ShieldLawrence's page

ShieldLawrence wrote:

Claxon wrote:

I believe you only land prone from a fall if you take damage. If the flier successfully arrests their fall they will land gently, taking no damage, and not be prone. However they will be on the ground.

If you are given Prone condition and are flying, you fall. You aren't falling "instead," you are knocked prone and falling now.

Arrest a Fall says you take no damage on a success. It doesn't say anything about changing whether you would become prone or not. Falling Damage does it for sure, but a creature falling from a Trip is falling and receiving the prone condition from the Trip.

I'd argue that a flier knocked prone using Trip falls prone no matter what, but might mitigate their damage from the fall itself.

I definitely don't agree with your take. The rules for prone tell you that if you were knocked prone while flying you need to look at the rules for falling. Falling says you only land prone if you take damage from the fall.

If a flier successfully arrest their fall (easy check, but maybe you get lucky and they've already used their reaction) then they wont take any damage and will land on their feat.

Again, my assertion is that receiving the Prone condition while flying adds that "you fall" but doesn't replace "being knocked prone" with "falling instead of being knocked Prone." You are knocked Prone, and additionally you are Falling.

Hence why arresting the fall doesn't make you no longer knocked prone, it just prevents fall damage.

If you would be knocked prone while you're Climbing or Flying, you fall (see Falling for the rules on falling).

Success You fall gently, taking no damage from the fall.

Can you arrest a fall to avoid damage? Yes.

If you were falling and you avoided the damage, do you avoid the Prone condition from falling? Yes.

If you received the Prone condition from an effect such as Trip, can you arrest a fall to avoid that Prone condition from that condition? No, not even if you were falling.

The Prone condition from the Trip should stand, since Arrest a Fall doesn't address Prone conditions; it only addresses falling damage (which can cause Prone itself).

I believe you only land prone from a fall if you take damage. If the flier successfully arrests their fall they will land gently, taking no damage, and not be prone. However they will be on the ground.

If you are given Prone condition and are flying, you fall. You aren't falling "instead," you are knocked prone and falling now.

Arrest a Fall says you take no damage on a success. It doesn't say anything about changing whether you would become prone or not. Falling Damage does it for sure, but a creature falling from a Trip is falling and receiving the prone condition from the Trip.

I'd argue that a flier knocked prone using Trip falls prone no matter what, but might mitigate their damage from the fall itself.

I say yes. It is the spell's tradition, not the caster's. I don't see the caster's tradition being mentioned anywhere in Recognize Spell, so I wouldn't default to using that in my games.

The Abundant Step monk feat is listed as Feat 6. It grants a Focus Spell of level 4, which means it cannot be cast until level 7 (when half your level rounded up becomes a 4).

So does that mean the only thing I can get out of this feat as a level 6 Monk is the extra focus point granted by it?

There are some reactions that react to initiative rolls, so reactions before your turn exist.

After looking at the GM section a bit more, it would appear that the intent is to roll initiative before any attacks are made, unless the trap or creature calls out something else.

Transitioning from exploration to an encounter usually involves rolling for initiative. Call for initiative once a trap is triggered, as soon as two opposing groups come into contact, or when a creature on one side decides to take action against the other. For example:

A group of PCs are exploring a cavern. They enter a narrow passage patrolled by a group of kobold warriors. Now that the two groups are in the same area, it’s time to roll initiative.
Amiri and a kobold champion agree to have a friendly wrestling match. They square off on a patch of dirt, and you call for initiative using Athletics.
Merisiel and Kyra are negotiating with the kobold king. Things aren’t going well, so Merisiel decides to launch a surprise attack. As soon as she says this is her plan, you call for initiative.
Harsk and Ezren are trying to Balance across a narrow beam to reach an isolated kobold treasure trove. When they get halfway across, a red dragon who was hiding behind the mountain flies around to attack! As soon as the dragon makes its appearance, you call for an initiative roll.

So I guess we are left with corner cases where a high initiative roll can lead to PCs reacting first to an unknown situation. Adventurer’s spidey sense it is!

ShieldLawrence wrote:

Alright so back to the topic...

Any reason to not have an initial attack/volley be the thing that causes Encounter Mode? I know we weren’t supposed to do that in 1e but I’m not seeing anything written to deter that interpretation for 2e.

By RAW, you can open an encounter with an attack by winning initiative and using your firsts action to attack. For a volley, if everyone of the ambushers succeeded on their stealth initiative they could ready actions on their first round to all shoot at once? But I don't know if that's worth giving the ambushed party a round to Seek, take defensive action, or otherwise prepare.

What I mean is, enemy attacks happening before initiative is rolled. As in, the enemy attack is what causes the initiative roll.

GM: As you are walking through this corridor, arrows begin whizzing by! Sam and Garnet, what are your armor classes? Oof. Those will both hit. Sam you take 5 damage, and Garnet you take 3. Alright everyone let’s get some initiative going.

Edit: ^This would all happen after rolling secret checks for those searching/investigating during Exploration.

Alright so back to the topic...

Any reason to not have an initial attack/volley be the thing that causes Encounter Mode? I know we weren’t supposed to do that in 1e but I’m not seeing anything written to deter that interpretation for 2e.

The Moonstone Sage

Name: Moon Fang of the Lyrune Quah
Alignment: Neutral Good
Race: A proud Shoanti-born Aasimar
Class: Oracle 12
Description: Moony is an outsider of seemingly average build with the head and coat of a glorious lion, Moony is determined to see and learn from the world in order to bring knowledge back to the Quah. Moony and his life companion Luna (a cosmic-looking celestial tiger) joined the society and the Scarab Sages. After becoming the Ruby Phoenix Champion, Moony took the final step in becoming a Jeweled Sage. Friendly and confident, Moony has heavily enjoyed making so many friends along his path to knowledge.

In a more realistic game, these encounters would be very spread out and compounds would be HUGE. Rooms with creatures may be maps apart. But in order to consolidate the maps and story, we use a smaller approximation of a dungeon. We keep the pacing realistic by not throwing every creature toward the first fight just as if the creatures were far apart to begin with.

CRB also establishes the general rule that a creature being directly observed cannot use Stealth at all. This rule gets ignored a lot.

Which concealment/cover breaks, as it is “enough” to attempt stealth against most creatures ie things that use precise senses like vision.

Flat footed can also come from climbing, acrobatics, various feats, spells, and class abilities. It definitely isn’t a surprise round-only thing.

I see the two interpretations now. Looking at the Grab rules, it isn’t super explicit that you are “using that weapon” for the attack unless you take the -20.

So either you:
-say the Grab uses the bonuses/penalties of the weapon (like weapon finesse, weapon focus, secondary attack, etc)
-say the Grab is a normal CMB check (no extra bonuses/penalties applied for the associated natural attack)

Interesting.

It may seem wonky not to do the math for players and GMs in the stat blocks, but we must also remember that the +4 from Grab also applies to all grapple checks made to start or maintain grapples, and will be the full bonus when doing a maintain check, or when the creature does a Grapple maneuver as a standard action.

The stat blocks are meant to be consistent and somewhat easy to use. By factoring in all the math for a multitude of special abilities, they would get quite confusing. So as GMs we calculate the feats, special abilities, spells, and so on when we need to apply bonuses or penalties to the monster’s statistics.

And perhaps the third scenario is worth mentioning too... Rapier-dagger-unarmed strike-and then bite at a -5 (because you’re mixing the bite with manufactured weapons). The bite goes back to being primary after the full attack and you could do a normal bite as an AoO.

The secondary attack penalty applies to CMB checks (all bonuses and panelties applied to a weapon you’re using for a CMB are applied as well). They list the blanket CMB and expect you to calculate using those bonuses and penalties yourself.

I think a lot of people may conflate the off-weapon rules and the secondary natural attack rules, as they are pretty similar. If you use multiple manufactured weapons to fight, let’s say a rapier as your primary, a dagger as your off hand, and an improved unarmed strike as your iterative, you could use any of those with no penalties as your AoO. As soon as your full attack ends, the two weapon fighting penalties and iterative makes end as well.

This is not true for secondary natural attacks, which remain secondary whether they are used in a full attack, attack action, or as an attack of opportunity.

"Against most creatures". A creature directly observing you would be an exception, per the other statement and per pretty much any honest reading of how blur manifests in the game. You don't cast blur and have the mook staring at you go "Boss, where'd he go?". The mook staring at you goes "Ow, that kinda hurts my eyes" and then tries to hit you, possibly failing because your exact location is a little ambiguous.

No, a creature directly observing you is the “most creatures.” Creatures directly observing each other is the MOST COMMON combat situation in the game.

A creature with blindsight or similar is the exception. Blur doesn’t work because of the Skills in Conflict section of Ultimate Intrigue.

Cover/Concealment is all that’s needed for a stealth check.

For starters, a PC is neither 'combat trained' nor 'a mount.' After that, we don't have rules where a non-sentient being is using a sentient being (let alone a PC) as a mount.

Animals are an official creature type, but beasts are not. I don’t know that the game defines what can and can’t be a mount. Combat Trained is also not explicitly defined but I’d say PCs definitely are because they are combatants and have proficiency in weapons.

I think using the survival skill would be an okay way to do it.

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

I'll tell you why Strangler isn't for me.

Stranglers lose the Unarmed Strike Ability, which means that they don't get Improved Unarmed Strike, and you need that for Improved Grapple.

Stranglers get Sneak Attack, but only when prosecuting a Grapple. But neither the Grappled nor Pinned conditions award you Sneak Attack Damage normally. Can Stranglers even do Sneak Attack Damage just for that, and if they can, what if they also take levels in Ninja or Rogue? Do they get all their SAD or just their Strangler SAD?

Personally, Sneak Attack is far from my preferred way to prosecute a Grapple, and prosecuting a Grapple is my least favored way to lock in Sneak Attack Damage. Snakebite Strikers get that Snake Feint ability, which makes it easier to for them to get SAD by Feinting. Bounty Hunter Slayers get an ability like Quick Dirty Tricks, which you can use to Blind your opponents. Take 3 levels in Bard with the Flame Dance Archetype, carry an Eversmoking Bottle, and you make all your opponents Blind, but you and your Allies can see just fine. Ninja Vanishing Trick makes you Invisible. Take a level in Arcanist and you get a 10' Teleport, perfect for Flanking.

If I were making a character that inflicted Damage with Grappling, I would get Constrict or wear Armor Spikes. I'd...

Fair enough, I was only thinking of it in terms of a recent build I made that used it and I was able to get around everything you talk about by multi-classing into rogue w/ the kidnapper archetype.

Stranglers do get to deal their sneak attack damage whenever they dmg or pin someone. looking at it, it's not clear to me if the "flanking" condition they get from this ability extends to sneak attack from other sources.

It does not extend to other sources, it is only for the purposes of that ability.

ShieldLawrence wrote:

you are not dealing bludgeoning, nonlethal damage.

He's doing Grappling Damage, isn't he? That's normally Bludgeoning, and it can be nonlethal. I think he's good there.

“Grappling Damage” doesn’t exist. When you grapple to damage, you are dealing damage as if with your US or natural attack. When a Strangler pins, they are getting bonus untyped damage not associated with the damage types of your US or natural attack. The distinction matters. So only when the Strangler grapples to damage could they make use of something that requires bludgeoning damage.

I realize after looking st the class feature again that they get the bonus Sneak Attack damage on a grapple to damage or a grapple to pin. I originally stated Sap Adept would never work but now I see that it works when the strangler takes the “damage” option on grapples.

whew wrote:

The delaying character has already won the initiative roll. They don't need to check again.

Right. The question is where in the initiative order does the delaying character go? If one uses page 238, the delaying character would have the same initiative count in the next round, and could act BEFORE the creature that the character acted after in the previous round because the character has a higher initiative modifier.

I believe a delaying/readying character would have the same initiative count but would be after the creature in initiative order.

Other say this is not the case.

As written, it operates as per page 238. If the writers had used “position in the current initiative order” rather than “initiative count” the Ready/Delay actions would be much simpler and more streamlined.

Paralyzed creatures count as two squares of movement and that’s it. Otherwise it’s normal movement through a creature’s square.

Tiny creatures do provoke even with a 5’ step into another creature’s square. If they use a move action into another creature’s square, it only provokes once total.

FAQ

Gary Bush wrote:

No they are not.

We don't agree.

I am hopeful for clarification from a "higher authority".

If I am wrong in my reading I will accept that but only if it comes from an official source.

Delay says "After any creature takes its turn in the initiative order, you can

come out of delay and take your turn. This changes your initiative
count to the current initiative count for the remainder of the
combat." on page 249.

The delaying character acts immediately after another. No roll off is required. Their position is set. It would be a roll off if two creatures chose to act after the same character.

Your count is changed to the current count. Multiple characters on the current count must roll off. There is no defined set position as you are suggesting.

You take your turn after them and then use the rules for Initiative to determine the rest.

You qualify for Sap Adept and Sap Master (when your die is +3d6) but can never actually use them because you are not dealing bludgeoning, nonlethal damage. You are doing un typed precision damage. Your strangle does not count as bludgeoning, as it isn’t explicitly described as bludgeoning.

You do not qualify for Accomplished Sneak Attacker until you take levels in a class that rants you the Sneak Attack class feature (which Strangle doesn’t count as, as it isn’t explicitly called out as counting.

ShieldLawrence wrote:

I’m not seeing anything on the mount creature not getting actions unless you spend a move.

You can spend your own move to move at its speed (which I think would actually have the rider provoke for movement since it’s their action.

For it to move at its speed while you're riding it, it has to use its move action for the round. That's always been the way mounted combat has worked. If it can move using your move while also taking its own round of actions, you're breaking the action economy. You're also getting into a weird situation where a horse with a rider is somehow faster than a horse without one.

Yes. I agree that the way the rules are written is weird for action economy. Doesn’t change that the way it’s written is:

Now I'm a little bit confused... What actions do I need to use my drone as a mount? I thought it's no actions at all (only for reactions or other things) but...

Use the same actions that the Survival skill entry lists, but you don’t have to make Survival Checks.

However, if your DM is a stickler for RAW, If you want to use your move action to use its speed instead of your own, right now it looks like it can take no other actions on its turn unless you also spend a move on your turn for Master control (in which case, it can then only move or standard, not both). Meaning, you get fewer actions than you would with a normal mount.

I’m not seeing anything on the mount creature not getting actions unless you spend a move.

You can spend your own move to move at its speed (which I think would actually have the rider provoke for movement since it’s their action.

I think I misspoke. You don’t have to make the check. If an action requires a check, the action happens as if the check succeeded. So no non-action fast dismount.

WOW HOW DID I MISS THE RIDE MOVE ACTION?! (also can you do it as a swift as per “Fight from a Combat Trained Mount”..?

Hmmm. This is pretty weird. The mounted rules are actually even less thorough than PF. I’m not seeing any language that requires the mount to act on your initiative. Is the move action “Ride” basically bonus movement for the mount?

There is a lack of rules overcoming the normal rules for a creature, so a mounted creature still has its own initiative and action and you can give a move action to ride the mount further. Maybe?

1) For what checks do I need to take actions or roll survival?

2) Do I need to roll SURVIVAL, or I need to roll something else?
3) How can I shoot from the back of mount, and can I do it while mount takes "shoot on the run" action? For example, readied action to shoot?
4) Are we both the same target, or separate targets? If separate, what if we threatent by one enemy and I want my mount to make "Shoot on the run", who provokes AoO and how many, can I avoid an attack with ride (survival) checks, like in PF?
5) Do I have penalties on attack rolls just for sitting in saddle and shooting while mount is moving?

1) You do not need to use any actions to make survival checks related to directing your mount. You still have to take actions that aren’t survival checks such as mount/dismount.

Stunned is not flat-footed, nor is it an invisible attacker. You lose your dex bonus.

Sometimes we forget that a double move each turn is hustling. Unless in combat, you likely aren’t hustling, you are walking (1move action per turn). Creatures who hustle for longer than an hour start taking nonlethal damage, which fatigues you.

Your drone can easily walk while the party walks. If you actually need to hustle for an extended period, you will be slower than the average party.

When a monster has the grab ability listed for more one attack, does the monster make a grapple check on each successful hit?

Yes.

Each grapple check is only to make the grab though, you can’t use subsequent ones to move/pin/etcetera. As stated above, this tactic is insanely good for monsters with constrict, as each successful grab/release will gain the bonus constrict damage.

For monsters without constrict, you’re basically just getting a bunch of tries to land the grappled condition. The math isn’t too bad, your -2 attack balances with their -4 dex for the rest of the full attack after you grab them.

If you are covered by the blanket, you have concealment and are able to make a stealth check. No distraction is necessary as the concealment from the blanket breaks observation for you.

You can carry items around with you within reason, it would likely fall under “Manipulate an Item” to cover a square with the blanket (a move action). As the blanket seems to be tied to a specific square for its benefits, you would have to use more actions to move the blanket around, it wouldn’t be as easy as keeping it tied to your shoulders. Move actions to pick it up, cover an adjacent square, stow it, etc.

ShieldLawrence wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Don't the rules say the tie is broken by the individual with the higher initiative modifier or, failing that, a new initiative roll to break the tie between them?

Correct.

Ah, but I disagree!! Thus the desire for a FAQ. :)

The rules are clear. You desire it to be run differently than the rules state.

If two or more combatants have the same initiative count, the order in which they act is determined by their total initiative modifiers (the character with the highest modifier acts first). If there is still a tie, the tied characters should each roll a d20, and whoever rolls highest goes first. This final method of determining which character’s initiative order is earlier is often referred to as “rolling off.”

ShieldLawrence wrote:

It doesn’t say “initiative order” but rather very specifically “initiative count.” The rules are explicit on how initiative counts work and how to determine ties with initiative counts. The rules you quoted so provide the timing of when the readied action occurs, but that can’t be confounded with how the following round’s iniative order is calculated using tied initiative counts.

The rules are clear on how the initiative order is determined at the beginning of combat. After the initial initiative order is determined, it is the ACTIONS that changes the order.

It simply does not make sense that a creature who acts after another can maintain a position in the initiative order just because the creature has a higher initiative bonus.

Do you want to see a bunch of high initiative characters running around so they can ALWAYS be acting before another (mostly NPCs) after the initial initiative order is determined?

It will unbalance the combat in favor of high initiatives. I don't believe the intent of the designers was for this to happen.

Thus the need for FAQ because yet another part of the rules are not clear and open to interruption.

It makes sense to me. It’s a different system than pathfinder. Combat won’t be unbalanced, but initiative is now a little bit more valuable.

The rules are clear on how initiative is rolled, what actions affect the initiative count, and how ties are determined. Have you tried playing it the way it is written?

Don't the rules say the tie is broken by the individual with the higher initiative modifier or, failing that, a new initiative roll to break the tie between them?

Correct.

Delay, page 249 wrote:

After any creature takes its turn in the initiative order, you can come out of delay and take your turn. This changes your initiative count to the current initiative count for the remainder of the combat.

This clearly indicates that for the creature who delayed, their initiative count is moved to AFTER the creature who's turn just ended.

No, it clearly indicates it “changes your initiative count to the current initiative count.” It literally says just that!

Ready an Action, page 249 wrote:

If your readied action is purely defensive, such as choosing the total defense action if a foe you are facing shoots at you, it occurs just before the event that triggered it.

This clearly indicates that if a Ready action is defensive, the character/NPC acts BEFORE the triggering event, thus moving the initiative count and being placed BEFORE the foe in the initiative order.

Ready an Action, page 249 wrote:

If the readied action is not a purely defensive action, such as shooting a foe if he shoots at you, it takes place immediately after the triggering event.

This clearly indicates that if a Ready action is offensive, the character/NPC acts AFTER the triggering event, thus moving the initiative count to being placed AFTER the foe in the initiative order.

Again, both Ready and Delay have a very specific sentence they both use word for word.

“This changes your initiative count to the current initiative count for the remainder of the combat.”

It doesn’t say “initiative order” but rather very specifically “initiative count.” The rules are explicit on how initiative counts work and how to determine ties with initiative counts. The rules you quoted so provide the timing of when the readied action occurs, but that can’t be confounded with how the following round’s iniative order is calculated using tied initiative counts.

If you don’t allow free escape artist attempts, would you also disallow other reactive skill checks?

Nauseated creatures can no longer discern a bluff, see a stealthed creature, catch a pickpocket, etc.

You roll the initiative count only once. That’s the only time you *roll* for your count. Then you remain at the same count unless you Ready/Delay.

What’s missing is any indication that you determine initiative count ties in any way other than compared modifiers, regardless of if it’s the beginning or middle of combat. Since the count changes, and we are given a way to deal with characters that have the same count, we use those rules.

Those rules are different than the initiative order rules in PF.

Once determined, the initiative order is no longer modified as outlined on page 238, which is were your quote is from.

No, it’s definitely modified by delay and ready.

A character rolls to determine her initiative count only once in each combat. Even if a character can’t take actions—for example, if she’s is under the effect of a hold person spell or is otherwise paralyzed—the character retains her initiative count for the duration of the encounter. The exception is when a character takes an action that results in her initiative changing (see the Ready an Action and Delay on page 249).

This changes your initiative count to the current initiative count for the remainder of the combat.

This changes your initiative count to the current initiative count for the remainder of the combat.

If two or more combatants have the same initiative count, the order in which they act is determined by their total initiative modifiers (the character with the highest modifier acts first).

So we are left with a different initiative system than PF. Ready and Delay change your count and higher modifier will act first on the next round.

I could Delay after an enemy to get better positioning/attack and then act before them on the next round with a high mod (yay!). I could ready a defensive action and then act after an enemy the following round with a low mod (boo!). The initiative modifier is now valuable during the entire combat, not just the first roll.

Initiative is further complicated by the wording found in Ready and Delay:

This changes your initiative count to the current initiative count for the remainder of the combat.

It doesn’t say you now go before Person X or after Person X, it says you go on Count Y. So what do we do with characters that have the same initiative count?

If two or more combatants have the same initiative count, the order in which they act is determined by their total initiative modifiers (the character with the highest modifier acts first). If there is still a tie, the tied characters should each roll a d20, and whoever rolls highest goes first.

So Ravingdork, your readied action takes you to Count 16. On the following round, the order is determined by initiative modifiers. Having a higher mod will cause you to act just before Bad Guy for the rest of combat.

The issue of free and swift actions while Nauseated came up previously and was FAQ'd:

Quote:

Nauseated and Actions: Does the nauseated condition really mean what it says when it says “The only action such a character can take is a single move action per turn” or does it just mean I can’t take a standard action?

The nauseated condition really means what it says. You are limited to one move action per round, and not any other actions. Compare to the staggered condition, which says “A staggered creature may take a single move action or standard action each round (but not both, nor can he take full-round actions). A staggered creature can still take free, swift, and immediate actions.”

So, Nauseated condition would prevent the character from using the free attempt to escape the grapple when placed in a hazardous square.

It prevents other actions. A “free attempt” isn’t an action. If you find evidence of why the explicit “free attempt” would be considered an action, please provide.

Free attempt =\= free action

If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD).

You are explicitly not allowed to attack when nauseated, so free CMB attempt is out. Since the free Escape Artist attempt is a skill check instead of an attack, the target can use it to try to break the grapple if grapple:moved over a hazard.

The sole will that animate dead gives the undead is obeying the vocal commands of the creator. The creator can make them do anything, including suicidal orders and not attacking your less-happy cleric. Mental control doesn’t matter. The undead will not do anything unless given an order. If you order them to attack obvious enemies, they may attack the cleric. If you order them to attack the goblins, they will attack the goblins only.

Without the mechanic, there is no drone. Ergo, drones are not independent creatures that can pilot starships. They are class abilities.

Without the necromancer, there isn’t the undead?

Drones are not independent creatures. They are still creatures though, they can take actions, they can even take some actions while not under the mechanic’s control. They can’t affect crew actions but they may be able to take crew actions.

And yeah, Piloting isn’t one of the Skill Units so of course they can’t pilot starships.

I don't see a drone as a creature. I see it as an extension of the mechanic. Otherwise, why does the mechanic have to use a move or standard action to take full advantage of what a drone can do?

It’s a creature that has limited ability to take actions. Still a creature though, specifically a construct with the technological subtype. All of the other rules that affect creatures still affect it.

Based on the Limited AI and such, in my own games I’d only allow the drone to do things it can do without being under direct control: gunnery and skills it has selected with Skill Unit.

My reading of it ... your drone cannot affect crew actions. Full stop. Your drone is a creature and has the ability to take actions (and therefore become a member of the crew). It cannot affect the crew actions taken, but it isn’t barred from taking its own crew actions. Your drone cannot aid another or anything like that, but it can still take crew actions.

It’s unclear and I can see both sides.

DR does not apply.

Also, fortuitous can only be taken advantage of once per round, regardless of how many fortuitous weapons you wield.

This special ability can be placed only on melee weapons. A fortuitous weapon grants the wielder more attacks of opportunity. Once per round, when the wielder of a fortuitous weapon hits with an attack of opportunity, he can make a second attack of opportunity with this weapon against that foe at a –5 penalty.

Regardless of having two fortuitous daggers or four fortuitous claw attacks (thanks AoMF), the “wielder of a fortuitous weapon” can only do this “once per round.” Having more than one fortuitous weapon does not make you a super wielder or ultra wielder who can do this more than once per round. It still limits a wielder to once per round.

I LOVE Up Close and Personal.

A character that successfully stealthed prior to the acrobatics check will still lose stealth after making an attack. If your acrobatics check was successful (and therefore can keep moving after the attack) you would be able to reenter stealth with that movement (assuming you meet the conditions to stealth).

I’m assuming you are making a Scout rogue with Stalker Talent to get UC&P. Skirmisher isn’t going to help, because there is no way to get an attack action before the swift action UC&P attack but after 10’ of movement. It’s always going to be move action->swift action attack->standard action or standard action->move action->swift action attack, I cannot find a way for the “first attack” to be an attack action after movement while using UC&P.