Master of None's page

Assuming there are no plans to create premium modules for the earlier seasons of Pathfinder Society (Second Edition), which I would completely understand, one product that I personally would love to see is a premium module that contains all of the repeatable scenarios from the first 4 seasons of Pathfinder Society (Second Edition). In my experience these scenarios still get run a lot and would be something I would definitely use as someone who is just starting out running PFS scenarios online.

One product that I personally would love to see is a premium module that contains all of the repeatable scenarios from the first 4 seasons of Pathfinder Society (Second Edition). In my experience these scenarios still get run a lot and would be something I would definitely use as someone who is just starting out running PFS scenarios online.

While Pirate Rob is correct that the only prerequisite for Wavetouched Paragon is that you are Bonuwat ethnicity, that only applies if you taking the feat at level 5 or above. If you are trying to use the special clause to take the feat at 1st level by also having the Bonuwat Wavetouched background, the background requires you be from the Mwangi Expanse region. Mediogalti Island is NOT part of the Mwangi Expanse region, it is part of the High Seas region.

Not sure if that is exactly what you were asking but I hope this helps.

Going back to PFS1, I have always and only played clerics of Gorum. So POOP.

Three questions on the 'free rebuild':
1) Can the Core Rulebook chassis be used instead of the Player Core chassis?
2) How much gp does the character get on the rebuild? The 15% tax/penalty on the remaster rebuild is a problem.
3) Will the answers to my first two questions be documented somewhere other than as a post on this forum to establish a Source of Authority?

I think the answers for all of your questions can be found in the remaster section of The Guide to Organized Play.

I have doubts about items that were reprinted, but not with the same name. One of my characters had, among its items, a Staff of Divination, Winged Boots, and a Hat of the Magi (Greater).

I'm pretty sure the Staff of Divination needs to be changed to a Staff of the Unblinking Eye.

Should the Winged Boots be changed to Winged Sandals? Or is it optional?

Should the Hat of the Magi (Greater) be changed to a Mage's Hat (Greater)? Or is that an unwarranted upgrade?

I believe what you are looking for is the Withdrawn Items tables.

At a quick glance it looks like only the Staff of Divination needs to be replaced.

Now if you're playing PFS, they have an extra rule for this: "Any spells which require metal to function require the PC to be holding at least one chunk of that metal or an item made of that metal."

Just wanted to point out that this requirement has since been updated.

[UPDATED] Any spells which require metal to function (such as needle darts [page 144]) require the PC to be in possession of at least one chunk of that metal or an item made of that metal.

I downloaded the Heroic Inspiration (Envoy's Alliance) boon today and it has the exact same text as Heroic Intervention (Radiant Oath). Is that also a mistake? I like the current effect of the boon but my gut instinct says that these two got swapped and only Heroic Intervention (Radiant Oath) got fixed. Lorespire has different text for the Heroic Inspiration (Envoy's Alliance) as well.

Dirge of Doom is my pick for most broken ability. It is a +1/-1 turn around for the whole party. No save. Mindless is only around 4% of monsters. It is fairly reliable.

In the past I would have agreed with you but when I was playing my Bard, I realised I was making a mistake that I suspect is pretty common. Dirge of Doom has the Composition trait which states that "The spell gains all the traits of the performance you used." so act, comedy, orate, or sing are going to add the Linguistic trait which will also cut down the number of enemies you can use this against. Dance adds the Visual trait which is a bit less restrictive as creatures are more likely to be able to see you than understand you. You could play an instrument and then they only need to hear you but not understand you however all instruments require two hands so that means no weapons. There are other balancing factors such as dancing and playing an instrument provoking more reactions. I think when you factor all this in, it is pretty well balanced, but the issue might be that a lot of groups aren't applying these rules.

While I don't really want to engage in this back and forth debate, I wanted to say that I feel that the rules about Move actions that do no leave a square (I assume this is what everyone is referring to when they say "stationary move action") are pretty clear.

If you use a move action but don’t move out of a square, the trigger instead happens at the end of that action or ability.

My understanding is the developers designed it this way so that you couldn't disrupt an enemy to keep them on the ground if they were standing up from Prone, as described in the following video:

Ask a Paizo Designer #17: Do Reactions Triggered by Standing Prevent the Enemy from Standing?

To the second: field commissioned agents keep their extended downtime, and any characters who already had bonus feats or lores keep them. No other school benefits remain.

Thanks for clarifying. After reading your response I did find that this was mentioned in the original blog post and I just didn't see when I was searching. I will leave the quotes here for anyone else searching for the same thing.

Your characters who are already Field Commissioned may still take bonus downtime, and we’re not going to take away the bonus Lores or feats your characters may have already gained.

We'll have a pared-down list of consumables which all agents (including formerly Field Commissioned agents) may choose from at the start of a mission.

Regardless of which Remaster Rebuild option you choose, do not re-apply Downtime. Downtime earnings for adventures the character has previously completed have already been factored into the Starting Gold amounts.

Perhaps I am interpreting it wrong but this guidance seems to suggest I am supposed to remove all of my gold from Earn Income during downtime even if I am only selling a few items at purchase price and purchasing new ones. It makes sense in the case where you use the Rebuild Starting Gold table but in the case of selling items, it represents a straight up loss of gold/downtime activities which is a bit harsh.

Also, regarding the removal Pathfinder Training, if you continue playing a character without rebuilding is it correct to assume that you do not gain any benefits from your school going forward? I have seen it stated that you do not gain the bonus feat if you do not already have it but, for example, would a Field Commissioned agent continue to gain extra downtime and no consumables or would they switch to regular downtime and use the Pathfinder Provisions? I am assuming the latter but I have not seen it specifically stated.

I have stumbled across this again with the release of GM Core as the Aeon stones listed there are still uncommon and the PFS character options do not grant PFS agents access to them. To make matters worse, at this point in time, there is no an Avid Collector boon for GM Core so there is no way to gain access to these Aeon stones.

The Additional Resources: Character Options page has this covered for Pathfinder Society:

The nephilim trait is interchangeable with either the aasimar or tiefling trait and vice versa, but aasimar characters may not treat that trait as interchangeable with the tiefling trait (or vice versa).

Courageous Anthem (Pg.370) The Spell Description states

You inspire yourself and your allies with words or tunes
of encouragement. You and all allies in the area gain a +1
status bonus to attack rolls, damage rolls, and saves against
fear effects.

It is lacking the Auditory trait from from the how it is worded, unless it is suppose to effect deaf creatures.

Unusual Composition (Pg.105) Level 10 Bard feat. - Most compositions do not have a trait which confirms rather or not they are visual or auditory outside their description. making this feat all subjected to your DM.

I don't know if anything has changed in the remaster as I don't have a copy yet but previously this was all handled by the Composition trait.

Edit: Beaten to the punch by minutes!

It was clarified at some point by a developer I think. Can't recall exactly where or by who though.

It was Logan Bonner on the How It's Played YouTube channel. Here is the link.

Just to confirm, the Bequeathal boon doesn't let you transfer the actual boons, right? It specifies "select one [Uncommon/Rare/Unique] character option" and it is possible to be granted access to multiple character options from a single boon.

For example, there are some boons that give you access to a number of spells from an adventure path. Since these spells are usually an "[Uncommon/Rare/Unique] character option", my current understanding is I have to transfer the spells one at a time. This does make sense to me because I may want different spells to go to different characters.

After how long the discussion has raged on, I am shocked to see that no one has mentioned wanting to get a clarification on whether making a Strike with a Reload 0 weapon should inherit the traits of the Interact action (such as Manipulate) that other Reload weapons have to perform.

Specific questions that I see commonly asked are:

• Does shooting a bow while Grabbed require a flat check?
• Do reactions that don't already trigger on ranged attack trigger because you are reloading?
• Is Mobile Shot Stance pointless if a Strike triggers a reaction because of reloading?

graystone wrote:

Michael Sayre wrote:

If you have the formula for black powder, the very first unit is (Dose or Round); with Alchemical Crafting and that formula you can make whatever ammunition you need without needing further formulas.

Do you need the black powder formula if you happen to have black powder on hand? Or is the black powder formula acting as a stand-in for all the items formulas made with it?

The black powder formula is also the formula for the basic non-magical rounds of ammunition (thus the dose or round designation). They go together so you're not burning entire formula books just on different types of firearm ammo.

Thank you for the clear answer. I think I had the right answer initially but then started to overthink things and disappeared down the rabbit hole!

I am taking the Munitions Crafter feat on a gunslinger I have created and now I need to choose my free formulas. It is a little unclear to me which formulas I need to make my own ammunition. Is it sufficient to just take the formula for Black Powder? Or do I some sort of formula specifically for firearm ammunition and, if so, how specific does it need to be (e.g. Arquebus rounds)?

I guess my response was a little brief...

The quote I posted was intended as evidence that you cannot get both effects from a single feint, you must choose one or the other.

As much as I would love an extended Overextending Feint on my Scoundrel, my understanding of the rules as written wouldn't allow it. The Scoundrel racket effectively changes the Success and Critical Success clauses of the Feint action. The Overextending Feint feat lets you choose to use the Success and Critical Success clauses listed in the feat instead of any other effect when you Feint.

To summarise, this would mean that when a Scoundrel with Overextending Feint uses the Feint action they can choose from the following success effects:

Critical Success The target is flat-footed against all melee attacks until the end of your next turn, not just yours.
Success The target is flat-footed against melee attacks you attempt against it until the end of your next turn.

OR

Critical Success The target takes a –2 circumstance penalty to all attack rolls against you before the end of its next turn.
Success The target takes a –2 circumstance penalty to its next attack roll against you before the end of its next turn.

As a general rule, I have found that the least favourable interpretation is usually the correct one 9 times out of 10.

I would say no because the Overextending Feint feat says the following (emphasis mine):

On a successful Feint, you can use the following success and critical success effects instead of any other effects that would occur when you Feint.

However, I see that weapon trick lvl 5 perk just work with weapon ( even if it also states that you get expert proficiency with unarmed attacks).

Am I reading it correctly?

You are reading it correctly but luckily it looks like this has been addressed in the errata:

Any class feature that improves the proficiency rank or grants the critical specialization effect access for simple weapons or a specific set of weapons, that ability also grants that benefit for unarmed attacks.

This should be a pretty simple rule and maybe it is but for whatever reason I keep changing my interpretation. The basic question is do property runes that deal damage double if you roll a critical success on a Strike? Looking at the Strike action and the rules for doubling (and halving) damage my gut instinct was "Yes".

You attack with a weapon you’re wielding or with an unarmed attack, targeting one creature within your reach (for a melee attack) or within range (for a ranged attack). Roll the attack roll for the weapon or unarmed attack you are using, and compare the result to the target creature’s AC to determine the effect. See Attack Rolls on page 446 and Damage on page 450 for details on calculating your attack and damage rolls.

Critical Success As success, but you deal double damage.
Success You deal damage according to the weapon or unarmed attack, including any modifiers, bonuses, and penalties you have to damage.

Sometimes you’ll need to halve or double an amount of damage, such as when the outcome of your Strike is a critical hit, or when you succeed at a basic Reflex save against a spell. When this happens, you roll the damage normally, adding all the normal modifiers, bonuses, and penalties. Then you double or halve the amount as appropriate (rounding down if you halved it). The GM might allow you to roll the dice twice and double the modifiers, bonuses, and penalties instead of doubling the entire result, but this usually works best for single-target attacks or spells at low levels when you have a small number of damage dice to roll. Benefits you gain specifically from a critical hit, like the flaming weapon rune’s persistent fire damage or the extra damage die from the fatal weapon trait, aren’t doubled.

I felt this interpretation was validated when I saw Jason Bulmahn rule it this way with the Disrupting rune in one of the episodes of "Knights of Everflame" but then I noticed subtle differences in the wording that made me start questioning again.

A disrupting weapon pulses with positive energy, dealing an extra 1d6 positive damage to undead. On a critical hit, the undead is also enfeebled 1 until the end of your next turn.

The bold emphasis is mine. The Flaming rune does not use the same wording.

This weapon is empowered by flickering flame. The weapon deals an additional 1d6 fire damage on a successful Strike, plus 1d10 persistent fire damage on a critical hit.

There are similar variations with the other runes too. Frost uses the "also" language while Shock does not. Are these language differences important? Or am I overthinking things? Are the critical success effects additions to the critical success effect of the Strike? A replacement? Or does it really vary by rune?

To keep it simple, let's just talk about the Flaming rune as that is the one used in the examples in the "Doubling and Halving Damage" section. If you roll a critical success on Strike with a Flaming weapon, does it double the 1d6 fire damage to 2d6 as well as add 1d10 persistent fire damage? Or does the damage stay at 1d6 fire damage and the 1d10 persistent fire damage is the only effect applied by this rune on a critical success?

beowulf99 wrote:

Master of None wrote:

I have been playing a rogue through the first book of Age of Ashes. I have been trying to be a good player and declaring my exploration tactics (usually Avoid Notice) well in advance. I don't try to convince the GM that I was avoiding notice in situations that are clearly not compatible. Then last session the GM decides to drop a bomb shell on me:

My GM wrote:

You know what, I don't think you should be able to Avoid Notice while you have a light source.

Needless to say, as a HUMAN rogue, I was not too happy about that. I mean it is not like Avoid Notice and Surprise Attack are supposed to make me invisible to his monsters, it just means that if I react faster than them (by rolling higher initiative) I can catch them off guard (flat-footed).

To the first point, he has a point. It is hard to avoid notice while carrying a torch. This doesnt apply in social situations however. If say you are simply trying to blend into a crowd at night, carrying a lantern around isn't that odd.

Yup. And while you probably can't use stealth for initiative while carrying a torch, I don't see why you couldn't use it while someone else carries a torch. Just stay out of the bright radius, either hanging in the dim light zone or even in the darkness itself. This might require being at the back of the party to pull off, which might make reaching an enemy a problem, but it seems legit.

It really shouldn't be an issue for group exploration, but a rogue without darkvision has always had problems as a solo scout I'm afraid.

Alright, I will put it down to edition bias on my part then. I have come from Pathfinder 1st Edition where everyone is flat-footed if they haven't acted so in my head it doesn't seem powerful enough to gated like this. It is hard to unlearn assumptions made from the previous edition of the game. ;-)

When an effect forces you to move, or if you start falling, the distance you move is defined by the effect that moved you, not by your Speed. Because you're not acting to move, this doesn’t trigger reactions that are triggered by movement.

I had not seen the mention of falling under the forced movement rules. That is a good find. I have taken a step back and can see that I am complicating things more than is necessary. Let me double check my new understanding...

Let's say I have 25 feet of movement and the Cat Fall feat. I use 15 feet of movement to Stride off a 10 foot high platform. I do not take any damage because of the Cat Fall feat and therefore I do not gain the Prone condition. Aside from the Prone condition, I do not see anything under the Force Movement or Falling section that suggests that falling disrupts actions so I can then continue my original Stride action for the remaining 10 feet.

Is this a reasonable interpretation of the rules as they are written?

I have been playing a rogue through the first book of Age of Ashes. I have been trying to be a good player and declaring my exploration tactics (usually Avoid Notice) well in advance. I don't try to convince the GM that I was avoiding notice in situations that are clearly not compatible. Then last session the GM decides to drop a bomb shell on me:

You know what, I don't think you should be able to Avoid Notice while you have a light source.

Needless to say, as a HUMAN rogue, I was not too happy about that. I mean it is not like Avoid Notice and Surprise Attack are supposed to make me invisible to his monsters, it just means that if I react faster than them (by rolling higher initiative) I can catch them off guard (flat-footed).

Then he also dropped this one on me too:

I don't think it is fair for you to use stealth for initiative because your bonus is too high.

Well, my stealth bonus is the same as the druids perception bonus. He also does not need need to use any special exploration tactics to enable it. The math is so tight in this edition I am not sure I can outclass anyone at anything unless it is something they neglected or it is by design.

I am not sure what I can do to combat with this kind of logic but it is really taking the fun out of being a rogue :-(

I have been meaning post about this grey area for a while. This came up in a game that I have been playing in. Another player wanted to move across a 10 ft high platform and fall off the other side, all in one action. This felt a bit odd to me so I scoured the core rulebook looking for the actual rules after the session. I didn't find a definitive answer but here is what I did find.

Switching from one movement type to another requires ending your action that has the first movement type and using a new action that has the second movement type.

So I thought, OK, when you reach the edge and begin falling your current action ends and you have to use a new action for the falling part. The problem is falling is not specifically called out as a movement type although if I had to choose I would treat it as a movement type because it has it's own speed which is different from your normal speed.

You fall about 500 feet in the first round of falling and about 1,500 feet each round thereafter.

The other players immediately started poking holes in my poorly cobbled together interpretation of the rules.

What if I was blind and accidentally felt off the platform? Then I would use less actions than the person who did it deliberately!

Well, there is nothing in the rulebook that addresses that. I would be tempted to say that anyone who falls at any time has to use a new action for the falling but I am not the GM and we are well into house rules territory now. Some people will think it is harsh losing an action for falling and for getting up from prone is too much of penalty. Also, what do you do if it is an accidental fall as the result of the last action of your turn? You would also have to build a free falling action into other actions like Leap so that people who take Cat Fall and like to do cool parkour type stuff aren't penalised. Now that I think about it, I think I would build a free action falling into the Cat Fall feat so that you don't lose any actions unless you take damage. At this point I have done way too much thinking about this considering I am not even the GM!

The good point of Flashback is that it's a free action (and it's missing the trigger, by the way).

It's perfectly valid for a free action to not have a trigger:

A free action with no trigger follows the same rules as a single action (except the action cost), and a free action with a trigger follows the same rules as a reaction (except the reaction cost).

In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results, such as trying to open a lock using Disable Device, you can't aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn't achieve alone.

Strictly speaking, I don't think the familiar could aid the PC on ranged feint check unless it also had the Ranged Feint feat because without that feat, it cannot perform a ranged feint at all.

The GM might still allow the familiar to aid the PC but it would probably have to follow the normal rules for feinting:

You can feint only with a melee weapon, and only against a creature you threaten with that weapon.

I imagine that is not the original poster's preferred option though.

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

I have a character that uses a klar. I have figured out the rules for enchanting the klar but I have never been able to figure out what to do when making a klar out of special materials. There are a few different ways you could interpret it and I am not sure which one is the most correct. I was just going to avoid using special materials with this weapon to avoid all the confusion but I thought it was worth one more try to figure it out.

If I treat a klar as a weapon and make it out of mithral then it would cost 3000 gp because it weighs 6 lbs but since that is the entire weight, it would make sense that the shield part is then also mithral and therefore masterwork. This option seems pretty simple but not very flexible. Also very few materials affect both weapons and shields.

The FAQ says that in most ways to treat a klar as a spiked shield which makes sense for a lot of materials but fails for anything priced by weight because a light steel spiked shield is 6 lbs + 5 lbs for shield spikes while the whole klar is 6 lbs so it is unclear how much of the klar is spike and how much is shield.

You could instead treat the klar a double weapon and use the appropriate rules for special materials that have them (silver, cold iron). So for example, if I wanted to make a klar with a cold iron spike and a living steel shield with both parts being masterwork then the cost would be 12gp (base cost) + 6gp (+50% for cold iron) + 300gp (masterwork weapon) + 100gp (living steel shield) + 150gp (masterwork shield) = 568gp. This makes the most sense to me but is also more complicated.

On a somewhat related note, if I made one end of the double weapon out of mithral which you pay for by the pound, would I only use half the weapons weight to calculate the cost? And since mithral halves the weight, I assume it would only halve the half that is mithral making the whole weapon weigh 25% less?

It seems like it might be OK to ask mechanics questions here but I apologize if it is not. I will start off with a simple one and see how it goes…

Acrobatic Spellcaster (Combat)

Your skillful movements prevent foes from disrupting your spells.

Prerequisites: Combat Casting, Skill Focus (Acrobatics).

Benefit: When you succeed at an Acrobatics check to move through a threatened square without provoking attacks of opportunity or to move through an enemy’s space, creatures denied attacks of opportunity by your Acrobatics check also cannot make attacks of opportunity against you when you cast spells for the remainder of your turn.

Normal: Casting a spell within an enemy’s reach provokes attacks of opportunity even after you succeed at an Acrobatics check to move through a threatened square.

My question is, can you make the acrobatics check to avoid the attack of opportunity from spellcasting without making a move action? I am asking from the perspective of a Magus who would like to use acrobatics to avoid the AoO and still be able to use Spell Combat which requires a full round action.

In the Studied Target ability, change the third paragraph’s first sentence to "At 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels, the bonuses on weapon attack rolls, damage rolls, and skill checks and to slayer DCs against a studied target increase by 1."

The latest errata revised the wording of some of the Studied Target description specifically to remove the reference to slayer abilities. Seems to me like it is intended to be a bonus to all DCs of the character that is using Studied Target versus the target that they studied.

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

I think I now understand how a klar works in all ways except for making one from special materials. There are a few different ways you could interpret it and I am not sure which one is correct.

If I treat a klar as a weapon made of mithral then it would cost 3000 gp because it weighs 6 lbs but since that is the entire weight, it would make sense that the shield part is then also mithral and therefore masterwork. This option seems pretty simple but not very flexible. Also very few materials affect both weapons and shields.

The FAQ says that in most ways to treat a klar as a spiked shield which makes sense for a lot of materials but fails for anything priced by weight because a light steel spiked shield is 6 lbs + 5 lbs for shield spikes while the whole klar is 6 lbs so it is unclear how much of the klar is spike and how much is shield.

You could instead treat the klar a double weapon and use the appropriate rules for special materials that have them (silver, cold iron). So for example, if I wanted to make a klar with a cold iron spike and a living steel shield with both parts being masterwork then the cost would be 12gp (base cost) + 6gp (+50% for cold iron) + 300gp (masterwork weapon) + 100gp (living steel shield) + 150gp (masterwork shield) = 568gp. This makes the most sense to me but is also more complicated.

On a somewhat related note, if I made one end of the double weapon out of mithral which you pay for by the pound, would I only use half the weapons weight to calculate the cost? And since mithral halves the weight, I assume it would only halve the half that is mithral making the whole weapon weigh 25% less?

A klar counts as a light shield for the purpose of using it as a shield (for instance, it grants a +1 shield bonus to AC, has a –1 armor check penalty, and has a 5% arcane spell failure chance). For the purpose of using it as a weapon, it is a one-handed weapon that deals 1d6 slashing damage, but it is otherwise similar to using a spiked shield (for instance, the damage doesn’t stack with the bashing ability, you lose the shield bonus to AC when attacking with the klar unless you have Improved Shield Bash, and so on). As a side note, anywhere that lists klars as counting as shields with “armor spikes” is a typo that will be handled in the next errata.

I think I now understand how a klar works in all ways except for making one from special materials. There are a few different ways you could interpret it and I am not sure which one is correct.

If I treat a klar as a weapon made of mithral then it would cost 3000 gp because it weighs 6 lbs but since that is the entire weight, it would make sense that the shield part is then also mithral and therefore masterwork. This option seems pretty simple but not very flexible. Also very few materials affect both weapons and shields.

The FAQ says that in most ways to treat a klar as a spiked shield which makes sense for a lot of materials but fails for anything priced by weight because a light steel spiked shield is 6 lbs + 5 lbs for shield spikes while the whole klar is 6 lbs so it is unclear how much of the klar is spike and how much is shield.

You could instead treat the klar a double weapon and use the appropriate rules for special materials that have them (silver, cold iron). So for example, if I wanted to make a klar with a cold iron spike and a living steel shield with both parts being masterwork then the cost would be 12gp (base cost) + 6gp (+50% for cold iron) + 300gp (masterwork weapon) + 100gp (living steel shield) + 150gp (masterwork shield) = 568gp. This makes the most sense to me but is also more complicated.

On a somewhat related note, if I made one end of the double weapon out of mithral which you pay for by the pound, would I only use half the weapons weight to calculate the cost? And since mithral halves the weight, I assume it would only halve the half that is mithral making the whole weapon weigh 25% less?