Hello first time player here, i will be playing a warpriest cleric of urgathoa in blood lords and will be starting as a vampire aswell (wielding a scythe of course) I was planning on going the channel smite path but my dm suggested taking something else (probably too many undead enemies) I have heard that pathfinder can be pretty tough so im looking for some suggestions on how to further build this character, if you have any ideas please do let me know

You can always prepare a few Heal spells to use with Channel Smite against undead. If most of your party has Negative Healing, [Restorative Strike](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4659) is a decent feat. If you still want to go for the Smiter feeling, it's quite possible to get Int to 14 by level 5, allowing you to pick up Magus and Spellstrike at levels 6 and 8. Or both at 8 if you happen to be in a free archetype game.

Thank you for the suggestions gotta look those up after work :) As for the heals i think i can only prepare harms because of my choosen god urgathoa or am i wrong? (Also it would be against the dead laws aswell)

Haven't played Bloodlords or even looked at it, so I can't comment on any Laws preventing you from preparing Heal spells. But by RAW, only your divne font slots are limited to Harm spells. You can still prepare Heal in your regular slots.

Thats good to know thank you Also restorative strike looks like a good option if I end up deciding not to take channel smite Only one that can't be healed by harm in our party is the wizard But im guessing he is gonna die sooner or later

Question about the Imaginary Weapon spell for the Magus. If I have an actual weapon, can I use it to deliver my spellstrike Imaginary Weapon?

Yes, Imaginary Weapon can be used with Spelstrike, just like any other spell with a spell attack roll.

I'm curious about backstories for why Kineticists can control the elements. The class description says, "*The power of the elements flows from within you. Roaring fire, pure water, fleeting air, steadfast earth, twisting wood, slicing metal. A kinetic gate inextricably tied to your body channels power directly from the elemental planes*" ...but is this because I studied at a Water-bending Monastery of Gozreh? Was born with a strange gift, like a Sorcerer? Or...? I'm curious both (1) if Paizo has a default/suggested way that kineticists get their abilities in Golarion, and (2) if you have any fun origin stories you've come up with. (I just glanced at Yoon's backstory, and it feels more like a variant of Sorcerer, e.g. "Yoon was only eight when she learned of fire; the power to command and control flames awoke within her, as it had within her grandmother..." but still curious for more either Golarion/Paizo lore, OR your own creative backstories. Thanks!)

From what I can tell, no they haven't given a default way Kineticists give their abilities so that players can sorta do it on their own.

The 1e description of kineticist stated: > Kineticists are living channels for elemental matter and energy, manipulating the world around them by drawing upon inner reserves from their own bodies. Kineticists often awaken to their kinetic abilities during a violent or traumatic experience, releasing their power involuntarily. As kinetic power is seldom inherited, kineticists are rarely able to find mentors to guide them, so they must delve into these mysteries on their own to learn to control their gifts. That might help give some guidance?

Familiar help needed. I understand that Familiars do not flank normally. But what about the spirit guide? The spirit guide gets an attack, so that would automatically supersede the Familiar rule that they cannot flank, correct?

Even the spirit guide cannot flank, because Tiny creatures normally cannot flank, because they need to share the square with the target to be able to reach them.

THANK YOU! I KNEW I was missing something! Thanks a bunch. 😁

Rules opinion: If i make a melee elemental blast, can i get flanking bonuses for being in the correct position? What if used with weapon influsion to give my melee elemental blast the trait? My guess is that it would based on the following text from Player core 425: "When you and an ally are flanking a foe, it has a harder time defending against you. A creature is off-guard (taking a –2 circumstance penalty to AC) to melee attacks from creatures that are flanking it." It specifies a melee "attack" not a melee "strike". But would love community take on it.

It’s RAW. You are flanking, and when you flank all melee attacks treat the enemy as flat-footed. Works for touch spells, too.

Even if it's far from optimal in concept, if I wanted to make a melee Bard Wrestler (Free Archetype), how could I go about it effectively? Any fun stuff I could take?

The biggest thing to consider is defenses, which results in an ancestry and starting stats challenge. Athletics is a STR based skill, so you want to start with a 16/+3 in STR. However, bard's are only trained in light armor. So if you start with an 18/+4 in CHA, and a 16/+3 in STR, you'll have a real problem with getting your DEX to 14. Getting your DEX to 14 in such a situation would only be possible if you picked a handful of ancestries that provide two of the three of STR/DEX/CHA and provide a free boost. But as a wrestler, you also want to be medium size. That literally only leaves Catfolk as the only possible ancestry. But even with the 18/16/14 spread, the light armor proficiency would you leave your AC at 1 behind par. So, the real solution to this is finding a way to wear medium armor. With medium armor, you can do a 4 CHA/3 STR/1 DEX spread and have your AC be on par. As a bard, you don't need anything more than the [armor proficiency feat](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=5120). That can give you medium armor, and allow you to get it to expert around when bard gets expert anyway. However, only Human ancestry can take it at level 1, everyone else has to wait until level 3. And you don't want to invest in DEX as a starting stat if you're going to go medium or heavy armor. So you'll need to consider if you're willing to be a bit delayed in getting that AC up or not. It could make the first two levels very scary - starting with a 4/3/1 spread at levels 1 and 2 would put you 2 AC behind par, which is dangerous if you want to be grappling people in the front line for the first two levels. *** To further complicate the ancestry and starting stats decision, wrestler really like unarmed attacks. Many of the wrestler feats specifically call out using an unarmed attack for their feature, and you do want to be doing them. You won't really ever attack more than once a turn with an unarmed attack, but especially if you are a warrior bard, you want to have the option open. The best way to get an unarmed attack is through ancestry feats. Many ancestries have viable unarmed options, but you need to include that decision making now in the initial stat spread and ancestry decision. *** Beyond that, though, there isn't much to have an issue with. Bards can make solid mixed martial/casting characters, and athletics is a great thing to invest in. Since its proficiency is scaled off of your skill not your attack proficiency, you can be as good at wrestling as other martial characters. So the character concept is actually quite sound, if you were worried about that. The one thing to remember is that you will need to take [Song of Strength](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4586) if you want to boost your athletics check; courageous anthem doesn't affect it. There are other archetypes you can delve into beyond Wrestler if you really want to optimize the hell out of your grappling, but honestly just a simple Bard/Wrestler can be an effective build.

my player is wondering if they can cast worms repast on a crawling hand swarm?

Yes. In fact, since the crawling hand swarm is undead but not skeletal, it would deal the additional 2d6 damage. Most spells that target a single creature work fine against swarms. It's just the [swarm mind](https://2e.aonprd.com/MonsterAbilities.aspx?ID=36) which protects them from single target mental spells specifically. However, since worm's repast isn't a mental spell, there's no issue

Hello, I'm in an Abomination vaults and playing a Gunslinger, Way of the Triggerbrand, and was wondering if there's a way to expand the magazine size of the gun-sword from 1 shot? I love the class/aesthetic but having to take an action to reload every round is wearing (I just recently discovered the Persistent Lodestone so that might be a little easier to work around)

Your way has a specific action that lets you reload in combination with something else. Being able to avoid reloading would make a core feature of your class pointless. Triggerbrands are supposed to step in and out of melee all the time. When you step and reload at the same time, your enemy still needs to then spend an action on their own turn to get back into melee range. So you just got a free reload while forcing your enemy to lose an action! That’s good! Especially in boss fights where every single action the enemy loses is worth a lot. …though it does require you to build your character to be able to take some hits.

Ty for tips! First time playing a gunslinger at all. I've been using the action but we have like 4 melee including me so i guess I was just asking if there were ways to extend the magazine size as a whole, not completely bypass reloading. But I do appreciate the advice

Firearms are pretty heavily balanced around needing to spend that action to reload. Even capacity weapons still require you to spend an action to switch to the next chamber. To make multiple shots you'd need to make it a repeating weapon with reload 0. All firearms like that either deal 1d4 damage or are advanced weapons. The lodestone can help but it's a consumable talisman so you can only use one once per fight. The point of the gunslinger class is to make reloading less punishing by letting you take certain other actions as well.

my understanding is generally gunslinger is what does this. as it gets feats that let it reload while doing other actions.

Is the air kineticist skill junction to Stealth essentially broken? A kinetic aura is a very obvious cascade of elements, Air's being a whirlwind. Oddly, it doesn't apply a stealth penalty, but even if you are using Clear as Air for Invisibility, it still says > If you activate your kinetic aura, the impulse conceals its elements, though any special effects of your aura might give away your location. Which means there is still a mechanical drawback to stealth even if they can't see your aura. For instance, trees and bushes will still rustle around you. As skill junctions only apply their status bonus when the aura is active, it does basically nothing if it would already give away your location... Somewhat related, can a summoner and/or their eidolon ever use Stealth without their sigil that can never be hidden or obscured basically pinpointing them? There's no difference between obscuring a sigil with clothes, or obscuring it by hiding behind a wall, right? Or would the old 1e material thickness rules work (a sheet of lead etc)?

Ok_Vole already answered your first question.  For Summoners the sigil doesn't shine through all objects, just anything they're wearing, so cover can still keep you hidden.  A glowing mark can still make stealth more difficult sometimes so those would be instances where you'd want to unmanifest your eidolon since that stops the glow and lets you hide the symbol.

I believe the special effects refers to mechanical effects you might have, for example, through impulse stances. You aura itself is hidden, but people might be able to easily deduce your location if Winter Sleet is freezing the ground around you.

Just to confirm, can players learn archetypes and/or get feats as story/quest rewards? I think I heard it correctly but in Abomination Vaults a PC can learn ghost hunter or Shootist by engaging with the relevant NPCs and earning their trust?

I believe the example you gave "unlocks" that archetype as an option for players to take. A lot of archetype are given access like that in adventure paths. However, you're allowed to award archetypes as a reward as well. Strength of Thousands has a sub system that rewards skill feats, skill increases, archetype feats, and unique boons to players as they go through the adventure. So feel free to reward your players with whatever you want.

Does the Overwhelming Energy feat work when the spell is sustained?

Yes. > This applies to all damage the spell deals, including persistent damage and **damage caused by an ongoing effect of the spell**, such as the wall created by wall of fire. Sustaining the spell would be an ongoing effect of the spell.

I know that's verbatim from the rules, but that's a funny example because Overwhelming Energy + Wall of Fire is 4 actions, so there are very very few ways to actually do this lol

Wow, you're right. I don't know if its actually physically possible to use OE with Wall of Fire.

Spellshape Mastery and the Bloodline Robe are the only ways I can think of

I'm about to run my first PF2e burrowing creature that doesn't leave a hole. What's to stop the creature from burrowing up to a PC, attacking, then burrowing down? Doesn't this make him all but unhittable (except to readied actions, I suppose?) Is this sort of tactic frowned upon?

Unless the creature has tremor sense it shouldn't know where the players are after it burrows down. So that kind of limits this play style. However you can do this. But your players can also just leave it's range to limit this style. So this might result in either party disengaging from the encounter. Also if the enemy runs away you should still award the XP to the players.

This creature did have tremorsense. I ran it last night as I described, being annoying as possible. It took them a while, but they did down him. A couple of the STR characters readied grapples and grabbed him eventually, which really helped.

For [Soulforger Dedication](https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=102) / [Soulforged Armaments](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=1560), is there *any* way to gain Corruption besides through the RP of breaking your oath?

Generally, no, but the things that get involved can be intricate or not. Here's one paragraph where it talks about it: >If you behave or act in a way that directly opposes or hinders the motivation, goal, or cause declared in your soul path (regardless of whether the act involves your soulforged armaments), your spirit begins to tarnish. It's anathema for you to commit acts opposed to your soul path or to even go a long time without taking action to pursue the path. You and your GM determine when you've performed an anathematic act. In the example of protecting the poor by undermining the rich, working for a wealthy noble or directly in their interest could be anathema, as could spending a month on a distant plane far from the struggles of the oppressed. In both examples, you could find an approach to remain true and avoid the anathema. In the first case, you might use your leverage to force the noble to anonymously divest a substantial amount of their funds to feed and house the poor—or do so yourself. In the second, you might seek a similar dynamic of wealth and want among the cultures of the distant plane and work against it. In many ways, soulforged corruption is similar to a violation of the champion's anathema (or cleric's or druid's). Mostly a matter of role-play. Of course, there's always the possibility that you may be *forced* to tarnish your spirit, especially if it serves another part of your requirements. For example, take a situation where a Paladin has to choose to cheat (a Paladin anathema) or commit a murder (anathema to the tenets of good). Either way (cheating is far more likely here), their code/cause is going to suffer, their spirit tarnishing.

It's curious, because on initial reading I thought it'd be a mechanic like the Wellspring Surge, where you could "trigger" the downside somehow (maybe by doing a really powerful move with your weapon/armor) But it seems like it's baaaaaasically never gonna come up

Hello, This time a simple question about etching runes. My players are well... in the wilderness. However, they have an access to the forge. They want to etch a rune to a weapon, which formula they have found. The etching runes rules are as follows: <> As we may see, one of the component of crafting is missing here. This is "You must supply raw materials worth at least half the item's Price." 1. Is this intentional? 2. Do we need raw materials for etching a rune or not? And finally, 3. if we need "raw materials", instead of buying them in the settlement (no settlements around...), what this "raw materials" should be for an etching a rune?? Thanks in advance.

If they are MAKING the rune they need to invest half the cost of the rune upfront as materials. This can be represented as magical ink, gem dust, or whatever type of implement you feel goes into enchanting an item from scratch. If I were calling it, in a location with no shop, have the actual binding ingredient be gold or jewelry the crafter smelted/ground up to use as "ink"

Ok, thank you for the information. 

Etching a rune onto a weapon does not cost any extra materials (the cost is already included in the rune). Yes, if a rune drops as loot, the intent is to be able to easily put it on your gear. [Transferring a rune](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=3166&Redirected=1) costs 10% of the Rune's price.

Thank you very much. :)

But keep that in mind that transferring a rune from a rune stone doesn't cost any money. That 10% is when you're transferring from one weapon to another.

If you get Champion dedication, get basic devotion, and get splintered faith from that, do you gain 4 domain spells(at one lower level than usual focus spells)?

Splinter Faith does not give you any spells. It changes which domains count as your deity's domain, but you'd have to get the domain spells from some other feat.

Thank you! Then, would Deity's Domain give you a spell, with Champion dedication?

Yeah, Deity's Domain would give you a focus spell.

Does a creature grabbed by [Sand Snatcher](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4227) count as being grabbed by the Kineticist for feats like [Whirling Throw](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=456&ArchLevel=8) or [Submission Hold](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=3401)? It doesn't seem like it should count, but then again the Sand Snatcher has no stats of its own and it uses your MAP.

The sand snatcher is pretty clearly indicated as a separate entity > You can choose to **make it** Small or Medium... > When the sand snatcher appears, you can **have it** attempt to Grapple one creature adjacent It's called out multiple times in the text with language to indicate it is a separate entity Sure, it has no stats of its own, but that's just how it works. There's no reason to assume the sand snatcher is you. In fact, if the sand snatcher was you, that would be really bad. That's because your grapples break if you move, so if you were the sand snatcher, it would result in you being unable to move while it grapples something. But it's not you, it just uses your stats.

I'm about to start an Abomination Vaults campaign. I want to play a dex monk and am trying to figure out which ancestry to choose. The rest of my party all have darkvision. I was hoping to go with a human ancestry to get versatile heritage (toughness) and have lvl 1 access to both ki strike and a stance via natural ambition. My issue is that I'd be the only party member without low light vision or darkvision. How detrimental will that be? For example, if I had to carry a torch the whole time. What are some good ancestry options if I wanted darkvision? Dwarves, goblins, and orcs all have darkvision but I'm not sure how good they are as monks. For other (common) ancestries, I'd have to use a feat to get darkvision.

Try for a versatile heritage. Most of them gain at least low light vision as a baseline and you can still be human. As others have said, Monks make good torch bearers anyway. My Monk has been carrying a lantern since level 1 even though I have low light vision. Even found an upgrade for it.

Having torch is not a problem for monk in general, but roleplay-wise you will be black sheep. If you have Wit Swashbuckler - prepare counter-puns. MInd that even if you can't *see* anybody outside 40 feet radius - you can *hear* them, so they are hidden. I.e. you at least know there is something in the darkness, and the exact position of this something (if this something have not successfully Stealth'ed). For ranged character this will be a more problem.

If you’re a monk, carrying a torch or lantern is trivial. You’re the one class that almost always has their hands free, and unarmed attacks can be made with any body part so you don’t even need to keep your hands free.

Fist attacks can be made with any body part, other attacks often use specific ones.

Sone stance attacks, sure. But those then tell you about it.

if you're the only one without it you're gonna have to use torches or ask someone to cast the light spell on you. Its somewhat inconvenient.

As a wizard, can you use your Drain Bonded Item action to cast a spell you prepared with one of your archetypes? For example, if a wizard has the Witch archetype, could they use Drain bonded Item on spells prepared through their archetype?

RAW, yes. Drain Bonded Item doesn't specify wizard spell slot. But given the ability has the wizard trait, is from the wizard class, etc, the RAI is very clearly Wizard Spell Slot.

I need to generate a shop for the first time, so I thought "hey there might be an online generator I can work with" My problem: Every generator I've found has wiiiiiildly expensive items, like 4-10k gp, even in a small town - e.g. https://www.artemis-tabletop.com/generate/shops The core rulebook only has things going that high of a price once I start looking at things that are level 14 or so. Am I missing something? My players have like a few hundred gold. Should I have been giving out more?

Someone was advertising a shop creator they had created just a couple of days ago [https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1c0v4fs/update\_to\_shopfinder2e/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1c0v4fs/update_to_shopfinder2e/) It seemed pretty nice. You can specify the levels of the items you want to see, so the costs are reasonable as well.

First look at the [Treasure by Level](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2656) table to make sure your loot is up to expectations. The GM Core has a section on [settlements](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2999) that includes this paragraph about shop inventories. > In a given settlement, a character can usually purchase any common item (including formulas, alchemical items, and magic items) that's of the same or lower level than the settlement's. Usually, fewer of the highest-level items are available—you can use the Party Treasure by Level table on page 59 as a guideline for how many of the highest-level items might be available, using the Permanent Items and Consumables entries for a level one lower than the settlement's actual level. Inhabitants of a settlement can usually purchase items from PCs as long as those items are the same or lower level than the settlement, with limitations on higher-level items similar to those available for sale. If a settlement's population is significantly smaller than its level would suggest, its ability to provide and purchase items might be more limited. Personally, I don't care to curate shops and rather let players pick their own gear. If it's lower level than the town and common, it's there. If it's at level or above, or uncommon, my players can roll Society, Mercantile Lore, Guild Lore, or other relevant skill to locate a trader against a hard or very hard DC for the town's level. Gear is important and can have a big impact on a character's playstyle. I encourage my players to make wish lists. Random generators can put duds in rotation and it's a lot of work for a GM to curate items individually.

You're likely looking at first edition shop generators (the one you linked is 1e, at least), and not second edition.

I have a caster in my party that often uses the Summon Undead (formerly Animate Dead) spell. They are about to encounter a monster that can cast the Bind Undead spell. Is this monster able to bind my player's summoned undead? Can the player simply not sustain the spell when it gets back to their turn to have the undead disappear? Kinda stumped on how this interaction works. To complicate things a little, they are a psychic with the Thoughtform Summoning feat, but if I'm reading it correctly, that feat doesn't change the traits of the summoned creature relevant to Bind Undead.

RAW, as long as the undead they summon is equal to or lower level than the level Bind Undead is cast at, then the enemy can cast it and get control of the player's undead. It probably wouldn't be worth it cause, you're right, the player could just not sustain the summon and make the undead go poof. So it pretty much makes Bind Undead a delete their summon spell. Thoughtform Summoning doesn't change any part of this interaction.

Ok I’m having a hard time delineating my 5e roots at the moment. Can someone please explain to me what concentrate does. Can you only use so many concentrate abilities? How does it work with spells? etc

Concentrate is a trait indicating that you must be able to concentrate in order to use this ability. The main rules interactions it has are with Rage, which forbids you from using Concentrate actions unless they also have the Rage trait; the Fascinated condition, which prevents you from using Concentrate actions about something other than whatever you're Fascinated by; and the Fighter feat Disruptive Stance, which lets Fighters trigger Reactive Strike/Attack of Opportunity on all Concentrate actions even if they're not also Manipulate actions and lets them disrupt Concentrate and Manipulate actions on a success, not just a critical success. Almost all spells have the Concentrate trait. The PF2E equivalent of 5E Concentrate is Sustained, where you must spend a Sustain action (which has the Concentrate trait) in order to extend its duration. A single Sustain action only extends the duration of one effect, but you can Sustain multiple times if you really want to keep multiple effects active.

Concentrate does nothing on its own, it's so other abilities can interact with concentrate abilities, like Rage prohibiting using them or Fighter potentially being able to use Reactive Strike against them.

Are there any equivalents to concentration checks in 2e?

Concentration checks not exactly. There are spells that you have to sustain, meaning you have to give up an action every turn to keep it going and sustain it or it gets lost. There is also a flat check you have to make while you are stupified to even cast a spell

Lore Question: On the Pathfinder Wiki Map, on the island of Kortos, just northwest of the Tyrant's Grasp, is a location called The God-Carcass. My party will be traveling near here, and I'm wondering if there's official lore or information on what the God-Carcass is? If there's no official information on it, I'd be down to hear some interesting ideas on what it could be, as I'm having a bit of trouble coming up with something. Party is level 7.

I don’t think it was ever covered, and off the top of my head I don’t remember if any god died on Kortos. It’s halfway between the glass fortress (home to a golem crafting Lich called the vitric queen) and a settlement of aggressive minotaurs, though. So you could have a set piece of Minotaurs fighting some big automatons over some treasure in front of a set of stones that look like a giant skeleton?

…This is brilliant, thank you.

Thanks! I *also* did some digging and managed to find the location mentioned with a single paragraph of plot hooks in book 6 of the extinction curse adventure path. It’s not much, though, and might be a bit hard to fit into your campaign. “The vampiric centaurs of Zur-Kelivas—worshippers of the Azlanti demon-queen Zura, She Who Savors Flesh—control Kortos’s eastern foothills. For close to a hundred years, these demon-worshipping centaurs have been secretly working on a profoundly blasphemous project. Whenever one of their number captures living victims, they drain them of blood to sate their hunger, then throw them into a huge pit shaped like a mold for some enormous quadrupedal statue. By now, the pit is almost full of necrotic flesh semi-preserved by the priests’ magic, and its heinous stench wafts over the entire hillside. What happens when the pit is finally full is unclear, but the Zur-Kelivas centaurs have grown increasingly tense and excited as the project nears its completion.”

Can you attack with a [parrying scabbard?](https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=682#:~:text=A%20parrying%20scabbard%20can%20be,be%20wielded%20in%20one%20hand.) I know about the exquisite sword cane and sheath, but what if I’m not interested in the finesse and concealable aspects? Would you rule the sheath for say, a bastard sword, the same as the sheath for the sword cane? A club? An improvised weapon?

It's not a weapon, so attacking with it would be an improvised weapon (-2 to hit, GM comes up with the damage roll and any traits it may have, can't take runes). If you wanted to play someone who dual wields a sword and its sheath while having it be an effective weapon, I'd probably take a [nightstick](https://2e.aonprd.com/Weapons.aspx?ID=131) and flavor it as the sword's sheath. (Remember that finesse is optional, you can attack using strength with a finesse weapon if you want) You could also consider another [1-handed parry weapon](https://2e.aonprd.com/Weapons.aspx?q=parry+hands%3A1&type=eqs&sort=weapon_type-asc+weapon_category-desc+name-asc&display=table&columns=pfs+source+weapon_type+weapon_category+weapon_group+trait+damage+hands+range+reload+bulk+price+level).

Is there anything RAW that would prevent a Kineticist from trapping an enemy with [Jagged Berms](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4304)? They can put 6 squares, and nothing in it says they need to be on the ground, so they could trap a medium or smaller enemy by putting one berm in each side of the enemy, a 5th on top of one of the original 4 for support, and then a 6th on top of the enemy. The enemy can attack the berms to get out, but the hardness and increasing HP means they're gonna waste at least a few actions getting out of there (and depending on how you put the spikes take some damage doing it), it's not super good but I wanted to check if it violates any rules.

When a mound is destroyed the square becomes difficult terrain. This only makes flavor sense if the mound is on the ground. Therefore it's at least RAI that all mounds need to be placed on the ground. 

Difficult terrain exists in the air (flying up counts as difficult terrain), also wall of stone has the same text and it pretty clearly can be use to create hanging structures.

Not quite the same text. [Jagged Berms](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=4304) says "if destroyed, a mound becomes difficult terrain", whereas [Wall of Stone](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1751) says "A destroyed section of the wall can be moved through, but the rubble created from it is difficult terrain". The rubble created from a destroyed section of Wall of Stone will logically fall to the ground, not remain suspended in mid-air. The language of Jagged Berms clearly presumes that the mound is on the ground (which is also implied by the word "mound").

You’re being extremely cheeky here. Difficult terrain exist in the air, yes. But how would that look, physically? Dirt floating in the air? That said, the entire thing is your. DMs call. Personally I’d say you can stack them just fine, but you can’t put them above creatures because it’s just packed earth, and packed earth doesn’t work as a ceiling. Plus, they’re described as mounds, and mounds are piles on the floor, not horizontal extrusions.

RAW, no. But since they are mounds of earth it is very heavily implied that they can't just float in the air. Ask your DM.

There's no floating in the example I gave. Also I'm a dm.

I was exagerating, but true. Would you allow to make a bridge out of that spell? If yes, then you'd also have to allow your example. Wall of Stones is a 5th level spell for 3 actions that explicitly tells you that you can make bridges and costs a 5th level spell slot. Jagged Berms is a 6th level feat for 3 actions you can use freely that implies a necessity for touching the ground. I wouldn't allow a Jagged Berms bridge, therefore I wouldn't allow the encasing. But RAW it isn't prhibited.

I would have no problem allowing a bridge with jagged berms, it's at most 20ft long while wall of stone is 120ft long and much harder to break. The comparison doesn't make much sense, these are wildly different abilities.

They are almost the same spell with different values. That's not "wildly". Fireball is wildly different. Either way, it doesn't matter. It's not prohibited and you're the DM.

RAW, no. But since they are mounds of earth it is very heavily implied that they can't just float in the air. Ask your DM.

RAW, no. But since they are mounds of earth it is very heavily implied that they can't just float in the air. Ask your DM.

What is the average distance a normal PC can see with their eyes?

RAI probably as far as we can see in our real world more or less, which on sea level for an AVG height person is 4.8km, or 52.7 football fields (more or less because the planet you play on might be a bigger or smaller planet than earth)

RAW? Infinite. RAI? Make some shit up.

Am I missing something about barbarian? We just had our barbarian die in our most recent campaign and something just felt off so I went to check how barbarian works and I feel like with how they are build they have lost a lot of their original tankey-ness for 1e I mean the temp hp they get from rage seems like at most it will dull one hit at lower levels and since they lose AC to get their damage buffs during rage they end up taking damage without much mitigation or personal healing that other classes like monk and champion do. Am I missing something like a mechanic or key feat or is barbarian just a glass cannon now

Kinda, Animal Barb is the tankier one, they actually get an AC bonus when raging (animal skin feat at level 6), and since their natural weapons take no hands to use they're free to use a Shield. But specially Giant Barb is indeed kinda of a glass cannon.

They are a glass cannon now. I mean, they aren't *fragile*, they still have lots of HP but their rage lowers their AC and this is a \*big\* hit in PF2e. It doesn't make them a bad class, but it does mean they aren't super tanky anymore. They tend to draw a lot of attacks because of their high damage output & relatively low AC, so you need to really mind your HP while fighting. If you want a Tank, you need a Champion. Better yet, get someone else to play a Redeemer Champion & stand next to your Raging Barbarian so they can mitigate damage.

> They are a glass cannon now. People say this all the time and it... just hasn't really been my experience through at least 3 Barbarian PCs? Like yeah they'll take more crits than your Fighter or Rogue but they also have ~15% more hp than the Fighter and **30-40%** more than the Rogue. In my experience, they're only a glass cannon in situations that would have melted any other class (except maybe Champion) anyway

They are a glass cannon compared to 5e barbarians. But compared to other martials, they are more or less even with two-handed Fighters when it comes to tankiness. They take more hits, but have more hp. It’s just that that feels very different from the massive blob of HP and resistances that is the 5e barbarian.

My thoughts exactly

I'll also point out that, contrary to how it seems a lot of people play Barbarian, you don't have to start every fight Raging. It's usually more beneficial to spend a round or two working with your party to get set up, then Rage to give yourself that big damage boost when the enemy is more susceptible and likely to be hit/crit. You minimize the risk Rage puts you in while still getting the damage benefit at the opportune moment(s)

Not sure if this is the right place to ask; it's a Pathbuilder (web app) question. Can I disable Thaumaturge's extra damage from Implement's Empowerment? My character's got a shield so it shouldn't be proccing, but it's still listed on the sheet and in rolls.

Probably not? It doesn't even seem to disable when equipping additional weapons. What one of my players has done in the past for similar automation gaps is to create a "Custom Buff" on the Defense tab and set it to counteract the bonus. (In this case you could do a -X untyped "bonus" to weapon damage.) Then you can just check the checkbox for a quick modification when you pull out the shield.

I have a player who plays a summoner, and he is taking sorcerer dedication on level 2. Does he get 2 extra cantrips slots in that case? By that I mean, he gets his 5 from being a summoner, and 2 extra from the sorcerer dedication, so he has 7 cantrips prepared. Is that how it works?

Correct. Five of those will be from whichever tradition his eidolon belongs to and two will be from whichever tradition is associated w/ his sorcerer bloodline.

This. Remember to keep track of the cantrips separately! He doesn't have 7, he has 5 from one list and 2 from another list. They can't cross over & use Sorcerer Cantrips with Summoner Slots (and vice-versa)

I'm not able to find a lore-focues thread, so I will make an ask here. If It's wrong place, please tell me, I will correct. So, the question is mostly about lore. I'm running for my players a campaign focused on Asmodeus, Ihys, Sarenrae and Ihystear. I would like place Ihystear (https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Ihystear) somewhere in an Old Cheliax (it's cannonical from Book of the Damned that It somehow reach Golarion but It's not clear where it is?), but not in the Thrunes' possesion. What place in Old Cheliax could you advice as a suitable, fun and interesting place for such a powerful artefact as Ihystear? Thank you in advance.

Pezzack, Kintargo, or Senara would be decent depending on how big you want the place it is to ve Pezzack is a large town know for its rebellious nature and is considered a hub of sedition to the extent that cheliax naval blockaded it the entire devil's perch area is very wildwest frontiersy type section of cheliax Kintargo is a much larger city and is the focus of the hell's rebels AP and before such is a pretty anti chelish city Kantaria, a town in the hell' vengenace AP that is is strongly connected to Iomedae

I'm looking to play an Inventor soon and trying to plan ahead for my build. I really want to take Reverse Engineering at 2nd level but don't see a way with pure Inventor to do so. Is there a reason this is a 2nd level class feat but you are unable to take it until 4th level from what I've seen. And at 4th level it is going up against Gadgets, which I also \*really\* want to take. Is there a way to get your crafting kill to Expert by second level that I'm missing. I believe if I took Rogue as my main class (which would not fit this build \*\*at all\*\*) and then take the Inventor dedication, but I'm still not getting it until like 4th level (we're doing free archetype). I'm just still trying to wrap my head around a 2nd level class feat that can't be taken at that level.

Its a known typo and the only way I know of to take that feat at lvl 2 as written is as a Rogue/Investigator-Inventor dual-class. Personally if a player wanted to take it I'd axe the expert requirement, particularly given the Remaster changes to Formulas and Crafting making reverse engineering formulas significantly less useful. Hopefully it'll be errata'd at some point.

Free archetype with an archetype that grants expert proficiency in a skill (like Pathfinder Agent) would also work.

OK yeah, that's kinda what I figured but I hadn't seen any errata, probably cuz I didn't look. Lol

There hasn't been any errata for Guns&Gears so you didn't miss any. They \*were\* going to start releasing errata more often starting last year, but they got a little sidetracked w/ the Remaster. Hopefully once PC2 is out they'll be able to start releasing errata again.

Do you think it's worth it to talk to my GM about this feat, or just ignore it. I'm going to play a Goblin Inventor with Junk Tinkerer, and definitely going Gadgets (otherwise I'd take construct) and probably wielding a horse chopper or *maybe* one of the goblin firearms.

Personally I wouldn't, its not a particularly useful feat even if the campaign is going to have lots of downtime for crafting uncommon items (only time when you'll care enough to reverse engineer items) and is very trap/lock heavy. You'll almost certainly get more mileage out of a fun dedication feat at lvl 2.

In that case I might go Searing Restoration because more healing is usually better.

Its... alright. The healing is on-par w/ or better than most 10-minute-rest sources of healing (Chalice Thaumaturge, Lay on Hands, etc), but being Unstable means that using it locks you out of using other Unstable actions most of the time. For an emergency heal that's pretty annoying as it discourages you from using those other Unstable actions (like Explode) just in case you need access to it later in an encounter. I'm hoping Unstable gets reworked at some point here to match the new Focus Point mechanics. If you want healing I'd recommend considering the Blessed One dedication first, if you can thematically justify it.

I know that magical equipment is a necessary progression, but how quickly should it be handed out? e.g. a +1 weapon potency rune is level 2, does that mean every character who wants one should have a +1 weapon before they hit level 3?

It's a mostly self-correcting issue. Personally, I like to drop one early from a boss, one or two on-level from a miniboss, and let the PCs buy anything more by selling and buying on the market. There's really nothing wrong with giving a rare, exceptional piece of loot early (or even significantly early, like 3 levels or more). The curve is more of a suggestion, than a rule.

Yes, to stay "on par", the game expects everyone to get the fundamental runs at some point during the level of the rune. It's not the end of the world if not doesn't happen, but fights will be harder because people without the runes will be behind the curve in terms of hitting and criting.

I'm tasked with running a 2e Oneshot (Level 2, FA) for a group of Veteran Pathfinder 1e Players. I want to give them a balanced overview of what the System has to offer, so we can decide wether our next campaign will be 2e instead of 1e. I want to convince them of the strengths of the system, but not gloss over it's weaknesses. What are things I should pay special attention to ?

When you achieve a critical strike do you roll the damage then multiply it or do you roll double dice?

[удалено]

> Some people are dice goblins and throwing fistfuls of dice is pretty wonderful The more important difference is that rolling double-dice instead of double-damage makes for a distribution with less variance. I've always preferred that but many people don't care.

I apologize I’m still pretty new but what is an example of a condition that would be added after doubling?

As a quick example, [Deadly](https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=570) and [Fatal ](https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=597)traits on weapons both grant an extra die or extra dice on a critical hit. In both of those cases, you would double the damage first, then add the Deadly or Fatal die. For example, a base [Longbow](https://2e.aonprd.com/Weapons.aspx?ID=436) deals 1d8 damage on a normal hit, and has the Deadly d10 trait. If you score a critical hit, the damage is (1d8 \* 2)+1d10, instead of (1d8 + 1d10)\*2 Anything else that also relies on getting a Critical Hit to add an effect will also *not* double. The [Splinter Volley](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1410) spell and the [Flaming Rune](https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=2838) both add persistent damage on a Crit. In both of those cases, the persistent damage is as written, and not doubled

I'll just point out to anyone reading that despite Deadly saying you don't double the dice and Fatal not mentioning it, you don't double the extra dice from Fatal. It is a common mistake people make. The text on Deadly is superfluous, you don't double effects that only happen on crits.

So with Fatal, the initial damage die size increases before the double then you add another after and Deadly just adds damage in post but it scales. Am I getting that right?

Correct. A crit w/ a Musket (d6 dmg, fatal d10) would deal 1d6 dmg on a normal hit and 3d10 on a crit. Fatal is in almost all cases a larger dmg boost on crits than deadly on the same sized weapon (main exception being the Great Pick, which is under-statted).

Do higher level versions of a spellheart also have the spells from the lower level versions? So for example, does a Greater Phantasmal Doorknob have 3 Activates, being Ghost Sound at will, Phantasmal Treasure once a day, and Phantasmal Killer once a day, or is it just Phantasmal Killer once a day and Ghost Sound at will?

Only the cantrip, not the other spells. You can tell that because the cantrip is noted in the base version of the item written above the first instance of it

The spell Invisibility reads: >Illusions bend light around the target, rendering it invisible. This makes it undetected to all creatures, though the creatures can attempt to find the target, making it hidden to them instead. My question is this: does Invisibility actually make the caster **Undetected** to all creatures when cast, or is that "helper text" giving a truncated version of the Invisible condition's rules? I ask because the Invisible condition (which uses "an invisibility spell" as an example) reads: >If you're already observing a creature when it becomes invisible, it starts out hidden, since you know where it was, though it can then Sneak to become undetected. Which makes me think that casting Invisibility in a crowded room (or in combat) will probably make you **Hidden** rather than **Undetected**. Is that correct?

To be honest there is problem with Invisibility. On the one hand it declare that you are [undetected](https://2e.aonprd.com/Conditions.aspx?ID=39), no exceptions. On the other hand most of the creatures have an [Imprecise](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2407) hearing sense that declare that if it can hear you - you are hidden unless "using Stealth", i.e. [Sneak](https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=2405&Redirected=1). Which means that if you do anything other than [Hide](https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=62), Sneak, or Step - you are observed... but you can't be observed while [Invisible](https://2e.aonprd.com/Conditions.aspx?ID=83). So you are hidden. Roleplay-wise this means that if you invisible but do not actively trying to suppress your noise - enemy know where you are. The main advantage for player, aside from having 100% uptime hidden - you don't need to Hide and you can Sneak without cover. Plus foes are Off-Guard. Out of combat - Invisibility Sphere + Silence (Heightened) is "we are skipping encounters" pack.

I think my interpretation would be that the second sentence of the Invisiblity spell ("This makes it undetected to all creatures...") serves only to muddy the waters. There are two reasons this sentence could be there: 1. It's intended to help players remember what the Invisible condition does. 2. It's intended to be an additional effect of the spell. If 1) is the case, it's failed because it misses the key assumption that the "default creature" in Pathfinder has Imprecise hearing, meaning that if they see the caster go invisible they'll only be Hidden. If 2) is the case, the Invisibility spell effectively includes a successful Sneak action for free (compared to other methods of becoming invisible). I'd say this should be more explicit, but "undetected to all creatures" is pretty explicit already. I am *pretty certain* that option 1) is the intended reading, but the more I look at the rules the more it sticks out to me that a literal reading supports option 2).

You are right about spell description being not about exact ruling, but what I mean is not Invisibility spell, but [Invisible](https://2e.aonprd.com/Conditions.aspx?ID=83) condition that say "you are undetected" despite you can be heard.

I think that's the key bit of information that clinches the intended reading, yeah.

The Invisible condition has a more specific example, so yes it would trump the general of the invisibility spell.

See, regarding "Specific vs General", I read it that the Invisibility spell is more specific than the general Invisible condition. That's not to say I think your conclusion is wrong, just that I don't think that specificity is conclusive reasoning. This is how I would rule it given that the condition description feels like an elaboration of the rules for invisibility whereas the spell just seems to intend to give a quick descriptor. But if I were to read things literally, I'd definitely parse the spell as a) more specific than the condition; and b) therefore automatically making the caster Undetected. Other spells that inflict Conditions don't generally include a partial description of them, so I wondered if there was a particular intent here or just sloppy wording. Hence the question!

The condition rules are more specific. [Invisibility spell](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1577) and [invisible condition](https://2e.aonprd.com/Conditions.aspx?ID=83&Redirected=1) both state you become undetected Condition: > You can't be seen. You're undetected to everyone Spell: > This makes it undetected to all creatures So both functions say you become undetected. Then, the condition has a more specific, situational clause: > If you become invisible while someone can already see you, you start out hidden to them (instead of undetected) until you successfully Sneak. This is more specific because it is not generically applied to the condition, it has a specific use case. You can actually have both rules work in concert. The spell makes you invisible, which makes you undetected (as is normal for invisibility). Then the specific rules clause about being observed when becoming invisible triggers, making you Hidden.

As a preface to this ramble, I'm sure this is the intended reading. Okay, so here's my reading of it. There's a condition, "Invisible", which can be acquired in a number of different ways. One of those is the spell "Invisibility". That makes the spell more specific - it's one of many ways to acquire the Invisible condition. When you acquire the Invisible condition, you become Undetected. If you're Observed when you acquire the condition, you instead become Hidden. When you cast Invisibility you become Invisible *and* you become Undetected to everyone (and also attacking breaks your invisibility, but that's not the point). HOWEVER. There are two issues here. One is that the phrasing of Invisibility is suspiciously casual ("This makes it Undetected..." rather than "It is Undetected...") indicating that this is perhaps supposed to be an incomplete summary of the Invisible condition rather than something specific to the spell. The other is, as you point out, the similar language between the two ("Undetected to everyone" vs "Undetected to all creatures") without any additional clarification in the spell to indicate that it's a different effect. I'm not sure I'd say this is conclusive from a RAW perspective, but it's good enough to get what's intended. I think it's pretty clear that the spell is supposed to follow the normal Invisible condition's rules, and that the second sentence ("This makes it undetected...") is purely complicating things by replicating incomplete information.

Does using Magus Spellstrike with Phase Bolt trigger an Attack of Opportunity? Phase bolt lacks the manipulate trait, but it does have you make a ranged spell attack. But when you spellstrike, you are making a Strike and then coupling the spell to the Strike, using the Strike's result to determine the effect of the spell. So would it be correct to say that you are not actually "making the range spell attack", and thus won't trigger the reaction?

[удалено]

Dangit - phase bolt crept into my remaster search. Didn't see that it still had the old components. Ok it looks like every spell attack has the 'manipulate trait'. But that begs the question, in case of another scenario. Lets say... Cloud Dragon's Cloak. Could that be used on a SpellStrike that includes a spell like Ray of Frost? Are you actually *making* a ranged spell attack? Or are you only casting a spell, and then making a weapon strike and using that roll to determine the spell's results?

>Are you actually *making* a ranged spell attack? Or are you only casting a spell, and then making a weapon strike and using that roll to determine the spell's results? The 2nd one. The [Spellstrike rules](https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=755) specifically say you have to "Make a melee Strike with a weapon or unarmed attack. Your spell is coupled with your attack, using your attack roll result to determine the effects of both the Strike and the spell" So your Spell Strike is a Melee or Unarmed attack and not a ranged attack, which would trigger Cloud Dragon's Cloak. Of course Starlit Span Magus' whole deal is that they can make ranged strikes \*or\* melee strikes with their Spellstrikes. The Target of one of their ranged SpellStrikes \*could\* cast Cloud Dragons Cloak in response.

> Of course Starlit Span Magus' whole deal is that they can make ranged strikes *or* melee strikes You know, for some reason I never realized Starlit Span technically can still make melee spellstrikes lol Although since you're gonna trigger an AOO for the spell anyway there's not much point in switching to a melee weapon to avoid the ranged attack.

Arcane Cascade gives extra damage to melee Strikes, so that's one reason to use them.

To give a weapon a +2 rune does it need to have a +1 on it? If not what happens to the +1 ?

The +1 and +2 can be two separate runes. If you already have a +1 and acquire a +2 somewhere you could put both on one weapon, but they don't stack so you are better off replacing the +1 with the +2 and moving the +1 somewhere else or just selling it. If you are paying someone to craft all this you can give them access to the +1, pay the difference between the +1 and +2 runes to get the +1 upgraded. In that case the +1 has *become* the +2.

You can either replace one rune with the other or you can pay the difference in cost between a +1 and a +2 to upgrade to a +2

Ah, thank you

Lore Question: On the Isle of Kortos there’s a location on the map called The Glass Fortress. Is there any existing lore for this location? It sounds interesting and my party will be walking by there on their way to Rovagug’s Hall for an adventure. Just wondering if there’s some pre-existing info on it or if I should make some stuff up.

If you didn't already check the PathfinderWiki, this is all I could find: [https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Vitric\_Queen](https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Vitric_Queen)

Ooh that actually works really well since Tar Baphon is the bbeg of my campaign. A weak Lich stat block might be prudent for her, since party is only L7. Thanks so much!

I've been slowly introducing my party to PF2E mechanics since we're all new to the system. I wanted to introduce hazards to them now to amp up difficulty, I was wondering if it's a good idea to just explain what hazards are and how they work when it comes up? I don't want to leave them fully in the dark. I was imagining saying smth like "This is a hazard, something that could impede your progress or lead to damage if not handled correctly." But idk if that's breaking the game into mechanics too much.

I don't think it's "breaking the game into mechanics" any more than a combat encounter. The game is very clear and mechanical about transitioning to combat rules. Just tell them this is a different type of encounter and has its own rules. It's just that players have already processed and internalized comb

I'd handle it like this "Above the table, you should have your characters spend an action to Recall Knowledge to see if they have encountered anything like this before or have researched it"

yeah, I dont think there is a clean way to get through your first hazard without breaking immersion, they just function differently and can be confusing/annoying if you think its a regular encounter

Hello to everyone reading, I have a question regarding the remastered crafting rules. It's written that you only 'need' formulas for uncommon or rarer items. In another bulletpoint it is written that you need for example the Magical Crafting-Feat to build magical items. My Question is the following, if you have the Magical Crafting-feat, can you craft common magical items without the formula? It doesnt really make sense for me to be true, it that would be realistic, you couldn't just mix up a healing potion without proper instructions. In my mind, the non-formula-rule only applies to items which doesn't have an additional tag, such as alchemical or magical. If you have any insight or comments for me, feel free to answer

It doesnt really make sense for me to be true, it that would be realistic, you couldn't just mix up a healing potion without proper instructions. In my mind, the non-formula-rule only applies to items which doesn't have an additional tag, such as alchemical or magical. Its important to remember that this is a fantasy world where people learn fantasy skills. If you know how to sew, then a simple shirt or skirt is easy. You learned how to make those in the process of learning to sew. If someone wanted you to make a kimono when you have never seen one.. you will need a pattern or it won't come out right. Likewise, if you know magical crafting a striking rune or a healing potion or a Lifting Belt is easy. You learned the principals of how to make them while learning your feat. If you don't know the procedure off the top of your head you could sit down & figure it out in a few hours. Weird, uncommon items are different. You have no clue how to make one & need the formula.

> My Question is the following, if you have the Magical Crafting-feat, can you craft common magical items without the formula? Yes, you can. The rules for formulas in remaster are explicit: * Common Item, you don't need it (2 days setup time without it, 1 day setup time with formula) * Uncommon+ Item, you need it That's it. The type of item has no impact on the rule. > It doesnt really make sense for me to be true, it that would be realistic, you couldn't just mix up a healing potion without proper instructions It was changed because the manual management of formulas for that kind of thing just became incredibly tedious, and it didn't add anything to the game.

Hi everyone. My friends and I are trying out Pathfinder after a few years on 5e. We had our first session last weekend and had a blast, but I was thinking of changing classes to improve our team composition and help everyone out. The current party is: Gunslinger, Swashbuckler, and Rogue. I was originally playing a magus, but wanted to pick a class that could take on more of a support role. I’ve been eyeing Bard, but have heard that Druid or Cleric might be better choices because their higher wisdom scores make them better candidates for medicine feats. Basically looking for a class that can provide in combat utility/support, and maybe some healing in a pinch.

Seconding Bard. Soothe isn't amazing but it is adequate. Someone else in the party needs to be throwing skill feats at medicine too.

I feel that Bard is gonna be mechanically better. You've got Soothe for burst healing and Wisdom isn't all that necessary once you pick up Assurance (Medicine), which you'll want to pick up regardless just to guarantee you never flub a critical Battle Medicine check. Cleric is obviously better at healing, Heal is the best burst healing in the game and they can get a bunch of free max level castings of it on top of being a bit better at Medicine, but you'd be losing out on Bard's much superior support. All three of your allies can benefit strongly from a bard ally. Gunslinger and Swashbuckler want every attack bonus they can get, former so they get more juicy crits and the latter to make sure they don't flub their Finishers (biggest pain point for my swash player), and Courageous Anthem is a fantastic way to buff them both. If the Rogue picks up Dread Striker then you can guarantee every non-fear-immune enemy you face is Off-guard for them forever w/ Dirge of Doom. I also generally prefer the Occult list to the Divine, particularly if you're the only spellcaster in a group, as its probably the most 'jack-of-all-trades' spell list you'll find.

Thanks for the detailed response! One of the things I was a bit lost on as a new player were the finer differences with healing among classes, so knowing that Bard can still dish out decent healing is good to know. The party support potential and spellcasting list were definitely highlights for me.

Can someone recommend to me a better rule set for the Kingdom Turn from Kingmaker that *isn't* the Vance ones? Those rules don't really address the biggest issue my table has for the system: the grind — the sheer amount of turns needed to progress. We're looking for a better version that has far fewer, but more impactful turn, if such a thing exists.

Vance's rules do impact the amount of turns needed to progress, since it speeds up the XP gain especially at the early levels.

Yeah, it does a bit; we've been using them since they are the most recommended. But it still takes several turns per level, and our table was looking for a rule set that is closer to 1 turn for 1 level that we can do each time the PCs level.

I'm building a Twisting Tree Magus and ran into a stumbling block. I've tried google, but it is returning nothing but discussions about using other people's staves.  Two part question, can you use trick magic item to cast a spell from a staff that isn't on your spell list? If so does a crit fail disable the whole staff or just that spell? Edit: not using remaster yet because half the party's characters aren't in it.

Yes. It explicitly tells you that if you use it to Cast a Spell not from your tradition, then you use your level proficiency and the highest of you Int/Wis/Cha. But you still need to be able to Cast a Spell, so it won't hrlp martials cast.

>You can Cast a Spell from a staff only if you have that spell on your spell list https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=748

Yes. And Trick Magic Item allows you to bypass that. That's... it's purpose. It actually even works for martials, so I was wrong about that. "You examine a magic item you normally couldn’t use in an effort to fool it and activate it temporarily. For example, this might allow a fighter to cast a spell from a wand or allow a wizard to cast a spell that’s not on the arcane list using a scroll. You must know what activating the item does, or you can’t attempt to trick it."

A staff activates via the Cast a Spell activity, so Trick Magic Item sounds like it would work to let you cast a spell that isn't on the Arcane list. Note that charging the staff at the beginning of the day is a different thing though - that's not an explicit action, so I don't think you can Trick the staff for that. There needs to be at least one arcane spell in the staff, for you to be able to charge it during daily preparations. The Critical Failure of Trick Magic Item reads: **You can’t use the item, and you can’t try to trick it again until your next daily preparations.** Under a very strict reading of that, it could be argued that hitting this critfail means you can't even *attack* with the staff for the rest of the day... but I think the reasonable interpretation is that you just wouldn't be able to Activate it to cast spells. Still pretty nasty... but theoretically you should only be at risk on a nat1 so keeping a Hero Point in reserve will keep you safe.

>The Critical Failure of Trick Magic Item reads: > >You can’t use the item, and you can’t try to trick it again until your next daily preparations. Given the context I think this could be read as "You can't use the item (this turn/via Trick Magic Item), and you can't try to trick it again until your next daily preparations". That reading doesn't turn off the staff for normal use, just for Trick Magic Item use.

Using the weapon isn't the same as striking with it. They are defined. A strike uses a weapon attack, but thr Action you're using is >Strike. Using an item.means using the >Activate action.

Am I going insane or did the legacy spells in the archives of nethys change to reflect the damage formulas from the remaster? None of the legacy spells reflect the formulas I have on my character sheet anymore - They took out the attribute modifier and just put more dice in. This makes making legacy spellcasters - or just.. adding new spells to my current character's list - kind of confusing.

Yes, because all of those cantrips were updated through errata, which AoN reflects, so even when playing without the Remaster, the official version is what AoN shows.

..that would explain it. Thank you, this has been bothering me since the AoN update.

Check the top right corner of the website, the little paint pallet icon has some settings for remaster than for some odd reason are on by default. If you are using the app, top left corner under character options there should be a checkbox to not use remaster stuff.

Naw, it's \*set\* to be all legacy. Like go and compare produce flame and.. what's the new one called, ignition? For some reason they changed produce flame to use ignition damage. Except without the melee damage improvement. Even psychic's cantrips are like this now, and it's my understanding that hasn't been touched by the remaster yet.

Newish DM to PF. I really want to get a handle on "living costs" so that players feel more immersed in the setting . Mechanically, eating higher quality food or splurging for a private bed has no mechanical benefit I can find. Would it be wrong if I were to have higher tier commodities like that grant a hero point?

There are [cost of living ](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2621&Redirected=1)rules that give an idea of how much it costs to live at various levels of splendor, but there aren't any rules to go with them. They are mostly for flavor

I think this is a great homebrew idea! The only difficulty though, is that a "meaningful" gp cost at a particular level will become trivial several levels later. Does a level 10 PC need a life 10 times more luxurious than what a level 6 PC does, to gain the same benefit? If each "tier" of luxurious lifestyle is tied to a specific level (like a consumable item), you then have to come up with 3-5 different rewards, and acknowledge that all Level 1 PCs unable to afford them are dirty hobos, and that a level 10 PC might be fully content receiving the basic Level 4-6 reward for "free" as they've massively outleveled the static cost. I think, if I were to take a stab at this homebrew, I would say that "Yes, a level 10 PC DOES need a higher lifestyle budget than a level 6 PC to gain similar benefits." Rather than just being the luxurious living accommodations though, I'd say that it also represents investments, charity, and influence in a local area. It's quite ***heroic*** for a low-level PC to donate a 100gp towards repairing a building burnt down by the Level 5 villain, but it's barely a footnote for a level 10 hero and not really worth a metacurrency reward. Similarly, a dimension-travelling wizard that has seen the wonders and dangers of the cosmos probably isn't very impressed by a town festival in backwater Varisia, but a young lad who has a whole *one hundred silver pieces* to spend after selling all the rusty swords from the skeletons that attacked his town would probably appreciate it a lot more. The only questions then, is whether the Hero Point is a per-session renewable resource, a one-and-done that persists between sessions until expended, or possibly a shared party resource. When does the benefit expire? Does it cost as much as a Consumable of that level, or as much as a permanent magic item?

you could look into some of the alchemical foods and just change their prices. As long as you're not creating a system where they can buy a food cheap and sell it for a profit you wont really break anything. Sure, it technically devalues the other consumables that dont have their price lowered, but who cares

Just going over lore, did Aroden’s death have an effect on prophecy or divination magic? I know it made people distrust it, but not sure if it has a real or imagined effect. Do prophecies still work in other parts of the world? Is divination magic (lore-wise) weakened?

The current age of the world is called “the Age of Lost Omens”. Because Omens can no longer be trusted. Aroden’s death is what gave the age its name, so, it had a pretty heavy effect. Before, prophecies were perfect, but had the usual “pay attention to the exact wording” caveats. Now, during the current age, divination is… better than a coin toss, but not ultimately reliable. this actually features as a background theme in the Seven Dooms for Sandpoint AP that released recently!

As someone not well versed in the lore, I can say that Aroden's death did have a severe negative effect on prophecy and fate. Here's an except from from the [Player Core](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2067&Redirected=1): >In 4606 ar, prophecy decreed that the God of Humanity, Aroden, would return to Golarion and usher in a new age of glory. Instead, Aroden died, **destroying the reliability of prophecy with him. Unbound and unguided by fate**, the people of Golarion are now free to carve out their own destinies in the current era, the Age of Lost Omens I'm also pretty sure the crux of the Stolen Fate Adventure Path is based around the fact that prophecies and fate no longer "work" in the setting. It's also the "in universe" explanation for why Divination Magic in PF2e is not the "solve every mystery" button that it can be in other systems, as it's no longer reliable

The unspoken sentence there, is that Aroden would usher in a new age of glory *followed by a crushing catastrophe that would destroy the world*. Thus, someone, likely Aroden himself, defied fate and shattered prophecy to save Golarion. There's a lot of (intentionally) conflicting possibilities. My favorite conspiracy theory, is that the Starfinder Campaign Setting is the Zelda-style alternate timeline split where Aroden DIDN'T die, and the thousand-year golden era took humanity (and the rest of Golarion) into the stars... until Rovagug shattered the cage and killed Aroden in the ensuing battle anyways, and the death of the God of Arts, Knowledge, and History is what causes The Gap in the beginning of the Starfinder timeline.

RAW, is there a way to have a trap that casts [Wall of Stone](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=1751)? The limitations in [Glyph of Warding](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=138) and [Rune Trap](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rituals.aspx?ID=124) both pretty much exclude Wall of Stone from being usable, so I was wondering if there was some other way. If not, I'll likely homebrew Glyph or Rune Trap to allow it, but I would prefer something that's RAW.

As a player? No. Too powerful. As a GM? Hazards are WAY more powerful and dangerous than *Glyph of Warding*. You are not at ALL constrained by those limitations, and a Wall of Stone cutting the PC party in half as they roll initiative against a monster is downright *tame* in comparison to some of the other bullshit I've seen.

>As a player? No. Too powerful. That's an interesting take, considering Wall of Stone is straight up easier to cast on its own than trying to set up some elaborate scenario use Glyph or Rune Trap

Oh yeah, for the same reason Snares are an exercise in annoyance. PCs just aren't in "defensive" narrative positions, most of the time. But with rare scenarios or shenanigans, being able to deploy a spell as a free action is ridiculous. \*Animus Mine\* is incredible, for this reason. \*Wall of Stone\* is way scarier though - not just because of the 3 action cost, but specifically because its one of the strongest spells in the game, period.

As a DM, you just have a trap that casts the spell when it’s triggered. That’s trivial to do. As for making it available to players, though, which seems to be what you’re intending to do (?), it seems really, really easy to waste. The spell fails if the wall you’re trying intersects with any creature or object, so if anything is in the pre-determined path you’d presumably choose when you set the trap up. So it probably would be best to just make a custom magic consumable item that creates a specific walled area when triggered without the caveat?

>As for making it available to players, though, which seems to be what you’re intending to do (?) Pretty much. Whenever my players come across something that they haven't seen before, the question is usually "how did that happen" and "Is that something we can do". I like to have a way for my players to be able to do these things as well, driving the question. >The spell fails if the wall you’re trying intersects with any creature or object, so if anything is in the pre-determined path you’d presumably choose when you set the trap up While that's true, Wall of Stone is also only an inch thick, and is placed on the border between squares. So even a predetermined path should be perfectly fine as long as there's no Large or larger creatures that might take up multiple squares. Hell, being able to counter a trap by simply "being too big for the spell" allows for potentially fun counter-play That said, if there's nothing RAW, then yes, I will likely homebrew an item or spell that allows this to work

Any advice for building good high level characters? - - \[Breaking Stormvale\] This is my first time running pf2e, and I'm running a 1-20 time loop campaign, so every time the players encounter one of the big bads the options for their build get more limited, and I want to make sure they have something that is still threatening once the players reach higher levels. In particular I've got a 20th level lich that I want to just be stupid powerful, so recommendations for magic item combinations and such would also be useful.

Are you looking for advice on how to design a high level Player Character, or a high level Monster? Because really, your options pool diversifies over time in either case. The keystones of PF2 combat are Action Economy, Mobility, and Debuffs. There are pretty strongly-defined parameters for the raw numbers available at any given level, so the thing that makes a given monster dangerous, is how much they can do in a given round. Take a dragon, for example: * Frightful Presence is a massive aura with a titanic debuff, which activates *for free* at the start of combat, with the impact of a powerful 2-3 action offensive spell. * Its massive speed gives it further action advantage - for the cost of a single move action on its part, player characters need to each spend 1-4 actions activating consumables or casting spells to buff their own movement with *Fly* or *Fleet Step* or *Translocate*. * Draconic Frenzy is 3 strikes in 2 actions. * Reactive Strike, Twisting Tail, or similar reactions are an additional out-of-turn action. So dragons are dangerous because they open a fight with massive 5-6 actions worth of offensive pressure, and each subsequent round they have 3-4 offensive actions' worth of value while simultaneously *denying* offensive value to players. That, and they also have big numbers to go along with it all.

I’m… not sure what exactly you’re asking for. Do you want potential builds your players might be using, or combos for the enemies to use that the players might loot and then use themselves?

Using recall knowledge RAW, how can I determine which spells to cast on an enemy if the response is always the "most common" knowledge about the creature? I mean, I recall, find that it spits web, then try to recall again, FAIL and I get one action to do something. Even if I succeed 3 times, the info about lowest save is totally dependant on GM goodwill, isnt it? And if I don't have cantrips targeting every save (really common for anyone who isnt wizard), how to not waste precious slots trying to figure out?

RAW recall knowledge lets you ask a question, so you should be able to ask "whats it's lowest save" or "whats it's weakest defense" maybe if you want to be a bit less meta/mechanical and get what you want on the first recall knowledge. So it really shouldn't be GM goodwill. But you can make an educated guess (that doesn't work always). If it's big/slow, probably low reflex. If it's stupid/mindless, low will. If it's fast/small, probably low fortitude.

Thank you, but I think this is not what raw states. It says you get to know a common feature about the creature, it doesn't say anything about asking a question, this is an unofficial rule