Hello, I have a question about waterfowl stance and injury poison.
While in Waterfowl Stance, the dandpatta, scimitar, talwar, and zulfikar gain the monk trait for you. When you Tumble Through a creature’s space or Leap over a creature while wielding one of these weapons, you can deal that creature 1d6 slashing damage. This damage is increased to 2d6 if the weapon has a greater striking rune and 3d6 if it has a major striking rune.
Injury: An injury poison is activated by applying it to a weapon or ammunition, and it affects the target of the first Strike made using the poisoned item. If that Strike is a success and deals piercing or slashing damage, the target must attempt a saving throw against the poison. On a failed Strike, the target is unaffected, but the poison remains on the weapon and you can try again. On a critical failure, or if the Strike fails to deal slashing or piercing damage for some other reason, the poison is spent but the target is unaffected. Only one injury poison can be applied to a weapon or ammunition at a time.
An injury poison is activated by applying it to a weapon or ammunition, and it affects the target of the first Strike made using the poisoned item. If that Strike is a success and deals piercing or slashing damage, the target must attempt a saving throw against the poison. On a failed Strike, the target is unaffected, but the poison remains on the weapon and you can try again. On a critical failure, or if the Strike fails to deal slashing or piercing damage for some other reason, the poison is spent but the target is unaffected. Only one injury poison can be applied to a weapon or ammunition at a time.
If a dandpatta/scimitar/talwar/zulikar has an injury poison and a character uses a tumble through or a leap with success being waterfowl stance, must the opponent attempt a saving throw against the poison ?
Thanks for your future answer.
Agreed.
It may be hard to narratively describe differently the Waterfowl stance damage from Strike damage, but the game mechanics do need the difference.
The poison rules are using Strike for a reason - it's defense is reliable and known - it uses the target's AC as defense. The waterfowl stance damage instead has a defense of the target's defense against Tumble Through or, in the case of a Leap height high enough, no defense at all. Waterfowl stance was designed to have that be the defense to deal its listed damage.
It isn't intended to combine poison onto the blade and have the different defense of Waterfowl stance used to deliver the poison with. That type of combinatorial change in power is something that PF2 tries to avoid.