Alternatives to Striking Runes


Homebrew and House Rules


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The Striking rune is a Fundamental Weapon Rune for a reason- it functionally replaces the damage contribution of PF1's fire/frost/shock enchantments. However, it does so while removing any sense of individuality and variation from those same enchants. I'm well aware that they still technically exist, but wouldn't it be so much better to integrate them back into the damage role they were always meant for?

This expansion of "Striking" runes (any of which can be slotted into the original Striking's place) aims to cover elemental variants like fire/frost/shock, disproportionate adders like Vicious and Bane, and even damage mutators like Brilliant Energy.

Elemental Rune (Flaming, Freezing, Shocking, Corrosive): Item 5/13(Greater)/20(Major)
- The weapon is cloaked in elemental energy, increasing the weapon damage dice to 2 instead of 1. These extra damage dice are Fire/Cold/Acid/Electricity damage. The Greater version increases the damage dice to 3, the Major to 4.

Vicious Rune: Item 3/11(Greater)/18(Major)
- The weapon draws vitality from the wielder to more easily damage foes, increasing the weapon damage dice to 2 instead of 1. However, when the wielder hits with a Strike, the weapon deals 1 die of weapon damage to them in return. The Greater version increases the damage dice (but not the return damage) to 3, the Major to 4.

Bane Rune: Item 3/11(Greater)/18(Major)
- The weapon has a particular hatred for a particular foe, increasing the weapon damage dice to 2 instead of 1 against foes with a Trait chosen when the Rune is crafted. The Greater version increases the damage dice by a further 1 regardless of the target, the Major by 2.

Energy Rune (Fire, Ice, Lightning, Acid): Item 4/12(Greater)/19(Major)
- The weapon's striking surface (And potentially more) is made of elemental energy, increasing the weapon damage dice to 2 instead of 1. All damage dealt by the weapon becomes Fire/Cold/Acid/Electricity damage, unless the original weapon had the Versatile property, in which case only the primary damage type is replaced.

As you can likely deduce, the nature of the Bane runes were toned down a fair bit from the "all or nothing" base, since in PF1 you'd have other "runes" to pick up the slack. It and Vicious are the discount Striking runes in this model, while the Elemental Runes are ranked higher because of the way Resistance and Vulnerability work. Likewise, the Energy Runes are much weaker than you'd think, to the point of being the same level as Striking because of the lack of touch AC and resistance frequency.

What do you all think?


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

Bane and Vicious seem like trap options; why would you get a rune when a strictly better rune is available only one level later? Especially egregious in the case of Bane, where you might as well not have a rune at all against many enemies.

I do like the general idea; I've wanted fundamental elemental runes ever since I knew that fundamental runes were a thing.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A minor quibble: the striking rune replaces the damage contribution of PF1's +1 enchantments.

Since you can still have elemental property runes on top, it's largely the same as the previous edition, no?

I do think being able to frontload the elemental damage in place of the bonus weapon damage for a price or level adjustment is a fine idea. It lets you make bigger elemental hits with high dice weapons.

As for Vicious: I tend to think effects like that should have a set amount of return damage. Not rolling for the damage speeds up play and lets the user better predict when and how to use it.

I think overall your concept is pretty good. I would need to playtest it a bit to be sure, but it doesn't seem broken.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dusbringer wrote:
The Striking rune is a Fundamental Weapon Rune for a reason- it functionally replaces the damage contribution of PF1's fire/frost/shock enchantments. However, it does so while removing any sense of individuality and variation from those same enchants.

I'm a little confused by this. The elemental enchantments are still in PF2 and have more personality than before if I recall. As they're property runes, you could run with all three of them on the same weapon eventually. And unlike before, we can move them between weapons, or duplicate them to offhand weapons with a ring.

PF2 versions
Fire: +1d6 fire damage - Crits add persistent fire damage.
Frost: +1d6 frost damage - Crits add Slowed 1 until end of your next turns, DC 24 fort save.
Shock: +1d6 electric damage - Crits chain up to two additional creatures.

PF1 versions
Fire: +1d6 fire damage
Frost: +1d6 frost damge
Shock: +1d6 electric damage

And unlike PF1, these actually scale up.
Or am I missing something that makes us unable to apply them?

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Alternatives to Striking Runes All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules