| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not 100% sure where to report an issue that probably needs errata, but I did wanna try and bring attention to a bit of an oddity I found with the following Leshy ancestry feat.
Unassuming Heroes (level 5)
Source Tian Xia Character Guide pg. 42
Frequency once per day
Access peachchild leshy heritage
You have a talent for making friends through simple kindness, often among stray animals or other creatures that people tend to overlook, and your inherent magic can make these acts take on additional power. As an Interact action, you can feed a small treat, such as a millet dumpling, to an animal that has an indifferent or better attitude toward you. For the next 1 minute, one of the animal’s unarmed attacks becomes a +1 striking unarmed attack. If it was already a +1 striking attack, it instead gains the effects of the ghost touch rune.
The issue with this feat how it's applied to two entities that don't actually (or wholly) interact with a +1 striking bonus.
Animal companions do not gain striking runes nor do they benefit from item bonuses other than to speed and AC. They do gain additional damage dice, but that isn't a striking rune (even if it is worded so they don't stack). This potentially could give them an extra damage die if they aren't mature yet and haven't gotten their damage upgrade, but the ghost touch aspect wouldn't really apply as they aren't getting that from a Striking rune or enchant.NPCs meanwhile operate on a different set of rules, and likewise just have their attack bonuses factored in; if they already have two damage dice, then technically this would give them a +1 to hit on top of it, but that throws into question if it'd ever grant them a ghost touch effect. If it doesn't, then the ghost touch effect actually can't ever be applied to an animal, companion or NPC.
I think the intention for this feat is pretty obvious, though, and it instead was supposed to be:
For the next 1 minute, one of the animal’s unarmed attacks is increased from one damage die to two. If it already had two damage dice, it instead gains the effects of the ghost touch rune.
Removing the rune requirement/reference. As is it seems more like just using the wording for the Runic Body spell, but applying it to something you wouldn't normally put it on.
Apologies if this is not the right place to discuss or report this thing, I'm not exactly sure where to bring up stuff that calls for an errata.
I do not think it needs an errata.
It does not work on people to begin with.
It specifically targets animals and is a once-per-day ability with a minor bonus. Basically, it lets you, at level 5, give that cat, or dog, or cow, or whatever a combat bonus.
I would also not allow it to be used on an AC/eidolon/awakened animal PC.
I do not think it needs an errata.
It does not work on people to begin with.
It specifically targets animals and is a once-per-day ability with a minor bonus. Basically, it lets you, at level 5, give that cat, or dog, or cow, or whatever a combat bonus.
I would also not allow it to be used on an AC/eidolon/awakened animal PC.
Awakened Animal characters are not people. They are not Animals any more either (they have the Beast trait instead), so the effect wouldn't work on them. Beast Eidolon also wouldn't work since they also have the Beast trait instead of the Animal trait.
But there is nothing that prevents the ability from being used on an Animal Companion with the Animal trait.
So if you wouldn't want it being used on an Animal Companion, then the ability needs errata.
However, is there an actual balance problem with using the ability on an Animal Companion? It effectively gives a 1/day Runic Body effect (including the rules language of making the target's unarmed attacks +1 Striking unarmed attacks) that is only usable on the party's Animal Companion.
Am I missing something? That doesn't seem overpowered to me.
I'm not 100% sure where to report an issue that probably needs errata, but I did wanna try and bring attention to a bit of an oddity I found with the following Leshy ancestry feat.
Unassuming Heroes (level 5)
Source Tian Xia Character Guide pg. 42
Frequency once per day
Access peachchild leshy heritage
You have a talent for making friends through simple kindness, often among stray animals or other creatures that people tend to overlook, and your inherent magic can make these acts take on additional power. As an Interact action, you can feed a small treat, such as a millet dumpling, to an animal that has an indifferent or better attitude toward you. For the next 1 minute, one of the animal’s unarmed attacks becomes a +1 striking unarmed attack. If it was already a +1 striking attack, it instead gains the effects of the ghost touch rune.The issue with this feat how it's applied to two entities that don't actually (or wholly) interact with a +1 striking bonus.
Animal companions do not gain striking runes nor do they benefit from item bonuses other than to speed and AC. They do gain additional damage dice, but that isn't a striking rune (even if it is worded so they don't stack). This potentially could give them an extra damage die if they aren't mature yet and haven't gotten their damage upgrade, but the ghost touch aspect wouldn't really apply as they aren't getting that from a Striking rune or enchant.NPCs meanwhile operate on a different set of rules, and likewise just have their attack bonuses factored in; if they already have two damage dice, then technically this would give them a +1 to hit on top of it, but that throws into question if it'd ever grant them a ghost touch effect. If it doesn't, then the ghost touch effect actually can't ever be applied to an animal, companion or NPC.
I think the intention for this feat is pretty obvious, though, and it instead was supposed to be:
For the next 1 minute, one of the animal’s unarmed attacks is increased from...
IMO this feat is clearly developed to not be used in companions but in some random animal that is not hostile to you.
Also NPCs can get runes benefits for their attacks but its ruled by GM. A GM can rule that a +1 is already accounted in the animal hit bonuses specially if these attack are considered magical, because if it is already magical probably the bonus is already accounted.
The additional dice of Strike bonus is more simple. The Strike rules doesn't says that it increases the number of dice by +1 but that "damage dice it deals to two instead of one", the designers take care in these runes to not use "additional dices" but explicitly changes the number of dices to a fixed value to prevent then to stack. So if the animal already does 2 dices or more the Striking simply doesn't do anything.
And finally if the animal attack is magic and have 2 or more dices it does the effect of ghost touch rune.
Anyway I this thing doesn't needs an errata it was developed to be used in some edge cases where you can be helped by a random animal that doesn't does magical attacks (or a magical one that you need striking an incorporeal creature) also it doesn't developed to work for companions.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A level 5 feat that only does anything at all in "edge cases"? Although it's less of an edge case for a Peachchild, since their heritage ability makes them better at befriending animals.
Besides which, as written it definitely works on animal companions and Awakened Animal PCs--though only on unarmed attacks for the latter.
Awakened Animals are Beasts, but have an ancestry feature that covers that.
By remembering your instincts, you can allow yourself to be affected by spells and other effects as though you were an animal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not think it needs an errata.
It does not work on people to begin with.
It specifically targets animals and is a once-per-day ability with a minor bonus. Basically, it lets you, at level 5, give that cat, or dog, or cow, or whatever a combat bonus.
I would also not allow it to be used on an AC/eidolon/awakened animal PC.
Awakened Animal characters are not people. They are not Animals any more either (they have the Beast trait instead), so the effect wouldn't work on them. Beast Eidolon also wouldn't work since they also have the Beast trait instead of the Animal trait.
But there is nothing that prevents the ability from being used on an Animal Companion with the Animal trait.
So if you wouldn't want it being used on an Animal Companion, then the ability needs errata.
However, is there an actual balance problem with using the ability on an Animal Companion? It effectively gives a 1/day Runic Body effect (including the rules language of making the target's unarmed attacks +1 Striking unarmed attacks) that is only usable on the party's Animal Companion.
Am I missing something? That doesn't seem overpowered to me.
From a mechanical perspective, I do not think there is an issue.
There might be since ACs do get bonuses from progression naturally. But, as Yuri pointed out, the writing of the ability does seem to minimize any balance issues.
However, the reason I would not allow it to be used on ACs is the intent behind the ability. As Yuri also pointed out, and as the ability itself says, it's meant to be used on other animals. It's not *just* a game about numbers, it's also a game about story-telling, so the intent behind an ability is just as important as a +1, and this Ancestry Feat has a very clear intent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The ability is a reference to the Japanese "peach boy" story, in which the boy born from a peach made some animal friends and beat up some oni, which is why it's peachchild-only. It's basically there to let you play a variation of that character, as implied by previous posts.
I do not think it needs an errata.
It does not work on people to begin with.
It specifically targets animals and is a once-per-day ability with a minor bonus. Basically, it lets you, at level 5, give that cat, or dog, or cow, or whatever a combat bonus.
I would also not allow it to be used on an AC/eidolon/awakened animal PC.
Awakened Animal characters are not people. They are not Animals any more either (they have the Beast trait instead), so the effect wouldn't work on them. Beast Eidolon also wouldn't work since they also have the Beast trait instead of the Animal trait.
But there is nothing that prevents the ability from being used on an Animal Companion with the Animal trait.
So if you wouldn't want it being used on an Animal Companion, then the ability needs errata.
However, is there an actual balance problem with using the ability on an Animal Companion? It effectively gives a 1/day Runic Body effect (including the rules language of making the target's unarmed attacks +1 Striking unarmed attacks) that is only usable on the party's Animal Companion.
Am I missing something? That doesn't seem overpowered to me.
From a mechanical perspective, I do not think there is an issue.
There might be since ACs do get bonuses from progression naturally. But, as Yuri pointed out, the writing of the ability does seem to minimize any balance issues.
However, the reason I would not allow it to be used on ACs is the intent behind the ability. As Yuri also pointed out, and as the ability itself says, it's meant to be used on other animals. It's not *just* a game about numbers, it's also a game about story-telling, so the intent behind an ability is just as important as a +1, and this Ancestry Feat has a...
The thing is, this is a level 5 ancestry feat. It's specifying a Ghost Touch benefit that technically can never be achieved--so why is it included in the first place? Generally if something like that is mentioned, the intention is that it can be accessed. (I guess maybe if you used Runic Body first and THEN this, but then... why is this a level 5 feat? That is a lot of hoops to jump through.)
If it was just supposed to give an animal (companion or wild) a +1 benefit to attack and SOMETIMES a striking benefit, there's better ways to word that, but also that is pretty weak for a level 5 feat that is limited to a single heritage.