The Rot Grub "The Rules Lawyer"'s page

Right. What I am arguing is that this targeting problem is the only problem. The ability works as long as you can target the undead creature properly.

Honestly, I am not sure why spells need to make the distinction for living/undead creatures. The living and Void Healing designation will take care of having the Vitality and Void healing things do their stuff (or not do anything) correctly automatically. If Void Warp was changed so that it only targets 'one creature', there would be no problems with casting it on a skeleton. A non-necromancer casting Void Warp on a skeleton would be wasting a couple actions is all. It wouldn't hurt the skeleton any.

All that having spells change their behavior based on living/undead does is makes Heal and Harm behave very strangely when cast on a living creature with Void Healing. Strangely enough that it needs houserules to work as intended.

On a similar note, our Blood Lords group ran up against the strangeness that Battle Medicine, post Remaster, can now be used on undead creatures because it is a Healing effect that lacks the Vitality trait. However, Treat Wounds says you target "one injured living creature," so Stitch Flesh is still required to Treat Wounds. You can do a 1-action patchup of an undead creature, but if it lasts 10 minutes? Nope!

This class looks like a lot of fun!

I am running Blood Lords, and I just want to bring up two things that have come up that I want to share.

I just made a video saying that the Necromancer's class feature lets you use Void Warp on undead, but the spell says it must target a "living creature." I just want to make sure the design team is aware of this existing in the spell, and also this is not the only time a spell says something like this.

Second, the necromancer's Level 3 reaction to raise a thrall is triggered when an enemy creature "dies." I have a player who wants to respec their wizard into a necromancer for the rest of the campaign, which I'm allowing. And their Mastery of Life and Death class feature seems well-suited for this campaign. But I realize that this reaction doesn't work against the undead who make up the majority of their foes. So I am considering houseruling that so they can substitute that ability for their subclass' "Thrall Enhancement" feature. (EDIT: I'm offering it as a homebrewed Level 1 class feat, so that one isn't pigeonholed into 1 subclass if they are in Geb.)

(I know that's technically a no-no for playtesting, but it is such an unusual campaign that I thought it was warranted.)

I'm bringing this up to make sure you know that it doesn't work against undead foes, and this might also be a possible future subclass idea! (Or a feat idea)

Link: https://paizo.com/pathfinder/getstarted

Ask anyone who has played this game "Where I should I start?" And the answer you will almost always get is to play the Beginner Box. But it's not mentioned on the Getting Started page?

I can understand wanting to promote the Player Core book, but there is no ad copy talking about what makes the Beginner Box special and why someone would want it. It's perplexing to me that it's not there.

To the comment above, yeah the animated statue is probably too hard for some parties who don't have a hefty damage dealer. It looked very dicey for our party until they landed a lucky crit. I think Hardness 6 should be avoided at 1st level to be honest.

Is anyone else utterly confused by some of the maps in Paizo adventures, especially ones that where north points anywhere besides up? And there are some other issues with the bank heist (pages 31-35) that left me confused:
-biometric locks get bypassed by "an employee's information"? Meanwhile, if you find an employee's badge you can bypass the "mechanical lock"? Both statements confused me
-"Ramps" (plural?) in the office area (E2) lead to the "lower levels" (areas E3 and E4), but there is no clear connection between the two on the map. (The lower levels are superimposed over a street scene which I think it has no relationship to. I'm imagining the street artwork isn't there and this is simply a lower floor that is deeper than "the basement.")
-"Automated sentries" patrol the vault, but there is only one who patrols.
-In the office area (E2), a "locked steel door to the southeast" blocks the stairs to the basement. The map has a door in the southWEST. And "the basement" looks like a single room. The "basement's" relationship to "the lower levels" is not explained.
-At the safes "the protection-class security robot enters the area from the south." This makes no sense: there is no point farther south from the safes. There is a small space that is from the south if North on the map pointed up, but it's pointed to the left. I will have to assume it approaches from the space on the map, which is actually from the west. And still I find it doing nothing while the party deals with the very dangerous 60-foot laser hallway just around the corner to be a bit hard to justify. (NOTE: I'm going to have it appear from behind a secret panel after they start dealing with the lock for dramatic effect!)

Oh by the way, on page 29-31, for there to be any believable way for there to be conflict between the goblins who are [/i]legitimate shippers[i] is for there to be legitimate fear on all sides that there are people who steal or rob shipments on those docks. Just a little reason for conflict that the module neglected.

(This is sort of a rant, but I'm usually writing notes in the adventures to make sense out of them more than I'd like! Grr.)

Anybody have ideas for Gurbo Mongsley, the guy with the stained wrinkled outfit who Gage tolerates who the mod says might have "some significant dirt on the casino owner."

It seems like a fun angle, and he has artwork and everything! But we don't have any guidance on how it might be part of the Infiltration.

(Gotta say, the 20+ page section on running the Infiltration (if you include the gambling games) could have been organized better!)

I hope this is the proper way to raise questions about individual rules questions and requests for clarity.

The Barricade feat (p. 146) has the following text:

BARRICADE [one-action] FEAT 1
GENERAL MANIPULATE
You hastily create a barricade using nearby items, junk, or debris. The barricade provides lesser cover for you and one other ally, though you can Take Cover to increase this benefit to standard cover. The barricade is flimsy and falls apart at the end of your next turn. There isn’t normally enough material for you to build a second barricade in the same space unless you’re in a particularly cluttered area (at the GM’s discretion).

It doesn't designate where this barricade is built. Is it a line bordering your space, facing one direction? And is it limited to an ADJACENT ally? I would have to think so.

Since it doesn't specify where you build it, I am going to run it as providing lesser cover to you and 1 adjacent ally facing all directions...

I would put this in the Pathfinder 2e Rules Discussion forum. There might even be an errata thread started for whatever book this comes from (I assume PC2) although I think this is the first I've heard of this feat, so it is worth a mention still!

Ah, I had intended this to be in the Starfinder Playtest feedback forum. Sorry for the confusion.

RAW, the Trip is affected by MAP, yes. I suspect it's not the intention, because applying a -5 MAP on a check that only applies on a critical success while also causing your second Strike to be at a -10 MAP is not great, but that's unfortunately how it works as written. I'd probably just make it work like the crit spec effect on flails and hammers and make the effect a Fort save based on your class DC.

Yeah, that's what I'd be inclined to do if these were published rules. But since we're playtesting I'm going to run it RAW and this thread can be feedback. (Also, it isn't mandatory, as you "can" Trip.)

I hope this is the proper way to raise questions about individual rules questions and requests for clarity.

The Barricade feat (p. 146) has the following text:

BARRICADE [one-action] FEAT 1
GENERAL MANIPULATE
You hastily create a barricade using nearby items, junk, or debris. The barricade provides lesser cover for you and one other ally, though you can Take Cover to increase this benefit to standard cover. The barricade is flimsy and falls apart at the end of your next turn. There isn’t normally enough material for you to build a second barricade in the same space unless you’re in a particularly cluttered area (at the GM’s discretion).

It doesn't designate where this barricade is built. Is it a line bordering your space, facing one direction? And is it limited to an ADJACENT ally? I would have to think so.

Since it doesn't specify where you build it, I am going to run it as providing lesser cover to you and 1 adjacent ally facing all directions...

Solar Shot on page 100 reads:

"Graviton-Attuned 1d8 bludgeoning, 15 feet. On a critical success, you can attempt a Trip using your Athletics even if you don’t have a free hand or are not adjacent to the target."

I assume Trip is affected by MAP, yes? That is my RAW reading. But is that the intention? Or is it supposed to operate somewhat like the Trip trait on monsters (a free attempt that is unaffected by and doesn't increase MAP)?

Thanks in advance!

Ah, these answers make sense.

(Well, this is feedback to the devs that the language "reveal" a weak point suggests otherwise and should be probably be cleaned up.)

Get 'Em has a Lead by Example entry saying: "If you attack the target you select before the end of your turn, you reveal a weak point in your foe's defenses. You gain a circumstance bonus to damage rolls against the target equal to 1 + half your Charisma modifier..."

As per Envoy's Directive, any benefits from this directive last "until the beginning of your next turn."

Does the extra damage apply to the Envoy's NEXT attack after using Get 'Em? Or does the Envoy's next attack "reveal" a weak point for subsequent attacks (i.e., your 2nd attack against the target)?

Since SF2 is supposed to be fully compatible with PF2, I'm trying to get clarity here. My Control-F skills show me that items with the Archaic trait are not effective against modern counterparts. But it doesn't actually say HOW that is true.

Does this have any game effect? And if it does, what is it?

Are the Errata needed for the Playtest PDF? Or is the Playtest PDF updated to include them?

On the topic of being able to playtest without having to buy the new SF2 modules, can people give feedback on the SF2 playtest classes while running them alongside PF2 characters in a PF2 adventure?

Link to the YouTube VOD
My post of the stream on the PF2 subreddit, which will probably elicit discussion there

We had six Level 7 PCs:
Ariel (fighter)
Dunbar (redeemer champion)
Ack (frontline guardian)
Alesha (commander)
Redwall (ranged guardian)
Virgash the Wardancer (warrior-muse bard)

Google Doc showing all the builds of our 6 characters
GM's character "cheat sheet"

There were some deliberate pairings:
-The Guardians, who made sure to pick none of the same options, could be compared to the Champion
-The Commander, as a "leader," could be compared to the Bard in this respect
-We wanted to see how the Commander pairs with the Fighter, with its high accuracy

I asked the group to optimize, to test the balance of the playtest classes and various options. It ended up being a melee-heavy party, with even the Bard focusing on melee. When building the characters, the players wanted to make sure the party dealt damage since the Guardians weren't strong offensively and the Commander was focused on commanding others.

The post-discussion was great, with people talking about their thoughts from the playtest and making suggestions for the final Commander and Guardian. (Redwall, one of our guardians, also had a lot of fun RP moments and says he was inspired by Face McShooty of Borderlands fame lol.)

The three fights were:
-Six L5 elementals, one of each element (Moderate)
-Party split in half, each facing L8 Weak Grappling Spirit, two L4 Weak Redcaps (each half is Severe)
-L10 Weak Young Diabolic Dragon (Severe-threat boss)

Timestamps for the stream:
0:00 Intro
6:06 Choices we made for this playtest
11:58 Our very serious adventure premise
14:01 Breaking into Paizo's Game Balance Division
19:43 COMBAT 1: 6 elementals (moderate)
56:16 Redwall's first of many fun Guardian RP moments
1:50:27 Calling forth the Spirit of Wrestling
1:55:32 COMBAT 2: The Spirit of Wrestling (severe)
3:32:14 The quest to Mount Remaster
3:45:50 COMBAT 3: Young Diabolic Dragon (severe-threat boss)
5:17:55 Coda
5:19:38 Post-discussion on Commander
5:40:21 Post-discussion on Guardian

I agree that in order to be affected by a banner, you need to be in range of its aura and able to see it.

The Rot Grub "The Rules Lawyer" wrote:

Meanwhile, the "Tactics" section says you may convey your tactic through a verbal command (auditory) or a wave of your banner (visual). To me, the intention here seems to conflict with the requirement that they be "affected" by the banner.

I don't think this is a contradiction, because there is no requirement that the Commander is in the same location as the Banner (it could be planted or on the Commander's Steed). This wording allows the Commander to be at a great distance or invisible and still be issuing tactics verbally to squadmates around the Banner.

Interesting. To be clearer, the contradiction I was talking about was how the Tactic trait (I misspoke and said "Tactics section" earlier), which says your Tactic has EITHER the auditory or visual trait, suggests that the intention is for you to make your effect rely on one of these senses only. But "affected by your banner" now means that, if you choose to yell out the command, your Tactic seems to gain an "unnecessary" extra trait, giving it less "reach." The invisibility example you raise makes clear that you do want to yell out sometimes though. So very helpful.

Part of what throws me off is that the Plant Your Banner feat clearly and specifically spells out that you may only visually signal with your banner, and not with a hand signal. But that contradicts the language of the Tactic trait itself, which only says you "typically" visually signal by waving your banner.

Most Tactics require the squadmate to be "affected by your commander's banner." The Commander's Banner description says that the the emotion, mental, and visual traits apply to "this effect" (which I assume is the +1 status bonus against fear effects and the Frightened effect when the banner gets destroyed or stolen).

Although the visual trait might seem restricted to that effect, I think it's a fair reading that "affected" by your commander's banner also means they must be able to see the banner, but of course it is a visual thing.

Meanwhile, the "Tactics" section says you may convey your tactic through a verbal command (auditory) or a wave of your banner (visual). To me, the intention here seems to conflict with the requirement that they be "affected" by the banner.

In another thread, I wondered why the language isn't like what we see with the Marshal archetype's aura, which simply requires that a target be "within your marshal's aura." This doesn't require that they be "affected," simply that they be in its radius.

If there's something I'm not considering, definitely please enlighten me. Thanks!

(EDIT: Also, I didn't want to make yet another thread about this, but I find the name of the Banner trait confusing. Many effects require you to have a banner but don't have this trait. The trait is more about committing a hand to the banner. I was wondering if a word like "signal" might be more accurate, suggesting you need a hand to convey the tactic?)

Just to be thorough, "affected by the aura" does mean a little bit more than just "within 30 feet." Creatures immune to mental or emotional effects or that are blind are not affected by the aura even if they are within 30 feet.

I wasn't suggesting "affected by the aura" but "in the aura." The rules for Tactics allow to yell (auditory) your command or wave your banner (visual). The traits for Commander's Banner aura only are for "This effect" -- which I assume refers to the entire paragraph before it, of the +1 bonus vs. fear and Frightened 1 when it gets stolen or destroyed.

So I think a Tactic requiring that one be "in the aura" doesn't prevent it from affecting a blind ally because you can simply use the yelling (auditory) option as per the language under "Tactics."

EDIT: I'm now suddenly realizing that "affected by your commander's banner," might be read as requiring that the squadmate SEE the banner. So a blinded ally will not be able to respond to a Tactic that is yelled...

Based on my reading, there are two separate things at play here.

1) Form Up! and similar tactics states "signal all squadmates affected by your commander's banner" - this means that the squadmates must be within the banner's aura when the signalling occurs (which is when the tactic is used), but not necessarily within the aura once the squadmates have responded to the tactic.

1A) Form Up! also requires that the squadmates must end their movement inside the banner's aura, which addresses the last point above in this specific example.

2) The banner trait is separate, and as I read it has nothing to do with the banner's aura at all. It instead imposes a hands restriction on those tactics and actions that have this trait. Form Up! doesn't have the banner trait, so you can use it when you are not wielding your banner (or even when it is planted). The tactics that do have the banner trait tend to have more powerful effects, so this trait acts as a balancing factor - to make use of them, you have to use a hand or commit to using a specific weapon, giving up some flexibility.

2A) Defensive Retreat, as an example, has the banner trait and says "signal all squadmates who can hear or see your signal". There is no range restriction here - all squadmates on the battlefield can respond to this if they can detect your signal. The banner trait adds a different restriction - that you have to be wielding your banner (holding it in one hand or wielding a weapon with the banner attached - and not wielding a shield with the banner attached).

I agree the wording could be better - saying "signal all squadmates inside your banner's aura" would be less confusing.

Thanks! Everything here makes sense to me, except for part of #1. How is this a different reading from "all squadmates must be in your banner's aura when you signal, and end their Stride within that same aura"? What is the distinction between "when the signaling occurs" and "once the squadmates have responded to the tactic"? Doesn't responding have to end with Striding into the aura?

The Rot Grub "The Rules Lawyer" wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

I have generally seen it ruled that the "Manipulate" trait requires a free hand.

That would be the Interact action. Many spells uses the Manipulate trait and don't require a free hand.

Manipulate wrote:

You must physically manipulate an item or make gestures to use an action with this trait. Creatures without a suitable appendage can’t perform actions with this trait. Manipulate actions often trigger reactions.

Oh, this is absolutely unclear enough to cause many arguments. Most tables I've been at have required a free hand if the specifics of the action require "physically manipulating an item" rather than "making gestures".

I think it's fair to require a free hand for things with the Manipulate trait that don't have the Interact trait (which would make that unambiguous). I'm only saying that Manipulate doesn't necessarily require a free hand. My thinking for a sword-and-board caster is that they're gesturing with their weapon hands to provide the necessary movements!

QuidEst wrote:

Usage for the Healer's Toolkit. Can't bandage someone up while your hands are full of swords.

Also, Wearing Toolkits says that you are drawing and stowing the tools - which would require a free hand - even if the action cost of drawing and stowing the tools is included in the action cost of the action that requires the tools.

Good link. Still, for some reason the Remaster removed the "need a hand free" requirement for Battle Medicine. That was a deliberate choice.

I'm inclined to require a free hand, given Shielded Recovery and the thematic weirdness of the Remaster change.

EDIT: Top comment on that thread points out that the healer's toolkit requires 1 free hand to use. Ugh I think the Remaster made it more confusing. But yes given that I think that should trump Battle Medicine's text.

EDIT 2: 2nd comment suggests that they copy-pasted an older version of Battle Medicine pre-errata. I think the Remaster text is in error.

I have generally seen it ruled that the "Manipulate" trait requires a free hand.

That would be the Interact action. Many spells uses the Manipulate trait and don't require a free hand.

Here is the text of Battle Medicine:

Battle Medicine

[one-action]
Feat 1
General Healing Manipulate Skill
Source Player Core pg. 253
Prerequisites trained in Medicine
Requirements You’re holding or wearing a healer’s toolkit (page 288)
You can patch up wounds, even in combat. Attempt a Medicine check with the same DC as for Treat Wounds and restore the corresponding amount of HP; this doesn’t remove the wounded condition. As with Treat Wounds, you can attempt checks against higher DCs if you have the minimum proficiency rank. The target is then immune to your Battle Medicine for 1 day. This does not make them immune to, or otherwise count as, Treat Wounds.

There is no Interact action and you simply need to be "wearing" a healer's toolkit.

But the Level 4 Shielded Recovery says "you can use the same hand you are using to wield a shield to... use Battle Medicine." Is there something I'm not understanding?

Since this term is used throughout the playtest, I wanted to be clear what it means. I assume it means within 30 feet because that is where allies need to be to get the passive bonus to Will saves and DCs versus fear. However, in theory, there are abilities with the Banner trait (so they require you to hold your banner) where all that is needed is that they "can hear or see your signal" (Defensive Retreat tactic on p. 6). And I ask myself why it just doesn't say "within the banner's aura"?

Is the first interpretation correct?

And if so, that means that the Form Up! tactic requires that allies start and end their movement within a 30' aura around you?

Also, if the answer is yes then "within your banner's aura" would be an appreciated clarification of the intention.

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.