The Failure result of Exploit Vulnerability says "You can exploit only the creature’s personal antithesis."
Does this remain true if I happen to be wielding an applicable special material weapon?
For example, if I fail the check whilst wielding a cold iron longsword against demons, am I still forced to use the creature's personal antithesis rather than their cold iron vulnerability (even if it is worse)?
No, you shouldn't lose any weaknesses that you are triggering in other ways (at least I don't think you would normally).
However, you are only going to get the highest weakness value.
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.
The “exploit” here is using esoterica to make your weapon work against the weakness.
It’s seemed very likely that for many Pathfinder and Starfinder abilities the writer thinks they work one way and the developer thinks they work a different way. Rashoman in Redmond.
Mark might very well think that each type of damage in a strike is a separate instance if damage while everyone else thinks a strike is a single instance of damage.
A magus can put at least four different sources of fire damage on or related to a strike. Are those separate instances for the stance, rune, spellstrike, and reaction spell? I don’t know and I don’t know that everyone at Paizo has the same answer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
From my understanding, the answer would be three applications of weakness or resistance. The stance and rune are both additional damage on the strike so would get added together (in the same was other sources of additional damage). The spells are entirely different abilities so would work separately.
... Honestly the wonkiness here seems to be from the way special materials work. They're the only time you can trigger a separate weakness with a single type of damage, because it's not actually a damage type.
It does seem like a mistake.
I'm not sure it is. Thaumaturges not benefitting from being able to naturally trigger weaknesses was a specific complaint with the class in the playtest and the transformation of find flaws into exploit weakness was specifically done to try to address that.
From my understanding, the answer would be three applications of weakness or resistance. The stance and rune are both additional damage on the strike so would get added together (in the same was other sources of additional damage). The spells are entirely different abilities so would work separately.
... Honestly the wonkiness here seems to be from the way special materials work. They're the only time you can trigger a separate weakness with a single type of damage, because it's not actually a damage type.
It does seem like a mistake.I'm not sure it is. Thaumaturges not benefitting from being able to naturally trigger weaknesses was a specific complaint with the class in the playtest and the transformation of find flaws into exploit weakness was specifically done to try to address that.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's why they made it a choice to inflict Personal Antithesis vs Mortal Weakness when the playtest version just gave you whatever is highest.
|
It’s seemed very likely that for many Pathfinder and Starfinder abilities the writer thinks they work one way and the developer thinks they work a different way. Rashoman in Redmond.
Mark might very well think that each type of damage in a strike is a separate instance if damage while everyone else thinks a strike is a single instance of damage.
A magus can put at least four different sources of fire damage on or related to a strike. Are those separate instances for the stance, rune, spellstrike, and reaction spell? I don’t know and I don’t know that everyone at Paizo has the same answer.
You can find a few dozen threads arguing about what exactly constitutes a single instance of damage, how to for example apply Resistance to All Damage to a hit by a flaming weapon, or weakness to cold iron and slashing to a hit by a cold iron sword.
There is no "everyone else thinks" here. There's longstanding confusion.
It’s seemed very likely that for many Pathfinder and Starfinder abilities the writer thinks they work one way and the developer thinks they work a different way. Rashoman in Redmond.
Mark might very well think that each type of damage in a strike is a separate instance if damage while everyone else thinks a strike is a single instance of damage.
A magus can put at least four different sources of fire damage on or related to a strike. Are those separate instances for the stance, rune, spellstrike, and reaction spell? I don’t know and I don’t know that everyone at Paizo has the same answer.
You can find a few dozen threads arguing about what exactly constitutes a single instance of damage, how to for example apply Resistance to All Damage to a hit by a flaming weapon, or weakness to cold iron and slashing to a hit by a cold iron sword.
There is no "everyone else thinks" here. There's longstanding confusion.
Hmmm... Now where is that FAQ button... :P