The Rot Grub "The Rules Lawyer"'s page

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.

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 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!

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?

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

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?)

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

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)

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 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.)

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.

Let's say that a rogue is Hidden and is adjacent to a Fighter, so the Fighter knows that the rogue is there. The rogue tries to Sneak away.

Normally, if the rogue tries to Stride away, the Fighter gets an Attack of Opportunity against the rogue, while rolling a DC 11 flat check to target the rogue, as I've seen in a number of threads.

The Sneak action says that on a successful check that "you're undetected." The first sentence you "move to another place while becoming or staying undetected."

Let's say the rogue Sneaks away successfully. Does it avoid Attack of Opportunity?

I think the rogue doesn't, because the Fighter knows what square you're in and will try to attack it.

What do other people think?

I'm working on an explanatory "Rules Lawyer" video about the Stealth rules, and I watched How It's Played's video on Perception. But I have yet to see any rules element where it is useful to note that a creature is Unnoticed, with one exception.

That exception is the Assassin archetype, which has a 12th level feat Assassinate, which requires that you be Unnoticed to your mark when you attack them.

Are there any other situations worth noting?

Also, I have a question about how Assassinate works. Language from the Gamemastery Guide suggests that, even when an Assassin succeeds at Avoiding Notice and is undetected to monsters, that it ceases becoming Unnoticed once a monster gets a turn in initiative:

From the GMG on page 11:

To determine whether someone is undetected by other participants in the encounter, you still compare their Stealth check for initiative to the Perception DC of their enemies. They’re undetected by anyone whose DC they meet or exceed. So what do you do if someone rolls better than everyone else on initiative, but all their foes beat their Perception DC? Well, all the enemies are undetected, but not unnoticed. That means the participant who rolled high still knows someone is around, and can start moving about, Seeking, and otherwise preparing to fight. The characters Avoiding Notice still have a significant advantage, since that character needs to spend actions and attempt additional checks in order to find them. What if both sides are sneaking about? They might just sneak past each other entirely, or they might suddenly run into one another if they’re heading into the same location.

So my reading of this is that, even if Assassin succeeds at remaining Undetected before combat and "marks" their target before combat, if the "mark" rolls a higher Perception for initiative then the Assassinate ability becomes unavailable. Is this correct?

The Determination feat can remove a "nonpermanent condition" automatically. It can only be used once per day.

There are some conditions that are obviously not permanent, like frightened or some conditions that have a set endpoint, like a monster ability that makes you "Stupefied 1 for 1 minute."

But what about the Drained condition that does not have a duration? It is arguably permanent, but it also goes away with a full night's rest? Same for Doomed.

I did a search on Archives of Nethys and am finding no definition for "nonpermanent."

Thanks in advance.

The pistolero seems to be intended for dual-wielding pistols, as the illustration of the pistolero pictures her doing just that. But her Slinger's Reload ability, Raconteur's Reload, does not make a provision for not having a free hand. (The Drifter's special reload does.) It looks like a dual-wielding pistolero needs to take the Level 1 class feat Dual-Weapon Reload, to be able to reload while wielding two pistols. But this is its own Action; it cannot be combined with Raconteur's Reload.

Is my reading correct? And is this intended?

Short post!
Commanding a minion lets it take 2 actions. Can you Ready to do this?

I usually don't quibble about relatively minor things, but I've found this so hard to grok in my head and use in play.

Attack of Opportunity is already a mouthful, and I wish there were a more elegant way to say it. But at least you can say "I AoO the monster."

But as for Esoteric Antithesis - how do we use it in a sentence? There's nothing natural about it and I get no picture in my head!

"I've studied it! Now I use Esoteric Antithesis!"

"I've now studied the creature's flaws. Now I attach my esoterica to my implement to create an antithesis."

"I make an Antithesis."

"I oppose it with my Esoterica (Antithesis)."

Given the flavor description, I most naturally want to say "I prepare my weapon" or "I attach a charm." Other people can probably think of better words than that. But as it currently stands, I feel a real disconnect with the current terminology.

(By the way, I might have been the first commenter to point out that I had a problem with Circumstance bonus and Conditional bonus starting with the same letter during the PF2 Playtest! I don't know how many headaches and missteps were prevented by changing the latter to Status, but I'm sure it has helped!)

Fling Magic is not a spell (and so therefore uses neither somatic nor material spellcasting actions). It does not have the attack trait and is therefore not a ranged attack.

So from my reading, it does not provoke Attacks of Opportunity.

It also doesn't provoke some other reactions -- it does not have the Concentrate trait, either.

It doesn't call for an attack roll; rather, it calls for a Reflex save.

So you can stand in an enemy's face, use Fling Magic, and swing your weapon, all without suffering any attack penalties and with no danger of provoking the usual reactions.

Am I right in reading this? And was this intended?

I just want to make sure I understand the rules as written:
-If Esoteric Antithesis is used against a creature that has no weaknesses, does it still have a custom Weakness against weapon Strikes from the Thaumaturgist?
-If yes, it looks like this combines with the Thaumaturgist's ability to effectively add 2 to their damage if they wield a one-handed weapon

The latter would be "make-up damage" to make up for the fact that they're not wielding a two-handed weapon, for a Thaumaturgist wants a free hand to hold/Interact with their implement.

Then, the Esoteric Antithesis gives, at the cost of two actions (or one action on a regular failure on the Recall Knowledge check), a +2 (plus half your level) bonus to damage with their weapon Strikes.

I just want to make sure I'm reading this all right.

I assume this is an editing error? (There is no PF2e class that doesn't improve at least to expert in Perception.)

It seems particularly anti-theme for the class, and particularly for the Infinite Eye unconscious mind, to never improve beyond Trained.

The Psychic's Spell Repertoire feature (pages 4-5) says that you gain "three occult cantrips of your choice." Later, it says "Your choice of conscious mind also grants you additional spells in your repertoire, starting with an additional 1st level spell and two cantrips listed in your conscious mind."

The Conscious Mind class feature actually grants three surface psi cantrips. Is this an editing artifact? I'm not aware of any PF2e spellcaster with a Repertoire having six cantrips at Level 1. How many occult cantrips "of your choice" should a Level 1 psychic have?

Hunted Shot is an action that consists of making 2 Strikes against your prey. Double Slice is a 2-action activity that states you make 2 Strikes, each with a different weapon, against the same target.

For both of these feats, what happens if the first Strike kills your target? Do you "spend" the 2nd Strike and does using the feat count as 2 attacks as your Multiple Attack Penalty?

Must you do everything stated in an ability? So, Strike the target, and Strike them after they fall? If the answer is no, does it still increase your MAP to -10?

I'm wondering whether the design intent is that you do declare beforehand that you're using X ability which involves 2 or more Strikes, and you swallow the resulting multiple attack penalty regardless of what happens. It seems like that would create an interesting tradeoff that makes using these abilities not always an automatic choice. You have the option of using the ability that is a more "efficient" use of your actions, but you sacrifice the flexibility of pivoting to do something else if you were to do a normal Strike that might defeat the creature.

(Similar question for Flurry of Blows and there is only one creature within reach.)

The enemy consists of intelligent human bandits. The party's fighter charges forward with a +2 greater striking flaming longsword, and during the battle the bandits succeed at knocking out the fighter.

When you gain the Unconscious condition in this game, you drop everything you're holding.

Shouldn't a bandit pick up the weapon?

Tactically this seems like the right thing to do. But I see a problem with how this interacts with another rule:

When you fall unconscious, your initiative changes to just before the effect that knocked you out. This more often than not results in a delay before you can act again.

This rule allows the party to aid you in recovering, but it also delays when you can pick up your dropped weapons. So it feels like having an enemy pick up your weapon was something the designers didn't account for. And it feels especially bad if you couldn't rescue your weapon simply because your initiative was delayed.

What do others think about this?

As presented, it looks like something that only works in Encounter mode, since it is a reaction on someone else's turn.

The other day, one of my players wanted to Aid another at their Treat Wounds check. Is this allowed?

And what about Aiding someone in crafting an item? Would this add a circumstance bonus? And could they combine their efforts to make Crafting faster?

I don't know if anyone else has caught this, but in a first for 2nd Edition APs, the first volume of Strength of Thousands will only cover 3 levels.

I think this is a positive change, as the first 1-20 APs all tried to cover 4 levels in the first volume. There has been criticism that this leads to too many "filler combats" and crowds out other parts of the story during the most crucial part of the campaign when you're trying to hook people to the story. Also, the earliest levels are usually the most difficult so hopefully this will dial down the tendency in other first volumes of having several challenging fights back-to-back or feeling "like a slog."

(This AP also makes clear early on that XP will be awarded for accomplishments more than players may be used to, as opposed to combat. It will be interesting to see how this turns out!)

Hi all,

Let's say that a party encounters a Ghost Mage and recalls knowledge, trying to find a way to bypass its resistance to damage. The PC fails if the DC is for a Level 10 creature (which the Ghost Mage is), but it would succeed if it were against a Level 4 Ghost Commoner. The means to bypass their resistance are the same for both.

How would other people adjudicate this? By RAW, you use the level of the creature they encounter. But arguably in the lore this piece of information is lower level.

I feel like Recall Knowledge is not used enough for my players, so I'm inclined to give this information.

I am looking at the statblock for the Carnivorous Crystal, which both has an Aura that forces creatures who start their turn in it to make a DC 28 Will save or become Stunned 1. They must do this every turn. In addition, this creature has the ability to Split if it is critically-hit with sonic or bludgeoning damage.

Let's say that crystal splits into 3 copies of itself. Does each of the player characters now need to make 3 saving throws at the start of each of their turns?

(And is this true for all auras? Let's say a PC enters the auras of 2 Mummy Guardians. Two Will saves?)

The effect reads:

You inflict despair on creatures in the area. The effects for each creature are determined by its Will save.

Critical Success The creature is unaffected.
Success For 1 round, the creature can't use reactions and must attempt another save at the start of its turn; on a failure, it is slowed 1 for that turn as it sobs uncontrollably.
Failure As success, but the duration is 1 minute.
Critical Failure As failure, and the creature is automatically slowed 1 for 1 minute.

If a creature fails the save (and doesn't critically fail), what does the 1-minute duration refer to? Which of the following scenarios applies?

1. You can't use reactions for 1 minute. If you fail your 2nd save, you are additionally slowed for 1 minute.
2. You can't use reactions for 1 minute. If you fail your 2nd save, you are slowed 1. You get a new save every round for 1 minute.
3. You can't use reactions for 1 round. If you fail your 2nd save, you are additionally slowed for 1 minute.
4. You can't use reactions for 1 round. If you fail your 2nd save, you are slowed 1. You get a new save every round for 1 minute.

And if you critically fail, how long are you denied reactions?

The Shock rune has the following effect:

Electric arcs crisscross this weapon, dealing an extra 1d6 electricity damage on a hit. On a critical hit, electricity arcs out to deal an equal amount of electricity damage to up to two other creatures of your choice within 10 feet of the target.

If you land a critical hit, the shock damage doubles to 2d6. If the electricity does "an equal amount of electricity damage to up to two other creatures," I assume the 2d6 you roll is the damage applied to the other creatures, yes? (Not just the base 1d6 electricity damage)

The Beginner Box adventure features a boss encounter that is rated as Severe and giving the party 120 XP. What is interesting is that it is a Level 4 creature going up against a 2nd-level party.

By the Encounter Building guidelines of the Core Rulebook, that is an 80 XP monster and the encounter is Moderate encounter. However, it is rated as Severe and awards 120 XP.

While GMing solo monsters from the modules and Adventure Paths that are 2 levels above the party's level and the party's still low-level, I have seen most such encounters lead to near deaths and near-TPKs and the party needs to blow many of their daily resources and pull off some heroics to prevail. It seems like monsters that are above the party's level hit above their weight class, as Level 1 characters have fewer HP and low level parties have fewer ways to counter bad luck. As my players have leveled up, they seem to be able to handle higher-level challenges more easily.

Now, I've had enough experience GMing that I feel I can put a finger to the wind during an encounter and sense whether it merits a Severe rating. In hindsight, I probably would have rated some of those "Moderate" encounters in the official adventures the way Paizo's Beginner Box does it: as Severe.

Going into the future, it may be worth having a caveat spelled out in the rules that the GM should feel free to adjust the XP reward, if the party's actual experience matches the description of what a "Severe" or "Moderate" encounter is.

In the case of Severe encounters, the relevant description is:
Severe-threat encounters are the hardest encounters most groups of characters can consistently defeat. These encounters are most appropriate for important moments in your story, such as confronting a final boss. Bad luck, poor tactics, or a lack of resources due to prior encounters can easily turn a severe-threat encounter against the characters, and a wise group keeps the option to disengage open.

I have seen the future of encounter budgets, and it's in the Beginner Box!

The Aquatic Combat rules from the CRB say that you can't use anything that has the Fire trait. Firearms in the playtest do not have the Fire trait. And the firearms description is silent on their effectiveness underwater.

My group is now in an aquatic dungeon level and, since this is a Playtest, we are going by RAW and allowing our gunslinger to use his firearms underwater.

Unless there is clarification saying otherwise...

I'm thinking of trying the Proficiency Without Level variant for an experimental "old school" style campaign. (I run five PF2 campaigns using the default rules.)

How are Level -1 and Level 0 creatures supposed to be run using this system. The Variant Rule says to "reduce" all statistics by the creatures level.

In order for the Encounter Building chart in the PWL variant to work, it seems like I actually need to add 1 to the statistics for Level -1 creatures. This would be compensated for by their low hit points. (Level 0 creatures would, of course, have the same stats since their Level is 0.)

Would this be correct?

(I don't know if this belongs in this forum, but I thought that my group's experiences with some of the elements of the Gunslinger class and firearms might be helpful. Mods should move if they think it's appropriate.)

One of my players wants to try Gunslinger as an archetype, and here is a draft homebrew of one:

Gunslinger Dedication-level 2

Gunslinging Mastery-level 14
Your proficiency rank in simple and martial firearms increases to master.

I'm inclined to move Basic Deed up to Level 6, the way that PCs who take the Barbarian can access the instinct ability with a 6th-level archetype feat. The player points out that the Fighter archetype gives access to Attack of Opportunity at Level 4, however.

I suggested modeling the proficiencies after the Fighter archetype, with a 12th-level feat granting Expert proficiency. This player raised that the Fighter archetype gives access to a wide range of weapons, and so suggests the above.

My first thought is to change it to exactly what the Fighter archetype gives: Dedication gives proficiency in all simple and martial weapons, and a 12th-level feat raises them to Expert. This does make it decidedly unappealing to any martial PC who already gets Expert proficiency at 5th level, however.

Do people have thoughts or suggestions? Thanks in advance.