How to Handle AP Archetypes / Feats?

[Bast L.]

Of course, everything in the game is up to the GM, but the idea here is to be as non-arbitrary as possible.

So, there's a new archetype in book 2 of Agents of Edgewatch, which has a feat that adds your level in damage to strikes until the end of your next turn, with a cost of 1 action. Having seen this, my more optimizing players are trying to work it into their characters, not even in this AP. Some people have said that AP stuff is specific to that AP, and you shouldn't allow it outside of the AP. But I don't know of such a restriction (other than just tacking it on).

In the AP that gives the option, I tend to wait until players gain access, but outside, a simple addition to backstory could allow access to many of the options.

How do you all handle them? Is there any official guidance on it?

Edit: Another example is Sudden Bolt, which some say is broken, I think is fine. But it is telling that they didn't include it in the APG, like they did some feats from AoA. Maybe Secrets of Magic will have it.

[Salamileg]

I handle it on a case-by-case basis. The Edgewatch archetype you mentioned, or the level 20 monk feat from AoA? Probably wouldn't allow those. The elemental spells from Extinction Curse? Might as well be considered common in my games.

[Kasoh]

Bast L. wrote:

Of course, everything in the game is up to the GM, but the idea here is to be as non-arbitrary as possible.

So, there's a new archetype in book 2 of Agents of Edgewatch, which has a feat that adds your level in damage to strikes until the end of your next turn, with a cost of 1 action. Having seen this, my more optimizing players are trying to work it into their characters, not even in this AP. Some people have said that AP stuff is specific to that AP, and you shouldn't allow it outside of the AP. But I don't know of such a restriction (other than just tacking it on).

In the AP that gives the option, I tend to wait until players gain access, but outside, a simple addition to backstory could allow access to many of the options.

How do you all handle them? Is there any official guidance on it?

Edit: Another example is Sudden Bolt, which some say is broken, I think is fine. But it is telling that they didn't include it in the APG, like they did some feats from AoA. Maybe Secrets of Magic will have it.

There's a quote from a developer or designer somewhere that they are putting content in products where it makes the most sense for that content. It plays into their new product design where there we shouldn't expect a combat book, a nature book, or whatever 'secrets of X' to follow the magic book coming out next year. So we'll see interesting stuff in the AP backmatter as a matter of course I think.

That said, if you don't want players to have access to things, that's what the rarity tags are for. They only get what you let them have access to and this edition empowers you to control that.

But aside from backgrounds, I don't think these are meant to be AP specific.

[Garretmander]

Bast L. wrote:

Is there any official guidance on it?

If these feats are tagged uncommon, then the rule is that the GM must give a player permission to take the feat. The GM is advised to work it into the story rather than just hand it out, but that depends on how your table works.

[Bast L.]

Page 35 of the GMG gives some guidance for rarity. Applicable to the feat I mentioned would be the "Access", which could, or could not, be handled by the character's backstory, it's not clear. Many uncommon feats, equipment, and spells are available to players with access (archetypes, racial weapon feats, focus spells), without needing input from the GM.

Of course, I could decide to allow it, or not. That applies to everything, even common, but this is the first thing I've seen where I thought, "I can't allow this, every martial would have to take it."

[BishopMcQ]

If it's the feat that I think you're talking about, the access is listed in the pre-requisite Dedication feat. The bonus damage feat comes as the next choice. Given some of the other restrictions on types of attacks made with the feat, I don't believe it is one that every martial will immediately queue up for.

Spoiler:

The AP offers an NPC with the necessary background to teach the PCs if they ally with him. That can serve as plenty of plot hooks for side quests and RP potential.

[Nocte ex Mortis]

Just for clarification on this, are you talking about Heaven’s Thunder? I mean, it’s a decent power, but it’s very limited at the same time. It only works on unarmed strikes and Monk weapons. Those aren’t exactly powerhouse weapons to begin with, so I’m really not seeing the issue with someone giving up two Class Feats for a boost in damage that effectively reduces their actions by 1 every round they use it, unless they’re already a Monk, or some weird Ranger using Monk weapons for Twin Flurry.

[Bast L.]

Yeah, talking about Heaven's Thunder. Looking at some options, temple sword, d8, or even d6 monk weapons would quickly outpace any others, with + level to damage, animal instinct barbarian, monk dedication + ancestral weaponry, the Sky and Heaven stance from Heavenseeker dedication.

Attacks with Heaven's Thunder aren't too limited.

Also, it lasts until the end of your next turn. Nothing compared to this, like smite evil. I guess Giant instinct barbarian keeps up for a time (and even exceeds at certain levels), but it has a steep cost. You could even combine them if you used moment of clarity, though that's an extra action, and a feat.

[HammerJack]

With things published in APs in general, I'd always take a look to see if there's any reason not to allow them.

With Heaven's Thunder, specifically, someone messed up. I believe it has an internal "errata this if we ever have time to get to it" flag already. I would not recommend allowing it as written, but I'd certainly consider houseruling in a weaker version if one of my players really wanted it because it fit their character, and not just because it's waaaay too strong.

[Elfteiroh]

Best balanced version I’ve seen is to change the bonus damages to be based on the number of dices instead of the level, to make it more similar to other damage bonuses.
But yeah, Mark Seifter confirmed it is on an internal list of things to make errata for. Also confirming that PF2 APs might actually see errata.

[PossibleCabbage]

The dedication feat in question clearly states: "Access trained
by a current or former member of a House of Perfection".

So if the character in question was trained by a member of the Houses of Perfection (including having trained at the Houses of Perfection, by virtue of being from Jalmeray) they can take the dedication.