I think technically no, that wouldn't work. Probably best not to try that in PFS play.
But that isn't a bad houserule to ask for among friends.
I would say, as long as you spend the two actions and end up adjacent to the enemy it's fine.
The real benefit of Threatening Approach is that you get frightened 2 instead of frightened 1 (only a crit success does standard demoralize get frightened 2).
I wouldn't try it in PFS, but for a home game I think it's reasonable.
I don't see anything that actually prevents you from using 0 distance as your Stride action for Threatening Approach. I would probably allow its use if you were already adjacent to the target.
It is a bit questionable if you can use a Stride action with 0 distance while mounted. But again I don't see anything that prevents it.
Edit: Nope, there it is.
Mounted Defenses
Because you can’t move your body as freely while you’re riding a mount, you take a –2 circumstance penalty to Reflex saves while mounted. Additionally, the only move action you can use is the Mount action to dismount.
-----
In either case, Threatening Approach still costs 2 actions. You don't get to discount the action cost just because you opt to not fully utilize one of the subordinate actions. Sudden Charge still costs two actions even if you only move 10 feet - making it mechanically equivalent to Stride, then Strike.
Edit: Nope, there it is.
Mounted Defenses
Because you can’t move your body as freely while you’re riding a mount, you take a –2 circumstance penalty to Reflex saves while mounted. Additionally, the only move action you can use is the Mount action to dismount.
Of course, this just leads to the weirder question of what happens when you use an activity that has a prohibited subordinate action, because threatening approach itself doesn't have the move trait.
Not sure I would allow a Magus in Pest Form to use Spellstrike since they aren't allowed to cast spells or make Strikes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course, this just leads to the weirder question of what happens when you use an activity that has a prohibited subordinate action, because threatening approach itself doesn't have the move trait.
Edit: Nope, there it is.
Mounted Defenses
Because you can’t move your body as freely while you’re riding a mount, you take a –2 circumstance penalty to Reflex saves while mounted. Additionally, the only move action you can use is the Mount action to dismount.
Doesn't matter if the ability itself doesn't have the trait, because the rules for subordinate actions already cover this:
An action might allow you to use a simpler action—usually one of the Basic Actions on page 469—in a different circumstance or with different effects. This subordinate action still has its normal traits and effects, but is modified in any ways listed in the larger action. For example, an activity that tells you to Stride up to half your Speed alters the normal distance you can move in a Stride. The Stride would still have the move trait, would still trigger reactions that occur based on movement, and so on. The subordinate action doesn’t gain any of the traits of the larger action unless specified. The action that allows you to use a subordinate action doesn’t require you to spend more actions or reactions to do so; that cost is already factored in.
So the subordinate action within the ability itself will still contain the Move trait, which is prohibited to take while mounted. But a bigger question would be if you actually have to perform the Stride action to utilize the other parts of the ability, and to that end, I'd say no, based on the likes of Sudden Charge being able to function when you become, say, immobilized by a reaction. Threatening Approach contains two basic actions with an improved Demoralize effect; nothing says you have to take those actions, and based on Demoralize and Stride not being reliant on one another to function (only that the Demoralize must target an adjacent foe), it should still work even if you are already adjacent to the foe to begin with, since in this case, spending 2 actions for an improved Demoralize is the real benefit of this ability (and not simply just being able to Stride), and justifies the increased action cost.
Which means the OP could do a 1 Action Command Dinosaur to have it run up to an enemy (or if it's an Independent Companion, it can just do this automatically if it can become adjacent within 1 Stride action), with a 2 Action Threatening Approach to Stride (which is negated) and Demoralize for Frightened 2.
It's not optimal, but under these circumstances, I'd say the combination could work out in the end. It certainly isn't gamebreaking.
Not sure I would allow a Magus in Pest Form to use Spellstrike since they aren't allowed to cast spells or make Strikes.
A Lizardfolk that is already adjacent to a foe doesn't even have to Stride to qualify for the adjacent requirement for the Demoralize ability. The idea that "You must Stride," and/or "You must Demoralize," doesn't really factor when already in conditions when doing one or the other is pointless (such as if you are already adjacent in the former case, or it turns out the enemy is immune in the latter case).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course, this just leads to the weirder question of what happens when you use an activity that has a prohibited subordinate action, because threatening approach itself doesn't have the move trait.
Edit: Nope, there it is.
Mounted Defenses
Because you can’t move your body as freely while you’re riding a mount, you take a –2 circumstance penalty to Reflex saves while mounted. Additionally, the only move action you can use is the Mount action to dismount.I don't think you can use them. While the activity doesn't inherit the traits, the subordinate actions keep their normal traits.
It feels like it would be too good to be true if you could get around being able to use an action because you made it a subordinate action. Like, can you Threatening Approach or Sudden Charge while Immobilized? I feel like that should be a no.
You wouldn't be able to get around anything, the subordinate action would still have its own traits and therefore not function. You can't Stride as part of a Sudden Charge if you're immobilized.
The reason the question is relevant here is because Threatening Approach has a secondary benefit.
So it's more like, can the lizardfolk use Threatening Approach, have the Stride fail (because they can't Stride while mounted), and then still use the upgraded demoralize.
I don't think you can use them. While the activity doesn't inherit the traits, the subordinate actions keep their normal traits.
It feels like it would be too good to be true if you could get around being able to use an action because you made it a subordinate action. Like, can you Threatening Approach or Sudden Charge while Immobilized? I feel like that should be a no.
This type of confusion is why I used Spellstrike in my response.
Squiggit wasn't asking if you could bypass Immobilize and the move restriction of Stride by wrapping it in Sudden Charge and using that instead so that you could actually manage to move from your current location. That certainly doesn't work.
The question is: if you aren't able to use one of the subordinate actions, are you able to use the composite activity at all?
So if you are out of spell slots and don't have a spell that qualifies, can you even use Spellstrike since you are unable to cast any qualifying spells? It would just be a Strike at that point if you could, so you might as well just use Strike instead. But that is beside the point.
Composite activities don't make an explicit distinction between required subordinate actions and optional subordinate actions. Some of them use the English term 'may' to qualify them, but not all do that. Do the ones that don't have that mean that all of the subordinate actions are required, or is it just that it is left up to the players to decide if you can Sudden Charge for zero distance while Immobilized?