Happy Holidays from the Pathfinder Design Team!


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee 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.

FAQ wrote:

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.

FAQ wrote:

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

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

...Could someone lay out the final adjusted text of Crane Wing for me? :/

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Aww yeah.

Edit:

Crane Wing wrote:
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.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Errataed Crane Wing wrote:
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.

Contributor

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.


Jiggy wrote:
...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.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Wait, when did the auto-deflect while in Total Defense disappear?

Paizo Employee Lead Designer

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Wait, when did the auto-deflect while in Total Defense disappear?

Its still there. This errata effects the part before that section of the text.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Joana wrote:
Errataed Crane Wing wrote:
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!!! :)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Wait, when did the auto-deflect while in Total Defense disappear?
Its still there.

I just triple checked myself, and it appears to have been deleted on the PRD.

Paizo Employee Lead Designer

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Wait, when did the auto-deflect while in Total Defense disappear?
Its still there.
I just triple checked myself, and it appears to have been deleted on the PRD.

Odd, I will look into having that fixed.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
N. Jolly wrote:
Joana wrote:
Errataed Crane Wing wrote:
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.

Shadow Lodge

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

Crane Riposte wrote:


...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..

Silver Crusade

Mark Seifter wrote:
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.

Silver Crusade

Thanks PDT! Merry Christmas to you too.

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* ...

Paizo Employee Designer

ElementalXX wrote:

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

Crane Riposte wrote:


...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).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Joe M. wrote:
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.

Shadow Lodge

Mark Seifter wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:

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

Crane Riposte wrote:


...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).

Nice, thanks for the wift answer mark


Well...the effort is appreciated at least. Merry Christmas!


Joe M. wrote:

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.


Gauss wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

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?

Paizo Employee Designer

Rynjin wrote:
Gauss wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

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?

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.

Sovereign Court

I'm glad about the reach fix. I think this is a big improvement.

I think the Crane Wing change is generally a good solution. However, it's probably best to take a long hard look at the text of all the three feats in the chain, just to make sure they're properly in tune with each other.


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').

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Thanks so much for clarifying 10-ft reach and diagonals. They fixed it in 3.5 and this takes us back to that solution. It should remove some arguments at the table.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the 25-ft case is fine as-is. It's probably easier to limit the 10ft-exception to 10ft only, because that's the only place where it's really necessary.

Paizo Employee Designer

Gauss wrote:

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.

Paizo Employee Designer

ElementalXX wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:

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

Crane Riposte wrote:


...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).
Nice, thanks for the wift answer mark

Web ninjas have the changes in place!


Mark Seifter wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Gauss wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

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?

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.


Mark Seifter wrote:
Gauss wrote:

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.

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.

Webstore Gninja Minion

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Web ninjas have the changes in place!

*readies an action for any more FAQ changes*


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.

Grand Lodge

I like the reach FAQ, but I'm not a fan of bringing back the 3.5 Dodge in the form of Crane Wing.

Dark Archive

Happy Holidays everyone.
Have a peaceful and relaxed Christmas and don't get to stressed if the dice don't roll they way you want them to :-)


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.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

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.

Silver Crusade

As someone you likes playing with reach weapons, thanks for the errata.


Excellent call on the 2nd diagonal. Thank you for addressing this!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I never cared WHICH way the 2nd diagonal ruling went, as long as there was one. Hooray!


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)

Sovereign Court

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.

Grand Lodge

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?


Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

Thank you!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kenji Elindir wrote:
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.

Grand Lodge

Just making sure before I post about it in my lodge's page, thanks.


So just for clarification this does nerf enlarge+ Reach weapon to be worse since you can no longer 5 foot back diagonally and hit them. it does significantly buff reach weapons on medium sized creatures though.

X= Open square
T= Threatened square
O= Natural reach.
C= Large creature with a reach weapon

Spoiler:

XXXXXXXXXXXX
XTTTTTTTTT TX
XTTTTTTTTT TX
XTTOOOOOOTTX
XTTOOOOOOTTX
XTTOOCCOOTTX
XTTOOCCOOTTX
XTTOOOOOOTTX
XTTOOOOOOTTX
XTTTTTTTTT TX
XTTTTTTTTT TX

From

XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXTTTTTTXXX
XXTTTTTTTTXX
XTTTOOOOTTTX
XTTOOOOOOTTX
XTTOOCCOOTTX
XTTOOCCOOTTX
XTTOOOOOOTTX
XTTTOOOOTTTX
XXTTTTTTTTXX
XXXTTTTTTXXX

Paizo Employee Designer

@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)

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Happy Holidays from the Pathfinder Design Team! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.