thorin001's page

thorin001 wrote:

Krik.longleaf wrote:

Was it ever changed from the play test that Hybrid class characters mukti-classed with one of that hybrid's parent classes does not get to stack duplicate abilities? In particular, I'm referring to the Rogue and Slayer sneak attack progression.

The sneak attack class feature from the classes does not stack. That is you do not add up the levels and then apply them to one of the two classes to see how many dice you get.

But the damage does stack. You have 2 sets of additional dice that both are added to the damage. So if you have R dice from rogue and S dice from slayer you do normal damage +(R+S), assuming the attack qualifies for sneak attack.

Except that's not how 'non-stacking' bonuses works:

Common Terms wrote:

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 11

...
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.
...

Unless you have a version of Sneak Attack that specifically states that it stacks, you ONLY apply the greater 'bonus' to your damage roll.

But they are untyped bonuses from different sources, so they stack.

Basic rule of thumb is voluntary movement provokes and involuntary movement does not.

Was it ever changed from the play test that Hybrid class characters mukti-classed with one of that hybrid's parent classes does not get to stack duplicate abilities? In particular, I'm referring to the Rogue and Slayer sneak attack progression.

The sneak attack class feature from the classes does not stack. That is you do not add up the levels and then apply them to one of the two classes to see how many dice you get.

But the damage does stack. You have 2 sets of additional dice that both are added to the damage. So if you have R dice from rogue and S dice from slayer you do normal damage +(R+S), assuming the attack qualifies for sneak attack.

Dead.
You use special, non-standard, soup mix. Then use the cauldron with a special giant. Use of cauldron requires a dead giant.

Or you could use a method like in the story The Black Cauldron. All that would require is a live good giant to climb into the pot knowing that doing so will kill him.

So I want to run a low magic game. No technology just pure medieval high fantasy setting. Things like +1-+5 will be flat bonus for superior craftsmanship which is an easy reskin.

Races and Monsters will be the same only I won’t introduce ones with crazy spell like abilities (minor ones I’ll reskin as supernatural abilities).

The issue I am having is having is when I introduce magic what way do I go about it:

Let the players pick any class from Core or APG

Option 1) Advise the players that yes you can pick say Cleric but until Magic is introduced, you will not have access to any spells or abilities that are magic in nature. This leads to the issue of do I not level my party at all till I introduce it so a character doesn’t go from no magic to say level 3 spells over night. Or level like normal with the understanding that gou will catch up in power and don’t make dumb calls.

Option 2) Have only Martial characters available at first but allow cross classing or re classing

This also brings up healing without magic. I know the heal skill can do wonders but I don’t want to have game stop cause “oh we are waiting 8 hours to heal again”

Play another system.

TxSam88 wrote:

Senko wrote:

Certain traps e.g. proximity go off when you enter a certain radius even if your flying. I don't think you can disarm these traps because to get to the "trigger" you have to enter the "proximity" and thus trigger it.

False, Any and all traps can be disarmed by a Disable Device check. it doesn't matter if you enter the proximity to disable it or not. No description on how it is done is needed. Hand wave it or whatever. If there is a trap and it has a Disarm DC, then it can be disarmed regardless of how it is triggered.

My point is this is when the rogues ranged legerdomain comes into its own as they can disarm the trap from a distance.

When do rogues get ranged legerdemain?

Reskin and apply templates to existing critters. Sheep with venomous fangs, a swarm of flesh eating bunnies, wolves that can cause sonic damage with their howls.

Find out if the characters have any phobias and use twisted versions of those.
Doing the same with the players can be done, but needs a lot more care. Actually triggering your players would be a bad thing.

If this is your first effort running a campaign I highly recommend a default answer of 'no'. Get a good handle on the rules and their interactions before allowing crazy corner cases. Give yourself plenty of time to consider the implications of what strange things your players ask for before saying yes.
Another thing is not to be afraid to retcon things if you allowed something unbalancing into your game. Tell your players that this is a possibility when they ask for weird things or want esoteric combinations.

These things become especially important if you like to use the 'rule of cool'.

Down time is for enjoying all the loot you acquired adventuring. So most of that time is spent enriching the bars and brothels.

You might want to look at the blossoming light archetype for cleric.
No armor proficiencies, but you get 5+ cha mod channels to start and gain one more at each even level.
You also get to harm a wide variety of enemies with channel: undead, chaotic evil outsiders, worshippers of chaotic evil deities, critters with light sensitivity, and critters with light vulnerability.

Pindoodly Wandfondler:

"A keen fashion sense, rapier wit, and world class culinary skills are just three of the benefits I bring to any adventuring party."

Doing some build playing. Not sure I like the 4 levels of ranger enough to give up that much spell casting. But still on the table for consideration.

- If I'm going to eventually go for the wild armor enhancement, it seems like I should take a level of fighter for the heavy armor prof, then get +1 wild stoneplate.

- The barding (in a bag of holding) is a cool idea I had not really considered. But it will limit you by the time needed to put it on and take it off. So you would definitely have to assume your combat form long before a combat is expected.

- If I don't go for armor, is a 2 level dip into monk for the wisdom to armor and evasion worth it?

- I'm considering a dwarf with the feral shifter archetype and earth domain. Any reactions?

- Do you need to be proficient with the weapon for the Weapon Shift feat chain?

- If you are holding 2 weapons, do you get the properties of both? I'm trying to think how many properties you could get among all the choices. Reach, disarm, trip, set, entangle, etc...

Monk is absolutely worth it. Depend on your allies to cast mage armor on you for even more AC. It can also set you up for even more melee dun later.

Feats you will want are:
weapon focus (claw)
feral combat training (claw)
improved unarmed strike -bonus feat from monk
dragon style -bonus feat from monk
dragon ferocity
shaping focus

Wild shape into a big cat. Eventually you will get pounce and rake. From dragon style you can charge through friendlies and difficult terrain. You also get a boost in damage to a claw attack. When you get dragon ferocity you get a boost to all your claw attacks. rake attacks are claws too. five attacks on a charge with 1 getting full str to damage, 1 getting 2X str to damage, and the others getting 1.5X str to damage can put a real hurt on the bad guys.

Don't worry about casting in combat, so you won't need natural spell. All of your spells should be long term buffs like barkskin, greater magic fang, and long strider that you cast before wildshaping. Lesser rods of extend are relatively cheap. A fairly cheap workaround is the ring of elequence since it gives the wearer the ability to speak 4 languages.

Your amulet of mighty fists can just do special abilities if you are using GMF for your enhancement bonus.

Check out the faq on multiple forms of rage not stacking, I think that would prohibit using weapon song twice.

But there is no stacking. And that does not answer the latter questions about different groups of weapons.

Can a skald with the spell warrior archetype use the enhance weapons raging song ability multiple times when using the virtuoso performance?

Can they enhance the same weapons twice with different abilities, such as keen and flaming with one set and frost and shocking with the other?

Can they enhance two different groups of weapons, such as +1, keen, and flaming on three weapons; and distance, returning, and seeking via virtuoso performance on another group?

“It's a convention they established when they made Pathfinder”

No they didn’t, it was like that in 3.5 as well.

3.5 Magic Item Crafting rules

And much of that was taken from Ars Magica's enchanting system. Jonathan Tweet designed much of Ars Magica and wrote 3.0.

Well, there's the Ring of Protection, and nothing says it can't be a nipple ring of protection :D

As long as it occupies the ring slot there is no reason that it can't be a prince albert. Or an earring.

Garak: Male half-orc barbarian/horizon walker

Really really hates demons
Knows lots of ways to kill demons
Unhealthy dislike of other outsiders

Poorly since the sarissa rules contradict themselves and combat patrol is extremely ill defined.

A cone is a cone, so yes, the burning hands cone template would apply.

Following the rules, all combat patrol could do is lengthen the cone. It cannot change the direction of the cone.

Dual caster defeats the purpose of gestalt: both classes are doing the same thing.

If it does not have to be 2 level 9 casters, paladins are technically casters. A paladin/oracle could be quite nasty.

Witch. Your hexes are not affected at all as DCs are not changed by negative levels.

Kasoh wrote:

As a GM, who runs a lot of pre written material, I find ABP to be a hassle to use. In a homebrew game, I have no doubt it works well, but if someone buys adventures to not have to do that kind of work, then asking them to do it is not much a starter.

What work? There is absolutely no additional work required. None. I'm using published enemies virtually exclusively, and yet I have zero issue usign ABP - I don't alter enemies at all, and simply remove all items from the loot that are removed by ABP (or the magic from those items, in case of weapons, armors, and shields). That's it.

The same would apply to adapting ABP for an existing group - remove or demagicify all Big 6 items, have the PCs gain the ABP benefits for their current level, done.

Kasoh wrote:

And treasure guidelines aren't perfect by any account. A level 5 character should have roughly 10,500 gp worth of stuff. If that treasure is concentrated in 'flavorfull' items that don't directly apply to their combat numbers, then they're still struggling.

You know what fixes this? Automatic Bonus Progression! The star-themed character wants to wear a Cloak of the Night Sky? No problem, they got the resistance bonus regardlessly!

Kasoh wrote:

I've had players who steadfastly refuse to upgrade their gear because shopping item lists is some form of torture for them

You know what fixes this? Automatic Bonus Progression!

Neriathale wrote:

NPCs offering the party a reward to go and deal with a situation. Make it an item the party actually want rather than a pile of stuff they don’t want but can sell for cash - “because we dealt with the Undead castle the local baron offered us each one item from his treasury”.

You can actually spice up quests with that. When the PCs have an audience with the baron, highlight the fancy set of armor collecting dusk in a display. If the PCs show interest beforehand,...

ABP plus full loot is a recipe for problems. So you need to do the work of trimming down the loot.

If you can see (or otherwise clearly perceive) your opponent, but have not acted yet then you can use Deflect Arrows.

If your opponent's stealth beat your perception then you are not aware of the attack and cannot use the feat.

It gets much grayer if combat has started and someone turns invisible/uses stealth. You are aware of the combatant, though maybe not the precise location. This is pretty much a GM call, but should be ruled consistently.

No, do not adjust the CR. Here is why: Take a look at the 'advanced' template. That is +4 to all stats and a +2 natural armor. That gives a +1 CR adjustment. Is the increase for a 25 point buy even close to the increase in effectiveness of the advanced template? If no, then it should not rate the same CR adjustment.

As long as you take the attack action or full attack action you can fight defensively. Thus you cannot fight defensively when delivering a touch spell or making a ranged attack with the spell because you did not take either of the actions that allow you to fight defensively even though you made an attack.

VoodistMonk wrote:

I wasn't sure if Armor/Weapon Training were introduced in a different book, or not. That's why I asked.

Is the end result what you are after, or does the majority of the AC bonus have to come from the armor, itself? A build based on Dex could achieve a high AC number, although it is lost when flat-footed.

To what extent are you dedicated to armor class? Are you willing to sacrifice offense just to "tank"?

I'm not too worried about damage output; the rest of the party is all squishies and damage-dealers, they mainly need someone to take hits. I've tried the barbarian low-AC/high-HP route, but in practice there's no amount of HP that can keep up with the damage.

You have to be some threat to the bad guys or they will just ignore you to kill the squishies. Without credible damage, or some other way to keep them focused on you, they will just take the AOO and keep moving.

Ryze Kuja wrote:

That rule should be re-written as "can clearly perceive you". It shouldn't be impossible to intimidate someone who is blind, or deaf. They just need to be aware that you're there, and aware that they're trying to intimidate you.

DM: "The orc pulls out his axe and shouts menacingly at you 'Ima gut you like a FISH! RAWERARWR!' " /rolls intimidate

PC: "I closed my eyes first, so I can't be intimidated."

DM: *checks Intimidate rules*

DM:

DM: *flips table*
{. . .}

This should only work if the Orc is as dumb as a Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal.

Who needs shades? I have my towel!

Look at season 5 scenarios. Those are mainly focused on the Worldwound. There is at least one scenario that takes place in the Tanglebriar. There is also a 3 part series that involves finding a sky citadel.

I would suggest starting with 8-8 Sandstorm Prophecy. It is for levels 1-5. It takes place on Golarion but starts you on the path to the plane of Air.
Next would be 8-10 Secrets of the Endless Sky. This is the direct sequel to the previous adventure. It is also for levels 1-5.
Next is 8-12 Caught in the Eclipse. The follows on the previous adventure and finally gets you to the plane of Air. The only problem is that it is for levels 3-7, so if your party has only played the previous two adventures they will have neither the experience nor the gear to face this.
After that I would recommend 8-5 Ungrounded but Unbroken. This takes place on the plane of Earth and is for level 1-5.
The next one should be 8-19 Treacherous Waves. This one take place on the plane of Water and is for levels 3-7. Since you already needed to be at least level 3 for 8-12 this should not be an issue.
After this the order of things is very much up to you. The only problem is that the minimum level is 5, so you will need to find some other adventures to fill in the experience. The adventures are:
8-9 The Cindersworn Pact on the plane of Fire
8-11 Cleansed With Flame on the plane of fire
8-24 Raid on Cloudborne Keep on the plane of Air
Lastly there is 8-20 Torrent's Last Will on the plane of Water, but this is for characters level 7-11.

All of these are to get items of a big quest. If you want to actually finish the quest that they were written for you would also need 8-13 What Sleeps in Stone. This is back on Golarion and is for characters level 7-11.
And the quest finale is 8-25 Unleashing the Untouchable. You go back to the elemental planes. It is for characters at least level 12.

Yes. According to the FAQ you get 1 real size increase (enlarge person) and 1 virtual size increase (hardened fists).

Can you use the Hex Strike feat through a conductive weapon?

Hex Strike

Conductive

Most hexes would not work via a conductive weapon because they do not require an attack roll. But a hex delivered by Hex Strike obviously does. While the feat does not list what type of ability it is, but nor does it say that it changes the underlying hex from being a (SU) ability.

Isn't this just a question of "assigned" vs "applied"?

Say your PC is Level 5, and the AP Chronicle is Tier 7-8. You "assign" the Chronicle to them when you finish the Book, then set it aside until they're Level 7. When they hit Level 7, you then "apply" the Chronicle, earning the XP, GP, Prestige and Downtime as usual.

That doesn't answer the question at all. Which set of numbers are used to generate the day job check? Those of the PFS character or those of the campaign character?

If you play a module or AP in campaign mode how are day job checks handled when you get the chronicle?

Do you use the stats of the character it is applied to? Even if the character is not of high enough level yet to apply the chronicle to?

Or do you use the pregen rules? Use the stats of the character you played the adventure with at the time the chronicle is awarded?

Diego Rossi wrote:

Some of you say that the NO near Charge is confusing.

So I suppose that you find the NO beside Full attack is confusing and that people will think that firing a bow during a full attack will not provoke. Or that making a combat maneuver or unarmed strikes without the relative feat will not provoke if made as part of a full attack.

Or instead, you feel that "it doesn't provokeunless you don't do other actions that provoke" is clear in those instances?

If you think that it is clear, what makes the difference?

You do realize that there have been people in the past who have tried to argue that their full attacks with ranged/thrown weapons don’t provoke because of the no on the table next to full attack… which just goes to show that the same sort of confusion has been created from that one as well… they could have opted for a more open ended entry for the table for these items instead of just “yes” or “no” like how aid another says “maybe” and use skill says “usually”… those entries make it clear from the start that all or part of the action may or may not provoke depending on the conditions surrounding it…

I notice that you used the past tense for those other discussions, meaning that you acknowledge that the issue is settled. And that brings us back to the question of "how is this different?"

Sort of like The Shire. A place where the citizenry is largely comfortable, well fed, adventure is nearly unheard of, and the worst conflict is about that horrible hedge between the Bolgers and Bracegirdles.

Cheliax. Anyone who says different will be re-educated.

Not for Gorum. Gorum is the god of fighting.
If it was someone who was opposed to killing and tried to use non-lethal damage could work because you are still fighting. Gorum does accept surrenders, even if it is only so that you can fight again later.

I might be mistaken about the Immediate Action/AoO thing... I could be remembering a specific ability that is an immediate action to use that denies AoO if you use the immediate action... or just misremembering entirely. Doesn't matter, really.

Immediate actions take up your swift action for the next round. That might be what you are thinking of.

For purposes of this interaction unarmed strikes are manufactured weapons.

SmooshieBanana wrote:

by polymorph rules, you have a -2 str

I'm kinda curious here... where did you get this from?

thorin001 wrote:

A gnome changing into a goblin still gets the bonus to dex

A gnome could use Alter Self and take the form of a gnome, and would still get the dex bonus!

Yup. I originally planned to use that example, but I thought it might confuse someone.

By polymorph rules the only ability scores to change are those noted, assuming your starting size is small or medium. If your starting size is medium then becoming small gives you +1 Atk/AC, -1 CMB in addition to the changes noted in the spell.

But yes a brown fur transmuter casting alter self to become a gnome (and spending an arcane reservoir point) gets +4 Dex.

Actually you do not need to change size to get the stat benefit. A gnome changing into a goblin still gets the bonus to dex and a human changing into an elf still gets the bonus to str.

Even for untyped, bonuses do not stack if from the same source. It is an entirely reasonable interpretation to say that the same action (aid another) from the same character is the same source.

Order of the dragon and helpful halfling do not stack at all. Both set the number to X, not increase the number by X. Thus you would only take the highest value.

thorin001 wrote:

Let's be clear here. If I want my character to rape your character whose permission do I need? Yours or the GM's?

The issue really is not agency; the issue is respect.

Your example involves a subject matter that is universally offensive and sometimes painful to even consider. Theft as a subject matter falls pretty far short by comparison. I mean, I have been the target of robbery. The violation and frustration...it was intense and awful. But that's certainly not the way theft in-game makes me feel. As long as it's handled correctly.

But yes, respect is key. It's not about gaming. It's about human decency.

And like so many have said above; lying/stealing/attacking other party members is *risky*. And 99 times out of 100, it's best to avoid.
But making these huge blanket statements about how it's *always* wrong is just false. Risk implies a chance for failure. A chance. It's not risky to jump off a cliff and hope you can fly. It's risky to climb a cliff.

Every group has it's own dynamic, and I've played with some that could safely involve stealing from fellow PC's. Even then, most of them didn't, because it didn't fit the characters or the narrative. But it is possible. I think anyone claiming otherwise is bordering on telling me that I'm having fun wrong; sometimes, it's really rewarding to have a group of PC's who tolerate each other professionally but who are still disrespectful to each other in a wry, world-weary sort of way. It feels very real, and it makes the moments where they really come together as a team all the more satisfying.
But that's not every game. I have never advocated for a free-for-all mindset in ttrpg's in general, nor do I condone the obnoxious tendencies of those who play a CN rogue like a spider monkey suffering from kleptomania and some sort of personality disorder.

Sometimes you have to make the example extreme so that people can't miss it. Less extreme examples of the same issue were met with equivocation. Somehow I do not expect equivocation for this one. Avoidance however ...

thorin001 wrote:

If you, another player, want to do something to my character you need MY buy-in, not the DM's.

I can sort of understand this sentiment, but I can't agree to it as a blanket statement.

I think "player agency" has become something akin to a sacred relic in a temple that no one's allowed to touch. But...there are games out there without a GM. Games where your character always dies at the end. And those systems sort of force us to let go of the sacred relic, even just a bit, and be a little more flexible.

I'll say this: in most games--and in every game where you don't know the other players super well--it's almost always better to play it safe and avoid the more complex, ethically gray areas of gaming. If your group is tight and knows (1) that it's a game, not real life and (2) when to knock it off or take it down a...

Let's be clear here. If I want my character to rape your character whose permission do I need? Yours or the GM's?

The issue really is not agency; the issue is respect.

I am going to disagree slightly with ShroudedInLight, in that if the GM and the player handle it well I'm not sure you need to coordinate with the rest of the players. Here is a typically really long example from me:

I had a player once who was joining a party/campaign in progress and asked me (as GM) if he could play Lawful Evil. We had a discussion around if that would mean doing anything negative / traitorous to the party, which I was firmly against. As the character's intro to the group was going to involve them rescuing him, he said he'd play the Lawful component strongly - he'd be in their debt, he'd agree to work with them, and therefore he'd not have any reason to work against the group. So I permitted it.

At some point, one of the party members got suspicious due to some of his comments (like what to do with captured prisoners) and without permission or discussion cast detect alignment on him, which was noticed. So the evil character pulled the mage aside and essentially told him to mind his own business and not say anything to anyone else in the party. Of course, the mage told a couple of party members.

To make a long story even longer, the evil character decided this violated the oral contract the party made with him, and while on watch one night he stole what he felt was his fair portion of the current party treasure and abandoned the group (and to his credit, it was a fair portion of the treasure). The other players were pissed at the character (but not the player or me...they thought it was an interesting and unexpected twist).

The player had to leave the group at this point (returned to university for the fall), so I had his evil character join the bad guys working against the party. As an NPC he made for a terrific re-occurring foil to the group, and in the end he was defeated in the final, difficult battle.

In summary, after the initial shock of the "reveal" that he was evil, the group had a fantastic reaction to trying to beat him throughout the rest of the campaign and...

If you, another player, want to do something to my character you need MY buy-in, not the DM's.

TheApapalypse wrote:

Derklord wrote:

Starting a grapple requires a standard action, and thus can't be done in a full attack. Dito for steal.

Disarm and trip can be made in place of a melee attack, that would work with TWF. Per this blog post, disarm and trip are made with a weapon, which can be an unarmed strike, that means things affecting the weapon also affect the combat maneuver. Thus, you'd provoke when using an unarmed strike and you don't have the IUS feat.

You could make the maneuver with a blade boot or armor spikes as the off-hand weapon, but that goes against the spirit of Singleton and against this FAQ, so don't be surprised if your GM vetos it.

Free Hand Fighter is just abysmal, though, I'm really not sure what the idea here is.

The FHF does have IUS and TWF....the point is to have a hand free to disarm and trip during an attack as well as be able to catch arrows, hang from a rope, or gesture with a single finger at enemies without dropping a shield or secondary weapon.....as well as be able to grapple without dropping a weapon.

Remember that grappling with a single hand suffers from a penalty.

Quote:

Humanoid creatures without two free hands attempting to

grapple a foe take a –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll.

Technically all humanoids must take that penalty because you cannot perform an action that requires 2 hands in a grapple. Gotta love catch-22 style rules.

A wonderful feat chain. Power attack and cornugon smash to use intimidate to make the target shaken. And then shatter defenses to make the target flat footed. Of course shatter defenses requires dazzling display and weapon focus. But, once you can put this combination together you can very reliably sneak attack all by yourself.

Stealing with the party is PVP. It should be treated as any other PVP variant.

thorin001 wrote:

You need to convert. SR works differently, so a 3.5 critter will have a much higher SR.

Can you explain how it was different, because my recollection is that it was a caster level check vs the SR value just like in PF1. Also, how is CR calculated differently (especially since CR is not really "calculated" at all, so much as derived form observation and testing).

thorin001 wrote:

Feats are acquired at different rates, so 3.5 critters will have too few feats. Many feats work differently. Some feats that appear in 3.5 do not appear in PF.

These are all true. They also do not matter in the slightest. You do need to calculate CMB and CMD for 3.5 monsters (at least if anyone is likely to try to use combat manoeuvres or tumble past them), but that is about it.

I ran Age of Worms in Pathfinder, and for most of the encounters I ran them as was and everything was fine (I did obviously use the PF1 version from the Bestiary if available, and I rebuilt the major villains to Pathfinder specs, but there were still a lot of encounters that I used straight out of the book).

_
glass.

Mechanically SR works the same; it is the calculation that is different. SR in 3.5 is based of hit dice, so it will be much higher for the CR than PF.

Critters having fewer feats than they should makes no difference? Then why is the fighter's big thing lots of feats?

thorin001 wrote:

But that same horde should go down to a single fireball.

The troop mechanic is an abstraction. There's way more glaring oddities than just "should be killed entirely by AoE effects". A troop at one HP still has just as many members and is just as effective as one at full health. But do one damage to it and they just decide "eh, screw it, the rest of us give up". For pit traps if the leading edge falls in do all the rest have to slapstick their way in after them? For the fireball, as someone else said, maybe the other zombies provide total cover. But that's the way it works. The explanation is left to the GM.

The thing is that for small and larger critters you do not need an abstraction. In fact the abstraction counters the rest of the system's mechanics.

thorin001 wrote:

But that same horde should go down to a single fireball.

It probably will. It does 50% more damage.

No, it won't. A 10d6 fireball only does about 50 damage average on a failed save WITH the extra 50% damage.

You are overthinking it. What value will this add to the gameplay? The system handwaves stuff like this since mending is a cantrip on just about every caster's list.