chibikami's page

When the construct traits template was written there was doubtless no way to inflict these status effects without a fortitude save, and so they were naturally immune.
However, with the oracle class there are a number of curses that can inflict the sickened condition on the character without a save if they don't fulfill the conditions of the curse (the Covetous and Hunger curses, for example).

so if I have a sentient/sapient construct (say, a wyrwood for example) who is an oracle with such a curse, are they immune to the sickened effect?

A phase locking weapon interferes with dimensional travel. A creature damaged by a phase locking weapon is affected as though by the dimensional anchor spell for 1 round.

1: Would nets or other weapons that do not do HP damage still apply the dimensional anchor effect?

2: In the case of a net, which continues to apply its entangle effect until the target is free of it, would it continue to apply the dimensional anchor effect each round until the target is freed or would it fade after the first round?

So I want to make a custom piece for my rogue that uses the body slot, specifically a corset.
This corset would enhance both mental and physical stats a la headbands and belts of various mental and physical superiorities
What descriptive-but-non-legendary name would you give such an item?

Also, I guess this can be a thread for getting item naming suggestions in general.

Pathfinder Playtest Core Rulebook, page 15:
For the rest of your character’s skills, subtract the
proficiency modifer for being untrained (your level – 2)
from the relevant ability modifer, and record those totals
on the lines below the respective skill names.

take note:
subtract the proficiency modifer for being untrained (your level – 2)
from the relevant ability modifer

one more time:
untrained skill value = Modifier - (Level - 2)

If this is written as intended, it would imply that our untrained skills get progressively worse with each level. Is this the intent? Are my fears that PCs are inherently too good at everything at high levels allayed by the polar opposite being true for untrained skills?
Because it would be an excellent trolling of the player if this is the case. But something tells me this is not as intended.

Should players receive XP based on the level of the encounter, or individually for each monster defeated?

The scenario: Doomsday Dawn's area A2 has 4 level 0 goblins for the level 1 heroes to encounter, but the book lists it as a level 0 encounter. Do the players receive 30 XP for each defeated goblin for a total of 120 XP, or do they receive 30XP for the whole encounter

So my group did a bit of Doomsday Dawn part 1 last night after spending upwards of 3 hours in character generation (unreasonable even for a new system), and I'm going to rant a bit (and I'm going to capitalize game system names for ease of reference):

Including the notes to gain an Ancestry Feat and Background in your class level up chart prompted two players to become confused as to whether they were supposed to pick a second Ancestry Feat and Background.

Switching to Unchained's action economy system is cool (though simply saying how many of my actions are taken by casting a given spell would be better than having a sidebar clumsily explaining that each component takes an action), but:

Adding your character level to absolutely everything serves only to make the wizard replace the fighter. Why make a fighter when I can make a muscle wizard and have him the fighter's equal after 5 levels with a couple weapon and armor proficiencies. At the moment, fighters do not gain additional attacks over time or anything else that makes them a viable threat over a caster class save for attacks of opportunity. And a wise GM mitigates those as much as he can.
Never mind that every skill is now tied intrinsically to your level, making any build a relatively effective face, loremaster, and lockpick all in one. It's trying to be 5e and it's bad at it.

TEML is uncommunicative of its properties.
It does not say -2, +0, +1, +2, or +3, it simply gives us a pip. At first glance this reminded me of WoD, but under analysis it's D&D2e's Weapon Mastery system applied to every skill as well as weapons and armor.
Not only does one not know what value they represent at a glance without reading the rulebook (and it didn't help that the GM miscommunicated their function at first), but the game is actively regressing its systems functions to an age where everyone was expected to memorize a hundred charts. Today's players do not memorize charts.

Action icons are uncommunicative of their properties. I don't want to consult a legend any time two chevrons are connecting in a way I don't quite recognize.

Feat types! There are five goddamn Feat types! FIVE! Not categories, TYPES! Gained at different rates and under different circumstances!

Choosing Class Feats feels more like choosing what you are comfortable with losing. Having a plethora of selections at every Feat level can only exacerbate this, making the player worry about whether they should dip back into a previous level's feat catalogue for a good secondary from that level or to advance ever forward.

Humans are blatantly underpowered compared to literally every other Ancestry. Not only are they at -2 to one ability score, they don't even get their traditional bonus feat. It seems that the only reason to be a human is to spec into something other than human (half-elf/half-orc). And as long as we're making crossbreeding a level 1 feat, I want half-dwarves and three-fourths-lings.

Chelish is no longer considered a viable ethnicity for a character, almost as if we are to automatically assume that anyone from Cheliax is irredeemably evil and not worthy of play. Hmm...

How do I use Combat Maneuvers? Okay, they relocated Grapple to Athletics and breaking it to Acrobatics, but what about the other maneuvers? Where's my CMB and CMD? The simplicity of resolving such maneuvers was, for me, one of three primary draws to Pathfinder over D&D3e/3.5e, the other two being the simplified perception skill and clearly indicated Experience Point gain for each encounter without having to consult a chart. Speaking of which:

The new Experience Point system is TERRIBLE!
Under the PF1 system we had to consult a chart once per level, but now, harkening back to the days of 3e, we must consult a chart every encounter, slowing down the game considerably. Locking it to 1000 XP per level looks like a JRPG (notably the .hack series) and such XP adjustments are best done by a computer.
You could actually put the chart on the character sheet, but that would put the onus on players to figure out how much XP they received. Again, today's players do not memorize charts

And the group couldn't figure out if the goblin fight in Doomsday Dawn A2 was supposed to award 120 XP (30 XP per level 0 creature slain) or just 30 XP for a flat level 0 encounter.

And sideways character sheets are for hipsters! They also make the flap of a binder eat valuable table space. At least PF2 included enough room for spells this time, so there's that.

I have seen a little debate about the effectiveness of Shatter in combat but never anything concrete.
The spell does 1d6 sonic damage per caster level (max 10d6 ) against crystalline creatures, but as far as I can tell there is not a single creature with crystalline type, subtype, or quality anywhere throughout the bestiaries. There are barely any with implications of crystal in their name.

I've argued for shatter affecting stone and metal constructs as stone and metal have crystalline atomic bonding structures, and the GM argues RAW in spite of not a single instance of usefulness having shown itself

The construct traits certainly allow for being affected if they're crystalline, as the immunity to fort save effects is negated if the effect affects objects, which Shatter does.

We're in Numeria now, lots of robot constructs, which leads to the question:

Does Shatter work against constructs? Or is this a spell with next to zero applicability?

Just ran through quest 1, Station. I'll try to keep it organized:

1: Just from the first quest, I see an issue with money rewards. The mercenaries each have a credstick with 250cr on them, equaling a total of 750cr between the 3 of them. This reward is greater than the 1st quest's credit reward of 140cr, not to mention the reward of 720cr for the 5th quest.
If looted, do the players keep this 250cr-750cr independent of the quest reward of 140cr, even after the questline is over? If they do keep it, is it divvied up or do they each get the full value?

2: The boss (if you can call her that) of the first quest has a "flight suit stationwear" item that shows in the chronicle sheet. The players found a way to peacefully resolve the conflict (after 2 merc died but still) and spared her but the GM did not have time to give the encounter rewards at a later part in the quest, largely because it's right at the end. The players did confiscate her weapon and arrested her for graverobbery and being undead in a no-undead zone.
Should the GM grant the stationwear item on the chronicle sheet or cross it off?

3: Back to the subject of money, and for that matter other numerical rewards--are the credits, exp, and fame listed on the sheet cumulative or additive?
To clarify my meaning, would a player get 1 exp for each quest he went through for a total of 5, or would they receive just 1 exp no matter how many quests they went through?
Similarly, for credits and fame would they receive the stated reward for each quest or is it a cumulative reward? If cumulative and a player misses a quest but comes back for a later one, should I figure out how much they missed out on and subtract it from their total?

I've read that there are two types of claw attacks in PF:
A singular "claws" attack gets you one attack roll and one damage roll
A "2 claws" attack which gets you two of each.
But which would a catfolk get when they take the cat's claws trait?

The wording in the Advanced Race Guide is as follows:
Cat’s Claws: Some catfolk have stronger and more
developed claws than other members of their race, and
can use them to make attacks. Catfolk with this racial trait
have a pair of claws they can use as natural weapons. These
claws are primary attacks that deal 1d4 points of damage.
This racial trait replaces natural hunter.

Between the use of "pair of claws", "natural weapons" (plural), and "primary attacks" (plural) it seems to indicate that the 2claws attack would be the one to use.
However, as "2 claws" is never directly indicated and there is a lack absolute confirmation after the damage value (the word "each" might be nice), it is still open to interpretation as the singular claws type of attack.

So which is it?