|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flames Oracle's curse is awkward in exploration mode. Many adventures, including those published by Paizo, will occasionally launch immediately into another activity after a combat. By the reading of a strict GM, this leads to the Flames Oracle taking 10 hp/cursebound level a minute, which is... impractical, forcing the GM to either let the Flames Oracle burn to death or allow them to refocus in situations Oracles normally can't.
A real strict GM will have you endure the damage for the whole 10 minutes that Refocusing takes.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A real strict GM will have you endure the damage for the whole 10 minutes that Refocusing takes.Flames Oracle's curse is awkward in exploration mode. Many adventures, including those published by Paizo, will occasionally launch immediately into another activity after a combat. By the reading of a strict GM, this leads to the Flames Oracle taking 10 hp/cursebound level a minute, which is... impractical, forcing the GM to either let the Flames Oracle burn to death or allow them to refocus in situations Oracles normally can't.
Only if they ignore that the damage is explicitly suppressed while refocusing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure if this technically qualifies as an errata but the recent change from the spring errata 2026 to allow draconic sorcerers to use the appropriate damage type for their specific draconic exemplar made me think I should propose another quality of life change for sorcerers.
Is there any reason why the level 4 sorcerer feat "Primal Evolution" couldn't be updated to allow any spell with the "summon" trait instead of only "summon animal" or "summon plant or fungus"? The reason I ask is that it would be more thematic if fey sorcerers could cast "summon fey", elemental sorcerers could cast "summon elemental", and draconic sorcerers could cast "summon dragon".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I also just noticed that [https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=3983]Trusty Helmet[/url]'s AC bonus has no duration and thus looks to last for life RAW. Might want to fix that too.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alchemical ammo is already pretty weak. Make it disable property runes as well and it’s cooked, dead on errata.
GM Core page 75 under Character Adjustment for a low threat encounter: adjustment value is listed as 20 but this causes low threat encounters for a single PC to be the only type to get zeroed out.
This seems like something that slipped past editing as back in Gamemastery Guide and even the Pre-Remaster GM Screen have it as being 15 leaving a budget of the same value rather than GM Core's adjustment of 20 reducing XP Budget to 0 for a solo PC facing a low threat encounter.
Alchemical ammo is already pretty weak. Make it disable property runes as well and it’s cooked, dead on errata.This internal discussion has to start with "were you aware those rules existed and did you account for them in your balance?"
Followed by "okay, what did you assume?"It might be simpler to buff the Alchemical Ammuniton, just to have one coherent set of rules.
Personally I like having ammo that disables property runes and ammo that doesn’t as two different design spaces.
You magic ammo has a hefty action tax and directly reduces your damage output, so it better do something impactful - and the best magic ammo does (admittedly most is crippled by fixed DCs, but that’s a different discussion). Bola shot and imp shot justify their DPR reductions with great riders.
The best alchemical ammo has to offer is good bit weaker, but it doesn’t shut off your normal damage. You can shoot a glue bullet and still get your flaming rune - but the situation in which that glue bullet denies an enemy action is less frequent than the bola shot, and it doesn’t come with the other riders prone does.
Elemental damage is good for hitting weaknesses, but are you really going to be getting anything out of that if it’s shutting off your property runes? The action cost is already a bit steep, if I lose my flaming rune as well to shoot that acid elemental ammo am I even coming out ahead on damage vs using those actions to shoot more often, or maybe even just the direct rune damage I’m forgoing? Probably not. But because it doesn’t shut off your runes, you can use it to snipe weaknesses, giving ranged users a meaningful reward for party RK.
Fixes / clarifications
1.) After the recent errata, one small issue is that the inventor dedication got a big nerf for Weapon Innovation since now it doesn't allow you to take advanced weapons. Don't know if this was intended or not. Also Advanced Design modification, feels weird now as it overrides your previously chosen weapons stats (potentially lowering damage or losing traits). Plus it specifies it needs to be common but almost all advanced weapons are uncommon.
2.) Clarification about releasing shields would be helpful, if that hand can be used to open doors or similar before regripping.
3.) Clarification on how inhaled poisons work. Can you pick where the 10ft square goes?
4.) Clarification if "Curse of engulfing flames" should stop damaging you while you are refocusing. If not, its very likely to kill you while you are out of combat.
5.) Smoke ball should likely be 1 handed item now after the remaster? "Upon smashing this ball on the ground, you instantly create a screen of thick, opaque smoke in a burst centered on one corner of your space."
6.) Update to the Creating a Personal Staff rules which seem a bit out of date. Maybe coming in the new book?
Nice to have updates
1.) Handwraps as a base level 0 item (to allow talisman on them from level 2 for monks and the like). Some GMs will "house rule" this, but nothing official.
2.) Poisoner Archetype is very weak mainly due to the bad DC scaling of poisons. Maybe a feat to allow it to scale with the class DC like alchemist archetype has?
4.) Clarification if "Curse of engulfing flames" should stop damaging you while you are refocusing. If not, its very likely to kill you while you are out of combat."The flames subside when you begin Refocusing to assuage your curse or if you fall unconscious, but they resume if your Refocus activity is interrupted or when you return to consciousness."
Seems pretty clear to me they are paused during refocussing, excactly to avoid the problem you are describing?
Oh wow, somehow I didn't see that before when I was building my oracle characters...
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you Paizo for the Errata change on Weapon Trance!
The 1 minute duration and removal of the sustain line was a step in the right direction, but I feel like it's *almost* there.
The last sentence removed was about 109 characters, meaning there's extra space to adjust Weapon Trance one more time.
My suggestion:
Add this sentence: "If you are at least Cursebound 1, you can cast weapon trance as a free action." This is only 78 characters, so should definitely fit without causing any editing issues.
Why I think this is a great idea?
1) Works with the Battle Oracle's kit. Oracular Warning is used at initiative, getting the Battle Oracle to Cursebound 1, meaning they can easily free action cast Weapon Trance to get into combat more easily.
2) Players responses to the Spring 2026 Errata on Weapon Trance is tepid. Those who don't play Battle Oracle don't see a reason why this isn't better than taking Weapon Proficiency to avoid an action tax and focus point tax. Free Action makes it feel closer to the original Battle Oracle who just *had* Weapon Proficiency. It also synergizes with the iconic gish feat Bespell Strikes. Gives Weapon Trance a function to keep using instead of picking Weapon Proficiency (unless they want to use more focus points on Domain spells or later Revelation spells). It's also a bit mechanically flavorful as players would like to have the Curse mean something and this is a minimal way to do that without being too impactful.
3) Many players suggest a flat duration damage boost is needed, but I think that's the wrong direction and becomes a poaching problem. Battle Oracle has a lot of 1A actions to use, so giving just this one action back (which is 11-17% of your actions in average combat) is already helpful defensively and offensively.
4) it heavily protects the Battle Oracle's identity from poaching:
A-Sorcerers and Martials will need a hefty investment to copy the Battle Oracle. Dedication at 2, Basic Mystery (Oracular Warning)/First Revelation at lvl. 4/6, and Bespell Strikes/Adcanced Mysteries at 8. This should help with niche protection while still rewarding investment.
B-Animist: Establishes itself distinctively from the Animist's Embodiment of Battle (EoB). Animist EoB sacrifices versatility for better martial skills while the Battle Oracle is free to be more spontaneous.
C-Other Oracle Mysteries: some complaints Bones and Tempest are better gishes due to Soul Siphon and Tempest Touch being 1A spells with bonus effects. Being a free action Weapon Trance, the Battle Oracle can compare via a 2A cantrip. It doesn't punish the other mysteries if they want to Gish, it just helps the Battle Oracle fit within them. It'll also further establish the Battle Oracle as a more defacto gish vs. Bone's Object Memory.
Overall, I think this "Weapon Trance as a free action if Cursebound 1+" would be a unique and flavorful solution for the focus spell and also meet players requests without significantly changing the spell. It changes how the class uses it, which is much more interesting (while preventing easy poaching)!
In PFS, the sustain wasn't an issue for me. However, the 1-action tax WAS annoying for my turns, especially when trying to use my Oracle abilities (2A buff spells and other Cursebound abilities) with Weapon Trance before combat ended (since Oracular Warning pushes your party ahead and Oracles tend aren't WIS class and have slow Perception proficiency growth). So this is something I've been wanting moreso in PFS than anything.
Hopefully this something that can be looked by the devs, but thank you again for keeping the Battle Oracle in mind and hearing us out!
Thought of a few more!
1.) Clarify requirements for crafting gadgets a bit. Magical? Specialty crafting? (Also, hope we might get a gadget dabbler archetype sometime which would be pretty sick.)
2.) Specialty crafting feels like it might be missing a few categories, mechanical for example. (Maybe something related to electrical or munitions as well?)
3.) Ashes Oracle and Blight Oracle are the only oracles missing their mystery based level 10 feats. (Time Oracle recently got "On Borrowed Time" for level 10 in the DA Remaster.)
4.) Radiant Beam a rank 4 divine spell still does "good damage", I think the wording needs updating and should probably do spirit damage now after the remaster.
5.) Some monk feats still reference "ki strike" which was renamed. For example the feat "Sacred Ki" still does.
Overdrive should let the Inventor Strike with Intelligence like Divise a Stratagem for Investigator
And Blast Boots should be more clear about how many actions it takes to properly use it. If you use 1 action to activate and another to do High or Long Jump shouldn't it be tagged with 2 actions one for activate and another to jump? Or just make the activation and the Jump with 1 action...
The way I read it it is 1 action to activate which triggers a free "high jump" or "long jump". (Similar to how many talismans work.)
"When you Activate the blast boots, you can High Jump or Long Jump, without the need to Stride first. Higher-level versions increase the distance of your High Jump or Long Jump."
If that's not the case the lesser version basically doesn't do anything.
The higher level ones kind of imply this as well as they say, when you activate the boots TO HIGH JUMP or activate them TO LONG JUMP. Then give you a 1 min effect after the initial jump.
"When you Activate the greater blast boots to High Jump, you can increase the vertical distance of your High Jump by up to 50 feet. When you Activate them to Long Jump, you can increase the horizontal distance of your Long Jump by up to 75 feet. Additionally, for 1 minute, the greater blast boots continue to boost your jumps. Every time you Leap during the duration, you can move 30 feet in any direction, or your normal Leap distance, whichever is further."
But definitely more clarity could be nice.
That is what it straightforwardly says
Except Line of Effect means a literal line, so it seems obvious those spells don't require LoE to the destination. Teleportation's target isn't the destination, it's the caster (plus). One simply designates the target.
It'd be a shock to many if Translocate couldn't get one out of a cube of Walls of Force or into a closed room with a window you can see through.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Teleporation and Teleportation Circle do not override Line of Effect, but to be actually usefull at those ranges they probably should?
Otherwise closing the door on either Teleporation Room would break Line of Effect, making them useless. You would have to include a chimney of some kind, just to give the teleport a consistent line of effect. While that would be interesting worldbuilding, it does seem kinda odd.
Other long range spells or heighteend entries (1+ mile, planetary, plane wide) suffer the same issue. Dream Message can reach anyone on the same planet - unless they have their doors, windows or tent closed. So it reaches nobody during winter.
I mean, if it really only works on "line of effect", Teleportation can't actually teleport you more than a few km because beyond that the curvature of the world kicks in.
This is a classic case of overthinking something and that creating a problem. It doesn't need to override anything to work. Teleport says you can go there, so you can. Full stop.
The longer the distance, the more likely either side or some part of the way will be blocked by a closed door. Which causes ludicrous results.
I mean, this the answer: if applying this kind of logic to the situation causes nonsensical results, then it's probably not intended that you do that.
This isn't an errata situation: it's a players need to use common sense situation.
The Agile Maneuvers feat for Swashbuckler should really add Dirty Trick to its list of affected actions given you added an entire Swashbuckler Style built around that Attack action.
Agile Maneuvers (with requested addition in italics/brackets): "You easily maneuver against your foes. Your Disarm, Grapple, Reposition, Shove, [Dirty Trick,] and Trip actions have a lower multiple attack penalty. Even if your weapon or unarmed attack doesn't have the agile trait, the penalty is –4 if the action is your second attack on your turn, or –8 if it's your third or subsequent attack. If your weapon or unarmed attack is agile and you have panache, the penalty is reduced further, to –3 if it's the second attack on your turn or –6 if it's the third or subsequent."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except Line of Effect means a literal line, so it seems obvious those spells don't require LoE to the destination. Teleportation's target isn't the destination, it's the caster (plus). One simply designates the target.
It'd be a shock to many if Translocate couldn't get one out of a cube of Walls of Force or into a closed room with a window you can see through.
So, which other spells "obviously" should not be affected by LoE?
Or rather, what Spell/Effect range obviously ignores LoE?
As Tridus wrote, when the interpretation would lead to nonsensical results, or using your word, ludicrous. Or we could revisit the LoE rules which list what you need an LoE to: to a target, to the origin point of an effect, or to the place where you create something. As I'd pointed out, Teleport does have a target line that you do need line of effect to, those the caster touches to join them.
Dream Message, on the other hand, does have a target entry. Uh oh. Yet the spell's description gives enough info for us to know it doesn't need LoE, doesn't it? To me, that also falls under obvious. Plus the spell has a range of planetary which as Tridus pointed out, could not function past the curvature of the planet if it needed LoE because yeah, Lines of Effect are singular lines. Your example of needing closed doors makes me think you believe there only needs to be open air the spell can wiggle through. If so, savvy Golarion citizens would always close doors; it'd have become a social norm that counters all divination spells, etc. But the rules are more strict than that, there needs to be an actual straight line for LoE. But using that as reasoning to nullify what a spell's text says it can do, that's unreasonable, some might say ludicrous. So ludicrous Paizo doesn't need to point it out explicitly when the spell's description should suffice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Agile Maneuvers feat for Swashbuckler should really add Dirty Trick to its list of affected actions given you added an entire Swashbuckler Style built around that Attack action.
Agile Maneuvers (with requested addition in italics/brackets): "You easily maneuver against your foes. Your Disarm, Grapple, Reposition, Shove, [Dirty Trick,] and Trip actions have a lower multiple attack penalty. Even if your weapon or unarmed attack doesn't have the agile trait, the penalty is –4 if the action is your second attack on your turn, or –8 if it's your third or subsequent attack. If your weapon or unarmed attack is agile and you have panache, the penalty is reduced further, to –3 if it's the second attack on your turn or –6 if it's the third or subsequent."
Reasonable concept, but the prerequisite is Expert in Athletics, and Dirty Trick is keyed off of Thievery.
Maybe it would be ok to change the Prerequisite to Expert in Athletics or Thievery.
Then have the feat ability grant the given reduction to MAP on Disarm, Grapple, Reposition, Shove, and Trip maneuvers if you are an expert in Athletics.
To expand on it, you might add Force Open to the Athletics options.
It could then grant reduction in map to Dirty Trick if you have Expert in Thievery.
The Agile Maneuvers feat for Swashbuckler should really add Dirty Trick to its list of affected actions given you added an entire Swashbuckler Style built around that Attack action.
Agile Maneuvers (with requested addition in italics/brackets): "You easily maneuver against your foes. Your Disarm, Grapple, Reposition, Shove, [Dirty Trick,] and Trip actions have a lower multiple attack penalty. Even if your weapon or unarmed attack doesn't have the agile trait, the penalty is –4 if the action is your second attack on your turn, or –8 if it's your third or subsequent attack. If your weapon or unarmed attack is agile and you have panache, the penalty is reduced further, to –3 if it's the second attack on your turn or –6 if it's the third or subsequent."
Reasonable concept, but the prerequisite is Expert in Athletics, and Dirty Trick is keyed off of Thievery.
Maybe it would be ok to change the Prerequisite to Expert in Athletics or Thievery.
Then have the feat ability grant the given reduction to MAP on Disarm, Grapple, Reposition, Shove, and Trip maneuvers if you are an expert in Athletics.
To expand on it, you might add Force Open to the Athletics options.
It could then grant reduction in map to Dirty Trick if you have Expert in Thievery.
Makes sense to me, thanks.
|
|
Except Line of Effect means a literal line, so it seems obvious those spells don't require LoE to the destination. Teleportation's target isn't the destination, it's the caster (plus). One simply designates the target.
It'd be a shock to many if Translocate couldn't get one out of a cube of Walls of Force or into a closed room with a window you can see through.
So, which other spells "obviously" should not be affected by LoE?
Or rather, what Spell/Effect range obviously ignores LoE?
I do not see anything in the Line of Effect's description that is in contradiction with how aforementioned effects work.
For example, Teleportation has a Target line that has to follow the line of effect rule.
Can you please give examples of an effect that does not respect this ?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
True Debilitating Bomb gives a upgrade for every effect of Greater Debilitating Bomb, except Clumsy 1.
Might be intentional, might be a oversight, bringing it to attention either way.
Pretty sure it's intentional. Clumsy 2 would allow an Alchemist to swing an opponents AC 4 points with a single Action (Quick Bomber with Greater Debilitating throwing a Bottled Lightning) with only a simple failure on the Fort Save. Even the mighty Skunk Bomb requires a Crit Fail to impose a -2 Status Penalty on AC.
Monster Core page 46: the atrixyl's Spell Break reaction triggers on any critically successful save, while the reaction's effects depend on "the triggering spell's rank" - that seems to be in need of clarification. Like, can a save against an alchemical item or non-magical effect trigger this or not?
Battlecry! page 136: the Limning Gem doesn't have a duration, which is slightly awkward when it's invisibility negating effect lasts for it's "remaining duration" on a crit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Battlecry! page 136: the Limning Gem doesn't have a duration, which is slightly awkward when it's invisibility negating effect lasts for it's "remaining duration" on a crit.
Actually not an error. All whetstones have a default duration of 1 minute unless otherwise noted, a.k.a. 10 rounds, after activation. So if you activate the Limning Gem applying it to your Longsword and immediately crit succeed a Strike against an enemy, that enemy is glowing for the full 10 round countdown.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Divine Wall - Champion feat (Player Core 2, pg 98)
The (flavour?) text for this is the reverse of how the rules work XD
You use your shield to harry your enemies, preventing them from stepping away from or around you. All spaces adjacent to you are difficult terrain for your enemies.
Stepping out of difficult terrain is unrestricted, only stepping into difficult terrain is blocked. All steps away from you are therefore viable and not prevented XD