So, over on the subreddit there’s a post that caught me off guard. I’m not experienced enough with the game to know the ins-and-outs of all of classes, so when someone posted asking about Ruffian Rogues and Picks.
From the comments, this appears to be a Thing of Great Contention within the Pathfinder space (or, at least within that Pathfinder space; I find r/Pathfinder2e to be a rather… idiosyncratic place, personally).
The long and short of it is that Picks have the Fatal d10 trait, but Ruffian specifies:
You can deal sneak attack damage with any weapon, not just the weapons listed in the sneak attack class feature. This benefit doesn’t apply to a simple weapon with a damage die greater than d8 or a martial or advanced weapon with a damage die greater than d6. (Apply any abilities that alter the damage die size first.)
(Emphasis mine.)
A lot of words have been published over how the Ruffian doesn’t lose Sneak Attack on a critical hit, but this seems pretty straight forward from the text here that it does. Weird and stupid, and something I’d never personally enforce, but clear and straight forward nonetheless.
This is the updated wording from Player Core 1, no less, and Ruffian’s text was updated in the remaster, so there was an opportunity to reword or clarify that was not taken, so I’m not sure what others are reading from this that I’m not.
How do you interpret this situation? How would you judge it at your table?
Paizo uses words very specifically, much like lawyers. Note that in your highlighted text they use the word “abilities.” A critical hit is not an ability, it is a game mechanic. It also isn’t modifying the weapon’s inherent damage dice, just the dice rolled for one attack.
IMO, sneak attack damage should and does apply, even on a crit with this weapon.
I would buy that if it was capital-A Abilities in the text, but it’s not. We also see this with “attack rolls”.
This is poor communication on their part. If they want to be lawyers about it, a halfway decent one would get these thrown out.