Combat Rites vs. Maneuvers

[Empedocles]

Basically, I'm wondering which of the following is better (I'll expand on what I mean by better in a minute): Combat Rites, from Arcana Evolved, or Martial Maneuvers, from the Tome of Battle.

However, I'm not just asking which is stronger - that's pretty much always ToB. My issue though, is that ToB always feels like either a gish to me, or at the very least some sort of mystic warrior from a wire movie. These combat rites are much more just little bonuses in combat that would help out the average fighter. And I feel like they just work more simply...

So any thoughts on this? Any suggestions for bringing combat rites on par with maneuvers?

[Starbuck_II]

I've never looked at Combat Rites much.

Can you explain them and the bonuses?
I see they are on pg 318. They have no saving throw. 1/rd limitation (free action). No preparation (cast like sorceror spontanous). Wisdom adds Bonus slots. They have 4 levels (4th level has one that heals).
Level 1
Battle Focus: +1 hit for whole rd.
Calmness of Thought: Ignore all penalties if succeed on Conc check.
Canny Strike: Sneak attack 1d6
Deadly strike: +2 dam to single attack at end of charge
Defensive Focus; +1 dodge AC till next rd
Disaring strike: +2 disarm
Mystic Strike: treat weapon as if magic for DR
Opportunist assualt: attacking a flanked target gets you +2 bonus hit
Power Focus: +1 dam this rd
Reaction of Viper: extra AoO
Resistant Focus: +1 save throw
Rhino Charge: +2 bull rush
Speed of Wind: +10 movement
Stealth Focus: +4 stealth
Take down: +2 trip
Level 2
Most are greater versions, increasing number
Critical hit: If crit, auto confirm.
Distracting shove: -2 AC for enemy
Ignore Condition: Conc check to ignore them
Missile Deflection: Deflect arrows with any weapon
Precision: Precise shot, if have precise shot, bonus to hit/dam
Quick Retrievel: Quick Draw/Quick draw from pack.

And so on, seems decent.

Some are like ToB maneuvers, others weaker or unique.

[Jodah]

ToB is supposed to be Orient meets Medieval England, so it should feel a little like a wire movie. It can ruin classic fighter flavor a little bit, but that is why I strictly refer to it as "blade magic," because it most certainly is magic.

[Flickerdart]

Except for the fact that almost all of them are Extraordinary, not Supernatural, and don't qualify as any sort of magic.

[Lord_Gareth]

ToB is supposed to be Orient meets Medieval England, so it should feel a little like a wire movie. It can ruin classic fighter flavor a little bit, but that is why I strictly refer to it as "blade magic," because it most certainly is magic.

Please tell me what's magic about Steel Wind, Ruby Nightmare Blade, Counter Charge, Blood on the Water, Wolf Pack Tactics, Rabid Bear Strike, Wolf Climbs the Mountain, Charging Minotaur, Wall of Blades and/or Hearing the Air. No, go on. I'll wait.

[The-Mage-King]

ToB is supposed to be Orient meets Medieval England, so it should feel a little like a wire movie. It can ruin classic fighter flavor a little bit, but that is why I strictly refer to it as "blade magic," because it most certainly is magic.

Hahahahahaha. No.

Desert Wind and Shadow Hand, yes, are kinda magical (note the "kinda". Not everything in them is, like Flashing Sun, or Assassin's Stance, or...). Devoted Spirit, maybe, if you don't follow the logic of HP being mostly morale, luck, and so on, and somehow think that it's actual wounds. But the rest?

No. If it's the maneuver names, this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11466731&postcount=720) points out that Western fencing has elaborate names too.

And the fighter never had flavor. They hit stuff. With a weapon. The same way each attack. Maneuvers (since I refuse to call it blade magic, what with it not being magic) are honestly a better representation of fighting than that- a Warblade (for example) shifts between forms, picking at openings that his opponent leaves to cause different effects, with a feint tricking his opponent into leaving himself open for a thrust, a carefully aimed blow slicing through his weapon/finding a spot in the dragon's scales that wounds it, and so on.


Also, what Lord_Gareth said, since he said it better than I could.



Anyway, regarding the actual topic...

Maybe increase the uses per day, or multiply numeric bonuses by 1.5?

[MeeposFire]

Well fighters never had SPECIFIC flavor and that was by design. The class was supposed to represent any fighting man imaginable and in that they succeed. Granted in 3e due to systamatic changes the fighter went from being useful but easy to use to being a class that requires high system mastery to succeed in the long run and has lost his job/benefits.

[JadePhoenix]

I love ToB, but "blade magic" is a term ToB uses within itself. It's, uh, official fluff? You're free to refluff, of course.

[Gharkash]

I have no knowledge of combat rites, they seem interesting, but i would like to support Tome of Battle here.

Iron Heart, Setting Sun, Diamond Mind, White Raven (not so sure about this one) and Tiger Claw have no magic elements at all, Shadow Hand, Desert Wind and Devoted spirit do have supernatural effects, but many of the maneuvers there are "non-magical". Stone dragon is borderline magical at some points but mostly mundane.

The term blade magic is mostly used by combatants that do not understand the focus and training needed to accomplish such feats of swordmanship (or any other weapon style to be fair), and the magical effects are based on ki (at least in fluff).

It is quite possible to make an initiator with little to no magical effets, i currently play a swordsage with Desert Wind traded for Iron Heart, and my "magical" maneuvers are two. Just two.

Also, fluff does not indicate that you cannot build a Warblade as Miyamoto Musashi (samurai/ronin) or as Alexander the great (conqueror/strategist).

Edit: the fluff in ToB is in many parts hideous, it is better to roleplay a maneuver as you see fit that as the fluff of it is written. Just read Baffling Defence, a maneuver that clearly was made in the lines of "i see where you are attacking from and i avoid it".

[Starbuck_II]

Thinking about it.
Combat Rites (as if Ritual Warrior) added to Fighter would go along way with making it Tier 3.
They are mostly extraordinary, not exactly ToB, but decent though limited in useage (since no refresh).

It would be distinct from Warblade still (as it uses maneuvers).

It would be a Fighter fix I've never seen mentioned.

[The-Mage-King]

I love ToB, but "blade magic" is a term ToB uses within itself. It's, uh, official fluff? You're free to refluff, of course.

This isn't about fluff. This is about crunch. By crunch, the majority of maneuvers are not magical at all and therefore they are not "blade magic".

And the ToB fluff is stupid, to start with.

[Chronos]

Quoth The-Mage-King:

Devoted Spirit, maybe, if you don't follow the logic of HP being mostly morale, luck, and so on, and somehow think that it's actual wounds.First of all, the "somehow" would be "that's the only way the HP system makes any sense whatsoever". Otherwise you have the absurdity of people drinking healing potions just because they feel a little discouraged, and you're left with no way of modeling people who really are just that damn tough (which really do exist in the real world). Second, even the book itself describes the Devoted Spirit healing maneuvers as resulting from "divine energy", and "mending wounds". I don't know where the notion comes from that it's just morale, but it's not the book.

[Answerer]

No, the HP system never makes any "sense" whatsoever if you start thinking of it in anything but abstract and gamist terms. That's all it is, a game mechanic. No interpretation of that mechanic makes sense in all situations, and while Devoted Spirit highlights this to a certain degree, the problem existed long before the printing of Tome of Battle.

Hell, it existed long before Wizards of the Coast acquired rights to Dungeons and Dragons...

[The-Mage-King]

Quoth The-Mage-King:
First of all, the "somehow" would be "that's the only way the HP system makes any sense whatsoever". Otherwise you have the absurdity of people drinking healing potions just because they feel a little discouraged, and you're left with no way of modeling people who really are just that damn tough (which really do exist in the real world). Second, even the book itself describes the Devoted Spirit healing maneuvers as resulting from "divine energy", and "mending wounds". I don't know where the notion comes from that it's just morale, but it's not the book.


The "notion" comes from the PHB, the SRD, and past editions. Does "[...] the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.", catch your attention? (Bold was for empathisis- it's right here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm) in the SRD).


Also, where did I say it was all morale and luck? I said "mostly". Some of it could be actual damage, but that's likely the bonuses from Con.

If it's mostly morale, luck, and fatigue, then drinking a healing potion would probably sooth sore muscles or something. Dev. Spirit stuff is inspiring allies to fight on despite their aches, and so on.

And HP never made sense in the first place. :smalltongue:

[eggs]

Combat rites aren't really out of line with the mundane ToB maneuvers, but they lack in flexibility and don't match its upward scaling.

In terms of balance, Level 2 rites do things like adding +2d6 damage for a full round's attacks and ignoring any 1 condition; level 4 rites do things like adding an extra move action per round - they fluctuate a bit in terms of a direct conversion to ToB, but they're all about where they'd be as maneuvers, give or take a level.

The big difference is the scaling. Combat rites end at the level 4 effects. This is enough to make a level 15ish Ritual Warrior can full attack each round, shrug off things like Exhaustion, Blindness or Fear and to substitute Concentration for all its saves. These are all abilities most noncasters would kill for, but they develop really slowly.

For example, the Ritual Warrior's Move+Full Attack option comes online at level 13. I don't want to drop a tier discussion in here (distracted as the thread already is with the 2,088th consecutive day of ToB flavor bickering), but to use some other powerful but not full-casting melee staples for comparison:

The Swordsage/Warblade get Sudden Leap at level 1, Pouncing Charge at level 9
The Psychic Warrior can get Dimension Hop at level 1, Hustle and Psionic Lion's Charge at level 4
The Mystic Ranger gets Psionic Lion's Charge at level 4
The Binder is also comparatively slow, but gets Chupoclops's pounce at level 10


And notice that even though the ritual effects are basically equivalent to many ToB effects +/- a level, they cap out at level 4 rites. This is still useful for melee characters, but it highlights the disparity.

The other meaningful difference between Rites and Maneuvers is the rigidity of Rites in combat style. They add power to the Ritual Warrior's attacks/full attacks, but they don't provide useful alternatives to those attack options. With strikes like Douse the Flames, Disrupting Blow or White Raven Hammer, the Warblade can switch between doing damage and just generally mucking its enemies up. And there are maneuvers for more general utility purposes, like the teleports to jump around obstructing terrain and the perception stances to combat defenses like invisibility. The Ritual Warrior is much more rigid.

To make them more comparable, I'd start by compressing the Ritual Warrior's advancement system. I'd follow the Psychic Warrior's power level advancement for guidance. This would give movement and full attacks at level 10, and keep sneak attack progression just a few steps behind the Rogue. Then flesh out the combat rites with both status effect attacks at low levels and ways of dealing with common obstacles like invisibility, difficult terrain, big mean grapplers, walls and flight. Adding these may involve going into level 5-6 Rites. That's fine - higher level effects are one of the big differences between ToB and Ritual Warriors.

And because the goal is to make the Ritual Warrior's 1/round Combat Rite comparable to the Warblade's Stance+Boost+Strike setup, it may also help to allow multiple Rites per round, giving a second at level 12, and a 3rd at level 18.

[JadePhoenix]

This isn't about fluff. This is about crunch. By crunch, the majority of maneuvers are not magical at all and therefore they are not "blade magic".

And the ToB fluff is stupid, to start with.

So your reasoning it's that it's not blade magic because you don't like it, nevermind what the creator's intended.
Seriously. This whole refluffing thing is becoming absurd. Next you'll have someone saying wizards don't have grimoires, because learning magic from books is ridiculous. :smallsigh:

[Empedocles]

Guys...getting off topic. The fact is that while ToB might not have a strictly magical feel, the effects are certainly have a more "superhuman/supernatural/Asian ki power" thing going then combat rites.

That wasn't really the point of the thread......

[The-Mage-King]

Yep. There's a variant for that. They get high inhale "incense" instead. It's in a Dragon Magazine. Damned if I know which. (No, really).


But seriously, wizards learn spells from books because it's in the actual rules, as a class feature. Warblades don't do blade magic because it isn't in the rules.


EDIT @OP: Sorry. People insulting the best book for 3.X makes me annoyed. And when I get annoyed, I argue.

Think we should take this to a different thread?

[Bovine Colonel]

So your reasoning it's that it's not blade magic because you don't like it, nevermind what the creator's intended.
Seriously. This whole refluffing thing is becoming absurd. Next you'll have someone saying wizards don't have grimoires, because learning magic from books is ridiculous. :smallsigh:

First of all, keep in mind that a wizard's spellbook is something that is actually represented in the game's crunch, i.e. an inventory slot.

Second of all, I'd be perfectly fine with a setting where wizards don't learn from books if said setting's creator could offer an alternative way.

[Empedocles]

Carry on the argument about ToB being magical or mundane here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13108091#post13108091) It's definitely a worthy conversation to have...just not what I was looking for here specifically.

[Dienekes]

So your reasoning it's that it's not blade magic because you don't like it, nevermind what the creator's intended.
Seriously. This whole refluffing thing is becoming absurd. Next you'll have someone saying wizards don't have grimoires, because learning magic from books is ridiculous. :smallsigh:

That's not quite the same thing. Personally I think the blade magic thing is fairly limiting, and especially since you can make a completely mundane character (my favorite build is Iron Heart/Diamond Mind), why should I have to make him a mystic who learned from some sensei? Or an arrogant blood knight searching to prove they're number one as the fluff says he is, when I'd rather make him a veteran mercenary who picked it up through years of experience?

The difference between this change and getting rid of a Wizard grimoires is because crunch is tied to it. Now if someone came up with an idea for a wizard that had the same strengths and weaknesses as a grimoire I'd totally allow it.

[Boci]

So your reasoning it's that it's not blade magic because you don't like it, nevermind what the creator's intended.

No, the reason it isn't magic is because it’s not magic. An extraordinary manoeuvre (which most are) will not show up on detect magic's radar and operates within an anti-magic zone. There is no reason to consider it magic in a mechanical sense and so the term "blade magic" is not liked because of the connotations the word magic has in D&D.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I just skimmed through a big chunk of ToB's fluff and I'm still of the opinion that "Blade Magic" is a a term used my the (in game) ignorant masses. There are many more references to Chi, Focus and Skill and the word(s) magic/blade magic are never given definitions suggesting that these terms not only have no crunch, but are also not used by Initiators. It's just very unfortunate name for a chapter.

Hit points as an abstract concept is a very old idea. I think the first instance of it might be in the AD&D DMG. I'd hoped there was a reference in the 3.5 DMG, but couldn't find one (I'm certain someone can provide a actual 3rd ed reference). It really is largely a fluff distinction allowing for more varied descriptions of attacks the only effect it has on fluff is what a reasonable person will accept healing hp. I have to imagine almost everyone uses hp abstraction to a point otherwise the critical hit for 15 damage that pierces a commoner through the heart killing them instantly would have to pierce a 10th level fighter through the heart without phasing him. Even if you decide that all HP damage from slashing/piercing weapons must draw blood those wounds are mostly superficial but they add up slowing the combatant down alloying a more telling blow later.

Lastly most of the Combat Rites that were given as examples are just small numerical bonuses that wouldn't allow a fighter to do anything new which is what would be required to go up a tier.

[Boci]

Carry on the argument about ToB being magical or mundane here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13108091#post13108091) It's definitely a worthy conversation to have...just not what I was looking for here specifically.

You know, you kinda opened up this thread for this discussion by mentioning your problem with the supposed quasi-magical nature of ToB fluff as one of your problems with the book in your opening post. That make's the discussion relevant.

[Empedocles]

You know, you kinda opened up this thread for this discussion by mentioning your problem with the supposed quasi-magical nature of ToB fluff as one of your problems with the book in your opening post. That make's the discussion relevant.

It was relevant but at this point it's largely worthless. For example, IMO ToB has a slight, but not overtly arcane, blade magic feel. Sorry Mage King. I'm not changing that opinion, and I wasn't looking for feedback on it. So it's no longer contributing to this thread.

[Boci]

It was relevant but at this point it's largely worthless. For example, IMO ToB has a slight, but not overtly arcane, blade magic feel. Sorry Mage King. I'm not changing that opinion, and I wasn't looking for feedback on it.

Then remove that portion from the OP and clarify that you are not interested in comparing fluff.

[Empedocles]

Then remove that portion from the OP and clarify that you are not interested in comparing fluff.

I am interested in comparing fluff. The key word being comparing. Pretty much everyone is now talking about ToB.

[Boci]

I am interested in comparing fluff. The key word being comparing. Pretty much everyone is now talking about ToB.

Probably because its the better known and is more popular. If you don't want to remove it then fine, but its a bit of a grey area as to whether the magical nature of ToB's fluff is off topic and your OP is an invitation to start discussing it. I'm just trying to help you get the results you want.

[Starbuck_II]

Combat rites aren't really out of line with the mundane ToB maneuvers, but they lack in flexibility and don't match its upward scaling.

The big difference is the scaling. Combat rites end at the level 4 effects. This is enough to make a level 15ish Ritual Warrior can full attack each round, shrug off things like Exhaustion, Blindness or Fear and to substitute Concentration for all its saves. These are all abilities most noncasters would kill for, but they develop really slowly.

Agreed. This is the good part of Combat Rites. And the bad (1/2 casters only).


The other meaningful difference between Rites and Maneuvers is the rigidity of Rites in combat style. They add power to the Ritual Warrior's attacks/full attacks, but they don't provide useful alternatives to those attack options. With strikes like Douse the Flames, Disrupting Blow or White Raven Hammer, the Warblade can switch between doing damage and just generally mucking its enemies up. And there are maneuvers for more general utility purposes, like the teleports to jump around obstructing terrain and the perception stances to combat defenses like invisibility. The Ritual Warrior is much more rigid.

Yet at the same time, you don't have to prepare so you have more options.
Thinking about it, Rituals to maneuvers are like comparing spontanous Adept to a Wizard (since Adepts have weaker effects like Rites)



To make them more comparable, I'd start by compressing the Ritual Warrior's advancement system. I'd follow the Psychic Warrior's power level advancement for guidance. This would give movement and full attacks at level 10, and keep sneak attack progression just a few steps behind the Rogue.

Wait, so make you get the Rites faster?


Then flesh out the combat rites with both status effect attacks at low levels and ways of dealing with common obstacles like invisibility, difficult terrain, big mean grapplers, walls and flight.

Status effects without saves? Because remember the rules are say no save throw mechanics are part of Rites theme.
But dealing with stuff like invisibility is thematic and fine. Though, each rite seems to last a few rounds at most (usually 1 full rd), unless it is ending an effect.


And because the goal is to make the Ritual Warrior's 1/round Combat Rite comparable to the Warblade's Stance+Boost+Strike setup, it may also help to allow multiple Rites per round, giving a second at level 12, and a 3rd at level 18.

I like this idea. Kind of like multiple Stance thing that some of ToB allows. Although, it does lean toward Novaing.

So anyone willing to homebrew a class table at homebrew section?

[eggs]

In terms of fluff, it's much more difficult for me to justify Combat Rites' daily limit than Maneuvers' encounter limit for a nonmagical swordsman. It's reasonable, in line with common experience, that someone wouldn't be able to trick an opponent the same way twice in a row. It doesn't keep with any experience of mine that a skilled character wouldn't be able to exercise that skill more than X times per day.

With magical abilities, that can be shrugged off, because magic isn't a real thing where players have any sort of real familiarity. With nonmagical abilities, it's just weird.

So the mechanics of the Warblade, while still a bit weird in certain senses, do seem to support nonmagical combat better than Combat Rites (or every Ritual Warrior is always sleepy/hankering to take the day off? that could be kind of funny with all the incense, altered consciousness and perpetual fascination the class describes).

EDIT:

Wait, so make you get the Rites faster?
Yeah, I think so. Even an un-varianted Ranger is getting a couple Lion's Charges per day 5 levels before the Ritual Warrior gets its extra move action. Add the Ranger's amazing framework and handful of useful abilities, and it really shows the RW up.

And I suppose since every AE character can get a few free move actions per day as a feat, one of the high points of the ritual system becomes a bit more bland.


Status effects without saves? Because remember the rules are say no save throw mechanics are part of Rites theme.
Dang, I don't remember that at all. Nix save-or-X rites then. :/

But the Ritual Warrior class gets a few at-will Save-or-X abilities, so adding more of them to rite-using classes wouldn't break the existing system assumptions. They'd have to be standard/attack actions to gain the same advantages as ToB maneuvers, though. I could swear Monty Cook even had a book about adding those sorts of abilities somewhere; I might go dig it up, see if it applies to Rite-users in the first place, before homebrewing something new.

[JadePhoenix]

People insulting the best book for 3.X makes me annoyed. And when I get annoyed, I argue.

I don't see anyone offending anything. Seeing that I'm defending ToB fluff and you're saying it is ridiculous, actually the only one offending the book is you. :smallconfused:

[The-Mage-King]

Jade: I wasn't talking specifically to you- I consider use of the term "Blade Magic" an insult to ToB. It isn't blade magic, despite what WotC called it. Because, dammit, melee needs non-gish nice things.

[JadePhoenix]

Jade: I wasn't talking specifically to you- I consider use of the term "Blade Magic" an insult to ToB. It isn't blade magic, despite what WotC called it. Because, dammit, melee needs non-gish nice things.

But you do realize you're the only one who called something in the books stupid, didn't you? :smallamused:
Also, magic does not equal spells, not even in D&D. Someone who performs prestidigitation tricks on the streets is called a 'street magician', even in D&D. Outside D&D, "magic" is repeatedly seen as "simply very good", like Bullseye immortalized in this panel ("You're good. But me... I'm magic.").
http://m0vie.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/daredevilmiller1f.jpg?w=468
Basically, blade magic does not mean "look, these guys are gishes". It means "these guys know a few very good fighting techniques".
Again, I think you're the one doing the book (and WotC) a disservice.

[Boci]

Basically, blade magic does not mean "look, these guys are gishes". It means "these guys know a few very good fighting techniques".

Let's look at the first use of phrase "blade magic" in this thread shall we:


ToB is supposed to be Orient meets Medieval England, so it should feel a little like a wire movie. It can ruin classic fighter flavor a little bit, but that is why I strictly refer to it as "blade magic," because it most certainly is magic.

Which meaning do you think Jodah had in mind?

[JadePhoenix]

Which meaning do you think Jodah had in mind?

Have you ever seen a wuxia movie? :smallconfused: They don't usually cast spells. When there is a spellcaster in a wuxia movie, he is usually the villain, even. I can't speak for Jodah, of course. We all know wuxia and D&D 3.5 (or should I sayd, 2.75?) go hand in hand anyway (http://www.stargazersworld.com/2008/12/10/scribd-gem-dragon-fist/).

[Boci]

Have you ever seen a wuxia movie? :smallconfused: They don't usually cast spells.

So in a game where spell casters are also known as magic users, can you see why ther term blade magic can be problomatic?


We all know wuxia and D&D 3.5 (or should I sayd, 2.75?) go hand in hand anyway (http://www.stargazersworld.com/2008/12/10/scribd-gem-dragon-fist/).

Not according to everyone. Some people think wuxia = bad, keep it out of my D&D before it ruins it (and also think ToB = wuxia, another debated point).

[JadePhoenix]

So in a game where spell casters are also known as magic users, can you see why ther term blade magic can be problomatic?
I can see why it might be misleading, but you can only understand ToB's blade magic as "omg they're totally gishes" if you purposefully read it incorrectly. Or if you don't read it.


Not according to everyone. Some people think wuxia = bad, keep it out of my D&D before it ruins it (and also think ToB = wuxia, another debated point).
Well, they are not Chris Pramas or the rest of the 3rd edition designers. ToB is pretty cleared intended as wuxia, among other things. Can you refluff it for, say, a Inigo Montoya expy? Of course you can. It doesn't mean it wasn't intended as wuxia and blade magic, though.
I'm just debating this because I like ToB's fluff and disliked seeing it called 'ridiculous'. Yeah, I'm a bitch.

[Empedocles]

Really, guys? I made a brand new, shiny thread to argue about blade magic...

[Starbuck_II]

Have you ever seen a wuxia movie? :smallconfused: They don't usually cast spells. When there is a spellcaster in a wuxia movie, he is usually the villain, even. I can't speak for Jodah, of course. We all know wuxia and D&D 3.5 (or should I sayd, 2.75?) go hand in hand anyway (http://www.stargazersworld.com/2008/12/10/scribd-gem-dragon-fist/).

Dragon Fist even had accending AC.
It had additional skills (stunts). You roll Fort Stunt instead of using Con for hp.
Dragon Fist seems like it would run a good AD&D game even in a fantasy world (non-fantasy china).
Martial Arts listed: Almost like Combat Rites, but a few emulate ToB too.
A few are just Unarmed Strike progression or Stunning Fist.