SadWolf's page

Yes, as the spell has the Manipulate trait.

If the Reactive Strike is a critical hit, the spell is disrupted.

If the Reactive Strike does not disrupt the spell or kill the Druid, then the spell goes off before the original strike is landed & the Druid has the spell-provided cover.

In that case, can you clarify how the "stack" is resolved?

Is it:
1. Orc Veteran targets the Druid with a Strike
2. Druid attempts to cast Interposing Earth
3. Orc Veteran uses Reactive Strike (target, attack roll, damage roll) on the Druid, who is not yet benefitting from the spells effect. For the sake of the example, we'll say that the strike wasn't a critical hit.
4. Interposing Earth is successfully cast.
5. Orc Veteran finishes his initial strike, for which the druid is benefitting from the spells effect.

Continuing on, what if the Reactive Strike does knock the Druid unconscious? Is the Orc Veteran "locked in" to finishing the initial strike on the Druid, or is it allowed to change its mind and target another creature?
If it is allowed to change its mind on the target, is it allowed to completely change the action?

So here's the concrete scenario I've run into:

1. An Orc Veteran (only important thing is that it has Reactive Strike) attempts to attack a Druid PC using a Strike on its own turn.
2. The Druid uses the Interposing Earth spell.
Q: Can the Orc Veteran use its reaction in response to the attempt to cast Interposing Earth to make a Reactive Strike?

My gut feeling says that it shouldn't be able to, seeing as the Orc Veteran would be "interrupting" his initial strike to make a Reactive Strike, and then, presumably, finishing that initial Strike, however I couldn't find anything concrete about this.

The closest thing that would support my interpretation of this would be the Reactive Strike wording of "uses a manipulate action or a move action", however that would imply that reactions aren't "actions", or at the very least that reactive strike can't be triggered on any reaction (which would include things like the barbarians No Escape).

Is my analysis correct, am I missing something, or is this just not an explicitly defined interaction?

Thanks in advance.

I'm wondering about how Animal repellent works with Quick Alchemy.

When you make it with Quick alchemy, does the item go inert before having the chance to actually take effect (because of the item's 1 minute activation time), or does it follow the logic of items with the Processed tag (that logic being as long as you start applying it as soon as you Quick Alchemy it, it is allowed to take effect)?

This question originated from a rules' discussion I've had with my playgroup (before I found the explicit ruling) on whether Elixir of Life should work on a Skeleton PC, seeing as it's not a positive healing effect. This is not a question about that - I know that it doesn't.

What I know:
The text for targeting saying "living creature" actually matters - it definitively can't target Undead or Constructs.
Both Ancestries with the Construct tag have feats that make them "living creatures".
In the errata of the soothe spell it says that the spell "can be used to heal undead, constructs, and so on".

What I don't know and wish to find out:
Other than creatures tagged with those specific traits (Undead and Construct), what other traits make a creature a "not-living" creature, what does the "so on" part of the errata refer to?

So, e.g., can an Android be affected by things targeting living creatures? Can Plants be affected by things targeting living creatures? If they can, can Conrasu be affected by things targeting living creatures?

Ideally, I'd if someone could point me to/provide me with the ruling that defines this, or a general rule that can be applied not only to PCs but also NPCs, I'd be very grateful.