[Pathfinder 2e - 1.6 Errata] Lay on Hands, unintended nerf?

[42nfl19]

After perusing some threads online, I just realized that Lay on Hands, while recently buffed, also got nerfed at the same time.I mean so did Paladin Reactions, they have set ranges now, but that is another topic. So for background information, Somatic action was changed so that it no longer requires a free hand to cast spells/powers. That is a good thing. Now Clerics/Paladins can heal allies while there hands are busy with weapons or shields. Lay on Hands was also buffed to have d6s instead of d4s. That is also good. Hospice Knight only increased healing from d4s to d6s. Now undead get hurt by d6s also. For the most part, Warded Touch is no longer needed. HOWEVER, Warded Touch had another benefit that was not added or replicated. The removal of the manipulate trait from the somatic portion of Lay on Hands. Before, you could attack undead, or evil creatures with Vengeful Oath, safely. Now you are super at risk for attacks of opportunities and losing your Lay on Hands.The Paladin already has limited resources to cast it. Now he can waste them also. At least with heal/channel you can cast it at range safely at the enemy. But Lay on Hands as I recall has no range option. Sure the Paladin is tanky and might be able to dodge the hit, but at higher levels, it is almost certain that the enemy will comfortably be able to exceed the damage threshold needed to waste the spell. To "safely" "smite" the undead you need to make sure you raise shield action BEFORE you attempt the give them the good touch. You can no longer safely heal allies next to enemies either. Lay on Hands seems worse now. I rather they keep the Warded Touch feat just so I can get rid of the manipulate trait. I can't even touch myself safely to heal in battle.

[42nfl19]

As a side note, this is just like what happened to the Alchemist with Tricky Tinker. 1.2 brought the end of Signature Skills. Therefor the Alchemist no longer needed Tricky Tinker. "Deception and Thievery become signature skills for you." HOWEVER, it also had the nice benefit of allowing the Alchemist to use alchemist tools or a repair kit INSTEAD of thievery tools. I hope this gets brought back in the final version.Sure it might not have been a strong option at level 8 but it was an option non the less.

[AndIMustMask]

exactly the kind of unexpected oversights i don't want to see enter the game during/after it's un-playtested release phase, when everything's set in stone...

[Sebastian Hirsch]

It is definitely a change, I am just not sure if it is a bad one. Right now even drawing a weapon provokes, so chances are good that most things are intended to provoke.

As a paladin you could likely just provoke an AOO by movement if you are worried, this might actually be a conscious design decision to make it harder to not provoke AOOs.

Of course, making sure that they have actually seen the issue is a good idea.

[shroudb]

Due to the much limited amount of AoO in the system, I like that there are also less ways to mitigate them.

It now is a feature of specific classes and monsters rather than something that's always on and abudant.

So it is better if it's treated like that.

[42nfl19]

If it is on purpose,that's fine but it sucks. If it was an oversight, that is bad.

[Bardarok]

At this point they could just make it a verbal only spell. I feel like it was somatic so that it would be literally laying on of hands but if it's just tapping them with the flat of your sword anyways might as well make it a prayer.

[42nfl19]

shroudb wrote:

Due to the much limited amount of AoO in the system, I like that there are also less ways to mitigate them.

It now is a feature of specific classes and monsters rather than something that's always on and abudant.

So it is better if it's treated like that.

This is just a feeling but as I play against enemies at higher levels in the playtest module, I feel like they get more and more AOOs compared to lower levels.

[Dante Doom]

All they needed to do it's instead of removing Warded Touch, just make it work like 1.0

[Blave]

Getting rid of the Manipulate trait also prevents failure chance from being Entangled/Grabbed which can be pretty important for a frontline character.

[Dire Ursus]

42nfl19 wrote:

shroudb wrote:

Due to the much limited amount of AoO in the system, I like that there are also less ways to mitigate them.

It now is a feature of specific classes and monsters rather than something that's always on and abudant.

So it is better if it's treated like that.

This is just a feeling but as I play against enemies at higher levels in the playtest module, I feel like they get more and more AOOs compared to lower levels.

A lot of higher level creatures with tails and such do in fact have AOO, however this version of attack of opportunity actually only triggers on movement, it would not trigger with the manipulate trait of Lay on Hands.

[scoutmaster]

lay on hands should trigger an attack of opportunity. The game is getting too easy.

[Bardarok]

scoutmaster wrote:

lay on hands should trigger an attack of opportunity. The game is getting too easy.

lay on hands didn't trigger AoO's in PF1 or DnD 3.5e

[TheFinish]

Dire Ursus wrote:

42nfl19 wrote:

shroudb wrote:

Due to the much limited amount of AoO in the system, I like that there are also less ways to mitigate them.

It now is a feature of specific classes and monsters rather than something that's always on and abudant.

So it is better if it's treated like that.

This is just a feeling but as I play against enemies at higher levels in the playtest module, I feel like they get more and more AOOs compared to lower levels.

A lot of higher level creatures with tails and such do in fact have AOO, however this version of attack of opportunity actually only triggers on movement, it would not trigger with the manipulate trait of Lay on Hands.

Did this get changed in an Update somewhere? The Bestiary's Attack of Opportunity triggers just like a PCs, and most monsters use it exactly the same way, though there's exceptions (like the Bunyip or the Giant Viper). However, all the other enemies either have stock AoO, sometimes limited to a particular attack, or have an enhanced AoO that is also triggered by Concentrate actions.

[Rysky]

TheFinish wrote:

Dire Ursus wrote:

42nfl19 wrote:

shroudb wrote:

Due to the much limited amount of AoO in the system, I like that there are also less ways to mitigate them.

It now is a feature of specific classes and monsters rather than something that's always on and abudant.

So it is better if it's treated like that.

This is just a feeling but as I play against enemies at higher levels in the playtest module, I feel like they get more and more AOOs compared to lower levels.

A lot of higher level creatures with tails and such do in fact have AOO, however this version of attack of opportunity actually only triggers on movement, it would not trigger with the manipulate trait of Lay on Hands.

Did this get changed in an Update somewhere? The Bestiary's Attack of Opportunity triggers just like a PCs, and most monsters use it exactly the same way, though there's exceptions (like the Bunyip or the Giant Viper). However, all the other enemies either have stock AoO, sometimes limited to a particular attack, or have an enhanced AoO that is also triggered by Concentrate actions.

I believe they were talking about Reactions that allow them to hit someone under certain circumstances (like 1st's AoOs), not the actual current AoO ability in 2nd. The Dragons are a good example of that (my favourite's the Black Dragon's).

[scoutmaster]

Bardarok wrote:

scoutmaster wrote:

lay on hands should trigger an attack of opportunity. The game is getting too easy.

lay on hands didn't trigger AoO's in PF1 or DnD 3.5e

this is not a good starting point, both systems did not have a three action system. now you can strike 2 times and heal.

[Rysky]

scoutmaster wrote:

Bardarok wrote:

scoutmaster wrote:

lay on hands should trigger an attack of opportunity. The game is getting too easy.

lay on hands didn't trigger AoO's in PF1 or DnD 3.5e

this is not a good starting point, both systems did not have a three action system. now you can strike 2 times and heal.

You could in 1st too.

[Dire Ursus]

Rysky wrote:

scoutmaster wrote:

Bardarok wrote:

scoutmaster wrote:

lay on hands should trigger an attack of opportunity. The game is getting too easy.

lay on hands didn't trigger AoO's in PF1 or DnD 3.5e

this is not a good starting point, both systems did not have a three action system. now you can strike 2 times and heal.

You could in 1st too.

Hell you could attack 8 times and heal in 1st.

[MER-c]

Dire Ursus wrote:

Rysky wrote:

scoutmaster wrote:

Bardarok wrote:

scoutmaster wrote:

lay on hands should trigger an attack of opportunity. The game is getting too easy.

lay on hands didn't trigger AoO's in PF1 or DnD 3.5e

this is not a good starting point, both systems did not have a three action system. now you can strike 2 times and heal.

You could in 1st too.

Hell you could attack 8 times and heal in 1st.

Ah the Swift Action, it will not be missed at my tables.

[Iron_Matt17]

I believe it was an oversight, I'm hoping they fix that soon... But the same could be said about the Cleric losing Emblazon Symbol. Same change, similar oversight of "where is the holy symbol coming from when they cast spells with their hands full?"
As of right now, I'm playing that Lay on Hands does not provoke until stated otherwise that this change was intentional...