Is "Interact" problematic?

[Ascalaphus]

As a quick sanity check, am I overlooking something obvious?

Quickdraw feat wrote:

Quickdraw [1 Action]

You draw your weapon and attack with the same motion. You Interact to draw a weapon, then Strike with that weapon.

So the way to use this would be to walk up to someone, then use quickdraw to draw a weapon and strike them as a single action.

Parry weapon property wrote:

Parry: This weapon can be used defensively to block attacks. While wielding this weapon, if your proficiency with it is trained or better, you can spend an Interact action to position your weapon defensively, gaining a +1 circumstance bonus to AC until the start of your next turn.

Now let's look at the Interact action:

Basic Actions wrote:

Interact [1 Action]

[Manipulate]
You use your hand or hands to manipulate an object or the terrain. You can grab an unattended or stored object, open a door, or produce some similar effect. You might have to attempt a skill check to determine if your Interact action was successful.

So the Interact action has the manipulate trait.

Fighter: Attack of Opportunity wrote:

Attack of Opportunity [reaction]

Trigger A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action, makes a ranged attack, or leaves a square during a move action it’s using.
Effect You lash out at a foe that leaves an opening. Make a melee Strike against the triggering creature. If your attack is a critical hit and the trigger was a manipulate action, you disrupt that action. This Strike doesn’t count toward your multiple attack penalty, and your multiple attack penalty doesn’t apply to this Strike.

So drawing weapons with Interact actions in general provokes. Okay. That's a notable change from PF1. But quickdraw specifically is written so that if you want to get anything out of it, you have to walk up to people, and then draw your weapon, so presumably in their threatened area.

And using a main-gauche to gain a bonus to AC with the Parrying property? Also provokes.

===

Someone please tell me what I overlooked? Or is this really as weird as it seems?

[Xenocrat]

Why do you have to walk up to people with quickdraw? You can use it if you're talking face to face and then combat starts, probably not an uncommon rogue situation. AoOs are so rare now that it provoking isn't much of a problem anyway. I think this is working as intended. And if you win initiative before they get their own weapons out it's a complete non issue.

The parrying property being manipulate is weird and seems wrong.

[painted_green]

+1 to Xenocrat's response. Quickdraw provoking seems fine (its main point, I would say, is to save you the Interact action just for drawing; the possible AoO is the price you have to pay), but Parry definitely should not provoke in my opinion.

[vestris]

I think I like this as it gives quick (high initiative) fighters an edge over those that are slow. And if it is true it accounts for all weapon drawing.

So a fighter that wins the initiative and has quickdraw, walks up to the opponent, draws, strikes twice and gets an AoO against his opponent if he draws in front of him.

[PossibleCabbage]

Parrying should not provoke.

Drawing a weapon probably should.

[CyberMephit]

1) unless you only pick fights with Fighters, most enemies will not have AOO reactions.
2) quickdraw also applies to ranged weapons.

I agree that parrying seems weird and maybe needs errata.

[Zaister]

Remember that provoking is usually not a big thing. Only very few opponents will have Attack of Opportunity. In most cases, you will assume that opponents cannot use that action, unless they have previously shown they can.

[Ascalaphus]

vestris wrote:

I think I like this as it gives quick (high initiative) fighters an edge over those that are slow. And if it is true it accounts for all weapon drawing.

So a fighter that wins the initiative and has quickdraw, walks up to the opponent, draws, strikes twice and gets an AoO against his opponent if he draws in front of him.

There doesn't seem to be much you can do to consistently get high initiative though. I mean, keep up your Perception, but that's about it. It's not like PF1 where you can take so many bonuses that winning initiative is practically guaranteed.

[lordcirth]

Ascalaphus wrote:

vestris wrote:

I think I like this as it gives quick (high initiative) fighters an edge over those that are slow. And if it is true it accounts for all weapon drawing.

So a fighter that wins the initiative and has quickdraw, walks up to the opponent, draws, strikes twice and gets an AoO against his opponent if he draws in front of him.

There doesn't seem to be much you can do to consistently get high initiative though. I mean, keep up your Perception, but that's about it. It's not like PF1 where you can take so many bonuses that winning initiative is practically guaranteed.

Depends. You could max stealth and sneak a lot, which is quite good.

[Ascalaphus]

Xenocrat wrote:

Why do you have to walk up to people with quickdraw? You can use it if you're talking face to face and then combat starts, probably not an uncommon rogue situation. AoOs are so rare now that it provoking isn't much of a problem anyway. I think this is working as intended. And if you win initiative before they get their own weapons out it's a complete non issue.

The parrying property being manipulate is weird and seems wrong.

I'm not so sure AoOs will really be that rare. Fighters get them by default, champions and paladins get them as class feats, and rangers have Disrupt Prey which also triggers on Manipulate actions. Of course monsters and NPCs don't have to have AoOs, but they're very powerful. I think writers will be tempted to use them a lot when designing monsters. They make a lot of sense for monsters with natural reach. And without AoOs a lot of bosses are sitting ducks.

So why do you have to walk up to people to quickdraw? Because how else are you going to use it? You draw and immediately strike. That only works if you're already close enough to hit them.

(Or using a ranged weapon, sure. But the feat's text contains no obvious hints that this was intended only for ranged attacks.)

[Ascalaphus]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Parrying should not provoke.

Drawing a weapon probably should.

Should it provoke? I mean, in PF1 it was one of the typical things that didn't.

[Ascalaphus]

lordcirth wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

vestris wrote:

I think I like this as it gives quick (high initiative) fighters an edge over those that are slow. And if it is true it accounts for all weapon drawing.

So a fighter that wins the initiative and has quickdraw, walks up to the opponent, draws, strikes twice and gets an AoO against his opponent if he draws in front of him.

There doesn't seem to be much you can do to consistently get high initiative though. I mean, keep up your Perception, but that's about it. It's not like PF1 where you can take so many bonuses that winning initiative is practically guaranteed.

Depends. You could max stealth and sneak a lot, which is quite good.

Yeah but is the maximum stealth you can get at your level really all that different from the maximum perception you could get? Is it all that different from the perception your opponents can get?

[painted_green]

vestris wrote:

I think I like this as it gives quick (high initiative) fighters an edge over those that are slow. And if it is true it accounts for all weapon drawing.

So a fighter that wins the initiative and has quickdraw, walks up to the opponent, draws, strikes twice and gets an AoO against his opponent if he draws in front of him.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the CRB states that not being able to use reactions before your first turn is no longer a given. If i remember correctly, it is basically GM's choice whether you get the reaction or not. When I am GM, I will most likely rule that everyone gets their reactions from the start in the case of a run-of-the-mill everyone-rolled-Perception-for-initiative combat situation.

EDIT: I completely missed the point of the enemy not having their weapon out yet, but I will leave my irrelevant response here for the rule tidbit. *shrug*

[kogarou]

I dislike when players say "assume I'm always detecting magic, and my weapon's drawn, and I have a readied attack". Are there any relevant rules about this? It seems like the exploration mode rules could apply (you're slow if you're so cautious), but then my players will probably just slow walk everywhere. I don't want to embarrass them in-game either, just give them a sense of baseline normal behavior.

AKA, given this quote: "Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game" - what new tools does this edition give me to limit that opportunity?

[HammerJack]

This is exactly what exploration mode rules are for. You ask what people are doing as they move, and if someone is searching carefully and moving slowly, they move slowly and make secret perception checks on things they may have walked into. If someone is detecting magic the whole time, that's what they're doing. If someone wants being on guard to translate into a permanently readied attack, then they can either learn to live with disappointment (likely), or learn to live in a world of monsters with permanently rea died attacks (if you're really ornery.)

[lordcirth]

kogarou wrote:

I dislike when players say "assume I'm always detecting magic, and my weapon's drawn, and I have a readied attack". Are there any relevant rules about this? It seems like the exploration mode rules could apply (you're slow if you're so cautious), but then my players will probably just slow walk everywhere. I don't want to embarrass them in-game either, just give them a sense of baseline normal behavior.

AKA, given this quote: "Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game" - what new tools does this edition give me to limit that opportunity?

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter. Reacting quickly is what initiative is for. IIRC in the playtest, constantly casting a cantrip or concentrating on a spell tired you out after 10 minutes.

[Mathmuse]

I brought that up during the playtest. For example, on November 16 Themetricsystem created a thread Hear our Plea(s) where everyone was allowed one complaint about the playtest rules. My complaint, comment #8 was about Method of Use and Interact. My main complaint was that some of the PCs were starting to carry their weapons in hand all the time and asking others to open doors for them, but I mentioned that merely changing a grip from carrying a two-handed weapon in one hand to wielding it in two hands provoked an attack of opportunity.

I had hoped Paizo would fix it.

I am planning on houseruling the Interact action so that some simple tasks performed with it, such as drawing a weapon, do not provoke. My houserule creation is delayed until I buy the new books. I used my money to pay medical bills instead of pre-order.

[kogarou]

Thanks all for the perspective everyone, I'm feeling a lot more confident about this. Still can't find anything preventing players from having their weapons drawn all the time, so I'll just embrace it. They'll probably leave them sheathed in town, and if someone wants to draw a weapon that implies we just roll initiative instead.

Mathmuse - thanks for the link. One update is that there's now a low-level Athletics skill feat that allows you to keep holding a weapon while climbing that should help with the action tax. And sometimes you can jump instead of climbing. And while it's a bit clunky, I'd imagine that the rogue in your example who put their weapons down and cozied up to peer into the lock would be well-served by just fumbling to pick up one weapon when caught off guard. Two-weapon fighting doesn't directly add much damage after all - you get 90% of the effect just by picking the right weapon for the situation.

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean, realistically for weapons too large to carry at the hip, the most common carriage for those is "held, resting up against your body in a way that is comfortable to march with." Not just for spears and polearms and such, also for large swords; back sheaths are sort of an invention of movies and video games.

So it's hard to envision a way one could carry a greatsword where it could be retrieved relatively quickly that does not already involve holding it.

[Vallarthis]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I mean, realistically for weapons too large to carry at the hip, the most common carriage for those is "held, resting up against your body in a way that is comfortable to march with." Not just for spears and polearms and such, also for large swords; back sheaths are sort of an invention of movies and video games.

So it's hard to envision a way one could carry a greatsword where it could be retrieved relatively quickly that does not already involve holding it.

The historical method was to have an attendant carry your big sword for you. Different players will consider that either an awesome or terrible idea for their character, I imagine.

[PossibleCabbage]

Vallarthis wrote:

The historical method was to have an attendant carry your big sword for you. Different players will consider that either an awesome or terrible idea for their character, I imagine.

Depends on how rich you are, lots of people had big weapons but not servants. I mean, plenty of people had to march around with spears or halberds or pikes and didn't have people to carry them, and those same techniques work for big carrying big swords. For the level of technology on Golarion, I imagine the standard carriage for a greatsword is something like this or this

Scabbards and sheaths were mostly for weapons for which it would not be socially unacceptable to walk around with in a social setting. If the "slaughter swords" are out, you're in a context where violence is not improbable, if not because of the context around you then because you can just start swinging that thing whenever so people around you are going to be ill at ease.

[kogarou]

Interesting idea to allow perma-wielding only by 1H weapons!

Also want to add to Mathmuse's scenario - the rogue picking up a weapon would be at risk of attack of opportunity or other reactions from their foe (who certainly doesn't want the weapons to be picked up). It might be best for the rogue to Step, Stride, and draw another weapon from their Merisiel dagger belt. Still, in general I'm fine with a slightly off-raw reading allowing players to grab and pass but NOT use two items at once.

[Narxiso]

My issue with quick draw is in how specific it is. Quick draw, as written, is iaojutsu. I wanted a quick draw technique that allows the drawing of items for within a shorter duration, such as pulling out two weapons at once, pulling out a potion or elixir and using it, or pulling out a weapon while moving. Mandatory weapon drawing also seems like a limited solely for martial characters, as Casting a spell does not force casters to spend actions to draw casting implements.

[sherlock1701]

Narxiso wrote:

My issue with quick draw is in how specific it is. Quick draw, as written, is iaojutsu. I wanted a quick draw technique that allows the drawing of items for within a shorter duration, such as pulling out two weapons at once, pulling out a potion or elixir and using it, or pulling out a weapon while moving. Mandatory weapon drawing also seems like a limited solely for martial characters, as Casting a spell does not force casters to spend actions to draw casting implements.

I'm in agreement there, it could easily have been a free action once per turn with less restriction on the item type. As it is it's pretty dumb, doesn't really do much for you compared to 1e.

[shadram]

kogarou wrote:

I dislike when players say "assume I'm always detecting magic, and my weapon's drawn, and I have a readied attack". Are there any relevant rules about this? It seems like the exploration mode rules could apply (you're slow if you're so cautious), but then my players will probably just slow walk everywhere. I don't want to embarrass them in-game either, just give them a sense of baseline normal behavior.

AKA, given this quote: "Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game" - what new tools does this edition give me to limit that opportunity?

Players can only be using one exploration activity at a time, which include things like Scout (+1 on initiative), Search (free perception rolls), Detect Magic (or any other cantrip) or Avoid Notice (be sneaky).

Also worth noting that Detect Magic won't always alert them to the presence of a magical aura before they walk into it, unless they move very slowly. Same for Search and traps.

[Vallarthis]

Also worth noting, detect magic and readying an action/attack are each 2 actions, so you can't be doing them both at the same time, let alone moving as well.

If they decide to just go everywhere very slowly, and you want to hustle them along, the time-honoured tradition is to bust out some nasty wandering monsters (that aren't carrying treasure). Maybe they spot some rust monster tracks. It just passed this way, who knows how long before it comes back?

[kogarou]

Fair Narxiso, though spellcasting is typically a two or three action activity. Quick Draw sounds great for anyone regularly throwing knives. Maybe there will be more feats for other interactions? I see a 4th-level fighter feat (Dual-Handed Assault) that lets you switch to 2-H grip and Strike as a single action (even if it's not normally a 2-H weapon; damage is improved over normal behavior with this feat either way).

Since we're talking about hands, I'd like to confirm how bards work (and mostly ignore hands limitations): it looks like many bard composition spells aren't somatic, does this mean that using an instrument to cast them (which requires "at least one of your hands to do so") triggers Attack of Opportunity? i.e. would it gain the manipulate trait even though it's not somatic? It seems the answer is YES if using an instrument for a composition spell in particular, as these "require you to use the Performance skill while casting them" even though there is no call for a check to be made, and the Performance skill (without literally taking the Perform action) says it add the manipulate trait if you use an instrument. This would suggest that bards in close range could safely avoid AOO for these specific spells if they simply sing instead. They could dance, but with its Move trait that would also provoke AOO.

It seems that bards can play their instruments "with one hand free" even though all musical instruments typically require two hands. I guess bards are ridiculously deft or magical when it comes to music in combat. Probably even just using magic to manipulate e.g. their violin's bow. This system lets the bard actually engage in combat, at the cost of 1 action to recast their compositions each turn they desire the effect.

[kogarou]

Vallarthis, thanks, that makes a lot more sense than having to calculate the literal speed players move and think about how much arriving early or late in the day causes an impact on an event at the destination. Because that's usually beyond player knowledge. I'll use this trick sparingly but when I think it's needed.

Perhaps there will even be guidelines in the GMG about how travel speed interacts with random encounters. Though hey, right off the bat, it makes sense if players can estimate how many times they need to make camp (given miles to destination), that could lead to some interesting thinking. Fast characters like elves laden with Speed feats might be able to take the 1/2 Speed penalty from an exploration activity without slowing their group, allowing them to avoid an extra encounter roll. For short trips that should take well less than a day even moving slowly, characters should all just pick a slow activity.

Suddenly I love this.

[The Gleeful Grognard]

Drawing a weapon should cast an AoO imo.

Be interesting to see where it goes and how different feats could interact. I will probably keep it RAW until errata as even with parrying it only serves to give more effectiveness to AoO using classes and NPCs.

[Ascalaphus]

Narxiso wrote:

My issue with quick draw is in how specific it is. Quick draw, as written, is iaojutsu. I wanted a quick draw technique that allows the drawing of items for within a shorter duration, such as pulling out two weapons at once, pulling out a potion or elixir and using it, or pulling out a weapon while moving. Mandatory weapon drawing also seems like a limited solely for martial characters, as Casting a spell does not force casters to spend actions to draw casting implements.

Yeah, I was looking at the ranger and fighters 2 weapon feats and thinking "how do you draw all those weapons?"

Quickdraw putting a strike into the action really doesn't help because then you're already onto Multiple Attack Penalty which you might want to avoid when using another feat. And it blocks Open feats because you've already made an attack.

I don't understand why they didn't just make it a "free action once per turn" to draw a weapon.

[Ascalaphus]

Mathmuse wrote:

I brought that up during the playtest. For example, on November 16 Themetricsystem created a thread Hear our Plea(s) where everyone was allowed one complaint about the playtest rules. My complaint, comment #8 was about Method of Use and Interact. My main complaint was that some of the PCs were starting to carry their weapons in hand all the time and asking others to open doors for them, but I mentioned that merely changing a grip from carrying a two-handed weapon in one hand to wielding it in two hands provoked an attack of opportunity.

I had hoped Paizo would fix it.

I am planning on houseruling the Interact action so that some simple tasks performed with it, such as drawing a weapon, do not provoke. My houserule creation is delayed until I buy the new books. I used my money to pay medical bills instead of pre-order.

I checked:

CRB p. 273 wrote:

Draw, stow, or pick up an item; 1 or 2 hands; Interact action
Change your grip by removing a hand from an item; 2 hands; Release action
Change your grip by adding a hand to an item; 2 hands; Interact action

(Release actions specifically don't provoke despite having the Manipulate trait.)

So I'm fine with grabbing a tuna sandwich being not such a great idea in the middle of combat, but changing the grip on your bastard sword really shouldn't provoke. I think they put way too many different things into the Interact action.

[Matthew Downie]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

plenty of people had to march around with spears or halberds or pikes and didn't have people to carry them, and those same techniques work for big carrying big swords. For the level of technology on Golarion, I imagine the standard carriage for a greatsword is something like ...this

Is he resting the blade of his greatsword on the back of his bare neck?

That seems uncomfortable.

I'm aware that big swords in real-life didn't have six feet of razor-sharp edge, but I'd be reluctant to try that with a +5 Golarion greatsword...

[pjrogers]

Matthew Downie wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

plenty of people had to march around with spears or halberds or pikes and didn't have people to carry them, and those same techniques work for big carrying big swords. For the level of technology on Golarion, I imagine the standard carriage for a greatsword is something like ...this

Is he resting the blade of his greatsword on the back of his bare neck?

That seems uncomfortable.

I'm aware that big swords in real-life didn't have six feet of razor-sharp edge, but I'd be reluctant to try that with a +5 Golarion greatsword...

That's a fairly common image from the period, albeit with some variation and maybe less neck exposure in some. I've always imagined that's how my bloodrager carries her sword.

[masda_gib]

Matthew Downie wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

plenty of people had to march around with spears or halberds or pikes and didn't have people to carry them, and those same techniques work for big carrying big swords. For the level of technology on Golarion, I imagine the standard carriage for a greatsword is something like ...this

Is he resting the blade of his greatsword on the back of his bare neck?

That seems uncomfortable.

I'm aware that big swords in real-life didn't have six feet of razor-sharp edge, but I'd be reluctant to try that with a +5 Golarion greatsword...

Many huge 2-handed swords had their edge not going right up to the guard but hat a few inches at the of the blade without an edge. So the neck is probably fine :)

[vestris]

Ascalaphus wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

vestris wrote:

I think I like this as it gives quick (high initiative) fighters an edge over those that are slow. And if it is true it accounts for all weapon drawing.

So a fighter that wins the initiative and has quickdraw, walks up to the opponent, draws, strikes twice and gets an AoO against his opponent if he draws in front of him.

There doesn't seem to be much you can do to consistently get high initiative though. I mean, keep up your Perception, but that's about it. It's not like PF1 where you can take so many bonuses that winning initiative is practically guaranteed.

Depends. You could max stealth and sneak a lot, which is quite good.

Yeah but is the maximum stealth you can get at your level really all that different from the maximum perception you could get? Is it all that different from the perception your opponents can get?

Strongly depends, on the situation and the opponent. If you get the drop on someone they will have to go with perception, while you use the skill of your choice. Lets say it is a fighter or a fighterish monster as we want to stay on the AoO example. Then they will likely have high proficiency in perception but unlikely high wisdom as well so their overall score evens out, while you as the attacker will choose a skill in which you are at peak proficiency and ability score. Be that stealth, deception, acrobatics or whatever fits the situation best. Plus it will likely be easier to gain circumstance bonus on your skill checks than on perception.

So I would figure you would have an edge of 3-4(5-6 with item) points over an equal level fighter. If both sides are surprised it would come down to perception and thus roughly a 50/50 situation which suits the situation.

[Ascalaphus]

Yeah so overall slightly in your favor but not by much. Doesn't seem great justification for spending a feat.

The thing that bothers me is: if you draw a weapon, move up, and then strike, you don't provoke. It's drawing a weapon really fast that makes you vulnerable. If anything, quickdraw should be less provokey than regular weapon drawing.

[lordcirth]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Yeah so overall slightly in your favor but not by much. Doesn't seem great justification for spending a feat.

The thing that bothers me is: if you draw a weapon, move up, and then strike, you don't provoke. It's drawing a weapon really fast that makes you vulnerable. If anything, quickdraw should be less provokey than regular weapon drawing.

If the enemy wins initiative, then both a normal draw and a quickdraw will provoke. Quickdraw is still strictly better in this situation. One thing I do notice is that Quickdraw and Sudden Charge don't work together very well.

[Captain Morgan]

lordcirth wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

Yeah so overall slightly in your favor but not by much. Doesn't seem great justification for spending a feat.

The thing that bothers me is: if you draw a weapon, move up, and then strike, you don't provoke. It's drawing a weapon really fast that makes you vulnerable. If anything, quickdraw should be less provokey than regular weapon drawing.

If the enemy wins initiative, then both a normal draw and a quickdraw will provoke. Quickdraw is still strictly better in this situation. One thing I do notice is that Quickdraw and Sudden Charge don't work together very well.

Luckily, I don't think any class gets both Sudden Charge and Quickdraw anyway.

[Captain Morgan]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Narxiso wrote:

My issue with quick draw is in how specific it is. Quick draw, as written, is iaojutsu. I wanted a quick draw technique that allows the drawing of items for within a shorter duration, such as pulling out two weapons at once, pulling out a potion or elixir and using it, or pulling out a weapon while moving. Mandatory weapon drawing also seems like a limited solely for martial characters, as Casting a spell does not force casters to spend actions to draw casting implements.

Yeah, I was looking at the ranger and fighters 2 weapon feats and thinking "how do you draw all those weapons?"

Quickdraw putting a strike into the action really doesn't help because then you're already onto Multiple Attack Penalty which you might want to avoid when using another feat. And it blocks Open feats because you've already made an attack.

I don't understand why they didn't just make it a "free action once per turn" to draw a weapon.

Fighters are probably well suited to carrying a single weapon in hand in exploration mode, which still leaves their other hand open for practical purposes. When combat begins, they need to spend an action to draw 1 weapon, which might mean no double slice if they need to move on their first turn, but their no worse off than a barbarian who want to draw or grip their two hander, rage, stride, and strike in the same turn. By turn two, these guys have hit their stride. Also, neither gets Quick Draw unless they multiclass.

Rangers actually have no major issue drawing weapons because their extra attacks take MAP normally no matter what feats/activities they are connected to. Because they aren't funneled into one weapon group, they are ideal switch hitters and with Quick Draw are well suited to starting a fight unarmed so they can whip out whatever is best suited to the encounter.

What this translates to in practice is that in the first round of combat they probably Hunt Prey > Quick Draw bow > Hunted Shot for 3 strikes at the same penalties as if they already had the weapon in hand and did Hunt Prey > Hunted Shot > Strike. On the next round, if the enemy closed in on them, they can drop the bow, Quick Draw agile weapon > Quick Draw Agile Weapon > Twin Takedown, which again has the same penalties as Twin Takedown > Strike > Strike.

There are some situations where you might not be able to launch your Twin Takedown as fast as you like, such as if you have to move and draw both weapins, but Quick Draw is still a huge action economy enhancer for Rangers anyway you (dobule) slice it.

The only issue class I've seen that may struggle with Quick Draw is the Twin Feint rogue, but Twin Feint was always meant to be a more situational feat becauses rogues give up so much less than other martials for wielding the smaller TWF weapons.

[Alyran]

I actually like that the first round of combat will actually include deliberate drawing of weapons as part of the action economy. It creates some potentially interesting trade-offs, especially in town situations.

I also don't think your first turn needs to always be maximum efficiency. Sometimes things don't go the way you planned and there should be consequences for that.

[RussianAlly]

Yeah, I kinda feel that with the surprise round gone, having one side being uncomfortable with the action economy for a round is an important part of the ambush mechanics, too.

[Stone Dog]

lordcirth wrote:

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter.

wait... Really?

So does the game actually want to prevent you from setting up an action if initiative hasn't been rolled?

[David knott 242]

Stone Dog wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter.

wait... Really?

So does the game actually want to prevent you from setting up an action if initiative hasn't been rolled?

Yes, that still seems to be the case. Presumably, maintaining that level of alertness in exploration mode is too tiring to keep up for 10 minutes or so at a time.

[vestris]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Yeah so overall slightly in your favor but not by much. Doesn't seem great justification for spending a feat.

The thing that bothers me is: if you draw a weapon, move up, and then strike, you don't provoke. It's drawing a weapon really fast that makes you vulnerable. If anything, quickdraw should be less provokey than regular weapon drawing.

I would disagree, in PF1 terms yes but in PF2 this is the difference between trained and Master or trained and Legendary. And as others already noted Quickdraw is especially useful for ranged or thrown weapons.

Regarding ready action in exploration mode. This depends on the exact phrasing of the ready action, the playtest version is clearly phrased in a way that sets it in encounter mode.
However if you slow down exploration mode while nearing an encounter as in: The group spotted a group of goblins and have not been noticed, now one of them sneaks up while the others ready actions to shoot if he/she is detected. I would consider this fine.

You could just switch to encounter mode, roll initiative and then let them play it out turn by turn, as the Goblins would not act differently while they don't notice the players.

I would prefer version 1 as it is less abrupt in the change of narration, and the flow is just better, letting only one person roll while the others don't change their behavior unless detection happens.

[The Gleeful Grognard]

Stone Dog wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter.

wait... Really?

So does the game actually want to prevent you from setting up an action if initiative hasn't been rolled?

Yes, that is how it works. It is less silly than it sounds though.

If you take a hostile action the GM rolls, whomever has the better initiative acts first.
If you are using a stealthy first strike approach it is your stealth vs their perception.

Works this way in 5e D&D as well and is good in play.

[HammerJack]

Honestly, readied actions out of combat were almost never a good device for handling things outside of initiative in 1E, either.

Scenarios with two groups that are aware of each other and getting ready work better with an initiative roll than a nested mess of readied actions.

Scenarios where group A is aware of group B, but not vice versa are better handled as a surprise round.

Scenarios where there is only one group and environmental challenges don't need the formal action economy framework of readying at all, just players describing their plan before you start determining necessary checks, rolling dice and determining results.

[lordcirth]

Stone Dog wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter.

wait... Really?

So does the game actually want to prevent you from setting up an action if initiative hasn't been rolled?

Determining how fast you react is at the start of an encounter is exactly what initiative is. If you want to be ready for a fight, have your weapon out and keep your eyes open. Or be sneaky so you can roll stealth for initiative. Take the time to set up an ambush to get a bonus. But you can't just say "I ready an attack" and just always act first.

[Ascalaphus]

vestris wrote:

Regarding ready action in exploration mode. This depends on the exact phrasing of the ready action, the playtest version is clearly phrased in a way that sets it in encounter mode.

However if you slow down exploration mode while nearing an encounter as in: The group spotted a group of goblins and have not been noticed, now one of them sneaks up while the others ready actions to shoot if he/she is detected. I would consider this fine.

You could just switch to encounter mode, roll initiative and then let them play it out turn by turn, as the Goblins would not act differently while they don't notice the players.

I would prefer version 1 as it is less abrupt in the change of narration, and the flow is just better, letting only one person roll while the others don't change their behavior unless detection happens.

I would say that the situation you describe is pretty much encounter mode. When it becomes important to track actions from turn to turn, you're not in exploration mode anymore.

[Stone Dog]

lordcirth wrote:

Stone Dog wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter.

wait... Really?

So does the game actually want to prevent you from setting up an action if initiative hasn't been rolled?

Determining how fast you react is at the start of an encounter is exactly what initiative is. If you want to be ready for a fight, have your weapon out and keep your eyes open. Or be sneaky so you can roll stealth for initiative. Take the time to set up an ambush to get a bonus. But you can't just say "I ready an attack" and just always act first.

I know what initiative is, thank you.

My surprise comes in with the the idea that technically you can't have a specific "if x then I do y" set up outside of starting an encounter.

[Alyran]

Stone Dog wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

Stone Dog wrote:

lordcirth wrote:

You can't ready actions outside of an encounter.

wait... Really?

So does the game actually want to prevent you from setting up an action if initiative hasn't been rolled?

Determining how fast you react is at the start of an encounter is exactly what initiative is. If you want to be ready for a fight, have your weapon out and keep your eyes open. Or be sneaky so you can roll stealth for initiative. Take the time to set up an ambush to get a bonus. But you can't just say "I ready an attack" and just always act first.

I know what initiative is, thank you.

My surprise comes in with the the idea that technically you can't have a specific "if x then I do y" set up outside of starting an encounter.

I think the point is that if you do that and it triggers, that's just the start of initiative and at that point you're just taking your turn.