this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)

pathfinder

347 readers
2 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

@pathfinder Does Stay down proccing on an enemy standing up prevent Reactive Strike of another character from working on that same enemy? Does Topple Foe from Marshal archetype attempt to Trip an enemy before or after the Reactive strike if the trigger was a reactive strike for re-prone pseudo-Stay Down purposes?

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kichae@wanderingadventure.party 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So very often, these types of questions remain fully mired in the realm of naked mechanics, but I find it helpful to imagine what's actually happening in the fiction. The mechanics are there to aid the fiction at the table, after all.

So, what's taking place during Stay Down!? How is the creature keeping the target down?

To me, this has real "stomp" energy, where the user is putting their foot on the target's back, or dropping a knee on them, or something, while yelling at them to stay down. The target tries to get up, but is forced back down to the ground before they can really move -- after all, if the prone creature can get up into a plank position, or up onto their hands and knees, it becomes significantly harder to force them back into a prone position.

That is to say, it happens very early.

Reactive Strike, on the other hand, is about looking for openings to strike, where the target has let their guard slip (or abandoned it altogether). This is why it applies when the target is trying to stand -- it's very hard to defend yourself from a determined attacker when you're transitioning from lying prone to getting into almost any other position.

But when the first creature uses Stay Down, they are functionally putting themselves between the target and anyone else who might want to strike. An ally might not want to take the chance in this situation, particularly since the fiction is not "attacking someone who's being held down", but "attacking at the same time that your ally is getting in the way".

Topple Foe, on the other hand, is entirely about taking advantage of a distracted or staggered target and trying to sweep or tackle them to the ground. And unlike Stay Down! and Reactive Strike in the first example, it doesn't even have the same mechanical trigger as the reaction you're trying to pair it with. This is just a pure tag team shine spot.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I like your idea of looking to the fiction, but I disagree with the outcome in this case if you do. Allies don't generally get in the way of each other, they cooperate. To both be in range of Reactive Strike, you're probably standing on opposite or at least adjacent sides of the same enemy, not one physically behind the other where blocking might make sense.

Your attempt to knock them back down shouldn't stop your ally attacking them as they try to stand.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The thing is, preventing someone from getting up - especially someone with any amount of combaat training - involves a lot more than just standing next to them. You have to get your weight on top of them, and then usually attack or manipulate one of the limbs.

That is not an act that leaves you out of the way. It kind of means being on top of the target, at least while you're forcing them baack down.

So, the Stay Down reaction kind of needs to be imagined as something that interferes with a strike that can be done without risking an ally.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago

But it doesn't require being on top of them for the whole 6 second round. I view it as a brief shove, disrupting their action. Someone else can easily act before or after you. Or, as you described it as a foot stomp, they could act at the same time, on a part of the body that is...not where your foot is.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Mhm the reactions are all triggered, would be insane when someone could interrupt the triggering action so that other reactions are then wasted.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Reactions: These actions can be used even when it's not your turn. You only get one reaction per encounter round, and you can use it only when its specific trigger is fulfilled. Often, the trigger is another creature's action.

Stay Down!

Trigger: A prone foe within your reach Stands

You have ways of keeping your foes down. Attempt an Athletics check against the triggering foe’s Fortitude DC. On a success, the action is disrupted, causing the creature to remain prone. On a critical success, the creature also can’t Stand until its next turn.

I think the trigger for Stay Down! should be attempts to stand, especially if you look at other disrupting reactions like Disruptive Stare, Reactive Interference, or Miraculous Intervention. Reactions trigger after the action is fulfilled, so the enemy can't remain prone if they're already standing. So I'd say Stay Down denies anyone else a reactive strike.

Topple Foe would have to trigger after a reactive strike, so that works fine.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

should be attempts to stand

I think if we're going to try to correct it, that should be to "takes the Stand action". That's why it's capitalised already, after all, so I think that's what the intent already is. And it fits with what Reactive Strike says, which is "A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action..."

As both reactions occur in response to someone "using an action", the action is complete whether or not they succeed in the goal they set out to complete by using the action. You both get to act.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It can't be "takes the Stand action", though, because Stand reads "You stand up from being prone." If your reaction prevents the targer from standing up, then they have't actually taken Stand, just attempted to.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 2 days ago

Hmm, maybe we have different views of what that means. To me, an action itself is triggered the moment you declare that's your action. Then its effects play out. Taking an action is an instantaneous thing, but the effects of the action obviously are not.

I think this becomes a lot clearer if we look at a different action, Stride. It says "you move up to your Speed." But this obviously does not instantaneously cause you to move your speed. And yet it's fairly unambiguous that if you take the Stride action, that procs any actions which may trigger on an action with the Move trait immediately, before you get to actually move. I view Stand the same. When you declare you are going to Stand, anything that would trigger on a Stand (or on a Move action) happens. Then you physically get to stand up (unless one of those actions says you don't). Or, in the flavour, those actions occur partway through your attempts to stand up, and interrupt it.

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

https://2e.aonprd.com/Search.aspx?q=disrupt&include-actions=Reaction&display=short

Reading through some other examples, it's definitely a mixed bag of wording, with some saying "attempts" or "begins" or otherwise implying before the action is complete, and some saying after.

I'll stand by my original claim that the correction should be "attempts to Stand" though, because reactions occur after the trigger is complete, you can't disrupt an action after it's happened.

[–] Reshirams_Rad_Slam@mastodo.neoliber.al 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

@DmMacniel What about the second one. Does Topple Foe re-prone an enemy hit with Reactive Strike since Reactive strike is triggered by standing up and Topple foe is triggered by being hit?

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 2 points 3 days ago

You only have one reaction per turn.

So if an ally (which does excludes you) Reactive Strikes a prone enemy that tries to Stand (which is an action with the Move trait) and succeeds, you can then react to that successful strike to Topple Foe to Trip them thus causing them to get the prone condition again.

So yeah in a duo this would be possible, alone not.