Official Rules Response
|
| 23 people marked this as a favorite. |
First off, we here on the Pathfinder Design Team would like to wish every player and GM a happy holidays! This being the time of year for giving, we thought it only appropriate to give you two pieces of errata today, both of which have been among our most requested and discussed rules issues. Note that these are both officially recognized as errata, despite being delivered via the FAQ!
Early this year, we made a change to the Crane Wing feat in response to a lot of player and GM feedback. At the time, we thought we were making the feat a more balanced part of the game. Many disagreed, but we decided to let the issue stand and revisit it later. Later is now! While we reduced the overall bonus to AC, it now applies to all attacks made by a designated enemy, making it more useful overall and easier to adjudicate at the table. Take a look.
Crane Wing: Does the Crane Wing feat really grant a +4 to AC against an attack before the attack is rolled? It seems like I have to play a guessing game and will probably waste the ability.
Update: Page 93 in the Crane Wing feat, in the first sentence after "you can designate” replace the rest of the sentence with “a single opponent you can see”. In the second sentence change “+4” to “+2” and “attack” to “opponent for one round”.These changes will be reflected in the next errata.
In addition, as some of you may have noticed, there was a change made to the way reach weapons work in relation to attacks of opportunity in the Pathfinder RPG Rules Reference Flash Cards. A few years back, we changed the rules to exclude the corners, but time has shown us that it is just confusing at the table, so we decided to change it back! Now your foes will provoke even if they happen to be standing in the corners of your reach. Check out the errata.
10-Foot Reach and Diagonals: I’m confused about reach and diagonals. I heard somewhere online that you don’t threaten the second diagonal with a 10-foot reach but that you somehow get an attack of opportunity when opponents move out of that square, but the Rules Reference Cards show that you do threaten the second diagonal. Which one is correct?
The cards are correct. As an exception to the way that diagonals normally work, a creature with 10 feet of reach threatens the second diagonal. These changes will be reflected in the next errata.
Well, that about wraps up the year for the rules team. We hope that you have a wonderful holiday filled with monster slaying, treasure finding, and plenty of laughs and good times with friends and family.
Pathfinder Rules Team
Jason Bulmahn
Stephen Radney-MacFarland
Logan Bonner
Mark Seifter
Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for one round.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for 1 round. If you are using the total defense action instead, you can deflect one melee attack that would normally hit you. An attack so deflected deals no damage and has no other effect (instead treat it as a miss). You do not expend an action when using this feat, but you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed.
...Could someone lay out the final adjusted text of Crane Wing for me? :/
Can't do that, but the way I understand it is pretty much the way the Dodge feat originally worked in 3.x. Pick an opponent and you get +2 AC against that opponent for 1 round.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for one round.
...yay?
Like I appreciate the effort but...you just made this 3.5 Dodge but you need an open hand, a few feat prereqs, and a one higher bonus. Wasn't Dodge changed to make it easier to adjudicate? And then Crane Wing turns back into old Dodge?
This...isn't good. All this does is reminds me that Crane Wing used to be good, and now it's some weird old school Dodge that requires a free hand. I mean it's better than it was before, but that's a low bar.
Kudos on the 10 ft threatening rules, but this Crane Wing? This just isn't good. It could have been "Make an opposed attack roll, on a success, deflect an attact", just make it Riposte, but a +2 to one target is just such a weird way to take this.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
YAY! 3.5 exception is back in the rules!!! :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Once per round, when fighting defensively with at least one hand free, you can designate a single opponent you can see. You receive a +2 dodge bonus to AC against that opponent for one round....yay?
Like I appreciate the effort but...you just made this 3.5 Dodge but you need an open hand, a few feat prereqs, and a one higher bonus. Wasn't Dodge changed to make it easier to adjudicate? And then Crane Wing turns back into old Dodge?
This...isn't good. All this does is reminds me that Crane Wing used to be good, and now it's some weird old school Dodge that requires a free hand. I mean it's better than it was before, but that's a low bar.
Kudos on the 10 ft threatening rules, but this Crane Wing? This just isn't good. It could have been "Make an opposed attack roll, on a success, deflect an attact", just make it Riposte, but a +2 to one target is just such a weird way to take this.
I personally recommend trying out +4 AC vs a single attack after you can see the roll if your group plays with open rolls and wants an alternative. My group (which plays with open rolls) has been running with that, and so far it's been as powerful as the original Crane Wing in normal situations (in that the character who has it has virtually never had a round where she was hit by an attack and was not hit by at least one attack by 4 or less) while avoiding all the degenerate cases in a neat package. The new FAQ version is appropriate for groups with both open and hidden rolls, but the retroactive +4 has more of the feel of the original if your group can swing it.
|
Erm sorry i like the effort, even tought so far it looks very underwhelming, but you should also show how this changes crane riposte because its faq combined with this one makes crane riposte nonfuncional, correct me if im wrong tought
...whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses..
|
|
I personally recommend trying out +4 AC vs a single attack after you can see the roll if your group plays with open rolls. My group (which plays with open rolls) has been running with that, and so far it's been as powerful as the original Crane Wing in normal situations (in that the character who has it has virtually never had a round where she was hit by an attack and was not hit by at least one attack by 4 or less) while avoiding all the degenerate cases in a neat package. The new FAQ version is appropriate for groups with both open and hidden rolls, but the retroactive +4 has more of the feel of the original if your group can swing it.
I'm not saying the old version was better (I remember rallying against the initial change), but changing things back to 3.5 Dodge (a change I know that was touted as better) but returning the same mechanic to the game is a step backwards. Why not just +2 AC at all? There doesn't feel like there needs to be a reason to designate a single target for this.
I recognize we're never getting the original wing back, I've come to accept this (barely), but what was the reason for pulling back an old mechanic like this? I still think this would have been better as a Riposte like ability, or even changing Crane Riposte into the original Crane Wing, if only to force a 3 level feat chain (4 with Dodge, 5 with IUS although that was going to be free from a monk dip) which would be harder to dip, or even changing the prerequisites of the feat to make it harder to dip.
Erm sorry i like the effort but you should also show how this changes crane riposte because its faq combined with this one makes crane riposte nonfuncional, correct me if im wrong tought
...whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses..
The design team can't edit FAQs, only create them. But we have top people on that (we notified them before putting up the Wing FAQ, but sometimes site things take longer than expected).
|
Question. What about reach longer than 10 ft.? My current PFS character is an aberrant bloodrager wielding a bardiche. 15 foot reach is standard, 20 foot with the wand of *long arm* ...
Reach greater than 10ft shouldn't be a problem, as then you clearly threaten the 15ft diagonal, and the third diagonal is 20. In no event can a character simply approach someone with 15 or 20ft reach on the diagonal without provoking.
|
|
The design team can't edit FAQs, only create them. But we have top people on that (we notified them before putting up the Wing FAQ, but sometimes site things take longer than expected).Erm sorry i like the effort but you should also show how this changes crane riposte because its faq combined with this one makes crane riposte nonfuncional, correct me if im wrong tought
...whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses..
Nice, thanks for the wift answer mark
Well...the effort is appreciated at least. Merry Christmas!
Very happy about the reach weapon adjustment. Much easier to run.
Question. What about reach longer than 10 ft.? My current PFS character is an aberrant bloodrager wielding a bardiche. 15 foot reach is standard, 20 foot with the wand of *long arm* ...
While it is possible to go beyond 20' reach it becomes more of a corner case than the standard 10' reach weapon issue.
It would be a simple matter to extend the logic to the 4th diagonal (25-30' reach). However, it would only come up when someone has a 25' reach.
Very happy about the reach weapon adjustment. Much easier to run.
Question. What about reach longer than 10 ft.? My current PFS character is an aberrant bloodrager wielding a bardiche. 15 foot reach is standard, 20 foot with the wand of *long arm* ...
While it is possible to go beyond 20' reach it becomes more of a corner case than the standard 10' reach weapon issue.
It would be a simple matter to extend the logic to the 4th diagonal (25-30' reach). However, it would only come up when someone has a 25' reach.
Bad time to tell you I can hit 25' Reach in some cases?
Bad time to tell you I can hit 25' Reach in some cases?Very happy about the reach weapon adjustment. Much easier to run.
Question. What about reach longer than 10 ft.? My current PFS character is an aberrant bloodrager wielding a bardiche. 15 foot reach is standard, 20 foot with the wand of *long arm* ...
While it is possible to go beyond 20' reach it becomes more of a corner case than the standard 10' reach weapon issue.
It would be a simple matter to extend the logic to the 4th diagonal (25-30' reach). However, it would only come up when someone has a 25' reach.
Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (Enlarge + reach weapon + either longarm or aberrant, but not both?)
In any event, I believe that it is impossible to have a reach of exactly 25 feet without at least threatening either 20 feet or 30 feet. Anyone who can discover how to do such, let me know and I'll put 25 feet on our list to FAQ. Otherwise, I think we're OK.
Yes, Enlarge Person + Reach Weapon + Lunge.
I did not say it wouldn't come up. However, the reach weapon exception sets a precedent that should allow such a person to hit the 4th diagonal.
Edit: Mark Seifter, Lunge is added after the fact so it would not be increased via Enlarge Person. Enlarge Person + Reach Weapon + Lunge = attacks at 25' (4th diagonal is officially 30' while 3rd diagonal is 20').
Yes, Enlarge Person + Reach Weapon + Lunge.
I did not say it wouldn't come up. However, the reach weapon exception sets a precedent that should allow such a person to hit the 4th diagonal.
Edit: Mark, Lunge is added after the fact so it would not be increased via Enlarge Person. Enlarge Person + Reach Weapon + Lunge = attacks at 25' (4th diagonal is officially 30' while 3rd diagonal is 20').
Ah, but in that case, I threaten 15, 20, and 25. I'm only disquieted if you can threaten 25 without threatening either 20 or 30.
Nice, thanks for the wift answer markThe design team can't edit FAQs, only create them. But we have top people on that (we notified them before putting up the Wing FAQ, but sometimes site things take longer than expected).Erm sorry i like the effort but you should also show how this changes crane riposte because its faq combined with this one makes crane riposte nonfuncional, correct me if im wrong tought
...whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses..
Web ninjas have the changes in place!
Bad time to tell you I can hit 25' Reach in some cases?Very happy about the reach weapon adjustment. Much easier to run.
Question. What about reach longer than 10 ft.? My current PFS character is an aberrant bloodrager wielding a bardiche. 15 foot reach is standard, 20 foot with the wand of *long arm* ...
While it is possible to go beyond 20' reach it becomes more of a corner case than the standard 10' reach weapon issue.
It would be a simple matter to extend the logic to the 4th diagonal (25-30' reach). However, it would only come up when someone has a 25' reach.
Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (Enlarge + reach weapon + either longarm or aberrant, but not both?)
In any event, I believe that it is impossible to have a reach of exactly 25 feet without at least threatening either 20 feet or 30 feet. Anyone who can discover how to do such, let me know and I'll put 25 feet on our list to FAQ. Otherwise, I think we're OK.
I have Righteous Might, and a Whip, and also Lunge.
Ah, but in that case, I threaten 15, 20, and 25. I'm only disquieted if you can threaten 25 without threatening either 20 or 30.Yes, Enlarge Person + Reach Weapon + Lunge.
I did not say it wouldn't come up. However, the reach weapon exception sets a precedent that should allow such a person to hit the 4th diagonal.
Edit: Mark, Lunge is added after the fact so it would not be increased via Enlarge Person. Enlarge Person + Reach Weapon + Lunge = attacks at 25' (4th diagonal is officially 30' while 3rd diagonal is 20').
Makes sense. I did not state it needed a FAQ. Just that for those interested in such a situation the existing FAQ's logic could be extended to cover it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Web ninjas have the changes in place!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The corner exception to reach weapons was always one of the things where I thought PF was wrong.
Nice fix- thanks!
WOOOT.
I like the crane wing feat better now then I did, I suppose.
Good to see effort, any witch way.
Good luck, design team. You've done fine, and I hope you do better.
I think I've seen overall improvement from my perspective, but that's me.
Maybe I'm not as bitter as I'd thought I'd be.
Bah-humbug, nonetheless.
Happy Holidays, and thanks so much for the Reach FAQ!
So, guess crane riposte can trigger off every miss by the winged opponent now?
That isn't terrible; like snake fang without the weapon restriction, single target, and supported by ac boosts instead of immediate action competition.
(EDIT: just read the FAQ, first attack only, never mind.)
And yay clarification, no more worrying about bishopping past reach.
Thanks PDT, happy holidays to you too.
Excellent call on the 2nd diagonal. Thank you for addressing this!
Thanks for the Crane Wing boost. I actually joined the Crane school after the errata since I thought it was too powerful before. I would have preferred being able to retroactively add +4 AC once per round after I’m hit, but the +2 AC vs a specific foe should be handy in a lot of fights. It would have stopped my PC from getting hit twice last session in rounds where I chose to apply the +4 from Crane Wing to the “wrong” attack (I've always just applied it to first one). Beware, gnomes of Golarion, Chief Sharky of the Birdcrunchers has studied the ways of birds and toads, and now he's “unhittable”! (or at least 10% less hittable against one opponent per round…)
I'm glad that the 10' diagonal ruling went the way it did though honestly that's the way I'd always played it and thought it was supposed to be played. I guess it is nice to know that I was "right all along" (even when I was actually wrong)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of the time getting the AC bonus towards a single opponent is good enough, because usually there's one opponent per round who's most dangerous to you. Either because he's the boss, or because he's the only one close to you. And monsters with many natural attacks have been the chief PC-killers I've seen, so getting the bonus against all attacks is good.
What I like best about the reach FAQ is not so much the particular solution they chose (although I think it's the least evil by far), but that I don't have to try to convince any GMs that there's a post from a few years back in a random topic where SKR introduces magical threatened grid intersections.
Thank you!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would I be correct in assuming that if you can take AoO's on squares 2 diagonals from you with a reach weapon that you could similarly attack those squares with your normal actions?
The FAQ says you threaten those squares. That's a prerequisite for making AoOs, to be sure. But it also implies that you can attack them normally, because threatened squares are defined to be those squares which you can currently attack.
So, yes.
@Undone: The FAQ doesn't change anything about reaches greater than 10 feet. All it does is let someone with exactly 10 feet of reach threaten that second diagonal. If you have exactly 15 feet of reach, you still threaten that diagonal (and not the third diagonal)