Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8113637" data-attributes="member: 70468">This feels like whoever wrote and edited polar ray forgot that spell attacks only do the listed damage in the spell description. Hopefully it gets fixed in the upcoming errata.The intent appears to be the GM should decide whether one can use a particular manipulate action (with having no hands and being unable to use manipulate actions requiring hands being the default). That’s fine. The GM can make an appropriate ruling in those cases.The stuff about casting is weird. In PF1, casting in another form was usually the benefit of a class feature. As far as I can tell, that’s not the case here. Holdover restriction from a previous edition? I think it would be reasonable for the GM to allow casting in some forms. That that should be possible needs to be made more clear (especially in the appendix where it doesn’t mention GM discretion at all).I like that traits are little bundles of rules that mostly keep to themselves, but they unquestionably make the game harder to learn. Some of this is presentation, but I’m not sure how much. I agree the game needs an editing pass.I think they’re treating it like adjusting your grip on a putter. It would make more sense (and probably be more realistic) if they had an action to set your fighting posture, and dropping out of it was free. You could even have an exploration activity where you move with weapon readied (a twin to the defend action). However, I doubt that would have been well-received.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenada, post: 8113637, member: 70468"] This feels like whoever wrote and edited [I]polar ray[/I] forgot that spell attacks only do the listed damage in the spell description. Hopefully it gets fixed in the upcoming errata. The intent appears to be the GM should decide whether one can use a particular manipulate action (with having no hands and being unable to use manipulate actions requiring hands being the default). That’s fine. The GM can make an appropriate ruling in those cases. The stuff about casting is weird. In PF1, casting in another form was usually the benefit of a class feature. As far as I can tell, that’s not the case here. Holdover restriction from a previous edition? I think it would be reasonable for the GM to allow casting in some forms. That that should be possible needs to be made more clear (especially in the appendix where it doesn’t mention GM discretion at all). I like that traits are little bundles of rules that mostly keep to themselves, but they unquestionably make the game harder to learn. Some of this is presentation, but I’m not sure how much. I agree the game needs an editing pass. I think they’re treating it like adjusting your grip on a putter. It would make more sense (and probably be more realistic) if they had an action to set your fighting posture, and dropping out of it was free. You could even have an exploration activity where you move with weapon readied (a twin to the defend action). However, I doubt that would have been well-received. [/QUOTE]

Verification