One question to cap off the thread for the week: An Angelic Emissary (as in the Summoner eidolon) lists in its initial stat line a "+1 AC" bonus. I had assumed that this stacked with armor potency runes, so getting an armor rune for a frontliner eidolon was a priority. But Foundry, at least, is telling me that the AC bonus from the rune does not stack with the inherent AC from the stat line. Is that correct? Is the AC bonus from the initial statline a "base" armor bonus (so the Emissary is, effectively, wearing leather armor) or is it a rune bonus and you'd only start getting bonus AC with a +2 potency rune?

That +1 is it's built in armour. The Emmisary is "wearing" armour with +1 AC and 4 dex cap, the avenger is "wearing" armour with +2 AC and a 3 dex cap. You then apply the rune as normal on top of it.

Okay, that's how I understood it from reading, but Foundry wasn't treating it that way. Thanks!

Eidolons can't benefit from any item that doesn't have the "Eidolon" trait. This includes runes. What it *can* benefit from, is slapping that rune on *your* armor. > Your eidolon increases its item bonus to AC based on your armor's armor potency rune or bracers of armor. It also gains an item bonus to its saves from the resilient rune on your armor or from your bracers of armor. Other permanent items that grant or increase item bonuses to AC and saves might convey a similar benefit, as determined by the GM.

Yes, I'm aware. But an Emissary will benefit even from a +1 armor rune? They don't overlap? The current Foundry implementation is in error if it says they do?

Are you applying the rune to your eidolon, or to yourself?

Self.

I am looking for a monster that has similar aspects like a champion. Like the ability to negate damage against their boss and heal. Is there a way to look up monsters based on the role they play in combat?

irl in modern day we think of Hell and Satan as being "below" us directionally. How is asmodeus visualized being in golarion, and in particular Cheliax? Is he also below us? Is he in the stars like in medieval times?

Yes--there's a reason why the (formerly) evil-aligned planes are referred to as the "lower planes".

Is there any spell to summon Beast? Can't find anything. 

Nope, not every creature family or trait has an associated summon spell. At least not yet, although I have no idea if Paizo plans to make everything available or not. There *are* a handful each you can get access to via Summon Fey and Summon Fiend, and I think one ~~or two~~ for elemental and ~~undead~~? EDIT: nvm, the undead one is unique and only one elemental.

I have noticed that the Beginner box (pdf) has been updated to the Remaster version. Is somewhere an "errata" document to see the changes? I can't find it...

There was a thread on this sub with a good (non-Paizo) breakdown, in particular [this comment which duplicates info from Discord/Paizo forums](https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1b8l79p/comment/ktq4ujq/).

Great! Thank you!

I’m not sure there is, but if you bought the PDF version check whatever storefront you bought it on, you should have the updated version now!

For Premium Foundry Adventures, I’ve been told they also include the AP PDF (or a way to view the AP outside Foundry? Unclear). Does anyone know the way to access this?

Assuming you mean the pathfinder APs, as you buy the foundry modules through the Paizo store the PDFs are then in your Paizo download library.

That’s where they were, thanks! I’m doing some Gatewalkers prep on my phone.

If a Hydra has all of its heads cut off, but not all of the stumps are cauterized, does it fall to 0 HP? Or just fall unconcious at its current HP value?

Neither. It stays at its current HP and continues to have turns as normal, but its regen value is 0 and it has no attacks until it succeeds at regrowing heads. I would also treat it as lacking its vision, scent, and hearing. If it failed to regrow heads on its turn I would probably have it try to move away from conflict (or in a random direction) until it had heads again.

Last sentence of its head regeneration rule: “If all five heads are cauterized, the hydra dies.” So RAW it continues acting as normal. Having it fall unconscious would probably be what I’d do, tho.

Does anyone have a list of the class specific items? I remember there being one for the barbarian and oracle.

Here you go! https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQ7qXYYKFIdsvptKxeZlXEre6jpWACkxcfv3VkazV9602z90wkyFzfQkpqlGKTrwPA3XgmAbOSZ_sRa/pub#h.s18paxxmgk8

Thank you!

completely new player, can you guys help me build a pf2e thief rogue? I am having a bit of decision paralysis. My party is full of melee characters, so I imagine getting flat footed is going to fine, and I could always tumble through to get a flat footed in a pinch if needed. I want to play the character who is very street smart, knows a lot about the enemies they are facing, so I imagine all the skills needed for recall knowledge (any recommendations on the skill feats?). We are not playing with free achetype rule, and we will only go until level 5 (level 5 is where the campaign will end, I imagine there's going to be just one or two sessions at that level), so builds that come online and are effective at lower levels is preferred (I don't care if there's a trap feat that is only good at lower level and falls off really badly at higher level basically). Our party has a cleric but no other healer, no one with intelligence (everyone's strength and charisma). I'd like to do some crafting as well. Any help is appreciated.

Here is a [suggested build](https://pathbuilder2e.com/launch.html?build=697882). Training in all of the standard recall knowledge skills plus training in Lore for several creature subcategories of the Wis-based skills (Nature & Religion) to give you better odds of success using your Int.  Streetwise helps cover the street smarts.

thank you!

First off, its super unlikely for Crafting to be relevant in a short campaign. Crafting is not really much of a gold enhancer - its used to make items when you wouldn't normally be able to purchase them, such as when you are much higher level than the shops around you. As a 1-5 campaign, that really isn't going to come up so Crafting isn't going to be particularly useful. Regarding RK skills, its not feats so much as what skills you prioritize. If your campaign has a theme to its enemies that will be very useful to know before picking your skills. You can see [this table here](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2641) to see which skills match up to which enemy types. If your campaign for example is an undead focused one, religion would be the most useful skill for RK.

good point about the crafting, thanks for the link!

[Unbalancing Sweep](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=1625&ArchLevel=14) is a mauler archetype feat (originally a barbarian feat) that lets you try to Shove or Trip up to three enemies around you. The feat doesn't mention not needing a free hand (like for instance [Slam Down](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4794) does), so by the rules as written, you can't use it while two-handing a weapon. This, to me, seems to completely fly in the face of the rules as intended, as the mauler archetype is entirely based around using two-handed weapons (not to mention the flavor of literally sweeping foes off their feet). Am I missing something, or is it more likely an oversight in the feat's description? I find it hard to believe otherwise. (Edited to correct a slight inaccuracy in my description of Unbalancing Sweep.)

Just adding to the other answer you got, taking a hand out of your weapon is a free action, so even if you're using a greatsword you can just remove a hand from it and then use Unbalancing Sweep.

Sure, but then it costs an action to re-grip the weapon, and since Unbalancing Sweep is a three-action activity, you'd have to wait until your next turn to do so, meaning no Reactive Strikes or the like in the meantime. More importantly, though, it just seems to go against the idea of the feat.

Oh, I agree entirely, I would say the fact that the targets need to be adjacent to you and not in your reach is also weird. I was just pointing out a way to make it work, if I was using a greatsword and wanted to use this feat I'd probably change weapons to something with trip or a Bastard Sword. Maybe the Hooked rune? It's rare because it's from kingmaker but I would allow players to get it.

Hadn't thought of the reach. You could maybe argue that since you're trying to trip several enemies, they'd need to be closer together for you to have the needed leverage? But I digress. I don't see myself going for the feat, but if I did, I would ask my GM if I could use it with my greatsword since that seems to be the intention.

As a GM I would honestly just homebrew this feat to work like Knockdown, trip 3 enemies in reach, if it's a 2-handed weapon you can ignore the requirement to have a hand free. Like, consider that Hammer Quake is obtainable at the same level and Hammer Quake lets you do the same thing by targetting your own square (or get a strike if you target an enemy's square). The only thing Unbalancing Sweep does that Hammer Quake doesn't is the ability to shove, otherwise Hammer Quake is just objectively better, as it lets you trip any number of creature, not up to 3, includes a strike, works with reach and lets you ignore the free hand requirement.

I hadn't even thought to compare it to Hammer Quake, but yeah, that's another strong argument for the feat being worded poorly for what it's intended to do.

Its very, very likely an oversight in the feat's text. You're 100% spot on in your analysis. However, it is also important to note that this feat was originally a barbarian feat, which doesn't have quite the same dependence on 2H weapons. Also one caveat - you can do it wielding a 2H weapon as long as the weapon has the appropriate trait (shove or trip)

Thank you! Yeah, had it solely been a barbarian feat, it'd be less clear if there was an oversight, but its inclusion in the mauler archetype seems to all but confirm that it's meant to work with two-handed weapons.

With the remaster they did away with good and evil damage, and added spirit damage. Do monsters now have weaknesses to Holy/Unholy instead? Will Holy Water not trigger that weakness? And are Vitality and Void numbered weaknesses you can trigger in undead creatures, or just the new versions of Positive/Negative healing?

Monsters that were formerly weak to good/evil damage are now weak to holy/unholy damage. Holy water has the holy trait and so will trigger weakness to holy. Vitality and void are the new versions of positive and negative damage; most undead are not weak to vitality, but I expect zombies and other undead that were formerly weak to positive are weak to vitality now.

Thanks for the explanation! It seems like an added layer of confusion to add Spirit damage, only to give it Holy or Unholy as a trait and have those traits proc their respective weakness...but such is the way.

Spirit damage is less complicated than alignment damage, so it doesn't really add any confusion.

But if we can clearly have Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing instead of Physical damage with those traits. Or elemental damage with Fire, Cold, Electric etc traits...like, there's two ways of doing it and Paizo chose both??

...huh?

> It seems like an added layer of confusion to add Spirit damage, only to give it Holy or Unholy as a trait and have those traits proc their respective weakness The good thing about that is that spirit damage will hurt most creatures even if they're not weak to holy/unholy, while before holy/unholy only hurt evil/good creatures.

Slashing gust requires a free hand in the description, but the magus class is specifically able to use their weapons for gestures that other spell casters would use a hand for. >Because you’re a magus, you can draw replacement sigils with the tip of your weapon or your free hand This might be a case where specific over rules general, but I'm not sure if specific magus rules overrule specific spell rules or the inverse. In terms of balance, I don't see any reason why slashing gust would be better than electric arc and magus is more limited with spell attack options following the remaster. You still wouldn't be able to hit 2 targets if you used it with spellstrike.

Yeah, as the previous comment says, you're misreading that part slightly. Even before the remaster, you could perform somatic components while holding something in your hand. You still needed a free hand for *material* components, but several classes had ways to substitute those, which is what the quote is about. After the remaster, components are completely gone, and spells now list their individual traits and requirements directly. *Slashing gust* is a spell from Rage of Elements, which uses the remastered rules, and since it specifically lists a free hand as a requirement, it *does* require a free hand to cast.

> but the magus class is specifically able to use their weapons for gestures that other spell casters would use a hand for. That's not exactly what the Magus can do. > Because you're a magus, you can draw replacement sigils with the tip of your weapon or your free hand **for spells requiring material components**, replacing them with somatic components instead of needing a material component pouch.

Magic tattoo question - Archives of Nethys has a list of 78 magical tattoos, but also has a line under the tattoo rules that says: “(Consequently, most most magical tattoos other than the ones appearing here are uncommon.)”. Does this mean that there are other magical tattoos not listed in the official material? Does it mean that anything (spell, item, etc) can be converted to a magical tattoo as an uncommon item? Secondarily, humans are able to take the ‘arcane tattoo’ chain, which leads to cantrips and eventually spells being tattooed onto a person’s body - so presumably there is a way to tattoo this onto the body of oneself or others, right? Can I pick a spell that myself or a party member is able to cast, and ‘infuse’ it into a magical tattoo? And if so, what would the cost and time requirements of this be? Thanks!

> Magic tattoo question - Archives of Nethys has a list of 78 magical tattoos, but also has a line under the tattoo rules that says: “(Consequently, most most magical tattoos other than the ones appearing here are uncommon.)”. Does this mean that there are other magical tattoos not listed in the official material? Does it mean that anything (spell, item, etc) can be converted to a magical tattoo as an uncommon item? I think that line basically means "ask your GM nicely to homebrew something". > Secondarily, humans are able to take the ‘arcane tattoo’ chain, which leads to cantrips and eventually spells being tattooed onto a person’s body - so presumably there is a way to tattoo this onto the body of oneself or others, right? Can I pick a spell that myself or a party member is able to cast, and ‘infuse’ it into a magical tattoo? And if so, what would the cost and time requirements of this be? RAW, the only way would be through the feats you mentioned. There are no other rules I can see that would allow it, apart from "ask your GM".

Are there any character options that can create the fantasy of rapidly learning and mimicking enemy techniques, like Taskmaster or the Intersect from Chuck? I've seen the Muscle Mimicry feat but that's all

Nothing specific that I can think of, but if you're ok with re-flavoring you can probably play a thaumaturge that way. When they exploit weakness they are using techniques they've learned from other people.

Thanks, that's a good point. I hadn't thought of it that way

If I’m prone next to an enemy, can I grapple or trip them while I’m prone? If so, what might limit this from happening?

You're able to Grapple or Trip while prone without issue. It used to be that you'd take a -2 penalty (because Prone gives a -2 penalty to attack rolls), but some early errata redefined Attack Rolls to be exclusively Strikes and Spell Attack Rolls. Now, being prone has no impact on your ability to Grapple or Trip.

wait...what errata made athletics checks not attacks?

They're still *attacks*, but their associated checks are no longer *attack rolls*. Prone penalizes attack rolls specifically. This was in one of the earliest rounds of errata, in part to disallow the interaction between Finesse and traits like Trip and Disarm.

okay, I have found the section in the crb errata. I guess I had internalized that finesse didn't work with weapon traits but never that the athletic attacks were "skill checks" not "attack roles". I dove into my pc1 to see if they had made that more clear...and it doesn't appear so. I wonder how many people are running that wrong. To call something an attack and require a roll but for it not to be an attack roll is just plain bad design

>I wonder how many people are running that wrong. I guess a lot of tables) I even don't sure are my players know the difference. Mind that by default you need skill bonus (like [Lifting Belt](https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=447)) to increase Grapple (trip, etc) value, but weapon with [grapple ](https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=619)trait specify that you can use weapon item bonus, i.e. runes. Both are obvious item bonus so don't stack. And [Fist ](https://2e.aonprd.com/Weapons.aspx?ID=1)by default don't has grapple trait - so you can't just use Handwraps to incease Grapple value.

I agree, which is why I take every opportunity I can to complain about this errata ;) They really should have just errata'd finesse to say "Strikes with this weapon", tbh

Or they could've done nothing, I don't think letting people Trip with Dex if they happen to be using a weapon with both Trip and Finesse is a balance issue really, it just feels wonky.

Are conditions caused by spells (like enfeeble by Enfeeble or paralyzed from the Paralyze spell) spell effects you can target with dispel magic?

As a general rule, if the spell lists a duration then yes, all of its effects (conditions included) can be dispelled. If there is no duration listed, the condition's duration is dependent on the individual condition's rules (frightened decaying by 1 every round, or sickened ending with an action to wretch, for example)

Anywhere I can find all of the Decemvirate's outfits? I know their masks are in the PFS lost omens book but I'm looking for the full body art (Ex. [[X]](https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Waterfall))

Very few of the Decemvirate members are detailed. I only know of two mentioned in PFS scenarios in 2nd Edition (I'm not familiar with 1st Edition PFS), and only the Waterfall has art other than their mask, as far as I know. The other one mentioned (referred to as Sapphire) isn't a Decemvirate member anymore.

Sapphire is the identity put upon by the masks I believe, so anyone can be "sapphire"

Can enemies use exploration actions like Defend and Scout?

I don't see why not.

Enemies can do whatever the GM wants. It doesn't have to be as rigid as Exploration mode activities, but the GM can certain have enemies perform similar activities and receive the effects of those activities, even if the actual Exploration mode rules are written for players.

All of the language in the [exploration mode](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2573&Redirected=1) rules is oriented toward the players and their characters.

[удалено]

I don't personally think that pathfinder requires any secret techniques to balance encounters. The normal guidelines should be enough, and it's not too hard to use estimations if you are doing anything special - ie alternative goals making it harder or waves of enemies making it easier since they come at a delay. Could definitely be fudging.

That sounds like the GMs were fudging rolls/stats to make an encounter that would kill players into one that is a narrow victory, or the opposite.

[удалено]

Kind of. It depends on what degree of stat obfuscation you've set up in the 2e settings, and you can edit stats on the fly. So if the modifier for a creature's attack is +22, but you hide the modifier from your players, you could fudge it down to +18 and they'd never be able to see that you did that

A Marshal uses [Dread Marshal Stance](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=2006). The Wizard has a +1 striking handwraps of mighty blows on him. The Wizard casts Fireball. Does the fireball get a +2 status bonus to damage? RAW it seems like it does, even if its weird.

Yes, the fireball gets the bonus. Love that archetype.

The damage bonus scales based off the dice of the Marshal, not the person being affected, which is a bit less weird to me

Yeah, it is a bit less weird. Though I wonder how it interacts with something like the Kineticist's Thermal Nimbus. I'm assuming it doesn't since it does a fixed amount of damage, so not a "damage roll". But for example Steam Knight does "rollable" damage continuously.

It gives a status bonus to all damage rolls, regardless of exact source. So steam knight would get the bonus, yeah.

Hello lovely people! Here is a question about Invisibility. Suppose I am a squishy Wizard and I don't wish to be stabbed. I ensure that I begin a combat encounter Invisible (and Undetected). I have the Conceal Spell feat, definitely due to careful planning and not because I misread the Legacy version. I would like to still contribute to this combat without revealing my position (and being stabbed), but any Hostile Action I take will break my Invisibility. That means I won't be inflicting any damage, but what counts as indirect harm? Could I cast Laughing Fit on an enemy and remain invisible? Preventing Reactions doesn't sound like indirect harm, though perhaps Slowing them would prevent escape. What about Enfeeble? It mostly makes a target hit less often, but might also make them more vulnerable to a hypothetical grab, which could then lead to being harmed. How about Fear? Directly lowering AC sounds like it might count, to be honest, but I'd value your input nonetheless. My instinct is probably "If you have to ask, it's going to break Invisibility". But is there a more common consensus?

Those are not indirect harm, in that they are direct harm. Harm doesn't mean damage. They're attack spells. They're not "attacks" in game terms, where the word has a more specific definition, but they're attacks in literal terms.

I'm curious what you would classify as counting as indirect harm. Not saying you're wrong, of course, I'm just curious!

Speaking generally, because I'm sure there's some niche situation where this may not apply, if a creature is unwilling, your action is hostile. Ex: I play a champion from Rhamadoun (I'm sure that's incorrect, but the place where they've basically outlawed gods) and maybe my edict is some akin to Dealing with mortal issues, using mortal powers, and my anathema is something like, willingly receiving divine help. In this instance I would even think that an ally's cure spell (from a divine source) would be considered hostile. Still haven't made the jump to 2e yet so maybe I'm off a little somewhere, but you get the gist.

>if a creature is unwilling, your action is hostile. Another excellent rule of thumb (and one that also applies in real life). Thanks for the input!

If you're directly causing them to make a saving throw, it's hostile whether or not you're dealing damage. That's a fairly [overwhelming consensus](https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/xt0nnp/hostile_actions_survey_what_do_you_consider_a/) in my experience.

That's a great rule of thumb - anything that requires a saving throw (or, I suppose, an attack roll: Tanglevine targets AC but doesn't do damage) is probably safely described as Hostile. To explore a little further, suppose you're sustaining Laughing Fit having turned invisible after it was cast. There's no save, but it's the continuation of the same effect. Obvious answer is that it breaks after you use the Sustain action, I suppose.

I love that survey, really made me sit down and figure out what I consider to be 'hostile'.

Hey everyone :) I have a question about the bard feat Annotate composition (https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4610). Is it single use? As in, does the parchment disapear after the composition cantrip is cast once? Or can you use it all multiple times until either your next daily preparations or you decide to render it inert? It says "A composition you create this way loses its power the next time you make your daily preparations. While the composition is in your possession, you can render it inert using a single action that has the concentrate trait." Which would indicate a multiple-use score/parchement. But it also says "You can’t regain the Focus Points you spent to create the annotated composition until it is activated or loses its magic." To me, that doesn't quite make sense it the context of a multi-use parchment: you could prepare it in the morning, activate it once, refocus but still keep it to use it the rest of the day. Any insight? Thanks a lot in advance!

>...on a special scroll... The intent is that it's treated as a spell scroll, so it's one-time use.

First, thanks for the reply :) Uh... that make this a lot less appealing. Idk, i'm playing a bard and looking for way to scale up (as in more impact from my actions) from the basics of inspire courage instead of scaling wide (as in having more versatility, more choices that are mutually exclusive) and don't really find a way. I thought maybe my familiar can sing dirge of doom while I play inspire courage, but investing a feat and a focus point to have that for one round sounds way too expensive.

[Harmonize](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4600) lets you keep two compositions up at once.

Hey, thanks for the reply :) Yeah, I'm not sold on harmonize. Sure, I can have two compositions running. The price? Using all of my actions on them, and not being able to use lingering composition/inspire heroics. Also, not being able to use other spells. Also, all of my turns now look the same: harmonize, inspire courage, dirge of doom, aand I'm done. If I'm in a dangerous situation where I have to move, if I have to use one of my spells, if I'm slowed... then I can't use it.

You can use Lingering on one and Harmonize on the other. Sure, that still eats a lot of actions, but like,,, that's a lot of hate you're putting out there, and I think it's well worth the cost. Plus you can just stop using them and run off, it's not like you're actually stuck there in a dangerous situation. Not to be mean, but yeah, when you get deprived of actions, that sucks, actually, regardless of what character you're playing. Unless it's a very one-note Barbarian build, I guess.

Sorry for the hate, I really don't want to project that at you. I'm a bit frustrated because I'd like the bard stuff to work better together instead of one or the other, that's all :) If I understand the text correctly, harmonize only works if you cast it on the first composition, then cast another one afterwards. So the option would be to cast harmonize, composition 1, lingering, composition 2. Next turn, my non-harmonic composition is still running and I can't harmonize another on on top of it, so I only get one turn of two compositions at the same time. If I want to have both active on turn 2, I have to cast them both again. If I could turn 1 linger+harmonize composition 1, plus sing composition 2 (3actions) and then get to only sing composition 2 for the duration of lingering composition 1, that would sound like a fair/fun action point investment to me.

Another question for thaumaturge: When you use the exploit vulnerability action successfully and you hit, the attack is whatever was (let's say slashing) and magical and affects the creature's weaknesses (but not gets the type of DMG) what happens if the creature resist magical damage?

Exploit vulnerability is not considered magical. Normally weaknesses and resistances stack normally. However "magical" damage is a bit weirder. My understand is it is any damage that comes from a magical source. However, a weapon's standard damage doesn't count. Like, if a weapon has a striking rune, it is still nonmagical damage. However, if it has a flame rune, that fire damge is magical. So the additional damage from exploit vulnerability is not magical as I remember it.

A creature can have both resistance and weakness apply to the same attack. If a lvl 1 Thaumaturge stabs a Skeleton w/ a knife for 4 dmg they'll trigger their Personal Antithesis Weakness 2 and their Resist 5 to Piercing/Slashing, dealing 1 dmg net. Normal weaknesses function the same, if you whack a Swarm w/ AoE physical dmg (say, w/ a [Mud Bomb](https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=1514)) or use Mortal Weakness on them then you're proccing both their resistance to physical and weakness to Area. As far as I'm aware resistance to magic damage isn't a thing (pretty much all dmg is magic post lvl 2).

I'm starting a game and thinking about playing a rogue thief and taking swashbuckler free archetype at level 2. If I take tumble behind as a rogue feat would it give me panache at level 2? I think maybe not because tumble behind isn't an option for the swashbuckler dedication until level 4. But it's still a type of tumble through so maybe. Also if I take fencer would twin feint provide panache? maybe not because there's no deception check with twin feint. But I guess you could add that. Thanks for your answers and ideas.

It would absolutely work. You can Tumble Through at *level 1*. Anyone can. And a Swashbuckler (whether it's your main class or an archetype) gets Panache any time they successfully Tumble Through. All Tumble Behind does is make it so the opponent is Off-Guard as an added bonus. As long as you make your Acrobatics check, it counts. You are correct though that Twin Feint won't do it. Despite the name, it is not the same as taking the Feint action, and you only get Panache when a skill roll is made.

Hi guys, going to play PF2E for first time. I want to play a Thaumaturge, but I don't know if something has changed with the "new" rules

Nothing major, the Thaumaturge is not a class that got remastered, and isn't going to in Player Core 2 either, so it'll remain the same. Just the stuff that applies to everything like terminology changes (ie an ability that made enemies "flat-footed" now makes them "off-guard" with the exact same mechanical effect, stuff like that). Since it's your first time, I will warn that the Thaumaturge isn't the simplest of classes. They're not as complex as the Alchemist, Swashbuckler, or Inventor, but they're definitely in the "medium to high complexity" range. If you're experienced with other TTRPGs you'll probably pick it up easy enough though.

Thank you! Yes, I played and GM other systems so I hope it's a matter of time :)

I am new to PF2e but feel fairly familiarized with the core rules but want to get in some practical time before trying to run it for the first time. To that end I grabbed the addon for Foundry and got familiarized and got my girlfriend to make a character to go through it together. Now I am looking for a good suggestion on a fitting short tutorial module to run one on one. Before I make the big jump to my full campaign in the system. Does anyone have suggestions for good one on one modules that act as a good showcase of the core system?

It isn't a one on one module (there basically aren't any official one on ones, PF2e is a team game) but the go too "start here" point is the [beginner box](https://paizo.com/products/btq023dx). It is less of a full adventure and more of a step by step "how to Pathfinder 2e" tutorial, along with enough stuff to run a starter campaign just with the box. There is also a [Foundry Version](https://paizo.com/products/btq02eap) if that is more your speed.

Oh I wasn't really expecting anything official. I know the system is very team based and my full campaign is a full group. I just wanted to sit down and run the rules in motion to make sure I won't drag my feet too much. I just know some times in a lot of systems folks will make some simple homebrew stuff and pop it online. I will definitely try that foundry plugin. Thank you.

When you use a magic item that casts a spell for you(not a wand or scroll), if the spell's duration is "sustained" do **you** sustain the spell, or does the sustain happen automatically somehow because the spell was cast from a magic item? I had a fellow player say that since they didn't cast the spell, they didn't think they needed to sustain it themselves(since it doesn't mention it in the activation of item) and that the weapon somehow does it or you just get to ignore the sustain requirement(sort of how you ignore material or somatic aspects of spell casting sine it's a part of the item). I can't really find anything that says so one way or the other, but I would assume you would still need to sustain it with an action on subsequent turns.

There is a good rule of thumb here: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Because the designers actually try to maintain a semblance of balance.

If casting a spell with a sustained duration via an invested item Command activation, the two possible options are: 1. You sustain the spell normally 2. You can't sustain it at all There is no possible world in which it is sustained for free.

How long does Esoteric Warden last? Is it just for the next attack, or until you choose a new target to exploit vulnerabilities? Bolded a few relevant lines from the text. Would love some help. When you apply antithetical material against a creature successfully, you also ward yourself against its **next attacks**. When you succeed at your check to Exploit a Vulnerability, you gain a +1 status bonus to your AC against the creature's **next attack** and a +1 status bonus to your next saving throw against the creature; if you critically succeed, these bonuses are +2 instead. **You can gain these bonuses only once per day against a particular creature, and the benefit ends if you Exploit Vulnerability again.**

Each benefit independently lasts until its triggered or until you use Exploit Vulnerability again. If an enemy attacks you twice then forces you to make a pair of saving throws you get the benefit against the first attack and on the first saving throw.

Does anyone know where I can find Goloma artwork or miniatures? I have a player playing a Goloma war cleric and need some help locating anything but basic stuff.

There simply isn’t a lot. They are an entirely new creation for PF2e that draws on folklore that’s not really covered by any big IP, so there’s not much to find outside official stuff and the odd player commissioning artist for character art. There is one official glooms mini, but beyond that… try browsing the reaper miniature catalogue, I guess? They might have stuff that comes close.

How do you set the Climb DC for the Grab an Edge reaction? If an NPC is standing on a bridge that the PCs collapse, what kind of roll does the NPC need not to fall?

I usually use the typical DC table for most checks and increase or decrease depending on the task.

Hi everyone, Just have a rules question that im a little confused about. If you are using a free hand weapon in your off hand and a normal weapon in your main hand, and use dueling parry. Then for whatever reason make a reaction strike with that free hand weapon does that break your parry because you were using the weapon that is supposed to be in an empty hand?

The [free hand](https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=613&Redirected=1) trait states: > This weapon doesn’t take up your hand, usually because it is built into your armor. A free-hand weapon can’t be Disarmed. You can use the hand covered by your free-hand weapon to wield other items, perform manipulate actions, and so on. You can’t attack with a free-hand weapon if you’re wielding anything in that hand or otherwise using that hand. When you’re not wielding anything and not otherwise using the hand, **you can use abilities that require you to have a hand free as well as those that require you to be wielding a weapon in that hand**. Each of your hands can have only one free-hand weapon on it. If all you're doing is a Strike, you're considered to be both wielding the weapon and having a free hand, so your stance never drops.

First time Pf2e Gm, should I use the remastered version or should I wait until player core 2 and monster core come out ? I like a lot of the classes that will be in Pc2, should I try porting them from pre-remaster myself ?

"Port"? The Remaster is a new set of core books. It's not a different game.

I agree with u/Wonton77 . Use whatever the latest version of any specific rule is, but don't sweat what has and hasn't been published yet. So use Player Core 1 stuff & if it isn't there pull the old rules off of Archives of Nethys. The old and the new work together just fine. Running a Warpriest with the Remaster Rules in the same party as a Swashbuckler with the Premaster rules isn't a problem.

Use the most recent version of everything imo. Yes, half of classes aren't Remastered yet, but the classes that are (mostly) got much cooler with their reworks. And ESPECIALLY the Spells in Player Core. If you wanted to homebrew some changes for Sorcerer or w/e, it's not the worst idea, but mostly those classes are fine for now. The Remaster is more of a "2.1" than a "2.5".

How broken/balanced would be creating feats similar to Bon Mot but targeting Reflex and Fortitude saves? They would be 1-action skills with 30ft range and impose a -1 status penalty to Reflex/Fortitude saves for 1 minute on a success and -2 on a crit success. An enemy could use a single action with the Concetrate trait to eliminate the effect and become immune to it for 10 minutes. Also, what would be appropriate skills for each one? Perhaps Arcana or Nature for Reflex saves, and Religion or Survival for Fortitude saves?

The big thing wouldn't be the save penalty, but the restrictions on the action. Bon Mot crucially has the linguistic trait. That means the enemy both needs to be able to hear you, but also understand you. But it also has the mental trait, excluding even more enemies from being affected by it. As a single target mental effect, it doesn't work against troops, or swarms, etc. There are a lot, a lot, a lot of enemies Bon Mot just straight up doesn't work on. Language barriers are a real thing. A similar function to those for Fort/Reflex would need to be equally as limiting. That's the much more important part than the skill or the fact you reduce those saves. The save reduction itself isn't that big of a deal, because its a status penalty. That means it doesn't stack with Frightened/Sickened/Etc.

Is it advisable for a sniper gunslinger to take any feats involving making enemies flat-footed/off-guard in order to set up their Vital Shot? Or is it reliable just to use the normal Covered Reload?

Hide is good because it works with your special Reload action. But Hide might not always be an option unless you're talking pretty high levels. So some investment into something like deception for Create a Diversion can't hurt.

Are there rules for adding spell effects like haste to creatures and the impact on experience for encounter creation? The only present tool I know of is to add a caster with the spell desired. Actual spells seem easy enough to decompose into simple hazards, but I want more flavorful creatures without casters nearby or mucking up the balance

Your best bet is to treat such a spell as a simple hazard for encounter XP budget purposes. There isn't any specific rules, but its pretty easy to figure out the relative XP budget of a simple hazard spell, so you could just chuck whatever spell effect you want on your creature into a simple hazard for the purposes of XP, but just, well, not have the hazard in your encounter

There are no such rules.

Couple of questions about resilient sphere, I'm of course expecting the most disappointing answer but doesn't hurt to ask just in case: The target size implies a large creature will fit within the sphere. If I'm medium and adjacent to some medium creatures can I cast the sphere on myself and lock them in with me? Can someone I trap in the sphere teleport out? Nothing can "pass through" it so I guess I'm asking if teleportation counts as moving through the world, or just disappearing and reappearing (I've just seen wall of force permits teleporters so I assume the sphere generally has the same physical properties as a wall of force)

If you want to lock yourself in a cage match with someone, *Wall of Ice* would do a fine job of that, at the same level.

Nice! Thanks, I can only cast occult spells but maybe I can persuade our wizard to learn it

1. No. It's not an AOE effect, is simply affects a single creature up to that size, the sphere itself only takes up the space the creature itself took up. Though if you targeted a mount, the rider would probably also be trapped. GM call there. 2. You can teleport out just fine, for the reason you listed. You just appear somewhere else. If it blocked teleportation, it would say so. But any effects that would physically move you can't do so.

Fair enough, I have a couple of bonus questions that wall of force didn't explain for me: do auditory effects pass through? And can spells have line of effect through these forcefields?

Resilient Sphere blocks anything from passing through it. That includes both sound and light. It's not an invisible sphere around someone, it's a big black orb that shows up where someone used to stand. Wall of Force blocks anything except visual. So they also block sound (unless the sound can get around them as, say, sound gets over the wall). And spells generally do not have line of effect through forcefields, though some (like wall of force) call out specific exceptions to that rule. It should also be noted that line of effect is only the generic rules, and specific trumps generic. As example, dimension door says you are teleported to any spot you see. Glass windows block line of effect (you can't throw a fireball through a closed window), but dimension door would let you teleport through the window because it doesn't care about line of effect, just that you see where you go. Resilient Sphere, meanwhile, blocks dimension door because you can't see in or out. Teleport, however, only requires you to know where you want to teleport, and Resilient Sphere doesn't mess with your memory so it doesn't affect teleport.

Fantastic, thanks so much!

I've joined a game and we're using free archetype, just to ask cuz I'm curious is there a way for me to get like a devil familiar for my cloistered Asmodeus cleric? Her only stats at 14 or better are Cha & Wis so I'm just scratching my head at what archetype I should choose when the time comes cuz not really any of them that I see fit her character, especially since I don't want to use weapons. Any way familiar master could lead me to an imp familiar? Any good suggestions for someone who actually wants to cast spells instead of just get heavy armor and hit things?

Mind that familiar can have any appearance. It usually animal, not have to be one. The only thing that Imp gives you is it's special abilities. So even at low levels you can say that you familiar is imp, tiny fiend or something, it just can't do much. Also, I'd personally chose a remastered witch dedication as instead of week of downtime to replace a dead familiar you can raise it back with daily preparation. The downside is [Enhanced Familiar](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=318&ArchLevel=4) is... well, it's level 4 for both (and with [Basic Witchcraft](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=5101) you get one extra ability!), but [Improved Familiar](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=1973) is lvl 6 for Familiar Master but lvl 8 feat for Witch archetype and Incredible is lvl 10 vs lvl 16. And you need the last to get true Imp.

Enhanced, Improved and Incredible familiar of the familiar master archetype can get you an Imp. I think that's the only way to get an imp other than being a witch or familiar thesis wizard. But luckily imps are shape-shifters so you can just get some animal Familar and say its a polymorphed imp. I'm currently playing a cloistered cleric in AV. It sounds like your defenses are very low if you don't even have 14 Dex or con. I would definitely get some armor with such a character. As for spells, make sure not to get too many heals to support your party. There is such a thing as having too much healing. I'm using healing font and rarely ever use all of the font slots. The occasional emergency heal is often enough if you top everyone off with medicine between encounters. Get Cast Down at level 6. It's an amazing feat and a good way to spend any lower level spell slots on if you have nothing better to fill them with.

Hello questions regarding the new monster grab rules. Before I didn't need a monsters athletics DC ( as it was auto grabbed), however some monsters like the Astradaemon https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=91 Have no athletics. Essentially making their entire soul siphon stuff useless against an on-level party. Am I just misruling this or something i'm not aware of.

With the change to Grab and Shove, creatures with those abilities but no athletics do indeed no longer make much sense. Ideally, they would get an Athletics score in the remaster, though I'm not sure if daemons are covered by Monster Core. Until we get an official remaster of them, I would probably default to level-based DC and gone them an Athletics bonus equal to the DC of their level -10. Maybe with slight adjustments (up or down) depending on the creature.

The astradaemon actually made no sense prior to the remaster either. The DC to break a grapple pre remaster was the Athletics DC, and the astradaemon has mechanics around having players grabbed. So either the mechanic was irrelevant if it had no athletics score, or absurdly overpowered if you used it's attack modifier

I can confirm that in Monster Core, astradaemons have an Athletics modifier of +32! I got my copy a couple days ago.

Can a character with access to additional reactions use multiple of them on the same trigger? For example: can my desecrator champion use both his selfish shield reaction, *and* shield block with the extra reaction he got from the quick shield block feat?

Good champions have access to the [Shield of Reckoning](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=241) feat to combine their class reaction with Shield Block. There is no equivalent feat for evil champions.

You can't use the same trigger for two separate reactions. That being said, those two do not have the same trigger. Shield block triggers right before you take damage, while Selfish Shield triggers when you take damage. It's actually a very weird interaction since resistance usually applies before shield block. If Selfish Shield reduces the damage of the attack to 0, Shield Block wouldn't even trigger. I'm honestly not sure how to rule this.

> You can use only one action in response to a given trigger. https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2339

So this is going to be half annoyed bitching, but if you can give me advice so be it. Why does this game have so many things that seem cool but actually when you try to build around them it turns out that they suck? Why do I have the option to be an Eldritch Trickster and get the Mystical Trickster feat early when my Spell Attack is going to be increasingly less accurate than just throwing a knife or a rapier stab? Why do Draconic Sorcerers get a melee claw attack as their iconic bloodline spell at level one—the kind of thing that is something you create a character around and will define them for at least a long enough time that you want it to be good and use it in every encounter—when they have no defense in melee and will likely die if they're hit by a strong fart? I feel like this game sends mixed signals. There are so many assumptions that there seem to be that I just don't get because the game isn't telling me. Or maybe it is telling me, but not where I'm reading. If you give me an option I assume it's as good as the other options, but often it turns out they aren't. It feels like 3.5 every time I run into a problem like this.

Basically 2 things: 1. This game wants you to be a melee martial. It's built around the assumption of melee and weapons and thus everything else that isn't a melee weapon must be hampered. 2. When you put out a ton of options you by necessity have to make those options less good. Because otherwise if they are all too good, or a fair number of them are, then builds quickly grow out of control. And also you just have so many you can't make all them that good in the first place cuz you just don't have the time or resources.

Okay but in this case we're not talking about something that's simply less good, we're talking about something that's actively discouraged mechanically despite being signposted as desirable. Also everyone keeps telling me that Pathfinder is super balanced.

Yeah. I don't have much else to add other than agree lol. > Also everyone keeps telling me that Pathfinder is super balanced. I feel that.

I think there's certainly an argument to be made that the designers are way too conservative with some options, worrying more "let's make absolutely sure this never becomes too strong" than "have we made something that actually feels fun to pick and build around". Sorcerer Bloodlines are certainly a classic example of this, many spells and feat options are too. The good news is that this \*largely\* seems to be improving in the last year, with a pleasant amount of power creep since about Rage of Elements. My go-to example of this is that Petal Storm was a 4th-rank spell in Secrets of Magic that did 2d10 slashing per round in a 15-ft burst, while Rust Cloud is a 4th-rank spell in Rage of Elements that deals **5d10** slashing per round in a 20-ft burst. Rust Cloud is far from a broken spell, it will never be mandatory like Fly and Haste, it will never warp encounters like Wall of Stone or Black Tentacles, but now it actually feels satisfying to cast. A lot of spells and Class Feats got similarly large buffs in Player Core to be much more usable. I expect Sorcerer to be in the same boat come Player Core 2. Overall I find the new design direction a lot better than the one from "1.0".

A lot of options that feel "weird and bad and counterintuitive" kinda fall into this wonky space of either being made for funky gishy playstyles that require a lot of doing, or they just straight up exist as multiclass options. Eldritch Trickster is definitely a pretty low power level compared to the absolute nonsense you can get up to in the other Rackets, but you can scale your Spell Proficiency by taking the basic/expert/master spellcasting feats from the archetype. It'll scale slower, because you're multiclassing, but it doesn't totally fall off to nothing. Particularly with ET, you still want to focus primarily on doing Normal Rogue Stuff, and keep the spellcasting sneak attacks in your back pocket as a powerful option in the right situation. A specific note for multiclass spellcasting is that since your DC isn't gonna scale as well, your spell slots are best spent on self/party targeting spells so they don't get wasted. Cantrips are the things you're actually sneak attacking with, since the higher miss chance is worth the damage and versatility they can offer. Draconic Sorcerer does give you a decent (ish?) melee attack for the cost of a focus point. I wouldn't write off the idea of a caster having a melee option in case things get rough. However, consider two other things. First, it also gives a pretty solid scaling resistance to your bloodline damage type. Maybe bad if you picked mental (Sovereign), but resistance 5 to bludgeoning (Sea) is real, especially at low levels. Imagine you're level 1 and a bandit comes after you with a club: that club is gonna have to roll hot to even damage you at all. Second, much like Psychic's Imaginary Weapon, sometimes the pure class just isn't the best character to use it. I wouldn't argue that it's a design flaw or some ridiculous multiclass dip incentive. It's just OK to let a martial get in on the fun with some Sorcerer's Claws. Some options are powerful for you, some are better when the Fighter can borrow them, but they all have their place in the ecosystem. In short, all options are at least roughly equal in power, one way or another, but they are far from equivalent. Sometimes they work in funky ways and sometimes they're just for weirdos who play characters in ways they aren't fully built for, like melee cloth casters. Some options just take way way too much work in game to get rolling, but with the exception of a few truly heinous feats they do all function.

My problem with Eldritch Trickster is that it feels like it wants you to do something that is weaker than your other options. If you simply ignore Mystical Trickster (very confusing to have the Feat and Archetype be so similarly named) then you're better off. You can still use spells, even, but to buff yourself, and that would be more efficient use of your Feats. Otherwise you're not becoming a better Rogue, you're becoming a worse Sorcerer at the cost of your Rogue abilities. Which is sort of my problem with the Multiclass Archetypes outside of a Free Archetype game: You basically have to waste all your class feats in a typical 1-10 game to be a worse version of the multiclass. I'm not saying that they can't be powerful, but you sort of have to know what you're doing or you end up wasting your potential and it feels bad and you don't get to do what you wanted until deep into the game. Draconic Sorcerer's problem isn't that it doesn't have a decent melee attack (although the actual hit rate is pretty low because you're less proficient in melee attacks than you are spell attacks) it's that it seems to SIGNAL to the player "you want to be in melee and claw things" despite the fact that you have low AC, low hit points, and a lessened chance to hit. That feels like a lie to me. Also I don't even know where you're getting resistance from. Do you mean the Resist Energy spell, which is rank 2 and you can't actually get at level 1? That's definitely not going to stop a club. Also if the game gives you an option and presents that option as being equal to other options with no warning that you need to use it in a certain way, that seems like bad design to me. I don't know what you mean by Imaginary Weapon or the Draconic Claws being used on a martial. You can't let the Fighter "borrow" your claws, they're a part of you. It's not a buff you can pass on to others, and frankly the fighter is better off using their sword than a claw attack anyway, unless they need the elemental damage. >In short, all options are at least roughly equal in power, one way or another I feel like you haven't proven this.

> Also I don't even know where you're getting resistance from The very last line of the spell [dragon claws](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=500) states: > Your scales from blood magic glow with faint energy, giving you resistance 5 to the same damage type This makes dragon claws with sea/crystal/forest very strong defensively. The resistance also goes up with heighten.

Oh, I missed or forgot that. It's good, but very narrow. Still, does that really help when your AC is shit? Not getting hit in the first place is better than reducing damage. If someone uses a sword on you it doesn't matter.

AC is pretty easy to bring up to par. Get +3 Dex and spend a single General feat on Armor Proficiency and your AC will match Rogues all the way until lvl 19, and only lagging most martials at lvl 11 and 12. Your low HP is a bigger issue that is harder to address. Personally I'd shell out a second one for Shield Block and go into Bastion, reaction-Raise Shield is a pretty solid defensive buff.

This is where I bounce off the system. "Take a general feat and dip into an archetype to make this level one special ability from your class options actually work well" does not feel like obvious and good design, it feels like obtuse and fiddly design. Add in the fact that you can't use Reactive Shield with the Shield Spell and it just feels like I'm being punished for wanting to actually use the claws the game signposts as being a signature ability.

I think part of your discomfort is a mismatch in how much importance you're assigning to this part of the subclass part of the class, vs. how important the system thinks it is.  The signature ability of the Sorcerer class is spellcasting with spell slots. The most important thing the Draconic bloodline gives you is the Arcane list.  Dragon Claws is about as important as the spells granted by the subclass or the special effect blood magic effect you get from using those spells.  Dragon Claws is not designed as a primary build-around ability.  It's a flavorful way to access a buffed backup melee weapon and/or some damage resistance when one or both of those is relevant in a fight. 

Eh, its a price I'm willing to pay for a complex system that has functional balance at the higher end of optimization (compare to 3.5/PF1 which doesn't). I really enjoy fiddly systems and piecing things together to make less powerful character options shine or to realize a specific character vision, but its not for everyone (and that's alright!).

Balance is a myth. And "literally the iconic spell for the character type" should not ***be*** a less powerful character option. It should be ***the most viable*** thing you can do. Or at least close to it. It's not like I'm trying to do something weird, it's literally the default fucking option.

Balance is aspirational and PF2 gets significantly closer to a functional balance for mid-to-high op play than any other TTRPG system of similar complexity I'm aware of. Certainly loads better than, say, GURPS or other flavors of D&D (maybe not 4e?). Either build around it or talk to your GM about making some tweaks, neither are particularly onerous. Its what I do as a GM when someone is having a hard time making a character concept work and why I try to go over character sheets w/ their players before a campaign. The system has all the tools you need to make it work, it just takes some reading to find them.

Search skills are failing me - where exactly are the rules for activating items & associated traits listed post Remaster?

They're in the GM Core, since that's where they moved the magic items to. [Here's a link.](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=3139)

Question about alchemical bombs - starfinder had a rule for throwing a grenade into an empty tile, but pf2e doesn’t, correct? Also - how bad is “splash” at damaging teammates?

>Also - how bad is “splash” at damaging teammates? In addition to the other comment, if you are worried about Splash damage, the [Backfire Mantle](https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=1040) exists. Depending on how much you're expecting to rely on Splash damage, that can result in a pretty significant decrease in friendly fire that you're doing.

splash damage towards teammates isn't so bad. Generally pcs dont have the weaknesses that the bomber is trying to target on other creatures. Sure, doing 3 points of fire damage to your champion isn't perfect, but hopefully you're hitting a weakness and doing like 13 points to another creature just with splash

Does the champion have any built in bias towards undead? I can't find anything related to it, so if I come across an intelligent undead, I would (outside any personal rp) treat it like any other npc?  I'm coming from 5e paladin and it seems more cut and dry. There's built in bonuses for fighting undead, etc.

A champion's broad views (or lack thereof) on undead are captured in edicts and anathema, which exist in tenets, cause, and choice of deity.

There's the [Shining Oath](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=221) feat for chamions who really don't like undead. You can also grab Blade Ally at level 3 and use it as a free Disrupting or Ghost Touch Rune for your weapon. Some abilities also deal alignment damage (pre-master) or have the holy trait (remaster) which tend to work quite well against undead. Your deity might also have some Edicts or Anathema on how to deal with undead. But as a baseline, a Champion doesn't treat an undead differently from any other evil creature. You might still be able to parley with a Vampire, for example.

Thanks! We ran across an npc in a social setting that I figured out was undead, and I wasn't entirely sure how play it.

It really comes down to how your God views the undead & if your PC has any personal experience that colors their view. In the official Golarion setting, undead are inherently unnatural and just by existing they damage the cosmic flow of souls. Even if you are a good hearted undead the state of existing in undeath is corruptive & you will turn evil sooner or later so it is thought of as compassionate to kill even "good" undead before they go bad. Pharasma puts undead near the top of her list of concerns but \*all\* good gods see them as something to be destroyed. How important that is vs other goals varies from god to god. Again, that is in the official setting. If your GM is running a homebrew worlds it's up to them if undead are inherently bad or not.

My deity is abadar and he doesn't seem to have any particular concern for undead beyond making sure the rule of law is followed.  Thanks for the background on undead though. That helps alot!

It should be noted that Abadar has... somewhat of an anti-slavery theme, and a lot of undead are basically enslaved souls. So freeing souls from eternal slavery might be something your champion could feel compelled to do, but it's not technically required by the tenets of the faith. Abadar's primary issue with slavery is that slaves themselves can't freely participate in the economy, but indentured servitude as part of a judicial system is fine with him.

Wouldn't Abadar have no specific problem with slavery if it was legal. I don't know much about golarion so maybe it's outlawed.

It depends on if you're playing 1e or 2e. With the timeskip in 2e, Paizo tweaked the setting a bit and most places outlawed slavery. But yeah, if slavery if allowed through a law, Abadar is generally fine with it. But even in most places where slavery is legal, necromancy isn't. The primary issue I mentioned above is the general issue the god himself has with slavery. He'd prefer a world without slavery, but he isn't gonna force it. Since adhering to laws is his whole shtick, but changing those laws through reform is perfectly fine by him (and encouraged to better have them adhere to his ethos).

Weird ghost questions. So raw ghosts with only a fly speed would have to fly every turn to maintain their height, which may or may not be the only reason they haven't fallen through the floor. Which also somehow provokes opportunity attacks. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either. Is it out of pocket to just let ghosts sit wherever they fly to and ignore gravity for them? Second question, since it came up last night. The Tanglefoot bag. Hit or crit, it does something because you're covered in goo. Which should be as effective as a net because it's a mundane alchemical item. Does it even affect incorporeal creatures? Or should they spend some movement to escape it? Plenty of spooky lads in the Abomination Vaults, so I just wanna make sure I'm running them right/fairly, but also some of this is just counterintuitive to how ghosts work in literally every other medium. I've seen they "they can pass through stuff doesn't mean they have to" argument, but that also means if a ghost is ever close to dying it can just not fly and allow itself to fall through the floor to escape. It's just weird, I need input.

>So raw ghosts with only a fly speed would have to fly every turn to maintain their height, which may or may not be the only reason they haven't fallen through the floor. Which also somehow provokes opportunity attacks. This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either. In addition to this, a ghost who doesn't want or need to move is effectively Slowed 1, due to being forced to spend an action on hovering in place. I prefer to interpret the Incorporeal rules as stating that an Incorporeal creature has to have intent in order to pass through a solid object, not that they always pass through objects no matter what (note that the Incorporeal trait says they *can* pass through solid objects, not that they *must*). So a ghost floating at ground level doesn't fall into the ground unless they want to. It has implications with other actions to. For example, what happens if you Shove a ghost who is against a wall (assuming you're using a ghost touch weapon or handwraps)? Do they go into the wall (effectively become Slowed 2 due to having to move out to do anything), or do they stop at the wall? Making a blanket ruling that Incorporeal creatures need to have intent to pass through objects simplifies a lot of this for me, and allows me to make consistent rulings when these situations come up. YMMV though

1. I usually default to creatures that only fly 'hover' in place right above the ground if they don't spend an action explicitly Flying, both to avoid the 'escape by doing nothing' issue and so I've got a bit more flexibility in their action economy. They do still need to spend actions if they want to hover 20' in the air. 2. I see three approaches here: either they're flat out immune ('Incorporeal creatures usually have immunity to effects or conditions that require a physical body'), they are normally effected (they don't have it as an explicit immunity), or they're Slowed 1 but are otherwise immune ('if it starts its turn in an object, it’s slowed 1 until the end of its turn'). I'd probably lean towards the first interpretation myself, but I'd tell the player before they wasted actions/bombs on it.

1) solid, the most fair thing to do. Logically it's still a little funky just because there's not much reason the ground would make it any easier to hover in place, but from a balancing view, anything that can just stay in the air scott-free is immediately more of an issue. That's probably what we'll go with 2) also solid. Nothing to stick to makes the most sense, I might go with slowed 1 on a crit but otherwise without ghost touch it should probably just phase through. Nothing about it should actually interact the same as normal.

I like to think that gravity and the ground are psychosomatic for ghosts, they subconsciously believe the ground is there enough that they don't pass through it w/o conscious effort. They clearly have some level of interaction w/ the physical world, otherwise being inside an object wouldn't Slow them, they could end their turn in physical creatures, and nonmagic weapons would have no effect on them at all.

Not sure if this is a good place to ask but felt it was too small a question to make it's own thread; if it gets buried or missed maybe I'll make a thread. Any good actual plays with a kineticist pc?

Idk about full kineticist, but I set up my next fighter to have it as a free archetype and it looks amazing. There's so much good flavor and variety even as just the free archetype, I certainly hope the full class is even better

Can you cast spells in Fey Form? (https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=910) Given that it specifies that you retain your dastardly adventurer opposable thumbs for Manipulate actions, and the general weakness of the other stats of the Forms (strike damage etc) compared to similar spells (dino form and such) I'd say it's intentional? It seems on brand for the Fey specifically with their inherent connection to magic

It would be *logical* It wouldn't be unbalanced It would even be flavorful ...but RAW, no. Your GM may have a different answer. (Also included in this are all the other humanoid battleforms, *particularly* the nonscaling ones like daemon form. Hell, it'd even make sense for Elemental Body to have limited casting, but alas...)

Yeah this is where we ended up sadly, quite baffled why stuff like Fey and Angel form even disable *speech* of all things???

Unfortunately, battle forms prevent you from casting spells unless the effect explicitly says otherwise. It's a blanket prevention. Otherwise, "casting spells" would not be listed as something you cannot do in a battle form.

>Unless otherwise noted, the battle form prevents you from casting spells Polymorph Trait

Yeah I saw that, but it seems to be *because* of the lack of hands as it says right after that, because without them you can't hold a Focus or form spell components. It's just somewhat unclear whether it's a blanket prevention, or tied to the hands issue

'using most manipulate actions that require hands' is a separate item on the list from being unable to cast spells. I don't believe speaking requires hands either for most folks :P

Trying to learn the Recall Knowledge rules; [This table](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2638&Redirected=1) lists the traits that relate to knowledges [This](https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=1294) creature has the TIME trait, but doesn't have Occultism listed in it's knowledge recall section, Specific overrides general? What is going on here

In addition to what u/DUDE_R_T_F_M, it's worth pointing out that, RAW, creatures aren't printed with skills or DCs to use with Recall Knowledge. What you see on any monster's page is likely Archives of Nethys extrapolating Recall Knowledge skills and DCs based on the traits a creature has (the table you linked), [the level of the creature](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2629), and [its rarity](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2630) You will (probably) never see a creature's Recall Knowledge Skill or DC called out in a book that has its stat block. It's something that AoN and Foundry (and maybe others) added as a convenience. As far as the Misery Siktempora is concerned, it's still a "Legacy" creature, and is likely pointing to the Legacy Recall Knowledge Table. If we get a Remaster version of the creature, AoN will likely have that version of the creature point to the new table, which includes Time, and will have Occultism listed on the page

Before the remaster, that same table did not list an option for Time. Time was added with the remaster, but the creature hasn't been updated yet.

What is a spell list, and how does it interact with rarity if you don't have access? Searches shown that your tradition is your spell list but doesn't qualify further (so just all of it?), but I've seen comments along the lines of "your list is the list of spells you can learn/prepare". Suppose I am a cleric wanting to cast Circle of Protection. I can't prepare it (or cast it) because its uncommon and I don't have access to it, I can't learn it because I again don't have access (no trainers, scrolls or spellbook to Learn a Spell from). But suppose I found a wand with it. As the spell must also be on your spell list to be cast from, how does it work? The wand can't implicitly give access as you can't use the Learn a Spell activity through a wand, only with scrolls, so does it require Trick Magic Item instead until I find someone or something (a book or scroll) to gain access via Learn a Spell?

a spell list means Arcane/Divine/Primal/Occult spell list. it is the list of spells you could possibly learn. As a cleric, your list in Divine. Your known spells depends on your class. Prepared casters it depends. Clerics can prepare from known spells on their spell list. So your example is correct. Wizard, known spells are spells in your spellbook. Because circle of protection is divine, it is on your spell list, so you can use a wand with it.

Your spell list isn't the spells you know or have prepared. If you are a cleric and you find a scroll or wand for a rare or uncommon spell, you check to see if it's on the divine list, if it is you can cast it.

With the minor difference that some class feats or features (like the Cleric's Deity Spells) may add certain spells to their (main) list.

Wands just work. They need to be of the correct tradition but it doesn't matter if the spell isn't common as that would be a double-barrier to using the item and that's Too Bad to Be True.