justastra's page

Poisons and similar items can't be used with unarmed attacks. The worst instance of this is probably the energy mutagen, which 'suffuses your body with energy that spills out of you whenever you attack'... but not if you're using an unarmed strike. This is because of the 'unarmed attacks aren't weapons, and effects and abilities that work with weapons never work with unarmed attacks unless they specifically say so' clause.

I wish there was more space for the poisonous natural attack fantasy. There are venomous unarmed stances now, but they only do a very small amount of poison damage. It would be great if there was an alchemist feat to support this play-style, especially for toxicologist which is supposed to be the poison user. We could have poison spine leshies, lethal nagaji spit, komodo dragon iruxi, and liquid death dripping from all manner of claws and fangs in general; a toxin-focused alchemist shouldn't be limited to blades, bows, and blowguns (and.. bullets??).

As of now, it seems I have to choose being limited to 1d4 gauntlets and reflavoring them or not using poison at all which is sad and disappointing.

Would this be too powerful? Am I overlooking something??

Oh, and as a cosmology concept, alignment is still mostly present - though again perhaps not with the same names. The various factions still exist and still war against each other.

I'm curious to see what new terms they'll use to describe the planes. Sure, you can say Hell embodies 'tyranny', but that feels a bit more narrow in scope than anything and everything lawful evil.

Applying cosmic morality to characters has always been a bit strange even if it does decide where your soul will end up. I think that personal edicts and anathema are more intuitive for most mortals.

The alignment system is a useful way to describe things and it seems a bit unfortunate that we'll be losing that tool even though a lot of the setting will still sort of be based off of it. The planes are literally opposed to one another cosmologically and the alignment grid was a good way to see that, though I suppose we might get some renamed/restyled flavor of it? Maybe something like the alignment wheel from the Pathfinder Kingmaker videogame, I did like that one for showing how much space there is within an alignment.

A personal comm unit is pocket-sized device that combines a minor portable computer (treat as a tier-0 computer with no upgrades or modules) and a cellular communication device, allowing wireless communication with other comm units in both audio- and text-based formats at planetary range (see page 272). A personal comm unit also includes a calculator, a flashlight (increases the light level one step in a 15-foot cone), and several entertainment options (including games and access to any local infospheres). You can upgrade a personal comm unit to function as some other devices (such as full computers and scanners) by spending credits equal to 110% of the additional device’s price.

I have a couple of questions about how the bolded section works:

• Does the comm unit take on the addtional device's Usage and Capacity? Bulk? Hands?
• Can you upgrade the comm unit to function as multiple other devices? Would that increase its Bulk additively? Use the heaviest? Make the additional device lighter?

Additionally, it seems weird that you would only be able to build new devices into a comm unit. Can you upgrade computers and datapads like this too? I feel like I should be able to build a Chemalyzer into either of those if I wanted to. There is this passage for the computer Range module which maybe implies that comm units are special in this way... (or it could be saying that you can't control a comm unit to automatically gain secure, remote connections to other devices which I don't think was ever in question in the first place)

While most computers have access to remote systems and local infospheres, this connection does not necessarily extend to other devices. A computer that controls a comm unit can use that comm unit to send and receive messages but cannot use it to control devices. The range upgrade provides a secure, remote connection to a device which allows it to be controlled from a distance. Without this upgrade, a computer must be physically connected to the devices it controls with its control modules. Range I allows the computer to control a device wirelessly within 100 feet, and costs 5 credits (this includes the adjustments to both the computer and the connected device). Extending this range to 1 mile (Range I) costs 50 credits, while increasing it to planetwide (Range III) costs 100 credits (requiring an infosphere connection for both the computer and device).

Personally, I'm just trying to figure out a way to combine a Video Camera Scanner and a miniaturized Tier-1 Computer so my envoy can livestream using her fancy AbadarCorp smartphone.

The extra 10 reduction only applies to the damage the shield takes.

So, in your example, the shield takes 23 less damage and the wielder takes 13 less damage.

Thank you! I knew I was missing something.

I'm GMing Age of Ashes right now and one of my players has acquired a Dragonslayer Shield and a Ring of Energy Resistance. Given that the rules say that the "shield has resistance 10 against the damage type" whereas the ring says that the "ring grants you resistance 5 against one type of energy damage" (both are against fire in this case), would these effects both apply to one attack?

Example:
You fail your save against Fireball and follow the steps for applying damage, rolling to see how much damage it does and determining that it's fire damage. Next, you apply any immunities, weaknesses, and resistances you have. The ring grants you 5 fire resistance, so you subtract 5 from the damage roll. You then would take damage and use Shield Block as a reaction (the Dragonslayer Shield allows you to do so against attacks dealing the damage type it's attuned to) and as per Shield Block it "prevents you from taking an amount of damage up to the shield’s Hardness". The shield has 8 hardness, so you subtract 8 from the damage roll. As per Dragonslayer Shield, the shield's energy resistance "applies after reducing the damage for Hardness". The shield has 10 fire resistance, so you subtract 10 from the damage roll. The shield and shieldbearer both take any remaining damage as usual.

In the end, this means that (with these items) you can effectively have 23 damage shaved off of any fire-based attack by using Shield Block. Dragon-slaying indeed, or is the difference between you and the shield not significant enough to go against the usual rules against multiple resistances of the same type that you have stacking?

How does Asmodeus's misogyny manifest?

The Queens of the Night are said to have faced abuse, but in the end they seem to be welcomed as an addition to Hell's power along with all the Erinyes. His mortal worshippers also seem to ignore it, having plenty of female characters in power (including the Queen of Cheliax herself).

If I use a readied action to disarm an enemy if they attack and succeed, rendering them incapable of continuing their attack, do they get their standard/full action back to do something else, or do they lose that action entirely?

Among Pharasmins, "creating undead is forbidden, and controlling existing undead is frowned upon", and "all priests have a solemn duty to oppose such abominations [undead] where they find them."

These sort of rules are never said to be put in place by Pharasma. These are likely the traditional laws of her clergy. Pharasma herself "opposes undeath as a desecration of the memory of the flesh and a corruption of a soul's path on its journey to her judgement," and "encourages her followers to hunt undead, as the souls of the destroyed undead will then reach her for judgement."

So, Pharasma detests undeath because it prevents souls from reaching her, and wants because it desecrates the memory of the person the reanimated corpse used to be, but she advocates for the hunting of undead primarily to set their souls back on track. However, what if undead were neither corrupted souls nor desecrated bodies?

Mindless undead are without souls; they are simply animated by negative energy. With magic and dedication, such undead can avoid becoming desecrations, they just need to be taken care of.

If someone wants their bodies to continue to do good after death, and they consent to reanimation as a mindless undead, it's not disrespectful to them to do such a thing; it's not disrespectful to carry out the wishes of the dead. Such consent could even be gathered with Speak with Dead!

Letting a body rot away, however, is certainly a kind of disrespect to the person who once inhabited it. This has easy solutions. With those freshly dead and intact enough to restore injured areas with Mending, periodically cast Gentle Repose to prevent rotting. With those already rotted or beyond mending, cast Decompose Corpse to make them a perfectly clean skeleton. Give both types dark hooded robes (reminiscent of Pharasma herself) and blindfolds as well as anything else to retain their dignity and prevent them from being disturbing.

Here's the question:
If a separatist cleric of Pharasma were to advocate the control and even creation of undead like this, would Pharasma continue to grant the cleric power?

Background Info:
This separatist cleric used to be a moderate priestess of Urgathoa, who led a small hidden cult opposite the local Temple of Pharasma. She advocated for living life to the fullest and saw undeath as a helpful tool as well as a blessing. One encounter with the PCs later, she was pulled into helping with the local undead uprising. Once the crisis is averted, the local Pharasmin in charge begrudgingly spares her, but forces her to give up her cult and convert. The silver-tongued cultist figures that if she can't beat them, she may as well join them and reform them to be more reasonable.

I am the GM, and I realize this basically means I can do anything I want, but I was still curious whether Pharasma would *officially* tolerate this sort of interpretation of her teachings.

Sorry for all the text!