Gris Glassbottom's page

I've had this come up a couple times now, especially as these later scenarios are fairly full of difficult-to-obtain treasure bundles where in some it's near impossible to get all ten - for example, in 1-19 there's a bundle that's tied to having someone at the table get a critical success on a Society check - this will be a missed bundle over 50% of the time.

However, what troubles me is the Grand Archive Meticulous Appraisal Service Boon where a GA player can spend 2 Fame to get an extra TB if some were missed. I've had it come up twice now, and it's almost impossible for the GA player to refuse this to everybody else at the table without feeling bad, but it's also the case that, especially at low levels, a single TB is hardly worth 2 Fame.

I feel like this is intended to create situations where the GA player gets to feel great that they're saving the day for the party, but that hasn't happened yet. In practice the cost of this Service often isn't worth it, and both times the player kinda begrudgingly spent the Fame. Everybody at the table can say "No hard feelings if you choose not to" but in reality nobody likes to feel like they're being the bad guy.

I don't like this - it either shouldn't have a cost or should work like a slottable Faction boon - the GA player could choose to slot this at the start of the session and the extra TB will be gained at the end if needed. That, I think, would have the intended effect - if you slotted this boon you are a hero at the end of the scenario if it was necessary, and if you didn't slot it, there's no pressure.

*I'd originally posted this in the PFS2e Rules forum, but my particular question on this is more applicable to how to manage this in Organized Play rather than home games (where of course every GM can do what they like at their table). Even then I got quite a few differences of opinion.*

So I've had this come up in multiple sessions now as people are catching on that the Mortal Healing feat is incredibly powerful for a Skill Feat (turns all regular Successes on Treat Wounds into Crits).

The drawback in theory is that you must be a follower of the Laws of Mortality, which for all intents and purposes acts like a deity with Edicts, Anathema, Alignment requirements... the works. As I understand from the GM Basics guide for organized play that if a player "actively and personally commits an anathemic act in Society play" there are consequences, but it's not entirely clear what those would be. There's one very specific anathema that to me seems like a balancing factor - you must not solicit or receive divine or religious aid. My interpretation is that functionally you can never choose to be a willing target for divine spells, so a divine Heal or Lay on Hands that specifies a "willing target" will not work on you.

However, I have had players skirt this because they really like the feat but don't like the consequences, and in practice there are no specified consequences to violating the anathema. It's awkward because as the GM I'm careful about taking away player agency and telling them they cannot do something, so if they just proceed anyway fully knowing they're breaking the anathema and not caring, I'm not sure how best to proceed.

I mean, if a player brought a Druid that was clearly wearing metal armor and an steel shield and tried to claim their character truly believed rocks were living things so it was okay, I'd not let that pass.

From everything I've read for Organized Play it just seems to be taken as a given that players will choose to not commit anathema. Like the example given is that a Champion of Sarenae could not lie to a guard. That seems pretty clear cut. But there's nothing on whether that means you'd prevent them if they went ahead and tried to lie anyways, or what would happen afterwards if they did so. Do you take away their focus pool for the rest of the session? Do you make note of this on the Chronicle sheet like you would for Infamy?

Mostly I'm finding the Laws of Mortality one to be the most awkward to work with, and a lot of players I've found don't actually even realize what the requirement for Mortal Healing means or that there even is an Anathema associated with it beyond "look disapprovingly at divine healers".

So what's the best way to handle it? Disallow the character from counting as a "Willing target" for divine spells? Allow them to choose to break the Anathema and then disable Mortal Healing for the rest of the session (although this winds up not meaning much since often the need for such healing almost always would come during the final encounter where the feat no longer is a factor)?

Just curious if this has come up for anybody else and how they've handled it, or whether there's been some prior official guidance on the topic and how it should be handled. Thanks!

So I've had this come up in multiple sessions now as people are catching on that the Mortal Healing feat is incredibly powerful for a Skill Feat (turn all regular Successes on Treat Wounds into Crits).

The drawback in theory is that you must be a follower of the Laws of Mortality, which for all intents and purposes acts like a deity with Edicts, Anathema, Alignment requirements... the works. There's one very specific anathema that to me seems like the balancing factor - you must not solicit or receive divine or religious aid. My interpretation is that functionally you can never choose to be a willing target for divine spells, so a divine Heal or Lay on Hands that specifies a "willing target" will not work on you.

However, I have had players skirt this because they really like the feat but don't like the consequences, and in practice there are no consequences to violating the anathema. It's awkward because as the GM I'm careful about taking away player agency and telling them they cannot do something, so if they just proceed anyway fully knowing they're breaking the anathema and not caring, I'm not sure how best to proceed.

I mean, if a player brought a Druid that was clearly wearing metal armor and an steel shield and tried to claim their character truly believed rocks were living things so it was okay, I'd not let that pass. Beyond the RP bits, there's a functional balancing reason to give the Druid class this drawback.

From everything I've read for Organized Play it just seems to be taken as a given that players will choose to not commit anathema. Like the example they give is that a Champion of Sarenae could not lie to a guard. That seems pretty clear cut. But there's nothing on whether that means you'd prevent them if they went ahead and tried to lie anyways, or what would happen afterwards if they did so.

Mostly I'm finding the Laws of Mortality one to be the most awkward to work with, since there's no actual "Deity" or primal forces behind it to enforce the rules, and a lot of players I've found don't actually even realize what the requirement for Mortal Healing means or that there even is an Anathema associated with it.

So what's the best way to handle it? Simply disallow the character from ever counting as a "Willing target" for divine spells? Allow them to choose to break the Anathema and then disable Mortal Healing for the rest of the session (although this winds up not meaning much since often the need for such healing would come during the final encounter where the feat no longer is a factor)?

Just curious if this has come up for anybody else and how they've handled it, or whether there's been some prior official guidance on the topic and how it should be handled. Thanks!