The Rot Grub "The Rules Lawyer"'s page

The Affinity Blaze is ability is one collective use per day, yes?

I ask, because on page 32 it says if they attain 33+ Soul Offering Points: "They gain a single extra use of Affinity Ablaze each day that can be used by any member of the team."

Which uses "they" and "can be used any member," as if the default is that each PC gets their own single use...

Has anyone run the next part of the adventure and know whether it's like Volume 1, where there can be a large number of encounters in a single day?

For anyone who had run this, did your players connect the various dragon statute clues to the Breath, Bones, and Spirit? Or even the necessity of the Celestial Dragon, itself?

The AP says "Upon piecing together these inscriptions, the player characters realizes this Celestial Dragon is clearly something more primordial than a common wyrm and that their power is likely sufficient to open a way
to Syndara’s Island and Hao Jin with it."
Are the players supposed to realize this at all? Or is it just kind of the GM saying so?

It feels like the kind of thing that, as the GM, I will have to explicitly tell them, which never feels great.
Related, reading out a list of clues and moments later having to tell them "Actually, one of those hints I just gave you was mistranslated, here's the actual hint" seems super weird.

IIRC, I used the info that the shrine was infused with energy, and a tracing of Hao Jin herself. With knowledge checks, I suggested that something beyond normal magic . The legend of the Celestial Dragon able to grant wishes was also something I had the players know through knowledge checks, etc. So I think that's how my players connected the dots.

I don't remember exactly the path to how they got to this, but the bottom line for me was them learning that the names of the 3 elements. The Monastery leader who knows how to summon the dragon can fill them in on details and make everything clear.

I now see that the gauntlet in E5 can't be run as written without filling in major holes, as was remarked above.

E5a. Every square does 10 points of piercing damage. No indication of how far they must travel.
E5c. Immobilize everyone in the party and each person must escape with a DC 39 Athletics check? So anyone who can't do a legendary Athletics DC can't make further progress?
E5e. Everyone is "exposed to suffocation"? The rules for suffocation say you "fall unconscious and start suffocating." What? I assume they must hold their breath like the Underwater rules. Of course, we have no idea how far they must travel.

There are other parts of the AP that have issues. The map says that the lava tube travels a quarter mile, but the map shows goes about 250 feet. This section desperately needs a few maps, and the only map we're given is useless.

Once you reach the tree, there is a DC 38 Nature check to "beseech the tree to give a branch to the party." No explanation as to why they're talking to a tree, or why they would think of doing this. The benefit? To be shielded from the kaijus' effects on the way out. I already know that I will not run the gauntlet a second time!

I must say this is the most poorly-edited AP chapter I think I've ever run. There are so many errors.

Jin-Hae, the intercessor the party needs to find, died decades ago (p. 18). Until she passes, the monastery cannot name a new intercessor (p. 16). The entire was founded IN ORDER to prepare the next intercessor (p. 11). So they have just been waiting for decades for some adventurers to stumble by to make their mission possible again? And the monastery doesn't entrust them until they learn the techniques they already know?

I really wish I didn't have to fill in plot holes like this!

(The lack of response here from the developers concerns me.)

I'm really getting frustrated by the strange and contradictory text that keeps coming up as I prep for this module. I'm currently in Chapter 3 and came up against these issues:

-Mechanics that only make sense as mechanics. The Plant False Tracks example on page 52, for instance. I don't know how to justify this without just laying the statblock before them. It is a FREE check to create "false tracks" that somehow delay the Burning Mammoths a whole day? I don't see how that opportunity can become apparent in-lore, and what it actually could even possibly encompass.

-The "deserter" (actually a tortured outcast) Aklep under "Punishment By Fire" on page 53. Why would Pakano leave someone alive in the way of the party who has valuable information on Pakano and his plans? Also, the possible information Aklep can give the party can be gotten anyway, from the waylaying group ("Reaver Squad") that the party encounters on page 53-54. I suppose the idea is that here is an interesting NPC, but we are given zero information as to who he is or his possible importance later in the AP. We already have enough NPCs to handle in this AP.

-The party is to see encounters that are so obvious that they see "a landmark, geographic, feature or clue" from ONE HEX AWAY. However, once the party reaches the hex, they must spend another day(!) to Reconnoiter the area? How does this make sense, and how can I justify it?

-The High Barrows give no motivation to explore them beside curiosity, while it gives crucial information for upcoming encounters. I might need to come up with one if the party isn't curious. Meanwhile, the glyptodon has contradictory descriptions as to what it will do. On page 55, it "attacks any creatures that intrude" and leaves if "reduced to fewer than 40 Hit Points." AFTERWARD, it tells us that the party can sense that it is "especially possessive" of the standing stones. My players at this point will likely try to Tame it upon visiting it, which is how the AP has structured every other encounter with a wild animal. But that is not countenance in the text: it says if the party "makes a big show of backing away... the glyptodon RETURNS." So the text clearly intends to have a fight to the death with this creature, and THEN the party tries to "befriend" it, which is kind of crazy. So I'm thinking of having it not attacking the party, they detect that it's possessive, but that it will take "a day"(!) of not approaching the standing stones. I don't see why the party isn't going to try to use their Tame Animal feat which is only a 10-minute check. Perhaps there is something strange and magical drawing the glyptodon to this location? All we are told is that the stones are larger than it and therefore rare... It likes to lean up against large rocks?

With the Remaster we are doing away with spell components and are supposed to look for traits like Concentrate and Manipulate on the spell.

None of the Vessel Spells have such traits in my PDF. This must be an oversight, yes? What traits do the designers intend them to have?

Of Course, Sustaining involves the Concentrate trait, but that doesn't answer the initial casting.

In my playtesting I'm going to assume they all have the Concentrate trait (unless I hear otherwise)

There are mythic heroes of legend who had nothing but amazing strength, and fought with their bare hands, wrestled angels, etc.

But the playtest doesn't support it, and this isn't an issue of the playtest not showing us all the options, but the fact that a default core feature is having a Weapon Ikon.

That seems to preclude the Exemplar supporting this fantasy. But maybe something could be devised?

Maybe something about Handwraps can be figured out, but in my opinion it would thematically be cooler if they could somehow have a 2nd Body Ikon in my opinion (like Samson and his hair supporting his mythical strength) that affected their unarmed strikes in combat.

Yeah you're all right on Earth's Bile, just found it myself!

CUTTING WITHOUT BLADE FEAT 20

EXEMPLAR
While tales of your divine ikons have spread far and wide, you’ve realized that as they are all manifestations of your soul, the object itself is unnecessary. Your ikons disintegrate into golden light. You can place your divine spark into any object in your possession, even a nonthreatening object like a single strand of grass, to transform it into a fully functional copy of your ikon made out of pure divine radiance. You can do this as a free action immediately before or after Striking with or otherwise using the ikon.

The only way I see it's useful is you can apply it to any weapon at will, or if you lose your physical ikons... which I don't see coming up in most adventures.

Is there something I'm not understanding?

A PLACE BEYOND MORTALITY FEAT 20

EXEMPLAR
Prerequisites Claim Advanced Domain
Frequency once per day
Requirements You have at least 1 Focus Point in your focus pool.
Your domain is not just a representation of your power but of your divine essence and the potential immortality that essence represents. You cease aging. When you would die for any reason, you can immediately expend all your remaining Focus Points as a free action that can be taken at any time and regardless of your current condition to survive at 0 Hit Points, purge yourself of any negative conditions. When you do, you heal yourself for half of your total Hit Points, stand back up in your current square, instantly summon your weapon ikon to your hand, and Shift your Immanence to any of your ikons.

Definitely has Cool Factor, and never aging is always cool, but you have to DIE for it to come up. Not just go down to 0 hit points, but DIE. So it seems less useful (and will come up less often) than a Level 20 feat seems to warrant.

Excited by the Exemplar. I have these questions about the intended rules after reading them through:

Page 19. The Mournful epithet refers to "tears or memories dance in their eyes," but it has only the mental and emotion traits (not visual). So I assume a blind creature with emotions is affected, yes?

Page 21. Whose Cry of Thunder: The Immanence effect says that when you crit with the weapon, "lightning strikes a target within 30 feet..." Can that be the same creature as the one you just hit?

Page 22. The overview of Ikons lets you change your ikon "to the new object by spending 1 day of downtime." I'm assuming this can be done with weapon and worn ikons, but [u]not[/u] body ikons. Would this be correct?

Page 23. Noble Branch: The Transcend ability lets you deal spirit damage to a creature you had a successful Strike against. It takes "spirit damage equal to your weapon damage dice." Is this supposed to read the [u]number[/u] of your weapon damage dice, as in 1 spirit damage if you don't have striking runes? Or do they take 1d12 damage if you just struck them with a greataxe?

Page 24. Skybearer's Belt says only "all allies" can carry more Bulk, which I thought strange given the theme of the ability magnifies "[u]your[/u] strength." Should this read "you and all allies"?

Page 26. Motionless Cutter: So long as you successfully Strike with the weapon, you can make another attempt until you make four Strikes this way. When it says you must strike "another target," can it be one you previously successfully did a Strike against with this ability? For example: hit target A, then target B, then target A?

Page 26. Binding Serpents Celestial Arrow: It says "the arrow" transforms and immobilizes the target. But it also indicates you can use this with thrown weapons. So if used with a thrown weapon I'm assuming it must not return to your hand in order to immobilize the creature...

Page 27. Extract Vow of Nonviolence refers to the "moderate DC for the weapon's level." Should this read "standard DC"?

Page 6. Apparition's Possession makes you immune to control effects "unless its spell [u]rank[/u] is [u]more than twice your level[/u]." This must be a typo, yes?

Page 8. Does Apparition Sense detect creatures through barriers? What about the ethereal plane?

Page 8. Does Spiritual Expansion Spell's ability to increase the radius of an emanation spell by 5 feet stack with itself? Can an apparition do it multiple times?

Page 9-10. Blazing Spirit doesn't indicate what its resistance applies to. I assume it's fire resistance, yes?

Page 10. Spirit Walk says that the party doesn't trigger reactions from haunts and spirits. Does this mean complex-hazard haunts never start?

Page 11. Banish Falsehoods of Flesh: You "attempt a Religion check to counteract a [u]polymorph effect currently affecting a creature you are aware of within 30 feet.[/u]" Must you be aware of the [u]polymorph effect[/u], or of the [u]creature[/u]?

Page 14. Earth's Bile does 1d4 fire damage and 1d4 bludgeoning damage. It also does persistent fire damage on a successful save. What saving throw does it call for? And I'm assuming it's a basic save?

Thanks in advance! This is an exciting class!

I ask, because the Apparitions definitely seem Primal-themed.
(EDIT: Or Occult themed)

I think I understand some reasons it's Divine:
* It's in a book about a divine war
* It's a way to provide support for the new Spirit damage mechanics
* The "Spirit" (and apparitions are spirits) essence sits between Occult and Divine

However:
* (EDIT: Most of) The apparitions seem united by their primal theming
* There is demand for a "blaster caster" right now, Primal fits the bill, and we already have 2 other Divine focused casters, but only 1 other Primal

Maybe another approach is to allow the Animist to take up either Occult, Divine, or Primal magic? Though do we have a number of other "pick your tradition" classes...

I don't pretend to have an easy solution and I understand the juggling act that is designing! =D

On Reconnoitering, I see that the text only talks about Reconnoitering at the landmark hex, which helps. I'll need to come up with a justification for each one, however.

Also, the Burning Mammoths move 1 hex every THREE days. This makes Reconnoitering easier to justify. I don't know much about overland travel, but this seems awfully slow to me. It says it's because they "are larger and less coordinated," but being 3 times as slow seems hard to justify to me.

But this makes Reconnoitering more palatable, since the party can tell how far away they are.

Is it okay for them to travel 1 hex every TWO days? I will need to read ahead, but the text does explain they might be at the Red Cat Cave for a few days. It looks like it takes 17 days to go through Hex C and Hex D. Add 2 days of Reconnoitering that is 19 days total; meanwhile, the Burning Mammoths will have traveled only 9 hexes according to what I'd propose.

I appreciate everyone's answers. My other concern I'll bring up again, as we're now about to start Chapter 2:

I'm concerned about being able to sell the Broken Tusks' flight plan across the wilderness to the players in a believable way. They are being pursued by a band that wants to murder them. I don't understand Reconnoitering every hex, or spending several days on a detour to the Red Cat Cave to go back WEST in the direction of their pursuers, instead of further east or south. Or eschewing their usual practice of letting scavengers eat the dead because they're on the run, opting instead to make a big funeral pyre that can be seen for miles around...

Agree with both.

Yes, will run it this way. The only reason not to, would be if Overflow abilities seem overpowered. But in the combat demo it was quite costly to lose the aura. So I'm thinking this was the intention. Ending the aura would make 3-action Impulses that overflow (which make you end your turn without your aura) significantly weaker.

In my kineticist combat video today, a fire kineticist had the Fire aura junction in effect, giving weakness to fire damage. She used Solar Detonation, which does fire damage. In the video, a target takes the damage and it increases due to the aura.

Solar Detonation is also an Overflow ability.

One commenter says:
"16:46 why would the fighter take the extra fire damage? The Aura went out with the overdrive didn’t it?"

Here is the text of the Overflow trait:

Overflow: Powerful impulses temporarily overdraw the energy of your kinetic gate. When you use an impulse that has the overflow trait, your kinetic aura deactivates until you revitalize it (typically with Channel Elements). Extinguishing your element this severely is taxing, and consequently, you can use only one overflow impulse per round, even if you reactivate your kinetic gate.

I think logic and intuition say that the aura of fire doesn't suddenly get "sucked up" when you overflow, before an explosion hits the target. Also, your aura needs to be in effect for you to do the Impulse to begin with, so I'm assuming it's in effect throughout the resolving of your Impulse.

And that's how I responded. I just want to put out there that I'm saying this is how to run it. But if some dev is reading this, or if anyone else thinks otherwise, let me know.

I suppose the text to work with is on page 5 of Book 1. But I still have trouble squaring it with something believable:

A NEW YEAR

When the Broken Tusks made their annual sojourn to Red Cat Cave and discovered that their plan to protect the Primordial Flame had failed, the following became a lost people. They maintained a small migratory route that passed by the cave, but they no longer bothered to visit the place, which had become haunted by the ghost of its murdered animal guardian.

The following saw the Flame was gone. A person who was alive even before then, Eiwa, is still among the tribe...

As the decades passed and the elders’ tales unraveled or were forgotten, the story of the Primordial Flame devolved from fact to fable. The oldest Broken Tusks—those who remembered when they were still called theBurning Mammoths—began to refer to this new era of lost hope and broken promises as the syorn, a term of great sadness, and the before-times as the ethgir, a golden era best left forgotten.

Okay, I get it now - Their mission failed... So they don't talk about happier before-times, because that's depressing. The FACT that things were better before is known, but exactly what happened and the central fact of the tribe's shame, the loss of the artifact, is not told to the younger generations.

Now, the small migratory route that has sustained the Broken Tusks in the syorn is failing. Without the Primordial Flame’s magic, the warm seasons are shorter, the winters longer, and the game sparser. In spite of these difficulties, the Broken Tusks maintain what traditions they can, largely in denial to the realities of the changing world around them. At present, they’ve temporarily settled in their familiar stomping grounds, the once-verdant Gornok Plain, for the spring thaw and to observe the following’s ancient vernal ceremony, the Night of the Green Moon. Their elders, including the centenarian Grandfather Eiwa, have put on brave faces for the sake of their following’s youngest generation, many of whom are coming of age in a world still reeling from demonic warfare.

Though spring should be a time of cheer and renewal, a sense of dread hangs in the air around the Broken Tusk camp. The elders stubbornly believe the best way to address the chronic food shortage is to maintain the path they’ve walked for the past century. Yet many of the youngest generation believe that exploration might be the group’s best hope for survival. With their leaders paralyzed by indecision, it falls to the Broken Tusk’s newest band of scouts to reignite their people’s nascent spirit of adventure and, with any luck, guide the following toward a new era of prosperity.

I'll be making this sense of declining fortune a theme that is known to the players. And so there already are rumblings of changing the tribe's migratory route. The fact that the elders are hiding some of the truth is a point of tension - why do this same route, and why aren't we being told everything?

So it makes more sense that younger members of the following don't know about the Flame. I still think they should know why they're called The Broken Tusk though.

I suppose the text to work with is on page 5 of Book 1. But I still have trouble squaring it with something believable:

A NEW YEAR

When the Broken Tusks made their annual sojourn to Red Cat Cave and discovered that their plan to protect the Primordial Flame had failed, the following became a lost people. They maintained a small migratory route that passed by the cave, but they no longer bothered to visit the place, which had become haunted by the ghost of its murdered animal guardian.

The following saw the Flame was gone. A person who was alive even before then, Eiwa, is still among the tribe...

As the decades passed and the elders’ tales unraveled or were forgotten, the story of the Primordial Flame devolved from fact to fable. The oldest Broken Tusks—those who remembered when they were still called theBurning Mammoths—began to refer to this new era of lost hope and broken promises as the syorn, a term of great sadness, and the before-times as the ethgir, a golden era best left forgotten.

Okay, I get it now - Their mission failed... So they don't talk about happier before-times, because that's depressing. The FACT that things were better before is known, but exactly what happened and the central act of the tribe's shame, the loss of the artifact, is not told to the younger generations.

Now, the small migratory route that has sustained the Broken Tusks in the syorn is failing. Without the Primordial Flame’s magic, the warm seasons are shorter, the winters longer, and the game sparser. In spite of these difficulties, the Broken Tusks maintain what traditions they can, largely in denial to the realities of the changing world around them. At present, they’ve temporarily settled in their familiar stomping grounds, the once-verdant Gornok Plain, for the spring thaw and to observe the following’s ancient vernal ceremony, the Night of the Green Moon. Their elders, including the centenarian Grandfather Eiwa, have put on brave faces for the sake of their following’s youngest generation, many of whom are coming of age in a world still reeling from demonic warfare.

Though spring should be a time of cheer and renewal, a sense of dread hangs in the air around the Broken Tusk camp. The elders stubbornly believe the best way to address the chronic food shortage is to maintain the path they’ve walked for the past century. Yet many of the youngest generation believe that exploration might be the group’s best hope for survival. With their leaders paralyzed by indecision, it falls to the Broken Tusk’s newest band of scouts to reignite their people’s nascent spirit of adventure and, with any luck, guide the following toward a new era of prosperity.

I'll be making this sense of declining fortune a theme that is known to the players. And so there already are rumblings of changing the tribe's migratory route. The fact that the elders are hiding some of the truth is a point of tension - why do this same route, and why aren't we being told everything?

Also, I'm not finding an easy answer to the question "What do members of the Broken Tusk following know about the origins of the following?"

I have to think that, with someone who lived through the original split still alive among them, and with oral traditions being so important, that there is basic knowledge known by everyone.

The Player's Guide doesn't mention the Primordial Flame. The anticipated questions posed to Eiwa on page 20 in the AP assume the PCs not only don't know that the Primordial Flame was lost, but also that they don't know why the following is called The Broken Tusks! This kind of baffles me...

I'm willing to accept that the younger generations don't know, but I wish we were given some kind of sound justification for keeping the truth away from them. I'm not coming up with one at the moment: they are small in number, migrate in the direction of the other half of their former following all the time, and they need to be wary.

And if their entire identity is based on protecting the flame, why do they never visit the cave in their annual migration normally?

(I also have a number of questions on how to sell their flight plan across the wilderness to the players in a believable way. They are being pursued by a band that wants to murder them. I don't understand Reconnoitering every hex, or spending several days on a detour to the Red Cat Cave to go back WEST in the direction of their pursuers, instead of further east or south. Or eschewing their usual practice of letting scavengers eat the dead because they're on the run, opting instead to make a big funeral pyre that can be seen for miles around...)

The overall treasure in the AP seems very light. Are the encounters tuned around the party having fundamental runes at the appropriate level given the lack of treasure/trade in the setting?

Should I be using ABP to supplement the lack of treasure?

Anyone else with experience running this have an answer to this question? This was my very first question before even opening the book...

A bear hug for Strength modifier damage at the level you would obtain these items is a fricking joke of an ability. I did 6 or 7 damage to the enemy with 300 hit points. Oh boy. They really felt that bear hug.

Sometimes I wonder if the designers tell themselves, "This is so cool" without ever going "This damage is so incredibly weak and pathetic compared to what the player will be facing at this level, why did I even bother to put this ability they will never use on this item. It's like I wasted words in the book and I should know better."

My read of the suffocation rules is that they fall unconscious on a critical success. So it could be a way to compensate for the amazeballs Critical Success effect.

My purchase of Crown of the Kobold King does not come with an Interactive Maps PDF. (Nor does my PDF of Malevolence.)

... And I'm running this module in 16 hours!

I could screenshot my PDF, but all the room numbers are visible. I have the same problem with the maps of Falcon's Hollow and Darkmoon Vale.

Is there any way we can get those added, so we can run this module in VTTs?

(I'm not able to select the map and save it within Adobe, either)

EDIT: I've found some maps from the 3.5 version on the internet, but it should come with the PDF!

Didn't follow the whole discussion, but since goblins are core Paizo has needed another stand-in for "comedic psychotic small humanoids." I think that's it.

I rather like their cute reimagination, but I think they're "too cute" for my liking. They're supposed to be, well, killed. On more than one occasion while running the Beginner Box (or watching playthroughs on YouTube) I've seen people see the artwork and say "Aww, they're cute!"

I have the Crown of the Kobold King and I'm happy with the artwork - it looks like they're walking back on the "cute" angle a bit. From what I've read of it so far, these kobolds are evil and vicious in the story, and their artwork plays up their evilness. (Check out the new cover art)

The links here are confusing:

The product page says preorders expected March 2023, and it says that "subscribers" get a free PDF when the physical copy ships.

The large link above goes to the "pretty" AV page, which also says preorders start March 29, 2023.

Thezzaruz wrote:

And that if there is an Interact action added to the process then that creates big problems

Again, no it doesn't. Whether or not you make an archer roll a flat check when they're grappled is pretty much the only scenario in the game where this interaction is relevant at all.

I found another interaction in my game last week: an Attack of Opportunity that critted an archer trying to fire a bow. I ruled that Reload 0 included an Interact action, and because Interact has the manipulate trait, then the arrows wasn't drawn.

It's very much an optional part of the campaign for a reason, and one that doesn't directly interface with the PCs stats themselves as well, so that if folks want to play with it some sessions and others just skip forward levels, you can do that without impacting the core play experience of the campaign itself.

I like the fact that it doesn't interact with player stats. The 1e implementation was very mechanical ("Who has the best Charisma?") instead of it being an RP choice. And this way it is also RPG system-agnostic.

There are also a lot of opportunities during the adventure itself to earn Kingdom XP (as well as additional resources) in the same way you earn PC XP and treasure by doing adventures. So actually playing through the adventure will shorten the number of turns it takes as well.

Ah! I'll take a look through the adventure for that then. (A brief scan tells me that about 280 Kingdom XP can be earned while the party is Level 4.)

Thanks. Well my first runthrough of a first turn makes me think that, if I were to run the AP, I would skip forward a year or so (would love to hear from others how long it took them to bring their kingdom to Level 4), and then at some point during each session, handle 1 or 2 kingdom turns so that they're not all back-to-back.

Just an idea. If anyone has experience simulating a kingdom, I'd love to hear how long it took!

That is the intended effect—the hex that you start your kingdom in should be a significant decision in which you have to weigh a lot of elements and factor in a lot of choices. Starting in a hex where you get a free Town Hall, though (which is what happens if...

** spoiler omitted **

...gets you a very important structure immediately, which will give you a pretty significant advantage even if you have to spend more time looking for food.

That said, it'd be interesting to see if some sort of meta-kingdom-placement thing arises as folks compare notes and suss out which hex in the Stolen Lands is the BEST hex to start your kingdom. Personally, I hope folks don't take that to heart and instead look to start their own kingdom where they prefer to begin rather than feel like they're forced to follow the only best route—had that been the intent, there wouldn't be 100 pages or so of how to build different kingdoms. We would have provided all of those details for you and there'd be no player agency at all!

I am both heartened that it was the intended effect, and challenged by the implications this has for kingdom building! It reminds me of some strategy board games that put a lot of importance on initial decisions.

So long as I might have the team's ear, did the team have a chance to playtest these rules and see how long it would take to reach 3rd level? And the adventure says to let the players get more kingdom turns to get the kingdom level to at least 2 levels below the party's level (preferably closer even). I was surprised that Farmlands are closed off at the beginning, as that runs counter to my years of playing Civilization-type games.

Let's assume the PCs build their capital in the same hex where the CRPG has them doing it...

That is a hex that has both the Landmark and Resource traits. (p. 73)

Your kingdom starts as a Level 1 kingdom, and thus can only have Villages. Villages have an Influence of 0 (p. 542). This means that its influence is limited to the hex that it's built on.

The hex's Resource trait makes it a great place to build a Work Site, to get double Commodities. A Work Site is a Terrain Feature (p. 537). The section on Terrain Features states: "A single hex can contain only one terrain feature. If you want to construct a feature in a hex that already contains a feature, you must first Clear the Hex unless otherwise specified in the text."

Besides Work Sites, Other examples of Terrain Features are Farmlands and Settlements.

Since the capital city is a Settlement, it cannot have a Work Site (a 2nd Terrain Feature) in it. Nor can it have a Farmland.

At the same time, a Farmland can only be built (and it can reduce the Kingdom's Consumption), only if it is located in the area of influence of a settlement. (Establish Farmland activity on p. 522, you reduce Consumption by "the number of Farmland hexes you have within influence range of your settlements" p. 538).

The fact that Villages have influence of 0 means that Farmlands cannot be built before the kingdom advances to 3rd level (2000 XP later), when a Settlement can become a Town to get an influence of 1. In the meantime, it looks like the kingdom is limited to Harvest Crops, Go Fishing, and Gather Livestock to meet its food needs.

Also, given that the kingdom starts 1st level and the party may be at around 4th level at that time, unless I'm missing something I don't know how the party viably gets that first 2000 XP. All the milestones assume some growth ("expand a village into your first town"), and the start is precisely when it's hardest to convert Resource Points into kingdom XP, when you're poorest.

Am I misreading anything here, or is there something I'm forgetting?
If not, is this all intended?

I made an extended response on my channel responding to June/July statements saying Pathfinder 2e players should stop recommending it to others. It's a little late, but I thought it was still worth making. (It was delayed by Dark Archive coverage)

Making this, I realized I should share this over on these forums as well! There was a lively discussion here, linked below, about this issue.

I thought would help the conversation and itself be a source of discussion.

0:00 Introduction
2:32 Why Pathfinder advocacy?
9:18 To the D&D content creators:
12:11 To PF2e players:
13:15 To people in the hobby:
21:22 Good and bad examples

Paizo CEO Lisa Stevens on network externalities (Paizo.com blog from 2012)

Twitter thread generating the discussion (Twitter thread)

D&D creator talking about Pathfinder players (Youtube video)
[url=Follow-up stream: "Pathfinder - Addressing this last week":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOCfydBKTYQ]His follow-up stream "Pathfinder - Addressing this past week"[/url]

Paizo.com discussion "Allegations of toxic community - A discussion" (discussion thread)

"Fixing my BORING D&D combat // DM tips & advice" (Youtube video)
Video's comments, Pt. 1 (PDF)
Video's comments, only those mentioning Pathfinder (PDF)

D&D Next poll favoring more choices in characters, including how PF2 does characters (dndnext subreddit)

What lessons can D&D learn from Pathfinder? (dndnext subreddit)

Well-received post about houseruling PF2 ideas into 5e (dndnext subreddit)

My gut tells me this for a general rule: for spells and effects that "happen" to include more creatures within their effect, I'd treat them like the fireball spell in the RAW example.

But if the attacker is choosing to distribute a limited number of attacks between the Summoner and the Eidolon, then they all count. Especially since the attacker doesn't necessarily know that they have a link. It would unfairly "punish" the attacker otherwise. And the summoner and eidolon aren't getting "double punished" for an effect that had limited efficacy anyway.

(Chain Lightning affecting the Summoner twice seems too brutal, and it arguably has a "limitless" resource, so I wouldn't allow it to target the Summoner/Eidolon pair twice.)

I have a question about how the shared hit point pool interacts with various effects.

First, here is the relevant language from the Summoner class:

Lastly, the connection between you and your eidolon means you both share a single pool of Hit Points. Damage taken by either you or the eidolon reduces your Hit Points, while healing either of you recovers your Hit Points. Like with your actions, if you and your eidolon are both subject to the same effect that affects your Hit Points, you apply those effects only once (applying the greater effect, if applicable). For instance, if you and your eidolon get caught in an area effect that would heal or damage you both, only the greater amount of healing or damage applies.

An AoE spell includes both of you. That's pretty clear. You both make saves; the worse save takes effect when determining hit point loss.

What if electric arc or magic missile targets both of you? You are arguably being "subjected" to different "effects," but one could read the spell as a single effect.

And what about chain lightning? Can you effectively be double-attacked by this spell?

What do people think? Thanks in advance!

The goblins' camp is suggested as a place for an overnight rest. But the text also describes the Shieldmarshals as being on the party's tail. How have other GMs handled this?

I'm in Photoshop but it looks like the outer frame cannot be modified to adjust for different party sizes...

Regardless of who takes the Unstable action, all Unstable actions depend upon the innovation to power the action ("Unstable actions use experimental applications of your innovation that even you can't fully predict, and that are hazardous to your innovation (and potentially you).").

So no matter who performs the action, if you, the player fail the flat check, Unstable actions are out until you repair your innovation (barring the feat that lets you ignore failure once per day).

EDIT: To say it more succinctly: Unstable actions make your innovation break, not the inventor. ...well, unless the damage from a crit fail kills you.

I honestly disregarded that as flavor text, because how to explain using Searing Restoration from your own person when you're the Inventor?

THEN I read Gortle's response and am thinking huh: this all becomes cleaner if the Inventor is unable to take actions where it says the minion "can" take it.

I guess reading the text of Searing Restoration in a different light, "it can take this action rather than you" can mean the Inventor simply cannot do it. I would think Paizo would know how to make its intent clearer, however - I don't think the way I read it at first was unreasonable.

Anyway, thanks for the responses! I will say only the innovation can do these things, and it makes more sense thematically anwyway.

The Unstable trait says:

On a failure, the innovation malfunctions in a spectacular (though harmless) fashion, such as a belch of smoke or shower of sparks, and it becomes incapable of being used for further unstable actions.

And for reference here is the full text of the Unstable trait:

Unstable actions use experimental applications of your innovation that even you can't fully predict, and that are hazardous to your innovation (and potentially you). When you take an unstable action, attempt a DC 17 flat check immediately after applying its effects. On a failure, the innovation malfunctions in a spectacular (though harmless) fashion, such as a belch of smoke or shower of sparks, and it becomes incapable of being used for further unstable actions. On a critical failure, you also take an amount of fire damage equal to your level. As the innovation's creator, you can spend 10 minutes retuning your innovation and making adjustments to return it to functionality, at which point you can use unstable actions with that innovation again.

To take an unstable action, you must be using your innovation (for example, wearing an armor innovation or wielding a weapon innovation). If you have a minion innovation, some unstable actions are taken by the minion instead of you. In these cases, only the minion can take that action, and the minion needs to have been Commanded that turn to take the action. If you critically fail the flat check, the minion takes the damage instead of you.

Some actions have an Unstable Function entry, which you can use to add the unstable trait for a bigger benefit. If you're unable to use unstable actions, you can still use the action normally, but you can't use the unstable function.

For Megavolt, there is both an Unstable version and a normal version. Additionally, for Inventors with a construct minion, either the Inventor or the minion can take the action. This trait description seems to indicate that, if you have a construct innovation, that only the construct can do the Unstable version of Megavolt.

But what about Unstable actions where there is no special "stable" option, like Searing Restoration and Explosive Leap?

The bolded text in the Unstable description seems to contradict these 2 feats, which explicitly say that if you're an Inventor with a construct innovation, it "can" take this action rather than you (i.e., either of you can take the action).

So what happens when one of them takes the action and fails the DC 17 flat check? Does the action now become unavailable to both?

I think the intention is that these abilities are only to be used once before you spend 10 minutes to stabilize your innovation.

However, it seems strange for a construct doing Searing Restoration 50 feet away from the Inventor, now makes that Inventor unable to do the same thing.

I've had situations similar to this come up in my games, and I want to know how other people handle it.

Let's assume a party is fighting a single graveknight that blocks a 5-foot wide hall and is blocking access to a large room. A Fighter is already engaged in melee with it.

All of the other party members are somewhere behind the Fighter.

1. The Barbarian wants to Shove this creature back. Can she do so? The Core Rulebook says "You can’t end your turn in a square occupied by another creature, though you can end a move action in its square provided that you immediately use another move action to leave that square." The Shove action does not have the Move trait.

2. The Rogue wants to Tumble Through the creature. When you fail to Tumble Through, then "your movement ends." So what happens to her? Does she immediately fall prone in the Fighter's space? What if she has more actions and wants to try to Tumble Through again... can she? And what if she has only one action left and failure would leave her in the Fighter's space?

For both characters, I've been letting people try what they wish, but if they fail then they are "teleported" to the closest logical space. (Even if this is several spaces back.)

For reference, this thread from the subreddit seemed to come down on the side of being able to resurrect destroyed undead: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/hbe9id/can_you_resurrect_und ead/

No official word from Paizo on this. Since Resurrect in 2E doesn't preclude resurrecting undead creatures (whereas it did in PF1E), I think RAW is that it can.

As for the corpse "destroyed," the only operable rules in 2E are in reference to items and not creatures. And in previous editions, having "some small portion" of the body was all you needed to resurrect someone (and 9th level PF1e True Resurrection didn't even need this). Yes, it's another edition, but the only precedent for preventing the raising of undead is language in the PF1 raise dead spell, which itself is explicitly ignored for the 7th and 9th level resurrection spells: "You can resurrect someone killed by a death effect or someone who has been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed."

In Book of the Dead, undead characters brought down to Dying 4 are destroyed. So it seems implied that the PC is gone for good. But can they still be resurrected and returned to life by the ritual, so long as the spell's requirements are met (died within the past year), yes?

I think saying the PC is destroyed is a holdover from talking about bringing undead monsters and NPCs down to 0 hp, because doing so doesn't "kill" the undead creature. And resurrection requires "the target’s body to be present and relatively intact." This is up to GM interpretation, but I'd imagine that a destroyed (0 hit point) undead is "intact" enough for resurrection purposes.)

EDIT: What got me thinking about this was the 9th-level ancestry feat Rejuvenation Token, which specifically says that resurrect using your soulbound object doesn't bring you back to life but returns you to your Skeleton state.

The Sixth Pillar Students on page 14 have 8th level spells as their "7th level" spells: disappearance, monstrosity form, and polar ray.

For my game, I replaced them with invisibility, elemental form, and disintegrate, all heightened to 7th level.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the water level in the megadungeon. On the second cover, B19 is a flooded cavern with the ceiling rising only three feet above the water level. Next to it are B18 and B20, which I assume will have ceilings that rise up higher than that. (In fact B20 has stairs leading up to meet up with the rest of the level!)

But shouldn't the water level be consistent throughout the dungeon? How can the second level fit "in between" the water level and the first level?

In my brain, I can only make sense of this if the shores are very steep on Level 1.

Is there something I'm not thinking of?