eboats's page

For Only the Worthy your wrote:

This is the ability of Thor’s hammer, and even better; it applies all the time; not just dependent on your divine spark’s location. It also applies to all of your worn and weapon Ikons. You can spend an action to activate your weapon as though it were an Immovable Rod that scales off your class DC, and can be placed over prone creatures to make them waste actions. This results in very effective and punishing combat maneuver artists: trip an enemy, then drop your weapon on them. Their turn, they’ll escape (remember that Escape has the [Attack] trait) and cause your weapon to fly back to your hand automatically, then stand up from prone, which triggers your Reactive Strike, and now you’ve wasted two of their actions plus given them a -5 penalty on any attack they might make as their third action. This also completely destroys any caster types, who may be unable to successfully escape and cannot cast most spells with just 1 action.

The feat does this:
You can designate your ikons as movable by only your own hand, leaving them fixed in place as surely as if they were lodged in stone. Whenever you Release an ikon, you can spend an action to command it to remain motionless. While motionless, the ikon can be moved only if 8,000 pounds of pressure are applied to it or if a creature uses Athletics to Force Open the ikon with a DC equal to your class DC. You can Release your ikon over an adjacent prone enemy to hold them down with the ikon's motionlessness - while so Released, you can't use the ikon, but the enemy must succeed at the Athletics check to Stand or to move. The ikon automatically flies back to your hand when the effect is broken or if you spend an Interact action to hold out a hand and draw it back.

A caster is likely to just cast while prone. I wouldn't assume NPCs are going to waste 2 actions to try to escape and then stand.

Love the Exemplar dedication and class. Fantastic work paizo.

Flexible Spellcaster:

During your daily preparations, you prepare a spell collection rather than preparing spells into each spell slot individually. The number of spells in your spell collection each day equals the total number of spell slots you get each day from your class spells. Select these spells from the same source as normal, such as from a spellbook for a wizard.

You can cast any of the spells in your collection by using a spell slot of an appropriate level.

Halycon Spells:

Each time you cast a halcyon spell, decide whether it is an arcane or primal spell. You can’t heighten a halcyon spell beyond your maximum spell level of halcyon spell, even if you have higher-level spell slots, and you can’t select a halcyon spell as a signature spell.

I am still not clear if I add Heal to my spell list and book if the specific language from Flexible Spellcaster enables that Heal to be cast at 9th level if it is out of a collection. It feels like we have 2 specific rulings here, and when I look up the rules on spell lists, spell books, spells, and every rule I can find it appears this is just GM discretion on which specific should take priority. Since I always rule in favor of what is stronger for the players I am inclined to allow the selection of 7th level and lower spells from non Arcane lists, but allow the casting of them at any level based on the bolded part in Flexible Spellcaster.

Flexibile Spellcaster
Halycon Speaker
Cascade Bearer's Spellcasting

I am asking for RAW interpretations only.

I will use a Wizard for this example, although this doesn't specifically apply only to Wizard.

So RAW it is possible with these 3 selections to have access to cast every spell in the game from your Wizard slots. Cascade Bearer lets you add any spell to your Hspell list/spell book.

Halycon lets you cast Haylcon spells from your Wizard slots.

Flexible Spellcaster lets you pick any spells from your spellbook to add to your collection.

Now just for fun we use Spell Blending as a specialist on this Wizard. We also consider a FA build. This Wizard take a casting archetype(lets say Witch). We blend the Curriculum Spell and one of the Archetype spells for our blends to create Wizard slots which by RAW is legal.

So what we end up with is essentially a Wizard with a collection of 25 spells that can come from any tradition, that are all able to be upcast or down cast like a signature spell would(while not being a signature spells) that cast from Wizard slots. (Limit on non arcane spells picked is only 3 can be picked from each of the levels 1-6 slots, and only 2 from the level 7 slot)

It says "a target" because multiple Diabolic spells have the potential to hit more than a single target. This allows you to pick a target that was hit by an AoE. This doesn't mean you can hit a target completely unaffected by the spell, a target that rolled a success on its save, or a target that you failed an attack roll against.

Which way are you ruling Jagged Berms? It feels like you can make a RAW case for either of the diagrams below.

♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
♒⬛♒♒⬛♒♒⬛♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬛= Jagged Berm
♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜ = Open Space
♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ♒ = Berm Spikes
♒⬛♒♒⬛♒♒⬛♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜

You conjure up to six cube-shaped mounds of packed earth. Each appears in an unoccupied square within 120 feet, fills its square, and provides cover. A mound has AC 10, Hardness 10, and 20 HP, and is immune to critical hits and precision damage. If destroyed, a mound becomes difficult terrain. The mounds last for an unlimited duration, but if you use the impulse again, any previous one ends.

Sharpened wooden stakes protrude from each mound into adjacent squares. They can project from any of its sides; you choose which sides for each mound. For each square of wooden stakes a creature enters, that creature takes 2d6 piercing damage. Destroying a mound also destroys its stakes.

⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
♒⬛♒♒⬛♒♒⬛♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬛= Jagged Berm
⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜ = Open Space
⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ♒ = Berm Spikes
♒⬛♒♒⬛♒♒⬛♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜♒⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜

You conjure up to six cube-shaped mounds of packed earth. Each appears in an unoccupied square within 120 feet, fills its square, and provides cover. A mound has AC 10, Hardness 10, and 20 HP, and is immune to critical hits and precision damage. If destroyed, a mound becomes difficult terrain. The mounds last for an unlimited duration, but if you use the impulse again, any previous one ends.

Sharpened wooden stakes protrude from each mound into adjacent squares. They can project from any of its sides; you choose which sides for each mound. For each square of wooden stakes a creature enters, that creature takes 2d6 piercing damage. Destroying a mound also destroys its stakes.

I am ruling all adjacent squares to the square the berm is in can have spikes. I am also ruling that while the berm itself has to be in an unoccupied square, the spikes can be in occupied squares, but they don't deal damage to anything currently occupying the square. Am I missing something in the RAW that clearly states one of these is correct, or is it really GM discretion on adjacent vs "sides" and which takes priority in the ruling?

There is nothing rules wrong with a specific rule requiring a Balance check as a free action or a reaction or just even as a non action. It does not have to be an action which is effectively part of movement in your turn - that is just the normal way.

Winter Sleet is odd because it requires a specific skill check and sets a specific DC. This is very weird. Normally it would be a Reflex save against your Spell DC. That would be typical.

However it is not, So RAW it is going to come down to whether that creature has an acrobatics skill or not. If it does it is likely to be an easy check. If it does not is going to be a very hard check as they aren't adding their level to it.
Over to each GM if they think that is broken and needs to be patched.

If we look at Tumble Through for comparison to Balance. It is also a movement action, but it specifically states: You Stride up to your Speed. During this movement, you can try to move through the space of one enemy. Attempt an Acrobatics check against the enemy’s Reflex DC as soon as you try to enter its space.

The Balance action does not have this specificity. There is no Balance free action, there is no Balance reaction that exist in this game. Winter Sleet isn't asking for a free Acrobatics to be rolled. Winter sleet is saying that if you don't use the move action Balance you fall.

However, you do not start a Climb action when you're already clinging to the wall, so why would you start a Balance action when you're already in an situation that requires balance?

Nothing you posted says that entering Uneven Ground makes you stop moving, only that you need to Balance or fall. Therefore if you don't use the Balance action you would automatically fall.

You aren't in a situation that requires the Balance action until you choose to be with Winter Sleet if you are entering it with your stride. It would work the same as using 1 action to stride, stopping your stride at the appropriate point, then using a 2nd action to step to avoid triggering AoO.

The difference is in this case you are stopping where you would need to in order to meet the Requirements You are in a square that contains a narrow surface, uneven ground, or another similar feature. for Balance, so that you can use a 2nd action to Balance. If you chose not to do that, Winter Sleet is very clear that you will automatically go prone.

You expend a prepared spell to counter the triggering creature’s casting of that same spell. You lose your spell slot as if you had cast the triggering spell. You then attempt to counteract the triggering spell.

This states what is being used to counter. This means spell level would be used to determine the counteract level.

Pixel Popper wrote:

There's no such thing as a "Balance check."

Excuse me, I guess since we're arguing semantics here, an "Acrobatics check to Balance"

Pixel Popper wrote:

Balance is a single action with the Move trait that uses an acrobatics check to determine the degree of success and the results.

Balance is a very poorly designed action and doesn't even work as intended. It is much cleaner of an action if it is a free action that is triggered when you enter an area where you would need to balance, with similar results as it has now. That way, you wouldn't have to move onto a surface with an action and then spend another action to immediately start to Balance, and it can handle situations like this where you need to Balance when it's not your turn.

By the way, what happens if you use your last action of a turn to Stride into uneven ground? You can't Balance, so do you just fall prone without a check, even if you could make it on a nat 1?

You would stop in the first square of uneven ground you entered so that you could meet the conditions to use the Balance action the next turn, or per the rules on Uneven Ground: Uneven ground is an area unsteady enough that you need to Balance (see Acrobatics) or risk falling prone and possibly injuring yourself, depending on the specifics of the uneven ground.

It is similar to how Climb works. You use a stride to get to the square where you want to Climb with an action. Then you use another action to Climb. You don't get to combine movement between 2 different move actions.

So, mono-element Kineticists can get composite impulses via the Elemental Overlap class feat at level 8, which has the prerequisite of "exactly one kinetic element".

Technically, you can fork the fork the path at level 9... what happens then? You suddenly have two elements, yet you already "purchased" the feat and composite impulse one level earlier. Does your feat/impulse stop working? Or does "I got this earlier" trump the prerequisite of the feat?

You would keep the feat and still be able to use it. Even if we reference Retraining, it specifically states the prerequisites need to be met at the time of taking the original feat which we did in this example. You would not be able to take Elemental Overlap again once you fork the path, but you would keep the original Elemental Overlap since you met the prerequisites at the time, and still meet the prerequisites to have it based on the selections made when it was originally taken. What choices you make after taking the feat in subsequent levels do not invalidate this.

eboats wrote:

Pixel Popper wrote:

Cordell Kintner wrote:

I would say the Water impulse junction can not move a creature into your aura with this stance on. If they were Pushed or Pulled into the aura, they would get an automatic Balance check (no actions required) to not fall. The only reason it's a "Balance" check and not an acrobatics check, is so creatures with some sort of bonus to Balance checks specifically (like the Steady Balance skill feat) can make use of them.

There's no such thing as a "Balance check." Balance is a single action with the Move trait that uses an acrobatics check to determine the degree of success and the results.

I think the best distinction for Winter Sleet's interaction is the agency of the movement. Winter Sleet says that, "[a] creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it Balances." Arguably, a creature that moves is actively doing so of its own volition as opposed to a creature that is moved being repositioned by forced movement.

Thus, I'd rule that forced movement can put a creature into or reposition it within the area of effect but does make them fall prone. While in the area, the creature cannot Stride or Step, but must use the Balance action to move.

Because willing/unwilling isn't used in Winter Sleet as it is in other spells and abilities where the creature's own volition matters in the outcome, the general use of "move" would be more appropriate since the specific of willing/unwilling you are inferring isn't stated. Flinging Updraft is a Kineticist feat that shows how that wording is used. We also see the use of willing/unwilling in the Water Impulse Junction itself regarding movement.

Counterargument:

Water junction is not push/pull since it doesn't say so.

So under forced movement rules you are unable to move someone in the "dangerous terrain" of your winter sleet aura.

Please see point 5.

Looking at the RAW, here is how interactions with Winter Sleet would work:

1) The water impulse junction does allow you to move a creature you hit or that fails it's save against a water impulse. This move immediately triggers the creature to go prone, since it is unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

2) All push/pull effects that happen to a creature in the aura immediately cause the creature to go prone, since they are unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

3) Any creature that is prone in the aura will immediately go prone if they attempt to stand while inside the aura, since they are unable to take a single "balance" action to stand. A prone creature must crawl outside the Aura in order to use the action "stand" without immediately falling prone.

4) Each time you are hit by an attack or fail a save on uneven ground, you must succeed at a Reflex save (with the same DC as the Acrobatics check to Balance) or fall prone. Winter Sleet states that "Surfaces in your kinetic aura are coated in slippery ice. A creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it Balances (DC 15). A creature is off-guard on the ice, as normal for uneven ground."

5) A GM could rule that "or the like" under the forced movement rule qualifies as a "dangerous place". In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature.

Alright, so. I have questions, and I need answers. I'm going to start by posting up the class feat in question.

"A small creature made of elemental matter springs forth from your kinetic gate. This elemental familiar appears to be made of one of your kinetic elements, though it might have unusual or distinguishing aspects. Like other familiars, your elemental familiar can assist you in various tasks and on adventures. You gain an elemental familiar with the trait of one of your kinetic elements. If you have more than one kinetic element, you can change the element you've selected for your familiar to a different one of your kinetic elements each time you make your daily preparations. The familiar uses your Constitution modifier to determine its Perception, Acrobatics, and Stealth modifiers."

So, this is the source of my problem. Some of my friends and I have been at odds with this feat. Does this feat (found on page 20 of Rage of Elements) give a familiar that has only the elemental trait, and therefore, allows for the basic two familiar ability choices;

OR

Does it mean that you get a familiar with the elemental trait, and then is REQUIRED to have the elemental ability and resistance abilities?

OR

Is it neither and the three of us are all wrong?

Some clarification from an official source would be nice, so that we can stop arguing over this feat, and get back to playing the game.

Elemental Familiar (Kineticist) says you gain an elemental familiar with the trait of one of your kinetic elements. It says nothing about required abilities. You would pick the 2 abilities as normal if you gained a familiar from this feat.

Can the concealed condition granted by Clear as Air be used to sneak?

No, sneak requires that you are undetected. You are not undetected when concealed. The concealed condition granted by Clear as Air does not specifically state that you can use it's concealed condition to sneak.

Can Counter Element be used to counteract a non-magical effect, such as an alchemist's bomb? If so, how does that work exactly?

Effects rules say that you can. Counteracting rules state that you would use the item level of the bomb to calculate the DC in the counteract check.

All this talk of late about kineticists, impulses, and hazardous terrain got me wondering:

If a plus-sized character or creature is forced to move through hazardous terrain, do they take damage for EACH square, or for each set of squares?

Take the following diagram for example:

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ ⬛ = Wall
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ ⬜ = Open Space
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛ ♒ = Hazardous terrain
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛ Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️ = Large Monster
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

If each square of hazardous terrain does 2 damage, and the monster were to cross the room, would it take 6 points of damage for entering 6 squares, as follows?

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ #️⃣ = Damage Taken
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒5️⃣6️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒3️⃣4️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒1️⃣2️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

Or would they be treated like a Medium creature, and take only 3 points of damage as shown below? (That is, their large space does not make them more susceptible, just like every single other area of effect in the game.)

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ #️⃣ = Damage Taken
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒3️⃣3️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒2️⃣2️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒1️⃣1️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

Which do you think, and why?

If it helps, some specific examples of instances in which this might come into play are a kineticist's Jagged Berms impulse or Scorching Column impulse.

Large creatures occupy all 4 squares. Using Jagged Berms and Scorching Column as the example, the Large creature would move through 6 squares and take damage from all 6 squares.

Can a kineticist with Cyclonic Ascent carry one or more allies aloft? If so, what are the rules covering such a scenario (and if there aren't any, how might you run it)?

What are some possible practical uses or clever abuses of carrying an ally or allies aloft?

Insofar as I can tell, only bulk limitations would pose as a potential barrier.

Bulk of Creatures gives you their Bulk. You would add their creature bulk and the bulk they are carrying to your current bulk and compare it to Bulk Limits to determine if it is possible and if you are encumbered.

Cordell Kintner wrote:

I would say the Water impulse junction can not move a creature into your aura with this stance on. If they were Pushed or Pulled into the aura, they would get an automatic Balance check (no actions required) to not fall. The only reason it's a "Balance" check and not an acrobatics check, is so creatures with some sort of bonus to Balance checks specifically (like the Steady Balance skill feat) can make use of them.

There's no such thing as a "Balance check." Balance is a single action with the Move trait that uses an acrobatics check to determine the degree of success and the results.

I think the best distinction for Winter Sleet's interaction is the agency of the movement. Winter Sleet says that, "[a] creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it Balances." Arguably, a creature that moves is actively doing so of its own volition as opposed to a creature that is moved being repositioned by forced movement.

Thus, I'd rule that forced movement can put a creature into or reposition it within the area of effect but does make them fall prone. While in the area, the creature cannot Stride or Step, but must use the Balance action to move.

Because willing/unwilling isn't used in Winter Sleet as it is in other spells and abilities where the creature's own volition matters in the outcome, the general use of "move" would be more appropriate since the specific of willing/unwilling you are inferring isn't stated. Flinging Updraft is a Kineticist feat that shows how that wording is used. We also see the use of willing/unwilling in the Water Impulse Junction itself regarding movement.

I would say the Water impulse junction can not move a creature into your aura with this stance on. If they were Pushed or Pulled into the aura, they would get an automatic Balance check (no actions required) to not fall. The only reason it's a "Balance" check and not an acrobatics check, is so creatures with some sort of bonus to Balance checks specifically (like the Steady Balance skill feat) can make use of them.

Balance is an action and not a passive check in pathfinder 2e. The only reason it requires the action Balance instead of an Acrobatics check is because the rules were written that way for Uneven Ground and Winter Sleet.

Looking at the RAW, here is how interactions with Winter Sleet would work:

1) The aura junction does allow you to move a creature you hit or that fails it's save against a water impulse. This move immediately triggers the creature to go prone, since it is unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

2) All push/pull effects that happen to a creature in the aura immediately cause the creature to go prone, since they are unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

3) Any creature that is prone in the aura will immediately go prone if they attempt to stand while inside the aura, since they are unable to take a single "balance" action to stand. A prone creature must crawl outside the Aura in order to use the action "stand" without immediately falling prone.

4) Each time you are hit by an attack or fail a save on uneven ground, you must succeed at a Reflex save (with the same DC as the Acrobatics check to Balance) or fall prone. Winter Sleet states that "Surfaces in your kinetic aura are coated in slippery ice. A creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it Balances (DC 15). A creature is off-guard on the ice, as normal for uneven ground."

5) A GM could rule that "or the like" under the forced movement rule qualifies as a "dangerous place". In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature.

1) The water impulse junction does allow you to move a creature you hit or that fails it's save against a water impulse. This move immediately triggers the creature to go prone, since it is unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

Fixed point 1, since the aura junction has no interaction.

WINTER SLEET says that "A creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it Balances". The exact meaning is "A creature that uses an action with move trait on this uneven ground immediately falls unless the action is Balance."

Considering this, moving a creature after using a 2A impulse of water is certainly the forced movement instead of an action with move trait.

Therefore, the creature neither falls, nor needs to attempt an Acrobatic or Reflex check.

The exact meaning is:

A creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it uses the action Balance.

Winter Sleet says nothing about requiring the movement to have the move trait in order to trigger immediately falling.

Looking at the RAW, here is how interactions with Winter Sleet would work:

1) The aura junction does allow you to move a creature you hit or that fails it's save against a water impulse. This move immediately triggers the creature to go prone, since it is unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

2) All push/pull effects that happen to a creature in the aura immediately cause the creature to go prone, since they are unable to use the single action "balance" and it moved.

3) Any creature that is prone in the aura will immediately go prone if they attempt to stand while inside the aura, since they are unable to take a single "balance" action to stand. A prone creature must crawl outside the Aura in order to use the action "stand" without immediately falling prone.

4) Each time you are hit by an attack or fail a save on uneven ground, you must succeed at a Reflex save (with the same DC as the Acrobatics check to Balance) or fall prone. Winter Sleet states that "Surfaces in your kinetic aura are coated in slippery ice. A creature that moves on this uneven ground immediately falls unless it Balances (DC 15). A creature is off-guard on the ice, as normal for uneven ground."

5) A GM could rule that "or the like" under the forced movement rule qualifies as a "dangerous place". In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature.

All weapons are considered permanent items.

Where is that written?

Magic Items under crafting and treasure:

These items are divided into two subcategories for ease of reference: consumable magic items, including ammunition, oils, potions, and talismans. Permanent items consist of armor, held items, runes, shields, staves, wands, weapons, and worn items.

We know Alchemical items are not magical. We know Alchemical Bombs are weapons. I am looking at the part here that says permanent items consist of weapons. This is the best reference I can find.

As a side note: Even if it were determined that Alchemical Bombs were not permanent, it would not impact the interaction with the Thrower's Bandolier. A weapon doesn't need to be permanent to be stored in the Bandolier nor does it need to be in order to be attuned to it.

The runes on the Bandolier are replicated to anything attuned to it. Replicated is different than etching, and I think people are getting caught up on the wrong thing in regards to the Bandolier.

While bombs may be considered a consumable item AND a weapon because there is nothing specific that says consumable items aren't permanent, and weapons are considered permanent, and we have an example of a consumable item(runestone) that is considered permanent there isn't sufficient RAW to say that Bombs aren't permanent.

You can sell them. They last until used. Weapons last until destroyed. There isn't any RAW that I can find that suggests Bombs aren't considered permanent. That treasure table you linked certainly does create confusion taken by itself though.

eboats wrote:

There is no "initial" damage that happens prior to the roll. All of the damage is part of the formula that determines the result.

I'm calling it 'initial damage' because it happens at the time of the Strike. Persistent damage doesn't happen then. It happens at the end of the target's turn if they don't remove the condition before then.

It is possible for a target to never take any persistent damage at all if they remove the persistent damage during their turn.

I believe I understand what you mean. The weapon still has damage dice. They are just rolled at a different time.

eboats wrote:

I can't know what was intended. What was intended is not relevant to how RAW works mechanically. If the RAW isn't what is intended we will see an errata change. I have no interest in a cost exercise.

Fascinating.

RAW is that you can only etch runes onto permanent items. Consumable items are listed separately from permanent items in several places (see previous posts to find where). The Runestone states specifically that it can have runes etched on it (it is typically ruled that the runes are dormant during that time to avoid shenanigans with calling a runestone an improvised weapon).

So you don't want to even attempt to determine what is intended even though the General Rules say that you should (see ambiguous rules). And you don't want to consider cost of the items as a balance consideration.

Alchemical Bombs are weapons. All weapons are considered permanent items. Bombs are not consumable items. Bombs are weapons with the consumable trait. The consumable trait and rules on consumable have no wording specifically stating that items with the consumable trait are not permanent.

Using "specific overrides general" rule in the General rule you linked we see there is no specific ruling that would disqualify Alchemical Bombs as permanent simply because it has the consumable trait.

Intention is completely subjective. While I do enjoy balance discussions my initial post was simply meant to provide information on how the RAW currently works in regards to the Thrower's Bandolier and bombs.

My personal opinion is that it was designed to work exactly like this, and was not an oversight. I don't think the RAW on how it works makes it unbalanced, but again this completely subjective. Someone would have to do the math to provide some objective information about the balance though.

eboats wrote:

The lesser acid flask deals 1d6(damage dice) persistent(condition) acid(type) damage and 1 acid splash damage(bonus damage)

I even bolded it. How are you still missing the initial damage? It is right there in the overall rule for the Acid Flask (not in the various item level stats).

The Lesser Acid Flask deals:
1 acid damage.
1d6 persistent acid damage.
1 acid splash damage.

Why are you considering the persistent damage the 'weapon damage' instead of the actual initial damage?

Lesser Alchemist's Fire deals:
1d8 fire damage.
1 persistent fire damage.
1 fire splash damage.

Especially considering that here you are wanting to use the initial damage as the 'weapon damage' instead of the persistent damage.

Why the inconsistency?

That is a great question. Looking at the rule for

Damage:

Damage is sometimes given as a fixed amount, but more often than not you’ll make a damage roll to determine how much damage you deal. A damage roll typically uses a number and type of dice determined by the weapon or unarmed attack used or the spell cast, and it is often enhanced by various modifiers, bonuses, and penalties. Like checks, a damage roll—especially a melee weapon damage roll—is often modified by a number of modifiers, penalties, and bonuses. When making a damage roll, you take the following steps, explained in detail below.

Roll the dice indicated by the weapon, unarmed attack, or spell, and apply the modifiers, bonuses, and penalties that apply to the result of the roll.

Determine the damage type.

Apply the target’s immunities, weaknesses, and resistances to the damage.

If any damage remains, reduce the target’s Hit Points by that amount.

In this case we have 1(fixed damage) + 1d6(damage dice) persistent(condition) acid(type) + splash(bonus damage). This weapon does both fixed damage and damage with damage dice.

There is no "initial" damage that happens prior to the roll. All of the damage is part of the formula that determines the result. If the Blowgun had a damage of 1 + 1dX it would benefit from the striking rune.

As an additional exercise, how about comparing the costs.

On one side, buy the thrower's bandolier with the +1 and striking runes and a bunch of Lesser Alchemist's Fire.

On the other side, buy a bunch of Moderate Alchemist's Fire.

Now, figure out how many bombs you need to buy in order to make it more cost effective to go with the thrower's bandolier hack.

-----

Now check it out with Bomber Alchemist's Perpetual Infusions.

Do you really think that the introduction of this particular item is intended to increase the effectiveness of Perpetual Infusions for Bomber specifically?

I can't know what was intended. What was intended is not relevant to how RAW works mechanically. If the RAW isn't what is intended we will see an errata change. I have no interest in a cost exercise.

Perpetual Infusions require the use of Quick Alchemy. The Quick Alchemy items would be gone by the start of my next turn. Additionally you must attune the weapons to the bandolier as part of your daily prep. It would only be possible to attune the Advanced Alchemy weapons you made during your daily prep to the Thrower's Bandolier.

eboats wrote:

How are you getting to 1d1? A blowgun has a flat damage of 1 with no damage dice. A d1 isn't a die that I am aware of either.

That is exactly what Acid Flask says too.

Acid Flask again wrote:

This flask filled with corrosive acid deals 1 acid damage, the listed persistent acid damage, and the listed acid splash damage.

So a Blowgun is definitely a weapon and a permanent item. You can absolutely etch a striking rune on it. What happens at that point?

Why wouldn't the Acid Flask get the same treatment?

And the Runestone itself is where the rule saying that it can accept runes is. No other consumable item says that it can accept runes, and the rules for etching runes (that you already quoted) specifically calls out Runestones in addition to the other examples.

The lesser acid flask deals 1d6(damage dice) persistent(condition) acid(type) damage and 1 acid splash damage(bonus damage)

While you could etch a striking rune on a blown gun it would have no impact. The blowgun has 0 damage dice + 1 flat damage. The striking rune doesn't increase the flat damage.

The acid flask doesn't get the same treatment as the blowgun because it has damage dice listed as d6.

eboats wrote:

The acid flask has a damage die of d6.

You sure about that?

Acid Flask wrote:

This flask filled with corrosive acid deals 1 acid damage, the listed persistent acid damage, and the listed acid splash damage.

It looks to me like they all have a weapon damage die of 1d1. Same as the Blowgun.

How are you getting to 1d1? A blowgun has a flat damage of 1 with no damage dice. A d1 isn't a die that I am aware of either.

eboats wrote:

breithauptclan wrote:

eboats wrote:

Regarding the Permanent vs Temporary Item debate:

As far as I am concerned, the debate isn't between permanent items and temporary items. The debate is between permanent items and consumable items.

Affixed or Etched:

Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.

A Runestone is considered a permanent item. Runestones have the consumable trait.

Runestones also have a specific rule saying that runes can be etched onto them. Other consumable items do not.

And you are seriously going to say that persistent damage is a 'weapon damage dice' that should be affected by a Striking Rune?

Runestones also have a specific rule saying that runes can be etched onto them.

I am unaware of this specific rule. Please share it with me.

The Affixed or Etched rule that I am quoting uses runestones as an example of a permanent item when it says "such as". That isn't a rule about runestones nor is it stating that armor, weapons, and runestones are the only permanent items in the game.

If runestones which have the consumable trait are considered permanent items then it follows that weapons with the consumable trait would be considered permanent items according to the rule I am referencing. Alchemical Bombs are a weapon.

It doesn't say weapons with the consumable trait are not permanent. Consumable is just a trait on the Alchemical Bomb weapon.

No weapon is "permanent" since they can all be destroyed. All weapons are classified as permanent items though.

eboats wrote:

breithauptclan wrote:

eboats wrote:

Regarding the Permanent vs Temporary Item debate:

As far as I am concerned, the debate isn't between permanent items and temporary items. The debate is between permanent items and consumable items.

Affixed or Etched:

Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.

A Runestone is considered a permanent item. Runestones have the consumable trait.

Runestones also have a specific rule saying that runes can be etched onto them. Other consumable items do not.

And you are seriously going to say that persistent damage is a 'weapon damage dice' that should be affected by a Striking Rune?

Persistent is a condition that changes how the damage is dealt. The acid flask has a damage die of d6.

eboats wrote:

Regarding the Permanent vs Temporary Item debate:

As far as I am concerned, the debate isn't between permanent items and temporary items. The debate is between permanent items and consumable items.

Affixed or Etched:

Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.

A Runestone is considered a permanent item. Runestones have the consumable trait.

eboats wrote:

TLDR: Alchemists can have a +3 Major Striking Thrower's bandolier with Flaming, Shock, Frost runes etched on it. Any bombs stored in it that were created with Advanced Alchemy would do:

4d(whatever damage die size the bomb has) + its other normal bomb stuff + benefit from the property runes.

Also, would you mind taking up my challenge here and explaining specifically how this ruling behaves for both Acid Flask and Alchemist's Fire.

Persistent Damage:

Persistent damage comes from effects like acid, being on fire, or many other situations. It appears as “X persistent [type] damage,” where “X” is the amount of damage dealt and “[type]” is the damage type. Like normal damage, it can be doubled or halved based on the results of an attack roll or saving throw. Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns as long as you have the condition, rolling any damage dice anew each time. After you take persistent damage, roll a DC 15 flat check to see if you recover from the persistent damage. If you succeed, the condition ends.

The rule for persistent damage states that persistent damage has damage dice and follows the normal damage rules based on the results of an attack roll or saving throw.

Here is how I see the RAW on Bombs with Runes and the Thrower's Bandolier.

Regarding the Permanent vs Temporary Item debate:

Temporary items:

Several archetypes allow you to prepare temporary items. Much like the infused items created by alchemists, these temporary items last only a short time before becoming useless. Examples include temporary scrolls created by the scroll trickster and temporary weapons, armor, or adventuring gear created by the scrounger.

Temporary items are clearly not up to the same quality as other items, so they typically can't be sold. If an ability doesn't list how long a temporary item lasts, the item lasts until the next time you make your daily preparations. Any effect created by a temporary item also ends at that time if it hasn't already (unless it's a permanent effect).

Consumables and Bombs can be sold and are permanent items.

Affixed or Etched:

Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.

Runestones themselves are consumable and specifically stated as valid permanent targets in the rule people are quoting.

Regarding Bombs having damage dice:

Some do and some don't. Alchemical Bombs have a damage entry in their profile, and it says varies. The damage dice for Alchemical fire would be D8. Just because it doesn't have the same damage dice for every bomb doesn't mean bombs don't have damage dice. Striking runes can be put on a lower level bomb to change the amount of damage die it rolls.

Regarding the Thrower's Bandolier:

This bandolier is covered in straps and pouches capable of holding up to 2 Bulk of one-handed thrown weapons.

The rule for Alchemical Bombs: Bombs are martial thrown weapons with a range increment of 20 feet.

Bombs are one-handed thrown weapons and can be sheathed in the Bandolier.

A thrower's bandolier has a +1 weapon potency rune etched into it, and it can be etched with runes as though it were a one-handed thrown weapon. When you invest the thrower's bandolier, you can attune it to all the weapons sheathed in it.

You can attune any weapon sheathed in it.

Whenever you draw a weapon from the bandolier, the bandolier's runes are replicated onto that weapon.

Even though Bombs created with Advanced Alchemy have the Infused trait and are temporary, they can still benefit from the runes on the bandolier because they are replicated on the weapons sheathed in it. The runes are not etched on them. Replicating is different than etching.

TLDR: Alchemists can have a +3 Major Striking Thrower's bandolier with Flaming, Shock, Frost runes etched on it. Any bombs stored in it that were created with Advanced Alchemy would do:

4d(whatever damage die size the bomb has) + its other normal bomb stuff + benefit from the property runes.