| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rules are unclear and clarificaitons have been requested in the Errata suggestion thread.
My currrent undestanding is:
- the Primary target strike is extra
- it works even with area wapons
- it doesn't consume ammunition
- it doesn't run into Unwieldy
While a bit unclear it almost specifically has to work with area and unwieldly. I believe this ability was put in specifically because early play test soldiers basically didn't give a rip about their proficiencies with weapons at all. They just never used it as everything was always just class DC area attacks. So basic/martial/advanced prof just didn't matter to them which felt very weird. The primary target strike makes sure they have at least one attack that uses their actual weapon proficiencies to strike.
Their reactive strike option also ignores the unwieldy and area modifiers in a very similar fashion to make a basic MAPless attack.
|
The rules are unclear and clarificaitons have been requested in the Errata suggestion thread.
My currrent undestanding is:
- the Primary target strike is extra
- it works even with area wapons
- it doesn't consume ammunition
- it doesn't run into UnwieldyWhile a bit unclear it almost specifically has to work with area and unwieldly. I believe this ability was put in specifically because early play test soldiers basically didn't give a rip about their proficiencies with weapons at all. They just never used it as everything was always just class DC area attacks. So basic/martial/advanced prof just didn't matter to them which felt very weird. The primary target strike makes sure they have at least one attack that uses their actual weapon proficiencies to strike.
Their reactive strike option also ignores the unwieldy and area modifiers in a very similar fashion to make a basic MAPless attack.
I too assume it has to work with unwieldy, but you know what they say about assumptions. And while you can adjudicate it at your own table, like I said, I’m trying to produce some 3rd party content under pathfinder infinite.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So AFAICT the new starfinder2e rules for a Soldier’s Primary target doesn’t say that they ignore the unwieldy trait. Is this intentional? Trying to get an official ruling so I can produce 3rd party stuff.
Correct, it does not ignore the Unwieldy trait.
Unwieldy says "you can't use an unwieldy weapon more than once per round to Strike and can't use it to Strike as part of a reaction, such as Reactive Strike."
So with Primary Target, you make a Strike (as directed by Primary Target)... and then make an Area Attack that includes that target. Area Attack is not a strike, so is not blocked by the Unwieldy trait. I see no problem there.
If you could make two area attacks in a turn (say you are level 20 and have the Bullet Typhon feat) then you would only be able to use Primary Target once, and would probably use it only on your first attack. But I think we can assume that Unwieldy is working as intended in that case!
What are you trying to do, OP? You're correct that right now Primary Target doesn't ignore unwieldy, but it also almost never matters that it doesn't either.
Soldiers are supposed to be the Area Attack class. do have improved Class DC. But that is a thing they share with Witchwarpers. And possibly some other future.
They needed something more then just DC to tell them appart. Primary Target is that extra buff to Area Attacks. That is why I think this needs to be as perrmissive as possible. It is the main reason to use the class.
Primary Target is still an extra strike per turn, that seems quite good. For two actions, a soldier almost always gets their PT strike, an area attack, and some bonus effect imposed on the PT or suppressed targets. Then they might even take a MAP -5 strike, and also get a ranged reactive strike. That means potentially attacking a boss target 4 times a turn, with 3 at no penalty and one at only -5 MAP. That is MUCH better than any other class would do using the same weapons, and is top tier martial stuff.
Except for a very few cases, you weren't ever gonna get 2 PT uses a turn (outside of Punishing Salvo, which still works) even when it DID ignore unwieldy. It may simply have been cut to reduce word count and rules bloat, and in which case - fine, no loss for 99.99% of soldier players.
Do you roll weapon damage on targets hit by the primary target ranged strike roll? I'm still confused on that part; idk if primary target is about focus firing or REALLY making sure that one enemy fails it's area attack save...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why wouldn't you? It's a strike.
Why wouldn't you? It's a strike.
your right, just the wording of if your strike hits the target it turns success into failures on the area attack save. I didn't know if that was the only benefit of that strike hit or if it functioned normally. Specific over general would probably specify that though, so yea,....I guess it's a normal ranged strike
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Primary target grants a free action. Unwieldy doesn't affect free actions. I'm not clear on the bullet/charge cost of primary target attacks with area only weapons.
|
Hello everyone.
What I'm about to say may be a bit convoluted, but here goes.
The Primary Target feature literally says:
"Before you make an area attack with a weapon (such as from the Area Fire or Auto-Fire actions), you can make a ranged Strike as a free action with the same weapon against a single creature in the area, who's selected as your primary target."
In my opinion, there's a subtle difference between that ranged strike and a ranged strike action.
Let's all remember that a strike is nothing more than an attack roll, and a strike action involves the attack roll and damage.
I think Primary Target is designed to implement a debuff, not a free attack, but of course, this is just my opinion.
I suppose we'll clear up any doubts when Paizo releases the errata.
I'm sorry if the text may be difficult to read. I used Google Translate; my English is very poor.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello everyone.
What I'm about to say may be a bit convoluted, but here goes.
The Primary Target feature literally says:"Before you make an area attack with a weapon (such as from the Area Fire or Auto-Fire actions), you can make a ranged Strike as a free action with the same weapon against a single creature in the area, who's selected as your primary target."
In my opinion, there's a subtle difference between that ranged strike and a ranged strike action.
Let's all remember that a strike is nothing more than an attack roll, and a strike action involves the attack roll and damage.I think Primary Target is designed to implement a debuff, not a free attack, but of course, this is just my opinion.
I suppose we'll clear up any doubts when Paizo releases the errata.
I'm sorry if the text may be difficult to read. I used Google Translate; my English is very poor.
I don't think you're right. That is WAY too subtle an implication to expect people to get. If Paizo intended that they'd say something like "That does no damage" as they do in other cases.
I also think that would weaken the soldier too much. They'd go back to basically not caring very much about their to hit number.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let's all remember that a strike is nothing more than an attack roll, and a strike action involves the attack roll and damage.
This is just not correct at all. A Strike is a Strike. Period. There are some things that ask for an attack roll that aren't Strikes, but strike is pretty well defined.
There is no such distinction between strike and strike.
I genuinely don't eve know how you can read an ability telling you to make a Strike and assume it's meant to mean no damage. So many abilities wouldn't work if you applied this broadly and the actual wording is so clear. Maybe a translation issue?
|
|
The truth is, what I'm proposing is very convoluted. Normally, they don't go to great lengths to implement a rule.
Yes, it clearly states that a strike must be performed; perhaps I overcomplicated it. What another user commented in another post is very true. If they wanted to clarify that it's only an attack roll, without damage, they would state it clearly, like in the Reactive Interference rogue feat.
In the playtest, it did clearly state that this attack used ammo equal to the weapon's standard expend and that it was an action, not a free action. That's why I thought they nerfed the ability and left it with just the debuff. But if we take into account that it's a strike, it would also use ammo normally, even though it's a free action.
Honestly, it's great for me. I'm making a soldier with close quarters for a campaign, with the idea of taking the Knight of Golarion Dedication feat at level 2 and, if my GM lets me, the versatile Nephilim heritage. I don't know if it will go well, but it looks good.
Primary target grants a free action. Unwieldy doesn't affect free actions. I'm not clear on the bullet/charge cost of primary target attacks with area only weapons.
How does unwieldy ignore free actions? It is a limit on per turn strikes, and reactions. So if you somehow have already done a Strike with an unwieldy weapon and get to make a second strike as a free action... you can't strike with that weapon.
This is actually seems quite possible for a level 20 Soldier using Bullet Typhon. They could easily make two area attacks, so get two chances to use Primary Target. Which is NBD, they just wouldn't use Primary Target on one of the (likely the second) area attacks.
Primary target grants a free action. Unwieldy doesn't affect free actions. I'm not clear on the bullet/charge cost of primary target attacks with area only weapons.How does unwieldy ignore free actions? It is a limit on per turn strikes, and reactions. So if you somehow have already done a Strike with an unwieldy weapon and get to make a second strike as a free action... you can't strike with that weapon.
This is actually seems quite possible for a level 20 Soldier using Bullet Typhon. They could easily make two area attacks, so get two chances to use Primary Target. Which is NBD, they just wouldn't use Primary Target on one of the (likely the second) area attacks.
well theres some thoughts to be had regarding what there intent on what should or shouldnt work. we have the feat Spread the Love at level 18, which lets you choose 2 primary fire targets rather then 1, but does not have any rules that would allow a unwieldy weapon to shoot twice, even though all area weapons have it.
theres also fan the hammer, which funny enough mentions you can ignore the unwieldy trait for a strike; even though the only thing you do with it is an area attack as the primary fire is restricted; so what gives? why have the unwieldly if you can strike freely, and why have bullet typhoon for area weapons if you cant since it misses the trait. there isnt a winning situation here.
I am also curious as to what happens if you are granted a strike and are wielding an area weapon which normally can only two action area fire. If an envoy, commander, or mystic grant an area weapon user a strike is it wasted even if the gun has not been used that round.
If so, that devalues bombards in particular and soldier, envoy parties in general.
I am also curious as to what happens if you are granted a strike and are wielding an area weapon which normally can only two action area fire. If an envoy, commander, or mystic grant an area weapon user a strike is it wasted even if the gun has not been used that round.
If so, that devalues bombards in particular and soldier, envoy parties in general.
Well for all* weapons this is covered that each area weapon *also* has the unwieldy trait, which prohibits using them for reaction strikes; the only exception being the grenade and its launcher, which both dont have the area trait; just lets you use them as *if* they had it. how that applies in game is unknown.