Search Posts
Thanks for the brilliant discussion. Was enlightening. Another reason it matters is for instances such as the Runescarred archetype and magic items requiring spellcasting ability (scrolls, wands and staves). The Runescarred has access to the arcane spell-list for purposes of picking their innate spells. If they use the spell-casting activity they seem to fulfill the requirements for using arcane spells up to lv 6 through such items. Since spellcasting classes specify they get access to the activity and the Runescarred doesn't specify it, it becomes unclear whether the requirement is fulfilled or not. And if not, and all activities are codified in the rules, what action they actually use to cast a spell comes into question. If there is none other, maybe they have access even tho the archetype doesn't specify they are able to use that activity. It's not important per se since the GM can just make a ruling, but it'd be nice to know.
Seems I can no longer edit my previous post so I'll add the obvious rules-solution here. Going by the original meaning of Alignments above. You should look at who's intended to use a given alignment-effect/spell/ability instead of who's granting it. If the character is Lawful by the original system he should be able to use the spell/effect/ability if it's intended to be used by the epic forces of opposition to evil and destructive ones (Chaotic characters by the original system). All such spells/abilities/effects should refer to the Lawful alignment for accessibility and Chaotic alignment for valid target. Visa versa for Chaotic characters. Neutral characters can then neither use them nor be affected by them. In the case of more granular effects, such as the 3 Champion causes, you could simply choose the most appropriate one for your character. Problem solved.
In my opinion there are only one good way of dealing with alignment. The original way. It started out as a faction identifier, nothing more. Are you friend or foe in the great scheme of things? Lawful - The heroes. People who put themselves at mortal risk or otherwise make substantial personal sacrifices in the struggle against the forces of epic evil and chaos. Neutral - The sane and normal people who doesn't sacrifice themselves in a war against something they don't fully understand. Nor do they intentionally work towards destruction of society or the world, or towards tyrannical subjugation. Chaotic - The villains. People who labor towards the destruction of the society or the world, or towards the tyrannical subjugation of others. It's got nothing to do with personality beyond what the definitions imply. It's simply to identify friends from foe, and all player characters are Lawful by default. Even if they routinely break the law in the fight against evil. Even if they are compulsive thieves. Even if they venerate nature forces or gods who the current alignment system identify as Neutral. As long as they are the heroes in the fight against epic evil and chaos they are Lawful. N are unantagonistic NPCs. With the magic targeting in the current alignment-system, magic would work as follows: Edit: Upon consideration that doesn't work at all. Have to think about it. Perhaps it just have to be contained and destroyed. That is not to say that any of the current alignments correspond to the original system on any other count. In the original system you are what you do. As long as you fight the good fight for real you can be a sadistic psychopath who revels in breaking the law, and still be Lawful. And visa versa. I've met kids who in all seriousness thinks people's personalities in the real world can be categorized with help of the current DnD/PF alignment-system. It's maddeningly moronic. I've also met GMs who impose semi-mechanical rules for "roleplay" by whatever they interpret the rulebook's description of alignments being. No biggie, one can just leave the table and wish them all the best. But it just shows how detrimental all attempts at making rules for role-playing personalities have been and are. The original way is the only easy way out of all that stupidity while still retaining the rules for alignment-based magic, effects and abilities. Just my two pounds.
Are characters with the Sorcerer Archetype afforded access to the chosen bloodline's Granted Spells list(not bloodline spells)? For example, does a character with the Sorcerer Archetype who's chosen the Demonic Bloodline get access to Disintegrate as a divine sorcerer spell when he choose to afford himself a 6th level spell slot through the Expert Sorcerer Spellcasting archetype feat?
Lets say my Fighter is armed with a longsword and a gauntlet. Assume that he has the relevant class feats for the questions. 1. He can now perform a Double Slice right? 2. And also a Snagging Strike? 3. Both in the same round? 4. He can perform a dueling parry right? 5. He can perform a Twin Parry right? 6. Can he benefit from both Improved Dueling Riposte and Improved Twin Riposte the same turn?
Which is the correct interpretation? 1.The Barbarian Sudden Leap feat (PF2C p92) doesn't state number of actions as a cost of usage, which in my interpretation indicate it refers to the Athletics skill action Long Jump. 2.The Fighter Sudden Leap feat (PF2C p150), which is otherwise identical to the Barbarian feat with the same name, specify a two-actions cost. Which means it's a feat-action and not a Long Jump skill-action. This again indicate the lack of an action-cost for the Barbarian feat is a typo. This matters because of the Athletics skill-feat Quick Jump reduce the skill-actions action-cost from two to one. Which doesn't affect similar feat-actions. Which is the correct interpretation?
1.Does Battle Medicine require no hands to use, since none are specified for the feat's action? 2.Does Battle Medicine require 1 hand to use, since none are specified for the feat's action? 3.Does Battle Medicine require 2 hands to use, since the Treat Wounds for the Medicine skill require that?
I crit-failed two medicine skill checks in tonights session. "I promise you, the scalpel goes up your nose" I also crit-failed a Battle Medicine check in the middle of a heated melee. Luckily I remembered my hero-point just before the GM was about to pronounce his sentence over my poor friend and got a crit-success instead. Everyone was jubilant and congratulated each other. That goodfeel. I agree with you guys that a failure triggers the cooldown, and that it's pretty obvious. But a lot of people don't seem to realize it, so better to ask. Could be me who had it wrong, if rule-conventions were different than I presumed.
It kinda depends on interpretation, I think the way to call it would be to say that you can't take both because they are the same feat (despite being on different classes) and you can't take the same feat more than once unless it specifies you can. While they are indeed the same feat in spirit, they have different names, different texts, and different feat requirements. |
