| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I kind of feel like it has to be this way as a 'game practicality over simulationism' thing. Poison ticking down at the end of your turn gives you your turn to do something about it, and poison not sticking to the initiative count of the monster who delivered it is a bookkeeping thing. The poison's on you, it's yours now.
There is, unfortunately, no hard logic to it, but there's also not really a difference in time if you go right after or right before the monster that poisoned you. In a 2-person fight, those things happen at the same time; the sense of time created by the other 5 combatants going between then are an illusion.
Granted, you could play it that your exposure save is also your 'first' save you would have made on your first turn after exposure, and not save again until your second round after, but this wouldn't really make more sense than the alternative, and adds an extra thing to remember ('do I start making saves for this poison now or later?') that only gets weirder the more bites you take per round.
Many things tick down on the turn of the creature who created it, but there are plenty of exceptions (Frightened, Afflictions, Persistent Damage). If I had to pretend a logic to it, the 'timer' ticks down at the beginning of your turn, so then you make your save at the end of turn as normal for afflictions. Or treat the 'rounds' count as tied to the end-of-turn, too, for all it's worth--the effect is the same. Thinking of end-of-turn persistent conditions as being 'yours' for the purposes of tracking duration isn't as clean as keeping everything on 'beginning of turn' but in practice it's a lot less of a headache than tracing every dose of poison or bleed handed out back to the original, who may not be conscious anymore.
When do you make saves against poison in the turn order?
Our druid got hit by a poison crossbow bolt and it brought our game to a screeching halt.
There are 2 interpretations but from experience the massively used one is the save at the end of your turn.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When do you make saves against poison in the turn order?
Our druid got hit by a poison crossbow bolt and it brought our game to a screeching halt.
Your options are: End of victim's turn or beginning of attacker's turn.
If you didn't remember the rule for it, pick one and move on. "Screeching halt" makes no sense.For an affliction with stages measured in rounds, making your next save can be either good or bad depending on whether you succeed. So neither option is stronger anyway.
When do you make saves against poison in the turn order?
Our druid got hit by a poison crossbow bolt and it brought our game to a screeching halt.
Your options are: End of victim's turn or beginning of attacker's turn.
If you didn't remember the rule for it, pick one and move on. "Screeching halt" makes no sense.For an affliction with stages measured in rounds, making your next save can be either good or bad depending on whether you succeed. So neither option is stronger anyway.
The "screeching hault" part was having 6 people looking up the rules on AoN, in their books, on the Foundry compendium, and on the forums, Reddit and Discord communities, and still not being able to find a clear answer to know what to do.
Poisons are a mess.
I suppose I'll recommend end of target's turn to our GM until it gets cleaned up.
Personally I like "during the turn of the opponent who poisoned you. A one round duration before the next save should be a one round duration, IMO. And persistent damage and poison feel rather distinct from each other to me.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rules have been linked to.
Poisons are an affliction, and so follow affliction rules unless otherwise noted.
You make the initial save to see if you gain the poison affliction and then save again at the end of each of your turns to see if it gets better or worse.
If you get a fresh exposure, you save to see if your existing affliction gets worse. Max duration is not impacted.
There are a lot of rules, but they're not overly complex.
--
You can be hit by an affliction without being attacked (trigger a trap, touch poison dust, etc.), and enemy initiative can change, so you would have to track poisonings as their own initiative.
The rules have been linked to.
Poisons are an affliction, and so follow affliction rules unless otherwise noted.
I don't for a moment believe that it is as clear cut as you claim.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't for a moment believe that it is as clear cut as you claim.The rules have been linked to.
Poisons are an affliction, and so follow affliction rules unless otherwise noted.
That... was the whole rules. One suffers an exposure event somehow, rolling immediately, then must deal with the affliction if it stuck to them.
Think of it as being similar to persistent damage, it may be inflicted by an outside creature, but the effect of the persistent damage is carried and incremented by the victim of the effect.
So...neither of you really know for sure?
If the save is made on the victim's turn, does that mean they'd have to save twice before they're able to do anything about it? (Asked by a fellow player at tonight's table.)
Poison continues to suck. LOL.
It would be at the end of the turn, so the affected PC always gets their actions before having to make the second save. Their allies might not get to react, though.
As for not knowing — like I said, the rules say different things in different places, that's all there is to know about RAW. Intention imo is likely the end-of-turn method (on account of being simpler to run and arguably the more specific rule regarding timing).
After extensive reading our group came to the conclusion (and it kinda fits with what the rules say in both places) of this:
If the poison have an Onset, that "Ticks" on the applying poisoners turn.
While an Poison Affliction(after onset) "Ticks" at the end of the Afflicted creatures turn.
So you could get hit twice in a row by the poison if you got poisoned by a monster as a reactive strike on your turn, then again when your turn ends?
So you could get hit twice in a row by the poison if you got poisoned by a monster as a reactive strike on your turn, then again when your turn ends?
By the interpretation of many people, it seems that way.
So you could get hit twice in a row by the poison if you got poisoned by a monster as a reactive strike on your turn, then again when your turn ends?
Not sure why that seems strange.
Again, persistent damage works the same way.
If you trigger a Reactive Strike during your turn and get sent dying, your persistent damage will immediately hit you while you are down.
If you carry multiple persistent damage types, you can be killed nearly instantly thanks to each type of persistent damage being a separate effect, effectively triple-tapping you with 0 chance for a non-Reaction method of intervention.*
*there's a specific rule stating all persistent dmg happens in one instance for just +1 more level of dying. (tyvm for the correction)
Still scary, but not insta-dead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The poison system basically encourages pounding in as many exposures as possible as fast as possible. This makes them very powerful against single, vulnerable targets, but harder to use in more general conflict, especially because it's hard for a non-monster to actually have that many doses on hand and is action-costly to apply them over and over.
Of course, poison immunity is common, so it's important to have other options anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The poison system basically encourages pounding in as many exposures as possible as fast as possible. This makes them very powerful against single, vulnerable targets, but harder to use in more general conflict, especially because it's hard for a non-monster to actually have that many doses on hand and is action-costly to apply them over and over.
Of course, poison immunity is common, so it's important to have other options anyway.
The poison immunity thing is why the tox alchemists are some of the few who will make a lot of use of them as their poisons basically are poison/acid so should always be able to do something.
The poison immunity thing is why the tox alchemists are some of the few who will make a lot of use of them as their poisons basically are poison/acid so should always be able to do something.The poison system basically encourages pounding in as many exposures as possible as fast as possible. This makes them very powerful against single, vulnerable targets, but harder to use in more general conflict, especially because it's hard for a non-monster to actually have that many doses on hand and is action-costly to apply them over and over.
Of course, poison immunity is common, so it's important to have other options anyway.
Yes, and I wish it were available to other poison users, even if it's costly.
Oddly enough, before I had ever gotten involved in Pathfinder, I had the exact same poison to acid mechanic for a 5E homebrew class I was working on. I was *very* happy to see that Pathfinder beat me to the punch.
When do you make saves against poison in the turn order?
Our druid got hit by a poison crossbow bolt and it brought our game to a screeching halt.
Your options are: End of victim's turn or beginning of attacker's turn.
If you didn't remember the rule for it, pick one and move on. "Screeching halt" makes no sense.For an affliction with stages measured in rounds, making your next save can be either good or bad depending on whether you succeed. So neither option is stronger anyway.
The "screeching hault" part was having 6 people looking up the rules on AoN, in their books, on the Foundry compendium, and on the forums, Reddit and Discord communities, and still not being able to find a clear answer to know what to do.
Poisons are a mess.
I suppose I'll recommend end of target's turn to our GM until it gets cleaned up.
Perhaps the idea is that any status that would linger past the inflicting enemy's incapacitation, such as poison, is handled on the player's turn? I'm trying to think if there are any obvious exceptions to this logic.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Turns are all intended to be near-simultaneous, as otherwise having many combatants would stretch time itself.
The poison system basically encourages pounding in as many exposures as possible as fast as possible. This makes them very powerful against single, vulnerable targets, but harder to use in more general conflict, especially because it's hard for a non-monster to actually have that many doses on hand and is action-costly to apply them over and over.
Of course, poison immunity is common, so it's important to have other options anyway.
Flurry hunters were damn scary with the old toxicologist backing them up in high level play.
That said, poison immunity being common is a bit misleading. It is ubiquitous to some creature types that are numerous, but you aren't necessarily going to be fighting heaps of those creature types outside of a campaign centred around them.
It is in fact quite common for the majority of creatures in APs to not be immune to poison (bloodlords being an exception)
But yeah other than that my groups never struggled to understand poison rules outside of my forgetting whether they triggered at the start of a turn or the end of a turn early on. really quite like how they work, and virulent afflictions are damn scary.
|
|
The poison immunity thing is why the tox alchemists are some of the few who will make a lot of use of them as their poisons basically are poison/acid so should always be able to do something.The poison system basically encourages pounding in as many exposures as possible as fast as possible. This makes them very powerful against single, vulnerable targets, but harder to use in more general conflict, especially because it's hard for a non-monster to actually have that many doses on hand and is action-costly to apply them over and over.
Of course, poison immunity is common, so it's important to have other options anyway.
Yes, and I wish it were available to other poison users, even if it's costly.
Oddly enough, before I had ever gotten involved in Pathfinder, I had the exact same poison to acid mechanic for a 5E homebrew class I was working on. I was *very* happy to see that Pathfinder beat me to the punch.
Wait! Are you saying Pathfinder spiked the punch with Poison/Acid?! No wonder my cups kept dissolving!