| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The wording on Ready Reload changed to be more confusing and I'm no longer sure what the feat is doing. I want to clarify that my goal is to write my confusion as clearly as possible, which is a difficult task, but I am generally happy with the playtest and trying to be helpful here rather than pedantic.
Where the Field Test 1 wording and the playtest rulebook wording agree are the requirements, action cost, and flavor text:
- Must be a 2h ranged weapon
- Must have a reload of 2+
- Your last action must have been an attack that used ammo
- Takes 1 action to do this activity
The Field Test is very clear:
- "You Interact and can reload your weapon twice."
The Playtest Rulebook is very unclear:
- "You Interact to reload your weapon, reducing its reload cost by 1."
- "Unlike most Interact actions, you don't need a free hand to reload your ranged weapon this way."
Now, there's a couple ways to interpret the Playtest Rulebook's version.
1. You Interact to reload your weapon, and "reducing its reload cost by 1" is a clarifying clause to remind what reloading is. This is certainly what the grammar suggests to me, but it means the feat does not let you reload twice, which renders it fairly pointless.
2. You Interact to reload your weapon, "[and reduce] its reload cost by 1" as a separate thing you do. This grammatical change would make it two separate things: a reload and a reload cost reduction. How long the reload cost stays reduced by 1 is very unclear in this interpretation. It presumably would not stack, and maybe presumably would not last after another firing or after the combat ends?
That compounds with confusion over the next line.
"Unlike most Interact actions, you don't need a free hand to reload your ranged weapon this way."
A: While that is true, a 2 handed ranged weapon, which you are definitionally required to be holding in order to Ready Reload, always allows you to remove a hand, reload, and replace your grip as normal. So in the vast majority of cases, this doesn't do anything a basic Interact to reload couldn't do.
B: Was there a design intent to no longer allow that part of reload? I don't think so, honestly.
C: Okay, so maybe it's meant to work with Damoritosh's Grip (18th level feat), which lets you wield a 2-handed melee weapon in one hand and a 2-handed ranged weapon in another hand. Okay, but then how does one reload a Reload 3 weapon with Damoritosh's Grip or a Reload 2 weapon when you're slowed and unable to use Ready Reload? How do you reload a Reload 1 weapon when Reload 2 is a requirement of Ready Reload? Is the only way you're expected to reload while using Damoritosh's Grip through Ready Reload or through dropping your 2 handed melee weapon?
D: Okay, so maybe it was reworded to prevent Operative from taking the Soldier archetype for two free Steps/Strides because Mobile Reload is a passive benefit that always works when you Interact to reload a ranged weapon. But it was already originally one Interact to reload twice, not two Interacts to reload once each. If that seemed a little confusing, are there better ways of phrasing it to make the singular Interact more explicit?
E: Do they no longer want to allow you to Reload twice like the original Field Test, but didn't have a clear vision for what the feat would do anymore? That seems like it would make the most sense to me honestly.
Anyway, if you're like me and trying to read it without the context of Field Test's Ready Reload, it's extremely confusing. My interpretation of the RAW is 1ACD, which unfortunately makes it nearly indistinguishable from a regular Interact to Reload until you reach level 18 and take a specific feat.
I genuinely do not know what the RAI is anymore because the language went from so clear to so confusing.
I was confused by the feat at first; the interpretation I landed on was (2), but it definitely could be more clear.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry for this, but it is too amusing to not post.
As I am reading through the post, I ran into this:
The Field Test is very clear:
- "You Interact and can reload your weapon twice."
And my thought is, "Wait, what? Why would you need to reload a weapon twice? What would be the point of that? Are you taking out the new clip that you put into it for the first reload and replacing it with a second new full clip?"
So yeah. Maybe not so perfectly clear, lol. Anyway, continuing reading the post...
Hahaha, I also overanalyzed it in another possible direction. "You Interact *and* can reload your weapon twice", so I can use an Interact action like swapping and also get the benefit of two actions toward reloading?
Language is so incredibly tricky.
Closest I got to the right phrasing is "You Interact once to reload twice" before your comical wrench was thrown in, but it would be closer to the text style of Running Reload for example. There's already a lot of precedent for an "Interact to reload" to mean spending an action toward reloading a weapon.
I'm pretty sure of the intent. Not so confident that the wording as it is currently printed is the best, but English is generally awful.
How I a interpreting it is based on the wording of the Reload stat of the weapons and the rules regarding that.
This entry indicates how many Interact actions it takes to reload a weapon’s magazine
So the Ready Reload action itself counts as one Interact action needed to reload the weapon, and separately reduces the reload number of the weapon by 1. Effectively that means that spending one action on Ready Reload means that two actions worth of interact have been done on the weapon to further the reloading. If those two actions (or rather one action and one action cost reduction) are enough to reload the weapon, then the weapon has been reloaded completely. If not, for a reload 3 weapon for example then you would only need to spend one more Interact action to reload the weapon.
The reload stat reduction from the ability would only last until the weapon has been finished being reloaded. It wouldn't permanently reduce the stat for subsequent reload processes.
Also, you couldn't fire the weapon while it is only partially reloaded, so I don't think there is any way of meeting the requirements to use Ready Reload twice on a weapon in a row.
As for the usefulness of not needing an empty hand to reload, that is generally unneeded for the weapons that we have printed so far. At least as far as I can tell, all of them that have Reload 2 or more are also 2-handed weapons.
The rule benefit would be a practical benefit for a 1-handed Reload 2 weapon. It means that you could have something else in your other hand and still be able to reload the weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of this confusion is caused by a wording collision between:
Reload: the complete process of completely refilling the ammunition and getting the weapon ready to fire again.
Reload: a single Interact action that is used towards the process of refilling the ammunition of a weapon.
The Field Test wording, "You Interact and can reload your weapon twice" is not making sufficient distinction between the two. Hence my initial humorous interpretation that for one action you are doing the entire Reload process twice.
The playtest wording, "You Interact to reload your weapon, reducing its reload cost by 1" is trying to stick to the meaning of Reload being a single action as part of the process and getting the action benefit by reducing the Reload stat of the weapon for that reload process.
-----
And yes, there is a third wording collision:
Reload: the number of Interact actions needed to be spent on Reload actions to Reload a weapon.
The Field Test wording is at least in line with all of Paizo's previous wordings on the subject. "Interact to reload" (in the meaning of 'spend an action toward reloading') is the phrase used in Raconteur's Reload, Running Reload, Covered Reload, Clear a Path, Reloading Strike, etc.
If anything, your point has made me more convinced that ", reducing the reload cost by 1" actually was a clarifying phrase to specify that the intent of the "Interact to reload" is to simply be the regular (spend an action toward reloading) interpretation rather than the others.
Especially because there are no additional mechanics described anywhere else for what reducing a reload cost by 1 would mean mechanically if it did mean anything different from the normal "Interact to reload". You've made reasonable assumptions about what that could mean (only for this current reload), for sure, but there isn't anything actually specifying a duration or that it's only this current reload.
What I mostly mean is that you have to want the new wording to mean what the old wording meant in order to really arrive at the conclusion that it still does functionally the same thing. Or you have to decide that any other interpretation would make it useless, so it has to be how it used to mean through a series of deductions.
For a grammar comparison about what I mean about clarifying clause, consider the two sentences below.
I put some gas in my car, reducing the amount it needs by a gallon. (Clarifying subordinate clause, shift away from the active "put". I put a gallon of gas in my car.)
I put some gas in my car, then reduce the amount it needs by another gallon. (Active "put", conjuncted with active "reduce". I put some gas in my car, then another gallon of gas.)
I reload, reducing (specifying the meaning of spending of an action toward reloading).
vs.
I reload, then reduce (separate mechanic).
To summarize:
- I don't think the reload and the reload cost reduction are intended to be two separate mechanics, but different grammar could make that happen
- If it were, I don't think it's clear it would only last for the one reload
- Ready Reload can only be used on 2 handed ranged weapons, so final case of your second reply doesn't work, unfortunately
That does then mean that the feat does absolutely nothing, though.
I will also mention that I never saw the old version of the feat and I still arrived at the interpretation that it's meant to be a double-reload.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree it's supposed to try to provide two actions towards a reload for one action, and that it could be phrased much better to convey that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the feat is meant to be action compression. Making it take fewer actions spent by the character to reload a Reload 2+ weapon.
Anyone can spend one action on Interact to get one action towards the Reload cost of a weapon. No feat is needed for that. Spending one action on Ready Reload to get one action towards the Reload cost of the weapon isn't an improvement.
Thank you Xenocrat!
---
A couple more notes on the topic while I'm thinking about it, for playtest feedback's sake:
Note 1:
The definition of reload includes this:
> If an item takes 2 or more actions to reload, the GM determines whether they must be performed together as an activity, or you can spend some of those actions during one turn and the rest during your next turn.
So I suppose a possible benefit of interpretation 1 is that you are guaranteed to be able to get 1 action toward the reload, where otherwise a GM might rule that your weapon requires being reloaded as a 2 action activity.
Still kind of a bummer feat, but still more ambiguity in interpretation.
Note 2:
A different example for what I mean in parsing Ready Reload, because the car gas one is rough.
You Strike, making an attack roll vs. your opponent's AC.
Vs.
You Strike, and then make an attack roll vs. your opponent's AC.
The first is a clarification/reminder of the Strike. The second would be a separate act, but poorly defined. (What am I doing with this attack roll ~ how long does the reload cost reduce)
Similarly, when I try to define what interacting to Reload does, I already think of it as reducing the reload cost by 1. So it reads to me as equivalent to "You Interact to reload, spending 1 action toward your reload cost."
Note 3:
My friend found it funny when I compared it to:
You fart, releasing gas from your butt.
Action, comma, elaboration on action.
---
Anyway, I think I've explained my confusion sufficiently and I hope they revert to the old wording or something closer to it if that's still their intention with the feat. I've decided that I can't playtest this feat because it's too ambiguous and that's okay.
|
When I asked about this on the discord server, people were thinking it’s meant to let you make progress towards reloading a weapon that isn’t empty.
E.g. Our Flamethrower Soldier has 4
petrol left in their gun. Without Ready Reload they could
Area Fire + Primary target (->2 ammo), Reload (changing the clip -> 0 ammo)
Then next turn
Reload (->8 ammo), Area Fire + Primary target (“wasting” 2 ammo)
With it they could use Ready Reload to reduce the action cost of reloading it in the future by 1, then reload on their second turn to not “waste” ammo, which seems like an extremely marginal benefit to me. I suppose if you have a spare action with nothing to do at some point it might be worth it.
When I asked about this on the discord server, people were thinking it’s meant to let you make progress towards reloading a weapon that isn’t empty.
E.g. Our Flamethrower Soldier has 4
petrol left in their gun. Without Ready Reload they couldArea Fire + Primary target (->2 ammo), Reload (changing the clip -> 0 ammo)
Then next turn
Reload (->8 ammo), Area Fire + Primary target (“wasting” 2 ammo)
With it they could use Ready Reload to reduce the action cost of reloading it in the future by 1, then reload on their second turn to not “waste” ammo, which seems like an extremely marginal benefit to me. I suppose if you have a spare action with nothing to do at some point it might be worth it.
I'm doing math and I'm not seeing where "waste" comes in
Also am I understanding the ready reload cost a action to reduce reload by one.... But wouldint that take two actions In the end 1 to trigger and 1 to reload I'm not seeing the advantage.... Math explain
|
|
When I asked about this on the discord server, people were thinking it’s meant to let you make progress towards reloading a weapon that isn’t empty.
E.g. Our Flamethrower Soldier has 4
petrol left in their gun. Without Ready Reload they couldArea Fire + Primary target (->2 ammo), Reload (changing the clip -> 0 ammo)
Then next turn
Reload (->8 ammo), Area Fire + Primary target (“wasting” 2 ammo)
With it they could use Ready Reload to reduce the action cost of reloading it in the future by 1, then reload on their second turn to not “waste” ammo, which seems like an extremely marginal benefit to me. I suppose if you have a spare action with nothing to do at some point it might be worth it.
I'm doing math and I'm not seeing where "waste" comes in
Also am I understanding the ready reload cost a action to reduce reload by one.... But wouldint that take two actions In the end 1 to trigger and 1 to reload I'm not seeing the advantage.... Math explain
Essentially the interpretation is that you can’t use the rest of the ammo in the middle of the reload. So with a reload 2 weapon, the soldier can’t do Area Fire->Reload into Area Fire->Reload normally, they have to do Reload->Area Fire on their second turn. That’s 2 turns in which all their actions are spent in a specific order to keep their Area Fire going, if they get slowed or need to move e.g. this might be disrupted and waste ammo or mean you can’t AF.
What ready reload does is let you frontload some of the reload actions in case you think you won’t be able to use them in the future.
E.g. Turn 1 I use Area Fire + Ready Reload as I don’t feel I need to move or take cover. Now my next Reload this combat costs only 1 action instead of 2, giving me more flexibility to reload and continue Area Firing in the future.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry. That makes very little sense.
There is nothing in the rules that indicates that you can start to reload a weapon and then continue firing the weapon normally. Or front-load actions to reload a weapon later. Or however else this is being described.
Reload is an activity. The Simultaneous Actions rule says that you have to complete the activity before you start doing something else. Reload has a bit of GM leeway to allow you to do the actions across your turn - with the last actions of one turn and the beginning actions of your next.
Firing a weapon in the middle of Reloading it probably shouldn't be allowed.
|
|
I'm sorry. That makes very little sense.
There is nothing in the rules that indicates that you can start to reload a weapon and then continue firing the weapon normally. Or front-load actions to reload a weapon later. Or however else this is being described.
Reload is an activity. The Simultaneous Actions rule says that you have to complete the activity before you start doing something else. Reload has a bit of GM leeway to allow you to do the actions across your turn - with the last actions of one turn and the beginning actions of your next.
Firing a weapon in the middle of Reloading it probably shouldn't be allowed.
Yes so what I'm saying is that ordinarily that isn't possible, so a Soldier would have to Area Fire, Reload then Reload, Area Fire to ensure they aren't firing the weapon in the middle of the Reload.
What Ready Reload would do is reduce the action cost of your next reload (whenever it might be, even if its not consecutive) without actually reloading the weapon, so you can continue to fire the weapon while making your next reload action cheaper on action economy.
The flavour text seems to support this
Reloading a weapon is a delicate process, but you've mastered how to do so in the middle of combat beginning the process while still in the act of firing your weapon
This may also just be referring to the feat's activation requirement, and I think this interpretation would make it rather niche over the "Reload twice for 1 action" interpretation.
The rules text starts with "You interact to reload your weapon", meaning Ready Reload explicitly starts (and likely ends) your reload process immediately. So what you are describing doesn't work.
It's just a "reload 2 for 1 action" feat with weird phrasing, nothing more complicated than that.