Dark Archive errata thread


Rules Discussion

1 to 50 of 200 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Distant Grasp Conscious Mind - 10th level deepest psi cantrip dancing blade:

The last entry of the amp mentions the "Push" action. This should obviously be "Shove".


[this is technically not for the DA, but the CRB, I just couldn't find a good thread for it and it affects the psychic specifically.]

Daze still has a duration of 1 round, despite that duration being completely superfluous.

The stunned condition is extremely weird when applied on a creature on its own turn. I think we would all appreciate a clarification on the topic, as the like 4 or 5 discussion about it I've seen in just the last few days demonstrate.

[For everyone reading this, this is an errata thread, please don't start a discussion here.Especially the stunned discussion, those always get out of hand in regards to length.]


The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?

No, it only requires the Expert Psychic Spellcasting feat which you can take at level 12. That means you could be master in a tradition at 14 (before any actual caster in the game), so that's 100% a mistake.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Karmagator wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?

No, it only requires the Expert Psychic Spellcasting feat which you can take at level 12. That means you could be master in a tradition at 14 (before any actual caster in the game), so that's 100% a mistake.

The absence of the skill requirement in tandem is strange. Makes it feel like it was almost intentional. Obviously it’s 100% in error, but it makes me wonder if the plan was to vary the access requirements somehow.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oscillating Wave - entropic wheel:

The spell limits gaining motes to 1/turn (or two when amped). This allows you to gain additional motes per round via dealing persistent damage, as that happens on a different turn. This allows you to potentially fill your max almost immediately and makes the amp somewhat redundant.

I'm pretty sure that is intended, since otherwise at higher levels you'll never reach the max, as combat is over too quickly. I've listed this just in case it is actually supposed to be once per round.

--

Conservation of Energy (Oscillating Wave feature)

It is somewhat unclear how or even if entropic wheel and redistribute potential are supposed to interact with this feature. Both spells are themed in a way that they are supposed to use both fire and cold at the same time, but Conservation of Energy negates that.


Oscillating Wheel - is unclear if a mind shift ability applying fire/cold is bound by Conservation of Energy or flips it.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Found one. Imaginary Weapon unamped calls for a melee spell attack but amped it calls for 2 strikes. Very odd for a spell and inconsistent with itself.

I'm already MCing into Tangible Dream Psychic with my Thaumaturge who will be taking Tome. With the Tome's Intensify Implement ability, if the amped version of Imaginary Weapon does indeed count as strikes, I could set myself up for some truly devastating attacks come lvl 9.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Karmagator wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?

No, it only requires the Expert Psychic Spellcasting feat which you can take at level 12. That means you could be master in a tradition at 14 (before any actual caster in the game), so that's 100% a mistake.
The absence of the skill requirement in tandem is strange. Makes it feel like it was almost intentional. Obviously it’s 100% in error, but it makes me wonder if the plan was to vary the access requirements somehow.

I just realized that Expert Psychic Spellcasting also lacks the usual skill requirement. So you don't need to invest anything in the Occult skill for this archetype. That can't be right.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Gisher wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Karmagator wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?

No, it only requires the Expert Psychic Spellcasting feat which you can take at level 12. That means you could be master in a tradition at 14 (before any actual caster in the game), so that's 100% a mistake.
The absence of the skill requirement in tandem is strange. Makes it feel like it was almost intentional. Obviously it’s 100% in error, but it makes me wonder if the plan was to vary the access requirements somehow.
I just realized that Expert Psychic Spellcasting also lacks the usual skill requirement. So you don't need to invest anything in the Occult skill for this archetype. That can't be right.

I'm thinking this might be intended and the trade off is you don't get access to a Breadth feat.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

REPOST FROM MY OTHER THREAD:

1)
Implement empowerment is worded rather confusingly:

“You don’t gain the benefit of implement empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica, and you must be holding at least one implement to gain the benefit.”

This leaves a few questions. "Anything in either hand other than a single handed weapon" could be interpreted as a single, one-handed weapon amongst your two hands, or one, single-handed weapon in each hand. PAIZO probably meant the former (which I am okay with), but official clarification would be nice. (I also have a question about weather your weapon-impliment counts against your single, one-handed weapon maximum or not. Fine with either way, just would appreciate clarification.) Additionally, things like a hand crossbow with a bayonette or reinforced stock, or a shield with a shield boss are technically (RAW) two weapons in a single hand, which would discount them and I am not sure that was the intent.

2)
The Mirror implement arguably gets worse at the adept level as the new ability basically says: "when you are attacked by an adjacent creature, that 'you' gets shattered and that mirror duplicate goes away." This doesn't give you a choice not to do this, is this correct? If so it seems like a smart group of enemies could prevent you from using the mirror in a small area by simply readying to attack if you show up to keep you penned in. Especially a group of mooks.

3)
The Adept of ability of the Tome is even worse. RULES AS WRITTEN: You cannot choose NOT to use it. It (basically) says at the start of each of your turns, you have to recall knowledge on a creature you see (no option not to use it, and it doesn't say that this is a free action) and gain a bonus to hit them. Doesn't even say in combat. So (again, RAW) as you are walking down the road with your Adept Tome out, you are constantly analyzing how to best stab your elf friend in the back because he happens to be in front of you in marching order? I am, like 90% certain that you are supposed to be able to choose NOT to use this ability and/or that it is supposed to be a free action, but nowhere in the text of tome is this actually written down.

4) Combination of the two, one brought up by Ronald the Rules lawyer in his video:
Tangable Dream-Imaginary weapon has two issues. One, relatively minor one is that it limits the weapon to a 'simple' weapon. Why? Aren't you conjuring any weapon you can dream about? Isn't that the purpose of imaginary weapon? Why can't I hit people with a giant lollypop or the biggest, nastyist sword in the universe? I get wanting to restrict the abilities, but simply saying "You conjure a weapon of your own design to strike your enemies. No matter its design, it has no weapon qualities, does 1d8 damage, and you can choose to have it do bludgeoning or slashing damage."

Ronald the Rules Lawyer brings up a more tangible question with this cantrip:
The Heightened Amp of Imaginary Weapon increases the damage by 2d8 every spell level AND gives you a second attack, which he feels is 'double dipping' (double damage with double attacks) and wants to make sure that was intended. Here is a link to his question.

For those that want to discuss these (instead of leave them here for Paizo to answer) it has been suggestion that discussion and argument take place on this thread.


Karmagator wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?

No, it only requires the Expert Psychic Spellcasting feat which you can take at level 12. That means you could be master in a tradition at 14 (before any actual caster in the game), so that's 100% a mistake.

It would also be granting a 7th level spell slot and 3rd signature spell at 14th level.


Let’s not get bogged down in this, but amped double damage plus double targets on Imaginary Weapon is consistent with scaling in Shatter Mind and the last Oscillating Wave cantrip - both increase their area bigly and go from d4 to d10 or 2d6. There’s no doubt it’s intended on IW.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Quote:
Additionally, things like a hand crossbow with a bayonette or reinforced stock, or a shield with a shield boss are technically (RAW) two weapons in a single hand, which would discount them and I am not sure that was the intent.

A shield with a shield boss is not 2 weapons in 1 hand, it is 1 weapon with an alternation (you can't even do shield bash for 1d4 B and shield bash with a shield spike for 1d6 P). Attached reinforced stocks and attached bayonets are not multiple weapons in 1 hand, they're 1 weapon (e.g., dueling pistol) with multiple ways to attack.


Blake's Tiger wrote:
Attached reinforced stocks and attached bayonets are not multiple weapons in 1 hand, they're 1 weapon (e.g., dueling pistol) with multiple ways to attack.

No, they are 2 different weapons: for instance, you have to put runes on each because they are different weapons: they'd use the same runes if they where in fact the same weapon...

Wielding Items
Source Core Rulebook pg. 272
"Some abilities require you to wield an item, typically a weapon. You're wielding an item any time you're holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you're not just carrying it around—you're ready to use it."

You are wielding 2 different weapons when using a ranged weapon and an attached reinforced stock/attached bayonet as you are holding both in the required number of hands to use them.


posted in another thread as well (didnt see this one lol):

I think foresee the Path needs some erratta as well:

Quote:

to instead gain a +2 status

bonus to melee Strikes it makes as reactions.

I don't think I have ever seen this language before.

Bonus to Strikes? I assume it means to the attack roll with the Strike, but maybe it the damage? or is it both? And etc.


caffeinatedninja over on reddit mentioned that he thinks the exact scaling of glimpse weakness's amp is somewhat unclearly worded as to whether it fully replaces the default scaling of 1 + 1 per spell level or retains the "+1 per spell level" part.

(I don't think the latter is true, it just fully replaces it. Just in case that is supposed to work differently, because the amp is extremely terrible as-is).


Karmagator wrote:

caffeinatedninja over on reddit mentioned that he thinks the exact scaling of glimpse weakness's amp is somewhat unclearly worded as to whether it fully replaces the default scaling of 1 + 1 per spell level or retains the "+1 per spell level" part.

(I don't think the latter is true, it just fully replaces it. Just in case that is supposed to work differently, because the amp is extremely terrible as-is).

Quote:
The additional precision damage is 1d4+1

it doesn't say that it increases by, simply that the damae IS x.

So i don't think you can justify a reading where it is an increase and not a replacement.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Reversing Charge, Pg. 186

Looks like it had a different name in the playtest because is says:
"You then teleport back to the square from which you began your Snapback Charge."

It then goes back to Reversing Charge in the next sentence.


Karmagator wrote:

caffeinatedninja over on reddit mentioned that he thinks the exact scaling of glimpse weakness's amp is somewhat unclearly worded as to whether it fully replaces the default scaling of 1 + 1 per spell level or retains the "+1 per spell level" part.

(I don't think the latter is true, it just fully replaces it. Just in case that is supposed to work differently, because the amp is extremely terrible as-is).

Yeah. If you don't add the spell level damage even when amped, here's the amped vs regular damage at every spell level. Parenthesis in amp is if you do still add the spell level.

1 - amp: 3.5 (4.5), regular: 2, amp bonus: 1.5 (2.5)
2 - amp: 3.5 (5.5), regular: 3, amp bonus: 1.5 (2.5)
3 - amp: 7.0 (10), regular: 4, amp bonus: 3.0 (6.0)
4 - amp: 7.0 (11), regular: 5, amp bonus: 2.0 (6.0)
5 - amp: 10.5 (15.5), regular: 6, amp bonus: 4.5 (9.5)
6 - amp: 10.5 (16.5), regular: 7, amp bonus: 3.5 (9.5)
7 - amp: 14.0 (21), regular: 8, amp bonus: 6.0 (13.0)
8 - amp: 14.0 (22), regular: 9, amp bonus: 5.0 (13.0)
9 - amp: 17.5 (26.5), regular: 10, amp bonus: 7.5 (16.5)
10 - amp: 17.5 (27.5), regular: 11, amp bonus: 6.5 (16.5)

The weak form of the amp is in line with other one action damaging actions (force bolt/magic missile and psi blast), but since you get a big portion of that even without amping it you shouldn't and allowing an amp is just a trap to waste your focus ineffeciently.

At 4th spell level using a focus point increase the damage by...2 points. You'll note that amp bonus if you do add spell level damage when amped is equivalent to one point less than a force bolt would get you for a focus point. That's what it should be. You can choose to do this when your ally has a decent chance to crit and double your contribution.

And amps for other psi cantrips tend to more than double the base damage past low levels. (d4 to d10 or 2d6 is common, although some lose the +attribute to the d4)


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Xenocrat wrote:
Karmagator wrote:

caffeinatedninja over on reddit mentioned that he thinks the exact scaling of glimpse weakness's amp is somewhat unclearly worded as to whether it fully replaces the default scaling of 1 + 1 per spell level or retains the "+1 per spell level" part.

(I don't think the latter is true, it just fully replaces it. Just in case that is supposed to work differently, because the amp is extremely terrible as-is).

Yeah. If you don't add the spell level damage even when amped, here's the amped vs regular damage at every spell level. Parenthesis in amp is if you do still add the spell level.

1 - amp: 3.5 (4.5), regular: 2, amp bonus: 1.5 (2.5)
2 - amp: 3.5 (5.5), regular: 3, amp bonus: 1.5 (2.5)
3 - amp: 7.0 (10), regular: 4, amp bonus: 3.0 (6.0)
4 - amp: 7.0 (11), regular: 5, amp bonus: 2.0 (6.0)
5 - amp: 10.5 (15.5), regular: 6, amp bonus: 4.5 (9.5)
6 - amp: 10.5 (16.5), regular: 7, amp bonus: 3.5 (9.5)
7 - amp: 14.0 (21), regular: 8, amp bonus: 6.0 (13.0)
8 - amp: 14.0 (22), regular: 9, amp bonus: 5.0 (13.0)
9 - amp: 17.5 (26.5), regular: 10, amp bonus: 7.5 (16.5)
10 - amp: 17.5 (27.5), regular: 11, amp bonus: 6.5 (16.5)

The weak form of the amp is in line with other one action damaging actions (force bolt/magic missile and psi blast), but since you get a big portion of that even without amping it you shouldn't and allowing an amp is just a trap to waste your focus ineffeciently.

At 4th spell level using a focus point increase the damage by...2 points. You'll note that amp bonus if you do add spell level damage when amped is equivalent to one point less than a force bolt would get you for a focus point. That's what it should be. You can choose to do this when your ally has a decent chance to crit and double your contribution.

And amps for other psi cantrips tend to more than double the base damage past low levels. (d4 to d10 or 2d6 is common, although some lose the +attribute to the d4)

I suspect it was intended to combine for a couple reasons -

1 - Because they put the 1 damage per spell level in the text of the spell which is very unusual, usually just make it a +1 heighten effect. I suspect it was done to make it combine.
2 - The way it is written I can see an argument that damage the amp is replacing is just the first part, the 1, with the +1 per level being on top.
3 - The scaling makes no sense without it. Like you showed, without the amp scaling better it is a dreadful waste of a focus point.

Psychic has quite a few weirdly written rules and strange scalings though so who knows.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Karmagator wrote:

Oscillating Wave - entropic wheel:

The spell limits gaining motes to 1/turn (or two when amped). This allows you to gain additional motes per round via dealing persistent damage, as that happens on a different turn. This allows you to potentially fill your max almost immediately and makes the amp somewhat redundant.

I'm pretty sure that is intended, since otherwise at higher levels you'll never reach the max, as combat is over too quickly. I've listed this just in case it is actually supposed to be once per round.

Agreed, would like this cleared up. It does seem like it is missing a heighten, like you should get extra motes at higher levels or it becomes rather useless.

Also, Order of Operations. Does it add it's damage to the spell that you use to activate it?

More unclear. When a later spell causes it to gain a mote, does that extra damage apply to that spell or just later spells? It is happening as you do things so.. who knows.

Karmagator wrote:


Conservation of Energy (Oscillating Wave feature)

It is somewhat unclear how or even if entropic wheel and redistribute potential are supposed to interact with this feature. Both spells are themed in a way that they are supposed to use both fire and cold at the same time, but Conservation of Energy negates that.

Apply this to Thermal Stasis too. An ability that gives two resists. Does it just give one thanks to conservation of energy? So it is better if taken by another subclass or on an MC that doesn't have that?

Finally, it is REALLY unclear if conservation of energy applies to cantrips taken from other subclasses with parallel breakthrough. I don't think it is intended (a mental cantrip doing fire etc. and yet still with the mental trait) but the wording is ambiguous.

I feel like a line or two got cut for copyfit.

Also, if you use firey body, is the produce flame/ray of frost you cast a psi cantrip with all the goodies or just the default? (Really only good anyways if you pick cha, as int doesn't help innate cantrips, or do much of anything...)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Unseen Animal Companions don't specify that their attacks count as magical when I believe every advanced option should.

Liberty's Edge

graystone wrote:
Blake's Tiger wrote:
Attached reinforced stocks and attached bayonets are not multiple weapons in 1 hand, they're 1 weapon (e.g., dueling pistol) with multiple ways to attack.

No, they are 2 different weapons: for instance, you have to put runes on each because they are different weapons: they'd use the same runes if they where in fact the same weapon...

Wielding Items
Source Core Rulebook pg. 272
"Some abilities require you to wield an item, typically a weapon. You're wielding an item any time you're holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you're not just carrying it around—you're ready to use it."

You are wielding 2 different weapons when using a ranged weapon and an attached reinforced stock/attached bayonet as you are holding both in the required number of hands to use them.

I do not think "you're ready to use a weapon" one way when your are using it to Strike another way though.

Dark Archive

John R. wrote:
Gisher wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Karmagator wrote:
Old_Man_Robot wrote:
Gisher wrote:
The Master Psychic Spellcasting feat from the Psychic Multiclass Archetype is listed as 12th level. It should almost certainly be 18th level.

Oh wow, that’s a big one.

Does it still have the legendary skill requirement?

No, it only requires the Expert Psychic Spellcasting feat which you can take at level 12. That means you could be master in a tradition at 14 (before any actual caster in the game), so that's 100% a mistake.
The absence of the skill requirement in tandem is strange. Makes it feel like it was almost intentional. Obviously it’s 100% in error, but it makes me wonder if the plan was to vary the access requirements somehow.
I just realized that Expert Psychic Spellcasting also lacks the usual skill requirement. So you don't need to invest anything in the Occult skill for this archetype. That can't be right.
I'm thinking this might be intended and the trade off is you don't get access to a Breadth feat.

Now that is an interesting wrinkle. I assumed they would have had a breadth feat as standard, but that would give an MC Psychic as many spell lots as a normal Psychic for most spell levels.

Either the breadth feat was also mistakenly omitted or they attempted to do something different with the Psychic dedication but made several errors.

Can't easily rule of thumb what they were going for.

We can all agree that Master Spellcasting before 18th is incorrect, but as for the rest of it, who knows.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Entropic Wheel isn’t useless at current scaling, its minor use is to give a bit more damage at minor action cost, its primary use is to trigger a weakness when you’re off cycle and have to use the wrong energy type against something that is resistant or immune. E.g. entropic wheel ensures you do some not nontrivial damage against a fire elemental even if you have to cast a fire cantrip at it. You can use your one action resist to flip every round if you have the action, but if you don’t there’s entropic wheel to avoid a completely wasted spell.

The breadth feat is of course not there because of base psychic having few spells and because getting a psi cantrip with focus point from the dedication is so so much better than any other dedication.


A real Entropic Wheel issue: a bunch of redditors are convincing themselves that the restriction that "you" do cold/fire damage and only once per "turn" mean that you can get multiple motes going with off turn persistent damage that you started through various means on multiple targets.

I suppose by using "turn" rather than "round" they might be technically correct on that point, and I gather there's supposed to be some rules precedent (Burn It?) for treating persistent damage as damage done by "you" rather than a separate effect.

If Paizo doesn't want a Blistering Words or Fireball (with Lingering Flames feat via Spell Trickster) to set a few people on fire and max out Entropic Wheel in a couple of turns at some tables (maybe including SFS) they might want to address this. Changing "turn" to "round" should resolve the big problem without having to address whether persistent damage causes entropic wheel to advance, although that would be nice to know as well for the odd fellow who only inflicts that form of cold/fire in a round.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xenocrat wrote:

A real Entropic Wheel issue: a bunch of redditors are convincing themselves that the restriction that "you" do cold/fire damage and only once per "turn" mean that you can get multiple motes going with off turn persistent damage that you started through various means on multiple targets.

I suppose by using "turn" rather than "round" they might be technically correct on that point, and I gather there's supposed to be some rules precedent (Burn It?) for treating persistent damage as damage done by "you" rather than a separate effect.

If Paizo doesn't want a Blistering Words or Fireball (with Lingering Flames feat via Spell Trickster) to set a few people on fire and max out Entropic Wheel in a couple of turns at some tables (maybe including SFS) they might want to address this. Changing "turn" to "round" should resolve the big problem without having to address whether persistent damage causes entropic wheel to advance, although that would be nice to know as well for the odd fellow who only inflicts that form of cold/fire in a round.

IIRC Persistent damage is a condition that inflicts damage. You inflict the condition. Not directly the damage from the condition.

So, no, it does not work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Am I blind? It doesn't look like Mindsmith gets proficiency in their mind weapon.


The Raven Black wrote:


IIRC Persistent damage is a condition that inflicts damage. You inflict the condition. Not directly the damage from the condition.

So, no, it does not work.

They made things clearer with the last errata:

Page 451, 621: There are a lot of questions about persistent damage. Check the CRB FAQ for more information, but the one thing that we're adding in errata is explicitly stating " Like normal damage, it can be doubled or halved based on the results of an attack roll or saving throw."

BTW what is the CRB FAQ (if not that same errata or earlier parts of it)? And yes, they again imply that everything was explained before :-D

So I guess now persistent damage is damage and therefore you deal it.


The Raven Black wrote:
graystone wrote:
Blake's Tiger wrote:
Attached reinforced stocks and attached bayonets are not multiple weapons in 1 hand, they're 1 weapon (e.g., dueling pistol) with multiple ways to attack.

No, they are 2 different weapons: for instance, you have to put runes on each because they are different weapons: they'd use the same runes if they where in fact the same weapon...

Wielding Items
Source Core Rulebook pg. 272
"Some abilities require you to wield an item, typically a weapon. You're wielding an item any time you're holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you're not just carrying it around—you're ready to use it."

You are wielding 2 different weapons when using a ranged weapon and an attached reinforced stock/attached bayonet as you are holding both in the required number of hands to use them.

I do not think "you're ready to use a weapon" one way when your are using it to Strike another way though.

There is no "one way" though: there is no action cost to using it to attack one way after you have used it another way like there is to use a weapon that actually requires a different way to attack like two handed or Modular B, P, or S. Saying it's a different weapon is like saying that for a versatile weapon switching damage types as there is NO grip change, you're still holding it in the same number of hands and no Interact actions are required to do so.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Guntermench wrote:
Am I blind? It doesn't look like Mindsmith gets proficiency in their mind weapon.

Their weapon is a martial weapon - but Mindsmith does not grant you martial weapon proficiency, correct. That doesn't feel like an error, though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Xethik wrote:
Guntermench wrote:
Am I blind? It doesn't look like Mindsmith gets proficiency in their mind weapon.
Their weapon is a martial weapon - but Mindsmith does not grant you martial weapon proficiency, correct. That doesn't feel like an error, though.

F*~* Rogues I guess?


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Guntermench wrote:
Xethik wrote:
Guntermench wrote:
Am I blind? It doesn't look like Mindsmith gets proficiency in their mind weapon.
Their weapon is a martial weapon - but Mindsmith does not grant you martial weapon proficiency, correct. That doesn't feel like an error, though.
F$!# Rogues I guess?

I would prefer if Wizard and Rogue had errataed proficiencies, but that isn't Mindsmiths fault in my opinion.


The Raven Black wrote:


IIRC Persistent damage is a condition that inflicts damage. You inflict the condition. Not directly the damage from the condition.

So, no, it does not work.

I agree, this is apparently hanging on the assertion of the Burn It! goblin feat that "You also gain a +1 status bonus to any persistent fire damage you deal." A lot is hanging on their choice of "deal" instead of "inflict" here and assuming that's generally applicable to all persistent damage interactions with things that "deal" damage.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Xethik wrote:


I would prefer if Wizard and Rogue had errataed proficiencies, but that isn't Mindsmiths fault in my opinion.

Amen.

It really is long past due really.


VestOfHolding reports that the Thaumaturge doesn't have text advancing Unarmed Proficiency when it gets advances in weapon proficiencies.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gisher wrote:
VestOfHolding reports that the Thaumaturge doesn't have text advancing Unarmed Proficiency when it gets advances in weapon proficiencies.

I can confirm:

WEAPON MASTERY 13TH: Your proficiency ranks for simple and martial weapons increase to master.

THAUMATURGE WEAPON EXPERTISE 5TH: Your proficiency ranks for simple weapons and martial weapons increase to expert.

It's no issue with psychics, as they mention unarmed in the WEAPON EXPERTISE feature.


graystone wrote:
Gisher wrote:
VestOfHolding reports that the Thaumaturge doesn't have text advancing Unarmed Proficiency when it gets advances in weapon proficiencies.

I can confirm:

WEAPON MASTERY 13TH: Your proficiency ranks for simple and martial weapons increase to master.

THAUMATURGE WEAPON EXPERTISE 5TH: Your proficiency ranks for simple weapons and martial weapons increase to expert.

It's no issue with psychics, as they mention unarmed in the WEAPON EXPERTISE feature.

Interesting. I went back to check the playtest and the text was missing there, too.

Horizon Hunters

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

On the topic of Oscillating Wave:

Technically, you only have to remove energy after adding it. Nothing stops you from constantly removing energy, meaning you can just cast Cold spells over and over. Also, swapping the energy type of Amped Ray of Frost doesn't really make sense, as the cold is supposed to be sapping the HP from the enemy.

Anyway here's how I would run it:

1. You can not change the energy types of any cantrips. Produce Flame counts as Adding Energy and Ray of Frost counts as Removing Energy, but they can only be cast as their original elements. The other cantrips can be cast freely as they do both cold and fire damage.

2. Add a line saying that after removing energy you must add it next.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

That's a bizarre reading, and the ability to choose which of two mechanically different cantrips you use is a feature rather than a bug.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Xethik wrote:
Their weapon is a martial weapon - but Mindsmith does not grant you martial weapon proficiency, correct. That doesn't feel like an error, though.

Yeah, I'm assuming the archetype was intended for classes like fighter or barbarian, etc.

Seems weird that it's not blatantly listed though; it's like classes are secretly banned.

Horizon Hunters

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Alfa/Polaris wrote:
That's a bizarre reading, and the ability to choose which of two mechanically different cantrips you use is a feature rather than a bug.

The text literally says:

Conservation of Energy wrote:
The first time in an encounter that you cast a granted spell from your conscious mind or a psi cantrip, decide whether you’re adding energy or removing it. Once you add energy, you must remove energy the next time you cast one of these spells. When you Refocus, you restore yourself to a neutral state, allowing you to once again freely choose whether you add or remove energy on your next spell.

There's nothing stating that when you remove energy you must add energy the next time you cast one of the spells.

The cantrip thing is just to fix the issue with using Redistribute Potential. Currently you would have to cast it as Adding/Removing energy which completely negates the whole point of the spell, as it would do all one damage type instead of both.

Also amped Ray of Frost says "You drain thermal energy at a distance, using what you plunder to replenish yourself." That makes no sense if you're adding energy with it. The same goes with Amped Produce Flame, there's so much energy that it splashes outward, which wouldn't make sense if you're actually removing it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

For Psychic's Unleashed Psyche downside, the stupefied condition doesn't say whether it can be removed by other means or not. Given that it doesn't list it, my assumption is that it works like stupefied of any other means.

However, there are some effects that remove the stupefied condition through a counteract check (such as by a Focus Cathartic elixir). However, it does not list its effect level nor its counteract DC. Currently I'm operating under the assumption that the effect level is that of the Psychic's and the counteract DC is just an average DC by Level, but clarification on this would be nice.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

What happens if when you cast thermal stasis for oscillating wave? You either add or remove energy changing the energy type to cold or fire: if you do this with thermal stasis, you get either 2x fire resist 2 or 2x cold resist 2 since ANY gets changed to fire or cold. It seems like it never gives 2 resistances like it's seems to intend unless cast by a multiclass psychic or another Conscious Mind with parallel breakthrough.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Golurkcanfly wrote:

For Psychic's Unleashed Psyche downside, the stupefied condition doesn't say whether it can be removed by other means or not. Given that it doesn't list it, my assumption is that it works like stupefied of any other means.

However, there are some effects that remove the stupefied condition through a counteract check (such as by a Focus Cathartic elixir). However, it does not list its effect level nor its counteract DC. Currently I'm operating under the assumption that the effect level is that of the Psychic's and the counteract DC is just an average DC by Level, but clarification on this would be nice.

Counteracting wrote:
If an effect’s level is unclear and it came from a creature, halve and round up the creature’s level.


People, please refrain from discussions in this thread, it makes it harder on the Paizo people who have to go through this later.

Scarab Sages

Question: doe Ammunition Thaumaturge work for reloading a repeating weapon (such as a repeating hand crossbow?) I'm guessing it should, but RAW it only works for arrows/bolts/bullets into weapons, not magazines. Just trying to make sure I get this right.


VampByDay wrote:
Question: doe Ammunition Thaumaturge work for reloading a repeating weapon (such as a repeating hand crossbow?) I'm guessing it should, but RAW it only works for arrows/bolts/bullets into weapons, not magazines. Just trying to make sure I get this right.

RAW is that it allows an interact action to reload: full stop. The talk about ammo is flavor text and isn't a limiter so that means that ANY reload works with it, ammo or magazine.

1 to 50 of 200 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Dark Archive errata thread All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.