| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder how rigorously people in practice handle the unattended objects used for TKP.
I feel like a large number of the tables I've played at or seen sort of gloss over that part of the spell and simply have the player pick a damage type and do damage without any particular fixation on the details outside flavor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On those in the camp of ''TKP can trigger weaknesses and aversions''
I'd like to remind you that the new class, the Thaumaturge, has it's core class damage power being ''learn an opponent's weakness and then deal damage of that type of weakness''
This is then showcased through the class kit that this option is considered to the option of ''the opponent has weakness to your attacks equal to 2 plus half your level''.
Therefore, TKP triggering weaknesses (Because on top of materials, there's ice cubes, holy water, etc. etc.) is a massive break in the power system. It's already a good cantrip, let's not make it silly.
Can I use TKP to throw a gourd filled with water at a Brimorak to trigger their aversion ?
What about a very fragile bottle of water ?
Or melting ice cubes ?
This really depends on what the GM constitutes as triggering their aversion.
If something that has water in it, and isn't bound to traits, such as even a basic waterskin, is enough to trigger, then it works. This is because this aversion is triggering regardless of magical properties or traits, and TKP lacking or barring these things is irrelevant to it being able to do this.
If the GM requires that the attack has the Water trait for it to trigger, then even if a character decides to use a glass of water as an improvised throwing weapon, it wouldn't work, because this weapon/attack doesn't inherently possess the Water trait, which is what the GM deems to sufficiently apply to their aversion.
I wonder how rigorously people in practice handle the unattended objects used for TKP.
I feel like a large number of the tables I've played at or seen sort of gloss over that part of the spell and simply have the player pick a damage type and do damage without any particular fixation on the details outside flavor.
Most do, but at my tables, we don't. This is especially true if we are using specific objects (such as a Silver object, like a Dagger or Coin), and if we are testing for viability in reusability of the same object, both based on the damage type it does, and its structurability.
Odds are, a piece of paper, wood, or glass will be destroyed in its use, maybe even a coin would be unable to survive if it's copper or silver. A piece of larger refined metal probably will not be destroyed, but if used to Pierce something, unless it's excessively small (again, like a tiny shard of steel), will probably be stuck in the creature. Slashing would also have a chance, though not a guarantee, whereas Bludgeoning is highly unlikely, if at all.
It's all simulationist houseruling, obviously, but this stems from the "Ambiguous Rules" clause, and IMO the game would benefit from more refined rules, since cases like this will come up regularly in actual play, and because of a campaign stream back in PF2's playtest, rules for passing/taking items from other players came to be, which is another common occurrence in gameplay, so it's not like this is a request for rulings on a corner case.
On those in the camp of ''TKP can trigger weaknesses and aversions''
I'd like to remind you that the new class, the Thaumaturge, has it's core class damage power being ''learn an opponent's weakness and then deal damage of that type of weakness''
This is then showcased through the class kit that this option is considered to the option of ''the opponent has weakness to your attacks equal to 2 plus half your level''.
Therefore, TKP triggering weaknesses (Because on top of materials, there's ice cubes, holy water, etc. etc.) is a massive break in the power system. It's already a good cantrip, let's not make it silly.
Wait, are you suggesting that a Thaumaturge with their class feature cannot ever trigger their in-class weakness with TKP, or that doing so makes the cantrip "silly"? That's the dumbest and most counterintuitive thing I've ever heard in regards to the class' function that I just think you're trying to curb assumed power creep with some arbitrary notion that just doesn't actually work that way.
The spell says that you don't transfer "specific traits" and "magical effects" to it. Very simple stuff. Let's ask the three obvious questions:
Does the class feature have "specific traits" that are required for it to work? Not particularly. Removing the traits from the feature doesn't mean it stops working the way it says it does, because the traits themselves (which is what, Thaumaturge, and that's it?) don't give it the mechanical power, the ability itself does.
Is it a magical effect? Again, not particularly. There's no "Magic" trait, or any "Tradition/School" trait on it, nor is there anything in the description saying it would gain such a trait based on certain conditions being met.
So what does that mean for the feature? If it doesn't have either of these things going against it, then it would still apply regardless of whether you perform a Strike or cast TKP. If it does, then sure, I can see the argument. But I'm pretty sure neither of these things are true, based on how fundamental it is to the class, and how mundane it's meant to function.
Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Darksol, this would mean that a Thaumaturge with a spellcasting dedication can take TKP and trigger weakness twice, both with their feature, and with the material they use for TKP! They're doing way more damage with TKP than intended!" To which, I highly suggest you actually review the Weakness rules again, because that's complete BS:
If you have a weakness to something that doesn't normally deal damage, such as water, you take damage equal to the weakness value when touched or affected by it. If more than one weakness would apply to the same instance of damage, use only the highest applicable weakness value. This usually happens only when a monster is weak to both a type of physical damage and a given material.
So, if the Thaumaturge is facing a Werewolf, and uses their Weakness feature on the creature, and actually possesses a Silver weapon to use on them, the amount of Weakness they inflict is the same, depending on if their Weakness feature, or the Weakness the creature possesses, is higher. Whichever value is higher, is the one that applies to the attack. That's it. Very simple and obvious stuff. Also, whether the attack is done with a basic Strike or TKP wouldn't change this factor, and it's quite obvious that TKP does less damage per action than a basic Strike does, based on Weaknesses alone, so suggesting that TKP is infinitely more powerful because of this is completely debunked.
Furthermore, suggesting that TKP triggering weaknesses invalidates the Thaumaturge's Weakness ability is absurd when you consider how many enemies exist that don't have weaknesses, or have Resistances instead, combined with the odds that a Thaumaturge's feature works on any creature, whether they have a Weakness or not, debunks this assumption as well.
I wonder how rigorously people in practice handle the unattended objects used for TKP.
I feel like a large number of the tables I've played at or seen sort of gloss over that part of the spell and simply have the player pick a damage type and do damage without any particular fixation on the details outside flavor.
That's how I do it when I am in charge. I houserule it to be a conjuration spell. Gets rid of all of the pesky problems of having to have an item in the first place, and dealing with items made of particular materials.
|
/s (for clarity)
I don't see the big deal, all you need to do is walk around in encounter mode with a knife, fork, and spoon in your mouth and when combat starts you simply start casting the spell, and since you have a verbal component they'll fall to the ground -voila- a B, S, and P appropriate unattended object to use for the spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
/s (for clarity)
I don't see the big deal, all you need to do is walk around in encounter mode with a knife, fork, and spoon in your mouth and when combat starts you simply start casting the spell, and since you have a verbal component they'll fall to the ground -voila- a B, S, and P appropriate unattended object to use for the spell.
Yes, obvious sarcasm is obvious, but let's say it wasn't: A GM might implement a Flat 5 check to fulfill Verbal components with an object in your mouth obstructing your ability to properly enunciate the words of power.
This would also assume a GM would be fine with you putting utensils in your mouth for extended periods of time for a mechanical benefit, which basically sounds like cheesing, and most GMs are against cheesing.
Extremely unconvincing. You are comparing a feature which allows to discover and expoit automatically an existing weakness and even invent a new one on the fly to maybe having some real items which allow to use a specific real weakness you also need to discover.
Therefore, TKP triggering weaknesses (Because on top of materials, there's ice cubes, holy water, etc. etc.) is a massive break in the power system. It's already a good cantrip, let's not make it silly.
maybe having some incredibly easy to get real items*
Fixed your quote.
Look I'm not getting dragged into this debate, your table your rules, you do what you want, but if you think asking any of the devs what they think on this would result in them saying yes you can use materials such as silver and cold iron with it, you're dellusional.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Look I'm not getting dragged into this debate, your table your rules, you do what you want, but if you think asking any of the devs what they think on this would result in them saying yes you can use materials such as silver and cold iron with it, you're dellusional.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For whatever that is worth.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look I'm not getting dragged into this debate, your table your rules, you do what you want, but if you think asking any of the devs what they think on this would result in them saying yes you can use materials such as silver and cold iron with it, you're dellusional.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For whatever that is worth.
That's for improvised thrown weapons of a legit spécial material melee weapon thrown though, not using TKP to chuck a silver piece at a devil.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's for improvised thrown weapons of a legit spécial material melee weapon thrown though, not using TKP to chuck a silver piece at a devil.Look I'm not getting dragged into this debate, your table your rules, you do what you want, but if you think asking any of the devs what they think on this would result in them saying yes you can use materials such as silver and cold iron with it, you're dellusional.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
For whatever that is worth.
I really don't see what difference TKP makes in that equation, whether it is or isn't being used. Feel free to explain why that is, but I'm almost positive that you'll just retread the same arguments as before.
Seriously, the Trait argument doesn't hold up because it's too inconsistent when actually applied (every Special Material Weapon/Armor/Shield should have the Precious trait, and they aren't printed as such, and there's no excuse not to have this with the Unique Special Material Weapons), and there's no indication that the trait is required to specify both which material it is, and whether it can trigger a weakness or not; because if it was required, well, Special Material Weapons/Armor/Shields wouldn't even function as intended by RAW. And we can't have that, now, can we? Also, Special Materials aren't magical, either, meaning the "magical effects" clause doesn't apply as well.
Right out of the gate, the two obvious limitations spelled out within the spell's description is debunked. So, there's no other particular reason to deny it besides "muh Power Creep," in which case, petition Paizo to errata the spell if you feel it's too powerful. I don't see a problem with it because it will never outpace martial options, even in the earliest of levels, it will almost never outpace Electric Arc, Scatter Scree, et. al. except in the most egregious of circumstances, and it rewards players who put value in Special Materials when they are otherwise overtly expensive for a relatively minor "treadmill" benefit (which requires exponential pricing to maintain its identical benefits throughout your adventuring career, given how the Quality rules for it work). A Wizard buys Cold Iron Arrows with his hard earned gold to fight Demons with his Telekinetic Projectile spells, because he wants to save his other spells for more important things? Burn the heretic. Slay them with Fire. He disobeys the 4th Universal Law of Magic, "Thine Magicks Can't Interact With Materials Of Specialty Under Any Circumstance," cast him from Hogwarts for his insubordination.
More seriously, nobody has provided any conclusive rules-proof that TKP disallows special material interactions thus far, so arguing that it doesn't "just because" is such an arbitrary hill to die on that it's just a case of people using it as justifying the ideal of "Don't Power Creep my CRB options."