101 errata, but today there is none.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, a sorcerer only refocuses when they spend 10 minutes doing something not stressful. So a sorcerer could tend to wounds, or repair or identify an item or attach a talisman or prepare a disguise or whatever.
But they don't "automatically refocus" they're just like everybody else if you immediately head into the next room.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s not ‘functionally identical to automatic’ because you still need to actively do it - which is the opposite of automatic. If you somehow spent 10min in an encounter because you hate yourself, I don’t think any gm would go “oh, right, I guess you have all your focus points back now!” because you still need to use Refocus and that is its own (contextually exploration) activity you have to explicitly say you’re doing on top of whatever else.
So claiming you literally don’t have to say or do anything to refocus, which is what it being ‘automatic’ would entail, is wrong.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whether a GM handwaves saying you are refocusing or not, or if you are refocusing as a free action while doing other things, the feat still does something. If the party stops for 10 minutes to treat wounds or whatever, you will regain 1 focus point without the feat. With the feat, you will regain as many as 3, depending on what your pool size is. If you then get into an encounter before another 10 minutes pass, without the feat, you will have 1 focus point. With the feat you will have 3 (or whatever your max is).
Like with every other feat, you can decide if that’s worth it to you or not. If you only have 1 focus point, it’s obviously not. If you have more, then maybe it is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, a sorcerer only refocuses when they spend 10 minutes doing something not stressful. So a sorcerer could tend to wounds, or repair or identify an item or attach a talisman or prepare a disguise or whatever.Nothing says anything about 'not stressful'. And they can Avoid Notice, or Scout, or Hustle, or Search, or do nothing in particular.
Which is functionally identical to 'automatically' refocusing.
No, it's not fundamentally identical to automatically refocusing because if combat somehow takes 60 rounds the sorcerer does not refocus, because combat is too stressful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether a GM handwaves saying you are refocusing or not, or if you are refocusing as a free action while doing other things, the feat still does something. If the party stops for 10 minutes to treat wounds or whatever, you will regain 1 focus point without the feat. With the feat, you will regain as many as 3, depending on what your pool size is. If you then get into an encounter before another 10 minutes pass, without the feat, you will have 1 focus point. With the feat you will have 3 (or whatever your max is).
Like with every other feat, you can decide if that’s worth it to you or not. If you only have 1 focus point, it’s obviously not. If you have more, then maybe it is.
As someone who has played a champion from 1-20, I can say that the full focus point feats are SO worth it for anyone with a lot of focus powers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
..Yeah? Like, 10 minutes is 10 minutes?
Yes, 10 continuous minutes out of an encounter, AFTER you start the activity. You have an encounter 9 minutes and 54 seconds after you start and you get no focus and have to start again. NOTHING creates the inference that it's automatic: the reverse in fact as it states you're "using the Refocus activity" and not stating 'you automatically regain focus'.
"You have to spend all the actions of an activity at once to gain its effects." and
|
As someone who has played a champion from 1-20, I can say that the full focus point feats are SO worth it for anyone with a lot of focus powers.Whether a GM handwaves saying you are refocusing or not, or if you are refocusing as a free action while doing other things, the feat still does something. If the party stops for 10 minutes to treat wounds or whatever, you will regain 1 focus point without the feat. With the feat, you will regain as many as 3, depending on what your pool size is. If you then get into an encounter before another 10 minutes pass, without the feat, you will have 1 focus point. With the feat you will have 3 (or whatever your max is).
Like with every other feat, you can decide if that’s worth it to you or not. If you only have 1 focus point, it’s obviously not. If you have more, then maybe it is.
Exceedingly campaign and GM dependent. Sometimes there is just about always at least 30 minutes between combats, sometimes you're lucky to get 10.
Exceedingly campaign and GM dependent. Sometimes there is just about always at least 30 minutes between combats, sometimes you're lucky to get 10.As someone who has played a champion from 1-20, I can say that the full focus point feats are SO worth it for anyone with a lot of focus powers.Whether a GM handwaves saying you are refocusing or not, or if you are refocusing as a free action while doing other things, the feat still does something. If the party stops for 10 minutes to treat wounds or whatever, you will regain 1 focus point without the feat. With the feat, you will regain as many as 3, depending on what your pool size is. If you then get into an encounter before another 10 minutes pass, without the feat, you will have 1 focus point. With the feat you will have 3 (or whatever your max is).
Like with every other feat, you can decide if that’s worth it to you or not. If you only have 1 focus point, it’s obviously not. If you have more, then maybe it is.
Plus that sounds like RD played back when you needed those feats to get more than 1 Focus Point back. While there are meany feats for higher level PCs to handle time pressure, I'm not sure how many APs actually apply any.
Yes, I benefited from the new version for only the last two or three levels.
I also had Desperate Prayer and Bracers of Devotion, so I could get a fourth and fifth focus point once per day.
There was never a day in high level play that, that those didn't get used up too. In fact, my fellow players had to frequently remind me that I had already used them that day.
(This was all during Agents of Edgewatch, by the way.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
..Yeah? Like, 10 minutes is 10 minutes?Yes, 10 continuous minutes out of an encounter, AFTER you start the activity. You have an encounter 9 minutes and 54 seconds after you start and you get no focus and have to start again. NOTHING creates the inference that it's automatic: the reverse in fact as it states you're "using the Refocus activity" and not stating 'you automatically regain focus'.
"You have to spend all the actions of an activity at once to gain its effects." and
This.
It is very similar to automatic in practical scenarios, since few groups won't take a 10 minute break after combat. But it is not -quite- identical to being automatic for the reasons described.
That being said, I think anyone who complained about a sorcerer not explicitly using the refocus activity in the 10 mins after combat would be splitting hairs. In practice, you should be assumed to be refocusing unless you explicitly state otherwise. If anyone gets their focus points back, you should as well.
|
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the point, though, is that the feat is not in need of errata. It works fine. It does what it says it does. If that isn’t worth it to someone, then they shouldn’t take the feat. All any of the versions of it do for any character is let them recover up to 3 focus points in 10 minutes instead of 30 minutes. It’s the same for the Sorcerer. No errata needed.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
...any GM who doesn't allow a sorcerer to recover their focus points in exploration which lasts more than 10 minutes whatever the sorcerer said (or not said) they were doing, is not fit to be a GM. To put it mildly. No, no sorcerer need to say 'I'm Refocusing while Hustling'.
For anyone who might have missed it during the course of conversation, I think it's worth pointing out that most focus pools require you to perform specific activities in order to replenish your focus points. Some of these activities can indeed be done alongside other exploration activities, but others cannot.
I think any GM ignoring these requirements is doing his table a grave disservice, since they serve to add a great deal of flavor to everyone's character concepts. Without it, everyone's characters feel that much closer to robot clones.
Lately, I've really enjoyed my champion of Qi Zhong who can, because of the nature of his chosen deity, recoup focus points while healing his fellow party members. It really serves to cut down on the wait times.
As you said, sorcerer is one of the few who can literally do nothing and still get their focus points back. GMs who ignore the descriptive requirements of Refocus take that class' particular strength away as well.
The Refocus rules are also pretty fun for Witches in particular, too, since "communing with your familiar" can be entirely different depending on your patron. A Starless Shadow Witch might be able to commune while skulking and scouting out the shadows ahead, for example.
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the Pre-remastered Swashbuckler, the "You're Next !" feat is a reaction.
In the Player Core Rogues, the "You're Next!" feat is also a reaction.
But in the Remastered Swashbuckler for Player Core 2, "You're Next!" requires an action which limits its usability. But the language of the feat includes the word 'trigger' which you generally only see in reactions.
Is this a typo, or do Swashbuckler PCs actually need to take a rogue dedication to get the "You're Next!" feat to be a reaction?
Hmm
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the Pre-remastered Swashbuckler, the "You're Next !" feat is a reaction.
In the Player Core Rogues, the "You're Next!" feat is also a reaction.
But in the Remastered Swashbuckler for Player Core 2, "You're Next!" requires an action which limits its usability. But the language of the feat includes the word 'trigger' which you generally only see in reactions.
Is this a typo, or do Swashbuckler PCs actually need to take a rogue dedication to get the "You're Next!" feat to be a reaction?
Hmm
Already clarified for Pathfinder Society, it's a reaction and the single action thing was a misprint.
https://paizo.com/pathfindersociety/characteroptions
Look under Pathfinder Player Core 2.
***
Now, my own issue with the Grandeur cause for Champion, is that the duration of Flash of Grandeur is "For 1 round", which according to RAW means it ends when your own turn starts, making its use very questionable. Given that other effects like the Redemption causes Glimpse of Redemption last until the end of the targets next turn, the text of Flash of Grandeur should probably be clarified.
|
|
Just pointing out again that Blessed Shield needs clarification about whether it applies to any shield. The phrasing isn’t that different from Shield Ally, which also didn’t say select a shield like Blade Ally said select a weapon. Also, Shield Paragon definitely assumes it’s a single shield, since it gives you the ability to temporarily transfer the runes to a single other shield.
No, it isn’t great if it’s one shield. Yes, it’s closer to Blessed Armament if it’s one shield.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I think there just needs to be a universal rule that effects that add a rune to a weapon can go over the normal cap based on potency runes, because this keeps coming up (there's numerous other examples of it - such as Conductive Sphere on Kineticist trying to add Shock runes on a level 8 impulse). Or should we just be interpreting them as overriding the normal rune limit if they don't say otherwise? (That is, since it says it adds the rune, it gets to do so, even though that's normally not allowed)
Not player core but my favorite example is actually another Kineticist impulse, Kindle Inner Flames.
If we assume that bonus runes from abilities follow all the normal rules for runes (including limits), then the Impulse gets worse when it heightens at level 12 and grants a rune instead of a flat damage bonus.
Yeah, I'm aware of the PFS clarification for Ghosts in the Storm, imo it's a bad call, though at least the effect internally consistent.
The outcome for Kindle isn't necessarily different, but if we apply the same PFS houserule to Kindle it means the spell gets worse when you heighten it, which clearly is somewhat broken design.
Champion is in a similar place, where you can apply the PFS clarification and it does work if you do, but it also essentially turns the class feature into a one time payment of 35-225 gold.
Flash of Grandeur does mean they have a miss chance for any attacks they take afterwards due to Dazzled, plus the upgrade inflicts Off-Guard automatically.
The effect doesn't need clarification, the duration does.
It says "another" finisher, so you'd need to pick something other than illimitable a second time.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
ELDRITCH ARCHER ARCHETYPE
The Eldritch Archer archetype as originally printed in the APG was unclear as to what happens if you were already a spellcaster when you take the eldritch archer archetype. Paizo eventually released errata which corrected and clarified the issue:
Remove the paragraph from the first printing that begins, “If you already cast spells from spell slots, you gain one additional cantrip from that tradition.” If you’re already a spellcaster, you use your normal allotment of spells for eldritch archer abilities and don’t gain more spells.
Thus, pursuant to the errata, it appears that you gain a repertoire with one cantrip and become a spontaneous caster from the dedication feat, and can later take the basic, expert and master spellcasting feats, but only if you do not already cast spells from spell slots when you take the eldritch archer archetype. If you already cast spells from spell slots when you take the eldritch archer archetype, since you “use your normal allotment of spells for eldritch archer abilities and don’t gain more spells”, it appears you do not gain the repertoire with one cantrip and cannot take the basic, expert and master spellcasting feats (though, admittedly, this latter is inferred from the “don’t gain more spells” language).
Player Core 2 repeats the basic mistake from the APG. It states what to do if you do not already cast spells from spell slots (i.e. you get a repertoire with a cantrip), BUT does not say what to do if you already cast spells from spell slots.
For now, I am basically applying the APG errata to the Remaster Eldritch Archer, but it would be nice if Paizo included the appropriate Player Core 2 errata for this archetype.
EDIT - It is possible that Paizo is thinking that since it only says you gain the repertoire, cantrip and Cast a Spell activity if you don't already cast spells from spell slots, that since it doesn't say you get anything if you already can cast spells from spell slots that you would infer that you don't get any additional spellcasting in the latter case. Definitely not a clear way to write, but it's possible that's what they were thinking. Also, if the intent would then be that you cannot get the basic, expert and master spellcasting feats since you are already a spellcaster, then Basic Eldritch Archer Spellcasting needs errata as the only prerequisite is that you have the dedication feat - also, you might not have a repertoire (e.g. a Wizard Eldritch Archer) and you don't choose a tradition if you didn't get a repertoire from the dedication.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is possible that Paizo is thinking that since it only says you gain the repertoire, cantrip and Cast a Spell activity if you don't already cast spells from spell slots, that since it doesn't say you get anything if you already can cast spells from spell slots that you would infer that you don't get any additional spellcasting in the latter case. Definitely not a clear way to write, but it's possible that's what they were thinking. Also, if the intent would then be that you cannot get the basic, expert and master spellcasting feats since you are already a spellcaster, then Basic Eldritch Archer Spellcasting needs errata as the only prerequisite is that you have the dedication feat - also, you might not have a repertoire (e.g. a Wizard Eldritch Archer) and you don't choose a tradition if you didn't get a repertoire from the dedication.
I honestly think the intent is for Eldritch Archer to just function as any other Spellcasting Dedication.
I mean, if you're a Wizard and you multiclass Bard, you also gain Cast a Spell (doesn't matter, you already have it) and a repertoire of cantrips, which use your Cha (as opposed to Int).
If you're a Magus and you multiclass Eldritch Archer, you also gain a repertoire with 1 attack roll Cantrip, which uses Cha. You can then take the Basic/Expert/Master Spellcasting to gain Cha Based spells of your chosen tradition.
I've no idea why they have the "If you don't already cast spells from spell slots" bit, when every other dedication that grants Cast a Spell doesn't, but I think treating it as any other spellcasting dedication works best.
I will agree though that it is unclear, and it goes against the already published errata. It might be intentional but I guess we'll need to wait for the FAQ.
On the lower end of things, and might even be Player Core 1 errata, but Poisoner could use a clarification on how it interacts with "Poison Weapon" feat's special feature dependent on rogue level. As written, the special feature only applies to scenarios where the player is also multiclassing rogue or if the player has a rogue and is trying to burn through the minimum feat requirements to get to another class.
I can see that historically people have made some assumptions that you can just use half of your main class level. Overall it's not the end of the world but it would be nice to clear it up.
Parthenogienic Hatchling:
I think I understand the rule but it is hard to read. I think it would be better with a phrase between dashes--for readability--instead of a parenthetical followed immediately with a comma (like the previous phrase), if you would like it to be more readable.
Shouldn't the Alchemist Archetype Dedication actually give you the Alchemical Crafting skill feat? It says it gives you 4 formulas in addition to those from Alchemical Crafting, but it neither requires nor grants that skill feat.
Shouldn't the Alchemist Archetype Dedication actually give you the Alchemical Crafting skill feat? It says it gives you 4 formulas in addition to those from Alchemical Crafting, but it neither requires nor grants that skill feat.
Check the page reference in the feat.
Alchemist Dedication
"You gain the Quick Alchemy benefits (page 174), creating up to 4 versatile vials during your daily preparations."
Alchemical Archetypes (page 174)
"Quick Alchemy Benefits: You gain the Alchemical Crafting feat (Player Core 252) if you don’t already have it."
Ah, that's the step I was missing. Completely forgot that they standardized alchemy benefits and didn't even think to look there.
Thanks!
It says "another" finisher, so you'd need to pick something other than illimitable a second time.
That might well been the intent, but "another" doesn't clearly imply that, since it often (typically?) means another (potentially identical) token of the same type. For example, suppose I have a plate of different kinds of cookies, and you eat an oatmeal cookie from it; if I then say, "have another cookie," nobody would think I was implying that you shouldn't take another oatmeal cookie.
Personally, I think the devs thought giving Illimitable Finisher the Fortune trait would provent using it recursively (as well, I suppose, as preventing you from using it with Perfect Finisher, which would otherwise be the obviously best choice in most situations). However, I think it would've been much clearer (and better all-around) if Illimitable Finisher were instead written like Flamboyant Leap--that is, as an action that let you use a finisher withotu being a finisher itself.
The Snare Setter ancestry feat for Kobold copied over the same issue as from the APG.You have to be trained to qualify, but gain training when you take the feat.
Prerequisites trained in Crafting
You are adept at the time-honored kobold art of making traps.
You gain the trained proficiency in Crafting. If you were already
trained in Crafting, you instead become trained in a skill of
your choice...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Kobold's Grovel Ancestry Feat still does (almost) nothing as written. It allows you to feint a target that is up to 30 feet away, but doesn't change feint to make your target off-guard to ranged attacks.
GROVEL [one-action] FEAT 5
AUDITORY CONCENTRATE EMOTION KOBOLD MENTAL
Prerequisites trained in Deception
You convince your foe you’re less of a threat. You attempt to
Feint against a creature. Unlike a normal Feint, the creature can
be within 30 feet instead of in your melee reach, and you make
your check against its Will DC instead of its Perception DC.
Feint
Requirements You are within melee reach of the target you attempt to Feint. With a misleading flourish, you leave an opponent unprepared for your real attack. Attempt a Deception check against your target's Perception DC.Critical Success You throw your enemy's defenses against you entirely off. The target is off-guard against melee attacks that you attempt against it until the end of your next turn.
Success Your foe is fooled, but only momentarily. The target is off-guard against the next melee attack that you attempt against it before the end of your current turn.
Critical Failure Your feint backfires. You are off-guard against melee attacks the target attempts against you until the end of your next turn.