I'd think still doing the disruption is probably correct, the wording on critical immunity does specify that it does not apply to other critical success effects. Essentially, the target is still subject to critical successes, they're just immune to the double damage part of it specifically.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
Walking out of your threatened range isn't an trigger with the manipulate action.
There is no disruption to be had in the first place.
If the trigger had been that they cast a spell while in your threatened range, and been a spell that has the manipulate trait, then you would have disrupted the spell. And that would have happened even with the immunity to critical hits, as that only prevents the additional damage done on a critical hit.
Did your group run it as disrupting the movement of the creature?
Engulf doesn't have the Manipulate Trait either. A Gelatinous Cube isn't actually capable of Manipulate Actions, as it has no appendages.
Yes. The only thing Critical Immunity says it changes is the damage.
When a creature immune to critical hits is critically hit by a Strike or other attack that deals damage, it takes normal damage instead of double damage.
Engulf doesn't have the Manipulate Trait either. A Gelatinous Cube isn't actually capable of Manipulate Actions, as it has no appendages.Well that settles it in this situation, but if the action has the manipulate trait, would it still disrupt?
Yes, it only disrupts the action if it has the manipulate trait. Which is primarily going to be spell casting.
Those are all true, and do happen in combat, but a lot less frequently in my experience than spell casting. But good to point out so that the OP is familiar.
Drawing a weapon technically falls under that umbrella, which happens quite often in combat and is extremely noteworthy when your fighter rolls high on initiative or closes on an archer. I personally feel like it shouldn't and tend to house rule it not to, but it a very relevant example if you play it as written.
Drawing a weapon technically falls under that umbrella, which happens quite often in combat and is extremely noteworthy when your fighter rolls high on initiative or closes on an archer. I personally feel like it shouldn't and tend to house rule it not to, but it a very relevant example if you play it as written.
That only happens a lot in your first game. After that, you learn to keep your weapon drawn at all times.
Drawing a weapon technically falls under that umbrella, which happens quite often in combat and is extremely noteworthy when your fighter rolls high on initiative or closes on an archer. I personally feel like it shouldn't and tend to house rule it not to, but it a very relevant example if you play it as written.That only happens a lot in your first game. After that, you learn to keep your weapon drawn at all times.
Nah, see the example of closing on an archer. As an archer with a decent melee weapon, it is usually worth drawing it and going to town on someone who closes with you. If that creature has AoO, though, you're gonna get punished for it. Stepping away and firing is usually the better option but still isn't always practical if the creature has reach. Also, plenty of combats happen when you (or your enemies) don't have a chance to be ready for them. Then there are examples like Quick Draw-- using this feat in melee can get you smacked.
I'm not fully convinced weapons were intended to provoke because of how often the above examples come up and it not provoking in PF1, and think it may have just been an oversight. Never the less, it is something you should absolutely keep in mind at most tables, especially if you play PFS.
Drawing a weapon technically falls under that umbrella, which happens quite often in combat and is extremely noteworthy when your fighter rolls high on initiative or closes on an archer. I personally feel like it shouldn't and tend to house rule it not to, but it a very relevant example if you play it as written.That only happens a lot in your first game. After that, you learn to keep your weapon drawn at all times.
Yeah, anywhere my party thinks they might fight weapons are assumed to be in hand. It's basically only when you're ambushed in a place where you thought you were safe.