Pathfinder Second Edition - Core Rules module (not PFRPG2 ruleset) info and feedback

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trenloe

See my post above here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...l=1#post446975

Amiri has 18 strength, so the speed penalty is 5 less (making it 0) and armor check penalty doesn’t apply. Thus the Paizo pregen is correct.

The quick work around is to manually change the armor penalties in the section in the bottom left of the inventory tab.

---

Ah ok, so I was looking at it from older editions :) I thought the strength score was the minimum to use, but it eliminates the penalties if you meet the score. That's good cause I thought it was a little extreme to be at -2 with crappy hide armor!!

SKILL effect: When adding negative skills to the tracker, the effect does not take place. Positive boosts do work.

Example: Goblin Song gives SKILL: -1 perception to targets on success (along with a negative to will saves). I tested it for other skills, too, just to make sure it wasn't limited to just perception.

Hello All,

Great work Trenloe, This is a mammoth task and I thank you for it.

It doesn't look like Clumsy:1 effect is working properly. I tested it for the -1 to AC and it didn't apply.

Thanks again.

Good work Trenloe! Epic stuff

Noticed this small bug:

Attachment 28214

The 'Field Medic' background fails to add the 'Battle Medic' feat when dropped on to the character sheet.
In the feats list the feat is actually called 'Battle Medicine'

When the Herbalist background is added through the tracker it is offering Dex or Wisdom, should be Con or Wisdom. It also adds the Survey Wildlife feat instead of the Natural Medicine feat and trains in Hunting Lore instead of Herbalism lore.

Seems like its tied to the wrong background so hopefully its an easy enough change =).

Edit: This was already reported! I'll be sure to check the issue tracker before reporting in the future.

Just noticed this as testing out some of the creatures and making some minor fixes:

All entries in the Ranged Attack section (for creatures) are coming up as [Attack (M)]. This includes all the range x feet, range increment x feet, and thrown x feet tags.

Thanks to everyone who's reported issues. I've updated the issue tracker and will work on resolving these in future releases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeRaven

I noticed that you have the nice symbols in the spell descriptions under casting. However, on the Actions/Spells tab, we don't have those symbols translated to images to indication # of actions like we did with the [[a]], etc. (which, incidentally, still works if you put that in). Not a huge deal, but it was nice having that quick reference to actions required.

---

I'm going to implement something like this:

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...chmentid=28216

That would be beautiful!

So Mr Trenloe. Paizo just had their big announcement today. And i bet you must be cursing the gods for literally how much they have coming in the next year. :rofl: tell me, how do you feel about that?

The champion has references to deity weapons and bonus deity skills. I would guess clerics have similar things but have messed with them. It's extremely difficult to locate information on deities in FG. Have to hunt for them in the reference manual. Is there a chance of getting a list or link to them for character creation?

I can roll Initiative and combat from the respective character sheet tabs, but they don't seem to be communicating with the Combat Tracker. Characters I create show up in the Tracker without weapons (I have them marked equipped in the Actions tab under Preparation and Combat) and have +0 Initiative values (they should both have +6). When I click on the initiative button in the Tracker (just says 0) to see if I can change it manually it I get the message:

Script Error: [string "campaign/scripts/manager_char.lua"]:1123: attempt to index local 'sSkill' (a nil value)

Just to reiterate in a more concise way, weapons and initiative work when I roll straight from the character sheet but don't populate the Tracker. However, Initiatives rolled straight from the character sheet DO update the Initiative values in the Tracker itself.

Vaeron, that's interesting because I never thought to try it. In general, I believe the expectation is that things like weapon attacks, initiative, saves, etc., get rolled from character sheets. Those fields are there to make the DM's job easier when it comes to acting out creature (NPC) actions.

Regardless, though, I am sure Trenloe doesn't want error messages to come up when they are clicked on, even if there's no intention of having them filled from the character sheet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mozmonar

The champion has references to deity weapons and bonus deity skills. I would guess clerics have similar things but have messed with them. It's extremely difficult to locate information on deities in FG. Have to hunt for them in the reference manual. Is there a chance of getting a list or link to them for character creation?

---

Yeah, it is difficult at present. The only place Paizo gave that info is in Chapter 8 -> Religion. View that info in the reference manual.

We plan to go through the data and replace the "see page XX" entries with links to a relevant section. Logged as CR2.006 in the issue tracker. So this should help in the long run. In the meantime, please access via the reference manual entry mentioned above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaeron

I can roll Initiative and combat from the respective character sheet tabs, but they don't seem to be communicating with the Combat Tracker. Characters I create show up in the Tracker without weapons (I have them marked equipped in the Actions tab under Preparation and Combat) and have +0 Initiative values (they should both have +6). When I click on the initiative button in the Tracker (just says 0) to see if I can change it manually it I get the message:

Script Error: [string "campaign/scripts/manager_char.lua"]:1123: attempt to index local 'sSkill' (a nil value)

Just to reiterate in a more concise way, weapons and initiative work when I roll straight from the character sheet but don't populate the Tracker. However, Initiatives rolled straight from the character sheet DO update the Initiative values in the Tracker itself.

---

Thanks for reporting the error. This will occur until a future update adds the ability to specify the skill to use to roll for initiative in the combat tracker. Logged as issue CR2.018, I'll default that field to use the PC Perception for now.

So let me expand on how this all operates.

1) PC attacks have never shown in the combat tracker for previous ruleset and that won't change for PFRPG2 - the data is way too complex to display simply in the combat tracker. Hence why there is not an "Atk" entry for PCs. Attack entries in the combat tracker are limited to NPC. GMs will rarely need to roll PC attacks. But if they do, they can open the PC sheet (link on the CT) and roll from there.
2) Initiative rolls from the PC sheet will only operate fully if rolled from the "Initiative" section of the main tab. Currently this covers just perception and stealth - but you have to roll from this section on the main tab, otherwise FG won't know that the "skill" roll is actually an initiative roll. As mentioned above, there will be future functionality to allow other skills to be used for initiative.
3) If you need to use other skills for initiative, have the players roll their skill checks (with any modifiers for Initiative checks added to the modifier box before rolling). Then the GM can manually add their roll results from the chat window to the main "Init" box (to the right of their name, to the left of the HP box) in the PC combat tracker entry - just click on the number field and type in the init value required. I know this is a bit of a pain, especially with lots of PCs, but the amount of times that you don't use perception or stealth for initiative is low, and you only have to do this once per combat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shadelon

So Mr Trenloe. Paizo just had their big announcement today. And i bet you must be cursing the gods for literally how much they have coming in the next year. :rofl: tell me, how do you feel about that?

---

Yeah, we've seen the pipeline for a while. Once we get over the initial hump of Core Rules, ruleset, Bestiary, Lost Omens World Guide, etc. then we should be good. It's just going to be a bit crazy for a while. I'm excited - kind-of... :)

Reference Module
The wizard kit has a "sta" as a weapon instead of a staff.

Equipment
I am pretty certain that Torches are L per torch, not L for 10. Mark has already clarified that an adventurer's kit should be 1 Bulk and if you don't count each torch as L an adventuer's kit comes to 6L instead of 1B.
Regardless of waiting for an official paizo response it means that the adventurer's kit effectively has three listed weights in FG atm :P

Waterskin their description states that when full they are 1 B, not necessarily a mistake but "waterskin (empty)" and "waterskin (full)" might be worth listing.

Also, all of the weights and costs for the class kits are off, but that isn't a FG issue. But might be something worth considering when implementing them so users of FG don't get confused.


PS. Goodluck Trenloe, this is a big job ahead of you O.o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostsanityreturned

Reference Module
The wizard kit has a "sta" as a weapon instead of a staff.

---

CR2.026. Fixed in next release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostsanityreturned

Equipment
I am pretty certain that Torches are L per torch, not L for 10.

---

CR2.027. Fixed in next release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostsanityreturned

Mark has already clarified that an adventurer's kit should be 1 Bulk and if you don't count each torch as L an adventuer's kit comes to 6L instead of 1B.
Regardless of waiting for an official paizo response it means that the adventurer's kit effectively has three listed weights in FG atm :P

---

Logged as CR2.029. We'll wait for an official Paizo response on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostsanityreturned

Waterskin their description states that when full they are 1 B, not necessarily a mistake but "waterskin (empty)" and "waterskin (full)" might be worth listing.

---

Good idea. Logged as CR2.028. Added to next release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostsanityreturned

Also, all of the weights and costs for the class kits are off, but that isn't a FG issue. But might be something worth considering when implementing them so users of FG don't get confused.

---

Logged as CR2.010.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostsanityreturned

PS. Goodluck Trenloe, this is a big job ahead of you O.o

---

Thanks! There is a lot to do. But with the help of the community we'll get there! :)

Bit of a muddy one here...

There are a lot of spells that work "until end of next turn" and "until start of next turn". It looks like the default is the start of next turn. I don't see anything that lets us extend that feature until the end of a turn cycle instead.

Now to make things a little worse, I also found in testing that if two creatures have the same initiative score, an effect that's set to end at the start of the next turn will end at the first instance of that initiative point. An example is if an orc warchief did a battle cry at initiative 16 and an orc scout was also at initiative 16 but in front of them on the CT, the scout wouldn't get the battle cry boost because it ended at the start of that initiative # with the scout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeRaven

Bit of a muddy one here...

There are a lot of spells that work "until end of next turn" and "until start of next turn". It looks like the default is the start of next turn. I don't see anything that lets us extend that feature until the end of a turn cycle instead.

Now to make things a little worse, I also found in testing that if two creatures have the same initiative score, an effect that's set to end at the start of the next turn will end at the first instance of that initiative point. An example is if an orc warchief did a battle cry at initiative 16 and an orc scout was also at initiative 16 but in front of them on the CT, the scout wouldn't get the battle cry boost because it ended at the start of that initiative # with the scout.

---

It's certainly an "interesting" piece of functionality. I've been thinking about how to do this accurately but without completely overhauling the default FG effect subsystem. I have some ideas, but it will be a few versions down the road when it gets implemented...

Logged as issue RS2.019.

There's a work around for some edge cases - for end of turn, change the "Initiative to adjust on" field to be 0.1 less than the actor's initiative. For example if the actor goes on init = 10, change the effect to end on init = 9.9. This won't work for actors all on the same initiative though...

Another thing I came across...but not sure if it's a real issue or just how it highlights on mouseover.

If a creature has a two word trait, typically as in a racial name (Sea Devil), it looks like it might parse it out as each one separate, at least it's highlighted as such (e.g. "Sea" and "Devil").

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeRaven

If a creature has a two word trait, typically as in a racial name (Sea Devil), it looks like it might parse it out as each one separate, at least it's highlighted as such (e.g. "Sea" and "Devil").

---

That's the first trait I've seen that has a space in it.

I'd changed the PF2 code to use spaces to separate traits (the playtest code used commas) as it was better for readability of trait entries (IMO) and I hadn't found any two word traits. But, looks like I may have to go back and change back to commas. Great...

Sort term work around - enter it as "Sea-Devil".

Thanks for reporting. Logged as RS2.020.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vyruxx

hello. The effects of the rune weapons are wrong, a +1 striking rune does not add a +1 to the damage instead gives +1 dice of the weapon .What he does now is simply +1 the attack and +1 the damage.

---

This has been updated in the next release.

If a weapon has the striking rune ("striking" is in the weapon "properties" field) then damage dice will be added equal to the weapon bonus.

Details on traits and properties of items in the PFRPG ruleset are available in the Wiki -> User guides here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/wiki/...PG2_Item_Sheet

I didn't see it reported here, nor in the doc file:

The Rogue and Wizard classes have their Skills Trained set as 0 + Intelligence Modifier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr0W

I didn't see it reported here, nor in the doc file:

The Rogue and Wizard classes have their Skills Trained set as 0 + Intelligence Modifier.

---

Thanks for reporting. Logged as CR2.031. This will be fixed in the next release.

We've worked through fixing a few issues over the weekend. See if the Google sheet linked in post #2 for fixes. These should go out with the usual product on Tuesday. Thanks to @damned for getting a lot of things updated.

Just started my Rise of the Runelords 2e campaign and it was blast. Noticed that elixer of life, minor was listing it healing as 1d6+1 and elixer of life, lesser is showing 3d6+3 when it should be the other way around. A way to add alchemist formulas to a spell list and integrate automation for them with out manual entry would be great down the road but its easily entered manually for now. Focus points seem to not be calculating correctly as well.

Thanks for reporting Roboconn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboconn

Just started my Rise of the Runelords 2e campaign and it was blast. Noticed that elixer of life, minor was listing it healing as 1d6+1 and elixer of life, lesser is showing 3d6+3 when it should be the other way around.

---

On page 548 of the Core Rules, the minor elixir of life is level 1, heals 1d6; lesser elixir is level 5, heals 3d6+6. This is what the two items in FG indicate.

However, the Elixirs in the Equipment Chapter (page 292) list the lesser Elixir incorrectly. This might be what's causing confusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboconn

A way to add alchemist formulas to a spell list and integrate automation for them with out manual entry would be great down the road but its easily entered manually for now.

---

See RS2.002 in the ruleset bug tracker. Link here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...l=1#post446769

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboconn

Focus points seem to not be calculating correctly as well.

---

Thanks for reporting. See RS2.017.

Yes, that is confusing for the elixirs and probably a typo on paizo's part. Page 543 also has elixir of life, lesser listed at the level 1 formula. That would also make it the same eqivilant name as all other level 1 formulas. Guess we'll have to wait for a FAQ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboconn

Yes, that is confusing for the elixirs and probably a typo on paizo's part.

---

There are quite a few typos/contradictions in Chapter 6. Listing the Minor Healing Potion as 3gp, whereas it's 4GP in the Treasures chapter. Plus the class kits need revising for bulk, to name but two...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboconn

age 543 also has elixir of life, lesser listed at the level 1 formula.

---

That table (Table 11-2) also lists the "Elixir of life, lesser" at level 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboconn

That would also make it the same equivalent name as all other level 1 formulas. Guess we'll have to wait for a FAQ.

---

Yeah, I was a little annoyed that they'd changed the name of the lowest level item to minor for this (and a couple of others - healing potion and sturdy shield).

Hopefully we'll get some clarification from Paizo soon...

A few typos
Attachment 28275

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skellan

A few typos
Attachment 28275

---

Thanks for reporting. Logged as CR2.032 and fixed in next release. I found a few more issues with single and doubles f's.

I noticed that skills and some spells in the PF2E rules go against an enemies DC rather than having them make a competing roll. However there is no way (that I know of) to have a spell or skill do this. I don't know if you already have plans on setting up a way to do this, but I wanted to point it out in case. :) It seems like a relevant thing that will come into play a LOT especially when it comes to skill checks.

Examples of what I mean:

The Black Tentacles spell attempts to grapple each enemy in the area, it has you make a spell attack roll against their Fortitude DC. If you make a spell attack roll currently, it will always be against their AC, if you set it as a DC then it makes them roll a save against it. However the way this spell is apparently supposed to work is by you making the spell attack roll and having to beat their Fortitude DC which is 10 + their fortitude save.

Regular grapple is a similar situation and requires an athletics check vs. their fortitude DC.


Some relevant pages and sections regarding this sort of thing in case you wanted to look, in the CRB: Grapple is on page 242 in CRB, Black Tentacles is on page 321,

Page 445 where it says Calculating DCs, it makes a point to say that when someone makes a check against a target, instead of rolling against each other, the one competing rolls against a fixed DC of the targets relevant statistic which is 10 + the total mods for that statistic. (Also says this on page 234 near the bottom of Skill Checks and Skill DC's).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DevilDraco

I noticed that skills and some spells in the PF2E rules go against an enemies DC rather than having them make a competing roll. However there is no way (that I know of) to have a spell or skill do this. I don't know if you already have plans on setting up a way to do this, but I wanted to point it out in case. :) It seems like a relevant thing that will come into play a LOT especially when it comes to skill checks.

Examples of what I mean:

The Black Tentacles spell attempts to grapple each enemy in the area, it has you make a spell attack roll against their Fortitude DC. If you make a spell attack roll currently, it will always be against their AC, if you set it as a DC then it makes them roll a save against it. However the way this spell is apparently supposed to work is by you making the spell attack roll and having to beat their Fortitude DC which is 10 + their fortitude save.

Regular grapple is a similar situation and requires an athletics check vs. their fortitude DC.


Some relevant pages and sections regarding this sort of thing in case you wanted to look, in the CRB: Grapple is on page 242 in CRB, Black Tentacles is on page 321,

Page 445 where it says Calculating DCs, it makes a point to say that when someone makes a check against a target, instead of rolling against each other, the one competing rolls against a fixed DC of the targets relevant statistic which is 10 + the total mods for that statistic. (Also says this on page 234 near the bottom of Skill Checks and Skill DC's).

---

Welcome to the FG forums!

Yep, spell attacks vs. DCs other than AC will need to be coded into the PFRPG2 ruleset.

Thanks. :) Yeah, I'm not sure how common that is but that spell for sure has it, lol.

The skill check one will probably come up a lot more often since as it seems reasonably common for such checks to be made in battle for inflicting conditions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trenloe

I'm going to implement something like this:

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...chmentid=28216

---

I LOVE that!

Druid Class: Weapon proficiency lists Simple Weapons and Scimitar. My PDF doesn't list Scimitar.

Also, on the table it lists 4 Cantrips, my PDF also says that, but the Primal Spellcasting says Five cantrips. So maybe there's an errata about that? (The brazilian official PDF lists the table having 5 cantrips)

Weird bug:

After building a module with images/maps and importing the module into another campaign the players were not able to load any images (all of them a few kb). The issue could only be resolved by copying the images into the campaign folder. The module was built using the playtest mods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stephan_

After building a module with images/maps and importing the module into another campaign the players were not able to load any images (all of them a few kb). The issue could only be resolved by copying the images into the campaign folder. The module was built using the playtest mods.

---

I haven't seen that before. A bit more info please:

What settings did you use to export the module?
Did you select "Player Module?" or "Read Only?" ??
Could the players open the module at all? If so, what did they actually see?