![]()
![]()
![]() SuperParkourio wrote: Is the GM's ability to restrict Ready triggers limited to observability? For instance, I would think a trigger of "anything perceptible" would warrant the GM to at least raise an eyebrow. I mean the GM has the ability to restrict whatever they want, they're the GM. Only the social contract inherent to the game with regards to player expectations makes GMs run the game "RAW". Ultimately the GM can decide if a trigger is valid, the rules only specify four criteria, spread between Player and GM Core: - It has to be a single action or free action you can use (so not Readying Twin Takedown if you don't have the feat and whatnot).
It's important that the full rules for Ready in the GM core actually say: "However, you might sometimes need to put limits on what they can choose. Notably, the trigger must be something that happens in the game world and is observable by the character, rather than a rules concept that doesn’t exist in-world" That notably isn't exclusive. The action has to meet those criteria, but that doesn't mean if the trigger meets those criteria you have to allow it as the GM. You can always just decide it's not valid and work with the player to find something you both agree on. ![]()
![]() Unicore wrote:
No because Reactive Strike says "This Strike doesn't count toward your multiple attack penalty, and your multiple attack penalty doesn't apply to this Strike. ", so even if other reactions (like Opportune Backstab) would suffer MAP, Reactive Strike doesn't, and it never contributes. If you try this against a creature with Reactive Strike you just eat a full bonus attack to the face, like everyone else. ![]()
![]() Trip.H wrote:
Spoilered to not derail this thread too much:
It's like the old discussion of "when does Shield Block trigger?" since both have the same trigger of "X would take damage". I personally run Shield Block before resistances, trigger be damned, but technically you only take damage after those are applied. Which means if we follow pure RAW then abilities that combine damage would not be interrupted by Warping Pull since the target doesn't take damage until we combine damage to check for resists, and we don't do that until we determine if both strikes have hit.
But if you pull back and say "No, actually, you know you would take damage the moment you get hit" (which is a perfectly fine stance to have) then yeah, those abilities get interrupted, combined damage or not. ![]()
![]() Finoan wrote:
I mean it's also the definition of Concealed and Hidden neither of which Disrupt and both of which can cause someone to spend an action (or several) to no effect. Not to mention there's already feats like Repel Metal, Soul Flare, Guardian's Deflection or even items like the Bracers of Missile Deflection or Fungal Armor that can turn a hit into a miss with 100% certainty without disrupting. Sure, they all have limits and specific use cases, unlike Ready, but saying Disrupting is the only way for this to happen is incorrect. ![]()
![]() Megistone wrote:
The Carin Wight could just use the same tactic against them. Have it Ready an Action to Stride when an enemy uses a ranged attack against it. Unless you're having people fight the wight in the open field (instead of the cramped mausoleums and cairns they're supposed to be in), they will quickly close the distance on someone outside their turn, leaving them in someone's face to use 3 actions to strike-pursue-strike again. Alternatively, it moves into range and readies to Grapple or Trip for when the enemy moves away from the wight (or when they attack, or whichever other trigger you prefer). Once immobilised, it can just maintain grapple and wail on them with its sword. Once tripped, a PC can basically no longer do their combo. +12 Athletics means landing the grapple or trip is super easy, as is keeping the grapple going with it's first action (or tripping a character again) is almost a given, and then it has two sword strikes at +9 and +4, which against a level 1 PC is more than enough (especially since a succesful strike is likely to make them Drained 1 and make grappling easier) when they're off-guard. If it's facing a party of level 1s in a confined space, they'll be dead sooner rather than later if they don't adapt. Remember the thing is Int +1, it's likely smarter than many members of the party. ![]()
![]() Trip.H wrote:
I'm not Hammerjack, but I don't think they're arguing over when the trigger happens, just what the trigger is. The rules state here that triggers like "when they use a concentrate action" or "when they have X amount of hit points" don't work. Therefore, something like "I Ready for a specific stage of resolving an action, where the enemy has spent their action but not had an effect yet", as Hammerjack says, wouldn't fly. It'd need to be something like "I ready to stride away when they try to attack me" or "I ready to leap away when they come within 15 feet of me" or "I ready to burrow when they cast a spell that includes me as the target". And I don't see any of these as particularly powerful. You're giving up 2 actions and a Reaction for this to pop off, and it's not guaranteed. The Guardian example above is in fact pretty bad. If the monster just goes after your friend, you basically took a one action turn for 0 gain. It was a complete waste. You would've been better off using Taunting Strike, Raising your shield and doing something else. It can in fact be detrimental, since they could attack you, you move, then they move, strike a friend, and because you avoided their attack you're now out of position and can't use Intercept Strike to help your friend. There's a lot of context that depends heavily on the encounter that makes this strategy worthless, which is why I've never bothered to use it and I've only seen it from my players like, three times. ![]()
![]() Balkoth wrote:
If we look at the rules for Multiple Attack Penalty you will see that it says it does not apply to attacks made outside of your turn. Moreover, as Red Metal points out, Reactive Strike itself says it does not suffer from nor contribute to MAP. Every time you use Reactive Strike, whether on your turn or someone else's, it will be without MAP, no exceptions. ![]()
![]() All characters have hearing as an imprecise sense (at least by default) which means if you're Blinded you can still detect people using your hearing, they'll simply be Hidden (per the rules in Imprecise Senses ). For any action that targets a hidden creature you'll need to pass a DC 11 flat check or it will fail (per the rules on the Hidden condition). Your Reaction does not target your ally, per se, and so it cannot fail. The Strike you make as part of Retributive Strike though does target the enemy so that one can fail if you don't pass the flat check. Other than these wrinkles though the reaction still functions as normal. Nothing in the Blinded condition says you can't use Reactions, so as long as the triggers are met you can take them. Just at very reduced efficiency in some cases. Compare for example with a reaction like Nimble Dodge where the trigger specifies you must be able to see the attacker. If you're blinded, you can't see them, so you can't use it. But Retributive Strike doesn't have this restriction, so it works fine. EDIT: Also, forgot to say that you don't need the enemy to be in your reach for you to use Retributive Strike. You can use the Reaction at any range if both the enemy and your ally are in your aura. You only get to strike if the enemy is in Reach, but the damage reduction happens regardless. ![]()
![]() The Raven Black wrote:
But this doesn't really work? If we look at effects that have duration in rounds (of which there are a lot), they do not work with your definition of rounds. If you have Enemy A, Enemy B, Bard, Enemy C, Fighter and the Bard casts Courageous Anthem on their turn, the spell won't end when the Fighter finishes their turn (which would be the End of Round 1), nor will it end when the Fighter finishes their 2nd turn (which would be the End of Round 2). Per the rules on durations, it will end at the beginning of the Bard's turn on Round 2. This is expressly shown here and here. Delay has to use different wording because it is taking you out of the initiative order, but the intent is clear, when they mean "a full round" they mean "when your pre-delay initiative would come around again". Because that's how all round based tracking works in PF2e. ![]()
![]() Like Hammerjack said, you're adding those traits to the normal Shield Bash , allowing you to give your shield weapon runes and a few neat traits instead of a die upgrade through Shield Spikes/Boss. ![]()
![]() They don't really meaningfully interact with each other, as far as I can see. "Into the Fray" always happens first, because it has a trigger of "you roll initiative". You can't use Eternal Composition for with Fortissimo Composition. Fortissimo is not a composition cantrip, it's a spellshape focus spell. What you can do instead is something like: - During exploration, use Eternal Composition to declare Courageous Anthem as an exploration activity. Combat Begins: - Into the Fray triggers, and you get to draw your weapon(s) as you roll initiative.
Your first turn comes up in initiative: - Courageous Anthem ends, since it has a duration of 1 round, and those effects end when your turn begins.
Hope it helps. ![]()
![]() In Combat, the rules are pretty clear that your Companion will not really act unless you command it, per the rules: "Your animal companion has the animal and minion traits, and it gains 2 actions during your turn if you use the Command an Animal action to command it; this replaces the usual effects of Command an Animal, and you don’t need to attempt a Nature check." There are ways around it. In general, the feat that makes your animal companion into a Mature animal companion also gives it 1 free action to Stride or Strike when you don't command it. But otherwise, if you don't command them, they do nothing in combat. The minion rules are a bit more open ended, since they state: "If given no commands, minions use no actions except to defend themselves or to escape obvious harm. If left unattended for long enough, typically 1 minute, mindless minions usually don't act, animals follow their instincts, and sapient minions act how they please." So, to answer your question: generally, no, your animal companion will not follow you for free during encounters. You need a feat for it to be able to move for free once per round, otherwise you need to command it. Outside of combat, the animal will probably follow you around with no commands needed, though if you want it to take an exploration action you do need to Command it. ![]()
![]() Castilliano wrote:
That is kind of...very hard to do. The only tactics that don't rely on your banner are: - Mountaineering Training
All the others require affecting people in your aura, and per the Banner class feature, you only have that aura while the banner is visible and in your possession. Plant Banner lets the aura keep working when its planted (and makes it bigger), but per the feat you lose the benefits of the feat and all other banner benefits if someone steals it (or destroys it). So it isn't impossible to do, it just limits you severely and lowers the Commander's battlefield power tremendously. ![]()
![]() YuriP wrote:
Group Taunt, better than Mighty Bulwark? Yeah, I'm sorry, no. One of them lets you Taunt 3 dudes, the other effectively gives you 3-4 attribute boosts in Dexterity for free (most Guardians I've seen are Dex 0 or +1) for what matters most. There's no contest here on which Feat is getting taken at level 8. ![]()
![]() Claxon wrote:
It's completely unintuitive to you because it's just unintuitive in general. It's not a corner case per se because it's not super rare, but in general people multiclass into something with the same spellcasting ability modifier (INT/WIS/CHA) as their main class, so this discrepancy never shows up at all. If OP was a Sorcerer MC-ing Oracle, there would be 0 difference between the Spell Attack and Spell DC for their spells. If they were a Fighter, and they multiclass Champion and then they also multiclass sorcerer, and then they also multiclass bard, same thing, their Spell DC and Spell Attack would be the same (all of them use Charisma). Yet the rules are clear: an archetype's spellcasting ability only applies to spells and nothing else, which means there will a difference only when casting spells. So OP and foundry are playing completely by the rules, though their GM can see fit to change it. Claxon wrote:
This would just be a huge boon for Martials MC-ing into casters because they can use physical stats for casting, which is huge, while Spellcasters getting to use their casting stat for Class DC is basically worthless. ![]()
![]() Claxon wrote:
Which DC you use is in the Cursebound trait, which says: "A cursebound ability that allows a defense uses your spell attack modifier or spell DC unless noted otherwise." Debilitating Dichotomy doesn't note otherwise, therefore it uses Spell DC. ![]()
![]() Your Druid and Oracle Spell DC should be at the same level of training since the remaster made it so there's only one Spell DC across all casters. It would differ on which ability to use (Wisdom or Charisma), however Oracle dedication specifies you use Charisma only for spells granted by the Archetype. Debilitating Dichotomy is not a spell, so it should use your baseline Spell DC, which is the Druid one. ![]()
![]() Claxon wrote:
I know statistics matter, but the game does have enough rules to adjudicate those, and even provides examples. The main problem isn't the game being unclear, it's that nothing except shields scales in HP, so anything but a shield becomes unuseable as levels increase because even though you get quite a bit of Hardness, that doesn't matter if your banner is still a 4 HP cloth pennant. An easy stopgap solution for GMs and players here is to allow enhancing the banner with Reinforcing Runes, since that will help a ton. Not much you can do about people yoinking it from the battlefield though. Xenocrat wrote:
I haven't, but Plant Banner simply says you plant your banner as part of the action, so there's no reason to assume you have to spend an action to detach it in order to do so, whether it's a shield, a pole strapped to your backpack, or a pole strapped to your mount, or something you hold in your hand. Just like how you don't need to spend an action detaching your shield to throw it if you have the corresponding shield augmentation, or you're using a shield that already has Thrown (like a Razor Disc). ![]()
![]() Kyrone wrote: I would rather if instead of going into the bestiary it was a simple template and like illusory creature where it uses the caster stats on the summon. The rank of the spell could define the amount of HP, damage a abilities that it have. The good news is that Magic+ (the 3rd party book) does exactly this for both Summon and Battleform spells, and I'm gonna be using that from now on in all home games I run. The bad news is it's 3rd party, so not something you can use whenever you want as a player. ![]()
![]() Spamotron wrote:
I'd argue Gray Maiden Plate is better because -1 bulk on Full Plate is better than +1 Bulk and Laminar while keeping the other stats the same. It makes it much easier to run around with a Fortress Shield because it's 8 Bulk total compared to the 10 of O-Yoroi + Fortress. Even if you don't want to use a Fortress Shield, less Bulk from armor is always better just t carry more stuff, especially when I've never, ever, seen Laminar come into play during the Tian Xia campaign I played. ![]()
![]() Poisoned Sticks and Stones lets you apply any injury poison to your sling bullets, which you normally can't do because they deal Bludgeoning Damage, and you need weapons that deal piercing or slashing. It also gives you a pool of simple injury poisons per day which just deal 1d4 damage with no save, so you can always use the feat even if you don't buy or craft other injury poisons. Lonely Army does not include a clause saying MAP does not apply, so it applies as normal, correct. Correct, the effect of Deathblow only applies if:
If those two things apply, they need to make a Fort Save vs Class DC or they die. And it's an incapacitation effect. ![]()
![]() queuebay wrote:
You almost had it, it still works but not in the way you think. Drawing a weapon from the sheathe as a free action is part of it's Immanence effect, and as you pointed out, the spark has to be in your Crescent Cross for this combo to work. Meaning that while the sheathe does give you infinite copies of the Crescent Cross to draw (because that's just part of the sheathe's general effect), you still need to spend actions to draw it, so this combo doesn't work. However, the Crescent Spray action lets you switch mode as a free action before firing so this still works out fine, assuming you jump through all the hoops. ![]()
![]() Deriven Firelion wrote:
FWIW, while I agree with you regarding the action in general, Sayre is on record stating the Liturgist interaction with Tumble Through is completely intended (but it was on Discord, so I can't link to it directly). You can find transcribed quotes here and here ![]()
![]() From Treasure Vault Remastered: The Gauntlet Bow, the Rotary Bow, the Sukgung and the Taw Launcher are described as Crossbows, but the table on page 30 lists their weapon group as Bow. The Crescent Cross and the Lancer are described as being a combination of a weapon and one or more crossbows, but the table on page 31 lists the weapon group of the ranged portion as Bow. Given that the Remaster rules introduced the Crossbow weapon group, I'm positive these instances are a mistake and all of these weapons should be in the Crossbow group, not Bow. ![]()
![]() Bluemagetim wrote:
All due respect, are you sure you're responding to the right post? You've pivoted into completely unrelated territory here and it's incredibly jarring. As for whether having less flavor text was a design goal for the remaster, I don't know and I don't care. Paizo can have as much or as little of it as they desire, I just want it clearly separated instead of intermingled with actual mechanical rules. ![]()
![]() Bluemagetim wrote:
Pathfinder having MTG like rules would be a boon, not a bane. You can have all the flavor text you want and have clear mechanical rules. 1st edition Dark Heresy did it (really, all the FFG 40,000 games), 4th edition D&D did it, LANCER did it, etc. Having a situation like Stunned, or boomerangs, or what an "instance of damage" is, as well as many others, doesn't add anything to Pathfinder besides needless ambiguity that detracts from the game. Clearly separating how the game wishes the effect to be perceived (flavor text) from what the effect actually does (mechanics text) is better for everyone. You can still run into problems with them having conflicts, but it is much easier to adjudicate, and it also makes it much easier to ignore one side or the other if you don't find it fits with your game mileu. And it will in no way lead to GMs no longer being required, anymore than clear rules have led to MTG now only being played by computers, against computers. ![]()
![]() Ravingdork wrote:
Regarding the Critical Failure thing*, the rules actually cover it: if there is no effect listed for a Critical Failure, you just use the effect of a normal Failure instead, per Player Core, page 8: "Note that not all checks have a special effect on a critical success or critical failure and such results should be treated just like an ordinary success or failure instead." So, for throwing a Boomerang, both a Failure and a Critical Failure have it return to you. Same way if you Critically Fail your Perform check using Lingering Composition, you get your Focus Point back. As for success on a Strike, I'd rule it doesn't return. Giving a returning rune for free with no caveats is definitely Too Good, but also that just isn't how boomerangs work. Now if you throw it for laughs and it doesn't hit anything then sure, we'll assume the PCs are good enough to have it always return. But if it actually hits something? You're gonna need some magic or feats to have it bounce back. *I need to point out though, that the Recovery trait never mentions Failure, it states "an unsucceful thrown Strike". That covers both Fail and Crit Fail equally. ![]()
![]() Thorn wrote:
But Tumble Through very specifically states you must attempt the check "as soon as you try to enter the enemy's space" and the Success line also states "You move through the enemy's space, treating the squares in its space as difficult terrain". Since difficult terrain only matters when entering a square, and we're moving through a space, we either trigger an AoO (because we Tumbled through, which means we entered said square and then we exited said square, fulfilling the prerequisites) or we don't need to Tumble through and we don't trigger an AoO. As for OP's questions, with the caveat that this is how I'd run it and there really isn't anything written for pure RAWW: 1 - No, unless the PC is incorporeal/can move through walls/is mist and there's a small gap between them that the map just can't really show, etc. If it's literally two solid walls and a bog standard human PC, no.
![]()
![]() Luke Styer wrote:
You need to remember 1e also had rules to take 10 and take 20. Using Perception was just an action, so that Commoner can just take 10 for a 14, allowing them to automatically see any visible creature up to 140 feet away, or they can take 2 minutes (20 times as long) to see creatures up to 240 feet away. As for distances, you're not exactly wrong. The numbers would make more sense if they were about identifying creatures at those distances, rather than simply detecting them. Because yes, if you seat down to watch a football game, you can tell there's players on the other end of the field, but can you tell who they are? (Fun fact about 1e rules, I had a player once who read the table on modifiers, saw the modifiers for "Through Door" and "Through Walls" and thought you could just see through those as a PC without the need for any items or magic.) Still, 2e has no guidelines so I'm afraid OP will have to eyeball it. ![]()
![]() cmarmor wrote:
This is both true and incorrect at the same type. Yes, the Gunslinger does not get Quick Alchemy Benefits from an Archetype. They're still gaining Quick Alchemy Benefits though, and they reference the Alchemical Archetype rules, not the Alchemist (specifically Player Core 2, page 174). The same goes for Advanced Alchemy. Now, the thing is, anyone can take Firework Technician and get infinite Versatile Vials anyway, which I honestly think is a mistake from Paizo, but we'll have to see. ![]()
![]() To better explain myself, this is how I see it: Forager: "While using [Survival] to Subsist..." Wandering Chef: ""When using the Subsist downtime activity, you can use [Crafting] or [Cooking Lore] in place of [Survival], and if you roll a failure, you get a success instead." Wandering Chef says [Crafting] = [Cooking lore] = [Survival] when you Subsist. Therefore, we can substitue [Survival] with [Cooking Lore] or [Crafting] in Forager and it still works fine. I can see what other people are saying, but like Ravingdork says it's an order of operations thing. It's either. We check Forager before applying Wandering Chef -> It works.
And since this is such a minor thing, why not go with the one that lets the NPC/player do more stuff. ![]()
![]() The way I see it, they should interact woth each other just fine. Forager says whenever you'd roll Survival to Subsist (as opposed to Society) you get X effect. Wandring Chef says whenever you'd use Survival to subsist, you can instead use Crafting or Cooking Lore. So to me you can get the effects of Forager with Crafting or Cooking Lore. Honestly the effect of this is pretty much a ribbon and unlikely to come up in 99% of all games, so might as well do it. Though I'm curious, since this is an NPC for your setting why are you asking? Just say it works and move on. ![]()
![]() Perpdepog wrote:
Ayup. It took a while for me to learn it too, but the Reload section in the Equipment chapter says: "Switching your grip to free a hand and then to place your hands in the grip necessary to wield the weapon are both included in the actions you spend to reload a weapon." ![]()
![]() Red Griffyn wrote: 'm trying to find a way to also keep my second hand open for quickdraw for bombs since a lightning bomb/dread ampoule are easy ways to inflict debuffs. Also in the rare case you want to activate ammunition you still need that free hand. But realistically if you just give up on easy bomb access you can always carry the mace and a slide pistol which gives you 8 rounds of stab and blast before you ever need a free hand (without the feat taxes of course). Keep in mind you can Regrip for free when you Reload weapons, so as long as you Release your gun after you shoot you're not losing any actions at all and you have a free hand basically every time you'd realistically want one, the one exception being Fatal Aim weapons. ![]()
![]() Stealth does really become an extremely useful tool for melee rogues, but at higher levels (13 for Halflings, 15 for Legendary Sneak). Using your third action to Stealth is probably your best defensive option overall, the enemy has to either Seek (1 action less, and it's not guaranteed to work), use some other form to make you lose Hidden or deal with a 45% miss chance. But yes at lower levels it's much harder to justify on a melee rogue, with a few exceptions, like if you have low-light/darkvision and the enemy doesn't and you're fighting in dim light. ![]()
![]() If you're wearing Explorer's Clothing, you are Unarmored. If you look at the Armor table, you will see there's a Category called Unarmored. Wearing anything from that Category = Unarmored, and will use your Unarmored Proficiency. Explorer's Clothing gives you a +0 item bonus to AC, with a Dexterity Cap of +5. If, while wearing Explorer's Clothing, you use Animal Skin, you will instead have an Item Bonus of +2 and a Dexterity Cap of +3. At 13th Level, it is instead +3 Item Bonus and Dexterity Cap of +3. If you're Unarmored, you can put runes on yourself with either Explorer's Clothing, the mystic armor spell or bands of force. That's why the Animal Skin feat says: "This item bonus to AC is cumulative with armor potency runes on your explorer's clothing, mystic armor, and bands of force." ![]()
![]() Teridax wrote:
I don't really have a dog in this fight, but Blue Frog's example isn't saying spells auto-heighten. What he's saying is that your signature spells are, effectively, more spells of your highest rank. If you're a 7th level Sorcerer, you have access to 4th Rank Spells. Your repertoire will have 1 4th rank spell from Bloodline and 2 you can pick yourself. But, if you've picked Signature Spells correctly, you will also have those available, at minimal loss. For example, if your 1st Rank Signature is Force Barrage, your 2nd Rank Signature is Blazing Bolts and your 3rd Rank Signature is Fireball, then, using your 4th Rank Slots you can cast: - Your Bloodline Spell
So while the Sorcerer only has 3 slots, they can use them to cast any of these 6 spells, in any combination. Yes, up-casting some spells is worthless, but that's where Signature spell selection is crucial. If you do it right, then you can expand your options without giving up too much power. The 7th level Wizard meanwhile will only ever have access to a maximum of 3 spells (school slot + 2), and the broader they go the less they can cast each of those spells. ![]()
![]() 1) Yes. The Splash damage from the Ikon is still damage from your Strikes, so it would trigger Mortal Weakness or Personal Antithesis just as if you'd hit. 2) Both, I'd say. It gets weird of course, but Twin Stars is very specific in saying "these copies are identical except for one mirrored feature, such as a sun motif on one and a moon motif on another." So if one is your Implement...the other is also your Implement.** 3) Again, refer to earlier, the copies are identical except for cosmetics, so both guns will have the exact same ammo when you make the copies*. Does this create problems if you later end up with more ammo in one than the other and you un-split them? Probably, yeah, but it's minor, and this is a super rare divine gun, so who cares. *So if you split them with 6 rounds in the magazine, both will have 6 rounds. If you Split them with 3, both will have 3, and so on and so forth. **This would, however, turn off Implement's Empowerment, since now you're wielding two one-handed weapons. That are also your Implement. Boy does Implement's Empowerment need some clarifications though. ![]()
![]() Alynia wrote:
To be fair, Cheliax works as a bogeyman but every time they appear in APs they get the stuffing kicked out of them and end up taking the L (which makes sense, since they're villains). Even if we take into account that they win in Hell's Vengeance, this is counterbalanced by how thoroughly they got trounced in Hell's Rebels. However, I don't think the AP will see Cheliax gone. I think a much better bet, given the geographical positions involved, is that Andoran takes part or the entirety of Isger, which has already tried rebelling before. That would deal a blow to Cheliax without removing them from the board, so to speak. ![]()
![]() I like that we're finally getting official half-giants, but at least in my home games I'll have to weigh them against Battlezoo's excellent Giant ancestries to see if they're worth including. I do think they look slightly comical, but there's much weirder things in Golarion so it doesn't bother me too much. ![]()
![]() Justnobodyfqwl wrote:
I like to imagine you essentially did something like 40k Orks: you've made an object that functions like something that already exists, but in such a roundabout and perplexing way that nobody else knows how in the nine hells you're supposed to operate it. ![]()
![]() SuperBidi wrote:
Explode and Gigavolt are AoEs, but what about Searing Restoration? Megaton/Gigaton Strike? Electrify Armor? Deep Freeze? There's a lot of Unstable actions besides the ones you keep bringing up and basically all of them aren't powerful enough to justify Unstable as is. As for your last paragraph, I heavily disagree. Overdrive is as much (if not more) a core part of Inventor as Unstable effects. Without it you're just plain worse in the damage department than everyone else, especially because your KAS isn't your to-hit stat. I mean, just comparing: Swashbuckler: You have KAS in a to-hit stat. Bravado ensures you get the full benefit of Panache even on a failure and even against things that would be immune (such as Intimidating mindless creatures). Your Bravado actions do more than just give you extra damage (except Battledancer, which requires feat investment).* Investigator: Devise a Stratagem can be a free Action. It doesn't require a skill check. It allows you to use your KAS as to-hit and it adds damage on top. And if you get a low roll, you can use it for something else. Non-Thief/Ruffian Rogues: You can have KAS as your to-hit (remember, the rackets allow you to switch KAS, they don't force you.). You can still get Sneak Attack off by simply flanking, meaning your damage bonus doesn't require a check. And when it does require a check, it does more than just enable Sneak Attack (remember, Overdrive just gives you more damage).* Alchemsit: Actually in the same boat as Inventor, though they far outstrip them in versatility. Thaumaturge: Exploit Vulnerability gives full damage bonuses on F, S and CS (unlike Overdrive) and, on a S and CS, gives additional benefits in knowing resistances/weaknesses/immunities (and even more, with a single level 1 feat).* So no, they aren't in-line with Inventor. They were, before the Remaster (particularly Swashbuckler and Investigator) but post Remaster most of them are just better. *One thing to note here of course is that all three of these depend on enemy values, unlike Overdrive. This means they'll be easier against lower level enemies and harder against higher level enemies, which we could argue is why their F effects are more powerful than Overdrive's. But Overdrive is also the only one of these that actively damages you in a CF and prevents you from trying again, and I will reiterate that all it does is increase your damage, so IMO it's still a worse use of an Action than any of them. ![]()
![]() YuriP wrote:
I actually see this more as a weapon with a Shifting Rune than anything else. If I have a Warhammer with a Shifting Rune and I turn it into a Trident (Thrown 20ft), I can now inscribe the Returning Rune on that Trident. If I shift it into a form that doesn't have Thrown, the Returning Rune is suppressed and stops working. As long as the spark is in the Greatsword, the greatsword is a Thrown weapon and can therefore be inscribed with the Returning Rune. If it loses Thrown, the rune just stops working. There's no need to complicate it further than that IMO. ![]()
![]() PathMaster wrote: Someone said they can use Advanced Weapons as the base for their Weapon Innovation, but don't get the initial modification. You can apparently start with a Level 0 Advanced Weapon (so, no Barricade Buster) as your Innovation, but if you do then you do not get an initial modification. SuperBidi wrote:
Maguses can Spellstrike more than once per combat 100% of the time though, unless combat is literally super short. An Inventor can only use their "main ability" twice per fight 30% of the time until level 14, where they finally get to use it twice. Yay. Your Overdrive comparison also kind of falls flat when you realise an Inventor starts with only a 15% Critical Success Chance, and they max out at 40% CS chance*. This means you're much more likely to spend an Action and only get Half-int to damage, and while you can use actions in subsequent turns to try to get a CS, now you're comparing 2 actions to get Full int to damage to a Free action on rolling Initiative, there's just no comparison here, Overdrive is bad. It was sort of OK when the Inventor came out but the Thaumaturge and remastered Rage have made it even worse. *Due to how level based DCs work and when Item bonuses become available, the CS chance of Overdrive fluctuates between 35 and 40% at levels 9+, but it's 40% at 20th so I went with that. My main point is you have higher chances of not getting a CS on your first Overdrive. ![]()
![]() ottdmk wrote:
Yes, the same OP in the original reddit thread clarified that you can make Level 0 Black Powder rounds in batches of 4. "When crafting alchemical ammunition, including black powder in doses or rounds, using advanced alchemy, you create ammunition in batches of 4 (meaning that if you were 4th level and used all of your advanced alchemy consumables to create alchemical ammunition, you could create a maximum of 24 rounds). You cannot use advanced alchemy to Craft horns or kegs of black powder." What's interesting to me specifically about Munitions Crafter is how it interacts with other Archetypes (Poisoner/Herbalist/Alchemist) that give you Advanced Alchemy benefits. Since, RAW, it'd mean you use the highest number of them but can now use them for anything you could do with either feat. So if you're a Gunslinger with Munitions Crafter and you take Alchemist Dedication, and then take Advanced Alchemy, you can craft 4+Half Level or any kind of Alchemical Consumeable. Which means you cap out at 14, vs an Alchemist's 17, which seems...very weird. And for those saying Gunslingers don't get Quick Alchemy: they do, that's what Munitions Machinist was changed to, and IIRC it gives you 4 versatile vials for munitions/bombs.
|