Bad or ambiguously worded class features and feats

[TiwazBlackhand]

Can we just try to compile a list of things that are badly worded or ambiguous enough to need dev comment?

Mostly, it seems like they tried to be very thorough in explaining powers fully, but there are a few things that seem to have fallen through, like, the team knew how they worked and didn't remember that we don't, and could make wrong assumptions.

Monk Flurry of Blows - How do the multi-attack penalties work with this? (spelled out in two weapon fighting feats, not here)

Monk - Perfected Form - When you make an unarmed strike you can treat any die that rolled under 10 as a 10. I'm pretty sure this is just supposed to be the d20 to hit rolls? But the way it's written, I make an unarmed attack, roll a d6 for damage, and because it's below 10 (1-6) I automatically treat it as a 10. I get auto 10's for damage on any die under a d12?

[Mudfoot]

Combat Grab (feat) - this requires you to have a 1h weapon and one hand free. "Make a Strike (see page 308). It gains the following enhancement and failure effects...", those effects essentially being to make the opponent flat-footed.

Is this a Strike with the weapon that does its normal damage? Or a Strike with the empty hand that does nothing else? As it "gains" those effects, it suggests weapon; as it says nothing about the potential dangers of grabbing a fire elemental or black pudding it suggests weapon; but the name of the feat suggests hand.

[Gug on the Silver Mountain]

CRB wrote:

Flurry of Blows (feat) - Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature, combine their damage and enhancements for the purpose of resistances and weaknesses.

I'm assuming that the intention is you make two Strikes at the cost of only one action, can target them as you wish, and that each strike would do it's normal damage on a hit unless both hit and are targeting the same creature, in which case they do combined damage as if it came from only one Strike.

Firstly, I'd like clarification as to how that interacts with multi-attack penalties (are both made with the same penalty, -0 if they are the first attack? If so how does that affect other attacks you make this round, counting as one or two attacks? Or does the second suffer a penalty as a second attack?).
Secondly, and this seems pedantic, but RAW could be interpreted as they only do damage if both attacks hit the same target, with either splitting them or missing one resulting in no damage dealt. As I say, pedantic, but I have known people to rules lawyer to that degree and if it could be tidied that'd be cool.

[Isiah.AT]

Keep in mind this is a play test and paizo has given numerous disclaimers that this would not be final. They have mentioned that they still need help catching typos or how to better explain things. Normally this stuff would have been heavily edited before release, but instead they are allowing us to play test it for free. I can think of other companies that charge you and they have a much worse playtest.

Don't complain. Instead give objective feedback. If you don't understand something, simply ask for clarity.

[Isiah.AT]

Isiah.AT wrote:

Keep in mind this is a play test and paizo has given numerous disclaimers that this would not be final. They have mentioned that they still need help catching typos or how to better explain things. Normally this stuff would have been heavily edited before release, but instead they are allowing us to play test it for free. I can think of other companies that charge you and they have a much worse playtest.

Don't complain. Instead give objective feedback. If you don't understand something, simply ask for clarity.

This is objectivity.

[Witch of Miracles]

Gug on the Silver Mountain wrote:

[

Firstly, I'd like clarification as to how that interacts with multi-attack penalties (are both made with the same penalty, -0 if they are the first attack? If so how does that affect other attacks you make this round, counting as one or two attacks? Or does the second suffer a penalty as a second attack?).

0, -4, -8, -8; compare the wording of double slice and it's a bit clearer what the intent is.

[Gug on the Silver Mountain]

Isiah.AT wrote:

Keep in mind this is a play test and paizo has given numerous disclaimers that this would not be final. They have mentioned that they still need help catching typos or how to better explain things... If you don't understand something, simply ask for clarity.

I thought that was exactly what this thread was for...

[Niels Christensen]

Unarmed strikes are iffy with what they function with. There are many fight feats that specify that you are wielding a weapon or have a hand free. The description of Unarmed before weapons says that it is treated as a simple weapon, than after the weapons table it says that the unarmed trait means that it isn't a weapon. But then an ability like Double Slice says it requires wielding two weapons, but its upgrade Graceful Poise says that Double Slice can work with agile unarmed strikes. So do they count as both wielding and a hand free? And what does a bite attack/horn attack count toward for something like an Animal totem barbarian?