Whilst trying to find the rules for persistent damage from several sources, I found out I haven't done the Fatal trait right since forever.
-
Whilst trying to find the rules for persistent damage from several sources, I found out I haven't done the Fatal trait right since forever. Thanks some offhand remark on a page nowhere near the trait description. Sigh. The specific kind of woe that crunchy games bring. #pathfinder2e #pf2e
-
Are you referring to the fact that you’re not supposed to double the damage from the extra die that Fatal adds, and how the Fatal trait discusses adding this die in such an insanely ambiguous way that it seems almost purposefully written to cause confusion? Because, honestly, the fact that PF2e’s books seem like they’re written only to be read by the writers has more to do with the writers, and not the level of crunch in the system.
-
Are you referring to the fact that you’re not supposed to double the damage from the extra die that Fatal adds, and how the Fatal trait discusses adding this die in such an insanely ambiguous way that it seems almost purposefully written to cause confusion? Because, honestly, the fact that PF2e’s books seem like they’re written only to be read by the writers has more to do with the writers, and not the level of crunch in the system.
@kichae Yes that's exactly the one. Because the Deadly trait specifically mentions you're not supposed to double it, but the Fatal trait doesn't, I concluded it did double. I *also* assumed the extra damage per die from the pick specialisation was doubled, so this explains why I thought picks were ridiculously powerful.
And true, crunch is much less a problem if writing and indexing is good. Less crunchy games with bad indexing are still a pain (Looking at you, #bladesinthedark)