If a dragon rolls a 1 to recharge a Breath Weapon, then at the start of the dragon's next turn, the 1 decrements to a 0, and the dragon can use it again. At least, that's the impression I got from the duration rules. But I recently heard that Mark Seifter stated that the intent was for the dragon to recover the Breath Weapon on the round after that. Where can I find that post?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The wording of these types of effects - "can't use X for 1dy rounds" - is not very precise.
The intent is shown if you reduce the timing down to 1 round. If an ability says that 'after you use this, you can't use it for 1 round', then it is pretty clear that this means that you are unable to use it on the round after you use it. Use it one round, it is on cooldown the next. Because otherwise it wouldn't need that wording, it would use the Flourish trait or have a 'once per round' limit. Because that would be identical and easier to understand.
A way of thinking of this that does make it work better with the Duration measured in rounds rule is that the effect of "can't use Breath Weapon" is not an effect that started on the turn that you use Breath Weapon. Because obviously you did in fact use Breath Weapon on that turn, so that turn is not one of the rounds that you "can't use Breath Weapon". The "can't use Breath Weapon" value is rolled on that turn that you use it, but the cooldown effect starts with that value on the first round that you are in fact unable to use Breath Weapon.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Nothing I post is official, but we mean 1d4 rounds that you can't use it. I'm OK clarifying that because attacks with a 1d4 round recharge tend to be on the "limited area" damage which means using them back to back could be mean to your PCs" - Mark Seifter
Yeah, that is what the rules say about Limited Use abilities.
The table includes values for unlimited-use abilities (ones that can be used at-will) and limited-use ones (which can be used once or, like a Breath Weapon, once or twice but not on consecutive turns).
Though you'd think it would work like every other duration. Usually you start counting rounds on the turn in which the effect was created. For Breath Weapon, I guess you don't start counting until the next round because the dragon used the Breath Weapon already. (I just refreshed and see that Finoan reached the same conclusion.)
But if the dragon uses Breath Weapon then crits to trigger Draconic Momentum, the cooldown is tossed, right?
But if the dragon uses Breath Weapon then crits to trigger Draconic Momentum, the cooldown is tossed, right?
What I find funny about this is it mitigates the crit a bit. Essentially it's saying that if the dragon does a lot of damage to one target, then it's not so bad for the dragon to spread out its damage next time (when focus fire on that one target would often be devastating...or easily solved with a targeted Heal...and crit + AoE=healer making a significant choice or appreciating the backup healing all the more).
If a dragon rolls a 1 to recharge a Breath Weapon, then at the start of the dragon's next turn, the 1 decrements to a 0, and the dragon can use it again. At least, that's the impression I got from the duration rules. But I recently heard that Mark Seifter stated that the intent was for the dragon to recover the Breath Weapon on the round after that. Where can I find that post?
I know James Jacobs said the same back in the late PF1 era.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The notation in PF2 is a bit weird. I mean, it's obvious that you're supposed to be unable to use the breath weapon for at least one round. And that shouldn't count the current round - notice that almost all breath weapons take 2 actions.
But the way effects with durations are defined, that's not how it works. So I'm confused why they didn't keep using the PF1 notation style, "1d4+1 rounds" which got exactly the desired cooldown time.
I wonder if this same logic applies to anything else? For example, the Psychic "Unleash Psyche" action, which you use at the start of your turn. It says your psyche remains unleashed for 2 rounds - I've been assuming that means the current round plus one more (total of 2 rounds), but does it really mean it's unleashed during the current round, plus it remains unleashed for two more?
I've always run if if they roll a 1, then it is usable the round after the next round. So there will be at least one round of downtime for the breath weapon or ability before they can use it again.
But the way effects with durations are defined, that's not how it works.
But we're not talking about a condition or something. We're talking about an ability that says you can't use something for X rounds.
There's no real logical way to argue that you should count the round you used an ability in as the round you can't use the ability in.
So I'm confused why they didn't keep using the PF1 notation style, "1d4+1 rounds" which got exactly the desired cooldown time.
Because "can't use for 1d4+1 rounds" would mean that there would be a minimum of two rounds where you can't use it.
I wonder if this same logic applies to anything else? For example, the Psychic "Unleash Psyche" action, which you use at the start of your turn. It says your psyche remains unleashed for 2 rounds - I've been assuming that means the current round plus one more (total of 2 rounds), but does it really mean it's unleashed during the current round, plus it remains unleashed for two more?
I believe your initial assumption is correct. The psyche is unleashed during your turn, so that turn counts against the duration of the unleashing. The dragon used Breath Weapon on its turn, so that turn can't count against a duration of being unable to use Breath Weapon.
|
|
But the way effects with durations are defined, that's not how it works.But we're not talking about a condition or something. We're talking about an ability that says you can't use something for X rounds.
There's no real logical way to argue that you should count the round you used an ability in as the round you can't use the ability in.
So I'm confused why they didn't keep using the PF1 notation style, "1d4+1 rounds" which got exactly the desired cooldown time.Because "can't use for 1d4+1 rounds" would mean that there would be a minimum of two rounds where you can't use it.
Nobody here is disagreeing about what it's intended to do. But every other "this lasts X rounds" thing in the game starts counting on the turn the thing starts, and ticks down at the start of each turn.
Using a different way of phrasing just for cooldowns is weird.
The ability doesn't even say "this last X rounds" so it's not 'every other' in the first place.
The way I read it is as follows:
1. Use breath weapon.
2. You cannot use again for X number of rounds starting the next round.
It's ambiguous, and we should expect table variance as it can be read either way.
I run my game such that if I roll a one I can have my creature use the ability again the following round should the situation call for it, because I find value in the players not knowing for sure whether or not the creature has a round in which it cannot be used. I like that ambiguity at my table as it cuts down on metagaming a bit.
While this doesn't necessarily apply to dragons, there are abilities with cooldowns that are reactions, so this should also be considered when deciding how to rule this at your table.
Nobody here is disagreeing about what it's intended to do. But every other "this lasts X rounds" thing in the game starts counting on the turn the thing starts, and ticks down at the start of each turn.
Using a different way of phrasing just for cooldowns is weird.
Cooldowns do behave differently. A cooldown like this isn't a "this lasts X rounds" wording. It is "this can't be used for X rounds".
Breath Weapon doesn't last for 1d4 rounds. That would be strange. Having this lingering area of elemental damage hanging around the battlefield for several rounds...
The breath weapon cooldown lasts for 1d4 rounds. Breath Weapon cooldown is a separate effect from the Breath Weapon. And the cooldown effect doesn't start the same round that the Breath Weapon happens on.
Nobody here is disagreeing about what it's intended to do. But every other "this lasts X rounds" thing in the game starts counting on the turn the thing starts, and ticks down at the start of each turn.
Using a different way of phrasing just for cooldowns is weird.
Cooldowns do behave differently. A cooldown like this isn't a "this lasts X rounds" wording. It is "this can't be used for X rounds".
Breath Weapon doesn't last for 1d4 rounds. That would be strange. Having this lingering area of elemental damage hanging around the battlefield for several rounds...
The breath weapon cooldown lasts for 1d4 rounds. Breath Weapon cooldown is a separate effect from the Breath Weapon. And the cooldown effect doesn't start the same round that the Breath Weapon happens on.
Wouldn't that mean a 1-action breath weapon could be used 3 times in a single turn before becoming unavailable?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are there any actions with cooldown that are 1 action? That don't also have a 1/round limit?
I haven't gone looking for one, so I don't know if one exists or not.
If one does, then this would be a problem. It shouldn't be allowed, but it is hard to argue that RAW matches the intent. One or the other intent would be failing - either the 1 action ability with a cooldown could be used multiple times in one round before going on cooldown, or the cooldown effect starts the round that the ability is used and that round would count against the cooldown round limit.
I suppose that an ability with a cooldown that is only one action could be intended to be one round shorter in cooldown length... But that seems really confusing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hell hound has a one-action breath weapon. It's as strong as a two-action breath weapon, so it might be a very unfortunate typo.
Well, if a dragon at the start of its turn on Round 1 uses its breath weapon, and rolls a 1 for its D4, then it being able to use it on the start of its turn on Round 2 means that it hasn't had a round where it wasn't able to use its breath weapon, which I am pretty sure is what a cooldown is meant to be. In short, we are treating the 1D4 as if it is a 1D4-1, which makes no sense, since that isn't what is printed.
I think if the rule was changed to turns, it would be more concise, but I think people would still end up ignoring the fundamental rule anyway.
At the very least, we know from Building Creatures that performing two Breath Weapons on consecutive turns isn't intended to be possible. Glad to learn that before running Beginner Box.
At the very least, we know from Building Creatures that performing two Breath Weapons on consecutive turns isn't intended to be possible. Glad to learn that before running Beginner Box.
Indeed, just wish it was a bit more spelled out in either the abilities themselves or in the actual general ability entry, instead of in a little tidbit about custom creature design.
At the very least, we know from Building Creatures that performing two Breath Weapons on consecutive turns isn't intended to be possible. Glad to learn that before running Beginner Box.Indeed, just wish it was a bit more spelled out in either the abilities themselves or in the actual general ability entry, instead of in a little tidbit about custom creature design.
The Duration rules are the best place to put it, to make the distinction clear.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's ambiguous, and we should expect table variance as it can be read either way.
I run my game such that if I roll a one I can have my creature use the ability again the following round should the situation call for it, because I find value in the players not knowing for sure whether or not the creature has a round in which it cannot be used. I like that ambiguity at my table as it cuts down on metagaming a bit.
While this doesn't necessarily apply to dragons, there are abilities with cooldowns that are reactions, so this should also be considered when deciding how to rule this at your table.
I don't think it is ambiguous at all. Literally been running these things for years and never heard anyone interpret the way some are on here as "For x number rounds" meaning next round if you roll a 1. This is a first I've heard anyone doing that. Not sure why it's being interpreted that way save some player is trying to gain an advantage with their breath weapon companion or what not.
I don't think it is ambiguous at all. Literally been running these things for years and never heard anyone interpret the way some are on here as "For x number rounds" meaning next round if you roll a 1. This is a first I've heard anyone doing that. Not sure why it's being interpreted that way save some player is trying to gain an advantage with their breath weapon companion or what not.
Really? Because that is how every other round based duration works in the game, you cannot fathom that without reading intent guidelines posted online that people would follow the rules of the rest of the game by default?
Also regarding ~"breath weapons shouldn't be able to be used two turns in a row on a lucky roll, that should be the indicator to people"~ argument, dragons the creature that is most famously associated with breath weapons have an ability that let's them recharge after a crit, and given that they are often solo fights... they can frequently use it consecutively if they get lucky (and +3 or +4 enemies often have ballpark 25% crit chance)
For tracking breath weapons it would be useful to have them changed to 1d4+1 rounds, or maybe stating that it lasts until the end of a round like a bunch of effects do since that is what they are going for.
In terms of balance, it is in fact doing a "limited use" amount of damage, which means it should only happen either:
A) once, or
B) once or twice but not on consecutive turns.
On the other hand, spellcasters can accomplish "limited use" amounts of area damage (or better) two or three turns in a row if they have the spell slots for it. This may be part of why the Building Creatures rules state that decent spellcasters should have plenty of weaknesses in other areas.
It's not a duration. It's a ban
colloquially it is both, rules wise "ban" isn't a rule term and there are immunities (or bans) and they use the, duration rules.
It's not a duration. It's a ban
Is ban a defined game term? I haven't seen it. The closest I've seen is temporary immunity which doesn't seem different than the default rules and aren't generally measured in rounds.
The only rule text that really makes this intention clear is in the monster creation rules (GM Core 124) which says dragon breath abilities "can be used once or twice but not on consecutive turns." If you haven't read that one line closely, I'd see no reason in the rules not to use duration.
I always wonder why they never imported the Recharge 5-6 mechanic from the other game, other than lawyer shenanigans.
I don't think it is ambiguous at all. Literally been running these things for years and never heard anyone interpret the way some are on here as "For x number rounds" meaning next round if you roll a 1. This is a first I've heard anyone doing that. Not sure why it's being interpreted that way save some player is trying to gain an advantage with their breath weapon companion or what not.Really? Because that is how every other round based duration works in the game, you cannot fathom that without reading intent guidelines posted online that people would follow the rules of the rest of the game by default?
Also regarding ~"breath weapons shouldn't be able to be used two turns in a row on a lucky roll, that should be the indicator to people"~ argument, dragons the creature that is most famously associated with breath weapons have an ability that let's them recharge after a crit, and given that they are often solo fights... they can frequently use it consecutively if they get lucky (and +3 or +4 enemies often have ballpark 25% crit chance)
For tracking breath weapons it would be useful to have them changed to 1d4+1 rounds, or maybe stating that it lasts until the end of a round like a bunch of effects do since that is what they are going for.
It's not a duration. It's a simple rule. You can't use this ability again for "x number of rounds." So no, I never saw it as some kind of duration. To me it's a special rule for specific abilities, mostly monsters to prevent them from chain using a powerful ability and add some fear in as to when it will come next due to the random nature of the recharge.
Supposed to simulate the monster recharging an ability like whatever biological parts a dragon has generating more of its poison or fire breath fuel or what not. You have at least 1 round between uses and up to "x" where x is the dice rolled.
It's been a rule since 3E and PF1 over a decade, maybe before that.
What I find strange is some folks suddenly finding ambiguity in a clear rule most of us have been running for well over a decade.
I figured everyone understood this rule both for intent and mechanics since it is not new to PF2.
I always wonder why they never imported the Recharge 5-6 mechanic from the other game, other than lawyer shenanigans.
That mechanic is so garbage. The challenge rating rules assume that the monster recovers the breath weapon no sooner than turn 4, but that only happens 4/9 of the time. Even worse, most of the dragons in 5e, much like fireball, were deliberately made too powerful for their challenge rating because "It's Dungeons & Dragons, bro!"
It's a countdown. That by definition also makes it a duration.
Be it long time home groups, short term pickup groups, convention groups, or random society groups; online or off, for over 30 years, they have all--without exception--ruled that a roll of a 1 meant the creature could use their breath weapon in the following round, potentially allowing for consecutive rounds of breath weapon use.
This notion that it is not a duration and that you must skip a round, right or wrong, is absolutely a foreign concept in my (extensive) experience.
Anyone else notice how Mark Seifter likes to shake things up with his unofficial comments?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a countdown. That by definition also makes it a duration.
Be it long time home groups, short term pickup groups, convention groups, or random society groups; online or off, for over 30 years, they have all--without exception--ruled that a roll of a 1 meant the creature could use their breath weapon in the following round, potentially allowing for consecutive rounds of breath weapon use.
This notion that it is not a duration and that you must skip a round, right or wrong, is absolutely a foreign concept in my (extensive) experience.
Anyone else notice how Mark Seifter likes to shake things up with his unofficial comments?
Unofficial comment or not, the Building Creatures rules make it clear that Breath Weapon two turns in a row just isn't a thing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a countdown. That by definition also makes it a duration.
Be it long time home groups, short term pickup groups, convention groups, or random society groups; online or off, for over 30 years, they have all--without exception--ruled that a roll of a 1 meant the creature could use their breath weapon in the following round, potentially allowing for consecutive rounds of breath weapon use.
This notion that it is not a duration and that you must skip a round, right or wrong, is absolutely a foreign concept in my (extensive) experience.
Anyone else notice how Mark Seifter likes to shake things up with his unofficial comments?
Except this proposes that 1D4 = 1D4-1, which makes no sense as a mathematical construct, since you can have results of 1=0. And no sane person would propose 1=0.
It also wouldn't be the first time that things which have been "established" for years turned out to actually be wrongly played the entire time. Errata simply brings these things to light.
That being said, the rules for building creatures makes the intent crystal clear: breath weapons cannot be used in consecutive rounds, meaning the interpretation resulting in breath weapons in consecutive rounds is incorrect as of PF2.
And no, the arguments of "critical hits recharge the breath weapon" doesn't change that.
Except this proposes that 1D4 = 1D4-1, which makes no sense as a mathematical construct, since you can have results of 1=0. And no sane person would propose 1=0.
2×2=3, by the way. It's an official rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone, really quick, I have a question for you: When you count to ten do you start by saying "Zero, one, two..." or do you start with one?
There is the answer to your question.
That's not the question. The question is "When do you start counting?"
|
One full round does not pass until, well, an entire round passes. There is no valid interpretation where you can use such cooldown abilities such as BW on consecutive turns, it's been understood based on the phrasing by most and was even clarified by those who wrote it for those who got tangled up in the wording (or hunting for cheese).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get why so many people on each side of this argument just can't fathom where the other side is coming from. Durations decrement at the start of each of your turns, so the possibility of consecutive Breath Weapons makes sense from that POV. That's why I thought it worked like that until recently. But a round on which you've used a Breath Weapon is not a round where you can't, so the impossibility of consecutive Breath Weapons makes sense from that POV.