Hi. This is super basic, but I don't understand how ritual DCs work? In particular, what is the DC (primary and secondary) for Resurrect? Is there a minimum level for the primary caster? Can anyone (with the appropriate skill) be a secondary caster even if they don't cast spells? Are the components lost if the ritual fails?
Note that 5 is the minimum level for Resurrect. Like any spell, rituals can be heightened to higher levels (up to 10th). The formulas cited by Jared Walter still hold to calculate DCs, primary caster's minimum level, etc, at the higher level.
Rituals pretty much always have changed (improved) effects when heightened. Resurrect at minimum level, for instance, can only raise a subject of up to 10th level, dead within a week, and with a mostly intact body. At higher levels the subject's level can be higher, they can be dead for longer, and you need less of the body. The requirements also increase---you need more diamonds and secondary casters of a minimum level.
Also note that while components are usually consumed no matter what, Resurrect has a special clause that if you fail because the subject was unwilling or Pharasma vetoed it (but not for other reasons) the diamonds are not expended. (Pharasma's veto = GM discretion for plot reasons, mostly.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's see if I can avoid embarrassing myself too much by trying to provide a concrete example.
A party of 3 player characters managed to get someone to teach them the Animate Object ritual and they want to give it a go.
The party is level 8 and they have a Rogue, a Barbarian, and a Bard. The rogue uses Trick Magic Item and has the Arcana skill at expert proficiency. The barbarian uses craft to repair his shield and has craft at trained proficiency. The bard, although being a spellcaster, is going to sit out this time because he has nothing to contribute.
They decide to try creating a level 2 animated object creature. The table on the ritual says that they have to heighten the ritual to level 3 to create a creature of that level.
So, first hurdle - spell level. Since the rogue is primary caster, he needs to be at least character level 5 to cast a level 2 ritual. That passes since he is level 8.
The second hurdle - required proficiency. The primary check requires expert proficiency on the Arcana check. Which the rogue has, so that passes also.
So, with the hurdles out of the way, we can start casting.
DCs: Primary check is Arcana DC 22 + 5 = 27. Secondary check is Crafting DC 22 + 0 = 22.
So the characters gather together 105 GP worth of materials and rare oils and start the ritual. One day later they start making checks.
I'll skip providing numbers for the players skill modifiers. I'll just give the results of the checks.
First up is the barbarian making the crafting check. Unfortunately his dice didn't like him and he failed the check. But not crit fail. So that imposes a -4 penalty to the primary check.
Now, the players may wish to stop there, recover their costs, and try again the next day - but the rules don't support doing that.
Secondary casters attempt their checks before you attempt the primary check; no matter their results, the ritual proceeds to the primary check.
Since there is only the one secondary check, we proceed to the primary check. The materials are consumed and the roll is made. The rogue's dice like him fine, but with the -4 penalty it results in only a regular success overall.
So the players are now the proud owners of an animated coat rack minion. Either that or they could leave it there and let it attack anyone that tries to move it.
Thanks everyone! I admit I'm pretty surprised that this is all SO complicated. Also, how does one learn a ritual? The book says rituals are uncommon but doesn't say much more than that. I assume this is another case where the needed info is elsewhere but the book fails to provide a cross-reference (which is pretty much the big failure of the PF2 book...).
My head spinneth. Going to consult the CRB. Not exactly a simplified system.
@breithauptclan: not following some of your points.
- how is the barbarian’s shield repair at all related to the ritual?
- what does “trick magic item” the rogue has refer to?
[EDIT] reading your post again, I think you are just inficating why these two have these skills, unrelated to the specific ritual itself...[/EDIT]
- you base the ritual spell level requirement necessary on the base (Ritual spell level 2 for animate object) instead of the heightened level needed to make the animated object level 2, which is ritual spell level 3 - is this in error?
- is the required DC for the Primary skill check = (ritual level doubled) + very hard? So ritual at spell level 3 doubled is 6 (DC 22) + 5 for very hard so 27? And for Secondary, same but without Very hard?
This last question is for anyone - what does the last sentence of the first paragraph refer to: “The primary skill check determines the tradition”? What tradition is it referring to?
[EDIT - ok, so I think tradition might mean magic school - divinatiom, transmutation etc.... but if so, what does the following mean from the EFFECT paragraph in page 409:
If an effect lists a save DC, use your spell DC for the ritual’s magic tradition...
Do tge different traditions have differing DC’s?
[EDIT 2.0]Ah. Traditions are the source breakdown - primal/occult/arcane/divine. Question still stsnds - do they have differing DCs? Or, how/why do they/what causes them to differ?[/EDIT]
So after reading the CRB, it isn’t complicated. But the presentation/rules suffer in two ways:
1: There is, and I find this throughout the CRB, a tendency toward what I term “hanging connectivity” - hints of other related rules systems that aren’t explained, and leave me with an opaque understanding until I flick to the index, search (sometimes in vain) for the connected rule, read it, hoping it is both clear and whole, and then head back to where I was.
To whit: traditions in first paragraph. Common and uncommon in third paragraph.
2: Nomenclature: The reference to casters and spell level. The rules go to great lengths to indicate neither primary caster or secondary caster(s) need actually be...spell...casters. The rules then go to more trouble to ensure that “learning a ritual does not count against any limits on spells in your spell repertoire or on any other normal spellcasting ability.”
Yet somehow, even though none of the participantsmight be spell casters, a ritual is an “esoteric and complex spell that anyone can cast” that “...can have more powerful effects”.
And that has spell levels.
All up, I don’t mind it (the system) altogether, but I’d move for a change in nomenclature (so...for an animated object, a level 5 creature can be created by a spell level 4 version of a base level 2 ritual performed by at least level 4 (or is it 8?) casters who need not actually be spellcasters. I’d probably have used participant (primary and secondary) and not made these spells. There’s already enough confusion in level (shades of the various level explanations paragraph in the ADnD Player’s Handbook) without muddying the types of spells - regular, cantrips, focus, ritual....[EDIT] and innate spells, p. 302[/EDIT]
reading your post again, I think you are just inficating why these two have these skills, unrelated to the specific ritual itself
Yes, I am just justifying why the characters would have the needed skills.
Ah. Traditions are the source breakdown - primal/occult/arcane/divine. Question still stsnds - do they have differing DCs?
No, they should have the same DCs regardless of the tradition. I think the tradition used would only be needed when interacting with other things. If someone wanted to try to identify the magic effects, they would use the appropriate skill for detection based on the tradition of the ritual that they are analyzing.
There is, and I find this throughout the CRB, a tendency toward what I term “hanging connectivity” - hints of other related rules systems that aren’t explained, and leave me with an opaque understanding until I flick to the index, search (sometimes in vain) for the connected rule, read it, hoping it is both clear and whole, and then head back to where I was.
Indeed. Being a software developer, I recognize the pattern instantly. It is a method of creating a central definition for something and then referencing that definition everywhere that it is needed - rather than copy/paste the definition inline. Because any time you have two copies of a particular piece of information, one of them will always eventually be wrong. It isn't even so much a matter of word count and book space. It is a matter of making the definitions and rules consistent.
Indeed. Being a software developer, I recognize the pattern instantly. It is a method of creating a central definition for something and then referencing that definition everywhere that it is needed - rather than copy/paste the definition inline. Because any time you have two copies of a particular piece of information, one of them will always eventually be wrong. It isn't even so much a matter of word count and book space. It is a matter of making the definitions and rules consistent.
All the doubts about whether a natural 20 in an attack roll would be a critical no matter what are the best demonstration for what you said.
Anyway, writing books that way does make them more complicated to reference sometimes.
Thanks for the answers breithauptclan.
Anyway, writing books that way does make them more complicated to reference sometimes.
It does. No disagreement here.
On tradeoff, I think it does make it easier to create a hyperlinked reference document like the online Archives of Nethys. It seems tailored for that type of media. But the printed version does suffer.