Erudite Owl

Poit's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber. **** Pathfinder Society GM. Starfinder Society GM. 185 posts (248 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 12 Organized Play characters.


RSS

1 to 50 of 185 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
2/5 ⦵⦵

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Kevin Willis wrote:
Poit wrote:
Quote:
The ally can attempt a given skill check only once, cannot retry a check, and cannot take 10 or 20 on a check.
This does not mean your hireling can only use a given skill once per scenario. It means your hireling can only make a given skill check once per scenario. If your hireling tries to perform an autopsy with Medicine, they can still use Medicine to perform another autopsy on a different body later, or to patch up a party member outside of combat.
See above. The player pointed out (and I agree) that would be redundant with “cannot retry a check.”

After reading it again, I see there is no "per scenario" clause included with "can attempt a given skill check only once". If we were to ignore the word "check" and interpret it as "can attempt a given skill only once", as you suggest, wouldn't that mean that a hireling can only use each of their three skills once ever?

2/5 ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Quote:
The ally can attempt a given skill check only once, cannot retry a check, and cannot take 10 or 20 on a check.

This does not mean your hireling can only use a given skill once per scenario. It means your hireling can only make a given skill check once per scenario. If your hireling tries to perform an autopsy with Medicine, they can still use Medicine to perform another autopsy on a different body later, or to patch up a party member outside of combat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Would this mean that say, finding Dandelions with Nature could be DC 15, while finding Dandelions with Botany Lore could be DC 13 or 10? (Made up numbers.)

If the base DC with Nature is 15, then I'd say DC 13 for Botany Lore, DC 10 for Flower Lore, and DC 5 for Dandelion Lore.

Though I strongly suspect no one will ever have Dandelion Lore, outside of saying "I'm going to use Bardic Lore for Dandelion Lore".


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Wild Shape: "When you choose to use your own attack modifier while polymorphed instead of the form’s default attack modifier, you gain a +2 status bonus to your attack rolls."

Humanoid form does not have a default attack modifier, so there is no choice to use your own attack instead of the form's default attack modifier. Because you cannot choose to forgo the default attack modifier, I don't think the +2 bonus applies.

2/5 ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Last Thursday, I and three others at my local game store reached level 12, and then we all played 2-00 together at a con this past weekend.

Three of us have been playing these characters together since level 1.

2/5 ⦵⦵

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

To justify the long rests, I just described the mission as taking place over multiple days, as the Starfinders on and around the planet needed time to research what was going on and stop the cultists. Since part 4 is a starship combat, which doesn't really use per-day resources before level 6, I had that one begin right before the players went to bed between parts 3 and 5.

I ran it three times this weekend - twice at high tier, once at low tier. The four player adjustment made the part 2 combat much easier, since that 4d6 cone is reduced to 15 ft.

The combats I saw my players struggle with were parts 1 and 4.

The create darkness in part 1 basically meant that Iseph fought the boss while everyone without darkvision kept missing. And the four player scaling only makes the drow sickened - which does almost nothing for someone who uses will save spells instead of attack rolls.

For part 4, the starship combat, there is no four player adjustment. Even with the cultists being penalized for having their skittermander engineer abandon them, the enemy ship was too capable against 4 PCs and it went way too long.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

And now for some numbers!

I made a spreadsheet to calculate every possible outcome for rolling a DC 20 check with modifiers ranging from +0 to +19. 20 rolls each with 20 potential outcomes - 400 combined outcomes. Here's the results:

64 critical fail (16%)
127 non-critical fail (31.75%)
144 non-critical success (36%)
65 critical success (16.25%)

So, this idea that if we interpret "fails by 10 or more" as "DC-10 or worse", we will make critical failures more likely than critical successes? I completely reject that.

If anyone would like to check the spreadsheet for errors or to make a copy to play with, here's a link. You can adjust the DC by changing cell A1. Red 1's are crit failures, yellow 2's are failures, etc.

(Note that the reason I used a DC 20 check with a scaling modifier, instead of a flat check with a scaling DC, was to prevent the rules regarding flat checks with DCs <= 1 and >= 21 from skewing the results)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Unicore wrote:
Mathmuse wrote:


On the other hand, the designers chose to use a format, "Every result that exceeds the DC by 10 or more is a critical success and every result that falls below the DC by 10 or more is a critical failure."

Except they changed this language from the play test to the CRB. They did not say “falls below the DC by 10” they said “fails by 10 or more.” Which heavily implied to me that you would have to consider the first value that is a failure before counting.

This language shift occurs 2x in the CRB, but then is countered in the glossary, creating a fair bit of confusion. They could have left the language as you propose from the playtest that confirms directly with what is in the glossary, and the intended interpretation would have been clear.

The "fails by X or more" language has been used for 10 years of Paizo products, plus 9 more years of D&D products before that (appearing in 2000 in the 3.0 Player's Handbook). A language shift from playtest to release, to be consistent with Paizo's other products, is in no way an indication that the math has changed since the playtest.

If we want to know how Paizo interpreted "fails by X or more" in PF1, we can look at this post from Sean Reynolds in 2011, where he describes a result of 5 on a DC 10 check as failing by 5 or more.

Now, is it possible that Paizo decided that a phrase that has been used in Pathfinder and its parent game for 19 years would mean something different in PF2? Sure. Is it remotely likely that they decided to make this change without telling anyone? No.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Temperans wrote:
the basic premise of "crit failures are more likely" is definitely true

It's not. 11 is not the middle of a d20. 10.5 is.

If you do your math based on 11 being the middle, yeah, it'll seem like crit failures are more likely. And if you do your math based on 10 being the middle, it'll seem like crit successes are more likely.

Temperans wrote:
regular successes are also slighlty more likely.

This is correct.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Unicore wrote:
I realize the wording in the playtest clearly established this line of thinking, but that the wording in the final rulebook was changed

The "fails by X or more" wording appears in PF1 and SF. While the PF2 playtest may not have used that wording, PF2 was updated before release to be consistent with Paizo's other products. This is not an indication of the math changing from playtest to release.

It's been 10 years since PF1 was released. Before this thread, I don't believe I've ever seen any confusion over the meaning of "fails by X or more".

2/5 ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The party starts each quest fully rested, correct?

SFS guide, pg. 4 wrote:

Starfinder Quests: Written for the Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild, quests are 1-hour adventures often used as introductions to the game.

Starfinder Quest Arcs: Written specifically for the Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild, quest arcs include multiple 1-hour quests that involve a common theme, typically culminating in a capstone adventure.

This scenario is a quest arc, and is therefore multiple 1-hour quests. And since a quest is an adventure, the players start each one fully rested. I think that makes sense (and is consistent with the previous quests), but I wanted to make sure, since the scenario takes place on or near a single planet.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Outrider wrote:
Poit wrote:
You keep saying pg. 445 is open to interpretation. There is no such openness to pg. 630.
And if you're fine with interpreting the glossary to give the foolproof definition while the main entry, related main entries, and even other glossary entries have no such language... that's your choice.

The rule is stated with two different wordings in different places. You claim one of the ways it is stated is ambiguous and can be interpreted in two different ways. The other way the rule is stated is unambiguous and matches one of the two interpretations of the first way it is stated.

If you're fine with interpreting the rule such that the glossary contradicts it instead of corroborating it... that's your choice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

You keep saying pg. 445 is open to interpretation. There is no such openness to pg. 630.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Outrider wrote:

The issue with "fail by X" meaning "DC-X" is that it becomes significantly more pronounced when you lower the value of X.

https://i.imgur.com/8NbuXMc.png

In this example, you can see that Fail by 1 or more means you just critically fail, with no chance of a regular failure.

Ignoring d20 rolls, just looking at pure probability:

At "Fail by 5" you critically fail 16.7% of the time as opposed to critical success at 8.3%

At "Fail by 1" you critically fail 50% of the time, with critical success at 25% (regular success at 25%, too).

If we ignore the fact that we're rolling a d20, and ignore the rule that a natural 1 or 20 adjusts the degree of success, then yes, the system would be broken.

But "the system is broken if we ignore the rules" is not a compelling argument.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Did PF1 have this issue with rules that said "If you fail by 5 or more, this bad thing happens"?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Unicore wrote:

Wait a minute. Page 10 of the PF2 CRB says: "Similarly, failing the check by 10 or more is a

critical failure (sometimes called a fumble)."

It actually does specify that your roll would be failing by 10 or more, not that the number you rolled is equal to 10 less than the DC. There is nothing to see here.

Failure has a range of 10 just the same as success.

with no bonuses against a DC of 12

a 22 or higher is a critical success.
a 12 is a success.
a 2 is a failure.
Less than 2 (so 1 or less) is a critical failure.

A result that is 10 lower than the DC has failed by 10.

HammerJack wrote:
CRB page 630 reads wrote:


critical
You can get a greater success—a critical success—by rolling 10 above your DC, or a worse failure—a critical failure—by rolling 10 lower than your DC. 445–446 critical hit (Strike) 471 critical specialization (weapons) 283–284


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Draco18s wrote:
Poit wrote:
Yes, rolling a natural 10 with a +0 modifier on a DC 10 check is a success. I do not see how "it can't be paired with 11" follows from that.

So, then how does it pair-up-with-the-opposite-result (9 is a failure and "matches" with 12 which is a success) with an 11?

Poit wrote:
How do 9 and 12 not match?

The pairing is based on the chances of critical success and critical failure.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

@Unicore

You may want to check out this reddit thread explaining the probabilities of the dying condition.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Draco18s wrote:
Poit wrote:
Draco18s wrote:


Except that 10 is a success! It can't be "paired" with 11 in the same way.
10 is a success on... what?

On a DC 10 with a +0 modifier.

Why a +0? Because the + is irrelevant when talking about natural d20 values.

By the way, I love how you decided that "these are a pair" (9 & 12, failure & success) "the same way these are a pair" (10 & 11) "and also 10 is identical to 11" (success & success) without throwing a Exception.

Yes, rolling a natural 10 with a +0 modifier on a DC 10 check is a success. I do not see how "it can't be paired with 11" follows from that.

And thank you for complimenting my ability to not throw an exception.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Draco18s wrote:
Less sarcastically: if 9 and 12 match (one success and one failure), then 10 and 11 match, centered around the midpoint of success.

Yes, I agree. Needing a natural 10 to succeed and needing a natural 11 to succeed match, and they both have an equal 5% chance each to critically succeed and critically fail.

Draco18s wrote:


Except that 10 is a success! It can't be "paired" with 11 in the same way.

10 is a success on... what?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Natural 9 needed to succeed: 10% critical success chance, 5% critical failure chance

Natural 12 needed to succeed: 5% critical success chance, 10% critical failure chance

How do 9 and 12 not match?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Unicore wrote:
This shift means that you are 5% more likely to Critically fail, rather than Fail for every DC between 12 and 19, while you do not get the same benefit from DCs with values between 1 and 9 to critical success. Hence why critical failure is the result that benefits from this interpretation of the math, NOT success.

Why do you not get the same benefit to critical success?

Natural 9 needed to succeed: 10% critical success chance
Natural 8 needed to succeed: 15% critical success chance
Natural 7 needed to succeed: 20% critical success chance
And so on.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Outrider wrote:
Poit wrote:
It's uneven, but it matches what's stated on pg. 630 of the Core Rulebook.

The problem is that specificity always outweighs other references.

In order:
Errata > Specific Rule > Other Rules > Other References (glossary/index/etc.) > Other Materials.

If a rule is clearly defined in two different places, and it is defined differently such that the two are in conflict, you use the more specific one.

If a rule is ambiguously defined in one place (as you are asserting) and clearly defined in another place, and it is defined differently such that the two are in conflict, shouldn't you use the one that's clearly defined? Especially if that clearly defined rule exactly matches one of the two interpretations of the ambiguous rule?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Unicore wrote:
NumenorKing wrote:


The assertion that DC+-10 makes Critical Failures twice as likely as Critical Success is flatly wrong.
True, but the statement that DC+-10 makes critical failures more likely than critical success across the entire spectrum of possible DCs is objectively true. It is only noticeable when you need to roll a 12 or higher on the die, but it is always present.

If you need a natural 12 to succeed, you have a 10% chance of critical failure and a 5% chance of critical success.

If you need a natural 9 to succeed, you have a 5% chance of critical failure and a 10% chance of critical success.

Both of these are 1 number off from the 10/11 "middle" part of the d20. Seems pretty balanced to me.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Franz Lunzer wrote:
Poit wrote:

...

Failing by 10 or more results in a critical failure. The 5 is a critical failure.

So, according to your reading of the rules, you can have 10 success results, but only ever 9 failure results?

Yes. The chance of a non-critical success will never exceed 50%, and the chance of a non-critical failure will never exceed 45%.

It's uneven, but it matches what's stated on pg. 630 of the Core Rulebook.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Ubertron_X wrote:

I guess what is confusing OP and he is absolutely right about is that you will never ever have the same change for either a critical failure or a critical success.

If the DC is 10 and your modifier is +0 you can never crit fail the check as you can not fail the roll by 10 (1-10=-9). However you can crit succeed the check (20-10=+10).

If the DC is 11 and your modifier is +0 you can never crit succeed the check as you can not beat the roll by 10 (20-11=+9), however you can critically fail it (1-11=-10).

Remember that barely failing a roll while rolling a natural 1 is a critical failure, while barely succeeding while rolling a natural 20 is a critical success.

If you need a natural 10 or 11 to succeed at a roll (coincidentally, the two examples in your post), you will have a 5% chance to critically succeed and a 5% chance to critically fail.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Outrider wrote:
Ubertron_X wrote:
Well I think most of this discussion is centering about the beat by / fail by definitions.

That is indeed the crux of it: the book doesn't state explicitly that it is DC-10, only, "If you fail a check by 10 or more, that’s a critical failure"

But if failing starts at DC-1... do we count from the start of failing, or do we count from the start of succeeding?

One method is simpler, but unequal. The other is equal, but can give pause. I see good reasons for both solutions.

The book does state this explicitly. HammerJack cited it earlier.

HammerJack wrote:
CRB page 630 reads wrote:


critical
You can get a greater success—a critical success—by rolling 10 above your DC, or a worse failure—a critical failure—by rolling 10 lower than your DC. 445–446 critical hit (Strike) 471 critical specialization (weapons) 283–284
While you can argue about what the critical fail number should be, I don't think there's really a grey area about what it is, by written rules.

5 is 10 lower than 15. A result of 5 on a DC 15 check is a critical failure.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Franz Lunzer wrote:
Poit wrote:
Outrider wrote:
https://i.imgur.com/dXEIEtX.png

Your number line illustrating this problem contains 22 numbers. We are not rolling 22-sided dice. This is not a problem for 20-sided dice.

Also note that natural 20s and 1s adjust the degree of success up or down. Unless the roll is trivially easy or exceedingly hard, you will always have at least a 5% chance to critically succeed and at least a 5% chance to critically fail.

That's beside the point. rolling 1 or 20 is only changing the outcome after the degree of success has been calculated.

The point being argued about is:

If DC15 is a success, a result of 25 is a critical success. Is a result of 5 a failure or a critical failure?

There are 10 results that indicate a success (before 1/20): 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24.

To get 10 (not-critical) failure results (before 1/20), these need to be: 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5. This 5 is being contested.

If the DC is 15, then...

A result of 14 fails by 1.
A result of 13 fails by 2.
A result of 12 fails by 3.
A result of 11 fails by 4.
A result of 10 fails by 5.
A result of 9 fails by 6.
A result of 8 fails by 7.
A result of 7 fails by 8.
A result of 6 fails by 9.
A result of 5 fails by 10.

And as quoted in the initial post in this thread:

Outrider wrote:

The CRB (pg 445) states:

"The rules for critical failure — sometimes called a fumble — are the same as those for a critical success, but in the other direction: if you fail a check by 10 or more, that’s a critical failure."

Failing by 10 or more results in a critical failure. The 5 is a critical failure.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Outrider wrote:
https://i.imgur.com/dXEIEtX.png

Your number line illustrating this problem contains 22 numbers. We are not rolling 22-sided dice. This is not a problem for 20-sided dice.

Also note that natural 20s and 1s adjust the degree of success up or down. Unless the roll is trivially easy or exceedingly hard, you will always have at least a 5% chance to critically succeed and at least a 5% chance to critically fail.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
kitmehsu wrote:
EDIT: Also, resistance and weakness is in step 3, while the doubling damage, like from a crit, is in step 1. pgs 450-453

In the subsections along with increasing dice through runes and Persistent Damage, which Weakness/Resistance also apply to.

Criticals are something you do at the end, they don't interrupt the damage process.

Where in the rules is it stated that criticals happen at the end?

As kitmeshu pointed out, doubling damage for a crit is listed as part of step 1 while applying weakness/resistance is part of step 3. Unless there's another rule somewhere saying you do step 3 before step 1, you double damage for a crit before applying weakness/resistance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
Those are cool house rules that totally make sense in those situations. But we're in the rules forum, and there are no rules providing for disrupting an action except for specific things that say "if X, disrupt." Things that do not say that do not, according to the rules, disrupt.

You don't need to use the "disrupt" keyword to argue that a creature who cannot act (such as a wizard who just fell unconscious due to a reaction) cannot take actions.

Core Rulebook, pg. 462 wrote:
The most restrictive form of reducing actions is when an effect states that you can’t act: this means you can’t use any actions, or even speak.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

1. The cantrip granted by First World Magic is an innate primal spell. Your proficiency in innate spells is at least trained, but if you have a better proficiency in any spell tradition, you use that proficiency instead. So your First World Magic cantrip would have a spell attack of +7 and save DC of 17.

2. I don't think bards use class DC for anything, but if you do need it for some reason, it would be DC 14 (not 15 - since it is untrained, your proficiency modifier is 0).

3. Correct. And since there are 3 actions, you still have 1 action left after using Inspire Courage and Strike.

4. Inspire Courage is a composition cantrip and Counter Performance is a composition focus spell.

5. Correct.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Core Rulebook, pg. 474: "Actions with the move trait can trigger reactions or free actions throughout the course of the distance traveled. Each time you exit a square (or move 5 feet if not using a grid) within a creature’s reach, your movement triggers those reactions and free actions (although no more than once per move action for a given reacting creature). 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."

Note that this is specifically for move actions that trigger reactions. For something like a manipulate action, I would guess the Attack of Opportunity has to happen before the action resolves, since the Attack of Opportunity can disrupt it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
graystone wrote:

Look at the Repair Kit "It contains a portable anvil, tongs, woodworking tools, a whetstone, and oils for conditioning leather and wood." ONE Bulk!!!

PS: and let me say what the heck is in the alchemist kit that makes it 2 bulk when a kit that has a PORTABLE ANVIL in it is 1 bulk...

Wow, that is a very portable anvil.

Then sure, you can totally put a mini anvil and related tools (together being a repair kit or a set of artisan's tools) in a bandolier.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Poit wrote:
Not exactly. Bandoliers let you draw a set of tools as part of the action to use them. That ability does not work on things other than tools.
I'm still not sure what this is supposed to look like in case I'm carrying artisan's tools for my blacksmith character in their bandolier. Presumably that does not include the anvil? Does my bandolier contain literal hammerspace?

Do you have an anvil as part of your 2 bulk set of artisan's tools? I assumed it was just stuff like a hammer, tongs, etc.

2/5 ⦵⦵

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Robert Hetherington wrote:
Poit wrote:
If you apply a GM chronicle to a character you haven't yet finished making, just don't make the rolls for your downtime until you've finished the character.

Problem is that the guide says:

Downtime must be spent at the end of the session or it expires.

So at the end of the session, you decide "I'm going to spend all 8 days of downtime to earn income". And once you finish making the character, before playing your first game with the character, you make the rolls to earn income.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
vagrant-poet wrote:
Bandoliers RAW let you draw as part of the action to use

Not exactly. Bandoliers let you draw a set of tools as part of the action to use them. That ability does not work on things other than tools.

2/5 ⦵⦵

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The PFS2 guide says "Upon completing an adventure that grants XP, you gain days of Downtime". There's no qualifier such as "Upon completing an adventure as a player".

If you apply a GM chronicle to a character you haven't yet finished making, just don't make the rolls for your downtime until you've finished the character.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

In the absence of a separate item entry for quivers, I'm just assuming that if I buy a sheath for my arrows it's a quiver.

2/5 ⦵⦵

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Blake's Tiger wrote:

Do keep in mind that even if secret rolls are rolled in the open, the check still bears the secret tag and is not valid for fortune/misfortune effects.

...I had someone complaining that PF2 was ruined because you couldn't use a reroll on a knowledge check. The complaint was made as I was explaining PF2's secret checks to the table not after he made a knowledge check. I thought to myself, when have you ever used a reroll on a monster ID roll?

The Core Rulebook says that you can "usually" use fortune/misfortune abilities on secret rolls that you know are happening, and specifically mentions knowledge checks as an example.

Link

Quote:
If you know that the GM is attempting a secret check—as often happens with Recall Knowledge or Seek—you can usually activate fortune or misfortune abilities for that check. Just tell the GM, and they’ll apply the ability to the check.

2/5 ⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:

-no optional encounters for anyone

Faster groups wind up with too much down time in between con slots

In my experience at cons, it's a blessing when a slot finishes early enough to go out and eat something other than con food.

2/5 ⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
GM Lamplighter wrote:
I'm working on a one-pager to go on the back of Chronicle sheets which covers player choices, level-up, and downtime stuff, but it's not done.

If you mean something you're going to print on the back of chronicle sheets, please give players an option to receive a sheet without the extra stuff on the back.

GM Lamplighter wrote:
Which reminds me - for downtime, there are two parameters involved: the level of the task, and the DC of the check. I'm confused between the two, as one seems to be defined as (PC level -2) but the other is "set by the GM" in the Core Rulebook. Surely for PFS it's standardized, but I just can't find it. Anyone?

Level-based DCs, pg. 503

https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=552

The "set by the GM" bit is the "Adjusting Difficulty" section, but I don't think that'll be done for Downtime.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Normally, a stance immediately ends if you stop meeting the requirements of the stance. For example, if a fighter has Point-Blank Shot active and is disarmed of their weapon, the stance will end because they no longer meet the requirement of "You are wielding a ranged weapon".

Nearly every monk stance has the requirement "You are unarmored". Monks generally do not don armor mid-combat, so there's not really any worry about the requirement.

Mountain Stance, however, has the trigger (not requirement) "You are unarmored and touching the ground". Since this is a trigger and not a requirement, that would mean that you only need to be on the ground when entering the stance, but it does not end if you leave the ground.

But the glossary in the back of the Core Rulebook defines a trigger as "A specified event when you can use a reaction or free action". Mountain Stance is not a reaction or free action, which suggests that the stance's use of trigger instead of requirement is a typo.

So, which is correct?

1. Mountain Stance's use of trigger instead of requirement is intentional. This is a specific exception to the rule that triggers are only for reactions and free actions. A monk in Mountain Stance can leave the ground without dropping the stance.

2. Mountain Stance's use of trigger instead of requirement is a typo. Triggers are only for reactions and free actions. A monk in Mountain Stance cannot leave the ground without dropping the stance.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Normally, a composition ends if you cast another composition, and you can only cast one composition per turn.

The Harmonize bard feat removes some of these restrictions. A harmonized composition does not end if you cast a non-harmonized composition, and casting a harmonized composition does not prevent you from casting another composition in the same turn.

That sounds great, but there are still enough restrictions that I cannot find any way to effectively use this ability with Lingering Composition.

Even though casting a non-harmonized composition does not end a harmonized composition, the opposite is not true. The Harmonize feat does not prevent a harmonized composition from ending a non-harmonized one. So, if you use Lingering Composition to cast a composition in round 1 that will last a few rounds, and in round 2 you cast a harmonized composition, your composition from round 1 immediately ends.

So, you might think that to use Lingering Composition and Harmonize together, you just need to use both on the same composition. But you cannot, because both of those actions require that your next action is to cast a composition.

As far as I can tell, the only thing Harmonize can be used for is to spend three actions to cast two compositions, with no ability to use Lingering Composition to save on actions. It seems very strange that the maestro-specific bard feat that says "You can perform multiple compositions simultaneously" is not usable with the maestro-specific bard feat that helps you with action economy while maintaining compositions. Is Harmonize really this restrictive, or am I missing something?

2/5 ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
I've been really looking forward to running Dawn of Flame, especially now that the last books are starting to come out and a GM can start reading from beginning to end.

Just look at the delay positively - if it takes longer to sanction the AP, there will be less time between when you start to run it and when the pawn collection is released.

2/5 ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
roysier wrote:
A perfect illustration was on display at my local store. The Tier 2 Drake in 2 combat rounds put out 47 points of damage and received 6 points with only 4 players playing. That;s the lop-sided crap that's souring me on Starfinder.

That encounter is supposed to be lopsided.

Spoilers for Against the Aeon Throne book 1:
The first encounter of the first book of this adventure path is a starship encounter. It's the start of an AP, so it's intended for four level 1 characters with a tier 1 ship. So, it's an incredibly easy encounter - against two tier 1/4 ships - to get the players used to how starship combat works before the real starship combat later in the adventure.

Last night, we started this book with three level 2 characters and one level 1 character. Because we were playing in event mode, we have to use a tier 2 SFS ship instead of a tier 1 custom ship, so we brought the drake.

We were a group of overleveled characters, played by people very experienced with the starship combat system, using an overleveled ship optimized for combat. On paper, we should absolutely destroy that encounter, and we did. That's not a flaw in the system.

2/5 ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
roysier wrote:
In my area players are getting sick and tired of Starship combats because they are too easy and are coming across as a big waste of time.

I'm a GM/player at the same game store as you, and I have not noticed players expressing this sentiment.

I, for one, do not want starship combats to be harder. When the party is not good at starship roles, the existing combats are hard enough. I haven't experienced a bad starship party often at my local game store, but I have at conventions. I really don't want those bad experiences to become worse.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

HammerJack pojnted out in this thread that the AC bonus from having an Entropy Point and the AC bonus from the blocking property (granted by entropic strike) are both enhancement bonuses and therefore do not stack. Is this intentional?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

There are a lot of weapons which, while they are available at multiple levels, have large gaps between the different levels of the weapon. A vanguard focused on using a specific weapon will face multiple levels where that weapon just won't be usable with their primary class feature. Take, for example, the immature xenolash (a level 4 weapon from Pact Worlds). A vanguard can use that weapon with entropic strike through level 6. Upon gaining level 7, they suddenly lose the ability to entropic strike with the xenolash, even though the entropic strike damage doesn't even improve at level 7. The next xenolash isn't until level 10, leaving a three-level gap where you have to find a different weapon to use.

I really dislike the concept of a character losing capabilities by leveling up.

I understand the the reasoning behind the item level requirement is probably to prevent someone from greatly increasing the damage of a level 1 weapon. But is there some middle ground? Maybe a vanguard can choose to act as being lower level for purposes of entropic strike? So, to use my example of the immature xenolash, perhaps it could be used for entropic strike by a vanguard of any level, but it can never deal more than 2d6 damage (the damage for entropic strike at level 6, which is the item level + 2).

2/5 ⦵⦵

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Thurston Hillman wrote:
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Poit wrote:
If a player is playing playtest character in a game that does not finish in a single day (such as playing an AP volume in multiple sessions, or playing a play by post game), and that game starts before 1/16 but finishes after 1/16, can the player continue playing the playtest character until the end of that game?

I *really* need to know the answer to this question. This will determine whether most of PBP can participate or not.

Hmm

As long as the character starts a game prior to the cut-off, I'm fine with it. HOWEVER, please don't abuse this into starting up 40 different PBP/long games with pregen characters to farm a bunch of credit using this system. Honestly, I'm ok with at most 1-3 games of this nature going past the cut-off, anything more starts to really look like abuse.

Thanks Thurston! I'll be playing in AP #7 in January, but it finishes on the 17th. I'd be sad if I missed the opportunity to play a playtest class because it finishes one day late.

1 to 50 of 185 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>