Mats Öhrman wrote:

Some spells, like Telekinetic Projectile, has the Attack trait and is thus subject to MAP, while others, like Magic Missile, don’t have that trait and is thus not subject to MAP.

Those spells that have the Attack trait are, by the way, all the ones where you make an attack roll (touch, ranged, or otherwise).

This is not true

Is there a page number that describes changing your grip from one handed to two handed?

The closest thing I could find is the hands section on page 184.

It is referenced (kind of) in table 6-2 on page 175. It is discussed circumspectly on page 174 in the carrying and using items section, kind of talked about on page 179 in the hands section. It is mentioned in the method of use on page 345 which also gives a junk page reference to page 307. I feel like it only sort of gives rules for how this works and I feel that this is an area where the rules could stand to be more clear.

Playtest Rulebook pg 323 wrote:

Persistent damage comes from effects like acid or burning and appears as “X persistent [type] damage,” where the “X” is the amount of damage dealt and “[type]” is the damage type. While affected by persistent damage, at the end of your turn you take the specified amount and type of damage, after which you can attempt a DC 20 flat check to remove the persistent damage. You roll the damage dice anew each time you take the persistent damage. Immunities, resistances, and weaknesses all apply to persistent damage. If an effect deals damage immediately and also deals persistent damage, you don’t take the persistent damage if you negate the other damage. For example, an attack that deals slashing damage and persistent bleed damage wouldn’t deal the persistent bleed damage if you blocked all of the slashing damage.

You can be simultaneously affected by multiple persistent damage conditions so long as they have different damage types. If you would gain more than one persistent damage condition with the same damage type, the higher amount of damage overrides the lower amount. All types of persistent damage occur at once, so if something triggers when you take damage, it triggers only one time.

As I read the second bolded part, if you're suffering 1d4 persistent fire damage and someone inflicts 1d6 persistent fire damage on you, you're now suffering 1d6 persistent fire damage, not 1d6 PFD + 1d4 PFD or anything like that. But that's because 1d6 is clearly greater than 1d4. What if the two PFDs are 1d6 and 1d4+1, or 2d4 and 1d8? Which one wins?

Or do you perhaps keep track of the 1d6 and the 1d4 PFD in my first example after all, and roll each of them each round and suffer the higher damage? That would be unambiguous, but if so then the second bolded part above needs rewriting, as it seemingly flat-out contradicts that interpretation. This would also make persistent damage considerably stronger, as you could re-inflict the same effect enough times...

I agree, this rule desperately needs rewriting.

Page 323 lists the rule for Persistent Damage, and states you take it at the end of your turn. So do you also take it when you are first hit by something? So if I crit with a flaming sword, does the bad guy take 1d8 slashing plus 1d10 fire right then, or only when their turn comes around?

Someone else asked the same question but used an acid flask as an example. It does ONLY persistent damage - so does it do nothing until the end of its target's turn? Seems a little odd.

It does seem odd, especially with the flask example. Persistent damage only hitting at the end of the target's turn is in the RAW and this does seem to be the intent.

The text is:

If you have available Spell Points, you can spend 1 Spell Point and Concentrate on a Spell to extend its duration by 1 round.

Does this mean that when you cast ancestral surge you can extend the duration of an active spell beyond what is written in the spell’s text by: 1. Spending one additional spell point? 2. Spending a spell point and an action? If either of these, I have follow-up questions.

…Or does it mean that you can spend a spell point to have the action used for ancestral surge count as the “Concentrate on a Spell” action for one of your already-active concentration-duration spells? (similar to the effect of effortless concentration)

…Or does the “its” refer to ancestral surge, allowing you to spend an additional action (or maybe just a spell point) to have ancestral surge end at the end of your next turn (like a concentration spell) instead of the beginning?

…Or does it mean something else that I am completely missing?

For casters who also attack using weapons some spells can cause the weapons to take a multiple attack penalty. But it is unclear what spells cause this penalty. Some spells like acid splash and harm do not have the attack trait in the bubbled key words but require you to make an attack. Others like chill touch do have this key word and also mention making an attack in the description. Further, there are spells such as electric arc that have the keyword “attack” but do not require an attack roll. “Based on the multiple attack penalty” wording on page 178 and the brief description on page 305 about what an attack is, I could see:
a) Acid splash and chill touch both being considered attacks but not electric arc
b) Chill touch and electric arc being considered attacks but not acid splash
c) All of these spells being considered attacks (and some wording changes needed in the spells and/or page 178)
d) All these and Spells like fireball which meet the spirit of what an attack is being considered an attack
Also, if things like electric arc are considered attacks, there is no attack roll for them. Would there then be a penalty if they are cast first, but no penalty if they are cast after the attack?