Reach out to the extension developer, it's probably due to controls overlapping and they should (may) be able to fix it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Endurance
Reach out to the extension developer, it's probably due to controls overlapping and they should (may) be able to fix it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Endurance
I don't recall if this is already the case, but the "clear prepared spells" one could use an "are you sure?" on it as well. Can be really time consuming to fix if done accidentally on a high level character, especially since most people don't have a mental list of everything they generally prepare.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trenloe
Good idea!Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxAstro
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forum...chmentid=64934
Hello... I have an issue with the Sky King's Tomb ruleset - specifically the Mantle of Gold. The maps in chapter 2 are backwards. The F1-F7 should be in the Workshop Heights (not Lower Guldrege) and vice versa for the G1-G7.
PDF version - Attachment 64937
FG version - Attachment 64938
Hi Momo. Thank you for reporting but there is no error here (at least in the FGU version). This was one of the cases where the Paizo cartographer did not coordinate with the person writing the story. The map in the PDF version is the one completely wonky. I actually fixed the issue and made the maps align to the story entries. Look at the story entries - you'll see that I was correct in modifying the map labeling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo
1. The PDF maps have 7 labels each map (F1 - F7 and G1 - G7). However, the story text has no entries for G5, G6, and G7.
2. Look at the entry for Workshop Heights in the PDF on page 49. It talks about silos for F2-F3 and larger home and workshop for F4-F6 and another home for F7. You will see that this description matches the FGU maps and not the Paizo PDF maps.
I hope this clarifies. I try my best to correct errors as I see them when converting to FGU. It doesn't track with an errored PDF but I would rather have it run smooth for GMs, even if it costs me more time to fix things like this. Ultimately, it creates a better FGU product, even if it doesn't align 100% with the original PDF.
Sincerely,
Danny (sciencephile)
Thank you for the quick feedback! I had wrongly assumed that Pazio knew what they were doing.. thank you for the clarification!
Apparently flat footed has been renamed to off-guard. Many many instances of flat footed still appear in the rules, would be good to have them renamed so it's clear to newbies like our group. It's bewildering to try to decipher the rules until we realized they're the same.
Flat footed still appears in pre-Remaster content. Many books have been revised with Remastered versions. If you want the language to be consistent you will need to either stick with Remastered or Pre-Remaster content exclusively, and not mix the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnimost
It can be confusing. There is remastered wording (off-guard) vs. legacy wording (flat-footed). We will change the wording in legacy products if Paizo decided to change that wording; which, to be perfectly honest, I doubt they will as there is a subset of the Pathfinder 2e community who still play legacy rules and want to maintain the legact wording. Paizo are slowly updating key legacy products to remastered, but I'm sure there will always be some legacy products out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnimost
The FG ruleset uses flat-footed and off-guard interchangeably - i.e. it will apply he relevant modifiers/effects for either. So, mechanically, don't worry about it - FG caters for this.
I've been building some NPCs using the PFRPG2 NPC Ability Automation. I was trying to create an NPC ability that affects a player until the end of their next turn, so I used:
"Effect Name"|Effect: Dazzled[D:1][REDUCETARGET][END]
But when testing it in the combat tracker, and making sure initiative was set and targeting was being used (just to be safe), this effect would always count down based on my source NPC's initiative, not the target's.