Double Strike combines the damage, no? Isn't it then fair to assume that both strikes are made simultaneously and therefore should both gain the benefit of an off-guard target?
Search Posts
Thanks for the help! I'll take this back to my table and see what they think. I suspect they will agree with you.
Because of that bad OG construction, you need special lines for every case where that assumed total of four is wrong. Ah, that makes sense. The current phrasing is not as clear or as obvious as I'd like though. Even now it reads to me like you add the value of the witch bonus to the bonus value granted by the feat. Kind of like how armor potency runes don't add an item bonus to AC, but rather increase the item bonus granted by armor.
If I have two apples, and Gary is to deliver me 3 apples, and Bill tells me he is going to deliver 2 apples plus an amount equal to that which Gary is delivering, then when all apples are delivered, I should have 10 apples. 2 + 3 + 2 + 3 = 10. I don't see the source of your confusion. You do not get to add twice your bonus familiar abilities for being a Witch. Except the feat clearly states to do exactly that: "Add the bonus familiar abilities you gain for being a witch to this amount." 2 + 3 = 5.
Then why would it say "Add the bonus familiar abilities you gain for being a witch to this amount." "This amount" being the extra abilities granted by the feat. If that wasn't the case then surely there's no point in including the above text in the feat. It goes without saying that a feat that gets you extra familiar abilities isn't going to take away abilities granted by a different source.
Enhanced familiar says "You can select four familiar or master abilities each day, instead of two." For witches it then goes on to say "Add the bonus familiar abilities you gain for being a witch to this amount." So if I'm playing a 6th-level witch, my familiar would have... 2 base abilities that all familiars get
For a total of 5 familiar abilities. If said witch took Enhanced Familiar, then at 6th level the familiar would have... 2 base abilities that all familiars get
For a total of 10 familiar abilities. Is that right? Seems like a pretty meager feat if not.
How long can a magus sustain that though?
My last activity was Swipe, but my last action was a Strike. If both are true, then Drink of My Foes has had its requirements met and should work, without violating the "activities and their subordinate actions are not the same thing" rules.
If an activity is not its subordinate actions, then it gains none of the traits or other properties of its subordinate actions, no? Seems like quite the slippery slope as that logical process and line of reasoning would completely break the game when taken to its logical conclusion. Ergo, it must be the case that Swipe can be used prior to Drink From My Foes.
My citation is common sense. If a group of people come together to play soccer, and the referee is changing the rules on the fly, or following the rules of American football, then expectations have been subverted. That is very likely to make for a bad time for all, and players would rightfully be calling foul if such changes weren't agreed to by all parties in advance. It's simple adherance to the basic social contract of gaming.
Any GM who tweaks existing stats without informing his players that, that is something he might do from time to time during the course of play is not only cheating, but subverting the expectations of both the game and its players.
Can Shape Wood create a metal gear solid box/basket for concealment? Shape wood can only target wood, and has no effect on metal, gears or otherwise.
Damn, that is a really good combo.Being able to auto-crit on aid actions at 9th level has some nice perks.Assurance (Diplomacy) for a character with the One For All feat. It really isn't.
That's all well and good until you find yourself stuck with a GM that won't let you use Intercept Attack to cover a friend from an unseen distant sniper because he hasn't called for an Initiative roll yet. Guardian reactions aren't guaranteed if you haven't yet rolled for Initiative.
Is it though? Seems like two feats from two different classes to me.
This is probably one of those "magic does what the rules say and nothing more" situations. The map's passive provides +1 bonuses to survival and relevant RK checks, that's it. Yes it's a map, but in the rules if you want to translate "I use the map" into some skill check, then it's getting you +1 on the skill check. I'd like to direct your attention to this thread.
THIS IS A PROBLEM. THIS IS A FEATURE.
Pathfinder 2e is quite nearly perfect at all levels of play.
The GM can decide to send a level +10 dragon against the party. So what? That in no way changes the standard expectation. A broken game is a good thing? EDIT: Ah never mind. Forgot who was speaking to. Cats love breaking things. The GM can choose to make any check secret...By RAW, GM decides.Entirely moot. It's not brilliant. It's stupid. No, wait...agh! Got me again, Finoan. ;P
All the actions that would be Stealth checks as defined in the skill have the Secret trait. Yet Avoid Notice does not. Until it gets errata to change that, it's a house rule. The GM can choose to make any check secret...By RAW, GM decides. Entirely moot. The GM can decide to send a level +10 dragon against the party. So what? That in no way changes the standard expectation.
Sadly with how Avoid Notice typically is a secret check you cant use hero points with it. Making the Stealth check to Avoid Notice a secret check when the exploration activity lacks the Secret trait is a house rule.
Like the lightning dash user, I rule that aerial boomerang ceases to exist upon impact with a solid wall that it can't break through.
I hope he is able to find a GM better able to meet his unique needs someday. ;P
Yes, you have to avoid the... two? casting eidolons, but that's the same as, say, outwit ranger. Outwit rangers are awesome. People just don't know how to properly leverage its amazing abilities properly.
Don't know what you guys have against phase bolt. It's awesome! Against baddies with cover or shields it's suddenly like being a fighter with +2 to hit. Great for shooting through over-eager martials too who don't know to wait before charging in the way.
It is rather vague, in't it?
It was my understanding that a grognard was a roleplayer who refused to move on from an older system in favor of newer ones.
...and Shield Block is not something you have to choose to take, it's there if you want it. It's not like its taking up space for something else. Ever hear of class design power budgets? It's totally taking up space that could have been used for a more versatile option.
This is what I was talking about.
I've heard it said by some that fist is it's own thing, and the ability to use other body parts (specifically to attack when your hands are occupied) is unique to the monk class.
Nope. It's the other way around. Everyone is wrong, and I'm the only one that is right. Also, Dork S. and shroudb were clearly mistaken in their assertion that people don't post just to agree with the prevalent (incorrect) opinion. Just look at any social media post! Herd mentality at its finest!
This feels like a RavingDork post. No it doesn't.
Loosing = The act if making something less tight. Losing = No longer having track of one's posession.
I would say yes. You simply move 1-4 feet, instead of the 5 feet required to get to the next space. No one would tell you "you cannot Stride less than your full speed." I fail to see how this would be any different.
Thanks for providing a source link, but that's wrong. Grapple is checked against Fortitude DC, not Reflex DC. ;P
What part of the game did you unexpectedly like? The end.
I hope that this means that you found a proper use for them. Could you please explain it?Why are high level staves such a letdown?They're not though. Though they can be expensive, they are also fun! And they also serve to expand my versatility and range, often with a cool theme to boot!
Why are high level staves such a letdown? They're not though.
Horsepersons of the Apocalypse. Proper etiquette dictates that individuals be referred to as people first; don't prioritize their condition--that's rude. For example, you should not say "the deaf boy..." but rather, would say "the boy who is deaf..." Ergo, they are "people of the apocalypse who ride horses." .
;P
No other published class gets "when you rolled a success, you get a crit success instead" at expert. I've heard it said otherwise. (Truly.) EDIT: Though I have not yet been able to verify said claim to the contrary.
Magic immunity is not dead! Everyone shout it from the roof tops and rejoice! I am SO psyched for Monster Core's recycled art!
Don't know what all the fuss is about. "Downcasting" has always been allowed. Not sure where anyone got the idea that it wasn't permitted in Pre-remaster.
Or are you telling me that if I cast Ignition it is invisible from further than the range of the spell? It is good to see you again, honored teacher. It thrills me to no end to see your skills at work.
The lack of the Staff trait is, to me, the nail in the coffin on this subject and says everything that needs to be known. You'd need to wait to upgrade/swap it to a proper one later on to prepare it in any other fashion. It's clearly just a normal staff in all respects, save for its acquisition and unique spells. Just because it doesn't mention the Staff trait doesn't mean that it doesn't have it. It's in the name. Literally. As others have said, why would the developers bother wasting words? Spoiler: All else aside, the game developers are rather fond of reminding us about rules with redundant text.
The constant reductio ad absurdum from both sides in this thread brings a tear to mine eye. But the fire aura does not provide light at all. Not even dim light.This is so fundamentally at odds with what fire is that I'm surprised the comment didn't come from The Contrarian. The thought had crossed my mind, but with the way this thread is going, I feared people might take me seriously.
Even if it left behind a cloud, it would leave a cloud without an effect tied to it, since no effect is being specified. The effect is specified in the trait. ;)
Of course it wasn't evil. Evil doesn't exist anymore. .
;P
|