1: Do you get the damage from rage when in battle form?
2: Do you get the damage from sneak attack when in battle form?
3: Do you get the damage from hunters edge precision when in battle form?
4: Can you use flurry of blows when in battle form?
5: Can you use your champion reaction when in battle form?
6: Can you use attack of opportunity when in battle form?
There has been a discussion about battle forms not long ago
Here's the link.
Shortly, rules are not that clear about different topics.
How are the rules not clear about the core class features from the core rulebook?
Leaving that much to interpretation seems to just lead to confusion, frustration and potential friction in games. Surely there has to be a comprehensive statement from paizo, an errata or a reprint of the core rule book by now if so many people still don't know how the abilities from the core book work at this point? Wouldn't that be a pretty big failure on the design side/how the abilities are explained if that was still the case?
I don't mean to start a debate on that side of things though, I just wanted to know how the rules work and and I couldn't figure it out from the book alone. I assumed it must have been clarified somewhere or I was being dumb.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is a dev answer on questions 1-3. 4-6 are a pretty obvious yes, battle form is explicit in what kinds of actions it does not allow (casting spells, speaking, and using most manipulate actions that require hands) none of which disallow any of those class features.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, in the discussion theres a gm answer to a similar question from that and my personal experience (and opinion as gm) I would say yes to all - but you should certainly talk with your gm in case you want to make a character that wants to go for it
For the why
1, Rage is not a damage bonus, it is additional damage added to your
2. Sneak attack is the same
3. the same again
4. this is an action you learned and there is nothing physically stopping you from using it
5. pretty much the same, you not suddenly lose your champion powers when you change (although this one is a bit more complicated)
6. same as 4
So the text from dragon transformation about applying your extra damage from rage is a reminder, not an exception to an unstated rule that you don't normally?
Also, just to be sure, you would add weapon specialisation damage in battle forms?
And as a last question does "One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose, which are the only attacks you can use. You're trained with them." mean you don't get your expert/master proficiency in the attacks, just trained?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the text from dragon transformation about applying your extra damage from rage is a reminder, not an exception to an unstated rule that you don't normally?
Also, just to be sure, you would add weapon specialisation damage in battle forms?
I agree with the previous posters about the above questions, based on Mark's statement that is already linked. Though there are some people who disagree and read meaning into the text from dragon transformation. It is an minor inference at best. It is just not enough to go past a clear statement from the lead designer.
And as a last question does "One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose, which are the only attacks you can use. You're trained with them." mean you don't get your expert/master proficiency in the attacks, just trained?
Nope. The base attacks in the battle form powers you are just trained. I don't think it matters. They aren't in any weapon group to cause any other problems anyway. I'm struggling to think of it being a problem?
However in your own attacks you can have higher proficiency. That counts when you work out your attack modifier in you normal form to substitute in ie in this clause If your unarmed attack bonus is higher, you can use it instead.
Could it be related to the limits of flurry of blows?
Nope. The base attacks in the battle form powers you are just trained. I don't think it matters. They aren't in any weapon group to cause any other problems anyway. I'm struggling to think of it being a problem?
Well weapon specialisation damage is based on trained/expert/master/legendary, so if you were limited to trained and not your normal proficiency, you would get lower additional damage from weapon specialisation no additional damage from weapon specialisation. Assuming weapon specialisation damage applies.
I'm just trying to figure out if "You're trained with them" means "you are only trained with them and don't use your normal proficiency."
(I don't think that will be the case... but these battle form spells are so vaguely written and omit so much information that I wouldnt be surprised, so I feel I have to ask.)
Could it be related to the limits of flurry of blows?
Nope. The base attacks in the battle form powers you are just trained. I don't think it matters. They aren't in any weapon group to cause any other problems anyway. I'm struggling to think of it being a problem?
Well weapon specialisation damage is based on trained/expert/master/legendary, so if you were limited to trained and not your normal proficiency, you would get
lower additional damage from weapon specialisationno additional damage from weapon specialisation.Assuming weapon specialisation damage applies.I'm just trying to figure out if "You're trained with them" means "you are only trained with them and don't use your normal proficiency."
(I don't think that will be the case... but these battle form spells are so vaguely written and omit so much information that I wouldnt be surprised, so I feel I have to ask.)
If you get trained from the spell but you get expert from somewhere else. You are still expert. I'd want very celar language from a spell before I would support a forced proficiency downgrade. It does matter for weapon specialization damage. But not for working out you own attack modifier (as you aren't in the battle form yet for the purposes of that calculation)
