Yeah, Final Gate's trigger is decidedly not "your turn begins" it's "you are going to spend your first action" which is different from "your turn begins" in that you could have spent a free action triggered by your turn beginning before you are about to spend your first action."
...or, indeed, any number of other things might have triggered off of your turn beginning. At minimum, any effects that were stated to last "until the beginning of your next turn" end.
I had a point to make about reaction timing, and whether it a reaction to your turn starting happens before or after your turn starts (with reverence to the fact that reactions can disrupt) but the fact that it's being used as a sustain makes that all wonky WRT sustain timing. If anyone has any actual knowledge on the persnickety details on this, that would be welcome.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would limit what stances you could use as monk given that they are explicitly medium/heavy armour
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a trap in the armor impulses.
The text says:
... The stone armor is medium armor but uses your highest armor proficiency...
... This hardwood armor is medium armor but uses your highest armor proficiency...
... The carapace armor is medium armor but uses your highest armor proficiency...
If you pay attention it doesn't mention unarmored proficiency so they don't applies to monks and unarmored spellcasters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, when the PF2 wants to include unarmored proficiency its explicitly like happens in sentinel archetype.
I think thematically combining the Kineticist Armor impulses with "being a monk" works a lot better than "Sentinel and being a Monk." It's hard to imagine a martial artist in full plate, but very easy to imagine one with a kineticist's defensive impulses- since that's just Avatar.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyway following one of the goldens rule of PF2 (Ambiguous Rules) "If one version is too good to be true, it probably is".
These armor impulses don't mention unarmored proficiency, even classes description the defenses are something like this:
Trained in unarmored defense
Trained in light/light and medium/all armor
or when it progress is also specific mentioned:
...Your proficiency ranks for light, medium, and heavy armor, as well as for unarmored defense, increase to expert...
...Your proficiency ranks for light, medium, and heavy armor, as well as for unarmored defense, increase to master.
...Your proficiency ranks for light, medium, and heavy armor, as well as for unarmored defense, increase to legendary.
The unarmored defense is normally mentioned when its relevant but the defensive impulses don't mention it.
Also this will create a too cheap way to a monk and unarmored casters get heavy armors where the game tries to prevent it many times:
Sentinel dedication having an exception where monk is unable to get master and legendary with the armored defense provided and Champion Dedication requires Diverse Armor Expert to grant expert heavy armor proficiency to casters and monks.
IMO its too good to think that Kineticist archetype will be allowed to workaround these limitations that other more specialized (Sentinel) and restricted (Champion archetype requires to follow the good and a deity anathema +2 in Str and Cha) archetypes can't.
Sorry but even if this will be clarified by Paizo in some FAQ or errata beased in their history I'm certain this will be clarified in this direction.
I think thematically combining the Kineticist Armor impulses with "being a monk" works a lot better than "Sentinel and being a Monk." It's hard to imagine a martial artist in full plate, but very easy to imagine one with a kineticist's defensive impulses- since that's just Avatar.
It's hard to imagine a monk using shields and tower shield too but...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sentinel dedication having an exception where monk is unable to get master and legendary with the armored defense provided
TBH, the fact that Sentinel is designed specifically to block monks has me question how much this is true at least a little bit, since you're inferring a general rule from a specific exception when you can also do the opposite (that a specific exception implies the general rule is the opposite).
At the very least it's ambiguous.
Since it's twice as expensive as Sentinel and only really benefits some very niche builds, it's not really TGTBT so I might just allow it until Paizo clarifies one way or the other (and might still allow it afterwards tbh).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I admit that use of Sentinel wasn't a good example. My point is just if don't specify unarmored defense so is not affected unarmored defense all places where something affect or not unarmored players usually are pretty clear and direct.
Back from a perilous and unfun trip to hype about kineticist again. I am currently channeling that meme of the grandma climbing up the barred doors until I can buy the PDF on Thursday (which is Friday for my timezone).
I am discussing with my friend stuff I've learned so far (aka absorbed information through other people discussing it) but I MUST KNOW. Friends.
Friends with books.
Can you please list all the most ridiculous ability names? Like "Hell of 1,000,000 Needles".
I want to see all the silly silly names. (bonus for at least a summary of what they do but honestly I'd be happy with just the names)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's mostly level 18 impulses. I'll list all of them (without descriptions, but you can find them online as someone did a lot of screenshots of the preview videos):
CROWNED IN TEMPEST’S FURY
INFINITE EXPANSE OF BLUEST HEAVEN
REBIRTH IN LIVING STONE
THE SHATTERED MOUNTAIN WEEPS
ALL SHALL END IN FLAMES
IGNITE THE SUN
BEASTS OF SLUMBERING STEEL
HELL OF 1,000,000 NEEDLES
RIDE THE TSUNAMI
USURP THE LUNAR REINS
ROUSE THE FOREST’S FURY
TURN THE WHEEL OF SEASONS
The all-caps is from Paizo, as they are printed in all-caps in the books and I really can't be arsed to change them manually. ^^
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The capstone impulses really should always be in all caps anyway. Maybe bold and in all caps.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The capstone impulses really should always be in all caps anyway. Maybe bold and in all caps.
And shouted while getting up from your seat.
Getting on the table if you're already standing.| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can you please list all the most ridiculous ability names? Like "Hell of 1,000,000 Needles".I want to see all the silly silly names. (bonus for at least a summary of what they do but honestly I'd be happy with just the names)
Here are some just for you in no particular order
HELL OF 1,000,000 NEEDLES : A comically large amount of needles transform everyone in a 30 feet sided cube into porcupines and immobilizes them with the power of aggressive acupuncture. The needles stay while you sustain, and as long as you sustain the ground is now transformed into caltrops while everyone inside gets to benefit from electroshock thereapy. I rate it hate-crime/10
ROUSE THE FOREST'S FURY : Become the lorax, sending three large trees to either go full MMA on your oponents and grab them in a chokehold, or to channel the power of "unsatisfied spectators at a bad comedy show" to throw rotten vegetables and fruits at them. I rate it "little leshy needs their big brothers"/10
USURP THE LUNAR REINS : Channel the power of minecraft steve holding four regular sized buckets and create, delete or alter Water, ponds, lakes and rivers. I rate it "old create water with no expiration date"/10
WALK THROUGH THE CONFLAGRATION : Become John dark souls and teleport between bonfires. Or non bon-fires. Really, any kind of fire. Also blow up for good mesure.
ALL SHALL END IN FLAMES : Drop an actual nuke on people. Alternatively, become the nuke. People that drop to 0hp because of the nuke turn into a pile of dust. Even you. But you get to come back to life because you weren't looking and it doesn't count and also you are a phoenix.
ELEMENTAL ARTILLERY: Reject magic for a few rounds and just shoot people with a giant ballista.
STEAM KNIGHT : Introduce your ennemies to the health benefits of standing in an overenthusiastic sentient sauna in the middle of summer in the desert at noon.
Same here, hopefully the kineticist is added to Foundry sooner rather than later.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
OH WOW.
A monk can absolutely use fuse stance (feat 20) on kineticist stances. Only on lower-level ones, of course, but having two kineticist stances up is fun.
Stance savant also works to immediately activate one.
On the flip side, they can't expand their aura unless you're using gestalt. That feat is lvl 10 on the kineticist side. They also don't get aura junctions... and you'd have to give up on the idea of doing anything with monk stances, which might make assembling an effective build a bit trickier.
That said... yes. That's true. You can do that thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Finally a monk with a reason to grab monastic weaponry (because you're using your stances for better stuff).
You want to be close to people (since your aura is small) so grab a whipstaff or something.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in love with solar detonation. An aoe blinding effect even without the damage is fantastic.I did as well until I noticed the Incapacitation trait. That ruined it for me. As it stands (hopefully errata will fix) the incapacitation is not only for the blind, but damage too. That makes this horrible in my eyes.
Got to question if that is true. The Incapacitation trait reads as follows: "An ability with this trait can take a character completely out of the fight or even kill them, and it’s harder to use on a more powerful character. If a spell has the incapacitation trait, any creature of more than twice the spell’s level treats the result of their check to prevent being incapacitated by the spell as one degree of success better, or the result of any check the spellcaster made to incapacitate them as one degree of success worse. If any other effect has the incapacitation trait, a creature of higher level than the item, creature, or hazard generating the effect gains the same benefits."
Emphasis on the bolded part. Unless the GM rules that "being in danger of getting killed by the damage" also counts as incapacitation, the trait should only apply to the blindness effect.
Unless there are rule clarifications by the devs I am unaware of. I'm still quite new at PF2E.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems a fair point, magnuskn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Got to question if that is true. The Incapacitation trait reads as follows: "An ability with this trait can take a character completely out of the fight or even kill them, and it’s harder to use on a more powerful character. If a spell has the incapacitation trait, any creature of more than twice the spell’s level treats the result of their check to prevent being incapacitated by the spell as one degree of success better, or the result of any check the spellcaster made to incapacitate them as one degree of success worse. If any other effect has the incapacitation trait, a creature of higher level than the item, creature, or hazard generating the effect gains the same benefits."
Emphasis on the bolded part. Unless the GM rules that "being in danger of getting killed by the damage" also counts as incapacitation, the trait should only apply to the blindness effect.
Unless there are rule clarifications by the devs I am unaware of. I'm still quite new at PF2E.
Huh. Well, that moves it straight into the "deeply unclear, ask your GM, and hope for eventual clarification from the devs" box for me. Cool. Thanks.
I'm not ready to buy into your argument entirely, because it's still the same check. But yeah... deeply unclear.
It's sort of insane troll logic to argue that "damage kills people, so the incapacitation tag is meant to apply because of the 'or even kill them' phrasing" but it might be intended.
It's extremely stupid if so. I may have to toss it in the "kineticist errata" thread.
Please do, this needs a bit of clarification.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Got to question if that is true. The Incapacitation trait reads as follows: "An ability with this trait can take a character completely out of the fight or even kill them, and it’s harder to use on a more powerful character. If a spell has the incapacitation trait, any creature of more than twice the spell’s level treats the result of their check to prevent being incapacitated by the spell as one degree of success better, or the result of any check the spellcaster made to incapacitate them as one degree of success worse. If any other effect has the incapacitation trait, a creature of higher level than the item, creature, or hazard generating the effect gains the same benefits."
Emphasis on the bolded part. Unless the GM rules that "being in danger of getting killed by the damage" also counts as incapacitation, the trait should only apply to the blindness effect.
Unless there are rule clarifications by the devs I am unaware of. I'm still quite new at PF2E.
Huh. Well, that moves it straight into the "deeply unclear, ask your GM, and hope for eventual clarification from the devs" box for me. Cool. Thanks.
I'm not ready to buy into your argument entirely, because it's still the same check. But yeah... deeply unclear.
It's exactly the same problem as Rainbow Fulmarole. Which is an incapacitation spell that deals damage. They probably meant for [Incapacitation] to only apply to the stuff that, well, incapacitates.
But rules-as-written...
...
An ability with this trait can take a character completely out of the fight or even kill them , and it’s harder to use on a more powerful character. If a spell has the incapacitation trait, any creature of more than twice the spell’s level treats the result of their check to prevent being incapacitated by the spell as one degree of success better, or the result of any check the spellcaster made to incapacitate them as one degree of success worse. If any other
I agree that the intention of Incapacitation trait is to prevent that an important target from being incapacitated by an ability that prevents it to act and when the trait is put into an entire stat block it easily brakes the entire efficiency of the entire thing way bellow than any other option without the trait.
The Rainbow Fumarole was a good example. IMO the only reason why the spell get the Incapacitation trait is because if your roll 5 or 6 in the d8 the rest will just been collaterally affected too negatively. These stat blocks with incapacitation traits even take these spells/feats into your spellbook/repertoire inviable to take due the fact that you know they will be useless if you face an opponent stronger than you.
Would be very good if someday Paizo designers rewrite the incapacitation trait only restricting it to only effect that's able to make an target to completely unable to act in their turn, be fully controled or instant kills it.
Since there are at least two instances of incapacitation being put in the spell header of damaging spells/impulses in Rage of Elements, I'm going to predict that the remaster will change the incapicate trait to make this the new normal for how you present, while also making it clear that the trait only applies to condition effects, not damage.
It would save time/space for things like Phantasmal Killer (or whatever its new name is), too.
Ewwww but that would mean Phantasmal Killer is vastly less effective most of the time. Because previously you could use it on bosses and not mind that they don't die when they crit fail. But making it all incapacitation means it's just damage and no frightening at all.Since there are at least two instances of incapacitation being put in the spell header of damaging spells/impulses in Rage of Elements, I'm going to predict that the remaster will change the incapicate trait to make this the new normal for how you present, while also making it clear that the trait only applies to condition effects, not damage.
It would save time/space for things like Phantasmal Killer (or whatever its new name is), too.
No, I'm saying they'll stick the incapcitation in the headers of the spell, but the new trait glossary for incapacitation will say "this never applies to damage, if it's in a spell with both damage and other effects only apply it to the part that causes conditions."