Enhance Weapon spell should give Tracking like Enhance Body does. Right now the target weapon does not give a bonus to DC for Area Fire like an Advanced weapon improvement would.
Not sure if errata territory, but Vehicle rules in GM Core are absolute nonsense. Changing how heading works or allowing certain vehicles to bypass the "can only go forward" rule would go a long way.
Auto-Fire also needs some clarifications/corrections.
Now that we are getting quite a few sessions under our belts across a couple different tables, my primary group is finding quite a few things. These are the biggest ones I'm not seeing discussed or mentioned yet.
Compact Trait
Wording needs to be changed from...
"You can Raise a Shield with your compact shield as long as you have that hand free or are holding, but not wielding, a light object in that hand."
...to...
"You can Raise a Shield with your compact shield as long as you have that hand free or are holding, but not wielding, an object of negligible or light bulk in that hand."
...otherwise as written a character cannot take the Raise a Shield action with a Compact shield when holding a datapad, cred stick, etc because they are not "light."
Field Scientist's Toolkit
A chemalyzer is Bulk L and provides a +1 bonus to skill checks to ID unknown drug, medicinal, poison, or other chemical substances.
A Field Scientist's Toolkit contains a chemalyzer and more yet is only Bulk - and provides no such bonus.
Seems like it should have at least Bulk L and at least mention the bonus of the chemalyzer if not outright include it in addition to its own bonuses. We went 5 or 6 sessions not knowing of the chemalyzer included in the kit providing separate bonuses to checks that honestly, would have been SUPER helpful to have had in our campaign. As far as we noticed it's the only "kit" to contain items with bonuses separate from what the kit provides so we read glossed over it the same way we did "sterile bandages" in the medkit.
Phase Shield
It's described as "...often worn strapped to a limb or belt that projects a hard light barrier when deployed." But due to having the Compact trait when deployed it still requires an active hand to use. Should this not have the Installed trait instead of Retractable or the belt portion of text removed?
Hefty +X Trait
This seems to have been copy pasted with the same issue that PF2e never fixed. There needs to be clarification on if the shield with this trait needs to be raised or not to benefit from Standard Cover.
As written a shield with hefty appears to provide standard cover to its wielder, and only its wielder, at all times. This also means that its wielder, and only its wielder, can Take Cover to increase the cover to Greater. The only benefit then of Raise a Shield being that the circumstance bonus to AC would not be affected by abilities that reduce/remove cover such as an Operative's Aim ability and that you would then allow other creatures to benefit from Standard/Greater Cover.
This also means the base +3 will never really come into play. A single action to Take Cover (+4 AC, Reflex, and Stealth) vs a single action (two actions if Strength less than +X) to Raise a Shield (+3 AC, and +2 Reflex and Stealth).
If intended, "...even when not raised," being added to the end of the text would go a long way.
If not intended, "...when raised," should be added.
Just spitballing some ways out of this.
Nothing to spitball. It just requires a 30 second errata. *shrug* I edited my PDF to remove the "Chemalyzer" bit and changed the bulk to L to be more in line with other two handed (one of worn) items. Quick and easy K.I.S.S. solution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lasers work fine because they don't have the fire trait. All energy weapons lack any energy trait and aren't affected by this alternative rule as written.
"Energy Damage in a Vacuum" variant rules a illogical, self-contradicting mess and need to be rewritten from scratch.
Apparently Lasers don't work in Vacuum, unless I literally push them into someones face. Because they deal ranged fire damage.
The same rule also say that apparently Spells don't work. But Magical Effects do, because magic breaks physics.
Magical Effects, like Spells?
So Spells don't work and do work at the same time. Or apparently a Dragons Firebreath works, but a Fireball doesn't?
While I agree and can apply the first sentence of your post to...honestly...all of 2e (PF included)... For better or worse, as mentioned, weapons don't have traits related to their energy damage. This is what leads to such nonsense as Flamethrowers work just fine underwater but an Atomic Blast spell wouldn't deal any fire damage. Instantly vaporized water from underwater detonations on Earth would like a word. *shrug*
Simple solution is for errata to remove the part about magical effects and upgrades being exempt if spells aren't supposed to work OR remove the bit about spells not working if magic is supposed to break the laws of physics (which still contradicts other entries like Aquatic Combat). The whole section (the whole book really ) already states GMs should just do what they want anyways so it really doesn't matter as long as Paizo corrects the contradiction one way or another.
Plasma Caster has the Art and Description of a "compact Pistol". Yet it is also a 2H Weapon. Those two don't seem to match.
And I can't really tell which direction that ambiguity should resolve into.
The stats are absolutely written by someone picturing a Bowcaster from Star Wars. The art and description is absolutely someone picturing the plasma pistol from Halo.
I'd imagine the easier fix for now is to make the stats match the boom pistol but a bit more expensive and Bulk L.
Not sure if errata territory, but Vehicle rules in GM Core are absolute nonsense. Changing how heading works or allowing certain vehicles to bypass the "can only go forward" rule would go a long way.
Yeah I can see future vehicles having some sort of trait to work around this, if not just errata'ing GM Core's vehicle rule.