Spring Errata 2025 suggestions

[magnuskn]

This is a thread for collecting suggestions for needed rules errata to be addressed in the spring errata cycle for 2025. Please do not start long discussions here, just post your desired errata issue(s) in a well ordered manner and go make a separate thread if you want to clarify or dispute anybody else's errata suggestion. If the thread becomes clogged down in long discussions, it will make it more unlikely that the developers will read all of it to get your suggestion. Please also be polite and concise.

Since the fall errata 2024 was focused on older books and Player Core 2 did not get as much attention as I would have liked and the "Fall Errata 2024 Questions" thread is a.) not titled right for the developers to notice and b.) already mired in pages long discussions about some rule or another, I thought to make a new thread which hopefully will catch the developers attention and make them adress the rules issues players have. Here goes, to start things off, my personal one thing I really, really want to be clarified.

Class: Champion
Rule for which errata is needed: Grandeur cause "Flash of Grandeur" reaction duration.
The issue: By a strict reading of the rules, the effects of the Flash of Grandeur reaction end when your own turn starts (Player Core, page 426 "For an effect that lasts a number of rounds, the remaining duration decreases by 1 at the start of each turn of the creature that created the effect").
This would make the worth of the reaction highly variable depending on when it is triggered.

However a soft reading of the text suggests it is supposed to last longer, i.e. "for 1 round", which a lot of people would read until the start of the triggering creatures next turn, especially since other causes reactions are much more generous with their duration than the RAW reading of the Grandeur reaction.

Therefore, the worth of the Grandeurs Champion's reaction depends a lot on ones gamemaster and since that gamemaster can change a lot in PFS, it may make this cause very inconsistent to use there. Please clarify the duration of Flash of Grandeur, to make the reaction's duration consistent for everyone.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Fixing Kineticist & Mythic rules...

[moosher12]

In Divine Mysteries, Rivethun Adept lists Rivethun Practitioner as a prerequisite. There is no Rivethun Practitioner. Likely it means Rivethun Devotion.

I suppose I also feel there is room to partially rebuff Sure Strike. The reason Paizo gave gavemakes sense to me. But I feel their 1d4 round cooldown method for other abilities could work fine for this spell. I'd hope something like that can be done as a middle ground to make it harder to spam, but more likely than never to get 2 or more castings in a single session.

[Trip.H]

issue scope: Alchemist feat
specific issue: Revivifying Mutagen & Regurgitate Mutagen use different scaling methods: Revivifying Mutagen needs to be changed.

The PC2 new Regurgitate Mutagen uses an appropriate + 1d6 per 2 (character) levels.
The old Revivifying Mutagen uses 1d6 per every 2 item levels, when there is no way to manually heighten created item level. The "standard" mutagens with alch feats jump from level 3 to level 11. Meaning from player levels 3 to 11 (the end of most campaigns!), the feat only heals 1d6.

The Revivifying Mutagen feat is presently a waste of space in the modern PC2 alch era, and needs to be deleted or changed.

[Trip.H]

issue scope: commonly taken Alchemist feat
specific issue: The alch feat Sticky Bomb's wording needs to be changed to better convey RaI about "stacking" the feat's effects with other bomb-boosting feats.

Sicky Bomb wrote:

You can mix in a sticky additive to an alchemical bomb to make its contents adhere and continue to deal damage. A creature hit by a sticky bomb also takes persistent damage equal to and of the same type as the bomb's splash damage. If the bomb already deals persistent damage, combine the two amounts.

My reading is that this feat only interacts with the base bomb formula, using the splash numbers listed there.

It is common for Alchemist players to insist that the feat/feature Calculated Splash, and Expanded Splash both boots Sticky's damage (and the normal splash damage).

This would add flat 10 (~3d6) persistent damage per hit, for 0A and 0 resource cost. At L11, the Acid Flask becomes 3d6 acid persistent damage. As far as I know, there is no feat stacking "thing" in this system that enables one to passively, freely, more than double their damage as this "combo" would. Note that they are also boosting the splash via those 2 feats.

In that reading, at L10, such an Acid Flask is doing 2 base damage + 2d6 base persistent + 10 boosted splash + 10 combo-Sticky persistent. The feats are more than 2/3rd the damage under that reading.

No class works like that in pf2, and for good reason. It is impossible to have discussions around the class balance / performance with such a big numbers difference being possible via GM ruling.

Sticky Bomb needs its wording tweaked to make the RaI clear.
It is possible to fix this via 1 word change & 1 word addition, something to the effect of "...as the bomb [formula's] splash damage.

If somehow that stacking is intended, the extra word could instead be "...as the bomb's [final] splash damage."

[Squark]

Archetype: Swashbuckler Multiclass
The Issue: The panache feature gained from the dedication doesn't actually do anything on its own. This seems to be a holdover from when panache granted a speed bonus and circumstance bonus to skill checks, but those are seperate features.

[JiCi]

Since the Magus got a much needed update, should the Summoner get the same?

It was the other class introduced on Secrets of Magic.

[Master Han Del of the Web]

Class: Rogue
Issues: Thief Racket and thrown weapons

The interactions of the Thief Racket and thrown weapons are muddy enough that some people (myself included) have interpreted this racket as allowing a player to apply their dexterity modifier to thrown finesse weapon damage. The logic being that thrown weapons tell you to "add your Strength modifier to damage as you would for a melee weapon" but with a finesse melee weapon, that strength modifier is replaced with a dexterity modifier.

Adding to the confusion, one of the gameplay examples in the book has someone making a thrown dagger attack with their thief rogue and adding their dexterity to damage with the attack.

Some method of specifying whether dexterity to damage with finesse thrown weapons is the intended interaction would be appreciated, either by adding an explicit exemption to the Thief Racket one way or the other or altering the thrown trait text. A tweak to the gameplay example would probably be wise as well if dexterity to damage is not the intended interaction of these abilities and rules.

[Agonarchy]

The void and vitality damage and healing scenarios that reference a living or undead target need clarification, per the necromancer feedback. It is unclear if undead and living are treated as synonymous with void and vitality healing.

[Tridus]

Agonarchy wrote:

The void and vitality damage and healing scenarios that reference a living or undead target need clarification, per the necromancer feedback. It is unclear if undead and living are treated as synonymous with void and vitality healing.

Same questions surrounding Bones Oracle and Nudge the Scales. There's a thread that gets into details.

This would be a great errata subject because some of these things just don't work in a way anyone would reasonably expect them to.

[Farien]

Would still be nice to know how long a minion will follow commands for when given commands while not in combat.

And was it intended for familiars to lose the ability to use trained-only actions of skills?

Yes, I am going to spam this on every thread like this one. You're welcome.

[exequiel759]

Class: Exemplar
Issue: Humble Strikes and unarmed attacks

I think that, much like how the Deadly Simplicity feat increases your unarmed attacks by one step if they are lower than d6, Humble Strikes should too. The class interacts with unarmed attacks already so I feel its unnecesary to force exemplars to use their d4 fist if they don't want to dip into monk.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Clarifying Blessed Armament. No seriously this has one on far too long and feels like the old stuff Pre-Remastered is getting weaker during the Remaster to make room for the new stuff post-Remastered. Is this

[Finoan]

Some classic ones that I don't think have been resolved:

-----

How is getting Stunned 1 during your turn supposed to work?

Do you lose the entire rest of your current turn, the ability to use reactions during the entire time between then and the start of your next turn, and one action from the start of your next turn?

Or do you have some unwritten means of paying an action from your current turn after your turn has started in order to remove the Stunned 1 condition immediately?

-----

For actions that allow incorporating other 'single actions' in them, do they mean simple actions only, or do one-action activities also qualify.

The only two actions that meet this criteria that I am aware of are Ready and Act Together.

So is a Monk allowed to Ready the single action activity Flurry of Blows with the Stunning Blows upgrade and use it with the trigger of 'an enemy moves within my reach'?

Or is a Summoner with a Beast Eidolon not allowed to use Act Together to cast the one-action spell Boost Eidolon (because spellcasting is always an activity) while having the Eidolon use Beast's Charge?

The only examples are given in Act Together and all of them involve the single actions being simple actions of Stride and Strike.

[Ascalaphus]

Issue: What is an "instance of damage", for the purpose of applying multiple weaknesses/resistances?

Can one attack do multiple instances of damage? For example, a flaming cold iron axe, would it do an instance of cold iron slashing + another instance of fire damage, or is all of that one instance? If the enemy has weakness to fire and slashing, are both of them triggered or only the biggest one?

[Pirate Rob]

So when Flexible Spellcaster was written

"Once you take a dedication feat, you can’t select a different dedication feat until you complete your dedication by taking two other feats from your current archetype."

was not a general rule, but one that was printed in every archetype except Flexible Spellcaster.

With only 1 total feat available for the archetype (Just the dedication), post remaster it's no longer possible to combine Flexible Spellcaster with other archetypes.

This is even theoretically a problem for existing characters.

[Secret Wizard]

I wound love for developers to have a sit down and figure out what's the acceptable power budget for classes and feats.

It makes no sense to me that Flurry of Blows gets a cooldown and Twin Weapon Flurry doesn't.

It's really weird that Shield Block exists as a General Feat but no other General Feats allowing for different defensive styles (one handed dueling, etc.) exist.

The game has a very very solid foundation but class options have never received a common sense pass to determine what they mean and what they should do.

[Errenor]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Issue: What is an "instance of damage", for the purpose of applying multiple weaknesses/resistances?

Can one attack do multiple instances of damage? For example, a flaming cold iron axe, would it do an instance of cold iron slashing + another instance of fire damage, or is all of that one instance? If the enemy has weakness to fire and slashing, are both of them triggered or only the biggest one?

I'd add to that the question of several different sources of the same damage type, like fire rune, fire kineticist buff, some fire buff spell on a magic weapon in the same Strike. One instance or not? How do weaknesses and resistances work?

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Secret Wizard wrote:

It makes no sense to me that Flurry of Blows gets a cooldown and Twin Weapon Flurry doesn't.

I swear I'm not trying to derail with discussion, but I think a clarification here is necessary bc all the Flurry feats I found in short order had exactly the same cooldown. Flurry of Blows, Two-Weapon Flurry (fighter, dual warrior), and Twin Takedown (ranger) all have the Flourish trait. Is there another ability you're referring to?

[Finoan]

Errenor wrote:

I'd add to that the question of several different sources of the same damage type, like fire rune, fire kineticist buff, some fire buff spell on a magic weapon in the same Strike. One instance or not? How do weaknesses and resistances work?

Flame Wisp specifically because it causes the most complexity in the ruling.

Also, instead of a regular weapon, have the combo done with a Blazing Armory weapon.

And throw in an Energy Mutagen (fire) for good measure.

[Ludovicus]

I'm sure this has been raised before, since the issue is pretty obvious (which makes it all the more impressive that the devs somehow dropped the ball on this not only when writing Player Core 2, but after their first errata pass). But, the swashbuckler's Illimitable Finisher feat needs to be fixed in (at least) two respects, both arriving from the (apparently legal) possibility of selecting itself as a finisher used as part of the action.

--) As part of the action you use for Illimitable Finisher, you Step, then perform a "single one-action finisher." If that finisher is itself Illimitable Finisher, you can Step, then select another finisher. Nothing prevents you from repeating the process ad infinitum, thereby taking any number of Steps before finally Striking.
--) It's completely unclear whether the feat's Fortune trait prevents--or is even intended to prevent--you from using Illimitable Finisher as the second finisher you get to make if you recover your panache upon using the first one. This is because individual Fortune effects normally apply to one roll, which in this case would be the first Strike you make as part of the action (such that part of the Fortune effect that applies here is the ability to proc a second finisher).

[Ludovicus]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Secret Wizard wrote:

It makes no sense to me that Flurry of Blows gets a cooldown and Twin Weapon Flurry doesn't.

I swear I'm not trying to derail with discussion, but I think a clarification here is necessary bc all the Flurry feats I found in short order had exactly the same cooldown. Flurry of Blows, Two-Weapon Flurry (fighter, dual warrior), and Twin Takedown (ranger) all have the Flourish trait. Is there another ability you're referring to?

Here you go, champ: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=6215

[Castilliano]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Secret Wizard wrote:

It makes no sense to me that Flurry of Blows gets a cooldown and Twin Weapon Flurry doesn't.

I swear I'm not trying to derail with discussion, but I think a clarification here is necessary bc all the Flurry feats I found in short order had exactly the same cooldown. Flurry of Blows, Two-Weapon Flurry (fighter, dual warrior), and Twin Takedown (ranger) all have the Flourish trait. Is there another ability you're referring to?

I think he's talking about how Monk's Flurry (Flurry of Blows via MCD Archetype) has a new cooldown period of 1d4 rounds, something that Twin Takedown (also one round) does not have. (The other flurries are two actions, so I'm thinking not those.)

But the difference does make sense since Flurry of Blows is superior: you can target different enemies, have your hands free, use your best Strike twice, and perhaps most relevantly don't have to spend actions on Hunt Prey. If that doesn't sound superior enough, it was; taking MCD Monk was advised as a must-have for Animal Barbarians playing into the higher levels. When such a build stands out so blatantly, it's too strong. Hence the change.

[Tridus]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Secret Wizard wrote:

It makes no sense to me that Flurry of Blows gets a cooldown and Twin Weapon Flurry doesn't.

I swear I'm not trying to derail with discussion, but I think a clarification here is necessary bc all the Flurry feats I found in short order had exactly the same cooldown. Flurry of Blows, Two-Weapon Flurry (fighter, dual warrior), and Twin Takedown (ranger) all have the Flourish trait. Is there another ability you're referring to?

Monk Archetype Flurry of Blows has a seperate "can't be used again for 1d4 rounds" cooldown added in PC2. And in isolation, that makes sense since its quite a powerful feature on some other classes and is a signature Monk thing. The game (often) wants to protect the signature class ability from the archetype getting it. Champion was the notable exception before.

... but then Exemplar Dedication showed up that is so far out of line with Flurry of Blows as a level 10 archetype feat that needs a cooldown that its baffling, since its just "you get the class' primary feature with no real restrictions except you get 1 instead of 3".

I just can't reconcile how that fits alongside the Monk Archetype nerf.

[magnuskn]

Alright, guys, pack it in and make your own separate thread if you want to go into detail about this flurry issue. This thread is for posting errata suggestions, as laid out in the OP, not for long discussions about them.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Swashbuckler MC Dedication to use Panache! - Like I know why it is a thing but like why is there no use for it?

[moosher12]

Monk Flurry's 1d4 round cooldown is only for monk archetype, not base monk.

[Gorgo Primus]

Please make it explicitly clear that when you use a Polymorph Battle Form to become an animal or something you lose your original speeds for the duration.

[PossibleCabbage]

Class: Monk
Rule for which errata is needed: Qi spells, also Advanced, Master, etc.
Issue: Feats generally cannot be taken more than once without a special section that explains what happens when you take the feat a second time (e.g. Assurance says "choose a different skill"). These feats serve to condense legacy feats to save save page space, however pre-remaster it was possible to select both Ki Strike and Ki Rush with two different feat choices, but currently you cannot select Qi Spells more than once because it lacks a special section. Considering there's no reason to make these an either/or choice, and it's clear what the rule *should* be (i.e. "choose a different qi spell") this merits errata since I strongly doubt the intention was to change how this worked in the remaster.

[Dubious Scholar]

We really need a pass on abilities that try to reference property runes as a way to buff weapons. Champion's Blade Ally is the most common one people will run into there, but the most egregious is probably Kineticist's Kindle Inner Flames impulse. It heightens from +2 damage per strike to "add Flaming to each strike", which for anyone with maxed property runes on their weapons is a straight downgrade without a rules interpretation that it can over the normal cap. (There's also Conductive Sphere at the same level that tries to add Shock runes, there's the Conductive Weapon spell...)

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

some kind fix for exemplar archetype ikon damage bonus

update to disallow alchemist archetype to take efficient alchemy

it is just better than advanced alchemy feat

clarification on if no limitation on talisman for thrower bandolier are intentional

update on dragon related item like dragon throat scale

update on elemental explosion of elemental barbarian since there are no cooldown on rage now

[Wheldrake]

The Decaying weapon property rune does void damage, but has the Acid trait, which states "Effects with this trait deal acid damage."

Either the type of damage or the trait choice need to be changed, or else some sort of text addendum explaining why this instance of void damage is like acid in some way.

[Errenor]

25speedforseaweedleshy wrote:

update to disallow alchemist archetype to take efficient alchemy. it is just better than advanced alchemy feat

No, it's not because it simply doesn't work on its own for the archetype (well, normal crafting part does work): the archetype doesn't have Advanced alchemy feature by default so you can't "increase the number of items you can create each day with advanced alchemy" when you don't have the feature at all. But you can take Efficient alchemy after you've took Advanced alchemy archetype feat which gives you the feature of the same name (with 4 items per day). So either Efficient alchemy should have an errata which gives it "Requirement: Advanced alchemy feature" or some mention for clarity that the first part of the feat doesn't work without it.

[Trip.H]

There is a (another) small gap in the familiar rules. Not sure if caused by the remaster or was always there.

By default, there is nothing preventing one from taking the same familiar or master abilities multiple times; only the type-changing abilities (like Construct) get a "only one" clause.

This means that it seems RaW legal to stack many abilities most would think are limited to only one. Everything from Extra Alchemy to grant multiple daily items, to taking Spell Battery a few times for the extra spell slots.

Honestly, this may be intentional and the designer RaI. Either way, some sentence should get a few extra words to explicitly state if default stacking of the same ability is allowed.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Update to Dragon Summoner.

[moosher12]

On the note of Familiars. Familiars in the Remastered edition no longer allow you to replace dead familiars with a week of downtime. While for some reason Animal Companions retain this ability.

[Guntermench]

moosher12 wrote:

On the note of Familiars. Familiars in the Remastered edition no longer allow you to replace dead familiars with a week of downtime. While for some reason Animal Companions retain this ability.

Retrain the pet feat into the pet feat.

[Ravingdork]

Gorgo Primus wrote:

Please make it explicitly clear that when you use a Polymorph Battle Form to become an animal or something you lose your original speeds for the duration.

Should be lose "base speeds"--I see no reason for things like Fleet, fast movement, or incredible movement shouldn't still apply.

Guntermench wrote:

moosher12 wrote:

On the note of Familiars. Familiars in the Remastered edition no longer allow you to replace dead familiars with a week of downtime. While for some reason Animal Companions retain this ability.

Retrain the pet feat into the pet feat.

Not as obvious as it should be. It being explicitly spelled out would be nice.

[Kalaam]

With the change to Sure Strike, I think that allowing potency runes to apply to spell attack rolls would now be balanced without the risk of an easy "get a divination staff with a +3 rune and spam Sure Strike 10 times a day" exploit.

Attack spells are often considered worse than saves and since caster progress in spell proficiency a bit slower than martials do with weapons (though they do end up at legendary eventually) Sure Strike was one of the main way to make use of those spells.

Allowing potency runes to apply to spell attack rolls wouldn't be as big of an accuracy boost as using Sure Strike was (especially against higher AC). It might not necesseraly put on staves but it's likely the simplest way to do it.
R
In either the GM Core or Player Core 1 (or both) section about staves (GM Core page 278) or casting attack spells (PC1 page 303)

GMCore: A magical staff is an indispensable accessory for a spellcaster. A staff is tied to a person during a preparation process, after which the preparer, and only the preparer, can use the staff to produce magic or amplify their own. The spells that can be cast from a staff are listed in bullet points organized by rank. Staves can be found in multiple types, with more powerful types containing more spells—such a staff always contains the spells of all lower-level types of the staff, in addition to the spells listed in its own entry. All magical staves have the staff trait and can be etched with weapon fundamental runes, the effect of potency runes etched on a staff applies to the preparer's spell attack rolls.

PC1: Some spells require you to succeed at a spell attack roll to affect the target. This is usually because they require you to precisely aim a ray or otherwise make an accurate attack. A spell attack roll is compared to the target’s AC. Spell attack rolls benefit from any bonuses or penalties to attack rolls, including a magical staff's potency rune and your multiple attack penalty, but not any special benefits or penalties that apply only to weapon or unarmed attacks. Spell attacks don’t deal any damage beyond what’s listed in the spell description. In rare cases, a spell might have you make some other type of attack, such as a weapon Strike. Such attacks use the normal rules and attack bonus for that type of attack.

[moosher12]

Guntermench wrote:

moosher12 wrote:

On the note of Familiars. Familiars in the Remastered edition no longer allow you to replace dead familiars with a week of downtime. While for some reason Animal Companions retain this ability.

Retrain the pet feat into the pet feat.

Firstly, as Ravingdork said, it's not as obvious as it should be.

Secondly, a lot of protections were lost in losing that stipulation. basic retraining rules encourage a GM to require you to both find, convince, and pay a teacher by default. Which means that you might need to pass Diplomacy checks to find and convince the teacher you are worth their time, and then often pay money to execute the training. A GM can be gracious and make it free, but it's not guaranteed, as you are not entitled to a free retraining.

Which means a GM is allowed to charge you to retrain a familiar, but is not allowed to charge you to retrain an animal companion.

The stipulation that the retraining is always free without requirements for finding, convincing, and paying a teacher being removed is a nerf. And you can get in situations where a GM can tell you "You're not in a metropolis with a magic academy, so you cannot find a teacher to retrain your familiar. Even then the closest college is wealthy, and you cannot afford the gold they'd charge." GM tries that against an Animal Companion user, they at least get the defense that, "No, the book says I get my training free". GM can of course choose to override, but the defense is there.

Now a GM may be made out to be the bad guy or called a bad GM for doing this sort of thing, but rules as written, the GM is well within their rights to do it. The player had an entitlement, and they lost the entitlement.

[Perpdepog]

Wheldrake wrote:

The Decaying weapon property rune does void damage, but has the Acid trait, which states "Effects with this trait deal acid damage."

Either the type of damage or the trait choice need to be changed, or else some sort of text addendum explaining why this instance of void damage is like acid in some way.

Specifically, the last sentence of the Decaying Rune, which states, "Unlike normal void damage, the void damage from a decaying rune damages objects, constructs, and the like by eroding them away," makes the Acid trait pretty redundant. Maybe it's a holdover from an earlier draft of the rune?

[Peacelock]

Some clarification requests related to the mythic rules, all of which I've seen people confused on what is intended:

1. Is it intended that Wildspell's Spellsurge focus spell (an aura around your character that much of the mythic path keys off) costs a mythic point to cast? There's been a lot of speculation that this wasn't intended as it makes Wildspell's mythic point economy really rough (for example to make the aura 30 feet costs a second mythic point), it makes taking Wildspell as a non-mythic archetype largely impossible, and it would be super easy to tag a focus spell in a mythic path as mythic without remembering that any spell with the mythic trait costs a point.

2. Do mythic player characters count as mythic creatures for the purpose of ignoring mythic resistance? There's been confused debates on this all over the internet (with many threads or discussions coming to different conclusions) mostly because the mythic strike feat says it bypasses mythic resistance, which any PC that could take it would already bypass if mythic PCs are mythic creatures. People also point to how mythic resistance in monster building is valued as equivalent to mythic resilience, when the former is possibly completely ignored by mythic PCs while the latter effects all PCs regardless of mythic status with no way to bypass it, as evidence that mythic PCs might still be subject to the resistance. (since it's weird that two equivalent features have one that would be completely ignored and one that's very powerful)

3. Is it intended that Mythic Magic works for non-spellcaster PCs?

4. Are the Beastlord and Apocalypse rider companions intended to be mythic creatures? It never says, but it feels to a lot of people like an oversight and the former even has a feat named Creature of Myth.

5. Are there any plans to patch Mythic to make it more compatible with classes that right now don't interact with some of its most important features (Kineticist is the big one that tons of people have been asking about, but also Summoner, Magus, and Swashbuckler all chafe on not being able to use mythic proficiency for strikes/spells without giving up on using your main class features)

6. Artisan's calling has the anathema "use a weapon or item crafted by someone else, except for the purpose of learning its function so you can understand how to create it yourself" which has been widely noted as being problematic and very difficult to follow as it disallows the use of any items you pick up as loot or buy and most campaigns don't have nearly enough downtime to craft every item a character would conceivably use, is it intended to be as punishing as it seems?

7. Mythic Defenses, the level 20 mythic monster ability that causes rerolls of critical attack rolls against them, is incorrectly combined into the mythic resilience entry of some of the monsters, including the Oliphaunt of Jandelay and Agyra, and the Oliphaunt has a research track that ends in discovering a way around its "mythic resilience" that is described as the crit reroll that is actually covered by mythic defenses. (this one is less a question and more pointing out the issue for getting errata lol)

8. Is it intended that several previously non-mythic rare rituals like Create Demiplane, Freedom, and Imprisonment are now mythic-exclusive, or should they still be considered rare for non-mythic chars and this is just automatic access? (lots of lore confusion on this one since PF lore is full of non mythic high level chars using these)

For a non-mythic question: How is the Exemplar’s Titan Breaker Ikon transcend intended to work? Currently the two readings are either “immanence damage increases” that at the majority of levels don’t increase anything or that it’s intended to scale to the point that it’s eventually doing +3 damage dice and +32 flat damage which is far more powerful than any other power attack style two action ability in the game. (This question caused a big argument in a previous thread, to my fellow commenters let’s not rehash that please)

[moosher12]

On this note:
The Mortal Herald did a really good job delineating which feats were mythic exclusive, and for the optional rule to let mythic destinies be taken without mythic powers, a clearly delineated list of which feats would be banned from such play would be helpful, as some feats are too powerful to be obtainable even if you remove their mythic point abilities.

Basically, I'd love to see the mythic destinies retuned to function more like the Mortal Herald.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Also the Beastlord's Companion is not any tougher then before and I feel will die even faster in a Mythic Campaign.

[kaid]

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

Update to Dragon Summoner.

Yes with the changes to dragons the dragon summoner needs a lot of change and or remaster as does a lot from the secrets of magic book due to the changes from the remaster.

[Ravingdork]

I for one would love to see clarification on holding/equipping/removing shields, particularly in regards to the shield straps that were introduced with the remaster.

Insofar as I'm aware, near every table handles it differently in no small part because nobody knows how many actions they're supposed to take to do ANY OF IT, or whether or not a shield dangling from a shield strap interferes with attacks, movement, holding things, or nothing at all.

In short:
- How many actions does it take to equip a shield for use?
- How many action does it take to unequip a shield to free the hand?
- Does a strapped shield not held in hand impede PCs in any way?
- Can you Swap a shield with a single action?
- Do you need to unstrap a shield in order to use it as a weapon (such as to throw it or wield it two-handed with certain feats)?
- What happens if someone disarms you of your shield?

I'm sure there are other things that can be better clarified as well.

[moosher12]

Fury Instinct Barbarian buff. A light uptick in its capabilities would likely be appreciated.

[moosher12]

Ravingdork wrote:

I for one would love to see clarification on holding/equipping/removing shields, particularly in regards to the shield straps that were introduced with the remaster.

Insofar as I'm aware, near every table handles it differently in no small part because nobody knows how many actions they're supposed to take to do ANY OF IT, or whether or not a shield dangling from a shield strap interferes with attacks, movement, holding things, or nothing at all.

In short:
- How many actions does it take to equip a shield for use?
- How many action does it take to unequip a shield to free the hand?
- Does a strapped shield not held in hand impede PCs in any way?
- Can you Swap a shield with a single action?
- Do you need to unstrap a shield in order to use it as a weapon (such as to throw it or wield it two-handed with certain feats)?
- What happens if someone disarms you of your shield?

I'm sure there are other things that can be better clarified as well.

Yeah, this was an awkward one to adjudicate. I ended up saying a non-strap shield works as a legacy shield. While a strapped shield gives the extra benefits with the cost of an extra action to equip. But I would love an official clarification.

[Darth Grall]

Class Gunslinger
Issue Triggerbrand Salvo + Stab & Blast

Both feats share the same text so they're both in need of correction imo, but the issue is that these feats don't outline what happens for MAP if you only make 1 attack when you missed on the first attack.

Stab and Blast/Triggerbrand Salvo wrote:

... This counts as two attacks toward your multiple attack penalty, but you don't apply the multiple attack penalty until after making both attacks.

The bold section above makes it feel like it really only increase by 2 attacks if you actually make both attacks but RAW is that it counts as two attacks even if you only make 1 since the first attack has to hit to get the second & it's not clarified either way. However this feels bad since it's a flourish action and as a gunslinger in Melee you're already at a disadvantage in terms of AB so it feels super punishing to miss with the first attack.

I've seen folks say that Combination Weapons are bad enough that they'd allow them to only take 1 attack on MAP on the miss anyways but not every DM is as generous on that ruling, so I'd like to see this errata'd if the consensus is it actually should work that way.

[benwilsher18]

It isn't clear how the goblin ancestry feat "Kneecap" interacts with MAP. It lacks the Attack trait, but it calls for you to make a Strike as a part of the action. I think it needs to be mentioned in the next errata, to either add the missing Attack trait or to confirm whether or not it counts as an attack when increasing MAP or calculating it's accuracy.