| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it intended that Guardians need to step/stride to be adjacent to the person they're intercepting attack for? The initial description in the action suggests you're physically taking the blow with your body, which would suggest so, but the literal wording indicates moving is optional. If adjacency is require, difficult terrain ends up preventing a guardian from using intercept attack in certain situations.
If guardian's intercept attacks, do they also take the grab / trip follow-up abilities from the creatures attacks? I assume so since you "intercepted" the original attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If guardian's intercept attacks, do they also take the grab / trip follow-up abilities from the creatures attacks? I assume so since you "intercepted" the original attack.
RAW - no. You take the damage and nothing else.
It's always felt weird that it worked that way given the ability name and narrative description. And the whole "you can step next to them if you want", which doesn't actually seem to be necessary either.
A clarification of intent would be welcome, for sure.
That was raised in the playtest as well because it does feel weird.
What will happen to the Summoner when the Summoner's Eidolon is killed by Death Effects without being reduced to 0 Hit Points? (e.g., Slain by the Grim Reaper's death strike ability.)
The Death effect does not get to applied to the Summoner, but this is still an unclear rules hole.
Normally, effects do fully harm the Eidolon. If they get Petrified, they are stuck that way, and you cannot dismiss / summon them to clear away the petrification. They'll stay petrified until someone removes the condition.
But Death doesn't make sense mechanically for an eidolon to be effected by. Eidolons cannot really be killed directly, because they only mostly "exist." Eidolons can only indirectly killed via killing the Summoner.
I'd rule that nothing happens. The Death effect is completely ignored. The HP dropping to 0 still is bad news for the Summoner, but that HP is the only reason the Summoner falls to the ground, not the Death effect.
________________
If an eidolon ever gets hit by a "target dies" effect that doesn't reduce HP, the GM could rule that as doing nothing, or they could rule it as unmanifesting the eidolon with no damage, or unmanifesting the eidolon and doing 100% HP damage. All of those are reasonable interpretations.
I personally think it would be fun to have the eidolon's abnormal existence as pseduo-life grant them immunity to Death effects outright, but that's just me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is the Shadow Relic gift Encompassing Darkness supposed to have the extradimensional trait? It lets you stash up to 3 bulk of stuff in your shadow, and grants a big fat circumstance bonus to concealing it. But, because it hasn't got the extradimensional trait, there's nothing stopping you from just putting a bunch of spacious pouches in there, which feels unintended.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the trick is really being missed here when it comes to resist all. Why not make it so that say if there's an attack that deals 6 fire, 5 bludgeoning, 3 spirit damage and you have resist all 10 (like if you're a champion with oath of the defender) that instead of the resist all only applying to the highest damage type (in this case the fire damage meaning 4 points of mitigation are completely wasted) have it so you sum the damage types together and subtract the resistance from the total (meaning 6+5+3 = 14 total damage, resist 10 brings it down to 4)
this means no points of mitigation are wasted but you don't completely wipe the damage out like the old system.
How do you know which damage has been resisted and which has not ? This matters for effects that happen depending on whether or not you were damaged.
I would suggest the following errata for the rules on loads:
1) base weight to load conversion should be 25 pounds per load, not 5.Someone with Str:4 should be able to carry more that 45 pounds without being encumbered.
2) creature load should be x4 difference by size category, not x2. so a large creature (horse) would be load:12, a small creature would be load:2, and so forth.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would suggest the following errata for the rules on loads:
1) base weight to load conversion should be 25 pounds per load, not 5.Someone with Str:4 should be able to carry more that 45 pounds without being encumbered.
2) creature load should be x4 difference by size category, not x2. so a large creature (horse) would be load:12, a small creature would be load:2, and so forth.
#1 pathfinder doesn't use load.
#2 a str 4 character can 'generally' carry 5-10 pounds/bulk, so they could carry 45-90 pounds without encumbered.
#3 You also need to factor in reduced bulk of items for those sizes. A large creature treats 1 Bulk items as Light [they treat 5-10 pound items as 1-4 pound items] and Light items as negligible [treat 1-4 pound items as one that's a few ounces]. They don't also need to carry twice as much of top of that.
A str 4 character is supposed to be at the high end of human normal strength. Giving a maximum level for encumbered that is lower than what an actual human in that strength range can curl seems a bit off.
I may have used the wrong term, but I stand by the observation that 5-10 pounds per bulk is way too low.
Marines routinely hike 30 miles with over 100 pounds of gear, and are not slowed by it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A str 4 character is supposed to be at the high end of human normal strength. Giving a maximum level for encumbered that is lower than what an actual human in that strength range can curl seems a bit off.
I may have used the wrong term, but I stand by the observation that 5-10 pounds per bulk is way too low.
Marines routinely hike 30 miles with over 100 pounds of gear, and are not slowed by it.
What you're saying just isn't true.
Since you're posting the exact same thing in multiple threads, I'll just link to my posts in the original thread. reply in first thread
I started posting in the other thread, I posted here because I do believe it should be errata. Even if the bulk is going to be a range for the weight based rough estimate it should be significantly higher than 5-10 pounds.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
RAW hitting a wall of force has a 50% flat check because it’s invisible. This effectively gives it double health.
I propose the “broad side of a barn” rule. If you’re hitting a stationary object with a known location where exactly where you hit it probably doesn’t matter that much, you don’t make the hidden flat check. This should apply to swallow whole too of course.
Player core 269 "Generally an item that weighs 5 to 10 pounds is one bulk" That sounds like a weight to bulk conversion to me.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Player core 269 "Generally an item that weighs 5 to 10 pounds is one bulk" That sounds like a weight to bulk conversion to me.
Generally =/= Always. That same rule goes on to say that different circumstances can shift bulk up or down regardless of weight.
Bulk is an abstraction of what someone can carry, not a direct conversion tool.
Issues with Immobilized
"If you're immobilized by something holding you in place and an external force would move you out of your space, the force must succeed at a check against either the DC of the effect holding you in place or the relevant defense (usually Fortitude DC) of the monster holding you in place."
What if the effect moving you is a save spell, like Pushing Gust?
What if it is a Spell without save, like Friendly Push?
This comes up in multiple places for other things and works the same as those: you can use the caster's save DC - 10 as the modifier on a roll for the check. In this case, that also happens to be the spell attack modifier of the caster.
Various Engulf/Swallow whole issues
Line of Effect:
Logically being inside a creature should break line of effect to everything outside (and possibly even other things inside, in case of some swarms or oozes).
But it isn't stated anywhere.
It doesn't need to be stated because it's obvious that you don't have line of effect through something like that. You even said as much.
Helping from outside:
The biggest problem is that there is no way for creatures from the outside to help. Affirmatively breaking line of effect actually makes that work.
One houserule my group tried was "3 attacks from the outside that overcome the rupture treshold free the creature".
Maybe something around that? Like maybe a Free Action/Reaction Escape attempt, if a external attack overcomes Rupture Threshold?
This is an interesting idea and would best be fleshed out in its own thread. :)
Since you moved the Hand Requirements from Medicine Actions to the Toolkit, that technically means abilities that remove the need for Toolkit also remove the need for a hand. That probably is not intended.
See Right Hand Blood on Kholo for a example.
That sounds like an actually meaningful benefit for what are even with it pretty weak feats. Removing it would be bad.
Shokasura (MC2 pg 42) have the same damage die on both their claws and thorns attacks (1d8+1), which is a little weird because the thorns are both agile and have an affliction rider. Normally either of those things would be cause to step the damage die down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, how are you using you right hand blood to heal without using your right hand, because that one is hold a weapon?That sounds like an actually meaningful benefit for what are even with it pretty weak feats. Removing it would be bad.Since you moved the Hand Requirements from Medicine Actions to the Toolkit, that technically means abilities that remove the need for Toolkit also remove the need for a hand. That probably is not intended.
See Right Hand Blood on Kholo for a example.
I bite my right hand. Or anywhere on the right side, the feat doesn’t actually require it be from the hand.
RAW hitting a wall of force has a 50% flat check because it’s invisible. This effectively gives it double health.
I propose the “broad side of a barn” rule. If you’re hitting a stationary object with a known location where exactly where you hit it probably doesn’t matter that much, you don’t make the hidden flat check. This should apply to swallow whole too of course.
I always assumed needing to roll to hit when attacking while swallowed whole was more about getting decent leverage in a dark, cramped space.
I always assumed needing to roll to hit when attacking while swallowed whole was more about getting decent leverage in a dark, cramped space.RAW hitting a wall of force has a 50% flat check because it’s invisible. This effectively gives it double health.
I propose the “broad side of a barn” rule. If you’re hitting a stationary object with a known location where exactly where you hit it probably doesn’t matter that much, you don’t make the hidden flat check. This should apply to swallow whole too of course.
Pretty sure they're talking about the miss chance for not seeing the target, not so much the AC. The argument's that there are zero issues targeting either because it's right there (!) so how could one miss. The counterargument is one might not gauge one's distance well for a proper hit, might even calculate incorrectly (depending on how much interaction has occurred). Inside a stomach, one might strike toward an empty area (depending on the size & nature of said stomach). Or whatever best represents the roll of the dice, as the rules say so though in scores of years of DM-GMing, I hadn't even considered miss chances for either case. Now I think I kinda have to apply them, perhaps letting the person take an action to nullify the miss chance. Comparably, even if grappling an invisible target, Strikes would retain the same miss chance, right?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gadget Specialist should let the DC's of the gadgets scale to your Inventor class DC. Alchemist gets this for free as part of their kit in respect to the effects of Alchemical items, and as it stands most gadgets that Inventors can acquire get left in the dust as they advance in level.
Also Unstable Redundancies should be a lower level and should scale with your rank in crafting (2 at Master, 3 at Legendary). I get that the fact that Paizo wants to be balanced with Focus Points, and you can theoretically use them an infinite number of times if you get good rolls, but just statistically up until you can take Unstable Redundancies, you will only be using them once per fight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also this is such a minor thing but it bothers me. If Wake the Dead #1 is still in circulation, Silver Orb needs to have the Consumable trait added to it. It is literally the only bomb that does not have that trait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the Gunslinger Feat Fakeout, it has the following requirement:
> You're wielding a loaded firearm or crossbow.
For Combination Weapons, they can be in a melee or ranged configuration.
Notably, *all* Combination Weapons can still fire their firearm despite being in melee configuration.
From the Combination Trait:
> However, if your last action was a successful melee Strike against a foe using a combination weapon, you can make a ranged Strike with the combination weapon against that foe without fully switching to the ranged weapon usage, firing the ranged weapon just as you hit with the melee attack. In this case, the combination weapon returns to its melee usage after the ranged weapon Strike.
Additionally, Critical Fusion also enables firing the firearm without leaving melee configuration.
The Combination Trait also explicitly refers to it as "one weapon".
The Wielding Rules state:
> You’re wielding an item any time you’re holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you’re not just carrying it around—you’re ready to use it.
So, can you Fake Out using a Combination Weapon that is in melee configuration mode? This matters quite a bit to Triggerbrands, given their preference for being in melee configuration.
|
|
For the Gunslinger Feat Fakeout, it has the following requirement:
> You're wielding a loaded firearm or crossbow.For Combination Weapons, they can be in a melee or ranged configuration.
Notably, *all* Combination Weapons can still fire their firearm despite being in melee configuration.
From the Combination Trait:
> However, if your last action was a successful melee Strike against a foe using a combination weapon, you can make a ranged Strike with the combination weapon against that foe without fully switching to the ranged weapon usage, firing the ranged weapon just as you hit with the melee attack. In this case, the combination weapon returns to its melee usage after the ranged weapon Strike.Additionally, Critical Fusion also enables firing the firearm without leaving melee configuration.
The Combination Trait also explicitly refers to it as "one weapon".
The Wielding Rules state:
> You’re wielding an item any time you’re holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you’re not just carrying it around—you’re ready to use it.So, can you Fake Out using a Combination Weapon that is in melee configuration mode? This matters quite a bit to Triggerbrands, given their preference for being in melee configuration.
Well, you can even reload a Combination firearm when it is in melee mode. So, I would say Yes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are questions about how long Quick Alchemy Poisons last.
The most common ruling I heard is "until start of next turn in your hand, 10 minutes on your weapon". But that isn't a actual rule.
Also, what about Familiar Poison Reservoir? Would it last 10 minutes in there?
This was clarified in the latest round of Errata (Player Core, Spring 2026):
"Quick Alchemy creates an item that remains potent only until the start of your next turn (or end of your current turn for a versatile vial), and says that an effect created by such an item that would have a duration longer than 10 minutes lasts for 10 minutes instead. The part saying the item “remains potent” means the item can be Activated only in that time frame. The effect is any ongoing effect after the item’s activated.
For example, if you used Quick Alchemy to create a greater silvertongue mutagen, you would need to drink it by the start of your next turn or it would go inert. If you did drink it in that time, you would gain its effects, but only for 10 minutes instead of for its normal 1-hour duration.
Similarly, if you created lethargy poison, you would need to Activate it by applying it before the start of your next turn, then the weapon would remained poisoned for up to 10 minutes. If someone waited 9 minutes, then hit with a Strike with the poisoned weapon, the affliction could last beyond the 10-minute limit due to the exception for slow-acting afflictions described in the sidebar on page 61."
The poison must be activated before the start of your next turn, per Quick Alchemy. So using Quick Alchemy poison with the Familiar's Poison Reservoir ability is tricky, though not impossible.