin, a rogue would not be able to gain the benefit on a throwing knife.

While true, I don't think that's any weirder than, say, our same rogue here getting dex to damage while wearing gauntlets but not if they take those gauntlets off (because unarmed strikes aren't weapons).

Excellent point. I've also been confused that Wizards become experts at using clubs but somehow can't figure out how maces work. :)

Mark made some posts on his discord that seemed to indicate this was not intended. So they aren't supposed to get Dex to damage.

And now I am sad.

Yep. So knives, starknife... I'm not sure if there are that many more that have all 3 reqs actually.

Dagger, starknife, and filcher's fork are the only three that I see.

I haven't found in the rules the "strap a shield" and "unstrap a shield" actions, so I assume I just need one action to retrieve a shield and strap it, and it's a free action to let go a shield?

I can't find any rules for strapping a shield on, but unstrapping it is listed on table 6-2 (CRB p 273) as a one-handed interact action. That should be a single Action.

I've seen it used a few times. Mostly it was incredibly useful in reducing damage and getting out of melee situations without spending actions or getting whacked with an AoO. The other time, though...is when Stephen's cleric used it in Part 5 of our internal Doomsday Dawn playtest and Logan's random directional die was evil. It would send Stephen to the other side of walls of force from the party, back into cloudkills he escaped, outside of the cathedral when demons were amassing out there and Jason's wizard had used spells to protect us, into the middle of blade barriers, off and into the edge of a reverse gravity multiple times causing falling damage each time, and so on. So make sure not to use Logan's die if you cast blink.

Well, it is called a 'die.'

Where are the rules for gripping a hands:2 weapon taking an action. i just read the Hands section in the book and then i searched the actions section, and then i searched the appendix, and could not find anything. I seems to me that you can just hold the weapon in one hand, cast a spell, then regrip the weapon without taking an action. (especially if you have quick draw) I don't see any limitation ion the CRB.

You'll find this information on the table of equipment-related actions on p. 273 of the CRB.

Changing your grip by taking one hand off of a two-handed weapon is a Release Action and is a free action.

Changing your grip by putting the hand back on the weapon is an Interact Action and takes one Action.

Oooh, dual-classing. I'm guessing that's like a gestalt approach to the old hybrid classes.

You might find this website useful since it is a the PF2 version of the guide to the guides

https://zenithgames.blogspot.com/2019/09/pathfinder-2nd-edition-guide-to-gu ides.html

Fixed Link

Barnabas Eckleworth III wrote:

I had thought Pharasma was like... old old deity from back in the day. I need to brush up on my Golarion lore again.

She's the first sentient thing in this reality, because she came from the previous reality and survived its unmaking, basically.

She might have survived more than one unmakings, there's no reliable historical record on "previous realities".

Interesting. Like the Twilight Pitri and Solar Pitri Manasaputras.

(And Galactus.)

pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/deity#Ascended_deities

Corrected Link

I get why they're doing it, as well as how and why it's that way. I, personally, just don't like it, and I admit that's mostly on me. I have a tendency to fixate, as I am obsessive compulsive.

I've been there, and I feel your pain.

1: Stances does not stop you from casting spells as I read it.

...

6: I see nothing that prevents it. Except the "must attack with" stances.

Technically stances like Mountain and Crane don't have phrases like "you must attack with." Instead they state "the only Strikes you can make are..." Since spell attacks and maneuvers are attacks but not Strikes they can be used while in any of the stances.

3) Ki powers probably won't be super useful, given that wild-shape or morph is already consuming ki points. Once you can get to the regain 2 at once they become possible useful, but typically need to be used before you shape.

As Mellored pointed out, being able to increase your Focus Pool through both Druid and Monk feats lets you increase it faster than either class alone. Also consider that the Familar Focus master ability on a Leshy Familiar basically gives you a reserve Focus Point. That would let you use up to 4 Focus Points in one battle.

This is the kind of thread that I love! I haven't had time to check out the buckler rules on my own, but in reading through this thread I've already learned a lot about them.

I think this thread should be merged with the original one. Two conversations on the same topic going on at once is confusing.

I'm still not sure what actually counts as an object - I personally think it feels weird to think of the ground as an object - to me an object in game terms would be like, a barrel or a large rock or a table or a sword, while the ground is just.... terrain.

My gut instinct is also to read it this way. The floor would not normally be considered a 'game object' even if it fits the normal definition of 'object.' But then I started wondering about weird situations like standing near a wall in a room made entirely out of sheets of glass, while enemies prepared to attack you from all of the rooms around, above, and below the room. It seems weird that the sphere couldn't be cast if it passed through the wall or ceiling, but passing through the floor is fine even though the material is the same and there is no preferred plane for the attacks.

p. 278 wrote:

You can Strike with your fist or another body part, calculating your attack and damage rolls in the same way you would with a weapon.

It doesn't say "only some people can also use different parts of the body" or "with special training you can use other parts of the body". Everyone can use other parts of the body to strike.

But, if the table only lists fists, what are the stats for strikes with other body parts? That's answered in the next paragraph:

p. 278 wrote:

Table 6–6: Unarmed Attacks lists the statistics for an unarmed attack with a fist, though you’ll usually use the same statistics for attacks made with any other parts of your body. Certain ancestry feats, class features, and spells give access to special, more powerful unarmed attacks. Details for those unarmed attacks are provided in the abilities that grant them.

So unless you have a special ability that says differently, your kick or headbutt uses the same stats as your fist.

That's the way I read it, but I agree with tivadar27 that the different types could be more clearly listed the way that they were in PF1.

graystone wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

I think it's unclear as to whether the "you can" implies that everyone can, or that only those with the proper unarmed attacks can (though everyone gets fists).

I don't think it's unclear: to me you are allowed to attack with other parts of your body.

If "can" is an issue, then it brings into question if you're even allowed to use a fist... For the quote on the table, it's about the potential for stats for the attack to be different and not a possibility the attacks aren't available. For instance, a DM might rule a kick deals more damage but lose agile, a headbutt deals less damage but adds forceful or a tail adds trip by giving up finesse.

You think it reads one way, I think it reads another, I'd argue that's pretty much the definition of "unclear" :). You can use a fist because it's listed as a common simple unarmed attack in the weapon section.

I am confused by this interpretation. The monk ability Flurry of Blows states 'You can attack rapidly with fists, feet, elbows, knees, and other unarmed attacks" yet only fists are listed in the weapon tables. How do you determine the weapon properties and damage for these other attacks if you don't believe they are included in the rules that graystone quoted?

I'm betting they just add the word "lethal" before unarmed attack to fix this, or maybe it's just easier to shoot someone when they're right in front of you and backed into your ally and it's fine.

Adding lethal won't change anything. You can make your nonlethal Unarmed Strikes lethal by taking a -2 attack penalty.

His badly written Fionna and Cake fanfiction?

Monk ki abilities all seem to run on focus points. So you will only have 1 - 3 per battle at most.

If you want to be a fist-fighting combatant that throws around mystical ki energy regularly, you will want to pick up a cantrip or three (electric arc, produce flame, ...) from some option (sorcerer multiclass, otherworldly magic, or something like that) and re-skin it.

If you go with multiclass wizard, sorcerer, or druid for cantrips, it's worth considering picking up a familiar for the familiar focus master ability. It basically lets your familiar store a backup focus point for you. That would potentially let you use 4 focus points in one battle.

Catfolk are one of the ancestries planned for the Advanced Player's Guide coming out at Gen Con 2020.

And the playtest starts next month.

Hidden one wrote:

If I wanted to do a more combat focused monk that then use Ki occasionally to apply effects like ki strike and elemental fist, I should put skills more in STR and DEX?

You want both as high as you can, especially at low levels

18 in one and 16 in the other is best. But either is fine put 18 in.

Or you can just pump up Str and use Mountain Stance.