Path of war, too powerful?

[Otodetu]

The maneuvers found in this tomb of battle conversion looks very interesting and breathes life into the initiators again.


My question is; is it to much powercreep, or are the classes a worthy addition to the game?
A direct comparison would be the tomb of battle trio; warblade, swordsage and crusader.
Can also be compared with summoners, wizards and clerics at low levels, like up to 3 to 8. (We all know casters are the best at high levels)


One of the things that have tipped me off is the warlords ability to recover maneuvers as a move action, by selecting the acrobatic gambit the warlord can tumble as a move action, gain 1d6+cha bonus dmg against anyone he tumbles past, and recover his cha bonus in maneuvers, and use one of said recovered maneuver. This can be repeated every turn, and has a 80% success rate against average foes without optimizing.
Even if he fails, he still recovers one maneuver.

There is no downside to this gambit, you will want to move most of the time anyways if the dm hands out half decent encounters. And as earlier noted, this allows constant spamming of your maneuver.

(With improved feint and Rascal's Gambit, it's also a move action, but this requires feats, and you cannot move.)

This is superior to the old warblade, where you are forced to do a bog standard attack now and then to recover.

The stalker and warder both need to use a full round action to recover, slowing their action economy.

[Snowbluff]

I agree that PoW is more powerful, but PF is full of pointless power creep, so I find the interesting gambit system a bit more interesting.

[Ssalarn]

Pathfinder in general set the base power threshold a bit higher, so it's appropriate that the Path of War classes also sit a bit higher than their predecessors.

I explained the power of the Path of War classes to someone once like this:

Say a martial character character can be judged on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being an unoptimized Rogue and 5 being something like an Erastil worshipping Qinggong / Zen Archer Monk or Superstitious Beast Totem Barbarian with Rage cycling gear. Path of War classes all start at 3, and you'd have to be actively sabotaging yourself to drop below that. They still hit the same cap as everyone else and won't be quite as strong as some existing builds of other martial classes, but if the average system mastery of your group is relatively low they're going to seem OP.

[Powerdork]

One of the things that have tipped me off is the warlords ability to recover maneuvers as a move action, by selecting the acrobatic gambit the warlord can tumble as a move action, gain 1d6+cha bonus dmg against anyone he tumbles past, and recover his cha bonus in maneuvers, and use one of said recovered maneuver. This can be repeated every turn, and has a 80% success rate against average foes without optimizing.
Even if he fails, he still recovers one maneuver.

There is no downside to this gambit, you will want to move most of the time anyways if the dm hands out half decent encounters. And as earlier noted, this allows constant spamming of your maneuver.

(With improved feint and Rascal's Gambit, it's also a move action, but this requires feats, and you cannot move.)

This is superior to the old warblade, where you are forced to do a bog standard attack now and then to recover.

The stalker and warder both need to use a full round action to recover, slowing their action economy.

Bear in mind, when you're performing a gambit, you're spending a swift action you could have used for a boost, and you can't have used a counter if you also used a swift action in the previous round.

Further, you can't use the same gambit each round. You start play knowing at least two gambits and learn more as you level, and you can only use each gambit once per encounter (but they refresh if you don't have any more gambits to perform).
Surprised to see that limitation taken out.

[Elricaltovilla]

The maneuvers found in this tomb of battle conversion looks very interesting and breathes life into the initiators again.

Yes, they're lots of fun! Hi there, part time expert on PoW here (also one of the authors for PoW:Expanded)

Fyi, the tomb of battle is where initiators go when they die, the TOME of battle is the book about them :P


My question is; is it to much powercreep, or are the classes a worthy addition to the game?
A direct comparison would be the tomb of battle trio; warblade, swordsage and crusader.
Can also be compared with summoners, wizards and clerics at low levels, like up to 3 to 8. (We all know casters are the best at high levels)

Almost every class in Pathfinder experienced some sort of powercreep compared to their 3.5 counterparts. Skill consolidations, HD boosts, preparing spells from banned schools, better control over rage or bardic performances. Everyone got a little boost. But even with all that, the Fighter and his compatriots are still only good for hitting things, while wizards and their ilk freely tell the laws of physics to bend over and take it.

Just like with the Tome of Battle, PoW closes the gap between casters and martials. The PoW classes are undoubtedly more versatile than their core counterparts, but you can still build a fighter that does nearly 600 damage per round, or a barbarian that can unload an obnoxious number of attacks on a pouncing charge. The numbers that PoW offers look big, but they actually lower the damage of their classes compared to the guys who only put out big numbers.


One of the things that have tipped me off is the warlords ability to recover maneuvers as a move action, by selecting the acrobatic gambit the warlord can tumble as a move action, gain 1d6+cha bonus dmg against anyone he tumbles past, and recover his cha bonus in maneuvers, and use one of said recovered maneuver. This can be repeated every turn, and has a 80% success rate against average foes without optimizing.
Even if he fails, he still recovers one maneuver.

There is no downside to this gambit, you will want to move most of the time anyways if the dm hands out half decent encounters. And as earlier noted, this allows constant spamming of your maneuver.

Actually, its a move+swift action (all gambits cost a swift action to activate). Maneuver recovery is supposed to be successful, we want you to burn through your readied maneuvers every couple rounds, that way you're using them! Sure you can use a strike before or after your gambit, but you could do that anyway as long as you had a standard action.

The penalty for failing a gambit is a -2 penalty to all d20 rolls for 1 round, and Acrobatic Gambit has an additional penalty built in since failing your check means you provoke an attack of opportunity from each enemy.


(With improved feint and Rascal's Gambit, it's also a move action, but this requires feats, and you cannot move.)

This is superior to the old warblade, where you are forced to do a bog standard attack now and then to recover.

Again, its a move+swift action. It might be "superior" to the Warblade, but you're actually recovering less maneuvers (CHA mod vs. ALL) and you may not actually be doing damage. Plus the Warblade could still recover maneuvers with a full attack, so his DPR wasn't penalized.

Gambits are a fun and interesting way to recover maneuvers that encourage your players to take risks which you, as DM, can capitalize on. If you're concerned about Acrobatic Gambit being too easy (its not) give your monsters some CMD boosts, the Step Up line of feats, or have them throw around some marbles to make it even trickier.



The stalker and warder both need to use a full round action to recover, slowing their action economy.

Yes and no. The Stalker's DPR will suffer, but spending a full round to recover maneuvers offers some significant defensive bonuses to the stalker, and having played many a warder, you want to spend time using your Defensive Focus as its one of your major tanking abilities. There's a reason I call it the "Zone of Nope" in my guide.

Now, the above might make you even more leery of Path of War, but trust me, within two books worth of material (Published POW and Open Beta Playtest POW:E) there are only two exploits I know of that are a lactose filled as a 9th level spell. We work really hard to make sure that our content is tightly controlled and balanced. You won't find a more dedicated, talented or creative group of guys that the ones I've had the pleasure of working with on this material.

I'm happy to answer any questions or address any concerns you may have about Path of War material.

[Otodetu]

Further, you can't use the same gambit each round. You start play knowing at least two gambits and learn more as you level, and you can only use each gambit once per encounter (but they refresh if you don't have any more gambits to perform).


This was new, where is this written?
I cannot find it under the warlord (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/classes/warlord)

And to the other posters, I like the path of war classes, but I just feel dirty thinking about playing one of them, or adding levels of path of war on my existing characters, it's just so goooood.

[Elricaltovilla]

Further, you can't use the same gambit each round. You start play knowing at least two gambits and learn more as you level, and you can only use each gambit once per encounter (but they refresh if you don't have any more gambits to perform).

That's actually not true anymore. It was that way in the playtest, but once it was pointed out how that made Warlords progressively weaker as they leveled it was scrapped.



And to the other posters, I like the path of war classes, but I just feel dirty thinking about playing one of them, or adding levels of path of war on my existing characters, it's just so goooood.

Why do you feel dirty? Don't let the caster burgeoisie keep you down! Its time for the martials of the world to unite. We can take back the game from these pretentious finger wagglers. Grab your arms and armor and rise up my bretheren! It is time for us to demand the equality and respect we deserve! Let the Path of War manifesto be your guide. With it we will create a Utopia of martial valor and justice, where all are equal in their epicness!

[Ssalarn]

This was new, where is this written?
I cannot find it under the warlord (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/classes/warlord)

And to the other posters, I like the path of war classes, but I just feel dirty thinking about playing one of them, or adding levels of path of war on my existing characters, it's just so goooood.

It's the whole "being a martial that gets the superior action economy of a caster" thing that creates that impression. Playtesting indicated at most levels the Path classes will have somewhat lower damage than dedicated damage dealers (Fighters, Barbarians, Cavaliers), though their per hit is going to be higher since they break away from the full attack dynamic. Important to remember that fewer hits = fewer crits = lower dpr, especially since the bonus damage from most maneuvers won't be multiplied on a crit. They also have less survivability and versatility than gish classes like the Magus and Inquisitor, so they occupy a really solid design space.

[Snowbluff]

Elrica's avatar should read "DSP Damage Control." :smalltongue:

[Elricaltovilla]

Elrica's avatar should read "DSP Damage Control." :smalltongue:

I'm going to assume you mean that as a compliment. Otherwise, I'll be forced to point out that my name is Elric, as in "of Melnibone.":smallamused:

[Snowbluff]

I'm going to assume you mean that as a compliment. Otherwise, I'll be forced to point out that my name is Elric, as in "of Melnibone.":smallamused:

Oh, I know that. "Elric" just isn't you. "Elricaltovilla" mashed together is your proper title, as far I am concerned. :smalltongue:

[Elricaltovilla]

Oh, I know that. "Elric" just isn't you. "Elricaltovilla" mashed together is your proper title, as far I am concerned. :smalltongue:

I keep stormbringer in the trunk of my car currently. You think I'm kidding.

[Snowbluff]

You think I'm kidding.
Apparently, I do. :smalltongue:
You forgot the question mark.

[Elricaltovilla]

I did not forget the question mark, I was being rhetorical.:smalltongue:

[Otodetu]

It's the whole "being a martial that gets the superior action economy of a caster" thing that creates that impression. Playtesting indicated at most levels the Path classes will have somewhat lower damage than dedicated damage dealers (Fighters, Barbarians, Cavaliers), though their per hit is going to be higher since they break away from the full attack dynamic. Important to remember that fewer hits = fewer crits = lower dpr, especially since the bonus damage from most maneuvers won't be multiplied on a crit. They also have less survivability and versatility than gish classes like the Magus and Inquisitor, so they occupy a really solid design space.

Ok. This is what I hoped, but I really did not know that they where equal to inquisitors and magus figures.
Makes me feel better.

Is there a updated tier list for pathfinder?

[Elricaltovilla]

Is there a updated tier list for pathfinder?

Not "officially" I think this guy (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=11990.0) has a pretty good list. Most people seem to be in agreement on these things.

As for where the PoW classes end up, which I assume is your next question, I'd say they're all pretty solidly tier 3. They're good combatants, with decent to great skill use, they have utility and healing depending on their discipline choices and can play with the action economy a bit. The 9th level Veiled Moon maneuver might be a tier 2 worthy trick, but its literally 1 trick and doesn't work unless the target can't planeshift on their own.

[Ssalarn]

Ok. This is what I hoped, but I really did not know that they where equal to inquisitors and magus figures.
Makes me feel better.



One of the more comprehensive playtests was run by YuenglingDragon over on the Paizo forums; what it showed was that in a standard 3 combat encounter day the Warlord and Stalker were each basically on par with comparative classes like the Magus and Inquisitor in both damage and utility during the first 10 levels or so; after that the Magus' ability to more efficiently deal with magical threats enabled him to deal with challenges the initiators just couldn't, but the Stalker's damage pulled slightly ahead and the Warlord's options (particularly Coordinated Charge coming online as a teamwork feat option) made the total party performance better. The Inquisitor compares favorably to both classes at all levels, with Solo Tactics putting him a bit ahead of the Stalker in action economy (dependent upon his Teamwork feat choices) and divine spellcasting bringing his durability and utility options up to a reasonable edge over both initiators. I believe that here again, the Stalker had an edge in damage, though he fell behind pretty much everywhere else, and the Warlord's damage was lower than both the Stalker and Inquisitor but total party performance was up.

[Elricaltovilla]

You wouldn't happen to have a link to that would you?

[Ssalarn]

You wouldn't happen to have a link to that would you?
I'll see if I can dig the posts up.

***Edit***
What I'm learning is that there are a ridiculous number of posts in the original Path of War thread.

[Otodetu]

So all in all, the summary of this thread is that Path of War is powerful and self-optimizing, but not directly broken. Putting the new initiators at tier 3.

I thank the playground for the constructive views and opinions, and consider this thread finished.

[Lord_Gareth]

So all in all, the summary of this thread is that Path of War is powerful and self-optimizing, but not directly broken. Putting the new initiators at tier 3.

I thank the playground for the constructive views and opinions, and consider this thread finished.

I provide one more term!

The "bottom" level of power for a class - how much it can suck without a deliberate attempt to make it suck - is known as its "optimization floor", whereas its highest level of theoretical power is its "optimization ceiling."

And now you know :D

[Elricaltovilla]

I provide one more term!

The "bottom" level of power for a class - how much it can suck without a deliberate attempt to make it suck - is known as its "optimization floor", whereas its highest level of theoretical power is its "optimization ceiling."

And now you know :D

And could we start defining the different focuses of your optimization as "walls"? We could build an entire optimization house!

[Snowbluff]

And could we start defining the different focuses of your optimization as "walls"? We could build an entire optimization house!

I don't know about that. If the floor is the minimum of versatility, and the ceiling is the top, wouldn't making walls means narrowing a characters focus? :smallfrown:

I guess it would be a fluff thing or something, if we wanted a positive spin on it.

[Elricaltovilla]

I don't know about that. If the floor is the minimum of versatility, and the ceiling is the top, wouldn't making walls means narrowing a characters focus? :smallfrown:

I guess it would be a fluff thing or something, if we wanted a positive spin on it.

I wonder how many forum members here are intimately familiar with fluffy walls? :smalltongue:

[Snowbluff]

I wonder how many forum members here are intimately familiar with fluffy walls? :smalltongue:

I am intimately familiar with them. :smalltongue:

[Extra Anchovies]

We already have an Optimization House. It's this subforum :smallsmile:

[Snowbluff]

We need more OP furniture.

[kardar233]

We need more OP furniture.

All my furniture is made out of Fine-sized Ice Assassins of Boccob and Rudimentary Intelligence Shadesteel Golems.

[Elricaltovilla]

Can anyone suggest a nice TO rug to put by my Mailman Sorcerer fireplace?

[Snowbluff]

All my furniture is made out of Fine-sized Ice Assassins of Boccob and Rudimentary Intelligence Shadesteel Golems.
I don't know. That sounds like it's a bit chilly.

Can anyone suggest a nice TO rug to put by my Mailman Sorcerer fireplace?

You know, I once put some Arrowsplit on an Arcane Archer... It covers a nice area. :smallamused: