Unresolved issues after errata round 2

[Staffan Johansson]

So, we got a new round of errata for the CRB, which was very welcome. But of course, nothing is ever perfect. So what things are still unresolved?

I'll start:

How do item bonuses interact with Polymorph effects? Notably, do you include attack bonuses from handwraps of mighty blows when you calculate your unarmed attack bonus before you compare it to the bonus granted by spells like animal form? Does a barbarian using Dragon Transformation get to include their weapon's item bonus when using their "own attack modifier"?

What about oracles and divine sorcerers who don't worship a deity? Are they just SOL when it comes to divine blasting spells?

Can a spontaneous caster use a higher-level slot to cast a lower-level spell that isn't a signature spell, without getting the heightened effect?

Do chirurgeon alchemists and characters with Natural Medicine need to advance the Medicine skill to access the Expert and higher uses of Treat Wounds, or does raising Crafting/Nature suffice? Relatedly, do chirurgeons need Healer's Tools to Treat Wounds or do their Alchemist's Tools suffice?

Edit: I'd like to keep this thread clear of debate about how to interpret these rules. If there's a clear answer that someone has missed, by all means post it, but things like "Of course you get to use your handwraps when wild shaped, any other interpretation would be underpowered" aren't helpful. There are many other threads where we can discuss, and have discussed, what the interpretation ought to be, but this thread should be about pointing out where the room for that debate still exists.

[Staffan Johansson]

Should alchemists not get Medium Armor Expertise at level 13, and Medium Armor Mastery at level 19?

[AnimatedPaper]

Quote:

Page 71: Alchemists should have proficiency in medium armor to make things easier for mutagenists who pursue higher Strength and lower Dexterity. Add training in medium armor to their initial proficiencies as well as to their 13th and 19th level armor expertise and mastery class features.

[graystone]

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Quote:

Page 71: Alchemists should have proficiency in medium armor to make things easier for mutagenists who pursue higher Strength and lower Dexterity. Add training in medium armor to their initial proficiencies as well as to their 13th and 19th level armor expertise and mastery class features.

It's not in the errata'd book from what I hear.

[HammerJack]

That's right. It is in the errata document, but it has been accidentally left out of the updated PDF (and so I presume from the 2nd printing physical CRB).

[Exocist]

Staffan Johansson wrote:

How do item bonuses interact with Polymorph effects? Notably, do you include attack bonuses from handwraps of mighty blows when you calculate your unarmed attack bonus before you compare it to the bonus granted by spells like animal form? Does a barbarian using Dragon Transformation get to include their weapon's item bonus when using their "own attack modifier"?

Also

Do property runes apply to battleforms? Does weapon spec? Sneak attack? Rage?

Can you escape/trip/grapple in battleform?

Do striking runes apply to battleforms?

[Exocist]

Can animals use activated (non worn) items like potions, elixirs and so on? 604 is unclear what it's supposed to apply to after errata 1, it says an animal may never activate an item, but it's in the companion items section.

[Shisumo]

It's still possible to use multiclassing to get a focus spell without a Focus Pool. There is errata on the bard that suggests that the that's not supposed to happen, but until Deity's Domain gives a focus point, it will continue to be true.

[HammerJack]

Shisumo wrote:

It's still possible to use multiclassing to get a focus spell without a Focus Pool. There is errata on the bard that suggests that the that's not supposed to happen, but until Deity's Domain gives a focus point, it will continue to be true.

This is not correct, as the general rules for focus spells on page 300 include "You automatically gain a focus pool of 1 Focus Point the first time you gain an ability that gives you a focus spell."

[Wheldrake]

Another unresolved issue is formulae for wands and scrolls. It is unclear if you need a specific formula for each level of each spell, or if it's just a single formula for all 1st-level spells (for example).

[SuperBidi]

Are the conditions that can be removed by themselves (Frightened, Sickened) ongoing effects of the spells that apply them when these spells have a duration? Or, taking an example, do you lose the Frightened condition when you move out of the Dirge of Doom emanation?

There's also a need to clarify Minions when they are out of combat. Do you need to Command them all the time or can they act like normal creatures of their type? Or, taking an example, do you need to constantly Command your Animal Companion for it to just follow you around.

I also think some clarifications on Familiars would be great. I think the whole "Familiars don’t have or use their own ability modifiers" is creating more issues than it solves. Giving them basic attribute would be faster and clearer to determine what a Familiar can actually do (what they can hold, what is their intelligence and so on).

[The Penecontemporaneous One]

And there is still confusion regarding Battle Medicine as relates to number of hands required to use healer's tools in conjunction with this feat.

[shroudb]

Can some of your Elixirs from Double Brew and Alchemical Alacrity be from your Perpetual Infusions?

Very strict raw would say "no". The language of instead of spending 1 spend up to 2 making no mention of "instead of spending 0" while the "up to" is much more open ended so it raises questions. (plus, if memory serves correctly, Double/Alacrity existed and is unchanged from before Pepretual was even a thing).

[Ubertron_X]

Any word on the Acid Splash cantrip (maybe I missed it)?

[The Wibble]

Does the spell Status detect all conditions on a target (including but not limited to things like prone, detected, hidden, and hostile) or just some of them(in which case how do you tell which ones)?

[beowulf99]

Snares went untouched despite being imo the most undercooked mechanic in PF2.

We still have no guidance on the following:

1. How heavy are Snares, especially free snares from Snare Specialist or the Kobold's Snare Genius?

2. Can more than one snare inhabit the same 5 foot square? Only some? None? Could you have a Signaling Snare/Marking Snare in the same space?

3. Where can a character deploy a snare? Common logic would say adjacent to your character, but some snares could feasibly be thrown to deploy, like the Biting snare.

4. Do the "free" snares deployed by a Snare Specialist/Genius decay? Can they only have X number total snares, or do they refresh each day, allowing the snare specialist to create doom hallways after a few days?

5. Can snares be Batch Crafted? Can a Snare Specialist place multiple snares using 3 (or less depending on their feat choices) actions since Snares have the Consumable trait and therefore qualify for Batch crafting?

All of these issues can be handled by a GM on a case by case basis, but my stance is that they shouldn't have to be. Snares should have more complete rules.

[CrystalSeas]

The Penecontemporaneous One wrote:

And there is still confusion regarding Battle Medicine as relates to number of hands required to use healer's tools in conjunction with this feat.

There may be RAW confusion, but the Beginner Box Hero's Handbook makes RAI pretty clear. Paizo has been stressing that the BB does not have any rules that are different from the CRB.

Beginner Box Hero's Handbook, pg 24 wrote:

In the Cleric chapter, 2nd-Level Cleric Class Features

Battle Medicine
You know how to quickly heal your allies with Medicine. Write "Battle Medicine" in the Level 2 box in the Class section of your character sheet.

Battle Medicine [reaction]
You can patch up wounds with your healer's tools and a free hand. Attempt a DC 15 Medicine check to heal yourself or an ally for 2d8 Hit Points. If you become an expert in Medicine, you can instead attempt a DC 20 Medicine check to heal for 2d8+10 Hit Points. You can heal a particular person only once each day with Battle Medicine.

[tivadar27]

CrystalSeas wrote:

The Penecontemporaneous One wrote:

And there is still confusion regarding Battle Medicine as relates to number of hands required to use healer's tools in conjunction with this feat.

There may be RAW confusion, but the Beginner Box Hero's Handbook makes RAI pretty clear. Paizo has been stressing that the BB does not have any rules that are different from the CRB.

Beginner Box Hero's Handbook, pg 24 wrote:

In the Cleric chapter, 2nd-Level Cleric Class Features

Battle Medicine
You know how to quickly heal your allies with Medicine. Write "Battle Medicine" in the Level 2 box in the Class section of your character sheet.

Battle Medicine [reaction]
You can patch up wounds with your healer's tools and a free hand. Attempt a DC 15 Medicine check to heal yourself or an ally for 2d8 Hit Points. If you become an expert in Medicine, you can instead attempt a DC 20 Medicine check to heal for 2d8+10 Hit Points. You can heal a particular person only once each day with Battle Medicine.

So you're saying Battle Medicine is now a reaction rather than an action as it is in the CRB? It seems as if there are differences between the BB and the CRB, and we'll have to see which is correct...

[CrystalSeas]

tivadar27 wrote:

So you're saying Battle Medicine is now a reaction rather than an action as it is in the CRB? It seems as if there are differences between the BB and the CRB, and we'll have to see which is correct...

Yeah, that's an unfortunate new conflict that needs staff input.

But what the paragraph does seem to clear up is the issue of "how many hands".

[tivadar27]

Ubertron_X wrote:

Any word on the Acid Splash cantrip (maybe I missed it)?

Curious about this as well. I'll dig a bit, as I know that splash rules got changed... But looks like it's not substantial changes. Believe it's still an open question.

[Bryan H]

CrystalSeas wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

So you're saying Battle Medicine is now a reaction rather than an action as it is in the CRB? It seems as if there are differences between the BB and the CRB, and we'll have to see which is correct...

Yeah, that's an unfortunate new conflict that needs staff input.

But what the paragraph does seem to clear up is the issue of "how many hands".

I'm still confused. Don't healers tools require 2 hands per page 288 of the Core Rulebook? How do you have a free hand if the tools require 2 hands to use?

[Midnightoker]

Battleforms are still trapped in Grapples without the option to Escape or Grapple.

Any maneuver is off limits still because even though they are not attack rolls, they are still attacks so the following still applies:

"One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose, which are the only attacks you can use."

[tivadar27]

Bryan H wrote:

CrystalSeas wrote:

tivadar27 wrote:

So you're saying Battle Medicine is now a reaction rather than an action as it is in the CRB? It seems as if there are differences between the BB and the CRB, and we'll have to see which is correct...

Yeah, that's an unfortunate new conflict that needs staff input.

But what the paragraph does seem to clear up is the issue of "how many hands".

I'm still confused. Don't healers tools require 2 hands per page 288 of the Core Rulebook? How do you have a free hand if the tools require 2 hands to use?

I'm going to suggest we stick to the OPs request to keep rule debates to a minimum. For reference, I'll try to get some of the threads discussion battle medicine (in its newest form) and edit this post with them, but in the meantime, they're reasonably easy to find.

EDIT: Honestly, just look at the discussion here: Battle Medicine in Errata document starts

[NECR0G1ANT]

tivadar27 wrote:

Ubertron_X wrote:

Any word on the Acid Splash cantrip (maybe I missed it)?

Curious about this as well. I'll dig a bit, as I know that splash rules got changed... But looks like it's not substantial changes. Believe it's still an open question.

Secrets of Magic Playtest p.5 wrote:

acid splash would still deal its splash damage to creatures other than the target

So acid splash is supposed to affect those adjacent to the target of an acid splash. But this is not technically errata.

[shroudb]

splash damage also no longer crits.

not sure if that was always like that and i missed it or if it's new.

[PlantThings]

Speaking of splash, was it addressed that the splash trait implies the area as relative to the target? As in, it can be read that the splash area grows with the size of the target creature, much like an emanation.

I've always assumed the "target" as the targeted square for larger creatures, but RAW, it always seemed open-ended.

[graystone]

Ubertron_X wrote:

Any word on the Acid Splash cantrip (maybe I missed it)?

It doesn't hit objects anymore...

[Zapp]

beowulf99 wrote:

Snares went untouched despite being imo the most undercooked mechanic in PF2.

We still have no guidance on the following:

We haven't needed any guidance in our group. One look and the players decided snares were crap, so no rules were involved at all.

[Ubertron_X]

graystone wrote:

Ubertron_X wrote:

Any word on the Acid Splash cantrip (maybe I missed it)?

It doesn't hit objects anymore...

Damn chairs, they are safe now...

[graystone]

Ubertron_X wrote:

graystone wrote:

Ubertron_X wrote:

Any word on the Acid Splash cantrip (maybe I missed it)?

It doesn't hit objects anymore...

Damn chairs, they are safe now...

Can't Strike them. Can't cast spells at them. Can't break them on something [improvised weapons don't take damage hitting things]. It's now an invulnerable barrier unless I use it as a shield!!!

Maybe I can Force Open a chair with a crowbar... :P

[tivadar27]

Would also be nice to have clarifications around flanking/unarmed attacks. Such as can you flank with a bow/does kicking an enemy require a free hand...?

[Nefreet]

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Can a spontaneous caster use a higher-level slot to cast a lower-level spell that isn't a signature spell, without getting the heightened effect?

It's not official, or errata, but FWIW, Jason Bulmahn answered this on Reddit.

[Quandary]

Some of this stuff seems more in the realm of implicit gripes about game balance or preferred flavor of candy, than rules ambiguity as such.
To be fair, in some cases an explanatory FAQ is probably more appropriate than Errata where RAW isn't wrong as such.
Stuff where the issue is exactly how certain mechanics intersect is where "executive summary" of FAQ seems like what people really want.
Perhaps Paizo will get around too releasing actual FAQ soon, with their once-promised new FAQ system, or just the old system
which wasn't really all that bad and certainly the best part about it was actually getting FAQ topics published every so often.

[Gortle]

Quandary wrote:

Some of this stuff seems more in the realm of implicit gripes about game balance or preferred flavor of candy, than rules ambiguity as such.

To be fair, in some cases an explanatory FAQ is probably more appropriate than Errata where RAW isn't wrong as such.
Stuff where the issue is exactly how certain mechanics intersect is where "executive summary" of FAQ seems like what people really want.
Perhaps Paizo will get around too releasing actual FAQ soon, with their once-promised new FAQ system, or just the old system
which wasn't really all that bad and certainly the best part about it was actually getting FAQ topics published every so often.

Strongly disagree. While your statement is correct, its only because you have qualified your language. There are a lot of rules issues.

[Gortle]

Nefreet wrote:

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Can a spontaneous caster use a higher-level slot to cast a lower-level spell that isn't a signature spell, without getting the heightened effect?

It's not official, or errata, but FWIW, Jason Bulmahn answered this on Reddit.

Thanks for that. But the question is not precise enough to used as an answer in this case.

[The Gleeful Grognard]

Just gonna say, WotC did a better job with twitter and black and white pdfs.

Twitter... the bar is that low.

[Lucas Yew]

Nefreet wrote:

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Can a spontaneous caster use a higher-level slot to cast a lower-level spell that isn't a signature spell, without getting the heightened effect?

It's not official, or errata, but FWIW, Jason Bulmahn answered this on Reddit.

Sweet. Now let's hope the 3rd printing actually addresses that tidbit officially, for the sake of all those tormented RAWists, such as the PFS players...

[graystone]

Lucas Yew wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Staffan Johansson wrote:

Can a spontaneous caster use a higher-level slot to cast a lower-level spell that isn't a signature spell, without getting the heightened effect?

It's not official, or errata, but FWIW, Jason Bulmahn answered this on Reddit.

Sweet. Now let's hope the 3rd printing actually addresses that tidbit officially, for the sake of all those tormented RAWists, such as the PFS players...

Just 2 more years...

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

Just gonna say, WotC did a better job with twitter and black and white pdfs.

Twitter... the bar is that low.

Twitter... I don't think I can limbo that low. :P

[Perpdepog]

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

Just gonna say, WotC did a better job with twitter and black and white pdfs.

Twitter... the bar is that low.

Given that WotC's PDFs were inaccessible to myself and other visually impaired/blind players, and Twitter is equally difficult to navigate or keep track of, I'm going to have to disagree pretty strenuously here.

[graystone]

Perpdepog wrote:

Given that WotC's PDFs were inaccessible to myself and other visually impaired/blind players

The FAQ page isn't winning any awards for readability... :P It is not in color-blind friendly format.

[Perpdepog]

graystone wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Given that WotC's PDFs were inaccessible to myself and other visually impaired/blind players

The FAQ page isn't winning any awards for readability... :P It is not in color-blind friendly format.

That's a pretty massive oof there :( I'm on screen reader so I totally missed it.

Though it is a bit confusing to navigate for me too because it's one massive, bulleted list.

[Amaya/Polaris]

Having come from a general background in 5E, I can safely say that, to me, the current Paizo mix of timidity, overreach and missing the mark doesn't hold a candle to the general WotC practice of answers contradicting each other, being extremely spare, not actually answering the question they're a direct reply to, taking the least interesting/fun possible route (and never addressing the actually overpowered or missing mechanics), and doing all of this in a smarmy you-should-know-this-already tone. Eugh. The actual errata documents that came out once or twice in its currently 5 year lifespan, to my knowledge, were okay, but Sage Advice was worse than silence.

That rant aside...sucky to hear that the errata hosting isn't especially accessible/friendly to look at. There have been a lot of problems just serving it to people, apparently, but I hope those issues are addressed soon as well.

[Ubertron_X]

Not sure if this is a resolved or unresolved issue, but has the focus point uncertainty ever been clarified? Like, Cleric multiclassing into Champion versus Cleric taking Domain Initiate twice?

[rainzax]

Ubertron_X wrote:

Not sure if this is a resolved or unresolved issue, but has the focus point uncertainty ever been clarified? Like, Cleric multiclassing into Champion versus Cleric taking Domain Initiate twice?

This could use a standardization, yes. +1 Focus Point each time you gain a new Focus Spell (capped at 3 normally), no matter the source.

As the real cap is Refocusing, having 2 or 3 Focus Spells is equivalent to having one or two extra 1/day abilities sharing a same pool, purchased with two or three class feats. And any ability balanced around 1/combat is, by extension, balanced around 1/day. No way to "break" it.

And as this seems to already be the intent, it'd be a matter of aligning the language of those abilities.

[zetalight]

Not sure if this is an issue or intended, but Stumbling Feint is borderline unusable in the Martial Artist Archetype because it requires Flurry of Blows, which requires either being a Monk (which gets it anyway, albeit at a later level) or taking the Monk Archetype (which prevents low-str/high-dex martial artists like Rogues (who would benefit from the free feint most) from taking it).

[Mandar.]

Merisiel is still adding her Dex bonus to thrown dagger damage on page 14.

[Captain Morgan]

graystone wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Given that WotC's PDFs were inaccessible to myself and other visually impaired/blind players

The FAQ page isn't winning any awards for readability... :P It is not in color-blind friendly format.

Just quoting to signal boost so it can be noticed and fixed. I know Paizo cares about this, but they don't always get it right on the first go.

[CrystalSeas]

Captain Morgan wrote:

graystone wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Given that WotC's PDFs were inaccessible to myself and other visually impaired/blind players

The FAQ page isn't winning any awards for readability... :P It is not in color-blind friendly format.

Just quoting to signal boost so it can be noticed and fixed. I know Paizo cares about this, but they don't always get it right on the first go.

For me, there are no colors visible on the FAQ page.

Can someone point me to a section or a phrase that they see in color?

[BastionofthePants]

When a poison is "used" by applying the poison to a weapon or poisoning food, the item is destroyed. For Quick Alchemy, this would seem to imply that you could Quick Alchemy a poison and apply it to a weapon.

However, for a toxicologist, this would imply that Perpetual Potency permits an alchemist to poison *every* piece of gear the party has in between battles. Now I love being able to do that as a toxicologist, but I have to admit... it feels a little OP. Is there (or should there be) some limitation on using perpetual potency to mass-apply poisons?